HomeMy WebLinkAboutRAVEN VIEW - FDP - 12-05B - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - REVISIONSa; .. • 1 -7
Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit.
RESPONSE: All redlines have been returned with this submittal package.
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, Anne H. Aspen, City Planner
RESPONSES BY: Northern Engineering - Site Engineer
Lyman Davidson Dooley - Architect/Planner
Page 16
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: General
Number:101 Created:9/29/2005
(9/29/05] Provide offsite easements for the water and sewer lines.
RESPONSE: The Applicant will provide the necessary easement documents subsequent to
this submittal package.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number:107 Created:9/29/2005
[9/29/05] Separation distance between water/sewer MAINS and trees is 10 feet. (Land Use
Code is incorrect.)
RESPONSE: Landscape Note simply reiterates the current code language. Within the
plan, all trees maintain at least 10' of separation from mains. In most instances this is also
met to services, though some are 8-ft.
Topic: Plat
Number:103 Created:9/29/2005
[9/29/05] On the plat, clarify that tracts are utility easements.
RESPONSE: The plat was revised prior to public hearing.
Topic: Utility plans
Number:102 Created:9/29/2005
[9/29/05] Provide 2 foot minimum separation between water services and driveways.
RESPONSE: Please see Sheet D4
Number:104 Created:9/29/2005
[9/29/05] Pothole the water main in Mulberry during final compliance to provide a complete
design for the water/sewer crossing.
RESPONSE: The nut at the top of the existing valve at this crossing location was field
surveyed. As a result, a waterline lowering was designed, and the detail is included on
Sheet D3.
Number:105 Created:9/29/2005
[9/29/05] If street is stubbed to the south, we may want to have water/sewer mains stubbed
also. We will await determination from planning and engineering on the street stub.
RESPONSE: Water and sewer mains are shown to be stubbed at this future street location
Number:106 Created:9/29/2005
[9/29/05] Schedule a meeting with me to discuss connection to water main in Taft and to
look at possibility of reversing the water/sewer locations in the streets.
RESPONSE: Said meeting transpired at Northern Engineering's office on January 4, 2006.
Page 15
._ 41 f
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater
Number:72 Created:3/30/2005
[9/30/05] Before hearing, need to make sure that the letter of intent includes a drainage
easement in addition to a utility easement for the detention pond spillway. Once that is
determined, project is OK for hearing.
[3/30/05] All off -site drainage easements or letter of intents need to be in place before a
hearing.
RESPONSE: This item was addressed prior to public hearing.
Number:83 Created:3/31/2005
[9/30/051 Stormwater is confident this can be worked out after the hearing. Comments may
follow at final compliance on the details of this to satisfy Stormwater and Poudre Fire
Authority's requirements.
[3/31/05] There is a conflict with the emergency access road and inlet along Mulberry which
needs to be resolved.
RESPONSE: Additional information and details have been provided by TwHartmann (see
Sheet ST1).
Number:87 Created:4/1/2005
[9/30/05] Repeat
[4/1/05] SWMM Comments - Please provide a connectivity schematic and show revised
basin boundaries on SWMM exhibit.
RESPONSE: Please see Map Pocket at back of Drainage Report
Number:88 Created:4/1/2005
[9/30/05) Please show more precisely the flow path for these off -site flows to verify that they
will miss the site.
[4/1/05] Investigation needs to take place for off -site flows to the west that may travel
through the site. Basin 21 from the Canal Importation Master Plan appears to flow near or
through the site.
RESPONSE: Please see additional analysis in appendix of Drainage Report.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: General
Number:32 Created:3/29/2005
[9/27/05] Repeat comment.
[3/29/05] A minor point, on the "Cover Sheet", please remove the wording "Bike Path Each
side of Road" as it references Taft Hill Rd. and Mulberry St. While bike lanes do exist (at a
sub -standard configuration) there are no bike paths along these facilities in this location. Of
course if you want you can leave the wording on the sheet but change "path" to "lane".
RESPONSE: So noted
Page 14
Topic: Street Names
Number:24 Created:3/29/2005
[9/30/05] Please see JR in Tech Services.
