HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY RIDGE, 2ND FILING - PDP - 49-95F - CORRESPONDENCE - (6)If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at (970)221-6341.
You s Truly,
S eve Olt
City Planner
Cc: Marc Virata
Jim Sell Design
King Surveyors
Current Planning File #49-95F
Page 7
Number: 3 . Created: 6/16/2004
(6/16/04] At one point in time, Traffic Operations expected the intersection of
Harmony/Seneca to be signalized. However, with the development that has occurred in the
area, it appears that it is unlikely that traffic signal warrants of the MUTCD will ever be met.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: General
Number: 9 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] East - West directional crosswalk ramps should be provided at the crossing of
Prairie Vista Drive and Fromme Prairie Way, not the radial ramps that are shown.
Number: 10 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] Directional ramps should be provided on Prairie Vista Way at its crossing of Prairie
Ridge Dr., not the radial ramps as shown.
Number: 11 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] The pedestrian connection to the trailhead parking west of this site should at a
minimum be 8' (LUCASS) since the existing natural areas trail and Cathy Fromme Prairie
are recognized activity centers. Parks Planning and Transportation Planning staff request
that this pathway be further expanded to 10' if possible, as Fromme Prairie Way is
anticipated to be a very popular pedestrian route to this destination.
Number: 12 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] 6' bicycle lanes need to be provided along Fromme Prairie Way in agreement with
discussions that took place with prior submittals. These lanes will provide safe and efficient
access to the Cathy Fromme Prairie natural area and trail that currently exist to the west of
this site, while at the same time providing an important connection to the existing and
planned bicycle facilities on Seneca St. and Harmony Rd.
Number: 13 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] The Bicycle LOS analysis portion of the TIS is incomplete, yet somehow that
.document arrives at the conclusion that Bicycle LOS is currently and will continue to be at
"A" in the future. Please explain this discrepancy or submit a worksheet and analysis that is
acceptable.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
Topic: Zoning
Number: 4 Created: 6/18/2004
[6/18/04] Remove topography lines from the final Site Plan.
This completes staff (and outside reviewing agencies) review and comments at this time.
Another round of staff review is determined to be necessary. This proposal is subject to
the 90-day revision re -submittal requirement (from the date of this comment letter,
being July 12, 2004) as set forth in Section 2.2.11(A) of the Land Use Code. Be sure
and return all of vour red -lined plans when you re -submit. The number of copies of each
document to re -submit is shown on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet.
Page 6
Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom
Topic: General
Number: 21 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] No comments.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Drainage
Number: 14 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] Please provide a historic basin layout and better clarify the area draining to the
detention pond so the release rate for the pond can be verified.
Number: 15 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] The time of concentration calcs for the 100-year flows do not seem to be correct.
They should be less than the 2-year storm calcs.
Number: 16 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] Please describe in the report the pond outfall. Where does the flow go? Is erosion
protection required.
Number: 17 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] The swale to the pond after basin 12 is very steep and erosion will be a problem.
This flow may have to be piped to the pond.
Number: 19 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] Drainage easements are required for the pond and storm sewers not in the right-of-
way.
Number: 20 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] It is not clear for the 100-year storm how the flows end up in the pond. There is 30
cfs that needs to get to the pond and still meet all drainage conveyance criteria.
Number: 42 Created: 7/9/2004
The wetland medians in the streets need to have an outfall so that they do not become
permanent wet ponds. This would create a nuisance which the City would have to correct in
the future. A sand filtering system is recommended, which the water can filter into
underdrains that tie-in into the storm sewer.
Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control
Number: 43 Created: 7/9/2004
A review will take place for erosion control measures once information is submitted.
Department:. Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke
Topic: Traffic
Number: 1 Created: 6/16/2004
[6/16/04] The Traffic Study is acceptable. I have concerns regarding the intersection of
Shields/Taft but the project does not put it over the top in terms of LOS.
Number: 2 Created: 6/16/2004
[6/16/04] Prairie Vista Drive is an 'oddly" design roadway. I am curious as to why the
developer has proposed the eyebrow adjacent to Lots 4-5 and the strange island designs on
the south end of the roadway?
