Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK FARMS NORTH, FIRST FILING, FINAL PLAT - PDP - 24-00B - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSRules of the Streets Page 2 of 2 V4 sweeping curve). 16. Existing street names shall continue across intersections and roundabouts. Back to Street Inventory System 200 W. Oak Street • Fort Collins, CO 80521 • 970-498-7000 11 -: 1995-2005, Larimer County http://www.co.larimer.co.us./streets/rules.htm 6/7/2005 _Rules of the Streets Page 1 of 2 Rules of the Streets Standardization Of Road Naming Criteria 1. Use only accepted suffixes. 2. Homonyms for road names are not acceptable. 3. Road names should be unique and not repeated in the County from this point forward, with the exception of continuation of existing streets. 4. Each Municipality and the County may develop a list of acceptable or recommended names for use in its jurisdiction. If there are duplications on such lists, and another Municipality or the County utilized the name, the name will be removed from the acceptable or recommended lists in the other jurisdictions. 5. Within the Growth Management Area around each Municipality, roads will be named using city/town names, not County road numbers. Outside of the GMA Boundary, County road numbers will be used. Street names, rather than County road numbers, will be used for internal roads in County subdivisions and 35 acre developments. 6. In the unincorporated area any road that serves as an access to multiple properties must be named. Multiple properties accessing of a single point from a County road may not use the single access point as a common address. 7. Continuous roads should have continuous names (with the exception of circle roads). Names should not change except at the Growth Management Area boundary, however, names are not required to change at the Growth Management Area boundary. 8. Recommend that road names must be simple to pronounce, in the opinion of the review jurisdiction. 9. Cardinal directions cannot be used in the name. Directions are used only to designate the portion of an existing road. (not acceptable - North Road, East Fort Road, Northstar Drive.) 10. No curse words or derogatory terms shall be used for road names. 11. These are meant to be minimum standards for each Municipality and the County. The main objective is to provide clear street names for citizens and for emergency dispatch and to minimize the possibility of emergency personnel being unable to find a location. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to limit any Municipality or the County from developing more extensive street naming guidelines. 12. Numerical addressing will not change from the current process. 13. All names shall be of the commonly acceptable spelling, according to a standard dictionary. 14. Street names cannot contain any punctuation or special characters. Only alphabetical symbols A through Z, and numbers 0 through 9 and blank spaces may be used in street names. 15. Anytime that a street makes a directional change of approximately ninety degrees, the street name shall change. A directional change of approximately ninety degrees shall mean a horizontal curve where a reduction in the design speed is required (i.e. a sharp turn vs. a http://www.co.larimer.co.us./strects/rules.htm 6/7/2005 Project: 50f.-nn lam+ u k r_oxm S l o T l Date: ( Z Planner:`- (;r Traffic Operations: Engineer: ems Requested Redlinedems eing a urne P: c m c 0 Other Items Required a; iz -c m a ? CU m " .FU W 0 Other Items being Returned Engineering fa Stormwater Water/ W a stew ate r/ FCLW D Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Transfort Engineering Pvmt. Light & Power Technical Services X PFA TOTALS ` u 71c0ther: �-I f .tJ /,%, Note: All redlined items should be returned with the resubmittaI/revisions. Please call 221-6750 to schedule a resubmittal 'PK appointment. ' REVISION ROUTING SHEET ITEM.' DATE RECEIVED: z F a o w o a � z°` da c7w za z ww r z �� a FILE: PROJECT PLANNER ZONING BUILDING INSPECTION FORESTRY POLICE -� ADVANCE PLANNING STREETS R.O.W. PLANNING WATER CONSERVATION POST OFFICE W EST XCELENERGY SCHOOLS: POUDRE / TH MPSON AT & T DIGITAL CABLE CDOT DITCH COMP Y lx w�v.eLi RAILROAD: UP or BNSF REA/DOE/PRPA NATURAL RESOURCES PARK PLANNING TOTALG; bA� lap The Railroad recommends that the City require the developers to incorporate similar language in deeds for all lots abutting Railroad right-of-way, plus consider the need for a sound wall and/or buffer zone. Should the above requirements be met for any proposed development adjacent to the Railroad's property, the objectives raised herein shall be withdrawn and the Railroad will agree to the Recorded Exemption adjacent to the Railroad. Should you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please call me to discuss. Sinc rely, Gregg A. Larsen Manager Real Estate (402)544-8552 Ei June 13, 2005 City of Fort Collins Colorado Current Plarnina Department 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: Spring Creek Farms Final Plat — Case No. 24-OOB Dear Mr. Ott: This is to acknowledge