The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLIND PROPERTY - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-16f6rIcr�.-_ -�l - ° Ti _ 1 - - i U ZqG� cc_-, eC�ti�-11v,_�;�-� .�,J AI.C;J�.�'�c.;��_� _"'O. ��" � 1� �� bf LL.1 _�•�� lA - ri _` - i�@.G.i � (�Z �i.� :.+.1,.,D �-�.�t.. n , � l f.�= '� 7�;.� Gv7 U- `._✓..1�%_ �•.-�'�`-1.�,1'r�c`l".._�" - yll�_�,`4 t� ��=-., �: -- +U bco-e- 15 See 7.6.4.0 for temporary turnaround requirements. Provide temporary turnarounds where Sternwheeler and Fairwater Drives stub out to the north. See detail 7-26. See detail 7-25 for temporary dead-end street requirements. 18 Due to the narrowness of the lots, we suggest a utility coordination meeting prior to the next submittal. This meeting needs to include all the utilities as well as the owners of the irrigation line. Topics of discussion should include the proposed 6' utility easement in the shared driveways (alley type) versus the 8' required by code, tree/utility/driveway locations and whether or not the utilities will fit within the narrow lots. 12.2.2 All utilities shall be located a least 2 feet below the scarified subgrade elevation. 22 Provide a complete design and profile of the irrigation line running along County Road 11. This design must be coordinated and approved by the owners of the line and located outside of the CR 11 ROW and 15' utility easement. See comment number 21 under "General". The irrigation line needs to be sleeved where it crosses public ROW and it needs to have a minimum of 2' of cover above the sleeve under the public roads. No ADS is allowed in ROW. See LCUASS for other design criteria. In addition, the design needs to show how the line will interact with the underpass. Provide an irrigation line signature block on the cover sheet and any other sheet that affects their line. ,,There are 48 General Notes required by LCUASS. Line 40 requires two (2) benchmarks. Line 41 must read "Centerline" stationing. See redlines. 24 The vicinity map on the cover sheet must be to a scale of 1" = 1000' - 1500'. 25( Line 14 of the Grading and Erosion Control Notes must be completed. Contact Bob Zakely at 224-6063 for the specifid •` seed mix required. j 26 �1 Please correct all overlapping labeling. All labels must be orientated to the reader. 29 The proposed roundabout must be designed in accordance with LCUASS. 31 Sternwheeler Drive does not appear to meet the minimum radii and curve lengths, etc. See redlines and LCUASS for street design requirements. 32 Several driveways do not meet the minimum separation requirements to the intersection or to other driveways as required by table 7-3. 1 - - 39 Provide and show Type 3 barricades where Port Place Drive and the roundabout are stubbed out. 41 Cover Sheet - Provide the names, addresses, phone numbers for the Developer(s), Owner(s), and Consultant Engineer(s). Page 5 44 Sight Distance Easements must be dedicated where applicable. See Chapter 7 of LCUASS. 45 Provide 500 feet of Off -Site design (including centerline, flowline, and cross sections) of all streets where future streets will tie into the proposed. 55 There are many inlets shown too close to the driveways and will not allow for the required curb transitions. 56 Sheet CS350 - see redlines. Since the proposed alleys are actually private drives, figure 71-12F should not be included. A simple cross-section would be sufficient or at least remove the term "alleys". Call it Shared Residential Driveways or something to that effect. 60 Numerous items required by the checklist in Appendix E-4 were either omitted or incorrectly checked off as "included" Many items were checked off as meeting code requirements but in reality the design does not reflect city standards. Correct or provide all the missing items required in the design by Chapter 3 of LCUASS and the checklist in Appendix E-4. Please see LCUASS for all other design requirements. 61, . -8heet CS902 - Provide the benchmark elevation in Note 10. 66 Design the underpass to meet ADA requirements and the following criteria: 8' high underpass, 16' wide 2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. 2' min from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrade or the road must be concrete. Entrance Flare taper width is 2' on each side in 10' of length Wing walls are 45 degrees from face where space allows, roadway fill 4:1 to end of wall. 5% grade max desired and 8.33% max allowed with 5' landings spaced every 30 feet Electric lighting, no skylights. Please provide grading/contour information on sheets on the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet. Provide retaining wall details. Provide a complete design for the sidewalk in the retention pond area including dimensions and radii. Please contact Mark Jackson in Transportation Planning for further requirements. M Please note that single family lots require a minimum of 20' from the back of walk to the face of the garage. 69 From ELCO: Coordinate water service location with Gas & Electric. Water services may have to be moved off property lines to accommodate gas, electric, water services and street trees. Water services must be at least 5' from a tree, 10' from sewer service and 3' from edge of driveway. Anchor all valve's to Tee's. Please see bluelines for more comments. 71 The utility plans do not show the same easements around the detention pond that the plat does. Please coordinate the plan sets so that they provide the same information. Page 6 > - .ands ape nrehiteotu re S i t e P l a n n i n g G r a p h i c e February 12,2003 Bob Barkeen, Project Planner Current Planning Division City of Fort Collins 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Bob, Attached are revisions to Lind Property Filing One,revised in response to City staff and agency review comments. The comments made and revisions requested on the PDP have been addressed as follows: Advance Planning - - 105.The site layout has changed per a joint meeting with planning, engineering, advance planning; and transportation. Current Planning ' We have revised the detention pond to be less rigid in design, with a more innovative landscape approach. 107.The neighborhood center has been correctly labeled. 108.The maximum building height has been changed 109.The HOA reference in note #2 has been removed. I 1 O.Note 12 has been removed. I 1 ].Landscaping has been added around the pedestrian underpasses, however the details will still be shown on the civil plans to avoid duplication. 1 12.The existing trees and notes have been added to sheet 4 of the landscape plan for clarity. . 113.The fence design has been altered to provide greater variation in setbacks. Additional landscaping has also been added to further break up the impact of the fence. 14.Noted. 115.The street tree utility conflicts have been reconciled, all utilities, driveways, and streetlights have been shown on the landscape plans. ] 16.Discussions are ongoing with the mineral rights owner in regards to the location of the future well. The location shown may very well change. 117.Street Names have been changed... does the applicant select names for arterials, or is this strictly a city process? I think County Road 11 is the same as Timberline Road in the southern portion of the city. Current Planning — Street Names 5. Bow Spirit Drive does not connect, and has been changed to Bow Side Drive. Engineering - General - 53 An additional foot of ROW has been added where streets have drive -over curb and gutter 63 The project name has been changed from Phase 1 to Filing 1: 76 An alternative compliance has been submitted with the PDP plans for the intersection seperation. -Refer to civil plans for other engineering revisions,. Lind Property Filing One Response#1 to revisions 2/12/03 • C i i s C: e n[ e V i l l a g e, 144 North Mas n Street Suite 2 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 -(970) 472-9125 • 1'.:(970) 494-0728 L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t u r e y - S i t e P I a n n i n g G r a p h i-, s Engineering —Landscape 17 Tree/utility separations have been revised 30 All site distance easements have been shown, and easement notes added. - 34 Driveway Locations have been added. 74 All medians and traffic circles will be maintained by the HOA. This note has been added. 75 • Reference Civil Plans Engineering — Site - 35 Note 2 has been modified. 36 Note 12 has been removed. 83 Building setbacks have been added. 106 Drive access notes for the alley homes has been added.. -Light and Power 1-3 See civil pllans for specific revisions. 4 Streetlights have been added and are shown on the site and landscape plans, PFA 20 Comment noted. See revisions on utility plans. Stormwater Reference revisions on the utility plans, and the response from Sear Brown. Transportation Planning 78. This issue has been discussed with Matt Baker.... the underpass on County Road 5j will be built with Phase 2 of Filing One. Specifics of financial sharing and obligations are still being worked out. 79. Reference Civil Plans 80. Reference Striping Plans 81. Directional ramps have been realigned., 82. The internal road network has been modified to be more grid -like. " I appreciate your time in reviewing these plans. If you have any further questions, please feel, free to contact me. - Cc Yvonne Seamen, Centex Homes Troy Campbell, Sear Brown Designs. , y Lind Property Filing One Response #1 to revisions I2/12/03 • c; v St c u It 2 144 IvorHo r Masn Stree[ Suite 2 . For[ Collins, Colorado 80524 (970) 472-9125 • F`—:(970) 494-0728 . Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: March 14, 2003 Project: LIND PROPERTY PDP - TYPE II (LUC) #39-9413 All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: March 05, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Cross Sections Number: 57 Created: 11/12/2002 These sections must reflect the site grading. Is what is shown how the proposed grade is actually tying into existing? 3/11/3: The cross sections were not included with the plan set. The cross section sheets were received a week later and received a cursory review only. The underpass must be clearly shown on the cross sections. Number: 72 Created: 11 /14/2002 Quite a number of cross -sections are incomplete. Please provide all missing information. 3/11/3: See LCUASS for cross section requirements Topic: Details Number: 59 Created: 11 /12/2002 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design 16-2 710 1606 701 711 1607 702 713.1 F 1609L if required by Transportation Planning or - 703 713.2F 1611 706 803 1612 707 1601 1613 708 1602 1413 709 1603 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still missing 711, 713.1F, 713.2F, 1607, 1612, 1613, 1413, 7-26 and CDOT m-609-1 curb and gutter type 2. Also, remove 1604 - it's not correct. Provide the Greeley standard for stamped concrete at access ramps (until the LCUASS detail is updated) and the CDOT standard for truncated dome access ramps for design and construction. See attached. 3 N4 Da e IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS ' Plat _ I Site f Drainage Report —L Other -F-4— � Utility __/ Redline Utility f Landscape Page I Topic: General Number: 21 Created: 11/12/2002 The irrigation line running north -south along County Road 11 must be located out of the ROW and the 15' utility easement and it must be in it's own dedicated easement. This easement may be dedicated on the plat or provided by separate document. Regardless of how its dedicated, the owners of the line must sign the final plat and utility plans before the City will approve the mylars. In addition, Boxelder Sanitation District and ELCO Water District must sign the utility plan mylars before being routed for City signatures. 3/1113: Repeat comment. The Underpass Plan and Profile sheets state that the irrigation line is being relocated but it doesn't show where. The plat does not show a separate easement for it's new location either. Please see above. Number: 27 Created: 11 /12/2002 Approval of these plans is contingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple Hill) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addition, this developer is responsible for the interim design improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. In the event that the transportation tax is approved, the money is appropriated by the city, and the improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for any improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. However, it could be years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lemay. 3/11/3: Keeping this item open until the conditions are met. Number: 37 Created: 11 /12/2002 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 46 Created: 11 /12/2002 The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction occurring on all sides. 3/11/3Repeat comment. There is off -site grading and construction occuring outside of the platted boundary. Please extend the platted boundary limits or provide all necessary off -site easements. Number: 53 Created: 11 /12/2002 An additional foot of ROW is required for each side of a local street where drive -over curb is used. Where vertical curb is used, driveway locations need to be shown and stationed. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Station driveway locations where vertical curb is used. Number: 54 Created: 11 /12/2002 See detail 7-24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the min PC to PCR. Show and label R1, R2, R3, W and flowline as required by 7-24. Number: 67 Created: 11 /13/2002 Quite a bit of information left off of this submittal. Expect more comments with the next submittal. 3/11/3: Repeat comment Number: 76 Created: 11 /14/2002 It appears that several streets do not meet the min/max separation distance requirements as required by LCUASS. See table 7-3. A modification or alternative compliance is needed for the road connections out to the arterials as they are currently proposed. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. (Alternative Compliance Letter just received on 3/13/3). Number: 143 Created: 3/12/2003 Page 2 Ghost all future filing improvements and label as "future", all sheets, all plans sets. Placing this information on this filing in now way constitutes an approval or review of those "future" filings. Number: 157 Created: 3/13/2003 The plans must be at least 90% complete before we will schedule It for a public hearing. Topic: Grading Plan Number: 38 Created: 11 /12/2002 Erosion Control Plan - provide rip rap at the end of Sternwheeler Drive and roundabout stubs. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The various sheets are not consistant. Some show it, some do not. Number: 40 Created: 11 /12/2002 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes effect public ROW. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 42 Created: 11 /12/2002 Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot corners. 3/11/3: Repeat comment.. Incomplete lot corners. Number: 43 Created: 11/12/2002 Drainage arrows must be provided and show positive drainage to streets or to an approved drainage facility. 