HomeMy WebLinkAboutREPLAT OF EAST RIDGE - MAJOR AMENDMENT - MJA150005 - CORRESPONDENCE -Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please revise the titles on all sheets to match the revised title on the
Subdivision Plat.
Comment Number: 39 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 40 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: There are text over text issues. See redlines.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson(afcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/30/2015
09/30/2015: Control type is unclear out on Timberline.
Page 13 of 13
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Public easements can be vacated by plat, but Roads & Alleys must be
vacated by City Council.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Are there any Lienholders for this property? If so, please add a
signature block. If not, please add a note stating there are none, and include
response in written comments.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Acknowledging that Note #4 is the same note as on the previous plat,
does the Note place a burden on the adjoining land owner, that needs to be agreed
to by that landowner? Does Anheuser Busch need to sign the plat?
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please clarify what "Phase 2" means in Note #4. See redlines.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please add new title commitment information as available.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please add a Note (#8) that Lots 17, 18, 19 & 20, Block 3 can not be
built on until the Temporary Turnaround Easement crossing them is terminated.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: The plat of East Ridge says 'Tract Q is a public park owned &
maintained by the City". Does the City own this Tract? Does the City need to sign
the plat?
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please label the Point Of Beginning.
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: All easements must be labeled & locatable. See redlines.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please add bearings and/or distances as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please make sure that all Tract uses are labeled on all sheets. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please make sure that all Lots, Blocks, Tracts & Outlots, etc. are
labeled on all sheets. See redlines.
Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please label all surrounding properties with "Unplatted" or the
subdivision name. This includes properties across right of ways. See redlines.
Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please label the additional right of way for Timberline Road shown on
sheet 11. See redlines.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: The easements on sheet 15 at the south of the property are confusing.
Please clarify. See redlines.
Page 12 of 13
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There are text over text issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Sheet GR06 shows the wrong area of the project. See redlines.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09128/2015: Please correct the title on sheet UT01. See redlines.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please tie the coordinate values shown for utilities to the project
boundary. We would prefer that this be done by adding property corner values to
each sheet, or showing the property corner values on the horizontal control plans
and adding a note to each sheet with coordinate values.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There is an issue with matchline numbering on sheet UT10. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas.
See redlines.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There is text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please correct the sheet reference numbers in the keymap on sheets
RD44 & RD45. See redlines.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please revise the titles on all sheets to match the revised title on the
Subdivision Plat.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: The titles in the sheet index do not match the titles on the noted sheets.
There are also 2 sheets missing from the index. See redlines.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please revise the title to match the revised title on the Subdivision Plat.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please change the title on all sheets, and in the Statement Of
Ownership And Subdivision. "Replat Of' is not an acceptable format for a title.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please change "Engineering Department" in the Notice Of Other
Documents statement to "Clerk". See redlines.
Page 11 of 13
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlamAfcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft, therefore Erosion and
Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control
requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of
Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do
not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan, Erosion Control
Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need clarification concerning
this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam
970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcountyCa)fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please revise the titles on all sheets to match the revised title on the
Subdivision Plat.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: The City has moved to the NAVD88 vertical datum, and as of January
1, 2015 all projects are required to be on NAVD88 datum. Please provide the
following information in the EXACT format shown below.
PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM.
SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED FOR
THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS.
IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE
FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = NAVD88
- X.XX'.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please change "Vine Street" in the title block on all sheets to "Vine
Drive". See redlines.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: There are spelling issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please change "Timberline Drive" on sheets EX01 & EX02 to
"Timberline Road". Make sure this is changed on all other applicable sheets. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/28/2015
09/28/2015: Please correct the numbering on sheet EX02. See redlines.
Page 10 of 13
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 09/17/2015
09/17/2015: ALLEY ACCESS
TIGERCAT WAY: The proposed alley labeled Tigercat Way is a primary fire access
route to the east facing homes along it's entire length. The alley is required to have a
minimum 20' of clear, unobstructed width. An Emergency Access Easement is
required and no parking will be allowed. FIRE LANE - NO PARKING signage to be
posted where determined necessary. Fire lane specifications shall apply, including
turning radii at all intersections and 40 ton min. weight limit. Code language and fire
lane specifications provided below.
> IFC 503.1.1: Approved fire Lanes shall be provided for every facility, building or
portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction.
The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section
and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the
exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route
around the exterior of the building or facility. When any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150
feet from fire apparatus access, the fire code official is authorized to increase the
dimension if the building is equipped throughout with an approved, automatic
fire -sprinkler system.
FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS
A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the
design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire
lane must meet the following general requirements:
> Shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement.
> Maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum
overhead clearance.
> Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40
tons.
> Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with
an approved area for turning around fire apparatus.
> The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of
25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. Turning radii shall be detailed on submitted plans.
