HomeMy WebLinkAboutGREENBRIAR - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-06` CoM
CARDER CONCRETE PRODUCTS CO. WYOMING CONCRETE PIPE C�yEEON -13.
8311 WEST CAR 3 COURT RYAN STOCK TRAIL
LITTLETON, COLvAADO 80125 CASPER, WYOMING 82601
PHONE (303) 794-6303 PHONE (307) 265-3100
_7 1 �
.,,e///:ute
j alu r a>i'mr fou! 4- 164cQjn/ g7�ez xQ Q, --
I. ,!��,/�
// :%e file to et
- rnr�umu e1 I 41e�'r r — c ? 6/ i �sz CVa7�Et
zw
1
cv+d/Ll lltclz tur lt— ae Rica- �laz- /11"m '�6—�f�Gf�!!C
&WA a.ec?,4s 710 ' .his 39- a-ud 39 /vllox '�u�u`
;6t �csa/ef &-7yAr
au—4.17'eua
36d/h �rmJd G�c a oazuu o� _��*4 laxytaf nr.-
02 - �1.%Yale /1f1 Awl _ :7vu -
' APrx+- �aerea
�m7m.rmu+.m ; mr+o-Gd%.ut
O
y �d ms/�et -6e
u.f
-yq-.-
eoarte�.G�ta
tetdica/[a� � � dx-.(2��P c%77e1[1r�dx L��� l/2 iLD�cGiiLPG{ . -
_ - - - _- _ - -- - . __ --- ------ ---_ _..._..._..----
Concrete Sewer, Culvert & Irrigation Pipe (12" Thru 144") Reinforced Concrete Low -Pressure Pipe
Reinforced Concrete Rubber Joint Pipe (R-4) Reinforced Concrete Jacking Pipe
Reinforced Concrete Str_el And Rubber Joint Pipe Precast Concrete Manholes
Reinforced Concrete Elliptical Pipe (18" Thru 96") Precast Concrete Box Culverts
CONCRETE FOR PERMANENCE
Dave Knox
Also, on September 16, a rendered set of the site plan and
and an 8" x 11" PMT positive or good reduction of all site
be submitted. If you have any questions, please feel free
Sincerely,
Joe Frank
Senior Planner
JF/lg
August 25, 1980
architectural drawings,
plans and maps must
to call me.
ARCHITECTURE
4836 SO. COLLEGE AVE. FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525
PHONE (303) 226-4836
September 8, 1980
Mr. Joe Frank
Planning Division, City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 58o
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
Joe, hopefully the following will satisfoactorily answer all concerns of staff
evidenced in comments of 8/25/80, as well as our discussion 9/2/80 (numbering
corresponds to staff comments).
*1. As we discussed, the following note will be added to the final documents:
"Open balconies and/or decks may be constructed outside the limits of building
envelopes, not to exceed 10 feet in depth from building or 150 sq.ft. in area;
and not to encroach upon an area within 10 feet of adjacent buildings, areas
designated as open space for active recreation, or pedestrian paths."
2. Elements of drives, parking, and building configuration have been revised
on the drawings to provide adequate access for fire protection for Building
Groups 5 & 6.
3. Parking configuration has been revised to bring compact spaces within 20%
of total. Parking summary has been revised as follows:
Standard
315
(73.3%)
Compact
69
(16.0%)
Handicapped
10
( 2.3%)
Motorcycle
36
( 8.49/6)
Total
430
4. Perimeter parking areas have been revised to 17' stall depth. Grass will
be provided in adjacent 21.
5. Limits of open space areas for active recreation have been revised. As we
discussed, *final design of detention areas used also for this purpose will
meet City guidelines. Revised land coverage summary is as follows:
Buildings 103,310 (2.37 A)17.63%
Drives & Parking 136,182 (3.13 A) 25.89%
Street R.O.W. 0 ( 0 A) 0.00%
Open Space 286,661 (6.58 A) 54.48%
O.S. for Active Recreation 85,396 (1.96 A)16.23%
Mr. Joe Frank 2 September 8, 1980
6. Final design of detention areas will provide positive flow control for
low flow.
7. A five foot wide sidewalk easement through Evergreen Park II to Foxtail Street
is being proposed..