Page 5
Topic: Plat
Number: 27 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] The plat language will need to be revised under the maintenance language to call
out Tracts B & C as having a maintenance period of 5 years.
Number: 28 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Provide the "private drive maintenance note" on the plat (this is the same note on
page 2 of the site plan).
Number: 29 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Provide a note on the plat indicating that all tracts are to be owned and maintained
by the HOA.
Number: 30 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] The right of way between lots 41 and 42 as well as lots 22 and 23 should not widen
as shown on the plat and should continue straight across.
Number: 31 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Correct "Ridge Prairie Drive" on the plat.
Number: 35 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Shouldn't the attached homes be known as "Lot T 1" instead of "T 1"
Number: 40 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Technical Services offers the following:
1. Boundary & legal close.
2. What does the "T" stand for in the lots that adjoin Fromme Prairie Way?
3. Need to have a note about future ownership of tracts.
4. Site plan has many problems (mostly hatch over lines) that will not scan.
Topic: Site
Number: 36 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Add a note on the site plan indicating that parking along Prairie Vista Drive adjacent
to the medians (tracts B & C) is allowed only on the outside edge of the street.
Topic: Street design
Number: 26 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Prairie Vista Drive shows vertical curves (both sag and crest) that are not long
enough in accordance with Chapter 7 of LCUASS.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Janet McTague
Topic: General
Number: 5 Created: 7/2/2004
[7/2/04] Please note that meter needs to be on the same side of the lot as the service stub.
If we know the meter location in the design phase, we can accommodate either side. Once
facilities are installed the meter will need to be placed on the same side of the lot as the
service stub.
Page 4
design that should be perhaps explained in the report are: how will the high clay content of
the existing soil be dealt with, as it reduces the thrivability of the vegetation? It appears that
area storm inlets are proposed to carry flows, is this preferred over a system that allows the
water to percolate to irrigate the soil and then drain to a buried pipe wrapped in a geotextile
fabric? What kind of maintenance plan will be necessary to be implemented by the HOA?
Why was the plant species chosen in the landscaping plan and what are some other
suggested species should certain plants not thrive after the initial planting?
Number: 8 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] There is not enough adequate parking for lots 17 through 21 in accordance with
LCUASS 7.6.1.E and Figure 19-4. 29' of space is required between driveways when less
than 20' is provided along this location. Single car width driveways appear to be needed to
meet this requirement.
Number: 22 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Please indicate on all the notes regarding HOA maintenance that maintenance also
includes the median areas within Prairie Vista Drive.
Number:23 Created: 7/9/2004 `
[7/9/04] Prior to this submittal when it was known that the applicant may be proposing units
to front onto Fromme Prairie Way ("FPW"), the comment was made that parking would need
to be provided along FPW and parallel parking that was "inset" was suggested. The design
instead shows perpendicular parking spots off of FPW. This was not anticipated and not
viewed favorably by City Transportation. In LCUASS 19.2.2 it states that the local entity
engineer must specifically approve parking areas that are not parallel. The sidewalk
provides a pedestrian linkage to the trailhead parking area and to create a situation where
parking sports cross over the sidewalk is not viewed favorably. Parallel parking should be
provided as originally notes.
Number: 24 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Access ramps shall be directional, not lead to the corners of an intersection.
Number: 25 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] A letter of intent is required for the construction along Prairie Ridge Drive onto the
first filing. (The submitted letter of intent appears only valid for Tract 7.) Is the signature of
the HOA president the extent of signatures needed for offsite easements onto the first filing?
It may be worth verifying, especially if the bylaws of the HOA require a percentage of all the
existing owners to sign.
Number: 38 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] At T-intersections (such as at Prairie Ridge Drive and Prairie Vista Drive), at least
three access ramps are required at the intersection, thus an access ramp is needed on the
south side of Prairie Vista Drive.
ti.
Number: 41 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Rick Richter, Engineering Pavement Manager offers the following comment: "I have
major concerns about introducing excess moisture to the pavement subgrade. After
reviewing the preliminary soils report for Harmony Ridge 2nd Filing, this site has some high
swell soils. Allowing a water quality pond in the middle of the pavement will aggravate this
issue and almost guarantee premature pavement failure.
