Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLOCK 43 325 CHERRY STREET CHERRY STREET LOFTS - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-08-03Project Comments Sheet Citv of Fort Collins Selected Departments ��� Department: Engineering Date: September 15, 2004 Project: 325 CHERRY STREET, CHERRY STREET LOFTS PDP - TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Anne Aspen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: September 22, 2004 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Alley design Number: 15 Created: 9/1012004 �y [9/101041 The alley design provided brings up more questions than it answers: - further �1 south, is the existing grade still this flat? - Does the whole alley drain south or is there a high point somewhere? - Does the proposed design need to drop in elevation so that minimum grades can be achieved further south? Please provide additional offsite data/design so that it can be seen that what is proposed to be constructed for this project will work for the rest of the alley. Number: 16 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/04] A grade break of 4% is proposed at the ROW line, but the maximum grade break allowed is 0.4%. Please revise. Number: 17 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/04] The slope shown for the alley as it crosses the sidewalk is shown at 4.5%, but the maximum cross slope for a sidewalk is 2%. At the north edge of the walk, LCUASS allows for a larger than 0.4 % grade break and a slope of up to 8%, if needed, down to the flowline. - Number: 18 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/04] Please show existing and proposed grading contours on the alley plan. Number: 19 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10'/04] Please verify that the drainage for the portion of the alley draining to the north (on - and off -site) will not exceed 0.5 cfs for the Design 2 Year storm. If this is not being met, then \Jfie water will need to be diverted to an under -walk drain. .( y Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat ✓ Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility yam Redline Utility %/ Landscape Page 1 Topic: General Number: 9 Created: 9/10/2004 [9! 104] The minimum setback of a garage from alley ROW is 8' per LCUASS. Please ft the garage 2.5' west. Number: 12 Created: 9/10/2004 (9/10/04] Due to the alley construction, a standard soils report is required. The one -page summary submitted is not sufficient. Number: 13 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/041 Please review LCUASS Appendix E for plan scanability requirements. In general: Behind any text must be plain white. Font size/pen width ratios must be met. Simplifying plans helps - less use of shading, speckling, cross -hatching, etc. Number: 14 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/1 04] When 20' of ROW exists for an alley, the full 20' should be utilized for alley 7im ovements: need to pave the full width. eys can go down to 12' when the ROW is only 12'. Number: 20 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/04] The City has just approved new details for pedestrian ramp construction. Please see attached. These details apply to all projects not yet constructed. Number:21 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/04] Please see plans and utility plan checklist for additional redlines and comments. Number: 22 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/041 Minimum single family driveway width within the ROW is 12'. Currently, the driveway is shown at 9'. Please revise. Number: 38 Created: 9/15/2004 19/15/04] There's an existing utility pole with guywires along the alley in front of the proposed garage doors. Please research which utility(ies) is using the pole and determine what they will require for the undergrounding of their facilities. Can it be undergrounded? (Undergrounding is a LUC requirement.) Num r:39 Created: 9/15/2004 [9 /04] Please ensure that at least 20' of space for parking is provided south of the ubmerged dumpster. Number: 40 Created: 9/15/2004 [9/15/04] In the DA for this project, it will be noted that special paving in the ROW is the responsibility of the Developer/Owner, and that, should the City or other utilities need to work in the ROW under the paving, they will not be responsible for repaving the area except for the standard sidewalk. Topic: Site Plan Number: 10 (9/10/041 Please clearly show and label all street ROW be shown on all plans. Created: 9/10/2004 including dimensions. This should Page 2 Number: 11 Created: 9/10/2004 [9/10/04] Please provide dimensions for sidewalks and parkways meeting or exceeding LCUASS standards. pO-A," " ,,lost A . 