4/11/3: Repeat comment Number: 146 Created: 3/12/2003 Comment 89 from Basil Hamden, Stormwater: The city requires that a detailed grading plan be shown that calls out how drainage will make it around proposed houses and shows potential building envelopes, so that the builder has an idea of the maximum size of house he can situate on the lot, given the size of that particular lot. There are several locations where the labeling makes it impossible to read the plans. Please move elevations so that they can be easily read. All lots draining across lower lots such as those fronting Forecastle Dr. will require an easement be placed on the lower lots in order to allow the drainage from the upper lots to exit through the lower lots. From Engineering: These requirements still stand. Provide the additional drainage easements by plat or by separate document. Number: 152 Created: 3/12/2003 Provide the statement shown in Appendix E,Section II, E, "The top of foundation elevations shown....." Topic: Intersection Details Number: 160 Created: 3/13/2003 See detail 7-27 and 7-28 for spot elevation requirements on all intersection details shown. Number: 161 Created: 3/13/2003 The midbtock crossing shown on CS331 must be a minimum 12' wide. See 7.7.5 for depth requirements. Identify the transition length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would be to have Sternwheeler the through street without mid -block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipper Way. Number: 162 Created: 3/13/2003 Crown the transition in accordance with detail 7-28 from Clipper Way to Sternwheeler Drive. Page 3 Number: 163 Created: 3/13/2003 Traffic Circle - show the yield line (flow line)as required in detail 8-13. Number: 164 Created: 3/13/2003 Concrete or other approved surface texture change required at traffic circle crosswalks. Topic: Landscape Number: 17 Created: 11 /6/2002 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 3/11/3: Repeat comments. Several trees shown right on top of inlets, etc. Number: 30 Created: 11/12/2002 Landscaping within a Sight Distance Easement must meet sight distance requirements. Please add the Sight Distance note to the plans and show all sight distance easements. 3/11/3: Incorrect sight distance easements shown. Repeat comment. Number: 74 Created: 11 /14/2002 The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the roundabout, and will be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping in these areas. This landscaping must also meet sight distance requirements (please add a note to the plans). 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please provide and show on the plans. Number: 75 Created: 11 /14/2002 Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. 3/11/3: Repeat commenl:. Please show on plans. Number: 135 Remove the contours. Created: 3/11 /2003 Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 47 Created: 11 /12/2002 See table 7-3, 7-17 and 7-18 for street design criteria. There are several areas where minimum VCs, minimum K values, and minimum tangent lengths between curves are not being met. 3/11/3: Repeat comment:. Minimum VCs are not being met in all places. Number: 48 Created: 11 /12/2002 Centerline profiles and stationing are required for all public streets. Provide Flowline profiles for the roundabout and design to standard. Specify the type of curb being used and where. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The station ahead/back shown on the plans are not in accordance with LCUASS. I do have an option for you that might be worth exploring. Engineering had an internal discussion on the CL and FL requirements currently being required in our street standards several weeks ago. It was decided that Mike Herzig would follow up with another meeting with: "the various Engineering firms interested in this issue will be held to work with them to determine what the final requirements for submittal will be. In the meantime the following direction can be given for the projects currently in review: For Arterials and Collectors - the existing criteria remains in place. Centerline stationing is to be provided along with the required x-sections every 50 feet. Page 4 For Residential and Local Streets - in lieu of providing centerline stationing flowline stationing can be used if actual x-sections of the roadway at the beginning of a horizontal curve, end of a horizontal curve, and additional x-sections be provided if there are other elevation changes, grade changes and street width changes that occur within the horizontal curve. They also need to identify the location of beginnings and endings of horizontal curves with elevations noted on the profile and plan view." 'You have the option then, of preparing your flowlines as currently required by the standards or designing them with the alternative suggested above. Number: 51 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. What's shown is incomplete. Number: 52 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide profiles for all curb returns. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 149 Created: 3/12/2003 Provide stationing/inlet information. Number: 150 Created: 3/12/2003 All profiles are missing Hi HPS, PVI STA, ELEV information, curb returns, station equations for the flowlines, stationing of all proposed driveways and all intersecting roadways, elevation and location of ALL utilities, station and elevation of the underpasses, etc. See Chapter 3 of LCUASS for other design requirements. Number: 158 Created: 3/13/2003 How does the future CR11 tie into existing? See sheet CS301. Number: 159 Created: 3/1312003 CS314 mislabeled as Flagstaff Place profiles. Is this supposed to be Fairwater? Topic: Plat Number: 6 Created: 11/4/2002 From Technical Services: The boundary and legal close. 3/5/3: The boundary and legal description do not close in this submittal. Number: 9 Created: 11/5/2002 Please provide the missing plat language as shown on the attached document (cert of dedication, maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee, notice of other docs, sight distance, etc.). 3/11/3: Missing Sight Distance Easement Restrictions and the Statement of Ownership/Surveyor's Statement require corrections. See redlines and attached. Number: 12 Created: 11 /5/2002 Provide a tract table. Who owns and maintains each tract? 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 16 Created: 11 /6/2002 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 3/11/3: Repeat Comment. Number: 65 Created: 11/13/2002 Provide sight distance easements as required by the design and code. Page 5 3/11/3: Those shown on the plat do not match the ones shown on the utility plans. Number: 123 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Legal and plat have several difference, see redlines. Number: 124 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Subdivision name in dedication does not match the title block. Number: 125 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services. Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal. Number: 126 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services. State law requires monuments at 1400' maximum. Number: 127 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Separate document reception number vacations need to be shown on this plat. Number: 128 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Who owns and maintains the tracts? Do some need an access easement also? Number: 129 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Dedication statement needs to include "alley." Number: 133 Created: 3/11/2003 The plat calls the private drives Tract A, etc, while the utility plans call them Blocks. Which is correct? Topic: Site Number: 130 Created: 3/11/2003 Remove the contours for legibility. Number: 131 Created: 3/11/2003 Remove all incorrect sight distance triangles. Number: 132 Created: 3/11/2003 Note 11 states that this is a single phase project, however, the utility plans show phasing. Please coordinate the plan sets. Topic: Soils Report Number: 147 Created. 3/12/2003 Please provide a Soils Report as required by LCUASS. Topic: Street Names Number: 134 Created: 3/11/2003 Is it Flagstaff Drive or Flagstaff Place? Not all the plan sets are consistant. Topic: Street Sections Number: 151 Created: 3/12/2003 The typical street sections provided are not correct. List each street under each cross section by stationing because some streets have more than one cross section. Label each section with N!S/ENV and move this sheet up behind the cover sheet or the site plan. Number: 165 Created: 3/13/2003 List each street under the appropriate street section by stationing (ex: Fairwater Drive Station _ to Station Page 6 d ta City of Fort Collins Current Planning PROJECT COMMENT SHEET DATE: October 16, 2002 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: #39-94B Lind Property PDP — Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen no later than the staff review meeting: November 13, 2002 Note - PLEASE identify your redlines for future reference No Lo z� Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat Site _Drainage Report _Other `— _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape city of Fort Collins Number: 166 Created: 3/13/2003 Correct the 53' ROW street section's parkway width to be 6'. The additional foot is due to the width of the rollover curb. The standard parkway width remains the same at 6'. Number: 167 Remove all reference to "alley". See redlines. Created: 3/13/2003 Topic: Striping Street Number: 137 Created: 3/11 /2003 Provide an interim striping sheet and label the ultimate as "ultimate." Number: 176 Created: 3/13/2003 Please contact Eric Bracke (224-6062) for comments regarding the signing and striping sheet. Topic: Traffic Study Number: 28 Created: 11 /12/2002 Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for all arterial/arterial intersections. Additional ROW may be required to accommodate a dedicated northbound right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter 8 for intersection requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. 3/11/3: Repeat commenl. Topic: Underpass; Number: 170 Created: 3/13/2003 As previously discussed on February 3, 2003, please design the underpass as shown on pg. 10 of the guidelines. The underpass should be 14' wide with a 2-10-2 cross section, that's a 2' drainage pan, 10' walk, 2' drainage pan. Number: 171 Created: 3/13/2003 Show where the irrigation line is being relocated to and how it will work with the underpass. This is a repeat comment from another section. Not enough information has been shown to evaluate the design. Number: 172 Created: 3/13/2003 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios may not exceed 4:1, Number: 173 Created: 3/13/2003 Provide a signature block for the ditch company on this and ALL other sheets that effect their irrigation line. Number: 174 Underpass detail shown on CS703 is not correct. Topic: Utility Created: 3/13/2003 Number: 13 Created: 11/5/2002 See 16.3.1 for access ramp requirements. Provide directional ramps at all intersections. Access ramps must line up with the ramp across the :street on all T-Intersections. Must provide a separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice. 3/11/3. Repeat comment. In addition, an access ramp shown lining up with a sidewalk connection must be the same width as the sidewalk it connects to. Remove the access ramp shown at the street widening. See redlines. Number: 14 Created: 11 /5/2002 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 3/11/3: Trees on the landscape plan still shown directly on top of inlets. Page 7 Number: 15 Created: 11 /5/2002 See 7.6.4.0 for temporary turnaround requirements. Provide temporary turnarounds where Sternwheeler and Fainvater Drives stub out to the north. See detail 7-26. See detail 7-25 for temporary dead-end street requirements. 3/11/3: Sheets are inconsistent. Some show the temp turnarounds, some do not. Number: 18 Created: 11 /6/2002 Due to the narrowness of the lots, we suggest a utility coordination meeting prior to the next submittal. This meeting needs to include all the utilities as well as the owners of the irrigation line. Topics of discussion should include the proposed 6' utility easement in the shared driveways (alley type) versus the 8' required by code, tree/utility/driveway locations and whether or not the utilities will fit within the narrow lots. 3/11/3: May need to schedule another one because there are still conflicts. Minimum spacing between driveways aren't being met in several areas, which when corrected, will shift the trees again. Please call me to set up another meeting if you get a lot o'` comments back from the various agencies. I don't see the comments from the outside agencies so I'm not sure how things are going there. Just let me know, 221-6605. Number: 22 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide a complete design and profile of the irrigation line running along County Road 11. This design must be coordinated and approved by the owners of the line and located outside of the CR 11 ROW and 15' utility easement. See comment number 21 under "General". The irrigation line needs to be sleeved where it crosses public ROW and it needs to have a minimum of 2' of cover above the sleeve under the public roads. No ADS is allowed in ROW. See LCUASS for other design criteria. In addition, the design needs to show how the line will interact with the underpass. Provide an irrigation line signature block on the cover sheet and any other sheet that affects their line. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Not enough information was provided to show where the line is going and how it's going to work with the underpass. Please reread the above. Number: 25 Created: 11/12/2002 Line 14 of the Grading and Erosion Control Notes must be completed. Contact Bob Zakely at 224-6063 for the specific seed mix required. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 26 Created: 11/12/2002 Please correct all overlapping labeling. All labels must be orientated to the reader. 3/11/3: Repeat comment:. The overlapping labeling, spot elevations, etc make the plans difficult (and in some cases, impossible) to read. Some areas, sheets could not be reviewed at this time. Number: 29 Created. 11/12/2002 The proposed roundabout must be designed in accordance with LCUASS. 3/11/3: See other comments under "Intersection Details." Number: 32 Created: 11/12/2002 Several driveways do not meet the minimum separation requirements to the intersection or to other driveways as required by table 7-3. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Driveways must be a minimum of 12' from another driveway. Number: 39 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide and show Type 3 barricades where Port Place Drive and the roundabout are stubbed out. 3/11/3: The plans do not show this consistently from to sheet to sheet. Number: 44 Created: 11/12/2002 Sight Distance Easements must be dedicated where applicable. See Chapter 7 of LCUASS. Page 8 3/11/3: There seems to be some confusion on how to properly calculate the sight distance easement. Those shown are not correct and need to be removed. Please call me if you would like to meet for some help. Number: 45 Created: 11 /12/2002 Provide 500 feet of Off -Site design (including centerline, flowline, and cross sections) of all streets where future streets will tie into the proposed. 3/11/3: Repeat commert. Missing stationing, etc. Number: 55 Created: 11/12/2002 There are many inlets shown too close to the driveways and will not allow for the required curb transitions. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Not enough information provided to verify whether or not their placement is acceptable Number: 56 Created: 11 /12/2002 Sheet CS350 - see redlines. Since the proposed alleys are actually private drives, figure 71-12F should not be included. A simple cross-section would be sufficient or at least remove the term "alleys". Call it Shared Residential Driveways or something to that effect. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please remove all reference to the word "alley" as they are not being dedicated as public alleys. Number: 60 Created: 11 /12/2002 Numerous items required by the checklist in Appendix E-4 were either omitted or incorrectly checked off as "included". Many items were checked off as meeting code requirements but in reality the design does not reflect city standards. Correct or provide all the missing items required in the design by Chapter 3 of LCUASS and the checklist in Appendix E-4. Please see LCUASS for all other design requirements. 