HomeMy WebLinkAboutBELLWETHER FARM - PDP - 46-04 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS1. Bellwether Farm is the proverbial bumble bee that shouldn't be able to fly.
The fact that this infill project has overcome complicated development -
related issues involving storm water release, secondary access, a bisecting
20'water line, and integrating a new section of the City's trail system is a
credit to the creativity and persistence of the staff and applicant.
2. Although the LMN zoning on the property would allow over 120 'units on this
property, the proposal for 44 single-family detached residences
successfully reconciles the typically conflicting concerns of neighborhood
compatibility and project feasibility.
3. This project introduces the potential for 44 new homes within easy walking
distance to Irish Elementary School and Lincoln Junior High School.
4. An objective of the City's Storm Water Utility— to implement a regional
storm water system in northwest Fort Collins— is advanced by the
applicant's willingness to accommodate a major drainage channel within
the south portion of the property.
5. The City's trail system is expanded by a pedestrian/ bike trail running east -
west through Bellwether Farm and constructed with this development.
On Behalf of VF Ripley and JR Engineering, we appreciate your perspicacious
comments and look forward to working with you in advancing the Bellwether
Farm PDP to its Type 1 public hearing.
Sincerely,
Lester M. Kaplan
cc. Linda Ripley, VF Ripley
Lee Watkins, JR Engineering
13
informal neighborhood bridge can lead to an open area where, over time,
common usage will establish a logical network of soft paths that connect to points
of interest. Such an amenity fits entirely within the semi -rural character of
northwest Fort Collins.
Response: Applicant has had several phone conversations with Ted Shepard
and understands that Ted is reconsidering the requirement for a second bridge.
The following are site design justifications for one bridge crossing thetitch:
1. The °passive recreation" quality of the area south of the Ditch will be
significantly undermined by the City's construction of a regional storm
drainage channel running west to east.
2. The City's Storm Water utility does not want the pedestrian/bike trail
sharing the existing sanitary sewer easement along the south property line.
Considering Bellwether's secondary detention area south of the Ditch plus
the City's eventual drainage channel, the only feasible trail location is atop
the Ditch bank This further undermines the potential for passive recreation
circulation south of the ditch.
3. A looped walk through this open area can easily be experienced without a
second bridge by simply beginning and ending this walk at the proposed
bridge.
4. The dominant circulation movement south of the Ditch will be west to the
school, public recreation, and existing neighborhoods. The proposed
location for a single bridge in the southwest corner of Bellwether is ideal for
these destinations. The average distance between residences in Bellwether
Farm and this bridge location is approximately 700 ft., or about one city
block. Certainly, a second bridge is not needed for neighborhood
convenience.
5. According to the Gene Fischer, attorney for the New Mercer Ditch
Company, they will oppose a second bridge crossing that close to the
crossing already shown on the plans.
6. According to Craig Foremen with City Parks and Recreation, any
pedestrian bridge, regardless of how "informal", would have to comply with
the City's engineering specification, including 10,000 lb. loading. The vision
of an inexpensive, secondary bridge is implausible.
7. The proposed site design contains the potential for the Bellwether Farm
homeowners' association to introduce a second bridge in the future, if the
residents feel so compelled.
Ted, during one of our previous conversations regarding Bellwether Farm, you
rhetorically asked me what special attributes could be identified with this project. I
would like this opportunity to briefly respond:
12
Response: At least 90% of the dwelling units are within one-third of a mile of 6
acres of public recreation facilities at Irish Elementary School. A note has been
added to the plan addressing this requirement.
2. Section 4.4(D) (2) (d) requires that a single housing type not constitute more
than 90% (39) of the total number of dwelling units. If single-family detached
dwellings are the only housing types included in the mix, then the difference
between the average lot size for each type of single family detached "elling
shall be 2,000 square feet. Please indicate how this standard is being met and
note on the plan the location of the five lots that are differentiated by at least
2,000 square feet.
Response: The average lot size is 5,497 square feet. On the re -submission, lots
6, 13, 22, 36 and 37 all greater than 7,497 square feet.
3. Section 3.5.2(B)(1 and 2) requires that any project of fewer than 100 single
family dwellings shall have at least three different housing types of housing
models. Each housing model shall have at least three characteristics which
clearly and obviously distinguish it from the other housing models. Please
indicate how this standard is being met.
Response: For PDP purposes, a note has been added to the plan paraphrasing
the relevant section of the Code to assure inclusion of this standard. The
applicant understands that the Final Plan will include conceptual building
elevations to provide illustrative clarity to how this standard will be addressed.
