Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAPLE HILL - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-165/7/2003 PROPOSAL FOR WORKING GROUP EFFORT - We currently don't have a good sense of how our concerns are being addressed and what will happen to us as a neighborhood - With the approaching start of both the Maple Hill and Lind Project developments, we need to achieve timely and reasonable resolution of these concerns - If neighborhood efforts on the frontage road and related issues don't come to fruition, we will experience severe adverse effects on neighborhood integrity, quality of life, safety, and home values which will destroy the character of our neighborhood o we estimate the negative effect on home values for the 17 homes fronting NCR 11 to be $75,0004100,000 per home (total of $1,275,000-$1,700,000) this represents a 25 percent decrease in home value due to quality of life and safety issues from the effects of greatly increased traffic, construction noise/debris/dust, structural vibration and damage from heavy construction traffic, .and both vehicle lights shining directly into homes and vehicle noise from acceleration and braking at new intersections perpendicular to existing homes other neighborhood homes on both Country Club Road and Richard's Lake Road which do not front directly onto NCR I l would also be adversely affected to a lesser extent further, the Fort Collins Country Club, with over 500 local members, would also be adversely affected - We want to make sure we know what will be happening and to develop reasonable milestones and triggers for future actions which affect us - We want to obtain written commitments so that our homeowners can feel they can remain in the neighborhood and make improvements to their homes rather than feel they should be selling their homes because of uncertainty about the future Page 6 Sincerely, Joseph W. Bleicher For Neighbors in the Country Club Heights Subdivision Fnclosures: August 5, 2002, letter to City on Lind Project Development Plan April 7, 2003, letter to City on Maple Hill Hearing cc: Mr. Ted Shepard Mr. Cam McNair Mr. Dave Stringer Mr. Matt Baker Mr. Craig Farver Mr. Tom Dougherty: Tom Dougherty Construction Ms. Yvonne Seaman: Centex Homes Mayor Ray Martinez, City of Fort Collins Mr. Thomas Bender: Chair of the Latimer County Commissioners Dave Stringer - Maple Hill Page 1 From: "Keith Sheaffer" <ksheaffer@TSTINC.COM> To: "Dave Stringer" <DSTRINGER@fcgov.com> Date: 5/9/03 3:13PM Subject: Maple Hill May 9, 2003 Re: Maple Hill trail cost estimate and Vine/Lemay cost estimate Project No.: OID53-004 and 953-005 Dear Dave, Per the direction of my client please find the enclosed Maple Hill "trail" opinion of most probable cost and the Vine/Lemay road improvements opinion of most probable cost spreadsheets. The Vine/Lemay cost should be split within the applicable "Development Agreements" between the Gillespie Farm Development Company and Centex Homes (Lind Farm). If you have arty questions regarding the enclosed information please feel free to give me a call. Respectfully, TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS Keith G. Sheaffer, PE <<003_pipe_storm-remove.xls>> «Vine-Lemay COST ESTIMATE.xls>> These files contain electronic horizontal and/or vertical design information, which has been used by TST, Inc., in the formulation of final development and/or construction documents. This electronic information may be used exclusively by the party as designated by this email message for information purposes only. By receiving this electronic information, the receiver agrees that this data may not be transferred to any other party, that this electronic information may not necessarily represent the information shown on the recorded or approved final development and/or construction documents, and that the receiver is responsible for verifying the information contained within the electronic data against the recorded or approved documents. CC: <solldev@attbi.com>, <tomd@jymis.com> Dave Stringer - County Road 52 Crossing Page 1 From: "Allen -Morley, Jim" <Jim.Allen-Morley@searbrown.com> To: "Dave Stringer" <DSTRINGER@fcgov.com> Date: 5/28103 8:44AM / Subject: County Road 52 Crossing < Dave, Sorry to keep bothering you. I assume you are very busy so I thought email may work better because you don't have to catch me on the phone which I know is hard. Centex, Lind Property, County Road 52. We all have been wondering how to solve this. The timing does not feel right to build a very expensive structure that may or may not meet the City of Fort Collins Master Plan. So on looking at this, The Section corner is about 30 feet west of the pipe crossing, Which is where the curb and gutter is required to be built to. I wanted to suggest that we pull the road build out back about 100 feet from the crossing so when the decision is made on the no. 8 ditch crosssing that as little damage to the road is done as possible with the construction. Just an Idea to get us past wasting resources on something that we won't be able to know for a while. Thanks Jim Dave Stringer - Re County Road 52 Crossing Page 1 From: Dave Stringer To: Allen -Morley, Jim Date: 5/28/03 10:21 AM Subject: Re: County Road 52 Crossing Jim, I apologize for not getting with you sooner. Also thanks for the e-mail reminder County Road 52 at the number 8 is difficult to design at this time without knowing what will happen in the future. I'm certainly willing to look at what you are proposing by dropping the design 100 feet short of the section line. However, the pavement transitions from Thoreau Drive on Lind and Maple Hill to meet the existing county road will need to be designed in accordance with our standards and to the speeds as posted. It appears to me that the Maple Hill side will be difficult to maintain safe transitions for the interim. In addition, each developer will be required to escrow with the City their local street portion of this section of County Road 52. 1 need this info. quickly since I'm currently working with Maple Hill on their D.A. Dave >>> "Allen -Morley, Jim" <Jim.Allen-Morley@searbrown.com> 05/28/03 08:44AM >>> Dave, Sorry to keep bothering you. I assume you are very busy so I thought email may work better because you don't have to catch me on the phone which I know is hard. Centex, Lind Property, County Road 52. We all have been wondering how to solve this. The timing does not feel right to build a very expensive structure that may or may not meet the City of Fort Collins Master Plan. So on looking at this, The Section corner is about 30 feet west of the pipe crossing, Which is where the curb and gutter is required to be built to. I wanted to suggest that we pull the road build out back about 100 feet from the crossing so when the decision is made on the no. 8 ditch crosssing that as little damage to the road is done as possible with the construction. Just an Idea to get us past wasting resources on something that we won't be able to know for a while. Thanks Jim CC: Susan Joy Transportation Services Engineering Department City of Fort Collins Joseph W. Bleicher 2509 North County Road 11 Fort Collins, Co. 80524 May 29, 2003 RE: Maple Hill Draft Development Agreement Dear Mr. Bleicher, For your information I have enclosed the first draft of the Development Agreement for the Maple Hill development project being proposed on the east side of County Road 11 from Country Club north to Couth Road 52. Please share this with your neighborhood group and if you have comments or questions concerning this draft feel free to contact me. However, please keep in mind, this is a legal document between the City and the Developer and any suggestions, additions and/or other requirements the neighborhood group may wish to incorporate into the agreement must be approved by the City and the Developer. Again, if you have comments or questions please call me at 221-6605 Sincerely, `_ i David Stringer Development Review Supervisor Cc: Tom Dougherty Ted Shepard nrthi' ile.c,-crnit, Sox 40 , .'IrI,,,Illins. '8015-2-0580, �9711-21 b715 _ A.):f9701221-�T37R 6 GV t V, fCO v-COITI Dave Stringer - Re. Maple Hill sidewalk Page 1 From: Craig Foreman To: Dave Stringer Date: 5129103 2:OOPM Subject: Re: (Maple Hill sidewalk Dave: I believe your talking about the section of trail that would lead down to the underpass of County Road #52. If so, that's the main trail and we want to keep at 1 O' wide. We place the signs with the name of the trail and no motorized vehicles allowed at the junction to the street. Pretty standard for us. If we have problems we can install a gate that allows for people passage and not cars. Let me know if you need anything else. Craig >>> Dave Stringer 05/29/03 11:16AM >>> Craig, There has been a concern raised regrading the width of the sidewalk along county rd 52 that also serves as the trail connection along the northern boundary of Maple Hill. The issue of the width is 10 feet versus 8 feet. The concern is that vehicles will drive on the trail/sidewalk because it's ten feet in width and can be mistaken for a vehicle access. Can the width be reduced to 8 feet which may make it look more like a sidewalk/trail and not a driveway or access way? Thanks for your input on this issue. Dave �Si Mr. Dave Stringer City of Fort Collins Engineering Department 281 N. College Ave. PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Re: Maple Hill Country Club grading variance request Project No.: 0953-004 Dear Dave, June 18, 2003 This letter is regarding our conversation and agreement concerning the Maple Hill Country Club road grading variance request. Due to site constraints associated with the existing property owner and limited ROW associated with Country Club Road, Maple Hill will tie the road grading for said road at 3:1 slopes instead of the minimum of 4:1. The 3:1 grading will occur at the most westerly intersection of Country Club Road and NCR11. This will be a temporary (interim) condition. Once the property to the south develops the grading and remaining portion of Country Club Road will be constructed to the City of Fort Collins current standards. The grading of the side slopes will be constructed by the developer to current construction standards and will not result in any additional capital costs to the city. The side slopes will not create any safety, welfare or public health issues, nor will it reduce the design life of the public streets. The allowance of the variance will create a better road tie-in to the existing south property. During the interim time frame there will be extremely minor maintenance changes due to the increased side slopes. We appreciate your review and approval of said variance. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to give our office a call. Respectfully, :ERS TST, INC. 748 Whalers Wat - Building I) Fort Collins, CO 80525 Consulting Engineers (970) 226-0557 Metro (3413) 595-9103 Fax (970) 226-0204 Email info@tstincaom www.tstinc.com Dave Stringer - Maple Hill Neighborhood Park Page 1 From: Craig Foreman To: Bill Whirty; Bob Leaven; Ingrid Decker; Kathleen Benedict; Paul Yarbrough, Ralph Campano Date: 8/13/03 4:37PM Subject: Maple Hill Neighborhood Park Hi; Since I know we don't have enough to do, and we need a challenge from time to time. Here is a new one. Tom Dougherty and Mike Sollenerger are developing the Maple Hill Project that is located in northeast Fort Collins. We are planning to purchase a 7.16 acre neighborhood park. Tom and Mike would like to get the park to at least have grass until we develop in 2010. So here are the details; 1. 1 told Mike and Tom that the City has no ability (staff or financial) to do work on the park until 2010. 2. We would need an agreement for them to develop and maintain (all at their cost) until we take over the park. We would not be able to reimburse any maintenance costs. 3.They would like to have us collect area parkland fees and repay them for the development costs. We would need to make sure the work is to our standard so we don't incur any additional costs in 2010. They will need to follow our park standards for irrigation systems, seed, grading, etc. They indicated they would. 4. We would need to work with their L.A. firm to get a grading plan that works in the interim and doesn't cause us too much additional cost in the future for final plan work. Tom or Mike will be talking with Ingrid, Bob and my staff on each topic. Their schedule is to :start construction on the development later this year. I get the impression, they would be into the park by early next year. Previous attempts at this developer build have not worked due to the costs. With just the land/grass option they may be able to make the financing work. However, they may have to get water rights, etc. for the park! We may all need to meet sometime once each of the areas has some shape and disucss All for now. Craig CC: Dave Stringer, Marty Heffernan; Ted Shepard _ Page 1 Dave Stringer - Meeting Notes From: Susan Joy To: Dave Stringer Date: 10/13/03 9:32AM Subject: Meeting Notes I didn't take "meeting minutes" for that meeting, but I do have notes. Here they are... The driveway improvements for the property owners along the west side of CR11 will occur with the realignment and ultimate improvements for CR11. The Lind and Maple Hill developer's portion of the driveway improvements are being collected over the first 100 building permits of each development. The city's portion of those driveway improvements are not presently funded but will be funded by the time the ultimate improvements go in. The CR11 underpass is critical to the timing of the realignment of CR11. It is funded by the Parks Department and we do not know at this time when Parks will have the money to build it. Another factor in the timing of CR11's ultimate improvements is the overall economy - how fast the houses provements will serve the area fflll ordacnute how mbe ofuickly the f years until the traffic conts unts become high enougho up in that area, The ttolwarrant the full improvements for CR11. It is Street Oversizing's preference to wait until the Forbe's property develops and then do the entire stretch from Douglas Road to Mountain Vista as one project. This brings the overall cost of the project down and saves the City money. CR52 will be improved to the east with Lind and Maple Hill developments. The construction traffic is being addressed in both the Lind and Maple Hill Development Agreements by specifying haul routes other than CR11 to minimize the impact to the residents and reduce the wear and tear on the existing road surface. The city agreed to determine the existing traffic volumes for CR11 and then use those numbers to approximate how many building permits will be issued prior to the ultimate road improvements. Transvortation Services Engineering Department :r ,r ,;!