Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMOUNTAIN RIDGE FARM PUD FOURTH - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-04-25Dave Stringer - Mountain Ridge Farms IV velopment Agreement Page 1 I From: George Hart <ghart@progliv.com> To: TS.ENG_NET(DSTRINGER) Date: Tue, Apr 10, 2001 11:27 AM Subject: Mountain Ridge Farms IV Development Agreement 4/10101 Dave, Here are our comments on the draft agreement we received in the mail last Friday. 1. In the first paragraph, add "Inc." at the end of "Progressive Living Structures". 2. On page 3, paragraph H., The fifth sentence beginning with "Failure of the City to give notice of such claim to the Developer within ninety (90) days ...". We request a notice within 30 days instead of 90. 3. On page 6, paragraph C. 3., the erosion control deposit seems excessive. Can this be lowered. 4. On page 7, paragraph D.2., there is a requirement that the development construction permit nor building permits cannot be issued until Seneca Street is constructed by Mountain Ridge Farms PUD 3rd Filing. We request you approve the development construction permit and withhold building permits only unitl the completion of Seneca by Mountain Ridge Farms 3rd. We may want to start this project before Seneca is completed by MRF 3rd. 5. On page 9, paragraph EA. refers to a 90 day notice to the developer, we request a 30 day notice. 6. On page 9, paragraph H.I. refers to Exhibit "C" but no Exhibit was provided. 7. On page 10, paragraph 1.2. states the developer will be reimbursed for the local portion of Westfield Drive, does this include water and sewer main installation costs? I have attached a spreadsheed with an estimate of the reimbursement costs which we would like referenced in the text and made part of the Development Agreement. If the City does not provide reimbursement for water and sewer, we would like additional language that requires any future development on the south side of Westfield Drive which taps the water or sewer in Westfield Drive will be required to repay Progressive Living Structures Inc.half the installation costs plus inflation. Mark McCallum told me we have to complete this agreement by April 15th. What are the consequences of missing this deadline. Thanks for your attention in this matter George Hart <<Streetrepay.xls» PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: December 29, 1999 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: # 18-92F Mountain Ridge Farms PUD, 4th Filing Final - PLANNER: Ted Shepard ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: January 26, 2000 General Comments ♦ See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility, site, and landscape plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. If you have any questions please call me (Mark McCallum) at 221-6605. This project has certain obligations to the proposed bicycle/ pedestrian path and the associated bridge structure. As the result of negotiations with Mountain Ridge Farms, 2" filing, % of the bicycle/ pedestrian path (the other '/ will be paid for by the City's Parks and Rec. Dept.) and '/z the associated bridge structure will be funded on a per lot basis for each lot approved on the Preliminary Mountain Ridge Farms, PUD. (All lots within the first filing, which is already under construction, were included in the over all fee.) The total fee for this subdivision is calculated as shown: 36 lots 160.45/lot = $5776.32. Please contact me (Mark McCallum) if a further explanation is needed. As 1 am sure you are aware, Mountain Ridge 3`d Filing has incorporated the Seneca Street design in with their plans. For the sake of clarity, I just want to reiterate that Westfield Park PUD, currently is only in construction phase 1, which does not complete Seneca Street to the north boundary of this development, and Mountain Ridge Farms 3'd Filing has only been through one round of review. In the event that this project desires to proceed prior to Westfield Park PUD 2" d Phase or prior to Mountain Ridge Farms 3rd Filing, this project will be obligated to construct Seneca Street adjacent to this project, to the north where Seneca Street ends at construction phase 1 of Westfield Park PUD, and to the south where Seneca Street ends at the proposed alignment of Troutman Parkway. Finally, omit any notes that state Seneca Street will be completed as a part of Mountain Ridge Farms 3 a Filing and submit the design of Seneca Street