HomeMy WebLinkAboutKECHTER CROSSING - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2014-08-14Fort Collins Selected Issues Report
Date:
4/11/2012
KECHTER CROSSING PLD/PD - COUNTY REFERRAL
SELECTION CRITERIA: Status = Unresolved
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Shelby Joy
Number:61 Created:3/27/2008 Unresolved
[3/27/08] After final County approval the City requests final copies of all plans (including site
and landscape plans) printed on mylar for recordation in our Technical Services
Department, in addition to any County recordation.
Topic: Plat
Number:94 Created:7/17/2008 Pending
[7/17/08) Please clairfy on the Plat who is responsible for maintenance of Common Areas
A, B, C & D - it is still unclear and only the outlots have been specified.
Also, as Randy mentioned in the last round of comments, please define what
"Buildable/Support Buildings" means in the common areas ON THE PLAT OR SITE PLAN.
This project will eventually be annexed into the City and it will be helpful to have the
County's definition on the actual plan set.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland
Number:64 Created:3/28/2008 Pending
[7/18/08] Reception numbers will be hand written in prior to Plat recordation. It should be
noted that I have not received a deed of dedication or letter of intent for the off -site storm
drainage easement. I will defer to the County to verify this easement will be granted prior to
final plan approval.
[3/28/08] Plat — all dedications by separate document should be referenced on the final Plat
with reception numbers prior to recordation of the Plat.
Number:95 Created:7/18/2008 Pending
[7/18/08] Ultimate Kechter plan and profile design were provided seperately. Please insert
the Ultimate design sheets into the Utility Plan set and revise the sheet numbering and
Cover sheet index accordingly. Ultimate design and cross sections look good however,
inlets should be shown in the sump condition on sheet 3 of 6 for future drainage.
Topic: Streets Design
Number: 4
[7/18/08] Same
[3/28/08] Same
Created:6/14/2006 Pending
Page 1
[6/14/06] The Fossil Creek master street plan classifies Kechter as a 2 lane arterial,
requiring a minimum total R.O.W. to be 84 feet (42' half). Kechter shall be designed and
built to the ultimate condition on the southerly side per LCUASS table 7-1 and figure 7-3F
(all pavement, curb & gutter, parkway, sidewalks, street trees etc... ). A 15 foot wide utility
easement should be located behind the R.O.W. along Kechter.
Number: 5 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] Interior local streets: The Fossil Creek Res. Area Plan — Land Use Framework
Plan requires at least one local connecter street be extended from the north to the south
boundary of the property. The local connecter should be constructed per LCUASS
standards with a minimum 57 foot R.O.W. (36' curb to curb) with bike lanes etc... and a 9
foot utility easement on both sides.
Number: 6 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] Please refer to the street "stub" on the easterly side of the site: This future street
connection "stub" should be constructed with a temporary turn -around having a minimum
radius of 80 feet. This is due to the access being taken off of this "stub" for the multi -family
units.
Number: 7 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] The minimum intersection spacing off of Kechter is 200 feet (measured CL to CL).
Please verify that this design criteria has been satisfied per LCUASS.
Number: 10 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] The spacing between the future local street connections does not meet the
minimum LCUASS standard of 660 feet (measured along the project boundary). Please see
clouded red line comments.
Page 2
Department: Traffic Operations
Date: June 27, 2012
Project: KECHTER CROSSING PLD/PD - COUNTY REFERRAL
All comments must be received by Shelby Sommer in Current Planning, no later
than the staff review meeting:
No Review Date
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
Issue Contact: Ward Stanford
Topic: Traffic
Number: 49 Created: 8/7/2007
[6/26/12] After a 5 year lapse the project development was resubmitted for final approval.
City Traffic Operations didn't receive submittal documents until after the initial comment due
date upon which a CD of the submittal was provided. The LCUASS provides that a project
lapsing after 3 years is required to resubmit a new traffic study. City Traffic Operations staff
thought a revised study was drafted but ultimately learned a new study was not drafted.
County staff had previously accepted the past TIS and determined a revised TIS was
unnecessary. City Traffic contacted the TIS author and requested a copy of previous TIS's
for review. Shortly afterwards County staff emailed copies of their TIS's. Upon reviewing the
past TIS's to gain knowledge of the past reviews and conducting traffic analysis of the
Timberline and Kechter intersection with the submittals proposed traffic it is found that the
project is acceptable from a Traffic Engineering perspective.
[8/3/08]
[9/30/07] Per my understanding the Jehovah's Witness project is not constructing
improvements at Timberline and Kechter. They are possibly dedicating R-O-W for their local
street portion and possibly a west bound right turn lane from Kecter at their access, but no
construction at the Timberline intersection. I'll verify my understanding. If you build first you'll
have the responsibility. If they build first and construct some improvements then a revised
TIS (memo level most likely) will be needed to evaluate the change.
[8/7/07] TIS indicates that the Short term Total Wb AM LOS at Timberline & Kechter will be
D. City analysis provides that the LOS will degrade to E and therefore will require mitigation.
Per LCUASS Fig 8-1, NOTES 1; Left turn lanes are required at all intersections on arterial
roadways.
It is the City's position that no further development be allowed on Kechter that will cause
additional impact to the Kechter/Timberline intersection without intersection improvements.
Signature
Date
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat Site Drainage Report Other
Utility Redline Utility Landscape
Page 1
Number: 51 Created: 8/7/2007
[6/26/12] Current available information doesn't provide much about the possible southward
extension of Tilden to other existing streets therefore need for a right turn lane on Kechter
can not be determined.
[8/3/08]
[3/31/08] Traffic is reiterating the belief that ROW should be provided for a future east
bound right turn lane at Tilden.
[8/7/07] Not having seen the original TIS, I've no knowledge of whether any other approved
area projects were included in the review. A religious use has been proposed, possibly
approved, at the notheast corner of Kechter and Timberline, but I've no knowledge of any
land planning or discussion about the future expectations of Tilden St adjacent and south of
this site. If not already, planning discussion should be had regarding the future possible
need for r-o-w for a west bound right turn lane at Tilden and Kechter.
Number: 53 Created: 9/30/2007
[6/26/12] Resolved.
[8/3/08] Continue comment.
[3/31/08] Sight distance on Kechter at Tilden and at Kadenwood is of concern. The quantity
of trees has shown to cause a picket fence effect significantly reducing sight distance for
vehicles at both intersections. City recommends that every other tree in the sight distance
easement be removed, starting with the trees nearest each intersection.
[9/30/07] Need to provide sight distance analysis at your intersections. Landscape plan has
trees right up to all intersections. Stop signs and stop bars will be placed preceeding
sidewalks. Sight distance and landscaping at the intersections needs to be evaluated and
planned from the understanding of where vehicles are being expected to stop for
peds/cyclists and vehicles on the crossing street and sidewalks.
Number: 54 Created: 9/30/2007
[6/26/12] Resolved.
[8/3/08] Continue comment.
[3/31/08] Traffic Operations believes current landscaping policies did not take into account
other departments Federally mandated safety requirements. As such, Traffic and Forestry
are having to expend considerable resources to move our signs and to trim trees to meet
those federal mandates. Traffic requests that language be placed in the development
agreement and in the HOA regulations that all yearly tree trimming required to maintain
visibility of street signage and safe commuting visibility be the responsibility of the HOA.
[9/30/07] Trees in public r-o-w need to meet placement and canopy height criteria in
LCUASS to provide adequate sight distance for peds/cyclists and motor vehicles.
Number: 85 Created: 3/31/2008
[6/26/12] Resolved.
[8/3/08] Trees still on SE side and therefore Traffic has concerns with sight distance issues
at the ped crossing.
[3/31/08] Suggest that the trees in the sight distance easement on Crossview be planted on
the northwest side of the road, since the north side has little to no sight distance problems
and the southeast side is the problem.
Number: 86
Created: 3/31 /2008
Page 2
[6/26/12] Resolved.
[8/3/08] Continue comment.
[3/31/08] Traffic has considerable concern about signage visibility due to very slow growing
Oaks being the primary tree planted at each of the intersections. A 2" or 3" Oak's canopy is
lower than eight feet for years. Does not seem like the right tree to have at intersections and
their safety concerns.
Number: 87
[6/26/12] Resolved.
Created: 3/31/2008
[8/3/08] Have not received any S&S plans since making previous comment.
[3/31/08] Sht 38 and 39:
S&S plans show crosswalks that go to areas without sidewalks. Please remove the
crosswalks shown on the east side of Timberline and Kechter, and on the south side of
Tilden at Kechter.
Please indicate R1-1 signs on Tilden and on Kadenwood at Kechter, and remove the
painted "Stop" on the street.
Number: 99
[6/26/12] Resolved.
Created: 8/3/2008
[8/3/08] LCUASS requires left turn lanes at all intersections and at all full movement
accesses. Previously noted in ID # 49, 8/07. Nothing shown on the plans nor any comments
received regarding LCUASS policy.
Page 3
Kechter Crossing Responses June 29, 2012
Landscape Plan
Under the title Site Distance Easement Restrictions the code reference is missing a
number in it. The code reference is 7.4.1.C.6. The 1 is missing. You may want to also
note that they should see the site distance easement restriction note on the plat.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
Utility Plans
Demolition Plan Sheets 3 and 4. I don't know if the notes on these sheets regarding the
relocation of the wire fence are correct or not. Per the agreement with the City the west
fence shall be moved to a location 2 feet to the east of the new row line and the parallel
east fence shall be relocated to create a new alley between the fences.
RESPONSE: Tilden has a ROW width of 57', so the ROW would extend 28.5' to
either side of the Centerline. Thus locating the fence 30.5' from the centerline
would place the fence 2' past the edge of the ROW. Additional notes have been
added to the Demo plan to move or replace the shed and create the fence alley as it
is currently configured, just moved to the east of the Tilden ROW.
Demolition Plan Sheet 3. The note on the plan indicates that the heated horse trough is to
be removed. Per agreement with the City the horse trough is to be relocated.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
Demolition Plan Sheet 4. There is no label currently on the plan set, but per the
agreement with the City the shed within the Tilden ROW is to be relocated east.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
Sheet 20, 21, and 31. The note regarding the dedication of row needs a reception number
enter in. The note regarding the dedication of the construction easement is incorrect. A
temporary construction easement will be dedicated by revocable permit by the City prior
to start of construction.