*, C.)iiins Joseph W. Bleicher 2509 North County Road 11 Fort Collins, Co. 80524 October 21, 2003 RE: County Road 11 realignment Dear Mr. Bleicher For your reference I am sending this letter to clearly establish in writing the City's position as it relates to the future realignment of County Road 11 adjacent to the Maple Hill and Lind properties. As was discussed in our meeting on September 24, 2003 between City staff members Susan Joy, Matt Baker, Cam McNair, myself, you and your two of your neighbors Steve Stansfield and Kervin Knox. In this meeting the City stressed on several occasions that the CR-11 ultimate widening and realignment would not occur until the traffic impacts warrant the construction. The City has agreed to determine the existing traffic volumes and monitor the amount of increase in traffic as one of the tools in the determination of when the ultimate roadway improvement will be built. As you are aware this construction work will be managed by the City's Street Oversizing Program with funding provided by the City and the developers, including each development's proportionate share of the pedestrian underpass which will serve the future regional trail system being built by the City's Parks and Recreation Department. Currently, the City has received monies from adjacent developments to construct an interim roadway improvement scheduled for the spring of next year. This improvement: will consist of an asphalt pavement overlay to a width of 36 feet. painted stripping for two twelve -foot vehicle travel lanes and two six-foot bicycle pedestrian lanes. The City has executed Development Agreements (copies enclosed) with Maple Hill and Lind developers which indicate the number of building permits that the City will release prior to these developments establishing escrow accounts with the City for the County Road 11 improvements. These agreements also discuss the construction traffic routes as the developments proceed to build out. In addition, the City will reinforce these designated construction traffic routes as a condition of the Development Construction Permits. „-r - We believe that timely and reasonable resolution of our concerns can be achieved in a cooperative manner at the lowest possible levels by neighborhood representatives participating in a working group with representation from the: o Neighborhood Resource Office to help us better express neighborhood concerns and to negotiate with the other participants o City Engineering Staff to include Cam McNair and appropriate staff o City Planning Staff to include Cameron Gloss and appropriate staff o Larimer County Representatives to assist in coordination of county/city issues - We want to work cooperatively with all parties to achieve reasonable, fair, and equitable resolution of issues so as to preserve neighborhood integrity, quality of life, safety, and home values - We are willing to evaluate reasonable alternative approaches which will enable us to achieve these goals and want the other parties in this effort to do the same - We want to participate in the decision making process on issues affecting us, to be informed of changes affecting us, and to be updated periodically on the status of ongoing efforts - We recognize that due to ongoing actions every issue and concern may not be resolved at this time but we should be able to achieve greater closure and come to agreements in principle that serve as the basis for future actions - As future development takes place in the north, we hope our efforts can serve as a model for future neighborhood/developer/government cooperation as the city comes to the country I understand that it is your desire to have the ultimate County Road 11 improvements constructed immediately. However, as stewards of the public rights -of -way and tax payers' dollars, the City does not construct roadway improvements prior to their need. Please be assured that the City will construct these roadway improvements in the future, at such time as the construct is warranted. Sincerely, David Stringer Development Review Manager Cc: Cam McNair Susan Joy Matt Baker Alternative Compliances and Variances Letter from TST dated September 19, 2002 concerning the Minor Amendments to Overall Development Plan (ODP). • Alternative Compliance for Solar Access, Orientation, Shading ( VF Ripley Associates) The Alternative Compliance was submitted to the Current Planning Department on October 24, 2003. The request was supported by Current planning on an email dated December 23,2002. See attached copies. Two primary reasons for not being able to meet the standard are stated in the request letter. Due to the need to meet these primary requirements on the site layout the 65% solar lot standard required by the Land Use Code could not be achieved. A variance to standard 4 (Curves with Small Deflection Angles (10' or less) of section A (Horizontal Alignment) of Section 7.4. 1 (Alignment) of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards is requested for the two horizontal center line curves between stations 16+00 and 24+00 of the proposed alignment of County Road 11. As described in a letter to Matt Baker dated 10/1712002, the existing conditions, existing homes, prohibit a design that meets the minimum curve lengths. The curves have been designed to be the maximum possible length while still maintaining the minimum tangent length between them. • A variance to Standard 12.2.2 of the LCUASS, which states that storm sewers need a minimum of 2-feet of cover to base coarse. ST-5 and ST-5B at the intersection of Maple Hill Drive and Thoreau Drive will have stabilization fabric placed per the City of Fort Collins. • A variance to Section 3.6(H), 1 & 2, of the Land Use Code, and Section 7.4 General Design Elements, Table 7-3, Access Management, which states that connecting streets to a 2-lane arterial be separated by no less than 460 feet and no more than 660 feet. The request and areas impacted are further outlined in a letter to Mike Herzig from Matthew Delich dated xx xx, 2003. Joseph W. Bleicher 2509 N. Country Road 11 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Phone (970) 407-0531 March 2, 2004 Mr. Cameron Gloss Planning Director City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 Dear Mr. Gloss: Our neighborhood, the Country Club Heights Subdivision, appreciates the opportunity to provide written comments on the Maple Hill First Replat, #29-OOC, and the Maple Hill Second Replat, #29-OOD. The Maple Hill First Replat affects Block 26 by adding an alley and two lots. The Maple Hill Second Replat affects Block 25 by also adding an alley and two lots. We appreciate the advance notification of any changes to proposed and ongoing developments which might affect our neighborhood. Absent such notification, we would not have an opportunity to review these changes and provide meaningful comments and raise our concerns on changes which adversely affect our neighborhood. We want to again express our desire to participate in the decision making process and request that we be informed of future changes which might affect our neighborhood. After a careful review of the project files and a comparison of both the original and revised plans for these two blocks, we believe that there will only be minimal impact on our neighborhood, and we therefore have no specific comments regarding these two development proposals. Nevertheless, our neighborhood would like to again note our continuing concerns with the adverse effects of ongoing and future developments on our neighborhood integrity, quality of life, safety, and home values. As you are aware, in the past we have repeatedly raised numerous strong concerns in these areas through both our oral and written comments. We want to continue to work in the future with the City of Fort Collins and other affected parties to resolve our concerns. Foremost, we want to achieve a reasonable, fair, and equitable plan for the earliest possible implementation of a frontage road to help mitigate the adverse Page 2 effects of development on our homes along the west side of NCR Ll between Country Club Road and Richards Lake Road. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on these development proposals and ask that this letter be made a part of the hearing file. Please feel free to contact me on (970) 407-0531 if I can provide any assistance. Sincerely, oseph W. Bleiclher For Neighbors in the Country Club Heights Subdivision cc: Mr. Ted Shepard Mr. Tom Dougherty Conceptual Review — Response to comments November 19,2002 ITEM: Gillespie Farm P.D.P. MEETING DATE: May 6, 2002 APPLICANT: Mr. Mike Sollenberger and Mr. Tom Dougherty c/o Ms. Linda Ripley and Louise Herbert, V-F Ripley Associates, 401 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO. 80521 and Mr. Steve Human, TST, 748 Whalers Way, Building D, Fort Collins, CO. 80525. LAND USE DATA: Request to develop approximately one -quarter section of land (160 acres) located at the southeast corner of C.R. I 1 and C.R. 52 (Richards Lake Road). The project would develop under the regulations of the L-M-N zone district and include 478 single family detached units, 68 duplex units and 121 multi -family units for a total of 669 units. The project also includes a seven -acre neighborhood park, a one acre recreation center and a bicycle/pedestrian trail. Some of the single family detached homes would be served by rear -access private driveways. The duplexes are served by front -loaded shared private drives. The eastern property line is formed by the Windsor Reservoir Company irrigation ditch. COMMENTS: The property is zoned L-M-N. The density must be a minimum of five dwelling units per net acre and not exceed a maximum of eight dwelling units per gross acre. Be sure that within the single family housing type, that the standards relating to housing model variety are also addressed and that sufficient architectural information is provided to review. Unless a Modification of Standard is needed, the P.D.P. is eligible for an administrative hearing. The project meets the density requirements under Section 4.4 (D) (1)(a) of the Land Use Code. Single-family and Duplex unit plans and elevations have been submitted with the Project Development Plan Review. 2. please note that the maximum number of units in a multi -family structure is eight. Any multi -family structure containing more than six dwellings must meet minimum design standards. Acknowledged. The Multi -Family is based on the above criteria in accordance with the City's Land Use Code. The Project Development Plans must comply with the parameters of the O.D.P. Acknowledged. The Project Development Plan complies with the approved Overall Development Plan. 4. The Poudre Fire Authority requires that a fire hydrants be placed on 800 foot centers and all structures within 400 feet of a hydrant. Hydrants must be capable of delivering a minimum of 1,500 gallons per minute with 20 psi residual pressure. Acknowledged. Please refer to Section 3.6.6 regarding fire and emergency access. Addresses must be visible from the public street in front of the dwelling. Be sure that the duplex units, served by the shared driveway, are located such there not more than 150 from the public street to the back of the units. Otherwise, automatic fire extinguishing systems must be installed. A Hazardous Material Impact Analysis will be required for storage and use of the pool chemicals. For further information regarding fire regulations, please contact Ron Gonzales at 221-6570. Acknowledged. 6. The site will be served by City of Fort Collins Light and Power. There is existing electrical system serving the Richards Lake property consisting of a switch cabinet and transformer at the southeast corner of C.R.'s 11 and 52. All existing facilities are underground. Power is adequate to serve both the project. Keep in mind where the electrical system is while considering phasing of the project. Any relocation of existing facilities will be at the developer's expense. For further information regarding electrical service, please contact Bruce Vogel, 221-6700. Acknowledged. The City of Fort Collins Utilities has received the request for water and sewer services. This request is under consideration. Other -wise, the site will be served by the Boxelder Sanitation District, 498-0604, and the East Larimer County Water District, 493-2044. Acknowledged. Please note that any water system will need to be looped and provide adequate pressure for fire fighting capability. All water and sewer lines must be placed within dedicated utility easement of sufficient width to allow proper separation of all underground utilities. Normal tap fees will apply. Water rights will need to be dedicated to either the City or the District in accordance with adopted policies. For further information on City Utilities, please contact Roger Buffington, 221-6681. Acknowledged. 9. Depending on who provides water and sewer, there may be utility separation issues with electrical, phone, cable and natural gas. Both special districts and the City may have different preferences on how to serve the single- family lots. Depending on the provider, water and sewer services may be in the middle of the lot or on the side lot line. A utility coordination meeting may be necessary, especially with the requirement for street trees, and the 50-foot wide lots. A utility coordination meeting was held on 8/21/02 with the main utility providers. The location of utilities, proposed driveways and street trees and the separation requirements were determined on a typical single- family and duplex unit block. 10. This site is in the Cooper Slough/Boxelder drainage basin where there are presently no development fees. There will be fees when the master plan is adopted. The 50' lots present utility and drainage challenges. Window wells and air conditioner compressors need to be considered in the detailed grading plan. Window wells `should not be in drainage easements. The standard drainage and erosion control reports and construction plans are required and they must be prepared by a professional engineer registered in Colorado. The detention proposed needs to include water quality extended detention to treat the runoff. The grading plan along the No. 8 inlet ditch needs to be detailed with cross sections. For further information, please contact Glen Schlueter, 221-6681. Acknowledged. TST, Inc has contained all of the necessary grading efforts within the property boundaries, however, all areas that encroach into/near the existing No. 8 ditch will be adequately detailed and profiled. 11, A Transportation Impact Study will be required. Please contact Eric Bracke, 221-6630, to determine the scope of the study and which intersections need to be analyzed. The T.LS. should address all modes including bicycles, pedestrian and transit. If you have a question regarding the analysis of the alternative modes, please call Tom Reiff, 416- 2040. Be sure to stay in contact with Eric Bracke and Matt Baker regarding the regional discussion around the adequate public facilities issue and off -site street improvements in the northeast area in general. A Traffic impact Analysis has been submitted with the Project Development Plan. 12 Utility plans, prepared by an Engineer registered in Colorado, will be required at the time of submittal. Be sure that the plat dedicates any additional land needed for any of the utilities serving the site Dedications for public streets must comply with the cross- section required per the classification of street. For example, the local residential street is 30-feet wide flow line to slow line within a 51-foot right-of-way. Please contact Sheri WamhotP, 221-6605, if you have any further questions regarding Utility Plans and public improvements. Acknowledged. 13. The Street Oversizing Fee is $1,624 per single family dwelling and $1,120 per multi- family dwelling payable at the time of building permit issuance. Also, please be aware of the Larimer County Road Improvement Fee. These fees are adjusted annually. For further information regarding these fees, please contact Matt Baker, 221-6605. Acknowledged. 14. A Development Agreement is required to be recorded along with other final documents. This Agreement spells out exactly which party is responsible for the construction of public improvements necessary to serve this proposal. A Development Construction Permit is required prior to beginning work on the site. The Utility Plans must be in final form and signed off by the City Utility Departments prior to recording. If special districts provide services, they must also sign the plat and utility plans. For further information, please contact Sheri Wamhoff, 221-6605. Acknowledged. 