Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPROSPECT GREENS PUD - PRELIMINARY - 15-95 - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTS022 The street right-of-way width needs to be discussed. Does it . go right up to the houses and how are the setbacks being addressed? Should this street be public or private? 23. The Landscape Plan should show the existing trees and indicate whether they are to remain or be removed. 24. If the scale is correct on the Landscape Plan (1" = 301) then the street is only 12' wide. 25. The site sign is subject to the requirements of the City Sign Code and will not be considered as part of the Planning and Zoning Board's review and'decision. The detail should note this. 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 May 22, 1995 Planning and Zoning Board hearing: ****************************************************************** Plan revisions are due no later than the end of the working day, May 3, 1995. Please contact me for the number of folded revisions required for each document. PMT's, renderings, and 8 folded copies of final revisions (for the Planning and Zoning Board packets) are due by 3:00 p.m. on May 15, 1995. ****************************************************************** Please contact me at 221-6750 if you have 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. Sinc rely, Steve Olt Project Planner xc: Kerrie Ashbeck Stormwater Utility Transportation file/Project Planner of A1,r0CVV, ; b. Please define proposed activities in the "Active Open Space". Will this area be mowed? 13. The degree of offset from the street to the north of Prospect Road could be a problem. How does the traffic study address this? It may be necessary to amend the study to deal with the offset. 14. The city would like to review a planting plan for.the active open space around the bike trail. 15. The public walkway will probably not function as such, with the meandering alignment. Most walkers will probably use the street. The units could be shifted back closer to the property lines (east and west), allowing for a straighter, sidewalk Dalignment. 16. The building massing appears to be somewhat awkward. The elevations look backwards, creating a "garage-scape" along the street. Also, there is no setback variation to break up the massing. \ 17. )diminishing he common open space areas look awkward. The areas are small nd configured so as not to be practically used. Is it ossible that there are too many units on the site, thereby the amount of privacy for the dwelling units and creating awkward (almost dead) common areas? 18. What type of fencing is being proposed? It is.possible that the garages could be re -oriented to the rear portion of the lots and incorporated into the fences. 19. A 1979 floodplain map has been used to determine the floodplain on this site. There is a later 1988 version of the floodplain map that should be used. Also, new improvements to the floodplain that have been implemented since 1988 must be incorporated in to the drainage report. The Hec-2 model that has been done will probably have to be rerun. There are some drainage considerations to the south that have not been accounted for with this drainage report. There could be fencing restrictions in the drainage easements. 20. The ditch owners for the irrigation lateral across this property will have to sign the plat and utility plans. The idea of isolating this property, and other future properties that could develop/redevelop along this strip on Q-the south side of Prospect Road, is a concept that the City is not really supportive of. It would be better to do a "sub- area" plan for numerous properties that could provide good internal circulation and limit the points of access to Prospect Road. (cross -access to the adjacent properties should be considered now with this development proposal.` e. A note is needed on the Landscape Plan, re; the landscaping needs to be completed prior to a certificate of occupancy being issued or a letter of credit must be provided. 3. The Building Inspection Department has indicated that the preliminary plat shows all single family dwellings on individual lots. The Site Plan should indicate the property lines. The location of the buildings on the lots must comply with the Uniform Building code requirements. 4. There would appear to be a break in the existing Spring Creek Trail bike path easement at the west side of the property on the subdivision plat. This easement must continue all of the way across the property. 5. The Light & Power Department would like a 6' easement along East Prospect Road to accommodate the undergrounding of the overhead electric. 6. The comments received from the Water/Wastewater Department have been forwarded to your engineer on a red -lined copy of the utility plan and to you on a red -fined copy of the Landscape Plan. 7. A copy of the comments received from the Stormwater Utility is attached to this letter. 8. A copy of the comments received from the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. 9. There are water conservation standards for landscaping that apply to this project. Copies of the comment sheet and general information handout are attached to this letter. 10. The City Forester is including a copy of two tree protection notes that must be added to the Landscape Plan. 11. The Parks & Recreation Department would like to have the sidewalk that connects to the Spring Creek Trail widened to 8' for maintenance vehicle access. P & R presently lacks access from East Prospect Road to the trail in this area. The planned sidewalk width with paving blocks may be an option for the additional width. 12. The comments received from the Natural Resources Division are as.follows: a. Do not use "Dry Land" grasses along Spring creek or in the active recreation area . this mix contains exotic pest. species (e.g.: smooth brome, crested wheatgrass) that invade natural areas. Use a native mix. Please see Karen Manci of the Natural Resources Division for recommended species. Comm ity Planning and Environment; Current Planning City of Fort Collins April 14, 1995 Robert Sutter Architectural Horizons 4730 South College Avenue, #206 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Bob, -ervices Staff has reviewed your documents for the Prospect Greens P.U.D. - Preliminary that were submitted to the City on March 20, 1995, and would like to offer the following comments: 1. The comments received from Public service are as follows: a. Utility easements adjacent to the right-of-way should be such that from the back of walk to the rear line of the easement is a minimum of 13". Easements need to be continuous. b. The easement width between the existing house and the proposed right-of-way needs to be wider (see comment a.). You may need to shift the right-of-way to the west. C. No trees can be planted within 4' of gas lines. d. Porches, front steps, etc. cannot encroach into the utility easements. 2. The comments received from the Zoning Department are as follows: a. Lot dimensions need to be shown on the plat and Site Plan (assuming that the homes are to be on individual lots). b. The building footprints should not be platted (on the subdivision plat). C. The Site Plan is very deficient on information provided. There is not one single dimension indicated. d. The Site Plan needs to show lot lines, building envelopes, the whole works (as specified in the preliminary P.U.D. submittal requirements in the Development Manual). 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 FAX (303) 221-6378 TDD (303) 224-6002