HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHAMROCK MANOR PUD PRELIMINARY - 53 89 - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSServices
Planning Department
November 17, 1989
Jim Gefroh
c/o Gefroh Hattman Inc.
145 W. Swallow
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Jim:
Staff has reviewed the Shamrock Manor PUD Preliminary plan and has the fol-
lowing comments to make:
Utility mains and services are existing within the subdivision. The utilities
/ must either be used or abandoned.
Y Any relocation of existing Light and Power facilities will be at the
developer's cost.
C)�M�,cWf�,Y/The drainage plan submitted does not clearly indicate the changes that are
going to be made. Please submit a separate sheet that shows the pre-
viously approved site and changes proposed; existing drainage easement and
changes proposed; and detention pond limits.
The drainage report needs to be expanded to more clearly describe the
changes to be made and how they differ from the approved plan. Addi-
tional comments are made on the plan and report.
Public Service Company recommends that all areas outside building enve-
lopes be dedicated as blanket utility easements.
V6. Low-rise lighting near Building A may be useful considering the plant
material planned near the building. Parking lot lighting needs to be
addressed.
G &7. The existing subdivision must be replatted. A preliminary plat needs to be
submitted at this stage of review, with a final plat submitted with a final
PUD application. The plat will need to vacate any existing unneeded
easements, as well as dedicate any easements needed as a result of this
plan.
,/8/The terminology used on the site plan should match that used by the State,
with respect to Building A being a board and care facility or an interme-
diate health care facility..
300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750
0--�A ramp needs to be shown on the site plan for the handicapped parking
stalls in front of Buildings B. and C. Building D should also have a
handicapped parking stall provided. Given the proposed use, staff ques-
tions whether additional handicapped parking spaces are needed, particu-
larly in front of Building A.
rjb-"'Existing and proposed public improvements (ie. curb, gutter and sidewalk)
and utilities need to be distinguished on the site plan.
/A preliminary utility plan, prepared by a licensed engineer needs to be
submitted as part of the preliminary application.
12. A traffic study, addressing the proposed use, needs to be submitted as part
of the preliminary application. The specifics, as well as the extent of this
information can be verified by Transportation Director, Rick Ensdorff.
13. The issue of the existing Homeowners' Association needs to be resolved, if
not already accomplished. The site plan indicates that maintenance of
areas on this site plan will be by the property owner. Please provide staff
with an update on this item; as well as the status of the existing garage
that is split by ownership lines.
J The fencing proposed along the north property line needs to be clarified as
to the extent of its existence, materials and height. Privacy and decorative
fencing proposed along the west and south property lines also should be
clarified as to materials and height.
The applicant needs to demonstrate compatibility (in terms of exterior
materials) of the proposed structures with those existing in the Pinewood
PUD. Brick matching that on existing units should be introduced in a
similar fashion as is used in the existing units.
J6.__'The site plan should be identified as an amendment to Pinewood PUD.
JT.' At final review, details on the proposed park benches and site lighting will
need to be provided.
f, . Land use data on the site plan needs to reflect the maximum building
height and number of anticipated employees.
19. Pedestrian connections should be made to the existing walks along the north
side of Building C and south of Building D.
The north property line dimension shown on the site plan needs to be
corrected.
By Wednesday. November 29, 1989 five copies of the revised site plan and any
other information needed to address these comments must be submitted to the
Planning Office. By Monday. December 11. 1989, ten (10) folded sets of the
site plan, a colored rendering (unfolded) of the site plan and an 8-1/2" x 11"
PMT reduction must be submitted for the Board meeting December 18.
If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
44" 7/1
Sherry Alberr son -Clark, AICP
Senior City Manner
cc. Mike Herzig, Development Coordinator
file