HomeMy WebLinkAboutSIDEHILL (JOHNSON PROPERTY) - ODP - 32-01A - CORRESPONDENCE - (7)cross section? and what portions of the street will consists of this cross section? and how will the
cross section operate at intersections?
Topic: Transportation
25
(Comment updated 1-2-02) It is strongly recommended that the development consider locating a
neighborhood trail parallel to the railroad tracks that connects from the future trail along the retention
pond that is being constructed by the Rigden Farm development to the south and connect to
Timberline Road to the north. This will support necessary internal and external level of service
connectivity to the proposed public park, Liberty Commons school, Spring Creek and Poudre River
Trails, adjacent neighborhoods, other development, etc ... It can also be a major support component of
the required neighborhood trail network. [LUC 3.6.2 (J.5)] If questions exists the Transportation
Planning staff would like to assist in this matter.
58
According to the applicant's responses regarding comment # 22 in the first round, further bike /
pedestrian level of service analysis will be performed at the PDP stage with a seperate TIS. Please
be aware that off site improvements may be necessary as parcels are sold off to individual
developers to satisfy the level of service for these transportation modes. The level of service analysis
will also have to take into account; 1. street crossings, especially into the neighborhood commercial
district and access to schools, 2. Visual interests and amenities, 3. security, and 4. directness,
including to schools and shopping districts. This may require further information and explanations
than discussions regarding street improvements to satisfy the LOS criteria.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: General
57
Please provide documentation on how the 1000 foot buffer around the Drake Water Reclamation
Facility was determined.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill
Topic: General
56
City water utilities has no comments at this time.
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.
Yours Truly,
TROYJONES
City Planner
Page 7
facilities to service these ponds. It would be a good idea to coordinate these prior to road
construction to avoid disturbing the newly built arterial street in the future.
Detention Pond A is currently designed to outlet into the North Tributary Storm Sewer. Please review
the plans for Drake/Ziegler and make sure that proposed outfall location and invert for Pond A are
acceptable for your site.
Detention Pond B is currently proposed to drain into FCRID. If this outfall is acceptable to you and
will ultimately be the one used by this development, then how the proposed alignement of the outfall
system into the ditch in order to determine what offsite easments will be needed at PDP stage. If you
will be proposing a master plan update in order to route the flows though the Rigden Farm pond, then
a redesign of the siphons, the outfall channel and the outfall system from your pond to the Rigden
Farm pond should be pursued immediately.
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke
67
The applicant needs to be fully aware that there are APF issues with the intersection of Timberline
and Prospect. The intersection is operating at LOS F in the morning and afternoon peak hours.
There is no capacity in the intersection to accommodate additional growth in the area and there is no
city capital project to remedy the condition. The applicant must be made aware that they are
undertaking the risk of not receiving any building permits if/when the project proceeds to final plan.
68
Other projects in the area that are undertaking the same risk is Spring Creek Farms located directly
west of their project.
69
Based on the volumes predicted in the TIS, I will be requiring auxiliary right turn lanes on Timberline
at all of the access locations. When Timberline becomes a six -lane arterial, the auxiliary lanes won't
be necessary.
70
The TIS evaluated only three access locations on Drake Road. The site plan shows four. The first
access location that is east of Timberline appears to be too close to the intersection and should be
eliminated.
71
Existing deficiencies in the area that need to be addressed are the two -one lane bridges on Ziegler
Road. The increase in recent traffic has, in my opinion, created a hazard that needs correction.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Tom Reiff
26
8/27/01 Recommendation; Establish a well connected network of streets that disperse traffic and
eases walking. Utilize a mix of narrow streets, short blocks, well defined x-walks, median refuges for
pedestrians, on -street parking and bike lanes, and traffic calming measures, to name a few.
Topic: Street Layout
23
Large medians; (Comment updated 1-2-02)
According to the applicant, this issue will be discussed at the PDP stage.
1. Provide a note stating that the Johnson Farm development will be responsible for the
landscaping and maintenance of the proposed 100' median.
