Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPEAK VIEW SUBDIVISION - PDP (RE-SUBMITTAL) - 26-00 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)122 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Place sanitary sewer service stationing on the plan views which are located on the plan and profile sheets. 123 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill All profiles must be corrected to show utility crossings, correct inverts, stations, lengths, etc. 124 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Provide lowering details for all watermain lowerings. 125 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Include the following details on the detail sheets: concrete joint encasement, 3/4"-1" meter pit and manhole adjustment Department: Zoning 109 Issue Contact: Gary Lopez 1. Zoning requires parking stall dimensions shown either as typicals or on one stall of each parking lot. 110 Issue Contact: Gary Lopez 2. Zoning requires that overall height (to ridge) be shown on elevations. 111 Issue Contact: Gary Lopez 3. Phasing is a bit confusing but I would interpret that phase is both to the north & south of phase 2 - would be correct? 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 16 179 Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Combined bike/ped trail crosses Pleasant Valley Road to park at T intersection. What crosswalk treatment is planned for here? Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Provide required landscape/ utility separation distances on the landscape plans. Show all water and sewer lines on the landscape plans. 3 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Provide meter pits for all duplex and larger units 116 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Field locate, show and label all existing utilities in West Elizabeth Street. Connection of proposed 8-inch watermain must be made on existing 8-inch CFC high pressure watermain in Elizabeth Street. Clearly define this and provide pothole information for existing 12-inch CFC water main along south side of Elizabeth. Will a lowering of the proposed 8-inch watermain be needed at this location? Provide an enlarged view of the intersection of Elizabeth and Peakview Drive showing all utilites. 117 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Water services may not be located in driveways. 118 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Provide 10 feet minimum separation between thrust blocks and other underground utilites. 119 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Show proposed routing of gas and electric through this site. Is a utility coordination meeting needed for this development? 120 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Show and label all meter pits and curb stops. Draw meter pits to scale and provide a 4 foot minimum separation between the outside wall of meter pits and all permanent structures 121 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Place all manholes on the centerline of the streets when at all possible. Page 15 7. The Peak View Drive crosses the PV&L; please include an analysis and documentation of the effects of this crossing on the PV&L - a hydraulic analysis using HEC-2 or HEC-RAS. 8. Please include a discussion in the text on the realignment of the PV&L and include the realignment on the drawings. 9. Hydrology appendix, please provide more documentation pertaining to the development of the rating curve for the pond, such as, pipe inverts, diameter, drawings with contours and pipe dimensions, length, elevation -discharge data, elevation -volume data, combined discharge -volume data, etc. Please document the release rate from the pond; the master plan has provided guidance for this area. 10. SWMM appendix, please discuss the changes to the original SWMM in the text and provide a SWMM schematic which represents the changes and flow of stormwater (the current schematic does not). Please ensure the rating curve input agrees with the documentation and the output provides values within the input rating curve. 11. Page 2, please provide documentation and more explanation in the text for the values, 160 and 140 cfs, and 5117 feet in elevation. It is assumed they are from the PV&L hydraulic analysis, however it is not readily apparent. Also include any other assumptions or detailed information used in the design of the emergency spillway. Basically, provide more detail and design documentation and calculations. It is important the text more clearly discuss and document the outfall from the detention pond and an emergency spill structure on the PV&L directed to the Clearview channel/ponds. 12. Please provide a complete drawing of the outfall from the PV&L to the Clearview Ponds, including a profile. 152 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Erosion/Sediment Control Comments 1. One or more City Stormwater required elements of an erosion/sediment control report and plan are missing. Please correct and resubmit. Department: Transportation Planning 177 Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Please provide cross sections of Andrews Peak Dr. & Pleasant Valley Rd 178 Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Site plan shows sidewalks crossing numerous drive aisles. What if any treatment is planned for these? Painted markings? Plain? Enhanced? Page 14 147 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 16. Please provide details for all drainage facilities in the plans. 148 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 17. Please provide an emergency spillway for the detention pond(s) and clearly show the spillway(s) on the grading and drainage plans. 