3/11/3: Repeat comment See reclined Appendix. Number: 66 Created: 11 /13/2002 Design the underpass to meet ADA requirements and the following criteria: 8' high underpass, 16' wide 2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. 2' min from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrade or the road must be concrete. Entrance flare taper width is 2' on each side in 10' of length Wing walls are 45 degrees from face where space allows, roadway fill 4:1 to end of wall. 5% grade max desired and 8.33% max allowed with 5' landings spaced every 30 feet Electric lighting, no skylights. Please provide grading/contour information on sheets on the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet. Provide retaining wall details. Provide a complete design for the sidewalk in the retention pond area including dimensions and radii. Please contact Mark Jackson in Transportation Planning for further requirements. 3/11/3: Repeat comments: 2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. 2' min from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrade or the road must be concrete. Please provide grading/contour information on sheets on the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet. Provide retaining wall details. Provide a complete design for the sidewalk in the retention pond area including dimensions and radii. Please label all slope ratios as requested in another continued comment. Number: 71 Created: 11/14/2002 The utility plans do not show the same easements around the detention pond that the plat does. Please coordinate the plan sets so that they provide the same information. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please dedicate the utility easement along the ENTIRE length of the west side of the plans Page 9 Number: 138 Created: 3/12/2003 May need school district PR1 signature on Baker laterial per letter from their attorney dated 2/24/2003. This item will need to be addressed prior to going to public hearing. See attached. Number: 139 Correction required on sheet CS001. Number: 140 Provide phasing sheets for the utilities as well as grading, sheets given on CS100,101 do not provide enough detail. Created: 3/12/2003 Created: 3/12/2003 drainage and erosion control phasing sheets. The phasing Number: 141 Created: 3/12/2003 CS100/101: Add a note: Install Type 3 Barricades where all sidewalks terminate at the temporary turnarounds and street stubs. Or something to that effect... Number: 142 Created: 3/12/2003 Please provide Interim and Ultimate plans for County Road 11 and label the sheets accordingly. I realize the interim conditions are still being coordinated but you will need the interim plans before you can go to hearing. Number: 144 Created: 3/12/2003 Ramp shown in driveway of Lot 15 on Flagstaff Place and Lot 6 on Sternwheeler Drive. Number: 145 Created: 3/12/2003 Some ramps shown to close to the drive cuts and do not provide enough room between the two to meet minimum curb transitions. Number: 148 Please provide a signature block for Larimer County. Created: 3/12/2003 Number: 155 Created: 3/12/2003 The midblock cross -pans shown are not to standard. Please see LCUASS. See redlines. Number: 156 All private drives are not clearly labeled as such. Created. 3/12/2003 Number: 168 Created: 3/13/2003 CS300 - A proposed pipe is shown at the corner of 52 and 11. What is it for? I couldn't find it on any other sheet. Number: 169 Created: 3/13/2003 Please provide some grading/spot information that I can tie into the CR52 road plans so that I can make sure that these two projects will work together. Number: 175 See redlines and Appendix E4 for other comments. Page 10 Created: 3/13/2003 Susan Joy - RE: Meeting dates Page 1 From: "Allen -Morley, Jim" <Jim.Allen-Morley@searbrown.com> To: "Dave Stringer" <DSTRINGER@fcgov.com> Date: 3/26/03 2:45PM " •� . ° =' '' " ` ' ` Subject: RE: Meeting dates Dave, Yes and here they are. Sheet No and Comment CS 000 Why Larimer County approval and to what extent. Will this cause for issues because they have not seen the set yet? < . , ,, sir, ,-�, i_ - CS 100 General discussion on issues. One question is the temporary turn a rounds on site - do they need a temporary easement as well. a, , 'CS 115 Want to double check site easements. /CS 221 why Ditch company signature block on erosion control sheet. CS 221 street sheets. We have to clear the stationing up. I met with Katy ni land this was OK now its not. Street sheets how are approach grades checked. what can we do to help. " { ' `,"4. County Road 11 cross sections seem complete to us so some of the information left off was the existing ROW information on the east side. We think it will clutter up the drawings. Do we need to call out existing side slopes. This will also clutter the cross sections. Cross Sections how do we show Richards Lake Sidewalk? As existing or proposed. CS 400 What level of detail do you want on calling out existing utilities. This is 100 scale and hard to read already. !V, , rids CS 600 Some of the details requested such as bus pull out and subdrains to not apply. We will put the others in. 1,� ,Details. Do we need to have a raised cross walk at the roundabout. It is one of the details requested. Underpass. We need to resolve the drainage channel in the underpass. Susan asks for two Tom has no comments. We feel one on one side is sufficient. ,_1i Cam( Underpass. Please tell us what to do this the sight distance comment. C `IC __ I hope this gives you an idea of some of the questions we have. Thanks Jim ri -----Original Message ----- From: Dave Stringer [mailto:DSTRINGER@fcgov.cFjj Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 12:58 PM To: Allen -Morley, Jim i Cc: Susan Joy 1� t _ fiiFe 1 I .t�' l• Project Comments Sheep N`+ Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: March 27, 2003 Project: LIND PROPERTY PDP - TYPE 11 (LUC) #39-9413 All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: March 05, 2003� Note - Please identify your redlines for fatuPJefeOe k 1 Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Cross Sections Number: 57 Created: r1/12/204- These sections must reflect the site grading. Is what is shown how the proposed grade is actually tying into existing? 3/11/3: The cross sections were not included with the plan set. The cross section sheets were received a week later and received a cursory review only. The underpass must be clearly shown on the cross sections. Number: 72 Created: 11/14/2002 Quite a number of cross -sections are incomplete. Please provide all missing information. 3/1113: See LCUASS for cross section requirements. Topic: Details Number:59 Created:11/12/2002 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design_ (� . 16-2 710 1606 701 711— 1607 702 7134-F 1609L if required by Transportation Planning or- wl�aYl� 703 713.24- 1611 706 803 1612 707 1601 1613 'i1�/ 708 1602 1413 709 1603 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still missing 711h 713-fF, 743:21`, 160�, 1612, 1613, 1413, 7-26 and CDOT m-609-1 curb and gutter type 2. Also, remove 1604 - it's not correct. Provide the Greeley standard for stamped concrete at access ramps (until the LCUASS detail is updated) and the CDOT standard for truncated dome access ramps for design and construction. See attached. Sigrrnture Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat __ Site Drainage Report Other Utility __ Redline Utility Landscape Jer Page 1 (2� - - Topic: General Number: 21 Created: 11/12/2002 The irrigation line running north -south along County Road 11 must be located out of the ROW and the 15' utility easement and it must be in it's own dedicated easement. This easement may be dedicated on the plat or provided by separate document. Regardless of how its dedicated, the owners of the line must sign the final plat and utility plans before the City will approve the mylars. In addition, Boxelder Sanitation District and ELCO Water District must sign the utility plan mylars before being routed for City signatures. 3/11/3. Repeat comment. The Underpass Plan and Profile sheets state that the irrigation line is being relocated but it doesn't show where. The plat does not show a separate easement for it's new location either. Please see above. Number: 27 Created: 11 /12/2002 Approval of these plans is contingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple Hill) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addition, this developer is responsible for the interim design improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. In the event that the transportation tax is approved, the money Is appropriated by the city, and the improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for any improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. However, it could be years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lemay. 3/11/3: Keeping this item open until the conditions are met. Number: 37 Created: 11 /12/2002 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number. 46 Created: 11 /12/2002 The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction occurring on all sides. -'3/11/3: Repeat comment. There is off site grading and construction occuring outside of the platted boundary. Please `� extend the platted bounday limits or provide all necessary off -site easements. Number. 53 Created: 11 /12/2002 An additional foot of ROW is required for each side of a local street where drive -over curb is used. Where vertical curb is used, driveway locations need to be shown and stationed. 3/11/3. Repeat comment. Station driveway locations where vertical curb is used-:- � ;' _ c: � v i ", r✓=r-1 '�- Z-1 \x, C Number: 54 Created: 11 /12/2002 See detail 7-24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the min PC to PCR. Show and label R1, R2, R3, W and flowline as required by 7-24. Number: 67 Created. 11/13/2002 Quite a bit of information left off of this submittal. Expect more comments with the next submittal. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 76 Created: 11/14/2002 It appears that several streets do not meet the min/max separation distance requirements as required by LCUASS. See table 7-3. A modification or alternative compliance is needed for the road connections out to the arterials as they are currently proposed. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. (Alternative Compliance Letter just received on 3113/3). Number: 143 Created: 3/12/2003 Page 2 Ghost all future filing improvements and label as "future", all sheets, all plans sets. Placing this information on this filing in now way constitutes an approval or review of those "future" filings. Number: 157 Created: 3/13/2003 The plans must be at least 90% complete before we will schedule it for a public hearing. Topic: Grading Plan Number: 38 Created: 11 /12/2002 Erosion Control Plan - provide rip rap at the end of Sternwheeler Drive and roundabout stubs. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The various sheets are not consistant. Some show it, some do not. Number: 40 Created: 11 /12/2002 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes effect public ROW. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 42 Created: 11 /12/2002 Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot corners. 3/11/3: Repeat comment_ Incomplete lot corners. Number. 43 Created: 11 /12/2002 Drainage arrows must be provided and show positive drainage to streets or to an approved drainage facility. 4/11/3: Repeat comment Number: 146 Created: 3/12/2003 Comment 89 from Basil Hamden, Stormwater: The city requires that a detailed grading plan be shown that calls out how drainage will make it around proposed houses and shows potential building envelopes, so that the builder has an idea of the maximum size of house he can situate on the lot, given the size of that particular lot. There are several locations where the labeling makes it impossible to read the plans. Please move elevations so that they can be easily read. All lots draining across lower lots such as those fronting Forecastle Dr. will require an easement be placed on the lower lots in order to allow the drainage from the upper lots to exit through the lower lots. From Engineering. These requirements still stand. Provide the additional drainage easements by plat or by separate document. Number: 152 Created: 3/12/2003 Provide the statement shown in Appendix E,Section II, E, "The top of foundation elevations shown....." Topic: Intersection Details Number. 160 Created: 3/13/2003 See detail 7-27 and 7-28 for spot elevation requirements on all intersection details shown. Number: 161 Created: 3/13/2003 The midblock crossing shown on CS331 must be a minimum 12' wide. See 7.7.5 for depth requirements. Identify the transition length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would be to have Sternwheeler the through street without mid -block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipper Way. Number: 162 Created: 3/13/2003 Crown the transition in accordance with detail 7-28 from Clipper Way to Sternwheeler Drive, Page 3 Number: 163 Created: 3/13/2003 Traffic Circle - show the yield line (flow line)as required in detail 8-13. Number: 164 Created: 3/13/2003 Concrete or other approved surface texture change required at traffic circle crosswalks. Topic: Landscape Number: 17 Created: 11 /6/2002 321.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 3/11/3: Repeat comments. Several trees shown right on top of inlets, etc. Number. 30 Created: 11 /12/2002 Landscaping within a Sight Distance Easement must meet sight distance requirements. Please add the Sight Distance note to the plans and show all sight distance easements. 3/11/3: Incorrect sight distance easements shown. Repeat comment. Number. 74 Created: 11 /14/2002 The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the roundabout, and will be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping in these areas. This landscaping must also meet sight distance requirements (please add a note to the plans). 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please provide and show on the plans. Number: 75 Created: 11/14/2002 Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please show on plans. Number. 135 Remove the contours. Topic: Plan and Profiles Created: 3/11 /2003 Number. 47 Created: 11 /12/2002 See table 7-3, 7-17 and 7-18 for street design criteria. There are several areas where minimum VCs, minimum K values, and minimum tangent lengths between curves are not being met. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Minimum VCs are not being met in all places. Number: 48 Created: 11 /12/2002 Centerline profiles and stationing are required for all public streets. Provide flowline profiles for the roundabout and design to standard. Specily the type of curb being used and where. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. The station ahead/back shown on the plans are not in accordance with LCUASS. I do have an option for you that might be worth exploring. Engineering had an internal discussion on the CL and FL requirements currently being required in our street standards several weeks ago. It was decided that Mike Herzig would follow up with another meeting with: "the various Engineering firms interested in this issue will be held to work with them to determine what the final requirements for submittal will be. In the meantime the following direction can be given for the projects currently in review: For Arterials and Collectors - the existing criteria remains in place. Centerline stationing is to be provided along with the required x-sections every 50 feet. Page 4 For Residential and Local Streets - in lieu of providing centerline stationing flowline stationing can be used if ❑ctual x-sections offhe roadway at the beginning of a horizontal curve, end of a horizontal curve, and additional x-sections be provided if there are other elevation changes, grade changes and street width changes that occur Within the bel'ILOntal curve. They also need to identify the location of beginnings and endings of her curves with elevations noted on the profile and plan view." 