The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutK2 INDUSTRIAL PARK PUD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-11PRO C:n ��c Fort Cati:,.> `,lay 1 t . 200,1 TO: EIS<tyineerino PROJECT: #51-91C K-2 INDUSTRIAL PARK LOT 1 — JB EXCAVATION - PDP — TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: June 13, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference �G�� , 1 WJ � / �� _L� � �� LA I�.jjYFty{�i... G4 � E�P - �`w'`_ 'Y G`J•�c � J'1�.��M'2 �3....r �;' �. l/ o✓{':,i_n; _cSi II..L.�-to,..Y�Qo {2) l.C.`J� --� � '�v �`-�. �� StwuPl.�ed J 4-ke Cow Fy. WeihaoL Gne/ors.( ad./...( rc 30' JO..blrJ. AccaJr le .i flj,.k iti, tccul V&4 a S+rre1- ^��/Y-� f �,` 14.E N �1 4 J 1 17 /l i /4l• Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS -, —' _Plat `Site _Drainage Report Other soft _-Utility —1re-ciline Utility =Landscape city of Foe conies ❑ Show centerlines of streets. ❑ The frontage road Right -Of -Way lines are not clear. Is the one shown actually the centerline? If not, where is the centerline located? ❑ Are there any easements on the west and south edge of the property`? If not, will need ,�Z`o dedicate additional ROW for future improvements. fhe 30' public access right-of-way shown is actually road right-of-way. This road must be brought up to current standards or money can be escrowed for future construction. Redesign the parking lot to meet current LCUASS. Parking lot setbacks are based on ADT's of the Traffic Impact Study. OR build it as shown agreeing to redesign and reconstruct the parking lot at your expense and according to current standards at such time the road on the south side of the lot is brought up to code. If you choose this option, then we would need a Development Agreement stating the above conditions. Provide sidewalk improvements for the frontage road. ❑ Updatc all details on Detail Sheet to current LCUASS details (Cross -pans, access ramps, curb and gutter, & sidewalks). ❑ Dimension all sidewalks. Show existing driveway locations of neighboring properties, labeled & dimensioned. Show existing features adjacent to this development in a ghosted or alternate line weight for a minimum of 150' beyond the project limits. ❑ Show general location of signs. ❑ All manhole locations, valves, curb stops, meter pits, etc, need to be dimensioned from the centerline of the roadway. Size and label all manholes. ❑ Intersections must show construction and lane details for new and existing facilities for a minimum of 150' beyond the limits of construction. Li Project Comments Sheet +„ Selected Departments City of Fort Collins mmmft�m Current Planning DATE: August 21, 2001 PROJECT: K-2 INDUSTRIAL PARK - JB EXCAVATION, #51-91C All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: August 15, 2001 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Dept: Engineering 22 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Is the TIS memo acceptable to Eric Bracke? If so, need documentation. 23 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Complete and submit the Checklist in Appendix E-4. 25 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Cover Sheet: Add preamble title of "Utility Plans for...." 26 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Cover Sheet: Add the legal description below the project name. 27 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Cover Sheet: Minimum size for the Vicinity Map is 10" x 10" and to a scale of 1"=1000-11500'. Zoom in on the project - see the current LCUASS, chapter 3. 29 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Cover Sheet: Update the current date (month and year) under the legal description. 30 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Cover Sheet Update the General Construction Notes, see attached. 1 of 4 43 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Fill in "done by" information in all title blocks, all sheets. 44 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Provide all existing and proposed ROW, property lines and easements with dimensions. Label on all sheets. 46 Issue Contact: Susan Joy The frontage road Right -Of -Way lines are not clear. Is the one shown actually the centerline? If not, where is the centerline located? 47 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Are there any easements on the west and south edge of the property? If not, will need to dedicate additional ROW for future improvements. 48 Issue Contact Susan Joy The 30' public access right-of-way shown is actually road right-of-way. This road must be brought up to current standards or money can be escrowed for future construction. This can be addressed in the Development Agreement. 