Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutINTERSTATE LAND - ODP - 49-02A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - CORRESPONDENCE-CONCEPTUAL REVIEWco72@@o urban design, inc. 12. This development request will be subject to the Development Review Fee Schedule that is available in the Current Planning Department office. The fees are due at the time of submittal of the required documents for the Overall Development Plan, Project Development Plan, and the Final Compliance phases of development review by City staff and affected outside reviewing agencies. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. 13. This development proposal is subject to the requirements as set forth in the City's LUC, specifically Articles 2. Administration (Development Review Procedures), Article 3. General Development Standards, and Article 4. Districts. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. Sincerely, Jo Carter, Project Manager Cityscape Urban Design, Inc cc: Stan Whitaker, Western Property Advisors Mike Brake, JR Engineering c0c, �n@ urban design, inc. Applicant's Response: The buffers for Box Elder Creek, Cooper Slough and the irrigations ditches have been shown on the ODP. A request to reduce the Cooper Slough buffer has been submitted with this application. The applicant is requesting that the 300' Cooper Slough buffer be reduced to an average of 254' as shown. The Land Use Code allows for a reduction in the buffer of up to 20% to be reviewed administratively. As per several meetings with Doug Moore, it was determined that the proposed buffer is less than 20% and hence would be reviewed administratively. Please contact Doug, at 224-6143, if you have questions about these comments. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. 10. Jeff Lakey of the Parks Planning Department indicated that this residential development will be subject to both the neighborhood and community parkland fees, which are based on the square footage of each individual dwelling unit. The fees will be assessed at the time of issuance of building permits. Please contact Jeff, at 416-2260, if you want additional information on the parkland fees. Also, they would like to discuss the possibility of a neighborhood park site being located within this ODP. Applicant's Response: Several meetings have been held with Craig Foreman from the City of Fort Collins Parks Planning Department regarding the potential for a City Park in the northwest comer of the site. The result of these discussions is a 10 to 14 acre park as shown on the ODP. Additional land north of the Cache La Poudre Ditch may be used as city parkland. 11. Ken Waido of the Advance Planning Department indicated that this property is in the I - 25 Subarea Plan but is not in the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. Because of the potential for a neighborhood park in this development it is very important that vehicular connections to surrounding residential neighborhoods be made. Please contact Ken, at 221-6753, if you want to further discuss his comments. Applicant's Response: The issue of connectivity to adjacent subdivisions has been brought up several times and was discussed at the CRT meeting. The applicant will request alternative compliance be granted for required connectivity to Boxelder Estates through the Alternative Compliance process. The applicant maintains that connectivity to Boxelder Estates should, at most, be in the form of pedestrian access only. Many discussions with the residents of Boxelder Estates have made it very clear to the applicant that these residents are NOT in favor of street connections through their neighborhood. This issue was discussed at length during the Neighborhood Meeting and will continue to be a topic of discussion. Additionally, Cooper Slough is specifically designated at a Natural Feature in Section 3.4.1 (E) of the Fort Collins Land Use Code. Department of Natural Resource staff has been adamant about maintaining a substantial 300' buffer from the edge of Cooper Slough. The applicant is attempting to reduce the average width of this buffer to a width of 254'. The buffer standards applied to the Cooper Slough and the connectivity requirements stated in the Land Use Code are in direct conflict with each other. Co�n@@o urban design, inc. Applicant's Response: Tess Jones, CDOT, has reviewed the proposed access points along the Frontage Road and deemed them acceptable. Additionally, during the initial construction of the Frontage Road, these access points were pre -determined. The connectivity standards set forth in the LUC must be addressed and met. Applicant's Response: See below response to Ken Waido's comment # 11 There is a planned bicycle/pedestrian trial along Boxelder Creek that must be addressed with this development plan. Applicant's Response: The planned bicycle/pedestrian frail has been shown on the ODP. Additional internal pedestrian routes have been shown on plan. These internal pedestrian routes are subject to change with more detailed design. Please contact Tom, at 416-2040, if you have questions about these comments. Garold Smith of Transfort indicated that the Interstate Land property is not within the proximity of existing or long-range Transfort service. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. 