'You have the option there, of preparing your flowlines as currently required by the standards or designing them with the alternative suggested above. Number: 51 Created: 11 /12/2002 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 3/1113: Repeat comment. What's shown is incomplete. Number: 52 Created: 11 /12/2002 Provide profiles for all curb returns. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 149 Created: 3/12/2003 Provide stationing/inlet information. Number: 150 Created: 3/12/2003 All profiles are missing HF'E, HPS, PVI STA, ELEV information, curb returns, station equations for the flowlines, stationing of all proposed driveways and all intersecting roadways, elevation and location of ALL utilities, station and elevation of the underpasses, etc. See Chapter 3 of LCUASS for other design requirements. Number: 158 Created: 3/13/2003 How does the future CR1' tie into existing? See sheet CS301. Number: 159 Created: 3/13/2003 CS314 mislabeled as Flagstaff Place profiles. Is this supposed to be Faimater? Topic: Plat Number: 6 Created: 11 /4/2002 From Technical Services: The boundary and legal close. 3/5/3: The boundary and legal description do not close in this submittal. Number: 9 Created. 11 /5/2002 Please provide the missing plat language as shown on the attached document (cert of dedication, maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee, notice of other dots, sight distance, etc.). 3/11/3: Missing Sight Distance Easement Restrictions and the Statement of Ownership/Surveyor's Statement require corrections. See redlines and attached. Number: 12 Created: 11/5/2002 Provide a tract table. Who owns and maintains each tract? 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Number: 16 Created: 11 /6/2002 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 3/11/3: Repeat Comment. Number: 65 Created: 11/13/2002 Provide sight distance easements as required by the design and code. Page 5 PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: October 16, 2002 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: 439-94B Lind Property PDP — Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen no later than the staff review meeting: November 13, 2002 s Note - P1:EASF identify your redlines for future reference 1.3ouu'Z>A+er LVC.A:L C.UOSE. Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _P atlatl _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape 3/11/3: Those shown on the plat do not match the ones shown on the utility plans. Number: 123 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Legal and plat have several difference, see redlines. Number: 124 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Subdivision name in dedication does not match the title block. Number: 125 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal. Number: 126 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: State law requires monuments at 1400' maximum. Number: 127 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Separate document reception number vacations need to be shown on this plat. Number: 128 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Who owns and maintains the tracts? Do some need an access easement also? Number: 129 From Technical Services: Created: 3/11/20L3 Dedication "alley." statement needs to include Number: 133 Created: 3/11/2003 The plat calls the private drives Tract A, etc, while the utility plans call them Blocks. Which is correct? Topic: Site Number: 130 Created: 3/11/2003 Remove the contours for legibility. Number: 131 Created. 3/11/2003 Remove all incorrect sight distance triangles. Number: 132 Created: 3/11/2003 Note 11 states that this is a single phase project, however, the utility plans show phasing. Please coordinate the plan sets. Topic: Soils Report Number: 147 Created: 3/12/2003 Please provide a Soils Report as required by LCUASS. Topic: Street Names Number: 134 Created: 3/11/2003 Is it Flagstaff Drive or Flagstaff Place? Not all the plan sets are consistant. Topic: Street Sections Number: 151 Created: 3/12/2003 The typical street sections provided are not correct. List each street under each cross section by stationing because some streets have more than one cross section. Label each section with N/S/E/W and move this sheet up behind the cover sheet or the site plan. Number: 165 Created: 3/13/2003 List each street under the appropriate street section by stationing (ex: Fairwater Drive station _ to Station _). Page 6 Number: 166 Correct the 53' ROW street section's parkway width to be 6' The standard parkway width remains the same at 6'. Number. 167 Remove all reference to "alley". See redlines. Created: 3/13/2003 The additional foot is due to the width of the rollover curb. lCreated,�/l3/2003 Topic: Striping Sheet Number:137 Created 3/11t2003 Provide an interim striping sheet and label the ultimate as "ultimate." - r 1.( , ) Number: 176 Created: 3/13/2003 Please contact Eric Bracke (224-6062) for comments regarding the signing and striping sheet ' r +� r _--yl, ty' i Topic: Traffic Study t Number: 28 Created: 11/12/2002 1L, J l' Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for all arterial/arterial intersections. Additional ROW may be required to accommodate a dedicated northbound right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter 8 for intersection requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Topic: Underpass Number:170 Created: 3/13/2003 As previously discussed on February 3, 2003, please design the underpass as shown on pg. 10 of the guidelines, underpass should be 14' wide with a 2-10-2 cross section, that's a 2' drainage pan, 10' walk, 2' drainage pan. Number: 171 Created: 3/13/2003 The Show where the irrigation line is being relocated to and how it will work with the underpass. This is a repeat comment from another section- Not enough information has been shown to evaluate the design. _ _ -_ t, �, -- yam. Number: 172 Created: 3/13/2003 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios may not exceed 4:1.��'L Number: 173 Created: 3/13/2003 Provide a signature block for the ditch company on this and ALL other sheets that effect their irrigation line j 0.+ Number:174 Created: 3/13/2003 t- Underpass detail shown on CS703 is not correct. Topic: Utility Number. 13 Created: 11 /5/2002 See 16.3.1 for access ramp requirements. Provide directional ramps at all intersections. Access ramps must line up with the ramp across the street on all T-Intersections. Must provide a separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice. 3/11/3: Repeat comment In addition, an access ramp shown lining up with a sidewalk connection must be the same width as the sidewalk it connects to. Remove the access ramp shown at the street widening. See redlines. Number: 14 Created: 11 /5/2002 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 3/11/3* Trees on the landscape plan still shown directly on top of inlets. Page 7 Number: 15 Created: 11 /5/2002 See 7.6.4.0 for temporary turnaround requirements. Provide temporary turnarounds where Sternwheeler and Fairwater Drives stub out to the north. See detail 7-26. See detail 7-25 for temporary dead-end street requirements. 3/11/3: Sheets are inconsistent. Some show the temp turnarounds, some do not. Number. 18 Created: 11 /6/2002 Due to the narrowness of the lots, we suggest a utility coordination meeting prior to the next submittal. This meeting needs to include all the utilities as well as the owners of the irrigation line. Topics of discussion should include the proposed 6' utility easement in the shared driveways (alley type) versus the 8' required by code, tree/utility/driveway locations and whether or not the utilities will fit within the narrow lots. 3/1113: May need to schedule another one because there are still conflicts. Minimum spacing between driveways aren't being met in several areas, which when corrected, will shift the trees again. Please call me to set up another meeting if you get a lot of comments back from the various agencies. I don't see the comments from the outside agencies so I'm not sure how things are going there. Just let me know, 221-6605. Number: 22 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide a complete design and profile of the irrigation line running along County Road 11. This design must be coordinated and approved by the owners of the line and located outside of the CR 11 ROW and 15' utility easement. See comment number 21 under "General". The irrigation line needs to be sleeved where it crosses public ROW and it needs to have a minimum of 2' of cover above the sleeve under the public roads. No ADS is allowed in ROW. See LCUASS for other design criteria. In addition, the design needs to show how the line will interact with the underpass. Provide an irrigation line signature block on the cover sheet and any other sheet that affects their line. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Not enough information was provided to show where the line is going and how it's going to work with the underpass. Please reread the above. Number: 25 Created: 11/12/2002 Line 14 of the Grading and Erosion Control Notes must be completed. Contact Bob Zakely at 224-6063 for the specific seed mix required. 3/11/3. Repeat comment. Number: 26 Created: 11/12/2002 Please correct all overlapping labeling. All labels must be orientated to the reader. 3/1113: Repeat comment. The overlapping labeling, spot elevations, etc make the plans difficult (and in some cases, impossible) to read. Some areas, sheets could not be reviewed at this time. Number: 29 Created: 11/12/2002 The proposed roundabout must be designed in accordance with LCUASS. 3/11/3: See other comments under "Intersection Details." Number: 32 Created: 11/12/2002 Several driveways do not meet the minimum separation requirements to the intersection or to other driveways as required by table 7-3, 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Driveways must be a minimum of 12' from another driveway. Number: 39 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide and show Type 3 barricades where Port Place Drive and the roundabout are stubbed out. 3/11/3: The plans do not show this consistently from to sheet to sheet. Number: 44 Created: 11/12/2002 Sight Distance Easements must be dedicated where applicable. See Chapter 7 of LCUASS. Page 8 3/1113: There seems to be some confusion on how to properly calculate the sight distance easement. Those shown are not correct and need to be removed. Please call me if you would like to meet for some help. Number: 45 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide 500 feet of Off -Site design (including centerline, flowline, and cross sections) of all streets where future streets will tie into the proposed. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Missing stationing, etc. Number: 55 Created: 11/12/2002 There are many inlets shown too close to the driveways and will not allow for the required curb transitions. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Not enough information provided to verify whether or not their placement is acceptable. Number: 56 Created: 11/12/2002 Sheet CS350 - see redlines. Since the proposed alleys are actually private drives, figure 71-12F should not be included. A simple cross-section would be sufficient or at least remove the term "alleys". Call it Shared Residential Driveways or something to that effect. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please remove all reference to the word "alley" as they are not being dedicated as public alleys. Number. 60 Created: 11/12/2002 Numerous items required by the checklist in Appendix E-4 were either omitted or incorrectly checked off as "included". Many items were checked off as meeting code requirements but in reality the design does not reflect city standards. Correct or provide all the missing items required in the design by Chapter 3 of LCUASS and the checklist in Appendix E-4. Please see LCUASS for all other design requirements. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. See reclined Appendix. Number: 66 Created: 11/13/2002 Design the underpass to meet ADA requirements and the following criteria: 8' high underpass, 16wide 2 foot minimum from top o:` structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. 2' min from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrade or the road must be concrete. Entrance flare taper width 's 2' on each side in 10' of length Wing walls are 45 degrees from face where space allows, roadway fill 4:1 to end of wall. 5% grade max desired and 8.33% max allowed with 5' landings spaced every 30 feet Electric lighting, no skylights. Please provide grading/contour information on sheets on the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet. Provide retaining wall details. Provide a complete design for the sidewalk in the retention pond area including dimensions and radii. Please contact Mark Jackson in Transportation Planning for further requirements. 3/11/3. Repeat comments 2 foot minimum from top of structure to finish grade, except where it lies under the road. 2' min from top of structure to bottom of scarified subgrace or the road must be concrete. Please provide grading/contour information on sheets on the Underpass Plan and Profile Sheet. Provide retaining wall details. Provide a complete design for the sidewalk in the retention pond area including dimensions and radii. Please label all slope ratios as requested in another continued comment. Number: 71 Created: 11/14/2002 The utility plans do not show the same easements around the detention pond that the plat does. Please coordinate the plan sets so that they provide the same information. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please dedicate the utility easement along the ENTIRE length of the west side of the plans Page 9 Number: 138 Created: 3/12/2003 May need school district PR1 signature on Baker laterial per letter from their attorney dated 2/24/2003. This item will need to be addressed prior to going to public hearing. See attached. Number. 139 Correction required on sheet CS001. Number: 140 Provide phasing sheets for the utilities as well as grading, sheets given on CS100,101 do not provide enough detail. Created: 3/12/2003 Created: 3/12/2003 drainage and erosion control phasing sheets. The phasing Number: 141 Created: 3/12/2003 CS100/101: Add a note: Install Type 3 Barricades where all sidewalks terminate at the temporary turnarounds and street stubs. Or something to that effect... Number: 142 Created: 3/12/2003 Please provide Interim and Ultimate plans for County Road 11 and label the sheets accordingly. I realize the interim conditions are still being coordinated but you will need the interim plans before you can go to hearing. Number: 144 Created: 3/12/2003 Ramp shown in driveway of Lot 15 on Flagstaff Place and Lot 6 on Sternwheeler Drive. Number: 145 Created: 3/12/2003 Some ramps shown to close to the drive cuts and do not provide enough room between the two to meet minimum curb transitions. Number: 148 Please provide a signature block for Larimer County. Created: 3/12/2003 Number: 155 Created: 3/12/2003 The midblock cross -pans shown are not to standard. Please see LCUASS. See redlines. Number. 156 All private drives are not clearly labeled as such. Created. 3/12/2003 Number: 168 Created: 3/13/2003 CS300 - A proposed pipe is shown at the corner of 52 and 11, What is it for? I couldn't find it on any other sheet. Number: 169 Created: 3/13/2003 Please provide some grading/spot information that I can tie into the CR52 road plans so that I can make sure that these two projects will work together. Number: 175 See redlines and Appendix E4 for other comments. Page 10 Created: 3/13/2003 Susan Joy - Lind Property comments/questions Page 1 From: "Campbell, Troy' <Troy.Campbell@searbrown.com> To: <sjoy@fcgov.com> Date: 4/27/03 1:59PM Subject: Lind Property comments/questions Susan, Following are a few questions we have regarding the Lind Property, Filing I plat comments. 