15. Local street names must be approved by Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority (LETA)_ Names will be checked for duplicates and sound-alikes with any name in LETA's 91 1 territory. Collectors must be named from an approved list established by City Council. This list is available from the Current Planning Department. Proposed streets are labeled with a letter or number on the Project Development Plans. Street names are currently being developed and the applicant will check and obtain approval of street names with LETA. 16. Since the single- family lots that feature alleys do not front on the City's "narrow residential street," the alleys cannot be public and should be referred to as private driveways for clarity. Acknowledged. 17_ Where the off-street trail intersects with C.R. 52, this may be a grade -separated crossing for safety. The Transportation Planning Department has a guideline booklet on grade separated trail crossings that may be helpful. Acknowledged. 18. Mid -block crossings of the trail are acceptable. Such crossings should connect open spaces, to the extent reasonably feasible, to create as much visibility for bikes and pedestrians as possible. Mid -block crossings have been utilized where there are combined trail and pedestrian sidewalks. 19. There should be direct sidewalks connecting the multi -family area to the trail. Acknowledged. 20. There is a north -south local street that intersects C.R. 52 close to the intersection of C.R.1 1. This may require a raised median in C.R. 52 to prevent left turns in and out of this local street. Acknowledged. TST, Inc will rely on the information provided by the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Mr, Matt Delich, PE. For any raised median requirements. 21. There are two Parks and Recreation fees collected at the time of building permit issuance. Please refer to the hand-out. One is for neighborhood parks and one is for community parks. All fees are adjusted annually. For further information, please contact Jeff Lakey, 221-6351. Acknowledged. 22. A fugitive dust permit will be needed from Larimer County Health Department prior to overlot grading. If prairie dogs are on the property, they must be relocated or humanely eradicated. A single trash hauler for the entire project is recommended. In the multi- family area, be sure to set aside sufficient land area for trash enclosures that are sized for both dumpsters and containers for recyclable materials. For further information regarding natural resources issues, please contact Tara Williams, 221-6750. Acknowledged. 23_ Staff understands that you have already met with the residents to the west whose properties front on C.R. I I that have resulted in some plan changes. Because of this effort and because the project is a Type One review, another neighborhood meeting is voluntary. The applicant has met and addressed issues from the residents. No additional neighhorhood mecting(s) are anticipated at this time. Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Cite of Foil Col lists Department: Engineering Date. December 23, 2002 Project: MAPLE HILL PDP - TYPE I (LUC) #29-OOA All comments must be received by TED SHEPARD in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: December 18, 2002 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: detail sheet 50 124/130 where is service disconnect detail being used? Provide water deflection detail 51 125/130 clean up details as redlined Topic: General 7 Provide Plan and profile of Baker irrigation Lateral. Need to see this pipe as it crosses roadways 8 Baker lateral can not be in a public easement. It most be in private easement 9 Baker lateral owners need to sign utility plans and plat 10 Need signatures of Larimer County on utility plans 11 Refer to LCUASS Appendix E-6 for quality of plans for scanability Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISn TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page I May 7, 2003 Ted Shepard City of Fort Collins Planning Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Ted: CC: Dave Stringer - Engineering Response to Staff Review comments. We have reviewed the Current Planning comments and dated February 26, 2003 and have the following comments: Planning: Please see attached redlines. Issue Contact: Ted Shepard 1) Building Elevations (sheet 9 of 10). Redline. The "Ranch -Style" Duplex sheet was submitted with the last submittal on 2/3/03. Please see attached sheet 9 of 11. Engineering: Please see attached redlines. Issue Contact: Dave Stringer 1) General Notes. Three additional notes have been added to all the Site and Landscape Plans. 2) Sheet 10 of 12. A note has been added to the fencing detail stating The fence on the right-of-way will be set back 2 feet. 3) Plans in relation to LCUASS Appendix E. All contours have been removed from the Site and Landscape Plans. The utilities have been removed on the Site Plan. Utilities will be removed from the Landscape Plan, after review and prior to the mylars. Phnnc wo 2P4 1,828 Fax 970 924.1662 901 Wesl Mounlvi , Ave. Suite 201 F utl Cnllin:. CU NtIS91 P604 vLlyloyi u,n 12 See comments for general notes sheet 2/130 52 All streets need to align with Lind property as shown on their PDP submittal 54 Site phasing plan will be determined by City Storm Water and Engineering Department needs, i.e. turn arounds, detention facilities and etc. 55 For Engineering this is a good set of plans, mostly detail stuff to work out. Keith, Good Job! 70 Need interim design for local street connections to existing Cty Rd 11 and 52. Ultimate design will be built in the future 71 Need a plat note and on the utility plans, indicating that all driveways are to be a minimum of 20 feet in length as measured from the back of sidewalk. Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 56 Cty Rd 52 cover sheet only add notes as appropriate for this job, otherwise use statement to the effect that all general notes as stated in LCUASS Appendix E apply 57 CS 130, indicate section lines for CTY Rds 11 and 52 58 CS 260 remove proposed from plans at under pass this facility will be built with this project. Make sure grading on Maple Hill Plans match what you are proposing work with Keith at TST Engineering Topic: Overall utility plan 27 Sheet 26/130 Detail to small can not read see LCUASS Appendix E- 6 scannibility 29 General comment, refer to detail sheet and number for casing and waterline lowerings 30 Page 2 Extend proposed utility services to property line or onto adjacent properties with associated easements Topic: Overlot Grading 22 Need off -site easement for pipe at number 8 ditch 23 Need to install pipe along drainage area along Cty Rd 52 with this project. Work out repay/prepay with Lind. If this project and Lind are not built together it will be difficult for Lind to install 24 Where are cross section as shown as detail. Identify where the detail applies 25 Need off -site easement for southern pipe into number 8 ditch 26 Sheet 18 /130 Better identify deal percent slope in pond, appears steep Topic: plat 13 Add statement about any existing easements to be vacated with this plat (if needed) 14 Is there a private street with this project? If not remove note 15 Title needs to be Maple Hill being a replat of Nineteenth Green Planed Unit Development 16 Need to look at Tract statements as it relates to future building sites. Not sure you want to dedicate all of tracts as easements 17 Dedicate typical 15 public easement adjacent to County Rd 11 and 52 18 Show any existing easements that will stay from old plat 19 Page 3 Is eastern boundary line the same as ditch easement line if so label, also show eastern most easement line of number 8 ditch 20 See sheet 417 for comments about buildings in tracts shown as easements 21 Why vacate portions of existing County Club Road? All existing rights -of -way in 19th Green P.U.D. will need to be vacated. Just Vacate the whole thing and new right of way will be dedicate with this plat. County Club and other streets will not be vacated until after approval of this project after signed plat has been filed Topic: sanitary sewer utility plan 33 36/130 may need more separation with storm sewer, work with Boxelder and City Storm Water Utility Topic: site and landscape 72 Streets don't match those as shown on Utility Plan revise to match with Utility Plans Topic: storm sewer utility plan 34 56/130 bury depth of pipe is not sufficient LCUASS 12.2.2 (typical comment where it may apply) 35 59,60,66,67,689,70/130 LCUASS 12.2.2 53 23/130 provide x-section of berm between ponds Topic: Street Names 2 Include street names on plat with next submittal Topic: street utility plan 36 71/130 need to identify where curb cuts will be on Collector Street with vertical C&G. If builder installs at later date they will be subject to permit fees and penalties for cutting new street (typical comment where needed) 37 77/130 General typical comment where it applies. Move curve data/data and elevations from each other so information is readable Page 4 38 79/130 Clarify with detail information being provided 39 81/130 can't read information provided 40 87/130 refer to LCUASS 8.2.4 and figure 8.17 as street intersections connect to Arterial Street system 41 89/130 Install RCP pipe at East End of street C to accommodate storm water flows 42 97/130 Show existing facilities and how existing streets and drives will connect with new construction, may need profile of each 43 98/130 Provide cross section of private drive from Cty Rd 11 to Cty Rd 52 including New Cty Rd 11 construction 44 Provide details and cross section of Baker Irrigation Lateral adjacent to Cty Rd 11 45 99/130 Sidewalks need to align with each other and ramps 73 Need to show sidewalk connections and bridge structures across number 8 ditch to meet connectivity criteria 79 Access ramps need to be truncated dome type as per Federal Standard. See attached CDOT Standard for design and construction. - 80 Will need to apply for alternative compliance (street Connectivity) to Land Use Code section 3.6 (H) (1) and (2) 81 See comments on Matt Delich Variance request letter dated November 12, 2002. Needs to better address why granting of Variance will not be detrimental to public health and safety? Page 5 Topic: street utility x-sections plan 46 104/130 Show typical percent slope on x-sections 47 Appears several off -site slope and construction easements are needed 48 112/130 Need to construct a minimum of 36-foot pavement section for Country Club Road Note on plans to be built by others 49 115/130 Off -site easements Show irrigation lateral in street intersection x-sections, show 2-foot flat area behind back of sidewalk, Did you calculate public water storm flows in drainage report to accommodate slope from street to swale? Topic: water utility plan 31 33/130 Note refers to sanitary sewer, this is water plan sheet, City does allow PVC Storm Sewer Pipe in right-of-way, which may help. Suggest you check into this. No "Advanced Drainage Systems ("ADS") pipe is allowed in R.O.W. 32 35/130 Provide a typical waterline lowering detail for each size of pipe, including thrust blocking, tie backs, fittings and etc. Page 6 Citv of Fort Collins Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: January 16, 2003 Project: MAPLE HILL PDP - TYPE I (LUC) #29-OOA All comments must be received by TED SHEPARD in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: December 18, 2002 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: detail sheet 50 124/130 Where is service disconnect detail being used? Provide water deflection detail 51 125/130 clean up details as reclined Topic: General 7 Provide Plan and profile of Baker irrigation Laterial. Need to see this pipe as it crosses roadways 8 Baker laterial can not be in a public easement. It most be in private easement 9 Baker laterial owners need to sign utility plans and plat 10 need signatures of Larimer County on utility plans 11 refer to LCUASS Apendix E-6 for quality of plans for scanability 12 see comments for general notes sheet 2/130 52 All streets need to align with Lind property as shown on their PDP submital Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page I 54 Site phasing plan will be determined by City Storm Water and Engineering Department needs, ie turn arounds, detention facilites and etc. 55 For Engineering this is a good set of plans, mostly detail stuff to work out. Keith, Good Job! 70 Need interm design for local street connections to existing Cty Rd 1 I and 52. Ultimate design will be built in the future 71 Need a plat note and on the utility plans, indicating that all driveways are to be a mnimum of 20 feet in length as measured from the back of sidewalk. Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 56 Cty Rd 52 cover sheet only add notes as appropriate for this job, otherwise use statement to the effect that all general notes as stated in LCUASS Appendix E apply 57 CS 130 , indicate section lines for CTY Res I 1 and 52 58 CS 260 remove proposed from plans at under pass this facility will be built with this project. Make sure Gradding on Maple Hill Plans match what you are proposing work with Keith at TST Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 86 Complete and submit the checklist in Appendix E4 with the next submittal. Please address all missing items and see the redlines for more comments. Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: Overall utility plan 27 sheet 26/ 130 detail to small can not read see LCUASS Apendex E- 6 scannibility 29 General comment, refer to detail sheet and number for casing and waterline lowerings 30 extend proposed utility services to property line or onto adjacent properties with associated easements Topic: Overlot Grading 22 Need off -site easement for pipe at number 8 ditch 23 Page 2 56/ 130 bury depth of pipe is not sufficent LCUASS 12.2.2 (typical comment where it may apply) 35 59,60,66,67,689,701130 LCUASS 12.2.2 53 23/ 130 provide x-section of berm between ponds Topic: Street Names 2 Include street names on plat with next submital Topic: street utility plan 36 71 / 130 need to identify where curb cuts will be on Collector Street with vertical C&G. If bulder installs at later date they will be subject to permit fees and penalittes for cutting new street (typical comment where needed) 37 77/ 130 General typical comment where it applys. Move curve data/data and elevations from each other so information is readable 38 79/ 130 Clarify with detail information being provided 39 81/130 Can't read information provided 40 87/ 130 refer to LCUASS 8.2.4 and figure 8.17 as street intersections connect to Arterial Street system 41 89/ 130 Install RCP pipe at east end of street C to accomidate storm water Flows 42 97/ 130 Show existing facilites and how existing streets and drives will connect with new construction, may need profile of each 43 98/ 130 Provide cross section of private drive from Cty Rd 1 I to Cty Rd 52 including New Cty Rd I I construction 44 Provide details and cross section of Baker Irrigation Laterial adjacent to Cty Rd 1 I 45 99/130 sidewalks need to align with each other and ramps 73 Need to show sidewalk connections and bridge structures across number 8 ditch to meet connectivity criteria 79 Access ramps need to be truncated dome type as per Federal Standard. See attached CDOT Standard for design and construction. - Page 4 Need to install pipe alomg drainage ara along Cry Rd 52 with this project. Work out repay/prepay with Lind. If this project and Lind are not built together it will be difficult for Lind to install 24 Where are cross section as shown as detail. Identify where the detail applies 25 need off -site easement for southen pipe into number 8 ditch 26 sheet 18 / 130 better identify deal percent slope in pond, appears steep Topic: plat 13 Add statement about any existing easements to be vacated with this plat (if Needed) 14 Is there a provate street with this project? If not remove note 15 Title needs to be Maple Hill being a replat of Nineteenth Green Planed Unit Development 16 Need to look at Tract statements as it relates to future building sites. Not sure you want to dedicate