*8,9,10,11. Concerns of staff will be met on final landscape plan. Our
preliminary plan i_s intended to convey the general approach to landscaping
rather than a specific design solution.
12. Additional pedestrian paths for access to sidewalks adjacent to public
streets have been provided.
13. Willox Lane and Redwood Street will be constructed to their intersection
with the development of this project.
*14. A blanket easement as required will be provided for these items.
*15. The site is described as "Tract P" the "Plat of Greenbrier" filed 2/1/79.
Any additional documents required will be provided.
16. This discrepancy has been corrected.
*17. Please review Empire Laboratories Inc., letter of 6/30/80 concerning
recommendations on the structural capabilities of the soil. Provisions outlined
in this letter will be met as well as any City requirements (copy attached).
*18. Additional hydrants will be provided as required.
*19. Provisions for responsibility of maintenance of on site storm water system
will be included :in homeowners association documents.
20. Curb cuts have been revised to 30' width.
21. The 201 utility easement shown in S.W. corner of site has been noted as
the Greeley water line easement.
22. Please note revisions to Building Group No. 2.
A number of the comments appear to be more in the nature of the final submittal
than the preliminary. Items intended to be specifically incorporated into the
documents at that time are noted w/ an astrerick If you have any further
questions, please feel free to contact us.
CRM Architecture I
David E. Knox, Project Architect
DEK:am
DATE: q�q ��� DEPART M
Itcokm
PCO&,eb C��r� A,e. � ►�.� a . - t i2.�.0 M .
Comments
W-0- Mcaf6 4,"
Wit-°.
ARCHITECTURE
4636 SO. COLLEGE AVE. FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525
PHONE (303) 226-4636
September 16, 1980
City of Fort Collins Planning Division
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
ATTE1MON: Joe Frank, Senior Planner
Regarding: Greenbriar Condominiums P.U.D.
Joe, regarding Staff" commentis datea '12 September iy80 our response follows:
STAFF COMMENT #1:
Final plats and final development plans will include notation requiring
complete soils testing and on -site engineering inspections. Also, the
Construction Documents will specify performance requirements of site pre-
paration, excavation, backfill, compaction of fill material etc.
All paved surfaces will be designed in compliance with proper construction
technics and will be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
STAFF COMMENT #2:
James Stewart and Associates, the Project Engineers are familiar with the
drainage and detention requirements and will design within the scope of
the proposed development plan.
STAFF C01,2�ENT #3:
All utility easements required for access, installation, and maintenance
of public utilities will be defined on the Final Plats.
STAFF COMMENT #4:
Building group 6 has been adjusted to meet the 150' requirement and all
final plats will reflect the same.
CRM Architects
David E. Y.nor., Project Architect
LIM
w 51ti std "'d ac'
" to f
4
P&Z - November 1981
#69-78B GREEMRIAR CaZOS - FINAL
1. Willox Lane & Redwood Street to be c,-anpleted to intersection
with c1JI-de-sac at south ends of property. Show phasing.
2. Haw is exposed metal on bridge to be treated for rust protection?
3. Where are Sections A & B for Sheet SD-6?
4. SD-6 must have professional stamp.
5. Show re>_bar on SD-6, also cover and lap length.
6. Drainage in utilities plan not canplete. No final drainage report
received. This report must match basin study.
7. Show the entrance to Sundance Village as plated..
Entrance shall either match up or be off -set by 200'
We feel this is a fair coment since project has taken so long
to go final and Sundance has been finally approved.
#142-80B WILLOW PARK SUBDIVISION - FINAL
1. No lots are to take access fran Troutman Parkway. Vertical curb required.
2. Drainage report does not address new street layout.
3. Check intersection of Brockridge Way and Red Feather Drive against
standards for horizontal alignment at intersections.
4. Show phasing.
\ h '
#157-79B AMENDNEI]T TO CREGER PIAZP
1. No cacments other than fotanats are ugly. �) '
#88-81 UNDERHILL P.U.D.
1. An under drain system on site with existing grater rights must maintain.
2. Project must canply with canal importation study. C-"v TF-t-L
3. Curb cuts have not been moved as per request at conceptual.
4. Fire :Lanes must be maintained year round. Please state how this will be
accacplished.
