HomeMy WebLinkAboutCITY PARK NORTH - PDP - 26-10 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSNumber: 22 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] The two water services shown on the southern part of Lot 3 appear to be in a
drive. This will cause the City and the property owner to face much higher costs for future
repairs. It appears that the drive for Lot 2 would have to be removed and replaced to repair
the water service to Lot 3. Adjust the driveway for Lot 2 to avoid the water services or move
the water service for Lot 3 onto Lot 3. 5_4rU(ces G6 r '�d c�c� a�� i t' d'r1Je<J%7
-CtVeJ -tom, P" been . y r Z
Number: 23 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] Easements may need to be adjusted depending upon the resolution of the
service line location issues. nd i, -ec__s«w n <52cLd
Number: 25 Created: 10/26/2010
110/26/10] Please return the red -lined plans with the next submittal.
ak
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Gary Lopez
Topic: Zoning
Number: 4 Created: 10/22/2010
(10/22/10] No comment.
It appears that another round of review is necessary to ensure that all of these comments
can be properly addressed before going to public hearing. Be sure and return all red -lined
plans when you re -submit.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6341.
Yours Truly,
k!e)O) lt
City Planner
cc: Marc Virata
Stewart & Associates
Current Planning file #26-10
Page 8
Department: Technical Services Issue Contact: Jeff County
Topic: Plat
Number: 13 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] The Plat boundary & legal description do not match.
Number: 14 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] The legal description references a "corner" that is not identified on the Plat. See
redlines.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 15 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] The legal description on the Site Plan is incorrect. Please include the "corrected"
Subdivision Plat legal description on the Site Plan. Cdfk
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 16 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] Please change the subtitle on the Utility Plans to read, "A Replat of Frey Street
Cottages". G{.„.,�e. J
Number: 17 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] The Utility Plan set only has sheets 1 & 4 of 8. Please include all 8 sheets, or
correct index & sheet numbering. Indrv- cor(erFv--1 c-„S, ol�es (\-v C,,W. A .
Number: 18 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] Please correct the benchmark on the Utility Plans sheet 1. See Redlines.
Contact City of Fort Collins Surveying @ 221-6605 or Technical Services @ 221-6588, for
an updated copy of the City of Fort Collins Vertical Control Network.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: stormwater
Number: 34 Created: 10/27/2010
[10/27/10] Please provide a note on the grading plan that a detailed lot grading plan will be
required at time ofbuildingilding permit for each structure.
no t;, c�o�.,�
Number: 35 Created: 10/27/2010
110/27/10] A reminder per the existing development agreement, 2 building permits is the
limit that can be issued before a drainage site certification is required.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Water/Wastewater
Number: 11 Created: 10/25/2010
(10/25/10] The water service locations shown on the utility plans do not agree with those
shown on a revised plan for Frey Street Cottage approved by the City in May 2007 signed
by Kevin Forbes on 11/21/07. Are the service locations shown on the current plan based
upon field locates and surveys or taken from the original design drawings? �y
?fiey hwse- k Z4rv, Ftl� tac4?�c¢� cHd qd�' 5five Qt� ` 1iGn S.
Number: 12 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/10] The current utility plans include an irrigation tap which was not shown on the
revised plan noted in the previous comment. Please explain. Tract A appears to be
scheduled for native grasses and water tolerant seed mixes; therefore, there does not seem
to be a need for an irrigation tap.
SG k G! Az:5perv,5e
Page 7
Number: 27 Created: 10/26/2010
REQUIRED ACCESS
Fire access roads (fire lanes) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a
building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the PFA's jurisdiction when any
portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is
located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access as measured by an approved route
around the exterior of the building or facility. This fire lane shall be visible by painting and
signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. A fire lane plan shall be submitted for
approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant
standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements:
❑ Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface (asphalt or concrete) capable of
supporting fire apparatus weights. Compacted road base shall be used only for
temporary fire lanes or at construction sites.
❑ Have appropriate maintenance agreements that are legally binding and enforceable.
❑ Be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement.
❑ Maintain the required minimum width of 20 feet throughout the length of the fire lane
(30 feet on at least one long side of the building when the structure is three or more
stories in height).
PLEASE NOTE: The residential structure on Lot 4 will be out of access. Per the above
requirement, you can either dedicate and maintain an Emergency Access Easement or
install an approved fire sprinkler system. If you go with the EAE, we need to resolve
placement of approved signs, to ensure the fire lane is maintained unobstructed at all times.
If the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic fire -sprinkler system, the
fire code official is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet.
