HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY RIDGE PUD, PHASE 2 (2ND FILING) - PRELIMINARY / FINAL - 49-95D - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS (7)etc.) As discussed with Ron Gonzales.
This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be
forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing
agencies.
Under the development review process and schedule there is a 90 day plan revision
submittal time -frame mandated by the City. The 90 day turnaround period begins
on the date of this comment letter (July 26, 2000) prepared by the project planner
in the Current Planning Department. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the
appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due
to the project planner no later than the third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday
mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be
discussed and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and
Zoning Board for a decision. If so, will be scheduled for the nearest Board hearing date
with an opening on the agenda.
Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. The
number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached
Revisions Routing Sheet. You may contact me at 221-6341 if you have questions about
these comments or would like to schedule a meeting to discuss them.
Sincerely,
Steve Olt
Project Planner
cc: Engineering
Stormwater
Zoning
Parks Planning
Traffic Operations
Transportation Planning
Technical Services
Natural Resources
J. D. Padilla
TST Engineers
Project File #49-95B
\\Server_dell\e driveTROJECT FILESU AND\1992V\docsVHaP-Rdg2-PF.retI 1.22resp.doc
ridgeline?
JSD: The standard LMN setbacks apply.
42. What keeps the homes from being right on the edge of the ridgeline?
JSD: See Site Plan and simulations.
43. Ridgeline protection does not appear to be met with this development plan. A
coordination meeting is necessary, to include the Natural Resources
Department, the Planning Department, the consultants, and the
owner/developer.
JSD: See simulations.
44. A mitigation plan for the wetlands that are to be disturbed is needed.
JSD. Addressed by Water Quality Technologies, Inc..
45. Proof of compliance from the Army Corps of Engineers is needed.
JSD: Addressed by Water Quality Technologies, Inc..
46. This development proposal does not meet All Development Criterion A-2.3 -
Natural Features in the LDGS.
JSD: The Plan has been modified to meet the Criterion mentioned.
Transportation Planning (Kathleen Reavis)
47. Show the sidewalk along Fromme Prairie Way and how the cul-de-sacs connect
to this sidewalk. How will the bollards and connecting sidewalks work?
JSD: The sidewalks have been shown on the Plan.
48. How does this development provide a bicycle/pedestrian connection to the Fossil
Creek trail in the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area? The original ODP showed
a future connection. A connection is needed, otherwise an "informal' path will
evolve, causing erosion. This could be a challenge. One possible solution is to
construct a small bridge over the Trilby Lateral irrigation ditch. This should be
coordinated with the City Parks Planning Department pertaining to possible joint
funding.
JSD: See Note 13.
Poudre Fire Authority (Ron Gonzales)
49. How does this development deal with the addressing of the 9 lots that face
north? Access to these lots is by a private drive/alley, which could be an issue.
JSD: Lots 6 — 8 will be addressed off Skunkbush Drive with a letter (A, 8 & C
etc.) Lots 4 — 5 will be addressed off Prairie Ridge Court with a letter (A,8 & C,
\\Server_dc1he driveTROJECT FILES\LAND\1992V\docs\liaRRdg2-PF.retol.22resp.doc
Stormwater (Basil Hamdan)
30. The grading plan needs more detail.
31. This development cannot drain into the Trilby Lateral irrigation ditch.
32. The off -site water quality pond is not yet designed.
33. This development cannot dump water into the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural
Area without some water quality or detention. The water cannot just be dumped
into the gullies without erosion control, water quality, or detention. The water
must be intercepted, treated, and detained.
34. Do Lots 40 and 41 encroach into an existing drainage easement in Phase I?
35. Lots of design is missing, such as for the outfalls, swales, and water quality
ponds.
36. A berm is needed on the north side of lots 34 — 40 to keep them from being
flooded by upstream lots.
37. A detailed grading plan is needed. All that has been submitted to date is an
overlot grading plan, which is not sufficient.
JSD: Items 30 — 37: Addressed by TST.
Natural Resources (Kim Kreimeyer
38. City staff had said that architectural specifications and visual simulations for the
homes along the ridge must be submitted for review. They were not provided
with this re -submittal on June 23rd. Technically, the re -submittal was
incomplete.
JSD: Simulations are being submitted with the revisions.
39. A detail of the proposed retaining wall along the ridgeline, showing visual
impacts to the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area, must be submitted for review.
JSD: Noted on the simulations.
40. What breaks up the homes along the ridgeline?
JSD: See simulations.
41. Are there designated building envelopes and are the buildings set back from the
\\Server_dell\e drive\PROJECT FILES\LAND\1992V\dms\Ha?Rdg2-PF.rc%91.22resp.dm
21. Why are portions of Lots 40 — 42, and the cul-de-sac serving them, shown as
being outside of the property boundary for this development?