5. Garages must have back-up space according to standards.
What about 0' to 2' to edge of drive or 20' back-up garages.
To: Virgil Taylor, Parks Superintendent
FM: muri Rupel, Engineering
RE: Subdivision Utility Plans
OT:
Sukmitted for your review and ocmnent are utility plans for
Please respond by pU / Z / 1
TO: Bob Smith, Assistant City Engineer - Drainage.
FRai: Atauri Rupel, Assistant City Engineer, Development
RE: Subdivision Utility Plans
DATE: November 9, 1981
Submitted for your review and cement are utility plans for
GRFTNBRIAR CONLMINIUMS P.U.D. #178
Please respond at your earliest convience.
DECEMBER 7, 1981
Douce r9artine, Liqht and Poser Department
FPdY1: P7auri Rimel, Tlzgineerinq Services
RE: Subdivision Utility Plans
DIVE': Novenber 9, 1981
stilntitted for your review aryl com-ent are utility plans for
Please resnond at your earliest convenience.
DEMMER 7, 1981
57' - T f. S!/oWtJ oN
syEC r .Zo F 7
R� P` L C�(��I���d LNf,f►11��YInlC�
�G9-78A G2FeNt-,P>2,iAtz Ct-Ac -
It N
zoxl�M� Wou�D ALA 1-718I.&NIIs YnAtC
�8-4�0 oeo Ys2, Qoazo Au;�scc,,,-�
Y
TY OF FORT COLLINS
PLANNING DIVISION
November 18, 1981
Mr. Chuck Mayhugh
CRM Architects
109 Cameron Drive
Fort Collins, CO
Dear Chuck:
P.O. BOX 580. FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522
PH (303) 484-4220
The staff has reviewed the application for final plan approval of the Green -
briar Condominium PUD and would offer to following comments:
1. Willox Lane will be constructed with this development from the
cul-de-sac at the south end of the development to its intersection with
Redwood Street. Redwood Lane will be constructed with this development
from the south property line to its intersection with Willox Drive.
Phasing of these improvements should be indicated on the site plan.
2. The plan should indicate how exposed metal on pedestrian bridges will be
treated for rust protection.
3. Sheet SD-6 -indicated sections for A and B. None are shown.
4. Sheet SD-6 must be stamped by a Professional Engineer.
5. Sheet SD-6 should indicate rebar as well as cover and lap length.
6. The drainage plan is incomplete as submitted. No final drainage report
has been received. Final drainage report should match basin study.
7. The applicant should verify that the location of the street access to
Sundance Village is correct as shown on the site plan.
8. The project is part of an overall drainage system. Approval for any
construction in this project will depend upon certain offsite improve-
ments in the basin being completed.
9. The site plan should indicate all proposed and existing easements.
10. The staff would recommend that all areas except building envelopes be
dedicated as utility easements. At a minimum, the bends in the easement
along the west side of the development should be eliminated (see me for
details). If power services are installed under asphalt, this added
expense will be borne by the developer.
EXT. 655
'1r. Chuck Mayhugh
CRM Architects
November 18, 1981
Page Two
11. Utility installation behind sidewalks as shown on the plan may present
problems. Typically, a 15-foot setback between rear of sidewalks and
building is required. Please coordinate utilities with the Public Works
Department. oes are
of
ding
12. Buildinq distance eof elenvelopes utoleat leastentwonspl ttedllpropertyellP es opes ands
required.
13. Typical dimensions of parking spaces should be indicated on site plan.
14. Internal sidewalks as approved on preliminary plan should be maintained
on final plan.
n surrounding streets, sidewalks and inter-
15. Additional connections betweeommended. See me for details.
nal pedestrian system are rec
16. The pedestrian connection between the project and the future commercial
area to the north should be maintained as was approved on the
preliminary plan.
17. Intensification of landscaping between future single-family areas and
this proposal is recommended.
lu
19
The building directly south of the pool
150-foot access requirement. A note on
stating that, "All portions of the first
be within 150-feet of the access roadway
sprinklers will be provided." Buildings
will not be issued building permits.