149 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 18. Please include the entire off -site basin that contributes flows from the southwest corner of the site on Pleasant Valley Road in the hydrology and other calculations (inlet, pipe size, etc.) calculations. Please show entire basin delineation on drainage plan. 150 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 19. Since the Siena PUD did not anticipate flows entering their site from this project, all the flows at design points I and J need to be captured. Please provide larger (or more efficient) inlets at this location or create a sump in the street to allow all the flows to be captured. Could not verify flow from hydrology calculations. DP 5 states 9.77 cfs in table, while only 2.8 cfs is shown on the Udlnlet calculations. 151 SWMM Comments: Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 1. Please ensure a professional engineer signs and stamps the cover letter for the report. 2. page 1, please include in the site description that the site is in the Canal Importation Drainage Basin. Also include in this section, the site is not in a City regulated floodplain. 3. page 2, please explain the last sentence in the third paragraph of the existing conditions section - .....masterplan describes the flow as being immediately upstream of the site". 4. page 2, in the developed conditions section, please provide more discussion on why the canal is overtopping - how was this determined? Also, please include more discussion on the background and purpose of the emergency overflow structure and sluice in the PV&L. Include the location of the structure on the drawing. 5. page 3, it was assumed this submittal was to have been the final design; however, the statement in the second sentence does not indicate this. Please explain. 6. page 3, please remove the sentences referring to Arapahoe County and Park Meadows; and provide documentation and design calculations if using the COE construction techniques - otherwise remove this reference as well. Page 13 needs to be installed here please include the top and bottom of wall elevations. Please include a detail of the box and invert elevations at the crossing. 138 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 7. Please include a section in the report for signed copies of all easements (grading) obtained. Please also include a copy of the approval letter from the ditch company stating they are ok with ditch modification. 139 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 8. Please provide profiles and calculations for all storm sewers. Outfall storm sewer will be checked once revised design is completed. 140 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 9. The grading in the pond on sheet 6 does not match the calculations given in the report. Please finalize the grading and or calculations. Also, grading around the pond does not match spot elevations and contour lines seem to be missing. 141 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 10. Please calculate.the time of concentration in the rational method by separating the overland flow time and gutter travel time per section 3.1.7 of the SDDC. 142 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 11. The Lot Grading around the single family lots has slopes greater than the allowed 4:1 slopes. Some slopes are as great as 1:1. Please revise to 4:1 or 3:1 with requesting a variance. 143 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 12. Please correct the elevation for City of Fort Collins vertical control benchmark 22-97. 144 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 13. Please provide a detention pond summary on the drainage plan including 100-year WSEL, release rate, and volume for all sub -basins. 145 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 14. Please provide details for the detention pond water quality outlet structure. 146 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 15. Has backf low from the ditch spills been considered in the detention pond design? Will a backflow preventor be needed? Please address these issues with the detention pond and spill structure design. Page 12 Department: Stormwater Utility 132 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 1. Please revise the outfall from this site and show on all plans. The park pond is not located where it is shown on the drawings and the smaller storm sewer on the west end of the site needs to tie into the 54-inch storm sewer and be routed to the park pond as well. Also, is the park pond being expanded to accommodate the undetained flows from the site. Please discuss in the text of the drainage report. Also, the 54-inch storm sewer is labeled as 36-inch on the storm sewer profiles. 133 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 2. Please revise and clarify hydrology calculations for all of the sub -basins. The basin areas do not match what is on plans and are inconsistent between one chart to another. Also, there seems to be four (4) basins that free release into the park site, which would result in higher undetained flows than are presented. The design points on the drainage plan do not seem to match the tables as well. 134 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 3. Please revise relationship between proposed site and park ponds. The two surveys are not aligned properly resulting in an inaccurate alignment for the outfall storm sewer. Also, please revise and show the outfall storm sewer on all plans that are applicable. 135 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 4. Please provide written explanations in the text or the appendices of what changes have been made (if any) to the SWMM and HEC-2 models in the report. If either of these models have been modified, please provide documentation on what changes have been made. Also, please include a revised SWMM map and schematic and HEC- 2 cross-section map. Also, as mentioned in the e-mail from Sue Paquette, the spillway design will need to be incorporated in the UNET model to determine the spillway's effect on the system as a whole and prove you are not creating a problem further upstream or downstream. 