Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTALEY ELEMENTARY 2001 - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - 7-01A - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)t 10. Please provide flowline, spot, high point, and low point elevations on the Grading Plan to further delineate flow patterns. These are especially needed along the north storm sewer to verify the freeboad between the spill elevations and the finished floor elevation as stated in the report. RESPONSE: 11. Please,submit drainage details. Include details of a trash screen for the water quality outlet, curb cuts, manholes, pans, and riprap. It appears that pans and riprap, though not currently shown, may be needed in some places as shown on the redlined plans. RESPONSE: 12. Please call out all drainage features in the plans. RESPONSE: 13. Please show the drainage features such as storm sewers, curb cuts, inlets, outlets, etc. on the landscape plan. Verify that there are no conflicts of placement such as trees over storm sewers or bushes directly in front of curb cuts. RESPONSE: 14. Please label the City of Fort Collins benchmark used for this project on all applicable plans (9-96). RESPONSE: 15. Please submit a plat of this site. Include drawings and documentation of easements for drainage (please put the water quality pond in its own easement). RESPONSE: Street Plans: 16. Please verify the drainage capacity of Ketcher Road and address any offsite drainage onto the school site or the section of the road in the plans. RESPONSE: StaleyElem-l.doc Page 3 of 4 17. Please verify the hydraulics of the irrigation structure being built to divert the current underground line. Also, please discuss who owns this irrigation ditch and include any necessary signature blocks for the owner(s). RESPONSE: Erosion/Sediment Control Comments: 1. The ideas in the report seem to be on the right track, but these ideas and the BMP's indicated in the report and in the calculations are not translated onto the plan in a manner making them easy to follow in the field. Please correct, and include all the BMP's (e.g. straw mulch, established grass cover) you use on the plan. This plan needs to be spelled out in good detail, because the site is immediately above a sensitive wetland area. RESPONSE: 2. Include standard erosion control notes and project schedule on the plans. RESPONSE: Please refer to the redlined plans and report for additional comments. StaleyElem-1.doc Page 4 of 4 P. 17. Please verify the hydraulics of the irrigation structure being built to divert the current underground line. Also, please discuss who owns this irrigation ditch and include any necessary signature blocks for the owner(s). RESPONSE: Erosion/Sediment Control Comments: The ideas in the report seem to be on the right track, but these ideas and the BMP's indicated in the report and in the calculations are not translated onto the plan in a manner making them easy to follow in the field. Please correct, and include all the BMP's (e.g. straw mulch, established grass cover) you use on the plan. This plan needs to be spelled out in good detail, because the site is immediately above a sensitive wetland area. RESPONSE: 2. Include standard erosion control notes and project schedule on the plans. ... RESPONSE: Please refer to the redlined plans and report for additional comments. StaleyElem-l.doc Page 4 of 4 10. Please provide flowline, spot, high point, and low point elevations on the Grading Plan to further delineate flow patterns. These are especially needed along the north storm sewer to verify the freeboad between the spill elevations and the finished floor elevation as stated in the report. RESPONSE: 11. Please submit drainage details. Include details of a trash screen for the water quality outlet, curb cuts, manholes, pans, and riprap. It appears that pans and riprap, though not currently shown, may be needed in some places as shown on the redlined plans. RESPONSE: 12. Please call out all drainage features in the plans. RESPONSE: 13. Please show the drainage features such as storm sewers, curb cuts, inlets, outlets, etc. on the landscape plan. Verify that there are no conflicts of placement such as trees over storm sewers or bushes directly in front of curb cuts. RESPONSE: 14. Please label the City of Fort Collins benchmark used for this project on all applicable plans (9-96). RESPONSE: 15. Please submit a plat of this site. Include drawings and documentation of easements for drainage (please put the water quality pond in its own easement). RESPONSE: Street Plans: 16. Please verify the drainage capacity of Ketcher Road and address any offsite drainage onto the school site or the section of the road in the plans. RESPONSE: StaleyElem-Ldoc Page 3 of 4 P. A"kI PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: February 26, 2001 TO: Stormwater PROJECT: #7-01A STALEY ELEMENTARY 2001 — SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW All comments must be received by Brian Grubb in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: March 14, 2001 ** Note: This is expedited at the request of Poudre School District. Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference It appears the proposed swale south of the lot is within 20 feet of the low flow bank of McClellands drainage way and may be within the erosion buffer limits. A stability study is needed if improvements like the swale are that close to the bank. Icon performed a study, McClelands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, in October 2000 and can be referenced. Please provide the erosion buffer limits on the plans and relocate any improvements within the boundary. RESPONSE: 2. Please show the 100 and 500-year floodplain boundaries on the plans and plat. The 100-year floodplain can be referenced from the "McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update" by Icon. The 500-year floodplain can be referenced from a study performed by Northern Engineering for the Fossil Lake PUD-2°d Filing project. City Code does state that no critical facilities, such as schools, can be located within the 500-year floodplain. Please contact Glen Schlueter or Wes Lamarque at 416-2418 if you have any questions regarding the above two issues. RESPONSE: Cc- Grin dlorc U;ra+o- Signature 3/30/0 ( CHECK HERE IF YOU WIS TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS �C Plat Site LDrainage Report 1t Other ,,,,.,„7L- Utility LRedline Utility XLandscape City of Fort Collins J 3. If construction is planned within the 100-year floodplain, than a floodplain use permit is required. RESPONSE: 4. If any construction is within the 100-year floodplain, an analysis following the City's floodplain modeling report guidelines would need to be done. The analysis would need to show no rise in WSEL. For any channel modifications, guidelines specified in the McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update would need to be adhered to. Please call Glen Schlueter or Wes Lamarque_at 416-241 8if you have -any questions RESPONSE: 5. Please include the Drainage Plan in the bundle with the rest of the plans. RESPONSE: 6. Please provide calculations verifying the operation of the storm sewers discussed in the report. Also, please submit plan and profile drawings for the storm sewers that meet the requirements of Section 5 of the SDDC. -RESPONSE: 7. Please show the calculations of basin imperviousness for the water quality calculations. Please clarify the constructed wetland basin and its integrated operation with the water quality pond and delineate wetland areas on the plans. RESPONSE: 8. Please submit a variance request for the 3:1 grading shown on the spillway or change it to 4:1. Please consider putting some type of erosion control below it to mitigate for the supercritical flow shown in the calculations. Finally, please clarify the relationship of the outlet works detail shown in the plans to the spillway calculated in the report. Is the outlet part of the spillway, or are these in separate locations? RESPONSE: 9. Please verify that Swale A -A will have capacity for the 1.33Q100 freeboard requirement and call out the slope of all swales in the plans. RESPONSE: StaleyElem-1.doc Page 2 of 4 1. 3. If construction is planned within the 100-year floodplain, than a floodplain use permit is required. RESPONSE: 4. If any construction is within the 100-year floodplain, an analysis following the City's floodplain modeling report guidelines would need to be done. The analysis would need to show no rise in WSEL. For any channel modifications, guidelines specified in the McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update would need to be adhered to. Please call_ Glen Schlueter or Wes Lamarque at 416-2418 if you have any questions --RESPONSE: 5. Please include the Drainage Plan in the bundle with the rest of the plans. RESPONSE: 6. Please provide calculations verifying the operation of the storm sewers discussed in the report. Also, please submit plan and profile drawings for the storm sewers that meet the requirements of Section 5 of the SDDC. -RESPONSE: 7. Please show the calculations of basin imperviousness for the water quality calculations. Please clarify the constructed wetland basin and its integrated operation with the water quality pond and delineate wetland areas on the plans. RESPONSE: I Please submit a variance request for the 3:1 grading shown on the spillway or change it to 4:1. Please consider putting some type of erosion control below it to mitigate for the supercritical flow shown in the calculations. Finally, please clarify the relationship of the outlet works detail shown in the plans to the spillway calculated in the report. Is the outlet part of the spillway, or are these in separate locations? RESPONSE: 9. Please verify that Swale A -A will have capacity for the 1.33Q100 freeboard requirement and call out the slope of all swales in the plans. RESPONSE: StaleyElem-l.doc Page 2 of 4. PROJECT r COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Callins Current Planning DATE: February 26, 2001 TO: Stormwater PROJECT: #7-01A STALEY ELEMENTARY 2001 — SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW All comments must be received by Brian Grubb in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: March 14, 2001 ** Note: This is expedited at the request of Poudre School District. Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference It appears the proposed swale south of the lot is within 20 feet of the low flow bank of McClellands drainage way and may be within the erosion buffer limits. A stability study is needed if improvements like the swale are that close to the bank. Icon performed a study, McClelands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, in October 2000 and can be referenced. Please provide the erosion buffer limits on the plans and relocate any improvements within the boundary. RESPONSE: 2. Please show the 100 and 500-year floodplain boundaries on the plans and plat. The 100-year floodplain can be referenced from the "McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update" by Icon. The 500-year floodplain can be referenced from a study performed by Northern Engineering for the Fossil Lake PUD-2°d Filing project. City Code does state that no critical facilities, such as schools, can be located within the 500-year floodplain. Please contact Glen Schlueter or Wes Lamarque at 416-2418 if you have any questions regarding the above two issues. RESPONSE: Signature �i 3/3 0/ 0 CHECK HERE IF YOU WIS TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS >C Plat vSite LDrainage Report /COther e-p.-j�- Utility Zc Redline Utility XLandscape CC. Arian irr"6 moxc. V; fd.+0. NoLte+4s�«- rt�., City of Fort Collins .i PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Plannine DATE: February 26, 2001 TO: Natural Resources PROJECT: #7-01 A Staley Elementary 2001 — Site Plan Advisory Review All comments must be received by Brian Grubb no later than the staff review meeting: April 23, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference Mc Clelland Channel • The Natural Resources Department is willing to work with the applicant and other City Departments on a collaboration design that will provide an appropriate buffer (suitable for all parties and within the guidelines of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code) and additional required improvements to the channel (including vegetation, drop structures, etc.) On April 23, 2001 we received an Ecological Characterization Study Report for the Project and have the following comments: • The Study has found that the site is potentially suitable habitat for the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse. The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code requires proof of compliance for all state and federal environmental regulations, prior to the scheduling of the public hearing. 3.4.1(0) The Natural Resource Department will need to receive copies of applicable Federal permits or a disqualification letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. • The Ecological Characterization Study also calls out a wetland area adjacent to the McClelland drainage in the southeast portion of the site. The wetland to the southeast measures roughly 1 acre. According to the Ecological Characterization Study, the wetland doesn't appear to have significant value to waterfowl or shorebirds so a buffer area of 100 feet would be required by our code. 3.4.1(E) Please contact Doug Moore at 224-6143 with any questions. Date: q — Z 7 —Q 1 Signature: �/ A RECEIVED STALEY ELE CURRENT PLA ITARY REVIEW SHEI 1. The sidewalk at the main entrance and Kechter Road should be detached with directional access ramps as per the City's street standards. On the opposite side (west) of the main entrance only a single directional ramp heading eastward to the enhanced crosswalk crossing is needed. 2. A 'safe route to school' has been identified to lead into this intersection from the development to the north. In order to cross the children safely to the school and to the future city park, a pedestrian signal will need to be installed (Transportation Planning will confirm location with Traffic Operations). Traffic Operations will design and install the crossing once approved. Funds to be provided by PSD. 3. Create a conceptual trail / sidewalk connection to the southern edge of the school and future street, which includes the shared regional trail. The future street just south of the school will also be utilized as a pick-up and drop-off point for parents increasing the need to make this connection. 4. Align the eastern crosswalk with the eastern side of the Cinquefoil Lane intersection. This will allow the reversible turn lane to be utilized as a pedestrian refuge. 5. Show the conceptual connection(s) to the future neighborhood trail and development to the east of the school. Connection(s) should have a connection to the bike parking facility. Date: Y )7 mod/ X-- fl6w Signature: _. F REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: April 3, 2001 Ji: Park Planning R E C E v E D PROJECT: #Staley Elementary 2001 Site Plan AdvisoDLReview CURRENT p�ANN►"G All comments must be recei�ed;by Brian Grubb in Current Planning no later than the staff iew meeting: April 18, 2001 'Note: Routing time is expedited at the request of Poudre School District. No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** 74� o Polk �GPr21i7Prrhp„ � r��J C/j-��h O/ �cli� CP.r)CI C. Vatc 4- a v dl-a� f�----- CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site _ Drainage Report _ Other Utility _ Redline Utility_ Landscape bate: Signature: REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: April 3, 2001 TO: Zoning PROJECT: #Staley Elementary 2001 Site Plan Advisory Review All comments must be received by Brian Grubb in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: April 18, 2001 "Note: Routing time is expedited at the request of Poudre School District. No Comment ® Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** L4cY c.0 U K O t -. o-Q��f� a��c�v.