HomeMy WebLinkAboutBANK OF COLORADO - FDP - 16-03A - CORRESPONDENCE -Additionally, the pond bottom slope is very flat, it is recommended that the pond seed mix
be chosen appropriately to accommodate wet conditions.
Topic: Plat
Number: 117 Created: 7/30/2004
[7/30/04] Please provide a copy of the plat with next round as none were routed to me.
Topic: Pond Retaining Wall
Number: 110 Created: 4/23/2004
(7/30/04]
[4/23/04] Please provide a detail for the proposed retaining wall on the south pond.
Topic: Seeding
Number: 108 Created: 4/23/2004
[7/30/04] Please provide native seeding rather than sod for the area in front of the inlet on
Lincoln. May need to be temporarily irrigated until establishment.
[4/23/04] Please provide some seeding for the areas between the edge of the asphalt to the
edge of the sidewalk on the Lincoln and Lemay frontage.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Utility Plan
Number: 106 Created: 4/21 /2004
[7/27/04] Repeat comment.
[4/21/04] Include a note to pothole existing 12-inch ELCO water main at the 8-inch water
main crossing and to provide pothole info to city Utilities and design engineer for evaluation
prior to construction.
Number: 114 Created: 7/27/2004
[7/27/04] Modify grading to provide flat area for fire hydrant and meter pit at west end of
detention pond.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill
Topic: Utility Plan
Number: 74 Created: 10/22/2003
[7/27/04] Still need details for traffic rated sewer service clean -out and cathodic protection
isolation.
[4/20/04]
[1 /28/04]
[10/22/03] Provide all appropriate details on the detail sheet (ie meter pit, water line
lowering, CP isolation, etc.). Remove any and all reference to Rodding on the city water line
lowering detail
See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments.
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.
Page 5
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Harridan
Topic: Details
Number: 116 Created: 7/30/2004
[7/30/041
Please provide a detail for the Type 13 inlet proposed at inlet 6-1.
Will the construction of this inlet fit within this property without needing any easement from
the property to the east ?
Topic: Erosion Control
Number: 115
[7/30/04]
Fifth Review
July 26, 2004
Created: 7/30/2004
1. Please delete all of the notes on your plan sheet #2 under "Grading and Erosion
Control Notes".
2. What BMP's are to be used to protect against sediment transport during construction of
the 36" storm line in Lincoln Ave?
3. The plan sheet 6 has a note indicating that "40.0 foot install sod from asphalt to
sidewalk for erosion protection." What does this mean? How is the area to be protected
from erosion prior to the sidewalk and asphalt installation? Is it just in the small area inside
the lines where the note is? Etc.
4. Please put a project schedule on plan sheet 6 or 7 indicating when various BMP's are
to be installed in relation to various construction events (e.g. grading, concrete installation,
etc.). Use Month 1, 2, 3, not specific months (April, May, etc.) for the timeline.
5. Where does the straw mulch indicated in your calculations go?
6. The surety calculation is incorrect, reseeding cost is now $775 per acre for less than 5
acres, $725 per acre for over 5 acres. Also, your plan shows bale outlet protection on the
ponds which aren't included in the calls.
Topic: Floodplain Comments
Number: 61 Created: 10/21 /2003
[7/30/04]
2. Show limits of the floodplain on the plat.
3. please submit separately the final signed floodplain use permit with the $ 25 fee to the
floodplain administrator.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 85
[7/30/04]
The north detention pond looks rather bare.
pond.
Created: 1 /20/2004
Please provide some landscaping within that
Page 4
Topic: Street design
Number: 10 Created: 6/2/2003
(7127/04] Repeat.
[4/16/04] Several, but not all, of the spot elevations required as depicted on Drawing 7-32B
were provided for the northeast quadrant of the Lincoln-Lemay intersection. Please add the
missing elevations so that it can be seen whether the design for the intersection in its
ultimate condition will work.
[1/27/04] Again, please provide additional information regarding the northeast portion of the
intersection of Lincoln and Lemay in the form of spot elevations and additional cross -
sections. More information is needed to determine whether the area will drain properly,
especially now that it is shown that the flowline along Lemay is to be raised in elevation.
[10/23/03] This design shown needs to connect to the existing design for.Lincoln. Please
provide station equations and ensure that the designs work together. Also, please provide
additional information regarding the northeast portion of the intersection of Lincoln and
Lemay in the form of spot elevations and additional cross -sections. More information is
needed to determine whether the area will drain properly.
Original comment:
Please provide the full design (detailed, not preliminary) of Lincoln along the property's
frontage, including the full lengths of the turn lanes that stretch east of the property. Beyond
this, to the east, please show the horizontal alignment as a possible future alignment of
Lincoln, to be designed by others, and remove the vertical design as well.
Number: 102 Created: 4/16/2004
[7/27/04] This data was not provided.
[4/16/04] Please provide additional data on Lincoln as discussed in this morning's meeting
(4.16.04). See redlines.
Number: 103 Created: 4/16/2004
[7/27/04] The revision sheet provided doesn't quite match the flowline data shown on sheet
11. Please revise.
(4/16/04] As discussed in this morning's meeting, revisions need to be made to the
previously approved CLC plans for Lemay to correct problems with the Lemay centerline
profile. (Sheet CS 11.12, last revised 6.6.01)
Number: 111 Created: 7/27/2004
[7/27/04] Please show proposed limits of street cut/mill/overlay for addition of median on
Lincoln. Please submit a variance request for the separation of the driveway on Lincoln to
the Lincoln/Lemay intersection. The previously approved variance only addressed the
driveway on Lemay.