receipt of your June 9, 2005 letter regarding Spring Creek Farms Final Plat for the dividing of an existing parcel of land into two (2) separate lots. I previously received notification in a December 28, 2004 letter from the Planning Department and responded with a January 31, 2005 letter a copy of which is attached. I will reiterate my earlier position in that we have reviewed the above letters and object to such proposed use without the City's requirement of a fence being constructed along the common property line of the Union Pacific Railroad Company's adjacent branch line rail corridor. The Railroad's corridor through this area is 150' wide being 75' on either side of the branch track centerline. Any development plans provided by Applicant must reflect the Railroad's 150' wide right-of-way (which they do). The proposed use as residential is contrary to the objectives of public safety and general welfare, and conflicts with the Railroad's adjacent industrial use. Therefore, at a minimum, the Railroad would request that a 6' chain -link fence be constructed to protect its operating corridor. The Railroad has long objected to uses that combine human occupancy or congregation near unprotected and unbuffered freight rail operations. These objections reflect a concern for public safety and impacts from the generation of noise and vibrations from freight operations. The Railroad's standard requirements for conveying property contiguous to our operating corridor is to include the following language in the body of the Deed: "Grantee acknowledges that Grantor is operating (and will continue to operate) a railroad upon its adjoining property, and recognizes that such operation may create some noises and vibrations affecting the Property. Grantee accepts the Property subject to such noises and vibrations, and hereby covenants to release Grantor from all liability, cost and expense resulting therefrom. This covenant shall run with the Property, and shall be binding upon the suceesors and assigns of Grantee." Real Estate UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 1400 Douglas Street, Stop 1690 Omaha, Nebraska 68179-1690 fx.(402) 501-0340 The Railroad recommends that the City require the developers to incorporate similar language in deeds for all lots abutting Railroad right-of-way, plus consider the need for a sound wall and/or buffer zone. Should the above requirements be met for any proposed development adjacent to the Railroad's property, the objectives raised herein shall be withdrawn and the Railroad will agree to the Recorded Exemption adjacent to the Railroad. Should you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please call me to discuss. Sierely, Greg A. Larsen Manager Real Estate (402)544-8552 January 31, 2005 City of Fort Collins Colorado Current Planning Department 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: Spring Creek Farms Final Plat — Case No. 24-OOB Dear Ms. Martin: This is to acknowledge receipt of your December 28, 2004 letter regarding Spring Creek Farms Final Plat for the dividing of an existing parcel of land into two (2) separate lots. I have reviewed the above letter and object to such proposed use without the City's requirement of a fence being constructed along the common property line of the Union Pacific Railroad Company's adjacent branch line rail corridor. The Railroad's corridor through this area is 150' wide being 75' on either side of the branch track centerline. Any development plans provided by Applicant must reflect the Railroad's 150' wide right-of-way (which they do). The proposed use as residential is contrary to the objectives of public safety and general welfare, and conflicts with the Railroad's adjacent industrial use. Therefore, at a minimum, the Railroad would request that a 6' chain -link fence be constructed to protect its operating corridor. The Railroad has long objected to uses that combine human occupancy or congregation near unprotected and unbuffered freight rail operations. These objections reflect a concern for public safety and impacts from the generation of noise and vibrations from freight operations. The Railroad's standard requirements for conveying property contiguous to our operating corridor is to include the following language in the body of the Deed: "Grantee acknowledges that Grantor is operating (and will continue to operate) a railroad upon its adjoining property, and recognizes that such operation may create some noises and vibrations affecting the Property. Grantee accepts the Property subject to such noises and vibrations, and hereby covenants to release Grantor from all liability, cost and expense resulting therefrom. This covenant shall run with the Property, and shall be binding upon the suceesors and assigns of Grantee." Real Estate UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 1400 Douglas Street, Stop 1690 Omaha, Nebraska 68179-1690 N. (402) 501-0340 Section 2.2.11(A) of the Land Use Code. Be sure and return all of your red - lined plans when you re -submit. The number of copies of each document to re- submit is