49 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Redesign the parking lot to meet current LCUASS. Parking lot setbacks are based on ADT's of the Traffic Impact Study. OR build it as shown agreeing to redesign and reconstruct the parking lot at your expense and according to current standards at such time the road on the south side of the lot is brought up to code. If you choose this option, we would need a Development Agreement stating the above conditions. 51 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Add Detail Sheet and show current LCUASS details (Cross -pans, access ramps, curb and gutter, & sidewalks, etc). 52 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Dimension all sidewalks and reference appropriate detail. 53 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Show existing driveway locations of neighboring properties, labeled & 54 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Show existing features adjacent to this development in a ghosted or alternate line weight for a minimum of 150' beyond the project limits. 55 Issue Contact Susan Joy Show general location of signs. 56 Issue Contact: Susan Joy All manhole locations, valves, curb stops, meter pits, etc, need to be dimensioned from the centerline of the roadway. 3 of 4 57 Size and label all manholes. M Issue Contact: Susan Joy Issue Contact: Susan Joy Landscape Plan: Please show all existing and proposed ROW, property lines and easements with dimensions. St re Da e CHECK HERE F YOU`WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat K Site — Drainage Report _ _ Other A Utility s Redline Utility X Landscape 4 of FLCO Response to staff project review comments dated 8-22-01 Cununuv I -I- Fast Larimcr Count) (FLCO) Water Di'sirict Currerih Pro', ida %eater scrvia: to Lot 1, k 1- Industrial Park troin a 2.5- water line located in the casement runninc north to south along the eastern edge of the site, No trees can he platted within the existing water line casement. The existing 2 S" water line serving the property is not callable of supplying a fire hydrant. Response, Acknowledged Engineering Commem.212' Wr,1Fa2.Fi� -- Response: Comment 23: Response: Commcnt23. Response. Comment Response: Coml Response: CommentJ9' Response: Comment 30: Response: Comment�t. Is the TIS memo acceptable to Eric Bracke? If so, need documentation. Documentation was E-mailed to engineering. Complete and submit the Checklist in Apvndix E-4. Checklist has been submitted. 'TO "l4l Cover Sheet: Add preamble title of "Utility Plans for.. Preamble title has been submitted. Cover Sheet: Add the legal description below the project name. Legal description has been added. Cover Sheet: Minimum size for the Vicinity Map is 10"x10" and to a scale of 1"=1000-1500'. Zoom in on the project - see the current LCUASS, chapter 3. Vicinity Map has been up sized. Cover Sheet: Update the current date (month and year) under the legal description. Date has been updated. Cover Sheet: Update the General Construction Notes, see attached. General Construction notes have been updated. -XW4F, S • — -PC' Cover Sheet: Provide 2 project bench marks referencing the city's datum - this information will be placed inside the General Construction Notes where asked for. Response: Benchmarks have been provided. Comment XCover Sheet: Reference the updated or current soils investigation report. Response: Soils investigation was waved per meeting with Engineering on 9-13-01. Comment 33.' Cover Sheet: Need the following statement annotated on the cover sheet: "I hereby affirm..." Response: Statement has been added. CommentA: Cover Sheet: Provide the names, addresses, phone numbers for the Developer(s) and/or Owner(s). Response: The above items have been added. Comment -/ Cover Sheet: Provide an area of 4"W' on each sheet for the Local Entity to place a stamp of approval. Response: Stamp spaces were discussed and waved at 9-13-01 meeting with engineering. Comment Cover Sheet: Add the Indemnification Statement "These plans have been reviewed...". See Appendix E-4. Response: Indemnification Statement has been added. Comment, Grading Sheet: Add a Signature Block, Response: Signature Block has been added. Comment/: / Grading Sheet: Note #5 on the Plat prohibits more than one access point to Lot i. I lowever, Gloria I lice -Adler with CDOT (970-350-214R) does not feel it necessary to close the aceem point nt Ihis lime. She stored Ihat CDOT will re-evaluate the access and frontage improvements at such time the area develops in the future. Response: Acknowledged Commcnt Grading Sheet Incomplete finish grade elevations shown. Please provide for streets, lot corners, and FF/fop of Foundation of buildings. Response: Above items have been added. Comment I/ Grading Sheet: Add the slatemcnt: "The top of foundation elevations shown..." See the Checklist in Appendix E-4. Response: Statement has been added ConunentX: Grading Sheet: show temporary and long-term erosion control devices and label. Where is the silt fencing going? lZesponse: Erosion control devices have been added. Comment