Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCITY OF FORT COLLINS UTILITY SERVICE CENTER PDP AND PLAT - 16 90E - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS (2)• • August 5, 2002 Ted Shepard Fort Collins Planning Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 City of Fort Collins Utility Service Center — ODP / PDP/ REPLAT Response to Staff Project Review comments Dear Ted, VF RIPLEY ASSOCIATES INC. Landscape Architecture Urhan Design Planning 401 West Mountain .Avenue Suite 201 Fort Collum CO 80521-2601 PHONE (970) 124-5828 FAX 19701224-1662 We have reviewed the staff letter dated July 2,02 and have the following comments: 1. Be sure to add a six foot wide sidewalk connection at the north terminus of Whitcomb Street that will tie into the proposed path connecting Elm Street and The Farm at Martinez Park. A six foot wide sidewalk has been added. Also bollards with a chain are shown to prevent vehicles entering the site. 2. Be sure to denote on the Landscape Plans exactly which trees are serving as the mitigation trees as per the discussion with Ralph Zentz, Assistant City Forester. It is our understanding that ten existing trees are to be removed and that evergreen trees, at a height that exceeds the minimum, will act as the mitigation trees. Proposed evergreen trees serving as mitigation, as per the discussion with Ralph Zentz, are identified in the plant list on the Landscape Plan. OTHER ISSUES: Department: Engineering Topic: General 10. Need to add signature block for ELCO A signature block has since been added for ELCO's review and approval. • Please call if you have any questions or need further information. Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to working with further you during the development review process. Sincerely VF Ripley Associates F-WO, M / IMA Louise Herbert 11. Is signature block required for Griffin Drain ownership? Based on conversations with the City of Fort Collins (Jack Gianola) a signature block Is not required for the Griffin Drain. 12. Add note to demo plan about remove and replace any damaged curb and gutter on Elm Street in area to be constructed. The note has been added. 13. Call out curb and gutter type, Elm Street and parking lot. Curb and gutter type has been added. 14. Show location of Griffin Drain on x-section sheet CS302. The Griffin Drain has been located and shown on Sheet CS302. 15. Will existing fire hydrant on Elm need to be relocated? The valve may be in gutter or curb head. The existing fire hydrant on Elm Street will require location, which has since been modified on the revised plan set. 16. Appears off -site easements are required for pond, retaining wall and trail. The water quality pond and trail will require easements, which will be submitted as separate documents and in conformance with the City's MO for such dedications. The construction of the retaining wall is expected not to require access on off -site properties, and can be accommodated by careful execution of this project construction component. As such, no easement or legal description will be submitted for the retaining wall structure. 17. How will existing alley terminate at the North end? At this point, the Owner has elected to maintain Type 3 barricades that restrict access through the alley at the north end. The City will be responsible for maintaining the barricades. E • 18. Provide elevations of the existing gutter at Loomis and Elm for tie in points. Elevations have been added. Department: Natural Resources Topic: Wetlands 7. A Wetland Delineation is required for this project but was not submitted. The delineation needs to be shown on plans. This is being completed in part by the City, and information related to the delineation will be provided on the plan set, as well as the associated mitigation plan report to be submitted by the City to the City. 8. A mitigation plan is needed showing how the wetlands will be mitigated and what planting will be done. A Landscape Plan has been submitted showing what planting will be done. 9. The request to remove the existing wetlands and mitigate for their loss a modification from the Planning and Zoning Board is needed 3.4.1(E)3. A Modification Request has been submitted. Department: Police Topic: General 5. For security and safety, lighting levels should be above I fc (vertical) throughout the parking area and both pedestrian and vehicular exits and circulation areas. The Lighting Plan has been adjusted and resubmitted. Department: Stormwater Utility Topic: Box Culvert Maintenance Access 27. The proposed box culvert seems to very deep in some locations. Please provide a maintenance access into the box culvert. Please contact Maureen Scullion to make sure that the proposed access complies with all Federal, State and City safety regulations. • Access is provided at the upper and lower -most ends of the RCBC. Further, and while not all that clear due to CAD line types and such, manhole access points are provided at intervals which conform to the City's Criteria for proximity of manhole accesses for storm lines. We have gone back and modified access locations that make