Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUNNINGHAM CORNER PUD - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2003-07-31TA&MMM S'MN roN & MlkGGE CONSULTING E "A"INEERS City of Fort Collins 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Attn: Maurice Rupel Engineering Services Dear Mr. Rupel: February 23, 1979 Re: unningham Corner P. U. D: Job No. This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation on the morning of February 23, 1979. The point in question was the street width of the residential streets in Cunningham Corner P. U. D. Per our telephone con- versation, we are proceeding with our street design of 36 feet flow line to flow line with 60 feet of street right-of-way. This will supersede our typical section shown on the prelimin- ary plat and the typical section shown in the City of Fort Collins "Specifications for the Design and Construction of Streets". Rather, it will conform to the standards set forth in the Code of the City of Fort Collins "Subdivision of Land and Zoning Chapter 99 and 118". If you have an,y questions or do not agree with this, please inform me as soon as possible. Very Truly Yours, <::�' QA( ���is and . Dvorak Senior Engineering Technician TARANTO, STANTON & TAGGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS RAD : a j t 1520 EAST MULBERRY/ SUITE 200 / FORT COLLINS / COLO. 80524 / PHONE (303) 226-0557 112 WEST 11th AVENUE / HOLDREGE / NEBRASKA 68949 / PHONE (308) 995-6677 City of Fort. Collins February 7, 1980 Page 2 This action by Melody Homes will effect the Drainage Plan in Cunningham Corner. Most specifically, it will reduce the amount of drainage improvements proposed for the project. Additionally, this action raised a concern centering on whether the New Mercer Ditch Board would in the future decide not to accept drainage flow from Cunningham Corner. These concerns were discussed with you last week. It is my understanding, that with regard to the latter item, the City attorney has indicated that the City would accept the Drainage Plans for Cunningham Corner, as they were originally approved. The City would not demand additional requirements to satisfy changes proposed by the New Mercer Ditch Board. Additionally, the City attorney felt that'..the Ditch Board had sufficient time to comment on the plans prior to their approval by the City. Since they did not indicate at that time that they would not accept the flows, they cannot now come hack and say they will not. They would have to sue the City to make changes at this time. If the Ditch company did come back with problems there would be some leverage in the fact that the City is now in the process of conducting drainage studies within the basin, which will eliminate storm water discharges to the New Mercer. This should eleviate any concerns the Ditch Board would have for this particular site. During this period we also discussed the possible reper- cussions of making changes to the Drainage Plan to reflect the elimination of Melody Homes drainage. As you indicated as long as there are no substantial alternatives to the drainage considerations, i.e. additional drainage flows, detention reduction, etc., we should be able to make pipe and ditch modifications as required. Additionally if replatting of a portion of the property is considered, no problems should develop with the drainage discharge as long as the major drainage considerations are not changed. Based on these comments you indicated that there should be no problem with changes to the drainage improvements or with replatting portions of the project. All proposed changes would be reviewed with both your staff and with Maury. It is noted that I have discussed this situation with Maury and he is in agreement with your comments. City of Fort. Collins February 7, 1980 Page 3 Also you indicated that the development could proceed as planned. There would be no problems with obtaining buil- ding permit: or proceeding with utility and street improve- ments. This is extremely important as the project is in the process of being sold. Hopefully this letter has accurately recapped what was discussed on drainage at Cunningham Corner. Please review the letter and if you have any comments, please do not hesitate to contact the office. Thanks for your help and consideration on this matter. Very truly yours, Larry E. Stanton, P.E. TARANTO, STANTON & TAGGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS' LES:cs CC: City of: Fort Collins: Maury Rupel; Trinity Financial Services: Lewis Raydor. (_I I Y OF I OR (()I HNS P ). BOX S50, FORT COLI.INS, COLORADO 50322 ENGINEERING DIVISION February 12, 1980 1,1r_ . Larry Stanton Taranto, Stani-on & Tagge 1520 F. mtilh-,rry, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado Dear Mr. Stanton: PH (303) 115I-4220 1 EXT. 728 I rc-,c:eiv(-d your letter_ of February 7th this morning, and while I am substantially in with the inforrr�tion as you present it, there are a few r-pints which require some clarification. In the second paragraph of page two, I believe the last three sentences are incorrect. ^1rs. Liley, the Citv Attornev, indicated in her discussion of this matter with me that she assurx�d the ditch company had been made a�,rare of the drainage plans of Cunningham Corners prior to their final a:_)p:roval by the City, as this has been normal procedure for the City develot)i'x'nt engineer for su•ne time. Second, rTrs. Liley did not indicate that the ditch co?lr)any now had no right to refuse to accent runoff; that, I believe, %��)uld have to be detelmined by the courts. And in the last sentence, the identity of the tkirties who might he involved in such a suit is a matter of some speculation; it might well involve the City, the developer, subsequent owners, the consulting engineer, etc. Also, let me state again that in the matter of replatting the property, if the replatting is relatively minor and does not substantially alter the drainage plan as it was originally apr)roved, then I do not foresee additional requirements on the property. However, this dei)ends entirely on the nature and extent of the replatting, and as I indicated in both of our telephone conversations, without reviewing the proposed replat, I will not make any definitive state -tent on this point. In conclusion, let me reiterate that in as much as the City has approved the proposed Cunningham Coi-ner development, I do not anticipate that we would retract such approval or r-)lace additional rc n)irc:onts on the development to accom. ate the ditch mimDany's pr�scnt cone rn. Ile will, ho;aever, continue to pursue basin -wide solutions for drainage problems within this watershed. I hope this letter serves to clarify our position. If_ you have additional questions rE-garding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ^ arc Fn' c n Civil E _ineer II cc: *Tauri RuDel v April 25, 1980 Randall E. Larson & Associates Suite 400, Savings Building Oak at Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 A P P 9 1990 Dear Randy: The staff has reviewed the application for replat approval of Cunningham Corner P.U.D. and has the following comments to offer: 1. Public Service requires additional easements. Contact Planning Department for details,. 