HomeMy WebLinkAboutSCENIC VIEWS PUD - PRELIMINARY - 3-96 - CORRESPONDENCE -The West Plum Street Basin Master Plan is currently being updated and reviewed by the
City of Fort Collins. The master plan update is in the final stages of review and will be
finalized in the near future. This update includes the area of the proposed Scenic Views
PUD. The drainage design for the proposed project must be in compliance with this
master plan update and documented accordingly. Referencing the 1990 draft version of
the master plan is not sufficient. The SWMM for the West Plum Street Basin should be
updated to reflect the proposed developed conditions of the site. The revised (developed
conditions of Scenic Views) model must demonstrate no downstream discharge increases
from the original master plan model (dated October 1995). A copy of the West Plum
Street Basin update and model, by Ayres and Associates, can be obtained from the
Stormwater Utility.
More information is needed regarding the proposed detention pond. Preliminary estimates
of the required detention volume should be included within the preliminary report. Please
provide supporting documentation on all areas to be routed through the pond. Please
provide existing documentation or similar calculations to justify the required detention
volume.
Please calculate the volume provided by the pond, due to the proposed grading. The 100-
year high water line should also be calculated. The maximum 100-year ponding depth
must not exceed 4 feet, per City criteria. What will be the surface area of the pond to
accommodate the required volume?
Please show off -site topography for the existing residence to the north of the site. This
area is basin 12 of the master plan model. The master plan shows this area (7.8 acres) to
contribute to the proposed detention pond.
Please show how the proposed construction within the existing wetlands will be mitigated.
All existing wetlands that will be eliminated must be replaced with new wetland areas.
Basin D7 is proposed to drain undetained into the PV&L Canal. The master plan specifies
that all areas west of the canal will be routed under the canal and to the proposed
detention pond. Please adjust the proposed grading of this basin to drain all flows to the
proposed detention pond. There must be no developed areas draining to the canal or to
existing properties west of the canal.
Please refer to the redlined plans and report for additional review comments.
City of Fort Collins
Current Planninv
DATE: 3 - lzi- y�
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
DEPARTMENT: 5�0rn' c,.gtel-
PROJECT:-- S G e l%c V,-Pws POD — Pre 1 �m
PLANNER: /'n% /-c h /V a " s
All comments must be received by:
❑ No Problems
M'ZProblems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Off -site construction and drainage easements are needed from property owners where off -
site construction and/or off -site drainage is proposed. A letter of intent from each affected
property owner is needed by the plan revisions due date of April 3, 1996.
Please show further details of the proposed outfall swale for this development. The design
of the swale must be shown from the proposed detention pond to the existing drainage
system. Off -site drainage and construction easements are needed for the construction of
this swale.
The submitted drainage report states that the detention pond proposed with this '
development will be a regional detention pond and will be constructed with the financial
assistance of the City of Fort Collins. This statement is not true and should be eliminated
from the text of the report. The proposed pond must be constructed and paid for by the
developer of this site. The master plan requires detention of this area upon development,
but the on -site detention will not be regional. The City of Fort Collins does not accept
responsibility for the construction or the maintenance of the proposed pond.
Date: -3 — / 1/— G Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE ❑ PLAT <�'C: Kerr;e AShk_cK
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ SITE M r-7Lch IdaQS
❑ LANDSCAPE /Uor+4err% ��,9•
❑ UTII.YI'Y
#3-96 Scenic Views PUD - Preliminary
Apartments accessible and adaptable for use by persons with disabilities must be provided in
accordance with Uniform Building Code Section 3103(a)8. as amended by the City of Fort Collins.
The 1992 edition of the American National Standard Institute publication #A 117.1 'Accessible and
Usable Buildings and Facilities°should be used in the design of accessible/adaptable dwelling units.