6 (1 i Page 3 Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments (ity of Port ('ollins m®® Department: Engineering Date: January 3, 2005 Project: 317 AND 325 CHERRY STREET, CHERRY STREET LOFTS PDP/FC #29- 03B/C All comments must be received by Anne Aspen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: December 29, 2004 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Alley design Number: 15 Created: 9/10/2004 (12/10/04] Initially, I stated that enough offsite design needs to be shown to prove that the alley segment to be constructed with this project would work with the eventual paving of the rest of the alley (this was an attempt to reduce the needed offsite design from the standard 500' length). The first round of review showed 100' offsite design, which did not answer this question. Now, even less information is shown than was shown before (only 13' of offsite design, and only 30' of offsite data). Previous existing grade lines showed a low point to the south that is no longer shown on the plans. The design shown does not provide for that low point to drain. Please provide existing elevations and preliminary design of the alley to the location where the alley is paved adjacent to Terracon. The design also only shows the centerline profile of the alley. This would be helpful if the flowline was in the center of the alley, but alone on a side -draining alley it does not help very much. Please provide the flowline profile as well as a profile of the west edge of the alley to verify flowline slopes and alley cross slopes (which should be between 2-3%, not 3-4%) will meet standards. Also, please provide the curb return profiles connecting the alley to Cherry Street, including the existing grade(s) being tied into. [9/10/04] The alley design provided brings up more questions than it answers: - further south, is the existing grade still this flat? - Does the whole alley drain south or is there a high point somewhere? - Does the proposed design need to drop in elevation so that minimum grades can be achieved further south? Please provide additional offsite data/design so that it can be seen that what is proposed to be constructed for this project will work for the rest of the alley. Number: 17 Created: 9/10/2004 /. 3. 05 Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat ✓ Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility !✓ Redline Utility = Landscape Page I [12/10/04] The slope from the walk to the Cherry flowline is over 8%, which is the maximum. [9/10/04] The slope shown for the alley as it crosses the sidewalk is shown at 4.5%, but the maximum cross slope for a sidewalk is 2%. At the north edge of the walk, LCUASS allows for a larger than 0.4% grade break and a slope of up to 8%, if needed, down to the flowline. Number: 18 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/041 The contours end at the ROW line to the east, but need to continue on the property to the east to show that the proposed alley can be built without impacting that property. Spot elevations are also needed to show this. [9/10/04] Please show existing and proposed grading contours on the alley plan. Topic: General Number: 12 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/04] 1 still have not received a soils report. [9/10/04] Due to the alley construction, a standard soils report is required. The one -page summary submitted is not sufficient. Number: 13 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/04] Improvements were made since the last round, but some revisions are still needed to meet scanability requirements. See green highlighted areas and double-check plans. [9/10/041 Please review LCUASS Appendix E for plan scanability requirements. In general: Behind any text must be plain white. Font size/pen width ratios must be met. Simplifying plans helps - less use of shading, speckling, cross -hatching, etc. Number: 20 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/04] Please improve the detail quality -it is very fuzzy- and add interim drawing 1606(a). Also, please provide additional information regarding the ramps (spot elevations) so that we know they can be properly constructed. This has been a problem in the past. [9/10/04] The City has just approved new details for pedestrian ramp construction. Please see attached. These details apply to all projects not yet constructed. Number: 21 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/04] [9/10/04] Please see plans and utility plan checklist for additional redlines and comments. Number: 22 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/04] A variance request for the driveway width was received and approved, please list this approval on the utility plans. [9/10/04] Minimum single family driveway width within the ROW is 12'. Currently, the driveway is shown at 9'. Please revise. Number: 38 Created: 9/15/2004 [12/10/04] The note on the pole says it is to be relocated. Where is it going? Please show on the