Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN NORTH - FDP - 28-99C - CORRESPONDENCE - STORMWATER-RELATED DOCUMENTSProject No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 87. It appears that you are showing the dedication of a portion of existing Vine Drive. Was this section not part of the existing dedicated row? R Yes. This has been revised. 88. Are their any utility easements that are needed adjacent to Jerome that need to be dedicated by separate document in order to get utilities to the site. R No utility easements are required. 89. Have some easements that do not match what is shown on the site plan R We believe we have now coordinated fully. 90. Need to show existing Redwood row, inchiding where it exists out 10 Vine. R Done. 91. See additional comments on the plans. R Acknowledged If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 226-5334. Sincerely, Bi'ran%. Shear, P.F. Shear Engineering ation BWS / lm cc: Monica Sweere; Palladian Construction Co. Tom Dugan; Pinecrest Planning and Design Russell Lee; BHA Design Rick Lewis; RJL Surveyors Troy Jones; City of Fort Collins Planning Department Page 15 Project No.: 1646-01 )3 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 79. How are you identifying that the G lots are associated with the other lots and can not be sold separately and are for garage use only? - Add to note # 7 All G lots are to be sold with the same numbered lot, no G lot shall be sold separately. Garage lots are for garages only no dwelling units can be provided on these lots. R This item will require direct discussion with you. 80. Add the explanation paragraph to the sight distance easement. R Done 81. A note on the plat indicates that all tracts are to be owned and maintained by the homeowners' assoc. A couple of the tracts are also labeled as fixture development areas. I doubt you want the homeowners to own those. R Revisions have been made. 82. Why is there a note that says that the Jerome box culvert is to be owned and maintained by the homeowners' assoc. ? It is a public street and thus would normally be maintained by the City. R This has been revised. 83. Provide a radius for the easement intersection at the corners highlighted. R Done 84. Jerome is a collector street and per the City Code (Seclion 24-91) the street name for all new collector and arterial st eels shall be takers from an official approved list. Check with planningfor the most current list. R This item is being revisited. 85. Need to provide water easements as needed and shown on the utility plans and site plan. Not all have beery provided at this lime. R Coordinated and Revised. 86. Lake Carnal Company easement or rosy? Is this to be an easement - that is the ivay it is being shown, but is not the way it is labeled? If it is to be row then the area Qf the canal needs to be its own tract so it can be dedicated to the Canal Company. Row indicates ownership. R The plat has been revised according to the wishes of Lake Canal. Page 14 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 Topic: Plat 72. Need to identify who is to own the private access easements. Easiest might be to reference the reception number for the filed document that contains the explanation. Monica said she had a three page document that explained the easement that will need to be filed at the county. This should be filed and the document referenced on the plat by its reception number. R Done 73. Need to define the points where the easements change type. Response was that where the easement change occurs a different letter is presented Okay, but that doesn't tell its where the easement actually ends. Need to provide a line to define the boundaries. R Done 74. Will need to increase the text size. I can not tell what some of the numbers are and this is a pretty clear copy. R Scale size has been increased. Number of plat sheets have also increased. 75. Remove the label fukn•e development from Tract KK. It is misleading, as this parcel will probably never be developable. R Done 76. You may not wish to dedicate the alley now between Block 7 and Tract KK since any changes in the fiuture to the row will require an action of council. R The alley in question has been removed in its entirety. 77. What is existing row? Show what is existing along.future realigned Vine Drive and Redwood Street. R Done. Only Redwood right-of-way exists. Additional data concerning where the right- of-way 78. Need to show the off -site easements that are needed and indicate that they are to be provided by separate document. R Acknowledged. Page 13 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 144. Alley K — Minimum vertical curve requirements are not being met. Min K=20 for sag. 15 mph design. R DONE 145. Alley K — Identify the sta where the valley pan depression is to occur. 