[3/29/05] This project does not meet the city's street naming criteria. Each of the legs will
need its own name and remove the "Court" from the street name. Please see JR/Tech
Services if you have any questions.
RESPONSE: The Applicant has met with J.R., and will be adding a new street name for the
eastern -most north -south street.
Topic: Traffic Study
Number:90 Created:4/1/2005
[10/4/05] Please provide another copy of the updated TIS.
[4/1/05] Needs to be updated to reflect the current layout and include the pedestrian LOS
requirements.
RESPONSE: The Applicant has met with J.R., and will be adding a new street name for the
eastern -most north -south street.
Topic: Utility
Number:37 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Need to dimension all drive aisles and parking stalls in accordance with
LCUASS.
RESPONSE: Parking stalls dimensions meet the LCUASS standards. There are (2) two
handicapped parking stalls shown on Sheets 2 of 10 and 3 of 10 of the Site Plan set.
Number:112 Created:10/4/2005
[10/4/05] Final Compliance. Please remove the street patch detail.
RESPONSE: This detail has been replaced.
Number:139 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] See redlines for comments on sheet U1. Add street cut note.
RESPONSE: Please see revised Sheet U1.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
Topic: General
Number:96 Created:9/23/2005
[9/23/05] In addition to previous comments submitted by Poudre Fire Authority a sign shall
be placed at the point where the "Emergency Access Road" meets Mulberry Street
indicating "Emergency Access Only -Raven View". Contact Michael A. Chavez with Poudre
Fire Authority at 970-416-2869 for sign details.
RESPONSE: Lyman Davidson Dooley has contacted Michael Chavez with PFA. Lyman
Davidson has added emergency access notes and sign detail to the Overall Site Plan, sheet
2 of 10.
Page 13
easier to widen out the 30' easement to include the wall. Please provide a letter of intent
from the property owner in order to go to hearing.
RESPONSE: Please see response to Number 134 above. Also, an additional 2-ft of
easement (east of the current 30-ft) is provided.
Topic: Scanning Requirements
Number:10 Created:3/28/2005
[9/30/05] This is more a Final Compliance issue but I'll just keep the comment open until
resolved.
[3/28/05] Please see Appendix E6 for our scanning requirements. Shaded areas and aerial
photos will not scan. Please correct all overlapped labeling. Please see JR/Tech Services if
you have any questions.
RESPONSE: We would be happy to work with JR Wilson to ensure that our plan sheets
scan well enough for the City's a-docs service and permanent records.
Topic: Site Plan
Number:46 Created:3/29/2005
[10/5/05] [3/29/05) The site plan needs to match the utility plan.
RESPONSE: So noted
Number:47 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Please coordinate the comments under other sections so that all plan
sets match.
RESPONSE: So noted.
Number:51 Created:3/29/2005
[10/5/05] [3/29/05] Dimension all sidewalks.
RESPONSE: So noted.
Number:128 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please provide a north arrow, scale, etc.
RESPONSE: A north arrow, scale, etc. have been provided on the necessary sheets.
Number:129 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please expand the Site Plan to include all offsites, must match the utility plans.
RESPONSE: So noted.
Number:130 Created:l0/5/2005
[10/5/05] Expand the Site Plan to include Taft and Mulberry and show all existing features
within 150' of the project boundaries.
RESPONSE: So noted.
Page 12
Number:70 Created:3/29/2005
[10/3/05] [3/29/05] Please provide a cut section through the PC and widest point of the
bulbouts so that I can verify you are meeting our cross slope requirements (Final
Compliance).
RESPONSE: Please see Intersection Detail Sheets.
Number:125 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. The cross slopes shown of 4% exceed the maximum cross
slope requirement of 3%.
RESPONSE: The typical sections have been revised, and the roadways are designed with
cross -slopes between 2-3%.
Number:126 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Minimum VC lengths are not being met on Pica. Please refer
to figures 7-17 and 7-18.
RESPONSE: Minimum VC lengths are being met on all roadways.
Topic: Plat
Number:30 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Final Compliance. Please provide signature/address lines and another
for the City Clerk.
RESPONSE: The plat was revised prior to public hearing.