RESPONSE: The reception number has been added to the plans for the ROW
dedication, and the temporary construction note has been adjusted.
There are still issues on the Kechter Road design. The interim and ultimate designs do
not match. I can find no reason why they do not match other than incorrect information
on the plans. It really seems like they should match, but they do not. If you can get the
plans to match the paragraph that has been placed within the City Development
Agreement regarding the need to provide funds for the ultimate improvements along the
entire frontage can be removed, since if the designs do match the project will be building
the ultimate design.
Areas where the design do not match are as follows:
♦ STA 10+88.77 the elevations do not match.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
♦ The curve between 11+06.15 and 12+86.15 the starting elevations at STA
11+06.15 do not match and the PVI ELEV do not match.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
♦ The ECR and BCR STA numbers for Kadenwood Drive do not match.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
♦ STA 14+50 the elevations do not match.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
♦ Sheet 34, x-section at STA 10+88.77 the south flowline elevation doesn't match
the interim or ultimate design.
RESPONSE: Note that the Sheet 34 does not show a cross section for 10+88.77,
the cross section is for 11+00, and there is a note stating that full pavement re
construction is to begin at 10+88.77.
♦ Sheet 35, x-section at STA 14+50 the south flowline elevation matches the
interim, but not the ultimate design.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
♦ Sheet 45, Ultimate Kechter Road cross sections. STA 14+50 the south flowline
elevation matches the interim design not the ultimate.
RESPONSE: This has been corrected.
Thanks,
Brian
Brian Williamson, ASLA LEED AP
Landscape Architect
Jim Sell Design, Inc.
Fort Collins, CO 80524
brianw(c_Diimselidesign.com
phone: (970) 484-1921 x 11
Kechter Crossing September 19, 2012
Revisions to add underdrain system to the project.
The underdrain design and additional sheets need to be an integral part of the approved
utility plan set.
There is a lot of fuzzy lines and text on this plan set that will need to be cleaned up.
Notes and information on the underdrain material, services and cleanout is needed. The
report indicated that the house services could be 4 inch PVH or HDPE. We don't allow
HPDE to be used in the ROW, so the PVC will need to be used.
Need to add the additional underdrain details to the plans. 713.1 F, detail for non street
clean out, foundation perimeter drain cross sections, and clay cut off wall detail.
As per the report need to identify the filter material that is to be used and the type of filter
fabric that is to be used on the plans.
The provided cover sheet is not needed; instead the existing cover sheet needs to be
revised to show the additional sheets that are being added for the underdrain.
Sheet 6A (prior 2) — the underdrain report shows that there should be a line in Old Farm
Lane, but you are not showing one on the overall plan.
Sheet 17 -
Need to identify the 100 year water surface elevation.
Need to bubble the revised areas. Also missing a bunch of information that is on the
approved sheet. All that information is still needed on this sheet.
Need to add notes regarding the underdrain pipe type and that it is to be a solid pipe for
the portion that is shown on this plan.
Need to identify the locations and number of clean -outs that are to be provided for the
portion that is not under the sewer line.
Per the plan view it looks like the underdrain is under the sewer not the stormline in
Kechter, so it seems that the line on the profile should end before STMHA5.
Sheet 7, sheet 9 thru, sheet 15 — Need to revise these approved sheets and add a big note
on the plans that indicates that an underdrain is to be located below the sewer and see
sheet XA for design information. This needs to be done for all of the existing sewer plan
and profile sheets for which an underdrain is located below the sewer. Because it is just a
note being added to the mylar you will not need to sign and stamp the drawing, but it will
be a new mylar sheet with a revision bubble, this note and sign off by City, District and
County.
Sheet 7A
Remove the notes that are not applicable to this sheet and add the needed notes. Identify
and label where the 100 yr projected water surface elevation surcharge of the pipe will
be.
Identify that this portion of the pipe is solid.
Sheet 9A
Need to identify where the pipe is to transition from solid pipe to perforated pipe. There
also needs to be a clay cut off wall at this location.
Need to identify that a cap is to be provided at the end of the underdrain pipe and that it is
not to be left open.
Sheet l0A
Is there to be an underdrain pipe in Old Farm Lane? The report says yes, the overall plan
says no and the profile sheet says yes.
Sheet 13A
Need to identify where the pipe is to transition from solid pipe to perforated pipe. This
transition needs to occur after the 100 year water surface elevation surcharge location on
the pipe. There also needs to be a clay cut off wall at this location.
The northern lot's perimeter drain connection needs to be moved further south so that the
tie in is south of the 100 year water surface elevation and the clay cut off wall.
Identify and label where the 100 yr projected water surface elevation surcharge of the
pipe will be.
Sheet 14A
The profile is showing the underdrain extending beyond where it is shown on the plan
view.
See comments on the plans.
Kechter Crossing September 24, 2012 S h 00 N ca. r ,.sl
Revisions to add and modify storm line in Tilden Street
General
• Please make sure original signatures are on all the signed sheets and add revision
note to the revision block.
• I am assuming Northern is now going to sign sheets 6, 12, 15
• If the intent is for Stormwater to ultimately take over the maintenance of this line
the existing DA will need to be modified and an easement dedicated to the City
for where stormline runs through private property.
• The plans cannot be signed until the easement from the City property is obtained,
the off -site easement is dedicated to the City, the DA has been amended, once that
has occurred revisions can be signed off on (assuming the design has been
accepted).
• Upon approval to these plans an amendment to the DCP will need to be done to
capture the additional inspection fees needed to inspect this line. Currently as a
private stormline the city would only be inspecting the portion in the streets and
that inspection would really only be to make sure the bedding and compaction are
done correctly. So if this is going forward it would be best that no portion of this
is installed before this is approved. If the City doesn't inspect it we cannot accept
it.
Per the existing DA Section II.E.e (pg 11), the storm drainage pipes within
Tilden Street shall be oversized (24 inch0 to convey additional flows from
adjacent developments. The pipe you are proposing is only a 15 inch pipe. If the
15 inch is adequate to convey flows for the property to the east and the south than
I would imagine that this statement could be changed (this was a condition of the
construction easement on the east property).
Sheet 6
With moving the water line to the west side of the sanitary sewer you will need to show
the waterline depth on the sanitary sewer plans for Copper Crest Lane and Crossview
Drive.
Some of the arrows and reference to the water line where not changed to point to the new
line location.
With the next set remove the old incorrect line references. It was good to see it to see
what the changes proposed were, but it will need to be modify for the final drawings.
Sheet 17
Ma
Assuming that this revision will get approved after the revisions for the underdrain, you
will need to include that design on this sheet and this change will be revision #2 to the
sheet.
The section of stormdrain pipe in Kechter Road should also be 19 x 30 HERCP pipe so
that minimum cover is met. I don't believe a variance request to the cover was ever
granted.
Sheet 17A
Need to show the drainage easement that is needed on the east property for this new pipe.
You are showing the storm line going to the southern property line. This is fine and a
great idea. We would need an easement for the construction of this. Also if the stormline
is to be constructed to the property line it might also be desirable to construct the full
street (waterline, curb, gutter, sidewalk, parkways and asphalt). We have it in the DA
that they will need to provide the City will funds for the portion that they do not build,
but what this is in today's money may not cover the full cost by the time that Everitts
builds on the south property so it would be for their benefit to get the full street built to
the property line now.
Sheet 18
You are showing the removal of this future pipe under Tilden, but you have not addressed
what happens to this flow that is in the swale along the backs of the lots. Where does this
flow go to if the pipe is removed. Maybe this inlet pipe should tie into the new pipe in
Tlden. This seems like this could be something that is done even now.
[10/5/07] Please see comments from Ward Stanford regarding warrants for a right turn lane
or impacts to the intersection of Kechter & Timberline. This project may be responsible for
contributing funds toward intersection improvements.
[8/2/07] It appears on the Plat that 50 feet of ROW is proposed to be ddicated from the
section line (existing center line of Kechter?). This should be adequate depending on
whether or not a right turn lane is required into the development off of Kechter. Please see
comments from Ward Stanford. If a right turn lane is needed into the development, a total of
54 feet of ROW from the ultimate Kechter centerline will be needed to accommodate the
extra lane. The Plat does not show a required 15 foot utility easement dedication behind the
ROW on Kechter.
[6/14/06] The Fossil Creek master street plan classifies Kechter as a 2 lane arterial,
requiring a minimum total R.O.W. to be 84 feet (42' half). Kechter shall be designed and
built to the ultimate condition on the southerly side per LCUASS table 7-1 and figure 7-3F
(all pavement, curb & gutter, parkway, sidewalks, street trees etc... ). A 15 foot wide utility
easement should be located behind the R.O.W. along Kechter.
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford
Topic: Traffic
Number:51 Created:8/7/2007 Pending
[8/3/08]
[3/31/08] Traffic is reiterating the belief that ROW should be provided for a future east
bound right turn lane at Tilden.
[8/7/07] Not having seen the original TIS, I've no knowledge of whether any other approved
area projects were included in the review. A religious use has been proposed, possibly
approved, at the notheast corner of Kechter and Timberline, but I've no knowledge of any
land planning or discussion about the future expectations of Tilden St adjacent and south of
this site. If not already, planning discussion should be had regarding the future possible
need for r-o-w for a west bound right turn lane at Tilden and Kechter.
Number:53 Created:9/30/2007 Pending
[8/3/08] Continue comment.
[3/31/08] Sight distance on Kechter at Tilden and at Kadenwood is of concern. The quantity
of trees has shown to cause a picket fence effect significantly reducing sight distance for
vehicles at both intersections. City recommends that every other tree in the sight distance
easement be removed, starting with the trees nearest each intersection.
[9/30/07] Need to provide sight distance analysis at your intersections. Landscape plan has
trees right up to all intersections. Stop signs and stop bars will be placed preceeding
sidewalks. Sight distance and landscaping at the intersections needs to be evaluated and
planned from the understanding of where vehicles are being expected to stop for
peds/cyclists and vehicles on the crossing street and sidewalks.
