HomeMy WebLinkAboutLIND PROPERTY - FDP - 39-94C - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTS (5)4 %
Please show where will low flows from underpass be directed to ?
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Gary Lopez
Topic: ZONING
Number: 251 Created: 7/3/2003
No Comment
Red lined drawings are available at the Current Planning front desk. Be sure and return all
of your redlined plans when you re -submit.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at (970) 221-67-0.
Yours Truly,
Bob Barkeen
City Planner
Page 6
V ,
C3710, 711 -Please design the parapet wall in accordance with detail 1108 and 1107. See redlines. Add
detail 1107 to the underpass detail sheet.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Monica Moore
Topic: CR52
Number: 279 Created: 7/17/2003
Lot 8 - Forecastle Drive
Street tree does not maintain minimum clearance to proposed streetlight.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Topic: CR 52
Number: 284 Created: 7/22/2003
Please provide a design and cost estimate for the future crosssing of CR 52 by the drainage channel
specified in the ACE report provided.
Topic: Ditch Company approval
Number: 281 Created: 7/22/2003
Approval from the Windsor Reservoir Ditch Companv will be required prior to approval of these plans.
Topic: Drainage and Erosion Control PI ,� • s
Number: 280 Created: 7/22/2003
It seems that the scale of the Drainage and Erosion Control plans are such that they are not scannable.
Please provide the plans at a different scale by exc+- , -ling CR 52 from these plans, CR52 Drainage and
Erosion Control plan can be done on a separate shy t.
Topic: Drainage Plans
Number: 248 Created: 6/4/2003
Please provide a design and a detail for an emerap.ncv spillway in the detention pond. All detention ponds
are required to have spillways. Please indicate tht; . -.i ion of the spillway on the drainage plan.
Topic: Drainage Report
Number: 283 Created: 7/22/2003
Please provide 3 copies of the drainage report as nr, was submitted with this latest submittal.
Topic: Grading Plan
Number: 282 Created: 7/22/2003
Please call out the Top Of Foundation elevations on the grading plans. It seems that this layer may have
been left off the latest submitted set of plans.
Topic: Overall Utility Plans
Number: 94 Created: 11 /19/2002
7/22/03
Please add size NMof all proposed and existing fnr7!f';-s on the overall utility plan
Topic: Phasing Plans
Number: 247 Created: 6/4/2003
Please add a note to the phasing plans indicating how the temporary swales will be seeded.
Please add a note calling for the area that is outsir, ' Phase 1 that will be disturbed will be reseeded.
Provide a detail of the capping that will be done tc a storm sewer on the phasing plan when there is no
downstream outfall connection.
Topic: Underpass Plans
Number: 88 Created: 11 /19/2002
Pi2e5
Number: 219 Created: 6/3/2003
CS200 - See Appendix E6 for scanability requirements (min font size, overlapping, etc). This sheet is a little
difficult to read and/or reproduce.
7/14/3: 1 know youVe tried hard to fix this problem, but unfortunately, the sheets are unsconable the way
they are. lye talked to Basil to find out what !nformo on you can eliminate and he said that you do not
need to show the future filings. Also, Dave Stringer SL.: gested breaking the sheets into 2 sheets so that you
can increase the overall scale.
Number: 252
CS001 - Correction required to the ramps shown in the legend.
Number: 253
CSl 15 - Overlapping labeling, see redlines.
Number: 254
CS131 - Overlapped labeling, see redlines.
Number: 255
CS132 - See comment #217.
Number: 256
CS200, 221, 222 -See comment #219.
Created: 7/16/2003
Created: 7/16/2003
Created: 7/16/2003
Created: 7/16/2003
Created: 7/16/2003
Number: 257 Created: 7/16/2003
The rip rap at the ends of the roundabout and Sternwheeler drive need to extend over the end of the c&g.
Also, the hatching chosen looks like it's some kind ci ::: `ace treatment (flagstone). Label the riprap just so
there's no confusion. Thanks!
