HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHOICE CENTER - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2011-11-10City of
Fort Collins
Current Planning
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Fia: 970-224-01j4
DATE: January 20, 2011
FINAL PLAN
COMMENT SHEET
TO: Engineering Pavement
PROJECT PLANNER: Ted Shepard
# 15-08/A Choice Center Mixed Use
Redevelopment Final
Please return all comments to the project planner no later than
the staff review meeting:
February 16, 2011
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
eNo Problems
❑ Problems or Cqncerns (see below, attached, or DMS)
Name (please print) '
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other
_Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape
i
Fort Collins Project Comments Sheet
Selected Departments
Department: Engineering
Date: February 18, 2011
Project:
Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP -TYPE I AND FINAL
PLANS
All comments must be received by Anne Aspen in Current Planning, Ted Shepard in
Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting:
February 16, 2011
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
Issue Contact: Randy Maizland
Topic: Engineering
Number: 39 Created: 7/23/2008
[2/16/11 ] The typical cross-section for Stuart does not show what the separation distance
from the back of sidewalk to the retaining wall is proposed to be (and should be at least 2'
per the original comment).
[7/23/08] Grading Plan — Please dimension sidewalk and parkway ROW improvements on
College and Stuart. Show one cross section for Stuart showing the relationship to the
proposed retaining wall which should have 2 feet minimum clearance from the sidewalk.
Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: General
Number: 147 Created: 2/16/2011
(2/16/11] Sheet SP3 of the site plan shows all of lots 3 and 4 as being built in a future
phase(s). This does not seem to coincide with the construction plans that show no phasing
of the infrastructure. Is the indication of the future phases only with regards to
redevelopment of the buildings, or does it pertain to the infrastructure within those phases?
Of concern if phasing is being looked at with lots 3 and 4, is that the frontage improvements
along College Avenue (sidewalk, street trees, etc.) are built with Phase 1 (the plan does not
indicate what phase the frontage improvements are intended to be built). Of additional
concern is how the infrastructure within lots 3 and 4 would be able to tie into the frontage
improvements along College Avenue to be built in Phase 1. Bringing in sidewalk detached
would have an impact on the existing parking. The construction drawings and site plan
ZXS�/, /
ate
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat Site Drainage Report Other
Utility Redline Utility z Landscape
Page 1
would need to show how the interim would tie into the frontage improvements without being
problematic for both the parking lot and frontage improvements.
Number: 148 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] The right-of-way vacation proposed on the southeast portion of the site no longer
seems relevant with the further detachment of the sidewalk along College at this area (the
plat should then remove from the legal description "that portion of vacated College
Avenue...". Ideally additional right-of-way should be dedicated to match the back of sidewalk
along this further detached area instead of providing access easement and/or vacating
existing right-of-way along this location.
Number: 149 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] What is the manner in which the landscaping being removed will be mitigated with
the median reduction taking place in College Avenue that removes several trees and
landscaping? I'm understanding that Community Development and Neighborhood Services
has a general concern about the landscaping and trees that along the median in College
Avenue that would be removed with the construction of the larger left turn lane onto the site.
Will the installation of the new median directly north result in the installation of low lying
plantings as mitigation for the lost landscaping. Will the narrowed down median that creates
the longer left turn lane have landscaping installed?
Number: 154 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] It doesn't appear that "Choice Center Drive" street signs are indicated to be
installed on the signing and striping plan. If desired (or required) however, wherever street
signs are posted indicating the private "Choice Center Drive", please provide separate
informational signage (black lettering on white background ) below (at about 5' off the
ground) indicating "Choice Center Drive privately owned and maintained". Please provide a
detail of this on the details sheet. This is in the same manner as to how Council Tree
Avenue (a private drive) in Front Range Village was addressed.
Number: 155 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Please ensure the title on all the drawings is coordinated (the plat has
"Subdivision" at the end of the title which does not match the site and construction plans).
Number: 156 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11 ] There is a location along College Avenue and a location along Stuart Street where
the public sidewalk is apparently shown to ramp down along the direction of travel. Why is
the ramp down being proposed?
Number: 158 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11 ] Has formal discussion taken place with City Real Estate (Helen Matson) for the
offsite work that is shown on City property in order to formalize the appropriate easements?
Is it understood how the City's process and timeframe in potentially granting these coincides
with anticipated final plan approval by the applicant?
Number: 164 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Thought/suggestion: The access ramp east of Building 4 on the north side might
be better served for the pedestrian if it faced directly south and not angle southeast as the
eastbound pedestrian crossing the drive aisle is angled by the current design to not as
easily see oncoming sounthbound traffic from the property to the north. As this in on private
Page 2
property and does not impact public right-of-way, this is more of a thought/concern rather
than requirement.
Number: 169 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Is there a reference document already compiled that lists the various dedications
and vacations of easements that are required both onsite and offsite? It is suggested that
this document be provided for review and will then be used as a "check -off' for verification
and agreement with all that all the required approvals are obtained prior to final plan
approval.
Number: 189 Created: 2/18/2011
[2/18/11 ] CDOT and the City would like to see an updated traffic memo/letter with the
consultant's traffic engineer indicating what changes (if any) to the proposed land use and
resulting trip generation may have taken place between the PDP (pre -hearing) submittal and
with the present final plan submittal, and the impacts (if any) that may result.
