Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA PDP - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-11-03Affordable Housing L� r®®®l� Comment Sheet r Current Planning DATE: March 7, 2001 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Veterans of America) Elderly Housing - PDP Type I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference 9,C h Signature 2-a Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape e. A fire department access road shall be provided and maintained unobstructed. f. If the street is to be dedicated as a public street then it must be named with this development request. Street names shall be verified by LETA prior to being put into service. Please contact Michael, at 221-6570, if you have questions about these comments. 8. Doug Moore of the Natural Resources Department offered the following comments: a. Natural Area Buffers should be shown on the subdivision plat. b. NO DISTURBANCE IS ALLOWED IN NATURAL AREA BUFFERS. C. Natural Area Buffer Zones and Ditch Company Easements are not one in the same. d. The applicant may drop to 80% of the buffer size without Planning and Zoning Board approval but the requirements of the performance standards, as set forth in Section 3.4.1(E)(1) of the LUC, must be met to do so. e. Please meet with Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, to determine which existing trees on -site may be significant. f. The City's Tree Protection Standards will need to be followed for all trees deemed to be significant, as set forth in Section 3.2.1(G) of the LUC. g. If any significant trees are to be removed the mitigation standards will apply and a mitigation plan will be needed, as set forth in Section 3.2.1(F) of the LUC. h. What is the Blue Gramma grass blend and is it the best choice for this area? Please contact Doug, at 224-6143, if you have questions about these comments. 9. Mark Jackson of the Transportation Planning Department offered the following comments: a. This development needs to make a sidewalk connection on West Horsetooth Road, across the ditch to the west, to the existing sidewalk at the Westfield Park PUD. b. The Site Plan shows the proposed new sidewalk on West Horsetooth Road to be 5' in width. The City's arterial street standards call for a 6' wide sidewalk. Please make this adjustment. C. Show bicycle parking at each residential building in addition to that shown at the community building. The bicycle racks should be located near primary entrances to buildings. d. The connection to the proposed future bike trail, as shown, is good only if Phase 2 of the project is built. How will this connection be made if only Phase 1 is built? C. Are the pedestrian crossings shown on the Site Plan to be painted or enhanced? f. Can the Brook Drive right-of-way area be used to make a bike/ped. connection to the east into Skyline Acres? Please contact Mark, at 416-2029, if you have questions about these comments. 10. A copy of the comments received from Rick Lee of the Building Inspection Department, with a copy of Codes and Standards, is attached to this comment letter. 11. Dennis Greenwalt of AT&T Broadband (cable television) stated that they would like to see Public Utility Easements noted on the subdivision plat. 12. Copies of two letters from Alden V. Hill, the general counsel for the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company, with his concerns and comments are attached to this comment letter. 13. Matt Baker of the Engineering/Street Oversizing Department stated that the street oversizing fee will be $996 per dwelling unit. This development will be responsible for street oversizing on West Horsetooth Road. The developer will be responsible for improvements along Horsetooth Road where it fronts the property. This project must either construct the necessary widening or escrow the local street portion for a future City project. Please contact Matt, at 224-6108, if you have questions about his comments. 14. GayLene Rossiter of Transfort stated that transit service exists on West Horsetooth Road near this site, located south of Seneca on Horsetooth Road. Please contact GayLene at Transfort Transportation Services, at 224-6195, to discuss improvements to the transit stop, according to City of Fort Collins Transit Standards & Guidelines. 15. A representative of Public Service Company stated that if telephone and cable TV are to be installed within the 8.5' wide utility easement then the easement will need to be expanded to 11' wide. 16. Ron Mills of the City Right -Of -Way Planning Department stated that their records do not show that the Brook Drive right-of-way (ROW) is vacated. R.J.L. Surveys should provide proper documentation that the ROW has been vacated or the "Appears Vacated" remark must be deleted from the subdivision plan and Site Plan. 17. Doug Martine of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. Since the street is to be a dedicated City street the street lighting will be designed and installed by Light & Power, not the plan shown on the "Proposed Lighting Plan". b. Large, shade street trees need to be a minimum of 40' horizontally from City street lights. C. The electric system will be installed between the curb & sidewalk, with pad -mounted transformers. d. The storm drain appears to be planned to be under the curb in several locations. To provide space for the electric system the storm drain lines need to be on the street side of the curb. e. Locations for electric meters need to be coordinated with Light 8c Power. Please contact Doug, at 224-6152, if you have questions about these comments. 18. Copies of the Water Conservation Standards for Landscapes - COMMENT SHEET and the Water Conservation Standards for LANDSCAPING and IRRIGATION SYSTEMS — General Information from Laurie D'Audney, the City's Utility Education Specialist, are attached to this comment letter. 19. Craig Foreman of the Parks Planning Department stated that they would like to work with this development to provide for the City's bicycle path. They typically need to have the trail off the ditch ROW, unless the ditch company gives them an easement. Please contact Craig, at 221- 6618, to discuss the trail issue. 20. Rick Richter of the Engineering Pavement Department stated that this site has high swell soils. More exploration will be required on West Horsetooth Road. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the City Staff Review Meeting held on March 21, 2001: Stormwater Utility 21. The spillway and protection have not yet been designed. 22. No easements have been provided for the `high' water line. 23. Necessary easements are not shown. 24. Details for the utility plans are needed. Engineering 25. The utility plans are inadequate. The major issues are: • ROW is needed on West Horsetooth Road. • The path is shown in the ditch. • Ditch laterals need to be piped. • No phasing is delineated. 26. There are major discrepancies between the various plans. 27. Provide a road stub for Brook Drive. 28. The bike/ped trail along the ditch needs to be connected to the south, into Mountain Ridge Farms. Natural Resources 29. The applicant needs to meet with Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, to identify "significant" trees on -site and provide a mitigation for any trees that may be removed. 30. An Ecological Characterization Study must be done and submitted to the City for review. 31. No site grading may occur in buffer areas. Advance Plannine 32. The proposed 51' wide street right-of-way is too narrow. This would produce a planting strip that is less than 6' wide. Transportation Planning 33. Provide adequate ped. connections to the existing ped. facilities on West Horsetooth Road. 34. Make the necessary bike/ped connection to the future bike trail. 35. Can the Brook Drive ROW be used for a connection to the east? Current Plannine 36. See red -lined plans for comments. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Under the development review process and schedule there is a 90 day plan revision submittal time -frame mandated by the City LUC. The 90 day turnaround period (that the applicant has to resubmit to the City) begins on the date of this comment letter (April 2, 2001) prepared by the project planner in the Current Planning Department. A resubmittal must be made no later than Monday, July 2, 2001, by 5:00 p.m. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due no later than the second weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Administrative Hearing Officer (or Planning and Zoning Board, if necessary) for a decision and, if so, will be scheduled for the nearest open date. Please return all red -lined plans and reports with your revisions when they are submitted to the Current Planning Department. The number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet. Please contact me at 221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments, if necessary. Sincerely, Awes Steve Olt Project Planner cc: Zoning Poudre Fire Authority Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Engineering Stormwater Water/ Wastewater Natural Resources TSP Five, Inc. JVA Consulting Engineers R.J.L. Surveys Project File # 14-01 Affordable Housing Revision Comment Sheet Current Planning DATE: July 25, 2001 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Volunteers of America) Elderly Housing - PDP Type I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: J Signature Wednesday, August 8, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference C� G _�" f'J - Ibc Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape Wit.. �i City of Fort Collins 1 � Affordable Housing Revision Comment Sheet Current Planning DATE: July 25, 2001 TO: Street Oversizing PROJECT: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Volunteers of America) Elderly Housing - PDP Type I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, August 8, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference 5� OLPG�iZ /'GdTiGLf�u?ro� !i {�aaY�oi �r%r IAA—le4/ C 4-� A �/ of S 4 /� /i(JOI�K o ✓l � /'Z o ✓Sf_ !`emu/ `"l Ytd � G` C�5 � � a�- s -/-C L,/k b-ss itt-e-c�lLc< P-6 � z s��o CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _utility _Redline utility _Landscape ka �i Gtv of Fort Ca(lim ID Affordable Housing ®®®1� Revision Comment Sheet Current Planning DATE: July 25, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Volunteers of America) Elderly Housing - PDP Type I (LUC) jk'. M All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, August 8, 2001 v1,4 34-70,/4&P Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference `, Et/Nvfh�1 CGOSE� . / EG/!G T�or'S ✓IJ�Dfi Z, N 4 Go�NE2 Doc'S Nor ✓rlFtTCF/Od2 KEcoeDs. = DATE 3. D674c2xp771'al,- //"0 • co�Nc><- is ivar' Sn�w� t <% EASClMC�/1-S � /2oA o /?uc.J ,4 Rr* AtoT C.acaT.4 £Sc.E . �j Ujr1Af /S A 106;/L 9RtD WN,4T frraE 7-Hr }�TST2t�T,au� �T�. Q/.1 THE ZS t�Jf}7✓aAI- 12CA �o��Crt 7. Tex{_ j_s t�� Swr i 1r1c PCv See ew Pl9ly Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS "flat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape City of Fort Collins AUG 6 '01 14:42 FROM HILL —HILL ATTORNYS PAGE.002 Affordable Housing ED 11 ® , ® Revision Comment Sheet A�_ Current Planning n ,mow DATE: July 25, 2001 TC PROJECT: #14-01 Ft. Collin: America) Elderly Type I i I Pleasant Valley &r;Ne� VOA (Volunteers of All comments must be receivet y Steve Olt . Current Planning no later than the w meeting: r' Wednesday, August 8, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference ** TOTAL PAGE.002 ** IAMMProject Comments Sheet I Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: March 29, 2001 PROJECT: FT COLLINS VETERANS OF AMERICA, ELDERLY HOUSING, #14- 01 All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Dept: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore Quality control needed Please perform quality control before submittals. Example: ROW width shown as different values on different sheets. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please use driveway cuts instead of radius -style cuts for parking lots (section 9.3.2.13 in the LUC, use detail 7-29A from the Street Stds), the traffic volumes warrant low -volume driveways. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Clearly delineate phasing and improvements included in each phase. AUG 6 101 14:42 FROM HILL -HILL GTTORNYS PRGE.001 ALDEN V. HILL BRETT M. HILL The City of Fort Collins Current Planning 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 ATTENTION: Mr. Steve Olt HILL AND HILL ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PRORESSIOAIAL CORPORATION FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 August 6, 2001 ALDEN T. HILL (im•19" P. O. BOX 421 iso WESTMOLINTMN AVE. TELEPHONE (WM 432%%W FAX (670) 482-7648 VIA FAX and HAND DELIVERY (970)416-2020 RE: The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company Project: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Volunteers of America) Elderly Housing - PDP, Type I (LUC) Staff Review Meeting: August S, 2001 AFFORL)ABLE HOUS STG RE ION COWAENT SEIEET As you know, we represent The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company. 1. There will need to be written approval with the Board of Directors for any shared use of the pathway/right-of-way. 2. There will need to be a written agreement for any crossing. 