plans. [9/15/04) There's an existing utility pole with guywires along the alley in front of the proposed garage doors. Please research which utility(ies) is using the pole and determine what they will require for the undergrounding of their facilities. Can it be undergrounded? (Undergrounding is a LUC requirement.) Number: 40 Page 2 Created: 9/15/2004 [12/10/04] [9/15/04] In the DA for this project, it will be noted that special paving in the ROW is the responsibility of the Developer/Owner, and that, should the City or other utilities need to work in the ROW under the paving, they will not be responsible for repaving the area except for the standard sidewalk. Number: 52 Created: 12/10/2004 [12/10/04] Building eaves are not allowed over the ROW without approval and an encroachment permit. Please revise your plans to limit the building eaves to within your property lines or apply for the encroachment permit (there is a fee associated with this permit). Number: 53 Created: 12/10/2004 [12/10/04] Please note that no part of the patio wall is allowed within the ROW and add the ROW location to the sketch of the wall. Please note also that no part of the underground dumpster may be located within the ROW. Number: 61 Created: 1 /3/2005 [1/3/05] Please show how water will drain out of the underground trash enclosure. Topic: Site Plan Number: 11 Created: 9/10/2004 [12/10/04] The proposed parkway on Cherry falls short of the minimum 8'. Please revise. [9/10/04] Please provide dimensions for sidewalks and parkways meeting or exceeding LCUASS standards. Page 3 5J Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: January 31, 2005 Project: 317 AND 325 CHERRY STREET, CHERRY STREET LOFTS PDP/FC #29- 03B/C All comments must be received by Anne Aspen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: February 02, 2005 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Katie Moore Topic: Alley design Number: 67 Created: 1 /31 /2005 [1/31/051 It appears that there is a significant grade difference between the top of proposed curb and the existing grades in that location. Please flatten the alley grades (probably to 0.5%) in order to minimize this grade difference. Number: 68 Created: 1 /31 /2005 [1/31/05] Where the new alley ties into the existing grades, please mill/overlay to approx sta 8+30 to allow the low point to drain. See redlines. Number: 69 Created: 1 /31 /2005 [1/31/05] Max. grade break allowed at curb returns (per LCUASS) is 3%, but 4% is shown on the west curb return. Sheri has ok'd a variance to this, so please add this to your list of approved variances. Please list only engineering variances on the utility plans (remove the stormwater variance). Topic: General Number: 20 Created: 9/10/2004 [1 /25/05] The spot elevations provided do not work with the new grades required per the new ADA details. Please review these details, show the locations of the truncated dome panels on the ramps, and provide spot elevations at the flowline, back of truncated dome, and top of ramp. [12/10/04] Please improve the detail quality - it is very fuzzy- and add interim drawing 1606(a). Also, please provide additional information regarding the ramps (spot elevations) so that we know they can be properly constructed. This has been a problem in the past. 'Gc( 2 C 5' Sigr ature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _ Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility � Redline Utility i Landscape Page i [9110104] The City has just approved new details for pedestrian ramp construction. Please see attached. These details apply to all projects not yet constructed. Number: 21 Created: 9/10/2004 [1 /25/05] (12/10/041 [9/10/041 Please see plans and utility plan checklist for additional redlines and comments. Number: 40 Created: 9/15/2004 [1 /25/05] [12/10/041 (9/15/04] In the DA for this project, it will be noted that special paving in the ROW is the responsibility of the Developer/Owner, and that, should the City or other utilities need to work in the ROW under the paving, they will not be responsible for repaving the area except for the standard sidewalk. Number: 61 Created: 1 /3/2005 [1/25/051 [1/3/05] Please show how water will drain out of the underground trash enclosure. Number: 65 Created: 1 /31 /2005 (1/31/05] Please label the ROW on the east edge of the Alley on all plans. Topic: Site Plan Number: 11 Created: 9/10/2004 [1/25105] Now the parkways have dimensions, but not the sidewalks. Please re -label the walk widths. [12/10/041 The proposed parkway on Cherry falls short of the minimum 8'. Please revise. [9/10/041 Please provide dimensions for sidewalks and parkways meeting or exceeding LCUASS standards. Topic: Utility plans Number: 66 Created: 1 /31 /2005 [1/31/05] Please add a note where street cuts are shown: 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. Page 2