Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN NORTH SUNTERRACE TOWNHOMES - MAJOR AMEND./REPLAT - 16-09 - CORRESPONDENCE - (9)Number: 7 Created: 4/14/2009 [4/14/09] Note - Meters, ducts and other exterior items need to be painted to match the building. Number: 8 Created: 4/14/2009 [4/14/09] How will trash and recyclables be handled? Will there be pick-up at the individual units or trash/recyclable enclosures? Please note as such on the site plan. Number: 9 Created: 4/14/2009 [4/14/09] 1 don't see any bike racks. Will there be any provided other than in individual garages? If so, please note as such on the site plan and show their locations. Comments from Current Planning: 1. Please add a section to the Planning Objectives that addresses how, with the Major Amendment, the entire Old Town North remains in compliance with the requirements of the C-C-N zone, Section 4.19(D) with regard to minimum density and the 40% maximum single family. 2. Also, please address how, with the Major Amendment, the entire Old Town North remains in compliance with Housing Model Variety in Section 3.5.2(B). 3. It would be helpful for the Planning Objectives to indicate what is originally approved so the what is proposed can be easily compared. 4. 1 am not seeing where the alley -accessed garages are set back by eight feet as per Section 3.5.2(D)(3). 5. Regarding site plan note number 8 — I cannot determine whether or not any of the granted modifications were for the lots that are subject of the Major Amendment. 6. Along Cajetan Street, the 80-foot gap on both sides of the street light can be filled in with two ornamental trees as long as they remain 15 feet from the street light. 7. If utility meters are to be ganged on the ends, then be sure there is screening if facing a public street. 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. Sincerely Ted Shepard Chief Planner Page 8 5. If work is to take place in the floodway, additional detailed survey information may be required for both existing conditions and as -built conditions. 6. Note 2 on sheet 13 needs to be revised (See comment #2). 7. Please make sure there is consistent wording of the FEMA floodway and floodplain on the various plans (see redlines). 8. Plat and other plans - Only the floodway is shown. Please also show the rest of the floodplain on sheets that show the floodplain extent. 9. Drainage Report - Please include a copy of the FEMA FIRM with the project location shown. 10. Drainage Report, P. 3, 1., b. - add ii - No critical facilities, including daycare, are allowed in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain 11. Please see miscellaneous comments in the Drainage Report. 12. Please review the 50% and 100% Floodplain Development Review Checklists for items to be included on the plans and in the drainage report. If hydraulic modeling will be conducted, please review the Floodplain Modeling Guidelines. These documents are available on the City's website at: http://www.fcgov.com/stormwater/fp-forms.php Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: WaterMastewater Number: 16 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] On Sht 3, revise the note on water main materials as shown on the redlined plans. Number: 17 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] Re -align the water service to the building containing Units 13-18 to be perpendicular to the main from the tap through the meter pit. Consider placing the service 2-3 feet from the the 3/4-inch service being abandoned to minimize street cuts/repairs. Number: 18 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] Are any irrigation services planned? Number: 19 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] Is the 1-inch meter pit detail needed? Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols Topic: Zoning Number: 1 Created: 4/13/2009 [4/13/09] Please remove topo lines from final site plan. Number: 2 Created: 4/13/2009 [4/13/09] Please note the building height on the elevations. Number: 3 Created: 4/13/2009 [4/13/09] Please note colors of buildings on elevations Page 7 Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Stormwater Number: 36 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The City requires twice the 100-year volume for retention ponds and for ponds where infiltration is the only source of an outfall. Please revise. Due to the pond detaining flows for a future development, the pond already has the volume. The extra volume could be allocated towards the twice the 100-year volume requirement. This would take away the credit for the future apartment development, however. Number: 39 Created: 5/1 /2009 [5/1/09] Off -site flows need to be investigated and accommodated. The low flows of Dry Creek are being blocked by the berm of the detention pond. The low flows need to be rerouted, or the detention pond relocated. Number: 40 Created: 5/1 /2009 [5/1/09] Please discuss in the drainage report how this site will work in conjunction with the ultimate improvements