11R10 146. Alley K - Clarify the valley pan depression note. R DONE 147. Alley P — Identify the sta where the valley pan depression is to occur. R DONE 148. Alley L — Indicate end of phase I improvements. R DONE 149. Alley L — Show how this project will tie into existing grade at the end of the phase I improvements. Per conversation with stormwater a portion of the turnaround is in the floodway where changing existing grade is not allowed Need to show how this turnaround works with the existing grades, how it ties in and what the slopes are. R DONE 150. Alleys general — Provide radius it formation for all can•ves inchiding pavement edges. R DONE 151. Curh return profiles — Have a few places where things do not match the plan profile sheets. R Done 152. Curb return profiles - Missing curb return information for: Blondel and re -aligned Vine and Redwood and Cajetan. R Done Page 12 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 137. Osiander — A point on the profile says to see intersection detail for this area. Why? All the detail shows is that the slope in this area is .50%. Why can't that be shown here? R DONE 138. Osiander—Mivvinng a PCR elevation. R DONE 139. Pascal and Heschel — Design for the portion west of Jerome needs to be provided in this set of plans and numbered as part of the set. It should he labeled as preliminary 1101 for construction' though. R Acknowledged. The designs have been incorporated into the plan set. The sheets have been labeled `preliminary not for construction'. 140. Pascal and Heschel — Can not add any drainage flows to College Ave., the street must slope away as soon as possihle. Design needs to be adjusted. R Acknowledged. As we discussed in our 03/13/2002 meeting, the profiles will be revised to indicate low points just east of College. 141. Pascal and Heschel — Need to show how this lines up with Woodlawn Drive across College Ave. R Acknowledged. We are providing a 1" = 100' mylar of the master utility plan showing proposed future street alignments. This can be overlayed onto a 1" = 100' quarter section aerial provided by G.I.S. 142. Pascal and Heschel — Provide curve info. R DONE 143. Pascal and Heschel — At intersection of Blondel provide a ramp on the west side of the intersection and move hail so that it aligns with the ramps. Ramps to be built on the south side of this intersection need to be built as close as possible to the sidewalk culverts so that they are close to aligning with ramps across the street. This would be a good location to place directional ramps. Page I I Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 129. Cajetan — Design for Cajetan west of Jerome needs to be provided in this set of plans and numbered as part of the set. It should be labeled as �preliminaiy not for construction ' though. R Acknowledged. The design has been incorporated into the plan set. The sheet has been labeled `preliminary not for construction'. 130. Cajetan — Can not add any drainage flows to College Ave., the street »must slope away as soon as possible. Design needs to be adjusted R Acknowledged. As we discussed in our 03/13/2002 meeting, the profile will be revised to indicate a low point just east of College. 131. Cajetan — What does the note end of typical section mean? NO LONGER A TYPICAL SECTION, THE STREEET DOES NOT FOLLOW TYPICAL SECTION DETAIL BECAUSE IT'S T RANSITIONING R NO LONGER A TYPICAL SECTION, THE STREEET DOES NOT FOLLOW TYPICAL SECTION DETAIL BECA USE IT'S TRAN.S'I710NING 132. Cajetan — Missing .some slope vahmes and other information. R Done 133. Baum — The ramp at the intersection with Osiander (north side) needs to be shown aligning with the ramp on the other side. R ACKNOWLEDGED, INTERSECTION WILL BE TREATED SAME AS BLONDEL AND PASCAL. 134. Baum — Provide a note indicating that the sidewalk and the ramp on the north side are fttttrre. R Done 135. Osiander - Provide rip -rap at the end of the pavement section to prevent undermining of the curb and gutter and pavement. R DONE 136. Osiancler - What do the grades do at the end of Phase 1 improvements? How do you lie into existing grade? Show crud label. R DONE Page 10 Project No.: t646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments dated February 15, 2002 121. Jerome — Show the barricades across Pascal and Cajetan being located right behind the cross pan as this is where we want them located and they will place them where you show them. R Acknowledged. Revised. 122. Jerome — Need to indicate if you are huilding the corner ramps on the west side of the street. If you are you need to show barricades where the sidewalks would continue. R Acknowledged. 123. Jerome —Provide a detail of the depressed curbing. What does this look like? R Will need to discuss this item with you directly. 124. .lerome — The vertical curves at the north end of the street do not meet design requirements. R DONE 125. Blondel — End Phase construction line is shown incorrectly in the profile. IMMEMISIM 126. Blondel — Need to provide curb return information for the connection with re -aligned vine. R DONE 127. Cajetan — Intersection with Herschel, move ped ramp on the north .ride to the west side of the intersection to keep the pedestrian out of the drainage flows. Pan was not located here in prior submittals. R DONE 128. Cajetan — Remove barricade across sidewalk at Redwood intersection. R Done. Page 9 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 114. Interim Redwood — Provide rip rap or some kind of protection at the end of the curb and gutter to prevent undermining due to drainage off the end. R Riprap has been added to the design immediately north of the Interim Redwood Street/ Cajetan Street intersection where flows from the northern gutter continue past the Phase 1 improvements. Verify. 