HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWIFT ADDITION TO FOSSIL LAKE PUD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-07-21Pr oje-- t comments Sheet
Selected Departments
Deparrment: Engineering
Date: October 7, 2003
Project:
SWIFT ADDITION TO FOSSIL LAKE P.U.D. - REPLAT - TYPE I (LUC)
All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the
staff review meeting:
October 22, 2003
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff
Topic: General
Number: 1 Created: 10/7/2003
Make corrections to the dedication language, certificate of dedication language, maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee,
notice of other documents, and the acceptance statements.
Number: 2 Created: 10/7/2003
1 believe the zone district noted on there is incorrect. I do not believe that there is a FAI-PUD zone in the City.
Number: 3 Created: 10/7/2003
Outlot A — the northern portion of this area was a utility and drainage easement on the prior plat. Is it to be vacated or is
It still to be a utility and drainage easement?
Number: 4
I, UuDE Is not listed In the key
Number: 5
1 at DE is not listed in the key.
Created: 10/7/2003
Created: 10/7/2003
Number: 6 Created: 10/7/2003
Outlot B — this area was dedicated as a utility easement on the prior plat. Is it to be vacated or is it still to be a utility
easement?
Number: 7 Created: 10/7/2003
Outlot C — this area was previously dedicated as a utility easement on the prior plat. Is it to be vacated or is it still to be a
utility easement?
Date
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat Site Drainage Report Other_
Utility Redline Utility Landscape
Page 1
Fossil Lake PUD — Swift addition sheet 2 of 2 December 4, 2001
9. Was Lake Ranch Road previously dedicated or is it being dedicated with this plat? Can't tell.
t 0. Need to show that the off site row for Lake Ranch Road is being provided by separate document. This row needs to be
dedicated and constructed with this project. Do not feel that it is adequate as an emergency access roadway. Plat/utility
11. Need to show the 9 foot utility easements that are behind the row on the outlots. Also need to show the rear lot
easements connecting across the outlots. Plat
12. Provide the two additional sight distance easements as noted and shown. Plat/utility
13. Curve C 14 on North Shore Lane needs to widen out to a 36 foot x-section since it is greater than a 60 degree curve.
See 7-26.
14. Need to provide a sight distance easement at this curve to provide for the stopping sight distance visibility.
15. Need to show how you are going to provide 1 off -site parking space for each residence that has frontage on a cul-de-
sac bulb. See Section 19.23. Need to provide 7 spaces on the cul-de-sac with no name, 8 spaces on Green Spring
Drive, 4 spaces on each bulb of South View Court, 4 spaces on Shallow Pond Drive and 7 spaces on Wild View Drive.
This is going to be tough to accomplish on the cul-de-sacs with the smaller lots.
16. Shallow Pond Drive at Lake Ranch Road will need to be widened out to accommodate the road width transition.
Shallow Pond Drive to the west is considered a connector. The transition in the width is not allowed to occur through
the intersection. Therefore Shallow Pond Drive shall have a 36 foot cross section on the east side of the intersection
and then transition to the 30 foot section with proper transitions.
17, Per II.B.2 need to provide street connections to the eastern and southern properties. Until such time as a conservation
easement is in place on the southern area a street connection to the property is needed.
18. These connections need to be made as a street on public row. An easement across 4 properties is not acceptable, as the
access point will need. to be a public street to serve the amount of developable land available there. Need to provide
street designs for these connections. The design will need to include any crossings of drainage ditches, irrigation
ditches or channels that exist. The connection(s) would not need to be built now, but money for the one connection
shown will need to be placed in escrow prior to the issuance of any building permit on lots 25, 26, 27 and 28. This
requirement will need to be reflected in the development agreement for this site.
19. Outlots D, B, C, A, E, F and H need to be access easements for the sidewalk placements as shown.
20. Some of the street sidewalks through outlot F are detached from the street too far. The sidewalk needs to be close
enough to the street to take advantage of the light from the street lights for safety and visibility, and shall not be
separated from the street by any landscaping that could obscure visibility of the pedestrian. The walk can be detached
and meander, but not to the extent shown.
21. Do not provide the ramps that are shown at the necks of the cul-de-sac. They are not needed nor desired.
22. Need to provide directional ramps at the comers. Per Section 16.3.1.5.
23. Provide 3 ramps at all "T" intersections. Per Section 16.3.1.2.
24. The trails need to line up with the ramps being provided and the ramps need to line up across the streets.
25. Need to provide fence details, notes and restrictions for fencing adjacent to and/ or across drainage swales, drainage
pipes, irrigation ditches and any other drainage feature that could be effected by landscaping and/ or fencing.