X: Add "Print Date"- all sheets. Response: Print dates have been added. Comment V: Fill in "done by" information in all title blocks, all sheets. Response:/ Comment 43 was discussed and waived at 9-13-01 meeting with engineering. Comment �i Provide all existing and proposed ROW, property lines and easements with , dimensions. Label on all sheets. Response: The above items have been added. Commcnt A15� The frontage road right-of-way lines are not clear. Is the one shown actually the centerline? If not, where is the center line located? lZesponse: Frontage ROW lines have been clarified. If not, Comment,4 / Are there any easements on the west and south edge of the property. will need to dedicate additional ROW for future improvements. Response: Acknowledged Comment �& The 30' public access right -of way shown is actually road right-of-way. This road must be brought up to current standards or money can be escrowed for future construction. This can he addressed in the Development Agreement. Response: Acknowledged Comment gW Redesign the parking lot to meet current LCUASS. Parking lot setbacks are based on ADT's of the Traffic Impact Study. OR build it as shown agreeing to standards at such time the road on the south side of the lot is brought up to code. If you choose this option, we would need a Development Agreement stating the above conditions. lZesponse: I'his will be addressed in the Development Agreement. Comp s7 ts,51-57-were all waived at the 9-13-01 meeting with engineering. Conuneni Landscape Plan: Please show all existing and proposed ROW, property lines and casements with dimensions. RCsponsc: The above items have been added to the Landscape Plan. Natural Resources Commcnt 62: Show buffer around offsite windbreak —If the offsite windbreak is shown on plans the 25' huller that is required by the Land use Code needs to be shown as well. Response: Acknowledged Police Comment 2: Plans do not indicate lighting. Some type of down lighting desirable for north and south entrances. Security lighting for area between buildings_ Response: All lighting described above already exists and has been added to the plans being re -submitted. Comment G 1: Lack of lighting and type of landscape between office and garage will increase potential security problems. Response: Lighting between office and garage already exists and has been added to the plans. Storm Water Comment 20: Erosion control comments: There is silt fencing mentioned in the report but not shown on the plans. Please provide erosion control efficiency calculations as well as escrow cales. Response: Silt fence was installed along the west property line and is still in place. Above calculations have been provided. Flood Plain Comment 21: Please address whether the building improvements will exceed 50% of the value of the current building. If they do, then the Substantial Improvement policy would be applicable. The building would then need to be Iloodproofed. Please confirm in the report that no additional fill will be placed in the floodplain. As previously requested please provide the Ayres report documenting the "no rise" condition with the nest submittal. Response: There are no building improvements planned. No additional fill will be placed in the floodplain. "rhe Ayres report has been submitted. REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: September 26, 2001 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #51-91C K-2 Industrial Park, JB Excavation - Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: October 17, 2001 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** Q £,J uM ems,¢_. i titnQ--x --M � FF�F�—S : t s 02, bC— Ml f HERE IF YOU WISH TO RI Plat Site _ Utility Redline Utility Drainage Report Landscape 3 f 4 6c=,� YoJ G�...� t►1wu�E- -r+iE a fart JJST 0" T (AGF'4' 4-1T Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: October 16, 2001 Project: K-2 INDUSTRIAL PARK - JB EXCAVATION, #51-91C All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: October 17, 2001 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy 64 Cover Sheet: You can include the Plat in the Index, just don't number it. lD l'7 0 Dale CHECK HERE-PF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ —�— Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: November 6, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #51-91C K-2 Industrial Park, JB Excavation - Type I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: November 21, 2001 �j% No Continent 121 Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** f p A mimstre�eanng is scTiedu/e t r a mber'1 b'4� i t Eommen r wd� 6e d scusse�Vo�veinber sand %�b app/scab% "to�fna/' �k assa¢mm t comp/lance submihtal. �t °s# t fir§ I i5 i S ci C,*u`1 7 SLLI. l kaT pT c; �, , �s 1 +ipo'SSW". r I t ue W!3 ot- ro d u,c-ab e- ; v 1OZeK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVIS100ignature:_ _ Plat _ Site Drainage Report _ Other Utility Redline UEV — Landscape Du v t'ce—draS � PROJECT r DAT1:: `,/la_w 16. 