2006 International Fire Code 503.1.1, 503.2.3, 503.3, 503.4 and Appendix D
7taC0nc,r-"P--6c drtAe� Ld'r 3 will6ec
Number: 36 Created: 10/28/2010
ADDRESS NUMERALS�y
Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a
minimum six-inch high numerals on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals on brown
brick are not acceptable). If the numerals are mounted on a side of the building other than
the side off of which it is addressed, the street name is required to be posted along with the
numerals. ok
PLEASE NOTE: City GIS (Tim Varrone) will need to give a separate numerical address to
the carriage house on Lot 3 and also there must be approved signage (monument -type sign)
at the front of the lot, to ensure the carriage house can be found from Frey Street.
006 International Fire Code 505.1
6K
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford
Topic: Traffic
Number: 39 Created: 11 /2/2010
[11/2/10] Traffic feels the Little Leaf Linden trees as shown on the landscape plan will be a
sight distance issue for residents backing out of the driveways to see traffic on Frey St. and
for Frey Street motorists seeing the backing vehicles. The LTL can have a very low canopy
as it matures causing sight distance issues with vehicles and with traffic signage. Please
revise to.a street tree that lower canopy meets sight distance criteria as stated in the
LCUASS. '�i�n 3 df-{ no+ h'-Uc eh 65s c, e. &0A -la, ty pc, of
5 `2rf.� "if 6G d'ti� 1 11(¢.• Ucz. d� % t-ots CL05C,
Page 6
4. All trees proposed on the project are mitigation trees. Therefore a mitigation tree would
need to be added to the native grass area on the east side of the project. 1?, .c
5. There are three significant trees remaining on the site. These three trees need to be
identified on the plan. If they will be impacted by construction that could require
removal then an on -site meeting with the City Forester is required to determine the
impact and mitigation j5krsus-�, a w pLr_�
5. Note # 8 should be changed to read as follows:
All street trees shall be inspected and approved by the City Forester prior to the
issuance of a certificated of occupancy. �" 4
6. The first street tree on the Frey Street parkway south of Laporte Avenue needs to be at
least 20 feet from the stop sign. ok
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 3 Created: 10/15/2010
[10/15/10] There is an existing street light on LaPorte Ave. at Frey St. The location of this
light needs to be shown on the landscape plan. Street tree locations need to be adjusted to
provide a minimum of 40 ft. between the light standard and the trees (15 ft. of the tree is an
ornamental). (:.C,.c,,j c,,,.� caddd Sk���- L�l�—!•
Topic: Light & Power
Number: 2 Created: 10/14/2010
(10/14/10] Until more specifics are known, it is not possible to know how these lots will be
served with electric power, and in turn what the Light & Power costs to the developer will be.
Specifically, will need to have a site plan showing building envelopes, and to know what
level of service is required for each unit (electric heat or not).
o�
Topic: Plat
Number: 1 Created: 10/14/2010
[10/14110] The preliminary replat indicates it is.a "Replat of Frey Street Cottages". I believe
it more accurately should be subtitled "A re ]at of a PORTION of Frey Street Cottages".
Ab is all d4
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carle Dann
Topic: Fire
Number: 24 Created: 10/26/2010
Just to document, please carry forward all PFA comments/applicant responses from
conceptual. -Oa&Q_
Number: 26 Created: 10/26/2010
HYDRANTS
Please show existing hydrants on Utilities plan. There is one hydrant on the west side of
Frey, south of LaPorte Avenue. However, there is also a hydrant south on Frey. Hydrant
locations will determine whether or not an additional hydrant is needed. Also, we need to
determine possible flow/residual pressure for existing hydrants. I d cat a-tt-
(1a Farrp 21 C..Fi �r e s, I S cd.� ! G127�rk... '�cc '� 1 Q ✓� o f /�e1 cl (t S
hid G �.`{a o�. C Q- 4s'iT• Page 5
Number: 9 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/10] The construction drawings reflect the construction. of driveways that intersect
with existing vertical curb and gutter. The construction of two drive approaches would
appear to be needed with the project and indicated on the plans with appropriate
construction details at time of final plan review. �Fur- drel-sk-�J-j
Topic: Plat
Number: 5 Created: 10/25/2010
[10125/10] Section 3.3.2(6) of the Land Use Code requires that development agreements
and any amendments thereto are recorded at the County. There will need to be one of two
approaches in order to address this requirement.
Option 1) The applicant shall directly record the original development agreement for Frey
Street Cottages (dated May 29th 2007) at the County and provide evidence of this
recordation to the City. Please then add the following note to the replat in order to ensure
that the replat is bound to this previous development agreement: "The Frey Street Cottages
Development Agreement, dated May 29th, 2007, between the City and John J. Shaw shall
apply to the property shown on this replat."
