HomeMy WebLinkAboutLEMAY AVENUE ESTATES - FDP - 37-04B - CORRESPONDENCE -This completes staff (and outside reviewing agencies) review and comments at
this time. Additional comments and red -lined plans may be forthcoming. It
appears that 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 August 3, 2005) as set forth in Section
2.2.11(A) of the Land Use Code. Be sure and return all of your 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,
*)e
Steve Olt,
City Planner
cc: Marc Virata
Stan Everitt
The Birdsall Group
Northern Engineering
City Current Planning File #37-04B
Page 12
Detail how the pipe outlet from pond 305 will be tied to the existing inlet box.
Topic: Water Quality
Number: 95 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Please provide water quality calculations as well as an outlet box
design for ponds 304 and 305.
The following comments and concerns were expressed at staff review on July
27, 2005:
Engineering:
1. What is the outcome on the perimeter drain system?
2. The South Lemay Avenue design is lacking.
3. Please verify with the utility companies their position on the features in
the easements.
4. Staff needs a letter of acknowledge from the property owner to the
south about the driveway.
5. Need more information on the street drain system.
Transportation Planning:
1. There are bicycle issues associated with Lemay Avenue.
Stormwater:
1. Most of the floodplain comments have not yet been addressed. Please
contact Marsha Hilmes-Robinson about these concerns.
**********************************************************************
Page 11
10. A floodplain use permit and $25 fee are required for the stormwater
outfall into Stanton Creek. Please include a detail of how disturbance to
the channel bed and banks will be minimized.
11. Please see checklists for items relating to floodplains that must be
included in the drainage report.
Topic: Eroding Plans
Number: 90 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Please call out minimum top of foundation elevations on the grading
plans.
There are several rear lot swales designed, please add notes to the grading plan
as well as the plat that prohibit the construction of fences or other vegetation
that may inhibit the flow of drainage from one lot across the downstream lot.
A pan may be needed in this situation in order to set the grade.
Topic: Plat
Number: 94 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Please show Tract G to be owned by the Developer (HOA) on the
plat. The dedication should be done to the City by separate document after
platting in order for the City to be able to keep track of all the property it
owns and maintains.
Topic: Pond outlets
Number: 93 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] The detention pond outlets into Stanton Creek look they are set at
an elevation that will cause erosion to occur downstream of the riprap pad.
Please extend outlet to bottom of slope. Make sure the riprap in the Natural
Area is buried. Call out re -vegetation for the disturbed area, show disturbance
limits and construction fences around the pipe outlets.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 96
Created- 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] The outlet from Pond 305 might conflict with existing utilities or
landscaping. The utility plans do not show, if there are any existing utilities in
that area, please make sure that proposed pipe will not interfere with existing
features.
Page 10
4. The erosion buffer zone and floodway must be staked in the field and
marked as a no disturbance area except for permitted items in the buffer
and floodplain (i.e. stormwater outfall). Include as a note on the plans and
in the drainage report. - REPEAT COMMENT
5. A floodplain use permit and $25 fee are required for the stormwater
outfall into Stanton Creek. Please include a detail of how disturbance to
the channel bed and banks will be minimized. - REPEAT COMMENT
6. Sheet 8, Overall Landscape Plan - Please include a note that "No irrigated
vegetation is allowed within the erosion buffer zone. Any plantings within
the erosion buffer zone or floodway require a floodplain use permit."
[11/9/04] Floodplain Comments
1. Please see the included floodplain checklists for items required for 50%
and 100% submittals.
2. The plat must show the floodplain/floodway boundary. The floodplain and
floodway boundaries are the same along Stanton Creek.
3. Please show the floodplain cross -sections and BFE's on the drainage and
grading plans.
4. The erosion buffer zone needs to be shown on the site plan, drainage plan
and grading plans. The erosion buffer zone is different than the natural
resources buffer.
5. All development must be outside of the erosion buffer zone (except the
required stormwater outfall). Please review plans for development that is
currently shown within the erosion buffer zone. In particular, look at lots
12115, 16 and the detention pond.
6. Please see checklists for other restrictions on buffer zones including no
construction traffic, storage of materials, fill, irrigated vegetation, etc.