Number:54 Created:9/30/2007 Pending
[8/3/08] Continue comment.
[3/31/08] Traffic Operations believes current landscaping policies did not take into account
other departments Federally mandated safety requirements. As such, Traffic and Forestry
are having to expend considerable resources to move our signs and to trim trees to meet
those federal mandates. Traffic requests that language be placed in the development
agreement and in the HOA regulations that all yearly tree trimming required to maintain
visibility of street signage and safe commuting visibility be the responsibility of the HOA.
Page 2
Kechter Crossing October 26, 2012,,�9i
Comments on revisions to add underdrains to the project. v
1. The plans submitted show the proposed underdrain and the proposed changes to
the stormlines. If you want the underdrain design approved right now you will
need to remove all of the stormline changes from these plans. Changes to the
storm system cannot be approved until the easement is granted by City Council
and an easement dedicated to the City for the outfall is provided (and any
comments on the design of this system are addressed). You could show the
waterline relocation with the underdrain addition if you want — the plans just
cannot include the new stormline.
2. The proposed alternative installation detail with the fabric just on the top of the
pipe will not be accepted by the City. The site soils consist of sandy clay, sandy
clay with silty sand layers, and silty sands and the full wrap is needed to prevent
the sand and fines in the soil from migrating into the aggregate base and into the
subdrain.
3. There was a response note from my prior comments that indicated that the
underdrain report was revised and the need for the underdrain within Old Farm
Lane was revised and removed. I did not receive a revised report that shows this.
If the report was revised to show that this is not needed I am fine with it not
existing I just need the revised report for our records.
4. I agree with Stormwaters comments in that the locations of the cleanouts in
relation to the storm manholes needs to be identified and labeled on the plans.
5. 1 do have a few other comments on the plans I marked up. Over all the plans and
design looked pretty good. Just the removal of the storm changes and addressing
the comments is needed.
6. Because the plans do need items removed and added to them I do want to see a
copy again before we go to mylars. I am willing to review electronic copies
although I will want my redline copies back before I do so.
JIM SELL DESIGN, INC.
Landscape Architecture, Engineering, MEMORANDUM
Environmental & Community Planning
153 West Mountain Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Tele: 970.484.1921
Fax: 970.484-2443
TO: Matt Lafferty, Larimer County Planning
FROM: Ed Hyatt
DATE: July 9, 2007
PROJEcr No.: 2463.4
SUBJECT: Kechter Crossing: Response to Sketch Plan Comments
We have revised the Sketch Plan/Preliminary Plat in response to staff comments received as follows:
Review Criteria for Rezoninq
A. The proposed change is consistent with the master plan.. Density of Townhome parcel is 12.2 du/ac.
The townhomes have been removed; single-family detached is the only housing type proposed.
Review Criteria for Planned Land Division
C. The Planned Land Division complies with all standards and technical requirements of this Code and
with all other federal, state and county laws and regulations.
Section 8.1. I Sewage Disposal Level of service Standards: Comments from South Fort Collins Sanitation
District indicate that the site is not currently in the District service area.
The applicant has petitioned to be included in the District and a service letter is included with this
submittal
Section 8.1.1 Domestic Water Level of Service
Easements for service lines need to be provided and prior to a public hearing for preliminary plat the
applicant will need to provide a letter indicating the Fort Collins -Loveland Water Districts is willing and
able to serve the property.
Easements and will -serve letter are provided with this preliminary plat submittal.
Section 8.1.3 Drainage Level of Service Standards
Historic drainage problems have existed in the area, which may require additional detention and small
releases.
The drainage report submitted with the PLD addresses this problem.
Section 8.1.4 Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Service Level Standards
In the next submittal the applicant should address the provision of fire protection and should consult with
Poudre Fire Authority to ensure compliance with their standards.
E:\PROIECT FUXS"ND\2763.4 KECHTER BRINKMAN\DOCS\PLD\] ST SUBMITTAU2463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENTS.DOC
This submittal addresses this requirement.
Section 8.1.5 Road Capacity and Level of Service Standards
A traffic report is expected with the next submittal. Possible of site improvements may be required.
This submittal includes a traffic report; the PLD addresses off -site improvements and responds to
Engineering Department comments.
Section 8.5 Landscaping
Future submittal should include a landscape plan complying with Section 8.5 of the Code.
This submittal includes a conceptual landscape plan, which Sean Wheeler has indicated is
appropriate at this submittal level.
Section 8 of the Land Use Code
Section 8 of the Land Use Code has more information that is not evident with this submittal. The applicant
is advised to review all areas of Section 8 to determine additional information is warranted.
Section 8 of the Land Use Code has been reviewed and its provisions have are reflected in the plans.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT COMMENTS
Water:
Applicant will need to obtain a letter of commitment, from the District for inclusion with the preliminary plat,
including pressure and delivery standards outlined in Section 8.1.4 of the Land Use Code. Information
necessary for review by State Engineer at the Colorado Division of Water Resources needs to be
included as part of the preliminary plat.
The property was included within the District with provision of water service to the existing home
Sewer:
Applicant will need to obtain a letter of commitment from the District for inclusion with the preliminary plat
submittal. Plans for converting the existing farmstead from septic to public sewer should be included in
the development plans.
The Applicant has submitted a Petition for Inclusion to the District but the petition has not yet been
before the Board; we have been in touch with the District and we expect to be included at the next
board meeting. Plans for connecting the existing farmhouse to public sewer are provided with this
submittal.
Stormwater Management during Construction
All construction activities are required to obtain coverage under a State level Stormwater management
permit if they disturb one or more acres of land.
This permit will be obtained prior to construction.
Fugitive Dust during Construction
Fugitive dust requirements will be complied with during construction.
Transportation/Access Issues:
EVROJECT MESV.AND\2463.4 KECHTER BRINKMAN\DOCSIPLD\1ST SUBMI7TALU463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENTS.DOC
1. Kechter Road is classified as a 2-lane arterial with an 84-foot right-of-way and a 15-foot utility
easement. In the next submittal, delineate existing and any proposed dedicated right-of-way and utility
easements necessary to satisfy this requirement.
This information has been provided.
2. The developer is required to improve the south half of Kechter Road adjacent to the site, and the north
half needs to be designed to included the minimum width for an arterial road, which is 36 feet.
The preliminary plat submittal reflects this requirement.
3. A soils investigation is required for any projects requiring right-of-way grading and paving.
A geotechnical report is included with this submittal.
4. The Fossil Creek Reservoir Plan shows a connector local street extending to and through this site. A
connector requires a minimum 57-foot right-of-way.
A connector local street has been added along the east side of the proposed development.
5. The applicant needs to provide detailed location and site distance information for the proposed
accesses with the preliminary submittal.
This information is included with this submittal.
6. Traffic counts recorded by this office are referenced.
Noted.
7. A traffic impact study needs to be submitted with the preliminary plat
A traffic impact study is included with this submittal.
8. Additional right-of-way may be required once a detailed traffic impact study and more detailed site
information have been provided.
Noted.
9. This project is located within the Fort Collins GMA and the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards (LCUASS) apply.
Noted.
10. This office requests that a Homeowner's Association be responsible for the maintenance of internal
streets.
At the pre -application meeting it was determined that Fort Collins will assume maintenance
responsibilities for internal streets because of the site's location with the Fossil Creek Reservoir
Area.
11. It appears from the sketch plan that the applicant intends to meet the connectivity design standard
stated in Section 8.12.2-S of the Land Use Code.
Noted.
E:IPRO]ECT FILE U ANDU463.4 KECHTER BRINKMANIDOCSXPLDV ST SUBMH7AU2463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENFS.DOC
12. It appears that adequate parking for the townhomes is available.
The townhomes have been removed from the plan.
13. The applicant should contact Poudre Fire Authority to ensure that the building and internal street
layout is adequate.
Poudre Fire Authority has been consulted regarding access spacing along Kechter.
14. The County prefers two benchmarks be shown and described on the plat and construction plans.
Noted.
15. The engineering department requests that all existing.fences and structures be moved out of the
existing and proposed rights -of -way as part of this development proposal.
Existing fences and structures will be removed from the right-of-way.
16. Utilities may need to be relocated as part of Kechter Road improvements, which is the developer's
responsibility.
Noted.
Drainage/Erosion Control/Irrictation Issues
1. A Drainage Plan and Report will be required at the next submittal and a preliminary grading plan will
need to be submitted with existing and proposed contours, building envelopes and finished floor
elevations.
A drainage report is included with this submittal.
2. The Drainage and Erosion Control Plan should detail any historic drainage problems, existing and
proposed drainage paths and any impacts caused by site improvements. The report should evaluate any
downstream drainage facilities to ensure they are adequately sized.
Noted.
3. With the next submittal the applicant must show that there is an acceptable legal and physical path of
flow for runoff through and from the development to an identified outfall facility.
The drainage report defines this path of flow for runoff.
4. The applicant should be aware that this site has been analyzed as part of an updated City of Fort
Collins Drainage Plan since there have been historic drainage problems in this area of the McClelland
Creek Basin. The Drainage Report shall reference the City's updated plan; on -site detention facilities may
need to be sized with a more conservative release rate than normally required.
Noted.
5. The Geotechnical Report will need to confirm that no groundwater will enter the detention ponds.
The geotechnical report confirms that groundwater levels are 8-12 feet, which is deeper than
detention pond depths.
6. The detention ponds and open spaces (if applicable) need to be within tracts and drainage easements,
which shall be shown on the plans and plat with the next submittal.
EAPRO]ECT FIL EAND\2463.4 KECHTER BRINKMANIDOMPLD\1ST SUBMIT TALU463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENTS.DOC
Detention ponds and open spaces are shown within tracts or easements with this submittal.
7. The appropriate irrigation company will need to approve the proposed improvements to the irrigation
ditch. A signature block should be provided on the appropriate plans.
Research by the applicant's attorney regarding this easement shows that the easement in question
is for off -site drainage only and off -site flows have been accommodated in the drainage plan. A copy
of the easement dedication is included with this submittal.