2. Sewer service must be provided for future service west of Shields Street. Contact Jim Hibbard at Water and Sewer Department. 3. Domestic waiver lines must be looped for each phase. 4. Olympic Drive must be improved to curb return and Shields Street improvements will be required to the north line of the out lot with Phase One. 5. If Windmill Drive is improved only to the phase line, the water line must have a temporary blow -off valve and sewer must end at a manhole with stub - out. Windmill Drive must be built to full width in Phase Three (including the off -site portion and should be 44' flowline to flowline. The southern- most curb cut on Windmill Drive is too close to Horsetooth Road and should line up with proposed curb cut to the east. Contact Rick Ensdorff at Traffic Engineering. 6. The 50' R.O.W. on Marathon Court is inadequate. Requirements are 54' R.O.W. with a 36' paved width. 7. Shields Street and Horsetooth Road will be required to be built to the intersection with re -pay agreement for the out lots. The timing of construction shall be completed when Four Seasons P.U.D. to the south completes street construction or before June 1, 1981. 8. The access off Shields Street for Phase Two commercial area must be eliminated. Access should come off the driveway into Phase Four. 9. Drainage report must show how storm water is routed for each phase and for the ultimate development. 10. Townhouse lots must have a minimum 20' of frontage on a public R.O.W. Randall E. Larson & Associates 2 April 25, 1980 11. Parking overhang for Phase Two commercial area should be shown. Typical parking space dimensions should be shown for Phase Four. Phase Three parking stalls should be 19' long and 9' wide and the 25' aisle width should be maintained since all parking areas are on streets used for circulation. 12. Bowling area should have two loading zones and the restaurant, one loading zone. 13. Setbacks and building envelopes and dimensions for Phase One must be shown. Additional dimensions for building envelopes in Phase Three must be shown. Building envelopes for lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 5 (Phase Four) need to be shown. 14. Building envelopes should be designated for tennis courts and shelter. 15. All fence locations should be designated on the plan. 16. The rear deck and stairs for the townhouse units must not extend beyond the building envelope. 17. All portions; of all structures must be within 150' of fire equipment access points. 18. Elevations for patio homes must be submitted. 19. Greater emphasis should be put on pedestrian access between residential and commercial areas and on general pedestrian flow throughout the entire development. 20. Landscaping plan lacks the intensity needed for this location and mixed uses. 21. Bicycle, motorcycle and handicapped parking spaces must be provided. 22. Staff would recommend that Phase Three be redesigned so units cluster around open space. 23. The character of the original design for the commercial building in Phase Two should be retained. 24. Developer should contact Barry Selberg at Transfort to see if a bus stop is desirable on Horsetooth Road. Before staff can proceed with processing this application, a revised site plan reflecting the above comments must be submitted to this office by May 9, 1980. I would suggest you contact me before this deadline to discuss these comments, or review your changes before a revised site plan is submitted. Also, on May 9, a rendered set. of the site plan and architectural drawings and an 8" x 11" PMT positive or good reduction of all site plans and maps must be submitted. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Sherry A ertson-Clark Planner I SAC/lg RANDALL E. LARSEN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. MEMBER AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS -_ CONFERENCE REPORT PROJECT: Cunningham Corner Replat JOB NO: 7950 RP PARTICIPANTS: Lenn Szopinski DATE OF MEETING: May 8, 1980 Sherry Albertson -Clark - Maurey Ruple PLACE OF MEETING: City of Fort Representative from Collins, Engineering Department Public Service Co., Power &Light and Water & Sewer Depts. The purpose of this meeting was to resolve the easement requirements, specifical- ly for the Cunningham Corner replat. The following items were discussed and de- cisions reached: 1. The Phase Two townhome area was discussed between Maurey Ruple, Sherry Albertson -Clark and Lenn Szopinski. As is stated in the zoning ordinances Item 118.11, the definition of a lot applies to the townhome area since it is the intention of the developer to sell the lots fee simple. This would then change the private drives to public streets and the Engineering Department would then require that these public streets meet all the re- quirements of the Engineering Department for a public street. If, however, these townhome units were changed to a condominium situation, none of these requirements would apply. 2. It was a joint suggestion by the Utilities Commission participants that all the dedicated greenspace within the P.U.D. also be a dedicated ease- ment space. This would then provide the utilities with enough easements so that they could install their utilities as they saw fit. If, however, the dedicated greenspace is not also dedicated easement space, there should appear on the replat drawings a statement to the effect that the easements will be provided at a later date after the utilities have had a chance to design their systems and to see what the exact easements will be required for each phase of the project. Over and above this, there should be a minimum 8' easement along all street right of ways within the P.U.D. 3. For the condominium areas, the Power and Light company will be providing pad mount: transformers with approximately three buildings being served by each transformer. The Power and Light will coordinate the exact loca- tion of these transformers with the developer. It is currently Power and Light's policy that the service from these transformers to the buildings be provided by the developer. SUITE 440, SAVINGS BUILDING OAK AT HOWES FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 (303) 484-0126 Conference Report Cunningham Corner Replat May 8, 1980 Page Two 4. In the townhome area, assuming that it stays at a fee simple sales approach with individual lots, the public