Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLIND PROPERTY - PDP - 39-94B - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS (4)Number: 90 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/ 03 The inclusion of an overflow pipe that drains onto the Gillsepie 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. Please clarify and clearly call out the maintenance and ownership responsibility of the pond area on the plans. RESPONSE: We have included excerpts from the TST report that shows a 60 cfs flow accounted for Topic: Signature Blocks Number: 177 Created: 3/14/2003 Pending Please note that underpass plans where they cross the Baker Lateral should have a signature block from that entity. RESPONSE: Done Topic: Stationing Number: 91 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/03 REPEAT Please show and call out stationing locations of inlets on the roadway RESPONSE:Done, see table at the side. Topic: Utility Crossings Number: 180 Created: 3/14/2003 Pending There are several water crossings that go on top of the storm sewers with less than the typical 18" minimum clearance. I understand that you were trying to keep the water line as deep as possible to avoid freezing, however a variance request is required whenever the clearance is below the required 18" minimum. RESPONSE: We are requesting the variance Department: Transportation Planning Jackson Topic: General Number: 121 No further comments Issue Contact: Mark Created: 3/4/2003 Pending Page 14 4' 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: Easements are now provided Topic: Horizontal Separation Number: 95 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/03 Please call out on the sanitary sewer profile sheets 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: This is now shown on the sanitary sewer sheets. Topic: Inlet Locations Number: 92 3/6/03 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending Please analyze overflow conditions for plugging in all cases where the inlet is in a sump condition such as on Clipper Way. RESPONSE: We have provided a table with the overflow elevations Please show and call out inlet sizes and types on storm sewer profile sheets and on roadway profile sheets. RESPONSE: This is done Topic: Landscape Plans Number: 179 Created: 3/14/2003 Pending The retention pond landscaping plan looks really goad, thank you. Please add street names to landscape plans. Please note that there is a conflict between the proposed inlet on Bow Side Drive and the tree in front of Lots 12 and 13 Block 8. This is also the case for lots 5&6 Block 8 and the inlet on Clipper Way. Topic: Outfall Number: 85 Created: 11/18/2002 Pendinc 3/6/03 The City's Boxelder Master Drainage Plan, does not address this area very well at this time. The City has contracted with ACE to provide better guidance for drainage system development in this area. The ditch company will have to sign off on these plans. There needs to be discussions regarding who controls the discharge and how it is released. Future Filings should take into account the possibility of a parallel drainage system carrying flows to the ultimate outfall, RESPONSE: We will wite Topic: Overall Utility Plans Number: 94 3/6/03 Please add size type of all proposed and existing facilities. RESPONSE: Please see the 50 scale drawings for that detail Created: 11/19/2002 Pending Topic Pond Design Page 13 sure that all relevant details are provided. RESPONSE: We have consolidated them towards the front Topic: Drainage Design Number: 100 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/03 This is a REPEAT comment 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: For this phase the rational method works because there is no outlet. However next phase will be designed with SWMM when we actually have a designed outflow. Topic: Drainage Plans Number: 99 3/6/03 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending Please discuss in the report 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: We have provided more detail. Also look for the exhibit that shows the future condition that shows that we are accounting for off -site future flows in our pipes. The overall drainage plan show that some future filings may go undetained into the Canal No. 8 ditch. Please clarity and specify on the Overall Drainage Plan that all future filings will be detained/retained prior to release into the Canal. RESPONSE: We have provide an exhibit that shows the future ponds Topic: Drainage Report Number: 103 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/03 REPEAT Please include a better description and discussion of all assumptions in the narrative section of the report. Use tables whenever possible. Drainage Report should include a compliance with standards section and a signature and stamp from a PE. As. RESPONSE: We have tried to show this. Topic: Erosion Control Number: 87 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/03 Please add a note requiring all disturbed areas to be re -seeded and mulched. RESPONSE: This has been added Topic: Grading Plans Number: 89 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/03 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. 