including the future streets and the future regional detention pond and outfall system of the NECCO project. Number: 41 Created: 5/1 /2009 [5/1/09] Since the detention pond will be an infiltration pond, the design needs to consider the possibility of the infiltration failing. Please discuss in the text of the report how and where the pond could be pumped if it were to not infiltrate. It must not hold water for more than 72 hours or it will violate State water law so please consider that in the pumping alternative. The design should also consider multiple infiltration points. Another project is providing several dry well locations were the pond can infiltrate incase one location is not functioning as intended. Number: 42 Created: 5/1/2009 [5/1/09] Floodplain Comments: 1. The detention pond is shown partially located in the floodway and partially excavated adjacent to the floodway. Because the floodway/floodplain boundary would change due to the excavation next to the current floodway line, this will require FEMA's maps to be revised through the CLOMR/LOMR process. 2. The detention pond is in a conveyance area and therefore a simple cut -fill balance is not the proper analysis. The impact of the fill, combined with the excavation, would need to modeled using hydraulic modeling. Additional cross -sections may need to be included in this modeling to reflect the placement of the fill. The modeling would need to be submitted to FEMA for a CLOMR/LOMR if there are any changes in water -surface elevations, if cross - sections are added or if the floodway/floodplain boundaries change. It is recommended that alternative pond locations be investigated. 3. The STORM A pipe shows an inlet elevation below the 100-year FEMA flood elevation. Since the inlet is outside the currently mapped floodplain, but connected to areas within the floodway/floodplain, it would result in the floodplain expanding to the inlet area. The inlet elevation will need to be addressed with the hydraulic modeling discussed above. 4. A floodplain use permit is required for any work in the floodway or floodplain. If hydraulic modeling is required, the permit fee is $325. If no modeling is required, the fee is $25. Page 6 [5/3/09] A utility coordination meeting was suggested after the site layout is adjusted from this round of review's comments and before the next formal submittal. Please call me to schedule this at your convenience. We hold the meetings every Wednesday starting at 1:30pm so pick a time that works best for you and your consultants. If you could send me a pdf of the latest utility sheet when you're ready (and at least by the Thursday prior to the meeting), I'll include that in the invitation we email out to all city and outside utilities. That way they can review it prior to the meeting and have their comments ready for the discussion. Thanks :) Just a heads up - the outside utilities have been extremely understaffed and unable to appear at most of the meetings I've had over the last year. You might have to work with them individually but we'll do our best to get them all together in the same room for you. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 6 Created: 4/13/2009 [4/13/09] A landscape plan showing planned electric facilities was sent to BHA Design on 4- 13-09. Street tree locations will need to be adjusted to provide 40 ft. minimum clearance between lights and trees (15 ft. if the tree is an ornamental). Also, all trees must be a minimum of 5 ft. from electric vaults. Topic: Utility Plan Number: 4 Created: 4/13/2009 [4/13/09] Due to changes to the development, electric system modification costs will apply (in addition to normal electric development charges). Number: 5 Created: 4/13/2009 [4/13/09] The electric facilities shown on the utility plan are not entirely accurate. In addition, some changes to the existing electric system will be necessary. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carie Dann Topic: Fire Number: 43 Created: 5/1 /2009 WATER SUPPLY: Just a clarification on the water supply requirement - these townhomes are considered a multi -family and therefore, maximum distance to hydrant is 300 feet, not 400, with minimum flow of 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure. Number: 44 Created: 5/1/2009 RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLERS: An automatic sprinkler system installed in occupancies in accordance with Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings with a Group R (Residential) fire area. Residential or quick -response standard sprinkler heads shall be used in dwelling units and guest -room portions of the building. PLEASE NOTE: In order to be considered single-family attached townhouses, property line separation walls must be a 2-hour separation wall on each side of the property line (two layers each side of 5/8-inch Type x gypsum board, or four layers total). 