HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CANYON COMMUNITY PARK - FDP - 20-05/A - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)4. Parking dimensions are not shown on the plans.
5. The plans are missing lots of details. They look more like a 50% submittal.
6. The check list has not been carried out.
This completes staff (and outside reviewing agencies) review and comments at this time.
Red -lined plan from City departments are included with this comment letter. Additional
comments and red -lined plans may be forthcoming. Another round of staff review is
necessary. This proposal is subject to the 90-day revision re -submittal requirement
(from the date of this comment letter, being November 8, 2005) as set forth in Section
2.2.11(A) of the Land Use Code. Be sure and return all red -lined plans when you re -submit.
The number of copies of each document to re -submit is shown on the attached Revisions
Routing Sheet.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at 221-6341.
Yours Truly,
Steve Olt
City Planner
cc: Susan Joy
Kathleen Benedict
Nolte
Ayres & Associates
Current Planning file #20-05A
Page 18
Comment has been addressed.
The following comments/concerns were expressed at staff review on November 2, 2005:
Natural Resources:
I . Please show the required buffers correctly on the plans.
2. Natural Resources must be added to the signature blocks on the plans.
3. This development plan is scheduled to go to the Natural Resources Advisory Board
on November 16, 2005.
Water/Wastewater:
1. Some previous comments have not been addressed.
2. Roger Buffington would like to schedule a meeting with Parks Planning and
AYRES & Associates to discuss Water/Wastewater concerns.
Light & Power:
1. Please show the electric duct bank design on the utility plans.
2. Where are the electric meter locations? They can be no more than 10' from a paved
surface where an electric line truck can park.
3. There is a big issue with the electric line locations as they relate to water lines. At
least a 10' separation is required and this must be shown on the utility plans.
Stormwater:
1. The applicant must document the modeling used for the park. The proposed plant
materials do not jive with the modeling. A meeting is needed with Parks Planning's
engineer to discuss this issue.
2. The drop structures are not shown on the plans but they are talked about in the
drainage report.
3. There is lots of missing information from the plans.
Engineering:
l . There still are scanability issues with the plans.
2. Please check with Kathleen Bracke of Transportation Planning regarding the design
of the handicapped ramps at West Horsetooth Road.
3. The PV&L Canal Company will need to sign the utility plans, subdivision plat, and
Landscape Plan.
Page 17
Department: Water Utilities Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Water/WW
Number: 133 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] Revise FH locations as shown on redlined plans.
Please see detail on sheet C4.4.
Number: 134 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] No connections to the 2-inch water service are allowed upstream of the meter.
Connection has been removed from plans
Number: 135 Created: 11/3/2005
[ 11/3/05] Provide field data on the elevation of the 60-inch and 20-inch water mains
opposite of Horsetooth Circle to see if sanitary could be extended in future. The 8-inch
sewer may need to be installed at minimum grade (0.4 %) to accomplish this. (This is a
repeat comment that Jeff Hill had made previously.)
Comment has been followed by initial investigation, but elevations of the 60- and 20-inch
water mains cannot be verified without potholing, which will occur later.
Number: 136 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] Schedule a meeting with Craig Foreman and myself to review project comments.
The meeting was scheduled and attended by Ayres, Craig Foreman, and Rodger
Buffington.
Number: 137 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] The 20-inch water main is cathodically protected; therefore, all connections to this
main must be isolated. Include appropriate notes and details on the utility plans.
All connections to the 20-inch water main are now protected, as shown on the plans and
details.
Number: 138 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] Define all fittings, connections and pipe lengths on public mains.
Comment has been addressed.
Number: 139 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] The distance between the 60-inch and 20-inch mains will prevent the use of thrust
blocks at the connections to the 20-inch; therefore, it will be necessary to restrain joints on
the lines connecting to the 20-inch. Provide calculations for the required restrained lengths
and note it at the points of connection.
Joint restraint locations have been identified.