1. Comment #12 requests a tract table be shown on the plat. The plat contains a note that addresses the maintenance of private streets and drives. Is there something additional that you are looking for? 2. Comments #128&129 regarding the alleys. On the utility drawings we refer to them as Shared Residential Drives. On the plat how should they be referred to? Should they be public or private? Should they be referred to as "access easements"? r,)ot;U We look forward to the further clarification of these comments. We'll see you on Thursday - Thanks, Troy Campbell Sear -Brown 970.482.5922 x. 141 970.482.6368 fax �® Project Comments Sheet City of Fort Collins Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: June 4, 2003 Project: LIND PROPERTY PDP - TYPE I (LUC) AND FINAL COMPLIANCE #39- 94B/C All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: May 28, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Details Number: 59 Created: 11/12/2002 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design 16-2 710 1606 701 711 1607 702 713.1 F 1609L if required by Transportation Planning or - 703 713.2F 1611 706 803 1612 707 1601 1613 708 1602 1413 709 1603 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still missing 711, 713.1 F, 713.2F, 1607, 1612, 1613, 1413, 7-26 and COOT m-609-1 curb and gutter type 2. Also, remove 1604 - it's not correct. Provide the Greeley standard for stamped concrete at access ramps (until the LCUASS detail is updated) and the COOT standard for truncated dome access ramps for design and construction. See attached. 5/3013: Please provide detail 1607 and remove the duplicate 16-2. Topic: Easements Number: 46 Created: 11 /12/2002 The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction occurring on all sides. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. There is off -site grading and construction occuring outside of the platted boundary. Please extend the platted boundary limits or provide all necessary off -site easements. 5/3013: Repeat comment. / i Signature Datte CHECK HERE IFYa" WIS TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS / Plat _ / Site Drainage Report Other !i Z _ Utility _ x Redline Utility _L_ Landscape Page I Luowe>r'>i Topic: General Number: 27 Created: 11 /12/2002 Approval of these plans is contingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple Hill) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addiJon, this developer is responsible for the interim design improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. In the event that the transportation tax is approved, the money is appropriated by the city, and the improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for any improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. However, it could be years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lemay. 3/11/3 and 513013: Keeping this item open. Number: 37 Created: 11 /12/2002 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. 3/11/3 and 5/30/3: Repeat comment. Topic: Intersection Details Number: 161 Created: 3/13/2003 The midblock crossing shown on CS331 must be a minimum 12' wide. See 7.7.5 for depth requirements. Identify the transistion length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would be to have Sternwheeler the through street without mid -block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipper Way. 5/30/3: Please identify the transistion length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. Number: 162 Created: 3/13/2003 Crown the transition in accordance with detail 7-28 from Clipper Way to Sternwheeler Drive. 513013: See sheet CS331. Still have some problems with the elevations Topic: Landscape Number: 74 Created: 11 /14/2002 The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the roundabout, and will be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping in these areas. This landscaping must also meet sight distance requirements (please add a note to the plans). 311113: Repeat comment. Please provide and show on the plans. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. Number: 75 Created: 11 /14/2002 Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please show on plans. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. Number: 212 Created: 6/3/2003 See Appendix E6 for scanability requirements (min font size, overlapping labeling, etc). Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 51 Created: 11 /12/2002 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. What's shown is incomplete. Page 2 5/30/3: Some of the intersection details do not match the elevations shown on the plan and profile sheets. Some details show spot elevations that create a low spot. See redlines. Topic: Plat Number: 16 Created: 11 /6/2002 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 3/11/3: Repeat Comment. 513013: Repeat Comment. Number: 125 Created: 3/11 /2003 From Technical Services: Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal. 5/3013: Repeat comment. Number: 127 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Separate document reception number vacations need to be shown on this plat. 513013: Repeat comment. Number: 203 From Technical Services - North arrow on sheet 2 is wrong Number: 204 From Technical Services - Boundary and Legal close. Number: 205 From Technical Services - In Block 6, is it an alley or tract? Number: 206 From Technical Services - Additional ROW notes. Number: 207 From Technical Services - Show County Road 52 on sheet 3 Created: 6/2/2003 Created: 6/2/2003 Created: 6/2/2003 Created: 6/2/2003 Created: 6/2/2003 Number: 208 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Show distances, section corner plat to S1/4 Section 29. Number: 209 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Solid lines, separate tracts from ROW. Number: 210 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Curve table has incorrect info (this effects lot dimensions). Please review. Number: 246 Created: 6/3/2003 Incorrect radii shown, see redlines. Topic: Site Number: 131 Created: 3/11 /2003 Remove all incorrect sight distance triangles. 5/3013: Label the remaining sight distance triangles and add the sight distance restrictions note to the Site plan. Number: 195 Created: 5/23/2003 Remove all reference to the word "alley". Use private drive instead. Page 3 Topic: Soils Report Number: 147 Created: 3/12/2003 Please provide a Soils Report as required by LCUASS. 5/3013: Repeat comment. Topic: Street Names Number: 134 Created: 3/11/2003 Is it Flagstaff Drive or Flagstaff Place? Not all the plan sets are consistant. 5/3013: Please correct sheet CS116 of the utility plans. See redlines. Topic: Street Sections Number: 151 Created: 3/12/2003 The typical street sections provided are not correct. List each street under each cross section by stationing because some streets have more than one cross section. Label each section with N/S/EM/ and move this sheet up behind the cover sheet or the site plan. 5/30/3: Please label each typical street section with the N/S/E/W direction. Number: 167 Created: 3/13/2003 Remove all reference to "alley". See redlines. 513013: See redlines, sheet CS116 - just one more alley word to take out Topic: Striping Sheet Number: 137 Created: 3/11 /2003 Provide an interim striping sheet and label the ultimate as "ultimate." 513013: Now the striping sheet is labeled as "Ultimate" but the sheet has added the interim condition as well. Please split the sheets into interim and ultimate. Number: 176 Created: 3/13/2003 Please contact Eric Bracke (224-6062) for comments regarding the signing and striping sheet. SI30/3: Have you contacted the City Traffic Engineer for comments on this sheet? Topic: Traffic Study Number: 28 Created: 11 /12/2002 Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for all arterial/arterial intersections. Additional ROW may be required to accommodate a dedicated northbound right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter 8 for intersection requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. The: TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. 3/1113: Repeat comment 5/3013: The roundabout analysis was received and accepted by Eric Bracker. However, the long range analysis is still missing from the TIS (only the short range was provided). Please provide the long range analysis in the TIS. Topic: Underpass Number: 245 Created: 6/3/2003 See detail 1108 for City railing/parapet wall requirements for the bridge/underpass for CRt 1 and add it to the detail sheet. Also, see the city guidelines for pedestrian facilities and AASHTO for railing requirements. The wooden fencing shown does not meet any of these standards, design or safety. Page 4 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW Jim Sell Design Date: 11/5/02 John Barnett 153 W Mountain Ave Fort Collins, CO 80524 ISSUES: Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff 6 Does Traffic Engineer agree with the LOS assessment (existing conditions) of Vine/Lemay? 7 Clearly show the boundary of the ODP - it needs to be the current property line boundary. 8 Note 4 - Please replace the words "if effective" with "in effect". Department: Park Planning Issue Contact: Craig Foreman 13 Park Location - Park location looks good. Still need to see how canal improemnts, grading, will be developed; and impact on the park if any. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Harridan 9 General - In addition to the following comments, please consider the conceptual review comments made on 8/21/00 by Glen Schlueter before submitting the PDP for this project. Since there were no comments on the ODP utility and drainage plans, they were not returned. 10 Drainage Easement - A drainage easement from the Windsor Reservoir and Canal Company (WRCC) will be needed to allow the flows from the site to enter their ditch. Without this easement, there will be no nearby outlet for stormwater from the site. The WRCC has expressed some concern as to the method of release into their ditch. Please contact them to discuss the different options for draining the site into their ditch. Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke 11 Vine and Lemay Level of Service - I have reworked the TIS analysis. The adequate public facilities issue at Vine and Lemay can be resolved with Eastbound/Westbound right turn lanes. These improvements will be the developer's responsibility. 12 Intersection Level of Service - The intersection of 52/11, Country Club/11, Lemay/Country Club fail level of service and adequate public facilities requirements. We need to discuss this further. Page I Topic: Utility Number: 13 Created: 11 /5/2002 See 16.3.1 for access ramp requirements. Provide directional ramps at all intersections. Access ramps must line up with the ramp across the street on all T-Intersections. Must provide a separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. In addition, an access ramp shown lining up with a sidewalk connection must be the same width as the sidewalk it connects to. Remove the access ramp shown at the street widening. See redlines. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. The access ramp shown lining up with the sidewalk on Brightwater Drive must be the same width as the sidewalk it is providing access to. Number: 54 Created: 11 /12/2002 See detail 7-24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. 3/1113: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the min PC to PCR. Show and label R1, R2, R3, W and flowline as required by 7-24. 5/3013: Repeat comment. Please provide a detail (per 7-24) and show/label R1-R3, W. Number: 56 Created: 11/12/2002 Sheet CS350 - see redlines. Since the proposed alleys are actually private drives, figure 71-12F should not be included. A simple cross-section would be sufficient or at least remove the term "alleys". Call it Shared Residential Driveways or something to that effect. 311113 and 513013: Repeat comment but now sheet CS116. Please remove all reference to the word "alley" as they are not being dedicated as public alleys. Number: 169 Created: 3/13/2003 Please provide some grading/spot information that I can tie into the CR52 road plans so that I can make sure that these two projects will work together. 5/30/3: As of our presubmittal meeting, you had the good suggestion of adding spot elevations at the PCs to make sure the two sets of plans line up. Unfortunately, the PCs are showing two different spot elevations - see CR52 and Forescastle for example. Number: 175 See redlines and Appendix E4 for other comments. Number: 213 Cover Sheet, Note 14 - Add the variances to the street separation. the variance was granted for. Number: 214 Cover Sheet - Add note # 10 from the CR 52 plans here. Created: 3/13/2003 Created: 6/3/2003 List the code section, the standard and then what Created: 6/3/2003 Number: 215 Created: 6/3/2003 CS115 - Remove all references to alleys and put Private Drive (or?) instead. Number: 216 Created: 6/3/2003 CS116 - Relabel Alley as Private Drives, all instances, all sheets. Do not ghost the proposed barricades. Will need to contact Ward Standford or Eric Bracke to see if they have any comments on the striping sheet. They usually prefer to have the interim and ultimate striping shown on two separate sheets. If they are ok with this as shown, then please relabel sheet as "Interim and Ultimate Striping" and label the interim flowline or edge of pavement so that it is as clear as possible. Number: 217 Created: 6/3/2003 CS131 and all others that apply - the proposed ramps and sidewalks need to show how they tie into existing ramps and sidewalks along the west side of CR11. Show your removals so that it is very clear what is staying and what is coming out. This will help Street Oversizing bid out and construct this road in the future. Page 5 Number: 218 CS132 - See redlines. Created: 6/3/2003 Number: 219 Created: 6/3/2003 CS200 - See Appendix E6 for scanability requirements (min font size, overlapping, etc). This sheet is a little difficult to read and/or reproduce. Number: 220 Created: 6/3/2003 CS221, CS222 - Same comment as sheet CS200. Also, a 12' crosspan is labeled as 6'. Number: 221 CS225 - See redlines. Created: 6/3/2003 Number: 222 Created: 6/3/2003 CS260 - See redlines. Overlapping labeling, correct the term "alley", correct note 4, show barricades. Number: 223 Created: 6/3/2003 CS261 - See redlines. Overlapping labeling. Number: 224 Created: 6/3/2003 CS280 - Overlapped label, change the term "alley" to "private drive". Number: 225 Created: 6/3/2003 CS300 - See redlines. Provide directional ramps at all street corners. Show how the proposed sidewalk/ramps ties into the existing and what will come out. Number: 226 Created: 6/3/2003 CS302 - conflict in the crosspan notation/size among the sheets. The access ramp to the proposed park must be the same width as the sidewalk (repeat comment). Number: 227 Created: 6/3/2003 CS303 - same as above. Correct overlapping labeling. Spot elevation conflict with the itnersection details. Number: 228 Created: 6/3/2003 CS305 - Overlapping labeling. Number: 229 Created: 6/3/2003 CS308 - Overlapping labeling. Number: 230 Created: 6/3/2003 CS308 - Spot elevation conflicts with the CR52 plans. Number: 231 Created: 6/3/2003 CS311 - See redlines. Spot elevations don't match the intersection details. Please look at the L for Sternwheeler Drives Right Flowline. Is this right? Number: 232 Created: 6/3/2003 CS312 - Place the detail of the street widening here as requested in an earlier comment. Also, spot elevation conflicts with intersection details. Correct overlapping labeling. Number: 233 Created: 6/3/2003 See redlines. Qs on stationing at the bulb out. Number: 234 Created: 6/3/2003 Page 6 CS330 - Some of the transistions on the next few pages are pretty far back. Please transistion a little closer to the intersection. Or is there a reason that is occurring so far back? Missing a spot. Correct the ramp note detail. Name the unnamed street. Correct the ramp width. Number: 235 Created: 6/3/2003 CS331 - See redlines and previous comments regarding this sheet. Correct the ramp detail in the Legend. Number: 236 Created: 6/3/2003 CS332 - Some spot elevation problems. Correct the ramp detail in the Legend. See redlines. Number: 237 Created: 6/3/2003 CS333 - Correct the ramp detail in the Legend. Missing spots, problem spots. Number: 238 Created: 6/3/2003 CS400 - See appendix E6 Number: 239 Created: 6/3/2003 CS401 - Correct the street cut note to read: Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with City street repair standards. Number: 240 Created: 6/3/2003 C3402 - Add the street cut note. Number: 241 Created: 6/3/2003 CS601 - Correct the term Alley to read Private Drive Number: 242 Created: 6/3/2003 CS700 - Correct the ramp detail in the legend. Number: 243 Created: 6/3/2003 CS703 - Provide a curve table for the other two legs of the sidewalk connections so that they can be laid out in the field. Only the information for the one leading to the underpass on CR11 was given. Number: 244 CS704 - Overlapping labeling. Correct the ramp in the legend. Page 7 Created: 6/3/2003 w,::Ate STAFF PROJECT REVIEW VIGNETTE STUDIOS Date: 6/9/2003 TERENCE HOAGLUND 144 N. MASON ST. #2 FT. COLLINS, CO 80524 Staff has reviewed your submittal for LIND PROPERTY PDP - TYPE I (LUC) AND FINAL COMPLIANCE #39-94B/C, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Topic: Site Issue Contact: Bob Barkeen Number: 250 Created: 6/9/2003 The applicant and mineral extraction company have agreed on a future location for an oil well. The location of this well is not included within this phase of the project, rather within phase II of the project, next to the designated neighborhood center_ This future center will serve the overall Lind development. It is very likely the well location will prohibit the development of the neighborhood center, making the Lind project out of compliance with the LMN zone district development standards. The second phase of the Lind PDP will need to include a minor amendment to the Lind ODE, showing the relocation of this neighborhood centermost likely northwest of the intersection of Bar Harbor and Brightwater Drives. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Details Number: 59 Created: 11/12/2002 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design: 16-2 710 1606 701 711 1607 702 713.1 F 1609L if required by Transportation Planning or - 703 7132F 1611 706 803 1612 707 1601 1613 708 1602 1413 709 1603 3/11/3- Repeat comment Still missing 711, 713.11', 713.2F, 1607, 1612, 1613, 1413, 7-26 and CDOT m-609-1 curb and gutter type 2. Also, remove 1604 - it's not correct. Provide the Greeley standard for stamped concrete at access ramps (until the LCUASS detail is updated) and the CDOT standard for truncated dome access ramps for design and construction. See attached. 5/30/3. Please provide detail 1607 and remove the duplicate 16-2. RESPONSE. We have provided 1607 and removed the duplicate of 16-2, Topic: Easements; Number: 46 Created: 11 /12/2002 The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction occurring on all sides. 3/11/3 Repeat comment. There is off -site grading and construction occurring outside of the platted boundary. Please extend the platted boundary limits or provide all necessary off -site easements. 5/30/3- Repeat comment. Page I RESPONSE. The client is aware of this and is obtaining these easements. When it is recorded we will put the reception number on the plat Topic: General Number: 27 Created: 11 /12/2002 Approval of these plans iscontingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple Hill) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addition, this developer is responsible for the interim design improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. In the evert that the transportation tax is approved, the money is appropriated by the city, and the improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for any improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. Howeverit could be years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lernay. 3/11/3 and 5/30/3: Keeping this item open. Number: 37 Created: 11 / 12/2002 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. 3/11/3 and 5/30/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: The grades are now coordinated. Topic: Intersection Details Number: 161 Created: 3/ 13/2003 The midblock crossing shown on CS331 must be a minimum 12' wide. See 7.7.5 for depth requirements. Identify the transition length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would be to have Sternwheeler the through street without mid -block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipper Way. 5/30/3. Please Identify the transition length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. RESPONSE: We have provided this on the intersection detail as discussed Number: 162 Created: 3/13/2003 Crown the transition in accordance with detail 7-28 from Clipper Way to Sternwheeler Drive. 5/30/3: See sheet CS331. Still have some problems with the elevations. RESPONSE. These have been corrected Topic: Landscape Number. 74 Created: 11/14/2002 The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the roundabout, and will be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping in these areas. This landscaping must also meet sight distance requirements (please add a note to the plans) 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Please provide and show on the plans 5/30/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: See Vignette Studios comments Number: 75 Created: 11/14/2002 Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. 3/1113: Repeat comment. Please show on plans. Page 2 5/30/3. Repeat comment. RESPONSE: See Vignette Studios comments Number: 212 Created: 6/3/2003 See Appendik E6 for scanability requirements (min font size, overlapping labeling, etc). RESPONSE. See Vignette Studios comments Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 51 Created: 11/12/2002 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. What's shown is incomplete. 5/30/3: Some of the intersection details do not match the elevations shown on the plan and profile sheets. Some details show spot elevations that create a low spot. See redlines. RESPONSE. We have corrected the Intersection Details Topic: Plat Number. 16 Created: 11 /6/2002 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 3/1113: Repeat Comment. 5/30/3. Repeat Comment. RESPONSE The client is aware of these requirements and is obtaining them. The existing sanitary sewer easement will be abandoned through the development agreement. The Irrigation easement is being worked on now. Number. 125 Created: 3/11 /2003 From Technical Services: Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: These have been addressed per redlines Number: 127 Created: 3/11/2003 From Technical Services: Separate document reception number vacations need to be shown on this plat. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE: These will be provided when the documents are recorded Number: 203 From Technical Services - North arrow on sheet 2 is wrong. RESPONSE: This has been corrected Number. 204 From Technical Services - Boundary and Legal close. RESPONSE: Thanks Number. 205 From Technical Services - In Block 6, is it an alley or tract? RESPONSE. It is a Trac: Created: 6/2/2003 Created: 6/2/2003 Created: 5/2/2003 Page 3 Number: 206 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Additional ROW notes. RESPONSE. Done Number: 207 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Show County Road 52 on sheet 3 RESPONSE: County Road 53 is shown Number: 208 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Show distances, section corner plat to S1/4 Section 29. RESPONSE: This is now shown Number: 209 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Solid lines, separate tracts from ROW. RESPONSE. This has been done. ' Number: 210 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Curve table has incorrect info (this effects lot dimensions). Please review. RESPONSE: This has been changed Number: 2461 Incorrect radii shown, see redlines. RESPONSE: This has been changed Topic: Site Number. 131 Remove all incorrect sight distance triangles. Created: 6/3/2003 Created: 3/11/2003 5/30/3: Label the remaining sight distance triangles and add the sight distance restrictions note to the Site plan. RESPONSE: See Vignette Studios comments Number: 195 Created: 5/23/2003 Remove all reference to the word "alley". Use private drive instead. RESPONSE. See Vignette Studios comments Topic: Soils Report Number: 147 Created. 3/12/2003 Please provide a Soils Report as required by LCUASS. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. RESPONSE. Will be provided Topic: StreetAiames Number: 134 Created: 3/11/2003 Is it Flagstaff Drive or Flagstaff Place? Not all the plan sets are consistent. 5/30/3: Please correct sheet CS 116 of the utility plans. See redlines. RESPONSE. This has been corrected to Flagstaff Place Page 4 Topic: Street Sections Number: 151 Created: 3/12/2003 The typical street section:, provided are not correct- List each street under each cross section by stationing because some streets have more than one cross section. Label each section with N/S/E/W and move this sheet up behind the cover sheet or the site plan. 5/30/3: Please label each typical street section with the N/S/E/W direction. RESPONSE: This has been done and type of curb labeled on Plan and Profile sheets. Number: 167 Created: 3/13/2003 Remove all reference to 'alley". See redlines. 5/30/3: See redlines, sheet CS116 - just one more alley word to take out. RESPONSE: This has been done. Topic: Striping Sheet {Number: 137 Created: 3/11/2003 Provide an interim striping sheet and label the ultimate as "ultimate." 5/30/3: Now the striping sheet is labeled as "Ultimate" but the sheet has added the interim condition as well. Please split the sheets into interim and ultimate. RESPONSE. As discussed we have changed the note to Striping Sheet with more notes regarding interim and final Number: 176' Created: 3/13/2003 Please contact Eric Bracke (224-6062) for comments regarding the signing and striping sheet. 5/30/3. Have you contacted the City Traffic Engineer for comments on this sheet? RESPONSE: I have: contacted Eric, he has no comments on both the site and County Road 52 Topic: Traffic Study Number. 28 Created: 11 /12/2002 Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for all arterial/arterial intersectiois. Additional ROW may be required to accommodate a dedicated northbound right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter 8 for intersection requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. 3/11/3. Repeat comment. 5/30/3 The roundabout analysis was received and accepted by Eric Bracke. However, the long-range analysis is still missing from the TIS (only the short range was provided). Please provide the long-range analysis in the TIS. RESPONSE. See Matt Cellch Responses Topic: Underpass Number: 245 Created: 6/3/2003 See detail 1108 for City railing/parapet wall requirements for the bridge/underpass for CR11 and add it to the detail sheet. Also, see the city guidelines for pedestrian facilities and AASHTO for railing requirements. The wooden fencing shown does not meet any of these standards, design or safety. RESPONSE: We are providing this as discussed- On the west side we have raised to the retaining wall to approxlrnately 27 inches above proposed grade and on the east side of county road 11 we have provided a railing Page 5 Topic: Utility Number: 13 Created: 11 /5/2002 See 16.3.1 for access ramp requirements. Provide directional ramps at all intersections. Access ramps must line up with the ramp across the street on all T-Intersections. Must provide a separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice. 3/11/3 Repeat comment. In addition, an access ramp shown lining up with a sidewalk connection must be the same width as the sidewalk it ccnnects to. Remove the access ramp shown at the street widening. See redlines. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. The access ramp shown lining up with the sidewalk on Brightwater Drive must be the same width as the sidewalk it is providing access to. RESPONSE. According to your detail the notes say to match the sidewalk for width- So the contractor should follow that instead of the drawing as the handicap ramps in the drawing are never to scale- Number: 54 Created: 11/12/2002 See detail 7'24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the min PC to PCR. Show and label R1, R2, R3, W and flowline as required by 7-24. 5/30/3- Repeat comment. Please provide a detail (per 7-24) and show/label R1-R3, W. RESPONSE. NEED TO CHECK. Number,:56 f Created:11/12/2002 Sheet CS350 - see redlines. Since the proposed alleys are actually private drives, figure 71-12F should not be included. A simple cross. -section would be sufficient or at least remove the term "alleys Call it Shared Residential Driveways or something to that effect. 3/11/3 and 5/30/3: Repeat comment but now sheet CS116. Please remove all reference to the word "alley" as they are not being dedicated as public alleys. RESPONSE: This has been removed. Number: 169 Created: 3/13/2003 Please provide some grading/spot information that I can tie into the CR52 road plans so that I can make sure that these two projects will work together. 5/30/3. As of our pre -submittal meeting, you had the good suggestion of adding spot elevations at the PCs to make sure the two sets of plans line up. Unfortunately, the PCs are showing two different spot elevations - see CR52 and Forecastle for example. RESPONSE. These have been checked and modified. Number: 175 Created. 3/ 13/2003 See redlines and Appendix E4 for other comments. RESPONSE_ This Is an old comment I think we are past this now. Number: 213 Created: 6/3/2003 Cover Sheet, Note 14 - Add the variances to the street separation. List the code section, the standard and then what the variance was granted for. RESPONSE. We have done this Number: 214 Created: 6/3/2003 Cover Sheet - Add note h'10 from the CR 52 plans here. RESPONSE: This has been done - Page 6 Number: 21 Created: 6/3/2003 CS115 -Remove all references to alleys and put Private Drive (or?) instead. RESPONSE_ This has been done( 1 hope we go them all) Number: 216 ' Created: 6/3/2003 CS116 - Relabel Alley as Private Drives, all instances, all sheets. Do not ghost the proposed barricades. Will need to contact Ward Standford or Eric Bracke to see if they have any comments on the striping sheet. They usually prefer to have the interim and ultimate striping shown on two separate sheets. If they are ok with this as shown, then please relabel sheet as "Interim and Ultimate Striping" and Zabel the Interim flowline or edge of pavement so that it is as clear as possible. RESPONSE: Eric is ok with this Number. 217 Created. 6/3/2003 CS131 and all others that apply - the proposed ramps and sidewalks need to show how they tie into existing ramps and sidewalks along the west side of CR11. Show your removals so that it is very clear what is staying and what is coming out. This will help Street Oversizing bid out and construct this road in the future. RESPONSE_ This has been done- The only remaining ramps are on Brightwater. Number. 218 Created: 6/3/2003 CS132 - See redlines. RESPONSE. These have been addressed Number: 219 Created: 6/3/2003 CS200 - See Appendix E3 for scanability requirements (min font size, overlapping, etc). This sheet is a little difficult to read and/or reproduce. RESPONSE: We have done our best Number. 220 Created. 