Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSILVER OAKS PAIRED HOUSING PUD - PRELIMINARY - 14-88K - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSCommunity Planning and Environmental Services Planning Department Citv of Fort Collins January 26, 1994 Mr. Ric Hattman Gefroh-Hattman, Inc. 145 West Swallow Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Mr. Hattman: Staff has reviewed the request for Silver Oaks P.U.D., Paired Housing, Preliminary. The following comments are offered: 1. The Light and Power Department has concerns regarding about the water and sewer services between each garage. Due to the limited space, there will need to be close coordination with Light and Power regarding suitable locations for the transformer and electric meters. 2. U.S. West will require that the utility easement for telephone services should be wide enough to accommodate both the telephone cable and the two foot wide concrete pan. 3. Public Service Company has an existing four inch diameter gas line in the utility easement on the west side of Auntie Stone Street. Street trees need to be kept a minimum of four feet from this line. 4. Public Service Company cautions that a 15 foot wide utility easement on the north side of Horsetooth Road may not be adequate. Due to the proximity and potential conflicts with water lines, electrical facilities, stormwater detention, paved areas, and landscaping, there will need to be a utility coordination meeting. 5. The five foot wide sidewalk along Horsetooth Road should be placed at the rear of the right-of-way. 6. The Traffic Study for Horsetooth West/Silver Oaks should updated with a memo from the traffic engineering consultant. 7. Is there no preliminary plat? 8. Columbine Cable T.V. will need suitable utility easements along Auntie Stone Street and along the north side of the property. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 211-6750 9. The following comments are from the Stormwater Utility: A. Please provide pond sizing calculations with your resubmittal and indicate what is the slope of the detention pond. B. An easement will be needed for the detention pond, concrete swale, and pipe. C. Orifice sizing calculations will be needed for the detention pond outlet at the time of final. D. Street capacity, swale capacity, and pipe capacity calculations will also be need at the time of final. E. Please show cross -sections and slopes of all existing and proposed swales. F. Please include a table on the plans showing detention pond requirements, size, and freeboard. 10. The applicant and consultants should be aware that the City - owned open space to the west is not a natural area or passive recreation area. Rather, it is planned to be a community park with illuminated ball fields for night use. The site plan should label this area as "Community Park (includes night, illuminated recreation activities.)" 11. Note Number Six should be expanded. Landscaped areas that serve this project that are located within the public right- of-way are also under the maintenance obligation of the homeowners association. 12. At the time of Final, the P.U.D. should include details on how fencing will be provided to create private yard and patio areas for each unit. 13. Does the curb cut on Horsetooth Road align with anything across the street? If so, please indicate. 14. The street trees on Horsetooth Road must be kept a minimum of 40 feet from existing or future streetlights. Ornamentals must be kept 20 feet from streetlights. Please be aware that, at the time of Final, the type of street tree must be selected from an approved list as authorized by the City Forester. 15. Has any consideration been given to fencing along the west property line? Keep in mind that this will form the border with a Community Park with active recreational uses. A solid stockade fence would probably be inappropriate. Perhaps a three -pole fence or a four foot solid fence would provide the necessary separation. The fence must be designed at the time of Final P.U.D. LI 16. The drive aisle doe is loading on only feet. s not need to be 24 feet wide. Since there one side, the width can be reduced to 20 17. It is not clear whether the driveway spaces are indeed driveways, with curb cut, or merely striped spaces and part of a larger asphalt area that includes the drive aisle. Are the driveways intended to be concrete and, thus, differentiated from the drive aisle? Driveways should be concrete, well- defined, separate and distinct from the drive aisle. Please clarify. 18. Staff is concerned about the monotony and row -like appearance of the garages. Although the site plan indicates these garages are to be slightly staggered, there appears to be little or no variety in style. It may be that the actual fronts of these units will be difficult to find given the fact that the two -car garages take up a substantial portion of the front elevation. Also, the garages are on the south of the units and block solar gain to the living area. Given these concerns, has the developer considered placing the garages and drive aisle on the north side of the units? This would allow indoor living areas and outdoor patios to enjoy the southern exposure without being blocked by the garages. In addition, the garages on the north would help buffer the living units from the prevailing winter winds and the school play area. A pedestrian walk could connect the fronts of the units, along the southern elevation. With the berms and landscaping as shown, there seems to be appropriate buffering of the arterial street. As proposed, the garages lack variety and interest and seem to dominate the streetscape. By placing the garages to the north, and opening up the south, the project seems to have greater curb appeal. 19. The architectural sheet should indicate the types of exterior materials as well as the heights of the various structures. 20. The Land Use table should be corrected. The density of the project is 5.18 dwelling units per acre. Also, please include solar orientation information. 21. An "Attorney Certification" is not necessary on a P.U.D. site plan, only on plat. 22. The vicinity Map should be more legible, perhaps larger scale, and include street names. This includes Staff comments at this time. In order to stay on schedule for the February 28, 1994 Planning and Zoning Board hearing, please note the following deadlines: Plan revisions are due February 10, 1994. P.M.T.'s, 10 prints, renderings are due February 22, 1994. As always, please call if you have any questions or concerns regarding these comments. Sincerely: Ted Shepard Senior Planner xc: Joe Frank, Chief Planner Kerrie Ashbeck, Civil Engineer