HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTONERIDGE PUD, SECOND FILING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL - 21 92E - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTST H E
K A P L A N
I N C O R P O R A T E D
April 1, 1993
Mr. Ted Shepard, Senior Planner
Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
C O M P A N Y
RE: Stone Ridge, Filing Two
Response to March 22, 1993 Staff Comments
Dear Ted:
As applicant, I have reviewed your March 22, 1993 comment summary on the
Preliminary and Final P.U.D. for Stone Ridge Filing Two, and I have
discussed these with project planner Frank Vaught and project engineer
RBD Engineering, Inc. It appears that very few of these comments require
of the applicant additional information on or design changes to Filing
Two as submitted.
I see no comments on the proposed revisions to the Stone Ridge P.U.D.
Overall Development Plan which was submitted to the City at the same time
as Filing Two and which the applicant has requested to be reviewed by the
Planning and Zoning Board simultaneously with Filing Two at the Board's
April 26, 1993 meeting.
The following is an item -by -item response to the Filing Two comments:
1. Applicant acknowledges Light and Power Department's acceptance of
detached sidewalk.
2. Applicant acknowledges Public Service Company requirement for a minimum
of four feet horizontal separation between street trees and gas line.
3. Applicant acknowledges advise from U.S. West that review of plans does
not constitute commitment that telephone service is currently available.
4. RBD Engineering is checking with various utilities to determine use
of area between path and curb for utility locations. Any need for
widening of utility easement on west side of Greystone Drive will be
responded to by RBD.
5. The land surveyor for RBD will respond to how the south line of
SW 1/4 Sec. 29 was determined on the plat.
1060 Sailors Reef a Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 303/226-6819
Mr. Ted Shepard
Page Two
6. The plat will delete reference to "Minor Road."
7. Applicant has met with Fire Marshal Warren Jones with Poudre Fire
Authority and has been informed that the proposed 28 foot wide streets
in Filing Two are consistent with the August 17, 1992 street width
criteria analysis completed by PFA. The City also has a February 18,
1993 street width variance request from independent traffic
engineering Matthew J. Delich, P.E., justifying the proposed 28 foot
widths.
The lot widths and sizes along Jewelstone Court are conducive to homes
with three -car garages or otherwise "high cost" houses, where Mr.
Jones' study indicates only .18 average number of cars parking on -street
per lot. Applicant is receptive to discussing street widths further
with the City but has not received any indication of concerns from
Poudre Fire Authority. To the contrary, support for the inclusion of
28 foot wide streets as proposed has been expressed to applicant by
Mr. Jones with PFA.
8. Applicant understands that a duplication of street addresses will
obviously not be allowed.
9. The proposed two Thornless Hawthorns at the entry to Jewelstone Court
will be of such size with branch locations so as to restrict any possible
horizontal spreading that could block the sidewalk. Applicant can so
note the Landscape Plan, if the City believes this to be an essential,
City -imposed limitation on the use of Thornless Hawthorns at this
location.
10. Applicant applauds the staff's applauding of applicant's commitment
to plant street trees in the parkway strip along Jewelstone Court.
The parkway strip involves a detached sidewalk. Such sidewalk, if
installed prior to the construction of houses on lots can be easily
damaged and would most likely require replacement. The applicant
intends to have Jewelstone Court sidewalk installed concurrent
with the driveway for each lot. Section 29-679 of the City Code
provides that sidewalk is a required improvement for the certificate
of occupancy and not the building permit. Please advise if the
applicant's intentions to install sidewalk along Jewelstone Court on
a lot -by -lot basis at the time of driveway installation is
unacceptable and for what reasons.
11. There will be a consistency of designation for open space areas on
the plat and the final site plan.
Mr. Ted Shepard
Page Three
12. The requested language of "by this plat" will be added to the plat.
Applicant requests any staff comments on the revised ODP for Stone Ridge
and that the revised ODP be presented to the Planning and Zoning Board for
official approval along with the Preliminary and Final P.U.D. for Filing
Two.
The required P.M.T.'s, prints, and colored rendering due April 19, 1993
will be submitted by Vaught -Frye Architects. There do not appear to be
any staff comments which would warrant the submission of site plan
revisions; if so, please advise.
On behalf of the design team for Stone Ridge Filing Two, we appreciate the
cooperative manner in which you have coordinated the City's thoughtful and
thorough review of this second filing.
Yours very truly,
Lester M. Ka0an
The Kaplan Company, Inc.
LMK/vv
cc: Frank Vaught
Stan Myers