136 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 5. Please include a discussion of water quantity in the beginning of the report. Explain how the pond is being over detained to make up for the free release into the park by the southern part of the site. Water quality extended detention may be mitigated by the existing wetlands in the Park for the southern part of the site. Please explain in report water quality for southern part of site and provide calculations for the volume of water quality required for the north and south site areas. 137 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque 6. It appears that there will be grading that occurs over the existing channel. The tie-ins for this portion of the grading will need to be more clearly defined. If a retaining wall Page 11 Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6-inch numeral on a contrasting background. 97 UFC 901.4.4 NOTE: 1) One address per multiplex cluster on the East side of Peak View Drive (2) posted next to main sidewalk visible from the street. 10-inch minimum. 2) Each multiplex shall have an alphabetical designation (A,B,C... ) per building. 10-inch minimum. 3) Each individual unit shall have a numerical designation with 6-inch minimum. Example: 1234 Peak View Drive Building A Unit #101 113 Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Water Supply: No commercial building can be greater then 300 feet from a fire hydrant. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 600 feet along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1500 gallons of water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. 114 Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Street Name: Street names shall be verified and reviewed by LETA and the City Planning Department prior to being put into service. 97 UFC 901.4.5 115 Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Required Access: A fire lane is required. The fire lane shall be visible by painting and signage, and maintained unobstructed. 97 UFC 901.3; 901.4.2; 902.2.1 Department: Police 126 Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Lighting: Would like to see security/safety lighting (lighting plan). Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Landscape Plan: This is one of the best plans we have reviewed! For most part, p are low around entries and foundations or provide a "hostile" design well suited to detering trespass. There are a few areas where plant selection may afford criminal/security issues (Lot 1). Page 10 The Pcr elevations on the north flowline do not match the profile. Per the profile it doesn't appear that a cross pan is needed in this intersection. The profiles and the detail do not match. 174 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff see plans for additional comments180 Sheri Wamhoff Issue Contact: Make the changes shown to the general notes: fill in the drainage study title and information, provide a second benchmark Department: Light & Power 108 Issue Contact: Doug Martine 1. Electric facilities need to be shown on the utility plan. The developer's reply to previous comments (their reply #6) states "electric facilities and easements have been incorporated on the utility plans." A utility plan was not included in this review set, however the electric facilities could not be on it because L&P hasn't designed the system. The developer needs to contact L&P engineering to initiate the design. There is a $50.00 per lot deposit required before the electric system is designed. This deposit will be credited to the electric developoment charges if the final plan doesn't require a re -design of the electric system. 175 Issue Contact: Doug Martine The storm sewer along the south side of Pleasant Valley Rd. must be relocated to provide space for electric that will be between the walk & curb. 176 Issue Contact: Doug Martine Streetlights, electric vaulte & transformer (shown on copy of landscape plan sent to Ted Shepard 10-12-01 via inter -office mail) must be shown on the landscape plan. The tree locations must be adjusted on the plan to provide 40 ft. of clearance to streetlights and 5 ft. to vaults & transformers. Department: Natural Resources 153 Issue Contact: Doug Moore No Outstanding Issues - Natural Resources will have follow up Development Agreement Language. Department: PFA 112 Address Numerals: Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Page 9 Per section 7.4.2 the min x-slope is 1.5% and the max x-slope is 4% and new x-slope shall be no less than the existing x-slope. This is not being met. this project is eligible for street oversizing reinbursement for the street work in the center of the roadway (beyond the local street portion) if the roadway is built to the ultimate street design. (ie if the road will not have to be rebuilt or torn out when the improvements go in on the north). We need the future north flowline design to determine what the road x-sections will be to determine how the x-sections will meet standards and how that impacts the existing pavement out there so we can determine what needs to be done to the road. 168 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans eliz x-sections Provide information as indicated in section 3.3.4.0 and indicated below: show row lines, show sidewalk placement and width, show future north flowline and sidewalk location, show future slope on the north side, show where you tie into existing pavement - this will need to fall on a lane line or in the center of a lane, and show what is new pavement, what existing pavement is to be removed and what the limits of any mill and overlay are. 169 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans striping transition the travel lanes south and use the marked out area as a bike lane on the north. This will keep the southern lane in a straight path with only the northern travel lane transitioning over. 170 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans intersection details - eliz/peak view Have a low undrainable spot in the intersection. 