streets to these lots need not exceed 24' in width. The Utilities Committee would then like to see a minimum 12' easement on each side of these public streets. for access to these build- ings. The Water and Sewer Department would like to see an easement at the rear of these units so that if water service can be provided separate- ly from storm service. This is our understanding of the items discussed and decisions reached. If you have any questions, additions or deletions, please contact this office -immediate- ly. Sincerely, r � 'Leonard P� yop�i✓nski Project Manager LPS: j rb cc: Kurt Smith Sher�ry Albertson -Clark aurey Ruple, Engineering Dept. Larry Stanton Trinity Financial Services RANDALL E. LARSEN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. MEMBER AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS May 12, 1980 City of Fort Collins Planning Department P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Re: Cunningham Corner Replat To Whom It May Concern: Attached at the end of this letter is staff comments received in our office on the 29th of April as a result of the application for replat for the Cunningham Corner P.U.D. The following comments address themselves to each item by their appropriate number. These comments are the result of four meetings held within the past few days. The meetings were as follows: On the 5th of May, 1980, Larsen & Associates met with the Planning Department, specifically Sherry Albertson -Clark, Joe Frank and Kurt Smith. On the 6th of May, Larsen & Associates met with the Traffic Engineering Department, specifically Rick Ensdorff. On that same day, Larsen & Associates met with the Fire Prevention Bureau, specifically Don Hisam. On the 8th of May, Larsen & Associates met with the Engineering Department and the Utilities Coordination Committee, specifically Maurey Ruple, a representative from Power and Light, Public Service and Water and Sewer, and Sherry Albertson - Clark. 1. All easements along Windmill Drive, Olympic Drive and Marathon Court will be changed to 8'. All the easements within the condominiums area in Phase Two and Phase Three will be determined by coordination with the developer and the appropriate utilities at a later date. The Utilities Committee felt that determining the proper easements at this time was unnecessary. They would rather have an opportunity to properly design their systems and then assign the easements that will be necessary. X 2. Sewer service will be provided for future service west of Shields Street. The final engineering drawings will reflect this. ,X 3. Domestic water lines will be looped for each phase. This again will appear on the final engineering drawings submitted. x 4. Olympic Drive will be improved to the curb return and Shields Street's improvements will be performed to the north line of the out lot with Chdse rung This will appear on the final engineering drawings sub- mi tted . '/ SUITE 410, SAVINGS BUILDING OAK AT HOWES FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 (303) 484-0126 City of Fort Collins Planning Department May 12, 1980 Page Two /--, N,o r � ►� � ►�v E o ��,-z T }� 5. Waterer ne out of Windmill Drive will terminate during Phase One at the intersection with Olympic Drive. The additional water line to the south of Olympic Drive will be put in Phase Three. These will be looped at each time, therefore there will be no need for a blow -off valve. The flow line to flow line dimension of Windmill Drive will remain at 36'. Parking will not be provided at Windmill Drive as noted on Sheet No. 2 of the resubmittal. The Bout curb cut on Windmill Drive which is close to Horsetooth will b 100' rom Horsetooth Road as shown on Sheet No. 3 of the resubmitta -A6. The 50' right of way on Marathon Court has been changed to 54' with a 36' flow line to flow line width. 7. It has been already planned that Shields Street and Horsetooth Road would be built to the intersection with a repay agreement for the outlots. This was resolved in the original P.U.D. submission. `/,8. The access off Shields Street for the Phase Two commercial area will be eliminated. Access shall be onto Marathon Court off the northeast end of the parking lot. The _driveway! connection between the commercial Phase Four._ rea _and_.Marat_hon Court wi 11 be e7imi►iat�d: � There wi-TT be, however, an easement platted i n thi s area:`- V 9. A drainage report showing drainage routes for each phase and the ulti- mate development will appear and be part of the final engineering draw- ings submitted. _ �(10. The townhome units in Phase Two part of the project have been changed from a fee simple to a condominium/townhome approach. This should resolve the apparent problems that would occur if these units were sold fee simple. Sheet No. 2 of the resubmittal reflects the changes that would occur. 11. The 8'-6" width for each parking space has been approved by all parties involved. The lengths of the parking stalls have been shown on the re - submittal. They are 19' in which a 2' overhang onto the greenspace has been provided. 12. As is shown on the submittal of the original plat drawings attached at the end of the replat drawings, the bowling area has two loading zones and the restaurant one loading zone. 13. The setbacks, building envelopes and dimensions for Phase One and Phase Four are shown on the original P.U.D. approved drawings. These again have been submitted with the replat resubmittal at the end of the draw- ing package. 14. Building envelopes have been designated for the tennis courts and the shelter. City of Fort Collins Planning Department May 12, 1980 Page Three 15. As indicated on Sheet No. 2 of the resubmittal, all fence locations will fall within the property lines of the appropriate phases as indicated by note on Sheet No. 2. 16. As a result of the sales approach change for the Phase Two townhomes, the building envelopes have been revised as indicated on Sheet No. 2. This will then include enough land to include the rear decks and stairs of the townhomes within the building envelopes. 17. All portions of all structures within Phase One, Phase Two and Phase Three are within 150' of fire equipment access points. Because all ! --buildings in Ph s�--_Four will be s ri nkl ed�, they need _n.Q_t_,_be- within the 150' des a er fire equipmet'rt"'access. 18. Elevations for the patio homes will not be submitted at this time. As we understand it, these items can be deleted from the initial P.U.D. re - plat submission or any P.U.D. submission if the developer agrees to fur- nish this information during the preliminary design phase of the build- ings after the P.U.D. has been approved. This is our intention. 