8. Any irrigation systems for this proposal must be kept within outlots or tracts, within easements and
separate from the road rights -of -way.
See response above.
9. This office will require the applicant to address the issue of erosion control and briefly describe erosion
control measures in a narrative and show them on the plans.
Erosion control measures are described in this submittal.
10. This office provides services to rural landowners and developers on matters of grading, erosion
control, restoration/revegetation and other environmental concerns.
Noted.
11. Larimer County is implementing new state Stormwater construction permit and erosion and sediment
control plan requirements. Please see the attached requirements for an outline of the new processes and
provisions.
Noted.
CITY OF FORT COLLINS COMMENTS
Advance Planning
18. The townhome configuration shows just over the maximum of 12 DU/AC per acre (12.2).
The townhomes have been removed; single-family detached is the only housing type proposed.
19. Additional density above what is required in the LC FA-1 Zoning needs to be obtained from the TDU
sending area transaction.
This is the applicant's understanding.
Engineering
3. A traffic study should be required for Kechter and interior streets to determine the level of service and
any need for additional right-of-way on Kechter for a possible right turn lane.
A traffic study is included with this submittal.
8. Due to the relocation of the irrigation ditch, the authorized ditch company should review and approve
the plans.
Research by the applicant's attorney regarding this easement shows that the easement in question
is for off -site drainage only and off -site flows have been accommodated in the drainage plan.
EAPROJECT FR.ESTAND\2463.4 K-OrFER BRWKMAN\DOCSIPLD\1ST SUBNMALU463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENTS.DOC
9. Refer to both areas where the relocated ditch will cross under the R.O. W. Any ditch crossings should
be constructed with Class 111 RCP or PVC C900 material. Pipe cover should be not less than 2 feet.
Noted. (See response above)
11. Lots 5 & 6, 18 & 19 cannot take access off of the future street connection "stubs". Proposed street
naming should be shown to satisfy any concerns that PFA may have, especially for those streets that
bend N-S & E-W.
The "stubs" mentioned have been eliminated in the redesign of the site. Street naming has been
coordinated with the county's list of street names.
14. Please review and revise the area and density calculations as needed. Gross acreage does not
match plat acreage (Feldman MRD 9 7-EX1094).
The acreage has been reviewed and matches the areas on the Feldman plat.
Streets Design
2. The distance between proposed connections cannot exceed 660 feet, measured along the project
boundary. The sketch plan does not meet the City/GMA minimum design criteria (see redline comments).
The spacing of accesses along Kechter Road does not exceed 660 feet.
4. The Fossil Creek master plan classifies Kechter as a 2-lane arterial.
This classification is reflected on the plans.
5. Interior local streets: The Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan requires at least on connector local street
from north to south. The connecter local should be constructed per LCUASS standards with a minimum
57-foot ROW. (36 feet curb -to -curb) with bike lanes and a 9-foot utility easement both sides.
A traffic study is included with this submittal.
6. The street stub on the easterly side of the site should be constructed with a temporary turnaround
having a minimum radius of 80 feet due to the access being taken of this stub for the townhomes.
This street stub has been eliminated.
7. The minimum intersection spacing off Kechter is 200 feet (CL to CL). Please verity that this criterion
has been met.
The intersection spacing off Kechter is shortest at Blackcomb Drive and Copper Mill Lane. The CL
to CL distance from Kechter to Copper Mill Lane along Blackcomb Drive is 255 feet.
Traffic Operations
3. Depending on the level of improvements by Writer Homes project on the north side of Kechter, a short
gap o f unimproved roadway should not be allow to remain between the Kechter improvements done by
this project and the existing Kechter improvements.
Noted.
4. Please provide utility plans and site plans with future submittals,
Utility plans are included with this submittal as required by the County.
EAPROIECT FB.ESUANDU463A KECHTER BRINKMANDOCSTI V I ST SUBMIITAL12463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENTS.DOC
Traff is
15. Please provide a TIS.
A traffic study is included with this submittal.
16. The project may have to mitigate impacts to Timberline & Kechter. A TIS is needed to determine
impacts there and adjacent to site on Kechter.
A traffic study is included with this submittal.
17. Provided sketch plan does not provide adequate dimensioning .for reviewing intersection spacing,
interior street classifications, etc.
The preliminary plat submittal provides this information.
EAPROLELT MES\L.AND\2463.4 KBCH[ER BRINKMANIDOMPLDU ST SUBMLTTAU2463 RESPONSE TO SKETCH PLAN COMMENI'S.DOC
September 10, 2007
Matt Lafferty
Larimer County Planning Division
P.O. Box 1190
Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190
Re: Kecther Crossing PLD/PD — COUNTY COMMENTS
RE: Kechter Crossing — Prelim Plans 2nd Submittal
Project No.: 2463.4
Dear Matt:
We offer the following responses to Staffs comments for the Kechter Crossing -Preliminary Plans (our
responses are in italics):
Preliminary Design Comments:
1. The typical road section for Kechter Road on Sheet 14 shows 24 feet between the south flowline and
right-of-way most likely to match the 50 foot half right-of-way that was dedicated with the Feldman
M.R.D. Plat in 1998. Normally, only 16 feet is required between flowline and right-of-way
(LCUASS Figure 7-3F). In this case, Staff would like to note that the 50 foot half right-of-way width
should remain as it may be beneficial should there ever be a future need for an eastbound right onto
Tilden Street when connections to the south are made.
Response: Acknowledged
2. The preliminary plat should show the 15 foot utility easement along the north site boundary per t\.
LCUASS Figure 7-317.
Response: 15' utility easement has been added to the plat.
3. The east half of the proposed Tilden Street right-of-way is shown on the adjacent City owned
property and as a result is not within the platted boundary of this development. Therefore, a letter of
commitment from the City is needed with the next submittal confirming this is acceptable and a
separate deed of dedication will be needed with the final plat submittal for the offsite portions of
proposed right-of-way.
Response: The Client is currently working with Ken Waido, at the City, to obtain an official letter of
commitment. The City has not changed their stance and is still willing to share ROW with this
property. This letter will be provided prior to public hearing.
4. Coordination with the City of Fort Collins will be needed as this application moves forward through
the review process to determine how the new 36 foot widening along Kechter Road to the west will
connect with the Kechter Road improvements that the Jehovah's Witness Church may be making. At
this point, the City has indicated that the Church is responsible for a westbound right turn lane into
their site off of Kechter Road, but it is unknown when the Church plans to sign their development
agreement and begin construction.
Response: The Church will be under construction this fall and hopes to be occupied by the end of the
year. Therefore, we have shown the 36' pavement width connecting to the approved taper, east of the
Kechter Road access to the Church.
5. This project's traffic will use the nearby Kechter Road and Timberline Road intersection which is
within the City of Fort Collins' jurisdiction. This office has contacted City Staff to determine their
concerns regarding any additional impacts to this intersection resulting from this site's traffic. Staff
will forward any City comments to the applicant once a response has been received.
Response: Noted. City comments have been received and responded to.
6. The preliminary geotechnical report must analyze the existing pavement and base on Kechter Road
adjacent to this project and further to the west toward Timberline Road to determine if it is adequate
to handle the increase in traffic from this development. Appropriate improvements to the existing
Kechter Road pavement section may be needed and shall be recommended in the geotechnical report.
Response: Please see the Pavement Evaluation Report for Kechter Road by EEC dated May 29, 2007.
7. According to LCUASS 7.4.1.A.8, 500 feet of plan and profile design, including centerline, flowline,
and cross sections are required past the project boundaries. Therefore, the Tilden Street and Old
Farm Lane plan and profile drawings shall provide the additional design beyond the project boundary
to confirm that these future street connections can meet the urban 'area street standards. In this case,
this department is willing to review a design length that may be less than 500 feet for the Old Farm
Lane connection. However, the proposed change in grade at the Tilden Street connection will likely
require the entire 500 feet of additional design. Cross -sections can be provided with the final design.
Response: We have added 200' of additional preliminary road design for Old Farm Lane. 500' has
been included for Tilden. Cross -sections and flowline profiles will be submitted with Final.
(Additional clarification note on Tilden) Due to the site's need to drain everything back to Kechter,
Tilden gets left a little high at the south property line. During the interim condition we would like A' tie
back into existing from the end of construction with a 4:1 slope. If this is acceptable we will obtain a
grading easement from the adjacent landowner and undermining/damage from drainage will be
mitigated against on the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Plan.
8. Note 3 on Sheet 3 of 22 indicates to possibly abandon existing dry utilities. This note needs to be
revised to indicate that the existing dry utilities should either be removed or placed underground
(LCLUC Section 8.14.5.D). Sheet 3 of 22 also shows removal of various features located on the
adjacent City of Fort Collins owned property. This offsite work requires documentation from the
City that the proposed demolition plan is acceptable.
Response: Note has been changed. We are in the process of obtaining documentation concerning
demo on City property.
9. A minimum 6 foot wide sidewalk is required along the south side of Kechter Road rather than the 5
foot width that is currently shown on the typical road section on Sheet 14 (LCUASS Figure 7-3F).
[9/30/07] Trees in public r-o-w need to meet placement and canopy height criteria in
LCUASS to provide adequate sight distance for peds/cyclists and motor vehicles.
Number:85 Created:3/31/2008 Pending
[8/3/08] Trees still on SE side and therefore Traffic has concerns with sight distance issues
at the ped crossing.
[3/31/08] Suggest that the trees in the sight distance easement on Crossview be planted on
the northwest side of the road, since the north side has little to no sight distance problems
and the southeast side is the problem.
Number:86 Created:3/31/2008 Pending
[8/3/08] Continue comment.
[3/31/08] Traffic has considerable concern about signage visibility due to very slow growing
Oaks being the primary tree planted at each of the intersections. A 2" or 3" Oak's canopy is
lower than eight feet for years. Does not seem like the right tree to have at intersections and
their safety concerns.
Number:87 Created:3/31/2008 Pending
[8/3/08] Have not received any S&S plans since making previous comment.
[3/31/08] Sht 38 and 39:
S&S plans show crosswalks that go to areas without sidewalks. Please remove the
crosswalks shown on the east side of Timberline and Kechter, and on the south side of
Tilden at Kechter.