Number: 140 Created: 11 /3/2005
[ 11/3/05] At the point of connection to the existing sewer, show the ex. sewer and ex.
service into the MH. Also, list existing and proposed invert elevations at this manhole.
Comment has been addressed.
Number: 141 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] Show alignment of 60-inch and 20-inch water mains on the West Horsetooth Road
street plan.
Page 16
Topic: Master Planning
Number: 144 Created: 11 /7/2005
[11/7/05] Stormwater Master Planning has received a set of updated plans this past week.
Comments from Master Planning will be given directly to Anderson Consulting by the end of
the week of the 7th of November.
Comment has been noted.
Topic. Parking Lot Plan
Number: 95 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Please provide spot elevation for the parking lot grading, show where curb and
gutter will be used call out elevations on proposed and existing contour lines.
Noted see plans
Topic: PV and L crossing
Number: 25 Created: 5/3/2005
[ 11 /7/05] Approval of PV & L needed prior to plan approval.
[5/3/05] Please show the proposed crossing of the PV and L Canal as proposed in the Spring
Creek master plan. Canal crossing structure will need to be approved by the ditch company
(PV&L).
City of Fort Collins stormwater has agreed that no Master Plan improvements shall
be implemented until further anaylisis of the PV and L is completed.
Topic: Underdrain
Number: 91 Created: 10/31 /2005
[ 10/31/05] Why do the underdrain lines in the pond have a separate outlet pipe into the
Spring Creek channel why not tie these into the storm line downstream of the outlet box.
We were advised not to tie into the storm system specifically for clogging.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 92 Created: 10/31 /2005
[10/31/05] Please provide a manhole for Line F within the pond embankment for
maintenance access.
A manhole has been added near the nutlet of the pipe..
Why not tie line E from detention Pond C into the proposed manhole where line D ties into
the trunk line.
The comment has been noted.
Please show the proposed drop structures in the Spring Creek channel on the plans and
provide a detail for these structures. on the plans.
The drop structures are now called out in the plans and a detail has been provided on
sheet C4.10.
Please reference a specific rip rap detail for all proposed riprap.
Please see detail on sheet C4.4.
Page 15
f. Please state in the report that an approved Floodplain Use Permit is required for the
structure and one for the other elements of the park prior to the start of construction.
Comment has been addressed.
g. Please state in the report that an approved elevation certificate is required for the
structure prior to release of the CO.
Topic: Grading Plans
Number: 94
Created: l l /l /2005
[1111105] Please add a note to the grading plan stating that all proposed grading will be done
on Park property and will not extend to neighboring properties.
A note has been added to the grading sheets.
Provide a cross section showing a swale between the proposed berm on the east side of Pond
A and existing homes.
This is an existing swale. The proposed grading ties into the existing swale. It should be
noted that the existing swale should not be modified. It should also be noted that the area
draining to the swale has been noticeably decreased, therefore decreasing the flow to the
Swale. An existing basin has been added to ensure that less water is flowing offsite with
the development of the park than as currently does.
Runoff from a portion of Basin 21, directly north of basin 14 seems to be directed at
neighboring properties. Please capture these flows in a swale and tie to the swale going north
along the east park boundary.
With the development of the park less land will be draining toward the neighboring
properties than currently does. Therefore, by developing the park the flows offsite have
been decreased. A swale is not proposed because currently more land travels offsite than
with the development of the proposed park. An existing basin has been added to ensure
that less water is flowing offsite with the development of the park than as currently does.
Grading on Natural Resources property will require some written approval from that
department.
Approval has been obtained.
Show the proposed rock wall on the grading plans, clarify what the dark line represents.
The dark line has been deleted. It was a sidewalk hatch.
The rock wall has been shaded.
Why not provide a low flow channel within the proposed Spring Creek Cross-section.
The comment has been noted. However, there is no base flow in the channel. The flow
that the channel will experience will be from storm events. It should be noted that the
channel would experience approximately 100cfs during a 2-year storm event.
Page 14
The drop structures are now called out in the plans and a detail has been
provided on sheet C4.10
f. Please add a note that an approved Floodplain Use Permit is required for the structure
and one for the other elements of the park prior to the start of construction.
