HomeMy WebLinkAboutLIND PROPERTY - PDP - 39-94B - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS (6)Engineer's comments:
1) Irrigation ditch — Centex Homes has been in correspondence with the downstream
owners of the irrigation ditch in regards to buying out their portion of the ditch.
However, the irrigation ditch is still being shown on the utility plans (outside of the City
right-of-way and easement). The ditch is being shown as relocated around the underpass
for CR 11 and tying in to the ditch on the Maple Hill side of CR 52. The status of the
ditch has not been determined as of the date of this submittal.
2) County Road 11 Improvements — We met with Matt Baker on February 3, 2003 to
discuss the timing of the improvements for CR 11. The City is planning to widen CR 11
to 36' and overlay this summer. Also, from this meeting, the ultimate improvements
seem to be several years away. After the meeting we spoke with Susan Joy and her
impression was that the improvements would be constructed within a couple of years.
We have not addressed the phasing of the realignment of CR 11, due to the differing of
opinions within the City.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 24 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Response: The relocated irrigation line is being shown on the plans. Spot elevations for
the relocated line near the underpass are being shown. Please refer to the underpass
drawings.
Where will low flows from underpass be directed to ?
Response: The drainage for the underpasses is designed to flow through the underpass for
CR 52 and onto the Maple Hill property.
Owners of the irrigation line will need to sign of on the underpass plans.
Response: Comment acknowledged.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Mark Jackson
Topic: General
78
Please clarify for me that applicant is responsible for building ped. underpass at CR 11. Is
Gillespie building the CR 52 underpass that connects to Lind?
Response: The pedestrian underpass for CR 11 is being designed with the Lind Property,
Filing I. The underpass for CR 52 is being designed for both the Lind Property and Maple
Hill development. The timing of the construction of the underpasses is being discussed
internally at the City of Fort Collins.
79
See Engineering comments re: underpass dimensions
Response: Okay — dimensions have been agreed upon as: 8.5' height, and 14' wide for
underpass for CR 11. (CR 52 dimensions: 8.5' height,16' wide.)
80
Make sure site plans and utility/striping plans reflect 8' bike lanes on 2L Minor Arterial and 6'
bikelanes on Collectors.
Response: The plans have been revised.
81
Provide directional ramp at Sternwheeler Drive south of Clipperway. Don't want ped's crossing
diagonally.
Response: Directional ramps have been provided throughout the Filing I site.
82
Internal road network could be more grid -like. Kind of maze -like as is for motorists and peds.
Response: The site layout has been changed as a result of comments and correspondence
with the City of Fort Collins.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 23 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Topic: Storm Sewer Profiles
96
Please provide a stub out and a plug for the future extension of the storm sewer at MH-1 at
Fairwater Dr. Please make sure depth of storm sewer is designed to accommodate future
extension associated with future filings of this development.
Response: The storm sewer is being extended beyond the limits of paving in order to
accommodate future extensions of the storm sewer.
The large depth of the storm sewer along Bar Harbor Dr makes access to that storm sewer very
difficult. Please maintain a 1:1 slope from bottom of trench to the surface clear of other utilities
Response: The horizontal location of the storm sewer has been revised and should be clear
of other utilities.
CR 52 pond outfall storm sewer is designed to exit the pond and be at very large depths all the
way to the Outlet No. 8 Canal. Please try to minimize storm sewer depth by using a larger stone
sewer at minimum slope and then a drop manhole at the end, near the Outlet No. 8 Canal.
Specify water tight joints and Class II RCP minimum. Maintenance of this stone sewer will be
extremely difficult and costly. The City requests that the issue of maintenance responsibility and
access to that storm sewer be carefully considered and discussed.
Response: The storm sewer has been revised, however it is still fairly deep. The storm
sewer design has been coordinated with the Maple Hill development.
The 48 " RCP from the inlet on CR 52 to the pond does not seem to meet the minimum cover
requirements. Please maintain a minimum 1 foot of cover below the subgrade.
Response: The storm sewer has been revised.
Topic: Street Capacity Calculations
101
Please provide a street capacity calculations for different types of streets included in this
development. Arterial streets should use a 10 year design for the minor storm and should have
one lane open in each direction for the major storm. Please discuss how the overflows from
sump inlets will be handled through this development and how will they affect street capacity
calculations.
Response: Street capacity calculations have been added to the drainage report and a
discussion of the overflow from sump inlets.
