Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREGISTRY RIDGE PUD - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2005-06-16Transportation Services Engineerinb Oepartment City of Fort Collins August 12, 1999 Susie Miller 5849 Plateau Court Fort Collins, Co. 80526 RE: Scenic Knolls Water Association Dear Ms. Miller: The intent of this letter is to verify that the street construction on South Shields Street is an interim improvement. The Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins requires all developments have access to an improved Arterial Street ( with this project Shields is the arterial), and if the access does not exist, they are required to upgrade the street to a thirty-six ( 36 ) foot wide cross- section on a base adequate to accommodate the ultimate design, or they must construct the arterial in accordance with the City design standards criteria, ( this would be the ultimate design). In most cases developers elect to construct the 36 foot interim design at their cost. Which is the case with the Registry Ridge Development. For your information I have inclosed a copy of the cross-section that will be similar to the ultimate design of Shields Street as well as a drawing that shows approximately what is being constructed as an interim improvement by the Registry Ridge developer. As I stated previously, the Shields Street design pioposed by the Registry Ridge developer is an interim design and Shields will be improved to the ultimate design with a cross section as per the attached detail sometime in the future. Hopefully, this information is useful and if you have any questions, please call me at 221-6605 David Stringer Development Review Supervisor cc: Sheri Wamhoff 281 North College AV'L'nUe • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6605 Der earlier 114--'_ S,lOnS, it +,_sus determined that the best dg(.it.d%h on :h;S bect ion of M_ Project Was 0) d Minimal _M011111- 01 chariges to the ex ivi_ ng grade. nd to insuall a new asphalt .deciu:, confuMing to di i ei id! s _du dads The interim roadway seuLica xci-I_. be 36 wide. with _ shoulders. and no curbs and gutter. This preliminary ;design -.ncluded the °o=%Uti_ing assumptions; 1. The design :riatoh the exis ing longizudinal giade of Shields. The.-e aLe suiire- ades whIal ±ze Ns- than 9.4., 2. NES utilized 3 - _ side slopes _u wininize Lhe SIOPeedSerrer [ A: eU 1 t -; elrieil .-., . �, can see( _[; i. '>>Fsections, 11Js t ) L u1@ hi ,tiny s dues are 2 1 of s _eel,(_- _. There are 3 Misting drainage culverts iy`ict cross Shields. Mae U-rossMg Will ML to u•Lr diJe& Wil- LIAO ex0epLLon of extending then. no antc the ievised giadfiiq. Roadside ditches will be designed to dusuamodate the 7 t _ yea.. design storm. baser_ on -jai Logo Mained from the City. h lei a VpU -. aducessi,g stolTwaveli1off calculations, as We:_ as Lhe :WMM -retitle'_ uilGatv will be s.,_ lltt_- with the final dessyn. ._ 5. Only the interim condition 7eblan will he included as a },aril of :_hest_ cuisk.uLwo do_,[(e':t S. Questions NES has regarding our final consiru(c .t i( do(_' Meni-s. _. Will the exist i'__r driveways regairs pavement, and if So how -- . al 7 Lail the existing Niveways culverts be salvaged, cleaned anti -. -epiaced ;if i_.l_ _ th s our call. `f not, w2ll new be iequiled to he UP (Me' are within Public R-yhv-c;-- 2. Who is "espo shble for _=t_i:i ,i the additional Right -of - nay,? At one Po Vni. , Qe, e was do e e- made by the City us _.elf yairiCi.pale ;.n Obtaining these e2MTMOR. We have attached _il exhibit i1 aid aowce -1 Property uwners diong Shlinldn. Shields Street adjacent to Registry Ridge Thin ..-..t.Liori is defined as being that cev` i! , of Shields sciui-h of Trilby hired, air_ lrancage of S Ridge. or .{ PLux_oai ea.-_' 2600 iinedl foe!. This {i._ i i LiulI also .dverage3 dpp-uxlwa e y 24 h t-- tit - _ curb and garter. bat -tad side= ditwhes Design <SSUM rii=1 > are as follows 1.. Ler ie[ t ,ixa ) section will be 50 ' aide, with shoulders on Rail( side The inte—IM loadway _v_li.n is rhac will be ii it `_l 1. in con Jtinot- to wi Lit the Regis t rl Ridge development-. Future street e 1._ _ Will . ._._ be S�eu _. FLY CMOs of Fort us Arterial seC_=cirri/ !v F - ! AQ artervaldesjgq h -ti been included hided as a par of these . ons .1.. -_.. }, plans. i dud whenthis portion o 1:__ds wuu d be widened, no changes J the longitudinal grades will be required. RoM L t__ T and .._timy._e. design plans sill be included in ibis conjmu.i._„un isen _. Pei _,;LL Dellch'S traffic study, this area will require left Win Janes um ., rt.hbound Shields. This will be accommodated by pro,idiny __ 14 center SUIAL-inUIDUS turn lane, tapered as shown. Trilby Road not adjacent to Registry Ridge This Section is defined as that portion of Trilby, east- of Shields Meer. and up Lia _.`e existing railioad tracks (virtu approximaLe and uf improvements associated with Ridgewood This s _ ._ _ -n is appyoximate3y 2500 linear feet 71'C_ ,. veldt .aty design drawings of _his por _ion of Trilby have been included. e design will be for Mario io condition only. a,. will maiLch the NES wesicin at Shields. and We RB13's desiqn at the exisUnq raMund tLacks. The pioposad cross section will be the sazu as 'he LVp1wal urass section _oi Shields north of .t ilb I'C%aM Trilby Road adjacent to Registry Ridge This bec. ion is defined at that portion f Trilby Road,westof Shields stren l ._ _e i_rage of Registry Ridge, or approximately 2550 linear feet. The exi6ting section Q, The interim design will be ii wide. with no curb and gutte ThIeu 12' laNes will he included; 2 - 12' travel lanes and , . _.r_}i- r___,_S left urn lane, and u _ wide ,-Ke lane provided MebouLh _ of irilby 1_ eu_ to Registry['ice Vie. Bo Lh Lhe interim and ultimate S i_vn_, will be offset from _tie Set. iota line. The Maim .. section will be _ M ap i.o mate'y ti to the __ .__ that Ehe proposed interim edge of d:;phal`_ matches the hoMonual and vertical locaLlun of the existing edyu. Attached is a copy of the review comments from __ i-SLa? es „iet_«_.c regarding Lheii 5,r'._ overhead trans._ wulines. E �u vfj J. -1 kH au ri rtea.r -,., -- f I J ef: Roye,�-A. C'uil iss� ��E CC: IM; i Xle B i y a 01 L at iRue-r Pit Y; M L k e H L t v a F 4 C I E i M Dot e TRILBY .. ......... PHASE I PHASE 7 PHASE PHASE 41 I PHASE 12 mmm I PHASE 11 i:] I PHASE 13 rr r� r r r o/ n r... W Co 0 J W N SHIELDS ST. IMPROVEMENT PHASE 4 SHIELDS ST. IMPROVEMENTS APPROXIMA IMPROVEME ST. WITH T NORTHERN ENGINEERING SEI 420 SOUTH HOWES SUITE 202, FT. COLLINS, COLORADO (970) 221-4158 �)Tvio'.S, !11C. September 6, 1995 Mr. Michael Ludwig Community Planning and Environmental Services City of Mort Collins PO Box 580 281 North College Avenue Port Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 RM,: Registry Ridge Preliminary Response to City Comments Dear Michael, This letter is the second letter to your office in response to the comments regarding issues received regarding the Registry Ridge ODP and Preliminary PUD. "I'his letter will address those issues which are applicable to Nort.herr, Engineering Services, Inc (N1iS). All other issues will he addressed by Jim Sell. Design, Matt Delich, or Riverside Technology, lnc. NF.S has reviewed comments regarding the onsite and offsite utilities with "berry Ferrill from Fort Collins/Loveland Water and Sewer District. All of the comments and concerns that the District expressed with the preliminary submittat can be addressed at the time of final design. The offsite sewer is currently being prepared and will be submitted to the District as a separate project. Northern Ingiueering has also developed and reviewed a Hydraulic Master Plan with Terry Merrill per District requirement (comment 8, Overall Development Plan). A copy of the letter from Elaine Spencer at Larimer County concerning Traffic issues has been forwarded to Matt Delich. Matt will be responding to Elaine's concerns. NES is currently working on the arterial designs of South Shields Street and "trilby Road. 