A note has been added to sheets C2.7 and C2.8.
g. Please add a note that an approved elevation certificate is required for the structure
prior to release of the CO.
A note has been added to sheets C2.7 and C2.8.
4. Drainage Report
a. Please provide more discussion about the existing vs the proposed floodplain and
reference the drawings in the appendix. Explain why a CLOMR is required and note
the revised floodplain is subject to change after submittal and review of the CLOMR to
FEMA. State in the report that a FEMA LOMR will be required after construction in
order to officially change the map.
A more detailed discussion on the existing and proposed floodplain has been
added. However, for a more detailed discussion on the existing and
proposed floodplain please refer to the submitted CLOMR report.
The report now states that a FEMA LOMR will be required after
construction.
b. Please cite the FEMA FIRM information and the City's Master Plan information as
your source for floodplain info.
The report has been updated.
c. Please describe in more detail the structures and other features which will be built in
the revised floodplain. For example: the restrooms, courts, bike paths, utilities,
landscaping, etc. Explain how these features are meeting the floodplain regulations and
how they were incorporated into the model. State that all features in the floodplain are
in compliance with Chapter 10 of the City Code.
Please see the landscape plans for further details on the berm. It should be
noted that the wall is not a retaining wall. The pond slopes at 3:1 and is
lined with large boulders.
d. Please clarify the landscaping proposed for the large detention pond berm. There
appears to be a rock wall, and many trees on the berm. Is this appropriate and
acceptable to FEMA? We'll need to discuss this in more detail.
The BFE has been provided in the plans and a note was made in the report.
e. The restrooms appear to be the only actual structure in the floodplain (as shown on
the revised floodplain drawing). This structure will need to meet floodplain regulations
by either elevating or floodproofing the structure 18 inches above the BFE. Please
provide the BFE, regulatory BFE, lowest floor elevation (or floodproofmg elevation),
type of foundation, and any HVAC elevation in the report AND ON THE PLANS.
Comment has been addressed.
Page 13
CLOMR. An approved CLOMR is required prior to the start of construction in the
floodplain.
Comment has been noted
2. Landscaping Plan:
a. Please review and revise as necessary the placement of the revised
floodplain/floodway on the Landscaping Plan sheets. Some lines are
incorrectly called out, some aren't connected and some sheets don't show
the floodplain at all.
The floodplain/floodway lines and notes are have been corrected on the
landscape plans. The proposed floodplain was added to sheets C2.7 and
C2.8. Cross section locations and BFEs were also added.
b. Please add a note that states changes to landscaping located in the
floodway must be approved by the Stormwater Utility. This note is on the
Landscape Notes sheet (LNI) note number 9 under planting notes. The bike
crossing upstream of the box culvert is a path that is at grade with the path.
It should not interfere with the storm flows in the channel.
c. Please clarify where fencing will be located.
Fencing notes have been added to callout fencing within the site.
3. Drainage/Grading Plan
a. Please add the revised floodplain/floodway to the drainage plan. Add cross-section
locations and BFE lines. See comment below for information about what information
about the restroom in the floodplain has to be shown on the drainage plan.
The proposed floodplain was added to sheets C2.7 and C2.8. Cross section
locations and BFEs were also added.
b. The bike crossing upstream of the box culvert crossing is not shown in much detail.
What is modeled in the revised model? It must be a breakaway bridge if it's not
modeled.
. The bike crossing upstream of the box culvert is a path that is at grade with
the path. It should not interfere with the storm flows in the channel.
c. Please note that all floatable features in the floodway, such as picnic tables, must be
anchored.
A note has been added to sheets C2.7 and C2.8.
d. Please note where fencing will be located. Any fences in the floodway must be
designed to not block conveyance.
No fences are within the channel floodway.
e. The report mentions three drop structures. These are not shown on the plans, nor is
there any detail for their construction. Please add to the plans.
