Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWIND SONG AT ROCK CREEK - FDP - FDP160010 - CORRESPONDENCE -Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See redlines. 03/30/2016: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See redlines. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: If the Eye Center Of Northern Colorado plat is filed before this, please make changes as shown. See redlines. 03/30/2016: If the Eye Center Of Northern Colorado plat is filed before this, please make changes as shown. See redlines. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: All easements must be labeled & locatable. See redlines. 03/30/2016: All easements must be labeled & locatable. See redlines. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: Please add an arrow for the Site in the Vicinity Map. See redlines. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: Please make corrections to the Basis Of Bearings statement. See redlines. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: No plans were provided for review. 03/30/2016: No comments. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: Work with engineering to get the sidewalks, ramp, and signal pole with pedestrian push buttons at Rock Creek and Ziegler to work properly. Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: Please provide a 20 foot sleeve rather than 10 feet. 03/30/2016: Water lines that are crossing under other utilities greater than 24 inches need to be sleeved. Please provide the sleeving detail in the plans as well. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: No plans were provided for review. 03/30/2016: No comments. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 03/30/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: There are sheet number issues. See redlines. 03/30/2016: There are sheet number issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: The location of the 30' SFCSD Easement does not match the Subdivision Plat. See redlines. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: There are match line issues on sheets 23 & 24. See redlines. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 03/30/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: Please add the name Vindsong At Rock Creek" to the titleblock on all sheets. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: Please make sure all plat language is the most current City language. 03/30/2016: Please make sure all plat language is the most current City language. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: Does the South Fort Collins Sanitation District need to sign? 03/30/2016: Does the South Fort Collins Sanitation District need to sign? 6 Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, Topic: General 970-416-28699 ilynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Auto -turn requested to show that an engine can negotiate the serpentine maneuver south of the main entrance. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: Please label cleanouts. 03/30/2016: The porous paver underdrain needs to be extended to capture a greater area of the paver section. Also, please show cleanout locations. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: Please replace riprap with permanent erosion control fabric. This is due to maintenance concerns. 03/30/2016: Is any erosion protection required at the pipe outlets? Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 05/10/2016: The detail requires some modifications. 03/30/2016: Please provide the sand filter detail from Urban Drainage. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: The landscaping plan shows evergreen trees in the sand filter where removal of material will be required. This will not be possible with trees in the sand filter material. Please revise landscape plan. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: Riprap is not required for the spillway. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: Please label the soft pan on the grading and drainage plan and reference the detail. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: The storm sewers between ponds A & B as well as A & C need to pass the 100-year flows for the basins that drain to the upstream ponds. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: Please delineate on the drainage plan the proposed area of sand filter material. This would be the flat bottom of these ponds, which needs to be equal to the required area in the calculations. 5 the subdivision plat). If the boundary of the drainage easement is considered in its final form with Stormwater, the legal description for the drainage easement can be reviewed by Technical Services. Since the SFCSD easement isn't conveyed to the City, fees and review of the easement isn't required. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: The plat language hasn't been updated, please see the following link: http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/subdivision—plat_final_subm ittal_r eq u i re m e nts_2016. pdf 03/29/2016: The plat language on the cover sheet appears to be outdated and will need to be updated to our current requirements. I can email the current version separately. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: The site plan appears to be missing Planning's approval blocks and should be coordinated with the project planner. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 03/30/2016: Continued: 12/23/2015: A redbud tree is shown in the parking lot peninsula at the North East section of the project. The Land Use code standard is for use of canopy shade tree in these parking lot locations. Please review this landscape area for a canopy shade tree. Department: Light And Power Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: 03/29/2016: Electric Capacity Fee and Building Site charges will apply to this development. Please click on the following link for Estimated Light & Power charges and the Light & Power Fee calculator. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen t-development-fees Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: Did not receive a utility plan set in the packet for this round. 4 Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 05/11/2016 05/11/2016: Please correct the indication of 3 Sheet 17's. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: Carried over as I understand the widths will be changing to the minimum standard. 