these locations more discernable. Maureen Scullion was contacted and the City elects to install manhole rungs for the deeper manholes. These are now included in the plan set. Topic: Box Culvert Trash Rack 32. It seems that the box culvert is designed with a security rack at the downstream end. Please make sure that the grate is not anchored to the headwall as currently shown, but is secured with lockable and moveable devices such as hinges and locks for maintenance access. Lockout and hinges components are now added. Topic: Channel Design 31. Please provide a hard copy as well as digital copies of the HEC RAS input and output files for review. Please show the limits of the floodplain along Elm Street and in the channel on the plans. Hard and e-copies for the HEC-RAS modeling is now added. Please note that the existing and proposed floodplains were shown on Sheets CS203 and CS204. We're thinking that given the scale of tributary areas, it's best to keep the delineations for each as previously shown. Also, no adverse impacts are seen at this point regarding floodplain capacity of the proposed south channel. Further, the floodplain between the NE corner of the Site and the Cache La Poudre River will be shown, which will also have a legal description for it (separate document) to ensure no development encroaches on the proposed flow path to the CLP. Topic: Detention Requirement 30. Due to proximity of this site to the Poudre River no water quantity detention is required. Acknowledged. n L Topic: Erosion and sediment control 25. June 20, 2002 Standard City erosion control notes need to be on the plan. Since included. The BMP's mentioned in the report versus those on the plan, versus those in the calculations do not match. Please make it so. We went back and checked things, and the original work seemed to be in order with what was reported/shown. Please note that with the new changes to the Site plan per the Natural Resources department, we've expanded these calculations. Project Schedule? Included with plan set. What happens where with permanent re -vegetation? How are the swales and the new pond to be protected from erosion until vegetation is established? The Contractor will need to work construction in conformance with the schedule and re - vegetation program now included with the set. Topic: Floodplain 4. Please show future floodplain delineation on ODP Plans, after proposed improvements are completed. The future floodplain delineation area is shown on the OPD Plan. 24. Please delineate floodplain downstream of the water quality pond all the way to the Poudre River. This will need to be delineated by hydraulic modeling of the area from the water quality pond spillway to the river. That area should be then reserved from the future development through a right of way designation agreement with the City Parks Department. The floodplain is delineated to the CLP. Hydraulic analysis included with the report. A legal will accompany the submittal. Topic: Future Building 29. Please specify the Finish Floor elevation of the future proposed building. Now included. Topic: Inlet Design 37. Please show that the 3'x3'x6' inlet at the northeast corner of the site has adequate capacity to handle the 100 year tributary area to the inlet. The inlet has the required capacity to pass the 100 yr flow for the tributary area, and calculations are included in the report. Topic: Joints 35. Please specify water -tight joints whenever possible when the system is pressurized. Macwrap notation is on CS302 (bottom of profile). We'll bold things up for review/construction purposes. Topic: Martinez Ditch 36. Have these plans been reviewed by Parks maintenance as for the relocation of the Martinez Park ditch lateral? The plans were at least submitted to the Parks department for review. No word back from, but they nodded their heads when we went over things in the field with them. We're guessing they're OK with the plans (no word, good word). Topic: Phasing Plan 33. Due to the high velocities experienced in the box culvert please make sure that the rip rap and stilling basin at the downstream end of the culvert, in the water quality pond, are built at the same time as the culvert (It should be included in Phase 1), Topic: Plat 26. Please call out the limits of the floodplain on the plat. • • The floodplain is actually off -site runoff, which has historically flowed through the site/area. As such, we're thinking that this information might create institutional concerns which might not apply to this type of stormwater conveyance. At this point in time, we respectfully request that this item be striken as the off -site water or "floodplain" is in fact not a jurisdictional floodway under City of Federal domain, and not be included in the plat. Please make sure that the Swale along Elm Street and the box culvert are called out as drainage easements. A legal description will accompany the plan addressing this item by separate document. Topic: Utility Conflicts 34. It seems that the Griffin drain crossing of the 24" RCP is not shown in profile view. Please investigate and provide elevation of drain