Topic: Plat
Number: 161 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] The plat indicates the use of "access easement", "public access easement", and
"sidewalk easement". When dedicated to the City, these should all just use the "access
easement" designation.
Number: 186 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11 ] There would be no objection from the City if on the plat all the various separate
document dedications/vacations of easements were to just be noted as to be dedicated (or
vacated as appropriate) by separate document, instead of the various blank lines for
reception numbers that would need to be filled in before the plat is filed.
Topic: Utility Plan
Number: 150 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] CDOT M&S Standards should be provided in the construction details pertaining to
the improvements in College Avenue and referenced in the plans. The City is meeting with
CDOT at our monthly coordination meeting this Friday and may have additional
comments/concerns following the Wednesday morning meeting. The following three
comments are thoughts I had specific to the new construction/reconstruction along the
median in College Avenue and may be further refined pending input from CDOT.
Number: 151 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] The new concrete median for the left turns onto the site and Parker Street should
have additional design information on sheet 15. Please provide spot elevations along the
gutter along with cross sections of College Avenue in at least a couple of locations along
this median. Is the hatching around this median intended to indicate concrete pavement? If
so, please provide a concrete jointing plan detail for this area (from the CDOT M&S
Standards).
Number: 152 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] The apparent new concrete "ribbon" median extending the left turn stack into the
site should have additional information on sheet 15. Please indicate a flowline to flowline
width of this median. If it's intended that the existing median along the west side of College
is to remain, how will the new median transition to the existing median? It seems that the
existing median no longer has the gutter at existing finished grade due to successive
Page 3
overlays and the new median gutter would need to then be set below finished grade in order
to tie into existing. Please provide spot elevations along the gutter (or final pavement grade
if gutter is set below) along with cross -sections at several locations in order to understand
how drainage along the extended turn lane is intended to function.
Number: 153 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] In consultation with the City's Traffic Engineer, please provide SU-30 turning
template information for the left turn movements off of College onto the site and onto Parker
Street in order to demonstrate that the median nose design will accommodate these vehicle
types.
Number: 157 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Please provide detail on the northeast portion of the site as to how the tie-in to the
existing sidewalk along College Avenue will occur. Label the width of existing attached
sidewalk the proposed is tying into. Show the existing landscape bed behind the attached
sidewalk and how this will be terminated (Sheet 10 of the landscape plan seems to imply the
continuation of the curb that defines the northern boundary but there is no indication if rock,
turf, plantings, etc. will be provided.)
Number: 159 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Please provide a note on the storm drainage sheets that the manhole locations
along storm drain B-1 shall be adjusted to be at the center or middle of the travel lanes
along Stuart Street. It appears that the manholes B6 and 136b should be shifted slightly
south to the center (crown) of Stuart Street with B7 appearing to be fine with the taper for
the turn lane.
Number: 160 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Sheet 13 of the construction plans shows a CDS2020 water quality device that
doesn't seem to be indicated elsewhere on the set and a detail is not provided. Will an
access manhole be needed and where will this be situated in relationship to the lane lines?
Will this be traffic rated? [Stormwater indicated that is a private improvement. Private
improvements should not be placed in public right-of-way and is considered problematic as
a result.]
Number: 162 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/111 On sheet 3 of the construction plan please change "County" to "City" on Note 5.
Number: 163 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] In the construction plan set, existing features (such as contours and utilities) are
too difficult to analyze with the lineweight used. It appears in some instances that proposed
contours don't tie into proposed contours.
Number: 165 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Please remove the incorrect labelling of the private drive as Stuart Street on sheet
12 of the construction drawings.
Number: 166 Created: 2/16/2011
(2/16/11 ] The plan and profile sheet for Stuart Street seems a little unclear as one profile
line is indicated that it's finished grade for both existing and proposed left and right flowline
while a different indication of the same line indicates to see additional curb return profiles on
the same sheet. Will the flowline profiles on both sides of the street be the same? Having
Page 4
the flowline and centerline profiles individually separate might be preferred for clarity in this
regard.
Number: 167 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] Please label on the Stuart Street plan and profile sheet where on the centerline (in
plan view) the transition starts to remove the crown from the street intersecting onto Conant -
Avenue.
Number: 168 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/11] On the Stuart Street signing and striping plan the location of the "STOP"
pavement painting directly west of the public right-of-way ending for Stuart Street seems in
an odd location as it appears to define the stop location where opposing westbound traffic
would cross into. Shouldn't this be shifted south to the south half of this driveway opening?
Number: 170 Created: 2/16/2011
[2/16/111 A detail of the concrete headwall for the storm outfall didn't seem to be included in
the plan set.
Number: 187 Created: 2/18/2011
[2/18/11] There is apparently an existing irrigation line/tap for the existing landscaped
median on College. If that irrigation line isn't utilized with the reworked College Avenue
improvements, the line will likely need to be abandoned.
Number: 188 Created: 2/18/2011
[2/18/11] CDOT met with the City on 2/18 and indicated that they needed to have additional
discussion internal to CDOT as to how the median improvements should be constructed
given the successive overlays to College (referring back to #151 and #152). They anticipate
having comments completed by next Friday (the 25th).
Page 5