4. Section 3.5.2(E)(1 — 5) requires that streetscapes not be dominated by
protruding garages. The plan needs to address this standard. Have you .
considered side -loading the garages on the corner lots (Lots 13, 30, 21 and 22)?
Also; Lots 5, 6, 12 and 40 appear difficult to not exceed 50% of the ground floor
street -facing linear building frontage as required by (E)(3). If alternative garage
door treatments are proposed as allowed for under (E)(5), then please provide
sufficient details. Please keep in mind that attractive neighborhood -scale streets
is the fundamental aspect of the standard.
Response: While the applicant is not indicating exact driveway locations on the
plans, the potential for side -loading on certain lots exists. All lots at 15 ft. front
yard setback can met the requirement of (E)(3)
5. Notwithstanding the requirement for a small neighborhood park, please
provide an informal bridge over the ditch to the open space area.. This bridge is
not intended to serve in fulfillment of bicycle or pedestrian connectivity standard.
Rather, this bridge will provide casual access to a passive recreation area for
such activities as dog walking, strolling or simply enjoying the out-of-doors.
Enclosed are two pictures of bridges that are used at City Park Nine public golf
course which span the New Mercer Ditch. The third picture is a bridge that
connects a neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail. Since two of these bridges
have to support golf carts, they represent an excessive level of design that is not
necessarily required for a more informal bridge to a passive recreation area. An
11
[1/10/05] will an irrigation tap be required for the open spaces?
See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments.
Response: Open spaces and median will be irrigated via a residential tap from
an adjoining residential lot and not by separately dedicated tap.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger
Buffington
Topic: Utility
Number:46 Created:1/12/2005
[1/12/05] Water main between Lots 5 and 6 must be in a tract to prevent
landscaping, fences, building from being placed within the easement.
Response: Applicant has discussed with and sent a January 28, 2005 letter to
Roger Buffington regarding an easement as opposed to a tract designation. On
February 11, 2005 Roger agreed to allow easement designation, 20 ft. wide,
provided that the easement is offset from the water line location, with 5 ft. on one
side and 15 ft. on the other.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes
Topic: Zoning
Number:2 Created:12/30/2004
[12/30/04] On lot 38 of the site plan, they show the typical building envelope.
The envelope they show indicates a 20' min. front setback from lot line.
However, the code only requires a 15' min. setback (Sec 3.5.2(D) (2) of the Land
Use Code). They need to change the envelope dimensions, or better yet, just
remove it entirely since the above code section regulates.
Response: Typical building envelope reference is removed on re -submission.
Number:3 Created:12/30/2004
[12/30/04] By showing driveway locations on the site plan, they are committing
to placing them as shown. In other words, the only way to place them in a
different location on a lot would be through a minor amendment. Is that their
intention?
Response: In that all lots are a minimum 50 ft. wide, all driveway locations have
been removed from the plans (see Response to comment No. 33).
The following comments are from Current Planning:
1. Section 4.4(D)(7) requires that projects of 20 acres or less in the L-M-N zone
provide a small neighborhood park that is within one-third of a mile of at least
90% of the dwelling units. This park can be either public or private. Is it intended
for the area south of the ditch to fulfill this requirement? If so, please indicate on
all plans and indicate how sub -sections a — e are satisfied.
10
[1/13/05] Please document that there will be no off -site flows entering the site
and better clarify this on the drainage plan with labeling of contours, etc.
Response: Addressed on re -submission.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill
Topic: General
Number:4 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Place water services on the center lines of the lots to avoid landscape
and drive way conflicts.
Response: Corrected on re -submission.
Number:5 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Clearly define the connection procedures for the connection between
the existing 20-inch and the proposed 12-inch water lines.
Response: Addressed on re -submission.
Number:6 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Use MJ bends and Meg -A -Lugs on all fittings which are adjacent to
manhole excavations.
Response: Understood
Number:7 Created:1/10/2005
[1 /10/05] Provide a water main to the south west portion of this project for future
connection in Cherry St.
Response: Included in re -submission.
Number:8 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Provide a drivable surface for the access and maintenance of the
existing sanitary sewer manholes along the south property line.
Response: During a January 25, 2005 conversation, Jeff informed applicant that
this drivable surface is not necessary. During a February 1, 2005 conversation
between Glen Schlueter and applicant, Glen stated that such a drivable surface
was not only unnecessary, but would conflict with the anticipated grade changes
associated with the City's construction of the regional storm channel on this
property.
Number:9 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Provide all appropriate standard details with the final compliance plan
set.