all of tracts as easements 17 dedicate typical 15 public easement adjacent to County Rd 11 and 52 18 show any existing easements that will stay from old plat 19 Is eastern boundary line the same as ditch easement line if so label, also show eastern most easement line of number 8 ditch 20 See sheet 4/7 for comments about buldings in tracts shown as easements 21 Why vacate portions of existing County Club Road? All existing rights -of -way in 19th Green P.U.D. will need to be vacated. Just Vacate the whole thing and new right of way will be dedicate with this plat. County Club and other streets will not be vacated until after approval of this project after signed plat has been fled Topic: sanitary sewer utility plan 33 36/ 130 May need more seperation with storm sewqer, work with Boxelder and City Storm Water Utility Topic: site and landscape 72 Streets don't match those as shown on Utility Plan revise to match with Utility Plans Topic: storm sewer utility plan 34 Page 3 80 Will need tp apply for alternative compliance (street Connectivity) to Land Use Code section 3.6 (H) ( I ) and (2) 81 See comments on Matt Delich Variance request letter dated November 12, 2002. Needs to better address why granting of Vaiance will not be detrimental to public health and safety. Topic: street utility x-sections plan 46 104/ 130 Show typical percent slope on x-sections 47 Appears several off -site slope and construction easements are needed 48 1 12/ 130 Need to construct a minimum of 36 foot pavement section for Country Club Road Note on plans to be bulit by others 415/130 Off -site easements Show irrigation laterial in street intersection x-sections, show 2 foot flat area behind back of sidewalk, Did you calculate public water storm flows in drainge report to accomidate slope from street to swale? Topic: water utility plan 31 33/ 130 Note refers to sanitary sewer, this is water plan sheet, City does allow PVC Storm Sewer Pipe in right-of-way which may help. Suggest you check into this. No "Advanced Drainage Systems ("ADS') pipe is allowed in R.O.W. 32 35/ 130 Provide a typical water line lowering deatil for each size of pipe, including thurst blocking, tie backs, fittings and etc. Page 5 Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to working with you further during the development review process. Yours Sincerely, Louise Herbert: VF Ripley Associates. REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: February 4, 2003 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #29-OOA MAPLE HILL PDP —TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Ted Shepard no later than the staff review meeting: February 26, 2003 ❑ No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** 1 a r fi` HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISION', at— __ �_ Site �A3irta�R�itC Utility Rcdlinc Utility landswpc i STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins February 4, 2003 Response to Staff comments dated 01/10/03. We have reviewed the Staff comments and have following comments: Ted Shepard — Current Planning Ginger Dodge — Current Planning Dave Stringer — Engineering Michael Chavez— PFA Mark Jackson — Transportation Planning Gary Lopez — Zoning Tim Buchanan - Forestry VF RIPLEY LOUISE HERBERT 401 W. MOUNTAIN AVE. #201 FT. COLLINS, CO 80521 ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Topic: Street Names Date: January 10, 2003 Issue Contact: Ginger Dodge 1 A list of proposed street names must be submitted for review and entry in the Larimer County Street Inventory System. A list of proposed Street Names is attached. The list has been submitted and street names checked and reserved with Current Planning. All proposed names are shown on the Site and Landscape Plans. TST, Inc. has provided the proposed street names on all "Utility Plans for Maple Hill" see sheets 1-130. Department: Engineering Topic: detail sheet Issue Contact: Dave Stringer 50 124/130 Where is service disconnect detail being used? Provide water deflection detail. Page I The service disconnect detail has been removed. The water line deflection detail has been provided, see sheet 124. 51 125/130 clean up details as redlined. All detail sheets have been "cleaned up" per the redline comments, see sheet 125. Topic: General 7 Provide Plan and profile of Baker irrigation Lateral. Need to see this pipe as it crosses roadways. Plan and Profiles of the Baker Lateral have been provided on sheets 70A and 70B. 8 Baker lateral cannot be in a public easement. It must be in private easement. The Baker lateral has been placed in a private easement please see the plat and sheets 70A-B. 9 Baker lateral owners need to sign utility plans and plat. Signature blocks for the Baker Lateral owner's have been provided on Sheet 1 of the Utility Plans and Sheet 1 of the plat. 10 need signatures of Larimer County on utility plans. The Larimer County signature block has been provided on Sheet 1 of the Utility Plans. 11 Refer to LCUASS Appendix E-6 for quality of plans for scan ability. Acknowledged and provided, see all sheets. 12 See comments for general notes sheet 2/130. TST, Inc. has contacted Mr. Dave Stringer and he stated that our notes match the October LCUASS manual and are the most current. All other redlines on the note sheet have been updated. See sheet 2. Page 2 52 All streets need to align with Lind property as shown on their PDP submittal. Acknowledged, streets align with the Lind Property. See sheets Utility plans. 54 Site phasing plan will be determined by City Storm Water and Engineering Department needs, i.e. turn arounds, detention facilities and etc. Acknowledged. TST, Inc. has been coordinating with the different utility divisions and has revised the phasing plans per their applicable comments. See sheets 24- 25. 55 For Engineering this is a good set of plans, mostly detail stuff to work out. Keith, Good Job! Thank you, our team appreciates your acknowledgement of the work we have done on this project. Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 56 Cty Rd 52 cover sheet only add notes as appropriate for this job, otherwise use statement to the effect that all general notes as stated in LCUASS Appendix E apply. Sear Brown will provide an updated revised plan set with the applicable revisions. 57 CS 130 , indicate section lines for CTY Rds 11 and 52. Sear Brown will provide an updated revised plan set with the applicable revisions. 58 CS 260 remove proposed from plans at under pass this facility will be built with this project. Make sure Grading on Maple Hill Plans match what you are proposing work with Keith at TST Engineering. Sear Brown will provide an updated revised plan set with the applicable revisions. TST, Inc. has coordinated with Sear Brown to match the information provided by Sear Brown. Page 3 Topic: Overall utility plan 27 sheet 26/130 detail too small cannot read see LCUASS Appendix E- 6 scan ability. Acknowledged, please see sheets 1-130. 28 27/130 PFA would like some hydrants on eastside of Cty Rd 11 at intersections. TST, Inc. has meet with Mr. Ron Gonzales, PFA, and Ron stated that we had to provide additional fire hydrants on median side of the new CR11, TST, Inc. has provided all of the required hydrants, see overall utility plan. 29 General comment, refer to detail sheet and number for casing and waterline lowerings. TST, Inc. has provided a water line lowering/casing detail see sheet 124. 30 Extend proposed utility services to property line or onto adjacent properties with associated easements. Acknowledged, see overall utility plan and applicable sanitary, storm and street plan and profile sheets. Topic: Overlot Grading 22 Need off -site easement for pipe at number 8 ditch. Acknowledged, all off -site easements were provided in the previous submittal and will be re -submitted with this submittal. If any department would like copies of the applicable easements and exhibits please give me a call and I will provide the requested copies (226.0557). 23 Need to install pipe along drainage area along Cty Rd 52 with this project. Work out repay/prepay with Lind. If this project and Lind are not built together it will be difficult for Lind to install. Page 4 Acknowledged, and TST, Inc. has worked out all issues with Mr. Basil Hamden, Stormwater Utilities for construction plans and language. 24 Where are cross -sections are shown as detail, identify where the detail applies. TST, Inc. is putting all applicable cross -sections on each street plan and profile sheet for better clarification. 25 Need off -site easement for southern pipe into number 8 ditch. Acknowledged, all off -site easements were provided in the previous submittal and will be re -submitted with this submittal. If any department would like copies of the applicable easements and exhibits please give me a call and I will provide the requested copies (226.0557). 26 sheet 18 /130 better identify deal percent slope in pond, appears steep. Acknowledged, TST, Inc. will provide, see sheet 18. Topic: Plat 13 Add statement about any existing easements to be vacated with this plat (if Needed). Acknowledged, and has been provided on the plat, see sheets 1-7 of plat. 14 Is there a private street with this project? If not remove note. Acknowledged, no private streets and note has been removed. 15 Title needs to be Maple Hill being a replat of Nineteenth Green Planed Unit Development. Acknowledged and has been done. 16 Need to look at Tract statements as it relates to future building sites. Not sure you want to dedicate all of tracts as easements. Acknowledged. Page 5 17 dedicate typical 15 public easement adjacent to County Rd 11 and 52. Acknowledged and has been provided. 18 show any existing easements that will stay from old plat. Acknowledged and has been provided. 19 is eastern boundary line the same as ditch easement line if so label, also show eastern most easement line of number 8 ditch. Acknowledged, and TST, Inc. has labeled all non -congruent sections of the Maple Hill boundary and the No. 8 ditch. Due to the fact that the No. 8 ditch property is fee simple, TST, Inc. has not shown the eastern boundary due it being off -site. 20 See sheet 4/7 for comments about buildings in tracts shown as easements. Acknowledged and revised. 21 Why vacate portions of existing County Club Road? Just vacate the whole thing and rededicate with this plat. County Club will not be vacated until after approval of this project. Acknowledged, see plat, sheets 1-7. Topic: sanitary sewer utility plan 33 36/130 May need more separation with storm sewer, work with Boxelder and City Storm Water Utility. Acknowledged, TST, Inc. has coordinated with all jurisdictions and utility separation has been approved by each. Topic: storm sewer utility plan 34 56/130 bury depth of pipe is not sufficient LCUASS 12.2.2 (typical comment where it may apply). Page 6 All storm sewer has been revised and all lines except ST-5 and 5B have the minimum cover. ST-5 and 56 cover issues have been worked out with Mr. Basil Hamden and Mr. Dave Stringer. TST, Inc. has provided a variance request with this submittal identifying the issue and resolution approved by both City departments. 35 59,60,66,67,689,70/130 LCUASS 12.2.2. Acknowledged and revised. See previous comment. 53 23/130 provide x-section of berm between ponds. Cross-section has been provided with this storm sewer plan and profile, see sheet 69 (ST-6). Also, note has been provided on the overall utility plan. Topic: Street Names 2 Include street names on plat with next submittal. Acknowledged and provided. See item 1 under Current Planning. Topic: street utility plan 36 71/130 need to identify where curb cuts will be on Collector Street with vertical C&G. If builder installs at later date they will be subject to permit fees and penalties for cutting new street (typical comment where needed). Acknowledged and provided on all applicable street sheets. 37 77/130 General typical comment where it applies. Move curve data/data and elevations from each other so information is readable. Acknowledged and revised, see applicable street sheets. 38 79/130 Clarify with detail information being provided. Typical street cross-section has been provided on each street sheet. Page 7 39 81/130 Can't read information provided. Acknowledged and revised. 40 87/130 refer to LCUASS 8.2.4 and figure 8.17 as street intersections connect to Arterial Street system. The slopes in question are NOT in the intersections and only within the PCR's (curb returns) of the curb and gutter. These slopes will not adversely effect the drive ability of the road, nor create monetary costs in maintenance or repairs. 41 89/130 Install RCP pipe at east end of street C to accommodate storm water flows. Curb and gutter has been extended to these swales, the flows will be intercepted and conveyed by the gutter section to inlets, therefore, no additional conveyance system is needed. 42 97/130 Show existing facilities and how existing streets and drives will connect with new construction, may need profile of each. Facilities have been shown and existing tie-ins have been provided on the grading plans for CR 11. 43 98/130 Provide cross section of private drive from Cty Rd 11 to Cty Rd 52 including New Cty Rd 11 construction. Acknowledged, and have been provided on the cross-section detail, see detail sheets. 44 Provide details and cross section of Baker Irrigation Lateral adjacent to Cty Rd 11. Baker Lateral has been plan and profiled, see sheets 70A and 70B. 45 99/130 sidewalks need to align with each other and ramps. Acknowledged and provided. Page 8 Topic: street utility x-sections plan 46 104/130 Show typical percent slope on x-sections. Acknowledged and provided, see sheet 104. 47 Appears several off -site slope and construction easements are needed. Acknowledged, all off -site easements were provided in the previous submittal and will be re -submitted with this submittal. If any department would like copies of the applicable easements and exhibits please give me a call and I will provide the requested copies (226.0557). 48 112/130 Need to construct a minimum of 36-foot pavement section for Country Club Road Note on plans to be built by others. Acknowledged and provide. 49 115/130 Off -site easements Show irrigation lateral in street intersection x-sections, show 2 foot flat area behind back of sidewalk, Did you calculate public water storm flows in drainage report to accommodate slope from street to swale? TST, Inc. is showing the new location, see Baker Lateral plan and profile (sheets 70A and B), the existing pipe will be removed and placed out of the proposed ROW per your request. TST, Inc. has accounted for all storm water runoff for both on -site and off -site contributions. Topic: water utility plan 31 33/130 Note refers to sanitary sewer, this is water plan sheet. All notes have been updated for their respective sheets. Sewer notes on sewer sheets, etc., the overall utility has notes for water, storm and sanitary sewer. 32 35/130 Provide a typical water line lowering detail for each size of pipe, including thrust blocking, tiebacks, fittings and etc. Acknowledged, detail has been provided on sheet 124. Page 9 DQ Ve sl tr Joseph W. Bleicher 2509 N. County Road 11 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Phone (970) 407-0531 May 8, 2003 7 Mr. Cameron Gloss Hearing Officer City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Dear Mr. Gloss: Our neighborhood, the Country Club Heights Subdivision, appreciates the opportunity to provide written comments on the development proposal referred to as Lind Project Development Plan. As development in the north has brought the city to the country, we have tried to work cooperatively to preserve neighborhood integrity, quality of life, safety, and home values. 