Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS - FDP - FDP110015 - CORRESPONDENCE - (14)Comment Number: . 10/26/2011: Is the 3/4" and 1" meter pit detail needed? _imment Originated: 10/26/2011 I• Comment Number: 13 10/26/2011: Provide a detail for each water main lowering. Comment Number: 14 10/26/2011: See redlined plans for other comments. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Adjust trees or water/sewer lines to provide 6 feet separation from water/sewer services and fire lines and 10 feet separation from fire hydrants. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Label the section of existing sanitary sewer easement which is north of the new Rolland Moore Drive. This portion of the easement (north of RMD) must NOT be vacated. Another round of development review will be necessary. Be sure and return all red -lined plans when you re -submit. If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970)221-6341. Yours Truly, c!A-1 we (U%` Steve Olt City Planner cc: Marc Virata Lindsay Ex Nick Haws, Northern Engineering Current Planning file #FDP110015 Department: Water-Wastew. .r Engineering 'Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffington(0),fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: On the utility, sanitary sewer and storm drain sheets, revise the note regarding the separation of water and sewer lines to remove the phrase "to the extent possible". Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Label all tees for fire hydrants as swivel tees. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Add a fire hydrant at the intersection of Perennial Drive and the existing Rolland Moore Drive near the horticulture Center. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10125/2011: Schedule a meeting to review and discuss the placement of the sanitary sewers with respect to the street centerlines. Include Engineering and Water Utilities. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Provide profiles of the underdrains. When the underdrains are lower than the sanitary sewers (1 foot clear vertical separation), the underdrains may be the same trench as the sewer. For those situations, follow the standard details in LCUASS. Include these details in the utility plans. When not in the same trench as the sewers, the underdrains must be a minimum of 10 feet from water and sewer lines. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Existing sewer that extends into the remaining undeveloped tract is a 12" sewer. Match crowns where the proposed 8" connects. Is CSURF okay with abandoning a portion of this 12"? Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Whenever storm drains 24" or larger cross over water mains or sanitary sewers, place the water mains and sanitary sewers in steel casings which extend 10 each side of the storm drain. Label the diameter and thickness of the casings. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: How will the existing sewer that is to be re-routed be abandoned? If MH bases are poured around the existing pipe, there is concern that there will not be a good invert channel through the manhole. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Add steel casings to the water and sanitary sewer where these cross under the . twin 18-inch storm drains between storm inlets 1-2 and 1-3. Label the diameter and thickness of the casings on the plans. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: At the point where the 18" storm drain crosses the water main NW of STMH 2-1, the joints on the storm must be encased 10 each side of the water main. A product call EZ-Wrap or similar may be used. Call out the product on the plans. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The swale along the north side of Native Plant Way has a longitudinal slope of 1 %. Normally slopes less than 2% require a pan. Slopes between 1 % and 2% can have a soft bottom if the invert of the swale is treated per Stormwater Criteria, which includes a sandy bottom. The invert of the swale should include a sandy loam bottom 2 feet wide and 1 foot deep. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The swale along the north side of Native Plant Way also has 3:1 side slopes in several locations. This would require a variance to our standard criteria if 4:1 slopes are not achievable. Good justification is required to grant a variance. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: There are some areas along Roland Moore Drive that have 3 to 1 slopes. Please revise to 4 to 1. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: A structural design and a building permit is required for the retaining walls taller than 36 inches. This can be done now, or submitted with the building permit. If this design is done now, the details need to be on the utility plans and the landscape plans. If this is to be done with the building permit, notes stating the requirement for a structural design and a building permit need to be on the utility grading plan and the landscape plan. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Please include riprap details and reference the details on the grading plans. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Details and cross -sections are required for the PLDs in Rolland Moore Drive. There also needs to be mention in the text of the report on how to retrofit these PLDs if they fail and are to be abandoned. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Please label all storm sewers private or public on the plan and profile sheets. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Please label outfall and inflow curb and gutter as on -site on sheet D2. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The water quality outlet structure detail on sheet D8 can be removed. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The water quality structure detail show 2 columns of 5/8 inch diameter holes. The City suggests having one column of larger holes to reduce the chance of clogging. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Please add a WQ summary table to the Drainage Exhibit. installation of a s, rail or similar type fence that would still dL humans but facilitate wildlife movement throughout the site to a higher degree than the metal rail fence would. To discourage social trails through the wetlands, signs installed along the fence could remind those passing by that the area has been protected for its natural features to encourage folks to stay out of the wetlands. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: What is the applicant's long-term plan for establishment and management of the native species within the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone? As you know, native plants are more difficult to establish and staff would like to work with the applicant to develop a long-term (minimum of three years) monitoring and weed management plan for the site's landscaping. Topic: Reports - Soils, Subdrain Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Staff has reviewed the 2011 (First) Annual Groundwater and Vegetation Monitoring Report prepared by Cedar Creek Associates for the applicant. Staff appreciates the willingness by the applicant to collect baseline and post -construction data that ensures the wetlands continue to function at a similar level to what is presently observed. Staff appreciates the effort by the consultant to not only collect scientific data on the vegetation and groundwater levels at the site, but also the effort to collect experiential knowledge (via the farmer who has been haying the site for quite some time). Staff recognizes that this experiential knowledge suggests the hydrology at these wetlands has been dynamic over the past few years especially. As the monitoring results are reviewed in the future, both the scientific and the experiential data will be assessed to evaluate site changes. Department: Park Planning Contact: Craig Foreman, 970-221-6618, cforeman(cDfcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/30/2011 09/30/2011: 1 believe we were still going to receive the repay for Rolland Moore Drive from this project. Department: PFA Contact: Ron Gonzales, 970-221.6635, ronzales ftoudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/27/2011 10/27/2011: Item #23, Emergency Vehicle Access, of memo dated 9-28-11 states any potential _issues regarding emergency access need to be resolved prior to approval. Page 6 of 21 of the FDP Site Plan does not indicate emergency access on north side Bldg 7. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416.2418, wiamargue(&fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: See the redlined comments on plat, site plan, landscape plan, utility plans, floodplain exhibit, and drainage report. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The landscape plan needs to indicate the landscaping that will be done by the development resulting from the removal of the existing Rolland Moore Drive street and temporary turnaround. The site and landscape plan documents don't show this area being impacted by the development. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970.224-6143, lex()fc4ov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Regarding comment #10, please also add the "Limit of Development" line to the erosion control and grading sheets in the utility plan set. Otherwise, this comment can also be resolved. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Please add the Environmental Planner signature block to Sheet CS2. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: In a case where there are both general notes and floodplain notes, e.g., Sheet G1, is it possible to distinguish the two types of notes? For example, when you indicate to someone that they should see note 2, and there are two note 2s, how does one distinguish? How does one know that both note 2s should be observed, as is the case when the Natural Habitat Buffer Zones and the floodway coincide? Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Comments numbered 7, 8, 13, and 16 from the September 28th letter are resolved. These comments refer to native plantings (#7), monitoring plan (#8), labeling on the landscape plans (#13), and trash/recycling enclosures (#16). Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The following note will be added to your Development Agreement, should your project be approved, "The trees along the Larimer Canal No. 2 shall be surveyed prior to any construction to confirm the presence or absence of raptor nesting activity. If an active nest is documented, the buffer zone setbacks in 3.4.1 shall apply, and as per the applicant's Ecological Characterization Study, "should be maintained during the breeding, nesting, and nestling rearing period." (This comment relates to comment #12 in previous documents). Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Comment #15 is resolved, especially in light of the project's pet restrictions. Topic:' Landscape Plans Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: In light of the pet restriction being placed on the project, City Staff would like to discuss changing the character of the fence on the site. Originally, the intention was to deter both human and pet encroachment into the wetlands. However, with the pet restriction in place, staff would like to explore the removal of the metal rail fence and instead suggest the Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 10/28/2011 10/28/2011: Please provide subdrain details indicating bedding, installation and cleanout information. Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The northeast corner of the Native Plant Way and Perennial Lane intersection should have an access ramp provided at this time to receive pedestrians crossing from the northwest comer. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: There should be contiguity in the sidewalk network that runs along the south side of existing Rolland Moore Drive, crossing Perennial Lane; additional 40 feet of sidewalk and access ramp should be shown as being built with the project from the existing termination of sidewalk on the south side of Rolland Moore Drive including the access ramp. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The sight distance easement legal description is being reviewed by Technical Services, note the need to change "site" to "sight". Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Email correspondence at the end of September had City staff inquire on the acceptance of the placement of notes on the plat and/or development agreement affirming the developer's commitment made at public hearing to use natural gas in the development. The last known correspondence in this regard was from Josie Plaut indicating that Robbie Robinson at Campus Crest would need to respond. Has there been further input in this regard? Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The site plan references the construction plan set for information regarding the retaining walls throughout the site, however construction detail information for the various walls aren't included. The grading plan should also be providing general elevation information (top of wall/bottom of wall/finished grade general information). Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: As a reminder of prior discussions, the City will be incorporating items into the development agreement pertaining to the existing Rolland Moore Drive's reconfiguration into Perennial Lane and the extension of the new Rolland Moore Drive. Among these items are 1) CSURF's responsibility for reimbursing the City of Fort Collins for one-half of the actual design and construction costs of the existing Rolland Moore Drive that stubs off of Centre Ave. 2) The City will not extend reimbursement right for a portion of the proposed new Rolland Moore Drive equal to the length of the existing Rolland Moore Drive roadway that was previously built. 3) The applicant is responsible for all the costs pertaining towards the removal of the unused portions of existing Rolland Moore Drive with it now connecting to Perennial Lane, including landscaping of the Gardens at Spring Creek and application for the vacation of right-of-way of the eventual unused portions of roadway. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 10/28/2011 10/28/2011: The legal description for the sight distance easement was fine with the one typo of changing "Center Avenue" to "Centre Avenue" at the end of line 3 in the third paragraph. driveway. If flows ie the street section into a rain garden, thr, ..jws shouldn't then re-enter the street system and then move to a successive rain garden. ' - It would be beneficial to provide some documentation that the plant species specified in the landscaping plan for the rain garden areas were viewed as appropriate for the rain garden design, function and use. - Additional review and comment may be needed upon providing the additional information. It would be of benefit if a rain garden design/report was provided addressing the items noted above with the report being signed and stamped by the engineer. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The northeast corner of Perennial Lane and Rolland Moore Drive shows a 7.1 % grade along the flowline of the curb return on the plan and profile sheets. Another steep grade along the flowline of curb return is at the southwest comer of Centre Avenue and Rolland Moore Drive at about 6.1 % These steeper grades around the curb returns along the flowline need to be looked at and reduced in some manner. There are concerns of how steep the access ramp cross slopes presumably are for pedestrians entering the intersections. Additionally, does this introduce the possibility that flows from the street won't actually want to remain in the flowline of the street but will want to enter the access ramp/sidewalk system itself? Spot elevations and longitudinal grade information along the sidewalks/access ramps at these steeper intersections should be provided to demonstrate that flows along the gutter are maintained. Perhaps roadway crowns should be flattened to make the amount of grade change along the flowlines less prominent in these instances. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Note that the flowline profile grades don't necessarily match the grades shown along the same flowlines on the intersection details sheets such as the Perennial Lane/Rolland Moore Drive intersection. There are also instances where the spot elevations shown on the intersection detail sheets don't necessarily match the elevations called out on the flowlines of the plan and profile sheets. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Station 26+50 on the cross section sheet for Rolland Moore Drive shows no curb and gutter delineating the roadway at this location. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The storm drain sheets have a note that reference seeing "UD" sheets for the underdrain, though these appear to be indicated on "DP" titled sheets. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The cross slope for the inner portion of the Perennial Lane/existing Rolland Moore Drive street turn appear to have minimal cross slope. Can this area be looked at in terms of bringing about a larger cross slope? Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 10/28/2011 10/28/2011: Can an exhibit be provided (separately, not necessarily in the plan set) overlaying the striping plan for streets with the sanitary manholes? I'd like to see how striping and manhole locations are situated. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 10/28/2011 10/28/2011: SSMH A8 along Native Plant Way is partially in the crosspan and partially in the street pavement section. Please have this relocated fully out of the crosspan. (Note that this comment may not be a concern if the streets are built in concrete instead of asphalt. Comment Number: ,omment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The trash & recycling enclosures closest to Buildings 3 & 8 have been moved back from the Rolland Moore Drive right-of-way distances of 20' and 22' to satisfy the requirement in the Land Use Code. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221.6567, mvirata()fcaov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The underdrain design shown on the DP sheets need to be shown in profile view in addition to the plan view. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: Please clarify if the indication of a Node on the underdrain design is indicative of a cleanout. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The underdrain design called out in the subsurface report indicated the use of a backflow preventer prior to the outfall of the system. The City would not the placement of any devices on the system and would want the backflow preventer removed. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/26/2011 10/26/2011: The rain garden concept needs to have additional design information provided in the construction plan set for final plan review. City staff with representatives of both Engineering and Stormwater had the opportunity to meet and review the final plan submittal and identified key considerations and issues. Among the information needed and concerns with the information provided thus far: - Indicate locations on the Rolland Moore Drive plan and profile views where the openings for the rain gardens are intended. - Provide a detail on how the curb and gutter section transitions to and from the opening for the rain gardens. - The flowline grade around the neckdowns past where the opening for the rain gardens occurs must remain on -grade. There are several instances where the grade goes negative past the openings which is of concern. The City requires that positive grade be maintained around the neckdowns to minimize the amount of retrofit needed should the rain garden use be eliminated and drainage is perpetuated around the neckdowns along the flowline. - Provide cross -sectional information of the rain gardens, including soil media information and depth, indication of underdrain (typical depth?), bedding material/wrap around the underdrain, etc. - Some structural analysis is needed to indicate how the structural integrity of the roadway and curb and gutter section is maintained where Rolland Moore Drive abuts the rain garden. There is the potential concern that the soil needed to effectively allow the necessary percolation for the success of the rain garden does not provide sufficient integrity to the abutting curb and gutter and roadway section. There may need to be the exploration of either the use of more native soil to provide sufficient stabilization abutting the public infrastructure that then slopes off to the different media specific to the rain gardens, and/or the use of a concrete wall extending below the curb and gutter of the neckdown to provide that support. - Indicate how the rain garden design is intended to be perpetuated for drainage where the rain garden is interrupted by driveways. There is a concern on the premise of flows leaving a rain garden, draining across a driveway and then reentering a rain garden on the other side of the Comment Number: b _.,mment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Regarding the heat source to be used in this development, there is still some ' uncertainty as to whether it will be electric or gas or a combination. Please clarify at this time. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Technical Services did not receive their red -lined plans from the last round of Project Development Plan review, which occurred prior to public hearing. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: The street names of Perennial Lane (public commercial street) and Native Plant Way (public local street) must be cleared by the appropriate City departments and emergency service agencies before they can be used. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/27/2011 10/27/2011: On June 16, 2011 the Planning & Zoning Board approved The Grove at Fort Collins, PDP with the condition that: No final Certificate of Occupancy (CO) will be issued until the ditch (Larimer No. 2 Canal) is realigned. This condition of approval should be put as a General Note on the Site Plan; and, probably should be included in the Development Agreement. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Eric Olson of the City Water Conservation division indicated that he has no problems or concerns with the Landscape Plan. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/27/2011 10/27/2011: Rob Irish of City Light & Power has indicated that they have no issues with The Grove at Fort Collins, Final Plans. Topic: Planning Objectives Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Current Planning did not receive a copy of the Planning Objectives that apparently were submitted with the Final Plan package. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/24/2011 10/24/2011: On the Site Plan cover sheet (1 of 21) please add the language for the 2 conditions of City Council approval of the PDP. They are: a. That at least one building that is constructed as part of the project described in the PDP must be LEED certified and that all other buildings in the project will be built to the same or comparable specifications and at the same or higher standards as the LEED certified building. b. That, to the extent permitted by law, pets will be prohibited in all buildings that are constructed as part of the project described in the PDP. Cftyof F6rt Collins Community Development and Neighborhood services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax kgov. com/developmentrevie w October 28, 2011 Linda Ripley Ripley Design, Inc. 401 West Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: The Grove at Fort Collins, FDP110015, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Steve Olt, at 970-221-6341 or solt@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Current Planning Contact: Steve Olt, 970-221-6341, solt(a)fcaov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Prior to the first certificate of occupancy for The Grove at Fort Collins City staff must review the project's standard lease agreement to ensure that the condition of approval prohibiting pets is being satisfied. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Craig Foreman of the Parks Planning Department offered the following comments: a. This development is responsible for a repay for the construction of Rolland Moore Drive along the south side of the Gardens on Spring Creek, a City -owned facility. b. A portion of the west end of the existing Rolland Moore Drive adjacent to the Gardens on Spring Creek will be demolished if this project is approved. Once any existing curb, gutter and pavement is removed the developer of The Grove would be responsible for reclaiming/restoring that area by putting it back into native/natural grasses and/or landscaping. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/25/2011 10/25/2011: Don Kapperman of Comcast Cable TV indicated that he has no problems or concerns with the development plans.