HomeMy WebLinkAboutJEFFERSON COMMONS PUD - PRELIMINARY - 50-95 - CORRESPONDENCE - (4)h. The Site Plan shows only five trash enclosures for 204 units. More enclosures are
needed and should incorporate recycling bins.
Please add a note to the Landscape Plan which states: "The developer shall ensure
that the landscape plan is coordinated with the plans done by other consultants so that
the proposed grading, storm drainage, or other construction does not conflict no
preclude installation and maintenance of landscape elements on this plan."
j. General note 14 on the Site Plan is not relevant and can be deleted.
k. 4 bedroom apartments (potentially 4 unrelated individuals per dwelling unit) are not
allowed through the variance process. Pursuant to Section 29-526 (E6) of the City
Code, "All residential developments approved pursuant to this section shall conform
v\ to the definition of "family" as established in Section 20-1 of the code, provided,
however, that with respect to multiple -family dwellings only, the Planning and Zoning
Board may, upon receipt of written request by the developer and upon a finding that
all applicable criteria of this section have been satisfied, increase the number of
unrelated persons who may reside in individual dwelling units. Further, the Planning
(� and Zoning Board shall not increase said number unless it is satisfied that the
developer has provided additional open space, recreational areas, parking areas, and
public facilities as are necessary to adequately serve the occupants of the development
and to protect the adjacent neighborhood." Please submit a request and justification
for such an increase at the Jefferson Commons PUD.
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 January 26, 1996
Planning and Zoning
Board hearing:
*************RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR*RRRR***RR**********RRR************RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Plan revisions are due by 5:00 p.m. on January 3, 1996. Please contact me for the number of
folded revisions required for each document.
PMT's, renderings, and 8 folded copies of final revisions are due by 3:00 p.m. on January 16,
1996. -
*******RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR***RR*RRR***RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR*RRR
6) Please provide drainage easements for the channel and show off -site easements
pertaining to this channel.
7) Please include stamp on the cover letter.
8) Please revise the landscape plan to match the grading plan.
9) Please call out the wetlands areas on all plans and discuss the design in the report.
10) Please justify the width and imperviousness parameters in the SWAM models.
11) Please model the floddplain of Plum Channel with HEC-2 at the final design.
12) Please explain what will happen to the irrigation return ditch along Elizabeth.
Please address additional redlined comments in the report and the plans.
w:\..\jpi-l.pre
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: Z �6ember 1995 DEPARTMENT: =WWXF-
PROJECT: * 50-9 5 $e �mmo�s 'PuD -" "�'(6ml nzry
PLANNER: Xkc Wwi6
All comments must be received by: TRICA`()
0 No Problems
LJ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
1) Please call out the dimentsion on Orchard Place on the Grading Plan.
2) Please tie all proposed contours into the existing.
3) Please provide erosion protection at the pipe outlets to the channel.
4) Please provide detention pond tables with the following information:
1. 100-year flow rate
2. Actual release rate
3. 100-year HWL
4. Required Volume
5. Actual Volume
5) Pease provide more flow arrows at the turnaround in the driveway off of West
Elizabeth.
Date: Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE ❑ PLAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ SITE 5
❑ LANDSCAPE Co es
❑ UTILITY � 5cc �a
improvements tie into existing, signing and striping plan, and cross -sections
every 50 to 100 feet (depending on how much profiles fluctuate), and a cross
section at the driveway into the site. New construction of arterial streets
requires a %2.00 cross=slope.
- A detail of the driveway design specific to this project must be included on the
final utility plans. Include radii, spot elevations, and proposed surfacing. The
driveway must be concrete to the property line and no colored or stamped
concrete or special pavers are allowed in the right-of-way.
- Show how the existing bike path will tie in to the proposed improvements to
Orchard Place and that it fits in with the proposed tennis court area.
- There is an existing irrigation ditch lateral along Elizabeth Street adjacent to
the property. What is being done with this lateral ? Does it serve upstream
and/or downstream users ?