Page 3
Number: 47 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] The Site Plan must show the labeled width of Fromme Prairie Way.
Number: 48 Created: 7/12/2004
(7/12/04] Lot 39 on the Site Plan would appear to be a two-family lot. Is this the case?
Number: 49 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] Please see red -lined Site Plan with Current Planning comments.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Construction plans
Number: 32 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] A utility coordination meeting is suggested for the attached units.
Number: 33 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] The Trilby Lateral Ditch Company should have a separate sign off, not within the
City's utility approval block. Add "Parks and Recreation" and "Natural Resources" to the
approval block.
Number: 34 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] Additional comments will be likely with further vertical design.
Number: 37 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] There appears to be instances in which the maximum amount of sheet flow
drainage over a sidewalk is being exceeded for the private drives that connect to Prairie
Vista Drive.
Number: 39 Created: 7/9/2004
[7/9/04] The plan view on FPW (sheet 7) is a little difficult to understand with regards to the
shading and sawcut labels, is this consistent with the typical section below? Add a note on
the sheet indicating: "Limits of street repair are approximate. Final limits are to be
determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector at the time the cuts are made".
Topic: General
Number: 6 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] The variance requests submitted to Cam McNair dated June 11, 2004 will not be
evaluated at this time. A formal decision on these requests will occur at the time of final
compliance (with full design and details). Please note that unforseen. long term
maintenance is a concern of Engineering which is why the additional maintenance/repair
period was noted in the initial variance response letter.
Number: 7 Created: 7/6/2004
[7/6/04] To a certain extent, the review of the sustainability of the medians within Prairie
Vista Drive (bioretention areas) is being left to Stormwater and Natural Resources as they
have more technical expertise. However, I'm of the concern that if we are going to accept
this concept, the consultant should provide a more detail standalone review/report on the
use rather than refer to elements of the pavement design report, stormwater report, etc for
evaluation explaining how the bioretention areas will function and thrive for vegetation
without negatively affecting street maintenance/function or the residents in the area. This
report would also be of benefit to the future residents. I've found information from Prince
George's County Maryland to be helpful. Some concerns I see in this preliminary phase of
Page 2
STAFF -PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
Jim Newcomb Date: 07/12/2004
932 Pitkin Street
Fort Collins, CO. 80524
Staff has reviewed your submittal for HARMONY RIDGE, FILING 2, PDP - TYPE I (LUC),
and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Building Elevations
Number: 44 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] The Building Elevations, as presented, lack enough information to evaluate the
two-family & multi -family buildings. Please see the red -lined drawings, attached.
Number: 45 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] The parking information for the two-family & multi -family dwellings (Lots T1 - T-13)
is insufficient to determine if the minimum parking requirements are being met.
Topic: Landscape
Number: 50 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] Some landscaping should be provided on the slope in the areas between the rear
of the single-family lots and the Cathy Fromme Prairie. This must be coordinated with Doug
Moore of Natural Resources.
Number: 51 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12104] The Landscape Plan does not provide enough information for. staff to determine if
and how the required Foundation Plantings will satisfy Section 3.2.1(E)(2)(d) of the LUC.
Number: 52 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] Plant Note 9 on the Landscape Plan indicates how the landscaping in the street
rights -of -way, open spaces, and parkways adjacent to residential lots will be maintained.
Who will be responsible for the installation of landscaping in these areas? This must be set
forth on the Landscape Plan.
Topic: Plat
Number: 53 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] Signature blocks for the City Engineer and Director of Planning must be included
on Sheet 1 of the subdivision plat.
Topic: Site
Number: 46 Created: 7/12/2004
[7/12/04] The number of single-family and two-family lots that meet the definition of a solar -
oriented lot are 14 of 49, or 30.6%. The minimum required is 65%, per Section 3.2.3(B) of
the Land Use Code (LUC). The applicant must submit an Alternative Compliance request,
with justification, per Section 3.3.2(E)(1) & (2) of the LUC.
Page 1