Topic: Underpass
88
It seems that the underpass in CR 11 will conflict with the relocated irrigation line. Please show
an irrigation line profile and detail how it will cross the underpass.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 22 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Please design a low flow channel in the retention pond that is landscaped with wetland type
plantings, to keep nuisance flows confined in a low area.
Response: A pan is not being shown in the retention pond. The storm drainage pipes are
entering the west side of the pond and should flow along the west side of the pond.
The pond design should also include a "shelf' where the area will be dry most of the time that
allows that pond to function as an active recreation area if that area is counted toward fulfilling
the open space requirements for this site.
Response: The pond has been redesigned in order to provide more active space.
Please design and call out an overflow emergency spillway. All ponds regardless of their size or
design should provide for emergency spillway condition.
Response: An overflow emergency spillway is being shown on the plans.
Please clarify and clearly call out the maintenance and ownership responsibility of the pond area
on the plans.
Response: A note has been added to the plans and plat.
Topic: Roadway Cross -Sections
93
Please call out embankment slopes on proposed roadway sections and show ROW limits in order
to identify any potential for erosion and need for slope stabilization measures and easements.
Response: Information has been added to the cross -sections.
Topic: Roadway Profiles
91
Please show and call out stationing locations of inlets on the roadway profile sheets.
Response: The stations of inlets will be added to the profile sheets at FCP.
Topic: Storm sewer design
102
Please relate in the storm sewer design plan the element numbers used in the schematic to
specific storm sewer ID numbers. Please clarify what was assumed as contributing flows from
future filings of this development. Please include this information in the narrative section of the
report.
Response: Information has been added to the drainage report.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 21 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Topic: Overall Utility Plans
94
These plans do not call out any of the storm drainage facilities, please add size type of all
proposed and existing facilities.
Response: The requested information has been added to the overall utility plan.
The detention/retention pond on these plans show low flow pans that are not reflected on the
grading plans. Which is correct ? The low flow channel as shown on the plans will interfere
with any potential beneficial use of the pond as a recreation area for the neighborhood.
Response: The information has been corrected. The retention pond has been redesigned in
order to provide more beneficial use.
Topic: Plat
84
Plat should be titled: Development Name, Filing One, PDP since there will be future filings in
this development.
Response: The name of the proiect has been changed (Lind Property, Filing I PDP).
Please provide copies of the called out easement vacations on the plat.
Response: The letters of intent will be provided prior to PDP hearing.
The detention pond area should be platted along with this filing as designated as a drainage tract.
Response: The detention pond is being platted with Filing I.
Topic: Pond Design
90
The inclusion of an overflow pipe that drains onto the Gillespie property should be analyzed to
make sure it does not present a problem for the Gillespie design. Will need easements from
Gillespie even if releasing at historical rates, since volume will be increased.
Response: Sear -Brown and TST have coordinated the outfall pipe from the Lind Property,
Filing I. This pipe is being shown on the CR 52 and Maple Hill plans.
The detention Pond design should include a detailed landscaping plan that will make the area
more attractive, this will be a very large hole in the ground for a long time and should not
become a wasteland that is ignored and neglected.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 20 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Please analyze overflow conditions for plugging in all cases where the inlet is in a sump
condition such as on Clipper Way.
Response: These conditions have been looked at for the inlet plugging in a sump.
Please show and call out inlet sizes and types on storm sewer profile sheets.
Response: The call -outs have been added to the storm sewer sheets.
Please specify Class III RCP storm sewers and water -tight joints. Please add a note stating that
all storm sewers in the ROW to be inspected by the City during construction.
Response: A note has been added to the plans.
Topic: Landscape Plans
104
There is a conflict between tree placement and inlets on Brightwater Dr., Clipper Way and
Flagstaff Pl., please correct.
Response: The site layout and storm sewer have been revised. Also, please see plans
prepared by Vignette Studios.
Topic: Outfall
85
The City's Boxelder Master Drainage Plan, does not address this area very well at this time. It is
however proposed that ultimately a natural channel be constructed along the low area that
crossed the Gillespie property, out to Cooper Slough. This site will need to tie into the outlet No.
8 Ditch in order to get the flows into that channel. The elevations of the channel has not been
set, but it is conceivable that in the future the No. 8 Canal, owned by the Windsor Reservoir and
Canal Company will be pipes across the Gillespie property, in order to make access to the
properties to the East more feasible. We do not have fixed elevations that will need to be tied to,
but it is suggested that this property and the Gillespie property work cooperatively in order to
design such an outfall system.
Response: Sear -Brown and TST have currently coordinated the outfall from the Lind
Property onto the Maple Hill Development. The flow from the Lind Property will now to
the Maple Hill development as it has historically. Once the Master Plan Update is
complete, drainage can be further coordinated.