Number: 258 Created: 7/16/2003
CS311 - label the ROW on the profiles for Bowside, see redlines.
Number: 259 Created: 7/16/2003
CS600 - Show the ramps as directional ramps in the typical curb return detail.
Number: 260 Created: 7/16/2003
CS701 - Provide a detail for the casing and label.
Number: 261 Created: 7/16/2003
The Baker Lateral signature block may have a typo. Is "delections" supposed to be "deletions"?
Number: 262
CS703, 704 - Overlapped labeling, see redlines.
Created: 7/16/2003
Number: 263 Created: 7/16/2003
CS705 - Correct the conflicting information in the Rondway Section A -A detail.
Number: 264 Created: 7/16/2003
CS708 - Corrections required to the Wooden Rail detoil, it conflicts with CS710, 711 and standard detail 1108.
Number: 265 Created: 7/16/2003
CS709 - Misspelling? See redlines.
Number: 266 Created: 7/16/2003
Page 4
Number: 267 Created: 7/16/2003
Sheets 2 and 3 require a few labels to be oriented to the reader.
Number: 268 Created: 7/16/2003
Correct the trail access to read "Public Access Easement".
Topic: Traffic Study
Number: 28 Created: 11 /12/2002
Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for all
arterial/arterial intersections. Additional ROW may be required to accommodate a dedicated northbound
right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter 8 for Intersection
requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. Thy: TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any
modification and/variance requested by this develc,..nent.
3/11/3: Repeat comment.
5/30/3: The roundabout analysis was received and accepted by Eric Brackie. However, the long-range
analysis is still missing from the TIS (only the short range was provided). Please provide the long-range analysis
in the TIS.
7/14/3: The response letter from Matt Dehlich was reraived and accepted by Eric Brackie In lieu of the long
range analysis. This item is now closed.
Topic: Underpass
Number: 245 Created: 6/3/2003
See detail 1108 for City railing/parapet wall requirements for the bridge/underpass for CR11 and add it to the
detail sheet. Also, see the city guidelines for pedest :n facilities and AASHTO for railing requirements. The
wooden fencing shown does not meet any of these .andards, design or safety.
7/16/3: Please see the attached for additional notes that need to be added regarding product specs, etc.
Also, there are some conflicting notes/details on the ,derpass sheets. See redlines.
Topic: Utility
Number: 54 Created: 11 /12/2002
See detail 7-24 for all street -widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards.
3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the min PC to PCR. Show and label Rl, R2, R3, W and flowline as
required by 7-24.
5/30/3: Repeat comment. Please provide a detail (per 7-24) and show/label R1-R3, W.
7/14/3: The detail has been provided as requested. �nwever, the flowline (R2) is missing and R3 In not
correct. Please show and label R2 and R3. Also, for .arity, remove the dimensioning (Rl, R2, R3, W) off the
plan view (it's already shown in the detail).
Number: 217 Created: 6/3/2003
CS131 and ail others that apply - the proposed ramps and sidewalks need to show how they tie Into existing
ramps and sidewalks along the west side of CRl 1. Slow your removals so that it is very clear what is staying
and what is coming out. This will help Street Oversi� bid out and construct this road in the future.
7/14/3: Your response on the redlines states that thF! :�movals should be "intuitive". As easy as that sounds, it
doesn't work that way in the real world. What is bei; constructed and/or removed must be clearly shown
on the plan & profile and utility sheets so that wher ?ts built 3 to 5 years in the future, there's no question
what supposed to be done. Basically, if it's not on i Mans, the contractors wont do it and our Inspectors
cant enforce it. Take the curb and gutter removal i . :e off the striping sheet and putting it on the plan and
profile and utility sheets and clearly show what is bei:.g removed and replaced (right now the plans are a
little vague).
Page 3
Topic: Easements
Number: 46 Created: 11 /12/2002
The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and
construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are
required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction
occurring on all sides.