Response: Understood.
Number:20 Created:1/10/2005
9
service" is too late to include acceptable names on a City -approved PDP and
causes problems with preparation and City review of Final Plan.
Number:45 Created:1/11/2005
[1/11/05] REQUIRED ACCESS: 2nd point of access
A fire lane is required. The fire lane shall be visible by painting and signage, and
maintained unobstructed. 1997 UFC 901.2.2.1; 901.3; 901.4.2; 902.2.1
The criteria for a required fire lane contain several conditions that must be met.
1. The minimum width shall be 20 feet.
2..Inside turning radius shall be 25 feet and outside turning radius shall be 50
feet.
3. Compacted road base shall be used during the construction phase only. The
permanent fire lane shall consist of asphalt or concrete and shall be required to
support 40 tons
4.The fire lane shall be platted as an "Emergency Access Easement' on the final
plat.
Response: Understood and so indicated on the re -submission. Please note that
a portion of this Emergency Access Easement will be shared with the pedestrian/
bike trail.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Drainage
Number:49 Created:1/13/2005
[1/13/05] The City is concerned the groundwater will infiltrate into the pond and
the percolation design will not function properly due to the groundwater rising
when the New Mercer Ditch is flowing. More investigation needs to take place to
how to resolve this probable problem. There are certain designs that can be
implemented to help mitigate this issue, like a clay cut-off wall along within the
berm between the pond and the ditch. Also, a suggestion would be to have the
primary design be the slow release of the pond into the New Mercer ditch, with
City approval based on this concept. The secondary, or backup, design would
be the percolation of the pond water into the ground. This would essentially be
the same overall design, just basing the approval by the City on a different
option.
Response: Per a discussion between JR Engineering and Wes Lamarque, this
comment has been differed to final approval and no revisions to the plans and
the drainage report regarding this item are required prior to PDP hearing. The
Stormwater Utility intends to further discuss percolation as a primary interim
discharge vs. discharge to the ditch and will notify the applicant and JR
Engineering of their preference in a timely manner.
Number:50 Created:1/13/2005
8
Response: Addressed on re -submission.
Topic: Tree Preservation Standards
Number:53 Created:1/14/2005
[1/14/05] If existing trees are going to be preserved add an L.O.D. -Limits of
Development line to landscape and utility plans. Tree preservation notes and a
detail of L.O.D. fencing will need to be added to either the Landscape or Utility
Plans. Contact Tim Buchanan, the City forester to see if the trees mutYbe
preserved or if they may be mitigated.
Response: On February 1, 2005, the applicant and JR Engineering met with Tim
Buchanan at the site. Tim recommends attempting to reduce possible root
damage to the tree adjoining the northwest detention pond but has determined
that the tree is not significant. According to Tim, the two mature cottonwoods on
the south side of New Mercer Ditch are at or near the end of their life span. One
has a large hollow in its trunk and the other appears rotted and stressed. Both
trees are up against the proposed pedestrian trail location, would experience root
damage with trail construction, and have major branches leaning over the trail.
The mature cottonwood near the pedestrian bridge crossing is also stressed and
leans over crossing, thereby creating a potential safety hazard. The re-
submission deletes these three cottonwoods.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
Topic: Genera/
Number:42 Created:1/11/2005
[1/11/05) PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: Approved numerals or addresses shall
be provided for all new and existing building in such a position as to be plainly
visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. 1997 UFC
901.4.4
Response: Understood.
Number:43 Created:1/11/2005
[1/11/05] WATER SUPPLY: Residential (Within GMA)
No Residential building can be greater then 400 feet from a fire hydrant.
Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 800 feet along an
approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1000 gallons of
water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. 1997 UFC 901.2.2.2
Response: Understood.
Number:44 Created:1/11/2005
[1/11/05] STREET NAMES:
Street names shall be verified and reviewed by County / City Planning Dept. prior
to being put in service. 1997 UFC 901.4.5
Response: Applicant would appreciate having proposed street names verified
for use prior to the PDP hearing. Verification of street names "prior to being put in
OA
into the Development Agreement. Please see Appendix C for landscaping
requirements.
Response: Applicant agrees that the Bellwether Farm development is
responsible for the maintenance of the median in Briarwood and for providing
irrigation to the median. On February 9, 2005 and after discussions between
Susan Joy and applicant, Susan notified applicant that Sherry Wamhoff with the
Engineering Department has waived the bond or letter of credit requirement.