'The Lind Project development is directly to the northeast of our neighborhood of 34 single-family homes on large lots that back onto Fort Collins Country Club from their locations on Country Club Road, NCR 11, and Richard's Lake Road. We are greatly affected by the ongoing Richard's Lake PUD (up to 682 units) to our north, the Maple Hill PDP (up to 667 units) to our east, and the Lind Project (up to 775 units). If our efforts on the frontage road and related issues don't come to fruition, we will experience severe adverse effects that will destroy the character of our neighborhood. We estimate the negative effect on home values for the 17 homes fronting NCR I I to be $75,000-$100,000 per home (total of $1,275,000-$1,700,000) which represents a 25 percent decrease in home value. This is due to quality of life and safety issues from the effects of greatly increased traffic, construction noise/debris/dust, structural vibration and damage from heavy construction traffic, and both vehicle lights shining directly into homes and vehicle noise from acceleration and braking at new intersections perpendicular to existing homes. Further, other neighborhood homes on both Country Club Road and Richard's Lake Road which do not front directly onto NCR I I would also be adversely affected to a lesser extent as would the Fort Collins Country Club, with over 500 local members. We earlier commented on the Lind Project in our letter of August 5, 2002, to the City of Fort Collins_ 'We raised neighborhood concerns related to the frontage road for NCR 11, safety traffic enforcement, infrastructure, city and county jurisdiction, and Department: PFA Topic: General Issue Contact: Michael Chavez 59 Address Numerals: Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6-inch numerals on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). 97 UFC 901.4.4 Acknowledged. 60 Water Supply: No residential building can be greater then 400 feet from a fire hydrant. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 800 feet along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1000 gallons of water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. 97 UFC 901.2.2.2 NOTE: Current proposed hydrant locations will meet PFA requirements. Acknowledged. 61 Street Names: Street names shall be verified and reviewed in accordance with Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards prior to being put in service. Acknowledged. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Topic: General 62 Development phasing lines on site plan make it very difficult to view sidewalk and trail connections, dimensions. An additional drawing titled "Access and Public Trail Detail Areas" by VF Ripley Associates has been provided which illustrates specific sections of the trail as discussed with Transportation Planning. 63 Where trail combines with sidewalk system, minimum width is 8'. Can combined sidewalk/trail be 10' to match trail width? Note: 1-100 scale makes it very difficult to measure sidewalk and trail widths. The majority of the trail is 10 feet wide. Please see attached Public Trail narrative. Again, a detail sheet as identified in item 62 above has been provided for clarification. Page 10 64 Show appropriate crosswalk marking on Collector -arterial intersections and near neighborhood center & neighborhood park. See redline comments. Acknowledged. These are shown on the Site and Landscape Plans. See also TST Engineer's striping plan. 65 Street 5 is labeled as a residential local street on its southern end of the development. This street is a collector on the Master Street Plan. Acknowledged. This has been corrected. 66 Where does the trail go or connect to at the southeastern end of the development? The Public Trial will connect to the Poudre School District site to the south in accordance with the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan. 67 Would like to see a site plan that clearly shows bike lane and crosswalk markings, bike lane, trail and sidewalk widths. Would like to see a detail of the grade - separated trail crossing of CR-52 (to be built as part of this project coordinated with Lind development). Please see TST Engineer's striping plan for crosswalk and bike lane width dimensions. Please see VF Ripley's drawing titled " Access and Public Trial Detail Areas" for trail and sidewalk widths. Sear Brown will provide plans and details on the grade -separated trail crossing of CR-52. 68 Street 1 needs to align on northern end with Lind development street. This has been revised and is aligned. 69 Bike/ped easement for connection to the east of the site is shown. Is this project escrowing funds to build future b/p connection? The applicant will ecrow funds for this future connection. Page LI Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Gary Lopez Topic: zoning 3 General notes indicate max. building height of 2.5 stories. We'd prefer to see foot dimensions as one story per LUC 3.8.7 (13)(3) could mean as much as 25'. Expectations and consistency require max. height be measured in feet. Based on elevation samples, maybe 30' max. for single family be stated instead. Building height dimensions have been revised and numbers rounded. This was discussed and agreed with Gary Lopez on 01/17/03 4 Any proposal for 2 story detached garages? If so no single family detached unit can be created from them. No. Acknowledged. 5 Landscaping note excluding parkway areas from CO/CO issuance not acceptable. Those areas must be secured prior to release of CO. Acknowledged. The landscape note 49 under plant notes has been removed from the Landscape Plan. This item will be addressed at Final Compliance. Department: Forestry Issue Contact: Tim Buchanan (Separate letter — see attached) 1 The Landscape Plan needs to show all the actual street tree locations along all of the streets. Current Planning has checked this item with Forestry and it has been verbally confirmed to VF Ripley Associates that this can be addressed at Final Compliance. Items 2 to 4. Landscape notes. These have been revised and added to the Landscape Plan. 5 Street trees species. Street tree species have been revised in accordance with the redlines and current City of Fort Collins Street Tree list (August 2002). Page 12 End of comments. TST, Inc. will provide all of the redlined utility plans to the respective utility jurisdictions. Due to the minimal comments from the City of Fort Collins, ELCO and Boxelder, and TST, Inc. ability to adequately revised and respond to said comments. TST, Inc. is requesting to submit mylars for jurisdictional signatures and approval. TST, Inc. is more than willing to work with each department to make this happen. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me immediately so that we can promptly respond. Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to working with you further during the development review process. Yours Sincerely, Louise Herbert VF Ripley Associates Iherbert@vfavfr.com Keith G. Sheaffer, PE 226.0557 (P) 226.0204 (F) 218.9520 (C) ksheaffer@tstinc.com Page 13 Maple Hill — Project Development Plan Description of Access and Public Trail. Please sec VF Ripley Drawings: Site Plans (Sheets 3 and 4 of 10) Access and Public Trail Detail (Sheet 1 of 1) The 30ft wide Access, Public Trial and Utility Easement crosses the site in a diagonal direction from the northwest corner to the southeast corner of the site. The trail relates to the trail alignment identified in the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan and the existing East Larimer County Water District (GLCO) water line easement. The Site Plan (Sheets 3 and 4 of 10) illustrates the overall Public Trail alignment. The Access and Public Trail Detail Sheet (loft) illustrates three specific locations where the Public Trail combines with pedestrian sidewalks. The majority of the trail is ten foot wide. Only at one location south of the intersection of Maple Hill Drive and Barharbor Drive does the trail narrow to eight feet wide due to the width restriction of the corner lot located on the southeast of the same intersection. (see Dctail B on the Access and Public Trail Detail Sheet — 1 of 1). Ramps and striped crosswalks are provided at appropriate locations as discussed and agreed with Transportation Planning. Please call if you require further clarification Louise Herbert VP Ripley Associates. Project Comments Sheet (W;6;0)z1Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: February 28, 2003 Project: MAPLE HILL PDP - TYPE I (LUC) #29-OOA All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: February 26, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: plat Number: 87 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 2/7 is the reference note correct, or is there another note 3 that I don't see? Number: 88 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 4/7 Are any easements need for lot 1 Block 32? If so show them on this plat, otherwise easements will need to be processed prior to building permit issuance for this lot. Move street name out from under match line so it is readable Number: 89 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 5 of 7, Change Street C to Maple Hill Drive Topic: Utility Plans Number: 90 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 211130 what is dark line along east edge of lots 1-12? Remove or identify as Number: 91 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 24/130 Need to meet with Engineering, Street Oversizing and Stormwater to discuss phasing plan Number: 92 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 28/130 if detail applies to all deflection/lowering situations add Typical to text. Also should move note so it is easily identifiable. Maybe into Tract I area, use larger text Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 Number: 93 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 29/130 Show length of PVC stub pipe onto PR1 property. Will need off -site easements for stubs onto their property Number: 113 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 67/130 Specify Geo -grid as material for subbase separator from pavement section. Use manufacturers recommendations Number: 114 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 70/130 May need school district PR1 signature on Baker lateral per letter from their attorney dated to me 2/24/2003 See enclosed Number: 115 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 70A/130 May be a conflict between pipes at station 13+12 Number: 116 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 70B /130 Are the manhole covers bolt on type? Are other structures needed such as air relief stand pipes and etc. needed? If so show on plans, details and notes Number: 117 Created: 2/26/2003 page 71/130 Do you think a utility coordination meeting is needed to verify driveway locations will work with all utilities, street trees and etc, General Comment - None of the drive ways are stationed. How will they be locatable in the field? Need to station so curb and gutter contractor will know where they are when placing C&G. Call me to set up meeting if you think it's necessary. Number: 118 Created: 2/26/2003 72/130 Also, show detail of off -site trail on a sheet that is more applicable to trail location and construction Number: 119 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 81/130 Repeat comment. Readability of plans for scanning is lacking go through entire plan set and correct those conflicts that are addressed in LCUASS Appendix E-6 Number: 120 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 89/130 Move barricade to end of street at property line. All curb, gutter, sidewalk and asphalt pavement will be constructed at this time Typical for all stub streets Number: 122 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 94/130 if no sidewalk and street trees are being installed along southside of Country Club Drive then modify typical x-sections to reflect this. Also show fill or cut slopes at 4/1 from 2 feet back of curb or edge of tree drip line. Page 2 Number: 123 Created: 2/26/2003 98/130 Can't read elevations at driveways very well obscured by lines. Appears these are to steep. Driveways to Cty Rd. 11 need to follow LUCASS intersection design criteria Number: 125 Created: 2/27/2003 100/130 If existing elevation is correct, there is a new roadway elevation at driveway by Cty Rd. 52, of almost 6 feet of elevation difference. How will this work? Number: 126 Created: 2/27/2003 101/130 include street names. Change frontage road to private drive Number: 127 Created: 2/27/2003 104/130 General x-section comment I'm having trouble reproducing cross slopes as per plan. Please check that flowline grades at cross sections match those on profile sheets. Also some numbers don't seem to correlate. In figuring x-slopes use lip of gutter to street center line and use pavement width not just 1/2 street width Number: 128 Created: 2/28/2003 105/130 Change street names Also. Check x-slopes Number: 129 Created: 2/28/2003 107/130 Change street names Also x-slopes (typical for all x-slope sheets) Number: 130 Created: 2/28/2003 119-123/130 Work with Traffic Engineering for signing and stripping plans Number: 131 Created: 2/28/2003 125/130 Show section of County Road 11 with private drive on the west side from station? To station? On east side show % slope from 2 feet back of walk Number: 132 126/130 Created: 2/28/2003 Access Ramps need to comply with Fed Standard using truncated domes (see attachment for truncation only) Page 3 Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments C'ityof Fort Collins s Department: P Enaineerina Project: March 5, 2003 MAPLE HILL PDP - TYPE I (LUC) #29-OOA All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: February 26, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: plat Number: 87 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 217 is the reference note correct, or is there another note 3 that I don't see? Number: 88 Created: 2/25/2003 page 4/7 Are any easements needed for lot 1 Block 32? If so show them on this plat, otherwise easements will need to be processed prior to building permit issuance for this lot. Move street name out from under match line so it is readable. Refer to LCUASS Appedix E-6 Number: 89 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 5 of 7, Change Street C to Maple Hill Drive Topic: Utility Plans Number: 90 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 21/130 What is dark line along east edge of lots 1-12? Remove or identify as Number: 91 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 24/130 Need to meet with Engineering, Street Oversizing and Stormwater to discuss phasing plan Number: 92 Created: 2/25/2003 � A Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page I Page 28/130 If detail applies to all deflection/lowering situations add Typical to text. Also should move note so it is easily identifiable. Maybe into Tract I area, use larger text Number: 93 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 29/130 Show length of PVC stub pipe onto PR1 property. Will need off -site easements for stubs onto their property Number: 113 Created: 2/26/2003 page 67/130 Specify Geo - grid as material for subbase separator from pavement section. Use manufactueres recommendations Number: 114 Created: 2/26/2003 page 70/130 May need school district PR1 signature on Baker laterial per letter from their attorney dated to me 2/24/2003 See enclosed Number: 115 Created: 2/26/2003 page 70A/130 May be a conflict between pipes at station 13+12 Number: 116 Created: 2/26/2003 page 70B /130 Are the nmanhole covers bolt on type? Are other structures needed such as air relief stand pipes and etc. needed? If so show on plans, details and notes Number: 117 Created: 2/26/2003 page 71/130 Do you think a utility coordination meeting is needed to verify driveway locations will work with all utilites, street trees and etc, General Comment - None of the drive ways are stationed. How will they be locatable in the field? need to station so curb and gutter contractor will know where