with this plan set. Date: 1 31 0n:::i Signature: PLEASEI SEND COPIES PLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: SITE ❑ `W UTILITY NO COMMENTS —SUBMIT MYLARS X LANDSCAPE The traffic impact study for the Mountain Ridge Farms Preliminary/ Phase 1 is outdated. Please submit an updated traffic impact study for review. In the event that the traffic impact study suggests that this development be required to provide any additional traffic measures or connections, this development will be responsible to comply with the study. An update to the traffic impact study has been requested from other developments in this area. It is encouraged that this development combined efforts with the surrounding developments. Utility Plan Comments Cover Sheet; Sheet 1 of 18: ♦ Revise the General Notes as redlined. ♦ Label the Plat independently. Windcreek Court, Sheet 9 of 18: ♦ Please correctly label all curve and line data. ♦ Please see Seneca Street comment made above and add note to this sheet regarding its construction. ♦ The K-value at the end of the cul-de-sac should be at least 10. Please correct the vertical curve. ♦ Please show the curb return elevations at the Windcreek Court/ Seneca Street intersection. Westfield Drive; Sheet 10 of 18: ♦ Please show the bicycle and pedestrian path with an access ramp at the end of the court ("SDM" Detail D-4). ♦ Please correctly label all curve and line data. Also, check to make sure the data is correct as shown in the table. ♦ The northern curb return should be a minimum of 0.4-% ("SDM" Section 1.02.03.09.g) Intersection Details; Sheet 11 of 18: ♦ The cross pan for Windcreek Court does not meet the minimum requirement of 0.6-% ("SDM" Section 1.02.03.12.c). Please correct the slope. ♦ Please check the Windcreek Court intersection detail against the profile. It appears some elevations are shown incorrectly. Utility Plan; Sheet 12 of 18: ♦ Please dedicate a sight distance easement as shown on this plan. ♦ Please add this note: All streets cuts, curb & gutter and sidewalk removal, and the repair & reconstruction of the aforementioned shall be done in accordance with the city's "Street Repair and Reconstruction Standards and Standards and Guidelines". The city inspector and/ or the City Engineer shall have final authority in regard to the limits of the street repair. Street Details; Sheet 15 of 18: ♦ Please include driveway detail D-14 and an access ramp detail for the bicycle/ ped. path at the end of Westfield Drive. Plat Comments ♦ Please reference and apply all Mapping and Drafting comments. ♦ Please note that all tracts are to be maintained by the H.O.A. ♦ Please include the sight distance easement and include the sight distance language as provided. ♦ Please label Tract A as drainage and access easement. Site and Landscape Plan ♦ Please make sure that the site and landscape plan are representative of the utility plan , and vice versa. ♦ Please include the sight distance easement language on the Landscape Plan and provide the proper sight line for that easement. Dave Stringer - Re: Mountain Ridge Farm 'V Development Agreement Page 2 construction permit nor building permits cannot be issued until Seneca Street is constructed by Mountain Ridge Farms PUD 3rd Filing. We request you approve the development construction permit and withhold building permits only unitl the completion of Seneca by Mountain Ridge Farms 3rd. We may want to start this project before Seneca is completed by MRF 3rd. 5. On page 9, paragraph EA. refers to a 90 day notice to the developer, we request a 30 day notice. 6. On page 9, paragraph H.1. refers to Exhibit "C' but no Exhibit was provided. 7. On page 10, paragraph 1.2. states the developer will be reimbursed for the local portion of Westfield Drive, does this include water and sewer main installation costs? I have attached a spreadsheed with an estimate of the reimbursement costs which we would like referenced in the text and made part of the Development Agreement. If the City does not provide reimbursement for water and sewer, we would like additional language that requires any future development on the south side of Westfield Drive which taps the water or sewer in Westfield Drive will be required to repay Progressive Living Structures Inc.half the installation costs plus inflation. Mark McCallum told me we have to complete this agreement by April 15th. What are the consequences of missing this deadline. Thanks for your attention in this matter George Hart <<Streetrepay.xls>> CC:"Ischuster@progliv.com"@FCI.GWIA Dave Stringer Re Mountain Ridge Farr IV Development Agreement e1, From: Dave Stringer To: "ghart@progliv.com"@FC1.GWIA Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2001 3:29 PM Subject: Re: Mountain Ridge Farms IV Development Agreement George, I have had the oppurtunity to review the proposed changes to the Development Agreement you have proposed. Following is my response per each item listed. 