- These are the preliminary comments at this time. Additional comments are
made at final when more engineering design detail is available.
- It is suggested that some preliminary design with aerial photos and other
sources of information on the existing street improvements, and those proposed
with the Overland Ridge P.U.D. , be submitted for review by the City Engineering
and Transportation staff prior to final submittal of the P.U.D.
- Need some preliminary information by revision date on the proposed
improvements to Elizabeth Street. The traffic study makes some
recommendations including widening and striping for a westbound right turn lane
into the site and a center left turn lane. We need information to evaluate how
these improvements will fit with the existing improvements and striping to the
east and to the west on both sides of Elizabeth Street. Widening was done
adjacent to the K.F.C. site and is being done to the west on the south side of
Elizabeth with the Overland Ridge P.U.D. (Manatta property). For example,
depending on the impacts to the intervening properties, we may want to consider
completing the widening off -site between this project and K.F.C.
- At final, we will need a striping plan and off -site information for West Elizabeth
Street. Be aware that West Elizabeth Street is proposed to be downgraded from
an arterial to d minor arterial under the new Master Street Plan. The transition
from arterial width to the minor arterial width as Elizabeth gets built out to the
west needs to be coordinated between the new projects proposed as well as
transitioned smoothly with the existing improvements.
- The site plan notes that the west dead-end of Plum Street is proposed to be
vacated. If no adjacent properties take access off that portion of Plum, the street
stub may be proposed for vacation. Right-of-way vacation requires a City
Council Ordinance (2 readings). The Developer is obligated for the removal of
the street stub, including grading, reseeding, and utility work, and reconstruction
of curb and gutter along Ponderosa Drive to complete a finished street frontage.
The area will likely have to be retained as a utility and drainage easement.
State statutes determine to whom the land ownership reverts. (Typically, it is
divided equally between the two adjacent properties.) The right-of-way vacation
must be taken to City Council for First Reading prior to final approval of the
P.U.D. Second Reading will occur upon completion of the removal of the street
stub and reconstruction along Ponderosa. To begin the vacation process, the
Developer should submit a written request and justification for the vacation,
along with a sketch of the area proposed for vacation, with the final P.U.D.
submittal.
- Since Plum Street is being extended onto the property, the Developer is
required to construct a permanent dead-end to the public street. That is, a
permanent cul-de-sac must be built to City standards either on the property or
on the adjacent property. To build it on the adjacent property, the Developer is
required to obtain the permanent right-of-way and easements necessary to build
to City standards prior to final approval. The City must receive a letter of intent
to dedicate from the adjacent owner prior to preliminary approval.
- At final, Elizabeth Street design must include flowline profiles (existing and
proposed for both sides of the street, centerline profile (existing and proposed),
limits of construction, off -site design to the east and west to show how
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: 21 16ember 1995 DEPARTMENT: ?tV;
PROJECT:*50-q5 80?tml' BUD—�relimic�ry
PLANNER: ,Me, ludwi�
All comments must be received by: TRICAY, bacsMQzL 1) 19G5
❑ No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
❖ Plat / Site Plan:
- Make sure building envelopes are large enough to accommodate minor shifts
in building location, stairwells, patios, decks, ... On similar projects we often
have to go through an easement vacation and/or replat when the developer
decides to make minor modifications or when construction problems arise. The
potential need to have do this can be minimized by platting larger building
envelopes than are necessary for the actual structure and appurtenances.
+ Utility Plans:
- At final, we will need detailed design of the ties to existing streets (i.e. the
connection of Orchard Place) and the transition of street width flowline to
flowline, right-of-way width, and easements adjacent to the right-of-way.
Vacations and/or dedications of rights -of -way and easements, on -site and/or off -
site, may be necessary to transition smoothly between proposed improvements
and existing improvements.
