HomeMy WebLinkAboutPARK SOUTH PUD, 3RD REPLAT - PRELIMINARY & FINAL - 46-88G - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSCommulay Planning and Environmental wrvices
Current Planning
P>00 F«iE-
City of Fort Collins
May 17, 1996
Marc Middel
c/o Phil Robinson
Stewart and Associates
P.O. Box 429
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Dear Phil,
Staffhas reviewed your documents for the Park South Amended Overall Development Plan and
the Park South P.U.D., 3rd Replat, Preliminary and Final that were submitted on April 22, 1996,
and would like to offer the following comments:
AMENDED OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
Public Service Company references comments stated regarding the Park South P.U.D., 3rd
Replat, Preliminary and Final.
2. The Transportation Department states: "We have installed a westbound left turn lane at
the intersection of Horsetooth and Manhattan. The existing signal has minor northbound left
and right turns and are operating with Levels Of Service (LOS) "D" at the P.M. peak. The
westbound left turn has delay already but we should be able to handle the additional trips by
adjusting the green splits. However, the storage capacity is limited in the westbound left -turn
lane. The signal should operate acceptably with fine tuning."
3. The Current Planning Department offers the following comments:
a. The proposed amendment to the O.D.P. eliminates all opportunity for mixed use in
this development. The Land Use Policies Plan which the O.D.P. is reviewed against
do not appear to support this amendment request. The Land Use Policies encourage
a mix of housing types and densities as well as the location of neighborhood service
centers and office uses within walking distance of residential neighborhoods. The
elimination of the neighborhood service center forces residents to drive on the arterial
streets to get to services. The current O.D.P. is more consistent with the existing
Land Use Policies Plan and the vision a goals of the City Plan process.
b. Please show the Preliminarily approved office and neighborhood retail approved on
the north side of Horsetooth Road (Warren Farm PUD).
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750
FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002
3RD REPLAT, PRELIMINARY AND FINAL P.U.D.:
,. Public Service Company has serious concerns with the proposed Replat. There is an
existing 4" gas main in Tracts "M" and "N" (parallel to Horsetooth Road) of the original Plat
of Park South P.U.D. This 4" gas main is aligned at 15' south of the south R.O.W. line of
Horsetooth. The 10' wide utility easement adjoining the south line of Horsetooth which is
proposed on this replat is not wide enough to include this gas line. Also, the shadowbox
fence proposed along the south line of Horsetooth Road represents a major obstacle to
maintenance of utilities south of this fence, including the existing 4" gas line.
2. The Zoning Department offers the following comments:
It would be nice if the Engineering Department and developer would install curb and
gutter along Manhattan Avenue. This shoulder/ditch will be a maintenance nightmare
for the City as it has become with Park South 2nd Replat.
Properties or Lots 115 thru 117 and 184 thru 189 will be responsible for sidewalk
snow removal along Manhattan so there should be access via a gate to those portions
of the sidewalk.
s% Note #5 on the Site Plan and Note 96 on the Plat cannot be enforced by the City.
Does this mean you can't put a fence along your property line? These requirements
should be removed from these documents and added to the private restrictive
covenants for the development.
All future site (plot) plan submittals for building permits must show adjoining
properties. The 3rd Filing as well as the 2nd Filing have floating side setbacks in
that setbacks are based on the structure's relation to the adjoining property's structure
(see "Typical Building Envelope Detail"). Zero lot lines are permitted as long as the
building is no closer 10 feet to the adjoining building. At present, we cannot
determine this distance without seeing the adjoining property's site/plot plan. Please
provide this information.
.3/1' The Transportation Department offers the same comments as expressed for the Overall
Development Plan (Comment #2).
r'
The Water and Wastewater Utility requests that the following comments be added to the
Landscape Plan:
"The following separation distances must be maintained. Trees must be a minimum
of 10 feet from any water and sewer mains, services, etc. Shrubs must be a minimum
of 4 feet from any water and sewer mains, services, etc."; and
"Call the Water Utility at 221-6681 for locates prior to any planting."
The Mapping Department requests that you specify on the Plat which lots are
effectedrmpacted by Note #8.
Comments from the Engineering Department are attached.
G7 Comments from the Stormwater Utility are attached.
8. The City Forester offers the following comments:
a. The turf in all parkway strips along Manhattan and Horsetooth must be irrigated.
b. The proposed shrubs (Tammy Juniper) at the corner of Manhattan and Horsetooth
will cause sight visibility problems and should be deleted.
C. Please delete Landscape Note #3 as the adjoining property owners or homeowners
association will be responsible for maintaining existing and proposed landscaping in
the public right-of-way.
9. The Current Planning Department offers the following comments:
Please dimension the width of the sidewalks at the end of each cul-de-sac.
Ob- A 6' wide pedestrian path from Haven Drive to Manhattan Avenue should be provided
between Lots 117 and 118.
Please contact Tom Chapel and/or Marc Engemoen of the Engineering Department
at 221-6605 to discuss the potential of coordinating efforts to install a drainage pan
along Manhattan Avenue.
Are the 1 '/2" caliper trees proposed on the rear lot line of Lots 131 through 140
ornamentals? If so please add them to the plant list. If they are not ornamentals, they
must be the minimum 2" (2 '/2") caliper.