'these arterial roadway plans will be submitted to the City as a separate project, and at that time the plans Will also he submitted to I,arimer County For their review and approval. NES met with City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility to review their comments, and to determine the extent of our resubmittal package. Stormwater indicated that they would like us to resubmit our Preliminary Drainage and Frosion Control Study, as this will serve as a Master Plan For the Registry Ridge ODP. NES is revising this study per City comments. We also discussed with Kerrie Ashbeck the extent of the revisions to be resubmitted. She indicated that the revised site plans from Jim Sell would address the majority of Engineerings' concerns. She said that we will not need to resubmit a revised copy of the Preliminary Plat, or revised Preliminary Utility plans, other than those required to be I esubmitted by Stormwater. Kerrie also indicated that a meeting should be set up with City Engineering regarding the proposed street rotaries. 'These meetings are being coordinated by Jim Sell Design. Other than that, all engineering issues cnn be addressed at time of Final Design. In particular, I would like to address the following specific issues per previous City comment and your letter dated July 17, 1995: Comment 4d., oDP - The developer understands that these wetlands cannot he negatively affected. Neither the proposed road or the fire access road will be located in the wetlands area, and at time of final desig❑ a hydrogeologic study will be prepared concerning these roads and to the sources of the wetlands hydrology, whether it is fed from above or underground (or both) sources. Comment 6a & 6c, ODP - If and when the park site is finalized, any drainage channel can be relocated on site to coordinate with any future park development. The design NES chose was one which ❑tilized the existing drainage conveyance clement. Per discussions with Stormwater Utility, rerouting this existing drainago channct will not be a problem. Comment 8, ODP - This has been prepared, and has been reviewed with the District. Coun7ient 1 and 2 a-e, Preliminary PUD - The developer agrees to the additional easements required by Columbine Cablevision and US West, and these will be incorporated into the Fivat plats for Registry Ridge. Comment 3, Preliminary PUD - This legal description will be added to the Site plan, submitted by Jim Sell Design. "The preliminary plat is not being resubmitted, per Kerrie Ashbeck. Comment 41), Preliminary PUD - Per conversations with the District, and per the preliminary hydraulic master plan developed for the District, these Fire flow requirements can he complied with. Comment 12a, Preliminary PUD - City Storrnwater policy (per Glen Schlueter) is that if the quality, quantity, or peak flows are changed, downstream offsite easements will be required to the receiving named drainageway. In regard to Registry Ridge, this would be applicable to flows that cross Trilby in the northwest corner of the project, and flow to Smith Creek. Glen has said the developer has two options; one is to obtain ol'fsitc easements, the other is to provide onsite detention and retentio❑ (this eliminates any changes to downstream runoff conditions). NES, as a part of the Preliminary drainage report resubmittal, is incorporating the latter alternative of a dek-11tio❑ and retention system. Comment 121), Preliminary PUD — The developer agrees and encourages cooperation and coordination with the Natural Resources Department, especially in regards to the Wetlands areas, transition areas, and water quality. Please call if you have any questions regarding this letter, or any queStionS pertinent to the Registry Ridge Preliminary submittal. Sincerely, Roger A. Curtiss P.C. cc: Jim McCory, Colorado Land Source Tom Kehler, Jim Sell Design Kerric Ashbeck, City of Fort Collins Glen Schlueter, City of Fort Collins Mike Bryaut, Larimer Cou11ty "ferry Ferrill, Ft. Collins/Loveland Water District Lucia Liley, March and Myatt A Com"olntr.rtt to Pro,�{rrss LARIMER COUNTY COLORADO July 12, 1995 City of Fort Collins Planning PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 RE: REGISTRY RIDGE PliD Engineering Department (970)498-5700 FAX (970) 498-7986 Post Office Box ' 190 Fort Collins, Coloraoo 80522-1190 Director of Engineering Elaine W. Spencer This proposal has been reviewed by this office and the following comments are submitted. This development will add significant traffic to Shields and Trilbv in this area. Traffic is increasing on both roadways and particular ;attention needs to be paid to the frilbp/Shields intersection and to Shields Street north of Trilby to Clarendon Hills. Shields Street north of this proposal does not meet current urban standards and should be improved. The intersection should be signalized with this develonment if it meets warrants. Larimer County is not in a position to signalize this intersection unless Funds are made available through the North Front Range Transportation and Air puality Pkmnine Council � NFRT&AQPC)i. Construction drawings for improvements to Shields and Trilby should be submitted to this office fer review. The following items relate specifically to the traffic report. Any questions regarding these comments should be addressed to Firian Fraaken at-198-571 S. I . In reviewine the existing count data with the future background traffic volumes it appears that there are several questionable future background traffic volumes. Specifically, the northbound AM right turns from Shields to Tidinv decrease front 1995 to �000. and no growth in hackground traffic (1995 vs 2015) is shown foi the Abl eastbound left turns as well as PM northbound left turns and southbound right turns. It is ur ikeh that there will be no growth for decreas--) in anv background turning movement volumes at this intersection. 2. hl reviewing the site traffic at the intersection of Shields and Trilby it is evident that there are several errors in routine the site ❑arc volumes through'he intersection from/to the site accesses. These errors are up to -0 vehicles in the peak hour (for instance the site traffic entering the intersection for the Short Ranee Afternoon Peak Hour Traffic from the south is 70 vehicles less than the sum of the site traffic routed through fie North Road access point). Due to the lark number of these errors and the potential for them to affect critical movements Through the intersection the results shown in the intersection analyses may not be valid. Site traffic in 2015 is shown as static or decreasing from 2000 on the AM peak southbound right turn and the westbound throuuh movements as well as the PM peak southbound right turn and eastbound left turns. As the site traffic volumes are to increase sieniEcantly from 3000 to 2015 it is not like] these turning movements would not increase too. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Jonn Clarke Janet Duvall Jim Disney District I District 11 District III Registry Ridge PUD July 12, 1995 Page 2 3. The need for left turn lanes on Shields is more based on an interruption of through traffic or accident history than by volume. Unless this was provided by the Developer or the City it is unlikely that the improvements would be made in the near future. The LOS A rating for through tragic on Shields indicates that the through traffic is not heing significantly impaired or delaved by the turning vehicles at this intersection. "rile salCty issues of an increasing volume of left turns from Shields could be partially mitigated by reducing the speed limit ou Shields to reduce the differential speeds of through and turning vehicles. d. For purposes of determining the amount of impact the development will have on this area it would be informative if the background only conditions were run. This would permit the identification of significant impacts due primarily to the new development as opposed to impacts caused by the anticipated background traffic volumes. 5. File background traffic volumes should include some effect of the McKee Trust to the south. It is not clear if this was the case or not. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerelv, Elaine W. Spencer Director of Engineering c: Nlatt Delich mlCOMMITT March 18, 1999 Sheri Wamhoff City of Fort Collins - Engineering 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Registry Ridge Dear Sheri, EN&AEERING DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-5700 FAX (970) 498-7985 Thank you for sending the latest revisions to the Registry Ridge off -site improvement plans. I have reviewed the plans and have also reviewed the previous comments sent to you by Pam Duncan, previously of our office, and Your response to Pam's fetter. It looks like you were able to address most of the comments from Pam but there are two issues that I would like to clarify: It is my understanding from talking with Bill Gleiforst, our Traffic Services Supervisor, that the City is planning on installing a "temporary traffic signal" at the intersection of Shields and Trilby in conjunction with the interim intersection improvements. Bill said that once the intersection was fully improved the permanent signals would be installed. I just wanted to double check with you that this is the City's intent. The only issue from your letter that I have some concerns with is regarding the decision not to include the intersection of Trilby and Taft Hill in the traffic study. You stated in your letter the City feels that the development will have a minimal impact to this intersection and therefore did not request that it be a part of the traffic study. I have no basis to argue the point other than my personal opinion, but I think that it should have been included as part of the traffic study to confirm the City's feeling. Is there a traffic analysis that would show the number of new trips directed toward this intersection? This would probably help me see why you decided not to include this intersection. After reviewing the plans, I did have some additional comments and questions. Some of the comments that I redlined on the plans are only suggestions. I will not list these out in this letter but I have included the redlined set of plans for you to look through. Following are the comments that I feel do need to be looked at and addressed: 1. There are several existing culverts called out in the plan view that cross Shields and Trilby. Only a few of these crossings are shown in the profile view. It would be helpful to see all of the culverts shown in the profile to insure that there is adequate cover over them with the modified road profiles. Were all of the regrading limits for the side streets and driveways checked? It looks like they probably were, based on the grading plan but I had a little difficulty reading the grading plan at the scale it was plotted. The only reason I ask this is that it is a little unusual that the driveways will all tie in smoothly at the ROW line, especially when some sections of Shields are being lowered by a foot or more and the ROW is only about ten feet off of the new edge of asphalt. h.`.devrev\planchk'.cilies.ftoilinstregisvy r dgB3 doc Transpor ion Services Engineering Department City of Fort Collins February 25, 1997 VF Ripley Associates, Inc. Linda Ripley 1113 Stoney Hill Drive Ft. Collins, CO 80525 Dear Linda: Last week, I met with Mike Herzig, Matt Baker, and Kerrie Ashbeck of the Engineering Department to discuss the City's requirements for the timing of off -site improvements. We discussed the City's general Code requirements and standard practice in interpreting and applying the Code. Hearthfire P.U.D. and the Registry Ridge P.U.D. were included in the discussion as current development proposals which must meet the off -site improvement requirements of the City. As you know, the Code requires all development to have access to an improved arterial street or an arterial street funded for improvement or the developer must improve the impacted off -site streets to a minimum of 36 feet in width back to the nearest improved arterial (Code Section 29-678). Improvements adjacent to a developing property are required at the time of development while improvements such as auxiliary lanes are often triggered during the buildout of the development when the impact is created. Off - sites are required at the time of development (prior to the issuance of the first building permit) per the Code section referenced above. The City will accept a letter of credit for 150% of the total cost of the off -site improvements at the time of the first building permit to guarantee completion of the off - sites. However, the off -site improvements must be completed prior to issuance of more than 25% of the building permits in the development (or prior to issuing more than 25% of the building permits in Phase 1 if the development is phased). Also, as stated in previous Staff comments on the Redgistry Ridge P.U.D. project, the off -site improvements are not eligible for any street oversizing reimbursement. The development agreement for the Registry Ridge P.U.D., 1st Filing will include language to stipulate the requirements described above. Please call me at 221-6750 with any questions. 'Rl A,rth C,�II�•;;r 9vrnuc • C'.(-i. F,c, 5R0 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-hh05 3. Were all of the taper lengths u_,igned by the posted speed limit? Some of one tapers appear to be too short based on the existing speed limit. Perhaps the speed limit is going to change because of the traffic signal. 4. I would recommend against having Pi's in the flowline at the right turn lanes entering the subdivision off of Shields. I would prefer to see curves constructed. 5. The tie in to the existing road section at the southern construction limits of Shields street,on sheet 16/34, needs to be changed. I redlined one possible option for tying into the existing asphalt at the south limits of the improvements. The asphalt needs to be sawcut along a proposed lane line, which in this case would be the existing centerline. 6. Also on sheet 16/34, I would like to see the profiles extended south (with existing grades called out) to insure that the existing grades make a smooth transition into the proposed grades. I redlined several comments on the striping plans with regards to the center lane striping. It seems that it would make more sense to actually stripe in the left turn lanes rather than have a continuous center turn lane striped. I would like to see a detail of the intersection at Shields and Trilby added to the plans. Not only does it look like it will be a difficult intersection to construct so additional information will be helpful, but I would like to see where the cross slope transitions are and what the ride profile in each direction looks like. On sheet 22/34, between stations 23+1 I and 30+40, it shows the pavement section of Trilby transitioning in and then back out. I think I understand the reason for this is to phase the bike lane out, but I think it would be better to keep the north edge of asphalt consistent and phase the bike lane out with striping. Future widening of Trilby on the north side will be easier to construct if the existing asphalt is straight and does not jog in and out. I also do not understand why the bike lane is being phased out where it is shown on the plans rather than at the western construction limits. 