HomeMy WebLinkAboutADRIAN SUBDIVISION, 1ST FILING - PDP - 42-03A - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)It is possible that another formal round of development review may not be necessary.
The issues expressed in this letter could be worked out directly with the offected
departments prior to a public hearing for the PDP. However, due to recent
circumstances the Current Planning Department is without an outside (impartial)
administrative hearing officer until sometime in October. Terms are being discussed
with an outside firm.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this
project, please feel free to call me at 221-6341.
Yours Truly,
Atk)e-�—�
Steve Olt,
City Planner
cc: Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director
Susan Joy, City Engineering
Wes Lamarque, City Stormwater
John & Julie Adrian
DMW Civil Engineers
Page 10
4. If the proposed 2" mill & overlay is done on North Impala Drive then the
construction would probably hit dirt. The full section of pavement may have to
be replaced.
5. The new construction plans are still deficient. Some of the changes can be done
with the Final Compliance review.
6. This item may not yet be ready for public hearing.
Stormwater:
1. The detention pond must not hold water beyond the normal storm water release
period. It should include a sand filter with under -drain.
2. This proposed development is maximizing the building envelopes on the lots. How
will drainage be provided along the lots? Drainage should occur away from the
adjacent properties to the south and east.
3. Positive drainage is needed on North Impala Drive all the way to Cherry Street,
to the south. There is a flat spot on Impala Drive downstream from this site
that could create a problem.
Water/Wastewater:
1. There are some small separation requirement issues with the utilities and
landscaping.
Transportation Planning:
1. The new sidewalk on North Impala Drive should connect to West Vine Drive. An
interim walk along the future 2"d Filing may work.
2. Adequate vehicle and pedestrian separations must be provided.
3. A bus stop in the area should be considered and provisions made for a stop.
Page 9
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: Transportation
Number: 96 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Transportation Planning respectfully requests that the applicant consider
extending the sidewalk along the frontage of this project to Vine Dr. It is Staff's
opinion that several compelling reasons exist for this request (this is not a
requirement). 1). There are two bus -stops currently located within walking distance of
this project - a continuous sidewalk from the project to Vine Dr. will provide an
important pedestrian connection and enhance access to transit from this site and
adjoining properties. 2). This development proposal is located in a school walking zone
(Irish Elementary). 3). If the sidewalk is extended to Vine Dr. from the parcel under
consideration, there will only be one "gap" remaining in the sidewalk along the east side
of N. Impala Dr. between Vine Dr. and Cherry St. - this will be on the frontage of the
parcel immediately to the south of this proposed project. 4). If this development
comes to fruition, there will bean increase in the number of vehicle trips along N.
Impala Dr. as residents/visitors access the site. It is staffs perspective that should
this take place it would be wise to provide a facility that truly separates vehicles and
pedestrians from Vine Dr. to the site. Thanks for considering this improvement.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill
Topic: Utilities
Number: 91 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Maintain 10 feet of separation between thrust blocks and all other
underground utilities. Show and label location of existing sanitary sewer from the
existing house. Clearly define the abandonment method procedure for this existing
system. Provide all appropriate stand details on the detail sheet.
See site, landscape, and utility plans for other comments.
The following comments were expressed at staff review on September 81n:
Engineering,
1. This development will need to improve North Impala Drive based on how the
development impacts it.
2. The applicant should work directly with Lorimer County Engineering
regarding required street improvements to North Impala Drive.
3. All plans need to match regarding the curb & gutter return onto West Vine
Drive from North Impala Drive.
Page 8
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Drainage
Number: 47 Created: 7/28/2004
[9/3/04] The pond water quality outlet detail shows a micro pool. The detention pond
needs to have dry extended detention with no water retention. Please revise outlet
structure detail and/or pond grading to accomplish a positive outf all for all storage.
The water quality portion of the detention pond also has to have a positive outf all. A
sand filter can be used, but an underdrain needs to be included to take the flow out
into a storm sewer, Swale, or gutter.
Number: 49 Created: 7/28/2004
[9/3/04] There is a stretch of Impala Drive downstream of the site which the
flowline profile shows as being completely flat with no grade. Please provide spot
elevations every 20 feet along this stretch to ensure the street flowline has a positive
slope. See redlined plan for more detail and exact location. There needs to be positive
slope all the way to Cherry Street for the proposed drainage to be designed to flow in
Impala Drive.
The downstream conveyance from the outlet of the detention pond needs to carry the
flow without causing a negative impact to any properties. This may include adding curb
and gutter along the east side of Impala Drive and any other improvements as needed.
