HomeMy WebLinkAboutPONDEROSA PARK PUD, 2ND REPLAT - AMENDED FINAL - 37-96 - CORRESPONDENCE -JAN-17-97 FRI 15:38
P. 13/.03.
2. Basin 3 appears to have a larger area than 1 acre. Also, the runoff coefficients for all
of the basins should be evaluated based on the proposed conditions of the site. Please
revise the detention calculations based on the actual conditions of the basins.
RESPONSE-
3. Please show more details of the proposed and existing topography along the south and
east property line. Please tie in all proposed grading with the adjacent existing
topography. Off -site grading will require easements.
RESPONSE:
4. The proposed detention ponds do not have emergency spillways. Please provide
emergency spillways for the ponds. If spillways are not feasible without inundating
property, then the ponds must have capacity for the 100-year event assuming zero release.
RESPONSE:
5. Pond 3 is shown to encroach onto lot 2. There must be no ponding on private lots.
Please revise pond 3 to eliminate ponding on this lot_
RESPONSE:
6. The concrete pans proposed for the swales should be extended to the detention outlets.
RESPONSE:
7. Please specify a design point for the northeast comer of the parking lot. The swale at
this location must have capacity for the Q 100. Please show a cross-section of the swale
with the adjacent property lines.
RESPONSE:
8. Please provide orifice plate detail and show where the plates will be placed in relation
to the concrete box inlets.
RESPONSE:
Please refer to the redlined plans and report for additional review co=cnts.
JAN-17-97 FRI 15:37
P. 02/03
PROJECT
COMMENT SBEET
City of Fort Collins
on ww�
Current Planning
DATE: jAd 17, 1997_ DEPT: StormWater
PROJECT: Z, /D ` I
All cow lean mi! ie &ed by-
[] No Problems
ffll� Problems or Concerns Oer below or attached)
A written response for each of the following comments must be submitted, with the
redlined plans and report, at time of project resubmittal- The responses must note any
revisions or clarifications completed in result of these comments_ If responses are not
submitted with the resubmittal, the project will be returned to the applicant without further
review. This procedure will help the review process become more efficient and effective.
Thank you.
1. The capacity of the downstream pipe system is a major concern with this project. The
total release from the ponds must not exceed the capacity of the downstream pipes. The
release from the mobile park into the existing system should also be considered. The
capacity of the downstream system should be checked all the way to PIum Creek It
appears that the existing 12" pipe has limited capacity. Along with this analysis, please
provide the necessary plans of the existing downstream system
RESPONSE:
Date. /— % 7— °/ 7 -.—.. Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE [] PLAT C� : �� hU ed
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ ME/Jl.�� 1441'
U LANDSCAPE
:Pa4e ��asca
• Please show and label the private drive which extends from this property out to
Ponderosa Drive as a tract which is an existing dedicated public access and
utility easement (or whatever the wording is on the previous plat) to illustrate that
.this property has access to the public street system via the common private drive
as was planned with the original P.U.D. Who owns that tract? The existing
H.O.A.?
• Please dedicate Tract B as a public access easement
• Add a statement under the notes about who owns and maintains the Tracts and
state that the City will not maintain any of the open space areas, detention pond
areas, nor the private drive.
Utility Plans:
• On sheet 1, remove "streets" from general notes 1 & 2 since there are only
private drives being built with this project. Also, add a note to specifically state
that the City shall not own or maintain any of the open space, detention pond
areas, and/or the private drive serving this development. Please add the same
note to the plat.
• As noted above, please show all improvements proposed with the Jefferson
Commons project adjacent to the site and within the old r.o.w. for Orchard Place,
including grading, sidewalk/bikeway, landscaping, etc. Again, the r.o.w. for
Orchard Place has not been vacated and will not be until Jefferson Commons
has completed all the improvements to that area that their P.U.D. requires.
• Since the Orchard r.o.w. has not been vacated, this development cannot plat any
of the r.o.w. area as part of this development (i.e. Tract "C" the detention pond)
until the r.o.w. has been vacated.
• Label the Private Drive on all sheets that show it .
• Show grading and existing topo around the perimeter of the entire site
• Widen the sidewalk connection out to the bike/ped path to 5 feet wide
• Is there adequate fire access to the units at the south end
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: December 24, 1996 DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: #37-96 2nd Replat of part of Ponderosa Park
PUD - Final
PLANNER: Mike Ludwig
All comments must be received by: Monday, January 13, 1997
Site Plan:
The site, landscape, and utility plans should reflect the improvements being done
with the Jefferson Commons project, including the pedestrian/bikeway,
landscaping and other improvements.
Plat:
Please research previous plats and the County records for the dedicated
Orchard Place r.o.w. and show it on the plat. Our records indicate that the r.o.w.
exists along the entire south property line of this development and curves east
next to Skyline Mobile Home Park.
• The r.o.w. for Orchard Place has not been vacated and will not be vacated until
the Jefferson Commons project has completed all improvements shown on the
approved site, landscape, and utility plans for that development and those
improvements have been accepted by the City. Therefore, this project, if it is to
proceed before Jefferson Commons completes those improvements and the
r.o.w. is vacated, will need to show the existing r.o.w. as it is currently dedicated.
In addition, until the City vacates the r.o.w., the r.o.w. cannot be utilized for
detention as shown on the grading and drainage plans.