A local amendment to the UBC requires that accessible units with numbers of bedrooms and other
amenities be provided in numbers proportionate to the remainder of the project. When more
stringent, the Colorado revised Statute, Title 9, Article 5, Section I I I also applies to apartment
projects. Though not administered at the municipal level, similar requirements are contained in State
and Federal civil rights le siation (Fair Housing Acts). Where provided in a preiec containing
accessible dwe!lings, a Portion of garages cr covered parking must be accessible.
The site shall be accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with Uniform Building Ccde
Section 3103 and UBC A ccendix Section 3106. Provide a designated and marked "accessibie route
cf travel" between all -he Buildings on the site and building exits and entrances and the Public •,vay
(public siciewaik). Accessibie routes shall ccmcly with ANSI Al 17.1-1992with running sieges no
greater than 1:20 and cross sicpes no steeper than 1:50. Where routes cress lanes for vehice - rmc
-
they shall :e designated and marked as a cross walk. Provide parking and signs per A.Dcendix Section
3107. Parking and access aisles shall comply with ANSI A 117.1-1992 with sicees no greater than
1:50 in any dire acn. (f c.;vered Parking er garages are provided comparable accessible parking must
be provided.
Section 504 cf the 1991 ediiien of the Uniform Building Ccde as adopted by the City cf Fcrt Ccilins
requires - a, extenor wails of one- and two-famiiy dwellings located closer than 3 feet from a
precerry iire be of one -hour ire -resistive construction. No openings are allowed in such exier cr
wails. A, parapet extending 30-inches above the roof surface is required unless the structure complies
with the exceptions to Section 1710. Projections, such as cornices, eave ovemangs or extencr
balconies shall not extend over the property line and must comply with UBC Sections 1710 and 504.
Sharon Getz
Building InspectionY.
970.221.6760
2-26-96
'DOJCT
CO:1 1
SBEET
Cifv of Fort Collins i
Carrent Piano
D TE: _, P�- V
PROJECT
P T
7
'T_(7: Obi:
i
W
i
='! "cc±eorce:-s see below or ar
1 F V•? L. E4eZCi ti5 SO Ela$�,t6,v; iC 3c 2csrC-: ,,ED
Tt}IS LACcrvlEtvi Y,G,.: �5 � �T'c itle Eti.T71 k� .:.Pts
7 Z�
NliCL
'nits
Lrl•J���pt,;;�
{ ` C
iS IV �( IM�RIiLc�� - _Xt�tilG T2o v , i v rCccT55 kJO ��Atwi6v ct
`�S rtcwn, tn, L-'fjOscaga
i � R2c ��t•�ti� 3? e�2:�io c:;-�i,JE
`l C. G _ A�Qa�JPrL �vQGJ� C2u�SSi u)G�
U ���,,;?�-� ;�g�t)� t•lt.��t� Sri
Z)UNJaGG tS ��2,tntllE� i,S_
�) AS a1 tL�T/(JcD �tiS Rau sj44Lat) (jDJRCc� NTl' C4-0ssipj(y 14�C J, `• (, �.
CCt c�,rt� R t_LJG SA Mg-,
(0) ?U-�l2rc� QJ s/c�vUnvYuiS Ro¢6S 3�Cau�_
Dat �QT. 2 , i Signature:
CHECK YOIT WISH TO RECEIVE _::: [ ...PLAT-_3105 M_Ae, fl_ti=
COPIES OF REVISIONS SITE ,o St. Ct7
Q. LANDSCAPE.. SoSZS
CoMMeT� err' D
flowline profiles, centerline profile, cross sections at 50' intervals with cross -
slopes labeled, off -site design ties, intersection details, striping plans, etc.
• As described previously, need to design for the future construction of the
extension of Orchard Place. In particular, this will affect the grading of the
detention pond at the northeast corner of the site. The pond must be designed
to fit with the necessary future grading for the street and sidewalk.
ta<
. *
�. as ..
a .s .� .$t
.. •-.
�f Fa.....
i�z
spaces, it is likely on -street parking will occur in front of the units on both sides of
the street.