10. I realize this may be answered in the traffic study, but why isn't a right turn lane for east bound Trilby into the development at Wainwright Drive provided? 11. Does the traffic study show a need for a right turn lane for east bound Trilby onto south bound Shields? If it does, and even if the turn lane is not constructed for some reason, shouldn't the ROW be dedicated now? 12. On sheet 29/34, I noted that the profiles do not seem to take the skew of the railroad tracks into account. I would like to see the railroad tracks shown in the profile and the vertical curves adjusted if necessary. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the plans. I apologize if any of my comments have already been discussed and resolved prior to my involvement with the review. If you have any comments or questions about the comments or the redlines, please give me a call at 498-5724. Sincerely, Rusty McDaniel c: Bill Gleiforst, Traffic Services Supervisor, Larimer County Bud Curtis, Northern Engineering Cam McNair, City Engineer, City of Fort Collins file h de,,ev,pl.xhkndge3. doc Page 2 of 3 Transpo ration Services higineering Department Citv of Port Collins April 5, 1998 Mr. Roger A. Curtiss Northern Fngineering Services, Inc. 420 S. Howes, Suite 202 Port Collins, Co 80521 Rl:: Registry Ridge, First filing - Trilby Road x-section Dear Roger, I'his letter is in response to the fax that was received on the proposed Trilby Road x-section on February 9, 1998. 'I lie following are comments from the transportation coordination group on the proposed x- section: 1) Make sure that the crown of the road is located at its ultimate location. It should not be located based on this interim condition. 2) If there is a borrow ditch on the north side and it needs to be rebuilt casements will be needed for this. Drainage and construction easements. 3)'fhe plan indicates no shoulder on the north edge of the road, but a 2 foot gravel shoulder is needed bevond the pavcnrent before the slope begins. This area should remain tairly flat, but sloping awaN from the road. d)'hhe power pole location should be shown on any further x-section representation. I have also attached a copy of the x-section with the comments on there for your reference. Tf you have any questions, please contact Shcri Wamhoff at 221-6750. Sincerely, Sheri Wamhoff cc: Mike l.udwig file :'81 1<vth CAHC ' • Port Collins, CO 80521-U-,`-0 • (970) 227-t�btlj Transport-"',)n Services Engineering 0epartnaent CAN of Fort Collins February 24, 1999 Rusty McDamels Latimer County - Engineering P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, Co 80522 RE: Registry Ridge PUD, I" Filing Dear Rusty, Attached for your review is the latest set of 'Registry Ridge P.U.D. Off Site Arterial Street Improvements' for your review and comment. Please return comments to Sheri Wamhoff at City of Fort Collins Engineering by March 17, 1999. Also attached for your reference is a copy of the last set of comments that were received by the City on this project dated September I, 1998. The following is the City comment/ response to the comments made by the County in the above mentioned letter. 1) The County indicated that the plans showed two different dimensions for the pavement width. The width from the centerline of the street to the pavement edge at station 16+00 on Shield Street should be 20 feet. It appears this has been corrected. 2) The County commented that the typical cross sections for Shields Street adjacent to the site show a I I foot travel lane and that the County requires a 12 foot travel lane. The interim sections (what this project is building) did show 12 foot travel lanes; it was the future cross secticns that showed I I foot travel lanes. This was in accordance with the Citys standard arterial cross section. By changing the section so that all lane widths are 12 feet, the future section does not meet the arterial standards under which this project is being designed, which was the Citys old street standards. But as the Citys arterial standards have changed since this project was submitted for review, and they may change again by the time the road is widened to its ultimate width, and we do not know what the actual lane widths will be when the road is widened to its ultimate cross section. It is therefore acceptable for all the travel lanes to be shown as 12 feet in the future on these plans . 3) The culvert under Trilby Road has been redesigned. The design of this culvert will need to be reviewed to determine if it is complete. 4) The County commented on the use of I I foot travel lanes and 5 foot bike lanes on Trilby Road adjacent to the site. The City had also commented on this. The travel lanes need to be 12 feet and the bike lanes 6 feet in width. �81 `�urth 6 IIe "I',cnur • I'J. Br,x • Pore i_-or Iin,, CC `o( _'1 0550 • ;117M 22I-<,605 S) The County asked about the timing of the installation of a signal at the intersection of Shields Street and Trilby Road. The installation of a signal at Shields Street and Trilby Road will be done when the intersection meets signal warrants. It is preferred to do this after the improvements to the intersection are in place as the signal poles would not have to be moved again. But if the intersection meets warrants prior to the construction of improvements by this project, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer, a signal may be put in place at that time. 5a) The County stated that they feel that there is a need for a center turn lane for Midway Drive, La Edna Lane and the Greenhouse entrance. The need for a centerla.ne is not directly related to this development and therefore the City can not require the development to construct those improvements. The developer is complying with the requirements of the City code by constructing off -site road improvements north to Fossil Creek Drive (36 feet of pavement, 2 - 12 foot travel lanes and 2 - 6 foot bicycle/shoulder lanes). If the County desires to build a center turn lane in this area it could be possible to get those improvements done in conjunction with this project. The County would need to work with the Developer to modify the plans and obtain the easements necessary for such a widening. As the interim improvements are considered temporary they have not been fully designed to meet City design criteria. Widening of the road to a 48 foot width may require the road to be designed to meet City standards. If the County wishes to pursue these improvements the City would need to be involved with the review and approval of the plans. 