Page 12
The foothill Rundown directs the flows from the Foothills to Spring Creek. The pipe
should direct the flow to Spring Creek with minimal ponding. The low flows will act as
the high flows and will drain via the 36" RCP with minimal ponding. The rundown
should not experience sedimentation buildup on a regular basis.
Provide better rip rap details for pipe outlets.
More detail has been added to the riprap detail.
Provide an overflow detail for all water quality ponds.
An overflow detail was provided for all ponds. Please see sheet C4.8.
Provide a water quality outlet detail for all water quality ponds.
A detail for the water quality outlet (Pond B) is shown on sheet C4.9. Pond A uses a
CDOT Type C inlet and this has been provided on sheet C4.3. The outlet for pond Cis
also a CDOT type C inlet.
Please provide a reinforcing detail for Pond A across the spillway. Show a spillway cross-
section.
Please see sheets C4.8 and C4.10 for pond A spillway detail and reinforcement
information. A spillway cross-section has been added for pond A on sheet C4.8.
Topic. Erosion Control
Number: 143 Created: 11 /7/2005
[11/7/05] November 3, 2005
Current City notes for sediment/erosion control need to be on the plan, the old set of notes
must be deleted.
The old notes have been deleted and new noted have been added.
It would probably be easiest if we scheduled a meeting to go over this plan. Please give Bob
Zakely a call, 224-6063.
A meeting has been scheduled between Ayres and Bob Zakely.
Topic: Floodplain Comments
Number: 96 Created: 11 / 1 /2005
[1111105] Floodplain Review Comments
Susan Hayes: 11-1-05
The park design is based on the proposed floodplain using the revised grading changes
and using the revised Spring Creek hydrology and hydraulics. The floodplain modeling
report has been submitted to document this change. This information has been passed
on to Anderson Consulting Engineers to use in the preparation of a CLOMR submittal
to FEMA. Changes to the plan may be required based upon FEMA's review of the
Page 11
NOTE: Contact Ron Gonzales with information regarding the fuel tank dispensing located in
the North maintenance yard.
Haz Mat analysis has been provided with this submittal
Number: 17 Created: 4/25/2005
[ 10/25/05] [7/20/051 [4/25/051 SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS:
If any welding will be done in the maintenance building the building shall be required to be
fire sprinklered.
Noted
Number: 18 Created: 4/25/2005
[ 10/25/05] [7/20/05] [4/25/05] PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: Approved numerals or
addresses shall be provided for all new and existing building in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. 1997 UFC 901.4.4
NOTE: Address for maintenance building and main entrance (Horsetooth Road entrance).
Addresses will be visible from Horsetooth for the park and from the entrance road off of
Overland Trail on the Maint. Building
Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom
Topic: Plat
Number: 125 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] No further comments.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Kurt Ravenschlag
Topic: General
Number: 110 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Comments per Kathleen Bracke: Sheet 511- Sidewalk on cul-de-sac needs to
connect directly to trail.
There is a direct connection from the ADA ramp off of the cul-de-sac to the trail system
Number: III Created: il/l/2005
[1111105] Comments per Kathleen Bracke: Need striping and signing plan for West
Horsetooth Road.
Striping and signing is on sheet C3.5 for Horsetooth.
Department: Water Utilities Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Topic: Channel Grading
Number: 113 Created: 11 / 1 /2005
[1111105] There are areas in the channel that will experience high velocities according to the
provided HEC-RAS modeling. Provide turf reinforcing mats at these locations.
Drop structures have been added to the model which has decreased the velocities in the
channels.
Topic: Details
Number: 97 Created: 11 / 1 /2005
[1111105] Please clarify on the Foothills Rundown detail how low flows will be drained and
how will the sump area be maintained as it will be holding sedimentation on a regular basis.
Page 10
Utility Plan set is supposed to look like? I'd be happy to suggest a few to help you get your
submittal up to speed.