• Will the private streets be constructed with a crown and curb and gutter on both
sides ? In the event the City would ever be approached about taking over
maintenance of the street, it is a good idea to design private streets with a crown
and curb and gutter.
• The street improvements to Elizabeth Street and Overland Trail adjacent to the
site must be constructed with this project. The site plan calls them "future".
- As previously mentioned, the improvements along the outparcel need to
be built with this project and the final utility plans need to include enough
off -site design on Elizabeth and Overland Trail to shcw how the
improvements being built with this prcject tie into existing and planned
imcrovements.
- Striping plans for both Elizabeth Street and Overland Trail will be
required with the final utility plans to accommodate existing conditions,
bike lanes, turn lanes, and intersection improvements.
There must be public vehicular access between the duplex area and the
condominium area. Restricting site circulation to the access points shown forces
vehicles to use the surrounding arterial street system when internal circulation is
entirely possible. Vehicles from the duplex area wanting to go eastbound on
Elizabeth Street (65% of trips generated) have to go left onto Overland and then
left at the Elizabeth/Overland intersection instead of being able to access
Elizabeth Street directly. Likewise, vehicles from the condominium area wanting
to go north on Overland Trail have to go through the Elizabeth/Overland
intersection instead of being able to make a right hand turn out of the project
onto Overland Trail. This is not good neighborhood planning.
UTILITY PLANS
• Same issues as on site plan
• Need to see some preliminary design of Elizabeth Street improvements off -site,
as previously described, to see how the transitions will occur between existing
improvements, unimproved parcels, planned improvements on the south side of ,
the road, etc. In general, how does this all fit together? Is additional widening
of'the ditch crossing needed now ? Need to accommodate turn lanes and biker '
lanes on Elizabeth Street and Overland Trail.
• Final utility plans will need to include full design for Elizabeth'Street
improvements and Overland Trail improvements including existing/proposed
Gi�G lal�ti� �MMcrrCs Co►JT' O
DRAINAGE REPORT
The Stormwater Utility will be providing comments separately. Items of particular
interest include:
- It is stated that site development will reduce runoff into the ditch from
historic rates. However, will the ditch company allow the continuation of
any runoff into the ditch, especially with the existing problems with the
ditch overflowing in this area ?
- Detaining off -site flows including 100-yr from west of Kimball Ave and
north of Locust Dr. City participation in detention pond costs as a
regional facility - need to discuss with Stormwater. (Development
agreement item)
- Need a letter from property owner(s) of intent to dedicate off -site
drainage easements for this development prior to preliminary ? & ?
hearing.
SOILS REPORT
Groundwater is a problem for basement construction and petentiaily utility
installation. A subdrain system will likely be needed for basement construction.
The City has standards for subdrains in the public r.o.w., although at this point,
,all streets in the development are proposed as private.
The final P.U.D. will need to include pavement recommendations for Overland
Trail and Elizabeth Street. Contact Keith Myer of the City Engineering
Department for design criteria and standards.
SITE PLAN
This property has an obligation for dedication of r.o.w. and construction of the
extension of Orchard Place adjacent to this site along the north property line.
Even if Orchard Place is not required to be extended at this time, this developer
is obligated to design the portion adjacent to the site and escrow funds to be
used for the future street construction. The grading for this site must be
designed to include the future street construction.
• As noted previously, even if an O.D.P is not required with this project, it is'
important to -look at the existing and future anticipated street network to see that
necessary connections are not being precluded by this project. - -
The street width. in the duplex area should be at least 30 feet to allow on -street
parking on both sides. of the street. Even with the provision�of off-streefparking.�'
,.a
• Private streets are not assigned a street name by the City. The units will be
addressed off of the public streets (Elizabeth Street and Overland Trail).
• Later comments will address the need for a connection between the duplex area
and the condominium area - please provide the necessary public access
easement between the two parcels.
