Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPINNACLE TOWNHOMES - PDP - 34-00A - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)131 Directional ramps need to be drawn and constructed to urban standards. Refer to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards or city engineering for design standards. Department: Technical Services Issue Contact: J.R. Wilson Topic: General 136 The existing easements on the south still do not have enough information to locate. 137 The original mylar must be clear and crisp due to the small text on this plat 138 The plat boundary closes. The legal description has a bad bearing causing misclosure. This bearing also doesn't match the boundary bearing. 139 East Prospect is a Road, not a Street. 140 A few distances are missing on the plat -see redline set. 141 1/16 corner is mislabled on the map (add Section 13) 142 "Flood line" covering other numbers. 143 Text size is too small to reproduce. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, or require additional information, please feel free to contact the listed reviewer from the respective departments/agencies. Sincerely, Cameron Gloss, AICP Current Planning Director Page 7 Northern Engineering floodplain report for Pinnacle PDP is what will be used for regulating construction of this development. However, you may want to look at this mapping to see if there are any changes you might want to make considering it will become the City's new mapping after it has been reviewed and approved. 10. Considering the previous comment, please put the lowest opening elevation for all of the structures on the plans. The lowest openings will be required to be above the base flood elevation. The lowest opening must be certified as part of the site certification after construction. By having the lowest opening above the base flood elevation, the lots that may be shown in the City's mapping will be able to be documented as being removed from the floodplain after they are constructed. Please make a note on the grading plan that a site certification documenting lowest opening will be required before the CO is issued. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Tom Reiff Topic: site plan 80 (Comment updated 11-28-01) The 8-foot wide trail connection should be placed at a minimum of 20 feet total from the front porches of homes #48 through 51. See red lines Original comment: The main` trail connection from Robertson Street to Spring Creek Trail needs to be designed more for the general public use. The 8-foot concrete walk should be extended an additional 10 feet minimum from the front of the homes (# 48 thru 51). 81 (Comment updated 11-28-01) The single-family attached units (#9-16) needs their own bike rack and handicap accessible parking stall. See red lines Original comment: Locate and label bike racks for units without garages (I.e.. 8 plexes) 87 (Comment updated 11-28-01) After identifying origins and destinations within and around the site the additional sidewalk width (6 feet) should be placed on the eastern sidewalk along Robertson St. from the trail connection to Prospect Road. The additional width for the western sidewalk along Robertson St. is not necessary. The minimum width required for western sidewalk is 4 feet 6 inches. See red lines Original comment; Increase the sidewalk width along the west side of Robertson St. to 6 feet to accommodate the higher pedestrian traffic. 130 Sign the Robertson St. culdesac with no parking signs and consider painting the curb red. This will improve visibility and safety issues for Spring Creek trail users as they transition through the site. It will also prevent potential trailhead parking. Page 6 For your reference here is a copy of the previous Erosion Control comments: It is preferable that City Standard Erosion Control Notes be on the erosion control plan, and that other notes (e.g. # 8, 9, & 10 of your general notes), be combined with them. Why is the swale and water quality pond outside the limits of the silt fencing, and why is there no, BUT in evidence protecting Spring Creek from their construction? Also, where are the contours on these constructions? Why does the report state that silt fence is to be installed "slightly north of Dry Creek"? Will doing that help keep sediments from leaving this project? Your Note # 10 - Why are the flat areas to be hydroseeded and hydromulched instead of the preferred drill seeding? And why are the slopes to be mechanically seeded? And why is straw mulch to be applied at a rate double what is required to smother all seeds planted? Why is the seeding rate to be double that used in field planting? What is a "Natural Grass" lined swale? Topic: Floopldin comments 132 1. Please put a note in the floodplain report and the drainage report that all of the structures are out of the FEMA 100-year floodplain. 2. Grading Plan - the BFE shown for XS 10968 does not match the floodplain report. Please review and revise as necessary. 3. Grading Plan - the culvert labeled Storm C and the swale are shown in the floodway. Please verify that there is not any fill associated with the culvert and swale. No fill is allowed in the floodway. Please make a note in the floodplain report and the Drainage report about these items. 4. Please show the floodway line on Sheet 15 of the Plans. 5. Grading Plan and Drainage Report - The table with the floodplain information has incorrect 100-year WSELs. Please review and revise as necessary. Interpolate between cross -sections for the BFE at the upstream end of the structure. Please also include this table in the floodplain report. 6. Grading Plan - Please add a note that says that a floodplain use permit is required before issuance of a building permit for the lots that are in the floodplain. Please add a note that says that a FEMA elevation certificate will be required before a CO is issued for the lots in the floodplain. 7. Drainage Report - P. 4 See text changes regarding "lowest floor". 8. Drainage Report - P. 11 In the "Compliance with Standards" Section, please also include Chapter 10 of City Code which deals with the floodplain regulations. 