•--�«'�C.�:_� e.�,,v�-�C.'�-f� � a-�-w;...�•�;.;.r.� ��;� b-�.a�c� wti��'�d; i.N-..tee_ X 3.3.1 64)(3A)� G GJ�01- CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _ Plat _ Site _ Drainage Report _ Other Utility Redline Utility _ Landscape Mate:U - o O / Sianature: a f FORT COLLINS•LOVE AND WATER DISTRICT SOUTH FORT COLLINS SANITATION DISTRICT v Mr. Brian Grubb, Planner City of Fort Collins By P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: #Staley Elementary 2001 Dear Mr. Grubb, The Fort Collins - Loveland Water District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation District have reviewed the,above mentioned project and submit the following comments. Flow detection is required on the proposed Back -Flow -Prevention -Device. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 226-3104, ext. 14, if you have any questions or require additional information. Respectfully, rTe W. Farrill Systems Engineer xc: Mr. Michael D. DiTullio, District Manager Mr. Tom Ochwat, Nolte 5150 Snead Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525 Phone (970) 226-3104 Fax (970) 226-0186 Is 9. As previously noted, the school district will have to obtain a construction, grading and shared access easement from the City's Parks and Recreation Dept. for the school access drive. Please coordinate this easement with Craig Foreman, Parks and Rec. and provide the Engineering Dept. copies of the documents. 10. As redlined on the previous plans, please include a driveway approach detail and an enhanced crosswalk detail. See plans for any additional comments. 11. W N-4'r I S TN e P&RPe s e- OF Tye Ae,oc- /4ce0v6 k-'e'C'tirzroe? hlemv Po ES -r-r .Z—•K��cT W, «e es, O.eooK K���r-�- s c� .e �0.90 �S•oy a / Z_ �p /Vo S SS /fC t-m w 6 AO 1ti R P b #y r Development Review Comments - Page 2 low 1qW PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: April 3, 2001 . DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: Staley Elementary 2001 Site Plan Advisory Review PLANNER: Brian Grubb ENGINEER: Marc Virata All comments must be received by: April 18, 2001 ❑ o Problems Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) Commen : 1. It would appear to be in the PSD's best interests to have documentation in writing for the partnerships on the infrastructure improvements they envision as being done by others. It should be noted that the City has not seen any designs (or substantial designs) for these improvements. It should be noted that the Kechter Road design by TST as well as the use of Williowbrook's waterline for fire protection has not been (re)submitted for review by the City and there are no definite timetables for approval of these designs. 2. Please make all documents 24x36. 3. Provide the necessary right-of-way dedication for Kechter Road (minimum 42' half street width). 4. Provide for 15' of utility easement behind the right-of-way. Because of the irrigation ditch within a portion of the utility easement, the utilities may need additional width beyond 15' to accommodate their needs. Verification should be made from the utilities that 15' is sufficient or additional width is necessary. 5. Coordinate access ramps along Kechter Road and other pedestrian treatments with Transportation Planning's Comments. 6. The 25' radius driveway curb returns need to be reduced to 20' in conformance with the criteria in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. (This should be conveyed to TST for the design of Kechter Road.) 7. Previous redlines indicated maintaining 20' of width for the parent pick-up/drop-off. Please widen the width from 18' to 20'. In addition, this area should be dedicated as an emergency access easement for PFA. 8. Please clarify the relocation of the PVREA powerlines. When will this occur, whose responsibility is this? The following is the original comment: We should discuss the overhead utilityfacilities that traverse and bisect the school site. Per land use code section 3.3.2(D)(7) all overhead facilities shall be placed underground. When you state that the overhead utilityfacilities will be relocated, what does that imply? There are provisions that will allow the overhead facilities to remain (3.3.2(D)(7) (a) — (c)), but 1 am not sure they apply. Date: April 25, 2001 Signature: PLEASE SEND CQPIES OF MARKED REVISION �Plat Site ElOtility Landscape 0 Drainage Report 0 NO COMMENTS -SUBMIT MYLARS lu I reduce the heat island created by the west parking lot. The south parking lot is in compliance with City standards. 