Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWATERFIELD P.U.D., 2ND FILING - FINAL - 7-95D - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSSincerely, / S#eve Project Planner cc: Engineering Stormwater Utility Water/Wastewater Zoning Transportation Planning Natural Resources Advance Planning Colorado Land Source, Ltd. Nolte -Associates, Inc.. F Project File #7-95D 27. Due to changes to the proposed Merganser and Garganey Drives, the City's Master Street Plan will need to be modified. Stormwater Utility (Basil Harridan) 28. The information regarding the outfalls from the site into the wetlands is not adequate. 29. Storm drainage sheet flows, and not a swale, is not acceptable. 30. The proposed mid -block cross -pans across Muscovy Drive are not allowed. 31. The storm sewer clips Lots 30 and 31. This sewer should be realigned to miss the lots. 32. A sub -drain easement is needed and one is not yet provided. 33. , There is a capacity problem for storm drainage in Merganser Drive. 34. There still are street name conflicts between plans. This must be corrected. Planning 35. This area is all zoned LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. The T — Transition Zoning District designation as shown on the plans for the Ball and Oppie Properties is incorrect. 36. There are still street names conflicts between plans 37. The fencing detail for the rear of Lots 1 — 31 „along the wetlands, is somewhat vague regarding height and materials. 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 the comment letter 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 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments. C. See red -lined Site, Landscape, and utility plans for other comments. Please contact Jeff, at 221-6681, if you have questions about these comments. 14. A copy of the comments received from Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Fire Authority is attached to this comment letter. Please contact Ron, at 221-6570, if you have questions about his comments. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the Staff Review meeting on December 22, 1999: Engineering (Dave Stringer) 15. It appears that several of the proposed crosswalk locations are not going to work. 16. Work is needed on the subdivision plat. The development boundaries need to be checked and, are the easements OK? 17. Make sure all off -site easements are adequate. 18. Provide cross -sections for all of the streets. 19. Add a detail for the detached sidewalks on the utility plans. 20. Show the distance from the wetland buffer to the property lines. 21. These plans are not in a condition for the project to be scheduled for a public hearing. Transportation Planning (Mark Jackson, Kathleen Reavis) 22. Muscovy Drive should be wide enough for on -street parking on the west side and bicycle lanes on both sides. The street needs to be striped for the bicycle lanes. 23.. Is there a plan for a bicycle/pedestrian trail from this development and along the Larimer & Weld Canal? A trail is shown on the Parks & Recreation Master Plan and the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan. How is this trail to be provided for and who will bear the cost? A meeting to discuss the potential trail (to include the applicant, Parks Planning, Transportation Planning, the ditch company, and the Planning Departments) should be set up. 24. What is being put in place to ensure that the future trail from Garganey Drive to Conifer Street will be constructed and who will participate in the cost and construction? 25. Pedestrian crossing markings must be provided across Merganser Drive at East Vine Drive. 26. The south portion of Merganser Drive is being designed, and will be built, to collector standards. Show the bicycle lane striping on the utility plans. j. Additional Engineering comments are on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Dave, at 221-6750, if you have questions about these comments. 11. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this letter. Red -lined reports and plans, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Basil, at 224-6035, if you have questions about his comments. 12. Kim Kreimeyer, the City's Natural Resources Planner, offered the following comments: a. The alignment of Conifer Street should avoid all existing trees. b. Vary the shape of the water quality pond. C. Bury and seed the rip -rap on the stormwater outfall(s). d. Show a detail of the stormwater outfall(s) noting rip -rap to be buried and seeded. e. What is happening with the drain/inlet in the wetland? f. A mitigation plan will be required for the disturbance of the wetland. It will need to address how this area will be dealt with during and after installation of the pipe and outfall/inlet, i.e., stock piling wetland material and restoration of the area when installation of the pipe is completed. g. What are the dashed lines between Lots 16 & 17 that go into the wetland? h. In a meeting on November 11, 1999, there was an agreement that there would be a 4' high, Western 3-rail fence, with mesh, on the rear of all lots adjacent to the natural area. Please change the fence detail on Sheet 5 of 10 to reflect this agreement. i.. Add a note to the plans stating: "City of Fort Collins Natural Resources to purchase wetland area". Please contact Kim, at 221-6641, if you have questions about these comments. 