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: We now show FHA Grading Page 13 Topic: Landscape Plans Number: 120 Created: 2/14/2003 Pending The list of changes provided with this submittal indicates the streetlights (Item #4) have been added to the landscape plan. They are shown on the 1=100' plan, but not on the 1"=30' detail. Also, the street trees have not been adjusted as required to provide the minimum clearances. A revised streetlight plan reflecting the new street layout has been sent to Bob Barkeen. Topic: Utility Number: 119 Created: 2/14/2003 Pending The existing 15" sewer shown along the N. side of Brightwater Dr. (between the walk and curb) will require Light & Power to install electric facilities behind the sidewalk, thereby requiring a minimum 4' additional easement to make room for natural gas mains. A utility coordination meeting to include Excel Energy is encouraged. The developers comment sheet indicated this has been addressed and to see the civil plans. The latest utility plan did not reflect any changes. and a plot was not included in this review set of plans to show if additional easement has been provided. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Topic: General Number: 122 Created: 3/5/2003 Pending No new Comments. Previous comments resolved. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan Number: 88 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending 3/6/ 03 Please show Baker Lateral on the plans. 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: This is shown Where will low flows from underpass be directed to? RESPONSE: According to TST, Frasar, The Parks department will be handling this separately. asked twice now and get the same answer Owners of the irrigation line will need to sign of on the underpass plans, RESPONSE: OK Topic: County Road 52 Improvements Number: 86 Created: 11/19/2002 Pending3/6/03 Please refer to redlined plans for comments on the CR52 plans. Please make sure that there is enough separation between storm line and proposed pedestrian underpass. RESPONSE: Topic: Cover Sheet Number: 178 Created: 3/14/2003 Pending Please update the list of plans on the cover sheet to remove the plans that were removed from this set and included in CR52 plan set. RESPONSE: OK Topic: Details Number: 182 Created: 3/14/2003 Pending Please add all consolidate all storm sewer details they are still scattered through the plan set. Make Page 11 Number: 141 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending CS100/101: Add a note: Install Type 3 Barricades where all sidewalks terminate at the temporary turn arounds and street stubs. Or something to that effect... RESPONSE:Done Number: 142 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Please provide Interim and Ultimate plans for County Road .11 and label the sheets accordingly. I realize the interim conditions are still being coordinated but you will need the interim plans before you can go to hearing. RESPONSE: done Number: 144 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Ramp shown in driveway of Lot 15 on Flagstaff Place and Lot 6 on Sternwheeier Drive. RESPONSE: Done Number: 145 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Same ramps shown to close to the drive cuts and do not provide enough room between the two to meet minimum curb transitions. RESPONSE: -We have moved Drives Number: 148 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Please provide a signature block for Larimer County. RESPONSE: I don't think this is required any more Number: 155 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending The midblock cross -pans shown are not to standard. Please see LCUASS. See redlines. RESPONSE: This allows for slowing of traffic. Number: 156 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending All private drives are not clearly labeled as such. RESPONSE: They are now labeled Number: 168 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending CS300 - A proposed pipe is shown at the corner of 52 and 11. What is it for? I couldn't find it on any other sheet. RESPONSE: This is in the County Road 52 plans for drainage. We have changed it since last time to go to the bottom of the detention pond Number: 169 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Please provide some grading/spot information that I can tie into the CR52 road plans so that I can make sure that these two projects will work together. RESPONSE: This is done Number: 175 See redlines and Appendix E4 for other comments. RESPONSE:OK Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Department: Light & Power Page 11 Issue Contact: Doug Martine RESPONSE Number: 66 Created: 11/13/2002 Pending Design the underpass to meet ADA requirements and the following criteria: 8' high underposs, 16'wide 2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade. except where it lies under the road. 2' mm 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. 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. Please contact Mark Jackson in Transportation Planning for further requirements. 3/11/3: Repeat comments: This is now corrected 2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. 2' mm from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrade or the road must be concrete. 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. Please label all slope ratios as requested in another continued comment. RESPONSE: We have provided a concrete suface Number: 71 Created: 11/14/2002 Pending The utility plans do not show the same easements around the detention pond that the plot does. Please coordinate the plan sets so that they provide the same Information. RESPONSE: 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please dedicate the utility easement along the ENTIRE length of the west side of the plans. RESPONSE: This is done Number: 138 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending May need school district PR1 signature on Baker lateral per letter from their attorney, dated 2/24/2003. This item will need to be addressed prior to going to public hearing. See attached. RESPONSE: I think this is addressed Number: 139 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Correction required on sheet CS001. RESPONSE: Corrected Number: 140 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Provide phasing sheets for the utilities as well as grading, drainage and erosion control phasing sheets. The phasing sheets given on CS100,101 do not provide enough detail. RESPONSE: We have added more detail. We are not adding the phasing to grading and utility plan because we think it will cover too much detail. Page 11 The proposed roundabout must be designed in accordance with LCUASS. 