5. The primary issue continues to be the fact that the school district is intent upon proceeding with construction prior to having adequate infrastructure and/or prior to having adequate commitments for construction of the infrastructure in place. Please contact me at 970.221.6750 and/or e-mail: bgrubb(a)fcgov.com if you should have any questions or concerns related to these comments. Since��-----��vV v Brian Grubb, AICP City Planner Page 4 of 4 N (3) Light sources shall be concealed and fully shielded and shall feature sharp cut-off capability so as to minimize up -light, spill -light, glare and unnecessary diffusionon adjacent property. (4) The style of light standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of architecture proposed on the site. Poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source. (5) Light sources must minimize contrast with the light produced by surrounding uses, and must produce an unobtrusive degree of brightness in both illumination levels and color rendition. Incandescent and high-pressure sodium light sources all can provide adequate illumination with low contrast and brightness and are permitted light sources. (6) Unique areas or neighborhoods within the city may have additional design guidelines for lighting as part of a neighborhood or area plan. The Community Planning and Environmental Services Department can provide information regarding neighborhood or area plans. Natural areas and natural features shall be protected from light spillage from off -site sources. (7) Maximum on -site lighting levels shall not exceed ten (10) foot-candles, except for loading and unloading platforms where the maximum lighting level shall be twenty (20) foot-candles. (8) Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent to residential uses or public rights -of -way) shall not exceed one -tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct result of the on -site lighting. (9) Outdoor display lots for vehicles sales and leasing (as those terms are defined in Article 5) shall comply with the requirements of this section. In addition, display fixture illumination shall be reduced within thirty (30) minutes after closing so that the remaining illumination levels are sufficient for security purposes only; provided, however, that any illumination used after 11:00 p.m. shall be reduced to levels sufficient for security purposes only. End of Code Section 2. The street trees mentioned in previous comments are still absent from the landscape plan. 3. The site plan still lacks information regarding surrounding properties. The plan should show ownership information, zoning information and label adjacent streets. 4. City standards require a landscape island where there are more than 15 consecutive parking spaces. This is a design feature you might consider to Page 3 of 4 IM landscape, shall be evaluated during the development review process. The following chart gives minimum lighting levels for outdoor facilities used at night. Area/Activity" Foot-candle Building surrounds 1.0 (nonresidential) Bikeways along roadside 0.9 Commercial areas 0.6 Intermediate areas 0.2 Residential areas Walkways along roadside 0.9 Commercial areas 0.6 Intermediate areas 0.5 Residential areas Area/Activity'' Foot-candle Park walkways 0.5 Pedestrian stairways 0.3 Loading and unloading platforms 5.0 Parking areas 1.0 Playground 5.0 "Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) Lighting Handbook (D) Design Standards. The lighting plan shall meet the following design standards: (1) Site lighting that may be confused with warning, emergency or traffic signals is prohibited. (2) Background spaces like parking lots shall be illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the functional needs of safe circulation and of protecting people and property. Foreground spaces, such as building entrances and plaza seating areas, shall utilize local lighting that defines the space without glare. Page 2 of 4 I C imunity Planning and Environr Current Planning Citv of Fort Collins April 27, 2001 Poudre School District Attention: Tammie Simpson 2407 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521-2604 Subject: 2002 Elementary School Advisory Review File # 7-01A Dear Ms. Simpson: ttal Services Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment upon the 2002 Elementary School project. We look forward to working with the School District to ensure that this a project is a positive addition to the City. The following review agencies have submitted comments (attached) regarding the plans submitted for review on April 3, 2001: City of Fort Collins Zoning Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and South Fort Collins Sanitation District City of Fort Collins Park Planning City of Fort Collins Stormwater (From Round 1 March 30th includes redlines) Excel Energy City of Fort Collins Transportation Planning (includes redlines) City of Fort Collins Engineering (includes redlines) Planning Staff has reviewed the plans and we offer the following comments: 1. Please ensure that the lighting complies with City standards as expressed in Section 3.2.4 of the Land Use Code. I recall reviewing a lighting plan with the original submittal; however, the plan did not have enough information to determine compliance. I did not find a lighting plan in the 90 percent submittal. Here are the pertinent city standards, for your convenience. (C) Lighting Levels. With the exception of lighting for public streets, all other project lighting used to illuminate buildings, parking lots, walkways, plazas or the 281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020