JSD: The plans have been modified through boundary line adjustment to
alleviate this problem.
22. To protect the ridgeline, and views to and from this development, there should
be no more than 6 lots in a row and a minimum of a 50' gap between them
(similar to the 6 unit townhome buildings in Phase One and the original submittal
of this phase).
JSD: The plans have been modified to represent the requested design.
23. The next re -submittal will hopefully constitute a full submittal of the project. If it is
determined to be complete then a 4-week turnaround cycle to the next
Wednesday morning staff review for this project will be done.
JSD: Noted
Engineering (Marc Virata)
24. "Phase II" is not as clear a term as "Filing Two" for this development proposal. It
is being recommended that the title of the project plans be changed.
JSD: Addressed by TST.
25. Add the water and sanitary sewer districts and the ditch company signature
blocks to the subdivision plat.
JSD: Addressed by TST.
26. Add the missing street names to the subdivision plat.
JSD: Addressed by TST.
27. The subdivision plat still has lots of little problems that must be cleaned up.
JSD. Addressed by TST.
28. A utility coordination meeting, to definitely include the Fort Collins -Loveland
Water and South Fort Collins Sanitation Districts, should be held as soon as
possible. Marc of the Engineering Department will help schedule this meeting.
JSD: Addressed by TST.
29. Driveway cuts are needed in the 2 cul-de-sacs to get to the private drive (Tract 4
— Alley) that serves the 9 lots facing north (Lots 4 — 12).
JSD: Addressed by TST.
\\Server_dell\e drive\PROJECT FILES\LAND\1992V\docs\liaRRdg2-PF.re�p 1.22resp.doc
Phase I.
JSD: The trail from the southern part of this project is not feasible due to the
existing grade along the southern portion of the site.
14. What is the maximum height of the proposed homes? This is not identified on
any of the plans.
JSD: Maximum building height of 35 feet; note added to Plans.
15. Is this not a PUD being reviewed under the LDGS? Why has it been "justified" by
the Principals and Policies in the City Plan, which is the LUC? It was the
developer's choice to go LDGS. This is a repeat question/comment.
JSD: It is being reviewed under the LDGS, but it is our intent to design it as
closely as we can to Land Use Code Standards.
16. What is the nature of the proposed street lighting? Phase I requested, and was
granted, diminished lighting in some parts of that development. Does this
developer intend to make the same request or will the standard City street
lighting be used? This is a repeat question.
JSD: Standard City lighting will be used.
17. The Residential Uses Point Chart is showing 20 points for being within 3,000' of
a major employment center. Is this the 2 schools (has this been substantiated?)
or is it something else? This is a repeat question.
JSD: Contacted both Johnson Elementary School and Weber Junior High School
— their combined total employees is greater than 100 full-time employees. This
meets the definition of Major Employment Center.
18. The Residential Uses Point Chart is showing 10 points for providing adequate,
safe, and convenient pedestrian and bicycle connections to...? There are 3
criteria available. If the intent is to make a connection to an existing adjacent
bicycle trail (in the Cathy Fromme Prairie) then the trail connection must be fully
committed to and shown on the plans. This is a repeat comment.
JSD: The connection to the Cathy Fromme Prairie has been provided along
Fromme Prairie Way.
19. The development request could be in jeopardy, based on points achieved on the
Residential Uses Point Chart, if the aforementioned points cannot be verified.
JSD: Noted
20. The City bicycle/pedestrian trail in the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area, south
of this property, should be shown on the plans.
JSD: See Note 13.
\\Server_dell\e drive\PROJECT FQ.ES\LAND\1992V\docs\HaRRdg2-PF.revT 1.22resp.doc
C. It is unclear what the locations of the easements recorded by Reception
No. 97006003 are.
d. The easterly cul-de-sac (unnamed) encroaches into the "old" Harmony
Road right-of-way.
e. The subdivision plat boundary closes OK. The legal description matches
the plat.
f. Please see Marc Virata's comments on this project regarding the
subdivision plat. Marc is the City's engineer that is reviewing Harmony
Ridge.
JSD: All above addressed by TST.
Please contact the Technical Services Department, at 221-6588, if you have
questions about these comments.
The following general concerns were discussed at the Staff Review Meeting on July 19,
2000:
Planning
11. The Site Plan and Landscape Plan do not show a retaining wall along the
southerly portion of the property that apparently is shown on the grading plan.