3. Any maintenance or liability the City takes over would also require a written agreement with the City of Fort Collins. There may be more information needed when the Company knows more about the project. Ve truly yours, U� Alden V. dill AVH:skd PC: Willis Smith Ed Wendel Robert A Donahue, TSP Five Architects (via fax - 493-1920) ;.Imdwa�ron a 1v) Project Comments Sheet rimskro""�ft)l Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: August 7, 2001 PROJECT: FT COLLINS VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, ELDERLY HOUSING, #14-01 All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: August 08, 2001 Note - Please identify pour redlines for future reference Dept: Engineering 11 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Printing should be legible on all plans. 20 Issue Contact Katie Moore Please see the Latimer County Urban Area Street Standards Utility Plan checklist (attached) for assistance in completing the utility plan set, but note that the checklist is not comprehensive. (repeat) Please submit a completed checklist with your next submittal. 22 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Offsite grading easements will be needed along east edge of property. Please see grading plan for locations. (repeat) Letters of intent from adjacent property owners must be provided by the time of hearing and actual easements provided by the time of filing mylars. 26 Issue Contact Katie Moore Please include signing and striping plans for Horsetooth and the development's street(s). The scale on these drawings must be 1:30. (repeat) 30 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a construction easement for Parks to construct trail (35' width). (repeat) IM&A 33 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Street standards (drawing 19-03) require a 40' setback of the first parking stall from the flowline of the street or an approved variance to the standard. 36 Issue Contact Katie Moore Driveways should be shown as concrete to edge of ROW. 37 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Horsetooth Improvements/ROW Please dedicate 57.5' for Horsetooth ROW. Please design Horsetooth improvements for ultimate conditions, showing continuance of grade and ground lines for 1000' beyond proposed construction (for continuity with adjacent areas). 38 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Variance requests must be made by a licensed professional engineer, and include the identification of the issue, proposed alternate design, a comparison to standards, and justification of the variance. (Section 1.9.2 in the street standards explains in further detail). Please resubmit your requests following these guidelines. i ey 48 Issue Contact: Katie Moore A pedestrian and bicycle connection needs to be made from Brook Drive street stub to Richmond Drive within existing Brook Drive ROW. (repeat comment) 49 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Grading/drainage/erosion control plan: show drainage arrows, curb spot elevations, centerline spot elevations, finish grade elevations for lot corners, etc on all lots, clearly label temporary and long term erosion control devices, more comments on plans. 50 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Lateral owners need signatures on plat. 51 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plat comments: Please correct plat wording and signature spaces. Please provide spaces for the ditch company and lateral owners to sign. 52 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Pleases�ee drawing 8-07 for the correct dedication of TOW at corners (repeat) 2 of 53 54 55 W; 57 F. 59 .1 61 62 63 LE Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label the total existing ROW for Horsetooth. Issue Contact Katie Moore Please combine the 5' "shared" easment and the 10' utility easement along Horsetooth into one 15' standard utility easement. Issue Contact Katie Moore Please dedicate the ROW for Brook Drive to Local Residential standards Please provide the vested rights statement. Issue Contact Katie Moore Issue Contact Katie Moore Please dedicate sight distance easments and add sight distance language on the plat. Please label adjacent properties. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plat should correspond to the most current utility plans (access easements are misplaced on this plat). Issue Contact: Katie Moore What is going on with the temporary construction easement for Parks? And the pedestrian access easement within the ditch easement? Please see plat for additional comments. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Utility plan cover sheet: Please provide better print quality plans, I can't read the shadowed lines. Please show the new layout in the vicinity map. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please include the plat (for reference only) in the Utility plan set. 3 of 65 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a signature block for the ditch company. 66 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please remove city contact names and numbers from the utility cover sheet. 67 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please correct general notes and construction notes as shown. 68 Issue Contact., Katie Moore Please see cover sheet for additional comments. 69 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Drainage and erosion control plan: Please show additional flow arrows. 70 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please more clearly show existing contours and more clearly label new contours. 71 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide more spot elevations and label high points. 72 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see plans for additional comments. 73 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Overall Utility Plan: What are all these lines? Barely anything is labeled. 74 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show street cut approximate limits. 75 Issue Contact. Katie Moore Please call out how irrigation will pass under ROW (what kind of pipe, size,etc.) 76 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show ROW on Kunz Ct and clearly label all easements using different line weights/types. 77 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please call out driveways as concrete to the ROW. 4 of 78 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label manholes and cleanouts, dimensioning from centerline of 79 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label Storm sewer and Sanitary sewers: type of pipe, sizes, slopes, length of segments between manholes, manhole numbering. 80 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show parking stall striping. 81 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see plans for additional redlines. 82 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Kunz Court plan and profile: Please label radii of curb returns on both Horsetooth and Brook. Horsetooth radii should be 25' and Brook Drive radii should be 20' per table 8-2. 83 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide additional spot elevations at the both intersections as shown on drawing 7-32B. 84 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please call out driveways as concrete to the ROW. 85 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Driveway width requirments vary with the number of units served by the driveway. Please provide 28' driveways for parking lots serving 12 or more units. (drawing 7-29B, table in lower right hand corner) 86 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please design corner pedestrian ramps to standard (see ramp detail on your detail sheet). 87 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide radii for cul-de-sac as shown on redlines. 88 Issue Contact Katie Moore Is the gutter infall or outfall in the center of the Culdesac bulb? 89 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide additional spot elevations in the culdesac bulb (see redlines). 90 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label flowline elevations as east and west, not left and right. 91 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please design street so that there is no drop in the flowline as shown at sta 0+ 54.3 (why would the flowline drop 6" in one spot?). 5 of 7 E+m 92 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please maintain constant grade on Kunz from flowine on Horsetooth back for 125' (drawing 8-15). 93 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show overlaps or gaps on the flowlines at the station equations. 94 Issue Contact: Katie Moore for the northmost vertical curve, the minimum length of a sag vertical curve is 70' (table 7-18). 95 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a minimum 1% flowline slope within the culdesac (figure 7-19). 96 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a flowline curve table including radii, arc lengths, angles and tangents for all curves. 97 Please provide a legend. M. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Where is the design for Brook Drive? The design of Brook drive is required for 500' beyond the proposed construction (plan and profile) (7.4.1.A8 and 99 Issue Contact. Katie Moore Please see kunz court plans for additional redlines. 100 Issue Contact., Katie Moore Kunz court profiles: Please provide minimum 2% cross -slopes in all locations (including culdesac). 101 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label slopes within the ROW and adjacent to the ROW. 102 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Horsetooth plan and profile: Please show expansion to the correct location (41.5' from centerline) (figure 7- 2F) 103 Issue Contact., Katie Moore Please show street cut. 104 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label the existing edge of asphalt. 105 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label the ROW and easements 106 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show how new and existing curb and gutter tie together. 6 of -P1CaS e. vro Ji �2 �o��� o � LCr.� �_o f'U Shoes c Y-6-h- , & (?rPV0V_A t f _/ __e� . 4T) Provid'AN , #_ on p ro'�i Gc 107 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please correct radius values for the curb returns. 108 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide spot elevations as required. 109 Issue Contact: Katie Moore The paved transition to the east may not be needed if it the transition can be accomplished through striping. Please provide a striping and signing plan for Horsetooth. 110 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide grading on Horsetooth. 111 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please put lines in the revision box (ALL SHEETS). 112 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Horsetooth cross sections: Cross sections on Horsetooth are required at 50-foot intervals (checklist XXXI.A) -Sower OA-t. 113 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label which side is north and which is south. 114 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label cross -slopes and slopes within and adjacent to the ROW. 115 Issue Contact: Katie Moore The new cross -slope shall be no less than the existing slope (7.4.2C). 116 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide additional spot elevations. 117 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide more details/spot elevations regarding the driveway cut across from Brook Drive. There is not enough information given to make a judgement on the variance request. 119 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Site Plan: Please match the site plan with the utility plans and plat. Easements, ROW, radii and other items do not match. See redlines. 120 Issue Contact: Rick Richter High Swell soils need to be addressed in the soils report. 122 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide design of pedestrian bridge. 7 of 122 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide design of pedestrian bridge and address the issue of who will be building it. 123 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide easement for laterals on the plat. 124 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Site plan: Crosswalk bars are not required across these driveways. The City will not maintain crosswalk markings placed there. Please see site plan for additional comments. 125 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Sanitary Sewer plan and profile and other sheets: Please place utilities a minimum of 2' below scarified subgrade elevation (12.2.2). Please see plans for additional comments. 126 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a variance request regarding the spacing of intersections on an arterial (the Standards require 1320' between intersections, please show what is existing). 160 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label depths of concrete for Transfort pad and bike/ped trail. 161 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please assemble/staple utility plans for your next submittal. Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS %,Plat Site Drainage Report _ _ Other i Utility / � Redline Utility _ K Landscape 8 of 8 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW VOA Natural Sevices Robin Keller 1660 Duke St Alexandria, VA 22314 Date: 8/15/01 Staff has reviewed your submittal for FT COLLINS VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, ELDERLY HOUSING, #14-01, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Advance Planning 138 Issue Contact: Clark Mapes East Perimeter Crowding/Lack of Trees There is an awkward and incompatible relationship created by the FRONTS of buildings facing what is technically a SIDE setback area, with a long, straight 6- foot fence typical of REAR yards. The flatness and repetition of the buildings and the lack of trees add to the issue. I acknowledge how the number of units squeezed into the narrow portion of the site has created this situation, and also that the number of units adds to the affordability. But at a minimum, this area needs more attention to the fence and the repetitive building finishes, and it needs trees. See the sketch comments on the Side Elevation showing a more architectural fence 8 feet high, with an arbor top, which can have vines on it (I suggest Engelmann Ivy and Purpleleaf Wintercreeper for low maintenance), and trees. The trees can mingle with the fence and ivy. Carefully considered medium size trees will be needed. I suggest Redspire Pear, Aristocrat Pear, Centurion Crabapple, Cardinal Royal Mountain Ash, and possibly Bur Oak. These are either tight and vertical, or else lend themselves to fitting the space. (Bur Oak because it is one shade tree with an informal canopy shape that could be trained to fit the space.) ALL tight vertical trees should not be used because that could simply serve to emphasize the confining space. Based on this, please design an architectural fence for visual interest and durability to create more of a court yard space to which the buildings can be oriented. Please provide some color variation in the vinyl siding and prefinished gutters. Can there be at least two color schemes, to lend at least a little bit of individual identity and visual interest? This is most important in the narrow east perimeter strip, but also pertains to the whole development plan. Call 221-6225 to discuss these comments specifically. 1of15 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 iirA 18 19 Issue Contact Katie Moore Bike trail should be 8' wide concrete. The trail needs to be moved out of the ditch, continued to the south edge of the property and tied into the planned trail on the connecting property (Mountain Ridge 2nd Filing). Printing should be legible on all plans. Issue Contact Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Parking will be short of requirements (1.5 spaces per one bedroom dwelling unit, 1.75 spaces per two bedroom du 3.2.2.(K)1.a) with the street stub to Brook Drive ROW. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide street stub to Brook Drive ROW to local residential street standards. (section 3.6.3(F))(eliminate parking lot) The street stub will provide for future connection to the east, but in the interim barricades should be provided at the property line. A pedestrian and bicycle connection needs to be made from this street stub to Richmond Drive within existing Brook Drive ROW. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plat needs site -specific title, correct wording, label all ROW, easements, and adjacent properties. Plat needs to be tied to city monumentation. Please see plans for additional comments. Issue Contact Katie Moore Ditch easement width needs to be verified through the ditch company, and a signature block for the ditch company provided on the plans. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Brook Drive ROW has not been vacated. Please correct labeling on plans. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please verify approval of mid -block crossing from Transportation Planning. At a minimum maintain crosswalk perpindicular to flowline. Trail ditch crossing needs to be in phase 1. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact Katie Moore Please include General Notes on utility plans (see attached) 139 Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Front stoops the sidewalks leading to individual units are a positive aspect of the plan. But typically, a dwelling unit benefits from some sort of stoop or landing. In this case the 3' wide walk leading clear to the entrance misses the opportunity to emphasize the entrance, maybe offer a place to put a chair, to wait, etc. It looks like it may be an oversight due to the 50 scale plans. In fact, there is no place sit outside anywhere on the plan. No patio, porch, urban walkway, etc. despite the urban intensity of the development. Can an entry landing be provided for each unit? Is there a reason not to? Engineering 11 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Printing should be legible on all plans. — SCorLnc., P i�- 20 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Utility Plan checklist (attached) for assistance in completing the utility plan set, but note that the checklist is not comprehensive. (repeat) Please submit a completed checklist with your next submittal. 22 Issue Contact Katie Moore Offsite grading easements will be needed along east edge of property. Please see grading plan for locations. (repeat) Letters of intent from adjacent property owners must be provided by the time of hearing and actual easements provided by the time of filing mylars. 26 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please include signing and striping plans for Horsetooth and the development's street(s). T peat) ,x Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a construction easement for Parks to construct trail (35' width). (repeat) Issue Contact: Katie Moore Street standards (drawing 19-03) require a 40' setback of the first parking stall from the flowline of the street or an approved variance to the standard. 36 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Driveways should be shown as concrete to edge of ROW. 2of15 37 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Horsetooth Improvements/ROW dedicate 57.5' for Horsetooth ROW. Please design Horsetooth improvements for ultimate conditions, showing continuance of grade and ground lines for 1000' beyond proposed construction (for continuity with adjacent areas). \,, t4 L 38 /J Issue Contact: Katie Moore Variance r ests must made by a licensed professional engineer, and include the identificat of th ssue, proposed alternate design, a comparison to standards, and j i ' ation of the variance. (Section 1.9.2 in the street standards explains in furthe l). Please resub your ests following these guidelines. 48 Issue Contact: Katie Moore A pedes 2n and bicycle connection needs to be made from Brook Drive street s�*to Richmond Drive within existing Brook Drive ROW. (repeat comment) 49 Issue Contact: Katie Moore U� Grading/drainage/erosion control plan: show drainage arrows, curb spot `f elevations, centerline spot elevations, finish grade elevations for lot corners, etc on all lots, clearly label temporary and long term erosion control devices, more comments on plans. 50 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Lateral owners need signatures on plat. (ECG cop Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plat comments: Please correct plat wording and §s_'Lqnature spaces. Please provide spaces for the ditch company an ateral own!Do sign. cif Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plea4ee drawing 8-07 for the correct dedication of ROW at corners (repeat) 53 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label the total existing ROW for Horsetooth. 3of15 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please combine the 5' "shared" easment and the 10' utility easement along Horsetooth into one 15' standard utility easement. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please dedicate the ROW for Brook Drive to Local Residential standards / Issue Contact: Katie Moore ¢ �r vide the vested rights statement. 57 / Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please dedicate sight distance easments and add sight distance language on the plat. y8 Issue Contact: Katie Moore V Please label adjacent properties. '759 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plat should correspond to the most current utility plans (access easements are misplaced on this plat). -760 Issue Contact: Katie Moore What is going on with the temporary construction easement for Parks? And the pedestrian access easement within the ditch easement? 61 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see plat for additional comments. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Utility plan cover sheet: Please provide better print quality plans, I can't read the shadowed lines. 6� Issue Contact: Katie Moore \/ Please show the new layout in the vicinity map. JCdj Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please include the plat (for reference only) in the Utility plan set. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a signature block for the ditch company. 4of15 f Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please remove city contact names and numbers from the utility cover sheet. f� Issue Contact: Katie Moore v Please correct general notes and construction notes as shown. J Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see cover sheet for additional comments. 69 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Drainage and erosion control plan: Please show additional flow arrows. 70 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please more clearly show existing contours and more clearly label new contours. 71 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide more spot elevations and label high points. 72 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see plans for additional comments. J Issue Contact: Katie Moore Overall Utility Plan: What are all these lines? Barely anything is labeled. v" Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show street cut approximate limits. '7 75 Issue Contact., Katie Moore Please call out how irrigation will pass under ROW (what kind of pipe, size,etc.) BPS a-n 9tre-e�t Aow`,S . rvc"4" �76 GIs ue Contact: Katie Moore Please show ROW on Kunz Ct and clearly all easements using different line weights/types. 77 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please call out driveways as concrete to the ROW. 78-� Issue Contact: Katie Moore 5of15 Ma.� h o le 3 On G --. \� . s �S 79 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label Storm sewer and Sanitary sewers: t e of i e slopes, length of segments between manholes, manhole num enn . 80 Issue Contact: Katie Moore stall strip' . d r( G3 4 81 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see plans for additional redlines. 82 \ Issue Contact: Katie Moore Kunz Court plan and profile: eF el Pleasradii of curb returns on both Horsetooth and Brook. Horsetooth radii should be 25' and Brook Drive radii should be 20' per table 8-2. 83 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide additional spot elevations at the both intersections as shown on drawing 7-32B. 84 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please call out driveways as concrete to the ROW. 5 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Drive ay idth requiryr�e�nts vary tie number f units a 12y the n driv av lease nr6vid(.28' d eways or oar na 8� v Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please design corner pedestrian ramps to standard (see ramp detail on your detail sheet). 87 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide radii for cul-de-sac as shown on redlines. 88 Issue Contact: Katie Moore utter *In ? 89 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide additional spot elevations in the culdesac bulb (see redlines). M Issue Contact: Katie Moore 91 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please design street so that there is no drop in the flowline as shown at sta 0+ 54.3 (why would the flowline drop 6" in one spot?). - +O 6of15 92 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please maintain constant grade on Kunz from flogine on Horsetooth back for 125' (drawing 8-15). 93 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show overlaps or gaps on the flowlines at the station equations. 94 Issue Contact: Katie Moore for the northmost vertical curve, the minimum length of a sag vertical curve is 70' (table 7-18). 95 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a minimum 1 % flowline slope within the culdesac (figure 7-19). 96 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a flowline curve table including radii, arc lengths, angles and tangents for all curves. g7 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Pts r vide ategend. I Yl gg Issue Contact: Katie Moore 5 Where is the design for Brook Drive? The design of Brook drive is required for 500' beyond the proposed construction (plan and profile) (7.4.1.A8 and 99 Issue Contact: Katie Moore \P`lease see kunz court plans for additional redlines. J Clrh} .,A-CSL- 100 Issue Contact: Katie Moore �S 101 Kunz court profiles: Please provide minimum 2% cross -slopes in all locations (including culdesac). Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label slopes within the ROW and adjacent to the ROW. 102 � Issue o tact Katie Moore setooth Ian a ofile- Please show expansion to the correct location (41.5' from centerline) (figure 7- 2F) 103 Please show street cut. 104 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Pease label the existing edge of asphalt. 