TRAFFIC STUDY
• Study notes that Elizabeth will have 2 travel lanes and a center left turn lane.
Elizabeth will also have bike lanes - this is not noted in the study.
• Need to see a copy of the feilcw-up traffic study being done on neighborhood
impacts which is referenced in the traffic study. At the neighborhood meeting, it
was suggested that the develcper provide a connection from the property to the
east of this site (which is now not par of the preliminary) out to Elizabeth Street.
It was stated that this may alleviate some cf the impacts on Kimball Drive by
providing an alternate route to Elizabeth.
• In general, traffic circulation was a significant issue with the neighborhood. It
would be helpful to see some Rind of overail pian/analysis showing the existing
local street network, the street network for this development, and a proposed
street layout for the undeveloped land between the ditch and the existing
development to the east. This should also include the planned future extension
of Orchard Place to Overland Trail.
• The traffic study notes that 65% of the traffic.wiil go east on Elizabeth Street
The conclusions state that Overland Trail and Elizabeth will be improved with this
development, but no additional roadway or intersection improvements are
necessary as a result of this project. However, due to the additional traffic and
roadway widening west of the ditch, some widening of the ditch crossing may be
necessary at this time. The plans submitted do not show how far away the ditch
crossing is from the project nor do they show existing improvements to the east
that will have to transition to match the improvements being done on Elizabeth
Street with this project. Need to see some preliminary off -site design to look at
these items. At final, enough off -site design will need to be done to show that
the improvements being built with this development work with the existing
improvements to the east as well as plans for widening on the south side of
Elizabeth Street.
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Punning
DATE: V ,:2� cllo DEPARTN ENT: 94-441
PROJECT: C- P+-L=
PL.A N-EER: t
11 -- eats i Ls% be r�'C�l�ie� bv: ( �/1C✓` `l(;�
No Problems
.�
Probie:ns or Conceals see below or cattache )
SC"VIC VIEWS P.U.D. - PRELIMINARY
P LA-:
Who owns the outparcel along Overland Trail ? The east side of Overland Trail
will be widened with this development - is the owner of the outparcel willing to
dedicate r.o.w. for the improvements that must be constructed ?
• If the r.o.w. for Orchard Place along the north property line is existing, why is it
shown within the plat'boundary ? If the r.o.w. is not dedicated, it must be
dedicated now.
Date: r Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE =❑: PLAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ SITE
❑. LANDSCAPE
Q. UTILITY
O. Transfort:
1. Transfort has a transit route on W. Elizabeth (westbound) with a bus stop on the north side
of W. Elizabeth at Cuerto Lane. Transfort would like ADA accessibility at the NW comer
of Elizabeth and Cuerto with a five (5) foot wide concrete pad connecting the sidewalk to
the street curb.
2. Also, Transfort is requesting that the concrete pad have a width of seven (7) feet and a length
of thirteen (IT) feet to the backside of the sidewalk for future bus shelter placement.
P. Public Service Company (PSC):
1. PSC has an existing overhead line running along the east side of Overland Trail. Relocation
of this power line caused by this development will be at the developer's expense. Trees must
be planted in a fashion which would assure that the mature growth will be at least ten (10)
feet away from the power line.
2. Utility easements of thirteen (I T) feet in width need to be provided. That is, from the back
edge of the walk to the rear line of the utility easement must be at least thirteen (I Y) feet.
3. Much of the gas system will end up under the asphalt due to lack of space.
This concludes Staff comments at this time. Additional comments may be forthcoming as the various
departments and reviewing agencies (i.e., Stormwater) continue to review this request. In order to
stay on schedule for the April 22, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing, please note the following
deadlines:
Plan revisions are due, Wednesday, April 3, 1996.
P.M.T.'s, 10 prints, colored renderings are due Monday, April 15, 1996.
'""No revisions or supporting documents will be accepted after revision date (4/3/96)."""