The ditch company will have to sign off on these plans. They are requesting that your system be
designed to handle all of the storm, then release later at a controlled rate to be agreed upon.
There needs to be discussions regarding who controls the discharge and how it is released.
Response: The storm water from Filing I is being retained and only the historic flow is
being released to the Maple Hill development. Once the Master Plan Update is complete,
drainage can be further coordinated.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 19 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Topic: Grading Plans
89
The grading plans currently only show overlot grading and no detailed grading, except for
typical Type A and Type B lot grading. The City requires that a detailed grading plan be shown
that calls out how drainage will make it around proposed houses and shows potential building
envelopes, so that the builder has an idea of the maximum size of house he can situate on the lot,
given the size of that particular lot.
Response: More detailed grading is provided with this submittal. Per correspondence with
the City of Fort Collins, an FHA grading plan can be submitted with the FCP submittal.
There are several locations where the labeling makes it impossible to read the plans. Please
move elevations so that they can be easily read.
Response: The labels have been revised to read more easily.
All lots draining across lower lots such as those fronting Forecastle Dr. will require an easement
be placed on the lower lots in order to allow the drainage from the upper lots to exit through the
lower lots.
Response: Comment acknowledged — the grading has been revised in this area.
Call out all lot numbering on the grading plan.
Response: The lot numbering has been added.
Topic: Horizontal Separation
95
Please call out on the sanitary sewer profiles the proposed horizontal separation from outside
diameter of storm sewer to the outside diameter of proposed sanitary sewer manholes and call
out street names. Note that maintenance access for these storm sewers should be taken into
account in your design.
Response: The horizontal separation has been added to the sanitary profiles. The street
names have been added.
Topic: Inlet Locations
92
The inlet on the south side of Brightwater Drive may interfere with the driveway location.
Response: The site layout has been revised and the conflicts have been corrected.
Water service for Lot 18 Block 2 on the south side of Flagstaff Pl. cannot be located under
proposed inlet, please move service line.
Response: The service line has been relocated.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 18 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
The overall drainage plan show that some future filings may go undetained into the Canal No. 8
ditch. Please clarify and specify on the Overall Drainage Plan that all future filings will be
detained/retained prior to release into the Canal.
Response: The layout of the future filings is still not completely determined. However, a
note has been added to the drainage plan.
Topic: Drainage Report
103
Please include a better description and discussion of all assumptions in the narrative section of
the report. Use tables whenever possible.
Response: The drainage report has been revised to include a better description of
assumptions.
Drainage Report should include a compliance with standards section and a signature and stamp
from a PE.
Response: The report will be stamped upon no further comments from the City.
Topic: Erosion Control
87
October 25, 2002
Please put a note on the plan indicating that all disturbed areas are to be seeded and mulched
(you already show the areas, which is good - thanks).
Response: A note has been added to the plans.
Your report states you will be putting silt fencing on the north and west perimeters of the project,
the plan indicates silt fence on the south and north. Which is it (I vote for the plan version)?
Response: The discrepancy has been corrected.
Please indicate that the detention pond in the southeast corner of the site is to be used as a
sediment trap (which you now show with straw bales at the outlet). Then change the straw bale
outlet protection - which won't work, in part because the bales will be on concrete pans - to a
gravel filter or over -excavated pond.
Response: A note has been added to the plans and the straw bales have been revised.
What is the erosion control plan for CR 11 and CR 52?
Response: Erosion control measures are being shown for CR I I & 52.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 17 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Response: Comment acknowledged. Please refer to the utility plan and water line plan for
fire hydrant spacing.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Topic: County Road 52 Improvements
86
CR52 will be designed and built with the Gillespie property apparently. This makes your site
development dependent on their schedule. If the road is to built by a separate set of plans, then
these improvements will need to be used to by either this development or the Gillespie
development whichever proceeds first.
Response: The CR 52 plans are being submitted with the Lind Property, Filing I proiect,
as well as the Maple Hill development. The plans will go with both proiects and show
phasing of the proposed improvements for CR 52.
Topic: Details
98
Please consolidate all drainage details needed in consecutive sheets; there are several details
missing, such as rip -rap, erosion control measures, etc.
Response: Details have been added to the plan set. The details have been consolidated
where possible.
Topic: Drainage Design
100
Please note that all storm sewer facilities were sized using the rational method which
underestimates flows considerably. The City requires for all larger development sites such as
this one that a SWMM model be used to design and size detention facilities. The current design
using the rational method may be considerably short on detention volume.