115. Interim Redwood — Don't provide a barricade across the NW sidewalk. It would block the trail connection. R Acknowledged. The Type II Barricade has been removed from the NW sidewalk as suggested. 116. Interim Redwood —Add a note so that it is clear that the path connection to the north is to occur regardless of whether interim or ultimate phase I improvements are constructed R A note has been added clarifying that the trail connection to the north shall be constructed regardless if the Interim or Ultimate Redwood Street improvements are completed. 117. Interim Redwood —Make sure that `Potential ' is in front of pavement section. R The word "potential" has been added. 118. Jerome —A ad note about the fence and gate setback at the outparcel. R Acknowledged. Done. 119. Jerome — Have greater than allowed grade break. R DONE 120. .lerome —,Show retaining wall if it is to exist. R All retaining walls have been removed. There will be no retaining walls adjacent to Jerome. Page 8 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated Febmary 15, 2002 107. Redwood Street — Remove for reference only' this plan is not for reference only - this prgjeet is responsible for the construction of a portion of this street. R THE INTERIM HAS BEEN SEPERATED FROM THE ULTIMATE ADDING TWO MORE SHEETS TO THE PLAN SET. 108. Redwood Street — The design as shown does not provide adequate cover over the proposed dry creek box culvert. Need to change the profile so adequate cover is provided and/ or modem the culvert configuration to achieve adequate cover. R The box culverts shown are conceptual only. The depth of the box culverts have been reduced in order to achieve adequate cover. As we discussed in our 03/13/2002 meeting, the number of culverts required will be conditional on Dry Creek basin improvements and ultimate design flows to this point as identified by the stormwater utility. Additional box culverts may be provided in order to keep the depth down to achieve cover. 109. Redwood Street — Design needs to meet minimum flowline grade requirements. As shown it does not. R Acknowledge. Has been redesigned and now meets minimum flowline grade requirements. I10. Redwood Street — What is the existing grade being tied into? Provide the it formation on the plan. R Acknowledged 111. Interim Redwood — Reniove ultimate improvements and only show what i.s to be built a.s interim. R Acknowledged 112. Interim Redwood — Idenlify where the end of curb and gutter placement is with the interim. R Acknowledged 113. Interim Redwood — Provide elevations at the intersection with Vine. Where is the transition? What radii, for pavement edge? R Acknowledged Page 7 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 98. Provide a design for the offvite sidewalk connection to college. Need something that Shows where it is to be located and what elevations it is to he at. Will need easements for this if it is not constructed in the existing row. R The offsite connection from Jerome Street west to College Avenue was previously provided. It was actually shown on the Master Utility Plan. At that time, the walk was 10' wide as directed by a member of City staff. A 10' wide walk did not fit adjacent to the exiting Vine Drive edge of asphalt and existing improvements north of the edge of asphalt. Therefore, the 10' walk was located on private property (Hersch property). The design was presented to Hersch and was unacceptable. Recently, a 5' wide sidewalk has been approved by Kathleen Reavis with transportation via an e-mail to Russ Lee at BHA. The 5' sidewalk is now attached to the existing edge of pavement and included on a separate sheet at a larger scale for detail and clarity. We have also discussed the proposed Vine Drive paving project with Erica Keaton in Engineering. Apparently, Vine will be widened to 36' feet with two (2) travel lanes and two (2) bike lanes. This may delete the requirement for an additional 5' walk. We have attached a copy of the Vine Drive plans provided to us by Erica. Topic: plan and profile sheets 102. Vine Dr (re -aligned) — The state does not allow drainage onto the state highway. The design needs to keep flows off the highway (Section 4.11(1) of the state highway access code). Will need to create a new low spot with inlets and piping. R These profiles have been revised. 103. General — Have several locations where the elevations shown on the plan and profile sheet do not match the detailsheets R DONE 104. General— Provide Key maps. R Key maps are provided. 105. Redwood Street — Are the parkway areas above the culvert to be grass? Is there enough cover above the box to support landscaping? R Parkway areas could be grass and appear to be capable of supporting landscaping. 