they are when placing C&G. Call me to set up meeting if you think it's necessary. Number: 118 Created: 2/26/2003 72/130 Also, show detail of off -site trail on a sheet that is more applicable to trail location and construction Number: 119 Created: 2/26/2003 page 81/130 Repeat comment. Readability of plans for scanning is lacking go through entire plan set and correct those conflicts that are addressed in LCUASS Appendix E-6 Number: 120 Created: 2/26/2003 page 89/130 Move barricade to end of street at property line. All curb,gutter, sidewalk and asphalt pavement will be constructed at this time Typical for all stub streets Number: 122 Page 2 Created: 2/26/2003 Page 2 monitoring and enforcing developer compliance related to construction. These are still ongoing neighborhood concerns which need timely and reasonable resolution with the approaching start of both the Lind Project and Maple Flill developments. Because of the interrelationship between both Maple Hill and the Lind Project on our neighborhood (e.g., traffic flow past our homes), you will note similar concerns were raised in our April 7, 2003, letter on Maple Hill. We want to again communicate our concerns, obtain current status of ongoing efforts, express our desire to participate in the decision making process, and request that we be informed of changes which affect our neighborhood. FRONTAGE ROAD Of greatest importance to our neighborhood is obtaining the earliest possible implementation of a frontage road along NCR 11, an effort that we began in 1996 with the developer of the Richard's Lake PUD. This frontage road would provide existing homes with limited, consolidated access to NCR I t rather than backing directly out onto the road. Further, the frontage road with a separation area from the relocated NCR 1 1 would help mitigate the noise and visual effects of the greatly increased traffic from ongoing residential developments which have had an adverse effect on both the property values and quality of life in our neighborhood. In our August 5, 2002, letter we stated:" We need your support in ensuring the earliest possible implementation of the proposed NCR 1 I improvements, especially the frontage road. A, reasonable timeframe for these improvements needs to be established. To clarify earlier discussions, we need to obtain a finalized written commitment of the involved parties from the City and the developers. Furthermore, we need your support in ensuring that the Richard's Lake Project, the Gillespie Farms Project, and the Lind Project each contribute a fair amount of the funding needed to do the NCR 1 I improvements in our neighborhood." This frontage road is essential for neighborhood integrity, quality of life, safety, and home values. Uncertainty about or unreasonable delays to implement the frontage road in a timely manner will be devastating to our neighborhood since we bear all the adverse effects rather than the developers or the City. The trigger in our agreement with the Richard's Lake developer was that improvements to NCR 11, including the frontage road, were to take place prior to the issuance of 201" building permit. We now have two other developments starting soon which will further increase the adverse effects on our neighborhood. We need some kind of trigger or milestone page 94/130 If no sidewalk and street trees are being installed along southside of Country Club Drive then modify typical x-sections to reflect this. Aalso show fill or cut slopes at 4/1 from 2 feet back of curb or edge of tree drip line . Number: 123 Created: 2/26/2003 98/130 Can't read elevations at driveways very well obsured by lines. Appears these are to steep. Driveways to Cty Rd. 11 need to follow LUCASS intersection design criteria Number: 125 Created: 2/27/2003 100/130 If existing elevation is correct, there is a new roadway elevation at driveway by Cty Rd. 52., of almost 6 feet of elevation difference. How will this work? Number: 126 Created: 2/27/2003 101/130 include street names. Change frontage road to private drive Number: 127 Created: 2/27/2003 104/130 General x-section comment I'm having trouble reproducing cross slopes as per plan. Please check that flowline grades at cross sections match those on profile sheets. Also some numbers don't seem to corolate. In figuring x-slopes use lip of gutter to street center line and use pavement width not just 1/2 street width Number: 128 Created: 2/28/2003 105/130 Change street names Also. Check x-slopes Number: 129 Created: 2/28/2003 107/130 Change street names Also x-slopes (typical for all x-slope sheets) Number: 130 Created: 2/28/2003 119-123/130 Work with Traffic Engineering for signing and stripping plans Number: 131 Created: 2/28/2003 125/130 Show section of County Road 11 with private drive on the west side from station? To station? On east side show % slope from 2 feet back of walk Number: 132 126/130 Created: 2/28/2003 Access Ramps need to comply with Fed Standard using truncated domes (see attachment for truncation only) Page 3 Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Cityof Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: March 12, 2003 Project: MAPLE HILL PDP -TYPE I (LUC) #29-OOA All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: February 26, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: General Number: 11 Created: 12/16/2002 refer to LCUASS Apendix E-6 for quality of plans for scanability. More cleanup work is required, check lines,text and overlay of the same. May need to turn some layers off to cleanup some sheets 2/28/03 Repaet comment - 3/6/03 Number: 54 Created: 12/16/2002 Site phasing plan will be determined by City Storm Water and Engineering Department needs, ie turn arounds, detention facilites and etc. Need to discuss phasing so its acceptable for all. 3/6/03 Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 Number: 145 Created: 3/12/2003 cs130 need to get comments from City Traffic Engineer for signing and stripping plans sheets Number: 146 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 302 show storm sewer pipe at underpass profile Number: 147 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 304 Show length of utulity service line installed with this project on cross street locations with thrust blocks, manhole etc. may have coverage issue with pipe and roadway section L' `> Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page I Number: 148 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 305 Is # 8 pipe being built by Lind property? Clarify Number: 149 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 307 appears wrong page is being referenced Number: 150 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 308 add not that existing inlet is to be removed and replaced Number: 151 Created: 3/12/2003 cs350 Show storm sewer pipe in x-section Number: 152 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 450 pipe coverage appears to shallow LCUASS 12.2.2. Number: 153 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 600 can use stamped concrete as per attached Greeley standard Number: 154 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 601 provide detail stubs and thrust blocks Number: 155 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 700 pipe under tunnel floor is shallow, need to lower or provide other options as per storm water desires Number: 156 Created: 3/12/2003 cs 703 provide detail of tunnel floor with drain channel along one side as well as typical slope of floor. Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General, CtyRd 52 Number: 86 Created: 1 /312003 Complete and submit the checklist in Appendix E4 with the next submittal. Please address all missing items and see the redlines for more comments. Repeat3/6/03 Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: plat Number: 87 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 2/7 is the reference note correct, or is there another note 3 that I don't see? Number: 88 Page 2 Created: 2/25/2003 page 4/7 Are any easements needed for lot 1 Block 32? If so show them on this plat, otherwise easements will need to be processed prior to building permit issuance for this lot. Move street name out from under match line so it is readable. Refer to LCUASS Appedix E-6 Number: 89 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 5 of 7, Change Street C to Maple Hill Drive Topic: street utility plan Number: 73 Created: 12/19/2002 Need to show sidewalk connections and bridge structures across number 8 ditch to meet connectivity criteria. Approval of ODP for this project was for at least 1 ped crossing to adjacent property to east to meet connectivity standard. 3/6/03 Number: 79 Created: 12/19/2002 Access ramps need to be truncated dome type as per Federal Standard. See attached CDOT Standard for design and construction.- Repaet comment 3/6/03 Number: 80 Created: 12/23/2002 Will need tp apply for alternative compliance (street Connectivity) to Land Use Code section 3.6 (H) (1) and (2) Repeat comment, Matt to redo letter address redline comments 3/6/03 Number: 81 Created: 12/23/2002 See comments on Matt Delich Variance request letter dated November 12, 2002. Needs to better address why granting of Vaiance will not be detrimental to public health and safety. Repeat3/6/03 Topic: Utility Plans Number: 90 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 21/130 What is dark line along east edge of lots 1-12? Remove or identify as Number: 91 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 24/130 Need to meet with Engineering, Street Oversizing and Stormwater to discuss phasing plan Number: 92 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 28/130 If detail applies to all deflection/lowering situations add Typical to text. Also should move note so it is easily identifiable. Maybe into Tract I area, use larger text Number: 93 Created: 2/25/2003 Page 29/130 Show length of PVC stub pipe onto PR1 property. Will need off -site easements for stubs onto their property Page 3 Number: 113 Created: 2/26/2003 page 67/130 Specify Geo - grid as material for subbase separator from pavement section. Use manufactueres recommendations Number: 114 Created: 2/26/2003 page 70/130 May need school district PR1 signature on Baker laterial per letter from their attorney dated to me 2/24/2003 See enclosed Number: 115 Created: 2/26/2003 page 70A/130 May be a conflict between pipes at station 13+12 Number: 116 Created: 2/26/2003 page 70B /130 Are the nmanhole covers bolt on type? Are other structures needed such as air relief stand pipes and etc. needed? If so show on plans, details and notes Number: 117 Created: 2/26/2003 page 71/130 Do you think a utility coordination meeting is needed to verify driveway locations will work with all utilites, street trees and etc, General Comment - None of the drive ways are stationed. How will they be locatable in the field? need to station so curb and gutter contractor will know where they are when placing C&G. Call me to set up meeting if you think it's necessary. Number: 118 Created: 2/26/2003 72/130 Also, show detail of off -site trail on a sheet that is more applicable to trail location and construction Number: 119 Created: 2/26/2003 page 81/130 Repeat comment. Readability of plans for scanning is lacking go through entire plan set and correct those conflicts that are addressed in LCUASS Appendix E-6 Number: 120 Created: 2/26/2003 page 89/130 Move barricade to end of street at property line. All curb,gutter, sidewalk and asphalt pavement will be constructed at this time Typical for all stub streets Number: 122 Created: 2/26/2003 page 94/130 If no sidewalk and street trees are being installed along southside of Country Club Drive then modify typical x-sections to reflect this. Aalso show fill or cut slopes at 411 from 2 feet back of curb or edge of tree drip line . Number: 123 Created: 2/26/2003 98/130 Can't read elevations at driveways very well obsured by lines. Appears these are to steep. Driveways to Cty Rd. 11 need to follow LUCASS intersection design criteria Page 4 Number: 125 Created: 2/27/2003 100/130 If existing elevation is correct, there is a new roadway elevation at driveway by Cty Rd. 52., of almost 6 feet of elevation difference. How will this work? Number: 126 Created: 2/27/2003 101/130 include street names. Change frontage road to private drive Number: 127 Created: 2/27/2003 104/130 General x-section comment I'm having trouble reproducing cross slopes as per plan. Please check that flowline grades at cross sections match those on profile sheets. Also some numbers don't seem to corolate. In figuring x-slopes use lip of gutter to street center line and use pavement width not just 1 /2 street width Number: 128 Created: 2/28/2003 105/130 Change street names Also. Check x-slopes Number: 129 Created: 2/28/2003 107/130 Change street names Also x-slopes (typical for all x-slope sheets) Number: 130 Created: 2/28/2003 119-123/130 Work with Traffic Engineering for signing and stripping plans Number: 131 Created: 2/28/2003 125/130 Show section of County Road 11 with private drive on the west side from station? To station? On east side show % slope from 2 feet back of walk Number: 132 Created: 2/28/2003 126/130 Access Ramps need to comply with Fed Standard using truncated domes (see attachment for truncation only) Page 5 Project Comments Sheet 6MZERI�." Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: May 30, 2003 Project: MAPLE HILL PDP - PHASE ONE #29-OOA/B FINAL COMPLIANCE All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: May 29, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: General Number: 163 Created: 5/30/2003 Need to submit all cost estimates and signed right-of-way and easement dedications with Mylar submital Number: 164 Created: 5/30/2003 Typical comment many pages still have text and line weights that overlap and/or text is to small to read Number: 165 Created: 5/30/2003 Page 98/130 enlarge text in street cross section B. Carry sidewalk straight through without dip to curb ramp. Extend curb ramp walk to meet through walk Number: 166 Created: 5/30/2003 provide better and more detail at private drive and street grades Number: 167 Created: 5/30/2003 Page 99/130 Same comments as page 98 Number: 168 Created: 5/30/2003 same comments about private drive. This is a big issue with existing residences. Plans need to be easay to read and understand so they can see exactly what is happening to their private drive and access points. There should be separate sheets detailing what happens and where. Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page I ;x Selected Issues Report Cih of 1'oi Collins 4/15/2008 Date: MAPLE HILL RECREATION CENTER PDP - TYPE I SELECTION CRITERIA: Status = All ISSUES: Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Landscape plan Number:7 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16104] It appears that shrubs and trees are too close to the sewer and water services. Please revise. Topic: Phasing Number:28 Created:11/29/2004 Resolved If the pool is planned to be built prior to phase 5, then re -phasing is needed so that all adjacent streets are built with this pool, and the DA will need to be amended as well. Number:29 Created:12/16/2004 Pending [12/16/04] Please show old revision bubbles on previously revised utility plan sheets. Topic: Plat Number:10 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16/04] Please provide a signature line for the City Clerk Number:11 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16/04] Tract A is labeled as future development, but is also dedicated in its entirety as a drainage easement, so any future development would necessitate vacating at least a portion of that easement. Was this the intention? Topic: Site Plan Number:8 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16/041 Why are 2 fences needed? There's one fence close to the pool and another on the property line, with no apparent way of getting to the area in between. Was this the intent? The fence on the property line should be moved a minimum of 2' from the back of the walk on Maple Hill Road. Number:9 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved (11/16/041 Please label the ROW widths on the site plan for Maple Hill and Bar Harbor. Topic: Utility Plans Number:12 Created:11/16/2004 Pending [12116/04] Didn't receive a revised plat or plat redlines. [11/16104] Please include the plat as (for reference only) and do not include it in the numbering of the sheets for the utility plan set. Page 1 Number:13 Created: 11116/2004 Resolved [11/16/04] There are 2 options for handling the utility plans. If you want the new sheets to form a separate new set of utility plans, that's ok, but the revised sheets need to be a part of the original plan set, and a note on the new plans added to refer to the original Maple Hill plans for more information. Or the new sheets could be added as new sheets to the original Maple Hill plans along with the revised sheets and no new separate plan set would be created. Number:14 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16/04] Two benchmarks are required on the cover sheet. Number:15 Created: 11/1612004 Pending [12/16/04] See redlines. [11/16/041 Please review appendix E6 in LCUASS for scanability requirements and revise plans accordingly. Number:16 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16/04] The proposed mid -block ramp makes sense only if a handicapped parking stall is designated on -street. Please show signing/striping for the stall. Number:17 Created: 11/1612004 Resolved [11/16/041 Grading is shown on City property. An easement might be required for this offsite grading. Please obtain a letter of intent from Craig Foremen of Parks prior to hearing. Once this is cleared up, then I'm ok with the project going to hearing. Number:18 Created:11/16/2004 Resolved [11/16/04] The ramp proposed is for mid -block use with *attached* walks. Please use a standard directional ramp and include interim detail 1606 and enlarge interim detail 1607. Number:19 Created:11/16/2004 Pending [12/16/04] [11/16/04] See redlines and utility plan checklist for any additional comments. Number:27 Created:11/29/2004 Resolved Please revise phasing plans (again) to show the pool as Phase 8 to match the DA. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill Topic: General Number:21 Created:11/22/2004 Unresolved [11/22/04] No Comments Page 2 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: February 4, 2003 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #29-OOA MAPLE HILL PDP — TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Ted Shepard no later than the staff review meeting: February 26, 2003 No Comment ElProblems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** ("4c �7p�J16 HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISION; Utility — Redline Utility _ landscape Page 3 based on permits and/or time rather than leaving this open-ended as to when it would take place. We need some written commitment ( perhaps through developer agreements) so our homeowners feel they can remaining the neighborhood and make improvements to their homes rather than feel they should be selling their homes because of uncertainty. STREET OVERSIZING Our concerns on this project were discussed in detail in our April 7, 2003, letter on the Maple Hill development. We would appreciate any cooperation and assistance that the Lind Project developer can provide both to the City and our neighborhood during this project. PRIVACY FENCE AND/OR WALL -We are already experiencing the adverse noise and visual effects of the increased traffic from the Richard's Lake development; these adverse effects will be greatly increased by the Lind Project and Maple Hill developments. As a result of these three developments, traffic along NCR 11 in our neighborhood is projected to eventually be over 16,000 vehicles per day. We are looking for the City to ensure adequate berming to help mitigate tire and other vehicle noise and also help mitigate some of the visual effects of traffic. We are also looking for the City to provide landscaping which will further help mitigate tire and other vehicle noise and also further help mitigate some of the visual effects of traffic. Even with this berming and landscaping, we believe a privacy fence and/or wall in the 6-fool height range may still be essential to help mitigate the adverse visual effects of the increased traffic. We envision that the privacy fence and/or wall would be on the eastern edge of the 20-foot frontage road and not be on the 26-foot wide separation area between the frontage road and the relocated NCR 11. The privacy fence and/or wall would help tie our neighborhood together with an attractive, integrated appearance. Further, it would provide visual blocking of most traffic and help minimize the problems with lights from the exiting vehicles shining into our homes. (We think the irregular locations and configurations of our driveways would render ineffective other methods of mitigating the effects of lights from exiting vehicles shining into our homes.) The privacy fence and/or wall would be 16 feet from the roadside edge of the parkway sidewalk and its appearance would be enhanced by landscaping. We've iizl Selected Issues Report (J h ofof F� nlj:f 4/1512008 Date: MAPLE HILL PDP - PHASE ONE FINAL COMPLIANCE SELECTION CRITERIA: Status = All ISSUES: Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: detail sheet Number:50 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 124/130 Where is service disconnect detail being used? Provide water deflection detail Number: 51 125/130 clean up details as redlined Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Topic: General Number:7 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Provide Plan and profile of Baker irrigation Laterial. Need to see this pipe as it crosses roadways Number:8 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Baker laterial can not be in a public easement. It most be in private easement Number:9 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Baker laterial owners need to sign utility plans and plat Number:10 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved need signatures of Larimer County on utility plans Number:11 Created:12/16/2002 Unresolved refer to LCUASS Apendix E-6 for quality of plans for scanability. More cleanup work is required, check lines,text and overlay of the same. May need to turn some layers off to cleanup some sheets 2/28/03 Repaet comment - 3/6/03 Number:12 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved see comments for general notes sheet 2/130 Number:52 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved All streets need to align with Lind property as shown on their PDP submital Number:54 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Site phasing plan will be determined by City Storm Water and Engineering Department needs, ie turn arounds, detention facilites and etc. Need to discuss phasing so its acceptable for all. 3/6/03 Page 1 Number:55 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved For Engineering this is a good set of plans, mostly detail stuff to work out. Keith, Good Job! Number:70 Created:12/19/2002 Resolved Need interm design for local street connections to existing Cty Rd 11 and 52. Ultimate design will be built in the future Cty Rd. 52 and 11 will be built at a date later then anticipated by developers. need coordination meeting to discuss 3/6/03 Number:71 Created:12/19/2002 Resolved Need a plat note and on the utility plans, indicating that all driveways are to be a mnimum of 20 feet in length as measured from the back of sidewalk. Number:163 Created:5/3012003 Pending Need to submit all cost estimates and signed right-of-way and easement dedications with Mylar submital Number:164 Created:5/30/2003 Pending Typical comment many pages still have text and line weights that overlap and/or text is to small to read Number:165 Created:5/30/2003 Pending Page 98/130 enlarge text in street cross section B. Carry sidewalk straight through without dip to curb ramp. Extend curb ramp walk to meet through walk Number:166 Created:5/30/2003 Pending provide better and more detail at private drive and street grades Number:167 Created:5/30/2003 Pending Page 99/130 Same comments as page 98 Number:168 Created:5/30/2003 Pending same comments about private drive. This is a big issue with existing residences. Plans need to be easay to read and understand so they can see exactly what is happening to their private drive and access points. There should be separate sheets detailing what happens and where. Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 Number:56 Created: 12/1612002 Resolved Cty Rd 52 cover sheet only add notes as appropriate for this job, otherwise use statement to the effect that all general notes as stated in LCUASS Appendix E apply Number:57 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved CS 130, indicate section lines for CTY Rds 11 and 52 Number:58 Created: 12116/2002 Resolved CS 260 remove proposed from plans at under pass this facility will be built with this project. Make sure Gradding on Maple Hill Plans match what you are proposing work with Keith at TST Engineering Page 2 Number:145 Created:3/12/2003 Pending csl30 need to get comments from City Traffic Engineer for signing and stripping plans sheets. 6/4/3: Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062. sjoy Number:146 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs 302 show storm sewer pipe at underpass profile Number:147 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs 304 Show length of utulity service line installed with this project on cross street locations with thrust blocks, manhole etc. may have coverage issue with pipe and roadway section Number:148 Created:3/12/2003 Pending cs 305 Is # 8 pipe being built by Lind property? Clarify 6/3/3: This will need to be discussed and included in the Development Agreement. Since the Lind property's phasing will put them in this area first, it will be required that they construct this pipe with their frontage with Maple Hill participating in the costs. Please correct the labeling as this is not part of Lind, 1st filing as shown. Also, the section line weight shown in the legend does not match the section line shown in the plans. Number:149 Created: 3/1212003 Resolved cs 307 appears wrong page is being referenced Number:150 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs 308 add not that existing inlet is to be removed and replaced Number:151 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs350 Show storm sewer pipe in x-section Number:152 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs 450 pipe coverage appears to shallow LCUASS 12.2.2. Number:153 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs 600 can use stamped concrete as per attached Greeley standard Number:154 Created:3/12/2003 Pending cs 601 provide detail stubs and thrust blocks. 6/3/3: Repeat comment. sjoy Number:155 Created:3/12/2003 Resolved cs 700 pipe under tunnel floor is shallow, need to lower or provide other options as per storm water desires Number:156 Created:3/12/2003 Unresolved cs 703 provide detail of tunnel floor with drain channel along one side as well as typical slope of floor. Page 3 Number:169 Created:6/4/2003 Pending cs 001 Correct note number A13e. sjoy Number:170 Created:6/4/2003 Pending CS 100 reference Lind Property, Filing 2, for the future 15" sanitary sewer located at Clarion Way and CR52 and the future 16" waterline at Thoreau Drive and CR52. sjoy Number:171 Created:6/4/2003 Pending cs 300, 301, 302, etc - correct the ramp detail in the legend. sjoy Number:172 Created:6/4/2003 Pending Please provide interim transitions and striping from proposed to existing on CR52, east of Thoreau Drive. sjoy Number:173 Created:6/4/2003 Pending cs 308 Please correct overlapped spot elevations for scanability. Sjoy Number:174 Created:6/4/2003 Pending cs 350 Please show the top of the underpass elevation in the cross section. There appears to be inadequate cover over the top of the box to the bottem of scarified subgrade. Code requires a minimum of 2 feet. Sjoy Number:175 Created:614/2003 Pending cs 702 all structures must be a minimum of 2 feet below scarified subgrade. What's shown appears to be to shallow. Sjoy Number:176 Created:6/412003 Pending cs 707 Please see detail 1108 (and add to underpass details) for City parapet wall requirements along the top of the underpass. In addition, the railing for both underpasses (CR11 and CR52) must be designed inaccordance with AASHSTO. I am not sure the wooden railing will suffice. sjoy Number:177 Created:6/4/2003 Pending cs 708 detail section A -A: Please dimension the cast in place topping for pathway. Sjoy Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General, Cty Rd 52 Number:86 Created:1/3/2003 Resolved Complete and submit the checklist in Appendix E4 with the next submittal. Please address all missing items and see the redlines for more comments. Repeat3/6/03 Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Topic: Overall utility plan Number:27 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved sheet 26/130 detail to small can not read see LCUASS Apendex E- 6 scannibility Number:28 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 27/130 PFA wouls like some hydrants on eastside of Cty Rd 11 at intersections. Disregard. PFA okay with hydrants on west side of Cty Rd 11 Page 4 Number:29 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved General comment, refer to detail sheet and number for casing and waterline lowerings Number:30 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved extend proposed utility services to property line or onto adjacent properties with associated easements Topic: Overlot Grading Number:22 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Need off -site easement for pipe at number 8 ditch Number:23 Created: 12116/2002 Resolved Need to install pipe alomg drainage ara along Cty Rd 52 with this project. Work out repay/prepay with Lind. If this project and Lind are not built together it will be difficult for Lind to install Number:24 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Where are cross section as shown as detail. Identify where the detail applies Number:25 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved need off -site easement for southen pipe into number 8 ditch Number:26 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved sheet 18 /130 better identify deal percent slope in pond, appears steep Topic: plat Number:13 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Add statement about any existing easements to be vacated with this plat (if Needed) Number:14 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Is there a provate street with this project? If not remove note Number:15 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Title needs to be Maple Hill being a replat of Nineteenth Green Planed Unit Development Number:16 Created: 12116/2002 Resolved Need to look at Tract statements as it relates to future building sites. Not sure you want to dedicate all of tracts as easements Number:17 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved dedicate typical 15 public easement adjacent to County Rd 11 and 52 Number:18 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved show any existing easements that will stay from old plat Number:19 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Is eastern boundary line the same as ditch easement line if so label, also show eastern most easement line of number 8 ditch Page 5 Number:20 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved See sheet 4/7 for comments about buldings in tracts shown as easements Number:21 Created: 12116/2002 Resolved Why vacate