The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutKINGSTON WOODS PUD PRELIMINARY - 58 91 - CORRESPONDENCE - CORRESPONDENCE-CONCEPTUAL REVIEWDevelopmr Servic%s Planning Department July 26, 1991 Mike Jones Northern Engineering Services 420 South Howes Street, Suite 106 Fort Collins, CO. 80521 Dear Mike: For -your information, attached is a copy of the Staff's comments concerning the Kingstowne village Subdivision / POD request, which was presented before the Conceptual Review Team on July 22, 1991. The comments are offered informally by Staff to assist you in preparing the detailed components of the project application. Modifications and additions to these comments may be made at the time of formal review of this project. If you should have a.iy questions regarding these comments or the next steps in the review process, please feel free to call me at 221-6750. Sincerely, 4Se O Project Planner xc: Tom Peterson, Planning Director Kerrie Ashbeck, Civil Engineer Project Planner File 2S1 North Colle,e Avenue • 1'.0. BOX �;St1 • Fort Coilin.. CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221417/ ;0 CONCEPTUAL 3EVIEW STAFF OMMENTS MEETING DATE: July 22, 1991 ITEM: Kingstowne Village Subdivision APPLICANT: Mike Jones Northern Engineering Services 420 South Howes Street Fort Collins, CO. 80521 LAND USE DATA: Request for 54 single family residential lots on approximately_.16,.acres. COMMENTS: 1. This request is in the RP - Planned Residential zone and may be submitted and reviewed as either a standard subdivision or a Planned Unit Development. Kingstowne PUD, planned for 123 condominium units, was originally approved in May, 1981. Extensions on this PUD were granted to November, 1983, then subsequently to October, 1984. This PUD has since ? expired. 2. This request would accumulate approximately 70% maximum credit on the criterion defined on the Residential Density Chart in the L.D.G.S. (see enclosed chart) if submitted as a PUD. This number would support up to 7 dwelling units/acre, with your proposal indicating 3.4 dwelling units/acre. 3. A Home Owners Association is encouraged in either a standard subdivision or a PUD to assure maintenance of common areas or facilities that are to be considered.' 4. The standard area requirements as specified in the RP zone (the same as RL -- -� — - Low Density Residential) will apply on a subdivision request. Several lots appear to be too narrow and would not comply with .code requiring —a- 7--- minimum of 60' in width 20' back from the front property line. It is important to verify dimensions. 5.• West Horsetooth Road is a designated arterial street. All lots adjacent to. an arterial must be a minimum depth of 150', according to code, to create adequate buffer between residential uses and a. major thoroughfare. Recognizing the fact that there is a 30' landscape buffer 'along the entire frontage to Horsetooth Road, it is possible to discuss a decreased lot depth. 6. There is existing sanitary sewer to the north in Seneca Drive, Wagonwheel Subdivision, and to the east in Horsetooth Commons PUD. Both of these could be extended if determined to be useable. An 8" water main exists in Seneca. Drive and a 16" line is in West Horsetooth Road. Both of these can be tapped into, if possible. There is a payback requirement on the .16" water line in Horsetooth. Please contact Roger Buffington, Water/Wastewater Department, at 221-6681 with any questions you may have. 7. Electric power is available from the City along the north side of West Horsetooth Road. .A conduit system exists in the Wagonwheel Subdivision to the.north that can be extended. There is an existing fiberglass vault on Horsetooth that will have to be protected. Please exercise caution when installing water lines into the development from West Horsetooth Road. Coordination with City Light & Power will be important since the water line would cross under existing electric. Please contact Doug Martine at 221-6700. He will address your questions. 8. Normal development charges for electric service will apply. Anticipate $900 - $1,000 per lot. ----.---- ----- --..... ---- - - - - 9. This property is in the foothills Drainage Basin. The applicable fees are $5,024/acre; however,•these fees are based on the runoff coefficient for the area and can be decreased by providing on -site detention approved by the City-Stormwater Utility. The home owners or a Home Owners Association, not the City, will be responsible for the perpetual. maintenance of the detention facility. 10. A drainage report and drainage/erosion plans will be required with the preliminary submittal. 11. The Pleasant "alley & Lake Canal, forming the west boundary line of this proposed development, appears to be entirely on this property. The status will have to be determined and the -applicable easement granted, if that is not already in place. The ditch company will have to review any development plans for this property and sign the Utility Plans. It is important to be aware that this canal has historically presented seepage concerns into other adjacent properties. 12. A traffic impact study must be submitted with preliminary plans. The alignment of Seneca Drive in this development with the same street to the . south of West Horsetooth Road should be addressed as part of the study. . Seneca Street is proposed as a local street in this development, requiring --- -a transition to collector status in Wagonwheel Subdiv-i.sion_to the_nor_th.._ 13. Standard street oversizing fees of $584/dwelling unit will be collected at the time of issuance of building permits. Applicable paybacks for street oversizing fees are sometimes made, depending on availability of money. Please Contact Mike Herzig at 221-6750 with any questions on this matter. 14. This development will be responsible for the cost of the local street portion of improvements to West Horsetooth Road ( the northside portion). Costs for 1/2 of the local street portion of a box culvert for the Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal will also be the responsibility of the developer. 15. A 15' wide utility easement, outside of the street R.O.W., is required along the entire West Horsetooth Road frontage. Utility easements, 8" wide along all front. lot lines and 6' wide along rear lot lines, will be required. 16. It is preferable to maintain the standard street width for Seneca Drive at the intersection with West Horsetooth Road and provide landscape parkways on both.sides of the street, instead of constructing a center median. ' 17. A conceptual trail corridor along the Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal has been adopted by the City as part of the Parks & Recreation Master Plan. This should be addressed as part of a preliminary submittal. Pedestrian/bicycle connections throughout the development, into adjacent properties, and to the proposed future trail corridor should be considered. Please contact the City Transportation Department at 221-6608 to discuss their plans and intentions for the area.. 18. An overall landscape plan showing proposed treatment for the 30' greenbelts, the detention pond area, the PV & L Canal, and all streetscapes/parkways must be part of a preliminary PUD submittal and is strongly recommended as part -of a subdivision request:, As a minimum with - - a subdivision request; the.proposed treatment for the detenton•p iond, to'r `meet C ity stormwater standards, and 30' greenbelts must be submitted for review. 19. Deciduous shade trees, minimum 2" caliper and 40' on center, will provide an extremely aesthetic streetscape appearance along Seneca Drive-. 20. Fencing guidelines regulating the design, height, materials, and placement will be an important factor in the overall aesthetics of the development and the mitigation of potential sight distance concerns. These guidelines should be part of the preliminary review. 21. Please investigate reconfiguring some lots,.such as 1, 13, 14, 20, and 22 (as examples) to take into consideration the proximity and relationship to possible commercial development and the opportunity for home day care provisions. 22. Stonegate Drive, as shown on this concept drawing, has been renamed Patterson Drive in"Horsetooth Commons PUD to the east. 23. The applicant, and the concept plan, should be commended for the thought and considerations given to provide, a unique buffer aaong_.the_maj.o.r thoroughfare and a pleasing entry into this development. 24. Due to the nature and location of this•request a neighborhood meeting is not being required prior to formal submittal.'of preliminary plans for Kingstowne Village.