105 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Ptea label the ROW and easements 106 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Pleas show how new and existing curb and gutter tie together. 7of15 107 / Issue Contact: Katie Moore lease correct radius values for the curb returns. f[Z' Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide spot elevations as required. 109 Issue Contact Katie Moore The pavedtransition to the east may not be needed if it the transition can be plished through striping. Please provide a striping and signing plan for orsetooth. 110 Issue Contact., Katie Moore P ease provide grading on Horsetooth. N Issue Contact: Katie Moore 1 U1- — Issue Contact: Katie Moore Horsetooth cross sections: Cross sections on Horsetooth are required at 50-foot intervals (checklist �LA) Issue Contact: Katie Moore Issue Contact: Katie Moore Plea �ab�lss-slopes and slopes within and adjacent to the ROW. 11 Issue Contact: Katie Moore The new cross -slope shall be no less than the existing slope (7.4.2C). Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide additional spot elevations. 117 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide more details/spot elevations regarding the driveway cut across from Brook Drive. lement 119 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Site Plan: Please match the site plan with the utility plans and plat. Easements, ROW, radii and other items do not match. See redlines. 120 Issue Contact: Rick Richter High Swell soils need to be addressed in the soils report. 8of15 aPlease provide building it. Issue Contact: Katie Moore design of pedestrian bridge and address the issue of who will be 123 I 1 lease provide easement for laterals 124 125 Issue Contact: Katie Moore on the plat. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Site plan: Cros III bars are not required across these driveways. The City will not ntain crosswalk markings placed there. Please see site plan for additional comments. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Sanitary Sewer plan and profile and other sheets: Please place utilities a minimum of 2' below scarified subgrade elevation (12.2.2). Please see plans for additional comments. 7alt*-ems 126 Issue Contact: Katie Moore-r'A,IbfiC, a� Please vide a variance request regarding the spacing of intersections on an a al (the Standards require 1320' between intersections, please show what s existing). 160 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please label depths of concrete for Transfort pad and bike/ped trail. 161 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Ple assemble/staple utility plans for your next submittal. 1 F4\ Issue Contact: Katie Moore HJO_Ts'tooth and profile: please provide designi he flowline along the south edge for the 100►J5ffsite. Please see pl for additional comments. 9of15 Light & Power 40 PFA Issue Contact Doug Martine 1. Electric facilities will inculde pad style transformers placed between the sidewalk and the curb. 2. Landscape plan needs to show the planned streetlights. A streetlight plan has been sent via interoffice mail to Steve Olt 7-30-01. Street tree locations will need to be adjusted to provide a minimum of 40 ft. of clearance between trees and streetlights. 3. Electric meters will need to be 'ganged' on each building, and their locations coordinated with L&P prior to development. 145 Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Address Numerals Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6-inch numerals on a contrasting background. 146 Issue Contact: Michael Chavez Sprinkler Requirement This comment is to confirm that all buildings beyond 660 feet are to be fire sprinklered. Street Oversizing 121 Issue Contact Matt Baker Street oversizing participation in Horsetooth Road improvements: Prefer curb and gutter and asphalt work on Horsetooth not be constructed at this time (unless curb needed for drainage purposes ) and developer provide contribution in aid for the local street portion of Horsetooth. Stormwater Utility 134 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Emergency Spillway: Emergency spillway actually occurs at the east crosswalk of the parking lot which is at an elevation of 98.45. The spilway should be modeled here and have 1 foot of freeboard. Also, the spillway detail does not match invert elevation on plan. 10 of 15 135 136 137 140 141 142 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Grading and Drainage Plans: Please separate grading and drainage plans. Please show basin delineations on drainage plan and please provide the same drainage plan in the report as in the plan set. Please show more low point and high point spot elevations around buildings, along swales,and flow line along streets to better clarify grading. Please show basin summary table, detention pond table, and swale cross - sections on drainage plan. Please show and label all drainage features on drainage plan. Issue Contact Wes Lamarque Erosion/Sediment Control Comments: 1. Please provide an erosion/sediment control report and plan in accordance with City of Fort Collins specifications. When this is done, a review of the report and plan can be done. No report, no calculations, no notes, no schedule, etc. Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Drainage Report: Please revise time of concentration calculations to reflect the gutter travel time. This will reduce the overland lengths and better represent the actual basin. Please revise detention pond volume calculations. Please check intensities and 100 yr. C coefficient. City of Ft. Collins allows FAA method for pond sizing. Please discuss sub- basin "P". Undetained flows from the site must be taken into account in the overall release rate. This is accomplished by subtracting the undetained flows from the overall release rate to calculate new pond release rate. Please change water quality structure to City standard detail. The currently shown detail does not allow release of flows between the water quality needs and 100 yr. event. Issue Contact Wes Lamarque Utility Plan Please use different linetypes for the various utilities. Please label all drainage features. Issue Contact Wes Lamarque Please show all storm sewers on the street profiles including alignments, size, and location. Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Please provide concrete encasements for stormwater crossings with waterlines per City requirements. 11 of 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 30 31 Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please see the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Utility Plan checklist (attached) for assistance in completing the utility plan set, but note that the checklist is not comprehensive. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Utility Plans: need coversheet with title and date, general notes, signature blocks, name/address/phone of engineer, developer, and owner, vicinity map, index, legal description, etc. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Offsite grading easements will be needed along east edge of property. Please see grading plan for locations. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Need details page showing standard details for driveway cuts, sidewalk, ramps, curb and gutter, and all other applicable items. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Grading/drainage/erosion control plan: show drainage arrows, curb spot elevations, centerline spot elevations, finish grade elevations for lot corners, finish floors, etc on all lots, include 100-year storm statement, clearly label temporary and long term erosion control devices, more comments on plans. Issue Contact.- Katie Moore Grading as shown is not allowed within ditch buffer area. Please contact Doug Moore with Current Planning/Natural Resources for further information. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please include signing and striping plans for Horsetooth and the development's street(s). The scale on these drawings must be 1:30. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Street plans: please meet parking setbacks, minimum radii and tangent lengths, cross slopes, grade break, curve length, and other requirements. Tables 7-1 and 7-3 in the Street Standards show many of these requirements. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please provide a construction easement for Parks to construct trail (35' width). Issue Contact: Katie Moore The ditch along Horsetooth needs to be outside of the 15' utility easement, and should be piped. Lateral owners need signatures on plat. 143 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Please provide a crosspan on Horsetooth Road and show on street plan. 144 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Please provide riprap calculations and provide a detail. Transfort 159 Transfort concrete pad should be 6" depth. Transportation Planning 4 Make Bike Trail connection with Phase I Issue Contact: GayLene Rossiter Issue Contact Mark Jackson • Connection to proposed future bike trail is good only if Phase 2 of site is built. How will this connection be made if only Phase I is built? 6 Issue Contact: Mark Jackson • Can Brook Drive ROW area be used to make a bike/ped connection to the east? 46 Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Pedestrian/bike path & bridge questions It is still unclear to me that the applicant has agreed to build the bike/pedestrian path as shown on the site plan. This includes the bridge necessary to cross over the canal/buffer area. I need clarification as to who is planning to pay for and build this facility, and when. 47 Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Brook Drive pedestrian connection Will this development make a pedestrian connection along the Brook Drive ROW east to the Skyline Acres subdivision at Richmond Drive? Technical Services 127 Issue Contact Jim Hoff Plat boundary closes. Legal does not match boundary. 128 Issue Contact: Jim Hoff North quarter corner does not match city's records (date). 12 of 15 129 130 131 132 133 Description of 1/16 corner is not shown. Easements and road ROW are not locatable. What is a "shared easement"? Issue Contact: Jim Hoff Issue Contact. Jim Hoff Issue Contact Jim Hoff Issue Contact: Jim Hoff What are the restrictions, etc on the 25' "natural area buffer"? Text is too small - need to see a new plat. Water Wastewater 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 Issue Contact: Jim Hoff Issue Contact: Jeff Hill It appears that the sanitary sewer main is not within the utlity easement. Coordinate the plat with the utility plans. Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Clearly label all fittings and valves on water mains. Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Coordinate landscape plan with civil plan to reflect the same information. Provide the required landscape/utility separation distances. Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Permanent structures may not be placed in utility easements (Le. trash enclosures, development signage, etc.). Issue Contact Jeff Hill Provide concrete encasement of all sewer lines which cross above or within 18- inches vertically of a water line. Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Use different line types to distinguish between utilities, R.O.W.s, easements, etc. Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Provide gravity block design on water main lowerings. 13 of 15 154 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Label all fire lines as D.I.P. Provide lengths of D.I.P. for fire lines. 155 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Correct sanitary sewer profile ( scale, inverts, other utility crossings, etc.). 156 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Clearly define the abandonment of existing stub and core drilling of new connection at sanitary sewer manhole. 157 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Use 1.5-inch water services for all 6-plex buildings. Include the 1.5-inch meter pit detail on the detail sheets. 158 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Provide insulation detail and calculations for our review. See attached. 162 Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Re -align sanitary sewer at tie-in to existing sewer as shown on marked up plans. Zoning 41 Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Need a tree in each parking lot landscape island. Most just have mulch or ground cover. Section 3.2.1(E)(5)© 42 Issue Contact: Peter Barnes The legal description on the plat in the "statement of ownership and subdivisiion" gives the legal description as Lot 1 and part of Lot 2 of the M&G Subdivision. That subdivision is on South Taft Hill, about 3 miles from this project. 43 Issue Contact: Peter Barnes What looks like an easement along the east lot line on the plat is labeled as a "5' side yard setback". If that's all it is, then remove from the plat. Setbacks should not be platted. If it really is an easement, then it needs to be labeled as such. 44 Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Need to dimension all easement shown on plat. For example, the public access easements need to be labeled. 14 of 15 45 Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Label the buildings with building numbers. For example, Bldg A, Bldg B., or Bldg 1, Bldg 2, etc. Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit. If you have questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750. Yours Truly, STEVE OLT City Planner 15 of 15 Meeting Memorandum TSP Five, Inc. 503 Remington Street, Suite 5 Phone (970) 493-1772 Fort Collins, CO 80524-3089 Fax (970) 493-1820 Subject: VOA Elderly Housing Project Fort Collins, Colorado TSP Project No. 0500002 Date: August 16, 2001 Persons Present: See attached. By: Jennifer Thong, TSP Five, Inc. The purpose of this meeting was to review the comments received from the re -submittal of the Project Development Plan drawings with the Engineering Department, Water and Wastewater Department and Current Planning Department. The following are responses from the staff present in this meeting: Engineering 11. Printing should be legible on all plans. There wrdv un error made drnirrg The line types for the drawings will be corrected. 20. Please see the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Utility Plan checklist (attached) for assistance in completing the utility plan set, but note that the checklist is not comprehensive. (repeat) Please submit a completed checklist with your next submittal. The completed checklist will be submitted with the next submittal. 22. Offsite grading casements will be needed along east edge of property. Please see grading plan for locations. (repeat) Letters of intent from adjacent property owners must be provided by the time of hearing and actual easements provided by the time of filing mylars. I sp to provide letter of intent for JV 4 to obtain written approval from the four property owners on the east side of the property for the offvite grading required for this development. The easements requested for the grading work will be incorporated into the grading plan and plat. 26. Please include signing and striping plans for Horsetooth and the development's street(s). The scale on these drawings must be 1:30. (repeat) .IVA will provide s`igrring and striping plans for Kunz Court and design within the 11. Lorsetooth Ri,,li f-Way frontage ofthis project. TSP and JV4 received an a -mail front Katie Moore on August 17, 2001 stating that the scale of the signing and striping plans for W. Horsetooth can be any scale as long as the drawings are legible. The scale of the drawing provided by JVA is 1.40, which is legible and consistent with other drawings in the submittal. 30. Please provide a construction easement for Parks to construct trail (35' width). (repeat) This easement is within the ditch and access easements on the plat. The ditch and access easements on the west boundary of the site will be revised to include the construction easement. 33. Street standards (drawing 19-03) require a 40' setback of the first parking stall from the flowline for the street or an approved variance to the standard. JVA is in the process of working on the application for a variance. TSP and JVA pointed out that if the 40' setback were enforced, it would make the site almost impossible to develop. This engineering variance was approved by "tonpney A.:1Ic Nair, .hr. City Engineer at the City meeting oo August 29, 2001. .1 o variance letter will be required. 36. Driveways should be shown as concrete to edge of ROW. .NA pointed out that this condition is very apparent in the drawings, but would include a detail tag at all the driveway locations to cmnply with the City's request. 37. Horsetooth Improvements/ROW Please dedicate 57.5' for Horsetooth ROW. Please design Horsetooth improvements for ultimate conditions, showing continuance to grade and ground lines for 1000' beyond proposed construction (for continuity with adjacent areas). The ROW will be shown in the drawings. In talking about this issue, the City expressed that they have not decided whether the widening of W. Horsetooth should be constructed in this project. Matt Baker from Street Oversizing proposed not to widen the street at this time, but requested that a design for the widening of the street be available for bidding so that the cost is known and can be escrowed with the City. If the work is not done in this project, then JVA will need to design the curb cut into the development to include a culvert to maintain the existing irrigation lateral along the south .side of W. Horsetooth. We then discussed hov to taper W. Horsetooth from the widened portion of the street on the west side of the property to the existing street on the east. TSP and JVA were informed that the 320' taper beyond this property to the east as shown in the drawings is insufficient. Dave Stringer then requested three alternative designs frown JVA. One to show a curb cut to tie into the existing street. The second design will show the widening of'W. Horsetooth to the ultimate width within the boundaries of this property and the third design will show the ultimate widening of W. Horsetooth to 1000' beyond this property. l'he Citr proposed to compensate the owner for engineering design costs through the streets oversizing program for the engineering efforts required for the third design. Dave Stringer will also consult with the Transportation Department to determine what are the limits of the taper for W. Horsetooth and inform the design team as soon as possible. TSP and JVA received an e-mailfrom Katie Moore on August 17, 2001 stating that the existing curb and gutter on the west end of the property shall tie into the existing curb and gutter at W. Horsetooth and Shields at a straight line. The City would like the north and south flowlines of W. Horsetooth be shown: in the ultimate design 1000' beyond this property. Additional surveying work will he needed at 11. Horsetooth and Shields to determine the ultimate design..S"igning and striping plans for the offsite ultimate design outside ROJI'frontage of Uri.s project are not required. The curb and gutter along W. Horsetooth within this property will need to be built in this project to assist with drainage. 38. Variance requests must be made by a licensed professional engineer, and include the identification of the issue, proposed alternate design, a comparison to standards, and justification of the variance. (Section 1.9.2 in the street standards explains in further detail). Please resubmit your requests following these guidelines (FYI — the request for the wider street width will most likely not be supported by staff). Sarre as item 33. Katie Moore said that the note that the staff'will not support a wider street width might not be true now. 48. A pedestrian and bicycle connection needs to be made from Brook Drive street stub to Richmond Drive within existing Brook Drive ROW. (repeat comment) Additional survey is required for approximately 1000' beyond the east boundary for the design of the connection. The City will inforthe property owners affected bt' the construction of this sidewalk as soon as possible. There is an existing irrigation lateral along the east boundary of this site that will have to be piped under the new sidewalk. At the City meeting on August 29, 2001 the City stated they would evaluate the need for the Brook Drive sidervolk corurectiae tl decision should be reached by Angnst 31, 2001. 49. Grading/drainage/erasion control plan: show drainage arrows, curb spot, elevations, centerline spot elevations, finish grade elevations for lot comers, etc. on all lots, clearly label temporary and long term erosion control devices, more comments on plans. 11'ts Latnarque froru the Stormwater Utility Department ha.s approved grading and erosion control drawings along with his review o the drainage report pending minor modifications. 50. Lateral owners need signatures on plat. The signatures from the property owners of Skyline Acres are needed on the plat. The City will find out whether there is one person from this subdivision that can represent all the owners. If not, the 18 approval signatures obtained by JVA earlier on will be scanned onto the plat. 51. flat comments: Please correct plat wording and signature spaces. Please provide spaces for the ditch company and lateral owners to sign. The signature blocks will be revised. See item 50. 52. Please see drawing 8-07 for the correct dedication of TOW at corners. 53. Please label the total existing ROW for Horsetooth. 54. Please combine the 5' `shared easement and the 10' utility easement along Horsetooth into one 15' standard utility easement. 55. Please dedicate the ROW for Brook Drive to Local Residential Standards. 56. Please provide the vested rights statement. 57. Please dedicate sight distance easements and add sight distance language on the plat. This easement will be added on the plat. The landscape plan will be revised to accommodate the vision triangles. 58. Please label adjacent properties. 59. Plat should correspond to the most current utility plans (access easements are misplaced on this plat). 60. What is going on with the temporary construction easement for Parks? And the pedestrian access easement within the ditch easement? 61. Please see plat for additional comments. 62. Utility plan cover sheet: Please provide better print quality plans. I can't read the shadowed lines. There was are error made during the plotting of the overall utility plan submitted. The line types for the drawings will be corrected. 63. Please show the new layout in the vicinity map. The vicinity map will be revised. 64. Please include the plat (for reference only) in the Utility plan set. The plat will be included in the Utilityplan set. 65. Please provide a signature block for the ditch company. A signature block for the ditch company will be provided on the cover sheet of the Utilityplan set. 66. Please remove city contact names and numbers from the utility cover sheet. The city contact names and numbers will be removed from the Utilityplan cover sheet. 67. Please correct general notes and construction notes as shown. The general notes and construction notes will be corrected. 68. Please see cover sheet for additional comments. fle di.scusxed including the developed drainage neap in fi-out gfYhe erosion control drawings in the plan set. 69. Drainage and erosion control plan: Please show additional flow arrows. This item was deleted from the list. 70. Please more clearly show existing contours and more clearly label new contours. The .screened evisting contours will be plotted darker per city request. 71. Please provide more spot elevations and label high points. This item was deleted frmn the list. 72. Please see plans for additional comments. This item was deleted from the list. 73. Overall utility plan: What are all these lines? Barely anything is labeled. This item was deleted from the list. 74. Please show street cut approximate limits. The construction at the curb cut into the development will be shown on the drawings. JVA to add the following note at that location. `The final limits of the construction shall be determined in the field by the City Inspector.' 75. Please call out how irrigation will pass under ROW (what kind of pipe, size, etc.) This item was deleted. 76. Please show ROW on Kunz Court and clearly label all easements using different line weights/types. It was decided that the line that represents the back of the sidewalk shall be darken to differentiate it as a ROW too. 77. Please call out driveways as concrete to the ROW. The concrete part of the driveways will be pocked to represent concrete. 78. Please label manholes and cleanouts, dimensioning from centerline street. This item was deleted from the list. 79. Please label storm sewer and sanitary sewers: type of pipe, sizes, slopes, length and segments between manholes, manhole numbering. Dave Stringer requested that the sanitary manhole numbering and waterlsewer pipe sizes be labeled on the overall utility plan. The detail information is provided in the enlarged plan. 80. Please show parking stall striping. This item was deleted from the list. 81. Please see plans for additional redlines. br reviewing this item, Katie Moore said that she would provide JVA with the standard detail for the pad for Transfort and the pedestrian bike trail, which shall be included in the drawings. 82. Kunz Court plan and profile: Please label radii of curb returns on both Horsetooth and Brook. Iorsetooth radii should be 25' and Brook Drive radii should be 20' per table 8-2. The drawings will be revised to show the correct radii. 83. Please provide additional spot elevations at both intersections as shown on drawing 7-32B. The drawings will be revised. 84. Please call out driveways as concrete to the ROW. This item was deleted from the list. 85. Driveway width requirements vary with the number of units served by the driveway. Please provide 28' driveways for parking lots serving 12 or more units. (drawing 7-2913, table in lower right hand corner) It was decided that the 24' driveways and parking lot aisles shown are correct This item was deleted from the list. 86. Please design corner pedestrian ramps to standard. (see ramp detail on your detail sheet) It was not geometrically possible to align the sidewalks and pedestrian ramp given the 20' radii for Brook Drive. The City will review this issue. 87. Please provide radii for cul-de-sac as shown on redlines. The drawings will be revised. 