> Be visible by painting and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times.
> Additional access requirements exist for buildings greater than 30' in height. Refer
to Appendix D of the 2012 IFC or contact PFA for details.
International Fire Code 503.2.3, 503.2.4, 503.2.5, 503.3, 503.4 and Appendix D;
FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006 and Local Amendments.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 09/18/2015
09/18/2015: WATER SUPPLY
A hydrant is required within 400' of any residential structure, and on 800' centers.
The proposed hydrant spacing within the development exceeds minimum
standards. The project team has the latitude to reduce the number of hydrants as
long as minimum code requirements are maintained. Corner hydrants are more
critical than mid -block hydrants, for example. Code language provided below.
> IFC 508.1 and Appendix B: RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS: Within the Urban
Growth Area, hydrants to provide 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not
further than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 09/18/2015
09/18/2015: WETLAND WATER ACCESS
I'm not seeing the 14' wide perimeter trail outlined in the response letter.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Page 9 of 13
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015:
RE: MJA150005 — Replat of East Ridge Minor Amendment Type I
East Larimer County Water District (District) has reviewed the documents received
regarding the above project and has the following comments:
1. Utility Plans: General layout of the water distribution network appears appropriate;
details will be worked out with design engineer when final design process starts. Of
note, for the 12-inch waterline to be installed as part of the project the District will
require plan and profile sheets.
2. Stormwater and Sanitary Sewer Coordination: The District assumes plan and
profile sheets of these utilities will be submitted with future review packages at
which time a review of potential conflicts will be conducted.
3. Landscape Plans: Future landscape plans will need to show water lines and
service lateral locations in relation to landscaping to insure adequate separation.
The District typically requires a minimum of 8-ft of separation from center of trees to
the District service line.
4. Lot Configuration/Utility Coordination in Front of Lots: The landscape plans show
a typical lot arrangement (drawing LP501) with only 6-ft of separation called out from
center of a tree to a water/sewer service, which is lower than the District typically
allows (see also note above). Drawing LP501 does not show other utilities, i.e. gas,
electric, cable, which brings concern to the District that some of the small lot
frontages may encounter conflicts in utility separation if trees are required.
Please contact me if there are additional questions regarding this review.
Sincerely,
Randy Siddens, P.E.
District Engineer ELCO
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwilerftoudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/17/2015
09/17/2015: GENERAL FIRE ACCESS
By providing a fire sprinkler system in all buildings, the project team has diligently
acknowledged the overall lack of fire access within the development. The fire
marshal has reviewed the plan and agrees that sprinklering the homes to be a
reasonable means of meeting the intent of the code through alternative measures.
Code language provided below.
> FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006; 061FC 503.2.5 and Appendix D: Dead-end fire apparatus
access roads cannot exceed 660 feet in length. Dead-end fire access roads in
excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning
around fire apparatus.
Page 8 of 13
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
List the percentage of each tree species used and check for the LUC minimum
species diversity.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Show locations of stop signs, street lights (not all street lights appear to be shown)
and water and sewer service lines. If drive way information is available also show
their location at each lot. Provide street tree locations that meet these separation
standards from these facilities as listed in the LUC 3.2.1.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Provide two typical lot details for street tree placement on the plan. One for a
midblock lot and one for a corner lot. Show the location of street trees, driveways,
stop signs, water and sewer service lines and street lights. Show the scaled
distance of the trees from each of these features.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Most if not all of the lots appear to be 60 feet or less in width. LUC 3.2.1 D 2 provides
for only one street per lot on these narrower lots. If two or more consecutive
residential lots along a street each measure between 40 and 60 feet in street
frontage width, on tree per lot may be substituted for the 30-40 foot spacing
requirement. With driveway and utility tree separation standards only one street tree
can fit on narrower lots. Adjust street tree placements to follow this standard for all
narrower lots.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Provide for greater variation in the groups of same species street tree clusters that
follow the Streetscape Standards of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standard
Appendix C. (See standard 4.1.2 page 8 of that document). Typically same species
groups of only three, five or seven trees are shown with only occasional variation of
these quantities for defined design reasons. Achieve variation with only canopy
shade trees unless planting is shown next to street lights.
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Narrow leaf cottonwood in prone to producing many root suckers. The Plains
cottonwood or Lanceleaf cottonwood do not have this quality and would be advised
for use in the place of Narrow leaf cottonwood.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Randy Siddens, ,
Topic: General
Page 7 of 13
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Tree Inventory and Mitigation Plan Comments:
Provide a written report by a private qualified certified arborist on the suitability of
retention of the following trees so documentation on intent to retain or remove these
major trees can be incorporated into the plans.
T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T9, T11, T12, T13, T34, and T35
Mark the following trees to retain.
T29, T31, T20 and T21
Mark the following trees for removal.