13. Jeff Hill of the Water/Wastewater Department offered the following comments: a. As previously indicated, show and label the existing 30" City of Fort Collins water main and all associated appurtenances in all views. b. As previously indicated, show and label the existing 20' water main utility easement on the subdivision plat. 8. Mark Jackson of the Transportation Planning Department offered the following comments: a. The south end of Merganser Drive is designed as a collector street. Show 6' wide bicycle lanes on this portion of the street. b. Muscovy Drive should be designed with extra width and an attached 4.5' wide sidewalk to accommodate combined bicycle lanes and parking on the west side of the street (as per special meeting on November 17, 1999). The street should be 36' from flowline to flowline and be comprised of (2) 8' wide Residential Local travel lanes, an 8' wide parking lane on the west side, and (2) 6' wide bicycle lanes. C. At the special meeting on November 17, 1999, the developers agreed to provide one future trail connection to County Road 11, to the west, in conjunction with the future elementary school and City park site. This trail location should be shown conceptually on the Site Plan at this time to ensure the commitment. d. A clearly mark pedestrian crossing at East Vine Drive and Merganser Drive must be provided and shown where there is a crossing from the 2ntl Filing to the Ball Property out -parcel to the east (see Site Plan comment). Please contact Mark, at 416-2029, if you have questions about these comments. 9. Lorie Digliani of LETA, Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority stated that, as previously noted, there are 2 different spellings for the same street ... MERGANSER and MERGANCER. Please use the same spelling for the same street. 10. Dave Stringer of the Engineering Department offered the following comments: a. The subdivision plat needs work. See the comment sheet from the September 1, 1999 submittal. b. Change all dates on the plans to reflect the year 2000. C. Note the Homeowner's Association maintenance responsibilities on the subdivision plat. d. See the Stormwater Department comments regarding street grades. e. Show cross -sections of streets. f. Provide a detail of the drive -over curb & gutter with attached 4.5' wide sidewalk. g. Muscovy Drive is to be 36' wide, flowline to flowline. h. See comments regarding the crosswalks on Sheet 32 of the utility plans. A reference plan showing the East Vine Drive improvements must be provided. e. Show pole -mounted lighting locations on the Site and Landscape Plans. They must be shown on the Landscape Plan so that lighting and tree placement can be checked. f. Show the one street tree per lot along the local streets as committed to in Planting Note #7 on the Landscape Plan. g. It is recommended that the landscape phasing be separated by residential and commercial. Please contact Gary, Jenny, or Peter, at 221-6760, if you have questions about these comments. 5. Comments received from Webb Jones of the East Larimer County Water District are on a red -lined set of utility plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. 6. Janet McTague of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. Paired water services will need to be coordinated with Light & Power facilities since their facilities are on the lot lines. b. The plans show a storm drain behind the curb & gutter along East Vine Drive. Light & Power will have a 3-phase line along Vine Drive that may conflict with the proposed storm sewer. Please contact Janet, at 221-6700, if you have questions about these comments. 7. Jim Slagle of Public Service offered the following comments: a. Please provide PSC with 2 sets of plans, 1 for Jim and 1 for PSC high pressure gas. b. There is a 50' wide PSC easement adjacent to the existing north right-of-way line for East Vine Drive (Book 1441, Page 747 and 749 in the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder's office) that should be shown on the subdivision plat, utility plans, and Site Plan. C. No foreign utilities are allowed in the 50' PSC easements without express written permission of PSC. d. The 9' wide utility easements adjacent to all internal streets appear to be adequate. e. Due to narrow lot frontages, all utilities (water, sewer, power, phone, CATV, and natural gas services) will have to closely coordinated. This will probably require a utility coordination meeting. Please contact Jim, at 225-7843, if you have questions about these comments. Commi ty Planning and Environmental Current Planning City of Fort Collins December 29, 1999 VF Ripley Associates, Inc. c/o Cathy Mathis 1113 Stoney Hill Drive Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Cathy, xvices Staff has reviewed your revisions for the Waterfield PUD,. Second Filing - Final, that were submitted to the City on December 1, 1999, and would like to offer the following comments: The Historic Preservation Planners asked about where the 2 historic structures are that the applicant promised to keep. Are they in the 15` Filing or 2nd Filing, or are they on the out -parcels along East Vine Drive? 2. Dennis Greenwalt of AT&T Cable Services stated that they have only one problem with this project. They would like to see a side lot easement on Lot 48 so that they can enter the rear lot easement. 3. The Advance Planning Department stated that a pedestrian connection should be added from the north side of the C-Store to Merganser Drive. 4. Representatives of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. Remove the topography lines from the Final Site Plan. b. This area is in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District in the Sign Code. The gas canopy only has "frontage" on one street, being Aleutian Drive. Therefore, only one canopy sign is allowed, and it needs to be on the north canopy fascia. The elevation drawings show a canopy sign on 3 sides — the north, east, and the west. C. Need some clarification on the woven wire fence. According to the elevation on Sheet 5 of 10 of the plan set, the fence appears to be only slightly over 3' above grade and yet the detail calls it a 4' Woven Wire Fence. It would be better to describe the fence differently, such as a "Split rail wood fence with a wire (or woven wire) grid". d. The surface treatment in the parkways need to be escrowed or a letter of credit received, as they are a part of the landscaping for the development. The parkways can be phased separately. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020