shown on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet. If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at 221-6341. Yours Truly, Steve Olt, City Planner cc: Katie Moore Rita Davis J.R. Wilson UP Railroad/&regg Larsen Current Planning File #24-006 Page 10 a continuation of that street from the Meadows East Subdivision to the south). These street names must be finally agreed to and changed before the subdivision plat can be scheduled for an administrative public hearing. Stormwater: 1. How is the coordination being handled for the 2 street projects? They will affect the storm drainage. Water/Wastewater- 1. A 35' wide easement, instead of the 30' easement as shown, is needed from the Nancy Gray Avenue - Sagebrush Drive intersection north to the property line. Light & Power: 1. Light & power does not want sidewalks and landscaping installed now on adjacent, undeveloped properties. Current Planning: 1. The street name issue must be resolved prior to scheduling this item for the required administrative public hearing. Apparently the use of the requested Joseph Allen Drive and Charles Brockman Drive names would require some City Council action as it relates to the IGA between Lorimer County and several municipalities. Also, if the requested names were determined to be allowed then there could be some duplicate or similar street name conflicts associated with existing streets. ********************************************************************** This completes staff (and outside reviewing agencies) review and comments at this time. Another round of staff review is determined to be necessary before this item can be scheduled for the required administrative public hearing. This proposal is subject to the 90-day revision re -submittal requirement (from the date of this comment letter, being July 5, 2005) as set forth in Page 9 Number: 54 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] Clearly define all utility easements on the plat. Number: 55 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] See utility plans and plat for other comments. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the City staff review meeting on June 29, 2005: Engineering: 1. There are still scanability issues on the utility plans. 2. Different drive curb cuts are needed. 3. A signature block for the affected ditch lateral company is needed on the subdivision plat. 5 -, Q nd1 Ure- bi 0 CL , ;e 4. The irrigation lateral line its located partially outside of its easement. 5. Approval is needed from the Union Pacific Railroad for the irrigation lateral changes that affect the railroad right-of-way. 6. A bus bay easement is needed on Lot 1. 7. Does the City of Fort Collins own Lot 1 at this time? If so the City needs to sign the subdivision plat and utility plans. 8. Regarding street names, there is an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Larimer County and several municipalities (including Fort Collins) that requires "existing street names to continue across intersections and roundabouts". This is set forth in the IGA's Rules of the Streets, Standardization Of Road Naming Criteria #16. Therefore, proposed Charles Brockman Drive must be Katandin Drive (a continuation of that street from the Sidehill development to the east); and, proposed Joseph Allen Drive must be Sagebrush Drive (ultimately Page 8 Topic: Utility Plans Number: 40 Created: 1/28/2005 [6/28/051 (1/28/05] The plans call for the storm sewers in this development to be connected to lines that will be constructed by a separate project, the Timberline Road Improvements project, presumably. This makes development of this site dependent on the completion of the improvements along Timberline that are currently being designed by the City's Street Oversizing group. Proposed storm drains A and B do not appear to meet the City's Engineering ,Z 1 .., ,4 r-over Department minimum 2-foot cover requirement. ak road. 11 L., , -,. ') - l` , imtlre- n "2k+ct cover , 19 3,5f4 4 C-0VY Call out clearance between proposed storm drain and irrigation line as well as "} rOQd' with sanitary line. �eAr'„nCf r<,IIo;.,15 hrkv n Please add a note requiring all disturbed areas by this project to be re -seeded. Number: 65 Created: 7/1/2005 [7/1/05] The drainage summary table is incomplete please provide all necessary information in order to be able to read the table. 1 Co( v.vrY� 1ri b f 15 �1ove bt e r\ re AA,* Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: General Number: 8 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/051 [1/24/05] No sanitary sewer connections currently exist to the east across Timberline Road. This project can not be approved until such time as the sanitary sewer is constructed or it becomes a part of this development. Number: 52 Created;6/28/2005 [6/28/05] Show, label and clearly define all water main lowerings, fittings, thrust blocks, valves, etc. ! 