The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRIGDEN FARM SEVENTH THE WILLOW - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-06-21Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Department: Engineering Date: October 25, 2001 Project: RIGDEN FARM, 7TH FILING, THE WILLOWS - #56-98N All comments must be received by TROY JONES in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: October 17, 2001 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Marc Virata 13 Add Light and Power to the City of Fort Collins Utility Plan Approval Block. 10/17 This only occurs on the cover sheet. It is at least also needs to be on the utility plan sheet at a minimum. m Letters of intent for all offsite easements are required before a hearing. 10/17 Not received at this time, this includes emergency access, utility, and sight distance easements. 79 Alternative compliance to Section 3.6 of the Land Use Code is required for no street connections to the south. 10/17 Response indicates this is addressed by Wheeler, has this been the case? m A groundwater analysis report because of the high groundwater shown on the soils report in conformance of Chapter 5 in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. 10/17 The submitted groundwater analysis by Terracon recommends perimeter drains surrounding individual units with a discharge to a drainage Swale, storm pipe, or some other drainage appurtenance. This analysis shows a preliminary design for discharge in some example areas. No actual design regarding this subsurface drainage system was shown on the utility plan set and should be designed at this time for the various utilities and Engineering to comment on. In general, horizontal and vertical separation from utilities needs to be addressed to the satisfaction of the various utilities. In general, Engineering needs to see the actual deli n to Signature Date ,�ECK HERE YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _ Sit Drainage Report ✓OtherS Utility _�� Redline Utility Landscape Page I PROJECT (i4z"■ COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planninu DATE: June 20, 2001 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #56-68N RIGDEN FARM, 7"' FILING, THE WILLOWS - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TYPE II (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: July 18, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for_ future reference Name (please print) CI IECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility __Redline Utility Landscape City of Fort Collins PROJECT /,�Avm liftaAalCOMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins R E c 1 V F D Current Planning DATE: June 20, 2001 TO: Technical Services RENT PLANNING PROJECT: #56-68N RIGDEN FARM, 7T" FILING, THE WILLOWS - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TYPE II (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: July 18, 2001 WIC-0W52r Note- Please identify your redlines for futllre reference /, hwAl plov K r7oEs No 7" CGo�E, 7, GueVr�S C1 f (',Z r 4-r,CFJ Z,GDEA) FPgty7 F74,iNG bn>E, Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report _Other Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape Citv of Fort Collins find out if there is an impact of the design on public right-of-way. There is an immediate concern in that the preliminary design appears to follow the alignment of the sanitary sewer in an area and appears to possibly be at or near the same depth. Please provide this design (horizon'. :: I and vertical) to ensure that such a system will not have any utility or public right-of-way impacts, as well as ensure that such a system is readily maintainable by the Developer and its successors in interest (HOA). The submitted study should make recommendations regarding pipe material, cleanout location and spacing, If the Developer seeks to deviate from the recommendations of the groundwater analysis, an addendum to the report must be submitted for review. A Street names are not the same between the site and utility plan sheets. Please ensure they correspond. 10/17 The Plat still shows old street names. M. The sidewalk along the west side of Parkfront Drive that meanders round the tree needs to be in a public access easement. 10/17 This appears to be somewhat addressed on the utility plans, but this is not reflected on the plat. However, the sidewalk must be in an access easement, not right- of-way as the utility plan and responses indicate. M A trench drain appears to be missing on Sheet 7. 10/17 Conflicting responses were made regarding this from the site planner and the engineer. The site planner indicated that the trench drain was added, the engineer indicated that it is not needed according to drainage criteria. The utility plan does not show a trench drain added, in my view it is required based upon 9.4.11 of LCUASS. 95 Directional ramps at intersections are required on all new construction in accordance to LCUASS, please revise the drawings to use directional ramps. 10/17 This was noted as acknowledged on the planners response letter, however this is not reflected on the site or utility plan sets. Please use Detail 164D of LCUASS. Please show the access ramps scaled out on the utility plans. 