Please include notes on the plans about these items
7. The stormwater outfall must be constructed so as to minimize disturbance
to the channel bed and banks and also no fill is allowed in the floodway.
8. Any construction in the floodplain/floodway outside of the erosion buffer
zone must be shown by a hydraulic analysis to cause no -rise. To avoid
hydraulic modeling, all development must stay out of the
f loodplai n/f loodway.
9. The erosion buffer zone and floodway must be staked`in the field and
marked as a no disturbance area except for permitted items in the buffer
and floodplain (i.e. stormwater outfall).
Page 9
Topic: Soils Report
Number: 14 Created: 11/5/2004
[7/26/05] The original soils report was submitted with the final plan. Per the
original comment, the potential need for a street drain system needs to be
addressed.
[2/15/05] The response letter indicates this is to be addressed at the time of
final engineering. This is sufficient, comment is carried over for reference.
[11/5/04] The soils report will need to address whether street drain systems
are recommended as was done in the Stanton Creek subdivision directly north.
The general area has high swelling soils and fly ash was used with the recent
work on Lemay Avenue.
Department: Natural Resources
Topic: 6enerol
Number: 98
[8/2/05] No remaining issues.
Department: Stormwater Utility
Topic: Floodplain Issues
Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Created:8/2/2005
Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Number: 55 Created: 11/9/2004
[7/29/05] All previous comments have not been addressed. Please address
these with the next submittal.
[2/16/051
Lemay Avenue Estates
Floodplain Comments
2-8-05
1. Please show the floodplain cross -sections and BFE's on the drainage and
grading plans. - REPEAT COMMENT
2. Please see checklists for other restrictions on buffer zones including no
construction traffic, storage of materials, fill, irrigated vegetation, etc.
Please include notes on the plans and the drainage report about these items
- REPEAT COMMENT
3. The stormwater outfall must be constructed so as to minimize disturbance
to the channel bed and banks and also no fill is allowed in the floodway.
Please provide a detail. - REPEAT COMMENT
Page 8
Number: 97 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Please provide additional spot elevations at the t-intersections as
redlined in the plans for verification of street design. The intersection design
details in general look good.
Topic: General
Number: 18 Created: 11/5/2004
[7/26/05] Carried over as reference.
[2/15/05] The response indicated that a letter of acknowledgement of the
driveway reconfiguration from the property owner will occur once agreement is
made on the plan set (approval?) The letter of acknowledgement will be
required prior to any City approval on the engineering plans.
[11/5/04] In general, it appears that there is sufficient right-of-way south of
the site in order to allow for the work along Lemay Avenue. However, we'll need
to get evidence from the property owners south of here that they are aware of
their driveway configurations being changed by the project. (The construction
plans need to show the newly configured driveways with the road improvements
and grading to demonstrate that off -site easements are not necessary.
Number: 20 Created: 11/5/2004
[7/26/05] Carried over for reference.
(2/15/05] Carried over for reference, as it appears the utilities have not been
contacted thus far. It is suggested that this issue be verified earlier than
prior to construction as it may result (worse case scenario) in having to modify
plans that were previously approved.
[11/5/04] The utility companies will all need to allow the fencing, columns, and
planters which are proposed within the utility easement along Lemay Avenue.
Number: 83 Created: 7/26/2005
[7/26/05] The sidewalk along Mountain Home Drive within Tracts A & 8 needs
to be in access easement where it falls outside of right-of-way as specified on
the site plan. The access easement will also need to be described in a manner in
which the access easement is only for a height of 10' where it lies within the
arbors.
Page 7
- 12.5' travel lane
- 12.5' travel lane
- 8' bike lane
- 19' parkway
- 6' sidewalk
Total = 57.5' (half ROW)
Number: 85
Created: 7/26/2005
[7/26/05] On Lemay Avenue, the northbound bikelane that currently starts
north of Mountain Home Drive shall be striped down to the southern boundary
of the site along the curb and gutter.
Number: 86 Created: 7/26/2005
[7/26/05] On Lemay Avenue per my conversation with the City Traffic
Engineer, the 30:1 tapers shown should be changed to 40:1 tapers.