Number:113 Created:10/4/2005
[10/4/05] See Technical Services comment sheet for their comments.
RESPONSE: The plat was revised prior to public hearing.
Topic: Public Hearing
Number:31 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29105] The applicant must provide a letter of intent for all offsite easements
from all effected property owners before being allowed to schedule a public hearing. The
actual easements themselves must be provided during Final Compliance and the reception
number must be shown on all plan sets. Please submit an exhibit and legal description for
our review and approval prior to recording so that we can verify that they are correct.
Easements dedicated to the City (drainage, utility and public access) must be done using
our dedication statement and then accepted through our own internal process. Easements
between private parties can be recorded at the County Clerk's office once we have reviewed
them for accuracy.
RESPONSE: Please see response to Number 134 above.
Number:41 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] There is a proposed retaining wall outside of the 30' drainage and utility
easement. This development will need a temp construction easement for any work done
outside of the easement as well as a permanent easement for the wall itself. It might be
Page 11
Number:40 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Final Compliance. The details shown are incomplete and are not buildable.
[3/29/05] Sheet D5: Put the offsite driveway details along with the other driveway details on
the Plan and Profile sheets. Put the appropriate cut sections on sheet U1 for both the
existing and proposed driveway area on sheet U1. In addition, you can not discharge more
than 500sf of drainage across a public sidewalk - a sidewalk chase will be required.
RESPONSE: Utilities will be installed per the appropriate plan and profile sheets. Other
plan sheets and supporting detail drawings allow for construction. This is an existing paved
driveway, and will remain a paved driveway; therefore, the 500sf drainage issue is not
applicable.
Number:42 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Repeat.
[3/29/05] The east driveway off Mulberry is shown draining towards the street. No more
than 500sf of drainage is allowed to discharge over a public sidewalk.
RESPONSE: This is an existing paved driveway, and will remain a paved driveway;
therefore, the 500sf drainage issue is not applicable.
Number:43 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Final Compliance. This driveway exceeds the maximum 500sf of drainage over a
public sidewalk. You will need to provide a culvert to the street or and inlet to the
stormdrain.
[3/29/05] Please provide a typical section and a plan and profile for the western emergency
access drive and include all information necessary build it. This drive must meet PFA's
minimum requirements. Show how you are tying into Mulberry with it. The maximum 500sf
of drainage over a public sidewalk applies here as well.
RESPONSE: Please see Sheets R5 and D7
Number:61 Created:3/29/2005
[10/3/05] Final Compliance.
[3/29/05] Need to station every driveway along a vertical curb.
RESPONSE: Please see roadway plan and profile sheets.
Number:64 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Final Compliance.
[3/29/05] Identify all grade breaks.
RESPONSE: Please see roadway plan and profile sheets.
Number:65 Created:3/29/2005
[10/3/05] [3/29/05] Final Compliance. Continue the centerline profile through the
intersection at Taft and where the road loops back on itself.
RESPONSE: Please see roadway plan and profile sheets
Page 10
Number:143 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Sheet D2 - See redlines for comments. Detail 10: Please label the slopes. The
18" separation requirement is not being met. Detail 11: See comments under Offsite
Easements in this letter.
RESPONSE: Please see appropriate storm and/or sanitary plan and profile sheets for pipe
slopes. The existing waterline in Mulberry Street will have to be lowered in order to get
adequate separation between the waterline and proposed sanitary sewer connection (this
information is included in the plan set). Sufficient easement width will be provided for all
improvements.
Number:144 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Sheet D3 - Needs to be to scale and must in engineering scale. Not scannible -
doesn't look like the minimum font size requirement is being met. Please see Appendix E6
for all scanning requirements.
RESPONSE: These details have been revised, as requested.
Number:145 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Sheet D5 - See redlines.
RESPONSE: See revised Sheet D5
Number:146 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Sheet D6 - Please provide more details on the modified inlet structure and drive
cut.
RESPONSE: Additional information and details have been provided by TwHartmann (see
Sheet ST1).
Topic: Plan and Prortles
Number:12 Created:3/28/2005
[10/4/05] Will need this detail before hearing to make sure the horizontal layout is to
standard OR you can go to hearing with the understanding that the row may still move if the
bulbouts are not designed in accordance with 7-24.
