HomeMy WebLinkAboutMALDONADO SUBDIVISION - PDP - PDP120021 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)r
only way that the , iposed architectural elevations or describe_ wilding limits (i.e. 1 112 story,
smaller than allowed footprint) can be enforced is if the decision maker conditions the approval
of the plat and modifications on the submitted documents. Otherwise, a prospective owner will
be allowed to build any size or style of home that is allowed by the regulations in place at the
time of building permit application.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Peter Barnes, 970-416-2355, pbarnespfcgov.com
Topic: Modification of Standard
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 07/25/2012
07/25/2012: If the plan is to allow a zero lot line garage on each side of the lot line as shown
on the site plan, then a modification will be needed to reduce the required side setback from 5'
to 0'. This may be moot though if the 10' wide drainage easement is required as shown on the
plat since a building can't be built on the easement. A 15' rear setback is also required, so if
the garage is intended to be built closer to the rear lot line, as shown on the site plan, a
modification will also be needed for the rear setback.
Topic: Planning Objectives
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 07/25/2012
07/25/2012: The applicant's written Planning Objectives narrative refers to the property being in
the LMN zone. Actually the lot is in the NCM zone. The narrative also states that there will be
two lots of 4500 s.f. each. However, the site plan submitted shows one lot to be 4503 s.f. and
the other to be 4506 s.f., and the plat shows one lot to be 4497 s.f. and the other to be 4496
s.f.. Which document has the correct lot square footages?
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 07/25/2012
07/25/2012: The narrative needs to clearly state the modification(s) being requested (i.e. cite
the code section and then describe modification, such as "a request to reduce the required
minimum lot area from 5000 s.f. to xxxx s.f." The narrative also needs to clearly state the
modification standard being met, such as 'hardship', 'equal to or better than', 'nominal,
inconsequential'.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 07/25/2012
08/10/2012: The 20' wide access easement is not required for the zero lot line garage and
driveway.
07/25/2012: The submitted site plan needs to show the setback distances from the existing
home to the lot lines of the new Lot 1. The site plan shows a shared driveway stradling the
common lot line so there needs to be a 20' wide access easement to allow this. The plat
doesn't show one. The building envelope for the proposed Lot 2 indicates a a 5' setback from
the south lot line. However, the plat shows an existing 10' utility easement along the south lot
line. If the utility easement is to remain, then the building envelope on the site plan needs to
be revised to show a 10' setback from the south lot line. The 10' setback from the south lot
line, in conjunction with the 10' setback from the north lot (assuming a 20' shared access
easement is needed with 10' on each lot) will leave a building envelope width of only 30'. All
of the potential house designs submitted show houses that are wider than 30, meaning they
won't fit on this lot. Finally, the site plan needs to contain a north arrow and needs to state what
scale the plan is drawn to.
4
08/07/2012: Arc e monuments along the alley found? Pleas ascribe them.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: The language shown is old. Please update all plat language.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, "county fcgov.com
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please label the record calls, and change the north & south lines to distances of
90.00'.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please provide a 24" x36" plan to City standards.
Comment Number: 11
08/07/2012: Please add a north arrow & scale.
Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: The subdivision plat shows an existing 10' utility easement along the south line of
Lot 2. There is no easement shown on this plan.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please label the lots on the plan.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: There is a note of a 412 water line, but it doesn't look like one is shown.
Comment Number: 15 1 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: The square footage of each lot doesn't match the subdivision plat.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221.6854, rbuffington fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: The applicant is aware of the need to work with the adjacent property owners
regarding water and sewer services which may need to be relocated prior to the construction of
a house on the new lot.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Peter Barnes, 970-416.2355, pbarnes(a)_fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 07/25/2012
07/25/2012: The new single family dwelling will be allowed and processed as a Basic
Development Review if the replat and modifications are approved (Sec. 4.8(B)(1)), meaning that
the only applicable size and design standards will be those found in Sec. 4.8. As such, the
A
fees or contact ,1. , Pakech at 221- 6375 for questions on fee. , here is also an erosion
control escrow required before the Development Construction permit is issued. The amount of
the escrow is determined by the design engineer, and is based on the site disturbance area or
a minimum amount in accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater Design Criteria.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Glen Schlueter, 970-224-6065, gschlueter(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: The design of this site must conform to the drainage basin design of the Old Town
Master Drainage Plan as well the City's Stormwater Criteria Manual.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: There should be a 5 foot drainage easement along the north property line as well
as the ones shown. The drainage easement in the center of the two lots that serves as access
should be the same width as the access easement; just label it access and drainage
easement. No easement should be shown anywhere you want to place buildings. If there is a
need to route drainage flows along the back property line an easement should be shown there
as well. The 5 feet of drainage easement does not need to be shown as a seperate easement
on top of another easement; it too can just be labeled drainage and utility easement unless you
have a specfic reason you want it that way.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please provide 24"x36" plans drawn to City standards.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
08/07/2012
08107/2012: The subdivision boundary closes.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated:
08/07/2012