3/11/3: See other comments under"Intersection Details." RESPONSE: This is now corrected Number: 32 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Several driveways do not meet the minimum separation requirements to the intersection or to other driveways as required by table 7-3. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Driveways must be a minimum of 12' from another driveway. RESPONSE: This is now corrected Number: 39 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Provide and show Type 3 barricades where Port Place Drive and the roundabout are stubbed out. 3/11/3: The plans do not show this consistently from to sheet to sheet. RESPONSE: This is now shown Number: 44 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Sight Distance Easements must be dedicated where applicable. See Chapter 7 of LCUASS. 3/11/3: There seems to be some confusion on how to properly calculate the sight distance easement. Those shown are not correct and need to be removed. Please call me if you would like to meet for some help. RESPONSE: This is now corrected Number: 45 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Provide 500 feet of Off -Site design (including centerline, flowline. and cross sections) of all streets where future streets will tie into the proposed. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Missing stationing. etc. RESPONSE: This is corrected Number: 55 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending There are many inlets shown too close to the driveways and will not allow for the required curb transitions. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Not enough information provided to verify whether or not their placement is acceptable. RESPONSE: Number: 56 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please remove all reference to the word "alley" as they are not being dedicated as public alleys. RESPONSE: This is done. Number: 60 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. See redlined Appendix. Page 11 Number: 15 Created: 11/5/2002 Pending 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. 3/1113: Sheets are inconsistent. Same show the temp turnarounds, some do not. RESPONSE: This is done per our discussions Number: 18 Created: 11/6/2002 Pending 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: This is now coordinated and drives moved. 3/11/3: May need to schedule another one because there are still conflicts: Minimum spacing between driveways aren't being met in several areas, which when corrected, will shift the trees again. Please call me to set up another meeting if you get a lot of comments back from the various agencies. I don't see the comments from the outside agencies so I'm not sure how things are going there. Just let me know, 221-6605. RESPONSE: I think we are OK Number: 22 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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 2' 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Not enough information was provided to show where the line is going and how it's going to work with the underpass. Please reread the above. RESPONSE: This is Done Number: 25 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Line 14 of the Grading and Erosion Control Notes must be completed. Contact. Bob Zakely at 224- 6063 for the specific seed mix required. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: This is now reference to the erosion control plan Number: 26 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Please correct all overlapping labeling. All labels must be orientated to the reader. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The overlapping labeling, spot elevations, etc make the plans difficult (and in some cases, impossible) to read. Same areas, sheets could not be reviewed at this time. RESPONSE: This is now corrected Number: 29 Page 8 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Topic: Underpass Number: 170 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending As previously discussed on February 3. 2003. please design the underpass.as shown on pg. 10 of the guidelines. The underpass should be 14' wide with a 2-10-2 cross section. that's a 2' drainage pan, 10' walk, 2' drainage pan RESPONSE: This has been designed per our meetings. Number: 171 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Show where the irrigation line is being relocated to and how it will work with the underpass. This is a repeat comment from another section. Not enough information has been shown to evaluate the design. RESPONSE: The information is now provided Number: 172 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios may not exceed 4:1. RESPONSE: They are now labled Number: 173 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Provide a signature block for the ditch company on this and ALL other sheets that effect their irrigation line. RESPONSE:This is done Number: 174 Created: 3/1.3/2003 Pending Underpass detail shown on CS703 is not correct. RESPONSE: This is now changed. Topic: Utility Number: 13 Created: 11/5/2002 Pending 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-Intersectians. Must provide a separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. In addition, an access ramp shown lining up with a sidewalk connection