2. Typically street cross sections are not shown at the ODP stage. But with the large proposed
median additional information is necessary, for example, which collectors are proposed with this
Page 6
Topic: Street Layout
55
Poudre Fire Authority has no new comments at this time. Previous comments still pertain 8/21 /01.
Department: Street Oversizing Issue Contact: Matt Baker
40
8/29/01 Traffic Impact Study shows acceptable levels of service at Timberline and Prospect at 2007.
Is Adequate Public Facilities (APF) an issue with this development? If so, at what point?
1/11102 See Enginerring Comment 453.
41
8/29/01 Staff has worked extensively to plan transportation network in this area. ODP access points
seem to follow these quidelines, with the exception of the alignment of Sharp Point extension through
the site. Please address roadway classifications for Sharp Point, Access H, and Access C.
1/11/01 See Engineering Comment #52.
42
8/29/01 Pedestrian connection from site to Poudre River trail system should be more of a "trail'
improvement than just street and sidewalks.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Harridan
Topic: Basin Delineation
48
Please show the master plan basin delineation on the proposed overall drainage plan. Please
discuss in the text and show on the plans how the original Master Plan approved basins are being
affected by this proposal. Will there be any basin transfer from Spring Creek into the Foothills Basin
as a result of this proposal ?
Topic: Detention Pond Design
13
8/20/01 The detention ponds designed were sized using UD Pond. This is fine for an approximate
sizing of these facilities, however, the site will need to be modeled using UDSWMM per City criteria at
PDP level. This may result in an increase in pond volume and aerial coverage.
Topic: General
50
Please provide a signed and stamped copy of the overall drainage report.
Topic: Off -site easements
49
It is important to make sure that this easement will accommodate the combined additional 85 cfs that
would be issued from this development if the currently proposed outfall route is chosen. Otherwise
please adhere to the outfall point designated in the Foothill Basin Master Plan which assumes that
this site will drain into the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch and easements will be needed from Pond
B to the Inlet Ditch.
Topic: Outfall Design and Construction
47
The Drake Road plans are currently being reviewed as part of the Rigden Farm Filing 6 submittal.
Please make sure that proposed Detention Ponds A and B have the appropriate outlet points and
Page 5
52
Suggest you just label the collectors as collectors and not minor collector and major collector. This
would allow either one to be used based on the desired use and volumes.
53
The issue of APF in the area needs to be kept in mind for the PDP submittal.
Topic: Hydrologic Study
9
8/10/01 Will need to submit a hydrologic study at the time of PDP submitllal due to high ground water
on the site.
Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Topic: Wetlands
54
It's not clear if the proposal is to mitigate the wetland shown on the plans, by reconstructing new one
in the southeastern corner of the site. If so please add a note to the plan explaining. If not a Natural
Habitats & Features Buffer will need to be shown around the wetland shown on the plan. 2.3.2(H)(6)
Department: Park Planning Issue Contact: Craig Foreman
66
As further design work proceeds in the future, we will want to work closely with the developer to
obtain utility services and an irrigation supply of water to the park site. We ill be interested in teh
design of the detention area and other abutting features of the James Company plan. Our interest is
for mutual compatibility between the park and surrounding uses as much as possible.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
18
8/21/01 Address Numerals: Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property,
and posted on a contrasting background with a minimum of 6-inch numerals for residential and 10-
inch for commercial buildings. 97 UFC 901.4.4
1/11/02 This is a PDP issue, but remeber that it will apply when you get to that level of detail in your
design.
19
8/21/01 Residential Water Supply Requirements: 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 with
a residual pressure of 20 psi. Commercial Water Supply Requirements: No commercial building can
be greater then 300 feet from a fire hydrant. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of
600 feet along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1500 gallons of
water per minute with a residual pressure of 20 psi.
97 UFC 901.2.2.2
1/11/02 This is a PDP issue, but remeber that it will apply when you get to that level of detail in your
design.
20
8/21/01 Street Names: Street names shall be verified and reviewed by LETA and the City Planning
Department prior to being put into service.
1/11/02 This is a PDP issue,'but remeber that it will apply when you get to that level of detail in your
design.
Page 4
farm site?" You have indicated that you would like this to be resolved at the PDP level of review.