V/ All proposed landscaping should be reflected in the Plant List.
Please provide a break down of the proposed water usage categories for the
landscaping.
Please note Density Chart H the specific names of point generators which are being
claimed. It does not appear that this P.U.D. request is within 2000 feet of an existing
neighborhood service center which will reduce the overall point total to 70 points.
If Please submit a current (revised 1994) All Development Criteria Chart.
This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments may be forthcoming as the
various departments and reviewing agencies continue to review this request.
Please be aware of the following dates and deadlines to assure your ability to stay on schedule for the
June 24, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing:
Plan revisions are due by 12:00 noon on June 5, 1996. Please contact me for the number of
folded revisions required for each document. Revisions and supporting documentation
submitted after this deadline will not be reviewed for the June 24, 1996 Planning and Zoning
Board hearing.
PMT's, renderings, and 8 folded copies of final revisions are due by 12:00 noon on June 17,
1996.
Please contact me at 221-6206 if you have any questions or concerns related to these comments. I
would like to schedule a meeting with you as soon as possible, if necessary, to discuss these
comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Ludwig7
Project Planner
xc: Ward Stanford
Stormwater Utility
file/Project Planner
• 0
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: April 23, 1996 DEPT: Stormwater
PROJECT: #46-88G Park
Preliminary & Final
PLANNER: Mike Ludwig
All comments must be received
❑ No Problems
South PUD, 3rd Replat -
by: May 3, 1996
L1J Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
A written response for each of the following comments must be submitted, with the
redlined plans and report, at time of project resubmittal. The responses must note any
revisions or clarifications completed in result of these comments. If responses are not
submitted with the resubmittal, the project will be returned to the applicant without further
review. This procedure will help the review process become more efficient and effective.
Thank you.
1. The downstream conveyance system does not have capacity to convey fully developed
flows from this development to the existing detention pond. The downstream available
capacity must not be exceeded. The proposed development must detain on -site to no
greater than the available downstream capacity. Downstream capacity must be checked
from the proposed development to the existing detention pond. Please check all
conveyance systems for the 2-year capacity and the 100-year capacity and provide all
supporting documentation.
RESPONSE:
Date: 6 Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE U PLAT `e:
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ SITE
❑ LANDSCAPE ;
❑ UTILITY //
2.A detailed hydraulic analysis is needed for the storm sewer system. The analysis should
include the existing and proposed storm sewer systems. The existing system must be
shown to have capacity for these additional flows. Hydraulic grade lines must be
established.
RESPONSE:
3. Please provide supporting documentation on the existing detention pond. The existing
pond design must be shown to have included the proposed development. Compliance
with the overall drainage system model must be verified. Please provide all details of this
pond.
RESPONSE:
4. The current storm sewer layout shows a 24" pipe between lots 117 and 118. The pipe
is only sized for the minor event, with flows in excess of the 2-year over flowing to the
swale and then back to the street. This overflow swale must be in a separate tract. The
overflow swale must be designed to handle the 100-year flow, with the inlet fully clogged.
RESPONSE:
5. Please show existing contours of the basin S lots, and show a cross-section of the
backyard swale of this area. Fencing restrictions are needed for these lots.
Inlet #5 must be analyzed as an on -grade inlet, rather than a sump inlet. Also, please
address where the overflow from this inlet will travel.
RESPONSE:
6. The drainage easements for basins G and D must be wide enough to include the 100-
year top -width plus freeboard for the swales. Please revise. Fencing restrictions are
needed for these lots so the fences do not block the flow of the swales.
RESPONSE:
7. Please provide more details of the inlet overflows for the 100-year event. The ponding
depth in the street and the flow depth over the crown must be checked. Will 100-year
street criteria be exceeded, due to upstream inlet overflows? Will there be any ponding on
private lots?
RESPONSE:
8. Please show cross -sections of the existing street and the proposed lots, along
Manhattan Ave. How will drainage from the street and lots be handled?
RESPONSE:
Please refer to the redlined plans and report for additional review comments.
I
3-
...........
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: S - / � - y DEPT.: SW W/WW =ENGW
PROJECT: ��.- So P- - 3
PLANNER: 1,n k e �W
All comments must be received by:
❑ No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
xJ h iQS t� .'A "ev /
ti s, le I. I.,
/'?��d - Q/oc ��a.►1�s s f O� /u -�/.feO
D, -// WPS
P/tease .��� nn n - Ac f S��/�• �.
� 4 D r
aIf" 0—
14 %le use �AT4 �6r G 1-7Dr L
/��v ✓.D
O✓edr —
Date: /,�F- SG Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE E3�'LAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS C3lSITE
LANDSCAPE
TILITY
8 .
P le As e s
P l-o -r, f e o fr
4e- c- r /So ,44 ,,1
9.
lea /o c A %g /vr,�. `QC- /,a,r� av
o Sfax-� o[i-,q«/ 5fc� 6
S �eu/.a / � of'�- �!1 � L
� s s!c vw ,� ate► fD �,a,�r S ,
j f.
L cl cA ie f1PP/'o?c
Zj,A,Pn, S .S
J5 e -e o T h- i- C�dv✓� ,K S