HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOUDRE SCHOOL DISTRICT 2004 HIGH SCHOOL - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - 43-01A - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control
90
1. Why has construction on this site begun with no approved plans?
2. The EFF of your plan is supposed to be greater than the PS, otherwise your plan is inadequate and needs to
be rethought. In this case, I think it's the calculations that need to be revisited (you indicate the PS = 94.4
and the EFF = 77.0).
3. The erosion control sheets in the plan need to be labeled as such, not just as grading or drainage plans.
4. What is going to be done in McClellands Channel to protect it from sedimentation while the new box
culvert, pipelines, detention area spillway, outlet pipe, etc are being constructed there?
5. What goes in the bottom of the detention facility in the southeast corner of the site?
6. Is it the intention of the school district to seed the entire disturbed area in native grasses?
7. Is it the intention of the District to install all buildings, parking areas, tennis courts, etc. at once? If not, any
areas not to be constructed or installed immediately must be seeded and mulched as well.
8. Why is the area immediately south of Rock Creek Drive and immediately East of Ziegler Road not shown as
a reseed/mulch area? It is currently much disturbed.
9. If stockpile material is to be placed on Ft Collins Park Site, show erosion control for that as well, or put a
note on the plan indicating that any offsite stockpile is to be protected with silt fencing (or whatever you
choose), then seeded and mulched.
10. Etc.
91
Please analyze the stability of the banks of the channel near the culvert and provide erosion control
measures if necessary.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Tom Reiff
Topic: Street design
83
A full intersection design of Rock Creek and Ziegler Rd. is necessary to determine adequate circulation flow.
Furthermore, intersections that exceed 56' in width are required to have a pedestrian refuge per the Lorimer
County Urban Area Street Standards (Repeat Comment from Round 2). Please provide Transportation
Planning a copy of the complete intersection design.
Department: Zoning
Topic: General
Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
3
In the parking lots, would like to see no more than 15 spaces in a row, with an intervening landscaped island
to break it up. 3.2. 1 (E)(5)(e)
4
On the site plan, please show the light pole locations
5
Show and label handicap ramps at parking areas as well as at intersections
6
Label all building envelopes, distances to property lines
7
Page 8
[4/3] This comment will be left as unresolved until drawings have been submitted.
[7/17] The revisions that were approved for Willow brook still show temporary paving, it
will be the responsibility of the high school to reflect permanent improvements. This
should perhaps be incorporated into the Ziegler Road design which has been removed
from the high school site, as the permanent improvements along Rock Creek Drive can
only be demonstrated to tie into Ziegler Road with a proper design of Ziegler.
37
Just west of the eastern driveway out to Rock Creek Drive and just west of the Rock
Creek Drive/Cambridge intersection, the plan set specifies the installation of Type R
inlets. Again, it would be beneficial to have this reflected on Willow Brook's plan set
before the roadway is constructed without these inlets and street cut penalty fees would
be levied.
[4/3] This comment will be left as unresolved until drawings have been submitted.
[7/15] See Issue 31 with regards to reflecting patching and adding street patching notes.
39
Cambridge Avenue on the Willow Brook plan set adjacent to Willow Brook does not
specify the construction of the 8' parking lane on the west side of the roadway. It would
appear to be beneficial if the entire roadway from curb to curb was built at once with
both sides of the street now being developed. The Willow Brook plan set would need to
be revised to reflect the full width construction. If Willow Brook constructs Cambridge as
currently shown on the plan set, the addition of the parking lane and curb and gutter at a
later date may require saw cut removal of a portion of the then existing roadway in
accordance with street cut criteria and would become more expensive rather than the
construction of the entire roadway at once.
[4/3] This comment will be left as unresolved until drawings have been submitted.
[7/15] Willow Brook revisions have been approved reflecting full -width construction of
Cambridge and showing inlet locations with stationing with a note that the design of the
inlets are to be done by Nolte. The two plan sets use different bearings to determine
locations. Ideally, Nolte's design should verify that the locations are the same.
Otherwise the contractor should have both plan sets on site and verify the locations are
the same prior to any construction.