1. 1 will add Inc. to the legal name pages 1 and 13 2. The request to limit the notice period is denied. This is boiler plate language drafted by our attorney and 90 days is a reasonable time period 3. The dollar amount as listed came from your consulting engineers estimate and approved by the Storm Water Utility. I advise that the estimated costs be reevaluated by your consultant and resubmitted to Storm Water for their evaluation 4. 1 agree with your request. The paragraph will be modified to rflect with holding of building permits and not to include the DCP. 5. Same response as number 2 above 6. 1 will add Exhibit C; to next draft. It is the maintenace language as shown on the plat. 7. LUC Section 3.3. F (2) lists the criteria for a repay agreement. This is document separate to the DA. Cotact Matt Baker, Street Oversizing for the Repay Agreement and information. 221- 6108. 1 will make reference to it in the DA. ie, The Developer intends to file for a Repay Agreement with the City. With the nature of the minor comments from you and our attorney, I propose to have the DA copies ready for you tomorrow afternoon for your signatures. If this is not acceptable, let me know, and I will send out another draft for final review before printing the actual document. Dave Stringer >>> George Hart <ghart@progliv.com> 04/10 11:27 AM >>> 4/10/01 Dave, Here are our comments on the draft agreement we received in the mail last Friday. 1. In the first paragraph, add "Inc." at the end of "Progressive Living Structures". 2. On page 3, paragraph H., The fifth sentence beginning with "Failure of the City to give notice of such claim to the Developer within ninety (90) days ...". We request a notice within 30 days instead of 90. 3. On page 6, paragraph C. 3., the erosion control deposit seems excessive. Can this be lowered. 4. On page 7, paragraph D.2., there is a requirement that the development ), Pt,/"-r '�" L.c c�k L voti1T coos . � r T L SHOW 114c` k?Ntc 4C,4S LJ�01C 3 l �O S �. To Ml Ian 1LGOCz�r T��� ` rCr G�P_Nv�A St4c THiF C 4 IN d Sl E !-1 i /�,STgIJccS �.4JEh?��r lS UN hoc. ?-,43CCr ISE-�2iAMi !N' LCG Rc- l�o LTJ A/u T-r%A re IV cam% Date: Signature:_ CHECK fIDffTYGOTVISfiTC site Drainage Report _ Other — Utility _ Redline Utility — Landscape REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: June 12, 2000 TO: Mapping PROJECT: #18-92F Mountain Ridge Farms PUD 4th Filing Final (LDGS) All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** (�'. rc1 T 1)c&s nlda S I-k , CA) (_,AJI s lq r U 6 5 0 J M { PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: June 112, 2000 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: # 18-92F Mountain Ridge Farms PUD, 4th Filing Final - PLANNER: Ted Shepard ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments ;must be received by: June 28, 2000 See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility, site, and landscape plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. If you have any questions please call me (Mark McCallum) at 221-6605. Please rectify the Seneca Street elevation difference. As I understand it, the applicant for Westfield Park (which is the same for this development) will be revising the Seneca Street profile to match the plan submitted by Dennis Donovan for Mountain Ridge Farms, 3'd. Those revisions shall be completed prior to a public hearing for this project. Is the emergency access required at the end of Westfield Drive? If so, the access shall not have the appearance of a street. The access must have bollards to delineate the difference. PFA shall determine if it is needed and how it should be constructed. Does the Developer need easements to construct the emergency access drive? The proposed tie-in is offsite, but is it in the county rieht-of-way. In addition. please provide more spot elevations to show the tie-ins. Site and Landscape Plan Please make sure that the site and landscape plan are representative