Karen McWilliams is not comfortable putting this issue off until then, please see her comments.
34
8/29/01 It is likely that there will need to be at least two elements to the notion of a buffer area
around the historic resources. The first element will need to be a "hands -off' buffer area where no
development activity occurs. The second element to the buffer will need to be a developable area
where the intensity of development is sensitive to the preservation of the integrity of the historic
resource. This second element to the buffer would be to ensure that highly intensive land uses (such
as 3 story apartment buildings) are not located directly adjacent to the "hands -off' portion of the
buffer, or in other words, it would be to ensure a gradual transition from the non -developed portion of
the buffer to the part of the site where there would be no restrictions on the intensity of development.
As mentioned previously, the determination of the appropriate locations of the buffers will be based
on the "in -the -field design exercise."
1/11/02 We should have a meeting or conference call with your development team, Karen
McWilliams, and myself to resolve the issue that she has regarding whether the establishment of the
compound and buffer boundaries is an ODP level of detail or a PDP issue.
62
Karen McWilliams had not finished her comments regarding this ODP submittal at the time this
comment letter was finalized. I will forward her comments to you as soon as I have them.
Topic: Street Layout
61
Street intersections along Drake need to be coordinated with the Rigden Farm plans for their
intersection designs. A King Soopers is tentatively planned for the southeast corner of
DrakefTimberline. This comment does not require any action at the ODP level, just keep it in mind as
you proceed toward the PDP level.
64
Intersection spacing along Timberline does not meet LUC standards in that intersections can't be
further apart that 660 feet along arterials according to the code. The development across Timberline
to the west had to have an alternative compliance request for the intersection spacing, which was
approved by P&Z. Staff wants the intersections in the location you show, but we just need you to
formally request the alternative compliance to get there. I've attached a copy of my staff report for the
Spring Creek Farm North ODP, which you can refer to to understand what needs to be covered in the
alternative compliance request.
Topic: Transit Stops
72
There is no transit service planned to serve the site until 2006 to 2008. If future transit pull-outs will
be needed, we will need to show potential future stops and put a general note on the ODP that states
that future transit stops may require additional pull-out ROW, and will need to be addressed at the
PDP review.
Topic: Transportation
60
The issue of the link to Poudre River Trail (see Street Oversizing comment #42 and Transportation
Planning comment #22) should be coordinated with Tom Reiff of Transportation Planning and Matt
Baker of Stree Oversizing prior to hearing. I would like to also be involved in this discussion.
Department: Engineering
Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff
51
The reference to sheet 3 under the bike lanes in the ledgend on sheet 2 should be removed.
Page 3
46
8/29/01 If the entire property Jessup Farm property is zoned LMN, then the rezoning should not
affect the historic farmstead. If, however, a portion is to retain the I zoning, then the appropriate farm
boundaries and buffers will need to be determined before supporting the zone's boundary change.
1/22/02 This issue has been resolved by zoning the entire Jessup Farm and its historic buffer I
(Industrial). The ODP submittal limits the specific uses allowed for the Jessup Farmstead and buffer.
Staff would suggest the ODP specifically also allow the following permitted uses, to increase
opportunity for adaptive reuse of the property, while still ensuring the use's compatibility with the
historic farmstead and purposes of the buffer: vocational and technical training school; parks,
recreation and other open lands; plumbing, electrical and carpenter shops; dog day-care facilities;
food catering; workshops and custom small industry uses; and animal boarding.
Department: Current Planning
Topic: Density
Issue Contact: Troy Jones
36
8/29/01 Please specify a minimum number of units for the UE zone district.
1/11/02 A maximum is specified, but not a minimum. One of the purposes of an ODP is to specify
the range of densities that future PDPs will fall within. I just to need a ball park low -ball figure for a
minimum density so there are fewer unkowns for the UE portion of the site.
63
See Current Planning redlines on general notes 49 through #11. Density ranges are needed, not just
maximum densities. Also change the text in the UE bubble on sheet 2 to specify a minimum number
of units proposed as part of the ODP.
Topic: Hearing
65
This project has been scheduled for the February 7, 2002 Planning and Zoning Board meeting. The
major issues to respond to prior to hearing are:
• Coordinate timing of the historic issues with Karen McWilliams.