Date: /cl, Signature
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE PLAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS SITE
LANDSCAPE
UTILITY
M. Please revise and resubmit planning objectives which reference a specific
land use policy number from the 1979 Land Use Policies Plan document
and/or specific goals and objectives from the 1977 Goals and Objectives
document which are applicable to this development.
This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments may be
forthcoming as the various departments and reviewing agencies continue to review this
request.
Please be aware of the following dates and deadlines to assure your ability to stay on
schedule for the February 24, 1997 Planning and Zoning Board hearing:
Plan revisions are due by 12:00 noon on February 5, 1997. Please contact me for the
number of folded revisions required for each document.
No revisions will be reviewed after the above deadline. If revisions are not received
by this date, the item will either go to the Planning and Zoning Board with a staff
recommendation based on the originally submitted documents or the applicant will
have the option to continue the item to the next month's P&Z agenda.
PMT's, renderings, and 8 folded copies of final revisions are due by 12:00 noon on
February 17, 1997.
Please contact me at 221-6206 if you have any questions or concerns related to these
comments. I would like to schedule a meeting with you as soon as possible, if necessary,
to discuss these comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Ludwig
Project Planner
xc: Kerrie Ashbeck
Stormwater Utility
file/Project Planner
10.
The Current Planning Department offers the following comments:
Please label the Site Plan as "Sheet 1 of 2"; and the Landscape Plan as
"Sheet 2 of 2".
g/ Please type the names of the owners who will be signing the Site Plan
beneath the signature lines of the Site Plan.
W Please revise the City Certification on the Site Plan to reference the
"Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Board" rather than the Director of
Planning.
OAll Development Criteria A-2.12 "Setbacks" asks: "Are the setbacks for
buildings and other site plan elements consistent with the setbacks
established in the surrounding neighborhood?" The proposed 6 foot building
separation is not consistent. A minimum of 10 foot separation should be
provided between each unit (5 feet from each property line). This can be
achieved by eliminating one dwelling unit and shifting the remaining units.
Please modify the # of units and density information in the land use data.
O Raised, patterned crosswalks should be provide where pedestrians are to
cross vehicular travel lanes.
f� A sidewalk may need to be added along the west property line from Lot 15
to the private drive.
( i
) A couple of trees are needed between Lot 15 and the west property line.
�, An additional tree is needed between the Lot 1 and the west property line
/ along the private drive and sidewalk.
v1' Points will only be awarded for being within 3,500 feet of o ers P (20
points) or 3,500 feet of City Park Nine Golf Course (10 points), but not both.
The proposed site is not within 2,500 feet of Poudre High School. However,
0010
it is within 2,500 feet of Moore Elementary School.
K 10 points will not be awarded for providing affordable housing unless the
applicant can provide documentation which guarantees that 10 percent of
the units will remain affordable for a period of 25 years.
Please submit a variance request to All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar
Orientation" based upon the Variance Procedures outlined in Section K
(p.108) of the LDGS.
A
7
91
Cr
�. One parking lot space needs to be handicapped accessible as garages
appear to be less than 13 feet wide and cannot be counted as the
handicapped space.
1 Please extend the asphalt pavement into Tract C for adequate back-up of
vehicles out of driveway of Unit/Lot 2.
Comment d also applies to Unit/Lot 15 as the driveway entrance and backup
conflicts with sod areas of Tract A. Unit/Lot 12 also has a similar conflict with
no access for driveway.
The Building Inspections Department offers the following comments:
a. The Plat indicates that the proposed units will be single-family dwelling units
each unit on an individually owned lot.
b. Section 504 of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building Code as adopted by
the City of Fort Collins requires that exterior walls of one- and two-family
dwellings located closer that 3 feet from a property line be of one -hour fire -
resistive construction. No openings are allowed in such exterior walls. A
parapet extending 30 inches above the roof surface is required unless the
structure complies with the exceptions to UBC Section 1710. Projections,
such as cornices, eave overhangs or exterior balconies shall not extend over
the property line and must comply with UBC Sections 1710 and 504.
c, Buildings shall be designed to comply with the Fort Collins Residential
Energy Code.
Comments from the Engineering Department are attached.
Comments from the Stormwater Utility are attached.
The Mapping Department offers the following comments:
If section corners are going to be used on this Plat for control, they must be
described.
6) The legal does not match the map, bearing direction of the 100.00' and
j 216.97' calls.
(c. The statement vacating easements needs to be revised to include oo those
easements within this Plat are vacated.
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
January 17, 1997
The Masters Touch Homes
c/o Dick Rutherford
Stewart and Associates
103 S. Meldrum Street
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dear Dick,
Staff has reviewed your documents for the Second Replat of Part of Ponderosa Park
PUD, Amended Preliminary and Final that were submitted on December 23, 1996, and
would like to offer the following comments:
Public Service Company stated the following:
"The proposed utility easements appear to be adequate. However, no trees may
be planted within 4 feet of any natural gas line.
The Natural Resources Department requests that the developer specify and note
on the Site Plan and Plat that the homeowners association will require residents to
use the same trash collection/recycling company.
$The Park Planning Division stated that park fees will be assessed on each
dwelling unit base upon their square footage.
The Transportation Planner stated that the width of the sidewalk out to the
bike/pedestrian path to the south needs to be a minimum of 4.5 feet wide (6 feet is
preferable).
5. The Zoning Department offers the following comments:
aO. Trees are required at sod areas west of the parking lot.
The location of trees the developer has agreed to plant on individual lots will
not be enforced by the Zoning Department.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6730
FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002