20. Sizes of plant materials should match requirements of PUD regulations.
The revisions to the plans reflecting the above comments should be
delivered
on
to this office no later than Monday, 1DecembdeU reductions (allo plans should be
Monday, December 14, 1981, lease
submitted. If you should have any questions regarding the above, p
contact d. and I will arrange any necessary meetings with City staff.
Architectural elevations should be submitted.
does not appear to meet the
the plan should be provided
story of sall structures will
for that structure or approved
not meeting this requirement
Sincerely,
Joe Frank
Senior Plannner
JF /f sr
cc: Ken Waido, Acting Planning Director
Josh Richardson, Development Engineer
DATE �I1DEPART fI�E''VT A.- •
g��m �tECN 13 R iAl� P�iD
REvKioNs
��r1 c ear
Comments
3„ AGE- V," SSX SR10,6e- 0ST1KN.(
IV40 4104 Nm,, 49444. F&M-01rf.
nevelooli .t se!" iceO
i_nt;ine.rin� L3co.ntment
�`:
Ctv of iort Collins
November 4, 1988
Tom Dougherty
220 Fast Mulberry
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
Re: Acceptance of concrete construction for Greenbriar P.U.D.
11TOWCOMP
The intent of this letter is to inform you that the concrete curbs,
gutters, cross pans grid storm sewer inlets installed by Via` r Concrete in
the Greenbriar Development have been inspected. The condition of these
inprcvF=ments is acceptable and Kiefer Concrete has fulfilled their warranty
obi'gaticn as it relates to this project.
Sincerely, r
David Stringer
Chief Construction Inspector
cc: John Kiefer
300 ['A'wtc :Accrue • P..O. lic,\ ,S0 • Pot (AIin,, Ch • (303) 221-6(,05
—JUL_G I w
.yame Inc.Branch Of ices
Empire pare L, oratie'.,.'3, x 1242 Eramwoo7 Puce
Longmont, Colorado 80501
MATERIALS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERS P.O. Bo, 1135
214 No. Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 (303) 776 3321
P.O. Box 429 (303) 484 0359 3151 Nation vray
June 30, 1980 Cheyenne, YP,Q, B : 0076
(307) 632.9224
Mr. Charles Mayhugh
CRM Architecture
4836 South College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
Re: Greenbriar Condominimums
Dear Chuck:
A site inspection made by our firm recently at the above -referenced
project indicates the site is suitable for the proposed construction.
Preliminary soil tests have been made in the area and it is emphasized
that dewatering systems should be installed as recommended. After the
areas have been dewatered, all organic material and topsoil should be
removed from the site and filled with a granular -type material. The
excavation of all fill should be verified and inspected and field density
tests taken under the direct supervision of a geotechnical engineer.
The upper four (4) feet of fill placed at the site should be compacted
to at least ninety-five percent (95%) of Standard Proctor Density ASTM D
698-78. In addition, the site should be graded to provide positve
drainage outside the area.
We recommend that a comprehensive soil study be made for the proposed
building site after all fill placement has been made. It would appear
that this site would require several feet of granular imported material
to bring building pads and parking areas to grade. In view of this, we
see no problems with construction in the area. However, all foundation,
street sections, and parking areas should be designed for the specific
subsurface conditions after fill placement.
If you have any questions regarding these recommendations or if we can
be of any further assistance, please contact us.
Very truly yours,
EMPIRE
LA,BOORATOORRIIES, INC.
Chester C. Smith, P.E.
President
cic
cc: Hvolvoll-Johnson
James H. Stewart and Associates, Inc. - Jack Blake
MEMBER OF CONSULTING ENGINEERS COUNCIL
- _ - __ -__ _ _ - - --- -- ------ - -
TY OF FORT COLLINS P.O. BOX SSO, FORT COLLIER'S. COLORADO b0�22 _ PH :303i 455 �?Zf��
_AN\ING DIVISION
EXT. 6»
September 12, 1980
Dave Knox
CP,� Architects
4835 South College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Dave:
The staff has reviewed the revised drawings of Greenbriar Condominiums and
offers the following coTrrents:
1. The engineering staff will accept the proposal of Empire Laboratories,
concerning the soil test with the following understandings:
A. Empire Laboratories or any other approved soils laboratory shall insure
to the city that all organic material and topsoil has been removed
from site, through field data.