Response: Per correspondence with City of Fort Collins Stormwater, a SWMM model was
not provided for this site, since retention is being utilized. The retention pond will be
utilized until release is allowed from this site, at which time is currently unknown.
Topic: Drainage Plans
99
Storm sewer and inlet sizes and types should not be called out on this plan, but rather on the
overall utility and all utility plan sheets.
Response: The plans have been revised.
Please discuss and analyze what will happen for off -site flows from future filings in the interim
period, when Filing 1 is developed while the rest is undeveloped.
Response: The storm drainage report has been revised to include a discussion of off -site
flows.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 16 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/ 11 /03 Sear -Brown
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Electric
The existing sanitary sewer along the N. side of Brightwater Dr. will require Light & Power to
install electric facilities behind the sidewalk. This will in turn require an additional 4 ft. of
easement across the front of these lots.
Response: The existing sanitary sewer line is being relocated to within the right-of-way for
Brightwater Drive. The electric facilities will not need to be installed behind the walk,
because of the sanitary sewer line.
The paired water services may be problematic relative to installation of other utility services.
Response: The water services have been changed to a single service per lot and are located
off the property line (and are near the driveways).
The narrow lots may be impossible to serve with all utilities. A utility coordination meeting is
strongly encouraged. Light & Power can provide an electrical design (which will identify
conflicts) for a deposit of $50.00 per lot. Contact Doug Martine at 224-6152 to coordinate an
electrical plan.
Response: A utility coordination meeting was held on January 8th, 2003 and
representatives from the City of Fort Collins, ELCO, Boxelder Sanitation District, AT&T
and Xcel Energy were present. A typical utility service schematic drawing was provided
showing the utilities and services, driveways and street trees. There were no major
objections to the service locations shown on the schematic. An electrical plan was received
from Monica Moore. The site layout was changed after the first submittal, so the electric
line will be shown with the FCP submittal.
A preliminary streetlight plan has been sent to Bob Barkeen 10-18-02. Streetlights must be
shown on the landscape plan and trees need to be adjusted to provide 40 ft. clearance from a
shade tree to streetlights or 15 ft. if ornamental tree. If there are any changes to the streetlight
plan when project is developed, other adjustments to street trees would be necessary.
Response: The streetlights have been added to the utility drawings. Please see the plans
prepared by Vignette Studios for the relationship between the streetlights and trees.
Department: PFA
Topic: Utility
20
Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
Water Supply: Residential Requirements - No residential building can be greater then 400 feet
from a fire hydrant. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 800 feet along an
approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1500 gallons of water per minute
at a residual pressure of 20 psi. 97 UFC 901.2.2.2
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 15
02/11/03
Lind Property, Filing I PDP
Sear -Brown
The grade to the underpass does not exceed 8.33%. Landings are provided on the west side
of the underpass. A curve radius of 30' was used on the west side of the underpass, in
accordance with the City of Fort Collins underpass criteria. Details for the lighting of the
underpass will be provided with the FCP submittal.
Please provide grading/contour information on sheets on the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet.
Provide retaining wall details. Provide a complete design for the sidewalk in the retention pond
area including dimensions and radii.
Response: Contour information has been added to the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet.
The sidewalk details have been added to the underpass plans. Retaining wall details will be
provided with the FCP submittal
Please contact Mark Jackson in Transportation Planning for further requirements.
Response: Sear -Brown has incorporated further comments from Mark Jackson.
68
Please note that single family lots require a minimum of 20' from the back of walk to the face of
the garage.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
69
From ELCO: Coordinate water service location with Gas & Electric. Water services may have
to be moved off property lines to accommodate gas, electric, water services and street trees.
Water services must be at least 5' from a tree, 10' from sewer service and 3' from edge of
driveway. Anchor all valve's to Tee's. Please see bluelines for more comments.
Response: Water services have been coordinated with ELCO. A representative from
ELCO attended the utility coordination meeting. The water services have been moved off
the property lines in order to help accommodate the other services. A note has been added
to the plans for anchoring the valves to tees.
71
The utility plans do not show the same easements around the detention pond that the plat does.
Please coordinate the plan sets so that they provide the same information.
Response: The easements have been coordinated.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 14 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
45
Provide 500 feet of Off -Site design (including centerline, flowline, and cross sections) of all
streets where future streets will tie into the proposed.
Response: 500' of preliminary design has been provided where future streets tie to
proposed streets for Filing I.
55
There are many inlets shown too close to the driveways and will not allow for the required curb
transitions.