6) The county questioned why the intersection of County Road 19 (Taft Hill) and County Road 34 (Trilby) was not evaluated in the traffic study. The developer was not asked to evaluate the intersection of County Road 19 (Taft Hill) and County Road 34 (Trilby) for the traffic impact study. It was felt that the traffic impact to this intersection by this project would be minimal as the majority of traffic from this site would be going North, South, or East. The question on the sanitary sewer should be addressed to the Fort Collins - Loveland Water District South Fort Collins Sanitation District If you have any questions, please call me at 221-6750. Sincerely, Sheri Wamhoff Civil Engineer II cc: Cam McNair, City Engineer, City of Fort Collins Bill Gleiforst, Traffic Services Supervisor, Larimer County Engineering department Rex Burns, Larimer County Engineering Department Marc Engemoen, Larimer County Engineering Department Bud Curtis, P.E., Northern Engineering Services file ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-5700 FAX (970) 498-7986 September 1, 1998 Sheri Wamhoff City of Fort Collins Re: Registry Ridge Subdivision Dear Ms. Wamhoff: Development review staff and traffic services personnel from this office have reviewed the submitted Utility Plans, and the Site Access Study for off -site street improvements for Registry Ridge and have the following comments / questions: Registry Ridge P.t1.D. Off -Site Arterial Street Improvements I ) On sheet I I at station 16+00 the cross section indicates that the dimension to the edge of asphalt is 20 feet but the plan sheet shows that it is 18 feet. Which is correct?? 2) On sheet 16 both of the typical sections show travel lane widths of I I feet. Larimer County requires and builds a standard 12 foot travel lane.. The portion of County Road 17 that Latimer County reconstructed a few years ago has 12 foot travel lanes. These sections should be reviewed. 3) On Sheet 30A, the details appear to indicate that there will be headwalls, toewalls, and wingwalls but the detailed information for these items is nonexistent. This information needs to be included in the plans. 4) On sheet 33 the striping plan indicates that the travel lanes will be 11 feet wide and the bike lanes will be 5 feel wide. Both of these widths are unacceptable to Latimer County due to the volume and speed on this road. The accepted standards should be required: 12 foot travel widths and 6 foot bike lanes. 5) It is Latimer County's understanding that the signal light at Shields and Trilby is planned to be installed in the year 2000. This office would like to see the signal light installed ahead of any construction for this development. The Traffic Impact Study reinforces this by stating that the short range peak hour traffic will warrant a signal. Further, we believe that the Traffic Impact Study used 1994 counts. The latest 1996 counts and a comparison to the 1994 counts are included in the table on the next page. ;'w AiEI a?'E: U'J3r Registry Ridge Off Site Improvei,._nts September 1, 1998, Page 2 Traffic Counts for County Road 17 North of Trilby Road ADT YR/WK ` %TNC: 8i00 6,, 96/38 1 8000 94/25 J 7 7500 93/29 ' Traffic Counts for County Road 17 South of Trilby Road 9500 96/38 11 8500 94/25 13 7500 93/29 --- (ADT = Average Daily Traffic) (YR = Year count was taken) (W K = Calendar week of subject year) (% INC = Percentage Increase) 5) 'file need for a left turn lane for north bound Shields (or continuous center turn lane) was questioned at Midway Drive, La Eda lane, and at the Greenhouse entrance. All the previous mentioned streets are on the west side of Shields, and at Scenic Drive on the east side of Shields. As these improvements do not appear to be planned as a part of this development's off -site improvements, this office would like to further discuss ways to possibly incorporate the improvements in this construction. 6) The TIS also does not address the impact of this development on the intersection of County Road 19 and 34 ("Taft Hill and Trilby). More specifically, is a south bound left turn lane from County Road 19 to Trilby needed in the short range or long range? Registry Ridge P.U.D. Off -Site Sanitary Sewer I ) On sheet 2, at station 2+67.19 a new 15" PVC sanitary sewer main feeds into the manhole and then a 12" sanitary sewer main goes out. The question: In the future will the 12" sanitary sewer main be replaced with a larger size pipe? If not, then the pipe sizing issue needs to be addressed in this project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this submittal. If you have questions about these comments or would like additional County input, do not hesitate to phone me at 498-5701. Sincerely, Pamela Duncan Civil Engineer II c: Bill Gleiforst, Traffic Services Supervisor, Larimer County Engineering Department Res Burns, Latimer County Engineering Department Marc Engemoen, Larimer County Engineering Department 131rd Curtiss, P.E._ Northern Engineering Services Inc., 420 South Howes, Suite 202, Fort Collins, CO 80512 File H:AdevrevAplanchk\cities\Fcollins\Rridge2.doc MARCH & LILEY, P.C. AR FHUR C. MARCH, JR. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW LUCIA A. HLEY 110 E OAK STREET J. HRAOI CHO MARCH FORT COLLINS, COI ORAOO 80524 2880 ARTHUR E. MARCH EDWARD M. VOS ES '97M 482.4322 19081981 Fax (9701482-5719 July 19, 1999 Sheri Wamhoff Engineering Department City ol'Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado RI?: Registry Ridge Dear Sheri: The following are my suggested revisions to the Registry Ridge Development Agreement: General Conditions, paragraph C: Add the following to the beginning of the first sentence: "Except as otherwise provided herein,..." 2. I. General Conditions, paragraph K: Change this paragraph to read exactly as it does in the Cottonwood Ridge Development Agreement. i. IL Special Conditions, paragraph A. Water Lines: Delete the words "Not Applicable" and add the following: 1. "Notwithstanding anything in this agreement to the contrary, the Property will be provided water service from the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District ("Water District"), and all waterline improvements shall be installed and inspected in accordance with the Water District's regulations and the approved plans therefor." Sheri Wamhoff .lulu 19, 1999 Page 2 4. 11. Special Conditions, paragraph B_ Sewer Lines: Delete the words "Not Applicable" and add the following: I. "Notwithstanding anything in this agreement to the contrary, the Property will be provided sanitary sewer service from the Boxelder Sanitary District ("Sanitary Sewer District"), and all waterline improvements shall be installed and inspected in accordance with the Sanitary Sewer District's regulations and the approved plans therefor." 5. 11. Special Conditions, paragraph C. Storm Drainage Lines and Appurtenances, subparagraph 3: In the 10" line of this subparagraph, between the words "City" and "may", add the following: "...after written notice of an opportunity to cure..." 6. H. Special Conditions, paragraph C. Storm Drainage Lines and Appurtenances, subparagraph 7: At the end of this subparagraph, add the following: "...or other publicly owned land." 7. 11. Sliccial Conditions. paragraph D. Streets, subparagraph 4: In the last sentence of this subparagraph delete the words, "in a City approved form" and add the following at the end of that sentence: ...and a copy of such notice shall be delivered to the City." S. 11. 'S ecial Conditions, paragraph D. Streets, subparagraph 7: Change the number of building permits to 100. Sheri Wamhoff July 19, 1999 Page 3 9. II. Special Conditions, paragraph G. Natural Resources, subparagraph L In the first sentence of this subparagraph, the word "humanly" should be changed to "h 1n11ar1C l y.. 10. II. Special Conditions, paragraph G. Natural Resources, subparagraph 4: Change this paragraph so that it reads as follows: "]'he Natural Resources Department has reviewed and approved the species mix Rrr the revegetation of any Natural Areas and/or wetlands. In addition, the Natural Resources Department has reviewed and approved all restoration plans for the areas disturbed by the sewer installation. Two copies ofthe proposed species mix and restoration plan have been provided to the Natural Resources Department. All top soil from the wetland areas to be disturbed shall be removed, stock piled and replaced upon completion of construction/disturbance." 