Option 2) A new development agreement shall be created for City Park North, with the
applicant providing recording fees to the City.
(gilt C36 QM, d� -I•14 oFG6,V
Number: 10 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/101 The creation of a 6' landscape "buffer" within the expanded Tract A is a little
unusual nomenclature to be placed on a plat. Is this intended to be a "landscape buffer
easement"? e cseti e.,� , ) ws b P� mF irr- 'tr Wl c-,& ts ^60
wo� ,
Number: 19 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/10] By virtue of the sidewalk along Laporte now abutting Tract A instead of Lot 1, it
appears that maintenance of the sidewalk along Laporte (such as snow shoveling) would
become a maintenance responsibility of the HOA instead of Lot 1. Is this intended, as it
seems awkward to leave one stretch of sidewalk to an HOA.
W t1I be. bra A me Fb T.: t 1 J ceS" - 4 xe fie, 0. Pam,,5f Se Jt
Department: Forestry Issue Contact: Tim Buchanan
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 37 Created: 10/29/2010
[10/29/10]
1. Littleleaf Linden should be listed in the plant list as.......
Greenspire Linden - Tilia cordata 'Greenspire'
D�oiuc,
2. Change Marshall Green Ash to a tree listed on the street tree list. The following would
be a good choice to replace Marshall Green Ash:
Bur Oak - Quercus macrocarpa
a-5-e.d 130.- C) .,k
3. Only three canopy street trees can be planted in the LaPorte Avenue Parkway. This is
because the first tree from the corner needs to be 40 feet from the street light that is
located at the corner. The next two trees to the east of the first tree from the corner will
need to be spaced about 30 feet apart. Planting an ornamental tree closer to the light
could cause a site distance problem.
Atbd�d
Pave 4
Number: 31 Created: 10/27/2010
[10/27/10] Existing and proposed landscaping needs to be shown on the Landscape Plan.
The plan needs to identify what trees are to be retained and protected and what trees are to
be removed. Also, the City Forester must evaluate the species and condition of trees on the
property to determine if any mitigation is required. l 6r L
Number: 32 Created: 10/27/2010
[10/27/10] It is difficult to determine where the proposed retaining wall along Lot 4 stops at
the north end. n4,-8,, nw, e ilts4�(c
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 28 Created: 10/27/2010
[10127/101 The Site Plan does not show a proposed retaining wall along Lot 4 that is shown
on the Landscape Plan. ti(ycj -Skown
Number: 29 Created: 10/27/2010
[10/27/10] The 10' Pedestrian Access Easement on the Site Plan does not match that same
easement on the Subdivision Plat. car-re,_+e-I -hi n4ei� pL-t" cad extS
Stf.e -Scd2{a.�GIC
Number: 30 Created: 10/27/2010
[10/27/10] The Wildlife Buffer Easement and Pedestrian Access Easement as shown on
Lots 1, 2 and 4 on the Subdivision Plat need to be shown on the Site Plan.
�✓' c„Q�cs� rye, •,^erte � Lv �scv� rn. d'i�rz r Ce �+t� Yhe.�.t�'
Number: 33 Created: 10/27/2010
[10/27/10] Is the 4' wide sidewalk in Tract A, as shown on the Site Plan, existing or
proposed? Please note.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Construction Plans
Number: 6 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/10] The construction drawings need to indicate and differentiate between what public
improvements exist vs. what public improvements are proposed. All the sidewalk appears to
be in place along the property, so the sidewalk should perhaps be indicated as "existing to
remain" (unless it's intended to be removed with the project). Notations on various "existing"
infrastructure along Laporte do not seem to be applicable anymore as well. The storm line A
profile seems to coincide with an existing storm line, having this shown as a proposed
improvement in the drawings wouldn't appear to be correct. E rve
Number: 7 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/10] The construction plans show two access ramps at the southeast corner of Frey
and Laporte, is this intended to be proposed instead of the existing condition of the single
access ramp that bisects the two?
Number: 8 Created: 10/25/2010
[10/25/10] The legal description on the construction plan set cover sheet should reflect the
original Frey Street Cottages plat. F—+ re.Fkc.�.s Frcy 54'•-ee.t Co [� � /t9C,1
(ess 4t-e. 7Z0_oi. 44--b wa-s �csE�d tiw� Pam. 'rhe totem( 5h�c.r�
Page 3
The code defines "Zero Lot Line Development Plan" and Zero lot line structure" as:
Zero lot line development plan shall mean a development plan where one (1) or more
dwellings (limited to single-family detached or single-family attached dwellings) are
placed on lots in such a manner that at least one (1) of the dwelling's sides rests
directly on a lot line, as measured from the outer edge of the dwelling's foundation at
the ground line, so as to enhance the usable open space on the lot.