106. Redwood Sd•eei — Provide flowline profiles. R Flowline profiles are now provided for both the interim and ultimate designs for Redwood Street. Page 6 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 157. For cross pans not located at a 4 legged intersection need to identify what portion of the curb is to be oufall and where the transitions occur and over what distance they occur. Need to provide a detail for an outfall curb and gutter with a 2-foot gutter. Then verb that these now work and that a low shot is not created R Acknowledged 158. Alley intersection details — Indicate the material, min slope and direction of slope for all parking spaces located adjacent to the alleys. Is the double line curbing? If so it needs to drop to a 0" curb height at its intersection with the alley. R DONE 159. Alley intersection details —Missing some information - .some intersection it formation not yet provided they have been marked R Acknowledged. Revised. Topic: Phasing plan 97. Need to show that the off site sidewalk is to be build as apart of Phase 1. Also need to include the path connection and ultimate Redwood Street work within Phase 1. R The phase line for construction items to be included in Phase I now incorporates the off -site connection along the north side of existing Vine Drive. The path connection also has been modified to include the path connection along ultimate Redwood Street, and Redwood Street improvements. Page 5 Project No.: 1646-01 '98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 96. See additional comments on the plans. R Acknowledged. Topic: Intersection details — 153. Provide information requested on Plans. R Acknowledged. Provided. 154. Missing some transition elevations and locations. R Acknowledged. Revised. 155. Add a mote regarding transition elevation and where it is measured from. R The intersection details have been updated to show the measurement from the intersection street according to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Drawing 7-32A and Drawing 7-32B. R The following general notes have been added to each intersection detail sheet. 1. The length of the transitions sections at intersections vary with each intersection. 2. In no case will the transition section be less than thirty feet (30') from the flowline of a crosspan when there is a crosspan condition at the intersection. Refer to Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Drawing 7-32A. 3. In no case will the transition section be less than thirty feet (30') from the flowline of the intersecting street when there is no crosspan condition at the intersection. Refer to Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Drawing 7-32B. 4. Refer to the street plan and profile sheets for the station where the typical section ends and the transition begins. 156. Pascal Heschel intersection needs some work. Things are still not clear. Need some additional information, elevations and clarification. R Acknowledged. Revised. Page 4 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4, 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 R A variance request for use of v-pans in alleys is included under separate document with this submittal. 55. Variance has been received for Rechvood Street and is under consideration. R Acknowledged. 92. The culvert work under Redwood can not be done until the condemnation for the property is complete and the City and/ or Monica owns the property. The timing of this may 1701 work for the applicants schedule therefore we talked about providing a temporary second point of access until this construction work can be done. If this is to be done a plan showing the design, location and grading (if any) needs to be provided with this set of plans. A temporary emergency access easement is needed for the location of this drive on site and offsite if it is not within existing row and/ or an existing emergency access easement. All easements by separate document need to be signed, in acceptable format and received prior to acceptance of mylars for signature. R Acknowledged 93. Need easements for all grading and construction work that is outside the platted houndaries and not within the existing row. All easements by separate document need to he signer, in acceptable format and received prior to acceptance of mylars for signature. R The storm sewer outfall alignment on the east side of Redwood Street, is situated within an easement that was dedicated with the plat of Redwood Village P.U.D. Phase II. A copy of that plat is attached for immediate reference. Also refer to the assessor maps for the relationship of properties in this area. 94. .Showing a retaining wall on the west side of Jerome. On one sheet it indicates that the wall is to be 3-4 feet above grade where another sheet i1 shows it at grade. If it is at grade what is the pu7pose of the ivall. If it is above grade then we will need to see a design of the wall due to the visibility of it. It will be important to know what it looks like. R All retaining walls in the detention pond area on the west side of Jerome have been removed. 