Chapters 2, 7, 18, 16 and 19 have been reviewed and the checklist has been read
thoroughly
Number: 115 Created: 11 /2/2005
[ 11/2/05] Please provide a typical street section on the cover sheet for each of the two
different widths for West Horsetooth Road and label them as "station xxx to station xxxx.
Please provide a typical section through the cul-de-sac.
Sheet C3.02 contains the typical cross-section as well as on the detail sheet. There is a
cross-section for the cul-de-sac on the cross-section detail sheet and there are standard
cul-de-sac details included in the detail sheets.
Number: 116 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] Please provide a design for the pedestrian underpass, bridges, etc. See redlines.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Alan Rutz
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 88 Created: 10/31 /2005
[10/31/05] Previous comment 51 still applies. Please show the electric duct bank design on
the UTILITY PLANS.
The utility duct bank is now shown on the utility plans.
Number: 89 Created: 10/31 /2005
[10/31/05] Previous comment 52 still applies. Please show electric meter locations and
proposed transformer locations on the Utility Plans. The transformer must be within 10' of a
parking lot or roadway.
The comment has been addressed.
Number: 90 Created: 10/31 /2005
[10/31/05] Previous comment 50 a request was made to move the water and sewer lines near
Station 14+54. These lines were moved slightly. The electric duct bank will require the
minimum of a 10' wide strip of flat ground adjacent to the water and sewer easement. Please
verify that this requirement has been met.
The required ]Oft offset has been met
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
Topic: General
Number: 16 Created: 4/25/2005
[10/25/051 [7/20/05] [4/25/05] HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
Corrosive, flammable liquids, reactive, or toxic materials (As defined in the Uniform Fire
Code) if used, stored or handled on site must have a Hazardous Materials Impact Analysis
(HMIA) completed and supplied to the Planning Department and the Fire Department.
FCLUC 3.4.5 (C)
Page 9
The scale is located on the right hand side of the drawing (above the drawing
name).
Number: 98 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[11/1/051 Please submit the plans in accordance with LCUASS. Please see chapter 2 for
submittal requirements.
Chapter 2 has been read thoroughly.
Number: 99 Created: 11 / 1 /2005
[1111105] Need to show, dimension and label all easements and row.
All easements and rows have been showed, labeled and dimensioned.
Number: 100 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Please remove all landscaping and contours from all utility sheets. Landscaping
does not belong in the Utility Plan set unless you are showing removals. Contours do not
belong on the utility sheets, only the grading and erosion control sheets.
These sheets do not show landscaping. The trees shown are existing trees. Ayres
feels that it is important to keep these trees on the plans so that the contractor
knows that the trees are there and that theu need to be protected during
construction. Existing trees have been added to the legend.
The proposed contours are on the sheets to show why some of the utilities are
present. After a meeting with Susan Joy it was agreed that the contours could be
shown on the plans. Existing contours have been removed.
Number: 101 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[I1/1/05] The legend is incomplete.
The legend has been updated.
Number: 103 Created: 11 / 1 /2005
[1111105] Please provide a north arrow and key maps on each sheet. Can't tell what is being
shown on each sheet in relation to the whole project.
North arrows can be found on each sheet above the sheet name and scale.
Key maps are being added to all sheets that show part of the site.
Number: 104 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[I 1/1/05] There is a LOT of information missing on this submittal that is incorrectly marked
"included" on the checklist E4. Please go through this checklist THOROUGHLY and make
sure all items are correctly shown on the plans. Read LCUASS. See chapter 2, 7, 8,16, and
19 in particular. I could not review this set in any kind of detail because the sheets were too
hard to read or too much info was left off. No scale, north arrows, or key maps were shown
and made it VERY hard to know what I was looking at and where it was supposed to be
located within the park. There was grading and landscaping on every sheet which obscured
the info that needed to be presented. More comments to follow on the next round when the
plans are more complete and in better shape. Would you like a good example of what a
Page 8
street intersection spot elevations as required in LCUASS and show them on sheet c3.2, not
on the detail sheet.
Street intersection is designed as a type 3 commercial driveway and a detail is
provided.