171 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans intersection details - eliz/peak view the per elevations do not match the profile 172 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans intersection details - Provide elevations at the intersection transition point. 173 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans intersection details -peak view/ pleasent valley Page 8 Elzabeth south flowline design - have slopes that do not meet min requirements and vertical curbs that do not meet min length requirements. 159 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utiltiy plans Need to provide curb return information for both intersections. 160 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans need to show which areas are to be concrete at the culvert structure and how this is to be treated (ie is it to be patterned or colored) 161 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans West end of pleasenet valley - it looks like you are narrowing the roadway. What are the widths here? If necessary use a VERY large radius to tie into existing improvments. you now have a kink in the roadway where you tie into existing improvements. Are the off site improvemetns shwon within the existing row? 162 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans Provide a type III barricade at the end of the sidewalk improvements. 163 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans What is the cover above the storm lines? Per section 12.2.2 utilities are to be at least 2 ft below the scarified subgrade. 164 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans Why do the details say draft on them? 165 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans Detail 16-41B is not needed per section 16.3.1.A.5 all corner ramps are to be installed per detail 16-4D for detached sidewalk. 166 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans Still need to provide details 7-32A, 7-32B and identify the transition length being used on these details. Also provide detail 22-1 167 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans eliz x-sections Page 7 Provide detail 7-29A identify values for x, y, w and t Detail provided - values were not identified. 128 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Site Plan - need to indicate that for the single family lots that the min garage setback is 20 feet min from the property line to the garage door.129 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Site plan - in the naritive - the street width is incorrectly referenced. Need to indicate the min setback for the garage door. Add that storage sheds shall not be placed over any easements. Add that all fencing shall be inaccordance with City standards. Also missing some information in places. 130 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff site/ landscape plan - See plan for comments regarding phasing line location. 131 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utiltiy plans Sheet 3A and 3B should be labeled Construction notes not General notes as that is what they are. Make changes as necessary in the notes to reference the location of the general notes. 154 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans The site and landscape plans show phasing. need to show phasing on the utility plans. Is the grading to be phased or is all the grading to be done at once. If it is to be phased need to provide two plans with the grading for each phase clearly shown. Show phasing on the utility, drainage and street plans. 155 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans The proposed park overllot grading - several notes indicate future improvements that I thought were in. ? 156 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans The radius at the intersection of Peak View Drive and Elizabeth st is supose to be 25 ft not the 20 ft radius as shown per table 8-2 8.2.9.A The sidewalk along elizabeth is a 6 ft walk not 5 ft as shown.. 157 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans 158 utility plans Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Page 6 63 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Pleasant Valley Road What type of curb exists on the property to the west? Will probably need to remove some of this curb and gutter to provide the necessary curb transition to the type r inlet. Will also need to saw cut and tie into a clean edge that is in good shape. This will need to be at or beyond the curb removal point. 65 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Pleasant Valley Road Need to show the area of repavement to the east. Will need to repave past the point where you are tying in with utilities. How are you tying in at this point? Curb transitions? Is their existing curb on the north side to tie into? Are you removing the temporary turnaround? 'C1ri Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Pleasant Valley Road What are the existing grades being tied into? Both ends Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Pleasant Valley Road Need to identify PCR points they have been identified, but do not match the intersection detail. 69 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Pleasant Valley Road Need to indicate the points where you tie into existing grades. 70 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Add a note to rotate the manhole so that the cover is not in the bike path. 71 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - What is detail 7-20B needed for? All streets are vertical curb. 72 Utility plans - Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Page 5 47 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Landscape plan - See additional comments on the plans 48 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Elizabeth Street Will need to see if the existing road section meets ultimate design - may not be able to just add pavement to the edge of the roadway as shown. The x-section of the road needs to meet ultimate design and any tie in to existing pavement will need to be at a lane line or center of a lane. Therefore it is important to know what the striping on this street will be. The pavement and patching on Eliz will need to meet current standards - see x- sections. 