Please indicate R1-1 signs on Tilden and on Kadenwood at Kechter, and remove the
painted "Stop" on the street.
Number:88 Created:3/31/2008 Unresolved
[3/31/08] Sht 39: Please add R1-1 signage at the intersecting leg of each of the internal "T"
intersections (i.e.: on Kadenwood @ Coppervein, etc) and remove the painted "Stop" on the
street surfaces.
Number:89 Created:3/31/2008 Unresolved
[3/31/08] Please add W11-2 with W16-913 a minimum of 200' or just before the beginning of
the curve, which ever is greater, in advance of the trail crossing on Kadenwood and
Crossview. Also place W11-2 with w16-7P adjacent to and right of the approach lane by
those crosswalks plus the crosswalk on copper Crest.
Number:99 Created:8/3/2008 Pending
[8/3/08] LCUASS requires left turn lanes at all intersections and at all full movement
accesses. Previously noted in ID # 49, 8/07. Nothing shown on the plans nor any comments
received regarding LCUASS policy.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Denise Weston
Topic: Traffic
Number:91 Created:3/31/2008 Unresolved
[3/31/08] Please include pedestrian and bicycle level of service analysis in the TIS. The
internal soft, pathway is acceptable as long as maintenance is assumed by the property
owner AND pedestrian level of service is met with the sidewalk system proposed.
Page 3
Response: the sidewalk width on the typical road section has been corrected.
10. The Landscape Plan shows new trees within the sight distance triangles at the Kechter Road site
accesses. Per LCUASS Figure 7-16, the line of sight can not be obstructed at intersections.
Response: Deciduous trees with branches no lower than 6' are allowed within the sight triangles. All
other plant material has been removed.
Preliminary Drainage & Irrigation Issues:
***Please see additional drainage responses attached to the drainage report
1. The applicant's consultants are aware that drainage agreements are needed for the portions of the
offsite storm sewer system which are not within public right-of-way. As a result, this office can not
support this proposal proceeding to the public hearings until one of the two following steps occur:
• An actual final agreement granting the easement subject to approval of the project is submitted
(this will be needed prior to final plat approval anyway).
• A letter is submitted from the impacted property owners stating that they will grant the
agreement/easement and that if the negotiations break down, it will be set for arbitration.
Response: appropriate documentation will be presented previous to public hearings
2. The proposed grading along the west side of the site appears to block the majority of surface flows
from the west that would otherwise sheet flow across the properties. It seems this will generate
standing water along the rear property lines of this project and cause adverse impacts to the proposed
Old Farm Lane's curb and gutter system where some offsite flows will be concentrating. Also, a
legitimate outfall needs to be in place should the properties to the west ever develop. For these
reasons, this office recommends that a swale be designed within a drainage outlot along the west
boundary which can ultimately convey the offsite runoff through the site in accordance with the
City's Mini McClelland's Basin Masterplan.
Response: A IS' drainage and utility easement with a swale has been added along the western
boundary of the project to collect offsite flows. These flows (roughly 20cfs-see drainage report) are
then conveyed along the south side of Old Farm Lane, under Coppervein and into the center detention
area. When the property to the west is developed, the release will likely need to be split between the
swale south of Old Farm Lane and to an extension of the proposed storm sewer in Kechter Road that
is being constructed with this project. t.
3. Portions of the Drainage Report text (Pages 7 and 14) indicate that the developed/onsite 100 year
flows will be detained and released from the site at the existing 2 year rate which conforms to the
City's Mini Master Plan and is required by this office. However, the Detention Design descriptions
(3 scenarios on Page 11) do not seem to fully encompass what this office considers the most
crucial/necessary scenario in which onsite 100 year flows are detained and released at the 2 year
historic rate into the proposed downstream storm pipe system while upstream/undeveloped 100 year
flows are passed through the site and also released into the proposed downstream pipe. As a result,
further clarification is needed in the Scenario descriptions to ensure the correct model is feasible.
Response: Additional text has been added to clarify the scenarios. Please see revised drainage report.
4. The proposed contours between Pond 1 and 2 on the Drainage Map seem to indicate that flows will
be retained in Pond 2 until the water surface reaches the 4934 elevation and can then spill into Pond
1. It should be noted that retention of any volume is not an acceptable stormwater storage method for
this project. Also, the Grading Plan calls out the bottom of pond contour as a "constant water surface
elevation". The plans and Drainage Report need to discuss what is meant by this in more detail. For
example, how is a constant water surface created if these elevations are the bottom of the pond? The
ponds need to be graded to drain minor storm water flows (min. of 0.5% with a trickle pan). Also, the
Drainage Plan shows a 4933 contour in Pond 2, but the Rough Grading Plans do not.
Response: The original intent was to have ponds incorporated into the design. These ponds would be
controlled with water rights and detention would be stored over the pond surface. We have dropped
this idea with the current submittal and have gone back to a more standard detention pond with min.
bottom slope of 0.5%.
5. A staged storage spreadsheet based on the proposed pond contours is needed in the Drainage Report
to demonstrate the actual pond capacities. Also, the Drainage Plan needs to show and call out the 100
year water surface elevations in the proposed ponds.
Response: A stage storage table has been added to the report and 100 yr water surface has been added
to the Drainage Plan.
6. The south side swale along Kechter Road adjacent to the northwest corner of the Homestead l't Filing
is roughly 18 inches higher than the swale flowline to the west, which does not allow emergency
overflows from this project to continue east along Kechter Road. Therefore, our office requests that
this discussion be expanded (Page 12 of the Drainage Report) to account for where these flows report
to once they reach the driveway near the northwest corner of the Homestead I" Filing as well as any
recommendations for mitigation.
Response: Runoff would be diverted south from Kechter in an existing ditch, just previous to the
Homestead property, and into the Edelweiss pond by the existing irrigation system and topography.
This was noted through topography and discussions with Homestead residents that have watched this
occur during past major events.
7. Based on the Geotechnical Report, groundwater was present at 8 to 12 foot depths below grade
throughout the site during testing. As a result, basements may not be feasible for various lots
throughout the site. Therefore, a note needs to be provided on the plat stating that an engineered
footing and foundation design along with an appropriate subsurface drainage system design is
required as part of a building permit application for all lots in the development.
Response: This note will appear on the final plat.
8. A signature block for the irrigation company which owns the ditch along the south project boundary
should be provided on the plat and appropriate plans. This 20 foot irrigation easement needs to be
separate from the adjacent single family lots and Tilden Street right-of-way and must be kept within
an outlot on the plat and plans. Also, Tilden Street appears to block ditch flows from the west. More
detail is needed on the plans showing how the ditch flows will be accommodated.
Response: We are abandoning the irrigation ditch that runs along the south property line and will be
lotting all the way to the south boundary. We have been attempting to track down any ditch companies
that might have ties to either one of these easements. It appears that they were created for sole benefit
of the property and do not continue onto adjacent parcels. For now, it looks like we won't need
additional signature blocks. These will be vacated by separate document
Final Design Comments:
Response: all "Final Design Comments" have been reviewed and will be addressed with the final
submittal (some were taken care of with the current submittal). Thanks for the early comments.
1. The Overall Utility Plan calls the existing 20 foot ditch easement which crosses through Blocks 2, 5,
11, 12 and Outlot E and F to be abandoned. Based on an email from the applicant's design engineer,
this easement was put in place with the Feldman M.R.D. plat to convey historic stormwater runoff
through the subject development and downstream to the adjacent City owned affordable housing
property. As long as all downstream users of this ditch (including any rightful users beyond the City
property) are agreeable with the proposal based on written confirmation, then the plat shall identify
this easement as being vacated rather than abandoned.
2. The final plans will need to provide further detail and complete design information for the ultimate
street section in order for any reimbursements from the City to be considered for the Kechter Road
improvements. Reimbursement eligibility for this project and other related details can be coordinated
with the City, County, and applicant as the application moves forward.
3. Right-of-way limits need to be drawn per LCUASS Figure 8-12 at the street intersections.
4. The final plat submittal will need to describe ownership and maintenance responsibilities for each of
the common areas, outlots, and easements.
5. A final pavement design report will be needed for the Kechter Road improvements. Also, the plans
will need to specify pavement type, lift thicknesses, binder grade, etc. (LCUASS Chapter 10 & 22.5)
6. Construction traffic control plans will be needed for the Kechter Road improvements and utility
installations.
7. Roadway cross -sections will be required on 50 foot intervals for the Kechter Road improvements
(LCUASS 3.3.4.D).
8. A sidewalk should be designed within Outlot C to provide for future pedestrian connectivity to the
south. All ramps need to align with the sidewalks.
9. Individual lot grading details should be provided on the plans for Type A versus Type B lots, etc.
Also, lowest minimum floor elevations should be provided for each lot and need to be set
appropriately above groundwater levels.
10. The offsite storm sewer redlines on Sheet 11 of 22 will need to be addressed.
11. All crosspans need to be shown on the Drainage Map.
12. The Kechter Road improvement redlines on Sheets 13-15 will need to be addressed. Other
miscellaneous roadway plan and profile comments should be addressed with the final design as well.
13. The Final Drainage Report will need to include composite runoff coefficient calculations for each of
the subbasins.
14. The preliminary Drainage Report Appendix D only included inlet and street capacity calculations for
Inlet 2. The final report needs to include proper street and inlet capacity calculations at all inlet
locations in order to demonstrate that the maximum allowable in -street flows (see LCSDS Table ST-
2A) will not be exceeded in the minor and major rainfall events.
15. The 2 year flow rate for SWMM ID RD-11 in the Drainage Report Table 5: Gutter Flows (Scenario
2) is given as 1.2 cfs with a corresponding flow depth of 0.19 feet. This seems to conflict with the
rational method 2 year flow rate of 7.2 cfs (Table 1: Existing Basin 901-W) reporting to RD-11 from
the offsite basin to the west. Therefore, it appears the tables should be updated for consistency.
16. Table 1 (Drainage Report and Existing Map): Existing Basin Runoff Estimation shows 3 rows of
information for Basin RD-EX-1. It seems the Basin labels should be updated (RD-EX-1, 2, 3).