Zero lot line structure shall mean a structure with at least one (1) wall conterminous with the
lot line, which wall may include footings, eaves and gutters that may encroach onto the
abutting lot under the authority of an encroachment and maintenance easement.
If we' know in advance that someone is proposing a development plan with zero lot line
structures, then in my opinion they should do a PDP for that type of plan per 3.5.2((D)(3),
and as long as they have a 6' setback on the other side, then a modification wouldn't even
be required. 3.5.2(D)(3) states (emphasis added):
(3) Side and Rear Yard Setbacks. The minimum side yard setback for all residential
buildings and for all detached accessory buildings that are incidental to the residential
building shall be five (5) feet from the property line, except for alley -accessed garages,
for which the minimum setback shall be eight (8) feet. If a zero -lot -line development
plan is proposed, a single six-foot minimum side yard is required. Rear yard setbacks
in residential areas shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet from the rear property line,
except for garages and storage sheds not exceeding eight (8) feet in height, where the
minimum setback shall be zero (0) feet.
Number: 40 Created: 11 /2/2010
[11/2/10] The modification of standards requests must be revised to cite the standards for
which modifications are being requested. Also, enough information about the building
placements, eave heights, and total size of the structure on the rear of Lot 3 to evaluate the
modification requests must be provided, preferably on the Site Exhibit.
O I,
Number: 41 Created: 11 /2/2010
(11/2/10] Please see red -lined Site & Landscape Exhibit Plans and Subdivision Plat for
additional Current Planning comments.
Coro,rnen4-5 l�6VrerN"a CO{ rec� ed
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 20 Created: 10/26/2010
(10/26/10] After reviewing the previously approved Landscape Plan and Natural Resource
Department comments it is clear that there was a purpose for the landscaping in Tract A
along the east side of the property. The Larimer County No. 2 Canal serves as a wildlife
movement corridor, which requires a 50' buffer from development. The buffer in this case is
only 20' wide and the previous Environmental Planner had required plantings to mitigate for
the decreased buffer. That environmental standard is still in the Land Use Code and must
be met. �({s cv� -r-rces pv., ' bc,k, ea. Lr-^J scc.pe pLc4-. A r RG(Bew
Number: 21 Created: 10/26/2010
[10/26/10] There were comments about protection of existing trees on the previously
approved Landscape Plan. The current Landscape Plan does not show the existing trees
on -site and does not indicate what is to be removed or protected, nor does it identify the
necessary tree mitigation for the trees to be removed. r
T.c,,,4•5 cj,.,� -rrvej pw,t &zr— cry, 4. r_, a s cc�f@ pcG.. T di r-eUfe W
Page 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City ofF�rtC=� ?C-5:po4ccer tl jl00110
Dennis Sovick - dsovick@frii.com Date: 11/2/2010
Sovick Design/Builders, Inc.
750 Havel Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Staff has reviewed your submittal for CITY PARK NORTH, PDP - TYPE 1 (ref. #17-06 Frey
St. Cottages), and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: General
Number: 38 Created: 11 /2/2010
(11/2110] Communications between Peter Barnes and Steve Olt regarding modifications
with PDP vs. ZBA variance requests. Peter's opinion is that waiting to do ZBA variance
requests with Building Permits is riskier than requesting modifications of standards with the
PDP to a Hearing Officer.
If we know about them now, they should do a modification with the PDP. The ZBA can't
hear a variance request for a pending development, those need to be a modification. Once
a development plan is approved, then it goes to ZBA for variances for things that come up
later and that were "unknown" at the time of the PDP. But if we know about the intent now,
we really need to include the modifications with the PDP.
Peter,
We should then address the garage structures (only) setbacks with the Subdivision Plat,
PDP and have the Hearing Officer consider that as part of the decision.
There are 2 other things that require attention: 1) Section 4.7(D)(2) Residential ... the
applicant is requesting that the total building square footage be 1,141 square feet (517 s.f.
garage and 624 s.f. dwelling unit), with a 881 s.f. footprint, in the rear building on Lot 3; and,
2) Section 4.7(F)(2)(b) Eave Height ... eave height at the side line of Lot 3 would exceed the
standard. These would require modifications of standards as part of the PDP, correct, or
could variances be done with the building permit?
Steve
Gary told me about the meeting this morning re: the replat of Frey St. Cottages, and the
zero lot line buildings. In my opinion, this wouldn't be a ZBA variance, rather it would need
to be a Type 1 PDP. I'm not even sure that a setback modification would be needed, per
Sec. 3.5.2(D)(3).
Page 1