88. Is the gutter infall or outfall in the center of the cul-de-sac bulb? This item is shown on the drawings and has been deleted from the list. 89. Please provide additional spot elevations in the cul-de-sac bulb. (see redlines) This item was deleted from the list. 90. Please label flowline elevations ad east and west, not left and right. This item was deleted from the list 91. Please design street so that there is no drop in the flowline as shown at station 0+ 54.3 (why would the flowline drop 6" in one spot?) The drawings will be revised. Pro rlesigrr started at If Horsetooth Road Centerline. At Nye FI Horsetooth flowline, the profile shifts to the Kurz Courtflowline profile. !Towline profiles will atart at 16'. Horsetooth Howline per CitY request. 92. Please maintain constant grade on Kunz from flowline on Horsetooth back for 125'. (drawing 8-15) The drawings will be revised. 93. Please show overlaps or gaps on the flowlines at the station equations. /Towline ,stationing will be used fin' flowline profiles. 94. For the northernmost vertical curve, the minimum length of a sag vertical curve is 70'. (table 7-18) I ertical curve design will be corrected. 95. Please provide a minimum 1 % flowline slope within the cul-de-sac. (figure 7-19) The drawings shore a slope of 0.95%. T'he slope will be revised. 96. Please provide a flowline curve table including radii, are lengths, angles and tangents for all curves. This information will be included in the drawings. 97. Please provide legend. This item was deleted from the list. 98. Where is the design for Brook Drive? The design of Brook Drive is required for 500' beyond the proposed construction (plan and profile) (7.4.1.A8) Additional survey is required to design Brook Drive. TSP and JVA received an a -mail from Katie Moore on August 17, 2001 stating that the City will not require it design for Brook Drive. However, the pedestrian and bike path still needs to be extended to Richmond Drive. The additional survey work is still required. 99. Please see Kunz Court plans for additional redlines. 6n reviewing this item, Katie Moore informed its that recorded easements are required for the vision triangles at the driveways along Kunz Court. 100. Kunz Court profiles: Please provide minimum 2% cross -slopes in all locations. (including cul-de-sac) JVA will revise the street profiles. The 2% slope is required from the lip of the gutter to crown of the road. 101. Please label slopes within the ROW and adjacent to the ROW. JVA will provide the slopes of the street profiles within the ROW and adjacent to the ROW. We discussed the possibility of not having to label the slopes adjacent to the ROW if the slopes are straight line slopes. 102. Horsetooth plan and profile: Please show expansion to the correct location (41.5' from centerline). (figure 7-217) See item 37. 103. Please show street cut. The street cut at W. Horsetooth will be shown on the drawings. 104. Please label the existing edge of asphalt. The existing edge of'asphalt will be labeled along on W. Horsetooth. 105. Please label the ROW and easements. The ROW and easements along W. Horsetooth will be labeled. 106. Please show how new and existing curb and gutter tie together. See item 37. 107. Please correct radius values for the curb returns. This information will be included in plans. 108. Please provide spot elevations as required. This information will be added onto the W. Horsetooth plan and profile drawings. 109. The paved transition to the east may not be needed if the transition can be accomplished through striping. Please provide a striping and signing plan for Horsetooth. See item 37. 110. Please provide grading on Horsetooth. This item was deleted from the list. 111. Please put lines in the revision box. (All sheets) This item was deleted from the list. 32 33 34 35 36 37 Issue Contact Katie Moore Plat issues: Please dedicate full 5A'' of ROW on Horsetooth, Please show full curve data for each curve: radius, length, chord, bearing, and delta. Please dedicate easement to ditch company. Please see drawing 8-07 for dedication of ROW at street corners. Please include vicinity map. Please provide 2 ties to section corners. Parking spaces on cul-de-sac need to be in dedicated access easements and designed in accordance with Drawing 19-2A in the Street Standards. The checklist (appendix E-4 in the Street Standards) and the Development Manual describe requirements for plats. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Street standards (drawing 19-03) require a 40' setback of the first parking stall from the flowline of the street or an approved variance to the standard. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Utility placement requirements are shown on drawing 12-1 and described in chapter 12 in the Street Stds; please revise utility placements to coincide with these requirements. Please remove Storm Sewer from parkway and move into street. Stormwater needs utility crossings at near-90-degree angles. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Drainage from private drives is not allowed to flow over public sidewalks (LUC section 3.6.2(L)2.f). Please provide inlets/under sidewalk drainage (drawing 7-31) to capture drainage before it reaches the sidewalks. See plans for additional comments. Issue Contact. Katie Moore Driveways should be shown as concrete to edge of ROW. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Horsetooth Improvements/ROW Please dedicate 57.5' for Horsetooth ROW. Please design Horsetooth improvements for ultimate conditions, showing continuance of grade and ground lines for 1000' beyond proposed construction (for continuity with adjacent areas). 112. Horsetooth cross sections: Cross sections on Horsetooth are required at 50-foot intervals. (checklist XXX LA) TSP and JVA received an e-mailfrom Katie Moore on August 17, 2001 stating that the cross sections required.lor W. Horsetooth shall be 50' apart within the boundaries of this property and 100' apart offsite. 113. Please label which side is north and which is south. This item was deleted from the list. 114. Please label cross -slopes and slopes within and adjacent to the ROW. See item 101. 115. Please label cross -slope shall be no less than the existing slope. (7.4.C) This issue will be clarified in the drawings. 116. Please provide additional spot elevations. Additional spot elevations will be provided. 117. Please provide more details/spot elevations regarding the driveway cut across from Brook Drive. There is not enough information given to make a judgement on the variance request. A variance for a different design for the drivervat' at Brook Drive is required. This can be included in the sarne application as the variance,for the setback at Kunz Court. The driveway has deviated from the Citr Standards because of'the need to convc), emergency overflow from Westfield park and I-"OA detention pour/ over/lows through Brook Drive in the 100 year or greater storm. This engineering variance was approved by Champney A. McNair, Jr. City Engineer at the City meeting orr ;Itrgus7 29, 3001. �N'o veriauce letter millbe required. 119. Site plan: Please match the site plan with the utility plans and plat. Easements, ROW, radii and other items do not match. See redlines. The site plan will be revised. 120. High swell soils need to be addressed in the soils report. This issue is duly noted especially at the cul-de-sac and the entrance to the development. 122. Please provide design of pedestrian bridge and address the issue of who will be building it. The City will provide TSP and JVA with the standard City design for this bridge. The City informed its that the bridge would be built by VOA, with no funding assistance from the City or the atliacent property. VOA will also be responsible for funding half'of'the pedestrian trail along the west boarulary of the property. The City believes the funding will be available to build the other half of the trail sometime in 2002. 123. Please provide easement for laterals on plat. This information will be included in the plat. 124. Site plan: Crosswalk bars are not required across these driveways. The City will not maintain crosswalk markings placed there. Please see site plan for additional comments. The crosswalk bars shown on the site plan will be remover. 125. Sanitary sewer plan and profile and other sheets: Please place utilities a minimum of 2' below scarified subgrade elevation. (12.2.2) Please see plans for additional comments. The City requested that a .shallower pipe srtch as an elliptical pipe he installed. The pavement above the pipe needs to be protected by gcowhnical fabric. JV I will investigate if the storm sewer sVeto can be lowered to obtain more corer over the pipe. 126. Please provide a variance request regarding the spacing of intersections on an arterial (the Standards require 1320' between intersections, please show what is existing) The City requested that the curb cut into the development should align with Seneca Street across front W. Horsetooth. The spacing between this intersection and Shields is less than 1320'. The City requested an application for a variance be included with the application for variances for Kunz Court street setback and driveway design for Brook Drive. 77ris engineering variance was approved by Chanrpuey A. McNair, Jr. Citr Engineer at the City meeting on August ugu.st 29, 2001. No variance letter will be required. 160. Please label depths of concrete for Transfort pad and bike/ped trail. See item 81. 161. Please assemble/staple utility plans for your next submittal. O.K. 164. Horsetooth plan and profile: Please provide existing north flowline as well as designing the flowline along the south edge for 100' offsite. Please see plans for additional comments. The north flowline design is not required. Water and Wastewater 147. It appears that the sanitary sewer main is not within the utility easement. Coordinate the plat with the utility plans. The plat will be revised so that the sanitary sewer main is within the utility easement. 148. Clearly label all fittings and valves on water mains. 411 fittings and valves on water mains will be added to Sheet C2.1. 149. Coordinate landscape plan with civil plan to reflect the same information. Provide the required landscape/utility separation distances. The landscape plan will be revised to match the civil plans. 150. Permanent structures may not be placed in utility easements. tie. trash enclosures, development signage, etc. The trash enclosure was relocated at the last minute. The site plats will be revised so that the trash enclosure in not located in the utility easement. 151. Provide concrete encasement of all sewer lines which cross above or within 18-inches vertically of water line. The water and sanitary sewer lines located close to the curb cut from W. Horsetooth appear to be very close to each other. The pipes have to be concrete encased if they are less that 18"apart. 152. Use different line types to distinguish between utilities, ROW(s), easements, etc. There was an error made during the plotting of the overall utility plan submitted The line types for the drawings will be corrected. 153. Provide gravity block design on water main lowerings. The City has a new detail for the water line crossing detail. JVA will revise the drawings.) 154. Label all fire lines as DIP. Provide lengths of DIP for fire lines. Drawings will be revised. 155. Correct sanitary sewer profile. (scale, inverts, other utility crossings, etc.) Profile drawing. Trill be corrected..leff ffill also sketched « detail nj'the b nffic rated cleauout that will be used in this project. This detail will be added to the plats. 156. Clearly define the abandonment of existing stub and core drilling of new connection at sanitary sewer manhole. OX 157. Use 1.5 inch water services for all 6-plex buildings. Include the 1.5 inch meter pit detain on the detail sheets. The mechanical engineer for this project, PAD One Design, provided TSP with fixture count calculations for each building. The calculations show that a 1-inch water service is sufficient for each building. Jeff Hill requested a copy of the calculations. He advised TSP to provide 1 %" service instead because there is no difference in tap fees compared to a I" service. Apparently, the water pressure available in this area is approximately 50-60 psi. We also discussed the water needs for the yard irrigation system for the site. Jeff Hill suggested that a 1 %a" water meter pit be added somewhere at the center of the site strictly for irrigation. TSP will contact an irrigation designer to find out whether that is sufficient. 