[3/28/051 Please provide a street widening detail for each of the three bulbouts. The street
widening must be designed in accordance with detail 7-24. Call out each of the dimensions
asked for in the detail (R1 can equal 20-36' per Mike Herzig). Where the street has been
widened on the east leg and out at Taft, show another typical street section for those areas
and label with "from station xxxx to station xxxx.
RESPONSE: See Intersection Detail Sheets.
Number:38 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Final Compliance.
[3/29/05] All structures must be a minimum of 2.5' below the scarified subgrade of a public
street.
RESPONSE: See appropriate plan and profile sheets.
Page 9
,. 1
RESPONSE: All discrepancies and acknowledgments/approvals from off -site property
owners were resolved prior to PDP approval. The Applicant will provide the necessary
easement documents subsequent to this submittal package.
Topic: Overall Utility
Number:59 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Need to show/dimension existing and proposed row and utility
easements along Taft and Mulberry.
RESPONSE: Existing R.O.W. and easements are shown as/where appropriate.
Number:60 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Final Compliance.
[3/29/05] Need to dimension the crosspan at Taft and provide the detail in the detail sheets.
RESPONSE: The crosspan at Raven View Road and Taft Hill is specified as 10-ft wide, and
the appropriate LCUASS details are provided.
Number:62 Created:3/29/2005
[10/3/05] Repeat.
[3/29/05] Need to show existing features within 150' of the projects boundaries in a ghosted
or alternate line weight. Need to show how your proposed items tie into the existing.
RESPONSE: Please see revised Utility Plans.
Number:123 Created:l0/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final compliance. Add Street Cut Note: Limits of street cut are approximate.
Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to
be in accordance with City street repair standards."
RESPONSE: This note has been added where appropriate.
Number:140 Created:10/5/2005
(10/5/05) Sheet U3 -see redlines.
RESPONSE: See revised Sheet U3.
Number:141 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Remove the word Preliminary from the title block, all sheets.
RESPONSE: "Preliminary' has been removed from the title block.
Number:142 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] The typical street sections shown on sheet R1, R2, R3, & R4 do not meet city
standard and require several corrections.
RESPONSE: The typical street sections have been revised, and satisfy City standards
Page 8
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number:48 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Please coordinate the comments under other sections so that all plan
sets match.
Number:131 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please provide a north arrow, scale, etc.
RESPONSE: A north arrow, scale, and legend are shown on the landscape plan.
Number:132 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please expand the Landscape Plan to include all offsites, must match the utility
plans.
RESPONSE: Per a phone conversation between Chris Whitted of Cityscape and Susan Joy
of City of Fort Collins Engineering, the landscape plan can remain at the scale and view
shown. Notes have been added indicating there is no. proposed landscaping along the
emergency access or stormwater easement which connects to Mulberry. The notes also
refer to the utility plans for the actual connections, which are not shown on the landscape
plan. Please refer to the Overall Site Plan for off -site features within 150-ft of the project
site. Taft Hill Road is shown along the edge of the sheet.
Number:133 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Expand the Landscape Plan to include Taft and Mulberry and show all existing
features within 150' of the project boundaries.
RESPONSE: See above response.
Topic: Offsite Easements
Number:134 . Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] The plat and the offsite easement documents do not match. The emergency
access drive on the plat says it is a 24' emergency access, maintenance and construction
easement while the contract calls it an emergency access and utility placement only. The
construction easement needs to be called out separately on all documents and say whether
its temporary or permanent. Is a drainage easement necessary as well? A letter of intent
from the property owner is required prior to hearing if the original document is not correct.
The drive on the east side of the property is called out as a 30' drainage and utility easement
on the plat. The contract document calls it an Access and Utility Easement. We will also
require a drainage and maintenance easement. Also, the 30' easement is not wide enough
to include and construct the retaining wall. A letter of intent revising the contract is fine
before going to hearing, the actual documents will need to be filed during Final Compliance.
Emergency Access and Drainage easements need to be dedicated to the city and accepted
through the city process. All other private easements can be recorded between the
individual parties at the County. We will need a copy of the recorded documents before final
plan approval.