Information is needed regarding this wall. If the grading of the site is to be
substantially altered, how will the proposal meet All Development Criterion A-2.3
— Natural Features in the LDGS? This deals with a development plan adapting
well to physical characteristics of the site and minimizing the disturbance of
topography. This is especially critical because of the property's proximity to and
overlook of the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area.
JDS: The grading and retaining walls have been modified to meet the "LDGS
All Development Criteria A — 2.3," and have been shown on the Site and Land-
Scape Plans. See Visual Simulations.
12. A Notary Public signature block is needed on the Site Plan to notarize the
Owner's Certification and signature.
JSD: The Notary Public signature block has been added to the Site Plan.
13. The proposed bicycle/pedestrian trail from this development to the Cathy
Fromme Prairie Natural Area must be constructed of concrete, for handicapped
accessibility reasons, and the developer is responsible for the construction of the
trail on -site from a roadway to the property line. This is consistent with the trail in
\\Server_deMe drive\PROJECT FIl-ES\LAND\1992 V\docs\HaRRdg2-PF.reo 1.22resp.doc
applicable Federal Regulations must be submitted to the City Natural
Resources Department for review.
JSD: Addressed by Water Quality Technology, Inc. See attached
letter.
f. The layout shown on the Site Plan does not meet the intent of the LDGS
or that of the Natural Resources Department. The lots should be broken
into maximum 6 lot masses, with a minimum of a 50' open area between
the masses of buildings. This scheme would naturally fit into the
landscape better than a straight row of lots (and houses) without any
breaks.
JSD: The plan has been modified to meet this objective.
g. List native grass species on the Landscape Plan.
JSD: Native grass species have been added to the Landscape Plan,
Please contact Kim, at 221-6641, if you have questions about these comments.
7. A copy of the comments received from Marc Virata of the Engineering
Department is attached to this comment letter. Red -lined copies of plans, with
additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Marc,
at 221-6750, if you have questions about his comments.
JSD: Addressed by TST.
8. A copy of the comments received from Donald Dustin of the Stormwater Utility
is attached to this comment letter. Red -lined copies of plans and reports, with
additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact
Donald, at 416-2053, if you have questions about his comments.
JSD: Addressed by TST.
9. Jim Slagle of Public Service Company stated that he has no problems
regarding this development proposal. JSD: Addressed by TST.
10. The Technical Services Department (Mapping 8r Drafting) offered the
following comments:
a. Some of the street names are missing on the subdivision plat.
b. Parts of Lots 40, 41, and 42 and the cul-de-sac serving them are outside
of the subdivision plat for this development. This cannot occur. They must
be within the plat.
\\Server_dell\e drive\PROJECT FILES\LAND\ 1992V\docs\IiaRRdg2-PF.re q 1.22resp.doc
JSD: The bicycle lanes and sidewalk have been shown on the plan.
b. The applicant needs to show a possible location for a bicycle/pedestrian
connection down to the City trail in the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural
Area.
JSD: The trail has been taken off the plan.
These are both repeat comments. Please contact Kathleen, at 224-6140, if you
have questions about these comments.
6. Kim Kreimeyer, the City's Natural Resources Planner, offered the following
comments:
a. The grading and retaining wall as shown on the latest grading plan does
not meet the intent of the LDGS All Development Criterion A-2.3 — Natural
Features.
JSD: The grading and retaining walls have been changed to meet the
intent of the "LDGS All Development Criterion A-2.3 — Natural Features. "
See attached Visual Simulations.
b. This site is visually sensitive due to its location to the Cathy Fromme
Prairie Natural Area. During review of Harmony Ridge, Phase I this issue
was of such high concern that a landscape architectural firm was hired to
create architectural drawings and visual simulations for this area. Copies
of these will be made available for your review if you do not already have
copies of them.
In a meeting with Tom Shoemaker and Steve Olt, it was
expressed that architectural specifications and visual
simulations would be required for this project. The applicant
has not yet submitted these items for review by the City.
JSD. Visual simulations are being submitted with the revisions.
C. Some type of water quality will be required for this project due to the
potential impact to existing wetlands.
JSD. Addressed by TST.
d. The City of Fort Collins requires a Wetland Mitigation Plan and Report for
this project.
JSD: Addressed by Water Quality Technology, Inc. See attached
letter from Water Quality Technology Inc.
e. Due to the impact to an existing wetland, proof of compliance with all
\\Ser er_dell\e drive\PROJECT FILES\LAND\I992V\docs\HaRRdg2-PF.re,41.22resp.doc
JSD: The topography lines have been removed from the Site and
Landscape Plan.
b. Related to Plant Note #17 on the Landscape Plan, is there a need for
temporary irrigation to the seeded areas for the first 1 to 2 years to
establish the native grasses?