Number: 75 Created: 7/12/2005
[11111051 [7/12/05] Please show what the new Overland entrance drives are connecting to.
Is there a street there? What does it look like? How does it transition to what is proposed?
The Overland North entrance detail sheet shows connectivity and details street
geometry.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: Street design
Number: 146 Created: 11 /7/2005
[11/7/05] The cul-de-sac is showing Vertical Curb and Gutter around the center portion and
our standards require Outfall. Please change. Please give spot elevations all around the
center so that I can verify the cross slope. The cross slope shown does not meet our 2%
minimum requirement. What are you constructing the middle out of? Is it rounded?
Pointed? Flat? Detailed information has been provided on the plans. The cross slope was
discussed with Susan Joy and Ayres and the designed cross -slope was agreed upon.
Number: 147 Created: 11 /7/2005
[ 11/7/05] The cross sections are missing a lot of information. Also, there are several cross
sections not meeting our 2% minimum cross slope requirement.
All cross-scetions have cross slopes between 2 and 3%.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 93 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Utilities/Water/Drainage Sheet C1.2,3 -Please remove all landscaping and
contours. The legend is incomplete -are the heavy lines representing retaining walls? If so,
please provide more info (TOW/BOW, design info, etc). Remove the grading for legibility.
What's the scale?
These sheets do not show landscaping. The trees shown are existing trees. Ayres
feels that it is important to keep these trees on the plans so that the contractor
knows that the trees are there and that theu need to be protected during
construction. Existing trees have been added to the legend.
The proposed contours are on the sheets to show why some of the utilities are
present. After a meeting with Susan Joy it was agreed that the contours can be
shown on the plans.
The heavy line has been removed. It was a hatch for a sidewalk that traveled
around and through the site.
Page 7
Topic. Site Plan
Number: 120 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] Please provide a signature block for the ditch company (PV&L). Signature blocks
have been added to the site plan cover page
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic: Street design
Number: 38 Created: 5/6/2005
[11/7/05] [7/12/05] [5/6/05] Please provide more data on the plan and profile views of
West Horsetooth Road, including elevation labels and vertical curve information on the
centerline profile. For reference please include the south flowline profile - it is needed to
determine whether cross -slopes will be adequate when the centerline is altered.
Comment has been addressed a d more information on the plan and profiles.
Number: 39 Created: 5/6/2005
[11/2/05] Please provide more information on the cul-de-sac including details. There is not
enough info shown to build it (need spots around the interior flowline, what's the middle look
like?, etc).
Spot elevations have been provided at the raised median.
[7/12/05] [5/6/05] Please design the cul-de-sac according to LCUASS Clip. 7, and figure 7-
19. Flowline grade minimum in cul-de-sac is 1 %. Additional elevation data is needed to
determine whether cross -slopes will be adequate. Show centerline profile of West
Horsetooth Road to the high point in the cul-de-sac (see redlines).
Per conversation on Thursday the 17`h of November, the cul-de-sac is designed
adequately.
Number: 40 Created: 5/6/2005
[1111105] [7/12/05] [5/6/05] Please see utility plan checklist for additional items.
Checklist items have been reviewed and responded to.
Number: 73 Created: 7/ 12/2005
[11/2/05] Repeat. The transition does not meet our minimum standards.
[7/12/05] The transition shown on West Horsetooth Road is pretty short for a 30' wide
transition.
Sheri W. from Engineering directed the 30ft transition. After meeting with Susan
Joy, the designed 30ft transition has been agreed upon.
Number: 74 Created: 7/12/2005
[1111105] Repeat. Please provide intersection details for all intersections.
[7/12/05] Since my previous comment to design the park entrance drive to meet the
driveway detail was ignored and it appears that it is being designed as a street, please provide
Page 6
[11/2/05] The ditch company (PV&L) needs to sign off on the plat, please provide a
signature block.
Plat has been revised accordingly.
Number: 122 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements. This plat is very hard to read
in some areas.
Plat has been revised accordingly.