Number: 89 Created: 9/3/2004
[9/3/04] The grading plan needs to clearly show that all drainage within a proposed
basin that was designed to drain to the detention pond will actually drain to the pond
after construction. Due to the building footprints being proposed very near the slope
grading along the east and part of the south sides of the site, lots 1 through 4 may act
more like Type B lots than Type A lots. This would result in drainage entering the
private drive which can not be allowed. A retaining wall may have to be designed or the
building footprints reduced and the grading plan has to clearly show that drainage will
flow to the private drives west of the lots. Spot elevations need to be shown with high
points, Swale inverts, etc. which clearly illustrates the flows going around the
structures and to the private drive.
Number: 90 Created: 9/3/2004
[9/3/04] Please see redlined plans for additional comments.
Department: Traffic Operations
Topic: Traffic
Number: 88
(8/31/04] No issues from Traffic Operations.
Issue Contact: Eric Bracke
Created:8/31/2004
Page 7
Number: 99 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Sheet 6 - The 5' culvert is shown on other sheets as 4'. See redlines.
Number: 100 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Vine Drive Improvements - Need to show/label/dimension all existing row
and easements. Show existing and proposed striping. Must provide a 6' bike lane both
sides of street and widen out Vine as necessary to accommodate that. Show eoa.
Label Taft Street.
Number: 101 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Sheet 13 - FC, remove detail 707 as it is not being used on this project.
Number: 102 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Sheet 14 - A trash rack detail is shown. Where is this going? Please remove
if not needed.
Number: 103 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Existing and proposed contours must be provided at 2' min intervals and
labeled.
Number: 104 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Contours must extend a minimum of 50' offsite and tie into existing
contours. There are no contours shown on Sandy Knox's property, please provide.
Number: 105 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] See Bob Zakely for revegetation and erosion control notes.
Number. 106 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] ROW, property lines and easements must be dimensioned and labeled. Plan
sets (landscape, site, utility) do not match.
Number: 107 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Existing features must be shown for a minimum of 150' beyond the property
limits. There are some fences and walls across the street that are pretty close to the
street, need to show those too.
Number: 108 Created, 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Grade breaks are shown on the profiles but they need to be labeled with the
%. Can't exceed .4%
Number: 109 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Centerline needs to be shown through the intersection (Vine).
Page 6
Number: 73 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] [7/30/04] Dimension all sidewalks.
Number: 74 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] Rotate labeling to the reader. Correct all overlapped labeling.
(7/30/04] See Appendix E6 for scanning requirements.
Topic: Utilities
Number: 29 Created: 7/27/2004
[9/8/04] Repeat comment. Need more information to make sure that the proposed
will tie into the existing and that it drains properly.
[7/27/04] Label the type of curb and gutter, both existing and proposed.
Number: 62 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] [7/30/04] See redlines for other comments.
Number: 67 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] All of the line weights are the same and it's hard to read the plans. Please
differentiate the line weights so that the plans are more clear.
[7/30/04] Please include in the design and the legend both the existing and proposed
row and utility easements.
Number: 68 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04][7/30/04] Label the existing and proposed curb and gutter with the type
(vertical or rollover).
Number: 69 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] (7/30/041 Please show how the proposed improvements to Impala and Vine
tie into the existing.
Number: 97 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Sheet 8 and others: Remove Note 6. Your certifying your design based on
this survey so it must be accurate.
Number: 98 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Sheet 6 - Note that all roof drains flow towards private drive doesn't work
in reality. Most people will remove the drain once they move in because it doesn't look
right.
Page 5
Number: 95
[9/8/04] Plan sets need to match.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 76
[9/8/04] [7/30/041 Remove contours.
Number: 77
Created: 9/8/2004
Created: 7/30/2004
Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] This set is unscannable. Repeat comment.
[7/30/04] See Appendix E6 for scanning requirements.
Number: 78 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] (7/30/04] Show, dimension and label all row and easements.
Topic: Plat
Number: 64 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] [7/30/04] From Technical Services: Boundary and legal close.
Number: 79 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] Corrections required to the Statement of Ownership and Subdivision.
(7/30/04] The plot language as shown is wrong. Please email me at sjoy@fcgov.com
and I can email you the correct language in a word document.
Number: 92 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] From Technical Services: Typo in legal or curve table. See redlines.
Number: 93 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] From Technical Services: Plat needs a note as to what Outlot A is and who
owns it.
Number: 94 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Need to define all of the abbreviations (UE, AE, etc).
Number: 110 Created: 9/8/2004
[9/8/04] Label adjoining properties.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 72 Created: 7/30/2004
[9/8/04] Dimension existing and proposed row.
[7/30/04] Show, dimension and label all easements and row.
