Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPIERCE MINOR SUBDIVISION - 74 93 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY STAFFMr. Evan Gilmartin June 14, 1994 Page 3 property. While the current local street standard is thirty six feet, flowline to flowline, there is not enough room for adequate transition from a thirty six foot wide street to a forty foot wide street. In addition, it is not desirable to transition from a forty foot wide street to a thirty six foot wide street and back again. Cherry Street also requires the installation of curb and gutter on both sides, construction of the full pavement width and installation of a sidewalk on your side of the street. Section 29-678 of the City Code allows the original installer of these improvements to request that the Director of Engineering prepare a reimbursement agreement. The City has offered to prepare this agreement between you and the school district so that when Putnam School expands or remodels in a manner to trigger street improvements, they will be required to reimburse you for their portion of the street improvement obligations. However, you are encouraged to contact the school district in advance of any street construction to determine their willingness to assist in the initial cost of this project. As we discussed, your application will continue to be processed as a minor subdivision even though you have indicated there will be seven lots. However, all drawings should label the seventh lot as a separate tract designated as a drainage easement and limited to use as a detention pond. Should you have any questions regarding the remaining requirements for approval of your application, please feel free to contact me. Sin er ly, Rondall V. Philli s Planning Director cc: Ann Azari, Mayor Steve Burkett, City Manager Debra.Kaestner, Assistant to the City Manager Greg Byrne, Community Planning and Environmental Services Director Rich Shannon, Utility Services Director Bob Smith, Stormwater Utility Manager Glen Schlueter, Civil Engineer II Steve Olt, City Planner Kerrie Ashbeck, Engineering Mr. Evan Gilmartin June 14, 1994 Page 2. also be necessary to locate the houses as far back on the lots as possible to minimize their intrusion into the floodplain. Development on this site could potentially force additional flood waters off -site to the south. If hydraulic modeling cannot prove "no -rise" in the floodplain elevation, an easement must be obtained on the Putnam School site to the south. I would encourage you to contact the school district to arrange for dedication of this easement. The stormwater models also need to be updated to show the impact of your development on stormwater drainage. This includes the floodplain HEC-2 model and possibly the basin master plan hydrology model. Complete drainage and erosion control reports and plans have not been -received. These may result in additional stormwater issues that need to be addressed. If this is the case, we will work closely with you and your engineer to correct any possible problems. STREETS The City's "Design Criteria and Standards for Streets" requires a minimum flowline grade for curb and gutter of 0.4% and a 0.6% grade for crosspans. The flowline grade shown on the subdivision drawings is 0.3%. However, your project engineer has evaluated whether any additional fall for the flowline grade could be gained by. reconstructing Cherry Street off -site to the west of the intersection with Lyons Street and determined that little fall could be gained due to the proximity of a high point in the curb and gutter. Because of this, it will be necessary for you to either increase the flowline to 0.4% in front of your property or apply for a variance to the design criteria through the Engineering Department. Section 24-95(a) of the City Code requires the construction of that portion of Cherry Street adjacent to your property. Section 24-95(b) requires that the street include, without limitation, curb, gutter, pavement and sidewalk according to the engineering standards and criteria of the City. The first step in determining the requirements to upgrade Cherry Street is to perform borings in the existing street to establish the integrity of the overlay, the quality and depth of the road base, etc. This information has been provided along with a recommendation from Foundation and Soils Engineering, Inc. for a new pavement section. However, this recommendation did not include consideration of the removal or utilization of the existing street pavement. Using the information from the borings, paving options based on the structural integrity of the existing street pavement can be prepared. The City will review these with you and your engineer to select how the existing material will. be removed or reworked to achieve the necessary pavement section. Cherry Street will need to be constructed forty feet wide from flowline to flowline to match the existing street widths to the east and west of the June 14, 1994 Mr. Evan Gilmartin III E. Drake #7011 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Mr. Gilmartin: This letter is a follow-up to the recent discussion you had with Debra Kaestner, Assistant to the City Manager, and me during our site visit to your property on Wednesday, June 1, 1994. After that site visit, staff from the Planning, Engineering and Stormwater Departments met and reviewed the Pierce Minor Subdivision proposal once again relative to City requirements. The following comments should clarify any remaining issues. Three areas have been identified that require resolution prior to proceeding with your proposal: stormwater, the 100 year floodplain that crosses your property and streets. STORMWATER The release of water from the proposed development onto Cherry Street will need to be controlled to protect impacts to property to the east. This requires a stormwater detention area to detain increased runoff caused by new development. The previously proposed detention of off -site flows from the north may offset this development's increased runoff rate temporarily but not the increased volume. It would also severely impact future development to the north by using up its allowed release rate. Therefore, this approach is only allowed when the off -site area is already developed and has no detention facilities. The southeast corner of the property appears to be the only location that will be able to collect the runoff. In addition, a drainage swale or other be established across the front of the yards and direct the runoff into the crown of adjacent streets is required t could be considered if an attempt is ma as possible. Easements will be needed The maintenance of these easements responsibility of homeowners. Therefo formed. FLOODPLAIN drainage collection system will need to proposed lots to collect water from front detention pond. Usually, runoff to the o be detained on -site. A variance to this de to detain as much of the street runoff for both the swale and detention basin. and the detention facility will be the re, a maintenance entity will need to be The 100 year floodplain runs across this property from east to west and needs to be considered in any development plan. At a minimum, all structures built on these lots must be elevated 18 inches above the 100 year flood level. It may 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750 Pierce Minor Subdivision Memorandum June 15, 1994 Page 2 3. Work with the school district to help share the street costs (mentioned in the letter). 4. Seek a variance from the Planning and Zoning Board (staff would recommend against this because of the precedent it would set for other similar developments). Please contact me if you have further questions. cc: Rich Shannon Gary Diede Bob Smith Bob Blanchard Steve Olt Debra Kaestner Community Planning and Environmental Services Planning Department City of Fort Collins June 15, 1994 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor Ann Azari THRU: Steve Burkett, City Manage., Greg Byrne, CPES Director tJ�' ►(v�/ FR: Ron Phillips, Planning Dire�to�'/f� RE: Pierce Minor Subdivision The attached letter was mailed to Evan Gilmartin today. Debra Kaestner and I met with Mr. Gilmartin two weeks ago on the site of his proposed minor subdivision to discuss the issues, and I told him I would respond .in writing to his concerns. This letter represents an attempt to coordinate all the various departmental comments into one document. The only answer we have been able to give that is satisfactory to him pertains to the continued treatment of this proposal as a minor subdivision. This will be the case as long as the stormwater detention area is dedicated as a permanent easement for drainage purposes on the plat, and not shown as a seventh lot. The physical constraints of this site make it less economical to develop than Mr. Gilmartin prefers, and the City does not have a program to help pay the costs. We do have requirements for development to pay its fair share, which to Mr. Gilmartin appears to be the City's unwillingness to support his project. Another small developer/builder is successfully developing similar infill property in the area while meeting the City requirements. Some options for Mr. Gilmartin may be: 1. Accumulate additional property to spread out the development costs. 2. Increase the density on the site to increase the financial return.. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 380 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750