2006 International Fire Code 903.2.7 Page 5 Topic: Plat Number: 35 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] From Technical Services: 1. This plat boundary does not match the right-of-ways of adjoining streets. We did not run closure. 2. Please change the title to "Old Town North Second Filing" being a replat of.... 3. Plat also replats Tract KK and JJ. 4. Site and Landscape plans look good. 5. Is there additional row being dedicated for Osiander Street? 6. Is block nine alley (alley m) in the same place as originally platted? If so, it will need to be vacated through council and then rededicated. 7. Missing data in block 9 (line data). 8. Redwood row in the lower southeast corner of the property needs to be dedicated with this plat. Topic: Site Plan Number: 49 Created: 5/3/2009 [5/3/09] Please remove all contours and utilities. Please use engineering scale versus architectural for all dimensions shown. Please label and dimension all street row & easement widths. Topic: Utility Plan Number: 11 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] Cover sheet - (FC) Please remove the word "final" and add the word "for'. In other words, title the sheet "Utility Plans for'. Number: 12 Created: 4/28/2009 (4/28/09] Cover Sheet - (FC) Index: Please add "for reference only" to the plat. Number: 14 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] Sheet 5 - (FC) Please see LCUASS 25.5.2 for street repair requirements and adjust the approximate limits of street cut accordingly. There are a couple of options with the best one to keep the project costs down being this: Continue to show the full depth street patches in the locations shown and do a mill and overlay from the outer edge of first cut to the outer edge of the last cut. This way you won't have to do a full depth street patch for the entire section and still satisfy the requirements in 25.5.2. We can talk about this more in FC so don't worry about adjusting your design before going to public hearing ... we just like to give you an early heads up on this so you can plan your project's true costs in as soon as possible. Number: 32 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] Please remove "min" from all typical street sections as we want these to show exactly what is being built. Number: 33 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] (FC) Scanning issues exist, please see Appendix E6 for all scanning requirements and Jeff County in Tech Services if you have any questions. Number: 46 Created: 5/3/2009 Page 4 Number: 13 Created: 4/28/2009 (4/28/09] The plan set titles need to match the plat. Number: 15 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] (FC) Type III barricades are required at all dead-end sidewalks and streets. Please do not re -use any existing type II in the public row without Traffic Engineering's approval. Number: 28 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The sidewalk along the north and east side of Osiander needs to be designed and constructed along the detention pond frontage with this development or at minimum, from the ramp at the intersection of Baum and Osiander to Redwood Street. The final limits will be determined with the final site layout. Also, we'll need to look at the grading on the east side of Redwood on the north end ... you'll want to either grade to accommodate the future street and sidewalk or escrow cash in lieu of to regrade the area at such time the street and sidewalk goes through. This will be addressed in the Development Agreement with requirements that an estimate for our review and approval and the escrow due prior to the first building permit. Number: 30 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] 3:1 slopes off the north sidewalk on Osiander requires a variance from stormwater. Typically engineering requires 4:1 unless a flat to nearly flat area of 1-2' is provided at the bow for pedestrian safety. Number: 31 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] Please see Parks and Rec for the interim/ultimate design and construction requirements for the 10' bike path design. This may or may not be something that needs to be addressed prior to public hearing - please check with Craig Foreman in Parks. Number: 45 Created: 5/3/2009 [5/3/09] Current standards require directional ramps at all intersections but a variance can be verbally granted and approved if matching existing radial style ramps in the neighborhood. If you wish to do this, just add this variance under line 48 of the General Notes and call it good. You do not need to submit a formal variance request. Number: 50 Created: 5/3/2009 [5/3/09] Tract HHH must be dedicated as a Sight Distance and Utility Easement in addition to the drainage easement shown. Please show this on all plan sets (Plat, Site, Landscape, Utilities). Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 47 Created: 5/3/2009 [5/3/09] Two trees are shown over the Lake Canal box culvert and stormline (NE corner of Redwood and Cajetan). Are these two things low enough to accommodate the trees? Number: 48 Created: 5/3/2009 [5/3/09] (FC) It might help the scannability/legibility of the plan sheet if you removed all contours and perhaps only showed the contours around the drainage pond and the Lake Canal drainage areas. We can talk about this more in Final Compliance :) Page 3 - Based upon the most appropriate solution, any impacts to the wetlands shall be mitigated at a ratio of 1:1; - Mitigation should occur in order: 1. On site; 2. In the area with the associated wetlands; 3. In the region; 4. Mitigation to occur in a wetlands bank. The proposed solution including the landscape plan, a mitigation plan and the grading plan shall be evaluated using Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(2). Topic: Over/ot Grading Plan Number: 29 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] Add the 50' "wetlands buffer' line to the Overlot Grading Plan. Number: 34 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] Add the LOD line to the plan. Topic: Plat Number: 25 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The 50' Natural Feature buffer line shall be shown and labeled on the plat, with reference to the note for allowable uses within a buffer zone. Number: 26 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The following note shall be added to the Plat, Site and Landscape Plans: For allowable uses within a buffer zone, refer to Section 3.4.1(E) of the Land Use Code. Number: 27 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The following note shall be added to the Plat: Per Section 12-122. Promotion of Conservation, of the Municipal Code, no person shall create, cause to be created, enforce or seek to enforce any provision contained in any restrictive covenant which has the effect of prohibiting or limiting the installation or use of Xeriscape landscaping, solar/ photo -voltaic collectors (if mounted flush upon any established roof line), clothes lines (if located in back yards), or odor -controlled compost bins, or which has the effect of requiring that a portion of any individual lot be planted in turf grass. Topic: Site Plan Number: 24 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The LOD line shall be shown on the Site Plan. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General Number: 10 Created: 4/28/2009 [4/28/09] (FC) Groundwater was found within 5 feet of the existing surface which then requires a Subsurface Water Investigation Report. Please see 5.6.1 of LCUASS and submit the report with the next round of review. This will need to be addressed prior to public hearing only if basements are proposed, otherwise, this requirement can wait until Final Compliance (FC). Page 2 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins David Kasprzak Date: 5/4/2009 BHA Design 1603 Oakridge Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 Staff has reviewed your submittal for SUNTERRACE TOWNHOMES, OLD TOWN NORTH MAJOR AMENDMENT/REPLAT - TYPE I, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: Grading Plan Number: 21 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] A Limit -of -Development (LOD) line shall be shown on the plans per Section 3.4.1.(N). The LOD will be determined by the Environmental Planner, Current Planning Office. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 22 Created: 4/29/2009 (4/29/09] The detention pond will need to have additional landscape treatment in the form of trees and shrubs to improve the character of the pond, eliminating the bomb crater effect. Number: 23 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] The LOD shall be shown on the Landscape Plan. Topic: Master Grading Plan Number: 20 Created: 4/29/2009 [4/29/09] Add the "wetlands 50' buffer line" per the Site Plan to the Grading Plan. The detention pond cuts off the end of the Dry Creek Channel. This channel and the associated wetlands fall under Section 3.4.1-Natural Habitats and Features, and will have a 50' buffer shown on the plan. Topic: Natural Resources Number: 37 Created: 4/30/2009 [4/30/09] Before the proposed grading plan is deemed appropriate for the detention pond, the applicant shall provide the Environmental Planner with sufficient information to evaluate the benefits -and impacts of -destroying the wetlands associated with this project. -The - - - justification for the proposed solution shall include a study of alternative designs with a brief narrative explaining why each alternative was not chosen. It is up to the applicant to decide what information is to be provided for the evaluation by the City's Environmental Planner. After reviewing the original Ecological Characterization Study and letter from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) , no further information is needed in regards to demonstrating that the wetlands do not meet the ACE's definition of a jurisdictional wetland. Number: 38 Created: 4/30/2009 [4/30/09] The options for protection of a natural feature include: - Do not impact the feature; - Develop a solution that has the least amount of impact to the natural feature; Page 1