compared to proposed pipes in order to check for potential conflicts. The location of the drain is called out in horizontal view however there are several crossings of proposed facilities with no vertical information on the drain that could present problems. We've checked things, and at this point this sensitive line does not appear to be in conflict with other on -site utilities. Further, design information received from the City is included at the tail end of the plan set. Topic: Water Quality Pond 28. Please clarify who will maintain the proposed water quality pond. Please make sure that the spillway is adequately armored. Please call out spillway elevation on the plan. The spillway is actually the downstream overtopping section which leads directly into the downstream wetlands (mitigated area). As the prevailing grade is to the north, no backwater or spatially varied flow would be expected in this case. Armoring information is contained in the plan set. Please specify the spacing in the Water Quality the trash rack. Specify no more than 4" clear between rods. The water quality design calculation in the report are unreadable due to poor reproduction, please make sure they are readable so that they can be reviewed. We've gone back and made them more readable for folks. Please provide an opening on the downstream side cifthe water quality stilling basin for dewatering. Given the location of the structure and its design function we respectfully recommend not going with a pipe connection between the stilling basin and WQ pond as there is a high potential for clogging at the inlet section regardless of horizontal plan configuration of such a pipe. Further, the basin will not be grouted, allowing for percolation of an y residual standing water that would be in the basin after an event, as well as Colorado's evapo-transpi ration rates. If this is a mandate for maintaining wetlands water sources, it should be noted that the source of water is provided by the Lee Martinez Lateral which will continue to operate in a condition equal to or better than existing. Department: Transportation Planning Topic: General 6. According to the City's LUC a facility that is designed for both pedestrians and bikes should be 8 feet in width as a minimum in order to safely accommodate the intended users. Currently the trail is shown as 6 feet. Please increase to 8 feet and include an access ramp at the corner of Elm Street and Loomis for cyclists to safely access the trail from the street. The City Parks department has requested that the walk be designed for 6 feet of width due to maintenance concerns on their behalf. With regards to the mandated pedestrian access at Elm and Loomis, it is felt that an access of this nature and location may expose certain path users to a hazardous situation (i.e., a kid on a bike heading west on the path to this location, with a car heading north on Loomis to Elm- This turn has very little in the way of lateral sight distances ) Further, in the vicinity of the Site, Loomis does not have a pedestrian conveyance system that this access would tie to. As such, this access will tie to an extended bike lane that will be striped on Elm Street (north side). A more appropriate location for the access would have been at the intersection of Elm and Grant where and pedestrian walk system currently exists. This information was conveyed to the City and rejected. Therefore, at the mandate of the City, the access at Loomis and Elm will be included in the final plan set. Department: Water Wastewater Topic: General 19. Maintain 10 feet of separation between existing buildings and sanitary sewer trunks and proposed relocation ELCO water main. ELCO actually selected the future alignment, and were notified that things were very tight. As there is the distinct possibility that the future line may never be built, we respectfully recommend that the alignment be approved, the understanding the ELCO will be responsible for constructing and maintaining such a future line in such a manner that does not disrupt City facilities or services. 20. Clearly define all aspects of existing and proposed water/sewer services (i.e. size, location, etc.). More information since included. 21. Provide signature blocks for ELCO and NWCWD. Since included. 22. Will existing 6" City of Fort Collins water main be abandoned with future building? Clearly define all aspects of future building impacts on existing water/sewer. It'll be maintained. 23. Provide all appropriate details on detail sheet (i.e. water main lowering, meter pits, etc.). See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments. Since included. Department: Zoning Topic: Zoning 1. The term "P.U.D." should be removed from the name of the plat since we don't do PUD's anymore. It should just be City of FC Service Center 6`h filing. Acknowledged. 2. Their narrative states that there will be an 8' tall security fence to tie in with the existing. Will the fence have barbed wire? If it does, then they'll have to comply with the standards in 3.8.11(B). Yes, the fence will have barbed wire and will comply with the standards in 3.8.1 l(B).