1 1 . IL Special Conditions, paragraph H. Development Construction Permit, subparagraph l: In the last sentence of this subparagraph, delete the word "the" before "public" and niter the word `-required" add the following: "...to he constructed and dedicated to the City." 12. III. Miscellaneous, paragraph D: Add the following to the last sentence: "In such event,..." Thanks for vour assistance. Sincerely, MARCH & LILEY, P.C. Py —_ Lucia A. Lilcy WICK CAMPBELL BRAMER UKASICK & TRAUTWEIN 9 LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW LANES 0. BWLbff.R" KF`7 N. CAMPBELL KATHRYNS. LONOWSKI ROBERT J. PENNY• KP.BERLY B. SCHUTr BL..R I. TRIUNJEIN• TROY A UKASICK' ROBIVL WICK .. ,m �,wa 0s. G Rusty McDaniel Larimer County Engineering 218 W. Mountain Fort Collins, CO 80521 thampney A. "Cam" McNair, Jr. City Engineer P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 43 CLOCK TOWER SQUARE 323 SOUTR COLLEGE AVENUE P.0 BOX 2166 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 (970) 42- 111 FAX (970) 482-8929 June 9, 1999 Bauch Offices 2312 CAREY AVENUE CHEYENNE, WYO:vIING 82001 (307) 632-0323 1295 MAIN STREET THE SHOPS AT WESTWOOD BUILDING ONE SUITE WNDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970)686-6005 Gregg Seebohm Double Eagle Construction Services 1601 Shenandoah Circle Fort Collins, CO 80525 Re: Shields and Trilby Road Improvements C'� I �� �� Gentlemen: Thank you for meeting with Jan and Jim Gulley and myself on June 8, 1999 regarding Gulley Greenhouse and their concerns as improvements are made to Shields and Trilby Road over the next several months. As background, Gulley Greenhouse has both a retail and a wholesale operation. The retail operation accounts for about 40% of Gulley's total revenues and employs approximately 40 individuals. Generally, Gulley's profit margin on the sale of retail items is approximately 50%. This 50% margin pays the salary of the 40 employees, pays part of the buildings, land and equipment, pays part of the home office overhead and, hopefully, provides a profit to the Gulleys as the owners. 70% of Gulley's retail customer base comes from Fort Collins and the remainder is from Loveland and the surrounding area. Sincerely, Sheri Wamhoff Civil Engineer I cc: File Matt Baker, S.I.D. Coordinator Bud Curtis, Northern Engineering Wick Campbell Bramer Ukasick & Trautwein, LLC June 9, 1999 page 2 Prior to this meeting, the Gulleys had provided Gregg Seebohm with dates for construction when the impact on Gulley's retail operation would be most minimal. These dates were September 30 through November 15 and February I through March 15. Gregg Seebohm has been receptive to the Gulleys' concerns. The greatest impact on the Gulleys' retail business will occur if construction occurs between April 1 and June 15. During this period of time, over 60% of Gulley's annual retail sales occur. Christmas sales are important because the customer base at that time of the year is often long-time Gulley customers who historically purchase poinsettias and other holiday items from Gulley If the customer goes elsewhere for her (his) Christmas items, it makes it easier for the customer to go elsewhere for the spring items. Currently, Gulley is ordering plants and other items for next Spring. Gulley also obtains a $500,000 bank loan during this period of time each year. The banker, Ed Wilkens at First National Bank, has stated his concern about Gulley's operating loan for the year 2000 because of the specter of this construction work and has also requested that the Gulleys receive written assurances to mitigate the impact on their operations while this necessary project is completed. As an overview, Gregg Seebohm stated that generally work was intended to be done in several phases -- Phase I - sewer extension, Phase II - onsite development, Phase III - Shields south of Trilby and Phase IV - Shields north of Trilby. With regard to Shields, the general plan is to widen Shields from 12 feet per drive lane to 18 feet per drive lane - 6 feet of which will be designated as a bike path. There is also work to be done on Trilby which apparently will precede the work on Shields. Gregg Seebohm emphasized the developer's legitimate concerns that in working with the Gulleys and others *hat they are not penalized or forced to stop further development, if, for reasons outside their control, street improvements cannot be completed in the time as set forth in their agreement and plans with the City/County. Cam McNair emphasized the City's requirement that street improvements be worked on diligently and the necessity to bond. He also emphasized the need to coordinate well in advance with the construction companies as the developer is using well -recognized but extremely busy contractors. The area in question is within the master plan and will require City/County review coordination and cooperation. Wick Campbell Bramer Ukasick & Trautwein, LLC June 9, 1999 page 3 Both the City and the County emphasized that they would cooperate in their reviews and that both City and County requirements are similar as to content both as to timing and technical requirements. Based on this background, the Gulleys laid out their concerns and desires: 1. That the work be done in a manner that allows the streets to be open at least on weekends. Gregg Seebolun and the City indicated that their were two times when Shields north or south of Gulley Greenhouse would be closed. To the north, there is a siphon that needs to be removed and replaced which involves a ditch company. There is apparently not sufficient room to detour around this construction and Shields will be closed for a two to four week period while this work is done. This work will most likely have to be done when the ditch is not in use (i.e., winter time). There was some thought that for part of this period that Shields might be opened temporarily over a weekend or two. To the South, there is some work that needs to be done in cutting down the size of a hill. I did not understand the length of closure for this construction. Again, there was discussion about finding a way to allow Shields to be open during part of this period. It was made clear that access to Gulley's Greenhouse would always be available at least one direction. 