The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSIDEHILL - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-04-08PROJECT i.� COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: October 27, 2000 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #28-98 Prospect Industrial Park, Lot 32, Midpoint Self -Storage — PDP — Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by ere-6Ct in Current Planning no later than the staff revi-eu-meeting: November 29, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference Prospect Industrial Park. Lot 32, toidpoint Self -Storage - PDP 'December 7, 2000 Site Plan i Need to show the emergency access drive through the property and show that it meets minimum radius requirements for PFA The access drive needs to be a driveway cut per Section 3.6.2(L)(2)(e) of the LUC. Show any curb cuts on the property across the street. Need to know if there are any conflicts with the proposed driveway location. i Indicate what is existing sidewalk and what is new sidewalk. i Does the 9-foot utility easement shown based on the additional 3 feet of row that needs to be dedicated? > Don't show the curb return for the Sharp Point extension unless you plan on designing and building it. Utility Plans I . See updated general notes. 2 Need to show where the driveways adjacent and across the street are located. The drives need to align or be adequately offset. 3. Indicate the location of the driveway cut in relation to the property line. I. The access drive needs to be a driveway cut per Section 3.6.2(L)(2)(e) of the LUC. Provide the driveway approach detail. 5. Indicate what is existing sidewalk and what is new sidewalk. Indicate the width and provide a type III barricade at the end of any sidewalk construction. ou will need to dedicate the row and all 6. Provide a new plat or provide a copy of the existing plat as part of the plans. If you do not plat, necessary easements by separate document. I prefer you replat the property. 7. Label all existing and proposed easements on the plans. R. What is the building set back from the new row'? o What does the fence look like and how does the Swale and v-pan go under it? 10. It would probably help if you indicated what is gravel, what is paved and what is landscape area on the grading plan. I I. Need ult-site easements from the adjacent property for off -site grading and the drainage pipe. 12. Do not show the curb. gutter Lind walk for the Sharp Point extension. We do not know where it will be placed until the row is dedicated and the destgn completed. Since it is not included in this plan set I assume you are not designing it. Keep Sharp Point Drive (future) label. Corrections to the TIS that should be noted. The development of the adjacent lot will require the dedication of row for the extension of Sharp Point Drivc. Midpoint Drive ;ntd Sharp Point Drive are designed for two travel lanes and two bike lanes not parking lanes. And the traffic ;tudv indicates that the intersections will lunction acceptably tier the short term, but do not indicate how thev will function -or the lone term. .SQgnatllre -- iz '` i I CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPES OF REVISIONS Plat Site _Drainage Report _Other Unlit%, _'(Redline Utility --4,andscaoe af� City of Fort Collins 122 Dimension all sidewalks. 12:5' Transitions from VC to drive -over curb and gutter must occur at one of three locations: street corners, where there is a concrete crosswalk, or where there is a concrete crosspan perpendicular to the transition location. Please provide detail(s) of transitions. 124 Crosspans are not shown to the correct width on the Arterial. 125 Centerline profiles and stationing are required for all street designs. 126 Show all utility crossings on plan and profile. 127 Sidewalk culverts must be designed in accordance with Details D10-D13. Please the appropriate detail on the detail sheet. 128 All existing features must be shown for a minimum of 150' beyond the project limits. (This includes all historic structures, various buffers, etc). 129 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 130 12.2.2 All utilities shall be !located a least 2 feet below the scarified subgrade elevation - including the stormsewer. Please contact Basil Hamdan with Stormwater (224-6035) and Roger Buffington with Wastewater (221-6854) prior to your next submittal regarding this design. 131 Manholes are not allowed within the bicycle lane or along the wheelpath of vehicles. 132 Several driveways do not meet the minimum separation requirements to the intersection or to other driveways as required by table 7-3. 133 ' The eyebrows must be designed in accordance with detail 7.23. 134 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design: 16-2 1413 703 1606 707 1607 708 D10 - D13 as needed 713.1 F 713.2E 1601 1602 In addition, the fees now require truncated domes on all pedestrian ramps. See attached for CDOT specifications until the City has approved spec's in LCUASS. Page 7 135 Provide 500 feet of Off -Site design (including centerline, flowline, and cross sections) of all streets where future streets will tie into the proposed. 136 Add the street cut note where street cuts are proposed (see redlines): 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. 137 Please note that single family lots require a minimum of 20' from the back of walk to the face of the garage. 138 Please provide and engineered subdrain system that meets the criteria set forth in Section 7. 139 Please submit a Hydrological study. - 140 Please provide CL (not FL) stations and elevations at all driveway intersections and roadway intersections in both plan and profile views. 141 Please provide a flowline curve table on each plan and profile sheet that includes radius, angle, arc length, and tangent length. 142 Provide CL curve data so that we can verify minimum radii, angles, arc lengths, and tangent lengths. Label the beginning and end of CL radii so that we can verify min arc and tangent lengths. Unable to review that portion of the design at this time, expect more comments with the next submittal. 143 Please review the Utility Plan Checklist, address the missing items, and resubmit with the next round of review. See redlines for additional comments. Page 8 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: March 12, 2003 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #32-01B SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP — TYPE I (LUC) s S All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: April 2, 2003 ❑ No Comment F1Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** 1. go I L05GRc, CI0SE Z, l(oiA 9Av6 GA866 CURVES AS Co/�1QOuMI>, �U/%iJ y A2r' 2EALLy' EASE 3, SEVE(1AL �jEp2rn1(�,5 Drg7aaG�5� GclQ✓GS LONtT MrrTC14 jj-5E6-AnDL��1E5. FFA Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape Date Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: April 21, 2003 Project: SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP -TYPE I (LUC) #32-01 B All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: April 02, 2003 Mote - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General Number: 50 Created: 1 /3/2003 The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the City's Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also needs to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the Prospect/Timberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current location. It is highly encouraged that the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline for the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The PDP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or filing of the plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline-Prospea: intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the intersection either by the City or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. Number: 51 Created: 1 /3/2003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. D to CHECK HEM&4F YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS �',�/�_ Plat Site / Drainage Report / Other_'" _ ` Utility _�_ Redline Utility �_ Landscape �lf Page 1 Number: 52 Created: 1/3/2003 The Drake Road design has already been completed by the Ridgen Farm development. The actual construction may either be done by that developer or through the City Street Oversizing Program in the summer of 2003, Sidehill must coordinate the plan sets so that this project will tie into the Drake Road design. Sidehill is also responsible for repaying the construction costs along their frontage of Drake Road as well as repaying the small portion of Timberline that has been built to the ultimate. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. Number: 53 Created: 1/3/2003 This project is responsible for the design and construction of the northbound right turn lane from Drake to Timberline and will require the dedication of additional ROW. This turn lane will impact the ultimate location of the sidewalk, trees, and perhaps the building setbacks. Place a note on the landscape plan saying that all trees must be 5' back from the edge of sidewalk. 4/18/3* It was determined that this project will not be constructing the right turn lane with this project, however, this project is dedicating the additional ROW for the future construction of the right turn as shown on the plans currently. Please place the sidewalk and trees in the ultimate location and place a note on the landscape plan saying that all trees must be 5' back from the edge of sidewalk. I'll repeat this comment in the landscape section as well. Number: 54 Created: 1/3/2003 This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. 4/1813: Item still open. Please provide 500' of off -site design or as far as necessary to show that the design will work with existing. It was determined in a meeting with JR Engineering that the cross sections asked for above were not necessary. Number: 55 Created: 1/3/2003 The proposed maintenance: road for the sewer line is designated as a future collector street. This project must provide an interim design with a driveable surface that will withstand heavy maintenance vehicles. The proposed gravel road as shown is not acceptable. In addition, this project must provide the ultimate design for the collector street (in accordance with 7-4F or 7-5F depending on TIS and whether or not access is taken off it) and show how it ties into Drake (1000' either side) in the interim and ultimate design. Show all historic structures, buffer zones (historic, treatment plant, natural resources, etc), on all plan sets. The Ditch Company and/or Carghill needs to sign off on the plat to vacate the easements proposed as well as sign off on the utility plans wherever the design is affecting their ditch. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. This project must provide the ultimate design for the collector street (in accordance with 7- 4F or 7-5F depending on TIS and whether or not access is taken off it) and show how it ties into Drake (1000' either side) in the interim and ultimate design. Show all historic structures, buffer zones (historic, treatment plant, natural resources, etc), on all plan sets. The Ditch Company and/or Carghill needs to sign off on the plat to vacate the easements proposed as well as sign off on the utility plans wherever the design is affecting their ditch. Number: 62 Created: 1/3/2003 The eyebrow on Haymeadow Way does not meet the 200' separation requirement between local street intersections. This distance is calculated from the CL of Iowa to the CL of the first leg of the eyebrow. See table 7-3. 4/18/3: The variance request to the 200' minimum separation requirement was approved by the Engineering department. In this instance, the TIS volumes are such that allowing the shorter distance between the two intersections will not present a safety issue. Number: 66 Created: 1/3/2003 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. Number: 223 Created: 4/21 /2003 Dedicate the ROW and utility easements required for the future traffic circle. You will need to account for this in the placement of any utilities. Page 2 Number: 229 Created: 4/21/2003 The variance request for a smaller centerline radii on Sidehill Blvd was received. Please resubmit the request and restate it so that the design speed is being addressed Instead of the traffic calming aspects and show how the design speed compares to what is being proposed. Discuss the operational characteristics of the road and relate it to the design speed instead of traffic calming. It is appropriate to reduce the design speed in this area and Engineering is open to this proposal. Thevariance request can be submitted any time and does not need to wait for the next submittal. Please call me at 221-6605 if you have any questions. Topic: Grading Plan Number: 67 Created: 1/3/2003 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes affect public ROW. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Thank you. Number: 69 Created: 1/3/2003 Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot corners. See redlines. 4/18/3: You did a wonderful job calling out all the spot elevations on this large of a project. Still have a few missing or overlapping though, see redlines. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 74 Created: 1/3/2003 Show all sight distance, emergency access, and utility easements - the plans currently show the utility easements incorrectly. 4/18/3: Utility easements :are still shown incorrectly at street intersections Number: 75 Created: 1/3/2003 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 4/18/3: Has this requirement been met in all instances? Number: 79 Created: 1/3/2003 Coordinate the comments among the various plan sets so that they present the same information. Number: 218 Created: 4/18/2003 Please place the sidewalk and trees in the ultimate location at Drake and Timberline and place a note on the landscape plan saying that all trees must be 5' back from the edge of sidewalk. See redlines. Number: 219 Created: 4/18/2003 Block 4, Lot 10 - Street tree shown in driveway. Number: 220 Created: 4/18/2003 Coordinate the typical street sections with the utility plans. Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 86 Created: 1 /312003 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 4/18/3: Please make the intersection details a little larger so that I can read the spot elevations better. Thanks very much! Topic: Plat Number: 93 Created: 1/3/2003 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.). See redlines and the checklist E4. Page 3 4/18/3: Repeat comment, see redlines and attached plat language. Number: 96 Created: 1 /3/2003 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Number: 98 Created: 1 /3/2003 See comments under "General" regarding additional ROW, emergency access easement requirements, Ditch Company Signatures, Right Turn Lane, etc. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Number: 144 Created: 1 /3/2003 The plat needs to include dedicated ROW for the maintenance/collector road and provide all ROW and/or offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Topic: Site Number: 102 Remove contour lines. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Created: 1 /3/2003 Number: 105 Created: 1 /3/2003 Coordinate the comments among the various plan sets so that they present the same information. Number: 221 Created: 4/18/2003 Remove the landscaping from the site plan. Topic: Street Design Number: 226 Created: 4/21/2003 Sheet 55/64 Trestle Road offsite design: What's happening here? Topic: Street Names Number: 106 Created: 1 /3/2003 Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Topic: Traffic Study Number: 107 Created: 1 /3/2003 Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. An Adequate Public Facilities analysis must be provided for the Timberline and Prospect intersection. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. 4/1813: Repeat comment. Topic: Underdrain System Number: 224 Created: 4/21/2003 Please provide a letter from Rigden Farm stating that they are willing to accept the additional Flows into their system. Number: 225 Created: 4/21/2003 Show the concrete clay out off walls at the start of the beginning and end of the site per note 9, page 9 of the subdrain report. Page 4 Number: 227 Is the Rigden Farm system sized to accommodate this flow? Number: 228 The subdrain system must be 8" below sewer Topic: Utility plans Number:109 Cover Page — Correct the index, see redlines. 4/18/3: See redlines. Number: 113 Line 41 and 48 of the General Notes require corrections. 4/1813: Lines 47 and 48 require corrections. Created: 4/21 /2003 Created: 4/21 /2003 Created: 1 /312003 Created: 1/3/2003 Number: 115 Created: 1/3/2003 Please provide the statement shown in Checklist E4, Section II, J and Section III, E. 4/1813: Please note the following on the grading sheets: The top of foundation elevations shown are the minimum elevations required for protection from the 100-year storm. Number: 116 Created: 1/3/2003 Provide all typical street sections for each street type proposed. Sections include appropriate horizontal and vertical dimensions and cross slopes. List each street in the development under the appropriate street type. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Please see John Lofton for further explanation. Number: 119 Created: 1/3/2003 Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. Number: 120 Created: 1/3/2003 This project will need to coordinate this design with the project to the west and show enough information on this plan set so that we can determine how the streets will line up across Timberline. 4/18/3: Open item. Number: 134 Created: 1/3/2003 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design: 16-2 1413 703 1606 707 1607 708 D10 - D13 as needed 713.1 F 713.2F 1601 1602 In addition, the fees now require truncated domes on all pedestrian ramps. See attached for CDOT specifications until the City has approved spec's in LCUASS. 