HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEARTHFIRE PUD, 2ND FILING - FINAL ..... ROUND OF REVIEW 7 - 31-95E - CORRESPONDENCE -0
Sincerely,
4
Steve Olt
Project Planner
xc: Engineering
Stormwater Utility
Transportation Planning
Traffic Operations
Natural Resources
Shear Engineering
Frederick Land Surveying
Project File #31-95E
10. A permanent storm drainage outfall system is needed for this development.
Stormwater (Basil Hamda
11. There are concerns about a necessary off -site drainage easement/agreement
with the Water Supply & Storage Company (WS&S). This easement must be
signed by WS&S and reviewed by City staff prior to this item going to the
Planning and Zoning Board for a decision.
12. No water quality ponds are being shown for the storm drainage outfall from this
site. They are needed.
13. The outfall needs to be permanent, not temporary as currently proposed.
Natural Resources (Doug Moore)
14. There are still Natural Resources issues with the rare plant species that is
present on adjacent property in the area of the southwest corner of this
development.
15. There is proposed grading and disturbance in the outfall areas on both Filings 1
2.
This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments could be
forthcoming as the various departments and reviewing agencies finish their review.
Staff has determined that the project is not yet ready to go to the Planning and
Zoning Board for a decision due to outstanding natural resource, storm drainage,
engineering issues, and/or off -site easements. Another full round of review may not
be necessary; however, the stated issues must be resolved before the item can be
placed on a Planning and Zoning Board public hearing agenda. Please work directly
with the appropriate departments to resolve the issues.
This development proposal is still subject to the City's 90 day turnaround period that
begins on the date of the comment letter prepared by the project planner in the
Current Planning Department (in this case, 3/07/01). The outstanding issues must
be resolved so that the item can be scheduled for public hearing or revisions re-
submitted with the 90 day period.
You may contact me at 221-6341 if you have questions about these comments or
would like to schedule a meeting to discuss them.
2. Mark Jackson of the Transportation Planning Department stated that they
have no further concerns or comments regarding this development proposal.
3. A copy of the comments received from Sheri Wamhoff of the Engineering
Department is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments may be
found on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact
Sheri, at 221-6750, if you have questions about her comments.
4. Jim Hoff of the Technical Services Department (Mapping & Drafting) stated
that the plat boundary closes and the legal description matches the plat.
5. Webb Jones of the East Larimer County Water District stated that their
comments are on red -lined utility plans that are being forwarded to the applicant.
6. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility
is attached to this comment letter. Red -lined plans and reports, with additional
comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Basil, at 224-
6035, if you have questions about these comments.
7. Mike Spurgin of the Post Office stated that they have no concerns or comments
regarding this development proposal.
8. Ward Stanford of Traffic Operations offered the following comments:
a. With the new possibility that the Douglas Road improvements will be east
of the site vs. west, the utility plans indicate County Road 13
improvements terminating at the Douglas Road improvements. If the
eastern improvements are accepted, County Road 13 will need to be
paved to existing Douglas Road, with any necessary improvements to
Douglas Road to facilitate a proper paved connection.
b. The utility plans do not reflect paving corrections on County Road 13, as
discussed with the developer's engineer.
Please contact Ward, at 221-6820, if you have questions about these comments.
The following comments and concerns were expressed at the weekly staff review
meeting of February 28, 2001:
Engineering (Sheri Wamhoff)
9. The applicant and developer must resolve the necessary off -site improvements to
Douglas Road before this project goes to the Planning and Zoning Board for a
decision. Based on the information still needed and the work to be done, it could
be 1 to 2 months before the item can be scheduled for a hearing.
and Environmental Wices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
March 7, 2001
Tom Dugan
PineCrest Planning and Design, LLC
4225 Westshore Way
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
Dear Tom,
Staff has reviewed your revisions for Hearthfire PUD, Second Filing - Final that were
submitted to the City on February 7, 2001, and would like to offer the following
comments:
Doug Moore of the City's Natural Resources Department offered the following
comment:
• A private citizen brought to the attention of the Natural Resources
Department that a rare Colorado plant species, Showy Prairie Gentian —
Eustoma grandiflorum, was growing around Richards Lake in the area of
this project. On October 22, 2000 this was confirmed during a site visit.
Present at this visit were Kim Kreimeyer, Doug Moore, and Karen Manci
of the City's Natural Resources Department. Please note:
Showy Prairie Gentian locations should be delineated and mapped
on the Site, Landscape, and Grading Plans.
Depending on the delineation, trails may need to be relocated.
This is a repeat comment and is significant enough to prevent the
item from being scheduled for a Planning and Zoning Board public
hearing and decision.
Please contact Doug, at 224-6143, for information related to the plant locations
found during the site visit and for guidance related to the sign placement after
delineation and mapping have been done.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020