T22, T 23, T24, T32, T34 and T37
Mark all other trees and those not recommended in the arborist report to remove as
Keep in place as long as feasible and advisable.
Replace tree inventory note number 1:
All trees not shown specifically for removal or for retention shall be kept in place as
long as possible based on the ongoing evaluation and recommendation of a private
certified arborist. Evaluation and recommendation by the private arborist shall
consider tree health, tree condition, habitat contribution, hazardous conditions or
impact from construction.
Replace inventory note number 3:
Trees not shown for removal shall pruned and maintained by a private Fort Collins
Licensed Arborist following the objectives of tree health, safety and habitat
contribution. Minimal pruning may be advised in habitat areas. After initial pruning
and maintenance any trees on City property shall be maintained by the City of Fort
Collins.
Add this tree inventory note:
Prior to construction a tree pruning and removal plan shall be prepared by a certified
arborist holding a City of Fort Collins Arborist License. This plan shall be submitted
to the City Forester, City Environmental Planner and Project Landscape Architect for
approval. The plan shall address the management objectives of tree health, safety,
species suitability and habitat contribution. Tree removal or pruning that needs to
occur after the initial tree maintenance has been completed shall be presented by
the Developer or HOA for City approval.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Provide upsized mitigation trees for tree not shown to retain. Mitigation trees should
be sized as follows.
Canopy shade tree 3.0 inch caliper
Ornamental tree 2.5 inch caliper
Evergreen tree 8 feet height
Coffetrees would likely be hard to find as 3.0 inch caliper mitigation trees. Forestry
advises using honeylocust, hackberry or Greenspire linden at mitigation trees
because of their better availability. If not already provided clearly show mitigation
trees on the plan and in the plant list.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/02/2015
10/02/2015:
Please use Shumard Oak in place of Texas Red oak for better supply availability.
Page 6 of 13
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: : The Mitigation and Monitoring Plan document will be attached to the
development agreement. A letter of credit to ensure the Natural Habitat areas can
be established per the success criteria will be required. Please prepare an estimate
for what it would cost to recreate the wetland and upland habitat areas, should the
success criteria not be met.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: Please add references to the wetland and the upland habitat areas onto
the site, landscape, and utility plans. A note should be added to the site, landscape,
and utility plan regarding HOA maintenance and intended uses of the wetland and
open space areas.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: Please add a reference on the landscape plans regarding the
transplanting of existing wetland material (soil and plant material) to the wetland and
to other areas on the site as available.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan(cDfcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Page 5 of 13
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: A wetland delineation report completed on March 9, 2015, assessed
the wetlands at 4.5 acres. A subsequent wetland delineation report completed on
June 24, 2015, assessed the wetlands at 2.2 acres. The City accepted the June 24,
2015 wetland delineation, with the agreement that 2.2 acres of wetland will be
mitigated on -site, including a 100 foot buffer, and that the 2.3 acre difference
between the delineations would be maintained as enhanced upland habitat.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: The code allows for varying buffer widths within a project, with the goal
of meeting the average of the required buffer widths on the site. For this project,
please provide the following through a vignette/detail on the site plan:
• The total area required for a straight 100' buffer around the 2.2 acres of mitigated
wetland versus the proposed total buffer area.
• Please add dimensions for the buffer widths around the mitigated wetlands so
staff can evaluate these smaller buffer widths and uses within the buffer zone. Refer
to Section 3.4.1(E) of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within a buffer zone
• The location and area for the mitigated and enhanced 2.3 acres of upland
habitat.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: In the document Project Site Characteristics and Pertinent
Environmental Report History, it states that "An open water body (pond) will be
created as part of the compensatory wetland mitigation approach. This pond will be
created in lieu of a portion of the vegetated wetlands to be impacted." Staff does not
agree with this approach as 2.2 acres of wetland will need to be mitigated and
successfully established on -site, with a 100' buffer. Incorporating an open water
pond into the design is fine, as long as 2.2 acres of wetland are mitigated on -site,
with a 100' buffer, plus an additional 2.3 acres of enhanced upland habitat.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: In response to the comments by the Parks Department, Environmental
Planning would agree to one simplified water system, provided there are 2.2 acres
of wetland (with the required 100' buffer) and 2.3 acres of upland are mitigated
on -site. Furthermore, the open water area could incorporate the irrigation needs of
the Parks Department. The details of this part of the design and necessary
agreements and easements would need to be arranged separately from the natural
habitat requirements.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: With respect to the mitigated wetland and open water features, the City
of Fort Collins Land use Code, in Section 3.4.1 (K) requires that "to the extent that a
development plan proposes the creation of water features such as lakes, ponds,
streams or wetlands, the plan must include clear and convincing evidence that such
water features will be supplied with sufficient water whether by natural means or by
the provision of sufficient appropriate water rights."