26. The 10 foot trail needs to be designed according to standards, see chapter 17. All radii need to meet standards (min r--
95 ft).
27. The sidewalk and trail along the east side of Lake Ranch Road needs to be built at this time with this project. A
portion of the sidewalk is not shown on the utility plans.
28. A note on the landscape plans speak of phasing, but there is no phasing shown on any of the plans. All proposed
phasing needs to be shown on both the site, landscape and utility plans.
How are the previous comments being addressed?
The following lots do not appear to meet the 100 fir min lot width requirement (section I.E.4.b.(1))
39, 36, 35, 34, 33, 31, 30, 3, 5, 6, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 17, 16, 14, 13
The following lots extend into the estate zoning area and do not meet the min '/2 acre size
13, 14, 15, 16
Does the City Park meet the park requirement or is a separate park space needed? (I.F.41)
Still suggest that on Southview Court connect the cul-de-sac bulbs out to Wild View drive and eliminate the middle street
connection.
_i=ROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Plannine
DATE: October 3, 2003 TO: Technical Services
PROJECT: #33-01K SWIFT ADDITION To FOSSIL LAKE PUD
-- REPLAT — TYPE I (LUC)
All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff
review meeting:
October 22, 2003
Note - PLEASF. identify Your redlines for future reference
IZ
I /-�t S Pe pt .4T �GQ� /t.lc�T IU. E'J 4,,j
121/ r P- .4rz
�C I�C- F i_¢c. lC �� l ,SC uc re
aif 7 /
ENGINEERING DEPT. NOTE:
THIS REPRESENTS THE BEST
OU FROMIVIERY POOR QUA 17Y EN
ORIGINALS
Name (please print)
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other
Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape city of Fort Collins
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
COUNTY REFERRAL
COMMENT SHEET
COMMENTS TO: Matt Lafferty FROM: Engineering
TYPE OF MEETING: Board of County Commissioners
PROJECT: Fossil Lake PUD Swift Amendment
THRU: City of Fort Collins Planning Department
PLANNER: Troy Jones
City comments must be received in Current Planning Department by:
September 18, 2002
❑ No Problems
O�oblems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Fossil Lake PUD — Swift addition sheet 1 of 2 September 20, 2002
City of Fort Collins Engineering Comments — Please return all redlined plans with
resubmital.
1. Provide current general notes and all applicable construction notes. Note 30—the city of fort Collins only
approves plans for 3 yrs not the 5 as noted_ This needs to be changed. Add the additional note to the general notes
that I wrote on the plans.
2. What is the status of this? Per ILB.6 needs to provide street connection(s) to the eastern and southern
properties. It has been discussed that this property will be put into a conservation easement. If that occurs
than the property is not considered developable and thus the connections are not needed nor required. The
connections do not have to be shown on the preliminary plat, but if at the time of final plat submittal the
adjacent property (to the south and east) is not in a conservation easement a street connection(s) needs to be
provided to the property. This/these connection(s) need to be made as a street on public row. An easement
across 4 properties is not acceptable: as the access point will need to be a public street to serve the amount
of developable land available there. Street designs for the connection(s) will need to be provided. The
design will need to include any crossings of drainage ditches, irrigation ditches or channels that exist. The
connection(s) would not need to be built now, but money for the connection(s) will need to be placed in
escrow prior to the issuance of any building permit on lots adjacent to the roadway. This requirement will
need to be reflected in the development agreement for this site.
3. Are street trees not required? No street trees are shown. May need to show how the street trees, utilities and
driveways work on the lots with small frontages.
4. Need easements for all offsite grading and construction work.
5. The signaee plan will need to be reviewed and approved by City of Fort Collins Traffic Operatioa
rout�efd to them
Date: /^D O� SignattIIe�� lw�a
City of F
Fossil Lake PUD — Swift Addition (continued) sheet 2 of 2 September 20, 2002
6. Correct the locations where the PCR elevations do not match between the plan and profile sheets and the detail
sheets.
7. In accordance with detail 7-24A the entry neck flowline radii shall be 50 feet. This is not being provided on one
cul-de-sac.