of the utility plan, and vice versa. Please include the sight distance easement language on the Landscape Plan and provide the proper sight line for that easement. Date: ���/ Signature:. PLEASE SEND COPIES UJI-AT OF MARKED REVVISIONS SITE UTILITY ❑ NO COMMENTS - SUBMIT MYLARS _-ate ANDSCAPE PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: September 28, 2000 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #18-92F Mountain Ridge Farms PUD, 4th Filing Final - PLANNER: Ted Shepard ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: October 18, 2000 ♦ See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility, site, and landscape plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. If you have any questions please call me (Mark McCallum) at 221-6605. ♦ As a reminder: The Developer is responsible to construct one-half the 8-foot width of the proposed city recreational trail adjacent to the site and the associated bridge structure. Since the proposed city trail has not been constructed offsite of this development and since the city does not have monies at this time to participate in the oversizing of the trail adjacent to the site, the Developer and the City agree that the Developer shall escrow $5,776.32 for the recreational trail and associated bridge structure prior to issuance of any building permits. (The escrow amount is based on a per lot fee ($160.45/lot for the recreational trail shown on the approved Preliminary Mountain Ridge Farms P.U.D.) ♦ Please rectify the (Seneca Street elevation difference. As I understand it, the applicant for Westfield Park (which is the same for this development) will be revising the Seneca Street profile to match the plan submitted by Dennis Donovan for Mountain Ridge Farms, 3`d. Those revisions shall be completed prior to a public hearing for this project. ♦ The north property line grading does not tie-in onsite. The public hearing can not be scheduled until the easements are received. If revisions to Westfield Park will rectify the situation, then those will have to be completed prior to public hearing. ♦ Please provide more information for the access ramp/ emergency access at the end of Westfield Drive. Also, show how the sidewalk connects into the city park sidewalk (for about 50 feet). ♦ The north cul-de-sac does not tie-in to the proposed Seneca Street grades. Please correct the elevations. Date: �'- 4 /X-) Signature: ✓� L / PLEASPIES APLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: SITE ❑ NO COMMENTS - SUBMIT MYLARS UTILITY LANDSCAPE REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: September 28, 2000 TO: Tech Services PROJECT: #18-92F Mountain Ridge Farms PUD, 4th Filing PDP -Type II- LUC All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 ❑ No Comment ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** � �-�C� ✓l s e ��S � 0 6 e o't � Size 4 �t d � I vl @. `��1 t'c �'>1 �^s5 OL Gnu b'Q_ Sc4H�e� 4Jo\� °lee 3 INC L 1/`{ Co1:zjje2 �S ��TSCl2tr3�p ti ��G /� 11S Wfc,� 11I� /tlo Co�N� Si-loc j Cl-j P q-r- C^t SNtc n� JT 1 1S ISa l7 �q o� Sr'g17_� Ca5et,,"ek7L' r:s got vk, Date: Signature:_ CHECK URFIF OTWI5I O RETER N_ Plat _ site — Drainage Report _ other ptility Redline Utility — Landscape /Ar9M PROJECT i�.� COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: December 29, 1999 TO: Street Oversizing PROJECT: #18-92F Mountain Ridge Farm P.U.D. 4th Filing - Final (LDGS) All comments must be received by Ted Shepard no later than the staff review meeting: January 26, 2000 E> Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference a 1 � Signature CHECK HEkE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility Redline Utility _Landscape Cryof Poir cou�as PROJECT i■�� COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planninle DATE: December 29, 1999 TO: Mapping/Drafting PROJECT: #18-92F Mountain Ridge Farm P.U.D. 4th Filing - Final (LDGS) All comments must be received by Ted Shepard no later than the staff review meeting;: January 26, 2000 Ei Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference a �LAf /70�5 ✓T Gr✓� z�,,J&N /4l 414AT/onl 5NcW"Ve NOV/ TEE �1��/Ca@,r 6 �%4.� NE�s 14�a>< fi-L� . e` L Lra(KS ... -;.•�%: f.;- r:! ti� 4 �o ^�OT GtI�.SE. �cv l'7�7 v t'i �i-CAsc SN��--� f-�-ow s E. N5C�1 .1 T• WAS �E O ICA Tom.0 . Signature CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report _Other _Utility Redline Utility _Landscape mrt� Q DV F4 Citv of Fort Collins