158. Provide insulation detail and calculations for our review. See attached. Je.f Hill provided the detail for sanitary sewer pipe insulation. The detail will be added to the plan set. 162. Re -align sanitary sewer at tie-in to existing sewer as shown on marked up plans. The City Standards do not allow shallow angle connections for sanitary sewer lines. JVA revised their drawings front the last review to eliminate the shallow angle connection they had far the line that was realigned with Brook Drive and added a manhole to achieve this. In this review, Water and Wastewater felt that the additional manhole would not be easily accessible fir maintenance work because it is located in the natural resources buffer zone and in a very steep area. Jeff Hill requested that the drawings be revised back to previous design to show a shallow angle connection for this line and eliminate the additional nnmnholc. Current Planning 1. Can additional sidewalk connections be added from the living units to the pedestrian/bike path to the east? The slopes front the living units to the path on the west are too steep to incorporate additional sidewalk connection. They will nut comply with AUA. At the conclusion of this meeting, it was decided that the Engineering Department would schedule meetings with bight and Power so that the design team can review their comments with them and the owners of the Skyline Acres to discuss the signatures required on the plat and the utility plan set as well as the pedestrian path that is to be extended to Richmond Drive from this property. If there are any discrepancies in this memorandum, please let me know so that I can get them corrected. Cc: Steve Olt, Current Planning Dave Stringer and Katie Moore, Engineering Jeff Hill, Water and Wastewater Kevin Tone and Curtis Kostecki, JVA, Inc. N111 Affordable Housing a Comment Sheet Current Planning DATE: September 19, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Volunteers of America) Elderly Housing PDP - Type I (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, October 3, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference �. t3ouNDA2VCLo5E5. Gc6fG P0C5,vrm1tTc�NQTNEPICATn. misSen/c. CA[J- d�J1TrIE �tfaT. _z, s} reel Y.cwie j S SPei��a d T� yP 1 T T vc, 37VEViouS per+ Wht��, js cer>ec�> 7 LoT,avF,� Ll 77/cr14Rl� ca� IUc,i 4, �o;z7M ofLP1 9200of /�UaJ� l�v�T � � -- S S / (. L.11SE r DTtU Mr Ss/e�j Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS LPlat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape Citv of Port Collins HILL AND HILL ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 ALDEN V. HILL BRETT M. HILL October 1, 2001 HAND DELIVER The City of Fort Collins Current Planning 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 ATTENTION: Mr. Steve Olt RE: The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company Project: #14-01 Ft. Collins VOA (Volunteers of America) Elderly Housing - PDP, Type I (LUC) Staff Review Meeting: October 3, 2001 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMENT SHEET ALDEN T. HILL (1908 - 190) P. O. BOX 421 160 WEST MOUNTAIN AVE. TELEPHONE (970) 482-3683 FAX (970) 482-7648 l . VOA is proposing two crossings of The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company, one sanitary sewer and one pedestrian bridge. A crossing agreement is required for both. We have not yet received these agreements. 2. In addition, the pedestrian bridge is part of a proposed trail which is to share a right- of-way with our 50 foot right-of-way. We were to _ get a proposal sent to us as to how this sharing of right-of-way was to be done. It was our understanding that the City's Parks Department would assume the final responsibility for this trail and bridge, but it would be built by VOA. An agreement of some kind is needed outlining the responsibility of the Parks Department for this trail right-of-way and how it affects The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company. 3. While the laterals off of the Pleasant Valley Ditch are the responsibility of the stockholders using them, the northern most gate, #121, on the property and its piping and flume are being relocated by VOA. The Company expects the gate and pipe and flume to work to both the Company's and the stockholders' satisfaction through two seasons. We are not hearing from the VOA representative or getting a proposed agreement. There will be no approval until a written agreement is in place, and it is best to allow adequate time to get this done. Mr. Steve Olt The City of Fort Collins, Current Planning October 1, 2001 Page 2 A message can be left with Susan Dinkel, as assistant, or me. My home telephone number is 484-3748. Very truly yours, C� 1CA V � t t v Alden V. Hill 9�- AVH: skd PC: Willis Smith Ed Wendel Robert A. Donahue, TSP Five Architects (a1&,/q,&Icd0lt 7It) s Project Comments Sheet y City otFort Collins Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: October 3, 2001 Project: FORT COLLINS VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, ELDERLY HOUSING, #14- 01 All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: October 03, 2001 (� D Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Katie Moore 22 YY11SSx�'j avu Sic6v'-o� SA-LQ ? Offsite grading easements will be needed along east edge of property. Please see grading plan for locations. (repeat) Letters of intent from adjacent property owners must be provided by the time of hearing and actual easements provided by the time of filing mylars. 50 Plat: Lateral owners need signatures on plat. 53 Plat: Please label the total existing ROW for Horsetooth. 57 &56k ea ® LWZ, t PPYOC'k- na.}- r dL4 Plat: Please dedicate sight distance easments and add sight distance language on the plat. These are for the driveway intersections with Kunz, not the intersection of Kunz and Horsetooth. Those proposed easements are not needed. 70 C1.0:Please more clearly show existing contours and more clearly label new contours. 075 C2.0: Please call out how irrigation will pass under ROW (what kind of pipe, size,etc.) 76 c2.0: Please show ROW on Kunz Ct and clearly show all easements using different line Signature Date &% -) C-) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat K Site Drainage Report Other_ _ V Utility \( Redline Utility �_ Landscape Page 1 , 82 c3.0: Kunz Court plan and profile: Please label radii of curb returns on both Horsetooth and Brook. Horsetooth radii should be 25' and Brook Drive radii should be 20' per table 8-2, 83 c3.0: Please provide additional spot elevations at the bot 'I c ions as shown on drawing 7-32B. rTtN� (ni�(h • 87 c3.0: Please provide radii for cul-de-sac as shown on redlines. .93 c3.0: Please show overlaps on the flowlines at the station equations. It is unclear what is going on at the points of overlap/gap. Please provide elevations for both points on each side of the gap/overlap. �95 c3.0: Please provide a minimum 1 % flowline slope within the culdesac (figure 7-19). ,101 c3.1: Please label slopes within the ROW and adjacent to the ROW. 106 c3.3: Please show how new and existing curb and gutter tie together. . 108 c3.2: Please provide spot elevations as required. CWtT'CJ 0-Y- rS ,115 The new cross -slope shall be no less than the existing slope (7.4.2C). a117 c3.0: Please provide more details/spot elevations regarding the driveway cut across from Brook Drive. There is not enough information to tell how it should be built. 119 Site Plan: Please match the site plan with the utility plans and plat. Easements, ROW, radii and other items do not match. See redlines. c 125 Sanitary Sewer plan and profile and other sheets: Please place utilities a minimum of 2' below scarified subgrade elevation (12.2.2). Please see plans for additional comments. (re: irrigation pipe) >160 Please label depths of concrete for Transfort pad an Page 2 �178 Sheet C0.0: Please add a directional arrow to the vicinity map and correct index (omit landscape and site plans from utility plan set). Please see sheet for additional comments. Q 180 Plat sheet 1: please provide a directional arrow for the vicinity map, and use the city's standard wording for the surveyor's certificate. 181 Plat sheet 2: Please label all easements (ie the esmt for the irrigation laterals and the access easement north of Brook Drive.) 182 Plat sheet 2: the 35' utility and drainage easement does not match what is shown on the site plan. 183 C1.0: Existing and proposed grades do not tie in at several locations. See sheet for locations. 184 Sheet C1.0: Swale cross section brackets don't match with cross sections on next sheet. s 185 C1.3: Please provide revegetation methods, including specific notes (utility plan checklist item Il.i) 186 C2.0: Is the ditch company in approval of the storm drain proposed in their easement? See sheet for comments. n 187 C2.2: Irrigation pipe is shown with no cover in roadway section. Is the "bottom of pipe" the invert elevation or the outside of the pipe? 188 C3.0: Flowline elevations shown on this sheet do not match corresponding values on sheet C3.1. . 189 C3.0: Please return to showing the flowline profiles for the culdesac as required. The flowline in the culdesac appears to be inadequate across the driveway cut. Page 3 0190 c3.0: Flowline grades on Brook Drive are inadequate in two places as shown on the sheet. 191 c3.0: It appears that drainage from the curb and gutter on horsetooth will flow without impedance down Kunz Court. Please address. 192 c3.0: There are still problems with the station equations. Please show the overlap, including the elevations on the "back" and "ahead" locations. 193 c3.0: Please show stations and elevations at beginnings and ends of horizontal curves on the profiles. 195 n 1 • c3.1: The minimum slope in the ROW (non -road areas) is 2%. (6 �L It �,4 l2Ct s( • 196 c3.2: Please label grade breaks, vertical curves, etc. (repeat) 197 c3.0-3.4: Please match values for stations and elevations for corresponding points. The stations and elevations should match from plan to profile to cross-section and match up for shared points on Horsetooth and Kunz or Kunz and Brook. . 198 fAV-nCa-&C 5tVicId Cx4ci&4 ovt r 5 cit_vfA� c3.2: the barricade should extend from the sidewalk almost to the existing edge of pavement. i 199 c3.2: please clearly label all interim improvements, including the installation of road base. 200 ' c3.3: Please label the ROW, existing curb and gutter, future curb and gutter, and the names of the adjacent properties. • 201 c3.3: Please provide labels of elevations at regular intervals as shown on c3.2. 202 c3.4: Flowline grades calculated from the provided cross -sections do not match the values shown on the profiles. 1n� G.[I Cq,SZa L< U N 1 V'c(( VC— 5 C`,_ i cLfL VtiC ` �� J Page 4 - 38 Issue Contact Katie Moore Variance requests must be made by a licensed professional engineer, and include the identification of the issue, proposed alternate design, a comparison to standards, and justification of the variance. (Section 1.9.2 in the street standards explains in further detail). Please resubmit your requests following these guidelines. (FYI -the request for the wider street width will most likely not be supported by staff) 39 Issue Contact: Katie Moore General Comments: I understand that this is JVA's first submittal to the City of Fort Collins and that the firm is unfamiliar with the City's requirements. Because of the amount of missing information, I am looking at this submittal as an incomplete submittal. I have tried to provide as many detailed comments as possible for your information and will try to help with the process where I can. Signature CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat xS(ite rainage Report Other Utility _ II Redline Utility Aandscape City of Fort Collins 203 /vl0l� �tnt/rv1 i v rio)I[t Sty 0,� iyaAl 1 G�DiGY in rurJ� c3.5: please provide curve warning signs on the bike path according to the MUTCD. (17.3.6 E LCUASS) 204 D c3.5: Minimum 6 width is required for sidewalks adjacent to parking lots where 17' depth of stalls are provided. 205 c3.6: see sheet for comments 206 ° c3.7: Please relocate Transfort sign to the east of the pad. Please show the crosswalk bars on Kunz. Please show the Type III barricades at the east edge of the property. It appears that the 4" white stripe along the south edge of Horsetooth is missing west of Kunz. See plan for additional comments. ° 207 i �xiPM� i� f nib c3.8: Please provide a connection from the trail directly to the street as previously discussed/shown on redlines. ,X 1 208 yarn Can wtm{ vvt *td- 4o a,vc4t., ifet-S 1)'K6i-�Lel_r KAtt 9$ rad+i c3.8: VINis the trail curved just to the east of the barricade? If possible, please keep it straight. IN is not possible, please use a radius of at least 95' (Chp. 17 of LCUASS, this applies to al urves). 0209 c3.8: Please keep trail at least 2' from fence where possible. n 210 c3.8: Please provide more specific information on reseeding materials. (DCr CCL � 211 c4.0: please eliminate duplicate details. Also, pavement design will be addressed after the preparation of the subgrade and shall be approved by the City's Pavement Engineer. Please do not include paving details at this time. e 212 c4.0 TraiLse4tnn Arta needs-t show-a=cross°sk©p _bf-4n&fit o. 220 c3.4: please label non -roadway slopes within the ROW. Slopes must be at least 2%. Q 221 -{-o Sov,+L, . Site plan shows extents of project as larger than it actually is. • 222 Site plan cites 50' of ROW on Brook/Kunz. This should be 52'. Page 5 . 223 Site plan: Please show trail all the way to the property line and note that the trail is to connect with the trail shown on the Mountain Ridge 2nd Filing plans. e Landscape plan: sight distance easements may affect plantings. Please check restrictions and modify if necessary. 225 Plat: The ped/bike trail in the ditch should be shown in only a 20' easement, not the full 50' as shown. It is the developer's responsibility to work with the Ditch company on this issue. 0 226 The irrigation pipes under the right-of-way will be allowed at the reduced 12" diameter if this is approved by the ditch users. Ductile iron pipe may also be used to reduce the outer size of the pipe and increase the cover. 227 t�7t��l�tGr��t 1, n Are the dwelling units being proposed as rentals? �'. 228 Please see redlines for additional comments. 