Page 7
RESPONSE: The emergency access drive is 20-ft wide and a 24-ft wide easement will be
dedicated to allow construction, maintenance, and grading tie-ins within 2-ft on either side of
the asphalt surface. There will be no need for off -site grading easements. Graphical
revisions have been made to help clarify this.
Number:58 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Final Compliance. Show drainage arrows on the drives out to Mulberry.
RESPONSE: Please see Developed Drainage Exhibit (Sheet DR1).
Number:121 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Label slopes in all detention areas.
RESPONSE: Slopes are now labeled in the detention area.
Number:122 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. You may have to break this sheet into two sheets so that the
information is clear and scannible.
RESPONSE: We would be happy to work with JR Wilson to ensure that this, and all of our
plan sheets, scan well enough for the City's a-docs service and permanent records.
Topic: Intersections
Number:68 Created:3/29/2005
[10/3/05] [3/29/05] Please provide intersection details in accordance with details 7-27 and
7-28 (Final Compliance).
RESPONSE: Intersection Detail Sheets have been provided.
Number:69 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Profile grades within the intersection can not exceed 3%.
RESPONSE: Profile grades do not exceed 3% through any intersection.
Topic: Landscape and Site Plan
Number:52 Created:3/29/2005
[10/5/05] [3/29/05] Please label and dimension all easements, row.
RESPONSE: All easements and R.O.W. will be properly labeled and dimensioned on all
planning documents.
Number:148 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Remove "Project Development Plan" from the plan sets.
RESPONSE: All reference to "Project Development Plan" has been removed from the plan
sets.
Number:149 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Must be in engineering scale.
RESPONSE: All dimensions have been changed to engineering scale
Page 6
I
RESPONSE: The street stub to the south is designed and shown. Only the ped. ramps and
curb returns will be constructed at this time (although ultimate intersection design and off -
site profile are still provided with this plan set). A Type III barricade will be installed behind
the gravel pedestrian crossing. The cash -in -lieu estimate will be provided subsequent to
this submittal package.
Number:115 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5105] Final Compliance. Directional ramps are required at all intersections. Those
shown at Taft Hill do not meet standard.
RESPONSE: Directional ramps are now shown at the intersection of Raven View Road and
Taft Hill.
Number:116 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final compliance. Please provide PFA approved bollards where the street stubs
to the north and add the appropriate detail in the detail sheets.
RESPONSE: Drive -over bollards (PFA approved) are shown on the plans and called out in
the legend. "Safe -Hit" SH236MAD-WS type bollards are specified. Installation and details
are deferred to the manufacturer/supplier.
Number:117 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please label all Tracts and Easements, all sheets, all plan sets.
RESPONSE: Tracts and easements are properly labeled on appropriate sheets of all sets.
Number:118 Creat ed: 10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Midblock crosspans must be 12' wide minimum.
RESPONSE: A 12-ft mid -block concrete crosspan is specified for Pica Street.
Number:119 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5105] Final Compliance. Change all dimensions to engineering scale (can't be
architectural in feet and inches).
RESPONSE: All dimensions are in engineering scale.
Number:120 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Please provide more information and details on the proposed
inlet modification on Mulberry.
RESPONSE: Additional information and details have been provided by TwHartmann (see
Sheet ST1).
Topic: Grading
Number:57 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/051 Hard to see if this was done on the offsite drives to Mulberry. It is not clear if you
will need offsite grading easements at this time. Please remove the landscaping off of all
sheets (except the demo sheet).
[3/29/05] Proposed contours need to tie into existing contours.
Page 5
I a
met. Please provide a drive cut on Mulberry so that the fire trucks don't have to jump the
vertical curb.
RESPONSE: The Emergency Access Road is designed per LCUASS alley requirements
and PFA criteria. The existing inlet box will be modified, and a new driveway approach will
be constructed where the EA intersects Mulberry. Drive -over bollards and emergency
signage will also be provided at this location.
Topic: General
Number:18 Created:3/28/2005
[9/30/05] The row dedication shown does not equal 57.5 from the centerline. The 15' UE
needs to be dimensioned and labeled.