Response: Numerous inlets and driveways have been adjusted.
56
Sheet CS350 - see redlines. Since the proposed alleys are actually private drives, figure 71-12F
should not be included. A simple cross-section would be sufficient or at least remove the term
"alleys". Call it Shared Residential Driveways or something to that effect.
Response: A cross-section has been added for the shared residential driveways.
60
Numerous items required by the checklist in Appendix E-4 were either omitted or incorrectly
checked off as "included". Many items were checked off as meeting code requirements but in
reality the design does not reflect city standards. Correct or provide all the missing items
required in the design by Chapter 3 of LCUASS and the checklist in Appendix E-4. Please see
LCUASS for all other design requirements.
Response: The utility plans were submitted for a PDP review and they were reviewed
under FCP requirements. The checklist has been resubmitted with this resubmittal.
61
Sheet CS902 - Provide the benchmark elevation in Note 10.
Response: The benchmark elevation has been provided.
66
Design the underpass to meet ADA requirements and the following criteria:
8' high underpass, 16' wide
2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. T min
from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrade or the road must be concrete.
Entrance flare taper width is 2' on each side in 10' of length
Wing walls are 45 degrees from face where space allows, roadway fill 4:1 to end of wall.
5% grade max desired and 8.33% max allowed with 5' landings spaced every 30 feet
Electric lighting, no skylights.
Response: After meetings and correspondence with the City of Fort Collins, the
dimensions of the underpass for CR 11 were agreed upon as 8.5' inside height 14' wide.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 13 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
25
Line 14 of the Grading and Erosion Control Notes must be completed. Contact Bob Zakely at
224-6063 for the specific seed mix required.
Response: The Grading and Erosion Control Notes have been modified. Will provide seed
mix with FCP.
26
Please correct all overlapping labeling. All labels must be orientated to the reader.
Response: Labels have been corrected, where possible.
29
The proposed roundabout must be designed in accordance with LCUASS.
Response: The traffic circle has been redesigned with input from the City of Fort Collins.
31
Sternwheeler Drive does not appear to meet the minimum radii and curve lengths, etc. See
redlines and LCUASS for street design requirements.
Response: Sternwheeler Drive has been realigned to meet design requirements.
32
Several driveways do not meet the minimum separation requirements to the intersection or to
other driveways as required by table 7-3.
Response: Several driveway locations have been modified with this submittal.
39
Provide and show Type 3 barricades where Port Place Drive and the roundabout are stubbed out.
Response: Type 3 barricades have been added at several locations.
41
Cover Sheet - Provide the names, addresses, phone numbers for the Developer(s), Owner(s), and
Consultant Engineer(s).
Response: The requested information has been added to the Cover Sheet,
44
Sight Distance Easements must be dedicated where applicable. See Chapter 7 of LCUASS.
Response: Sight Distance Triangles (and easements) have been added to the utility
drawings.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 12 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
18
Due to the narrowness of the lots, we suggest a utility coordination meeting prior to the next
submittal. This meeting needs to include all the utilities as well as the owners of the irrigation
line. Topics of discussion should include the proposed 6' utility easement in the shared
driveways (alley type) versus the 8' required by code, tree/utility/driveway locations and whether
or not the utilities will fit within the narrow lots.
Response: A utility coordination meeting was held on January 8`h, 2003 and
representatives from the City of Fort Collins, ELCO, Boxelder Sanitation District, AT&T
and Xcel Energy were present. A typical utility service schematic drawing was provided
showing the utilities and services, driveways and street trees. There were no major
objections to the service locations shown on the schematic.
19
12.2.2 All utilities shall be located a least 2 feet below the scarified subgrade elevation.
Response: Comment acknowledged and utilities have been modified where appropriate.
22
Provide a complete design and profile of the irrigation line running along County Road 11. This
design must be coordinated and approved by the owners of the line and located outside of the CR
11 ROW and 15' utility easement. See comment number 21 under "General".
The irrigation line needs to be sleeved where it crosses public ROW and it needs to have a
minimum of T of cover above the sleeve under the public roads. No ADS is allowed in ROW.
See LCUASS for other design criteria. In addition, the design needs to show how the line will
interact with the underpass.
Provide an irrigation line signature block on the cover sheet and any other sheet that affects their
line.
Response: The irrigation line is located out of the R/W and utility easement. Spot
elevations for the relocated irrigation line are provided near the underpass and along
Filing I.
23
There are 48 General Notes required by LCUASS. Line 40 requires two (2) benchmarks. Line
41 must read "Centerline" stationing. See redlines.