51 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Elizabeth Street Show where the row lines are adjacent to and across from the site. 52 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Elizabeth Street Provide curb return information on this sheet or on the profile for Peakview Drive 59 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Peak View Drive Need to show and locate and identify the driveway widths. .E Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Peak View Drive Need to see the culvert/ structure design. See sample notes - make sure this info is provided as it applies to this structure. I provided sample notes last time. Let me know if you need another copy. 61 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans - Peak View Drive Provide intersection elevations and use directional ramps Page 4 The driveways are shown, but they are shwon differently on the utility plans from the site/landscape plans. Need to identify the driveway widths and locations. 34 utility plans eliz street provide cross sections (50 ft intervals) 36 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans eliz street how does the north flowline profile tie into the existing grades shown? Provide a north flowline design - will not have to be built now, but it is needed to design the cross sections correctly and define what needs to be built now. 40 Site plan /landscape plan - Provide directional ramps 41 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Site plan/ landscape plan - rotate manhole that is in walk so that the cover is not in the sidewalk 44 Site plan - See plans for additional comments 45 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Landscape plan/ site plan - Show the sight distance easement and provide sight distance note - The sight distance easments as shown are not correct - see the plans - and /or use figure 7-15A to determine. 46 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Landscape plan/ site plan - Need to show where the driveways are to be located for the single-family lots. This will effect tree placement. - Have a few trees that appear to be too close to objects - the driveway locations are shown differently than the on the utility plans. The driveways need to be at least 12 feet apart per T 7-4. Page 3 17 plat not meeting min tangent requirements in Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Plat show sight distance easements and provide the sight distance easement language have provided the language, but not the easements on the plat. 20 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans show the off site easeements needed - indicate that they are to be provided by seperate document 21 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility plans need grading easements for work outside the platted boundaries. Show the easments that are needed. Letters of intent for the easements will be needed before this item can be scheduled for hearing 25 utiltiy plans sheet 7 have some conflicts in the dimensioning 26 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utiltiy plans not meeting the tangent between curve requirements for some of the curves. 28 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utitity plans The min curve length per the standards table 7-5 is 100 feet. not meeting this on two of the southern curves. The western one needs to be lengthened so as to take the kink out of the road. I can support a variance request for the lenght of the other one 29 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff utility plans need to show the driveway locations for the single family lots. they will need to be set as they affect the utiltiiy and tree placement and since the streets have vertical curb they will need to be built at the same time the curb is being poured. Keep in mind that the driveways need to 12 feet apart (edge to edge) and that waterwastewater will not normally allow the waterline to be under the driveway. Have been allowing the sewer under the driveway in some situations though. Page 2 III STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins DESIGN DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS Date: 10/31/01 DONALD LEFFLER 2627 REDWING RD. #350 FT. COLLINS, CO 80526 Staff has reviewed your submittal for PEAK VIEW SUBDIVISION PDP - TYPE II (LUC) #26- 00, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Engineering 4 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Site Plan - per section 3.6.2(L)(4) of the luc add notice for private drives (see attached for recommended wording) Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utiltiy Plans Use the attached list of general notes -The list that was attached last time wasn't used. See plans for changes to notes. Elimintate some notes and add the notes that you are missing - the notes on the cover sheet need to be eliminated and if you don't plan on putting the true general notes there - put a note indicating where they are on the cover sheet and indicate where necessary where they are at. 8 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Utility Plans Provide typical street sections on the cover sheet see section 3.3.1.E 11 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Plat indicate who is to own and maintain all tracts you say the property owners are to maintain the tracts - well some of the tracts won't have structures on them so in that case who will be the property owners. 12 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff Plat identify the row line on the north - where is it how much is there 15 Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff plat need to provide radius at the corner of row for the row and easements Page 1