HomeMy WebLinkAboutNEENAN OFFICE BUILDING - RC SITE PLAN REVIEW & MINOR SUBDIVISION - 5-96 - CORRESPONDENCE -Sheet 8 of the utility plans shows two inlets and a storm sewer crossing the site entrance.
Please show these drainage facilities on the drainage and erosion control plans. What is
the flow entering from the east and west sides of Prospect Road? What is the capacity of
the inlets and the storm sewer? Please state the type and size of the proposed inlets and
pipes. A profile of this system is needed. Please provide sizing calculations for all
drainage facilities.
Please specify the size of all proposed rip -rap. All rip -rap under 12" must be buried.
The City of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation Dept. must approve of the construction of
the storm drain under the Poudre River bike path. A bike path traffic plan will be needed
for during this construction.
An erosion control report must be submitted for this project. The report should include
discussion of proposed erosion control measures, performance standard and effectiveness
calculations, erosion control escrow, and erosion control construction sequence schedule.
Please see the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual for further
details of these requirements.
Please refer to the redlined report and plans for additional review comments.
}
The submitted drainage report does not include sufficient details needed for a final
drainage report. Please provide fiuther discussion of the proposed drainage conditions of
the site. The drainage report should include design calculations for all drainage facilities
(storm sewers, inlets, swales). The drainage report should also include the erosion control
report for the site.
The proposed overflow swale from the Tract B pond must not be within the Prospect
Road right-of-way. The overflow swale must be contained within the property boundaries
of the site. Please adjust the proposed grading of the overflow swale to remove the swale
from the right-of-way and to on -site drainage easement.
The Tract B pond should be within a drainage easement. The drainage easement must
include the maximum water surface elevation of the pond plus one foot of freeboard. The
pond's overflow Swale should also be within a drainage easement.
Please provide a cross-section of the pond overflow point and a cross-section of the
downstream swale. The cross -sections should show the depth of the 100-year flow,
freeboard, Q100, side slopes, etc.
The capacity of the proposed 12". PVC pipe at the end of the swale should be verified.
Will there be overtopping of the sidewalk during large storms? The pipe must have
capacity for the 10-year storm.
The proposed grading plan shows areas along Prospect Road with slopes of greater than
4:1. Please adjust all proposed grading to slopes of no greater than 4:1.
Please plot, on the plat and the drainage plan, the 100-year floodplain limits and base flood
elevation.
The time of concentrations for each developed subbasin should be calculated and used for
estimating peak runoff from each subbasin. Using the historic time of concentration for
the entire site will under estimate the peak runoffs. The basin parameters will change due
to development, so the developed time of concentrations should reflect this change.
Please calculate peak runoffs at points of discharge from the site.
There will be increased concentrated release into the Poudre River, due to the
development of this site. The two points of release must have outlet and bank protection
from the pipe outlets to the Poudre River. Please provide permanent erosion control
protection at these locations. Please provide a detail of each location with the designed
protection. All rip -rap protection at these locations should be buried.
PROJECT
COMNMNT STET
DEPARTMENT: tfb r rn Ou f6-
=MT : /Ve e n G� Oft')Ice�3�,' l�l,'�� l� C = s; � /m�'Wr
Please respond to this project by
Planner:
No Problems...
Problems or 'Concerns (sae below)
The Poudre River Master Plan is currently being developed and reviewed by the City of
Fort Collins. Structural Alternate 1 of the Master Plan proposes raising Prospect Road
adjacent to the Neenan site by 1.5 feet. The raising of Prospect from its current elevation
would be to protect downstream property. Although specific Master Plan alternatives for
this area have not been finalized, the proposed grading surrounding Prospect Road should
allow for the possible implementation of Alternate 1. It should also be noted that
Alternate 1 is not anticipated to cause a significant rise in the current 100-year base flood
elevation for the area surrounding this site. Please contact Susan Hayes of the
Stormwater Utility -if you have any further questions concerning the Poudre River Master.
Plan. (OvPo-)
Date: 3 - 4/- q� Signature:
COCK IF REVISIONS REQL'IEZED: ❑ PI.?.T �G : Kerr; ,fish Enc k
❑ SM prig r KP L�dwr9
'❑ LANDSC_AYE / orh i,579intTring
❑ tiTI's rl Y
Sheet 5/12
• See the general comments listed previously describing the basic design
information necessary to provide on arterial street cross -sections.