Number:40 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] This development is responsible for improving Vine Drive to Taft Hill
with a minimum of 36' of asphalt and striping in bike lanes. This design is
currently being done by the Adrian PDP. Those mylars need to be approved and
signed before this development's mylars can be approved and signed off on. If,
forwhatever reason, the Adrian design is not completed, than this development
will need to submit utility plans with said improvements. In addition, these
improvements must be constructed with whichever development goes first. No
building permits can be issued until the Vine improvements are complete.
Response: Bellwether Farm applicant and Adrian PDP applicant Mikal Torgeson
have agreed to split the cost of widening Vine Drive between Briaiwood and Taft
Hill. Applicant understands from Susan Joy that because this widening would not
be to the "ultimate" condition for Vine Drive, that any sharing arrangement would
need to be in a private agreement between the parties and not an element of the
Development Agreement for either project..
Number° 48 Created: 1/12/2005
[1/12/05] From Pavement Management: No Comment.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: General
Number:1 Created:12/3012004
[12/30/04] No Comments.
Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Topic: General
Number:51 Created:1/14/2005
[1/14/05] Utility and Landscape Plans need to show Natural Habitats and
Features Buffer Zone for wildlife movement. (See redlines)
Response: Non -development areas are indicated on the re -submission.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number:52 Created:1/14/2005
[1/14/05] Landscape Plan needs a planting schedule for dryland seed mix. Seed
mix should be comprised of Fort Collins native species. (See redlines and Fort
Collins Native Plants List, contact Doug Moore at 224-6143 if you have any
questions.)
2.
[1/10/05] Please add the driveway symbol to the legend. Will need stationing for
every driveway on the plan and profile sheets in Final Compliance.
Response: The applicant prefers not to show driveway locations on the plan.
Comment No. 3 from Peter Barnes acknowledges the problem and seems to
suggest that indicating exact location should be avoided. During applicant's
February 7, 2005 phone conversation with Ted Shepard, Ted indicated that it
would not be necessary to show a specific driveway location for each lot and
agreed with applicant's suggestion to show a "typical" lot with a 20' wide
driveway on the plan. During a February 7, 2005 phone conversation with Jeff
Hill, Jeff stated that driveways need to be platted only for lots less that 50 ft.
wide. All proposed lots are a minimum 50 ft. in width. Re -submission excludes
driveway locations.
Number:34 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] No structures of any kind (retaining walls) are allowed in the utility
easement.
Response: Understood and so reflected on the re -submission.
Number:35 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Sheet 12 - Turn off the utilities layer to improve scanability.
Response: Done on the re -submission.
Number:36 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please label the 6' crosspan on Sheet 14.
.Response: Done on the re -submission.
Number:37 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Plan and Profile Sheets - Please provide a detail of each widening
calling out the various dimensions shown in detail 7-24.
Response: Done on the re -submission.
Number:38 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] More detailed comments to follow in final compliance.
Response: Understood.
Number:39 Created:1110/2005
[1 /10/05] This development is responsible for the maintenance of the median in
Briarwood and for providing irrigation to the median. A bond or Letter of Credit
will be required to cover the cost of the City removing it in the future should this
development not maintain it properly. Please provide an estimate (Final
Compliance) for the City's review and approval. This, requirement will also be put
F.
Response: Corrected on re -submission.
Number:29 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Sheet 8 -A retaining wall is shown along a portion of the west
boundary. A temporary construction easement from the neighboring properties
will be required unless you can show that you can construct the wall all within
your property. No footing allowed on the neighboring property without; a
permanent easement. Will need to provide a letter of intent from the affected
property owner prior to going to hearing.
Response: As shown on the re -submission, this retaining wall will be
constructed all within the property. No temporary construction easement or letter
of intent needed.
Number:30 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Will need to show the pedestrian connection and bridge out to Taft Hill
as well as enough information to lay it out in the field (ie: a curve table).
Response: During a January 1, 2005 phone conversation with the applicant,
Glen Schlueter stated that he does not want the pedestrian trail atop the sanitary
sewer easement due to grade changes within the easement anticipated with the
construction of the regional storm drainage channel adjoining to the north. The
pedestrian bridge location and the new (and only remaining) location for the trail
atop the south ditch bank are shown on the re -submission. The curve table
information will be submitted with the Final Plan. Applicant has discussed the
new location for trail with David Averill who concurs with,this location. .
In that both the trail and bridge over New Mercer Ditch will be part of the City trail
system and adjoin the property south of Bellwether Farm, both Susan Joy and
David Averill have agreed that 50 percent of the these costs would be repaid by
the developer of that property. According to Dave Averill, both the trail and bridge
will be dedicated to and maintained by the City.