17. The storm sewer system shall be sized with the assumption that tailwater conditions are present at the
downstream outlets. The storm sewer profiles will need to show the hydraulic grade lines.
18. The final plans and Drainage Report will need to demonstrate how the pond outlet configuration will
detain the developed 100 year onsite flows and release at the 2 year historic rate while allowing the
upstream/offsite flows to pass through the site undetained into the downstream storm pipe system.
19. The detention pond will need to be sized and designed to account for water quality capture volumes in
accordance with Volume 3 of the Urban Drainage Criteria Manual. Since this site is in a City of Fort
Collins master drainage basin, the WQCV needs to be additive to the 100 year detention volume. The
ponds need to provide at least 1 foot of freeboard as well.
20. The Final Drainage Report Appendix will need to include copies of the referenced tables, figures, and
graphs from the various criteria manuals, etc.
Fees & Permits:
The Fees and Permits Comments 1-5 that were issued in the memo dated 6/28/06 from this office will
still apply as this project moves forward. Permits will not be issued until the development application
receives final approval, etc.
Staff Recommendation:
1. The Larimer County Engineering Department can not recommend approval of this preliminary plat
proposal until the remaining Preliminary Comments stated above have been addressed and our
department has reviewed and approved the additional information.
2. This office has also prepared redlines on the submitted plans set which can be picked up at the
applicant's convenience. We request that the redline plans be returned with the subsequent submittal.
3. In addition, the applicant shall provide written responses to the above comments on the next
submittal. These comments can be emailed to the applicant's consultants upon request.
4. The applicant should be aware that our department has based the comments on the submitted
information and once the additional information has been submitted, we may have additional
comments.
If you have any questions regarding the responses to the comments please feel free to contact me at
484-1921.
Sincerely,
Jim Sell Design, Inc.
Jonathan Sweet, PE
Project Manager
September 10, 2007
Matt Lafferty
Larimer County Planning Division
P.O. Box 1190
Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190
Re: Kecther Crossing PLD/PD — CITY COMMENTS
RE: Kechter Crossing — Prelim Plans 2nd Submittal
Project No.: 2463.4
Dear Matt:
We offer the following responses to Staff's comments for the Kechter Crossing -
Preliminary Plans (our responses are in italics):
ISSUES:
Department: Advance Planning Issue Contact: Pete Wray
Topic: General
Number: 24 Created: 7/31 /2007
[7/31/07] In Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan this property has a land use designation
of Low Density Mixe-Use Neighborhood with minimum net average density of 3
dwellings units per acre. Project data shows 3.1 D.U.'s per acre.
Response: noted
Number: 25 Created: 7/31 /2007
[7/31/07] The IGA with Fort Collins and Larimer County for deferred annexation until
final approval by County and TDU transfer is complete.
Response: noted
Department: Current Planning
Topic: General
Number: 23
[7/27/07] Natural Resources: No comments
Issue Contact: Shelby Sommer
Created: 7/27/2007
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland
Topic: Engineering
Number: 26 Created: 8/2/2007
/2/07] The Vicinity Map on the Plat does not meet LCUASS Appendix E scannability
requirements. Please remove shading and topography layers.
Response: Plat vicinity map has been revised
Number: 27 Created: 8/2/2007
J�v [8/2/07] Please show a 15 foot utility easement dedication behind the ROW on Kechter
or add the word UTILITY to the outlot A and outlot E dedications.
Response: 15' UE has been added behind Kechter ROW.
Number: 28 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] If a right turn lane is warranted into this development off of Kechter, additional
ROW will need to be dedicated on Kechter (54 feet from ultimate CL). I will defer turn
lane warrant comments to Ward Stanford.
Response: Right turn into development not warranted
Number: 29 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] A variance to the standard should be noted in the general notes (note no. 48)
for the LCUASS street stub connection standard. This development will be providing a
pedestrian connection in lieu of a street stub connection near the SW corner of the
development. This does not meet the standard but will be satisfactory to the City as a
pedestrian connection.
Response: Variance note has been added to general notes page.1Ci
Number: 30 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] The pedestrian access easement on the south off of Copper Crest Lane does
not show a proposed concrete walk/trail connection to the boundary line. If this
connection is to occur in the future, how will this be done? Who will be responsible for
constructing this stretch of concrete walk/trail? The City recommends that the developer
construct it with this project to the property boundary and install a small turn around or
barricade.
Response: Concrete trail is shown with barricade at property line. Ot
Number: 31 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] The off -site storm drain connection and outfall north of the development shall be
contained in a drainage easement. This drainage easement should be shown and
labeled on the off -site utility plan sheet and the easement reception no. should be
referenced on the plan. A complete plan and profile design of the proposed storm drain
system shall be submitted and reviewed prior to plan approval.
Response: A 25' drainage and access easement is being dedicated by separate
document. The reception number will be shown once it is known. A profile has6�v
been added, even though this is not typically done at a prelim level, due to the
importance of this line being approved by the City/County.
Number: 32 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] This project needs to show that Kechter meets the requirement for a connection
to an IMPROVED arterial. Kechter Road from the development frontage to Timberline
shall be a minimum of 36 feet in paved width AND the pavement section width must also
meet the minimum requirement for a 2-lane arterial. The plans or soils report do not
provide the existing pavement section for this stretch of Kechter Road. Please provide
this information with the next review submittal. If the existing pavement section does not
meet the current 2-lane arterial requirements, this development will be required do
additional paving or reconstruction to comply with this standard.
AA Response: Please see the Pavement Evaluation report for Kechter Road by EEC,
6�� dated May 29 h 2007. The Church at the intersection of Timberline and Kechter
�� Road is being constructed this fall. Therefore, we will be connecting to the
(� Church's interim taper, just east of their site, in order to maintain the 36' min.
p pavement width to nearest improved arterial intersection.
Number: 33 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] The City will not reimburse the developer for any interim improvements to
Kechter.
Response: Acknowledged.
Number: 34 Created: 8/2/2007
[8/2/07] This development is required to provide a minimum of 1000 feet of preliminary
ultimate off -site design for Kechter Road to the east and west of the site. 500 feet of
preliminary off -site design is needed for Tilden to the south of the development. All
street designs shall meet LCUASS Appendix E standards and provide centerline and
2
flowline profiles for interim and ultimate designs. LCUASS also requires cros sections
every 50 feet for arterial designs. All street designs should show flow line and centerline
profiles per LCUASS Section 3.3.4
Response: See "Ultimate" design linework included with profile sheets for
Kechter and preliminary "not for construction" linework for Old Farm and Tilden.
Flow/ines and cross sections to be shown with final. The County agreed that is Ok--
J was reasonable to show only 200 additional feet west of Old Farm.
„Number: 35 Created: 8/3/2007
�� SJ [8/2/07] Please show the proposed interim improvements more clearly from the site to
Timberline. From the plans it appears that interim improvements stop at station 8+50.
Response: I have roughed out the interim and ultimate linework from the Church's
approved plans. No new turning movements will be required at
Timberline/Kechter intersection with the Kechter Crossing project and we are
connecting to the east side of the Church's improvements. Therefore, I left off a
lot of the detail at the intersection and replaced it with a note to reference the
Church's plans.
Number: 36 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] The meandering sidewalk along Kechter cannot be closer than 10 feet to the
curb line. Please dimension the closest section of walk. Please provide the smallest
4� radius on the meandering sidewalk to verify minimum standards are being met with
respect to sidewalk curvature.
Response: The standard LUCASS 2- lane arterial sidewalk has replaced the
sidewalk shown in the previous submittal.
oj✓ Number: 37 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] Intersection details per LCUASS 7-24, 7-27 & 7-28 need to be provided with
street design.
Response: Details are not required to be shown until final submittal. They will be
provided at that time.
Number: 38 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] Please use different line type or concrete hatch fill on proposed sidewalks and
grails throughout the plans. T
b Response: A dot pattern has been used for the soft trails and the concrete pattern
has been used for the concrete trails.
Number: 39 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] Please line up all proposed trails with curb ramps.
Response: Trails have been aligned correctly.
Number: 40 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] Please verify that all sight distance standards are being met where pedestrian
ramps cross mid block on curved roads. Dedicate adequate site distance easements on
the Plat and identify on the street design plans where needed.
Response: The plat, Landscape Plan and Street Plan and Profile sheets show the
new site distance easements. See Kadenwood and Crossview streets.
Number: 41 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] A vertical curve is needed at the intersection of Coppervein and Copper Mill.
.L See Sheet 17.
Response: The profile was accidentally reversed in plan view. This has been
corrected.
3
Number: 42 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] It is recommended that mid block pedestrian crossings be eliminated and
'Odditional ramps be provided where Tilden intersects with Copper Crest and Crossview.
c See redlines for clarification.
Response: Access ramps were modified as per redline comments.
Number: 43 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] Additional ramps are needed at the intersection of Crossview and Copper
Crest.
Response: Additional ramps were added.
Number: 44 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] The south end of Tilden should be protected from undermining and damage
from drainage where the pavement ends.
a
Response: With the preliminary design of the future road extension to the south,
the profile was modified. Due to the site's need to drain everything back to
Kechter, Tilden gets left a little high at the south property line. During the interim
condition we would like to tie back into existing from the end of construction with
a 4:1 slope. if this is acceptable we will obtain a grading easement from the
adjacent landowner and undermining/damage from drainage will be mitigated
against on the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Plan.
Number: 45 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] Construction details should be provided for all public infrastructure
improvements.
Response: Details are not required to be shown until final submittal. They will be
provided at that time.
Number: 46 Created: 8/3/2007
Cv [8/3/07] A water and sewer system design has not been provided with this submittal.
Response: Please see Utility Plan and Will Serve letters from SFCSD and FCLWD.
Number: 47 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07] See redlines for additional comments and clarification. Please return all redlineslt
with the next round of review.
Response: Thank you for the redline comments, they were addressed and
returned.
Topic: General
Number: 3 Created: 6/14/2006
[8/2/07] 1 will defer all traffic and TIS related comments to Ward Stanford since I have
not received a copy of the original TIS dated Feb. 22, 2006.