Number: 87 Created: 7/26/2005
[7/26/05] The southbound Lemay design merge should "reverse", the right lane
should merge into the left lane.
Number: 88
Created: 7/26/2005
[7/26/05] In general the Lemay Avenue design is lacking in vertical information
(however the onsite design appears good and complete). 1000' of offsite design
per LCUASS standards is also required.
Number: 89 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Ensure that intersection information is updated on Mountain Home
Drive and Lemay Avenue.
Number: 91 Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Please provide detail information on the cul-de-sacs (spot elevations,
flow arrows, high points, grades, etc.) per LCUASS detail 7-19.
Number: 92
Created: 7/29/2005
[7/29/05] Please provide detail information at the two street turn
intersections (Honholtz & Showline), (Showline & Woods Landing) in order to
verify how cross slopes and drainage works.
Page 6
Number: 22 Created: 11/5/2004
[7/26/05] What was the outcome regarding this? Will a perimeter drain
system be used and if so how will the systems outfall, or will a subdrain system
be designed? If a subdrain system is proposed, the plans need to reflect the
design.
[2/15/05] The response indicated that the necessity of a subdrain system is to
be addressed at final engineering. This is of concern, as if a subdrain system is
to be proposed, without a preliminary design at this time, it cannot be verified
that a suitable outfall for the subdrain can be designed without perhaps
needing to daylight onto property outside of this development (when a letter if
intent would be required prior to going to a hearing) or needing to redesign the
site after the hearing. The question of a subdrain system needs to be resolved
prior to a hearing.
[11/5/04] The soils report mentions a perimeter drain system, will an actual
subdrain system be proposed by the development? A groundwater report may
be required.
Number: 84 Created: 7/26/2005
[7/26/05] Per previous discussions after hearing, the following horizontal
alignment is required for the northbound Lemay Avenue right-of-way adjacent
to the site:
At the Mountain Home Drive intersection from the centerline of the street
(where a left turn lane exists):
- .5' of additional median to the 6' median on the other side of the
street for a total median width of 6.5'.
- 12' turn lane
- 12' travel lane
- 12' travel lane
- 6' bike lane
- 9' parkway
- 6' sidewalk
Total = 57.5' (half ROW)
Past the intersection from the centerline of the street (where no left turn lane
exists, median only):
- 9.5' of additional median to the 6' median on the other side of the
street for a total median width of 15.5'
Page 5
Number: 101 Created: 8/3/2005
[8/3/05] Terry Farrill of the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and the
South Fort Collins Sanitation District offered the following comments:
a. The District requires minimum 30' wide easements on the District's
standard easement form for all facilities that are not located in the public
right-of-way.
b. The sanitary sewer connection to the existing manhole is to be core drilled.
c. The interior meter setting typical that is labeled standard manhole detail
on Sheet 01 of the utility plans is to be deleted. The District requires curb
stops for residential development. There are no irrigation taps identified
on the project. The meter pit typical is to be deleted. The sewer joint
encasement detail is to be identified as storm sewer encasement. The
District does not allow encasement of the sanitary sewer line.
d. The District does not allow landscaping or trees within 15' of a sanitary
sewer line.
Please contact Terry, at 226-3104, ext. 14, if you have any questions or require
additional information.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Construction Plan
Number: 19 Created: 11/5/2004
[7/26/05] The overhead electric doesn't appear on the plans anymore.
[2/15/05] The note on the plans is not clear as to where are the limits of
undergrounding of the overhead electric.
[11/5/04] There needs to be an indication on the plans that the overhead line
adjacent to the site is to be undergrounded with the development. In addition,
the work on Lemay south of the site will cause additional sections of line to be
undergrounded. Please indicate on the construction plans where the
undergrounding in proposed to begin.
Page 4
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 44 Created: 11/5/2004
[8/3/05] Repeat comment. Appears to still be relevant.
[11/5/04] Phase lines should be shown on the Landscape Plans if the project is
to be phased. Otherwise, the installation of landscaping or securing with a
letter of credit will apply to issuance of any certificate of occupancy in the
entire development (Planting Note #18 on the Landscape Plan). Also, Note #18
should be revised to state, in part:
"..... Installed or secured with an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount
of 125% of the estimated cost of the materials and installation of the
landscaping prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy in each
identified phase of development".
