Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAPLE HILL 3RD REPLAT - PDP - 29-00G - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSNumber: 14 Created: 6/8/2004 Marshfield land flowline design: While sag curves are allowed for centerline profiles, a minimum of 0.5% straight grade should be maintained on flowlines into inlets. Please revise. • Acknowledged and revised. Number: 15 Created: 6/8/2004 Where the sidewalks cross the private drive on block 23, the cross slope of the sidewalk should be 2%. There is an area of the drive shown at 2% but it does not match the location of the sidewalks. • Acknowledged and removed. -Which phase is the alley in Block 26in? -Please work closely with your engineer to ensure that utilities, driveways, and street trees will fit with the newly narrow lots. It currently appears that some lots will not be able to have driveways. • Acknowledged and revised. • All of CR 11 will be constructed in Phase 4. The rough grading will be completed with Phase 1 to allow access to the site, but no further improvements will occur until Phase 4. • Sheet one of the landscape plan has been revised • Temporary turnarounds with easements have been included with this resubmittal. • Alley product is not applicable. • Utilities and street trees have been coordinated. See above. Number: 18 Created: 6/10/2004 Because of the existing DA for Maple Hill, a very close look needs to be taken at the proposed re -phasing of the project. If the conditions of the DE need to be altered to reflect differences in phasing, then an amendment to the DA will be necessary, requiring all affected parties to sign. The utility plan sheets showing phasing need to be revised to coincide with the changes proposed on the site plan. • Acknowledged and reviewed. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 9. Created: 6/8/2004 The proposed revisions are a mess. At least half of the sheets refer to the wrong sheet to be revised. Please take another look at the plans and label them correctly. There are two options for revising utility plans: the first is to bubble out areas on the original sheets and make revisions on that sheet, and the second is to bubble out areas on the original sheets and add notes referring to new sheets (ie 20C, 20D) where the revisions are shown. Please use one of these two choices (except sheet 80, which should be revised on the original sheet). In going trough the revisions for the first and second replats, this was not done. Please correct those revisions as well. As the plans stand, there is no way of knowing that revisions were made to the original sheets if all a person sees is the original sheet (which is where most people would stop looking). Sheets that I found to need revising: 20, 32, 58, 80, 65, 28, 29, 19, 24, 25, 25A, and the cover sheet. Please double-check this, as there may be more sheets that need to be included. • Acknowledged and reviewed. We will be submitting signed drawings showing areas that are changing in bubbles, and calling out which sheet to reference. Number: 10 Created: 6/8/2004 Please take a very close look at how the utilities will fit with street trees and driveways on these narrower lots. The detail provided on the utility plans still has the wider lots shown. It appears that there will be at least a few frontloaded lots where driveways will not fit. • Acknowledged and reviewed. We have had 4 utility coordination meetings with ELCO, Boxelder, XCEL, City Power, Comcast and Qwest. The overall landscape plan submitted by VF Ripley is a concept, showing the required 1 tree per lot. The detail on the utility sheet of the replat shows the revised layouts, including the tree location. Our goal is to describe the requirements, making sure that there is at least one option for tree/utility layout per lot, and still leave the home builder as much flexibility as possible. Number: 11 Created: 6/8/2004 The private drive (private alley) design shows a fair amount of water point discharging over the public sidewalk. This is prohibited under LCUASS. Please divert the water to an under -walk drain (use D-10 from the stormwater manual). • Acknowledged and removed. Number: 12 Created: 6/8/2004 The lot detail showing lots with private alley frontage still shows all lots taking driveway access from the street. Was this intended? • Acknowledged and removed. Number: 13 Created: 6/8/2004 The utility plans show a detail of the alley being in ROW, with 4' utility easements on either side, but this does not match the plat, nor does it match the intent of having the alley be a private drive, please revise. Acknowledged and removed. Number: 16 Created: 6/8/2004 See redlines for additional comments. • Acknowledged and revised. Number: 17 Created: 6/8/2004 FYI -a copy of my comment on the minor amendment: Maple Hill Replat 3 Minor amendment comments 6.8.04 Phasing: Some changes need to be made to the phasing plan proposed: County Road 11 still needs to be shown as Phase 1 at least south of Maple Hill Road. I've been told that the grading has been completed for this portion of CR11, but the $ for improvements still needs to be City in Phase 1. North of Maple Hill Road, the grading and for $ for CR11 should be put up with the first phase to go in (Phase 4?). Please show the entire Maple Hill site phasing (revise sheet 1 of the site plan?) -Also, Phase one will also require a temporary turnaround (with easement) for Summerpark Lane's east dead-end, and Phase Two will require a temporary turnaround (with easement) for the North dead-end of Bar Harbor Drive. Maple Hill 3rd Replat- Type I (LUC) June 16, 2004 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: General Number: 3 Created: 6/7/2004 Please add a signature line for the Baker Lateral Ditch Company. • Acknowledged and revised. Number: 4 Created: 6/7/2004 Please correct the plat language on the cover sheet as redlined. • Acknowledged and revised. Number: 5 Created: 6/7/2004 Please add the following note, which appears on the original plat and is applicable to this replat: All driveways are to be a minimum of 20' in length as measured from the back of sidewalk. Acknowledged and revised. Number: 6 Created: 6/7/2004 The outer boundary of Block 17 is different than on the original plat. Please correct boundary and tract H acreage. • Acknowledged and revised. Land records asked that we change the names of the Blocks, to correspond with the Replat. The changes are as follows: o Block 17 is now Block 1 of Maple Hill First Replat o Block 22 is now Block 2 of Maple Hill First Replat o Block 29 is now Block 3 of Maple Hill First Replat Number: 7 Created: 6/7/2004 This replat no longer shows the Baker Lateral easement. Was this intended? Whether or not the easement remains, a representative of the Baker Lateral will have to sign the plat. • Acknowledged and revised. Number: 8 Created: 6/7/2004 If Tract EE is intended as an easement and not as public ROW, then it should not be named an alley. It should be labeled as a private drive. • Acknowledged and removed because we are no longer platting alley product.