HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN NORTH PILOT PROJECT - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-05-06REVISION
COMMENT SHEET
DATE: December 4, 2000, 2000 TO: Dave Stringer
PROJECT: #28-99A OLD TOWN NORTH — PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning
no later than the staff review meeting:
December 14, 2000
PLEASE BRING COMMENTS TO THE 12/14 MEETING
No Comment
❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
`PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE
REFERENCE**
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Dahill Site Drainage Repa Signatuflt5ar
Utility _ Ratline Utility _ Landscape
c�
REVISION'``%�
COMMENT SHEET'
DATE: September 18, 2000 TO: Engineering
PROJECT: ##28-99A Old Town North PDP — Type I - LUC
All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current
Planning ino later than the staff review meetin
d d T L G
No Comment
ffiz'problems or Concerns (see below o(attached)
**PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE**
l
Date / — 1 QQ Signature:
CHECK HERE IF YO WISH TO RECENE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_ Plat Site _ Drainage Report _ Other
Utility RedliDc Utility Landscape
9/29/00
Comments on Old Town North Schematic Design:
1. The north -south collector street on the west side of Phase 1 will need to be constructed to
connect with the existing Vine Drive, south of the project site, as part of Phase I of the
project. Likewise, the portion of Redwood Street shown as "future Redwood Drive" at the
SE corner of the project will need to be constructed with Phase 1, providing the two required
access points. Some street oversizing reimbursement is available on collector streets.
2. The local street cost -share of the portion of the realigned Vine Drive that is adjacent to the
project will need to be escrowed to the City, to be applied to the future construction of the
new Vine Drive. The local street costs of the new Vine Drive can be paid in segments, as
each phase of the: project is permitted.
3. All of the streets and alleys must meet the City's standards for alignment, grade, tangent,
section and sight -distance. At the schematic design stage, it is not possible to determine
whether these standards are being met. However, several of the streets appear to be out of
conformance with these standards. This will need to be addressed in more detail as design
proceeds.
4. The traffic study incorrectly shows the future realigned Vine Drive intersecting with College
Avenue at Hemlock Street. It should actually line up with Pinon Street. In fact, the entire
context of the project site could be better portrayed by showing existing and future streets
more completely.
5. The phasing sequence is different on the site plans and the utility plan. Is the commercial
area Phase 2 or 3?
6. The correct name of East Vine Street is East Vine Drive.
7. The correct name of Redwood Drive is Redwood Street.
8. The scale on the site and landscape plans is labeled incorrectly.
The typical alley cross-section should show that the inverted crown alley as a concrete
pavement. Also, the right-of-way (ROW) should be shown as 12-feet or the entire width of
the alley pavement. Utility easements of 8-feet wide on each side of the alley ROW will also
need to be dedicated to the City.
END OF COMMENTS
CAM