95. The Lake canal needs to sign all sheets that show work affecting the canal. R Acknowledged. A Lake Canal Company approval block has been added to all sheets that reflect design information over and adjacent to the Lake Canal. Page 3 Project No.: 1646-01-98 March 4. 2002 Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated Febniary 15, 2002 171. provide values for the structural backfill requirements. R Box culvert structural backfill and bedding specifications have been provided by Terracon in a supplemental report. That report is attached with ,this response for immediate reference. All structural backfill and bedding recommendations have been added to the plans. A supplemental General Note concerning this supplemental report has been added to the Cover Sheet. 172. What is the minimum elevation that occurs between the top of the box structure and the bottom of the curb and gutter section? What kind of clearance is above the box structure? Can the standard pavement section with sub base be provided above the box or does this area require a special design - potentially concrete? R Please refer to revised plans. 173. For the box under Redwood, there needs to be separation (minimum distance to be determined by water wastewater) provided between the pipe casings and the bottom Of the box or the bottom of the box will need to be designed so that the casing is enclosed in concrete and a part of the structural design of the box bottom. R A concrete encasement around the sanitary sewer under the box culvert bases is being provided and is detailed with the drawings. Casings have been eliminated where a concrete encasement is provided. The structural design and backup calculations will be provided immediately upon availability. These are being provided by JVA of Ft. Collins. Topic: General 37. Variance requests that a; needed - Redwood alignment, curves and tangents do not meet standards. Alley section - request to use a v pan. For this request here is some information that needs to be considered and provided with this request. Will need to show that the 2- year storm stays within the v-panl row. Will need easements on private property adjacent to the alley for the 100 yr storm. Need information to know the width of this easement adjacent to all alleys, is it consistent width, does it vary. No fencing Or structure will be allowed within these easements. Foundations will need to be 1 foot higher than the 100 yr level. 7hi.s could be vent' impactive to the plans and the plat. R A variance for the Redwood alignment, curves and tangents has previously submitted and is currently under consideration. Page 2 April 5, 2002 ,X Project No: 1646-01-98 SHEAR City of Fort Collins Engineering ENGINEERING 281 North College Avenue CORPORATION Ft. Collins, Colorado 80524-0580 Attn: Sheri Wamhoff Re: Old Town North; Fort Collins, Colorado Response to Floodplain Review Comments, dated February 15, 2002 This is a response to City of Fort Collins Engineering comments as provided for the Old Town North; ODP — Type Il #29-99B; and PDP and FC & Modifications of Standards, #28- 99A & 28-99C. Original comments and responses to each are provided. Topic: box culverts 168. Provide CDOT details M-601-1, M-601-2 or M-601-3 and M-601-20 as applicable and needed R Three sided box culverts will be precast and delivered to the site for installation on a poured -in -place base. This is required since both bases are specifically designed to incorporate "notches" for the existing shallow utility lines. A structural analysis of the bases has been requested to be performed. The design reflects the results of the analysis. R CDOT detail M-601-20, "Wingwalls For Pipe or Box Culverts", has been included in the plans. CDOT details M-601-2, M601-3 are not applicable and not included in these plans as they define double and triple box culverts respectively. Need to include the CDOT detail M-601-1. The contractor shall design according to this last detail. 169. Per a meeting on 218102 at least the bottom of the box under Jerome will need to be cast in p1'(J, �. The whole bar can be cast in place or only the bottom with a three-si: box attached to that The server pipe under the culvert needy to be encased in concrete under the box and the encasing needs to be .structurally designed into the floor of the box structure. Provide a design for whatever portion of the box is to be cast in place. Provide copies of struaural calculations for ow• files with the submittal. R The box culverts will be cast -in -place. A three sided structural precast box will be delivered and placed on the poured -in -place base. The box culvert structural design, plans and details have been provided by Amcor of Lakewood. Plans have been incorporated into the plan set. Structural calculations have been requested from Amcor. 170. Make sru•e notes provided reflect the design beingprovided R Acknowledge. Plans have been clarified. 4836 S. C011cge, Suitc 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 Fax (970) 282-031 1 xeNN-%%,.shearengineering.com