B. Approved soils laboratory verify and send the city the results of all
field density tests taken during back -filling procedures.
C. That a street section be designed taking into account all the field
data above. This design shall be approved by the Director of Engi-
neering Services.
2. Engineering staff has not received any preliminary drainage information
showing the adequacy of the stormwater detention areas. We reserve the
right to require major chances due to the lack of this information during
final review.
3. 8' utility easements will be required along private R.O.W.
4. Building Group 6 still does not appear to meet the 150' requirement.
If you have any questions or require further information, please feel free to
call.
Sincerely yoy
Joe f nn
rank, AICP
n or SePeer
j`/,e
I n" A-u6 VST F'* z M rG
GnSccititErAW A.56 60mYAEJJTS
7 zi-e0
Sri,- /of z
ski 4 te. (?,O�),v 0 M /Av r v M s No IZ�V 1 �� s i o L oc K r; �v �� No &PM Nr E&�r1
73 8� V 1LCA�zE Gi�oc%E �n�vE-<ATro-J e
//JIS /S °a2� aL T+4E 1 j6� A+V rJE�cAT/O nJ TD NE SOUTFF W94C.4
WILL R"�u,�� 1—fig C,TLIs TRaf-Jc— e„� SfcTio,j Tc
Y\)4D2L-r�j A M "-rcR_ /,2A- tG aA-rJ >1-11D CKr-ATvt-S
NEU✓ Z�Ze vs /*A oud( -I9.-R1.0uh E ZIT�/�Ty c
VP 4&Q -) A L PAIo 6 R �4 p y '� tb %�Si,J A-rTo ""e- J , j�1
uJ/oG Y 54VXF, 4DD/7-)ON94 SajVe-yIA16 Ab AVt 44/707A ,
M
E7',6,Z� %i �0 v /� �E? /47ON A4-�S
# �-�-So �� ����M, Fv�u� , yo,✓ J�7JA/E>cf}T10 Al
.` -Zzl� -Bd
TT 10 ;1�,&
4-s T&L5
✓jJeico/r1Ej
S1671 S 4"S/'/.ESJ 4iyNe-X-,0-7-)0AI
v 9.J >eS Z-L r a> /Tf{i,) 7-he-ic- S.e-M E �
Z,o •eooE- , -Lu 4bD/7,/c/J 7;;E
��✓6-N
M Et-7 l2Im M)5) L
aF A �vs�N�ss
1nz01.E (24 % T/ C� L �vE IJN�N6
QzE,Et-� Ti3E_.v77gL /c!9z6ROS
O—L9S S 1)e' e* 7/ o.J .
�JS gU • �DT�tJ���_/i= ,
IS FINAL
/ �4tuASEaE�n7nos�
0 C )SY/STiAlC --r4-lkj 6 F-Tjo.0 G 7xtA L
Aop*,e-,r 7 Ta / ek-rA Diu 6t.
?3°I - ao
PS
Coot - 76 A
Is a
4�X wc�� Sa►.�c.`
lso`
r r /
4—zl -V
OATE:
DEPARTMENT
..fit
Item--Y6Q— 7cpA
Comments
I_ We ll IL(- P—eQui Q.@ -NU CbrlsTwcTlov O� Q.;m-CwooD ANp
L. Q �LAT W�" 66 QETZ n�2Ep,
3 w e •,� r �- •. '2 �-c� u � rz. �.s -tea az- w A,� � 5 t w�'2 1 �� S�act,r� 17Q�A�.aA6e
a.Nr� +access 3t � H E�hs�sg��
�'. A 3L.a��k� E`a.St-r.��l'c Foe. urLmEs is2EL-or,..c,.�o<-p
�. 1146 q�:�p� N-ouss SMauLD �E 541a..oN C-v Wfkn3� s SCwe� 1�-2q�rn6S,
�o, WE kti�,L 2.FQ�t�e� ^iE�li SorLS r S—UCTUAL.