4/18/3: Still missing details as listed above. The CDOT detail is no longer required, however, as the city has determined that we will be using our standard detail until further notice. Number: 136 Page 5 Created: 1/3/2003 Add the street cut note where street cuts are proposed (see redlines): 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. 4/18/3: The note needs to be corrected in a few places. See redlines. Number: 222 Created: 4/21/2003 Correction to the vicinity map on the cover sheet required. Number: 230 Created: 4/21 /2003 Do not show the future right turn lane since it will not be constructed with this project. Number: 231 See redlines for other comments. Created: 4/21 /2003 Page 6 Project Comments Sheet a Selected Departments Cit Department: Stormwater Utility Date: April 18, 2003 Project: SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP -TYPE I (LUC) #32-01B All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: April 02, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number: 214 Created: 4/16/2003 Extran analysis for Sidehill Filing One Drainage Report comments 1. It appears the area south of rational method basin 102 was not included in the analysis; please explain why not. This area is also not labeled on Sheet 31 of 64. 2. It appears the Cargill inflows are in master plan 5WMM subbasin 56. If this is true, please indicate the change in area between subbasin 55 and 56. 3. Please ensure the data created in Extran is used to develop the proposed rating curve for Pond A/B, ensure the calculations/documentation are presented in the appendices, and ensure this rating curve is put into SWMM to analyze the effect of the development and its facilities. 4. The intent of the analysis was to show the hydraulic connection between Pond A and Pond B and verify the master plan release rate of 20 cfs for the site. However, looking at the existing 5WMM and schematic, and the Extran input, this does not appear to have been fulfilled. The two ponds should initially be modeled separately in 5WMM to determine which subbasins and their pertinent hydrographs flow into each pond. These hydrographs should then be put into Extran which also models the two ponds, not as one pond. The final SWMM can have a'combined" pond but only after the initial SWMM and Extran analysis are conducted - and document the development of the final rating curve (see number 3 above). 5. Initial 5WMM input, conveyance element 230 appears to be the outlet for pond 525; this element should already have appeared in the rating curve for the pond when calculating the discharge elevation data. Thus, it should not be modeled again as a'separate" conveyance element. Subbasin 109 should be separated into what portion goes into Pond A and what portion goes into Pond B. Also, please ensure the initial SWMM output presents the hydrographs which you will use in the Extran input. ( oucr) Signature M Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site ✓Drainage Report Other —� Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 C—C - Ten es 5y, �"3 �r PROJECT i••� COMMENT SHEET City of Fort CallinS Current Planning DATE: November 27, 2002 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: #.32-01B SIDE HILL, FIRST FILING PDP -TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: December 30, 2002 Note - PLEASE identify your redlines for future reference —� i( Vance (please print) y" CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Repoli Other Utility _Redline Utility _Landsca)e lie co'�'- c14j City of Fort Collins 6. Extran input, please explain the purpose of conduit 225 at 72 inches and 10 feet long. This could not be found on the drawings. Also, the elevation for junction 300, which is associated with conduit 225 could not be found for verification. Please verify the lengths for the conduits: conduits 209 and 205 could not be verified. Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control Number: 204 Created: 4/14/2003 1. The schedule on sheet 32 would be easier to read if it weren't upside down. 2. Please indicate that detention ponds are to be utilized as sediment traps. 3. Please place a note on the erosion control sheets that all areas disturbed by construction are to be seeded and mulched (per your report/calculations). Page 2 REVISION COMMENT S DATE: May 21, 2003 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #32-01B SIDE HILL, FILING ONE PDP — TYPE I (LUC) S � All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: June 11, 2003 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE" MGM s�,our� o�fy s o �llrs �1� 1s �I U lj""C S Ijce� 2- 9lta-lc� -be ofeq Y a s W ti4� is � �1uc�� i'Li �)li5 5A). Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape Date City of Fort Collins May 21, 2003 Mr. Troy Jones City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Re: SideHill Filing One Dear Troy: J R ENGINEERING n %�0h,d.:ny m We,to.,,� We have revised the final construction drawings and drainage report per your comments dated April 21,2003. The following numbers correspond to the comments: AT&T Broadband 196. The 20-foot drainage easement has been changed to a drainage and utility easement. 197. A rear utility easement was added. 198. A rear utility easement was added. 199. A rear utility easement was added. 200. This area needs to be designated as a tract because it is carrying stormwater from a public right-of-way as requested by the city stormwater department. 201. SideHill Boulevard is being constructed as maintenance road for the sanitary sewer only at this time. At the time Filing Two, Three, Four, and SideHill Boulevard are designed the easements can be added. Current Planning General 28. See comment response by Cityscape. 1"-0. See comment response by CityScape. 177. See comment response by CityScape. 202. Noted 203. See comment response by CityScape. 207. See comment response by CityScape. 208. See comment response by CityScape. 2 t 3. See comment response by CityScape. 215. See comment response by CityScape. 216. See comment response by CityScape. 217. See comment response by CityScape. X: 935000 / Corresp / Letters / commentresponseletter 2620 Ism Prospc Road, Suim 190, Fort Collins, CO 80525 970-491 9888 • Fax 970-491-9984 1 w .jmnginmring.nrm Engineering General 50. Noted. 51. Noted. 52. Noted. 53. See comment response by CityScape. 54. Design will not be required for the north side of the railroad tracks along Sharp Pointe Drive because another developer/engineering firm is currently designing this. JR Engineering has been coordinating our design with theirs as discussed in a meeting with Sheri Wamhoff and Susan Joy. 55. The offsite sanitary sewer road has been designed to ultimate finish grade. A note was added to the drawings stating that the ultimate pavement section will be designed to handle heavy maintenance vehicle loading as determined by geo-technical engineer. A note was added to drawings stating that sanitary sewer road will not impact any historical structures. A centerline station equation was added to the drawing specifying connection point to Drake/Ziegler road as discussed in meeting with Shen Wamhoff and Susan Joy. This will allow the city to review the vertical alignment of the approved Drake/Ziegler plans at this location. The road has been designed (vertical and horizontal) per minor collector standards as designated in the TIS. The signature blocks for necessary companies have been provided on appropriate sheets. 62. See comment response by CityScape. 66. Noted 223. The proposed offsite sanitary sewer line and right-of-way will be revised prior to mylar submittal once it is determined what will be designed at this location. 229. A revised variance is included with this submittal. Grading Plan 67. Noted 69. Drawings revised per redlines. Landscape Plan 74. Utility easements have been revised. 75. See comment response, by CityScape. 79. See comment response by CityScape. 218. See comment response by CityScape. 219. See comment response by CityScape. 220. See comment response by CityScape. Plan and Profiles 86. The intersection details as previously shown are satisfactory per meeting with Susan Joy. Plat 93. Plat has been revised accordingly. 96. All offsite legal s/exhibits for offsite easements have been giver. to client for their use their attorneys review. These offsite easements have been submitted with this submittal for your review. X: 935000 / Corresp / Louers / commentresponseletter 98. All the ditches being vacated in this filing are privately owned by developer and therefore require no signature. A signature block is provided on grading plan and appropriate sheets for Cargill (adjacent property owner to the cast) for ditch realignment to Cargill property. 144. Plat has been revised accordingly. Site Plan 102. Sec comment response by CityScape. 105. See comment response by CityScape. 221. See comment response by CityScape. Street Design 226. The offsite road design as shown reflect the approximate future ground as discussed with Sheri Wamhoff and Susan Joy and are to only be used for informational purposes only. Street Names 106. See comment response by CityScape. Traffic Study 107. See comment response by CityScape. Underdrain System 224. The proposed underdrain system is not discharging into the Rigden Farm detention pond as discussed in meeting with Susan Joy and Sheri Wamhoff. 225. Cut off walls have been added per underdrain report. 227. The proposed underdrain system is not discharging into the Rigden Farm detention pond as discussed in meeting with Susan Joy and Sheri Wamhoff. 228. The Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) detail 713.2F calls out 12- inches for separation. Utility Plans 109. Index in cover sheet has been revised. 113. General notes have been revised. 115. The top of foundation note has been added to grading plans. 116. Additional typical street sections were added to show different right-of-way and flowline dimensions as shown on sheet 58. 119. Revisions have been made accordingly. All offsite legals/exhibits for offsite easements have been given to client for their use their attorneys review. These offsite easements have been submitted with this submittal for your review. 120. Both developments (SideHill and Mansion Park) have been coordinated through design and JR Engineering and Sear -Brown have been working together through the design process. 134. All details have been revised. 136. Note was corrected and added to pavement sawcut lines. 222. Vicinity map was revised. 230. Future right turn lane for Drake Road is not shown. X: 935000 / Corresp / Letters / commentresponseletter Excel Energy General 160. Noted. 161. Noted. 162. A note has been added to drawings stating this. 163. Noted. Light and Power Utility plans 185. The developer is aware of this and will he supplying city with this information. 186. Electric line has been revised to maintain 5-feet from storm sewer. 187. Electric line has been revised to maintain clearance from storm sewer. 188. JR Engineering and architect are currently coordinating this to satisfy your requirement. Once this is accomplished the area will be revised. This will be done prior to mylar submittal. 189. The utility plans are showing the appropriate separation. 190. Gas and electric meters are shown on the elevations and in plan view on the landscape sheets. 191. Noted. 192. Electric facilities and street lights have been added per redlines. 193. JR Engineering and architect are currently coordinating this to satisfy your requirement. - Once this is accomplished the area will be revised. This will be done prior to mylar -� submittal. 194. Electric service now shown correctly. PFA 184. Noted. 209. Noted. 210. Noted. 211. Noted. 212. Noted. Stormwater Utility Drainage I. The basin south of basin 102 is basin 108. An additional label has been provided for that basin on that sheet. 2. The Cargill inflows are from sub -basin 56. This change in area is approximately 1.81 acres. 3. Th - rating curves that were generated in Extras were used to model Ponds A and B as one pond in SWMM. See appendices. 4. The ponds were run separately in SWMM and then in Extran. The Extran results were then used to formulate a stage discharge cury � for the combined pond used in a different SWMM file. 5. Changed the model. 6. That conduit was used for a "direct connection" type of conduit but now is not used, as the hydrograph is directly input to the detention pond. X: 935000 / Corresp / Letters / commentresponseletter Erosion/Sediment Control I. "fable is now right side up. 2. A note was added to drawings for clarification. 3. Note added to cover. Traffic Operations General 157. Noted. 158. Noted. Transportation Planning General 181. Ramp has been removed. 22. See comment response by Cityscape. 195. See comment response by CityScape. Wastewater/Water Utility Plans 39. Irrigation tap locations will be determined by landscape/irrigation consultant and will be included prior to mylar submittal. 40. Sheets have been revised accordingly. 42. Drawings have been revised to show all concrete encasements of sewer lines. 206. Noted. A conference call was held with Ric Walton of James Company, Roger Buffington of City Of Fort Collins Wastewater/Water Department, and Randall Provencio of JR Engineering on Monday afternoon 5/19/03 to discuss the offsite sanitary sewer road. The following ierns were agreed upon: • An interim road profile will be shown on drawings along with the ultimate ro�_d profile. This will allow contractor to only construct the interim conditions for Filing One. • Roger Buffington will check with city staff to determine if they will allow the currently shown right-of-way for this road to be shown as an easement at request of James Company. • Roger Buffington will not require the interim road surface to be of a base material to withstand heavy vehicle maintenance loading as previously required since the Johnson's will still be farming on this land. It was agreed that all the above bullet items could be addressed prior to the mylar submittal. There was not enough time to make these changes from the time the decisions had been made to the time the drawings were complete and being plotted. X: 935000 / Corresp / Letters / commentresponseletter 11 you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 970.491.9888. Sincerely, andall K. Provencio Project Manager cc: Jim Postle, James Company Joe Carter, CityScape Mike Brake, JR Engineering X: 935000 / Corresp / Letters / commentresponseletter Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments City of Fort MIMS Department: Engineering Date: June 18, 2003 Project: SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP -TYPE I (LUC) #32-01 B All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: June 11, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number: 245 Created: 6/13/2003 The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. Topic: General Number: 50 Created: 1 /3/2003 The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the Citys Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also needs to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the ProspectMmberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current location. It is highly encouraged that the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline for the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The PDP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or filing of the plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline -Prospect intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the intersection either by the City or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. 4/18/3, 6/11/3: Your respp^nn a is acknowledged. This item will remain open, Date l8 3 / CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat / Site Drainage Report ✓ Other AA44&,F, Utility _t, Redline Utility �_ Landscape Page I Number: 51 Created: 1 /3/2003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3,6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. Number: 52 Created: 1/3/2003 The Drake Road design has already been completed by the Ridgen Farm development. The actual construction may either be done by that developer or through the City Street Oversizing Program in the summer of 2003. Sidehill must coordinate the plan sets so that this project will tie into the Drake Road design. Sidehill is also responsible for repaying the construction costs along their frontage of Drake Road as well as repaying the small portion of Timberline that has been built to the ultimate. 4/18/3,6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. Number: 54 Created: 1 /3/2003 This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. 4/18/3: Item still open. Please provide 500' of off -site design or as far as necessary to show that the design will work with existing. It was determined in a meeting with JR Engineering that the cross sections asked for above were not necessary. 6/11/3: Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Pointe connection for the City's review. See above. Number: 66 Created: 1 /3/2003 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. Number: 223 Created: 4/21/2003 Dedicate the ROW and utility easements required for the future traffic circle. You will need to account for this in the placement of any utilities. 6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will stay open until resolved and it may be taken care of during Final Compliance Number: 267 Created: 6/18/2003 The phasing/filing needs to match the utility and plat sets. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 75 Created: 1 /3/2003 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 4/18/3: Has this requirement been met in all instances? 6/13/3: An alternative compliance request has been submitted. This item will remain open until resolved. Number: 239 Correction required to note 23. See redlines. Created: 6/13/2003 Number: 266 Created: 6/18/2003 1 did not receive sheets 1-5 of the Landscape set, but make sure that the filing/phasing matches the utility and plat sets. Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 86 Created: 1 /3/2003 Page 2 PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning= - DATE: November 27, 2002 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #32-01B SIDE HILL, FIRST FILING PDP - TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: December 30, 2002 Note - PLEASE identify your redlines for future reference UosE5, LEG/ -I L IbES I/O-r CLoSE /�oES vOT mIftCN 10ol97_, SEE eE�uNFs. 1Z, ?DED/CAT/onl sraTEwr^1-r Do E5 nior />IA/TCf/ >�i� pT Tc.CC ,J �Jil<S/1 C6 F� 1�; /1i/t i./ J/AT�. /M�n i J/-iU ✓moo h�u JOuTH C.lw� 5L./ //l I4 L' .K,0-H l! NC/Y // Sy"•� P�cw / O/,/T/Old,4 L_ a/- % /N/3C/2c1/,, 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 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 4/18/3: Please make the intersection details a little larger so that I can read the spot elevations better. Thanks very much' 6/11/3: The spot elevations are overlapped in some of the intersections details and I couldn't read/review them. Other details appear to have a low spot. Please see redlines. Topic: Plat Number: 93 Created: 1 /3/2003 Please provide the missing plat language as shown on the attached document (cert of dedication, maintenance guarantee, repair guarantee, notice of other does, sight distance, etc.). See redlines and the checklist E4. 4/18/3: Repeat comment, see redlines and attached plat language. 6/9/3: Repeat comment. Corrections are still required to the plat language. Pleasee see redlines and attached plat language document. Number: 240 Created: 6/13/2003 From Technical Services: Vicintiy Map should only show what this plat is subdividing. Number: 241 Created: 6/13/2003 From Technical Services: Sheet 2 should be clear as to what is included in this subdivision. Number: 242 Created: 6/13/2003 The plat has divided the property in half and then described both boundaries. This must be corrected so that only one single outside property boundary is described. Number: 243 Created: 6/13/2003 Under Fence Restriction Notes: Add a note restricting the lots with the sight distance easements on them. Number: 244 Created: 6/13/2003 Correct the project title to match the utility plans. Number: 262 Created: 6/17/2003 Need the distance and bearings for Sidehill Blvd. The ROW must be dedicated as such. Number: 263 Created: 6/17/2003 Sheet 3 - How can these driveways be located? Use typicals or some other means to locate without cluttering the plan sheets. Number: 264 Created: 6/17/2003 Sheet 4 - Use the same note as shown on Sheet 3 for the driveway locations. Topic: Street Names Number: 106 Created: 1/3/2003 Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. 6/11/3: Repeat comment. Have the street names been approved by the appropriate city departments/agencies? Topic: Utility plans Number: 109 Created: 1 /3/2003 Cover Page — Correct the index, see redlines. 4/18/3: See redlines. Page 3 6/1113: The plat pages have been numbered separately as requested, however, the utility sheets need to be renumbered to reflect the correct number of total pages. See redlines. Number: 113 Created: 1/3/2003 Line 41 and 48 of the General Notes require corrections. 4/18/3: Lines 47 and 48 require corrections. 5/9/3: Repeat comment. See redlines. Number: 116 Created: 1/3/2003 Provide all typical street sections for each street type proposed. Sections include appropriate horizontal and vertical dimensions and cross slopes. List each street in the development under the appropriate street type. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Please see John Lofton for further explanation. 6/11/3: Please identify E/N,S/W on the typical street details. Number: 119 Created: 1/3/2003 Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. 6/1113, The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners stating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. Number: 120 Created: 1/3/2003 This project will need to coordinate this design with the project to the west and show enough information on this plan set so that we can determine how the streets will line up across Timberline. 4/18/3: Open item. 6/1113: Your response is acknowledged, however, you still need to provide the information on the actual plan sets. Number: 128 Created: 1/3/2003 All existing features must be shown for a minimum of 150' beyond the project limits. (This includes all historic structures, various buffers, etc). 6/11/3: Your response indicates that there are no buffers to show, however, the site plan shows multiple buffers in the future filings. These buffers must be shown on the grading sheets. Number: 134 Created: 1/3/2003 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design: 16-2 1413 703 1606 707 1607 708 D10 - D13 as needed 713.1 F 713.217 1601 1602 In addition, the feds now require truncated domes on all pedestrian ramps. See attached for CDOT specifications until the City has approved spec's in LCUASS. 4/18/3: Still missing details as listed above. The CDOT detail is no longer required, however, as the city has determined that we will be using our standard detail until further notice. Page 4 6/13/3: Looks great! But still need detail 707 and detail(s) 1310-1313 for the sidewalk chases. Also, remove detail 709 because even though it's in LCUASS, it's not correct. They are supposed to be taking that one out - sorry for the confusion! Number: 231 Created: 4/21/2003 See redlines for other comments. Number: 248 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 12 - Please show the matchline referenced on sheet 57. Number: 249 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 13 - Who is designing and installing the retaining wall shown? If this wall needs to be there to accommodate this project's grading than it will need to be designed and constructed with this project (add the appropriate details to the detail sheet). Number: 250 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 25 - What is the hatching for? Please correct the overlapped spot elevation. Number: 251 Sheet 48 - Correct some overlapping labeling. Created: 6/13/2003 Number: 252 Created: 6/13/2003 Plan and Profiles - Show elevation and location of all proposed utilities. Number: 253 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 51 through 54 - Overlapping labeling, illegible spots. Number: 254 Created: 6/13/2003 Where ever a street cut is shown, provide hatched areas for the approximate area. Street cuts must be shown to the middle of the drive lane or the center of the street depending on the circumstance. See sheet 51 for example. Number: 255 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 58 - Temp access road typical section: Please show which way the crown goes and what depth and material the road consists of. Topic: Variances Number: 247 Created: 6/13/2003 Your variance request to reduce the centerline radius for a portion of Sidehill Blvd was received. Engineering is inclined to approve this request based on the logic presented within the request with one small change to the variance request itself. Please resubmit the letter so that the second to the last paragraph does not include the word "anticipated". Restate the sentence so that there is no doubt that there will be any problems and the City can approve the request.. This can be resubmitted at any time and does not need to wait until the next submittal. Once received, we can process this request within a couple of hours. This will need to be done before going to hearing. Please call me if you have any questions! Thanks! Page 5 km RED ir•� FINAL COMPLIANCE CiivCollins COMMENT SHEET Current ntt Plannianninf7 DATE: August 27, 2003 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #32-01C Side Hill, Filing 1— Final Compliance — Type I (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: September 10, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference l• t3aculi✓OR2Y GEGAG Do /VDT VL&C! l.ire S�t•e=ice tholfes no� vvi�ell �ouJeVgrdi CGOSt , SE6- /PelAlrodT /NeouDrD , JC RpOrocrej b'( PFA,. Pegu�r-ew1r�/�t�S Imo.. 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 August 27, 2003 Troy Jones City of Fort Collins Community Planning and P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Environmental Services RE: SideHill — Final Compliance Plans Dear Troy, urban design, inc. 3555 stanford road, suite 105 fort Collins, Colorado 80525 (970) 226-4074 fax (970) 226-4196 e@cityscapeud.com Included below are the comments received from City Staff regarding the third round of Project Development Plans for SideHill. An explanation (in italics) of how issues have been addressed follows each comment. The redlined drawings you provided the applicant have been included in this resubmittal set M11111W Department: AT&T Broadband Issue Contact: Dennis Greenwalt Topic: General Number: 272 Created: 6/18/2003 No comment. So noted. Thank you Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: General Number: 202 Created: 4/10/2003 [6/18/03] This "FYI comment" still applies. [4/10/031 On April 8, 2003, voters did not pass the proposed transportation taxes, therefore we have no City money to improve the Prospect/Timberline intersection. The requirement of Adequate Public Facilities is therefore still a major obstacle for this project. This issue won't prevent PDP approval, however final compliance approval cannot occur until funds are allocated for the Prospect/Timberline intersection improvements. For clarification, final compliance approval is basically the administrative process of signing the mylars, recording them, recording the development agreement, and officially logging the project into the system as an approved project. So noted. Thank you Number: 203 Created: 4/10/2003 [6/18/03] Thank you lfor providing building elevations for the bathhouse. In accordance with 3.5.3(D)(6)(a) a base treatment needs to be articulated on all 4 facades of the pool house. [4/10/03] Elevations of the bathhouse building must be included on the building elevation sheet(s) Make sure materials, colors, and dimensions are included. The base treatment has been added to the bathhouse to match on all four facades. Please see sheet 15 for the design. Page I Number: 268 Created: 6/1812003 There are only a few items to clear up before we are ready to go to hearing. These items won't require a full formal submittal, however the items do need to be resolved prior to scheduling for the hearing. Here is a list of the items: (1) Susan Joy needs a revised plat informally submitted to her that addresses her plat comments, (2) Susan Joy needs the variance request resubmitted with the correction asked for, (3) The Sidehill Boulevard right-of-way, as it crosses the valley wall, may or may not have grading encroachment into the required natural habitat buffer (see issue # 146 dated 1/6/03), and needs to be coordinated with Doug Moore of Natural Resources at 224-6143. Doug needs the grading sheets of the utility plans with the buffer zones shown in order to complete his review; (4) Letters of Intent or the actual easements themselves for all off -site easements (all we have so far is legal descriptions). The plat and the variance were revised by JR Engineering and submitted to the City of Fort Collins on 7/25/03. A mitigation plan for slope restoration adjacent to SideHill Boulevard was submitted to Doug Moore on 8101103. The client and the City of Fort Collins agreed that since all easements were private not letters of intent or actual easements would be need securing prior to hearing. Number: 269 Created: 6/18/2003 The driveway location for Lot 1, Block 2 is different between the plat and the alternative compliance diagram. Please double check that this information is correct for all other lots, and fix the discrepancy for this lot. The location of the driveway on the plat was incorrect. The driveway location on the site plan is correct. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter regarding this item Number: 270 Created: 6/18/2003 The alternative compliance to "reduce the required separation distance between street trees and driveways and between street trees and utilities" is acceptable to staff. A staff recommendation of approval of this request will be forwarded to the hearing officer as part of the staff report on the project. So noted. Thank you. Number: 273 Created: 6/18/2003 On page 3 of 6 on the plat, add to the note explaining the shaded areas that "these driveway locations shall not be varied." Please clarify this in the general notes on sheet 4 of 15 also. This text was added to the General Notes as requested. Number: 274 Created: 6/18/2003 The owner's certification signature block on the site plan shows James Construction Company as the owner, and the plat shows Spring Creek Farms as the owner. These should be the same, and if there is a lien holder, such lien holder should be listed. The owner's certification block on both the site plan and plat needs notary certification language (which was provided on the plat, but not on the site plan). The site plan signature block has been changed. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number: 245 Created: 6/13/2003 The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted Page 2 OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter regarding this item Topic: General Number: 50 Created: 1 /3/2003 The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the City's Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also need's to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the Prospect/Timberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current: location. It is highly encouraged that the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline for the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The PDP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or filing of the: plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline -Prospect intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the intersection either by the City or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. 4/18/3, 6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. So noted. Thank you. Number: 51 Created: 1 /312003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3,6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open So noted. Thank you. Number: 52 Created: 1 /3/2003 The Drake Road design has already been completed by the Ridgen Farm development. The actual construction may either be done by that developer or through the City Street Oversizing Program in the summer of 2003. Sidehill must coordinate the plan sets so that this project will tie into the Drake Road design. Sidehill is also responsible for repaying the construction costs along their frontage of Drake Road as well as repaying the small portion of Timberline that has been built to the ultimate. 4/18/3,6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open So noted. Thank you. Page 3 Number: 54 Created: 1 /3/2003 This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. 4/18/3: Item still open. Please provide 500' of off -site design or as far as necessary to show that the design will work with existing. It was determined in a meeting with JR Engineering that the cross sections asked for above were not necessary. 6/11/3: Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Pointe connection for the City's review. See above. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 66 Created: 1 /3/2003 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information. So noted. Thank you Number: 223 Created: 4/21 /2003 Dedicate the ROW and utility easements required for the future traffic circle. You will need to account for this in the placement of any utilities. 6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will stay open until resolved and it may be taken care of during Final Compliance Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 267 Created: 6/18/2003 The phasing/filing needs to match the utility and plat sets. The site planning documents only reference the Filing One Project Development Plan area. Any platted area that deviates from the extents of the Filing One Project Development Plan area will be shown only on the plat. This variation has been confirmed by conversations between JR Engineering and the City of Fort Collins Engineering Department and has been deemed acceptable to both parties. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 75 Created: 1/3/2003 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 4/18/3: Has this requirement been met in all instances? 6/13/3: An alternative compliance request has been submitted. This item will remain open until resolved. So noted. Thank you. Troy Jones stated that the alternative compliance request for a reduction in separation distances was approved by the City of Fort Collins. Please note that the recently approved Supplement 13 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code has provided an amended tree/utility separation standard that is only six (6) feet between wet utilities and street trees. The previous standard separation distance was 10 feet. Page 4 Number: 239 Created: 6/13/2003 Correction required to note 23. See redlines. Note 23 was amended per the redlines provided by City Staff. Number: 266 Created: 6/18/2003 1 did not receive sheets 1-5 of the Landscape set, but make sure that the filing/phasing matches the utility and plat sets. The site planning documents only reference the Filing One Project Development Plan area. Any platted area that deviates from the extents of the Filing One Project Development Plan area will be shown only on the plat. This variation has been confirmed by conversations between JR Engineering and the City of Fort Collins Engineering Department and has been deemed acceptable to both parties. Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 86 Created: 1 /3/2003 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 4/18/3: Please make the intersection details a little larger so that I can read the spot elevations better. Thanks very much! 6/11/3: The spot elevations are overlapped in some of the intersections details and I couldn't read/review them. Other details appear to have a low spot. Please see redlines. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment Topic: Plat Number: 93 Created: 1 /3/2003 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.). See redlines and the checklist E4. 4/18/3: Repeat comment, see redlines and attached plat language. 6/9/3: Repeat comment. Corrections are still required to the plat language. Please see redlines and attached plat language document. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 240 Created: 6/13/2003 From Technical Services: Vicinity Map should only show what this plat is subdividing. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 241 Created: 6/13/2003 From Technical Services: Sheet 2 should be clear as to what is included in this subdivision. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 242 Created: 6/13/2003 The plat has divided the property in half and then described both boundaries. This must be corrected so that only one single outside property boundary is described. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Page 5 Number: 243 Created: 6/13/2003 Under Fence Restriction Notes: Add a note restricting the lots with the sight distance easements on them. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 244 Created: 6/13/2003 Correct the project title to match the utility plans. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 262 Created: 6/17/2003 Need the distance and bearings for Sidehill Blvd. The ROW must be dedicated as such. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 263 Created: 6/17/2003 Sheet 3 - How can these driveways be located? Use typicals or some other means to locate without cluttering the plan sheets. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 264 Created: 6/17/2003 Sheet 4 - Use the same note as shown on Sheet 3 for the driveway locations. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Topic: Street Names Number: 106 Created: 1 /3/2003 Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. 6/11/3: Repeat comment. Have the street names been approved by the appropriate city departments/agencies? As per conversations with Planning Staff, all of the departments that have reviewed these plans have approved the street names because said departments have not stated otherwise. The major collector formerly referred to as "SideHill Boulevard" has been changed to Nancy Gray Boulevard. Topic: Utility plans Number: 109 Created: 1/3/2003 Cover Page - Correct the index, see redlines. 4/18/3: See redlines. 6/11/3: The plat pages have been numbered separately as requested, however, the utility sheets need to be renumbered to reflect the correct number of total pages. See redlines. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 113 Created: 1 /3/2003 Line 41 and 48 of the General Notes require corrections. 4/18/3: Lines 47 and 48 require corrections. Page 6 Project Comments Sheet (MLM�"!Selected Departments Citv of Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: January 6, 2003 Project: SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP -TYPE I (LUC) #32-01 B All comments must be received by TROY JONES in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: December 30, 2002 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General 50 The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the City's Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also needs to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the Prospect/Timberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current location. It is highly encouraged that: the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline for the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The POP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or filing of the plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline -Prospect intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the intersection either by the City or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. 51 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 52 The Drake Road design has already been completed by the Ridgen Farm development. The actual construction may either be done by that developer or through the City Street Oversizing Program in the summer of 2003. Sidehill must coordin t 'plan sets so the is project will tie into the Drake Road design. Sidehill is also responsible for repaying Si a Date CHECKIWRL Iy YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _ Site / Drainage Report _� Other Utility _ Redline Utility Landscape H y 5n /Oi Page 1< COvVIrVI I 5/9/3: Repeat comment. See redlines. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 116 Created: 1/3/2003 Provide all typical street sections for each street type proposed. Sections include appropriate horizontal and vertical dimensions and cross slopes. List each street in the development under the appropriate street type. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. Please see John Lofton for further explanation. 6/11/3: Please identify E/N/S/W on the typical street details. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 119 Created: 1/3/2003 Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. 6/11/3: The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners stating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 120 Created: 1/3/2003 This project will need to coordinate this design with the project to the west and show enough information on this plan set so that we can determine how the streets will line up across Timberline. 4/18/3: Open item. 6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged, however, you still need to provide the information on the actual plan sets. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 128 Created: 1/3/2003 All existing features must be shown for a minimum of 150' beyond the project limits. (This includes all historic structures, various buffers, etc). 6/11/3: Your response indicates that there are no buffers to show, however, the site plan shows multiple buffers in the future filings. These buffers must be shown on the grading sheets. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. The Context Diagram on the site plan set identifies the proposed buffers as well. Number: 134 Created: 1/3/2003 Update all the old details to the new. Provide these details and any other as required by the design: 16-2 1413 703 1606 707 1607 708 D10 - D13 as needed Page 7 713.1 F 713.2F 1601 1602 In addition, the feds now require truncated domes on all pedestrian ramps. See attached for CDOT specifications until the City has approved spec's in LCUASS. 4/18/3: Still missing details as listed above. The CDOT detail is no longer required, however, as the city has determined that we will be using our standard detail until further notice. 6/13/3: Looks great! But still need detail 707 and detail(s) D10-D13 for the sidewalk chases. Also, remove detail 709 because even though it's in LCUASS, it's not correct. They are supposed to be taking that one out - sorry for the confusion! Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 231 Created: 4/21/2003 See redlines for other, comments. Number: 248 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 12 - Please show the matchline referenced on sheet 57. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 249 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 13 - Who is designing and installing the retaining wall shown? If this wall needs to be there to accommodate this project's grading than it will need to be designed and constructed with this project (add the appropriate details to the detail sheet). Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 250 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 25 - What is the hatching for? Please correct the overlapped spot elevation. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 251 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 48 - Correct some overlapping labeling. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 252 Created: 6/13/2003 Plan and Profiles - Show elevation and location of all proposed utilities. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 253 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 51 through 54 - Overlapping labeling, illegible spots. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 254 Created: 6/13/2003 Where ever a street cut is shown, provide hatched areas for the approximate area. Street cuts must be shown to the middle of the drive lane or the center of the street depending on the circumstance. See sheet 51 for example. Page 8 Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment Number: 255 Created: 6/13/2003 Sheet 58 - Temp access road typical section: Please show which way the crown goes and what depth and material the road consists of. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Topic: Variances Number: 247 Created: 6/13/2003 Your variance request to reduce the centerline radius for a portion of Sidehill Blvd was received. Engineering is inclined to approve this request based on the logic presented within the request with one small change to the variance request itself. Please resubmit the letter so that the second to the last paragraph does not include the word "anticipated". Restate the sentence so that there is no doubt that there will tie any problems and the City can approve the request. This can be resubmitted at any time and does not need to wait until the next submittal. Once received, we can process this request within a couple of hours. This will need to be done before going to hearing. Please call me if you have any questions! Thanks! Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Department: Excel Energy Issue Contact: Len Hilderbrand Topic: General Number: 271 Created: 6/18/2003 No further comments. Same comments still apply. So noted. Thank you. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Monica Moore Topic: General Number: 234 Created: 5/29/2003 Lot 1 - Iowa Drive The driveway is located over the electric service. The electric service is not to be located under a driveway. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 235 Created: 5/29/2003 Electric service to Building G does not maintain minimum clearance of 10-feet from the water service to Building F. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 236 Created: 5/29/2003 Developer needs to provide a detail drawing showing the building walls and the distances between gas meters and electric meters located on these walls demonstrating that gas meters and electric meters will be able to maintain the minimum distances required. A detailed drawing was submitted to Monica Moore at the City of Fort Collins for her review. As per conversations with Cityscape, this comment has been satisfied. Number: 237 Created: 5/29/2003 Electric meters will be required to be located on the same side of the building as the service stub. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment Page 9 Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Topic: General Number: 238 Created: 6/12/2003 Lighting: Lighting falls below minimum of 0.5fc throughout parking lot areas and adjacent to building entrance points. Also, lighting at driveway/sidewalk intersections falls below 1.0fc needed to mitigate potential pedestrian/cycle/auto conflicts. As per conversations with Planning Staff, a meeting with Joseph Gerdom, city staff and the applicant's representative should be held to discuss the photometric plan. The applicant maintains that lower light levels are desired around buildings and within parking lots and would like to retain the photometric plan "as is." Security lighting is proposed at all building entries but is not shown on the photometric plan. These lights will increase the lumens around building entries. The applicant would also like to retain a maximum pole height at 12'. Additional wattage can be used per fixture or additional poles can be added if necessary. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number: 261 Created: 6/17/2003 Second Submittal of Extran analysis for Sidehill Filing One Drainage Report comments 1. SWMM subbasin input and percent imperviousness does not agree with MODSWMM data table information in the report appendix, particularly subbasins 108 and 109. Also, percent imperviousness should be no less than 5 percent for subbasin 109. 2. Pertaining to the Extran schematic and input, where is the input for junction 101 and conduit 201, which are both shown on the schematic? Also, where are 90010, 90011, and 90012, which are also shown on the schematic but not in the Extran output? 3. Pertaining to Extran output, please explain the warning statements on page 4 of 19 forjunctions 505 and 326, "Warning ! ! ! Junction ... is not associated with any conduit." Also, on page 4 of 19, please explain why the crown elevation equals the invert elevation forjunctions 505 and 326. 4. Please verify the invert of pond B - Extran junction 532 - with the drawing set; the invert on the drawing set did not appear to agree with the Extran input. 5. Please include in the appendix an outline/discussion of how and where (with sample calculations) the Extran output was extracted to develop the SWMM pond 560 rating curve. The information currently in the appendix is difficult to follow and verify, and it does not appear to agree with the SWMM input. Also, the final SWMM output (with the Extran developed rating curve for the ponds) should closely agree with the Extran output - pond volumes, elevations, and discharges. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control Number: 265 Created: 6/18/2003 1. The plans contain no notes indicating the ponds are to be utilized as sediment traps. 2. Some notes relating to sediment and erosion control are not with others. 3. Please schedule a meeting with Bob Zakely to discuss this plan. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Tom Reiff Topic: General Page 10 Number: 180 Created: 2/12/2003 Work closely with the Shops at Rigden Farm development proposal to the south in order to properly align the pedestrian crossing / refuge and access ramps at the Drake / Illinois intersection. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Plat Number: 260 Created: 6/16/2003 Will the offsite sewer be in R.O.W. or easement? Both have been discussed, therefore, please clarify. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment Topic: Utility plans Number: 259 Created: 6/16/2003 What is the 100-year water surface elevation at the outlet of the underdrain? Is this area a channel, pond, river? Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: Utility plans Number: 31 Created: 12/30/2002 As previously indicated, clearly define all water and sewer service sizes on the overall utility plans. Provide fixture count information for the proposed multi -family buildings for our review. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 38 Created: 12/30/2002 Provide utility easements for proposed water and sanitary sewers in future roadways. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 39 Created: 12/30/2002 6/12/03 4/14/03 If all the irrigation ditches are to be abandoned, then will irrigation taps be required on the domestic water mains. Show and label any and all proposed irrigation service on the utility plans. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 206 Created: 4/16/2003 The existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rigden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. See Site, Landscape and Utility plans for other comments. So noted. Thank you. Comments have been addressed. Number: 256 Created: 6/16/2003 Fire hydrants may not be located in lowered section of the water mains. Relocate the fire hydrant at the end of HayMeadow Way or lower storm sewer. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 257 Created: 6/16/2003 Page 11 AS previously indicated relocate the proposed fire hydrant or the proposed drive between lots 4 and 5. Maintain 10 feet of separation between fire hydrants and all drive ways. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Number: 258 Created: 6/16/2003 As previously indicated, raise or lower storm sewers where possible to avoid water main lowerings. Please refer to JR Engineering's response letter addressing this comment. Please call me if YA have any questions regarding this submittal. Thank)Ou. Joe Carter Cityscape Urban Design Page 12 Project Comments Sheet CitvotFort Collins Selected Departments -- Department: Engineering Date: September 16, 2003 Project: SIDE HILL (FILING ONE PDP & FINAL COMPLIANCE - TYPE I (LUC) #32- 01 B&C All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: September 10, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number: 245 Created: 6/13/2003 The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. 9/9/3: Repeat comment. The mylars cannot be approved until the RECORDED off -site easements are received. Topic: General Number: 50 Created: 1 /3/2003 The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the City's Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also needs to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the Prospect/Timberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current location. It is highly encouraged that: the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline I'or the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The PDP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or fling of the plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline -Prospect intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the I / r % Signature l Date! CHECK HERE It, YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _ I Site Drainage Report x' Other Utility _ / Redline Utility + Landscape Page 1 intersection either by the City or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. 4/18/3, 6/11/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open until the interim and ultimate design for Timberline is submitted. 