Number:31 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please provide a plan and profile for the emergency access road and
show how it ties into the existing Cherry Street.
Response: Provided on re -submission.
Number:32 Created: 1/1012005
[1/10/05] Sheet 8 - Suggest turning off the driveways, landscape and utility
layers for better scanability.
Response: Driveways are depicted on the utility plan only for lots with a width of
less than 50 feet. Utilities and landscaping remain on the grading plan.
Number:33 Created:1/10/2005
4
Response: Done on re -submission
Number:25 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please provide a note saying who owns and maintains Tract A.
Response: Re -submission more specifically defines tracts. All tracts to be
deeded by developer to the Bellwether Farm homeowners' association
Number:26 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Easements - The Fire Lane Easement needs to be called "Emergency
Access" Easement.
Response: Corrected on re -submission.
Number:27 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] There is a portion of an existing 10' utility easement that is being
vacated. If the easement is dedicated to the gas company, than they can either
sign off on the plat to vacate the easement or you can vacate it by separate
document as indicated. Please provide a copy of the recorded vacation. If the
easement is dedicated to the City of Fort Collins as a utility easement, than we'll
need to vacate the easement in house.
Response: In conjunction with Final Plan submittal, the 10 ft. Excel Energy
easement will be vacated by separate document.
Number:28 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Tract A will need a public access easement in addition to the utility and
drainage easement currently shown.
Response: The tract south of New Mercer Ditch is currently being evaluated by
Glen Schlueter and Jim Hibbard for acquisition by the City pursuant to applicant's
September 14, 2004 letter to Susan Joy.
Topic: Site
Number:14 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Need to show the entire property.
Response: Corrected on re -submission.
Number:15 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please label Tract A.
Response: Tracts have been more specifically designated on re -submission.
Topic: Utility
Number:21 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Cover Sheet - Please correct the typical street section so that the word
"min" is removed. This section needs to reflect exactly what you are building.
9
they will need to be rerouted for signatures. Please meet with them early to
avoid this delay. Thanks!!
Response: To be done prior to Final Plan submission.
Number:18 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please show how the proposed emergency access lane ties into the
existing Cherry Street. "' 'A
Response: Shown on re -submission.
Number:19 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please coordinate the comments under the various plan sets so that all
plan sets match.
Response: Done on re -submission.
Number:47 Created:1/12/2005
[1/12/05] Per 16.3.1.A.2 - All T intersections shall have a minimum of 3 access
ramps as shown in figure 16-2. Will need an additional pedestrian ramp on
Bellwether Lane between Lots 16 and 17.
Response: Shown on re -submission.
Topic: Landscape
Number:16 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Need to show the entire property.
Response: Done on re -submission.
Number:17 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements.
Response: Done.
Topic: Plat
Number:22 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Cover Sheet - Please correct the Statement of Ownership. I've taped
what it should say over the paragraph on the redlines.
Response: Corrected on re -submission.
Number:23 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Cover Sheet -Please add a signature line for the City Clerk.
Response: Corrected on re -submission.
Number:24 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please provide two bearings.
2
Imago Enterprises, Inc.
140 Palmer Drive . Fort Collins • Colorado 80525
Phone: (970) 226-6819 Fax: (970) 207-9256 Email: lesterkaplan@comcast.net
February 15, 2005
Ted Shepard, Current Planning
Planning and Community Development
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Re:. Bellwether Farm Infill Project
Response to January 20, 2005 Staff Comments
Ted:
The following is a verbatim itemization of your compilation of staff comments
regarding the first -round PDP submission for Bellwether Farm and the applicant's
responses to these comments:
Number:10 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] Please dedicate an additional 27.5' of row along Taft Hill Rd.
Response: Shown on re -submission.
Number:11 Created.-1/10/2005
[1/10105] The street names are different on the various plan sets
Response: Corrected on re -submission:
Number:12 Created:1/10/2005
[1/10/05] The median in Briarwood needs to be in row. Also, the crosswalk
needs to align with the directional ramps so the median needs to either move up
further north or accommodate the pedestrian crossing within it.
Response: Shown on re -submission..
Number:13 Created:1/10/2005
[1 /10/05] Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements. You may want to
visit with JR Wilson in Tech Services before your next submittal to discuss
whether or not your plans will scan or not. The grey scale on some sheets
probably will not scan and will need to be corrected. Just to warn you that even if
the mylars are signed off and they don't scan in properly, Tech Services will not
accept them. New mylars will need to be provided that meet their needs and