S. Provide transition elevations on the intersection details. Missing a couple still.
9. Label the pavement widths in the cul-de-sac with parking. Label the parking area width and label it as concrete.
10. Per Section 12.2.2 a minimum of 2 feet of cover below scarified subgrade is required for all utilities. It doesn't
appear that the stromdrains always meet this. — This has been met for most cases. The two remaining ones still
need work. For the portion of Storm sewer line g2 under Shallow Pond Drive can we gain the 6 additional inches
that we need if you go with 3 pipes. For the portion of storm sewer lines 4, 5 and 6 this needs to be designed as
boxes (box culverts) or a structural deck designed and built above the pipes. Another solution is to raise the road
in these areas to provide the minimum clearance. Contact Rick Richter if you have questions.
11. The soils report indicates that their maybe high groundwater on this site, but gives no indication of what high
means. Need additional information on this. If the groundwater is encounter within 5 feet of the original ground
surface a subsurface investigation report (hydrologic study) is required. — reponse to comment stated see attached
letter from Earth Engineering. No letter was attached with the stuff I received. Please send or fax me a copy of
this letter.
12. Return comment indicated that the eastern portion of Lake Ranch Road row north of this project was going to be
dedicated by this plat. This row is not shown on this plat. If it is not to be dedicated as a part of this plat then need
to show what portion is currently dedicated and indicated the portion that is to be dedicated by separate document.
A utility easement is also being shown on the eastern side of this row north of this property. Does this exist?
Provide the reception number for this easement if it exists.
13. You have indicated on that plat that all tracts and outlets not dedicated to the City of Fort Collins will be owned
and maintained by the home owners association. What outlets and tracts are being dedicated to the City. Need to
identify which these are. The City will also need to sign the plat accepting the tracts or outlets that would be
dedicated to them. Which city department is taking these? Is the City really going to accept any?
14. The building setbacks are being shown on the plat. By providing this information on the plat rather than the site
plan it will make it much more complicated to change these in the future. It is quite common for a lot to come in
with a request to reduce the required setback. With the setbacks listed on the plat it will require a plat amendment
or replat to occur in order to change the setback for the lot in addition to the process to vary the code.
15, Response to my question about what is going to happen to the irrigation ditch that has a label that says it is to be
removed indicated the at the irrigation ditch along the north property boundary is to be replaced with a buried
irrigation pipe. If so a design for this needs to be provided. Where this pipe crosses under the row it needs to be
sleeved and meet minimum cover requirements. A siphon will be needed if minimum cover can not provided with
a straight grade. The Ditch owner will need to sign all plan sheets showing work to the irrigation ditch.
16. How and where does the 4 foot sidewalk culvert transition into the 2 foot pan. Need to show how this is to be
done.
17. There is a label on one of the sheets that says the trail is an 8 foot trail the trail is a 10 foot trail. A design needs to
be provided for the trail. A profile is needed to show that the trail grades stay within ADA requirements.
Horizontal information is also needed to show the alignment of the trail. As indicated previously the 10 foot trail
needs to be designed according to standards, see chapter 17. All radii need to meet standards (min r= 95 ft).
18. See other minor comments on the plans.
19. 1 received a copy of the draft development agreement this week. This will be reviewed and a draft copy of the
Citys portion of the development agreement will be forwarded once it has been drafted.
20. Items that will need to be placed within the development agreement for this site. The developer (homeowners) are
responsible for the maintenance of the cul-de-sac islands and landscaping.
21. Money wi I I need to be put up for the removal of the temporary turn around, since all lots are buildable.
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
COUNTY REFERRAL
COMMENT SHEET
COMMENTS TO: Matt Lafferty FROM: Engineering
TYPE OF MEETING: Board of County Commissioners
PROJECT: Fossil Lake PUD Swift Amendment
THRU: City of Fort Collins Planning Department
PLANNER: Bob Barkeen
City comments must be received in Current Planning Department by:
June 26, 2002
l
[�No Problems ���� ��- �U--, r �rl
roblems or Concerns (see below or attached)
*This is an addition to the Fossil Lake Swift
Amendment plans that were routed earlier in the
week.
Date:
city of Fort Collh s
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
COUNTY REFERRAL
COMMENT SHEET
COMMENTS TO: Matt Lafferty FROM: Engineering
TYPE OF MEETING: Board of County Commissioners
PROJECT: Fossil Lake PUD Swift Amendment
THRU: City of Fort Collins Planning Department
PLANNER: Bob Barkeen
City comments must be received in Current Planning Department by:
June 26, 2002
No Problems
2"Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Fossil Lake PUD — Swift addition sheet 1 of 3 June 29, 2002
City of Fort Collins En incerine Comments — Please return all redlined plans with resubmital.