Date: I Z / ��� Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE ❑ PLAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ SITE
❑ LANDSCAPE
0 UTILITY
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
A-2.2 Building Placement and Orientation. It does not appear the proposed Site
Plan has any relationship to neighborhood character. It does a marginal job of
forming the "activity area". The basketball, and tennis courts appear to be stuck in
the comer of the development where they will get very little use. Why not
incorporate them in the middle of the development? Will this area be lighted? What
bout noise and light pollution on surrounding neighbors to the north and east?
0 The ratio of the building heights to the width of the open space is should be
reconsidered. It appears that open space was an after thought and that it is only the
;' remainder of land after buildings and parking were placed on plan.
A-2.4 Vehicular Circulation and Parking asks: "Is the street and parking system
designed to be safe, efficient, convenient and attractive, considering use by all modes
of transportation that will use the system, (including, without limitation_ cars, trucks,
buses, bicycles and emergency vehicles)? The proposed "secured" or "gated"
community does not meet this criteria. The circulation through the parking lot is not
efficient or convenient. The parking lot is over -parked by approximately 200 spaces
and does not contribute to the developments attractiveness. The formation of
useable or purposeful spaces is marginal. Rather, parking is everywhere and useable
spaces are "left over" and not distributed proportionately.
A-2.6 Pedestrian Circulation asks: "Does the pedestrian circulation system (a)
accommodate pedestrian movement from the neighborhood to the site and throughout
the proposed development safely and conveniently and (b) contribute to the
attractiveness of the development?" The "secured" or "gated" community prevents
pedestrian movement from the neighborhood to and throughout the site. The
d proposed layout is not efficient, convenient, or attractive. The entire development is
&44r)auto-oriented, not pedestrian -oriented or equal.
S 1g':c2> A-2.7 Architecture. Buildings should be of a similar size to other buildings in the
neighborhood. It does not appear that height is the issue. It is the placement and
mass of the buildings. Staff suggests smaller buildings towards the single family side
of the development and the larger buildings near the commercial uses and existing
multi -family buildings east of this proposal. The mass and scale of the proposed
buildings must be mitigated. Brick on the first floor and heavy dimensional, high -
profile shingles are a starting point.
A-2.8 Building Height and Views. Staff does not see the height of buildings as an
issue (see A-2.7). However, * applicant must submit a request and justification for
a variance to exceed 40'. ease refer to Section 29-526 (K) of the City Code (page
108 of the LDGS) fo an explanation of the variance procedures.
A-2.12 Setbacks. Yepsroplerty
specially concerned about the placement of building 4 in
relation to the singlesidences. This building is 47' tall and a portion of is not
more than 10' fro line.
In order to claim 5 points for Criterion "m" of the Residential Uses point chart, there
must be at least 1.586 acres (69,086.16 square feet) of recreational space.
"Recreational space shall mean privately owned space which is designed for active
recreational use for more than three (3) families and would qualify as one (1) of the
Diefollowing categories:
() open Active ace.
[a] A parcel of not less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet and not
less than fifty (50) linear feet in the smallest dimensions;
[b] Public dedications may not contribute to the active open space area;
[c] Partial credit may be given to active open space areas which are
devoted to improved flood control channels and areas encumbered by
flowage, floodway, or drainage easements.
(2) Active indoor space.
[a] Recreational facilities or structures and their accessory uses located in
approved areas including, but not limited to game rooms, swimming
pools, gymnasiums, bowling alleys, exercise rooms, and tennis and
racquetball courts;
[b] Residents of the project for which the facility is planned must
automatically be members without additional charge."
Please submit a plan which outlines the areas which constitute the 1.586 acres of
recreation space.
10 points are being claimed for Criterion "o" of the Residential Uses point chart. This
suggests that $102,000 will be spent on a neighborhood public transit facility. Please
a submit a letter from Transfort which states there acceptance of the proposed facility
at the_ entrance to Jefferson Commo and verification of the cost of the transit
facility. �,oS{ tv� c%� Vec "
f. 10 bonus points will not be awarded for Criterion "u" of the Residential Uses point
or, chart. Automatic fire extinguishing systems for the dwelling units are required by the
Building Code (see Poudre Fire Authority comments).
g. The All -Development Criteria of the Land Development Guidance System are
mandatory compliance criteria. Staff feels that the land use is appropriate for this site.