2001 TO: Engineerincr Pnvemenl PROJECT: #51-91C K-2 INDUSTRIAL PARK LOT 1 —JB EXCAVATION - PDP — TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: June 13, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference �Cee:4 60)(,Is Ae 4;�--gp -�5 +� ON JIlze s t1*1 5(� e of -f t to `e le. 91 G14— Gl,'6'lL Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS6 JOIN a AM _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other `� _utility _Redline utility _Landscape city of Fart Collins REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: November 6, 2001 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #51-91C K-2 Industrial Park, JB Excavation - Type I (LUC) All comrrtents must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: November 21, 2001 Z— No Comment ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) *"PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** DA0K HERE F YOU WISH TO RI _ Plat _ Site _ Utility Rc&c Utility _ Drainage Report — Landscape January 4, 2002 Ms. Susan Joy City of Fort Collins Engineering Design P.O. Bo x 580 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: K-2 Industrial Park Submitted by Dick Rutherford -Stewart & Associated Dear Ms. Joy: The district has reviewed the proposal for the K-2 Industrial Park and has no comments to offer on the plans as submitted as there is no indication that a sanitary sewer service will be necessary to serve this project as planned. The district stands willing and ready to provide sanitary sewer service when and if requested. Sincere) , Sheri V. Jensen Real Property Management P.O. Box 1518 - 2217 Airway Ave. #3 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Phone (970) 498-0604 • Fax (970) 498-0701 • Email bsd@verinet.com Response and Redline Comments/Questions Planning — Landscape plan Question: Where are the street trees? Answer: In areas where street trees would be required are existing 15 to 25 year old pines. Adding canopy trees would take away from the naturalistic design we are attempting to achieve. There are now only partial views of the mountains looking west where street trees would be required. Adding them now would eliminate any remaining view. Part of the initial design was to preserve a view of the mountains. There is already a high congestion of existing trees, both pine and deciduous, between the frontage road and the first building. All remaining trees for required planting will be of the street tree variety. Planning — Siteplan Question: Gravel surface doesn't comply with section 3.2.2 (P) (3) (d) of the laind use code. Answer: In May 2000 I met with Peter Barnes and the pavement vs. gravel issue was discussed. My concern was that pavement would get torn up the first time a piece of heavy equipment with steel tacks was unloaded and parked. Mr. Barnes asked me how much traffic would be going in and out of the storage yard. I told him that since our heavy equipment stays on jobs or travels from job to job, there would be one trip per day or less in and out with our transport tuck. He said, "with that small amount of vehicular usage, in his opinion, we would not need to change form the washed rock surface to pavement in the storage yard area. Also, there will be no public access to the gravel fenced storage area. Planning — Siteplan Question: What's with this property? Answer: We are in the process of negotiating for the purchase of this property. Presently our proposed project lies in side the existing property lines. Planning — Siteplanes Question: Any fence on the east property line? Answer: There is an existing tree screen east of Fort Collins feed's property lime. I contacted Steve Woodward with Ft. Collins Feed (970) 482- 8001 and he said and I quote "The area from the tree screen to our east property line is a wetland designed to stdre the overflow from the agriculture ditches running through our property." He said the area would never be developed. Given this, it would seem unnecessary to duplicate with another screen along our east property line. Response to comments made at staff project review Issues: Current Planning 3 Conuncnts: This property is presently operating as Colorado Customs RV & Marine Response: Correct 4 Comments: Len I lilderbrand of Excel Energy (Public Service) indicated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. Response: This is good. 5 Comments: A copy of the comments received from Jenny Nuckols of the Zoning Department is attached to this comment letter. Please contact Jenny, at (970) 221-67670, if you have questions about her comments. 1. Comment: Missing sheet L2 of landscape plan — can't do thorough review without it. Response: Sheet L2 along with sheets L 1 and 13 have been re- submitted. 