9/9/3: This issue continues to remain open until the ultimate and interim design for Timberline has been received. An internal meeting was held on 9/11/3 and it was determined that this development is still responsible for the interim and ultimate design for Timberline along its frontage plus a 1000' of preliminary design north of their northernmost boundary. In no case will any building permits be issued until the Adequate Public Facilities requirements have been met for this development. Number: 51 Created: 1/3/2003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3,6/11/3, 9/9/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. Number: 54 Created: 1/3/2003 This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. 4/18/3: Item still open. Please provide 500' of off -site design or as far as necessary to show that the design will work with existing. It was determined in a meeting with JR Engineering that the cross sections asked for above were not necessary. 6/11/3: Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Pointe connection for the City's review. See above. 9/9/3: The estimate for Share Pointe has been received and forwarded to Street Oversizing for their review. Comments to follow. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 239 Created: 6/13/2003 Correction required to note 23. See redlines. 9/9/3: Repeat comment. Number: 279 Created: 9/9/2003 See comment #278 from .Jeff Hill/Water Wastewater. Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 80 Created: 1/3/2003 Show how the streets will tie into the interim and ultimate Timberline design. 9/9/3: The ultimate is shown clearly and a note for tieing into the EOP is shown, but it is not clear what will be built in the interim. Are you proposing a temporary asphalt patch from the curb return to the existing Timberline road? If so, please show. Number: 86 Created: 1 /3/2003 Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 4/18/3: Please make the intersection details a little larger so that I can read the spot elevations better. Thanks very much! 6/11/3: The spot elevations are overlapped in some of the intersections details and I couldn't read/review them. Other details appear to have a low spot. Please see redlines. 9/9/3: There appears to be a low spot in the intersection detail - see redlines, sheet 53. Page 2 Topic: Plat Number: 280 Created: 9/9/2003 From Technical Services: Boundary and legal do not close. See printout included. Number: 281 Created: 9/9/2003 From Technical Services: Street names need to be approved by PFA. Street does not meet requirements for a Boulevard. Topic: Stormline Profiles Number: 301 Created: 9/16/2003 Please use ductile iron pipe in the ROW ( instead of the RCP currently shown) where the concrete encasement does not meet the minimum cover requirements (2' below scarified subgrade). Topic: Street Names Number: 106 Created: 1/3/2003 Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. 4/18/3: Repeat comment. 6/11/3: Repeat comment. Have the street names been approved by the appropriate city departments/agencies? 9/9/3: Repeat comment. See comment under "Plat" regarding street names as well. Topic: Utility plans Number: 119 Created: 1/3/2003 Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. 6/11/3: The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners stating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. 9/9/3: Repeat until documents received. Number: 126 Show all utility crossings on plan and profile. Created: 1/3/2003 9/10/3: Sheet 49 - show the irrigation line crossing under Windrow. Keep in mind that it must have at least 2' from bottom of scarified subgrade. The pipe itself must be constructed with watertight joints (like a C900 or RCP R4 joint). Number: 283 Created: 9/9/2003 Sheet 9 - The shaded areas are too dark and will not scan. Would a light hatching work a little better? This comment applies to other sheets as well. Number: 284 Created: 9/9/2003 Sheet 23, 24 and 25 - Cor. ect the overlapped labeling. Number: 286 Created: 9/9/2003 Sheet 47 - scanning problems. Number: 287 Created: 9/9/2003 Sheet 49, 50, 52, 53, 54 - correct overlapped labeling. Number: 288 Created: 9/9/2003 Sheet 51 - scanning problems, overlapped labeling. Page 3 Number: 289 Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements. Created: 9/9/2003 Number: 292 Created: 9/11/2003 Provide a signature block for the ditch company on any sheet that effects their ditch (including the cover sheet). Number: 298 Created: 9/15/2003 Sheet 15 - matchline missing. Sheet 16 - where does the underdrain go on the profile? Number: 299 Created: 9/15/2003 Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's outfall is below the 100 year storm. Number: 300 Created: 9/15/2003 Sheet 31, 33, 34, 35, 36 - (Please label the slope ratios (4:1 max allowed) Page 4 the construction costs along their frontage of Drake Road as well as repaying the small portion of Timberline that has been built to the ultimate. 53 This project is responsible for the design and construction of the northbound right turn lane from Drake to Timberline and will require the dedication of additional ROW. This turn lane will impact the ultimate location of the sidewalk, trees and perhaps the building setbacks. Place a note on the landscape plan saying that all trees must be 5' back from the edge of sidewalk. 54 This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. 55 The proposed maintenance road for the sewer line is designated as a future collector street. This project must provide an interim design with a driveable surface that will withstand heavy maintenance vehicles. The proposed gravel road as shown is not acceptable. In addition, this project must provide the ultimate design for the collector street (in accordance with 7-4F or 7'-517 depending on TIS and whether or not access is taken off it) and show how it ties into Drake (1000' either side) in the interim and ultimate design. Show all historic structures, buffer zones (historic, treatment plant, natural resources, etc), on all plan sets. The Ditch Company and/or Carghill needs to sign off on the plat to vacate the easements proposed as well as sign off on the utility plans wherever the design is affecting their ditch. 56 See detail 7-23 for all eyebrow requirements as those proposed do not meet standards. In addition, the median in the middle must be dedicated on the plat as ROW but noted that it shall be maintained by the HOA . 57 Iowa and Windrow Drives are designated as Connector streets and must be designed in accordance with detail 7-8F. 58 The sight distance easement shown is incorrect. Please see redlines for their correct approximate locations and see detail 7-16 for calculating ithe sight distance triangle. All sight distance easements must be dedicated on the plat and shown on all plan sets. Add the sight distance easement and landscape restrictions to the Landscape Plan and Utility Plans. 59 Please provide more information on the MF parking lots so that we can better evaluate them. Show all radii, parking stall widths, lengths, etc. Suggest a horizontal control plan sheet to keep the plans from getting too crowded. 60 Please refer to LCUASS 19-6 for parking setback requirements. 61 See Table 7-3 for separation distance requirements for driveways and intersections. 50' min separation is required from CL to CL on locals. For example, lots 7 and 8 off Iowa Drive do not meet this requirement. 62 The eyebrow on Haymeadow, Way does not meet the 200' separation requirement between local street intersections. This distance is calculated from the CL of Iowa to the CL of the first leg of the eyebrow. See table 7-3. 63 Show driveways on the landscape and utility plans (with centerline stationing) so that it can be determined whether or not all the utilities, landscaping, etc, will fit within the narrow lots. 64 Page 2 October 28, 2003 Troy Jones City of Fort Collins Current Planning 281 N. College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 J R ENGINEERING RE: Side Hill Filing One PDP & Final Compliance — Type 1 (LUC) #32-01B&C Dear Mr. Jones: This letter is in response to the staff project review comments dated 09-16-2003. Our responses, in italics, follow the City comments. ISSUES: Department: Current Panning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: General Number: 273 Created: 6/18/2003 19/16/2003] Take the word "typical" out of the note explaining the shaded driveway areas, and add another sentence to the note that reads "Any variation of driveway location can only be approved by the City Engineer. Response: The note explaining the shaded driveway areas has been revised as suggested in the comments. [6/18/20031 On page 3 of 6 on the plat, add to the note explaining the shaded areas that "these driveway locations shall not be varied." Please clarify this in the general notes on sheet 4 of 15 also. Number: 302 Created: 9/16/2003 19/16/20031 The City Clerk does not sign the plat. Take off the City Clerk signature line from page I of the plat. Response: The City Clerk signature line has been removed from page I of the plat. 2620 b:m F"..vpccr Road, Sint, 190, Fort Collio,, CO 80525 970491 '9888 • nlx: 970-491-9984 • www.irenginceri rig coil, Number: 303 Created: 9/16/2003 [9/ 16/20031 The lighting plan is now satisfying both Current Planning and Police Services. Response: NOTED Number: 304 Created: 9/16/2003 [9/16/2003] As stated previously, the Adequate Public Facilities requirement triggers the need for improvements to the Prospect and Timberline intersection. On Tuesday, Sep. 2, 2003 the City Council chose not to put on the November ballot, the redirecting of funds from other road projects to these intersection improvements. City Attorney staff has advised Current Planning staff that a condition MUST be placed on the Final Compliance approval for this project requiring improvements to the Prospect Road and Timberline Road intersection. This condition will be a formal letter from the City to the applicant, and will also be reflected in the Development Agreement Response: NOTED Number: 305 Created: 9/16/2003 Please re -submit paper copies of the following items: 6 site plans; 6 plats; 6 landscape plans; 6 utility plan sets; 1 drainage report; 6 response to comment letters from both JR Engineering and Cityscape; all easements; and the Timberline design. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number: 245 Created: 6/13/2003 [9/9/31 Repeat comment. The mylars cannot be approved until the recorded off -site easements are received. Response: NOTED 16/13/2003] The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must he submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. Topic: General Number: 50 Created: 1/3/2003 19/9/31 This issue continues to remain open until the ultimate and interim design for Timberline has been received. An internal meeting was held on 9/11/3 and it was determined that this development is still responsible for the interim and ultimate design for Timberline along its frontage plus :r 1000' of preliminary design north of their northernmost boundary. In no case will any building per be issued until the Adequate Public Facilities requirements have been met for this development. Response: NOTED [4/18/3, 6/11/31 Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open until the interim and ultimate design for Timberline is submitted. [1/3/2003] The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the City's Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also needs to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the Prospect/Timberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current location. It is highly encouraged that the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline for the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The PDP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or filing of the plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline -Prospect intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the intersection either by the City or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. Number: 51 Created: 1/3/2003 14/18/3,6/1 l/3, 9/9/31 Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. 1 1/3/20031 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. Number: 54 Created: 1/3/2003 [9/9/3 1 The estimate. for Share Pointe has been received and forwarded to Street Over sizing for their review. Comments to follow. Response: NOTED 16/ 1 1 /3] Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Pointe connection for the City's review. See above. 14/18/31 Item still open. Please provide 500' of off -site design or as far as necessary to show that the design will work with existing. It was determined in a meeting with JR Engineering that the cross sections asked for above were not necessary. [ 1/3/2003] This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 239 Created: 6/13/2003 [9/9/3] Repeat comment. Response: Please refer to City Scope's response letter. [6/13/2003] Correction required to note 23. See redlines. Number: 279 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/20031 See comment #278 from Jeff Hill/Water Wastewater. Response: See response #278. Topic: Plan and Profiles Number: 80 Created: 1/3/2003 [9/9/3] The ultimate is shown clearly and a note for tying into the EOP is shown, but it is not clear what will be built in the interim. Are you proposing a temporary asphalt patch from the curb return to the existing Timberline road? If so, please show. Response: A temporary asphalt connection to Timberline Road is now shown on sheets 48 & 50. [ 1/3/2003] Show how the streets will tie into the interim and ultimate Timberline design. Number: 86 Created: 1/3/2003 19/9/31 "There appears to be a low spot in the intersection detail - see redlines, sheet 53. Response: Water flows in a SE & SW direction from the spot indicated on the redlines. [6/1 1/31 The spot elevations are overlapped in some of the intersections details and I couldn't read/review them. Other details appear to have a low spot. Please see redlines. 14/18/31 Please make the intersection details a little larger so that I can read the spot elevations better. Thanks very much! [ 1/3/2003] Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. Topic: Plat Number: 280 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] From Technical Services: Boundary and legal do not close. See printout included. Response: We foundone course of the boundary that was labeled with an incorrect distance. It has been revised to reflect the correct distance and the boundary now closes. See attached map check sheet. Number: 281 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] From Technical Services: Street names need to be approved by PFA. Street does not meet requirements for a Boulevard Response: Street names have been revised on the plat sheets to reflect new names. Topic: Stormline Prot"iles Number: 301 Created: 9/16/2003 [9/16/20031 Please use ductile iron pipe in the ROW (instead of the RCP currently shown) where the concrete encasement does not meet the minimum cover requirements (2' below scarified subgrade). Response: Ductile iron pipe has been used where the concrete encasement did not meet the minimum cover requirements. Inmost cases the entire pipe run, from structure to structure, was changed. In one location, sheet 41, we specified a 20 LF DIP centered over the water line. We specified an RCP x DIP adapter to connect the two pipe types, see detail sheet 63. Carder Concrete can fabricate this adapter. Topic: Street Names Number: 106 Created: 1/3/2003 [9/9/31 Repeat comment. See comment under "Plat" regarding street names as well. Response: See response #281. 16/11/31 Repeat comment. Have the street names been approved by the appropriate city departments/agencies`/ 14/18/31 Repeat comment. 