However, staff is concerned about how the proposed Site Plan meets All -
Development Criteria A-2.2, A-2.4, A-2.6, A-2.7, A-2.8, and A-2.12.
6� 8. The Water Conservation Specialist states that th�Landscape Plan will need to include
a schedule of the landscape water use categories and associated square footages.
9 . The Natural Resources Department states that more information is needed on the design,
establishment, and preservation ofwedands on this site. Please contact Susie Gordon at 221-
kW 6265 to discuss the information required.
e
10. Comments from the Engineering Department are attached.
11 Comments from the Stormwater Utility are attached.
12. The City Forester states that the large spruce tree along West Elizabeth needs to be
preserved. It is not currently shown on the Site Plan. The applicant should contact Tim
Buchanan at 221y76jA61 to schedule a meeting on site to discuss the preservation of this tree.
w l� a in �4di�o C Cigh� of u — P05Z-61U,4 rNove St C
The Transportation Department states that there must be bike and pedestrian connections
from the site to the east (see Planning comment "g" ). i
14. Transfortstated that the there is currently a weekly bus route which serves the CSU campus
that has a turnaround in Cedarwood Plaza This bus stop must be moved out of the shopping
center and will be eliminated in January. Transfort is exploring other options at this time.
However, as stated in earlier discussions with the applicant, the proposed bus stop and
turnaround on the Jefferson Commons Site Plan does not work as the Transfort bus would
have to make an unsignalized left turn onto West Elizabeth. Please contact Gaylene Rossiter
of Transfort at 221-6195 to discuss further options.
15. The Planning Department states the following:
Criterion "b" of the Residential Uses point chart requires the proposed project to be
within 650 feet of an xtstrn sit stop. Points will not be awarded for Criterion
"b" for the proposed bus stop at the entrance of Jefferson Commons.
b. Criterion "c" of the Residential Uses point chart awards points for proximity to a
a9 existing neighborhood park; or a publicly owned but not developed neighborhood
_ olfcourse._Points_are-awmaed for onl .on ther.
The proposed project is within 3,500 feet of a neighborhood par very P - and
therefore is eligible for 20 points or the applicant may claim 10 points for being within
3,500 feet of City Park golf course.
Criterion'? of the Residential point chart references the projects proximity to a major
0- employment center. Please submit documentation from Poudre High School or the
aw Poudre R-1 School District which verifies that there are at least 100 full-time
t S� employees at Poudre High School during a single, eight hour shift.
parking. Accessible routes shall comply with ANSI Al 17.1-1992 with running slopes
no greater than 1:20 and cross slopes no steeper than 1:48. Where routes cross lanes
for vehicle traffic they shall be designated and marked as a cross walk. Provide
parking and signs per Appendix Section 3107. Parking and access aisles shall comply
with ANSI A117.1-1992 with slopes no greater than 1:48 in any direction., Curb
ramps shall be provided where the accessible routes traverse curbs. Ensure that bike
racks are located to leave accessible routes unobstructed. Where accessible routes
cross lanes for vehicle traffic they shall be designated and marked as a crosswalk.
C. Approval from the Larimer County Health Department is required for the swimming
pool. Please contact the health department at (970) 498-6775 for requirements.
d. Storage or use of hazardous materials (pool chemicals) must be in compliance with
the Fire Code and Chapter 9 of the 1991 Uniform Building Code as adopted by the
City of Fort Collins. A list of such materials with quantities and classifications should
be submitted for review at the time of building permit application.
6. The Water and Wastewater Utility states:
w, a. The water mains and sanitary sewer mains need to be constructed in accessible areas
such as drives, alleys, and parking areas.
b. The 6" water main in Plum Street on the south side of the property needs to be
connected (looped) with the proposed system.