• The sidewalk must be built up to the level of the street. Provide the necessary fill
and slope easements to raise the sidewalk to the street level (providing enough
slope to the back of curb for proper drainage), provide a. 2 foot area behind the
walk as you have indicated on the typical cross section, and accommodate a
maximum 4:1 slope down to match existing grade.
• Please contact Keith Myer of the Engineering Department at 221-6605 to
discuss the requirements for final pavement design. Particularly in areas where
fill material is being brought to the site for street construction, final pavement
design is determined after the development review process when testing on the
fill material can be done. Keith has the pavement design criteria and traffic
loading numbers available.
Sheet 8/12
• Show the inlets in the driveway on the Prospect Road design sheet so it is clear
where the pavement is draining to and add flow arrows to the street design and
intersection design.
Sheet 10/12 and 11/12
• See comments on Prospect Road design and modify grading to match.
Sheet 12/12
• Standard details for arterial street, sidewalk, and ramp construction are missing
ALL SHEETS:
More comments will be generated when the design is complete enough to conduct a
detailed review.
z
Intersection details with spot elevations for any driveway or public street
• intersections
• Off -site design information to illustrate that the proposed improvements tie in to
the existing improvements or interim conditions at the end points of the project
Sheet 4/12
• Cannot distinguish between the existing centerline and the proposed centerline -
have to assume they are the same, but can't tell for sure from the information
provided. Without flowline profiles nor labels on cross slopes, it is impossible to
tell from these plans whether the proposed pavement can tie in to the existing
and achieve a 2.00% cross slope. Without design information on the existing
south E.O.A. and proposed future south flowline, it is impossible to tell whether
or not more of the road needs to be reconstructed at this time or, if it is not
desirable to do it now, the north flowline needs to be designed to work with the
future proposed crown and cross slope on the south side of Prospect Road.
Begin detaching the sidewalk as close to the bridge as possible while still
maintaining the minimum 95 foot centerline radius required for detached
sidewalks along arterial streets. Per the City's standard, the back of the sidewalk
must be at least at the r.o.w line once it swings away from the attached section
on the bridge. If a portion of the walk needs to be attached for a distance after
the bridge, the sidewalk must be a minimum of 7 feet wide. If the applicant
wishes to detach the walk so the back of the sidewalk is beyond the existing
r.o.w. for aesthetic/landscaping purposes, the sidewalk must either be in
additional dedicated r.o.w. or in a pedestrian/bicycle access easement.
• Maintain a minimum 0.40% flowline grade. Without flowline profiles, it is
impossible to tell whether or not this is being achieved. Complete the design per
the design requirements listed above.
• Show the driveway intersection in the profile (old Sharp Point Drive)
• Smooth out the transition from the bridge to the full arterial width of the north
side of Prospect Road.
• Provide a signing and striping plan. If you have questions about what the
striping plan needs to look like, please contact the City Traffic Engineer, Eric
Brace at 221-6615.
• Design the intersection of Prospect Road and the driveway (Sharp Point)
• Further comments will be forthcoming when the basic design elements described
above are provided in adequate detail to conduct a full review.
c
Sheet 3/12:
• Clearly define the limits of the Prospect Road r.o.w. dedicated with the various
reception numbers shown. In particular, it is not clear which document dedicated
the 5.00 foot strip at the west end (extend the lead arrow or label with the
reception # again).
• Please show the existing platted r.o.w. for Sharp Point Drive and a note to state
that it is existing r.o.w platted with (name of plat or reception number of deed) to
be vacated by Fort Collins City Council Ordinance No.
• A pedestrian/bicycle access easement is required anywhere the sidewalk along
Prospect Road lies outside of the r.o.w.
PROSPECT ROAD STREET DESIGN COMMENTS
The design as submitted is incomplete for final arterial street design. As stated in
presubmittal meetings and previous conceptual review comments on the site, the
following items are minimum required design elements for all arterial street design:
• Existing edge of asphalt and existing centerline profile
• Proposed centerline profile if different from existing
• Flowline Profiles - existing and proposed on both sides of the street
• Cross sections every 50 feet showing cross slopes on any existing pavement,
cross slopes on the proposed pavement, pavement depth, curb and gutter,
sidewalk, grading behind sidewalk, grading to match existing, r.o.w. lines, limits
of slope easements necessary for the grading behind the walk, location of utility
lines to be able to check cover and identify conflicts.