48
[RD 01 ] The driveway out to Cambridge shows 30' corner radii. 15' corner radii are the
maximum allowed to intersect a collector street in accordance with the Larimer County
Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). A variance request to the City Engineer is
required to vary the standards. Because this driveway was not intended for normal
school bus operations and the smaller radii would decrease speeds at this intersection,
Page 5
Please review number of bike parking spaces. With all of the recreational amenities at the school, there may
be a need for more bicycle parking
8
Note building height on the elevations
9
Provide street trees along Zeigler rd.
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.
Yours Truly,
TED SHEPARD
City Planner
Page 9
[7/17] Preliminary legals were provided, however this will be left as unrresolved while
issues regarding Ziegler are worked out.
74
Please ensure that the plans by indicating and shading distinguishes between:
-proposed by PSD (solid)
-existing (faded)
-proposed by Village Homes (dashed?)
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
Topic: General
12
Required Access: A fire lane is required. the fire lane shall be visible by painting and signoge, and maintained
unobstructed. 97 UFC 901.2.2.1; 901.3; 901.4.2;902.2.1
13
Address Numerals: Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the
property, and posted with a minimum of 6-inch numerals on a contrasting background.
97 UFC 901.4.4
14
Water Supply: A fire hydrants is required to be within 300 feet of the building. A
maximum spacing of 600 feet is required along an approved roadway. Each hydrant
must be capable of delivering 1500 gpm with a residual pressure of 20 psi. 97 UFC
901.2.2.2
15
Fire Sprinklers: This proposed building shall be required to be fire sprinklered. Note:
Poudre Fire authority requires a "Knox Box" to be mounted on the front of every new
building equipped with a fire sprinkler system or fire alarm system.
16
Fire Alarm: A fire alarm system shall be required for this proposed project.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Drainage
75
Repeat 6/12/02 - The future commercial lot (sub -basin 500) does not have a designated outfall for when it
develops. Please provide an outfall from within the high school site to the future property line of the
commercial lot. See sheet DROI.
78
Repeat 6/12/02 - Please document how the flow was obtained in the swale at design point 308. See
inage report.
82
Repeat 6/12/02 - The storm sewers in the private drives need to be in a 20-foot drainage easement, or have
the street be public. This is needed due to the main storm sewer down the private drive conveying flows for
the future offsite drainage.
Page 7
the City's Transportation group does not see a compelling reason to allow for the larger
radii.
[4/3] In response to the variance request submitted by Nolte on 3/11/02, the City
Engineer has issued a letter dated 4/3/2002. This states that the City Engineer does not
support the use of 30' corner radii for the driveway out to Cambridge and will only
support 15' radii for the driveway entrances as required under LCUASS.
[7/17] The plans reflect this directive with the exception of a 25' radius is proposed at the
northwest corner of Cambridge and the private drive. 15' is required per the directive
from the City_ Enigneer.
51
[RD 02-03] The design of Ziegler Road needs cross -sections at 50-foot intervals in order
to verify that a constant cross -slope is being maintained from the existing edge of
pavement to the proposed. Please use centerline stationing for the cross sections and
have the centerline stationing shown on these sheets in order to form a basis of
comparison between the cross -sections, saw cut line and flowline.
[4/3] The submitted cross sections need additional labels:
-elevation at the flowline
-cross slope of existing roadway
-cross slope of new road section
It should be demonstrated with this additional information that the additional road
widening results in a cross slope that is equal to or greater than the existing cross slope,
though not exceeding 3% as required under LCUASS.
[7/15] Issues regarding Ziegler Road are left as unresolved, though it is understood that
Ziegler Road is to be removed from the high school site.
89
See redlines for Ziegler Road design issues. This was not reviewed extensively due to
outstanding issues on the design and the removal of Ziegler from the plan set at this
time.
Topic: Utility Plan
25
[UT 01-02] Ther does-noi pea"o-be-exi i ht-of-way along the eastern part of
JZ'eeoacomplete the roadway improvement started wit a
Creek. Please provide the necessary deeds of dedication and legal descriptions to
dedicate the right-of-way. Ideally, these deeds of dedication should be submitted to tr
City prior tom lar signatures. (Please note that there are still deeds of dedication that
,have not been given to Staley Elementary School site.)