I. Provide current general notes and all applicable construction notes.
2. Indicate that the minimum garage door setback is 20 feet from the property line. This needs to be noted on the
site plan. — setback is noted, unless otherwise required by planning or the codes the 20 ft setback applies to the
garage door. The actual building can be closer.
3. Need to indicate who is to own and maintain the tracts/ outlots. Plat
4. The radius at the entry to the cul-de-sac should be 39.5 feet not the 30 foot shown per 7-24A. Property line
radius = 39.5 ft, Flowlinc radius = 50.0 ft.
5. Need to identify the areas that are to be access easements for the trails and sidewalks that go through the site.
Plat
6. Per I LB.6 needs to provide street connection(s) to the eastern and southern properties. It has been discussed
that this property will be put into a conservation easement. If that occurs than the property is not considered
developable and thus the connections are not needed nor required. The connections do not have to be shown on
the preliminary plat, but if at the time of final plat submittal the adjacent property (to the south and east) is not
in a conservation easement a street connection(s) needs to be provided to the property. This/these connection(s)
need to be made as a street on public row. An easement across 4 properties is not acceptable; as the access point
will need to he a public street to serve the amount of developable land available there. Street designs for the
connection(s) will need to be provided. The design will need to include any crossings of drainage ditches,
irrigation ditches or channels that exist. The connection(s) would not need to he built now, but money for the
connection(s) will need to be placed in escrow prior to the issuance of any building permit on lots adjacent to the
roadway. This requirement will need to be reflected in the development agreement for this site.
(continued on next page)
Date: ___ Signat e:_ � /� � Cit of Fert Collins
Fossil Lake PUD - Swift addition sheet 2 of 3 June 29, 2002
7. Outlots D, B, C, A, E, F and H need to be access casements for the sidewalk placements as shown.
8. Provide 3 ramps at all "T" intersections. Per Section 16.3.1.2.
9. The trails need to line up with the ramps being provided and the ramps need to line up across the streets.
10. The 10 foot trail needs to be designed according to standards, see chapter 17. All radii need to meet standards
(min r= 95 ft).
Still suggest that on Snuthview Court connect the cul-de-sac bulbs out to Wild View drive and eliminate the middle
street connection.
The above comments in bold are repeat comments.
No Me V�d
,{
I. Are street trees not required? street trees are shown.
q .''1
dnr2o:.c�Y;
2. The sidewalk connection between Shallow Pond Drive and Rocky Stream Drive along the west boundary of the
property needs to be made with this project. Since you are not putting in a street connection a sidewalk connection
�jiy p{J
needs to be made at this time.
3. The parking stall areas within the cul-de-sac island shall be concrete in accordance with detail 19-01 A, please
1y:,11
show as such.t�
4. At a T-intersection on the side where there is not a pedestrian ramp remove the directional ramp on the comer
across from this. Where a directional ramp is provided a ramp across the street from it must be provided.
5. Plat - Who is to own the irrigation easement? Need to have the owner sign the plat.
6. Plat - the agreement will probably be between the Developer, the County and the City.
7. Was the row for Lake Ranch Road (both sides) dedicated with the 2"d Filing plat? Was the row for the portion of
Muskrat being shown to be built already dedicated? if not this needs to be dedicated with this project as well as
any easements needed to construct the improvements shown.
8. The curve between Sage Sparrow Lane and Sandy Shore Lane does not meet minimum standards as shown on the
plat, but as shown on the utility plans it does. If the centerline radius meets min requirements nothing is required
if it does not a variance is required.
9. Plat - I believe it is the building setback line that is being shown on the estate lots, but you may want to label it as
it is not clear what this is.
10. Need easements for all offsite grading and construction work.
11. The signage plan will need to be reviewed and approved by City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations.
12. There is a note on the utility plan that the existing irrigation ditch is to be removed. What happens to it? Is it
relocated? Does it go away completely? If it is to be removed from here why is an easement being dedicated for it
on the plat?
13. Need to provide curb return information for all intersections.
14. Per Section 8.2.9.A, Table 8-2 the curb return radii shalt be 20 feet. You are showing a curb return radii of 15 feet
for all street intersections. Use of this radius would require submittal and approval ofjustiftcation of why 15 foot
radii are needed and work.
15. Label the trail crossings on the plan and profile sheets as enhanced x-walks.
16. It will not be required for this project, but for all future submittal of new projects Centerline stationing is required.