• Cross slopes on arterial streets are to be kept at %2.00. Existing conditions can
create situations where it is not possible to get exactly %2.00 but new
construction is kept as close to %2.00 as possible. The cross- slopes on the
opposite side of the road also need to be shown and evaluated to see if it is
necessary to raise or drop the flowline on the side being designed in order to
ultimately achieve %2.00 cross slope on both sides of the road. In some cases it
is desirable and/or necessary to remove existing pavement and/or overlay
portions of a street to adjust cross slopes, and sometimes, the crown line. If the
ideal cross -slopes cannot be achieved when only portions of a road are being
constructed, the design must be planned to best achieve the ideal design with
the complete improvements/ full width roadway construction in the future.
• Signing and striping plan
• Plan view needs to define limits of pavement construction and or
reconstruction/overlay if any is required
V
NEENAN OFFICE BUILDING II - Minor Subdivision/RC Site Plan Review .3
Engineering Department Comments
a's In general, these plans are incomplete for a final submittal. Based on the lack of
detailed design information provided with this initial submittal, it is likely that at
least 2 more full rounds of review will be necessary before the plans will be
considered for acceptance of mylars for approval. One round of review will be
necessary to review the revisions based on these comments and at least another
round will be needed to go over any remaining details prior to submittal of
mylars. As was described in the presubmittal meetings with the applicant, on
average, projects go through 3 to 4 rounds of review before mylars are
submitted. As stated in the presubmittal meetings, frequently part of the reason
projects go through so many rounds of review is due to the lack of information
available for review on the initial submittal.
❖ As of March 14, 1996, no submittal has been received with respect to the
vacation of Sharp Point Drive. As stated in presubmittal meetings, the City
needs letters from all adjacent property owners agreeing to the vacation, a
formal request and reason for the vacation in a letter from the applicant, and a
legal description of the area to be vacated prior to scheduling the item for City
Council consideration. The final plat cannot be recorded ( nor a building permit
be issued) until the r.o.w. vacation has been heard and passed by Council on
First Reading.
❖ It is not clear from the plans submitted where the existing and/or proposed
access points to the old Sharp Point Drive are on the west side. It is important
that the proposed private driveway provide shared access to the property to the
west (and the north unless the property owner agrees to Timberline Road as
access). Please include enough information on the plans to show how access
works with the adjoining property(s).
Sheet 1/12:
Please eliminate "street, drainage W from the title. City Code and the
Development agreement refer to the civil engineering/public improvement plans
as the "Utility plans", so the plan set title needs to match that reference.
Sheet 2/12:
• Minor subdivisions do not go to the Planning and Zoning Board. Please modify
the City signature blocks to match those required for a minor subdivision.
• Please add notes to define the purpose, ownership, and the maintenance
obligation (who is going to maintain the tracts) for all Tracts shown on the plat.
{
PROJECT
COMMENT SBEET
Citv of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: .ei�, �q� (P EPARTIMENT: 9-pQ
PROJE
. C11 Suers
PLAlw'ER: �-(i Lu0 --
....._ _-. -------_.._..._-
All comments must be received
0 No Problems `' --- — _-_ --JL� SAY
/ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) -TO P
Date: - �l� ��� Signature: L-V,"Ae -2't
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE PLAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS SITE
'LANDSCAPE
30
\NDSCAPE PLAN
I
PRIVATE DRIVE GRA" MIX 3
1
IDENTIFICATION SIGN I
1
�c EXISTING a AFf Q XM TE LIMIT OF
SNFUBS TO i Cp4TMZTlC" / BEED L"IT LINE
, eA E% ! REMAIN sl
1.. bco•E
i a I'1A -. 3--' \• • \ FUTURE
\ \ OFFICE
I OPEN SPACE TRACT B
GRAI *^x I
RI Ail �1 IL
t
FUTURE PARKING !
'Pi A" "CO-
RI OV D WAL
po
AFr4ROXII•TATE LIMIT OR
• '1 GO1,19TRUCTICH / SEED LkT LINE
t r
A RI
6RA00 MIK I, TY ,*
f
T F7 NI
1
1
_
.I /
It CM OC
I RI AU
Please add a note to the Site Plan which states that the trash enclosure will be
constructed of materials compatible with the main building, a minimum of 6 feet in
height, and gated.