Number: 123 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] All easements, etc, need to be locatable.
Plat has been revised accordingly.
Number: 124 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] Please label all existing easements, row, etc as "existing" and/or label with
reception number. Please label all NEW easements, etc, as "to be dedicated by this plat."
See # 118 above. Existing easement have recording citations in parentheses. The word
"existing" in not needed and clutters up the plat unnecessarily
Number: 126 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: Boundary and Legal close.
Acknowledged
Number: 127 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: There is something wrong at Michener Drive with
found set pins.
Plat has been revised accordingly
Number: 128 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: East line of W1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 is labeled incorrectly.
Plat has been revised accordingly
Number: 129 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: Ownership and maintenance of Outlot A?
Plat has been revised accordingly
Number: 130 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: Problem in legal - 5th filing, not Subdivision.
Plat has been revised accordingly
Number: 131 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: Please call to talk about flood lines/easements/etc.
With the permission of Susan Hayes the flood lines have been removed since the floodplain
is currently being changed and will change again in the near future. The note on the cover
sheet will serve as sufficient notice at this time.
Number: 132 Created: 11 /3/2005
[11/3/05] From Technical Services: Boundary monument Avery(?) 5th filing (47.32' pin
missing).
The legal description has been revised to eliminate this point. This was not intended to be a
monumented point in the boundary since Cottonwood Glen Park does not have a break there
and the call was intended to be descriptive. No monument was found or set by us in that
location.
Page 5
[5/3/05] Please see the Fossil Creek Community Park Plat as a reference and model this plat
after it.
Number: 60 Created: 7/ 12/2005
[11/2/05] Repeat but why "areas"? Shouldn't these be alignments or easements?
[7/12/05] Please label the "water areas" as "water utility areas".
Linear features have all been renamed as alignments. Irregular areas have been renamed as
areas. No easements are being dedicated because of the City attorney's position that the City
cannot dedicate easements or rights of way to itself. The easements labeled as such were
dedicated by previous documents as cited in parentheses.
Number: 62 Created: 7/ 12/2005
[11/2/05] Did PFA approve the 17' width? Their minimum is 20'. Also, why "areas" - these
should be alignments or easements. PFA has approved the 17' width. Alingment has been
used
[7/12/05] Please show/label/dimension all emergency access areas on the plat.
Noted
Number: 63 Created: 7/ 12/2005
[11/2/05] There are a LOT of un-labeled lines on the plat. What are they and do they belong
on the plat?
[7/12/05] Some items are un-labeled on the plat - I think it's another water utility area - what
is it?
Plat has been revised accordingly.
Number: 82 Created: 7/ 15/2005
[11/2/051 Has this been done? Can't really tell.
[7/15/051 Please provide an alignment/area for the electric duct bank on the plat.
A utility alignment was added to accommodate the electric and additional future utilities.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: Plat
Number: 117 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] Plat language needs corrections. Please email meatsjoy@fcgov.com and I'll
email you the most current language.
Revised language was obtained and plat was modified
Number: 118 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] The additional ROW to be dedicated along West Horsetooth Road is not labeled
correctly. Need to dimension and label with "...to be dedicated with this plat." Same with
the Utility Easement.
See #60 above. We cannot dedicate right of way to the City. The Horsetooth right of way
alignment area has been reserved and set aside for that purpose. Any alignments or areas
shown on the plat without parentheses. There is no dedication, so that language cannot
appear on the plat.
Number: 119
Created: 11 /2/2005
Page 4
[11/7/05] Trees need to be planted all the way around the cul-de-sac.
[7/12/05] Once the street is widened to allow parking, street trees should fit in the parkway
instead of behind the walk. Please show street trees along West Horsetooth Road and around
the cul-de-sac bulb.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: Landscaping Plans
Number: 105 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] This set does not meet the scanning requirements set forth in Appendix E6. Plans
are now meet the scanning requirements of Appendix E6
Number: 106 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Please remove all contours. Steve Olt with Current Planning wants the contours on
the Landscape Plans
Number: 107 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Please show, label, and dimension ALL easements and ROW. All easements and
ROW have been labeled.