6/3/2003 CS221, CS222 - Same comment as sheet CS200. Also, a 12' crosspan is labeled as 6'. These have been addressed Number: 221 Created: 6/3/2003 CS225 - See redlines. RESPONSE. These have been addressed Number: 222 Created: 6/3/2003 CS260 - See redlines. Overlapping labeling, correct the term "alley", correct note 4, show barricades. RESPONSE. These have been addressed Number: 223 CS261 - See redlines. Overlapping labeling. RESPONSE. These have been addressed Number. 224 CS280 - Overlapped label, change the term "alley" to "private drive". RESPONSE: These have been addressed Page 7 Created. 6/3/2003 Created: 6/3/2003 Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Mark Jackson 1 Does Traffic Engineer agree with the LOS assessment (existing conditions) of Vine/Lemay? 2 • Does developer agree to make improvements to roadways identified in TIS to satisfy LOS in short term period? 3 Will project make improvements to CR 11 & CR 52(Minor Arterial) along their frontage as shown on MSP? Not stated clearly in TIS or documentation. 4 Developer will be responsible for building or escrowing funds for bridges and street connections across canal. 5 Request that additional width be preserved for bike lanes (6'each side) on the northern east/west: Connector roadway internal to the site. This will be an important bike connection to the future park site and trail (activity areas per LUC). Page 2 Number: 225 Created: 6/3/2003 CS300 - See redlines. Provide directional ramps at all street corners. Show how the proposed sidewalk/ramps ties into the existing and what will come out. RESPONSE. This has been done. Number: 226 Created: 6/3/2003 CS302 - conflict in the crosspan notation/size among the sheets. The access ramp to the proposed park must be the same width as the sidewalk (repeat comment). RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number: 227' Created: 6/3/2003 CS303 - same as above. Correct overlapping labeling. Spot elevation conflict with the intersection details. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected Number: 228 C3305 - Overlapping labeling. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number: 229 CS308 - Overlapping labeling. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. r Number: 230 CS308 - Spot elevation conflicts with the CR52 plans. RESPONSE. These have bee corrected. Created: 6/3/2003 Created: 6/3/2003 Created: 6/3/2003 Number: 231" Created: 6/3/2003 CS311 - See redlines. Spot elevations don't match the intersection details. Please look at the L for Sternwheeler Drives Right Bowline. Is this right? RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number: 232 Created: 6/3/2003 CS312 - Place the detail of the street widening here as requested in an earlier comment- Also, spot elevation conflicts with intersection details. Correct overlapping labeling. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected Number: 233 z Created: 6/3/2003 See redlines- Qs on stationing at the bulb out. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number: 234 Created: 6/3/2003 CS330 - Some of the transitions on the next few pages are pretty far back. Please transition a little closer to the intersection. Or is there a reason that is occurring so far back? Missing a spot. Correct the ramp note detail. Name the unnamed street. Correct the ramp width. RESPONSE. `Ne have shortened which transitions we could. See comment above on ramp detail. Number: 235 Created: 6/3/2003 CS331 - See redlines and previous comments regarding this sheet. Correct the ramp detail in the Legend. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Page 8 Number: 236 Created: 6/3/2003 C3332 - Some spot eleva:ion problems. Correct the ramp detail in the Legend. See redlines. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number: 237 Created: 6/3/2003 CS333 - Cdrrecl the ramp detail in the Legend. Missing spots, problem spots. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number:238 CS400 - See appendix E6 Created: 6/3/2003 RESPONSE: We have removed the typical that had the scanning Problems. Number: 239 CS401 - Correct the street cut note to read: Created: 6/3/2003 Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with City street repair standards. RESPONSE These have bee corrected. Number: 240 CS402 - Add the street cut note. RESPONSE. These have bee corrected. Number: 241 CS601 - Correct the term Alley to read Private Drive RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Number: 242 CS700 - Correct the ramp detail in the legend. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Created: 6/3/2003 Created. 6/3/2003 Created: 6/3/2003 Number. 243 Created: 6/3/2003 CS703 - Provide a curve table for the other two legs of the sidewalk connections so that they can be laid out in the field. Only the information for the one leading to the underpass on CR11 was given. RESPONSE: Done Number: 244 Created: 6/3/2003 CS704 - Overlapping labeling. Correct the ramp in the legend. RESPONSE: These have bee corrected. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Monica Moore Topic: General Number: 185 Created: 5/16/2003 Show all street lighting on landscape plan and utility plans. Streetlights must maintain minimum clearances to streetlights.. RESPONSE: This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore. Number. 186 Created: 5/ 16/2003 Page 9 Add streetlight to the northeast corner of lot 8 - Forecastle Drive. RESPONSE: This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore Number: 187 Created: 5/1612003 Streetlight should be shown on plans at the intersection of Clipper Way and Sternwheeler Drive on the southeast corner of the intersection. RESPONSE_ This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore - Number: 188 Created: 5/16/2003 Eliminate streetlights should shown on plans between lots 6/7 and lots 16/17 on Bow Side Drive. Instead streetlight should be located between lots 4/5 on Bow Side Drive. RESPONSE- This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore.. Number: 189 Created: 5/16/2003 Streetlight should be shown on plans between lots 2/3 - Block 8, Clipper Way. RESPONSE: This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore. Number: 190 Created: 5/16/2003 Streetlights should be shown on plans to both the southwest corner of Block 12, Tract A and the southeast corner of Block 12, Tract A along the north side of County Road 52. RESPONSE- This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore. Number: 191 Created. 5/16/2003 Streetlight should be shown on plans between lots 9/10 - Block 8 along Bar Harbor Drive. RESPONSE- This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore Number: 192 Created: 5/16/2003 For Correct spacing regLirements of streetlights, the streetlight shown near the pedestrian path at County Road 52, should be located approximately 90-feet east, between lots 12/13. RESPONSE: This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore.: Number: 193 Created: 5/16/2003 In order to prevent future problems encountered with installation of electric lines, street trees, sidewalk, landscaping, etcare not to be Installed along the east side of Bar Harbor Drive or along the north side of Brightwater Drive east of Fairwater until such time as these parcels of land develop. RESPONSE: This has been done Topic: Site Number. 196 Created. 5/27/2003 All electric facilities must be shown on utility plans. This includes electric line locations, vaults, streetlights, etc. 'Typical Layout' is not sufficient. Electric facilities have been coordinated with Sear Brown and must be shown on utility plans RESPONSE. This has been corrected with the new redline from Monica Moore. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Harridan Topic: County Road 52 Improvements Number. 86 Created: 11 / 19/2002 6/3/03 Please refer to reclined plans for comments on the CR52 plans. Page 10 RESPONSE: These have been corrected Please specify when the shown storm sewers will be built on the phasing plan. RESPONSE. We have removed the storm sewer in County Road 52- It will be built with those plans Call out and label contour elevations on the grading plan. RESPONSE- We have change the line weights you should be able to see them Call out pedestrian box invert on road profile. RESPONSE. We will show in County Road 52 . Also see the profile for the box in the 700 series of sheets. Please explain how the 54"pipe crossing of CR52 sized. According to the study completed on June 2nd by ACE the Boxelder Creek masterplan a bridge crossing is needed for the crossing of storm flows under CR 52 in the future. The 100-year flows anticipated for this section are 810 cfs of storm flows and 125 cfs of irrigation flows. The Developer shall be required to post an escrow for half of the future bridge crossing of CR 52. Please provide an estimate of the cost of such a crossing. RESPONSE We are not going to build this now and wait for things to settle down. Please provide ditch company signatures on the plans showing the outfall pipe into the Canal No.8 Ditch. RESPONSE: This will be done with mylars Please call out top of pipe elevation for the ELCO water line crossing of the storm sewer on CR 52. RESPONSE: All the storm sewer is in the eastern portion of CR 52, The 24 Inch dia. Water line turns south out of CR 52 before it crosses the storm sewer. Topic: Drainage Plans Number: 248 Created. 6/4/2003 Please provide a design and a detail for the emergency spillway on the detention pond. RESPONSE. This is shown on sheet CS223 Please design a low flow channel in the detention pond taking trickle flows from the storm sewer points of outfall draining into the pond to the pond outlet structure. RESPONSE. This has been done Please consolidate all details to the detail sheets at the end of the plan set. RESPONSE. As discussed to keep all the notes together these are in the front with the erosion control notes. Topic: Erosion Control Number: 87 Created: 11/19/2002 3/6/03 Please add a note requiring all disturbed areas to be re -seeded and mulched. RESPONSE. This has been done 5/28/03 Plan is OK. Topic: Grading Plans Number. 249 Created: 6/6/2003 Please show proposed contours on the grading plan currently only 5-foot contours are called out. Call out block numbers on the grading plan. RESPONSE- This is done Avoid back yard swales that exceed 3 lots whenever possible. Page t L RESPONSE: As discussed there should be no backyard swales they drain to the front. Call out pipe inverts and all low point elevations. RESPONSE- We have called out the low point elevations an the grading plan Topic: Overall Utility Plans Number. 94 Created: 11/19/2002 6/4/03 Please add size type of all proposed and existing facilities an the overall utility plan RESPONSE- We put a general note on CS400 stating material types. Sizes are noted Topic: Phasing Plans Number. 247 Created. 6/4/2003 Please call out the size and dimensions of the proposed temporary swales on the phasing plan. Please indicate that these will be seeded and maintained in operational function by the developer. RESPONSE. This is done Will the area that is outside of Phase 1 be disturbed. If yes please indicate where and add a note requiring all of that area to be reseeded. RESPONSE- The entire site will be overloted and the site erosion control notes will hold therefore disturbed areas will be taken care of. Provide a detail of the capping that will be done to the storm sewer on the phasing plan when there is no downstream outfall connection. RESPONSE. We have noted this on the plan and profile sheet for the future filings to the north. I don't think there should be any others to be capped because they should be emptying into the temporary swales. Provide erosion protection at the points where temporary swales enter the detention pond. RESPONSEThis is shown an the plans The inlets and storm sewers on CR 52 will be built with the CR 52 plans. Please add a note on the phasing plans indicating that. RESPONSE: We have removed these from the phasing Plan. Topic: Underpass Plans Number. 88 Created: 11 /19/2002 6/3/03 Please show Baker Lateral on the plans. Done RESPONSE. Done It seems that the underpass in CR 11 will conflict with the relocated irrigation line. Please show an irrigation line profile and detail how it will cross the underpass. RESPONSE. See Baker lateral profile Where will low flows from underpass be directed to ? RESPONSE As discussed TST says the Parks Department will take care of this Owners of the irrigation line will need to sign of on the underpass plans. RESPONSE. This will be done with Mylars Page 12 Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Topic: General Number: 198 Created: 5/27/2003 My only concern is the potential pedestrian safety hazard presented by the ped connection shown on LCR 52. This connection to the north-s de sidewalk is roughly aligned with a similar ped. connection in Gillespie Farm/Maple Hill. This might invite ped's to cross mid -block across a 21. Arterial roadway. Not a deal breaker but a situation we might want to monitor. Red -lined drawings are available at the Current Planning front desk. Be sure and return all of your reclined plans when you re -submit. If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750. Yours Truly, Bob Barkeen City Planner Page 13 REVISION COMMENT SHEET REC. D DATE: June 26, 2003 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #39-94B LIND PROPERTY PDP FINAL COMPLIANCE — TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen no later than the staff review meeting: July 16, 2003 No Comment aProblems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** Bvu�oAllY � LEGAL CGoSE, SC1003 LT- A/ T,A.vcE �cJ�'1Tt U��s — ,�rJ CIiV�7 Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS =t Iat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape Date City of Fort Collins SEAR•BROWN June 26, 2003 Susan Joy 281 N. College Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Lind Property, Phase 1 FCP Deal' Susan, Please find attached the response to comments. 209 South Meldrum Fort Col lins, CO 80521 970.482,5922 phone 970482.6368 fax www,searbrown.com The largest fundemental change regards County Road 52. Please, note that we have stopped the Construction of County Road 52 at the Section Line and have provided a transition by striping the road section to the west rather that extending the transition to the east over the No. 8 Ditch. The transition to the west does meet LUCASS Standards therefore a variance is not being requested for this. I believe we should be inn good shape with the reply to your comments. Any Questions please call. Sincerely, YAlEInA-BROWN lcn-Morley Attachment CC: Yvonne Seaman Centex Homes 'Terrance I Ioaglund Vignette Studios r Project Comments Sheet ® of Fort Collins Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: July 23, 2003 Project: LIND PROPERTY PDP - TYPE I (LUC) AND FINAL COMPLIANCE #39- 94B/C All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: July 16, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: CR52 Number: 269 Created: 7/16/2003 Correct the ramps shown in the legend of pages 001, 302, 305, and 306. Should all be directional. Number: 270 CS100 - Correct the overlapped labeling. Created: 7/16/2003 Number: 271 Created: 7/16/2003 CS303 - Lind Filing i does not show the proposed 36" storm line as currently labeled. Should this be Filing 2? Number: 272 Created: 7/16/2003 CS305 - The proposed 24" storm line is not shown in Lind 1st fling as labeled. Should this be 2nd filing? Number: 273 CS308, 309 - Correct the overlapping labeling. Created: 7/16/2003 Number: 274 Created: 7/16/2003 CS601 - Repeat, provide the detail for the waterline stub and thrust block. Number: 275 Created: 7/16/2003 CS702 - Block out the background contours for better clarity on the labeling - see redlines. Number: 276 Created: 7/16/2003 CS703 - Overlapping labeling, see redlines. Number: 277 Created: 7/16/2003 ;nature I CHECK HERE Plat Utility Date IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Site Drainage Report Other_ Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 See attached for additional note requirements for the underpass. All the details for the underpass shown on Lind, first filing, need to be shown on these plans as well. The underpass must be designed in accordance with detail 1108. The underpass details shown on sheets 704, 706, 707 do not meet the city's requirements. Number: 278 Created: 7/16/2003 CS708 - How thick is the cast in place topping for the pathway? Please label and dimension. Repeat comment. Topic: Easements Number: 46 Created: 11 /12/2002 The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction occurring on all sides. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. There is off -site grading and construction occuring outside of the platted boundary. Please extend the platted boundary limits or provide all necessary off -site easements. 5/30/3, 7/14/3: Repeat comment. Topic: General Number: 27 Created: 11/12/2002 Approval of these plans is contingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple Hill) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addition, this developer is responsible for the interim design improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. In the event that the transportation tax is approved, the money is appropriated by the city, and the improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for any improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. However, it could be years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lemay. 3/1113, 5130/3, 7/14/3: Keeping this item open. Topic: Intersection Details Number: 161 Created: 3/13/2003 The midblock crossing shown on CS331 must be a minimum 12' wide. See 7.7.5 for depth requirements. Identify the transistion length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. Perhaps the better design would be to have Sternwheeler the through street without mid -block crosspans since the stop condition is at Clipper Way. 5/30/3: Please identify the transition length from outflow to inflow curb and gutter on the crosspans and label that it is to go to outflow C&G. 7/14/3: Conflicting spot elevations, see redlines. Topic: Plat Number: 16 Created: 11 /6/2002 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 3/11/3, 5/30/3, 7/14/3: Repeat Comment. Number: 125 Created: 3/11 /2003 From Technical Services: Many bearing and distances missing. Please review before the next submittal. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. 7/16/3: Repeat comment. Several distances missing. Some lot line distance questions - see redlines. Number: 127 Created: 3/11 /2003 From Technical Services: Separate document reception number vacations need to be shown on this plat. 5/30/3: Repeat comment Page 2 Project Comments Sheet City of Fort Collins Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: November 20, 2002 Project: LIND PROPERTY PDP - TYPE II (LUC) #39-94B All comments must be received by BOB BARKEEN in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: November 13, 2002 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Cross Sections 57 These sections must reflect the site grading. Is what is shown how the proposed grade is actually tying into existing? 72 Quite a number of cross -sections are incomplete. Please provide all missing information. Topic: Details 59 Update all the old details to the new. Ptovide these details and any other as required by the design: 16-2 710 .701 711 702 713.1E 703 713.2E 706 803 707 1601 .708 1602 709 1603 ,1606 1607 1609L. if required by Transportation Planning or - 1611 1612 1613 1413 •--�tt t � t. I i 1, r�`I� f ( -r ..'/ Topic: General 21 The irrigation line running north -south along County Road 11 must be located out of the ROW and the 15' utility easement and it must be in it's own dedicated easement. This easement may be dedicated on the plat or provided by separate document. Regardless of how its dedicated, the owners of the line must sign the final plat and utility plans before the City will approve the mylars. In addition, Boxelder Sanitation District and ELCO Water District must sign the utility plan mylars before being routed for City signatures. 27 ---_ Approval of these plans is contingent upon the approval of the design of CRs 11 and 52. This development must be coordinated with the Gillespie development (Maple Hill) to the south. All streets at CR 52 must align with Gillespie's proposed streets. In addi' tj�ry, thi�veloper is responsible for the interim design improvements to the Vineand Le ay Sl e L I ( D tel CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _ l Site I Drainage Report _� Other Utility -_�� Redline Utility I Landscape Page 1 Number: 204 Created: 6/2/2003 From Technical Services - Boundary and Legal close. Number: 267 Created: 7/16/2003 Sheets 2 and 3 require a few labels to be oriented to the reader. Number: 268 Created: 7/16/2003 Correct the trail access to read "Public Access Easement". Topic: Traffic Study Number: 28 Created: 11 /12/2002 Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout analysis must be provided for all arterial/arterial intersections. Additional ROW may be required to accommodate a dedicated northbound right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter 8 for intersection requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. 3/11/3: Repeat comment 5/30/3: The roundabout analysis was received and accepted by Eric Brackie. However, the long range analysis is still missing from the TIS (only the short range was provided). Please provide the long range analysis in the TIS. 7/14/3: The response letter from Matt Dehlich was received and accepted by Eric Brackie in lieu of the long range analysis. This item is now closed. Topic: Underpass Number: 245 Created: 6/3/2003 See detail 1108 for City railing/parapet wall requirements for the bridge/underpass for CR11 and add it to the detail sheet. Also, see the city guidelines for pedestrian facilities and AASHTO for railing requirements. The wooden fencing shown does not meet any of these standards, design or safety. 7/16/3: Please see the attached for additional notes that need to be added regarding product specs, etc. Also, there are some conflicting notesidetails on the underpass sheets. See redlines. Topic: Utility Number: 54 Created: 11/12/2002 See detail 7-24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. 3/11/3: Repeat comment. Still not meeting the min PC to PCR. Show and label R1, R2, R3, W and flowline as required by 7-24. 5/30/3: Repeat comment. Please provide a detail (per 7-24) and show/label R1-R3, W 7/14/3: The detail has been provided as requested, however, the flowline (R2) is missing and R3 in not correct. Please show and label R2 and R3. Also, for clarity, remove the dimensioning (R1, R2, R3, W) off the plan view (it's already shown in the detail). Number: 217 Created: 6/3/2003 CS131 and all others that apply - the proposed ramps and sidewalks need to show how they tie into existing ramps and sidewalks along the west side of CR11. Show your removals so that it is very clear what is staying and what is coming out. This will help Street Oversizing bid out and construct this road in the future. 7/14/3: Your response on the redlines states that the removals should be "intuitive". As easy as that sounds, it doesn't work that way in the real world. What Is being constructed and/or removed must be clearly shown on the plan & profile and utility sheets so that when it gets built 3 to 5 years in the future, there's no question what supposed to be done. Basically, if it's not on the plans, the contractors won't do it and our inspectors can't enforce it. Take the curb and gutter removal note off the striping sheet and putting it on the plan and profile and utility sheets and clearly show what is being removed and replaced (right now the plans are a little vague). Page 3 Number: 219 Created: 6/3/2003 CS200 - See Appendix E6 for scanability requirements (min font size, overlapping, etc). This sheet is a little difficult to read and/or reproduce. 7/14/3: 1 know you've tried hard to fix this problem, but unfortunately, the sheets are unscanable the way they are. I've talked to Basil to find out what information you can eliminate and he said that you do not need to show the future filings. Also, Dave Stringer suggested breaking the sheets into 2 sheets so that you can increase the overall scale. Number: 252 CS001 - Correction required to the ramps shown in the legend. Number: 253 CS115 - Overlapping labeling, see redlines. Number: 254 CS131 - Overlapped labeling, see redlines. Number: 255 CS 132 - See comment #217. Number: 256 CS200, 221, 222 - See comment #219. Created: 7/16/2003 Created: 7/16/2003 Created: 7/16/2003 Created: 7/16/2003 Created: 7/16/2003 Number: 257 Created: 7/16/2003 The rip rap at the ends of the roundabout and Sternwheeler drive need to extend over the end of the c&g. Also, the hatching chosen looks like it's some kind of surface treatment (flagstone). Label the riprap just so there's no confusion. Thanks! Number: 258 Created: 7/16/2003 CS311 - label the ROW or, the profiles for Bowside, see redlines. Number: 259 Created: 7/16/2003 CS600 - Show the ramps as directional ramps in the typical curb return detail. Number: 260 CS701 - Provide a detail for the casing and label. Created: 7/16/2003 Number: 261 Created: 7/16/2003 The Baker Lateral signature block may have a typo. Is "delections" supposed to be "deletions"? Number: 262 CS703, 704 - Overlapped labeling, see redlines. Created: 7/16/2003 Number: 263 Created: 7/16/2003 CS705 - Correct the conflicting information in the Roadway Section A -A detail. Number: 264 Created: 7/16/2003 CS708 - Corrections required to the Wooden Rail detail, it conflicts with CS710, 711 and standard detail 1108. Number: 265 CS709 -Misspelling? See redlines. Created: 7/16/2003 Number: 266 Created: 7/16/2003 CS710, 711 - Please design the parapet wall in accordance with detail 1108 and 1107. See redlines. Add detail 1107 to the underpass detail sheet. Page 4 intersection. In the event that the transportation tax is approved, the money is appropriated by the city, and the improvements are scheduled for construction, this developer will no longer be responsible for any improvements to the Vine and Lemay intersection. However, it could be years before this happens. If this development wants to go to construction before then, then the developer would need to design and construct the interim improvements to Vine and Lemay. 33 These plans are being reviewed under the October 1, 2002 LCUASS. 37 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. 46 The plat needs to include the detention pond or provide all offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. Off -site grading and construction easements are required for any work occurring on neighboring properties. The plans currently show off -site construction occurring on all sides. 53 An additional foot of ROW is required for each side of a local street where drive -over curb is used. Where vertical curb is used, driveway locations need to be shown and stationed. 54 See detail 7-24 for all street widening requirements. Those proposed do not meet standards. ' 63 Change the project name from "Phase I" to "Filing 1". 67 Quite a bit of information left off of this submittal. Expect more comments with the next submittal. 76 It appears that several streets do not meet the min/max separation distance requirements as required by LCUASS. See table 7-3. A modification or alternative compliance is needed for the road connections out to the arterials as they are currently proposed. Topic: Grading Plan 38 Erosion Control Plan - provide rip rap at the end of Sternwheeler Drive and roundabout stubs 40 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes effect public ROW 42 Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot corners. 43 Drainage arrows must be provided and show positive drainage to streets or to an approved drainage facility. ,TTh slope can't come off the back of walk - there must be a minimum 2' flat area next to the walk. Topic: Landscape? 17 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. Page 2 30 Landscaping within a Siclht Distance Easement must meet sight distance requirements. Please add the Sight Distance note to the plans and show all sight distance easements. 3,f Driveway locations need to be shown for the single family lots in order to coordinate the utility and street tree locations. 74� The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the roundabout, and will be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping in these areas. This landscaping must also meet sight distance requirements (please add a note to the plans). 75 Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. .. Topic: Plan and Profiles 11 Curb return radii must be in accordance with table 8-2. 47 See table 7-3, 7-17 and 7-18 for street design criteria. There are several areas where minimum VCs, minimum K values, and minimum tangent lengths between curves are not being met. M Centerline profiles and stationing are required for all public streets. Provide flowline profiles for the roundabout and design to standard. Specify the type of curb being used and where. 49 Show how the proposed CR i 1 ties into existing north of Brightwater Drive. May need cross sections for the transition to clarify what's happening and how it Will all tie in. May need to dedicate additional ROW for the taper. 50 Key Maps must be corrected on several pages so that it matches the design being shown on the page. 51 "� ?,v� Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. u 52 XL ti Provide profiles for all curb returns. ` Topic: Plat 6 From Technical Services: The boundary and legal close. 7 From Technical Services: We will need to see a copy of the final plat. 9 Please provide the missing plat language as shown on the attached document (cert of dedication, maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee, notice of other docs, sight distance, etc.). - 10 Label each adjoining prooerty. Page 3 12 Provide a tract table. Who owns and maintains each tract? 16 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. S ow all existing easements (sewer easement running diagonally through site, etc) and if vacating by plat, provide a note vacating the easement. k- 65 Provide sight distance easements as required by the design and code. _. f ! r - 73 A note for Tract A and B must state that all lots off Tract A and B must be rear loaded only. No driveways allowed off the public street in front. Topic: Site 35 1 Note 2 - remove the words "unless maintained by a homeowners association, l r 36 Note 12 - remove. This is not applicable. 83 Identify building setbacks. Please note that the garage door is to be a minimum of 20' from the back of sidewalk or property line. 106 A note for Tract A and B must state that all lots off Tract A and B must be rear loaded only. No driveways allowed off the public street in front. Topic: Street Narnes 8 Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. Topic: Striping Sheet- 70 Correct the bike lane label to read'T' parking". See redlines. Topic: Traffic Study 28 Pease contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. A roundabout anall must be provided for all arterial/arterial intersections. Additional ROW may be required to ac�anmry1obate a dedicated northbound right turn lane on CR 52, to be built now or in the future. Please see LCUASS Chapter $ forintersection requirements and Chapter 4 for TIS requirements. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. Topic: Utility 13 See 16.3.1 for access ramp requirements. Provide directional ramps at all intersections. Access ramps must line up with the ramp across the street on all T-Intersections. Must provide a separate access ramp where rollover curb is used. A driveway will not suffice. - , 14 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. Page 4