O t1 N O rJ 3t S G L-0TS, C L O
A-2 rC i r.l
TEST Di0 1V,o-r laDD2�y
' -I. RIOT 'A�..� .�U��DIwC� ia� Tb CriC �.7�iiirN TVio �So�fG.%ULE
�2.oi1='L.T10+11 CISb FRrµ.�`.-1'1Luc-1; Pga.Cln6 locq'Renl TO
8, ADp,T,eY.c p,eQ tL,�Derawrs wIL_L.
a� 2-cA8LY
A �-L C u 2 Ci Gn{UTS S H-�L r3 E 3 0�
`O . D �Tzny S LeyJ TF+C.\ L � Tl
/� Lf'S Sroo uLp '�2aviot Pos i't'lv16 FLOCO
Crma,-R-at. t�mrL L-o e,� �)S
t -Me W ATnme. o-r� -51 rE S N-4L4_ 8 � -4-►6-
Rx"" >m'yslF3i.�v.y op 1 nw o e u- nN&7rr-s A-ssoc,
Lt
PH 303 484-4220
CITY OF FORT COLLINS P.O. BOX 580, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522
-� - EXT.655
PLANNING DIVISION
August 25, 1980
Dave Knox
CRM Architecture
4836 S. College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Dave:
The staff has reviewed the preliminary plans for the Greenbriar P.U.D. and
would offer the following comments.
1. Building envelopes should include all patios, decks and fences, if any.
If buildings are connected, the building envelopes should reflect this.
2. All portions of buildings must be within 150' of accessway for fire
equipment service. Building Groups 5 and 6 do not appear to conform to this
requirement.
3. 75 parking spaces may be allowed as compact car spaces (20% of total).
Please revise.
4. The applicant may use 17' stall depth with two -foot overhang as long
as the two foot is grassed area or if overhanging sidewalks, is a minimum
of 6' in width. Would recommend using this standard for exterior parking
(2' extra should be in grass).
5. Active open space is short 2% per P.U.D. regulations. Club house area
may be used as partial credit. Detention areas may be used as partial credit.
Applicant should provide information on how much of total open space and
active open space is devoted to detention. Design of these areas must reflect
its recreational use first, and then its function as a storm drainage facility
second.
6. Detention facilities should provide positive flow control for low flows.
7. Applicant should provide evidence as to pedestrian access being assured
into Evergreen Park II - single family area.
8. Staff questions desirability of blue grass in detention areas. There
are more suitable varieties of grass that can withstand both wet and dry
conditions better than blue grass. We would recommend that one of these
varieties be chosen.
9. Additional landscaping in detention area is recommended.
Dave Knox
2 August 25, 1980
10. While the design objectives of the landscape plan are very good, the extent
and number of planting materials appears to be irzufficient. This is an item
which should be addressed on the final landscape rrawings.
11. Sidewalks and pedestrian paths should avoid : reas of low pedestrian interest
(blank walls, fences, etc.). If not possible, la-dscaping should be utilized
to mitigate the undesirable impacts.
12. Additional sidewalks are recommended. See r for details.
13. The construction of Redwood and rWillox to to it intersection will be
required with the development of this project.
14. Easements for water, sewer and storm draina;: will be required. Staff
would recommend a blanket easement. Also, an erc-gency vehicle access easement
across all parking areas will be required. A pla• of dedication for these
items will be required.
15. If the site is not already on an existing su`.divided lot, a one -lot
subdivision plat will be required.
16. The club house/pool area was not shown on the sewer and water utility
drawings. This should be corrected.
17. Public Works Department will require new soi.s test to verify structural
adequacy.
18. Additional fire hydrants may be required.
19. The storm water system on site shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners
Association.
20. The staff would LOV�'_r2:'* 30' curb cuts rather than 24'.
21. How will location of Greeley water line affect the site plan?
22. The staff would recommend the applicant reevaluate Building Group No. 2 in
terms of relieving the feeling that these units were an "after thought" in terms
of the rest of the plan.
Before the staff can proceed with processing of the application for development
approval, a revised site plan reflecting the above comments will be required.
For those items that cannot be shown on the site ;lan, a letter from the
applicant resolving these issues should be submit_ed. The above materials
should be delivered to this office no later than September 8, 1980. I
would urge you to contact me before you submit a `Drmal revised site plan.