Number: 108 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[11111051 Please show all utilities. All utilities are shown on landscape plans.
Number: 109 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] Trees are required all the way around the cul-de-sac. Trees are shown around the
cul-de-sac where they do not conflict with utility easements.
Number: 114 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] The cul-de-sac needs to match the Utility Plans. The cul-de-sac now matches the
utility plans
Number: 121 Created: 11 /2/2005
[11/2/05] Please provide a signature block for the ditch company (PV&L). A signature block
has been added to the landscape plans for the ditch.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic. Plat
Number: 29 Created: 5/3/2005
[11/2/05] Please see Technical Services for formatting suggestions and see the plan set
suggested below.
Removed floodplains which were causing the confusion. Clarified easement labels.
Page 3
[11/8/05] Rick Lee of the Building Department indicated that there are no apparent
Building Code concerns with this submittal. All restrooms shall satisfy the 1997 UBC and
the Accessibility Standards of 1998 ANSI 117.1.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic: General
Number: 65 Created: 7/ 12/2005
[1111105] [7/12/05] Scanability is still a big problem -please read LCUASS appendix E-6
and revise all plans accordingly. If you have questions, please contact Technical Services.
Plans have been adjusted so that no color is present. The location map has been
changed to black and white.
Number: 72 Created: 7/ 12/2005
[1111105] [7/12/05] Please ensure that the plat, site, landscape plans, and utility plans are all
coordinated and match.
The site plan has been coordinated with the plat, landscape and utility plans.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: General
Number: 102 Created: 11 / 1 /2005
[1111105] Is this project being phased? If so, each phase needs to be complete and function
fully by itself AND you will need to phase all of the plan sets (site, landscape, and utility).
The project is not being phased.
Number: 112 Created: l l / 1 /2005
[1111105] No structures are allowed in any easement. A 34' x 34' dumpster pad is shown
within the easement on the northwest corner of the site.
Topic: Grading Plans
Number: 145 Created: 11 /7/2005
[11/7/05] The scale is too small. Needs to be 1 "= 50' max. Please label all slope ratios. The
grade at the back of walk needs to be flat to nearly flat for a minimum of 2'.
Overall plan sheets are at 100'=1 " scale, this has been agreed upon by a Ayres and
Susanjoy.
The 2ft of flat ground next to walk will be detailed in the architectural sidewalk
details.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic: Landscaping Plans
Number: 64 Created: 7/ 12/2005
Page 2
aSTAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
BHA Design, Inc. Date: 11/08/2005
c/o Russell Lee
4803 Innovation Drive
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
Staff has reviewed your submittal for SPRING CANYON COMMUNITY PARK - FINAL
PLANS, and we offer the following comments:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: PV and L crossing
Number: 148 Created: 11 /8/2005
[11/8/05] Ed Wendel of the Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal Company offered the
following comments:
The PV&L Canal has a 50' right-of-way (ROW) on the north portion of this project for
access and maintenance. The project does not appear to affect their ROW as it is
currently described.
Comment has been noted
2. The drainage off of this property might be of concern. Perhaps a silt fence or straw bale
berm might be used.
Please refer to sheets C2.5 and C2.6. Wattle dikes and silt fencing will be used
during the construction.
3. Long-term drainage issues at Spring Creek crossing of the PV&L ditch have been
proposed in the past. Is any of this going to happen?
Pv and L was investigated by City of Fort Collins stormwater staff: It was directed
to leave existing conditions at the crossing until further studies have been
completed.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 149 Created: 11 /8/2005
[11/8/05] Len Hilderbrand of Xcel Energy offered the following comments:
1. There is an existing 2" gas main at West Horsetooth Road and Horsetooth Court.
Comment has been noted.
2. There is an existing 4" gas main at the end of Blue Leaf Drive.
Comment has been noted.
Topic: Building Plans
Number: 150
Created: 11 /8/2005
Page 1