1 1/3/2003] Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. Topic: Utility plans Number: 119 Created: 1/3/2003 [9/9/3] Repeat until documents received. Response: NOTED [6/1 113] The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners slating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded casement document itself before you can go to hearing. [4/18/3] Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. [ 1/3/20031 Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. Number: 126 Created: 1/3/2003 [9/10/3] Sheet 49 - show the irrigation line crossing under Windrow. Keep in mind that it must have at least 2' from bottem of scarified subgrade. The pipe itself must be constructed with watertight joints (like a C900 or RCP R4 joint). Response: This is shown on sheet 44. [1/3/03] Show all utility crossings on plan and profile. Number: 283 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 9 - The shaded areas are too dark and will not scan. Would a light hatching work a little better? This comment applies to other sheets as well. Response: The shading has been lightened. Number: 284 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 23, 24 and 25 - Correct the overlapped labeling. Response: The plans have been revised to make them more legible. Number: 286 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 47 - scanning problems. Response: The plans have been revised to make them more legible. Number: 287 Created: 9/9/2003 19/9/2003] Sheet 49, 50, 52, 53, 54 - correct overlapped labeling. Response: The plans have been revised to make them more legible. Number: 288 Created: 9/9/2003 19/9/20031 Sheet 51 - scanning problems, overlapped labeling. Response: The plans have been revised to make them more legible. Number: 289 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements. Response: NOTED Number: 292 Created: 9/11/2003 19/1 1/2003] Provide a signature block for the ditch company on any sheet that effects their ditch (including the cover sheet). Response: There is no private ditch company involved here. This irrigation ditch is for Cargill site only. Number: 298 Created: 9/15/2003 [9/15/20031 Sheet 15 - matchline missing. Sheet 16 - where does the underdrain go on the profile? Response: The under drain shown on sheet 15 begins at that location. Caps are now shown on the under drain profiles. Number: 299 Created: 9/15/2003 [9/15/2003] Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's outfall is below the 100 year storm. Response: The report has been revised. Number: 300 Created: 9/15/2003 [9/15/20031 Sheet 31, 33, 34, 35, 36 - Please label the slope ratios (4:1 max allowed) Response: Slope ratios have been labeled. Department: Excel Energy Topic: General Number: 271 [9/8/2003] Same comments, same redlines. Response: NOTED Issue Contact: Len Hilderbrand Created: 6/18/2003 16/18/20031 No further comments. Same comments still apply. Department: Light & Power Topic: General Number: 277 19/3/20031 No comments. Response: NOTED Department: Stormwater Utility Topic: Drainage Number: 291 Issue Contact: Monica Moore Created: 9/3/2003 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Created: 9/11/2003 [9/1 1/20031 Please provide documentation on how the size of the orifice plate was determined without running extran first. See tab in drainage report. If previous analysis from prior submittal was used as a first iteration, then please include this information in this report and explain more clearly the methodology in the text. If you have any questions, please call Sue Paquette at 221- 7214. Response: The comment was discussed with City of Fort Collins (City) staff, through this discussion City staff indicated that their concern with the report was that a second ModSwmm analysis was not performed using the stage/discharge relationship front the EXTRAN model output. A second ModSwmtn model was added to the report using the stage/discharge relationship from the EXTRAN output. Spreadsheets and graphs were also added to the report to demonstrate how the EXTRAN data was extracted. In response to the written staff comment the following explanation is provided. The orifice for the initial ModSwmm model was sized using the orifice outlet equation (Q=Cd*A*(2gh)^0.5) with no downstream hydraulic grade line. This was determined to be acceptable through discussion with City staff since the outfall pipe discharges into the City storm sewer at a drop manhole. Any downstream hydraulic grade line produced by the pond discharges through the orifice would have a negligible backwater affect on the discharge capacity of the orifice. Number: 294 Created: 9/12/2003 19/12/20031 The easement, which acts as the outfall for the site and where the off -site sub -drain is located, needs to he obtained before the approval and signing of the Side Hill mylars. Response: NOTED Number: 295 Created: 9/12/2003 [9/12/20031 Please explain why the sub -drain travels the distance it does off -site. The sub -drain just needs to he higher then the 100-year WSEL at the location where it discharges into the Swale. Response: We cannot get above the 100-year WSEL until the location as shown on the plans. Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control Number: 290 Created: 9/10/2003 [9/ 10/2003] Please contact Bob Zakely to discuss the plan (phone call). Response: A nteetin,g was held with Bob on 9113103 and his concerns were addressed. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: General Number: 278 Created: 9/5/2003 [9/5/2003] There are still several locations where the proposed trees are in conflict with the proposed water mains or services. Please adjust trees or water lines to avoid these conflicts. See Site, Landscape and Utility plans for other comments. Response: Please refer to City Scape's response letter. Topic: Utility plans Number: 206 Created: 4/16/2003 [4/16/2003] As previously indicated; the existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rjgden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. Response: NOTED If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at (970) 491-9888. Sincerely, Je Paulsen, JR Engineering 9350010E Mapchk.txt Parcel name: 9350010a North: 65917.48 East : 60087.42 Line course: s 06-04-34 E Length: 329.33 North: 65590.00 East 60122.28 Line Course: s 01-42-38 E Length: 120.14 North: 65469.92 East 60125.87 Line course: s 00-01-49 E Length: 63.34 North: 65406.58 East 60125.90 curve Length: 20.29 Radius: 13.00 Delta: 89-24-46 Tangent: 12.87 Chord: 18.29 Course: s 44-44-12 E Course In: N 89-58-11 E Course out: S 00-33-25 w RP North: 65406.58 East 60138.90 End North: 65393.58 East 60138.78 Line course: s 89-26-35 E Length: 144.20 North: 65392.18 East 60282.97 Line course: s 81-218-45 E Length: 168.86 North: 65368.13 East 60450.11 Line course: S 85-53-24 E Length: 315.93 North: 65345.49 East 60765.23 Line course: s 89-26-35 E Length: 566.23 North: 65339.99 East 61331.43 Line course: N 00-17-35 w Length: 1706.80 North: 67046.77 East 61322.70 Line course: s 76-41-35 E Length: 36.75 North: 67038.31 East 61358.46 Line Course: s 37-53-05 E Length: 729.12 North: 66462.85 East 61806.20 Line Course: S 50-15-05 E Length: 366.40 North: 662213.57 East 62087.91 Line course: s 41-50-35 E Length: 246.15 North: 6604:5.19 East 62252.11 Line Course: s 49-49-35 E Length: 360.30 North: 65812.76 East 62527.41 Line course: s 14-40-35 E Length: 193.40 North: 65625.67 East 62576.41 Line course: s 01-07-25 w Length: 309.78 North: 65315.95 East 62570.34 Line course: s 89-26-35 E Length: 2551.31 North: 65291.15 East : 65121.53 Line course: N 49-38-05 w Length: 6355.08 North: 69407.07 East : 60279.40 curve Length: 366.13 Radius: 2914.93 Delta: 7-11-48 Tangent: 183.31 Chord: 365.89 Course: N 46-02-11 w Course In: N 40-21-55 E Course out: S 47-33-43 w RP North: 71625.05 East 62167.27 End North: 69661.07 East 60016.03 Line Course: s 00-13-56 E Length: 1697.99 North: 67963.10 East 60022.92 Line Course: S 00-01-49 E Length: 715.64 North: 67247.46 East 60023.30 Line Course: S 02-26-23 E Length: 832.36 North: 66415.85 East 60058.73 Line course: s 03-17-52 E Length: 499.18 North: 65917.50 East 60087.44 Perimeter: 18694.70 Area: 9,507,039 SF 218.25 AC Page 1 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 tree/utility/driveway locations and utility separation requirements. Please call Susan Joy, 221-6605, to set the day and we will arrange to have all the utilities represented. Utility Coordination meetings are held every Wednesday starting at 1:30pm. This project should take approximately 1 to 1 % hours and since most utility companies end the day at 3:30pm, starting the meeting at 1:30 or 2:00 is recommended. 65 Line up the "wishbone" sidewalks with the pedestrian access ramps. See redlines. 66 Coordinate the comments given under various sections so that all of the plan sets present the same information Topic: Grading Plan 67 Label all slope ratios. Slope ratios cannot exceed 4:1 in public ROW or where the slopes affect public ROW. 68 Grading adjacent to public sidewalks is required to be (nearly) flat for a minimum of 2'. i 69 Finish grade elevations must be provided for all streets and lot comers. See redlines. 70 Provide contours for a minimum of 50' offsite and tie into existing contours. How will the grading affect the Carghill property to the east and can it be done all onsite? Please show tie in points in more detail as the neighboring property is very concerned how this project will effect their farming operations. 71 All sidewalk culverts must be designed in accordance with detail 709. Add detail to detail sheet Topic: Landscape Plan 72 Remove contour lines for clarity. 73 Show all utility and driveway locations in order to coordinate the street tree locations. 74 Show all sight distance, emergency access, and utility easements - the plans currently show the utility easements incorrectly. 75 3.2.1.K requires 10 feet between trees and water or sewer lines. 4 feet between trees and gas lines. 76 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. 77 The developer must provide any needed irrigation to the medians of the eyebrows, 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). 78 Landscape medians include must include drainage facilities to handle sprinkler runoff and nuisance flows. Refer to Appendix C. Page 3 9350010B Mapchk.txt Mapcheck closure - (uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error closure: 0.02 course: N 55-01-13 E Error North: 0.014 East : 0.019 Precision 1: 934,735.50 Page 2 October 28, 2003 Troy Jones City of Fort Collins Community Planning and P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Environmental Services RE: SideHill — Final Compliance Plans Dear Troy: Cityscape urban design, inc 3555 stanford road, suite 105 fort collins, colorado 80525 (970) 226-4074 fax (970) 226-4196 e@cityscapeud.com Included below are the comments received from City Staff regarding the first round of Final Compliance Plans for SideHill. An explanation (in italics) of how issues have been addressed follows each comment. The reclined drawings provided to the applicant have been included in this resubmitted set. ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: General Number: 273 Create& 6/18/2003 [9/16/2003] Take the word "typical" out of the note explaining the shaded driveway areas, and add another sentence to the note that reads "Any variation of driveway location can only be approved by the City Engineer. [6/18/20031 On page 3 of 6 on the plat, add to the note explaining the shaded areas that "these driveway locations shall not be varied." Please clarify this in the general notes on sheet 4 of 15 also. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:302 Created: 9/16/2003 [9/16/20031 The City Clerk does not sign the plat. Take off the City Clerk signature line from page 1 of the plat. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:303 Created: 9/16/2003 [9/16/20031 The lighting plan is now satisfying both Current Planning and Police Services. So noted. Thank you. Number:304 Created:9116/2003 [9/16/2003] As stated previously, the Adequate Public Facilities requirement triggers the need for improvements to the Prospect and Timberline intersection. On Tuesday, Sep. 2, 2003 the City Council chose not to put on the November ballot, the redirecting of funds from other road projects to these intersection improvements. City Attorney staff has advised Current Planning staff that a condition MUST be placed on the Final Compliance approval for this project requiring improvements to the Prospect Road and Timberline Road intersection. This condition will be a formal letter from the City to the applicant, and will also be reflected in the Development Agreement. So noted. Thank you. Page 1 Number 305 Created:9/16/2003 Please re -submit paper copies of the following items: 6 site plans, 6 plats; 6 landscape plans; 6 utility plan sets; 1 drainage report; 6 response to comment letters from both JR Engineering and Cityscape; all easements, and the Timberline design. The requested plans and copies have been included in the submittal package. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number:245 Created:6/13/2003 [9/9/3] Repeat comment. The mylars cannot be approved until the recorded off -site easements are received. [6/13/20031 The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. So noted. Thank you. Topic: General Number:50 Created:1/3/2003 [9/9/3] This issue continues to remain open until the ultimate and interim design for Timberline has been received. An internal meeting was held on 9/11/3 and it was determined that this development is still responsible for the interim and ultimate design for Timberline along its frontage plus a 1000' of preliminary design north of their northernmost boundary. In no case will any building permits be issued until the Adequate Public Facilities requirements have been met for this development. [4/18/3, 6/11/31 Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open until the interim and ultimate design for Timberline is submitted. [1/3/2003] The following is a summary of the conclusions reached at the City's Transportation Coordination meeting on Thursday, December 19, 2002: Sidehill is responsible for the full design of Timberline along the property frontage. Timberline also needs to be designed offsite to the north through the intersection at Prospect, showing the horizontal and vertical alignment, the centerline profile of Timberline, and any further information needed to verify that the design will work to City Standards. This design should maintain the current elevation of the railroad tracks and, if possible, should accommodate any trees that the City Forester requires to be maintained. In addition, it is anticipated that the proposed roadway coming into the crest of the hill will be 3 to 5 feet lower then the existing elevation. The redesign of the Prospect/Timberline intersection will need to be included as well, holding the east curb line in its current location. It is highly encouraged that the engineers from Sidehill coordinate with the engineers of the Mansion Park development directly across Timberline for the design of Timberline, and Development Review Engineering will schedule a meeting to facilitate this coordination. The PDP for Sidehill may be approved with conditions pertaining to the APF issues by the Planning and Zoning Board /or Hearing Officer after the above designs have been completed, However, the Final Compliance will not be approved and plans signed off , nor will a Development Agreement be started, or filing of the plat will occur until the APF issues at the Timberline -Prospect intersection have been solved by the design and construction of improvements to the intersection either by the City Page 2 or by private development, or the City has appropriated a Capital Project to construct the required improvements. So noted. Thank you. Number:51 Created:1/3/2003 [4/18/3,6/11/3, 9/9/31 Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open. [1/3/2003] The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. So noted. Thank you. Number:54 Created:1/3/2003 [9/9/3] The estimate for Share Pointe has been received and forwarded to Street Oversizing for their review. Comments to follow. [6/11 /3] Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Pointe connection for the City's review. See above. 14/18/3] Item still open. Please provide 500' of off -site design or as far as necessary to show that the design will work with existing. It was determined in a meeting with JR Engineering that the cross sections asked for above were not necessary. [1/3/2003] This project is responsible for the ultimate design of the Sharp Point connection. To insure that future street improvements will meet City Standards, the centerline flowline, and cross sections of all streets (Sharp Point connection and all stubbed out streets) shall be continued for 500 feet beyond construction or as far as necessary to show that the design will work. Please provide an engineer's estimate for the cost of the Sharp Point connection for the City's review. Once the final cost has been approved by the City, it shall be included in the Development Agreement and a portion collected over each phase to assure that this connection is made in the future. So noted. Thank you. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 239 Created- 6/13/2003 [9/9/3] Repeat comment. [6/13/2003] Correction required to note 23. See redlines. The note has been amended per a meeting between Joe Carter of Cityscape and Susan Joy on Tuesday September 23, 2003. Number:279 Created:9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] See comment #278 from Jeff Hill/Water Wastewater. So noted. Thank you. Please see response to comment number 278 below. Topic: Plan and Profiles Number:80 Created:1/3/2003 [9/9/3] The ultimate is shown clearly and a note for tying into the EDP is shown, but it is not clear what will be built in the interim. Are you proposing a temporary asphalt patch from the curb return to the existing Timberline road? If so, please show. [1/3/2003] Show how the streets will tie into the interim and ultimate Timberline design. Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment Page 3 Number:86 Created:1/3/2003 [9/9/3] There appears to be a low spot in the intersection detail - see redlines, sheet 53. 16/11/31 The spot elevations are overlapped in some of the intersections details and I couldn't read/review them. Other details appear to have a low spot. Please see redlines. [4/18/3] Please make the intersection details a little larger so that I can read the spot elevations better. Thanks very much' [1/3/2003] Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment Topic: Plat Number:280 Created:9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] From Technical Services: Boundary and legal do not close. See printout included. Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number: 281 Created- 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] From Technical Services: Street names need to be approved by PFA. Street does not meet requirements for a Boulevard. Joe Carter from Cityscape met with Troy Jones and Ron Gonzales regarding street names. PFA requested that the northwestern % of Iowa Drive be renamed because it changes direction. The applicant proposes this % of street be named Katandin Drive. PFA also has issues with the naming the primary collector throughout the development Nancy Gray Boulevard. The PFA maintains that the street does not qualify as a boulevard but rather an avenue. Cityscape has submitted a plan showing median widths and lengths per a request by Ted Shepard. Ted intends to take this plan to PFA to discuss the possibility of using the suffix "boulevard". At time of the submittal, the plans do not reflect a final decision on the suffix of this collector. Prior to the submission of mylars, a suffix will be determined and shown on all plan sets. Topic: Stormline Profiles Number:301 Created:9/16/2003 19/16/2003] Please use ductile iron pipe in the ROW ( instead of the RCP currently shown) where the concrete encasement: does not meet the minimum cover requirements (2' below scarified subgrade). Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Topic: Street Names Number:106 Created:1/3/2003 [9/9/3] Repeat comment. See comment under "Plat" regarding street names as well. [6/11 /3] Repeat comment. Have the street names been approved by the appropriate city departments/agencies? [4/18/3] Repeat comment. [1/3/2003] Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. Please refer to the response to comment #281 Page 4 Topic: Utility plans Number 119 Created:1/3/2003 [9/9/3] Repeat until documents received. [6/11/31 The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners stating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. [4/18/31 Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. [1/3/2003] Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number 126 Created:1/3/2003 [9/10/31 Sheet 49 - show the irrigation line crossing under Windrow. Keep in mind that it must have at least 2' from bottem of scarified subgrade. The pipe itself must be constructed with watertight joints (like a C900 or RCP R4 joint). [1/3/03] Show all utility crossings on plan and profile. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:283 Created 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 9 - The shaded areas are too dark and will not scan. Would a light hatching work a little better? This comment applies to other sheets as well. Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number 284 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 23, 24 and 25 - Correct the overlapped labeling. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:286 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 47 - scanning problems. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:287 Created:919/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 49, 50, 52, 53, 54 - correct overlapped labeling. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:288 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Sheet 51 - scanning problems, overlapped labeling. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:289 Created: 9/9/2003 [9/9/2003] Please see Appendix E6 for scanning requirements. Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Page 5 Number: 292 Create& 9/11/2003 [9/11 /2003] Provide a signature block for the ditch company on any sheet that effects their ditch (including the cover sheet). Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:298 Created: 9/15/2003 [9/15/20031 Sheet 15 - matchline missing. Sheet 16 - where does the underdrain go on the profile? Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number: 299 Created- 9/15/2003 [9/15/2003] Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's outfall is below the 100 year storm. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:300 Created: 9/15/2003 [9/15/20031 Sheet 31, 33, 34, 35, 36 - Please label the slope ratios (4:1 max allowed) Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Department: Excel Energy Issue Contact: Len Hilderbrand Topic: General Number:271 Created:6/18/2003 [9/8/2003 Same comments, same redlines. [6/18/20031 No further comments. Same comments still apply. So noted. Thank you. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Monica Moore Topic: General Number 277 Created:9/3/2003 [9/3/2003] No comments So noted. Thank you. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number:291 Created:9/11/2003 [9/11 /20031 Please provide documentation on how the size of the orifice plate was determined without running extran first. See tab in drainage report. If previous analysis from prior submittal was used as a first iteration, then please include this information in this report and explain more clearly the methodology in the text. If you have any questions, please call Sue Paquette at 221-7214. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Number:294 Created:9/12/2003 [9/12/20031 The easement, which acts as the outfall for the site and where the off -site sub -drain is located, needs to be obtained before the approval and signing of the Side Hill mylars. So noted. Thank you. The applicant is working to obtain the necessary easements Page 6 Number 295 Created:9/12/2003 [9/12/20031 Please explain why the sub -drain travels the distance it does off -site. The sub -drain just needs to be higher then the 100-year WSEL at the location where it discharges into the Swale. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control Number:290 Create:d:9/10/2003 [9/10/2003] Please contact Bob Zakely to discuss the plan (phone call). Please refer to J. R. Engineering's response letter for this comment Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: General Number:278 Created:9/5/2003 [9/5/2003] There are still several locations where the proposed trees are in conflict with the proposed water mains or services. Please adjust trees or water lines to avoid these conflicts. See Site, Landscape and Utility plans for other comments. All tree separations have been adjusted per a meeting between Joe Carter of Cityscape and Jeff Hill on Thursday October 2, 2003. Notes have been changed within the Landscape Notes section per Jeff Hill's request. Topic: Utility plans Number:206 Created:4/16/2003 [4/16/20031 As previously indicated; the existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rigden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. Please refer to J.R. Engineering's response letter for this comment. This concludes the response to comments. Please call with any questions regarding this submittal. Thank you, 4( Xe Carter Cityscape Urban Design Page 7 FINAL COMPLIANCE REVISION COMMENT SHEET REC. C DATE: October 28, 2003 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #32-01C SIDE HILL FILING ONE FINAL COMPLIANCE — TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: November 12, 2003 ElNo Comment ElProblems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTUF.Y REFERENCE" i" ''C (5% �� f•< ._ .>i;. vim' i�C- ii/f _. �l �G • ZL 14 Z;,� Name (please print) Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _Site Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape city of Fort Collins Citv o! fort Collins roject Comments Sheet Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: November 12, 2003 Project: SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP & FINAL COMPLIANCE - TYPE I (LUC) #32- 01 B&C All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the staff revi(-w meeting: November 12, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number: 245 Created: 6/13/2003 [11/7/03] Repeat comment. I apologize for this duplicate comment (see #119), but I'll keep both in for history's sake. Thank you. (9/9/3) Repeat comment. The mylars cannot be approved until the recorded off -site easements are received (6/13/03) The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this projec t, ,J to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. Topic: General Number: 51 Created: 1/3/2003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3,6/11/3, 9/9/3 11/5/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open for history only Number: 306 Created: 11 /7/2003 (11/7/031 Now that the design and construction of Timberline Road is being being done with the SID, it is preferred that the street trees and sidewalk along Timberline NOT be installed with this project. They will be installed with the SID instead and then become part of this Development's local street portion. Please make a note on the appropriate sheets (Landscape and Utility) stating that the sidewalk and street trees will be installed with the Timberline Road SID. Indicate on the plans in some way (ghosting them out or ?) where the start/stop of construction/installation will be for the sidewalk and street trees. Topic: Utility plans Number: 119 Created: 1 /3/2003 [11/4/031 Repeat comment. The DA and/or the utility plans cannot be signed off until the off -site easements have been obtained and submitted to the City. Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat __ Site Drainage Report - Other Utility Redline Utility Landscape -- Page 1 79 Coordinate the comments among the various plan sets so that they present the same information. Topic: Plan and Profiles 80 Show how the streets will tie into the interim and ultimate Timberline design. 81 Curb return radii must be in accordance with table 8-2. 82 See table 7-3, 7-17 and 7--l8 for street design criteria. There are several areas where minimum VCs and minimum tangent lengths between curves are not being met. 83 Please provide more information on the size, type and location of all inlets so that we can verify that they are not located in the curb returns. 84 Centerline profiles and stationing are required for all public streets. 85 Please specify the type of curb being used and where. 86 i l.. Provide intersection details per 7-27, 7-28 and 3.3.4. 87 Provide profiles for all curb returns.0 -. 88 Please provide CL stationing for the storm inlets and provide enough information to determine whether or not the inlets are properly located out of the curb returns. Topic: Plat 89 From Technical Services: Plat closes, legal does not close and does not match plat. See redlines. 90 From Technical Services: Dedication statement does not match the title. 91 From Technical Services: Basis of bearing statement should be south line SW 1/4 not south line section. 92 From Technical Services: Please show how additional ROW of Timberline and Drake was dedicated by providing the Reception Numbers. 93 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.). See redlines and the checklist E4. 94 Change the Sanitary Sewer and Waterline Easement to "Utility Easement." Page 4 Incomplete or incorrect ROW. pronerty I as and ea-emr -f si-, vn. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW o: easements by plat or separate document. 4/18.'3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. 6/1' 3: Tha egals have been r-seived but you will need eith,r a Letter of Intent from the individual oroperty owners st : q th they will grantthe easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. 9/9/3: Rec^at until documents received. Number 299 Created:9/15/2003 [11/4/031 F.epeat comment. The response on the redlined utility sheet indicates that the subsurface report will be revised to reflect the avert elevation shown on the utility plans. Mike Brake indicated both verbally and by email that he is waiting for Anderson Consulting to provide the revised report to JR Engineering and that he would submit as soon as he can. Mike was also advic q at that time that the mvfars gill not r pproved until the City receives the revised report and/or the plans be changed to , elect the current repori s re,u firemen _;. (9/15/3) Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's outfall is below the 100 year storm. Page 2 February 2, 2004 Troy Jones City of Fort Collins Current Planning 281 N. College Avenue J R ENGINEERING Fort Collins, CO 80525 Re: SideHill Filing 1 PDP & Final Compliance — Type 1 (LUC) #32-01B&C Dear Mr. Jones: The following are JR Engineering responses to staff's 11/14/2003 and January 26, 2004 review comments. Our responses, in italics, follow the City comments. NOVEMBER 14, 2003 REVIEW COMMENTS ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: General Number: 304 Created: 9/16/2003 [11/12/031 This condition will still apply. Please add a general note on the site plan that refers the reader to the Development Agreement for the specifics on how the Adequate Public Facilities requirement is going to be met. [9/16/20031 As stated previously, the Adequate Public Facilities requirement triggers the need for improvements to the Prospect and Timberline intersection. On Tuesday, Sep. 2, 2003 the City Council chose not to put on the November ballot, the redirecting of funds from other road projects to these intersection improvements. City Attorney staff has advised Current Planning staff that a condition MUST be placed on the Final Compliance approval for this project requiring improvements to the Prospect Road and Timberline Road intersection. This condition will be a formal letter from the City to the applicant, and will also be reflected in the Development Agreement. JR Response: Issue is addressed in the Development Agreement. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number: 245 Created: 6/13/2003 [11/7/03] Repeat comment. I apologize for this duplicate comment (see #119), but I'll keep both in for history's sake. Thank you. (9/9/3) Repeat comment. The mylars cannot be approved until the recorded off -site easements are received. (6/13/03) The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. JR Response: Off -site drainage easements are not required. Sidehill Filing 1 stormwater drainage requirements are in compliance with the City's Master Drainage Plan. Additional overflow discharge ,protection engineering design to Rigden Pond 216 has been provided and will be constructed with Sidehill Filing 1 DCP. See Utility Plan sheet 36A. Pa�c l to Lo I!,a I'R„p,ti, IL,ad, Sui,_ 190. Iba C�,Il iuc CO 80525 9-0 491 M8 • Ihx'. 9-f1/i91 `08%1 • www_jrcnhlntt riug.com Topic: General Number: 51 Created: 1 /3/2003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3,6/11/3, 9/9/3 11/5/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open for history only. Number: 306 Created: 11 /7/2003 [11/7/03] Now that the design and construction of Timberline Road is being being done with the SID, it is preferred that the street trees and sidewalk along Timberline NOT be installed with this project. They would be installed with the SID instead and the become part of this Development's local street portion. Please make a note on the appropriate sheets (Landscape and Utility) stating that the sidewalk and street trees will be installed with the Timberline Road SID. Indicate on the plans in some way (ghosting them out or ?) where the start/stop of construction/installation will be for the sidewalk and street trees. JR Response: Done. See note on Utility plan sheets 9, 10, 23-25 and 29-31. Number: 307 Created: 11 /10/2003 [11/10/03] From Technical Services: Curve information and curve tables are incomplete. JR Response: Done. Plat will be revised with an affidavit of correction. Number: 308 Created: 11 /10/2003 [11/10/03] From Technical Services: Add street prefixes - south and east to street names (Timberline and Drake). JR Response: Done. Number: 309 Created: 11 /10/2003 [11/10/031 From Technical Services: The "gray tone" hatch needs to be lightened so that there is good contrast with the liens and text. The shadow analysis plan is particularly too dark. JR Response: Adjustments have been made to the best level possible. Topic: Plat Number: 280 Created: 9/9/2003 [11/10/031 Repeat comment. Legal does not close. Legal and boundary do not match. See redlines. (9/9/3) From Technical Services: Boundary and legal do not close. See printout included. JR Response: Legal has been corrected. Boundary and legal closes. Topic: Utility plans Number: 119 Created: 1 /3/2003 [11/4/03] Repeat comment. The DA and/or the utility plans cannot be signed off until the off -site easements have been obtained and submitted to the City. 9/9/3: Repeat until documents received. Page 2 6/11/3: The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners stating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. 1/3/3: Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. JR Response: Off -site drainage easements are not required. Sidehill Filing 1 stormwater drainage requirements are in compliance with the City's Master Drainage Plan. Additional overflow discharge protection engineering design to Rigden Pond 216 has been provided and will be constructed with Sidehill Filing 1 DCP. See Utility plan sheet 36A. Number: 299 Created: 9/15/2003 [11/4/031 Repeat comment. The response on the redlined utility sheet indicates that the subsurface report will be revised to reflect the invert elevation shown on the utility plans. Mike Brake indicated both verbally and by ernail that he is waiting for Anderson Consulting to provide the revised report to JR Engineering and that he would submit as soon as he can. Mike was also advised at that time that the mylars will not be approved until the City receives the revised report and/or the plans be changed to reflect the current report's requirements. (9/15/3) Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's outfall is below the 100 year storm. JR Response: An underdrain outfall for Sidehill Filing 1 is re -designed to discharge on site and above a 100-year floodplain. A copy of the revised subsurface drainage report is included with the submittal. Department: Stormwater Utility Topic: Drainage Number: 294 [11/12/03] Repeat Comment Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Created: 9/12/2003 The easement, which acts as the outfall for the site and where the off -site sub -drain is located, needs to be obtained before the approval and signing of the Side Hill mylars. JR Response: An underdrain outfall for Sidehill Filing 1 is re -designed to discharge on site and above a 100-year floodplain. An on site drainage easement to encompass groundwater flows discharged on the surface is provided by a separate document submitted with the Utility plans. See Utility plan sheets 12, 12A and 34 Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control Number: 310 Created: 11 /12/2003 1. The note that all disturbed areas are to be seeded and mulched is on the cover sheet of the plan set, and not with the erosion control notes or on the erosion control plans. Please put it with the other EC notes or on the EC plan. JR Response: Done. See Utility plan sheet 2. Department: Water Wastewater Topic: Utility plans Number: 44 Page 3 Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Created: 12/31 /2002 [11/14/031 This comment is being carried forward mainly so that it does not get lost. The 42-inch sewer in the Rigden 6th plans will need to be approved, the development agreement will need to address the construction and cost responsibilities and coordination will be needed between the City and developer for the sanitary sewer improvements. The existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rigden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. JR Response: The City Utility Department will construct the necessary 42-inch sanitary sewer. Sidehill Filing 1 will provide appropriate funding as identified in the Development Agreement. Number: 259 Created: 6/16/2003 [11/14/031 The underdrain must outlet above the 100-year flood elevation. The pump station which has been proposed for the underdrain is not an acceptable solution. If you would like to meet and discuss/brainstorm other possible solutions, we are willing to participate. What is the 100-year water surface elevation at the outlet of the underdrain? Is this area a channel, pond, river, ???? JR Response: An underdrain outfall for Sidehill Filing 1 is re -designed to discharge on site and above a 100-year floodplain. A copy of the revised subsurface drainage report is included with the submittal. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: Utility plans Number: 206 Created: 4/16/2003 [11 /12/03] As previously indicated, the existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rigden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. JR Response: The City Utility Department will construct the necessary 42-inch sanitary sewer. Sidehill Filing 1 will provide appropriate funding as identified in the Development Agreement Number: 311 Created: 11 /12/2003 [11/12/03] As previously indicated, if the future intersection of Nancy Gray Ave. and Miles House Ave. is not constructed as a round -a -bout then the sanitary sewer as shown will need to be relayed. The sanitary sewer at the intersection of Nancy Gray Ave. and Miles House Ave. needs to be designed at a slope which would be adequate should the sewer need to be relayed due to the future realignment of this intersection. JR Response: Done. See Utility plan sheet 11 and attached sewer profile worksheet. JANUARY 26, 2004 REVIEW COMMENTS Please define all aspects of the proposed under drain (i.e. future extension, vertical separation from sanitary sewer if in the same trench, cleanout locations, etc.) Page 4 JR Response: Done. See sheet 12A. If sanitary sewer tyrunik is being bored under railroad right of way, how will concrete encasement be accomplished? JR Response: The 42" sanitary sewer trunk line will be constructed by the City of Fort Collins Utility Department. Is the wall thickness to be 0.34 feet or 0.34 inches? JR Response: The thickness has been clarified on the drawings. See sheet 11A. Connect 15 inch sewer to Existing 27 inch west of existing manhole. JR Response: Done. See sheet 11 If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 491-9888. Yours Truly, Michael Brake Director of Operations JR Engineering Pagc 5 February 3, 2004 Susan Joy City of Fort Collins Engineering Department P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: SideHill — Final Compliance Plans — Second Round Dear Susan, co �Y�@@[P@ urban design, inc 3555 stanford road, suite 105 fort Collins, Colorado 80525 (970) 226-4074 fax (970) 226-4196 e@cityscapeud.com Included below are the comments received from City Staff regarding the second round of Final Compliance Plans for SideHill. An explanation (in italics) of how issues have been addressed follows each comment. The redlined drawings provided to the applicant have been included in this resubmitted set. ISSUES: * Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: General Number:304 Created:9/16/2003 [11/12/03] This condition will still apply. Please add a general note on the site plan that refers the reader to the Development Agreement for the specifics on how the Adequate Public Facilities requirement is going to be met. [9/16/2003] As stated previously, the Adequate Public Facilities requirement triggers the need for improvements to the Prospect and Timberline intersection. On Tuesday, Sep. 2, 2003 the City Council chose not to put on the November ballot, the redirecting of funds from other road projects to these intersection improvements. City Attorney staff has advised Current Planning staff that a condition MUST be placed on the Final Compliance approval for this project requiring improvements to the Prospect Road and Timberline Road intersection. This condition will be a formal letter from the City to the applicant, and will also be reflected in the Development Agreement. • A note has been added to the general notes section of the Site Plan stating that improvements to the Prospect Road and Timberline Road interchange are required and references the Development Agreement. The note references Section "D" of the Development Agreement as per conversations with Troy Jones and Susan Joy. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: Easements Number:245 Created:6/13/2003 [11/7/03] Repeat comment. I apologize for this duplicate comment (see #119), but IT keep both in for history's sake. Thank you. (9/9/3) Repeat comment. The mylars cannot be approved until the recorded oft -site easements are received. Page 1 o urban design, inc. (6/13/03) The legal descriptions for the off -site drainage easements have been received. In order for this project to go to public hearing, either the copies of the recorded easement itself must be submitted OR at the very minimum, signed Letters of Intent from the property owners stating that they will sign the easements must be submitted. So noted. Thank you. The applicant is working on the easements and will submit them to your department. Topic: General Number:51 Created:1/3/2003 The actual ROW required along Timberline is unknown until the ultimate design of Timberline is complete. 4/18/3,6/11/3, 9/9/3 11/5/3: Your response is acknowledged. This item will remain open for history only. • So noted. Thank you. * Number: 306Created: 11/7/2003 [11/7/03] Now that the design and construction of Timberline Road is being done with the SID, it is preferred that the street trees and sidewalk along Timberline NOT be installed with this project. They would be installed with the SID instead and the become part of this Development's local street portion. Please make a note on the appropriate sheets (Landscape and Utility) stating that the sidewalk and street trees will be installed with the Timberline Road SID. Indicate on the plans in some way (ghosting them out or ?) where the start/stop of construction/installation will be for the sidewalk and street trees. • A note has been added to the landscape sheets stating that the sidewalk and landscaping shown in the tree lawns will not be installed with this project. These improvements will be installed with the Timberline Road SID project. An "End of Construction" line has been added to the drawings along the Timberline ROW as per conversations with Susan Joy. Number:307 Created:11/10/2003 [11/10/03] From Technical Services: Curve information and curve tables are incomplete. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. * Number: 308Created: 11/10/2003 [11/10/03] From Technical Services: Add street prefixes - south and east to street names (Timberline and Drake). • The street prefixes have been added to Timberline and Drake. Page 2 CD�y7S§@o urban design, inc. * Number: 309Created: 11/10/2003 [11/10/03] From Technical Services: The "gray tone" hatch needs to be lightened so that there is good contrast with the liens and text. The shadow analysis plan is particularly too dark. • The gray tone hatch has been lightened to create more contrast between lines and text. Please call Chris Whitted or me directly if the lines and text are still illegible. Cityscape has submitted four test prints to Technical Services to see which hatching is acceptable for their purposes. As of this writing, we have not received a response from Technical Services. Topic: Plat Number:280 Created:9/9/2003 [11/10/03] Repeat comment. Legal does not close. Legal and boundary do not match. See redlines. (9/9/3) From Technical Services: Boundary and legal do not close. See printout included. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Topic: Utility plans Number:119 Created:1/3/2003 [11/4/03] Repeat comment. The DA and/or the utility plans cannot be signed off until the off -site easements have been obtained and submitted to the City. 9/9/3: Repeat until documents received. 6/11/3: The legals have been received but you will need either a Letter of Intent from the individual property owners stating that they will grant the easements or the actual recorded easement document itself before you can go to hearing. 4/18/3: Your response is acknowledged. Item remains open. 1/3/3: Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Number:299 Created:9/15/2003 [11/4/03] Repeat comment. The response on the redlined utility sheet indicates that the subsurface report will be revised to reflect the invert elevation shown on the utility plans. Mike Brake indicated both verbally and by email that he is waiting for Anderson Consulting to provide the revised report to JR Engineering and that he would submit as soon as he can. Mike was also advised at that time that the mylars will not be approved until the City Page 3 o urban design, inc. receives the revised report and/or the plans be changed to reflect the current report's requirements. (9/15/3) Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's ouffall is below the 100 year storm. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number:294 Created:9/12/2003 [11/12/03] Repeat Comment The easement, which acts as the outfall for the site and where the off -site sub -drain is located, needs to be obtained before the approval and signing of the Side Hill mylars. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Topic: Erosion/Sediment Control Number:310 Created:11/12/2003 1. The note that all disturbed areas are to be seeded and mulched is on the cover sheet of the plan set, and not with the erosion control notes or on the erosion control plans. Please put it with the other EC notes or on the EC plan. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Utility plans Number:44 Created:12/31/2002 [11/14/031 This comment is being carried forward mainly so that it does not get lost. The 42-inch sewer in the Rigden 6th plans will need to be approved, the development agreement will need to address the construction and cost responsibilities and coordination will be needed between the City and developer for the sanitary sewer improvements. The existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rigden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Number:259 Created:6/16/2003 [11/14/031 The underdrain must outlet above the 100-year flood elevation. The pump station which has been proposed for the underdrain is not an acceptable solution. If you would like to meet and discuss/brainstorm other possible solutions, we are willing to participate. Page 4 95 Provide a tract table. Who owns and maintains each tract? 96 Provide all easements and vacations by separate document as stated on the plat. 97 Provide the correct sight distance easements as required by code. 98 See comments under "General" regarding additional ROW, emergency access easement requirements, Ditch Company Signatures, Right Turn Lane, etc. 99 The ROW required for Drake is a minimum of 42' measured from the section line plus additional width for the right turn lane and taper. Building envelopes need to be called out and labeled separately. 't -1 c-, � tl._ 144 The plat needs to include dedicated ROW for the maintenance/collector road and provide all ROW and/or offsite easements (off -site grading and construction) that occur outside the platted boundary. 145 Dedicate Emergency Access Easements on the Plat and show on all plan sets for the MF parking areas. See Ron Gonzales with PFA for their requirements. He can be reached at 416-2864. Topic: Site 101 Dimension all sidewalks. 102 Remove contour lines. 103 No signage is allowed within the utility easement. Please note that the garage door is to be a minimum of 20' from the back of sidewalk or property line. 105 Coordinate the comments among the various plan sets so that they present the same information. Topic: Soils Report 147 From Rick Richter in Pavement Management: This site has some high swell soils. This will need to be addressed in the Soils Report. A new report should be completed to address the utility trench backfill and overlot grading. Topic: Street Names 106 Please refer to Chapter 13 of LCUASS for street naming requirements. Page 5 Qo y7p@ urban design, inc. What is the 100-year water surface elevation at the outlet of the underdrain? Is this area a channel, pond, river, ???? Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: Utility plans Number:206 Created:4/16/2003 [11 /12/031 As previously indicated; the existing sanitary sewer in Drake Road has limited capacity available. Some of the sewers included in Rigden Farm 6th Filing are needed to provide relief capacity for the: sewer in Drake. If the Side Hill project proceeds before Rigden 6th filing, Side Hill will be responsible for constructing the needed sewers. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Number:311 Created:11/12/2003 [11/12/03] As previously indicated, if the future intersection of Nancy Gray Ave. and Miles House Ave. is not constructed as a round -a -bout then the sanitary sewer as shown will need to be relayed. The sanitary sewer at the intersection of Nancy Gray Ave. and Miles House Ave. needs to be designed at a slope which would be adequate should the sewer need to be relayed due to the future realignment of this intersection. • Please refer to JR Engineering's response to comment letter. Please contact me if you have any further questions regarding this submittal. Joe Carter Cityscape Urban Design Page 5 t Project Comments Sheet FM Selected Departments :'t :A i oli t <i1ii_: • Department: Engineering Date: February 12, 2004 Project: SIDE HILL FILING ONE PDP & FINAL COMPLIANCE -TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: November 12, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General Number: 309 Created: 11/10/2003 [02/11104] Please contact J.R. Wilson in Technical Services regarding the Site and Landscape Plans. The sheets currently do not meet the City's requirements set forth in Appendix E6. [11/10/031 From Technical Services: The "gray tone" hatch needs to be lightened so that there is good contrast with the liens and text. The shadow analysis plan is particularly too dark. Number: 316 Created: 2/11/2004 [2/11104] Comments regarding the easement and Subsurface report to follow tomorrow, February 12, 2004. Number: 318 Created: 2/12/2004 [2112/041 Please provide the additional 20' easement required for the 42inch sewer line. The 40' temporary construction easement is not required. Make sure the additional easement is showing on all plan sets. Number: 319 Created: 2/1212004 [2/12/04] Please update the contact list for Stormwater and Wastewater, see redlines. Topic: Plat Number: 315 Created: 2/11/2004 [2111/041 Please see the plat redlines from J.R. Wilson and Wally Muscott. There are several errors that need to be corrected with the Affidavit of Correction. This Affidavit will need to be filed with the County and a copy of the recorded documented must be provided to Engineering before we will release the signed mylars. Topic: Utility plans Number: 299 Created: 9/15/2003 [2/121041 Repeat comment. Still need a revised Subsurface Report or a letter updating that report to reflect the current design. .Signature. Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 [11/4/031 Repeat comment. The response on the redllned utility sheet indicates that the subsurface report will be revised to reflect the invert elevation shown on the utility plans. Mike Brake indicated both verbally and by email that he is waiting for Anderson Consulting to provide the revised report to JR Engineering and that he would submit as soon as he can. Mike was also advised at that time that the mylars will not be approved until the City receives the revised report and/or the plans be changed to reflect the current report's requirements. (9/15/3) Offsite Underdrain System - see page 7 of the subsurface report. It appears that the underdrain system's outfall is below the 100 year storm. Number: 317 Created: 2/12/2004 [2112104] Please remove sheets 21-22A - Offsite Subdrain design as it is no longer part of this project. Page 2 Topic: Traffic Study 107 Please contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 regarding the TIS. An Adequate Public Facilities analysis must be provided for the Timberline and Prospect intersection. The TIS must be detailed enough to sufficiently address any modification and/variance requested by this development. Topic: Utility plans 108 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. 109 Cover Page - Correct the index, see redlines. 110 The vicinity map on the cover sheet must be to a scale of 1" = 1000' - 1500'. ill Provide a title block on each sheet. 112 Provide a legend on each sheet identifying the symbols used on that particular sheet. fit,. t _ 1-" -' f'' � Vt A t, ' 113 Line 41 and 48 of the General Notes require corrections. 114 Line 14 of the Grading and Erosion Control Notes must be completed. Contact Bob Zakely at 224-6063 for the specific seed mix required. 115 Please provide the statement shown in Checklist E4, Section II, J and Section III, E. 116 Provide all typical street sections for each street type proposed. Sections include appropriate horizontal and vertical dimensions and cross slopes. List each street in the development under the appropriate street type. 117 Drainage and Erosion Control sheets - provide drainage arrows and show positive drainage to streets or to an approved drainage facility. 118 Provide all development and construction of all public improvements phasing information. All public improvements witin each phase stand alone. Phases separated by a thick, ghosted line and identified by either numbers or letters. 119 Incomplete or incorrect ROW, property lines and easements shown. Please provide and label with dimensions and labels. Please provide all off -site ROW or easements by plat or separate document. 120 This project will need to coordinate this design with the project to the west and show enough information on this plan set so that we can determine how the streets will line up across Timberline. 121 Vertical curb and gutter is required on Connector Streets (Iowa and Windrow). Page 6