• Resolve comment #60.
The minor revisions need to be updated on the drawings. I will need one 8.5x11 print and 10
oversized prints of the revised sheets 1 & 2 by noon on Janurary 28.
Please e-mail or fax me an alternative compliance request by noon on Tuesday January 22nd
(see comment 464).
Topic: Historic Issues
28
8/28/01 Section 3.4.7(A) of the LUC states that the Historic and Cultural Resources regulations in the
LUC are intended to ensure that historic sites "are preserved and incorporated into the proposed
development," and that "any undertaking that may potentially alter the characteristics of the historic
property is done in a way that does not adversely affect the integrity of the historic resource." The big
question is how to fairly determine what sizes and characteristics would be needed around the
historic resources to ensure that the integrity of the historic resources are not adversely affected by
the proposed development. Staff will be deferring the decision on where the appropriate historical
buffers should be until after such time as an in -the -field design excercise has been conducted with
the applicant, City Staff and staff's historic consultant. I am in the process of trying to set this meeting
up during the first 2 weeks in September, but have not yet finalized a time. I will be continuing to
contact you regarding your availability for this meeting. A copy of the consultant's report will be made
available to you prior to the in -the -field design exercise.
1/11/01 As you know, the in -the -field design exercise took place, and it apprears City staff and your
development team agree on the compound and buffer zone boundaries around the Jessup Farm site.
The question now is: "what are the proposed compound and buffer zone boundaries for the southern
Page 2
l,wt� � �, STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
(��, f� City of Fort Collins
OWNING, THORPE & JAMES Date: 01/11/2002
SUSAN WADE & GREG WHITE
1881 9TH ST. #103
BOULDER, CO 80302
Staff has reviewed your submittal for JOHNSON PROPERTY ODP - TYPE II (LUC)
#32-01A, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Issue Contact: Karen McWilliams
43
8129/01 Historic Preservation is opposed to the collector street proposed to connect Sharp Point
Drive and Drake Road. This street will have a severely detrimental impact on the Johnson Farm's
integrity, including both its historic context and its historic viewshed.
1/11/02 Staff remains concerned that the location and design of this collector street will negatively
impact the Johnson Farm's integrity.
44
8/29/01 Historic Preservation Staff have a disagreement with the James Co. and the James Co.'s
consultant as to which buildings, structures and features are significant. Buildings and structures are
evaluated for their historic significance, not for their current "functionality." Historic buildings and
structures without an obvious new use should be stabilized and "mothballed" until an appropriate new
use is identified. The James Co.'s proposal to demolish several of the Jessup Farm structures is not
in compliance with Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code.
1/11/02 This issue was resolved as a result of an on -site meeting, which determined historically
significant buildings, structures and features, and establish the historic boundaries of the farmsteads.
45
8/29/01 There is the need to resolve the issue of an appropriate buffer around the two farmsteads,
sufficient to maintain the historic contexts of the farmsteads. The farms' contexts include not only the
farm buildings, structures, objects and features, but also significant in any determination of a buffer
are the historic viewsheds, land uses (including grazing, vegetation and cropland), and the historic
relationship of the two farms to each other. The issue of appropriate buffers will be the focus of an
on -site meeting, to occur in the near future.
1/22/02 The location and extent of the buffer around the Jessup Farm has been determined to the
satisfaction of both the Historic Preservation staff and the applicants. This buffer corresponds to the
boundaries of the area zoned I (Industrial) and consists of 12.22 acres.
It is staff's strong preference that the preservation buffer surrounding the Johnson Farm be defined
during the ODP process. Defining the buffer at this stage would ensure the protection of the
significant historic features associated with the farm, as well as the farm's historic integrity and
context, and would facilitate the time and expense involved with resolving potential future conflicts
between the PDP and preservation of the Johnson Farm's integrity. However, the applicable code
regarding the ODP Review Criteria, Section 2.3.2(h), does not specifically address the issue of
historic preservation buffers at the ODP level. Therefore the applicant may instead choose to
address the issue at the PDP level.
Page 1