[4/3 & 6/28] This comment is left as unresolved until the deeds and legals are provided.
Page 6
2) have the area fully designed at this time, showing spot elevations of the parking lot
and driveway, patching to the edge of the bikelane and through lane, specify a cross
pan is applicable, etc.
In either situation an excavation permit will be required to be obtained from City
Engineering prior to any construction.
87
A Type III barricade is needed at the northern termination of Cambridge construction
defined by the plan set if construction is ahead of Willow Brook. Please indicate the
requirment of a Type III barricade and provide a detail (CDOT S-630-2) on the plan set.
88
The street striping of Cambridge at Kechter does not work from the standpoint that the
combined left turn/through lane would line up directly with the left turn lane across the
street. Please reconfigure the striping with the bike lane along the outside edge, a
combined through/right lane, and a center left turn lane. In the future, please include the
existing/approved striping across the street of any intersection to help determine offset
and alignment issues.
Topic: Street design
31
Both driveways out to Rock Creek Drive are not reflected on the approved Willow Brook
plans. Ideally, the Willow Brook plans should be revised to reflect the driveways in order
to prevent construction by Willow Brook without the drive entrances -- street cut penalty
fees would be levied if the driveway cuts were made later.
[4/3] It was agreed that these driveways would be designed on Nolte plans and left off
TST drawings. Care must be exhibited when making the driveway cuts as street cut
penalty fees would be levied if damage to the asphalt occurs.
[7/17] The plans should indicate street patching in front of the driveway (as well as
where inlets and access ramps are being shown) with limits to between the through lane
and bikelane. Add note to reference these: "Limits of street repair are approximate.
Final limits to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to
be in accordance with City Street repair standards." This comment is made with the
understanding that patching may not be needed and street penalty fees may not be
assessed if the construction of the driveway, inlets, and access ramps can be made
without impact to the pavement.
35
The eastern leg of Rock Creek Drive along the Ziegler Road/Rock Creek Drive
intersection was not designed by Willow Brook as a permanent improvement and was
designed with temporary paving to transition into the existing portion of Ziegler Road.
The utility plans should show an ultimate design of this area, which ties into the
improvements proposed on Ziegler Road.
Page 4
Deciduous trees with trunks large enough to obstruct line of sight for motorists shall be
removed by the owner.
For non -level areas these requirements shall be modified to provide the same degree of
visibility.
[4/3] The response from the Enigneer states that the creation of a 3-way stop at this
intersection causes the sight distance easement to be removed. This is not the case. A
sight distance easement is required regardless of any traffic control devices at an
intersection and is still required here.
[7/17] The sight distance easement is reflected with the typical sight distance easement
language revised, this was satisfactory to Traffic Engineering and therefore the revised
language is okay to remain. A sight distance easement deed of dedication is required to
be dedicated for this sight distance.
61
The private drive that connects Cambridge Avenue with Ziegler Road needs to be
dedicated as an emergency access easement for emergency access. In addition,
because this roadway is shared with the future park development, the roadway should
also be dedicated as a public access easement to allow legal public access. A legal
description with a deed of dedication to the City of Fort Collins as a public access and
emergency access easement should be submitted prior to mylar sign off on the plan set.
[4/3] In conversation with the Parks Department, they are supportive of this private drive
needing to be dedicated as an access and emergency access easement. Again, these
documents should be submitted prior to mylar sign off on the plan set.
[7/17]This deed of dedication is required prior to sign off on the plan set.
84
The pump house now being shown with a driveway off of Cambridge results in a sight
distance issue. Please provide legal descriptions and an exhibit of this area which will
need to be reserved because the sight distance is within City property.
85
Coordinate the access ramp locations along Cambridge with the Willow Brook plan set.
There are access ramps shown on the high school site that weren't provided on the
Cambridge Road design of Willow Brook.