3/11 /3: Repeat comment. There is off -site grading and construction occurring outside of the platted
boundary. Please extend the platted boundary limi!s or provide all necessary off -site easements.
5/30/3, 7/14/3: Repeat comment.
Topic: General
Number: 27 Created: 11/12/2002
Approval of these plans is contingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development
must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple HIII) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align
with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addition, this developer Is responsible for the interim design
improvements to the Vine and Lemay Intersection. In the event that the transportation tax is approved, the
money is appropriated by the city, and the improver^-nts are scheduled for construction, this developer will
no longer be responsible for any improvements to t: ; ine and Lemay intersection. However, It could be
years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer
would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lemay.
3/11 /3, 5/30/3, 7/14/3: Keeping this item open.
Topic: Intersection Details
Number: 161 Created: 3/13/2003
The midblock crossing shown on CS331 must be a minimum 12' wide.- See 7.7.5 for depth requirements.
Identify the transition length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it Is to go
to outflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would - `o have Sternwheeler the.through street without mid -
block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipf: uy.
5/30/3: Please identify the transition length from out ::w to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label
that it is to go to outflow C&G.
7/14/3: Conflicting spot elevations, see redlines.
Topic: Plat
Number: 16 Created: 11 /6/2002
Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat.
3/11/3, 5/30/3, 7/14/3: Repeat Comment,
Number: 125 Created: 3/11/2003
From Technical Services: Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal.
5/30/3: Repeat comment.
7/16/3: Repeat comment. Several distances missing. Some lot line distance questions - see redlines.
Number: 127. Created: 3/11 /2003
From Technical Services: Separate document recen' nn number vacations need to be shown, on this plat.
5/30/3: Repeat comment.
Number: 204 Created: 6/2/2003
From Technical Services - Boundary and Legal close.
P.i m 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Citv of Fort Collins
�v
VIGNETTE STUDIOS Date: 7/24/2003
TERENCE HOAGLUND
144 N. MASON ST. #2
FT. COLLINS, CO 80524
Staff has reviewed your submittal for LIND P!'OPERTY PDP - TYPE I (LUC) AND FINAL
COMPLIANCE #39-946/C, and we offer the ijilowing comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Bob Barkeen
Topic: Site
Number: 285 Created: 7/24/2003
The "Potential Future Oil well" is. not shown within the location agreed upon by the applicant and Mineral
Rights Holder, please show this oil well in its proper location.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: CR52
Number: 269 Created: 7/16/2003
Correct the ramps shown in the legend of pages 001, 302, 305, and 306. Should all be directional.
Number: 270
CS100 - Correct the overlapped labeling.
Created: 7/16/2003
Number: 271 Created: 7/16/2003
CS303 - Lind Filing 1 does not show the proposed 36' storm line as currently labeled. Should this be Filing 2?
Number: 272 Created: 7/16/2003
CS305 - The proposed 24" storm line is not shown in Lind 1 st filing as labeled. Should this be 2nd filing?
Number: 273
CS308, 309 - Correct the overlapping labeling.
Created: 7/16/2003
Number: 274 Created: 7/16/2003
CS601 - Repeat, provide the detail for the waterline stub and thrust block.
Number: 275 Created: 7/16/2003
CS702 - Block out the background contours for better clarity on the labeling - see redlines.
Number: 276
CS703 - Overlapping labeling, see redlines.
Created: 7/16/2003
Number: 277 Created: 7/16/2003
See attached for additional note requirements for the underpass. All the details for the underpass shown on
Lind, first filing, need to be shown on these plans as well. The underpass must be designed in accordance
with detail 1108. The underpass details shown on shy is 704, 706, 707 do not meet the city's requirements.
Number: 278 Crested: 7/16/2003
CS708 - How thick is the cast in place topping for the pathway? Please label and dimension. Repeat
comment.
Page 1