Response: Per comments received on the CR 52 plans, the General Notes have been
modified to include only those on the cover sheet which are project specific. Two
benchmarks have been added to the cover sheet.
24
The vicinity map on the cover sheet must be to a scale of 1" = 1000' - 1500'.
Response: The vicinity map has been revised to be 111=1500".
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 1 1 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
16
Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat.
Response: Letters of intent for necessary easements will be provided prior to PDP hearing. -
The vacations will be provided at a later date, with the Final Plat for this project.
64
Show all existing easements (sewer easement running diagonally through site, etc) and if
vacating by plat, provide a note vacating the easement.
Response: The existing sanitary sewer easement is shown on the plat and utility drawings.
A note is provided on the plat.
65
Provide sight distance easements as required by the design and code.
Response: The sight distance easements are being shown on the plat and utility drawings.
73
A note for Tract A and B must state that all lots off Tract A and B must be rear loaded only. No
driveways allowed off the public street in front.
Response: A note has been added to the plat.
Topic: Site
35
Note 2 - remove the words "unless maintained by a homeowners association.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
36
Note 12 - remove. This is not applicable.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
83
Identify building setbacks. Please note that the garage door is to be a minimum of 20' from the
back of sidewalk or property line.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
106
A note for Tract A and B must state that all lots off Tract A and B must be rear loaded only. No
driveways allowed off the public street in front.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 9 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
50
Key Maps must be corrected on several pages so that it matches the design being shown on the
page.
Response: Key Maps have been corrected.
51
Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4.
Response: Intersection details have been provided with this resubmittal.
52
Provide profiles for all curb returns.
Response: Curb return profiles will be provided with FCP submittal. Per correspondence
with City of Fort Collins review staff, profiles of curb returns are not necessary in order to
proceed to PDP hearing.
Topic: Plat
6
From Technical Services
The boundary and legal close.
Response: Comment acknowledged.
7
From Technical Services: We will need to see a copy of the final plat.
Response: The final plat will be submitted with the FCP submittal.
9
Please provide the missing plat language as shown on the attached document (cert of dedication,
maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee, notice of other docs, sight distance, etc.).
Response: The requested language has been added to the plat for this project.
10
Label each adjoining property.
Response: Okay — labels added.
12
Provide a tract table. Who owns and maintains each tract?
Response: A note regarding ownership and maintenance has been added to the plat.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 8 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
34
Driveway locations need to be shown for the single-family lots in order to coordinate the utility
and street tree locations.
Response: Driveway locations are being shown on the utility plans.
74
The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the roundabout, and will be
responsible for the maintenance of landscaping in these areas. This landscaping must also meet
sight distance requirements (please add a note to the plans).
Response: Please see utility plans for locations of irrigation taps.
75
Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and
nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C.
Response: Comment acknowledged.
Topic: Plan and Profiles
11
Curb return radii must be in accordance with table 8-2.
Response: Comment acknowledged.
47
See table 7-3, 7-17 and 7-18 for street design criteria. There are several areas where minimum
VCs, minimum K values, and minimum tangent lengths between curves are not being met.
Response: Profiles have been modified in an effort to meet the design criteria.
48
Centerline profiles and stationing are required for all public streets. Provide flowline profiles for
the roundabout and design to standard. Specify the type of curb being used and where.
Response: Centerline profiles and stationing is provided with this resubmittal. A grading
detail for the traffic circle has been provided. The traffic circle has been redesigned with
input from the City of Fort Collins.
49
Show how the proposed CR 11 ties into existing north of Brightwater Drive. May need cross
sections for the transition to clarify what's happening and how it will all tie in. May need to
dedicate additional ROW for the taper.
Response: The final design for CR 11 is shown with the Filing I plans. The City of Fort
Collins has yet to determine the timing/phasing of the improvements. Transitions to the
existing roadway will be shown when the timing has been determined.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 7 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Topic: Grading Plan
38
Erosion Control Plan - provide rip rap at the end of Sternwheeler Drive and roundabout stubs.
Response: Rip -rap has been provided at the end of Sternwheeler Drive and the traffic
circle stub (northeast).
40
Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes effect
public ROW.
Response: Slopes are shown on the plans.
42
Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot corners.
Response: The lot corner elevations are provided on the grading plan, as are the finished
grade contours for the streets. Intersection details and street plan/profiles are provided
within the plan set.
43
Drainage arrows must be provided and show positive drainage to streets or to an approved
drainage facility.
Response: Drainage arrows are provided on the grading plans.