19. As was discussed with the Planning Department, access to the greenspace from Windmill Drive by means of hard surface will be provided between the greenspace and the Phase Three parking area. This hard surface access will then help to provide better access to the greenspace for residential area and to the commercial area from the residential area. 20. Landscaping has been intensified as was discussed with the Planning Department. Specifically, additional landscaping has been provided on the north side of the tennis courts to the west of the townhomes, and to the south of Marathon Court between the separation of the townhome and commercial area. 21. Motorcycle and handicapped parking spaces will be provided in Phase Four as well as in Phase Three. It is our understanding that specific motor- cycle parking need not be provided as long as the adequate number of parking stalls is provided in the Phase Three condominium/apartment area. Bicycle parking will be provided within the building envelope of the Phase Three area. The exact location will be determined at a later date. 22. The Phase Three condominium/apartment area has been redesigned so that the units cluster around open space as was suggested by the Planning Department. 23. Larsen & .Associates has never seen or been aware that there was an origi- nal design for the commercial building in Phase Two. In lieu of that, we would suggest that the Phase Two building be designed in keeping with the overall design theme of the entire P.U.D. There should be a basic over- riding design theme for the entire area with each area to have its own special design features within a common overall theme. n ONALD C. MCLAUGHLIN t KCNNCTH R. WRIGHT HALFORO E. ERICKSON DOUGLAS T. SOVERN JOHN T. MCLANC WILLIAM C. TAGGART THOMAS W. MORRIS JIMMIE O. WHITFIELD WRIGHT-Mc LAUGHLIN ENGINEEF ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER. COLORADO 60211 13031 A58-6201 wSPrN O-Cr STEAM90AT OPPICE . D. .ou 102■ P. o. Bolt 5220 ASPKN, COLORADO 11.11 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE. COLORADO...., April 19, 1977 Mr. William C. Stover, Attorney United Bank Building Suite 315 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Mr. Stover: COMPLETE ENGINCCRING SERVICES' IN THE SPECIALTY FIELDS OF WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION WATER AND SEWAGE TREATMENT SEWAGE COLLECTION AND REUSE INDUSTRIAL WASTES STORM DRAINAGE FLOOD CONTROL AND ' OTHER WATER -ORIENTED PROJECTS DILLON LANK OPrICK PRISCo, COLORADO 10.43 RE: Foothills Park Subdivision We have completed our analysis of the drainage plan for the Foothills Park Subdivision, Fort Collins, Colorado. The drainage plan proposes to provide: a detention pond located in the northeastern corner of the development. This pond is designed to hold the excess stormrunoff from the development over what would have occurred in the natural state for the 100-year event. These waters would then be discharged at approxi- mately the: historic 25-year rate to the New Mercer Ditch. According to the letter from Donald M. Parsons of December 17, 1976, to Drexel, Barrel & Company, attached, "It has been the City's (Fort Collins) policy to require that the increased stormwater runoff gener- ated by a 50-year storm frequency be retained on -site. The discharge rate from the retention pond shall be equal to the runoff of a 2-year. storm frequnecy prior to development." Mr. Parsons' letter states that.- -using --this criteria, 72,690 cubic feet of runoff be retained on -site and released _at- a__rate of 10.8 cfs. The engineer for the Foothills P'ael used these figures for-the-si-zing of--the-pond and its outlet.. However, they then pointed out that they calculated the 10.8 cfs rate to be approximately the historic 25-year rate. As such, the sizing of the pond appears to not meet the before -quoted policy of -the City of For t___Collins. The engineers also pointed out that they -calculated that 59,549_cubic feet of storage would be required to retain the increased runoff generated by a 100-year event if the water were re- leased at the historic 100-year rate. As discussed in our letter to you of January 6, 1977,.on:"Water Qual-ity- and Irrigation Ditches," we would recommend that no runoff waters from subdivisions be allowed to be discharged into irrigation ditches; espec- ially since your study has not been completed for the formulation of goals, objectives, policy, and general criteria for urban storm runoff discharge to irrigation ditches. City of Fort Collins Planning Department May 12, 1980 Page Four 24. The developer will contact Barry Selberg at Transfort to see if a bus stop is desirable on Horsetooth Road. As was suggested by the planning staff and agreed with Larsen & Associates, included in the resubmittal of the Cunningham Corner replat, the original approved P.U.D. drawings for Cunningham Corner are included at the end of the replat drawings. The original Cunningham Corner P.U.D. drawings have been highlighted so that the parts of the P.U.D. that are not part of the replat are obvious. This is our understanding of the items discussed, decisions reached and action taken as a result of the above mentioned meetings. If you have any additions, deletions or modifications, please notify this office immediately. Sincerely, Leonard P. ,Szopi'nski Project Manager LPS : j rb enclosures cc: Larry Stanton Trinity Financial Services FI �. b ...._ ,. _ - (.IIYOf I(Ill(()IIIN) _ 2 P.O. Box �$0, Fort Collins,Colis, Culorado _ M1 b0�22 Ph 303 484-1.20 Ext. 7�� ENGINEERING DIVISION May 15, 1980 Mr. Lenn Szopinski Randall E. Larsen & Associates, P.C. Savings Building, Suite 440 Fort Collins, Colorado Dear Mr. Szopinski: t� Thank you for the conference report on Cunningham Corner Replat dated May 8, 1980. I find no disagreement with paragraphs 1 through 3. However, in paragraph 4, please be advised that the 24' you refer to for public street is flowline to flowline width only and does not constitute the required right-of-way dedication. This right-of-way requirement would include the paving plus curb, gutter and sidewalk, where required, plus a reasonable dedication beyond the curb and/or sidewalk for public maintenance. (Easements would begin at the right-of-way, of course.) Again, thank you for your report and the opportunity to respond. Sincerely, Maurice E. Rupel, P.E. & L.S. Assistant City Engineer - Development cc: Sherry Albertson -Clark, Planning RANDALL E. LARSEN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. ' MEMBER AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS CONFERENCE REPORT PROJECT: Cunningham Corner Replat JOB NO: 7950 RP PARTICIPANTS: Sherry Albertson -Clark DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 1980 Curt Smith Josh Richardson PLACE OF MEETING: City of Fort Eldon Ward Collins Planning Department Leonard Szopinski Conference Room The purpose of this meeting was to review some items that have come up since the Planning and Zoning Board's approval of the revised replat proposal of 9.5 dwell ing units per acre. The following items were discussed and decisions reached. 