must be the same width as the sidewalk it connects to. Remove the access ramp shown at the street widening. See redlines. RESPONSE: Number: 14 Created: 11/5/2002 Pending 3.2.1. K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 3/11/3: Trees on the landscape plan still shown directly on top of inlets. RESPONSE: Page 8 Topic: Site Number: 130 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending Remove the contours for legibility. Number: 131 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending Remove all incorrect sight distance triangles. Number: 132 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending Note 11 states that this is a single phase project, however, the utility plans show phasing. Please coordinate the plan sets. Topic: Soils Report Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Number:147 Please provide a Soils Report as required by LCUASS. RESPONSE: This is provided Topic: Street Names Created: 3/11/2003 Pending Number:134 Is it Flagstaff Drive or Flagstaff Place? Not all the plan sets are consistent. Topic: Street Sections Number: 151 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending The typical street sections provided are not correct. List each street under each cross section by stationing because some streets have more than one cross section. Label each section with N/S/E/W and move this sheet up behind the cover sheet or the site plan. RESPONSE: These have been corrected. Number: 165 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending List each street under the appropriate street section by stationing (ex: Fairwater Drive Station _to Station_) RESPONSE: These have been corrected Number: 166 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Correct the 53' ROW street section's parkway width to be 6'. The additional foot is due to the width of the rollover curb. The standard parkway width remains the same at 6'. RESPONSE: These have been corrected Number:167 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Remove all reference to "alley". See redlines. RESPONSE: This has been done. Topic: Striping Sheet Number: 137 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Provide an interim striping sheet and label the ultimate as "ultimate." RESPONSE: This has been done Number: 176 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Please contact Eric Bracke (224-6062) for comments regarding the signing and striping sheet. RESPONSE: Eric said it was fine. Topic: Traffic Study Number: 28 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Please contact. Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for Page 7 Number: 16 Created: 11/6/2002 Pending Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plot. 3/11/3: Repeat Comment. RESPONSE: We will do this before approval of the plat. The san sewer easement will need to be handled with the development agreement. Number: 65 . Created: 11/13/2002 Pending Provide sight distance easements as required by the design and code. 3/11/3: Those shown on the plot do not match the ones shown on the utility plans. RESPONSE:These. have been corrected Number: 123 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical Services: Legal and plot have several difference, see redlines. RESPONSE: These have been corrected Number: 124 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical Services: Subdivision name in dedication does not match the title block. RESPONSE: They now match Number: 125 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical Services: Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal. RESPONSE: These have been corrected Number: 126 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical Services: State law requires monuments at 1400' maximum. RESPONSE: This has been corrected. Number: 127 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical. Services: Separate document reception number vacations need to be shown on this plat. RESPONSE: This will be done before mylars are submitted. Owner is in the process of obtaining this Number: 128 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical Services: Who owns and maintains the tracts? Do some need an access easement also? RESPONSE: This is covered in a note Number: 129 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending From Technical Services: Dedication statement needs to include "alley." RESPONSE: There are no alley's so this is still excluded Number: 133 Created: 3/11/2003 Pending The plat calls the private drives Tract A. etc. while the utility plans call them Blocks. Which is correct? RESPONSE:This is just a general description for the block it was not intended to show the alley as a block on the utility, plan. The plat is correct. Page 7 Number: 51 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. What's shown is incomplete. RESPONSE: These are now complete Number: 52 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Provide profiles for all curb returns. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: These have been added Number: 149 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Provide stationing/inlet information. RESPONSE: These have been added Number: 150 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending All profiles are missing HPE. HPS, PVI STA. ELEV information, curb returns, station equations for the flowlines, stationing of all proposed driveways and all intersecting roadways, elevation and location of ALL utilities, station and elevation of the underpasses. etc. See Chapter 3 of LCUASS for other design requirements. RESPONSE: These have been added Number: 158 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending How does the future CR11 tie into existing? See sheet CS301. RESPONSE: We have now shown a taper at the north end with grading we will provide a easement for the grading. Number: 159 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending CS314 mislabeled as Flagstaff Place profiles. Is this supposed to be Fairwater? RESPONSE: This is fixed. Topic: Plat Number: 6 Created: 11/4/2002 Pending From Technical Services: The boundary and legal close. 