10/ 17 (Ensure that that these are directional ramps scaled out on the drawing.) Page 2 102 A variance request is required for the instances where the minimum off street parking setback distance is not being met per the requirements in 19-03 in LCUASS.109 The access road along the west that heads out to Custer needs to be clarified on roadway width, plans show both a 20' and 30' wide access road. In addition, since the proposed onsite roadway for Kansas Drive does not tie into existing grades at the end of the property, are slope easement needed at the property line and along the access road? 10/17 The utility plan set should indicate whether the access road for emergency purposes is being built at the new grade for the designed street or to existing grade. 127 Is it the "Willow" or "Willows"? The site and landscape plans differ from the plat and utility in wording. Also, the documents differ in title, starting with either "Rigden Farm 7th Filing..." or "The: Willow(s)...". Please ensure the titles are all the same and coordinate the naming of the project with the project planner. 141 Please show the platted boundaries on the utility plan in order to distinguish between on -site and off -site construction and grading proposed. 142 It was discussed at staff review that the driveways in close proximity to the street storm sewer inlets could have the storm drainage off these driveways conveyed to these inlets via an underground pipe instead of the culvert/chase system. In addition, at these driveway locations, area inlets could be used instead of trench drains. Can this be accomodated into the system? 143 I have received preliminary indication from Xcel Energy that they have concerns regarding the placernent of the trench drains on top of the gas lines as shown on the utility plan sheet. Any issues regarding gas line location shuld be resolved prior to a hearing. 169 The Developer should provide some sort of documentation regarding the ownership of lands beneath the common breezeway for the attached single family 12-plexes. Could access through this breezeway be prevented from the property owners? 170 Show the transition point to remove the crown of Willow Tree Lane as it approaches Parkfront Drive. (Already shown on Sheet 12, just needed on Sheet 13.) Page 3 171 Revise utility plan details for the pedestrian ramps (to be bi-directional) and neckdowns (to be in accordance with the design.) 172 Add a note on the plat regarding maintenance of tracts (who maintains them.) Page 4 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: September 26, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #56-98N Rigden Farm, 71h Filing, The Willows - Type II (LUC) Ma ti C L All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: October 17, 2001 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE 5007-W REFERENCE** %. tIND/-�r�4' ^J'� ✓,uG"r ln.*-rCfi 7L 3o+�lu-74 V of ,�i(GDc`,�JJ Fr7,P�✓l c C4 1 S�%eeT" fti� �eL Se c, /°v'y. . lt� �lS C(ME L�flCt C a � l.) 11 CL I MeK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RI _ Plat site Utility Redline ffity Drainage Report _ Other Landscape of REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: September 26, 2001 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #56-98N Rigden Farm, 71" Filing, The Willows - Type 11 (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones no later than the staff review meeting: October 17, 2001 No Continent ElProblems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** QMOK _HERE, IF YOU WISH TO RE,CEIV_E, COPIES OF REVISION�ignature:_ Plat Site Drainage Report _ Other Utility Redline Utility _ Landscape PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: June 20, 2001 DEPT: ENGINEERING PRO<IECT: 956-68N Rigden Farm 7th Filing, The Willows PLANNER: Troy Jones ENGINEER: Marc Virata All comments must be received by: July 25, 2001 ❑ No Problems 0 Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) Comments: 1. Letters of intent for all offsite easements are required before a hearing. 2. Alternative compliance to Section 3.6 of the Land Use Code is required for no street connections to the south. 3. A oroundwater analysis report because of the high groundwater shown on the soils report in conformance of Chapter 5 in the Latimer County Urban Area Street Standards. 4. Street names are not the same between the site and utility plan sheets. Please ensure they correspond. 5. The sidewalk along the west side of Parkfront Drive that meanders round the tree needs to be in a public access easement. 6. Are the street names considered okay by the City and LEITA? 7. (Note for the file) While it appears that the attached units are not in conformance with Section 3.6.2(L)(1)(b) of the Land Use Code, this is allowed based upon Bob Blanchard's interpretation that the application of private drives to single family attached shall be the same as multi -family. 8. The units on the southwest comer of the site have issues. Per LUC 3.6.2(L)(2) Private drive requirements, the maximum dead-end length of a private drive is 150', a modification is needed to allow this. Plat l . Correct private chive maintenance note (Natural Resources will not maintain.) 