9. Doug Moore of the Natural Resources Department offered the following comments: a. A Fugitive Dust Control Permit will be necessary. This permit would be issued by the Larimer County Environmental Health Department. Please contact them directly for information about their requirements. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. b. Native plant materials and grasses should be incorporated in the Landscape Plan. The use of bluegrass should be minimized. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. The applicants have submitted a "preliminary" Ecological Characterization Study to the City for review. Applicant's Response: The Ecological Characterization Study has been updated to include the wetland delineation within and adjacent to Box Elder Creek. The possibility of the Ute Ladies Trusses Orchid being on this site must be addressed. The necessary natural areas buffers must be shown on the ODP. Cr9Y2@@P@ urban design, inc. These comments all refer to the proposed crossing of Boxelder Creek Stormwater recommends against crossing Boxelder Creek and suggests that the applicant consider other points of access, such as north of the I - 25 box culverts on the Frontage Road or to the north and west. If there is no other way to get access than the Boxelder Creek crossing then the crossing needs to span the erosion buffer limits, i.e. a bridge. The utility needs to purchase additional stream width to accommodate possible future master plan flows. The master plan design flow recommended at this time is the one from Alternative C, of 4,180 cfs, to be used in designing the stream flow, proposed crossing, and Prospect Road crossing. The Prospect Road crossing should also be a bridge for channel stability and wildlife movement. The City Engineering Department did a cost analysis as part of the preliminary design of Prospect Road and found a series of culverts is more expensive than a bridge. The developer is responsible for designing and building at the existing flow rate of 3,700 cfs and providing a design that can accommodate the 4,180 cfs in the future if & when Alternative C is implemented (or build for 4,180 cfs now without Stormwater participation). Please contact Glen, at 224-6065, if you have questions about these comments. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. 6. Bruce Vogel of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: There is 3-phase power on the Frontage Road that can feed development on both sides. The standard electric development charges will apply to this project. Bruce may be reached at 224-6157 if you want to contact him about these comments. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. 7. Tom Reiff of the Transportation Planning Department offered the following comments: A TIS, addressing all modes of transportation, will be required with your PDP submittal. Please contact Ward Stanford of the Traffic Operations Department (221-6820) and Tom Reiff of the Transportation Planning Department (416-2040) to determine what information will be needed in the TIS pertaining to LOS for vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of transportation. Scheduling a "scoping" meeting with them would be appropriate. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) must review the TIS and development plans because of impacts to the Frontage Road and I - 25. Please contact CDOT directly to discuss the development and any concerns they may have. Con@@ o urban design, inc. The site is on Stormwater Inventory Map #15J. A copy of the map can be obtained from the Utilities office at 700 Wood Street. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. The site has major impacts from the Boxelder Creek and Cooper Slough floodplains that meet at this site. The present state of the master plan identifies that, in the long term, the two boxes under I - 25 will be opened up, so the site needs to be designed with higher flows. The reason "long term" is mentioned is that the master plan needs to involve Wellington and Timnath as well, so the City and County are planning interim improvements that will benefit City and County residents. The long term solutions to flooding involve enlarging Cobb Lake and building another large regional detention pond and also opening up the I - 25 box culverts and possibly adding more, which also affects the Prospect Road box culverts. Further downstream, the Boxelder Sanitation District needs to be protected or the new flow diverted to the Poudre River before reaching the District's facilities. The standard drainage and erosion control reports and construction plans are required and they must be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado. On -site detention may be needed if the site adds to the peak discharges. Applicant's Response: Currently, the culverts under 1-25 are not open. When these culverts are open, additional flows will impact this site. Currently there is approximately 1500 cfs impacting this project site during the 100-year storm event. When the culverts under 1-25 are opened, there would be an approximate increase of 2600 to 3000 cfs encumbering the site. With a closed culvert condition in place under 1-25, it is the applicant's view that any additional flood impacts resulting in the opening of culverts will be at the cost of the city. It is generally understood that the