[3/28/05] This project is responsible for dedicating their half of a total of 115' of row along
Taft plus a 15' utility easement.
RESPONSE: The R.O.W. dedication is 57.5-ft from the section line in Taft Hill Road, and
the new 15-ft utility easement is dimension/labeled.
Number:33 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Repeat- Final Compliance.
[3/29/05] The curb returns must be designed in accordance with LCUASS, Table 8-2.
Those shown on the plans do not.
RESPONSE: The curb.returns shown on the Utility Plans do satisfy LCUASS Table 8-2
(please see flowline curve table, not to be confused with curve table on the Plat for radii at
R.O.W. intersections).
Number:49 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] Repeat. Also, please dimension all parking stalls in accordance with LCUASS.
[3/29/05] There are no handicapped parking spaces shown.
RESPONSE: Parking stalls dimensions meet the LCUASS standards. There are (2) two
handicapped parking stalls shown on Sheets 2 of 10 and 3 of 10 of the Site Plan set.
Number:54 Created:3/29/2005
[10/3/05] [3/29/051 More detailed and specific comments.to follow in Final Compliance.
Number:114 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. The street stub to the south needs to be designed and
constructed to the property line and a type III barricade is required (please show on all plan
sets). This development has the option of building the stub and the curb return to the PCs
and ramps and then cash in lieu of the rest. If this option is chosen, the plans would need to
show interim and ultimate and an estimate for the remaining portion of the street has to be
submitted for our review and approval. The estimate must include the removal of any
landscaping in the row of the future street. Only grass will be allowed in the row, however,
no shrubs or trees of any kind. We need it to be very clear to the future and existing
residents that the street is absolutely going through.
Page 4
RESPONSE: Tract F is correctly labeled on all documents.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: Demo Sheet
Number 135 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Label the existing Gravel Drive on the north side of Raven
View that it is to be removed.
RESPONSE: Additional labeling has been added. No driveways beyond the limits of the
project boundary are to be removed.
Number:136 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Scanning issues here. Don't shade the existing offsite
structures, just outline. Add the street row for Crestmore Place and Court.
RESPONSE: We have had success in the past utilizing similar shading, and feel that it
adds benefit and clarity to the drawings. Approximate street R.O.W. is shown for Crestmore
Place and Crestmore Court.
Number:137 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Label which trees are to be removed.
RESPONSE: Please see notes on Sheet EX1 and U1.
Number:138 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Add Street Cut Note (provided elsewhere in the comment letter).
RESPONSE: The drawings now include the requested Street Cut Note.
Topic: Driveways
Number:67 Created:3/29/2005
[10/4/05] [3/29/05] Sidewalks must be continuous through the driveways. Final
Compliance.
RESPONSE: Sidewalks are continuous through driveways (per LCUASS Drawings 706 &
1601, which are included in the Utility Plan set). Additionally, sidewalks are shown as
continuous on Sheets 2 of 10 and 3 of 10 of the Site Plan set.
Topic: Emergency Access
Number 124 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please see PFA as soon as possible for their comments on the emergency
access drive.
RESPONSE: Northern Engineering met with Ron Gonzales at PFA prior to PDP approval,
and he was satisfied with our proposal. The Site Plan set has addressed their concerns with
signage.
Number:127 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] Final Compliance. Minimum VCs are not being met along the emergency access
road. Ensure that PFAs requirement of 25' inside and 50' outside turning radius is being
Page 1
contribution in aid as a possibility and suggested that you be in touch with her about that.
There was no further communication about that. Finally, in an email dated April 1, 2005,
Susan Joy wrote to Nick Haws and stated that the street stub would need to be designed
and constructed. So as it stands now, you will be responsible for the design and
construction of the street stubs. Staff has determined that it would be possible to modify the
requirements given the nature of the circumstance. See Susan's comment # 114.
RESPONSE: The street stub is designed and shown. Only the ped. ramps and curb
returns will be constructed at this time.