58
The slope can't come off the back of walk - there must be a minimum 2' flat area next to the
walk.
Response: The grading has been revised to reflect a 2' flat area.
Topic: Landscape
17
3.2. LK requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas
lines.
Response: The required minimum separations are being met when possible. Trees and
utility locations should be reflected on the plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
30
Landscaping within a Sight Distance Easement must meet sight distance requirements. Please
add the Sight Distance note to the plans and show all sight distance easements.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios for landscaping. The sight
distance triangles have been added to the utility plans (See sheet CS115).
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments b Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
37
Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the
same information.
Response: Okay.
46
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.
Response: The plat does include the detention pond in the southeast portion of the Filing I
site. Off -site construction will occur on CR 11 & 52 and utilities will be stubbed beyond the
protect boundary as necessary so roadways are not cut with future construction.
53
An additional foot of ROW is required for each side of a local street where drive -over curb is
used. Where vertical curb is used, driveway locations need to be shown and stationed.
Response: A foot of R/W has been added to the revised site layout for Filing I. Driveway
locations are being shown throughout the entire Filing I layout.
54
See detail 7-24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards.
Response: Okay — site layout has been revised.
63
Change the project name from 'Phase I" to "Filing I".
Response: The project name has been changed to "Filing I".
67
Quite a bit of information left off of this submittal. Expect more comments with the next
submittal.
Response: Comment acknowledged.
76
It appears that several streets do not meet the min/max separation distance requirements as
required by LCUASS. See table 7-3. A modification or alternative compliance is needed for the
road connections out to the arterials as they are currently proposed.
Response: The site layout has been modified with this resubmittal. Alternative compliance
will be pursued if necessary for the arterial connections.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments S Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/ 11 /03 Sear -Brown
Topic: Details
59
Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the
design:
16-2 710 1606 701 711 1607
702 713.1F 1609L if required by Transportation Planning or -
703 713.2F 1611 706 803 1612
707 1601 1613 708 1602 1413
709 1603
Response: The new details have been provided with this resubmittal.
Topic: General
21
The irrigation line running north -south along County Road 11 must be located out of the ROW
and the 15' utility easement and it must be in it's own dedicated easement. This easement may be
dedicated on the plat or provided by separate document. Regardless of how it's dedicated, the
owners of the line must sign the final plat and utility plans before the City will approve the
mylars. In addition, Boxelder Sanitation District and ELCO Water District must sign the utility
plan mylars before being routed for City signatures.
Response: The irrigation line is located out of the R/W and utility easement. Spot
elevations for the relocated irrigation line are provided near the underpass and along
Filing 1.
The approval blocks have been added for Boxelder Sanitation District and ELCO.
27
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 Hill) 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
improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for
any improvements to the Vine 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.
Response: The design for Countv Road 11, north of County Road 52, is included within
the Lind Property, Filing I plans. The design for CR 52 is a separate plan set that is being
submitted with the Lind Property, Filing I and has been submitted with the Maple Hill
nlans. The streets that connect with the Maple Hill development do align and have been
coordinated.
33
These plans are being reviewed under the October 1, 2002 LCUASS.
Response: Comment acknowledged.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 4
02/11/03
Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
Sear -Brown
117
The mineral rights owner has indicated they would like to reserve a location for a potential future
oil well within this vicinity. If this oil well is located within 500 feet of the site, it should be
noted on the site plan.
Response: Comment acknowledged and a letter has been received from the mineral rights
owner.
118
Street names - New street names need to be assigned for each street that does not connect
through to another street segment (Fairwater Drive, Sternwheeler Drive, Forecastle Drive, Port
Place Drive). A name for County Road 11 will need to be selected. This is a separate process that
will require Council approval.
Response: The site layout has changed with this submittal. The street names have been
revised where appropriate.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Ginger Dodge
Topic: Street Names
5
Is the proposed Bowsprit Drive connecting with the existing Bowsprit Drive?
Response: Bowsprit Drive has been renamed to Bow Side Drive.
The following names are acceptable and are now reserved in the Larimer County Street
Inventory System per the Intergovernmental Agreement concerning street naming protocol:
Sternwheeler Drive Fairwater Drive Port Place Drive
Brightwater Drive - connecting with existing Forcastle Drive
Clipper Way Mainsail Drive - connecting with existing
Barharbor Drive Flagstaff Place
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: Cross Sections
57
These sections must reflect the site grading. Is what is shown how the proposed grade is actually
tying into existing?