If you should have any questions regarding these comments or if I could be of further assistance to
you in any way, please do not hesitate to contact me at 221-6641.
Sincer ly,
Awc�>
JNfitcgell Haas
Project Planner
encl.
E. Transportation:
1. The internal circulation layout is awkward.
F. Light and Power:
1. . Electric lines and equipment are installed 4' behind the sidewalk or curb. A minimum of 13'
of R.O.W. and/or easement is required behind the sidewalk or curb for installation of electric,
gas, and water valves. In some areas there is not sufficient clearance to install utilities.
2. Streetlights will not be installed along private drives.
3. Developer should contact Light and Power as soon as possible to coordinate location of
electric lines with other utilities, garages, etc.
G. Water and Waste Water.
1. The following separation distances from water and sewer mains and services will have to be
maintained: ten (10') feet from trees, and five (5') feet from shrubs.
2. It will be necessary to route water and sanitary sewer lines around the island in front of the
daycare.
H. Building Inspections:
1. Please see attached comments.
L Poudre Fire Authority:
1. Please clarify the surface proposed for the emergency access; provide spec. sheets.
2. Fire Lane signs will need to be posted.
J. Police:
1. Would recommend changing the name of the P.U.D. since a non -associated street with this
name already exists.
K. Columbine Cable Television:
1. Columbine Cablevision would like to see the utility easements better defined. Also, what are
the two open spaces south of the canal, east of lot 7, and north of lot 6?
2. Please label the tracts on the plat map as to what they are.
L. Water Conservation:
1. Please be aware that the final submittal will need to include a schedule of the areas of
landscape water use categories.
M. Stormwater:
1. Comments from the Stormwater Utility will be forthcoming.
N. Natural Resources:
1. The site plan needs to clearly show areas of existing wetlands and define which, if any,
portions will be disturbed. If wetlands are to be disturbed, appropriate mitigation in the form
of created wetlands will be proportionally required. All Army Corps of Engineers
requirements must also be met.
2. Natural Resources will need to be kept abreast of engineering/grading plans and landscaping
for the detention pond.
3. The Natural Resources Department will inform you if a fiuther study of orchid habitat is be
required.
3. The recreational open space shown on the site plan adds up to one square foot less than that
shown on the land use breakdown. Although minimal, please correct this slight discrepancy.
4. Under the "coverage" section of the land use breakdown, please make it clear'that the "street
ROW' is referring to public streets.
C. General Notes Comments:
1. Please add the following phrase to the end of note number 7 (or something to this affect):
"...using down directional high pressure sodium lighting to minimize overflow/light pollution."
2. Note number 8:
► What does "and shall be limited common elements mean?
► Please add the following to the end of this note: "Materials and colors shall be the
same or compatible with the residential buildings."
► Please define the parking structures; will they be carports or garages?
3. In note number 9, please add a stipulation calling for the provision of recycling facilities.
4. Please explain note number 17. A "nationwide permit?"
IL - - - ELEVATION COMMENTS - - -
If possible, please provide elevations for the duplexes and the carports/garages.
HL - - - POINT CHART COMMENTS - - -
A. Residential Uses Point Chart H (Density Chart):
I spoke with Ted about this, and we're willing to give you five (5) points under bonus criteria
` v," if you want to take them This would give the project a total of 105 points (as opposed
to 100 points). I just thought you might like to know this.
IV. - - - COMMENTS FROM OTHER REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS - - -
A. Engineering:
1. See attached comments.
B. Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal:
1. See attached comments.
C. Zoning:
1. Please note the building dimensions, typical or otherwise, on the site plan.
2. Please building envelopes and setbacks for the multi -family structures.
E
D. Mapping:
1. If interior roads are private, this entire development will have one address. .
2. The mapping and drafting department will need to see the final plat. Please provide enough
copies.
ti
5. Along the west side of buildings 2-8, please provide additional landscaping between the
sidewalk and the buildings.