1. We briefly reviewed the problems with the intersection of Horsetooth Road and Windmill Drive. After discussing with Josh and Eldon, it was decided that Eldon would take the main entrance of the Park West Development and move it approximately 200' north. What he essentially is doing is closing off the original main entrance and opening up the next street to a main en- trance. This then would put the second entrance for the condominium area on Cunningham Corner directly across from the main entrance for the Park West Development. Josh said then if everybody was in agreement with this proposal that our main entrance for Cunningham Corner would be okay as it had been drawn. Along with this, Josh stated that since originally it was agreed that 100' distance between Horsetooth Road and our main entrance was approved, the Engineering Department would allow this to continue to be that way„ However, Josh said that the Engineering Department in future submittals for any project will be looking more closely at the traffic patterns„ the back-up potential at an intersection, etc., and will make a decision earlier in a project concerning entrances to a development off an arterial street. 2. Curt and Sherry and I discussed the arrangement of the centered grouping of condominiums. After doing some sketching and discussing, Curt and Sherry essentially said that if we moved the condominium that was on Windmill Drive further west and rearranged the remaining three condominiums such that there would be a little pocket of open space among them, that this would be accep- table to them. This type of arrangement would still open up more greenspace between the condominiums, townhouses and commercial space and is a good compromise arrangement. This will provide pocket space for the condomin- iums and a larger greenspace for the whole development. SUITE 440, SAVINGS BUILDING OAK AT HOWES FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 (303) 484-0126 Conference Report Cunningham Corner Replat August 5, 1980 Page Two This is our interpretation of the items discussed and decisions reached. If you have any additions, deletions or modifications to the above, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Leonard P. zopinski Project Manager, cc: Louis L. Roeder Les Kaplan Rick Ensdorff l2- � MEMORANDUM To: File From: James 1R. Dubler, P.E Date: August 10, 1983 Subject: Cunningham Corner Conference Menu ]Cno U, - IARa►MM STANTON & TAGOG caesut W. ours Job Number: 280-019 Bob Scherm erling and I visited the Fort Collins City offices this morning and resolved the following: 1. Mgt with Mauri Rupel and decided: a. It would be acceptable to treat Phase I comprising areas E and H as a replat. b. Area H would be platted only to what will later become the east R.O.W. line of Windmill Drive extended north to Woodwest Subdivision. C. The R.O.W. adjacent to Area H (i.e. the retention area) on the south will not be paved at this time. 2. in conversation with Mauri, Dan Bunting and Tom Hays, it was agreed that it would be to the advantage of all to pursue Horsetooth Road paving through formation of a paving district. Efforts will be made by the Cunningham Corner developer, with appropriate assistance from the City, to revive this idea. Accordingly, design plans for Horsetooth Road adjacent to Area E of Cunningham Corner will not be required for the September 5 Final Submittal. cc: Metcalf Ltd. City of Fort Collins Mauri Rupel vs)= Hays Dan Bunting CITY OF' FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING SERVICES January 22, 1985 Mrs. Suzanne C. Bassinger Taranto, Stanton & Tagge 740 Whalers Way Building D Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Re: Cunningham Corners - Shields Street Design Dear Suzanne: Thank you for your letter of January 9, 1985 outlining your concerns for our requirement for eight (8) foot wide bike paths off the street and, more particularly, the relatively flat curves where these paths leave the street travelway and again re-enter the street at grade. I have shown ;your letter to Mr. Josh Richardson of our Transportation Department, Messrs. H.R. Phillips and Randy Balok of our Parks and Recreation Department, Mr. Tom Hays, City Engineer, and Mr. Mike Herzig, Assistant City Engineer - Projects. Every person I have talked to with the City, shares your concern for the possibility of auto traffic either accidentally or mischievously using the bike path. However, contrary to your statement in your letter, our off-street bike path system is eight (8) feet in width and we have not experienced thus far, this problem. All persons contacted feel we need to standardize our bike path system in order to make the maintenance of the bike paths economically feasible. We simply cannot afford to have several different width bike paths requiring several different types and pieces of equipment to keep the paths clean and open. Suzanne C. Bassinger January 22, 1985 Page Two After much deliberation, the City's staff concurs that the eight (8) foot bike path is needed and should be used when leaving the travel lanes on Shields Street. We hope that with intensive signing and traffic striping, we can lessen the potential hazard your letter identifies. Thank you for your concern. Sincerely, Maurice E. Rupel, P.E. & L.S. SID Coordinator cc: Tom Hays H.R. Phillips Bob Lee Mike Herzig Josh Richardson Randy Balok CITY OF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING SERVICES May 14, 1985 Mr. William C. Stover, Esq. 110 East Oak, Suite 220 Fort Collins, Colorado Re: Cunningham Corners SID #82 Dear Bill: Thank you for your letter of May 1, 1985 revealing your concerns for the placement of sidewalks adjacent to Shields Street and Horsetooth Road in your Planned Unit Development, Williamsburg P.U.D. I purposely delayed answering your letter so as to take the item to the Conceptual Review Committee and to allow you time to return to Fort Collins from your winter in California. The committee„ composed of a member from each department of the City which reviews subdivision and P.U.D. plans, was given a copy of your letter and I presented your concerns. They expressed disagreement with your suggestion to move the sidewalk to the curb for the full length of Horsetooth Road. Their reasons were several, however, two stand out, i.e. the separated sidewalk provides a separation of pedestrian and high-speed (designed for 50 mph) automotive traffic and the landscaped median provides a space for stacking snow during snow removal operations. The committee did not agree with your analysis of the maintenance of these landscaped "streetscapes" along arterials and pointed out several P.U.D.'s which are currently being maintained nicely by the homeowners' associations. The streetscape will be planted to trees and low maintenance shrubs and grasses. If the homeowner's association desires more maintenance prone grass then they may do so if they agree to maintain it. The City has taken the position that low maintenance grasses should be used unless or until the permanent homeowner's association is established. E NC,INFERMC ;FRVICFS 90522 221 80�� Mr. William C. Stover May 14, 1985 Page Two Horsetooth Road from College to Shields is nearing completion now and you can observe the type and amount of landscaping we recommend in this streetscape area. The only reason we allowed the seven -foot sidewalk along Shields is the fact that the street had to be moved westward to preserve the trees along the east side thereby reducing the available right- of-way for our normal sidewalk-streetscape design. Bill, please contact me when you return and, if you are still of strong conviction on this matter, I will be glad to steer you to the people you need to convince. Glad to have you back! Sincerely, Maurice E. Rupel SID Coordinator cc: Joe Frank, Planning Suzanne Bassinger, TS&T CITY OF= FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. PLANNING DIVISION January 28, 1986 Mr. Tom Sibbald 3565 Windmill Drive N-4 Fort Collins, CO 80526 Dear P1r. Sibbald: This is the letter I promised to confirm what was discussed at our meeting with Joe Frank and the Fishers on January 21, 1986. Basically what was agreed was; 1). Mr. Sibbald would be responsible for all paper work involved in transfering the property from the Schroeders to the Fishers. 2). All existing improvements will be removed by Mr. Sibbald and the ground graded according to the approved plans on file in the City Engineer's Office. Mr. Sibbald would also install the curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to Gunnison Drive. 3). The Fishers are to present to Mr. Sibbald estimates to relocate and enlarge their fence to enclose the newly acquired area. He agreed to participate in 50% of those costs up to approximately $300. 4). Mr. Sibbald would then hydroseed the area. 5). Mr. Sibbald would also install the bikepath and the adjacent landscaping and perpetually maintain the bikepath and the adjacent landscaping between the fences. Joe Frank is to meet with the City Arborist to determine suitable landscaping for the area to be maintained by Cunningham Corners. We will let you know what the results are. I need from you now an updated map (8.5"xll") and legal description showing the waterline easement, the bikepath easement, and the utility easement adjacent to Gunnison Drive. I will call Mike Carver at TS&T with this request. Yours truly, Bonnie Tripoli Development Coordinator OFFICE OF COMMUNITY T DEVFI OPMENT. PLANNING DIVISION 300 LaPorte Ave. • P O. Box 580 • Fort Collins. Colorado 80522 • (303)221-6750 / Mr. Will C. Stover April 1 AP 9, 1977 Attorney at Law Page 2 We realize that the ditch company is trying to work in harmony with adjacent landowners, and therefore like to offer the following comments on .the sub- mitted drainage plan: 1. The outlet from the pond should have the capability of variable discharge rates. 2. All riprap should be constructed with a'minimum of 6 inches of appropriate bedding material. 3. All riprap should be 12-inch median diameter or larger. 4. The outlet from the pond should be fitted with a debris trap. .Ifyou have any questions in regards to this matter, please feel -free to .contact us. Very truly yours,' WRIGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEERS By David J. Love DJL:ekb Encl. .CC: Louis Swift _752- 32.2 D CITY OF FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. PLANNING DIVISION February 7, 1986 Mr. Tom Sibbald 3565 Windmill Dr. N-4 Fort Collins, CO 80526 Dear Tom: Attached is a copy of the landscape plan proposed by Joe Frank and the City Arborist, Tim Buchannan. Please direct any comments regarding the plan to Joe. In the next few weeks, I will be putting together an agreement for your signature regarding the perpetual maintenance of the bikepath by Metcalf Ltd. and its successors. Thank you for your cooperation in the handling of the vacation of Windmill Drive. It will be going to Council for first reading on March 18, 1986. Yours truly, Bonnie Tripoli Development Coordinator z OFFICE OF COMMUNITY 300 LaPorte Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins. Colorado 80522 (303) 221-6750 DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING DIVISION ENGINEERING DEPT. NOTE: THIS REPRESENTS THE BEST QUALITY IMAGE POSSIBLE TAKEN FROM VERY POOR QUALITY ORIGINALS 5 MADE Hamel 10 C- u's 7 MA c V, PC -fi, 0 0 4 N -x July 31, 1986 Mr. Mick Mercer Stormwater Utility Department City of Ft. Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Re: Credit Transferability Dear Mr. Mercer: Please :be advised that as stated in our recent con- versations, :Metcalf, Ltd. is the developer of all of the Cunningham Corner residential parcels, and that as such, we ask the City to transfer the credits due us from your department, :between any of the parcels as needed. The current credit in question was earned on the Five Oaks Village site. We desire the application of the credit to either Five Oaks Village or Chestnut Village as demand warrants. In the unlikely event of selling these parcels to different owners, we would request that any remaining credit on any parcel stay where it was originally earned. Thank you for your help with this matter. Sincerely, 9 Thomas R. Sibbald President, Sibbald/Lustig Co. General Partner of Metcalf, Ltd. yr:nJmili i `d 4 ( A) ?;kYS; O CITY OF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING SERVICES August 18, 1966 Ms. Suzanne Bassinger Taranto, Stanton & Tagge 748 Whalers Way Fort Collins, Colorado Re: Cunningham Corners SID #82 Dear Suzanne: As specified in the Special Improvements District Manual of the City of Fort Collins, this letter is issued to accept the public improvements for Cunningham Corners S.I.D. #82. A final inspection of this District has been made by the SID Coordinator and the Construction Manager and all corrections have been completed. As of the date of this letter, the public improvements are hereby accepted by the City pending normal warranty periods. Accepting these improvements does not relieve any developer of the responsibility to repair damage caused by his home building operation. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 221-6605. Sincerely, Gary 6iede Acting Director of Community Development Services cc: Metcalf, Ltd. c/o Sibbald/Lustig Company William C. Stover Lucia Liley ENGINEERING SERVICES 300 LaPorte Ave. P O Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221-6605 Utility Services Water & Wastewater City of Fort Collins September 30, 1993 Brian Shear, P.E. Shear Engineering; Corporation 4836 So. College Ave.; Suite 12 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Re: Rose Tree Village at Cunningham Corner Dear Brian: 1 have reviewed the request you recently made concerning the above referenced development. The first request in your letter of September 15, was to be allowed to use plastic pressure pipe for water main construction. We currently allow the use of PVC water pipe whenever soil tests show a need due to high corrosiveness of the soil. We are, however, in the midst of reviewing our Standard Construction Specifications for Water Mains, and are considering the use of PVC pipe as a part of this review. We have several concerns regarding this change and believe it may be advantageous to employ a few projects as test sites. Therefore, we are willing to allow the developer of the Rose Tree Village development to use PVC, water pipe, if he will agree to certain requirements which will eventually be incorporated into the revised construction specifications. These requirements are as follows: 1. All PVC water pipe must be Class 200, with a dimension ratio of 18 (DR 18). 2. A tracer wire must be buried directly with the pipe. The wire will be a standard 12 gauge solid wire, and will be attached to each section of pipe with black electrical tape. This tape must completely encircle the pipe. The tracer wire will be brought to the surface inside every valve box but should not be attached to the valve box. A minimum of 6-inches of extra wire should be looped inside the valve box at ground level. The: plans which you have submitted call for Rose Tree Village's water system to connect to existing 8-inch stubs near the 7-11 store on the south and Richmond Drive on the north. The tracer wire must extend to the existing valves at these stubs. 3. All water service connections (2-inches and smaller) must be made with a tapping saddle. Direct taps will not be allowed. P.O. BOX 5iSO • Dort Collins, CO 80t 22-05S0 • I'W) 221-60(1�1 4. The Design Engineer must prepare and submit detailed "as -constructed" utility drawings for the entire development. These drawings must include ties from the water main to the flow line of the adjacent curb and gutter. Since the curb and gutter will not be in place when the water main is installed, it will be necessary to tie the pipe to adjacent property corners during construction, and then tranfer these measurements to the curb and gutter after it is installed. The second request in your letter was to allow the use of 6-inch water pipe within the development, rather than 8-inch. if you submit documentation proving that 6-inch pipe will provide adequate domestic and irrigation flows, using a peak hour static water pressure of 35 psi at the main, and that 6-inch pipe will provide minimum fire flows during peak day conditions, we will approve the use of the smaller diameter pipe. In addition to the ability of the pipe to provide adequate flows, I am particularly interested in the velocities that will be generated in the smaller pipe. Your third, and last, request was to allow 6-inch sewer service connections to 8-inch mains without the use of a manhole. This is acceptable, if the developer agrees to make these connections with the use of tee or wye fittings, rather than direct taps. We have not allowed 6-inch services to be tapped directly to an 8-inch main because after the tap is completed, there is not sufficient material left at the top and bottom of the 8-inch pipe to maintain the integrity of the connection. I hope that this adequately addresses your concerns and requests. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call me at 221-6681. Sincerely, w1 � T.11ko. Mark Taylor, P.E. Civil Engineer 11 cc: Shields Street Corporation Vaught -Frye Architects Kerrie Ashbeck, City of Fort Collins Planning Department Dave Stringer, City of Fort Collins Engineering Department STOVER, BRANDES be FARRINGTON ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROBERTSON BUILDING -SUITE 220 110 EAST OAK STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 WILLIAM C. STOVER P.O. BOX 523 ROBERT, W. BRANDES,JR. 482-3664 DARRYL L. FARRINGTON AREA CODE 303 August 17, 1979 Wright-KcLaughiia Sagiaeers 2420 Alcott street Denver, Colorado _SV 11 Rgs Cunningham Corners g . U . 0�.. 1° r Gentlemen: on August 190 1979 we received your statement, dated July 31, 1979, for services rendered The U*w Mercer bitch Company in connection with Cunningham Corners F.U.D. We have not had the benefit of seeing any of your work in writing on this matter, and the Board, therefore, has nothing upon which to make its decision. Very truly yours, C. Sve1r, Secretary MC81s1 analosure cat Mr. Louis F. Swift Taranto, Stanton i Tagge Mr. Maurice Rup*l, City Engine or * s Office U `l l - o-�, TARAMM S MIWGN & TAGGE City of Fort Department o:E 300 La Porte Fort Collins,, Collins Engineering Avenue Colorado 80522 Attention: Mr. Maury Rupel,. Dear Maury, /,--5--,y December 3, 1979 Re: Drainage Improvements for the Cunningham Corner Planned: C41,4e it DeveTopment"""'�" Per our conversation this morning, I am sending this letter to request that some action be taken by the city to insure completion of proposed drainage improvements in the Foothills Park Subdivision. Foothills Park Subdivision is located directly east of the proposed Cunningham Corner Development. The drainage plan for Cunningham Corner revolves around the capability of discharging storm water runoff into the proposed drainage improvements in Foothills Park. As Cunningham Corners will be developed in the spring of this year, we would appreciate seeing some type of improvements being made in the Foothills Park area. If you have any questions on this item please do not hesitate to contact our office. If you feel that a site inspection and plan inspection of the necessary improvements would be beneficial, please let me know and we'll arrange time to get together. Very Truly Yours, Larry E. Stanton, P.E. TARANTO, STANTON & TAGGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS LES:gs cc: Mr. Gil E:llerby 1520 EAST MULBERRY / SUITE 200 / FORT COLLINS / COLO. 80524 / PHONE (303) 226-0557 112 WEST 11th AVENUE / HOLDREGE / NEBRASKA 68949 / PHONE (308) 995-6677 .<IGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEER 1, �•.A.;I .- V,.l AjG11l IN CONSULTANTS R ;vRIa"T ENGINEERING 4 1 W) F i RI(,KSON 2420 ALCOTT STREET I7 J'J',I AST SOVE RN A lAM C. ':�GGART DENVER COLORA DO 80211 `•A JID I LOVE .303 458-6201 R ,'t RT L CARLEY JOIN T MCLANE P A.LD 9 CLONINGER GE r.'E. A 9DRRELL December 4 1979 JAVES B FLOOD � V.'