portions of existing County Club Road? All existing rights -of -way in 19th Green P.U.D. will need to be vacated. Just Vacate the whole thing and new right of way will be dedicate with this plat. County Club and other streets will not be vacated until after approval of this project after signed plat has been filed Number:87 Created:2/25/2003 Resolved Page 2/7 is the reference note correct, or is there another note 3 that I don't see? Number:88 Created:2/25/2003 Resolved page 4/7 Are any easements needed for lot 1 Block 32? If so show them on this plat, otherwise easements will need to be processed prior to building permit issuance for this lot. Move street name out from under match line so it is readable. Refer to LCUASS Appedix E- 6 Number:89 Created:2/25/2003 Resolved Page 5 of 7, Change Street C to Maple Hill Drive Topic: sanitary sewer utility plan Number:33 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 36/130 May need more seperation with storm sewqer, work with Boxelder and City Storm Water Utility Topic: site and landscape Number:72 Created:12/19/2002 Resolved Streets don't match those as shown on Utility Plan revise to match with Utility Plans Topic: storm sewer utility plan Number:34 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 56/130 bury depth of pipe is not sufficent LCUASS 12.2.2 (typical comment where it may apply) Number:35 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 59,60,66,67,689,701130 LCUASS 12.2.2 Number:53 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 23/130 provide x-section of berm between ponds Topic: Street Names Number:2 Created:l2/6/2002 Resolved Include street names on plat with next submital Topic: street utility plan Number:36 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 71/130 need to identify where curb cuts will be on Collector Street with vertical C&G. If bulder installs at later date they will be subject to permit fees and penalittes for cutting new street (typical comment where needed) Page 6 Number:37 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 77/130 General typical comment where it applys. Move curve data/data and elevations from each other so information is readable Number:38 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 79/130 Clarify with detail information being provided Number:39 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 81/130 Can't read information provided Number:40 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 87/130 refer to LCUASS 8.2.4 and figure 8.17 as street intersections connect to Arterial Street system Number:41 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 89/130 Install RCP pipe at east end of street C to accomidate storm water flows Number:42 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 97/130 Show existing facilites and how existing streets and drives will connect with new construction, may need profile of each Number:43 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 98/130 Provide cross section of private drive from Cty Rd 11 to Cty Rd 52 including New Cty Rd 11 construction Number:44 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Provide details and cross section of Baker Irrigation Laterial adjacent to Cty Rd 11 Number:45 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 99/130 sidewalks need to align with each other and ramps Number:73 Created:12/19/2002 Resolved Need to show sidewalk connections and bridge structures across number 8 ditch to meet connectivity criteria. Approval of ODP for this project was for at least 1 ped crossing to adjacent property to east to meet connectivity standard. 3/6/03 Number:79 Created:12/19/2002 Resolved Access ramps need to be truncated dome type as per Federal Standard. See attached CDOT Standard for design and construction.- Repaet comment 3/6/03 Number:80 Created: 12123/2002 Resolved Will need tp apply for alternative compliance (street Connectivity) to Land Use Code section 3.6 (H) (1) and (2) Repeat comment, Matt to redo letter address redline comments 3/6/03 Number:81 Created:12/23/2002 Resolved See comments on Matt Delich Variance request letter dated November 12, 2002. Needs to better address why granting of Vaiance will not be detrimental to public health and safety. Repeat3/6/03 Page 7 Topic: street utility x-sections plan Number:46 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 104/130 Show typical percent slope on x-sections Number:47 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved Appears several off -site slope and construction easements are needed Number:48 Created:12/1612002 Resolved 112/130 Need to construct a minimum of 36 foot pavement section for Country Club Road Note on plans to be bulit by others Number:49 Created: 12116/2002 Resolved 115/130 Off -site easements Show irrigation laterial in street intersection x-sections, show 2 foot flat area behind back of sidewalk, Did you calculate public water storm flows in drainge report to accomidate slope from street to swale? Topic: Utility Plans Number:90 Created:2/25/2003 Resolved Page 21/130 What is dark line along east edge of lots 1-12? Remove or identify as ?? Number: 91 Page 24/130 Need to meet with Engineering, phasing plan Created:2/2512003 Resolved Street Oversizing and Stormwater to discuss Number:92 Created:2/25/2003 Resolved Page 28/130 If detail applies to all deflection/lowering situations add Typical to text. Also should move note so it is easily identifiable. Maybe into Tract I area, use larger text Number:93 Created:2125/2003 Resolved Page 29/130 Show length of PVC stub pipe onto PR1 property. Will need off -site easements for stubs onto their property Number:113 Created:2/26/2003 Resolved page 67/130 Specify Geo - grid as material for subbase separator from pavement section. Use manufactueres recommendations Number:114 Created:2/26/2003 Unresolved page 70/130 May need school district PR1 signature on Baker laterial per letter from their attorney dated to me 2/24/2003 See enclosed Number:115 Created:2/26/2003 Resolved page 70A/130 May be a conflict between pipes at station 13+12 Number:116 Created:2/26/2003 Resolved page 70B /130 Are the nmanhole covers bolt on type? Are other structures needed such as air relief stand pipes and etc. needed? If so show on plans, details and notes Number:117 Created:2/26/2003 Resolved page 71/130 Do you think a utility coordination meeting is needed to verify driveway locations will work with all utilites, street trees and etc, General Comment - None of the drive ways are stationed. How will they be locatable in the field? need to station so curb and Page 8 gutter contractor will know where they are when placing C&G. Call me to set up meeting if You think it's necessary. Number:118 Created:2/26/2003 Resolved 72/130 Also, show detail of off -site trail on a sheet that is more applicable to trail location and construction Number:119 Created:2/26/2003 Unresolved page 81/130 Repeat comment. Readability of plans for scanning is lacking go through entire plan set and correct those conflicts that are addressed in LCUASS Appendix E-6 Number:120 Created:2/26/2003 Resolved page 89/130 Move barricade to end of street at property line. All curb,gutter, sidewalk and asphalt pavement will be constructed at this time Typical for all stub streets Number:122 Created:2/26/2003 Unresolved page 94/130 If no sidewalk and street trees are being installed along southside of Country Club Drive then modify typical x-sections to reflect this. Aalso show fill or cut slopes at 4/1 from 2 feet back of curb or edge of tree drip line . Number:123 Created:2/26/2003 Unresolved 98/130 Can't read elevations at driveways very well obsured by lines. Appears these are to steep. Driveways to Cty Rd. 11 need to follow LUCASS intersection design criteria Number:125 Created:2/27/2003 Resolved 100/130 If existing elevation is correct, there is a new roadway elevation at driveway by Cty Rd. 52., of almost 6 feet of elevation difference. How will this work? Number:126 Created:2/27/2003 Resolved 101/130 include street names. Change frontage road to private drive Number:127 Created:2/27/2003 Resolved 104/130 General x-section comment I'm having trouble reproducing cross slopes as per plan. Please check that flowline grades at cross sections match those on profile sheets. Also some numbers don't seem to corolate. In figuring x-slopes use lip of gutter to street center line and use pavement width not just 1/2 street width Number:128 1 Created:2/28/2003 Resolved 105/130 Change street names Also. Check x-slopes Number:129 Created:2/28/2003 Resolved 107/130 Change street names Also x-slopes (typical for all x-slope sheets) Number:130 Created:2/28/2003 Resolved 119-123/130 Work with Traffic Engineering for signing and stripping plans Number:131 Created:2/28/2003 Resolved 125/130 Show section of County Road 11 with private drive on the west side from station? To station? On east side show % slope from 2 feet back of walk Page 9 Number:132 Created:2/28/2003 Resolved 126/130 Access Ramps need to comply with Fed Standard using truncated domes (see attachment for truncation only) Topic: water utility plan Number:31 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 33/130 Note refers to sanitary sewer, this is water plan sheet, City does allow PVC Storm Sewer Pipe in right-of-way which may help. Suggest you check into this. No "Advanced Drainage Systems ("ADS") pipe is allowed in R.O.W. Number:32 Created:12/16/2002 Resolved 35/130 Provide a typical water line lowering deatil for each size of pipe, including thurst blocking, tie backs, fittings and etc. treat trees nee Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Topic: General Number:62 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Development phasing lines on site plan make it very difficult to view sidewalk and trail connections, dimensions. Number:63 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Where trail combines with sidewalk system, minimum width is 8'. Can combined sidewalk/trail be 10' to match trail width? Note: 1-100 scale makes it very difficult to measure sidewalk and trail widths. Number:64 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Show appropriate crosswalk marking on Collector -arterial intersections and near neighborhood center & neighborhood park. See redline comments. Number:65 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Street 5 is labeled as a residentail local street on its sothern end of the development. This street is a collector on the Master Street Plan. Number:66 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Where does the trail go or connect to at the southeastern end of the development? Number:67 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Would like to see a site plan that clearly shows bike lane and crosswalk markings, bike lane, trail and sidewalk widths. Would like to see a detail of the grade -separated trail crossing of CR-52 (to be built as part of this project coordinated with Lind development). Number:68 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Street 1 needs to align on northern end with Lind development street. Number:69 Created:12/17/2002 Unresolved Bike/ped easement for connection to the east of the site is shown. Is this project escrowing funds to build future b/p connection? Page 10 Page 4 noted that the design of the Maple Hill development has fencing to the rear of the duplex units directly across from our homes on NCR 11. MAINTENANCE OF FRONTAGE ROAD AND 26-FOOT WIDE SEPARATION AREA We want to ensure that any responsibility for the maintenance of the frontage road and the 26-foor wide separation area would be fair and equitable rather than place an unfair burden on us. As residents, Latimer County now provides us with road maintenance, snowplowing, and cutting of the grassy area along the eastern side of NCR 1 L Our neighborhood's March 7, 1997, Memorandum of Understanding with the developer of Richard's Lake states: "...the Developer and Neighbors agree to negotiate in good faith, along with the City and County to establish the specifics of engineering, maintenance ( i.e., landscaping, snowplowing ), and the financial obligations of the; section of roadway from Richard's Lake Road south to Country Club Road." We want to undertake negotiations to resolve these issues using this guidance. We would like to note that only 17 homes ( with less than 40 total residents ) front along NCR 11. The parkway area is considerably isolated from us and represents a large area of land compared to the common situation where it might be a few feet of grass between the owner's sidewalk and the street. Further, the traffic projected for this highly visible arterial street is over 16,000 vehicles per day. We think our percent of useibenefit of the parkway would be very small compared to the large number of users from the neighborhood ( most of whom would be from the three new developments ) and from outside the neighborhood. We do want to assume a fair and reasonable share of maintenance; are there instances you can provide of other existing homeowners who have dealt with a similar situation) MITIGATION OF CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC We believe that reasonable actions must be taken to help minimize construction traffic in our neighborhood. All such traffic now Flows down NCR 11. We believe that if CR 52 was paved between NCR 1 I and NCR 9, this could serve as an effective route for construction traffic for the Lind Project. City engineering staff thought there might be some other treatment for this dirt road which might make it suitable for construction traffic. We want to see this treatment or other alternatives Page 5 evaluated; we strongly believe NCR 11 should not serve as a construction route for the Lind Project until after the frontage road is completed. SPEEDING/TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT Safety on NCR 1 I remains a major neighborhood concern. Speeding and reckless driving are problems not just for neighborhood residents but also for the large number of cyclists, runners, and walkers from outside the neighborhood who use NCR] I on a daily basis. Heavy construction vehicles such as concrete trucks and dump trucks require more time to stop and are more likely to cause serious injury to these users. There is very strong neighborhood support for the reduction of speed limits along NCR 11. Al a minimum, we would like to see reduced speed limits in the areas of the entrances for construction traffic ( this could be limited only to actual construction hours). We would also like to see an agreement reached by law enforcement agencies (city/county highway patrol ) as to who will be responsible for enforcement of speeding and reckless driving violations on this portion of NCR 11. Finally, we would like to see vigorous enforcement of speeding and reckless driving violations by the responsible law enforcement agency. CONTACT POINTS Finally, we would like to work closely with all parties to cooperatively resolve any construction related problems which affect our neighborhood. Prior to start of actual site work and construction, we would like to identify contact points for the different parties (neighborhood, developer, and local government) in the event that problems arise. Nick Yobbagy, Kirvin Knox, and I will continue to act as representatives in working with the developers and local government representatives on neighborhood concerns. In closing, we plan to continue to work cooperatively with all parties to preserve neighborhood integrity, quality of life, safety, and home values. We are especially appreciative of the efforts of the developer of the Lind Project and the representatives of the City of Fort Collins who have worked with us on these goats. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments. Please feel free to contact me on (970) 407-0531 for further explanations of our comments.