Number: 112 Created: 7/27/2004
[7/27/04] Please re -include the ultimate cross -sections for Lincoln.
Number: 113 Created: 7/27/2004
[7/27/04] Sheet 1 la- the new centerline design should tie into the existing centerline design
- the elevation at sta 47+50.92 should match the previously approved plans (4942.22).
Page 3
[1/27/04] The section of unpaved area along Lincoln between the EOA and the sidewalk
contains a low point, and it appears that a Type R inlet is proposed to drain this low, point. In
the interim, this inlet should be changed to an area inlet with interim grading shown to drain
to it.
Topic: Plat
Number: 54 Created: 10/20/2003
[7/27/04] Repeat:
[4/16/04] You are correct in that the existing ROW is not within your legal description
boundary, but you still need to label how the existing ROW for Lincoln and Lemay (outside
of your boundary) was originally dedicated.
[1/27/04] This applies to all portions of Lemay and Lincoln ROW dedicated along the
property's frontage, not just the triangle at the comer. How were the rest of Lemay and
Lincoln dedicated?
[10/20/03] Please show how the ROW for Lemay and Lincoln was dedicated (book and
page, reception number, etc).
Number: 55 Created: 10/20/2003
[7/27/04] Too little ROW is proposed to be dedicated on Lincoln. This round shows a
significantly smaller amount than all previous rounds of review. The Land Use Code
(3.6.1.6) requires compliance with the City's Master Street Plan, which shows Lincoln as a 4
lane arterial (minimum 115' ROW, excluding right turn lanes or special conditions) for Bank
of Colorado's frontage, and further east. The MSP also shows that Lincoln will shift from a
south -curving road to a north curving road in this vicinity. To accommodate this, as required
by the LUC, the Bank of Colorado needs to dedicate ROW for the future alignment of
Lincoln. Assuming that the Section Line to the south of the development will be the future
centerline of Lincoln (since it is pretty much the centerline of Lincoln as it crosses Lemay),
and taking into account the variance for the street cross-section previously approved (a 7'
attached walk, which is one foot wider than the standard walk, and a 12' right turn lane
attached to that walk, which is 2' wider than the standard parkway), this project needs to
dedicate the standard ROW (57.5', or half of 115% plus 3' for the abovementioned items,
making a total of 60.5' of ROW dedicated from the section line. It appears that previous
rounds of review showed the correct ROW to be dedicated along Lincoln (see previous
utility, site and landscape plans). Please revise and resubmit.
Variances were granted for this project based on the ROW shown on previous utility and site
and landscape plan sets. These variances may need to be revisited if less ROW is now
proposed.
[4/16/04] The ROW dedication on the plat still does not appear to match the other plans.
Please read the comments below and address them.
[1/27/04] The ROW dedication shown on the plat does not match the other plans. As
shown on the utility plans, the new ROW dedication should be measured from the section
line as opposed to the center line of Lincoln, since Lincoln Avenue is slated on the City's
master street plan to veer north instead of south as it heads east of this property.
[10/20/03] Please clearly identify and dimension the existing ROW and the proposed ROW
for both Lincoln and Lemay.
Page 2
6aSTAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
DOBERSTEIN & LEMBURG Date: 08/02/2004
DAN BERNTH
702 W. DRAKE RD. #B102
FT. COLLINS, CO 80526
Staff has reviewed your submittal for BANK OF COLORADO PDP - TYPE I (LUC) AND
FINAL COMPLIANCE (LINCOLN EAST #40-94), and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic: General
Number: 33 Created: 6/6/2003
[7/27/04) [4/16/04] [1/27/04] [10/21/03] Repeat fyi.
Original comment:
Please see redlines for any additional comments.
Number: 99 Created: 4/16/2004
[7/27/04] Repeat: the site plan and utility plans should clearly label the new ROW and
should provide a dimension for the ROW being dedicated, including a measurement from
the Section line.
(4/16/04] Please clearly show on all plans (except the landscape plan) that the same ROW
is being dedicated. Measurements from section line should be provided. Currently, the
ROW dedications do not match on all the plan sets.
Number: 100 Created: 4/16/2004
[7/27/04] Repeat:
[4/16/04] This comment was previously included on redlines, but not in written comments,
and was not addressed: The sidewalk along Lincoln should be transitioned to be detached
at the property's eastern property line. See redlines for clarification.
Number: 101 Created: 4/16/2004
[7/27/04] The emergency access easement is now being shown, but it still includes curb,
gutter, and landscaped areas. Please revise the emergency access easement to include
only the applicable drive aisles.
[4/16/04] Please show the emergency access easement on the overall utility plan and the
site plan. The easement should exclude landscaped areas and curb.
Topic: Grading Plan
Number: 93 Created: 1 /27/2004
[7/27/04] A detail for the inlet is still needed for its interim condition. Please show how the
5' curb and gutter transitions will work.
[4/16/04] Please provide additional detail for this inlet to address erosion control concerns.
The gutter should be constructed in front of the inlet, plus five foot transitions on both sides
of the inlet (east and west), and the areas between EOA and the sidewalks on Lincoln and
Lemay should be seeded.
Page I