[6/14/06] A traffic study should be required for Kechter & interior streets to determine
the level of service (all modes of transportation) and any need for additional R.O.W. on
Kechter for a possible right turn lane.
Response: Noted.
4
Number: 8 Created: 6/14/2006
[8/2/07] The existing irrigation easement across the development needs to be vacated.
The Plat needs to show the easement as being vacated and the ditch company will need
to sign the Plat. The easement can also be vacated by separate document and this
should be noted on the Plat and reference the reception number. All of the plans need
to be revised to show the easement has been vacated.
[6/14/061 Due to the relocation of the irrigation ditch, the authorized ditch company
should review and approve the plans.
VAResponse: The irrigation easements will be vacated by separate document. It
appears that neither easement belongs to a ditch company and that they were
both put in place for sole benefit on the property. This issue is currently being
finalized.
Topic: Streets Design
umber: 2 Created: 6/14/2006
[8/2/07] Pedestrian connection at SW corner satisfies the requirement without providing
a street stub connection.
[6/14/06] The distance between proposed street connections cannot exceed 660 feet,
measured along the project boundary. The sketch plan does not meet the City/GMA
minimum design criteria (See red line comments).
Response: Acknowledged. This information has been added to the general notes.
Number: 4 Created: 6/14/2006
[8/2/07] It appears on the Plat that 50 feet of ROW is proposed to be dedicated from the
section line (existing center line of Kechter?). This should be adequate depending on
whether or not a right turn lane is required into the development off of Kechter. Please
IA
e comments from Ward Stanford. If a right turn lane is needed into the development,
otal of 54 feet of ROW from the ultimate Kechter centerline will be needed to
commodate the extra lane. The Plat does not show a required 15 foot utility easement
edication behind the ROW on Kechter.
[6/14/06] The Fossil Creek master street plan classifies Kechter as a 2 lane arterial,
requiring a minimum total R.O.W. to be 84 feet (42' half). Kechter shall be designed and
built to the ultimate condition on the southerly side per LCUASS table 7-1 and figure 7-
3F (all pavement, curb & gutter, parkway, sidewalks, street trees etc... ). A 15 foot wide c
utility easement should be located behind the R.O.W. along Kechter.
Response: A right turn into the development will not be required. A 15' UE has
been shown on the Plat.
Number: 5 Created: 6/14/2006
[8/2/07] Tilden Street shall function as the collector street to satisfy the Fossil Creek
Plan. Only half of Tilden is being dedicated by this development. I cannot determine by
these plans if sufficient ROW exists on the east side of Tilden. Has this Off -Site ROW
dedication already been made by the property owner on the east side? Please provide
documentation to show the dedication has been made and note this on the Plat.
[6/14/061 Interior local streets: The Fossil Creek Res. Area Plan — Land Use Framework
Plan requires at least one local connecter street be extended from the north to the south
boundary of the property. The local connecter should be constructed per LCUASS
standards with a minimum 57 foot R.O.W. (36' curb to curb) with bike lanes etc... and a
9 foot utility easement on both sides.
Response: The additional ROW is being dedicated by separate document and a
letter of commitment from the City will be provided prior to public hearing.
5
Number: 10 Created: 6/14/2006
[8/2/07] Some intersections are still spaced at greater than 660 feet but may be close
enough.
[6/14/06] The spacing between the future local street connections does not meet the
minimum LCUASS standard of 660 feet (measured along the project boundary). Please
see clouded red line comments.
Response: se seeg-sQm #29 a d Stre ent #2.
Department: Traffic Operations Iss a Contact: Wa anff ord
Topic: Traffic
Number: 49 Created: 8/7/2007
[8/7/07] TIS indicates that the Short term Total Wb AM LOS at Timberline & Kechter will
be D. City analysis provides that the LOS will degrade to E and therefore will require
mitigation. Per LCUASS Fig 8-1, NOTES 1; Left turn lanes are required at all
intersections on arterial roadways.
It is the City's position that no further development be allowed on Kechter that will cause
additional impact to the Kechter/Timbedine intersection without intersection
improvements.
Response: The TimberlineXechter intersection will be improved this fall with
construction of the Jehovah-s Witness Church on this corner.
Number: 50 '— \-- ----C-reated\ZLZL280`/
Per LCUASS Fig 8-4, the combination of PM entering trips and the PM east bound
advancing volume on Kechter, an east bound right turn lane is not required at the site's
Kechter access.
Number: 51 Created: 8/7/2007
[8/7/07] Not having seen the original TIS, I've no knowledge of whether any other
approved area projects were included in the review. A religious use has been proposed,
possibly approved, at the northeast corner of Kechter and Timberline, but I've no
knowledge of any land planning or discussion about the future expectations of Tilden St
adjacent and south of this site. If not already, planning discussion should be had
regarding the future possible need for r-o-w for a west bound right turn lane at Tilden r
and Kechter.
Response: Noted.
Department: Storftnvate'r-Water-WastevWaTer Issue Contact: Basil Harridan
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 48 Created: 8/3/2007
[8/3/07]
The proposed detention scenario by the Kechter Crossing uses several scenarios to
model the flows from this development.
The proposed scenario is to release at a 100 year rate into a storm sewer directed at the
McClelland channel.
The City's master plan update proposes a 2 year release rate from this basin area and
upstream developments. If the developer complies with the City Master plan update, no
additional modeling of the McClelland channel would be required.
The drainage analysis submitted proposed to release at the 100 year historic rate. The
City does not support this release, as it is in contravention to the adopted Master Plan
update for the McClelland channel for this sub basin area. Please revise and provide
0
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Topic: Stormwater
Number:84 Created:3/28/2008 Pending
[7/21/08] Reminder Comment.
[3/28/08] Please provide a drainage easement for the off -site portion of the storm line.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater
Number:97 Created:7/21/2008 Pending
[7/21/08] Please provide a riprap detail in the utility plan set. The riprap should be buried 6
inches with topsoil which will need temporary erosion control until the seeding is
established.
Page 4
detention with a maximum release ate equal to the 2 year rate.
Please clarify how the size of the outfall sewer was arrived ,at any capacity is available
for off -site areas at the two year rate.
Please provide a storm sewer plan and profile for the off -site storm line. An off -site
drainage easement is needed for that storm line.
An easement will be required for the off -site line.
Water quality detention should be accounted for in the pond.
Response: Expanded reasoning for the scenarios and additional response to
comments have been incorporated into the revised drainage report for this
submittal. The project is not intending to release at the 100-yr historic rate. Water
quality will be accounted for in the pond and a 25' offsite drainage and access
easement is being dedicated by separate document.
If you have any questions regarding the responses to the comments please feel free to contact me
at 484-1921.
Sincerely,
Jim Sell Design, Inc.
Jonathan Sweet, PE
Project Manager
9
7
INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Response to Comments
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158 WEBSITE:
200 S. College Ave. Suite 10
Fort Collins, CO 80524 FAX: 970.221.4159 vrww•northernengir�ering.com
City of Fort Collins
Community Development and Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970-221-6750
Attn: Ted Shepard
Project: Kechter Crossing Replat - Revision 6
Fort Collins, Colorado
Dear Ted,
Project No. 379-017
Date: April 17, 2013
This letter shall serve as a response to the comment letter, dated April 12, 2013, from the City
of Fort Collins for the Kechter Crossing Replat.
Northern Engineering's responses to the comments are shown below in RED:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-211-6573, slanRenbereerOfceov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
4/10/2013: Need a note on the plat indicating that the open space, drainage, irrigation
and access easement within the new lot areas is vacated with this plat.
NE: Note has been added to the Plat.
Comment Number: 2
4/10/2013: Need to identify that the common space is an access and drainage
easement. Does it also need to be a utility easement?
NE: Common Area B is labeled as "Open Space, Drainage, Irrigation and Access
Easement (Buildable/Support Buildings"
Comment Number: 3
4/10/2013: The utility plan revisions — These cannot be signed until the prior revisions
have been signed. And they cannot be signed until the revised Development Agreement
has been signed by the 3 developers/owners.
NE: The prior revisions and revised Development Agreement have been signed and are
on file with the City.
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158 WEBSITE:
200 S. College Ave. Suite 10
www.northernengirieering.com
Fort Collins, CO 80524 FAX: 970.221.4159
Comment Number: 4
4/10/2013: When doing revisions — The number associated with the revision is based
on is it the first, second, third revision on that page. The numbering needs to be
consecutive so that someone is on looking for the missing revision on that sheet.
IAE: I ne pnoi revisions were aucunlei teu 111U idUeieu UII iile uove� kneel as revisiuris i
the plans as a whole. If we were to switch the pattern of labeling revisions to be per
sheet vs. per plans, it could cause confusion due to the inconsistency with the Cover
Sheet. I discussed this with Sheri, and we came to the conclusion to keep with the
Comment Number: 5
4/10/2013: See Additional Comments on plans.
NE: The comments on the plans were regarding the revisions numbers and revision
bubbles. The revision bubbles have been changed to reflect the entire changes. The
revision numbering has been changed as described above.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970-224-6143, Iex(@fceov.com
Comment Number: 1
4/01/2013: No comments on the proposed plan but thank you for submitting this replat
and saving the tree and the raptor's nest!
NE: We are happy to make these changes.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icountvC«�fc>±ov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 16
4/04/2013: No comments.
NE: Acknowledged.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 14
4/10/2013: The easement along the south line of Lot 2, Block 4 is not shown, see
redlines.
NE: The easement was added to match the original plat.
INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158 WEBSITE:
200 S. College Ave. Suite 10
Fort Collins, CO 80524 FAX: 970.221.4159 www•northernengineering.com
Comment Number: 15
4/10/2013: Why are the Site & Landscape Plans not being revised?
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
4/04/2013: The boundary closes.
Comment Number: 2
4/04/2013: Please change "Planning" to "Planned" in the title, subtitle and Statement
of Ownership and Subdivision. Also add "Crossing" to the subtitle. See redlines.
NE: The title has been changed on the Plat.
Comment Number: 3
4/04/2013: The distances along the east line of Lots 4 & 5 do not add up to the total
distance shown.
NE: The distances were revised on the Plat.
Comment Number: 4
4/04/2013: The delta for curve C1 does not match the original Plat.