Please add data to the Landscape Plan regarding water usage categories (high,
moderate, low) and percentage calculations.
Please add a note to the Landscape Plan which states: The developer shall ensure that
the landscape plan is coordinated with the plans done by other consultants so that the
proposed grading, storm drainage, or other construction does not conflict nor
preclude installation and maintenance of landscape elements on this plan.
0( t. { Additional landscaping is needed along the eastern property line to screen the parking
�J lot from the public view (bike path). Additional screening will also be needed along
the south and western edges of the future parking and the northern and southern
edges of the parking lot in the northwest corner of the site.
This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments may be forthcoming as the
various departments and reviewing agencies continue to review this request. Plan revisions are due
by 5 P.M. on April 3, 1996. A R-C Site Plan administrative hearing will not be scheduled until
comments have been addressed and the utility plans are at an "acceptable level" to the City Staff.
Please contact me at 221-6206 if you have any questions or concerns related to these comments. I
would like to schedule a meeting with you as soon as possible, if necessary, to discuss these
comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Ludwig
Project Planner
xc: Kerrie Ashbeck
Stormwater Utility
file/Project Planner
C. There had been discussions with the Rocky Mountain Orthopedic Center for shared
access. What happened?
5. Columbine CableVision would like to see a utility easement along Prospect Road and also
a utility easement along the west property line of Tract B (See Light and Power Utility and
PSCo comments also).
6. Please contact the City Forester at 221-6361 for an on -sight inspection of all existing trees
impacted by the development. Additional tree protection notes may need to be added to the
plans based upon the on -sight inspection.
7. Public Service of Colorado requests that the Final Plat dedicate the following minimum
width utility easements:
a. 15' adjoining the northerly right-of-way line of E. Prospect Road.
b. 15' adjoining the west lines of Tract B and Lot 2 (See Light and Power Utility and
Columbine CableVision comments also).
8. The Natural Resources Department notes that they have met in the field and spoken
extensively with the developer's consultants. It appears that all is in order with regard to the
Natural Area concerns. However, all parties will need to assure that the Site and Engineering
Plans are well coordinated.
9. Comments from the Engineering Department are attached.
10. Comments from the Stormwater Utility are attached.
11. The Planning Department offers the following comments:
Please revise the signature block on the Site Plan to reflect Planning approval by the
"Director of Planning" (not the Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Board).
;Jpo'*� Please add the Legal Description to the Site Plan.
be' Please label the Site Plan as Sheet 1 of 3, the Landscape Plan as sheet 2 of 3, and the
Building Elevations as sheet 3 of 3.
de-' Please add notes to the building elevations describing the proposed colors of building
materials.
e. Please add a note to the Site Jhich states that all rooftop or ground mounted
mechanical equipment is to b lly reeved from the public view.
CommL :y Pl;
Current Planning
Citv of Fort Collins
March 15, 1996
Bruce Hendy
BHA Design
2000 Vermont
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Bruce,
and Environmental rvices
Staff has reviewed your documents for the Neenan Office Building H, R-C Site Plan that were
submitted February 29, 1996, and would like to offer the following comments:
1. The Poudre Fire Authority will require the entire building to be equipped with an automated
fire suppression system as the building is out of access as per the Uniform Building Code and
is greater than 5,000 square feet in size.
2. The Light and Power Utility offers the following comments:
a. A 15' utility easement is needed along the Prospect Road right-of-way (See PSCo and
Columbine CableVision Comments also).
b. The utility and access easement for the private drive needs to be at least 10' wider, all
on the southerly side of the drive at least to the point it attaches to Lot 1 (all the way
from Prospect Road).
C. Attached is a drawing showing planned streetlights. One tree needs to be relocated
to provide a minimum of 40' clearance to the streetlight.
3! The Parks and Recreation Department is interested in continuing the bike path along the
southern edge of the proposed and future parking lot to a point where grades will allow it to
connect to the sidewalk along Prospect Road, at the Parks and Recreation Departments
expense. Please contact Craig Foreman at 221-6366 to discuss this further.
4. The Transportation Department offers the following comments:
a. The northbound left turn is a level of service "F" but is acceptable.
b. The Sharp Point Drive / Prospect Road intersection will not be signalized.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750
FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002