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/01/2015
10/01/2015: A mitigation and monitoring plan will need to be developed to indicate
how these two Natural Habitats Areas — wetland with buffer and upland - will be
installed and monitored to ensure success. The wetland will be designed as a
wetland and will have responding success criteria, e.g., a wetland soil moisture
regime. The upland will be designed and monitored for the establishment of native
trees, shrubs, and grasses/forbs, and all areas will be evaluated for the
establishment of native and desirable plants, with limited weeds and bare spots.
Page 4 of 13
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Sight distance triangles are needed where there are proposed curved
roads. See redlines.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Alley A and Alley B are the only alleys that were approved with the
original plat. No new alleys are allowed. These will need to be shown as private
drives. See redlines.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Show the ROW needed on Timberline for the potential overpass at
Vine Drive.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: A road design is needed for Timberline Road, since both Sykes Drive
and Crusader Street both tie into it. As a part of this project, the Developer is
responsible for the construction of their property frontage
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: As part of the ODP, the intersection at Crusader Street and Timberline
Road shall be limited to a right -in, right -out, not a full movement intersection.
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please refer to LCUASS standards for road design. For collector
roadways, k values must be greater than 60 and have a 120' minimum length of
curve for crest and 110' for sag.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Change the sidwalk width on the street profile on the cover sheet to 5'
for a minor collector.
Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 09/30/2015
09/29/2015: Streets on Vicot Street, Zeppelin Street, Crusader Street and Comet
Street need to be widened to include 8' parking lanes and 10' travel lanes.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 09/30/2015
09/30/2015: Please update the map on the cover sheet to show Timberline Road. It
currently shows N Summitview Drive.
Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 09/30/2015
09/30/2015: Update the Utilty Contact List on the cover sheet of the Utility Plans for
Electric and Stormwater.
Comment Number: 15
Comment Originated: 09/30/2015
09/30/2015: Show all City signature blocks on the lower right corner of each sheet
of the Utility Plan.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 09/30/2015
09/30/2015: Sheets RD44 and RD45 reference the worng sheets. See redlines.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kelly Kimple, , kkimple(cUcgov.com
Topic: General
Page 3 of 13
Topic: Landscape Plans
I
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: LP001: Remove signature block from cover page. We do not need to
sign this set, only site plan.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: LP403/LP404/LP405/LP407: See Park Planning comments on Park
tract regarding revisions to stormwater swales and irrigation pond.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: LL101: Too much information on sheet to highlight lighting. Remove
stormwater layer and increase size of street lighting fixtures on plan to read.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Cover sheet - replace planning signature block with correct CDNS
block, see Site Plan.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Total dwelling unit count consistent with approved ODP and APF
capacity requirements.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: LS403/LS404 - See Park Planning comments regarding park area in
Tract BB.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Sheet LS405: Label of -site as "future street connections".
Sheet LS401: Label Tract A "Future Multi -family". LS402: Label Tract B, "Future
Single-family attached/Mini-storage/Multi-family". LS403: Label Tract B as "Future
Single-family attached".
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Ragasa, 970.221.6603, mragasa(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: On the final plans, please call out the utilities that will be built with each
phase.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Temporary turnarounds will be needed at the end streets that take
access off the street. Please include these locations with each phase. See redlines.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: Please relook at the placement of the handicap ramps on the plan.
There are some that either do not line up. There are some ramps that are missing
and others that can be removed. See redlines.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: There are some intersections that do not intersect at 90 degrees.
Please show the angle of intersection so that it can be verified they are within
standard.
Page 2 of 13
City Of
Fort Collins
October 07, 2015
John Beggs
Russell + Mills Studios
141 S College Ave Suite 104
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: Replat of East Ridge, MJA150005, Round Number 1
Community Development and
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6750
970.224,6134 - fax
fcgov. com/developmentrevie w
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for
your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may
contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Pete Wray, at
970-221-6754 or pwray@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Matt Day, ,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
09/29/2015: Park Planning:
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
We have several comments for the East Ridge Major Amendment/Re-plat.
o We will require that the proposed surface swales for stormwater be piped
across the park site.
o We will require a raw water delivery system and easements as part of your
development.
o The irrigation pond location has yet to be determined. We want to work with you
on a more central pond location, this will affect the proposed property lines.
o Can the wetlands and water quality area shrink in size?
o We would like to meet and discuss the irrigation and stormwater pond locations,
park property lines, stormwater swales, and irrigation supply prior to the project
hearing.
o We would like to have one simplified water system. It is odd that we have to
develop 2 separate ponds adjacent to each other, one for storm and one for
irrigation?
Thank you,
Matt
Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwrayAfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 09/29/2015
09/29/2015: In assessing the magnitude of comments from other staff, another
round of review is needed.
Page 1 of 13