2. PFA had stated in past conceptual reviews that the common driveway courtyards between multifamily units needed to be emergency access easements. I believe this is still the case. 3. 1he sight distance easement along Custer Drive appears to be OK (if not perhaps larger than needed based upon LCUASS Standard Drawing 7-16.) However, the sight distance easement at the intersection of Kansas Drive and Parkside Drive appears to be too small. Because this is not considered a stop condition at this intersection, the standards in LCUASS do not have this criteria. The City has been applying the criteria in Section 3.8(G)(1) of the Land Use Code to determine sight distance. Date: July 26, 2001 Signature: PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVIS16 S 2 Plat 0 Site 21 Utility 2 Landscape 0 Drainage eport 2 Subdrain Report Utility Plan l . In general, the utility plan submittal is of good quality, however, as the submittal falls under the Latimer Countv Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) there are items that need to be addressed to meet this new criteria. Please ensure that all the requirements in LCUASS are complied with in future submittals. With the next submittal, there may be additional comments made with regards to meeting the requirements under the new standard. 2. Please refer to Appendix E-4 in the Latimer County Urban Area Street Standards for the checklist requirements. This is required to be completed and submitted with all projects under the Larimer County Urban Area. Street Standards and will help ensure that submittal requirements are being met. 3. A Utility Coordination Meeting is suggested with this formal submittal. 4. Light and Power wants to sign off on the utility plan set, please provide "Light and Power" on the City's utility plan approval block. 5. Replace General Notes on Utility Plan set with General Notes per LCUASS. 6. Ensure two benchmarks are used for the General Notes. 7. A trench drain appears to be missing on Sheet 7. 8. Directional ramps at intersections are required on all new construction in accordance to LCUASS, please revise the drawings to use directional ramps. 9. The street corner radii for Parkl ont out to Custer and Parkside out to Rigden are required to be a maximum of 20' per LCUASS (8.2.9). 10. The plan and profile sheets need additional information in conformance with LCUASS: -centerline profiles -storm drainage flow arrows -label of where transition point takes place to remove the crown from the street at an intersection -label cross pan widths 11. Continue offsite design of Kansas north of this site (500 feet required per LCUASS.) 12. Please show the access ramps scaled out on the utility plans. 13. Do all trench drains have enough capacity? 14. Add "or approved equivalent" to all notes specifying Neenah trench drain 15. A variance request is required for the instances where the minimum off street parking setback distance is not being met per the requirements in 19-03 in LCUASS. 16. Provide details for driveway approach, eyebrow, and neckdowns in conformance with LCUASS on the detail sheets. Ensure all details shown on detail sheets conform with or exceed LCUASS. 17. Provide a note referencing all the patching that "Limits of street repair are approximate, final limits to be determined by the City Engineering Inspector at the time the street cuts are made." 19. Gnsure that line weights and types differ between lot lines, edge of pavement, utilities, etc. 19. My measuring appears to show the stationing on the plan view not measuring out to 100' between STA's itt all cases, some fall short, some are longer. 20. Correct stationing labeling, street names, etc. on the utility plan. 21. Can the driveways out to the public street be shaped to appear to intersect the street closer to a 90 degree angle? Some appear to be less than 80 degrees, which would require a variance request. 22. The access road along the west that heads out to Custer needs to be clarified on roadway width, plans show both a 20' and 10' wide access road. In addition, since the proposed onsite roadway for Kansas Drive does not tie into existing grades at the end of the property, are slope easement needed at the property line and along the access road? (Additional comments may be made with the resubmittal mid detail in conformance with LCUASS— se e plans For additional information.) Development Review Comments — Page 2 PROJECT llft"j COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: June 20, 2001 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: i156-68N RIGDEN FARM, 7T" FILING, 'THE WILLOWS - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TYPE II (LUC) All comments must be received by Troy Jones in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: July 18, 2001 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference i-Z-CV`t` Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECF,IVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report other Utility RedlincUtility Landscape us City of Fort Collins