6. At the western of the two accesses off of W. Elizabeth, please provide two trees on each side
of the drive (within the property and outside the R.O.W.) fo match the eastern entrance.
I'm not sure how this can be solved, if at all, but the southwestem comer units of buildings
21 and 22 are a bit far from the parking areas. Imagine having a carload of groceries and
living in the upstairs, southwest comer of building 22. This would not be convenient (A-2.4).
The following is a couple of suggestions to help improve some specific pedestrian circulation
problems:
Please provide a sidewalk connection from building 24 to the west, toward building
23 and the trash enclosure.
As the people living in building 1 will likely park in the structures and parking area
immediately to the east, the sidewalk from the western side of the building should
wrap around/continue all the way to that parking area.
Building 9 (type 2) is somewhat isolated from a pedestrian standpoint. Pursuant to
All Development Criteria A-2.6, we recommend that the walkway around this
building connect to a sidewalk. This can be done by connecting to the public sidewalk
to the west, providing a sidewalk along the recommended roadway (comment 2,
above) and a connection thereto, or both.
9... Please provide public access easements on all private streets.
10. The "Statement of Planning Objectives" calls for phased implementation; however, there are
no phasing lines shown on the site/landscape plan. If phasing is planned, please delineate
these phases on the site and landscape plans.
11. Please provide bike racks and show them on the site plan. Will there be any fencing?
12. Please check with the City Forester, Tim Buchanan, as to the desired future disposition of the
existing Russian Olive trees.
13. Will eight (8) dumpsters be enough to serve all 24 eight-plexes? That's 3 eight-plexes, or
twenty-four households, per dumpster.
B. Land Use Breakdown Comments:
The area of the site is listed as 20.90 acres, yet the property description (legal) states that the
property has an area of 23.6034 acres. Please correct this discrepancy or explain the
reasoning behind it. Also, if necessary, please adjust the rest of the land use breakdown
calculations accordingly.
2. You may lose a few parking spaces with the revisions suggested in this letter. Please adjust
this section of the Land Use Breakdown accordingly.
Comm-.ity Planning and Environmentai cervices
Current Planning
Citv of Fort Collins
March 15, 1996
Mr. Eldon Ward
Cityscape Urban Design, Inc.
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Eldon,
Staff has reviewed -your submittal for the Scenic Views P.U.D., Preliminary (#3-96) and offers the
following comments:
L - - - SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS - - -
A. Plan Comments:
As the submitted site/landscape plan is somewhat busy, it would be very helpful if the
revisions could be separated. That is, please submit a landscape plan and a site plan
separately on revision date.
2. Pursuant to All Development Criteria A-2.4, staff feels that the "twenty foot emergency
access" should be a permanent roadway connection between the duplex and the multi -family
portions of this development. We do not feel that this would encourage extraneous, high
speed vehicular traffic, but if this is a concern, we would suggest using some traffic calming
mechanism(s), such as speed bumps. It is our contention that the lack of this connection
would encourage extraneous traffic by forcing those people living in the duplexes to use
Overland Trail and W. Elizabeth Street (and thus have to make two left turns) to get to the
daycare center, or to visit someone living in the multi -family portion (or vice -versa). After
all, most people will not walk or bike these trips, especially to drop-off or pick-up their
children at/from the daycare facility. Please make this connection.
In an effort to screen the wall of parking structures from the out parcel's back yard, and
pursuant to All Development Criteria A 2.13, we suggest providing a continuous row of trees
(mix of coniferous and deciduous) between these four (4) parking structures and the property
line of the out parcel. Similarly, we recommend some more trees on the north side of the
duplexes in order to provide a buffer between the duplexes and the home(s) to the north.
Finally, it might not be a bad idea to have a few more trees between duplex #1 and building
#9.
4. We would like to request that any rows of parking consisting of ten (10) or more spaces
please be broken into two (2) sections by the addition of a landscape peninsula.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750
FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002