229 Lan scape p al nLs Landscaping within the island in the culdesac must meet the requirements of landscaping in a sight distance easement and will not be maintained by the City. Landscaping on the island must be maintained by the HOA, who must provide irrigation if needed. Issue Contact: Rick Richter 120 High Swell soils need to be addressed in the soils report. Page 6 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: October 31, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: ##14-01A Fort Collins VOA Elderly Housing - Final Compliance );lam All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: November 14, 2001 No Comment IDProblems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** .'�,. Mq�,/ ��S NCG$ q?` v✓IiSS In9 ovt I%7C )64, 0.1So �✓. SOWAJb) Y Gt}� GGoSE, DOCK HERE IF YOU WISH TO R' Plat _ Site _ Utility _ Redline Utility _ Drainage Report _ Ofher Landscape City of Fort Collins 4�3 Project Comments Sheet S City of Fort Collins elected Departments Department: Engineering Date: November 8, 2001 Project: FORT COLLINS VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, ELDERLY HOUSING, #14- 01 All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: November 14, 2001 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Katie Moore 202 c3.4: Flowline grades calculated from the provided cross -sections do not match the values shown on the profiles in some cases. 238 c2.2: Is the "bottom of pipe" the invert or the bottom of the outside of the pipe? Please clarify on plans. Topic: Bikelped trail 240 c3.8: If a fence is built south of the trail on Brook Drive ROW, it must be placed on the owner's property, off of the ROW. 249 c3.5: Please move the curve warning signs. The northmost sign should be on the right side of the path, and the southmost sign should be moved closer (no closer than 50') to the curve. Signs should be kept 3-6 feet away from the edge of pavement at a height of 4-5 feet above the grade of the path. (MUTCD pg. 9b-1, Fig 9-1). 260 c3.8: Please adjust edge of asphalt to extend to curb face at connection to Brook Drive. 251 c3.8: It would be permissible to adjust the trail to avoid the trees as long as the minimum 95' radii are maintained. r 261 Please provide detail(s) for how trails cross irrigation ditches. (repeat) Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat �_ Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Z Landscape Page 1 Topic: Details 262 Please label all standard details with the drawing/figure numbers from LCUASS. Topic: General 205 c3.6: see sheet for comments. 227 Are the dwelling units being proposed as rentals? 228 Please see redlines for additional comments. . 244 If the missing signature for the offsite easements has been obtained, please send me a copy. If not, that portion of the offsite easement needs to be removed and grading adjusted. 252 Please remember to put in the plat with the utility plans. Topic: Grading Plan 253 cl.0: Please show finish grade elevations for lot corners. 254 cl.0: Please label trail as concrete and not as existing. 255 Should note read: ... after construction is complete *lateral* maintenance is the responsibility of individual shareholders? 256 Where is the geotextile paving fabric detail? 257 It looks like a couple of contour labels were reversed. See plan for locations. Topic: Landscape Plan r 229 Landscaping within the island in the culdesac must meet the requirements of landscaping in a sight distance easement and will not be maintained by the City. Landscaping on the island must be maintained by the HOA, who must provide irrigation if needed. Please add notes to the Landscape plan reflecting this. Topic: Overall Utility Plan 258 c2.0: Shouldn't the note read that the UNCC will be contacted instead of just the gas company? (note 7 of general notes) Topic: Plat 50 Lateral owners need signatures on plat. 245 The sight distance easments shown on the corners of Kunz and Brook are not needed. Page 2 247 sheet 1: Please use the city's standard wording for the surveyor's certificate (attached, repeat). 266 Please see Plat for additional comments. Topic: Site Plan 119 Please match the site plan with the utility plans and plat. Easements, ROW, radii and other items do not match. See redlines. 221 Site plan shows extents of project as larger than it actually is. (road improvements to west) 263 Please note that sidewalks should be flush with the driveways at all but one location (driveway in line with Brook Drive) and do not need to be labeled as handicap ramps there. 264 Sight distance easements at the corners of Brook and Kunz are not needed. 265 Please change location of edge of pavement for Brook to the property line, and move the barricade to that location as well. Issue Contact: Rick Richter Topic: Soils Report 120 High Swell soils need to be addressed in the soils report. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Street Design 197 c3.0-3.4: Please match values for stations and elevations for corresponding points. The stations and elevations should match from plan to profile to cross-section and match up for shared points on Horsetooth and Kunz or Kunz and Brook. 246 c3.1: Please provide additional spot elevations at the Horsetooth intersection as previously requested and as shown on drawing 7-32B. 248 c3.2: The barricade should extend over the sidewalk. 259 c3.1: The depth of the cross -pan should be 1.5". The detail in LCUASS is wrong, but the text is correct. Please correct in design and on detail sheet. 260 c3.2: The minimum length for a crest curve on an arterial with design speed of 50 is 170'. (Figure 7-17, LCUASS) • 267 c3.0: The grade break on the west edge of Kunz just beyond the curb return at Horsetooth is above the maximum 1 % allowed. Larger than 1 % grade breaks are allowed only within the curb return, but still must not be excessive. The grade break along the Page 3 northeast corner of Brook and Kunz looks to be excessive. Please put in more grade breaks, possibly at quarter -points. .268 c3.0: The flowlines from Kunz onto Brook need to be lowered around the curb return. Currently there are flat areas from the lip of gutter to the centers of the lanes. . 269 c3.0: Please provide centerline profiles through intersections. It was indicated on the Utility Plan Checklist (item V.R) that was submitted that these were completed, but I have not been able to locate them. av l IZ�VJ f C 1� l✓\-S Page 4 Project Comments Sheet IL+' Selected Departments Citvof Fort Collins Date: December 10, 2001 Project: FORT COLLINS VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, ELDERLY HOUSING, #14- 01 All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: October 03, 2001 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Bike/ped trail 285 Please shift the 96 contour further east on the Brook Drive ROW trail so that the slopes are more gradual. (currently about a 1.3' drop over 5'). Topic: Details 262 Please label all standard details with the drawing/figure numbers from LCUASS. Topic: General 228 Please see redlines for additional comments. Topic: Plat 50 Lateral owners need signatures on plat. 245 The sight distance easments shown on the corners of Kunz and Brook are not needed. 247 sheet 1: Please use the city's standard wording for the surveyor's certificate (attached, repeat). 266 Please see Plat for additional comments. Topic: Site Plan 119 Please match the site plan with the utility plans and plat. Easements, ROW, radii and other items do not match. See redlines. /a 7 0 Date CHECK HERE, IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS �. Plat Site Drainage Report Other �- Utility <- Redline Utility Landscape Page I 286 Please remove any easement lines that are within ROW. (Landscape plan and plat, too). See redlines for locations. Issue Contact: Rick Richter Topic: Soils Report 120 High Swell soils need to be addressed in the soils report. Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Street Design 197 c3.0-3.4: Please match values for stations and elevations for corresponding points. The stations and elevations should match from plan to profile to cross-section and match up for shared points on Horsetooth and Kunz or Kunz and Brook. 283 Why are the cross -slopes at the end of Brook Drive less than 2%? Please correct. 284 The cross -pan is still too shallow at one point. See redlines. Page 2 Community Planning and Environmental Services Current Planning City of Fort Collins March 30, 2001 Volunteers of America National Services c/o Robin Keller 1660 Duke Street Alexandra, VA. 22314-3427 Dear Robin, Staff has reviewed your documentation for the Fort Collins Volunteers of America (VOA) Affordable Elderly Housing - Project Development Plan (PDP) request that was submitted to the City on March 7, 2001, and would like to offer the following comments: 1. This property is located on the south side of West Horsetooth Road, approximately 1,500' west of South Shields Street and is in the LMN - Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood Zoning District in the City's Land Use Code (LUC). The proposed 4-plex and 6-plex multi -family dwellings are permitted in this District (up to 8 units per building are allowed by the LUC), subject to an administrative (Type I) review and public hearing. If any standards in Article 3 or Article 4, Division 4.4 cannot be met, thereby requiring a modification of any standard, then the development proposal is subject to a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review and public hearing. This is set forth in Division 2.8 of the LUC. 2. Peter Barnes of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. The Site Plan shows 90 vehicular parking spaces to be provided. A total of 91 spaces are required (90.25 spaces for the 59 1-bedroom units and the 1 2-bedroom unit, to be rounded up to 91 spaces). This is set forth in Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) of the LUC. b. Is this property to be platted as one big lot? The subdivision plat needs to show lot number(s) and square footage(s). 281 North College Avenue • P0. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 C. On the subdivision plat it looks as if there is some sort of an easement along the entire east property line, but it's not labeled or dimensioned anywhere. d. A 6' high fence is needed along the east side of the parking lots that are on the east side of the project, for screening purposes, as set forth in Section 3.2. 1 (E) (4) (b) of the LUC. The future parking area around the cul-de-sac will require a 6' high fence at the time of construction of those spaces. e. Each parking lot has to contain at least 6% interior landscaping, as set forth in Section 3.2.1(E)(5) of the LUC. f. A note is needed on the Site Plan stating that the trash enclosures will be of the same or similar materials as the buildings and that they will be gated, as set forth in Section 3.5.1(J)(2) of the LUC. Also, staff is recommending that some more trash enclosures be provided to serve the southernmost buildings. Otherwise, some of the elderly residents will have to carry their trash almost 400' to the nearest trash receptacle, as now shown. g. Do the light poles in the proposed small parking lots need to be 20' tall? That seems a bit excessive. h. A note is needed on the Landscape Plan stating, to the effect, that "All landscaping must be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy or secured with a letter of credit, bond, or escrow in the amount of 125% of the value of labor and material of the landscaping and irrigation system", as set forth in Section 3.2.1(I)(4) of the LUC. Is the internal street serving this development to be public or private? Please label this on the Site Plan. Please contact Peter, at 221-6760, if you have questions about these comments. 3. A copy of the comments received from Jeff Hill of the Water/Wastewater Department is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Jeff, at 221-6674, if you have questions about his comments. 4. A copy of the comments received from Wes Lamarque of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are on red -lined plans and reports that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Wes, at 221-6681, if you have questions about his comments. 5. A copy of the comments received from Katie Moore of the Engineering Department is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Katie, at 221-6750, if you have questions about her comments. 6. Ward Stanford of the Traffic Operations Department stated that they have no issues regarding this development proposal. 7. Michael Chavez of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following comments: a. Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property and posted with a minimum of 6" numerals on a contrasting background (example: bronze numerals on brown brick is not acceptable). b. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 600' along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1,500 gallons of water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. No commercial (multi -family residential) building can be greater than 300' from a fire hydrant. C. These proposed buildings shall be fire sprinklered. Note: This comment pertains to the proposed 4-plex and 6-plex buildings furthest south and the future 4-plex and 6-plex buildings directly north and south of the cul-de-sac. d. A dead-end street cannot exceed 660' in length. The turn -around at the end of the street must have an outside turning radius of 40' or more, and an inside turning radius of 20'. Short fire lanes are permitted to facilitate a second point of access when a street is greater than 660' in length. All structures beyond the 660' limit must be fire sprinklered if a second point of access cannot be provided.