culverts under Prospect Road currently are undersized as well. Any additional culvert sizing required for Prospect Road should be at the cost of the party responsible for the increase of flows. It is the applicant's view that the City of Fort Collins is the responsible party not this development. Some road improvements to Prospect Road may be necessary as a result of this development, but the applicant does not feel that this development should pay more than it's contributing share of any stormwater improvements since this is a regional problem. On -site extended detention for water quality is required to treat the runoff Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. The floodplain and drainage along the west property line need to be addressed and it does not appear that the plan accommodates that drainage, especially at the south end. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. If the FEMA floodplain is modified then a CLOMR may be needed. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. CoVP@ o urban design, inc. A left turn bay from eastbound East Prospect Road onto the Frontage Road will be required. Design for improvements to the Frontage Road will be required. East Prospect Road over I - 25 is not up to current standards. The location of the southbound off -ramp will need to be addressed and possibly relocated. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. Regarding the PDP: This development must address and provide for vehicular connectivity, as set forth in Section 3.6.3 of the Land Use Code (LUC). The City prefers that a "3-legged" traffic circle not be used, as shown on the east side of the multi -family area of the development. Street widening is required at street turns. Cul-de-sacs are required at the termination of all non -connecting public streets. Access points are required to meet the City's LUC and City's Street Standards. Further discussion is required on site layout if the applicant wishes to use public alleys. The current site design requires the use of private drives. Applicant's Response: The conceptual street design has been revised. The Larimer County Road Impact Fees will apply to the development on this property. This new development will be subject to the City's current Street Standards. Please contact Marc, at 221-6605 or 221-6750, if you have questions about these comments. Roger Buffington of the City's Water/Wastewater Department indicated that this site is within the service areas of the East Larimer County Water District (ELCO) and the Boxelder Sanitation District. Please contact them directly if you have questions about their requirements. Mike Scheid of the ELCO Water District indicated that the applicant should contact him, at 493-2044, to discuss the water needs and requirements for this land use. They have a 12" water main on the west side of Interstate 25 that can be used to serve this property. At this time, no date has been set to submit the Project Development Plan for the residential area. Applicant's Response: These comments have been noted. 5. Glen Schlueter of the Stormwater Utility offered the following comments: The site is in the Cooper Slough/Boxelder Creek drainage basin where there are currently no new development fees. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. August 13, 2003 Steve Olt City of Fort Collins Community Planning and Environmental Services P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Interstate Land Dear Steve, Co @caa o urban design, inc. 3555 stanford road, suite 105 fort collins, Colorado 80525 (970) 226-4074 fax (970) 226-4196 e@cityscapeud.com Included below are the comments received from City Staff from the Conceptual Review Team for Interstate Land. An explanation (in italics) of how issues have been addressed follows each comment. COMMENTS: �f 1. Jenny Nuckols of the Zoning Department indicated that the ODP (a Typelopment request in the Land Use Code) would be subject to a Planning & Zoning Board review and public hearing. She has no further comments at this time. Please contact Jenny, at 416-2313, if you have zoning -related questions. Applicant's Response: So noted. Thank you. 2. Marc Virata of the Engineering Department offered the following comments: The standard utility plan submittal requirements will apply to this development request. Street oversizing fees will apply to the PDP development request. The fees are based on vehicle trip generation for the proposed land uses in the development plan. Please contact Matt Baker of Engineering (224-6108) for detailed information on the fees. The fees will be collected at the time of issuance of building permits. A Transportation Impact Study (TIS), addressing all modes of transportation, will be required with your ODP and PDP submittals. Please contact Ward Stanford of the Traffic Operations Department (221-6820) and Tom Reiff of the Transportation Planning Department (416-2040) to determine what information will be needed in the TIS pertaining to Level of Service (LOS) for vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of transportation. There will be some Adequate Public Facilities (APF) issues associated with the East Prospect Road & I - 25 access ramps, overpass, and Frontage Road. Please see Section 3.7.3(D)(1) of the LUC. Improvements to East Prospect Road will be required.