NE: The delta for curve C1 was revised on the Plat.
Comment Number: 5
4/10/2013: Are there any lienholders? If so, please add the Lienholders signature
block.
NE: There are no lienholders. The property is fully owned by Meritage.
Comment Number: 6
4/10/2013: Please add vicinity map to the Plat.
NE: A vicinity map was added.
Comment Number: 7
4/10/2013: Please add a note about the title commitment.
NE: Note has been added to the Plat.
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158 MUM
S. College Ave. Suite 10
Fort Collins, CO80524 FAX:970.221.4159 www.northernengineering.com
Comment Number: 8
4/10/2013: Please add a note vacating the easements from the original plat.
Comment Number: 9
4/10/2013: Please label all properties surrounding this Plat.
NE Surrounding properties to lots were labeled
Comment Number: 10
4/10/2013: Please add the dedication information for all streets.
NE: Dedication information for the streets was added to the Plat.
Comment Number: 11
4/10/2013: The easement shown along the south line of Lot 3, Block 4 does not exist
on the original Plat. This needs to be removed or dedicated by separate document.
NE: The easement was deleted to match original plat.
Comment Number: 12
4/10/2013: Please label the use of Common Area B, and add a note stating the use and
who will own and maintain the area.
NE: Common Area B was labeled as "Open Space, Drainage, Irrigation, and Access
Easement (Buildable/Support Buildings)". A note concerning maintenance was on the
original plat.
Comment Number: 13
4/10/2013: Please add "Basis of Bearings" to the south line.
NE: The label "Basis of Bearings" was added to the south line.
Northern Engineering has responded to all comments from the City, and provided the revised
Plans to the City. If there are other questions or items that need clarification, please do not
hesitate to contact me at 970-568-5412 or SteohaniePnorthernen ineerin .c�om.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Thomas, P.E.
Department: Engineering
Date: May 4, 2011
Project: KECHTER CROSSING PLD/PD - COUNTY REFERRAL
All comments must be received by Shelby Sommer in Current Planning, no later
than the staff review meeting:
No Review Date
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
Issue Contact: Randy Maizland
Topic: Engineering
Number: 34 Created: 8/2/2007
[7/18/08] The City Street Oversizing project to design and construct improvements at the
intersection of Kechter and Timberline has been suspended. The Kingdom Hall Church will
move forward with construction of Kechter improvements as shown on the Kingdom Hall
approved plans. Please verify that design grades (interim and ultimate) tie into the kingdom
Hall street improvement plans.
[3/28/08] Continued coordination.
(10/5/071 It should be noted that the City of Fort Collins Street Oversizing Department is
currently working on design plans to schedule improvements on Kechter in front of the
church. The Church design does NOT match all aspects of the City's proposed design. It
would wise to coordinate this projects off -site preliminary and interim design with theh City's
new design plans. Please contact Chris Parton in Street Oversizing at 416-2719 for the
latest City design plans (CAD files). The off -site preliminary design should tie into the City
design rather than using the Church plans.
[8/2/07] This development is required to provide a minimum of 1000 feet of preliminary
ultimate off -site design for Kechter Road to the east and west of the site. 500 feet of
preliminary off -site design is needed for Tilden to the south of the development. All street
designs shall meet LCUASS Appendix E standards and provide centerline and flowline
profiles for interim and ultimate designs. LCUASS also requires cros sections every 50 feet
for arterial designs. All street designs should show flow line and centerline profiles per
LCUASS Section 3.3.4
Number: 64 Created: 3/28/2008
[7/18/08] Reception numbers will be hand written in prior to Plat recordation. It should be
noted that I have not received a deed of dedication or letter of intent for the off -site storm
Signature
Date
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat Site Drainage Report Other
Utility Redline Utility Landscape
Page 1
drainage easement. I will defer to the County to verify this easement will be granted prior to
final plan approval.
[3/28/08] Plat — all dedications by separate document should be referenced on the final Plat
with reception numbers prior to recordation of the Plat.
Number: 66 Created: 3/28/2008
[7/18/08] Same comment.
[3/28/08] Please provide the City with a draft of the County Development Agreement when
it becomes available. The City will also prepare a DA to be signed by the applicant after
annexation and plan approval. I will need information from the County agreement to prepare
the City agreement.
Number: 68 Created: 3/28/2008
[7/18/081 Same comment
[3/28/08] The City has not been provided a copy of the letter of intent or deed of dedication
for the off -site storm drainage easement required north of Kechter for the 10 inch storm
drain line. Has this easement been obtained yet ? Is there a letter of intent ?
Number: 95 Created: 7/18/2008
[7/18/08] Ultimate Kechter plan and profile design were provided seperately. Please insert
the Ultimate design sheets into the Utility Plan set and revise the sheet numbering and
Cover sheet index accordingly. Ultimate design and cross sections look good however,
inlets should be shown in the sump condition on sheet 3 of 6 for future drainage.
Topic: General
Number: 3 Created: 6/14/2006
[7/18/08] Same
[3/28/08] Same
[8/2/07] 1 will defer all traffic and TIS related comments to Ward Stanford since I have not
received a copy of the original TIS dated Feb. 22, 2006.
[6/14/06] A traffic study should be required for Kechter & interior streets to determine the
level of service (all modes of transportation) and any need for additional R.O.W. on Kechter
for a possible right turn lane.
Topic: Streets Design
Number: 4 Created: 6/14/2006
[7/18/08] Same
[3/28/08] Same
[10/5/07] Please see comments from Ward Stanford regarding warrants for a right turn lane
or impacts to the intersection of Kechter & Timberline. This project may be responsible for
contributing funds toward intersection improvements.
[8/2/07] It appears on the Plat that 50 feet of ROW is proposed to be ddicated from the
section line (existing center line of Kechter?). This should be adequate depending on
whether or not a right turn lane is required into the development off of Kechter. Please see
comments from Ward Stanford. If a right turn lane is needed into the development, a total of
54 feet of ROW from the ultimate Kechter centerline will be needed to accommodate the
extra lane. The Plat does not show a required 15 foot utility easement dedication behind the
ROW on Kechter.
[6/14/06] The Fossil Creek master street plan classifies Kechter as a 2 lane arterial,
requiring a minimum total R.O.W. to be 84 feet (42' half). Kechter shall be designed and
built to the ultimate condition on the southerly side per LCUASS table 7-1 and figure 7-3F
Page 2
(all pavement, curb & gutter, parkway, sidewalks, street trees etc... ). A 15 foot wide utility
easement should be located behind the R.O.W. along Kechter.
Page 3
Kechter Crossing comments May 30, 2012
Landscape Plan
Under the title Site Distance Easement Restrictions the code reference is missing a
number in it. The code reference is 7.4.1.C.6. The 1 is missing. You may want to also
note that they should see the site distance easement restriction note on the plat.
Utility Plans
Demolition Plan Sheets 3 and 4. I don't know if the notes on these sheets regarding the
relocation of the wire fence are correct or not. Per the agreement with the City the west
fence shall be moved to a location 2 feet to the east of the new row line and the parallel
east fence shall be relocated to create a new alley between the fences.
Demolition Plan Sheet 3. The note on the plan indicates that the heated horse trough is to
be removed. Per agreement with the City the horse trough is to be relocated.
Demolition Plan Sheet 4. There is no label currently on the plan set, but per the
agreement with the City the shed within the Tilden ROW is to be relocated east.
Sheet 20, 21, and 31. The note regarding the dedication of row needs a reception number
enter in. The note regarding the dedication of the construction easement is incorrect. A
temporary construction easement will be dedicated by revocable permit by the City prior
to start of construction.
There are still issues on the Kechter Road design. The interim and ultimate designs do
not match. I can find no reason why they do not match other than incorrect information
on the plans. It really seems like they should match, but they do not. If you can get the
plans to match the paragraph that has been placed within the City Development
Agreement regarding the need to provide funds for the ultimate improvements along the
entire frontage can be removed, since if the designs do match the project will be building
the ultimate design.
Areas where the design do not match are as follows:
♦ STA 10+88.77 the elevations do not match.
♦ The curve between 11+06.15 and 12+86.15 the starting elevations at STA
11+06.15 do not match and the PVI ELEV do not match.
♦ The ECR and BCR STA numbers for Kadenwood Drive do not match.
♦ STA 14+50 the elevations do not match.
♦ Sheet 34, x-section at STA 10+88.77 the south flowline elevation doesn't match
the interim or ultimate design.
♦ Sheet 35, x-section at STA 14+50 the south flowline elevation matches the
interim, but not the ultimate design.
♦ Sheet 45, Ultimate Kechter Road cross sections. STA 14+50 the south flowline
elevation matches the interim design not the ultimate.
of Fort Collins
Project Comments Sheet
Selected Departments
Department: Engineering
Date: June 14, 2006
Project: KECHTER CROSSING PLD/PD - COUNTY REFERRAL
All comments must be received by Shelby Sommer in Current Planning, no later
than the staff review meeting:
June 26, 2006
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
Issue Contact: Randy Maizland
Topic: General
Number: 3 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] A traffic study should be required for Kechter & interior streets to determine the
level of service (all modes of transportation) and any need for additional R.O.W. on Kechter
for a possible right turn lane.
Number: 8 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] Due to the relocation of the irrigation ditch, the authorized ditch company should
review and approve the plans.
Number: 9 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/061 Refer to both areas where the relocated ditch will cross under the R.O.W.: All ditch
crossings should be constructed with Class III RCP or PVC C900 material. Pipe cover for
these crossings should not be less than 2 feet to scarified street sub -grade.
Number: 11 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] Lots 5 & 6, 18 & 19 cannot take access off of the future street connection "stubs".
Proposed street naming should be shown to satisfy any concerns that PFA may have,
especially for those streets that bend N-S & E-W.
Topic: Streets Design
Number: 2 Created: 6/14/2006
[6/14/06] The distance between proposed street connections cannot exceed 660 feet,
measured along the project boundary. The sketch plan does not meet the City/GMA
minimum design criteria (See red line comments).
Number: 4
Signature
Created: 6/14/2006
Date
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat Site Drainage Report Other
Utility Redline Utility Landscape
Page 1