2. That Gulley's prime retail sales times be protected from construction activity. Jan Gulley emphasized that women form a large percentage of Gulley's retail base and that many women are unwilling to drive through construction zones if it can be avoided. Jan stated that during the Clarenden Hills construction, Gulley's retail sales declined by as much as 70% during that period. Gregg emphasized his desire to work with the Gulleys in this regard but that weather delays could hinder any construction schedule. Gregg suggested that the road closure work could be separated from the remainder of the work, that the remainder of the work may be able to be done with roads open for at least one way traffic and that the overlay work could be completed separately from the remainder of the work on Shields if the City and County would agree. Gregg also pointed out that it was unlikely that this work would be done in 1999 since it was already June and necessary approvals, and scheduling with contractors remains to be done. Wick Campbell Bramer Ukasick & Trautwein, LLC June 9, 1999 page 4 Both the City and the County emphasized their concerns about leaving the road in a gravel condition for anything more than a day or two but stated that they might consider allowing driving on the road after the initial asphalt was laid for some period if necessary prior to requiring overlay work to be completed. Both emphasized that their preference was that work start and be diligently completed as this is required by statute or ordinance. They also indicated that timing problems may be more a function of the contractor's work schedule than anything else because the developer's proposed contractors are it,. dernand and have work scheduled several months in advance. They suggested that the developer line up the contractors time as soon as possible. In this regard, the Gulleys suggested that if the work other than the fill and siphon work could not be done in the Spring window that it would be best from Gulley's standpoint for the work to be done continuously after June 15, 2000. One concern from the developer is that the City only allows building permits for 25% of the first phase of the development to be provided before all street improvements must be done. Thus, a work stoppage/delay on Shields could delay and reduce the developer's revenue from sale of homes. The City indicated that it might be able to provide some leeway if work has proceeded diligently and delays were for reasons outside the developer's control. If work must be done continuously and it cannot be completed prior to April 1, 2000, in any final agreement between Gulley and the contractor/developer, Gulley would request that there be a liquidated damage clause providing for payment of $3,500 per day between April 1 and April 30 and for $7,000 per day from May 1 through June 15. Again, Gulley would prefer an agreement that simply would not allow work to take place between April 1 and June 15, 2000. It would be most helpful if most of the work (except the siphon and leveling) be done after June 15, 2000 and that the roads be open and not under construction during Gulley Greenhouse's critical season. Any help that the City/County can provide to the developer to enable the developer to continue to build residences during this period even if delayed because of this problem would be appreciated. 3. That sufficient signage be provided during periods of construction to help customers of Gulley to be aware of the alternate routes to Gulley's and as to the area under construction. This did not appear to be a problem with either the City, the County or the developer. 4. That Gulley Greenhouse be provided with sufficient notice of the initial plans and substantial changes in plans . Wick Campbell Bramer Ukasick & Trautwein, LLC June 9, 1999 page 5 Gulley Greenhouse needs 60 days to respond to any changes in conditions. Gulley Greenhouse is well aware that in large protects, timetables sometimes slide. As much notice as possible of material changes in plans that affects Shields or Trilby would help Gulley's mitigate any problems that arise from the change in timing. 5. That an acceleration/deceleration lane be provided to allow traffic to more safely turn into Gulley's property. The developer and Gulley's have had discussions about this proposal. The developer has been receptive to providing a turnout or acceleration/deceleration lane in some form. The City and County have suggested that the developer provide its proposal as part of its plan to be reviewed. Hopefully, this will be done as it will increase safety for motorists. 6. That an enforceable written agreement be entered into between Gulley and the appropriate party/parties. Gulley's is looking for an agreement and its banker wants assurances that Gulley will be protected to reduce its risk in making its annual loan to Gulley Greenhouse. Gulley understands that the appropriate party is either the developer or the general contractor for the street improvements or both. The City and County have made it clear that they are not to be parties to any agreement. CONCLUSION The Gulleys are aware that the development of Registry Ridge is complex and that the developer and the City/County have other concerns besides Gulley Greenhouse. Gulley Greenhouse is also aware that the street improvements will be beneficial to Gulley when completed and that homeowners in Registry Ridge will find Gulley Greenhouse a convenient, and, hopefully, an attractive place to come for their landscaping needs. Jan and Jim Gulley thank everyone at the meeting for their listening, suggestions and cooperation. Gulley Greenhouse looks forward to the cooperative completion of this project in a timely manner that benefits everyone. If I have misunderstood and/or misstated the statements made by any person in attendance at the meeting, please advise immediately. Wick Campbell Bramer Ukasick & Trautwein, LLC June 9, 1999 page 6 Sincerely, WICK CAMPBELL BRAMER UKASICK & TRAI,U,T�WEIN, LLC PBlaWir %rdutwein'Y /W BJT/dkp cc: Jim and Jan Gulley Ed Wilkens - First National Bank ARTHUR E. MARCH, JR. RAMSEY D. MYATT ROBERT W. BRANDES. JR. RICHARD 5. GAET LUCIA A. LILEY J. BRAOFORD MARCH LINDA 5, MILLER JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATIHtW J. DOIIGLIS MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 110 EAST OAK STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524-2880 (970)482-4322 TELECOPIER (9701 4e2-3038 March 27, 1997 ARTHUR E. MARCH 19 O 9-1961 MAILING ADDRESS'. P.O. BOX 469 FORT COLLINS, CO BO522-0469 Mr. Gary Diede Engineering Department City of Fort Collins VIA HAND DELIVERY 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado RE: Registry Ridge First Filing Final PUD Request for Variance from Street Design Criteria Dear Gary: As has been discussed with City staff, the developer of Registry Ridge, Dalco Land Liability Company ("Dalco"), is requesting a variance from the City's Street Design Criteria (the "Criteria"), approved in July 1986 and on file in the City's engineering office. We have been authorized to state that LeAnn Thieman ("Thieman"), who represents the interests of several of her neighbors, joins in this request. Section 1.02.01 of the Criteria permits a variance from its regulations under certain circumstances. "As with any design criteria, occasions may arise where the minimum standards are either inappropriate or cannot be justified economically. In these cases a variance to these criteria Shall be considered. Written request for each variance should be directed to the City Engineer." Dalco and Thieman request a variance from Section 1.02.05 of the Criteria related to Street Lighting Standards. The request is for a reduction of the required number and wattage of street lights on Trilby Road, particularly west of Ranger Drive, and for a reduction in the number of street lights adjacent to the large_ lots on Forestel Drive and Wainright Drive in the northern portion of Registry Ridge First Filing Final PUD. The basis for the request is that it would be inappropriate to fully comply with City lighting standards at the very edge of the Urban Growth Area, in an area that is essentially surrounded by agricultural properties, open lands and existing large -lot, rural development which has no street lighting of any kind. Mr. Gary Diede March 27, 1997 Page 2 A variance from the street lighting criteria is justifiable for the following reasons: it is simply inappropriate to require full urban standards in a largely rural area. Street lights at the required intervals and wattage would not help create the "soft edge" the City desires nor would there be a gradual visual transition from urban -type development to rural/open land. Vehicles approaching the development from any direction will be coming from unlit or dimly lit stretches of roadway; a drastic, abrupt change in lighting may create a safety problem for drivers who have difficulty making the adjustment, especially senior citizens or visually impaired persons. Finally, full City lighting would have a negative visual impact on the rural setting. Thieman and her neighbors consider City street lights to be intrusive and undesirable. These neighbors fully support and encourage the granting of this street lighting variance. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you for your continuing cooperation. Sincerely, & MYATT, P.C. ,LucQa A. IL1deyJ LAL/jpk pc: Jim McCory LeAnn Thieman il(>1"thE'tll F'11C3111cC'.11!1t 5F?tV1Ct_'S, Inc. September 6, 1995 Mr. Michael Ludwig Community Planning and Environmental Services City of Fort Collins PO Box 580 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 RE: Registry Ridge Preliminary Response to City Comments Dear Michael, This letter is the second letter to your office in response to the comments regarding issues received regarding the Registry Ridge ODP and Preliminary PUD. This letter will address those issues which are applicable to Northern Engineering Services, Inc (NF.S). All other issues will be addressed by Jim Sell Design, Malt Delich, or Riverside Technology, Inc. NITS has reviewed comments regarding the onsite and offsite utilities with Terry Ferrill from Fort Collins/Loveland Water and Sewer District. All of the comments and concerns that the District expressed with the preliminary submittal can be addressed at the time of final design. The off -site sewer is currently heing prepared and will he submitted to the District as a separate project. Northern Engineering has also developed 'Inc] reviewed a Ilych aulic Master flan with Terry Ferrill per District requirement (comment 8, Overall Development Plan). A copy of the letter from Elaine Spencer at Larimer County concerning 'traffic issues has been forwarded to Matt Delich. Matt will be responding to Elaine's concerns. NFS is currently working on the arterial designs of South Shields Street and Trilby Road. These arterial roadway plans will be submitted to the City as a separate project, and at that time the plans will also be submitted to Larimer County for their review and approval. NES mct with City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility to review their comments, and to determine the extent of our resuburittal package. Stormwater indicated that they would like us to resubmit our Preliminary Drainage and Frosion Control Study, as this will serve as a Master Plan forthe Registry Ridge ODP. NES is revising this study per City continents. We also discussed with Kerrie Ashbeck the extent of the revisions to be resubmitted. She indicated that the revised site plans from .lim Sell would address the majority of Engincerings' concerns. She said that we will not need to resubmit a revised copy of the Preliminary Plat, or revised Preliminary Utility plans, other than those required to be resubmitted by Stormwater. Kerrie also indicated that a meeting should he set up with City Engineering regarding the proposed street rotaries. These meetings arc being coordinated by Jim Sell Design. Other than that, all engineering issues can be addressed at time of Final Design. In particular, 1 would Like to address the following specific issues per previous City comment and your Ietter dated July 17, 1995: Comment 4d., ODP - "fhe developer understands that these wetlands cannot be negatively affected. Neither the proposed road or the fire access road will be located in the wetlands area, and at time of final design a hydrogeologic study will be prepared concerning these roads and to the sources of the wetlands hydrology, whether it is fed from above or underground (or both) sources. Comment 6a & 6c, ODP - If and when the park site is finalized, any drainage channel can be relocated on site to coordinate with any future park development. The design NES chose was one which utilized the existing drainage conveyance element. Per discussions Witt] Storiwater Utility, rerouting this existing drainage channel will not be a problem. Comment 8, ODP - This has been prepared, and has been reviewed with the District. Comment 1 and 2 a-e, Preliminary PUD - The developer agrees to the additional easements required by Columbine Cablevision and US West, and these will be incorporated into the Final plats for Registry Ridge. Comment 3, Preliminary PUD - This legal description will be added to the Site plan, submitted by Jim Sell Design. The preliminary plat is not being resubmitted, per Kerrie Ashbeck. Comment 4b, Preliminary PUD - Per conversations with the District, and per the preliminary hydraulic master plan developed for the District, these Fire flow requirements can be complied with. Comment 12a, Preliminary PUD - City Stormwater policy (per Glen Schlueter) is that if the quality, quantity, or peak flows are changed, downstream offsite casements wilt be required to the receiving named drainageway. In regard to Registry Ridge, this would be applicable to flows that cross Trilby in the northwest corner of the project, and flow to Smith Creek. Glen has said the developer has two options; one is to obtain offsite easements, the other is to provide onsite detention and retention (this eliminates any changes to downstream runoff conditions). NES, as a part of the Preliminary drainage report resubmittal, is incorporating the latter alternative of a detention and retention system. Comment 121), Preliminary PUD — The developer agrees and encourages cooperation and coordination with the Natural Resources Department, especially in regards to the Wetlands areas, transition areas, and water quality. Please call if you have any questions regarding this letter, or any questions pertinent to the Registry Ridge Preliminary submittal. Sincerely, Roger A. Curtiss P.E. cc: Jim McCory, Colorado Land Source Tom Kehler, Jim Sell Design Kerric Ashbeck, City of fort Collins Glen Schlueter, City of Fort Collins Mike Bryant, Larimer County Terry Perrill, Ft. Collins/Loveland Water District Lucia Liley, March and Myatt zMen orardum To: Platt. Baker, CiLv of Fort Collins L:ginvefinq Frog:. Auld Curtiss, Northern Engimeef ing 221-43 6 plate: November 6, 1-935 Subject: Reg-'stry Rldge fUD gAt.Ct 1 -- Offsite Arterial Design: of UeSLil t-4i--_'Ids SLxee L- alit: `xi1by Road. Mail L, Ar r, ached :s a r,re L Ill ._.ti --Y tiet [f iTpr-•ve: en is LL.. S Leids StLeet aii 3 - "L-'. Ruud ,. Qvv.: -__P _ _.. '1<._ �1- i _e Ri'l_ :.s v '<:- � deVe-' �1•;Se-. Tni:` tier ,S .a l"! -L a:C -.l.J i:( _III `. I ii-° - j 1i1 ill{fir e .,-e i i_'Is i_._ _ u__ ,R u., v .,i `. s1 _.1 eI I .: P:3_ l•:it ' 2 .�. .V ! have i_I- uU' ..u. - s t_ No: the "r'_ig m eer Inn s,=es Fu, -i .<s salt pL logs qf �'�'t:+•-' .1 - _ _. S {-i :._ sLs. iti 3f evil e-.n% cdn dill 3: :A C. �-_iR_.- ..-L.L=� smut Ltt,L- PT`i - er.�_S-G _SS 1.€e8. ti s.L,-= t. tigti . _ �..u;..�. ... � c ctL U i OC11- 1.,. W _be acidlre: :fsed if— t_ ._tii.utiS tJf:{ - -;Lh.. `h'e vve_.. �_ i.'•L v �_ -Lilt") -he $.ie_ds Scree - r.o'- a d 1 a uert o Re g 35t r v R i dige e eue.._ .. .. l -ry c`_ _ i`jpl-cl'_ se _J�_.• fur r.u-h .vim _ , :�...-_ h' e .��v�t '. �,l _ _-L.: Shields Street noL ad;aceL.t to Registry Ridge _..i7_.i` _ i L F!- pL-o-; r={__,, a _{-!L; ner' as m the center 2_L'e scot :. z ,t:.-2`-f `{ --. _-eek i�Je, Sots_ Lv e _St t4 _ 'L`> `4t�au, e i1i _U ... ,. _. _ _..- ki s�.i- ii �it- +1 Lif'U -ieL - .Sv'-r erIt eI St _ a-, I v..,-..SS 01. l_i1C 1itS .