JSD: A note has been added to the plan regarding a temporary irrigation
System being provided for the first two years.
C. Based on the information on the Site Plan, the type of residential being
proposed in this development is confusing. Are these single family, patio
homes, or townhomes? Each term is used on the Site Plan. Since the
plan does not indicate setbacks, it is not known if these are "attached"
single family or "detached" single family. It is being suggested that the
applicant refer to the dwelling units by a legally defined term, such as
attached or detached single family.
JSD: The notes have been changed to clarify the confusion regarding
the type of dwelling. (single family & duplexes)
d. The Site Plan must include setback information. This is a repeat
comment. If setbacks are not indicated on the Site Plan, then a statement
that the setbacks will conform to the LMN Zoning District will clarify this
issue.
JSD: A statement has been added to the plan regarding the setback.
Since this is a PUD being reviewed under the LDGS, if the setbacks are
not indicated on the Site Plan then the standards of the underlying zoning
(LMN) will apply. If the applicant wants something different, the Site Plan
must indicate this-, otherwise, the LMN standards will apply.
Please contact the Jenny or Gary, at 221-6760, if you have questions about
these comments.
5. Kathleen Reavis of the Transportation Planning Department offered the
following comments:
a. The applicant needs to show 6' wide bicycle lanes and a 5' wide sidewalk
on Fromme Prairie Way, plus show details or clearer bicycle/pedestrian
connections from the cul-de-sacs to Fromme Prairie Way. (Planning
question: Is the Emergency Access Only roadway, as shown on the Site
and Landscape Plans, named Fromme Prairie Way?)
\\Scrver_dell\e drive\PROJECT FILES\LAND\1992V\dms\HaRRdg2-PF.rev3 1.22resp.dm
r
July 26, 2000
Jim Sell Design
c/o Vaughn Furness
153 West Mountain Avenue
Fort Collins, CO. 80524
Dear Vaughn,
Staff Has reviewed your documentation for revisions to the Harmony Ridge PUD,
Phase II — Preliminary & Final that were submitted to the City on June 23, 2000, and
would like to offer the following comments:
Due to the timing of the submittal date for this final PUD request, Harmony Ridge
PUD, Phase II — Preliminary & Final is being reviewed against the Land
Development Guidance System (LDGS), which is in the process of being
replaced by the City's adopted Land Use Code (LUC). This combined preliminary
& final request will go before the Planning and Zoning Board for all decisions.
JSD: Noted.
2. The revised Harmony Ridge PUD, Phase II — Preliminary & Final plan
(submitted on 6/23/00) proposes 63 patio homes (small lot single family) on
15.81 acres. This is in conformance with the approved Minor Amendment to the
Harmony Ridge Overall Development Plan (ODP). The gross residential density
would be 3.98 dwelling units per acre, which also is in conformance with the
approved Amended ODP.
JSD: Minor Amendment approved 7.13.00.
3. A copy of the comments received from Terry Farrill of the Fort Collins -
Loveland Water District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation District is
attached to this letter. Please contact Terry, at 226-3104, ext. 14, if you have
questions about his comments.
JSD: addressed BY TST Consulting Engineers
4. Jenny Nuckols and Gary Lopez of the Zoning Department offered the following
comments:
a. The topography lines should be removed from the Site and Landscape
Plans because they are Final PUD plans that will be recorded and filed.
This is a repeat comment.
\\Server_deMc drive\PROJECT FILESV.AND\1992V\docs\HaRRdg2-PF.rev31.22resp.doc
P
4
r
November 22, 2000
CITY of FORT COLLINS Current Planning Department
Mr. Steve Olt — Project Planner
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins CO 80522-0580
RE: Harmony Ridge PUD, Phase II — Preliminary & Final Staff
Dear Steve:
l.,md,nip'.I" bil"I...'(, PLrnnnnd
The attached prints of Harmony Ridge PUD, Phase II — Preliminary and Final, Site and
Landscape Plan, reflect revisions made in accordance with the comments in your letter of July
26, 2000. Our specific response to each comment is noted in a copy of your July, 2000, letter
with italicized JSD response notes following each numbered entry.
Please review this information and should you have questions, give me a call.
Sincerely,
JIM S/oEL�L,, DESIGN Inc.
L. Vaughn Furness, Project Manager
Director of Community Planning
encl: Response Comments by JSD; Simulations
cc: `J.D. Padilla for Harmony Ridge II
JSD files
\1Se a-dell\e drive\PROJECT FILES\LAND\1992Ndocs\HaRRdg2-PF.m%g 1.22rosp.doc
153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 9704841921 FAX: 970 484 2443 E-MAIL: IIMSELLC1FRII.COM