1 1 L c��� I bef� (a(��f'� f'� , , s cgl A 0UA Number: 53 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] Clearly define all sanitary sewer main extensions. Cross check all inverts elevations, rim elevations, etc. Sewer olr0� ►r1�o�',ma`f;a►1 has bets rtckrAeA1# Page 7 Number; 62 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] For crest vertical curves, both the centerlines and flowlines need to use curves (not just the centerline). aer�Apo7i 4� It (v�w�ir�pS. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan Topic: Ditch relocation Number: 41 Created: 1/28/2005 [6/28/05] [1/28/05] The proposed plans involve the construction of a pipe system to convey the existing ditch along the site. Construction of that pipe will need to be approved by the ditch company. The irrigation line will need to be tied to a proposed line that will be built by the Timberline Road project. Construction of the off -site portion of the irrigation line will require that a temporary construction easement and a permanent irrigation easement be dedicated prior to project approval. Topic: Drainage Number: 66 Created: 7/1/2005 [7/1/05] Please quantify the amount of flows on the west side of Joseph Allen Drive that will be allowed to infiltrate in the interim condition. This is an acceptable alternative, as long as a temporary drainage easement is dedicated for the area where these flows are being discharged at. Topic: Grading Plans Number: 67 Created: 7/1/2005 [7/1/05] Please tie proposed road grades to the existing grades in the field in order to evaluate if any slope easements will be needed. Topic: Off -site easements Number: 43 Created: 1/28/2005 [7/1/05] [1/28/05] The construction of the proposed detention ponds, and some of the outf all for these ponds will require the dedication of off -site easements. It is recommended that all detention pond easements be placed in separate tracts. Page 6 8. (on redlines) Joseph Allen Drive should be named Sagebrush Drive and Charles Brockman should be named Katandin Drive to meet the street - naming conventions agreed to in the IGA. Topic: Street design Number: 24 Created: 1/24/2005 [7/1/05] Some cross -slopes are still less than 2%, and some are greater than the maximum of 3%. Please revise. [1/24/05] Cross -slopes for streets should be min 2%. Where I've checked, they've been close, but not quite up to 2%. Number; 27 i Create& 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] repeat (1/24/05] Maximum grade breaks allowed =0.4%. Grade breaks around curb returns are allowed to go as large as 3%, but this is allowed only for "extreme circumstances" which do not exist here. Please minimize grade breaks around curb returns. .a'cOek vc Merl L,P�a�ic � • Number: 28 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Flowlines are allowed 1% grade breaks at inlets, but no larger than 1%. Please revise. [1/24/05] While flowlines are allowed 1% grade breaks at inlets, the centerline must still be designed with a vertical curve. I o Je b,A / ma)( 5 !'m. Number: 29 Created: 1/24/2005 ' [6/28/05] repeat (1/24/05] Please provide details of all pedestrian romps showing that they will meet current ADA standards, including distances and spot elevations. ` ;11 (r�rn 5 qfL �o bC bh, li r` j-}d. �etat� PCOUI( Cd( rye lA I l i �y �IQriS, Number: 33 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] repeat [1/24/05] ROW is labeled much larger than iq shown on the plot for the local streets. PC ln/ IC - � e- 6 Number: 58 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] The arc length of curve c11 on Nancy Gray should be at least 100' long due to the shallow angle of the street. (Chapter 7, LCUASS) C� r v� c 1��- VIU_ t P r r (-AO a-1- e� Gn a. s aV, arC_ 1erij4k 5rta4er-�lr.on IDU\. t') G�S) bffn tw -5}po' ��• ohs qr�o� PPI' Topic: Plot Number: 9 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Repeated for the record. [1/24/05] ROW will be needed along Drake Road. This can be addressed now or it can wait until the development/replatting of Tract A. Number: 14 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Repeat: Utility easements should curve to parallel the ROW at corners. [1/24/05] The curves at local street - local street intersections should be a minimum of 15' instead of 95, and the utility easements should curve parallel to the ROW. Number: 16 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Repeat: All should read: Spring Creek Farms. [1/24/05] Please match the titles of the plat and utility plans. Number: 45 Created: 1/28/2005 [6/28/05] Please provide a signature line on the plat and call out the easement owner on the plat. [1/28/05] Who owns the irrigation lateral easement? They must sign the plans and the plat. Number: 57 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] For the construction easement on Lot 1, please re -label it as a construction area, and not an easement. This will simplify building construction issues for the police department. Number: 63 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] Technical Services comments: 1. Boundary and legal close. 2. How was the south line se 1/4 determined? (south 1/4 corner) 3. Plat name in dedication does not match 4. What is Tract A? Who owns and maintains Tract A? 5. The easements on the "outside" of the internal streets are not locatable. 