2. Comment: No plat sheet. Please provide one with the basic lot of intbrmation. Site and landscape items should be on their own plans/sheets. Response: The plat sheet has been submitted. 3. Comment: Planning — shouldn't legal description be lot 1, K-2 Ind PK PDP — not PUD. Response: Legal description has PUD. 4. Comment: In the 3' concrete walk raised or flush with the parking lot, if raised, needs an I IC ramp from the I IC space. Response: The concrete walk will be flush with the parking lot. 5. Comment: Provide a bike rack near the entrance to the building. Response: Bike rack has been added. 6. Comment: Remove topo lines from final site and landscape plans. Response: Topo lines have been removed. 7. Comment: Please verify through planning if the gravel drive and storage area lot are acceptable. Ite,ponse: This issue is being addressed with vlannilig with this submittal. 8. Comment: Are the building envelopes or footprints being shown? Show distance to property lines for each building. Response: These items have been added for this submittal. 9. Comment: Need evaluations for both buildings. Response: They have been added. Comments: Rick Lee of the Building Inspection Department stated that a copy of the various codes that the Port Collins building department will enforce is attached to this comment letter. With limited information provided please be aware that the Access Aisle serving the accessible parking space should be a smooth hard surface. This may require that the new walk be increased to 60" and he provided the whole length of the parking space per Section 502.3 of the 1998 ANSI 117.1. Please contact Rick, at (970) 221- 6760, if you have any questions about his comments. Response: A. designated 60" walk the whole length of the parking space has been added with this submittal. There will also be HC pavement markings and I IC sign. Comments: Beth Sowder of the Streets Department indicated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. Response: None Comments: Craig Foreman of the Parks Planning Department indicated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. Response: done 9 Comments: A, copy of a letter from Mayo Sommermeyer of the Larimer & Weld Irrigation Company is attached to this comment letter. Response: Acknowledged 10 Comments: Copies ol' the Water Conservation Standards for Landscapes — COMMIXF SI IEET and General Information received from Laurie D'Audney, the City's Utility Education Specialist, is attached to this letter. Response: Both compliance standards marked by Laurie D'Audney on her comment sheet, do appear on sheet L3 of the landscape plan. We do not plan any improvements to the existing buildings at this time, other than paint. Fxterior colors will be very similar to those used on the exterior of the near by Anhueser Busch plant. No work or maintenance will occur in the fienced area, only storage. Il Comments: Alan Rutz of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: A. The applicant will be required to obtain a permit from the affected ditch company to cross the Larimer & Weld Canal. B. The applicant will also be required to obtain easements from the Larimcr & Weld Irrigation Company for electric line extension to the project site. C. Coordinate transformer location(s) and power requirements with Light & Power. D. Due to the location of this site and easement & permit requirements, please contact Light & Power as soon as possible. Please Contact Alan, at 224-6153, if you have questions about these comments. Response: Comments are acknowledged 12 Comments: Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Eire Authority has indicated the PEA has no comments due to no new structures with this project. Response: None 13 Comments: VV. Dean Smith of the Boxelder Sanitation District indicated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. Response: None 14 Comments: Webb Jones of the East Larimer County (ELCO) Water District offered the lidlowing Comments: A. ELCO currently provides water service to Lot 1, K-2 Industrial Park from a 2 '/2" water line located in the easement shown on the Site Plan. The existing 2 %" water line serving the property is not capable of supplying a fire hydrant. 