86
With the eastern driveway off Rock Creek Drive no longer proposed but indicated as
future, the plan set should either:
1) note that revisions to the plan set are required to be reviewed and approved by the
City prior to any construction of the future parking area; or
Page 3
71
It should be verified what the utility needs are around the bridge structure, what amount
of sleeving needs to be specified and whether utility easement is required outside of the
right-of-way at the bridge structure. A utility coordination meeting is recommended to
evaluate utility needs and ensure that the proper information is specified on the plan set.
This should also include ensuring that irrigation lines are extended for irrigation of the
landscape strip at the structure.
[7/17] Was this done with the pre -con that was done a month ago?
72
The sidewalk across the bridge structure needs to be widened out to 6' in order to meet
separation requirements from a fixed structure. A transition should be shown from the 5'
to the 6'.
[7/17) This was not addressed.
Topic: General
49
[RD 01, Site and Landscape Plan] A sight distance easement is needed for the driveway
entrance off Cambridge Avenue in accordance with LCUASS Standard Drawing 7-16.
This is sketched out on the Landscape Plan. Please show this easement on the site,
landscape, and utility plans, provide the standard note below regarding sight distance
and provide the necessary deed of dedication to the City to record the easement.
Please note the vertical requirements of a sight distance easement, including how
fences are required to be no greater than 42 inches in height and do not obstruct the
line of sight for motorists; there is a vertical crest along the travel of Cambridge in
between the start of the sight distance easement and the driveway entrance that. The
ballfield fence may need to be less than 42 inches in order to maintain the proper
degree of visibility. Also note that conifer trees are not allowed in a sight distance
easement and thus requires changes to the landscape plan.
----------Add the following note to the site, landscape and utility plans ----------------
Sight Distance Easement - The sight distance easement is an easement required by the
City at some street intersections where it is necessary to protect the line of sight for a
motorist needing to see approaching traffic and to react safely for merging their vehicle
into the traffic flow. The following are requirements for certain objects that may occupy
a sight distance easement for level grade:
(1) Structures and landscaping within the easement shall not exceed 24 inches in height
with the following exceptions:
(a) Fences up to 42 inches in height may be allowed as long as they do not obstruct the
line of sight for motorists.
(b) Deciduous trees may be allowed as long as all branches of the trees are trimmed so
that no portion thereof or leaves thereon hang lower than six (6) feet above the ground,
and the trees are spaced such that they do not obstruct line of sight for motorists.
Page 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
Nolte Assoc. Date: 7/17/2002
Tom Ochwat
1901 Sharp Point Dr.
Ft. Collins, CO 80524
Staff has reviewed your submittal for POUDRE SCHOOL DISTRICT 2004 HIGH SCHOOL -
SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW, #43-01 A, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES: P�
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Bridge Structure
63
A design of the boxes across Cambridge is required on the utility plan drawings with
structural calculations from a structural engineer prior to sign off on the plan set.
[4/3] Structural calcs have not been received. The structural calcs are required to be in
the form of a sufficiency rating as specified in LCUASS 11.2.2.
[7/15] Structural calcs may need to be revised with issues regarding the design of the
bridge structure outstanding.
69
There is a concern on the culvert design regarding the drainage flow as it approaches
the structure. The direction of flow is not perpendicular to the culverts, this combined
with the grading of the channel prior to the culvert raises a potential concern of scouring
at the structure and compromising the integrity of the structure. Why can't the channel
be graded to be less circuitous to reduce potential scouring at the structure and the
structure designed to be perpendicular to the flow? Additional measures to reduce
scouring (rip -rap) may need to be investigated. The structural calcs previously
mentioned should also address this potential scouring issue.
[7/15] Stormwater is doing further analysis of this issue.
70
Additional right-of-way along Cambridge will be needed along the east side to include all
of the bridge structure (the additional right-of-way is evidently not needed on the west
side as it is now owned by the City?)
With this area being within City property, right-of-way dedication is not required.
However, area needs to be reserved as notice in lieu of dedication of right-of-way.
Please provide a legal description and picture sketch of the expanded area on both
sides of the structure. (4' beyond the wing walls is needed.)
Page 1