Flowline stationing will not be accepted except for the exceptions mentioned in the standards.
17. Correct the locations where the PCR elevations do not match between the plan and profile sheets and the detail
sheets.
18. Show the inlet locations and sizes on the profiles.
19. Correct the typical x-sections; the maximum x-slope is 3% not the 4% as shown.
20. Correct the typical x-section for Lake Ranch Road to reflect the trail and its location.
21. Need to identify where the transition from vertical curb and gutter on Lake Ranch Road to the drive -over curb on
the adjacent streets is to occur and what the transition distance is.
22. Does the trail continue up to the corner of Lake Ranch Road and Muskrat Creek Drive? If so the ramps need to be
built to the appropriate size when the curb and gutter is put in. If not show the standard sidewalk on the east side
and label as future.
23. Show existing grades being tied into for the streets tying into existing streets.
24. Midblock cross pans need to be a minimum of t2 wide. The midblock x-pan on Wild View Drive is only being
shown as a 6 foot pan. Section 7.7.5.
25. Shearwater Court cul-de-sac, do not use a vertical curve in the cul-de-sac. A minimum slope of I % is required.
26. In accordance with detail 7-24A the entry neck flowline radii shall be 50 feet. This is not being provided.
27. Need to show how will tic into existing grades at the end of Pelican Drive and Muskrat Creek Drive.
(continued on next page
i� f�t7C`•>2� �uy-
Fossil Lake PUD —Swift addition sheet 3 of 3 June 29, 2002
28. Provide transition elevations on the intersection details.
29. Need to provide a design for Copper Springs Drive.
30. Where a cross pan is not used at an intersection the elevation at the intersection of the Flowlines needs to be
approximately .2 feet higher than the Flowline at the middle of the PC. This elevation needs to be higher than the
lip of gutter elevation or a low point in the street is created.
31. Cul-de-sac for shallow pond drive does not appear to meet the x-slope design requirements as shown. Also might
check the east side of Snowy Plover Court as it may be less than 2%.
32. Need more information for the cul-de-sac with parking islands in order to determine if they are meeting the x-
slope and design requirements. The 24 foot on the detail is a misprint; the minimum x-section width is 28 feet.
33. Per Section 12.2.2 a minimum of 2 feet of cover below scarified subgrade is required for all utilities. It doesn't
appear that the stromdrains always meet this.
34. Use correct drive -over curb detail 7-20B.
35. Correct the intersection approach detail so that they show the correct min/max x-slope.
36. Provide current street intersection detail 7-30.
37. Provide pedlbicyle path connection detail 7-14.
38. Provide detail l6-I.
39. Items that will need to be placed within the development agreement for this site. The developer (homeowners) are
responsible for the maintenance of the cul-de-sac islands and landscaping.
40. Money will need to be put up for the removal of the temporary turn around, since all lots are buildable.
41. The soils report indicates that their maybe high groundwater on this site, but gives no indication of what high
means. Need additional information on this. If the groundwater is encounter within 5 feet of the original ground
surface a subsurface investigation report (hydrologic study) is required.
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
COUNTY REFERRAL
COMMENT SHEET
COMMENTS TO: Matt Lafferty FROM: Engineering
TYPE OF MEETING: Larimer County Planning Commission
PROJECT: Fossil Lake PUD, Swift Addition
THRU: City of Fort Collins Planning Department
PLANNER: Bob Barkeen
City comments must be received in Current Planning Department by:
December 5, 2001
No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Fossil Lake PUD — Swift addition sheet I of 2 December 4, 2001
City of Fort Collins Engineering Comments — Please return all redlined plans with
resubmital.
1. Provide current general notes and all applicable construction notes.
2. Where is the TIS? Needed per II.C.3.
3. Indicate that the minimum garage door setback is 20 feet from the property line. This needs to be noted on the site
plan.
4. Remove the maintenance note from the plat — since the City of Fort Collins is not signing the plat they can not be
obligated to something by it.
5. Need to indicate who is to own and maintain the tracts/ outlots. Plat
6. The radius at the entry to the cul-de-sac should be 39.5 feet not the 30 foot shown per 7-24A.
7. When streets change direction they need to have a street name change also. It appears that there are a couple of places
where the streets need to change names. Also missing a name on the western most cul-de-sac off of Green Spring
Drive.
8. Need to identify the areas that are to be access easements for the trails and sidewalks that go through the site t
(continued on the next page,) �
Dale: Signature: City of Fort Collins