9. The City is in the process of updating the floodplain mapping for Spring Creek using the revised rainfall standard and the 1999 topographic mapping. A draft of that mapping has been submitted to the City for review. Because you have gone through the work of mapping the floodplain based on the information available at the time, the mapping that is in the. Page 5 Construction of the Spring Creek Trail connection needs to include warning/safety about construction near the trail 101 Contact Park Maintenance 24 hours prior to start of work- 221-6660 Department: PFA Issue Contact: Ron Gonzales 71 In accordance w/FCLUC3.6.2(C), Meadowlands Lane shall terminate at both ends with a turnaround having proper dimensions. Topic: dead end terminus 123 See Items 117 & 71also: Per Utility meeting with the customer on 11/14/01, and in accordance with LUC3.6.2(C), a properly dimensioned 80'cul-de-sac turnaround was to be provided on his property on west side or obtain a letter of agreement from adjoining property owner if the cul-de-sac crosses the property line; and a hammerhead turnaround on the east side was to be provided to properly terminate a public street without turning around on private property. See item 15 of meeting minutes by Shear Engineering. If turnarounds are not provided as designed and specified at this meeting, a second point of access is required; as stipulated in Item 15d of the mtg. minutes. New Utility Plans dated 11/06/01 do not illustrate the specified design. PFA does not approve this latest submittal. Department: Right of Way Issue Contact: Ron Mills Topic: General 144 The Spring Creek Trail Easement is still not identified by Book and Page Number. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Plan 125 Please show and label size and type of all drainage features on the drainage plan including, sidewalk chases, swales, storm sewers, curb cuts, etc. Please show a water quality pond summary table (WSEL100, Q, V) Topic: Erosion Control 129 This submittal is still missing several key elements required by CITY OF FORT COLLINS SPECIFICATIONS for an erosion/sediment control plan. These include, but are not necessarily limited to calculations, notes, etc. Please submit correctly so a review of the plan can be made. Page 4 4. Are there any existing wells in the area?; a statement that City has jurisdiction of water doesn't mean there are not other adjudicated holders. 5. Address ground water quality. 6. Address water flow calculations, i.e.-how was the pipe sized?, what are recommendations for construction of subdrain? 7. Identify the cone of influence as a result of the dewatering. 8. Subdrain terminates at SS trunk manhole; what steps are being taken to prevent subdrain blockage and /or back flow? ill Need a better design of the subdrain system, i.e.- Cleanouts, wrapped pipe in gravel encasement and etc. Department: Excel Energy Issue Contact: Len Hilderbrand Topic: General 145 PSCO will install gas main in 1 F-wide utility along the north side of the private drive to serve lots 28-35 and Lots 40-47. The waterline is within 5' of said easement. PSCO will lay 7' back in the easement in order to maintain a 10' clearance of waterline. No room for other utilities along this easement. 146 Any relocation of existing facilities will be at the developer's expense. 147 The 11'-wide easement along the north side of Apex Dr. and east of Robertson St. needs to be expanded to a 16'-wide utility easement to accommodate the existing tree. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Alan Rutz 118 Site Plan, Landscape Plan: Light and Power does not install streetlights on private drives. However floodlights -are available at an additional cost. Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore 148 Buffer Zone Performance Standards are not being met - A meeting was conducted on September 4`s and the use of Fort Collins native vegetation explained. It seems that the intention of the Performance Standards was missed; if the buffer is reduced by 20% the project needs to replace the loss in some way. One way being recommended is to enhance the buffer with additional native vegetation. This would improve the screening and provide additional habitat value of the remaining buffer zone. Additional options are listed under Section 3.4.1(E)(1) of the Land Use Code. Please contact Doug Moore for additional information at 224-6143. Department: Park Planning 100 Issue Contact: Craig Foreman Page 3 108 Remove L&P signature block from Plat sheet 112 Plans call ADS pipe in roadway; PVC is required 113 Need to provide a solid line on striping plan at the intersection with Prospect Street. 114 Provide detail 12-3 for irrigation sleeve at cul-de-sac 115 Omit detail 8-12 and provide underwalk drains at locations of driveways and streets. Water from drives and parking lots are not allowed to flow across the sidewalk if the surface area exceeds 500 sq.ft. LCUASS 9.4.11 Topic: dead end terminus 109 Dead end street terminations do not meet Code nor comply with discussions from our meeting of 9/13/01. The applicant -will need to present a modification -request subject to review by the Planning &Zoning Board. Topic: easements 117 Need off -site easements for turnarounds, requiring a letter of intent to grant easements from abutting property owners prior to hearing or dedication documents. Topic: General 39 Street oversizing participation in improvements to Prospect Road Full reimbursement for Bus Bay improvements Topic: landscape plan 116 Plan is difficult to read, too much information with small scale. sheet 1. What are plantings being proposed in cul-de-sac island? Staff would support one street tree in the middle of the island, with low profile plantings for the remaining planting area. Topic: Subsurface Report 110 The Subsurface Report does not address issues as outline in LCUASS 5.6. 1. Site location map does not address irrigation ditches, wet lands or other features. 2. Where are flow rates addressed, potential high water levels? 3. What is the potential source of the groundwater? Page 2 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins PINECREST PLANNING AND DESIGN Date: 12/5/2001 C/O TOM DUGAN 4225 WESTSHORE WAY FT. COLLINS, CO 80525 Dear Tom: City staff and referral agencies have reviewed your revised submittal for the PINNACLE TOWNHOMES PDP - TYPE I (LUC) #34-OOA, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Cameron Gloss Topic: Architecture 135 Rear and side elevations are needed. To ensure that the buildings`are compatible with the surrounding area, side and rear elevations for those building elevations facing all public streets and the Spring Creek trail, still need to -be -provided. The expectation is that these elevations will match the quality and. . character of the front elevations with respect to solid: void ratios, fenestration, materials, and trim details. (Staff acknowledges receipt of revised front building elevations indicating the proposed color palette) Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Dave Stringer 9 Need a groundwater report - high ground water is present in much of site. Buildings appear to need sump pumps/or other dewatering system 25 A drainage system may be required with the irrigated median/island 28 How much drainage is crossing sidewalks at driveways/alleys? Can only put 2-year flows across walk, may need stormsewer inlet or underwalk drains. 29 Use City's Standard underwalk drain design; the proposed design looks like a type R inlet 31 Please see additional Engineering comments on the redline plans 76 Please Return redline plans with next submittal Page 1