11. ELCO has a 6" water line in county Road 48 and a 24" water line on the north side of the Larimer & Weld Canal, approximately '/4 mile north of the site. Please contact Webb at the water district if you have questions about these comments. Response: Comments are acknowledged 15 Comments: Doug Moore of the Natural Resources Department indicated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. Response: None 16 Comments: Gayl,ene Rossiter ofTransfort has indicated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. Response: None 17 Comments: Nlark Jackson of the Transportation Planning Department offered the Billowing comments: A. Provide bike parking near the main entrance to the building. R. Contact the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Access Management staff to discuss access issues/requirements off of the frontage road system. C. Transportation Planning would recommend that the applicant contact Ken Waido of The City's Advance Planning Department to get information on the I-25 Corridor Subarea Plan and how or if it might affect this property in the future Please contact Mark at 416-2029 if you have questions about these comments. Response: Bike paring has been added. CDOT, Gloria Hice-Idler, (970) 350-2148, will not require any changes to the existing access. I have contacted Ken Waido of the advanced planning department. 18 Comments: Dave Stringer of the Engineering Department offered the following comments: A. If this property is platted as a County subdivision then the applicant should please submit a reproducible mylar of the plat to the City Engineering Department. If it is not platted, then the property will need to be platted in the City. B. A cover sheet is needed for the utility plans. C. Is the road along the south side of the property a public right of way (ROW) or access easement? If it is ROW then the proposed perpendicular parking on the north side at the office building will not be allowed. Please contact Dave at, 221-6750 if you have any questions about these comments. Response: A reproducible mylar of the plat will be submitted to the City Engineering Department_ A cover sheet for the utility plans has been submitted. The road along the south side of the property is an access easement. 19 Comments: Basil Ilamdan of the Storm water Utility offered the following comments: A. please include a cover sheet for the utility plans, including all Necessary components with the next submittal B. Please show the 100-year tloodplain and BFE on the subdivision plat and on the drainage plan. C. Please clarify the condition of the berms on the site. Are the berms existing or are they being added to the site with the landscaping? If they are new to the site, please include a copy of the AYRES report stating "no rise" with the next submittal. If they are existing then show them on the grading plan. Please contact Basil, at 224-6035 if you have questions about these comments Response: Cover sheet for the utility plans has been submitted. The 100-year flood plan and BFE has been added to the subdivision plat and the drainage plan. The berms on the site are existing. They have been added to the grading plan. Police Comment: plans do not indicate lighting. Some type of down lighting desirable for north and south entrances. Security lighting for area between buildings. Response: a-/ cftt 9� d�atino L�ee"l ,e,•�� q - Vz �`3I�'1�/�, 451-91 C K-2 Industrial Park 08115101 General Comments: u Is the TIS memo acceptable to Eric Bracke? If so, need documentation. u Complete and submit the Checklist in Appendix E-4. u Must design and improve the frontage road along the property in accordance with CDOT. Contact Tess Jones at 970-350-2163. Cover Sheet: u Add preamble title of "Utility Plans for...." u Add the legal description below the project name. u Minimum size for the Vicinity Map is 10" x 10" and to a scale of 1`1000-1500'. Zoom in on the project - see the current LCUASS, chapter 3. u Update the current date (month and year) under the legal description. Li Update the General Construction Notes, see attached. u Provide 2 P'roject bench marks referencing the city's datum — this information will be placed inside the General Construction Notes where asked for. Li Reference the updated or current soils investigation report. u Need the tollowing statement annotated on the Cover Sheet: "I hereby affirm..." u Provide the names, addresses, phone numbers for the Developer(s)/or & Owners(s). u Provide an area of 4"x6" on each sheet for the Local Entity to place a stamp of approval, each sheet. Li Add the Indemnification Statement "These plans have been reviewed...". See Appendix E-4. C"ing Sheet: Add a Signature Block. Note 45 on the Plat prohibits more than one access point to Lot 1. Delete the new driveway shown coming off the frontage road. _(�j a Incomplete finish grade elevations shown. Please provide for streets, lot corners, and ( A FF/fop of (Foundation of buildings. u Add the statement: "The top of foundation elevations shown...". See the Checklist in Appendix E-4. Drainage arrows to not show flows into approved drainage facility — all water seems 4 x to flow to property to the north. Is this acceptable? Is the drainage report provided T acceptable" n u Show temporary and long term erosion control devices and label. Overall Utility✓ Plan Sheets: Li Add "Print Date" — all sheets. o Fill in "done by" information in all title blocks, all sheets. u Provide all existing and proposed ROW, property lines and easements with dimensions. Label on all sheets.