6. The note about the ownership and maintenance of Lot 1 needs to be removed. 7. If the City owns Lot 1 now, we need to sign the plat. Page 4 Number: 35 Created:1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Please see redlines for any additional comments, and remember to return all redlines with each resubmittal. P �. A � : , I �_ [1/24/05] Please see redlines for any additional comments. A more detailed review will be provided with more detailed plans. Number: 37 Created: 1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Please see redlined utility plan checklist for any additional comments. v [1/24/05) Please complete a utility plan checklist and submit with future revisions. Number: 56 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] Street names: Joseph Allen needs to be changed back to Sagebrush, Charles Brockman should be Katandin. (per IGA) Number: 59 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] A bus bay was previously required by Transfort just south of Nancy Gray. What is the status of this? Should an easement for the shelter be dedicated by this plat? -} co pla to bps �ay In �roposer aP.0, W, Number: 60 Created: 6/28/2005 [6/28/05] The irrigation line is shown outside of its easement where it crosses Joseph Allen/Sagebrush. `�.Y 7rY, i t u c c v c; i `. Number: 61 Created: 6/28/2005 (6/28/05] It appears that an off -site easement is needed from the railroad for work on the irrigation line in RR ROW. Please provide documentation from the RR that they intend to grant this development an easement to do that work. Please submit it to the City prior to the scheduling of a hearing for this (p� ( 11 i o c:0,VC; k cor4lfcl0 project.hc(5 fen rnOve6 Number: 64 Created: 7/1/2005 [7/1/05] Please note on the plans that street sidewalks are to be installed at 1 the time of development of lot 1 and Tract A. 1 aA ACA i� goa A Pro�l c s�ee4s. Page 3 Number: 71 Created;7/5/2005 [7/5/05] The Technical Services Department offered the following comments: a. The outside boundary and legal description on the plot do close. b. How was the south line SE1/4 (south 1/4 corner) determined? c. The plat name and the name in the Statement of Ownership and Subdivision Dedication (last paragraph) do not match. d. What is Tract A? Who owns and maintains Tract A? e. The easements on the "outside" of the internal streets are not locatable. f. The note on Sheet 2 of 2 about ownership and maintenance of Lot 1 needs to be removed. g. If the City owns Lot 1 now then the City needs to sign the subdivision plat. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: General Number: 17 Created:1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Lots of scanning problem areas still exist. A number of areas are hard to read as it is before scanning. Please enlarge fonts, limit areas of overlap of text/symbols/lines/shading. 5,; eie S�nnQaI 11 [1/24/05] Please review LCUASS appendix E for scanability requirements and revise all plans as required. Number: 19 Created:1/24/2005 [6/28/05] Please show the striping for Nancy Gray on the east side of Timberline to show how lanes will align. [1/24/05] The intersection of Circle with Timberline needs to be redesigned to work with the design of Nancy Gray across the street: Right turn lane, bike, thru, left, thru, bike). (This was discussed in the Mansion Park comments in '02) Please coordinate with Side Hill. Page 2 h STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Date: 07/05/2005 c/o Jim Allen -Morley 209 South Meldrum Street Fort Collins, CO. 80521 Staff has reviewed your submittal for SPRING CREEK FARMS POP - FINAL PLAT (TYPE 1), and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Topic: Plat Number: 68 Issue Contact: Steve Olt Created: 7/5/2005 [7/5/05] Carl Jenkins of the U.S. Post Office indicated that they have no problems with the Spring Creek Farms subdivision plat as it exists at this time. Number: 69 Created: 7/5/2005 [7/5/05] Dennis Greenwalt of Comcast Cable TV indicated that they would like to see a 15' wide utility easement along East Drake Road. They would also like to see a 9' wide utility easement along the Union Pacific Railroad right-of- way. Along the north property line they would like to see a 9' wide utility easement granted. Number: 70 Created: 7/5/2005 [7/5/05] Please see the attached letters from Gregg Larsen of the Union Pacific Railroad (dated 1/31/05 & 6/13/05) regarding their concerns about residential uses in close proximity to and along their right-of-way. Although their concern is founded and acknowledged by City staff, this subdivision plat does not convey any particular land uses at this time. Site specific land uses on Tract A and Lot 1 of the Spring Creek Farms plat will be determined with subsequent Project Development Plan submittals to the City for review and approval. To date, only the proposed City of Fort Collins new police facility on Lot 1 (contained within the square bounded by 4 streets) is under development review. Nothing is currently under review on any portion of Tract A. Paoe 1