3/5/3: The boundary and legal description do not close in this submittal. RESPONSE: It now closes Number: 9 Created: 11/5/2002 Pending Please provide the missing plot language as shown on the attached document (cert of dedication, maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee. notice of other docs, sight distance, etc.). 3/11/3: Missing Sight Distance Easement Restrictions and the Statement of Ownership/Surveyor's Statement require corrections. See redlines and attached. RESPONSE: This has been added Number: 12 Created: 11/5/2002 Pending Provide a tract table. Who owns and maintains each tract? 3/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: We have provided a note that the homeowner association owns and maintains the tracts Page 6 3/11/3: Repeat comments. Several trees shown right on top of inlets, etc. Number: 30 . Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Incorrect sight distance easements shown. Repeat comment. Number: 74 Created: 11/14/2002 Pending 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). 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please provide and show on the plans. Number: 75 Created: 11/14/2002 Pending Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please show on plans. Number: 135 Remove the contours. Created: 3/11/2003 Pending Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 47 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Minimum VCs are not being met in all places. RESPONSE: This has been checked. Number: 48 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The station ahead/back shown on the plans are not in accordance with LCLASS. I do have an option for you that might be worth exploring. Engineering had an internal discussion on the CL and FL requirements currently being required in our street standards several weeks ago. It was decided that Mike Herzig would follow up with another meeting with: "the various Engineering firms interested in this issue will be held to work with them to determine what the final requirements for submittal will be. In the meantime the following direction can be given for the projects currently in review: For Arterials and Collectors . the existing criteria remains in place. Centerline stationing is to be provided along with the required x-sections every 50 feet. For Residential and Local Streets . in lieu of providing centerline stationing flowline stationing can be used if actual x-sections of the roadway at the beginning of a horizontal curve, end of a horizontal curve, and additional x-sections be provided if there are other elevation changes, grade changes and street width changes that occur within the horizontal curve. They also need to identify the location of beginnings and endings of horizontal curves with elevations noted on the profile and plan view. *You have the option then, of preparing your flowlines as currently required by the standards or designing them with the alternative suggested above. RESPONSE: If you need for information we will provide cross sections Page 5 Number: 43 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Drainage arrows must be provided and show positive drainage to streets or to an approved drainage facility. 4/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: This is done. Number: 146 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Comment 89 from Basil Hamden, Stormwater: 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, There are several locations where the labeling makes it impossible to read the plans. Please move elevations so that they can be easily read. 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. From Engineering: These requirements still stand. Provide the additional drainage easements by plot or by separate document. RESPONSE: We have now provided this Number: 152 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Provide the statement shown in Appendix E. Section II, E. "The top of foundation elevations shown..." RESPONSE: This is now done Topic: Intersection Details Number: 160 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending See detail 7-27 and 7-28 for spot elevation requirements on all intersection details shown. RESPONSE: These are now complete Number: 161 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending 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 oufflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would be to have Sternwheeler the through street without mid -block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipper Way. RESPONSE: It is now a 12 foot pan Number: 162 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Crown the transition in accordance with detail 7-28 from Clipper Way to Sternwheeler Drive. RESPONSE: All transitions are now shown in the intersection details Number: 163 Created:. 3/13/2003 Pending Traffic Circle .show the yield line (flow line)as required in detail 8-13. RESPONSE: This is now shown in the intersection detail. Number: 164 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending Concrete or other approved surface texture change required at traffic circle crosswalks. RESPONSE: This is now shown in the intersection detail. Topic: Landscape Number: 17 Created: 11/6/2002 Pending 3.2.1 X requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. Page 4 Number: 53 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Station driveway locations where vertical curb is used. RESPONSE:This is done Number: 54 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending See detail 7-24 for all street -widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the mm PC to PCR. Show and label R1, R2, R3, Wand flowline as required by 7-24. RESPONSE: This has been changed Number: 67 Created: 11/13/2002 Pending Quite a bit of information left off of this submittal. Expect more comments with the next submittal. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: OK, hopefully this will go along way towards this Number: 76 Created: 11/14/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. (Alternative Compliance Letter just received on 3/13/3. RESPONSE: This should be OK now. Number: 143 Created: 3/12/2003 Pending Ghost all future filing improvements and label as "future", all sheets, all plan sets. Placing this information on this filing in now way constitutes an approval or review of those 'future" filings. RESPONSE: This is done. Number: 157 Created: 3/13/2003 Pending The plans must be at least 90% complete before we will schedule it for a public hearing. RESPONSE: I think we are there. Topic: Grading Plan Number: 38 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Erosion Control Plan .provide rip rap at the end of Sternwheeler Drive and roundabout stubs. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The various sheets are not consistent. Some show it, some do not. RESPONSE: This should be taken care of now Number: 40 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes effect public ROW. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: These should be labled Number: 42 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot corners.. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Incomplete lot corners. RESPONSE: This is done Page 3 707 1601 1613 708 1602 1413 709 1603 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still missing 711, 713.1F, 713.2F, 1607, 1612, 1613, 1413, 7-26 and CDOT m-609-1 curb and gutter type 2. Also, remove 1604 - it's not correct. Provide the Greeley standard for stamped concrete at access ramps (until the LCUASS detail is updated) and the ODOT standard for truncated dome access ramps for design and construction. See attached. RESPONSE: We should now have all required details. Also we have kept the standard HC Ramp per your instructions. Topic: General Number: 21 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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 plot or provided by separate document. Regardless of how its 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 lateral is now outside of the right of way and in a plan and profile sheet 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The Underpass Plan and Profile sheets state that the irrigation line is being relocated but it doesn't show where. The plat does not show a separate easement for it's new location either. Please see above. RESPONSE: Please see plan and profile sheet for baker lateral Number: 27 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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. 3/11/3: Keeping this item open until the conditions are met. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Number: 37 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: We are trying Number: 46 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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 limits or provide all necessary off -site easements. RESPONSE. We will provide the easements with their recording number when we go to mylar. Also, the sanitary sewer easement needs to be covered in the development agreement. Page 2 _4, d Selected Issues Report City of Fort Collins Date:3/17/2003 Terrance Hoaglund Vignette Studios 144 North Mason Street, Suite 2 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re; LIND PROPERTY PDP _TYPE I (LUC) #39-94B The following are revised comments for the Lind Property PDP. These comments will need to be included on a revised submittal prior to scheduling for a public hearing. Red -lined drawings are available at the Current Planning front desk. ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Bob Barkeen Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 181 Created: 3/14/2003 Pending Landscaping will need to be included on the west side of County Rood 11, in the area of the relocated street. A portion of the landscape plan is void adjacent to County Road 52 (west of Bar Harbor Drive), perhaps some shrubs beds would be appropriate here. It appears several street trees are in conflict with storm drainage utilities. Please make sure street trees have adequate separation. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Cross Sections Number: 57 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending These sections must reflect the site grading. Is what is shown how the proposed grade Is actually tying into existing? 3/11/3: The cross sections were not included with the plan set. The cross section sheets were received a week later and received a cursory review only. The underpass must be clearly shown on the cross sections. RESPONSE: These sections reflect site grading. Also see the profile sheet for how the underpass works with the road Number: 72 Created: 11/14/2002 Pending Quite a number of cross -sections are incomplete. Please provide all missing information. 3/11/3: See LCUASS for cross section requirements. RESPONSE: These should now be complete Topic: Details Number: 59 Created: 11/12/2002 Pending 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 702 713.1 F 1 609L if required by Transportation Planning or — 703 713.2F 1611 706 803 1612 Page t