Response: The cross -sections reflect the proposed site grading where appropriate. The
cross -sections show existing ground and the proposed grade slope to tie to existing.
72
Quite a number of cross -sections are incomplete. Please provide all missing information.
Response: Information has been added to the cross -sections.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 3 Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
110
Please delete the HOA maintenance responsibilities from note #2.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
111
Please correct or remove note 912.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
112
Detail of the underpass walls should be shown on the site plan (materials, forms, etc.)
landscaping should be included around the entrance to soften the walls, and provide an easier
maintained landscape and discourage people from getting 'too close to the edge'.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Sear -Brown for underpass details. Please see
plans prepared by Vignette Studios for landscaping. The underpass will generally be
constructed from pre -case concrete sections and structural details for the retaining walls
will be provided at FCP.
113
Existing trees that are to be removed should be shown on the site plan. Existing trees that must
be mitigated will need to be shown as well.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
114
The fence adjacent to CR 11 and CR 52 has several stretches which exceeded the requirements
of Section 3.8.11 (A) of the LUC. Variation in fence setback should be done on these sections of
fence. Additional shrubs and evergreens should be planted in front of the fence as well.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
115
Close coordination will need to occur with the Maple Hill (Gillespie Farms) project immediately
south of this project. This project has just been submitted to the City for review. Utility
coordination meetings that are held may need to include the applicants of this project.
Response: Coordination is taking place with the consultants for the Maple Hill
development.
116
Several street tree/utility conflicts exist on the plan. Please follow separation requirements from
street lights, hydrant, storm sewer, water and sewer utilities.
Response: The tree/utility conflicts should be corrected with this resubmittal. Street lights
are being shown on the Utility Plans in an effort to help avoid conflicts.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments Z Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Date: February 11, 2003
Lind Property, Filing I PDP
Utility Plans
Note: The original comments from the City of Fort Collins, dated 11121102 are incorporated
into these responses.
ISSUES:
Department: Advance Planning
Topic: Site
105
Issue Contact: Clark Mapes
The street layout violates 3.6.3(A) and (B). It does not provide direct routes and is not efficient
and convenient. The street system as proposed creates significant discontinuity and circuitous
routes. It would thwart movement and way -finding. It would create particularly acute obstacles
to walking and bicycling, but would also frustrate drivers. We realize that a comment to
redesign the street system is a major comment and probably warrants a meeting. We understand
the reasons for a discontinuous layout. It may be adequate in some cases to provide direct routes
with pedestrian/bike linkages.
Response: The design team for the Lind Property met with the City of Fort Collins on
12/09/02 to discuss the site layout. The layout has been changed to provide more continuity
and was changed according to suggestions provided by the City of Fort Collins.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Bob Barkeen
Topic: Pond Design
107
The detention/retention pond is very rigid in design and very deep. Design alternatives will need
to be explored to soften its appearance and create an asset to the project. Benches, wetland
plantings, varied slopes could be included in the design of the pond.
Response: The pond has been redesigned using various slopes in an effort to make the
pond less rigid and soften the appearance. The required pond volume should still be
maintained.
Topic: Site
108
Please correctly label the neighborhood center within the site plan (not as a community center).
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
109
Please change the maximum building height to 2 1/2 stories.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 1. Lind Property, Filing 1 PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown
Topic: Street Names
8
Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements.
Response: Please see plans prepared by Vignette Studios. The street names for this proiect
have been reserved in the Larimer County Inventory System.
Topic: Striping Sheet
70
Correct the bike lane label to read "8' parking". See redlines.
Response: The label has been changed.
Topic: Traffic Study
28
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. The TIS
must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this
development.
Response: Please refer to the TIS prepared by Matt Delich.
Topic: Utility
13
See 16.3.1 for access ramp requirements. Provide directional ramps at all intersections. Access
ramps must line up with the ramp across the street on all T-Intersections. Must provide a
separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice.
Response: Directional ramps have been provided at intersections. Ramps have been
aligned at T-intersections, where feasible.
14
3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas
lines.
Response: The required minimum separations are being met when possible. Trees and
utility locations should be reflected on the plans prepared by Vignette Studios.
15
See 7.6.4.0 for temporary turnaround requirements. Provide temporary turnarounds where
Sternwheeler and Fairwater Drives stub out to the north. See detail 7-26. See detail 7-25 for
temporary dead-end street requirements.
Response: Temporary turnarounds have been provided. Also refer to the phasing plan for
the Lind Property, Filing I.
Response to November 21, 2002 Comments 10 Lind Property, Filing I PDP
02/11/03 Sear -Brown