Number:111 Created:l0/4/2005
[10/4/05] Since the remaining issues are primarily Engineering's comments, you will not be
required to submit for another formal round of review. Please submit a complete set to
Susan Joy and address any other issues to the commenter directly. Once I have heard from
Susan Joy that she finds the project ready to go to hearing, I will verify with the rest of staff
and then schedule the hearing.
RESPONSE: N/A — Hearing was scheduled, and PDP was approved.
Number:152 Created:10/5/2005
[10/5/05] The USPS comments as follows:
"Mail Service: Centralized delivery using of a minimum of 4 centralized box units (3 industry
type III and 1 type 1) is required. Revise plan to show the required CBU locations as
approved by the US Postal Service. In all cases the CBU's must be located in the public
right-of-way or a designated easement. Be advised the responsibility of purchase and
maintaining the CBU's with the concrete pads is that of the owner/developer/builder/HOA.
Prior to occupancy within the development approved mail receptacles will be in place.
Delivery Agreement will be in place prior to any delivery of mail. Contact Carl Jenkins
Growth Coordinator, US Postal Service 301 E. Boardwalk, Fort Collins, CO, phone # 970-
225-4130, cell # 970-214-3668, fax # 970-225-4139.
RESPONSE: We have meet with Carl Jenkins and located the mail service areas and sizes
as requested on the site plans.
Topic: Ped LOS
Number:108 Created:10/4/2005
[10/4/05] The proposed project is not meeting the pedestrian level of service standards.
While City staff is well aware that at this infill site it is perhaps not possible to meet these
standards, they are standards nonetheless. In order to go to hearing, the applicant will need
to submit a written request for modification of standards. City staff is in agreement that this
modification of standards request will receive staff support. Since the request is more of a
formality than anything else, it can be submitted concurrently with the PDP and be
addressed at the same hearing as the PDP. Please let me know if you have any questions
about the process or requirements for a modification submittal.
RESPONSE: The modification was submitted and approved.
Topic: Public Hearing
Number 151 Created:l0/5/2005
[10/5/05] Please remember to relabel the Lot that is Tract F for your plans to be submitted
to the Hearing Officer.
Page 2
1
,MZKN"
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
TOM PETERSON Date: 10/05/2005
3555 STANFORD RD. #204 RESPONSES: March 22, 2006
FORT COLLINS, CO 80525
Staff has reviewed your submittal for RAVEN VIEW PDP, TYPE I, and we offer the following
comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: General
Number:97 Created:9/27/2005
[9/27/05) Change Director of Planning to Director of Current Planning on the signature block
(2 times).
RESPONSE: So noted on Cover Sheet
Number:99 Created:9/27/2005
(9/27/05] Need to add a street tree at the NEC of Pica and Corvid Way
RESPONSE: Cityscape is unable to add a tree at the NEC of Pica and Corvid Way, since
there is a fire hydrant at this location.
Number:100 Created:9/27/2005
[9/27/05] The lighting fixture you have chosen does not meet the standards of the Land Use
Code. It is not down directional nor is it fully shielded.
RESPONSE: The light chosen will be down directional and full cut off — see sheet EPM.
Number:109 Created:l0/4/2005
[10/4/05] You will need to meet with Ron Gonzales at Poudre Fire Authority right away to
make sure that they have no concerns with this proposal.
RESPONSE: Northern Engineering met with Ron Gonzales at PFA prior to PDP approval,
and he was satisfied with our proposal.
Number:110 Created:10/4/2005
[10/4/05] In the staff review meeting, you indicated that you do not intend to construct the
stub road to the south. Your site plans seem to show, with equal line weights, that you plan
to build and not build the stub. You said that City staff had OK'ed not building the stub at
this time. I told you that wasn't what I recalled but that I would look back through the record
and get back to you. I looked through the entire record on this project and found nothing to
indicate that staff OK'ed your not building the street stub. What I did find were three
references to the contrary. First, in your conceptual review letter dated May 10, 2004, it is
clear that street stubs must be designed and constructed. Second, at a transportation
coordination meeting on March 31, 2005, Susan Joy and I explained to you, Russ Wells,
Matt Delich and Wayne Hochstetler that you would be required to construct the street stubs
to standard, which in this case would be 51-53'. Susan mentioned the possibility of a
Page I