08/0712012: Please add reference to the prior plat that this plat is replatting.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated:
08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please correct the spelling of lienholder in the lienholder signature block.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated:
08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please reference the dedication of all street rights of way.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated:
08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please show the full street right of way on all streets with the widths.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
08/07/2012: Please provide a reception number for the existing 10' utility easement along the
south boundary line.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/07/2012
a
Department: Park Plannim,
Contact: Craig Foreman, 970-221-6618, cforeman(cilfcgov.com
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Craig Foreman, 970-221-6618, cforeman(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/20/2012
07/20/2012: No comments
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Glen Schlueter, 970-224-6065, gschlueter(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: Since this is being processed as PDP and not just a paper exersice as a simple
lot split on a plat the standard PDP requirements will apply. The primary requirements are a
grading plan and a drainage report/letter meeting the standard requirments of the design criteria
manual. They must be prepared by a professonal engineer registered in Colorado.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: The drainage outfall for this site appears to be sheet flow runoff to the property to
the east and sheet flow to Whitcomb. The design engineer will need to verify and document
the existing flow patterns. Of particular concern on this site is the amount of runoff leaving the
site and draining to the east onto other private property. It must be shown that the proposed
volume of runoff from the 100 year - two hour design storm will be equal to or less than it is
now. The building gutters and downspouts must be considered in this evaluation. Their size
and flow direction need to be shown on the plans and documented in the report.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: Onsite water quality treatment must be provided in accordance the Urban Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 3 - Best Management Practices (BMPs).
(hftp://www.udfcd.org/downloads/down_critmanual_volII1.htm) Extended detention is the usual
method selected for water quality treatment; however the use of any of the BMPs is
encouraged. In this case disconnection of impervious area or raingardens are two suggested
options.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: It is important to document the existing impervious area since drainage
requirements and fees are based on new impervious area. An exhibit showing the existing
and proposed impervious areas with a table summarizing the areas is required prior to the time
fees are calculated for each building permit.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 08/10/2012
08/10/2012: The city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $6,390.00/acre ($0.1467/sq.ft.)
for new impervious area over 350 sq.-ft., and there is a $1,045.00/acre ($0.024/sq.ft.) review
fee. No fee is charged for existing impervious area. These fees are to be paid at the time
each building permit is issued. Information on fees can be found on the City's web site at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-development-
sidewalk.
Topic: Plat
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Andrew Gingerich, 970.221-6603, agingerich(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/08/2012
08/08/2012: Label the right of way width along Whitcomb
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/08/2012
08/08/2012: The seperate site exhibit showed the proposed home being 5' from the south
property line. The plat shows a 10' utility easement in this area. The building can not be
constructed on top of the utility easement.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/08/2012
08/08/2012: The proposed garage will not be able to be constructed on top of the drainage
easement that is shown on the plat.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970-224-6143, lex(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/31/2012
07/31/2012: No comments.
Department: Historical Preservation
Contact: Josh Weinberg, 970-221.6206, iweinberg(a�fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/31/2012
07/31/2012: The proposed side -to -side lot subdivision on the 400 block of North Whitcomb
complies with LUC 3.4.7, as it respects the historic character and pattern of the block and
surrounding neighborhood.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224-6152, dmartine(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/26/2012
07/26/2012: A 5 foot wide utility easement is required along the east property line of lot #1.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/26/2012
07/26/2012: The owner will need to coordinate power requirements and locations with Light &
Power Engineering (221-6700).
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/26/2012
07/26/2012: Electric development and system modification costs will apply. Estimated total =
$4,200.00.
Fi OAL- UNAA CU%XC >
Community Development and
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/d`eve/opmentreview
August 10, 2012
Christine Ann Maldonado
412 N. Whitcomb St.
Fort Collins, CO 80521
RE: Maldonado Subdivision (412 N. Whitcomb St.), PDP120021, Round Number 1
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your
submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the
individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Jason Holland, at 970-224-6126
or jholland@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland(&fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 08/14/2012
The project needs to be formatted on 2436 sheets, with the site plan at a scale large enough
to include the required information. Please refer to the PDP checklist for the required
information and appropriate tables and notes. Building elevations need to be shown as line
drawings with no shaded or toned areas. Show overall length and width dimensions and eave
height. Please show a finish grade line and show height dimensions from that line.
Department:, Engineering Development Review
Contact: Andrew Gingerich, 970-221-6603, agingerich@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/08/2012
08/08/2012: Please provide a grading/utility plan with your next submittal. This should include
grading spot elevations, slopes, etc. as well as existing utilities and proposed services.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/08/2012
08/08/2012: Add note to grading/utility plan that if sidewalk is need of replacement prior to
construction or is replaced during construction that it should be replaced with 4.5' width