Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutADRIAN SUBDIVISION, 1ST FILING - PDP - 42-03A - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSIt 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 affected departments prior to a public hearing for the POP. However, due to recent circumstances the Current Planning Department is without an outside (impartial) adWnistrative 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, 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 11 2. The applicant should work directly with Lorimer County Engineering regarding required street improvements to North Impala brive. 3. All plans need to match regarding the curb & gutter return onto West Vine Drive from North Impala Drive. 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 10 Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke Topic: Traffic Number: 88 Created: 8/31/2004 (8/31/04] No issues from Traffic Operations. 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 be an 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. The walk has been extended. 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. Completed. The following comments were expressed at staff review on September 8 h: Engineering: 1. This development will need to improve North Impala Drive based on how the development impacts it. Page 9 [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 outfall for all storage. The water quality portion of the detention pond also has to have a positive outfall. 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. The micro pool has been removed. 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. Existing roll over curb andgutter is now shown and labeled on the Street plan. Existing slopes are shown for 400'south. Spot elevations are labeled every 20' 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 8 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. Grading has been revised to insure that this drainage flows to the front of the lots Number: 90 Created:9/3/2004 [9/3/04] Please see redlined plans for additional comments. Acknowledged. Page 8 [9/8/04] Sheet 14 - A trash rack detail is shown. Where is this going? Please remove if not needed. The trash rack is a part of the pond outlet structure. It insures that the water quality release plate, orifice plate and release weir do notget plugged with trash. Number: 103 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] Existing and proposed contours must be provided at 2' min intervals and labeled. Acknowledged. 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. Acknowledged. Using 2' contours there is less than 2' of elevation difference across Sandy's lot, hence the reason no contours are shown. Number: 105 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] See Bob Zakely for revegetation and erosion control notes. We have no notes from Bob. Bob indicated in a phone call that he has no comments at this time. 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. Completed. 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. The fences are shown and labeled on the existing conditions plan. They are also shown, but not labeled, on a// other sheets 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% All grade breaks %'s are now labeled. Number: 109 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] Centerline needs to be shown through the intersection (Vine). Completed. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number: 47 Created: 7/28/2004 Page 7 Acknowledged. [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). Existing roll over curb andgutter is now shown and labeled on the Street plan. Existing slopes are shown for 400'south. 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. This is now shown on the Street plan. 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. Note has been revised. 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. Grading has been revised to insure that this drainage flows to the front of the lots Number: 99 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] Sheet 6 - The 5' culvert is shown on other sheets as 4'. See redlines. Corrected. 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. Completed. Number: 101 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] Sheet 13 - FC, remove detail 707 as it is not being used on this project. Acknowledged. Number: 102 Created: 9/8/2004 Page 6 Number: 93 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] From Technical Services: Plat needs a note as to what Outlot A is and who Correctedowns it. Number: 94 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] Need to define all of the abbreviations (UE, AE, etc). Corrected. Number: 110 Created: 9/8/2004 [9/8/04] Label adjoining properties. Corrected. 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. 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. Existing roll over curb andgutter is now shown and labeled on the Street plan. Existing slopes are shown for 400'south. [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. Acknowledged. 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. Page 5 All driveways are shown and labeled on the street plan and the grading plan. The tie in point for the existing curb andgutter is dearly shown on the street plan. Number: 23 [9/8/04] Repeat comment Acknowledged. Plan sets do not match. Created:7/27/2004 [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. Number: 95 [9/8/04] Plan sets need to match. Acknowledged. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 76 [9/8/04] [7/30/04] Remove contours. Created: 9/8/2004 Created: 7/30/2004 Number: 77 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. Corrected. Number: 79 Created: 7/30/2004 [9/8/04] Corrections required to the Statement of Ownership and Subdivision. (7/30/04] The plat language as shown is wrong. Please email me at sjoy@fcgov.com and I can email you the correct language in a word document. Corrected. Number: 92 [9/8/04] From Technical Services: Corrected. Created: 9/8/2004 Typo in legal or curve table. See redlines. Page 4 Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: 6enerol 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 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. The offsite improvements to the north and south have been revised as requested. The flowline on Impala has since been surveyed and has been updated on the profile. The grade is at least 0.5% all the way to Cherry St.. [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. Text has been cleaned up and rotated. Shaded areas are now hatched with dots. [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) Page 3 Topic: P/at 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. Acknowledged [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. The easement is now 13' wide. [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. Page 2 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins M. Torgerson Architects Date: 09/14/2004 c/o Troy Jones 223 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO. 80524 Staff has reviewed your submittal for ADRIAN SUBDIVISION, 1ST FILING, PDP - TYPE I (LUC), and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt Topic: senerai 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(8) 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