The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHARMONY TECH. PARK 3RD FILING, CUSTOM BLENDING - FDP - 01-08/A - CORRESPONDENCE -Response: Per discussion with Staff all the valves and fittings are stationed on the profile to allow easy calculation of individual lengths. Number: 57 Created: 5/8/2008 [5/8/08] Add butterfly valve, air release valve and tracer wire (2) details. Response: Details provided on plans. Number: 58 Created: 5/8/2008 [5/8/08] See redlined plans for other comments. Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols Topic: Zoning Number: 5 Created: 2/7/2008 [4/24/08] [2/7/08] Please show building envelope, footprint and dimensions on site plan. 4-24-08 Building dimensions are still not shown on the site plan Response: Building dimensions have been added. Number: 7 Created: 2/8/2008 [4/24/08] [2/8/08] Add note to landscape notes regarding installation of landscaping prior to issuance of CO. 4-24-08 Landscape assurance note needs to include all landscaping, not just that in the drainage tract, but all landscaping on that site. Response: Note has been revised to include both sheets. Comments from Current Planning Please consider adding a small cluster of evergreen trees south of the proposed tanks. Response: Evergreen trees have been added.. On the Lighting Plan, be sure to include a quantity for the number of fixtures, not just the lamps per fixture. Response: Quantities have been added. Be sure and return all of your redlined 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) 221-6750. Sincerely: Ted Shepard Chief Planner Page 4 Number: 46 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] The "sight visibility easement' specified on the plat and other documents should be called out as a "sight distance easement' on the various documents. In addition, please provide our standard sight distance easement language on the plat. Response: Sight distance called out on the plans. Sight Distance Easement Restrictions notes are added to the cover sheet. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan Topic: Detention Pond Landscaping Number: 45 Created: 5/6/2008 [5/6/08] Thank you for providing adequate landscaping for the detention pond on Tract A. The lower portion of the pond is to be planted with a wetland seed mix, will there be sufficient water in this pond to sustain wetland vegetation? If not what would be done to address that. Response: A meeting with Natural Resources and Storm Water Dept was held to discuss wetland design. Pond was regarded to allow for 05 % slopes and BHA will provide planting plan. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 50 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] Why is the storm drainage being discharged into the pond through a subdrain system and a level spreader? Response: This was used to improve water quality and to eliminate inlets and multiple pond outlets. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Water/Wastewater Number: 16 Created: 2/19/2008 [5/8/08] [2/19/08] Information pertaining to water service size is conflicting in various spots. Response: Water service size corrected to be 1 " and changes 5' beyond meter pit. Number: 53 Created: 5/8/2008 [5/8/08] Water main from Rock Creek to Precision to be 24". Response: The 24" main will be used in Precision Drive. Number: 54 Created: 5/8/2008 [5/8/08] Add 24" butterfly valve at point of connection near Rock Creek. Response: Valve added. Number: 55 Created: 5/8/2008 [5/8/08] Use joint restraint for the water main lowerings rather than thrust and gravity blocks. Provide calculations on the required restrained lengths on each side of the lowerings and label clearly on the plans. Add a note (as outlined in the redlines) regarding MEGALUGS or pre -approved equal. Response: Restrained joints are used and lengths labeled on profile. Calculations were provided via email. Number: 56 Created: 5/8/2008 [5/8/08] Label lengths of pipe between valves, fittings, etc, etc. Page 3 Response: Spot grades added to intersection. Number: 52 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] The use of a cross pan at the high point of a flowline (Tech Parkway and Precision) is odd and technically not to standard. Can it just be eliminated? Perhaps in general it might be better not to build the curb return at the west leg of this intersection since it may not be a public street or a street for that matter with future development. Response: Curb returns removed and curb extended through the west side of intersection. Topic: General Number: 10 Created: 2/8/2008 [5/6/08] Carried over for reference. [2/8/08] The offsite pond (Pond B) shown on the northwest corner of Technology Parkway and Rock Creek Drive is considered development and as such the street frontages abutting Pond B needs to be obligated for. Sidewalk along Technology Parkway and Rock Creek Drive abutting Pond B would need to be escrowed for if not being built at this time. If a repay was filed with the City for the construction of Rock Creek Drive, the frontage abutting Pond B would also be required. Response: The pond has been removed and rerouted to discharge to the Tract A pond. Per discussions there will be no escrow necessary. Number: 11 Created: 2/8/2008 [5/6/08] Carried over for reference. [2/8/08] The offsite pond (Pond B) should have a 9 foot utility easement dedicated along Technology Parkway and Rock Creek Drive. Response: The pond on the west was removed therefore no easement is necessary at this time. Number: 44 Created: 5/2/2008 [5/2/08] Please note that the Engineering Development Review Manager has determined that there is $300 owed in TDR Fees from the PDP. Response: Noted Number: 49 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] As a heads -up, the additional width in Technology Parkway that encompasses the center turn lane which was previously a median, is not reimbursable from street oversizing. Response: Noted Topic: Plat Number: 37 Created: 2/20/2008 [5/7/08] Technical Services has the following revised comments: 1. Boundary and legal close but have minor differences. 2. Remove all references to Cambridge Avenue. Done [2/20/08] Technical Services has the following comments: 1. No north arrow and scale plat. North arrow and scale on. 2. Plat closes, legal does not match plat at curve C7. Area is good. Curve updated 3. Show how all the adjoining streets were dedicated. Dedication Added 4. Minor line over text issues. Done 5. Looks good as a preliminary plat. 6. Who owns and maintains Tract A? Owner added Page 2 City of Fort Collins BHA Design, Inc 1603 Oakridge Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW Date: 5/12/2008 eS PONd'e- Staff has reviewed your submittal for HARMONY TECH PARK, 3RD FILING, CUSTOM BLENDING PDP - TYPE I AND FINAL PLANS, and we offer the following comments: leer ,o MAY a26 11 ISSUES: '240000 Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: Construction Drawings Number: 15 Created: 2/19/2008 [5/6/08] Please remove the reference to "plus added median" below the typical cross section on Sheet C-003. Is the use of the broken yellow line for the inside of the reversible lane ideal given that there are no turning movements currently to necessitate entering the center lane? Response: Double Yellow lines added. [2/19/08] With the median on Technology Parkway intended to have landscaping per C-003 then additional information at the time of final will be required, such as landscaping plan, subdrain systems, etc. Response: Median has been removed. Number: 32 Created: 2/20/2008 [5/6/08] The applicant's response is fine, though interestingly, I'm now realizing that west of Technology Parkway may not necessarily be a public street. Maybe a note on the construction plan should be provided indicating that Precision Drive may or may not develop as a public street west of Technology Parkway. Information shown for reference only. Response: Note added that the extension if Potential Future Precision Drive. [2/20/08] For the future Precision Drive section please provide horizontal curve data. Number: 33 Created: 2/20/2008 [5/6/08] See response to #32. [2/20/08] For the future Precision Drive section, please clarify the profile view information, the lines aren't apparent as which might be proposed, existing, or other. Response: Labeled on the plan as potential future. Number: 47 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] Please update the details in LCUASS, many of the details are not the current version. Response: Details reviewed and updated. Number: 48 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] The typical road sections sheet seems to have the Precision Drive cross section shown incorrectly at the future sidewalk would be in the 11' parkway delineation. Response: Typical section updated to reflect sidewalk within limit of future ROW. Number: 51 Created: 5/7/2008 [5/7/08] Please add additional spot elevations at the PI per LCUASS 7-28. Page l