03/29/2016: There appears to have been a change between PDP to Final regarding the widths of the sidewalks on Ziegler Road (from 6 feet to 7 feet) and Rock Creek Drive (from 5 feet to 6 feet). Just wondering how this came about (and perhaps I may have not recalled a conversation regarding the increase in sidewalk widths.) The street classifications for Ziegler and Rock Creek have sidewalk width requirements of 6 feet and 5 feet respectively. The additional 1 foot provided on both streets would not be eligible for street oversizing reimbursement and with that in mind, I would question perhaps whether the additional width adds much value to the pedestrian given proposed (Eye Center), to be constructed (Mainstreet) and existing (Intel) sidewalks on Ziegler Road are at 6 feet, and similarly existing sidewalk along Rock Creek is 5 feet. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: The placement of the standard drawing LCUASS 1604 ramp results in the existing traffic signal pole placed into the new sidewalk along Ziegler Road. I've verified with Martina Wilkinson in Traffic Operations that we won't necessarily require the directional ramps at this intersection as commented below, but the project will still have to provide a design that has the sidewalk abutting the signal pole, not have the signal pole in the sidewalk. 03/29/2016: The construction of directional access ramps at the Rock Creek/Ziegler intersection abutting the site is not depicted on the plans and needs to be designed on the civil plans from both a horizontal and vertical perspective with spot elevations, grades, widths, etc. The access ramps need to show how they align with existing crosswalks across Rock Creek and Ziegler. Additionally the access ramps and sidewalk system need to show how they function in relation to existing infrastructure (or relocated infrastructure accordingly) -- there appears to be the existing signal pole that would be in conflict with the sidewalk design, as well as an existing control box that's not depicted on the plans and may be in conflict as well. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: The access ramps aren't depicted correctly on the civil plans and the receiving ramp itself is still missing on the site plan. 03/29/2016: A receiving access ramp needs to be provided on the east side of the private drive intersecting Rock Creek Drive, designed on the civil plans and depicted on the plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: Carried over for reference on the need for a legal description for the offsite drainage easement. 03/29/2016: A $250 deed of dedication Transportation Development Review Fee is needed with the offsite drainage easement, with the actual dedication needing to be provided along with recording fees prior to approval of the plans. SFCSD's approval of their easement and recordation needs to similarly occur prior to plan approval (with reception numbers on both easements indicated on 3 Comment Number: 5 Uomment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: The Irrigation Plan and Details are not a part of the Planning Set for recording final mylars. Please remove sheets A1.2a, A1.2b, A1.4a from the set. Sheet A1.4b includes a mix of details from the Landscape Plan (needed) and the Irrigation Plan (unneeded). Please adjust the sheets so that the Landscape Plan details are retained and Irrigation Plan details are removed. Please note that the Irrigation Plan is submitted separately, post recording, to Eric Olson in Water Utilities. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: On the Lighting Plan, sheet E2.1, please remove all data (schedule, mounting heights, fire alarm, heat schedule, legend) that relates to interior lighting. We do not review interior lighting. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: On the Exterior Luminaire Schedule, please add a column for quantity. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: Instead of the graphic on sheet E1.2 that depicts the three types of pole lighting, please replace with a manufacturer's specification sheet. Be sure to include the detail for the House Side Shield as called for. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: Please provide a specification sheet for the wall -mounted fixtures and under -canopy fixtures. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: Please add a note that the under -canopy lighting must be flush -mount and flat lens.6 The light source must be fully recessed and concealed and not protrude below the underside of the canopy deck. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/10/2016 05/10/2016: We typically see in the schedule a data point that indicates the Light Loss Factor. We require that the illuminance plan be calibrated and depicted with a Light Loss Factor of 1.0. Please provide this data point and adjust the illuminance plan accordingly, if necessary. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/29/2016 05/11/2016: The drawings provide a detail of 707.1 presumably used for the full movement driveway out to Rock Creek. The access ramps aren't drawn to match the detail and need to be corrected, they should appear to continue straight across the driveway and not brought out closer to the street. 03/29/2016: The private drive intersecting Rock Creek Drive should not be built as a public street intersection, which is implied with the cross plan depicted on the plans and the inclusion of LCUASS Detail 708. This driveway should be depicted and built either as LCUASS 707.1 or 707.2, utilizing concrete fully in the right-of-way. (It would seem that 707.1 could be the design parameter with less concrete along the curb returns.) 2 of Fort Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax icgov. com/developmentreview May 17, 2016 Tim Halopoff JR ENGINEERING 2900 SOUTH COLLEGE AVE, SUITE 3D Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Windsong at Rock Creek, FDP160010, Round Number 2 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, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343 ortshepard@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 03/30/2016: The trash enclosure is specified to be 7�6� in height which seems a bit high. Perhaps this can be lowered to six feet so it is not as imposing with no loss of screening capability. 05/10/2016: Carried Over, not seeing the trash enclosure detail. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/30/2016 03/30/2016: Please add all signature blocks and standard notes to the site plan cover sheet and label site, landscape, architectural, lighting sheets sequentially. I can provide standard notes in a word document. 05/10/2016: Carried Over.