— LY KENDALL M r,HAEL E MERCER jo, VIE D WHITFIELD R''�EERT A FERGUSON J HAROLD ROBERTS A-K h STEINMEYER LEANDER L URMY Mr. William C. Stover Attorney -at -Law Robertson Building, Suite 220 110 Oak Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Dear Mr. Stover: '.r,•;P:FTF E.NG'NEFRING SFRVICFb ud THE 4PEGALTY FIELDS OF WATER SUPPLI AND DISTPIRIJTION WATER AND SEWAGE TREATMENT SEWAGE COLLECTION AND REUSE STORM DRAINAGE FIRE PROTECTION FLOOD CONTROL OTHER WATERORIENTEDPROjEC-S '.Re: Cunningham Corner P.U.D. and Wagon Wheel Subdivision Drainage Plan Review We have reviewed the drainage plans as submitted to the New Mercer Ditch Com- pany for the above named residential developments. The Flagon Wheel Sub- division is located west of Shields Street, north of Horsetooth Road. The subdivision is tributary to Woodwest 7th Filing and to Cunningham Corner, both located east of Shields Street. WAGON WHEEL SUBDIVISION The Wagon Wheel Subdivision has been subdivided into two drainage basin areas. Storm runoff from the northern portion of the Subdivision will be collected in a 17.22 acre-foot capacity detention pond located in the northeast corner of the property. Water will be discharged at 15 cfs, directly to the proposed Bar Tran Outfall, a 28-inch by 32-inch RCP, slated for construction in July 1980. Runoff from the south basin, will be stored in a 7.96 acre-foot capacity de- tention pond in the southeast property corner. Water will be discharged at 7.31 cfs to an 18-inch RCP which crosses Shields Street and continues to a concrete lined tapezoidal channel which parallels the north property line at the top of the north bank of the detention pond. This channel will intersect with the discharge channel from the detention pond for the Cunningham Corner P.U.D. at their northeast property corner. CUNNINGHAM CORNER The detention volume of 253,143 cubic feet for the Cunningham Corner P.U.D. is acceptable. The discharge from the pond has been calculated at 9.31 cfs, the two year historic rate from the development. BRANCH OFFICES G,ENW000 SPRINGS STEAMBOAT SPRINGS ASPEN DILLON LAKE PO BOX 1286 PO BOX5220 CHEYENNE 0241 VL NTNOR AVENUE !� DRAWER B G_ENW00D SPRINGS. STEAMBOAT VILLAGE. 3228 LOCUST DRIVE ASPEN C,ULORADO 91611 FRISCO COLORADO 80443 COLORADO 81601 COL ORADO 80499 CHEYEN:%E. Wt ONA,NG 82?-' Mr. William C. Stovei December 4, 1979 Page Two When developed, runoff from the land between Foothills Park Subdivision and Cunningham Corner Subdivision should be directed to the Cunningham Corner de- tention pond. The report estimates that this will require an additional 52,191 cubic feet of storage volume. This is an estimated volume and would need further evaluation depending upon the type of land developments. COMBINED DISCHARGE The discharge, 7.31 cfs from the Wagon Wheel Subdivision and 9.31 cfs from the Cunningham Corner P.U.D., continues 320 feet in the concrete lined channel to the west property line of Foothills Park. The channel for "...Foothills Park has been constructed and it is understood that the City will insure this chan- nel will be installed oy the owners of Foothills Park Subdivision so as to in- sure the continuity of this drainage channel." Additionally, we feel that the City should insure the continuity and adequacy of the Foothills Park detention pond. We have enclosed a copy of the Foothills Park drainage plan review, dated April 19, 1977. The discharge from the Foothills Park Subdivision has been proposed to dis- charge at 10.8 cfs directly to the New Mercer Canal. SUMMARY The pond volumes and discharge rates from both the Wagon Wheel and Cunningham Corner Subdivisions are acceptable. A construction phasing of these improve- ments to the New Mercer Canal must be developed so as to assure complete drainage continuity before, during, and after construction of each subdivi- sion. The detention ponds should be planted with grasses to reduce the sedi- ment loading to the ditch. The outlet works from each pond should be ripraped sufficiently to prevent scour and erosion. It is further advised that the City insure the adequacy of the Foothills Park pond based on the April, 1977 letter enclosed. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEERS MAB:pr 752-32.2M cc: Louis Swift / Maurice Rupel✓ CITY OF FORT COLLINS P.O. BOX 580, FORT COLLINS COLORADO 80522 PH (303) 484-4220 ENGINEERING DIVISION EXT. 728 January 31, 1980 rir. Glen Larson James Street Builders P.O. Box 1246 Fort Collins, Colorado Re: Cunningham Corner Dear Glen: This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation of January 30, 1980 regarding a building permit for a proposed bowling alley on Lot 1 in the Cunningham Corner subdivision. A hermit will be issued when the fire hvdrant is installed and is serviceable at Station 6+54 along Horsetooth }mad with adequate access into the construction site. By adequate, I am referring to a roadwav constructed with compacted subgrade and base course material not less than 20 feet wide with at least 4 inches of base course material. The last requirement being that the sanitary sewer service is not connected to the sanitary main until such time as the main has been inspected and approved by the City Construction Inspection Department. If you have anv questions, please feel free to call me. Yours truly, Dave Stringer Chief Construction Inspector cc: Mauri Rupel Pod Albers "FALniftlynm STANTON & TIMGGE CX)FMKMM EI UNEEM February 7, 1980 Re: Cunningham Corner Drainage Plan City of Fort: Collins 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Attn: Mr. Marc Engoemen Dear Marc: This letter is written to recap our recent conversations concerning the Drainage Plan for the Cunningham Corner Planned Unit. Development. As we discussed, Cunningham Corner.P.U.D. which was approved last June, was designed to accomodate drainage flows from the Melody Homes development. This develop- ment is located west of Shields Street directly across from Cunningham Corner. All storm water from Cunningham and Melody Homes was to be routed through Foothills Park and then discharged to the New Mercer Canal. During the past week it was brought to our attention that Melody Homes was changing its plans and had decided to route all its drainage flows to the North, thereby bypassing Cunningham Corner. In meeting with Mr. Dave Oyler of Melody Homes, it eras determined that these changes had been facilitated in response to the statement by the New Mercer Ditch Board that they would not accept any storm drainage flows from Melody's prop- erty into the ditch. This recommendation was made by'the Ditch Board even though their consulting engineers had recommended approval of the Drainage Plan prepared by Melody. 1520 EAST MULBERRY / SUITE 200 / FORT COLLINS / COLO. 80524 / PHONE (303) 226-0557 112 WEST 11th AVENUE / HOLDREGE / NEBRASKA 68949 / PHONE (308) 995-6677