Page 4
side) along the first filing's frontage only. There will be some offsite improvements to
the north and south of the project limits because you will need to taper out the crown
of the road to match into the existing. The curb and gutter shown north of the
property line on Impala does not need to be put in at this time (it will go in with the
2nd filing). Also, will need to show the existing flowline of the west side of Impala
down to Cherry to make sure your improvements will work with the existing and any
future improvements when the rest of the road is brought up to standards. Our
minimum flowline grade is .5%, the existing shown is .32%. You need to leave the new
curb up high enough so that the road can be reworked in the future to meet the .5%
minimum. You do NOT need to correct the existing deficiency UNLESS it is to make
your drainage work. I will be glad to meet with you to go over this and the redlines to
make sure that this is clear.
(7/27/04] This project is responsible for improving Impala Drive along their frontage
up to and including the curb and gutter on the west side of the street and tying it into
the existing curb and gutter to the south. Also, the current design is terminating the
curb and gutter at the property line on the east side of Impala Drive and this presents
a drainage problem for the neighbor to the south. This project will need to curb and
gutter as far south as necessary to properly discharge the drainage generated by the
project.
Number: 15 Created: 7/27/2004
(9/8/04] Correct all overlapped labeling and rotate all labeling to the reader. Do not
shade areas of removal as this will not scan. Hatching works much better. Please see
Appendix E6 for scanning requirements.
[7/27/04] Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements.
Number: 20 Created: 7/27/2004
[9/8/04] [7/27/041 Show existing features for a minimum of 150' of the project
(show driveways to the west and south, show where the curb and gutter picks up again
to the south and how the proposed C & G ties into it, etc)
Number: 23 Created: 7/27/2004
[9/8/04] Repeat comment. Plan sets do not match.
(7/27/04] Show all easements on all plan sets (Site, Landscape, Utility) and they need
to match. The back of the sidewalk needs to be at the row line. It appears from the
plans that the row is overlapping the sidewalk.
Page 3
Topic: Plat
Number: 111 Created: 9/13/2004
[9/13/04] The City's Technical Services Department offered the following comments:
a. The outside boundary and legal description close.
b. There is a typographical error in the legal description or Curve Table for Curve C3
(see red -lined plat).
c. The subdivision plat needs to include a note identifying what Outlot A is and who
owns it.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 56 Created: 7/29/2004
(9/14/04] Repeat comment.
[7/29/04] The Site Plan states that the Maximum Building Height will be 28'. It
should also identify the proposed type of single-family homes; to be 1-story, 2-story,
or a combination of 1- and 2-story.
Topic: Traffic
Number: 28 Created: 7/27/2004
[9/8/04] To reiterate; however, now Lots 1 - 4.
[7/27/04] No direct vehicular access to Lots 2 - 5 and Outlot A will be allowed from
the existing gravel drive off -site along the east side of the Adrian property. This
information must be included as a General Note on the Site Plan and as a note in the
Land Use Table on the subdivision plat.
Topic: Utilities
Number: 5 Created: 7/27/2004
(9/13/04] Repeat comment.
[7/27/04] Dennis Greenwalt of Comcast Cable Television indicated that they would
like to see the standard 13' wide utility easement along North Impala Drive or a 6'
wide utility easement along the rear property lines of Lots 1, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: general
Number: 13 Created: 7/27/2004
[9/8/04] Now that the project has split into two filings, this project is only
responsible for full street improvements (up to and including curb & gutter on the west
Page 2
n
City of Fort Collins
M. Torgerson Architects
c/o Troy Jones
223 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO. 80524
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Date: 09/14/2004
Staff has reviewed your submittal for ADMAN SUBDIVISION, 1ST FILING, PDP
- TYPE I (LUC), and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning
Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Genera/
Number: 45 Created: 7/28/2004
[9/8/04] An Alternative Compliance request was received from the applicant on
September 8, 2004. It is being reviewed by City staff.
[7/28/04] Section 3.2.3(B) of the Land Use Code sets forth the requirement that at
least 65% of single-family or two-family lots less than 15,000 square feet in size must
conform to and satisfy the definition of a "solar -oriented lot". Only 2 lots (Lots 1 & 2,
fronting West Vine Drive) satisfy this requirement. The 2 of 9 lots constitutes 22.2%
of the total lots. The applicant may submit an Alternative Compliance request to the
City based on the criteria set forth in Section 3.2.3(E) of the LUC. The request would
be reviewed as part of the Project Development Plan review process, with a decision
rendered by the ultimate decision maker for the project.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 58 Created: 7/29/2004
[9/14/04] Has the City Forester met with the applicants on -site to make
determinations on the conditions of the existing trees? It appears that tree
preservation and protection could have a significant impact on the potential building
envelopes on these lots.
[7/29/04] The Landscape Plan must label all existing and proposed trees. It should
also identify whether the existing trees are to remain and be protected or are
proposed to be removed. The City Forester (Tim Buchanan) should be contacted to
determine if any of the trees are significant, which could preclude removal or require
mitigation. Tim can be reached at 221-6361.
Page 1