C. The tennis court can not be constructed on top of the sanitary sewer main.
d. Please route the drainage channel so that it is not over the existing sanitary sewer.
e. The water mains in Orchard must be connected.
f. Please add a note to the Landscape Plan which states: "Maintain a minimum
separation distance of 10 feet for trees and 4' for shrubs from any water/sewer mains
and services."
g. Please add a note that states: "Utilities to be located in the field prior to layout and
planting of landscaping."
7. Public Service of Colorado states:
a. PSC gas does not want to be limited to "rear lot" easements. Access easements on
"parking lot" sides of buildings should also be designated as utility easements.
B�
b. Gas mains will be under asphalt since there is no landscape area on the front or the
lot.
b. The Title on the Plat should read "Preliminary Plat of Jefferson Commons PUD".
�c. i Double row (end to end) parking stalls must be a minimum of 19' in length. Currently
��1� these stalls vary from ITto 18'.
d. A minimum of 12,684 square feet of interior parking lot landscaped islands (6%) are
u1 ,�, required. Please calculate and list the percentage of interior parking lot landscaping
Pro?in the land use data.
e. Please show bui ding dimensions and distances to property lines on the Site Plan.
f. The building height shown on the elevations is approximately 47'. However, the
General Note on the Site Plan indicates that the maximum height is 40'. A variance
to the 40' building height limit will be required of this development (see Planning
comment "g„) b�, 8
• � u
g. Please add a note to the landscape note which states that "all landscaping and
irrigation systems shall be installed or secured with an irrevocable letter of credit,
escrow, or performance bond for 125% of the valuation of materials and installation
prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy."
0 w h. Please submit a plant list for the landscape plan.
5. The Building Inspections Department states the following:
a. 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 Forty Collins. The 1992 editions of the American National Standard
Institute publication #A117.1 "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 Stature, Title 9, Article 5, Section 111 also applies to
apartment projects. Though not administered at the municipal level, similar
requirements are contained in State and Federal civil rights legislation (Fair Housing
Acts). Where provided in a project containing accessible dwellings, a portion of
garages or covered parking areas must be accessible.
b. The site shall be accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with Uniform
}; Building Code Section 3103 and UBC Appendix Section 3106. Provide a designated
g and marked "accessible route of travel" between all the buildings and facilities
�4b (including mail and trash disposal) on the site; building exits and entrances and the
�� public way (public sidewalk); and between accessible buildings/facilities and accessible
Comm ty Planning and Environmenta: !rvices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
December 15, 1995
JPI Texas Development, Inc.
c/o Rick Hattman
Gefroh Hattman Architects
145 W. Swallow Road
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Rick,
V _ }D0. n..�.
Staff has reviewed your documents for the Jefferson Commons PUD, Preliminary, that were
submitted on November 20, 1995, and would like to offer the following comments:
1. The Light and Power Utility states the following:
�e cs kGr a. A utility coordination meeting regarding this site should be held with all affected
parties bringing preliminary layouts. Kerrie Ashbeck of the Engineering Department
will contact you regarding the date, time, and location of this meeting.
\+ CV,wr� b. Trees on W. Elizabeth and Orchard Place streets will need to conform to treelstreet
W' standards.
Provisions need to be made in the two bridges for utilities to cross.
YP
2. The Poudre Fire Authority states the following:
\� i' The proposed bridges must be capable of supporting a 35 ton fire apparatus.
\\ , sb � Auildings that are three or more stories in height or contain 16 or more dwelling units
a � Q must be equipped with an automated fire suppression system.
C. The proposed security gate must be provided with an emergency access code or
�knox-box key system (see Planning Department comment "g").
wrll�'9°w-
3. Comments from the Pleasapt Valley and Lake Canal Company are forthcoming.
coax .�
4. The Zoning Department states the following:.
a. Don't show building envelopes on the Plat unless they are substantially larger than the
building foot print. If any portion of the buildings project outside or overhang the
y'k building envelope, the applicant will be required to replat and vacate easements.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750
FAX (970) 221-6378 TDD (970) 224-6002