The last part of the above note applies only if the project is to be phased.
Number: 82 Created: 2/24/2005
[8/3/05] Repeat, just for reference.
[2/24/05] The language proposed in the Design Team Responses to Comments
letter for the installation and maintenance of trees is acceptable and should be
added to the Landscape Plan, replacing Planting Notes 19, 20, and 20. This note
should be expanded, however, to state who is responsible for the on -going
maintenance of the trees. Is the developer still going to install the street trees
adjacent to the common, open space areas? Lastly, the "first" Planting Note 20,
regarding phasing, should remain on the plan.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 80 Created: 2/17/2005
[8/3/05] Repeat, just for reference.
[2/17/05] Len Hilderbrand of Xcel Energy indicated that they have a 4" PED
pounds medium system and a 6" intermediate pounds system gas line along the
easterly edge of South Lemay Avenue in this area. This system is adequate to
serve the proposed subdivision.
Page 3
Number: 99 Created. 8/3/2005
[8/3/05] Carl Jenkins of the U.S. Postal Service indicated that centralized
mail delivery, using a minimum of 5 centralized box units (CBU's - 4 Industry
Type III boxes and 1 Industry Type I box) is required. Please revise the plan to
show the required CBU locations as approved by the U.S. Postal Service. In all
cases the CBU's must be located in the public right-of-way or a designated
easement. Be advised that the responsibility of purchasing and maintaining the
CBU's with concrete pads is that of the owner/developer/builder/HOA. Prior to
occupancy within the development approved mail receptacles must be in place. A
delivery agreement will be in place prior to any delivery of mail. Please contact
Carl Jenkins, Growth Coordinator, U.S. Postal Service, 301 East Boardwalk
Drive, Fort Collins, CO. Phone #970-225-4130, cell #970-214-3668, fax #970-
225-4139.
Number: 100 Created: 8/3/2005
[8/3/05] Judy Green of the Lorimer County Assessor's Office indicated that
according to the site map, this parcel belongs to Lemay Avenue, LLC. Is this
correct? Also, they show a residence built in 1954 with an outbuilding. Are the
buildings staying and, if so, which lot/tract will they be located on? Or have
they been demolished?
Number: 102 Created: 8/3/2005
[8/3/05] All of the lot numbers, consistent with the plat, must be shown on the
Site & Landscape Plans.
Number: 103 Created: 8/3/2005
[8/3/05] There is a short dashed line behind Lot 18 on Sheets 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and
11 of the Site & Landscape Plans. What is this line?
Number: 104 Created: 8/3/2005
[8/3/05] How high is the wooden fence, with stone .& brick columns, along
South Lemay Avenue?.The height is not indicated on Sheets 1, 2, 4, and 6 of the
Site Plans.
Page 2
aSTAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
M. Torgerson Architects Date: 08/03/2005
c/c Troy Jones
223 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO. 80524
Staff has reviewed your submittal for LEMAY AVENUE ESTATES - FINAL
PLANS, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Bike Trail in the Erosion Buffer Zone
Number: 79 Created: 2/17/2005
[8/3/05] Repeat, just for reference.
[2/17/05] Craig Foreman of the Parks Planning Department indicated that the
trail extension (on the Lemay Avenue Estates property) will not be designed nor
constructed by the City of Fort Collins. This is the responsibility of the
development. The trail should be brought to the north property line of Lemay
Avenue Estates, at the northeast corner, and the City will connect from there
to the main trail. This is the typical process used for numerous trail
connections.
Topic: General
Number: 9 Created: 11/4/2004
[8/3/05] Repeat, just for reference.
[2/24/05] Carry-over comment. The trail will now occur between Lots 20 & 210
continuing to the north property line at the northeast corner of this
development. The developer will be responsible for the design and construction
of this trail to the property line, where the City will pick up responsibility.
[11/4/04] Craig Foreman of the City Parks Planning Department has indicated
that the City trail will be located just north of this development on the west
side of Stanton Creek. From Woods Landing Drive, between Lots 21 & 22, the
City should have a 5' wide sidewalk to the north property line for a trail
connection in Tract 0.
Page 1