Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUPPER MEADOW AT MIRAMONT PUD - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2005-08-15City of Fort Collins January 13 Comr- pity Plannin; and Environment.. Services Engineering Department 1994 Dennis Donovan Land Development Services 2600 Canton Court Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Upper Meadows at Mirrormont 1st filing Dear Mr. Donovan The intent of this letter is to inform you that the public improvements on the city rights -of -way have been inspected and initially accepted by the City of Fort Collins pending the normal contractors warranty period with the exception of the punch list items listed below. All manholes and valve boxes listed below need to be adjusted either up or down to bring them into spec (-1/8" to -111) in relation to the top of the asphalt. Manhole #1 (Paving ring to Manhole #2 (Paving ring to Manhole #3 Manhole #BE Manhole #8H Manhole #BJ Manhole #9 Manhole #10 Valve box at Manhole #8J Water valve vault ring and be removed) be removed) cover at Boardwalk and Meadowrun Dr. Due to the fact these streets are newly constructed we will require that an infrared asphalt heater be used to facilitate patching back of the asphalt after each structure is adjusted. Please be informed that this letter of acceptance does not relieve the developer or the contractors, lot owners or their contractors of their responsibility for the repair of any damage which may occur as a result of the building construction. 281 North College Avenue • 11.0. Bus �80 - Fort Collins, CO 80;22-0;80 • (303) 221-660; 4. The utility plans for this phase of the Miramont subdivision indicate that the detention pond is temporary. Where will the permanent pond be located and how will changing from a temporary pond to a permanent one impact the subdrain system, the wet well, and the pump station`? 5. According to RCE,'s groundwater analysis (Pge. 5.2), "Subdrain flow rates at the outlet should he measured and recorded on a periodic basis...". How will the tlow rates be measured and recorded and who will do the measuring`? / 6. RCE analyzed the groundwater and designed the subdrain for only the Upper Meadow at Miramont. There are other areas which will probably contribute to this subdrain when they are developed. What will their affect be upon the subdrain system, wet well, pump station, detention pond, outlet structure, and downstream drainage system? 11" you have any question or comments, please call me at extension 6681. 0 m O 0 a 0 O v z z g w O J ui d --2 W F- F-- June 2, 1992 (File: 9230LT1) o Mr. Mike Herzig S Fort Collins Development Engineer P 'O P.O. Bok 580 o o Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 M Dear Mike It is proposed that the Upper Meadow at Miramont have 28 foot streets on four cul-de-sacs. According to the Fort Collins Desicyn_Criteria and Standards for Streets_, this street width will require a variance by the City of Fort Collins. The reasons for requesting/granting this variance are listed below: The streets will have less than 750 ADT on them. The longest street is Sawgrass Court, which will have 18 dwelling units and generate 180 vehicle trips on an average weekday. The other street volumes will be significantly less than this. - All +he streets which are proposed to be 28 feet wide are cal -de -sacs. - None of the streets are accessed from an arterial street. - Lot lines are somewhat staggered on opposite sides of the streets. It is not likely that the homes would face each other across the street. - One side of the street can be signed as "NO PARKING." However, I recommend allowing parking on both sides of the street. There will be four or more off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit. In making observations of a similar type residential area (Clarendon Hills along z Hinsdale Drive), the average number of vehicles parked on Hinsdale was 3 in a length of 1300 feet. In my Zjudgment, on -street parking in Miramont would be similar. This amount of on -street parking would present no traffic w or safety concerns with parking on both sides of the street given the anticipated volumes. U z I recommend that the subject streets (Sandreed Court, Switchgrass Court, Sawgrass Court, and Bulrush Court) in the F � Upper Meadow at Miramont be 28 feet wide (curb to curb). I o further recommend that parking be allowed on both sides of the a street, if at least four off-street parking spaces are provided per dwelling unit. F- `' Sincerely, a Matthew J. Delich, P.E. January 13, 1994 Page Two If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 221-6605 or 222-1135. Sincerely, Todd Juergens Engineering Construction Inspector CC: Gary Nordic, Nordic Construction and Development Kelly Steele, Western Mobile Northern Inc. Andy Krill, Schmidt Earth Builders Inc. City of Fort Collins Engineering Department Map # R' 2 CitK of Hirt Collins Development rvices Fngineering Department Mike Herzig 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. BoN BO • Fort Collins, CO S0322 • q03) 2210W,:; tire. of E/�O COMPANIES December 14, 1992 Mr. Gary Diede City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Dear Gary, I have reviewed some of the materials relating to the groundwater situation of the Miramont P.U.D. just west of OakRidge Village Subdivision. As we discussed, this groundwater will outfall into the surface stormwater system that traverses the 4th, 2nd and 7th filings of OakRidge Village and I am concerned that any significant increase in the volume of this water could cause damage to these facilities. Since these facilities are maintained by the homeowners associations, a situation such as I have described could create difficulties for the City and the developer of the Miramont P.U.D. Another area of concern is the possible revision of historic flows of adjudicated water used by downstream farmers. We have taken measures to address this in the OakRidge development and any reduction of these historic volumes could create additional problems. The information I have reviewed seems to address these problems, but I do not claim to be an expert in this field. I would strongly recommend that this subdrain/stormwater system be thoroughly analyzed by your professional staff to avoid any problems in the future. I would also suggest that the City communicate with the officers of the affected homeowners associations to let them know about this system and your review process. Sincerely, �v Stanley K. Everitt Vice President SKE/cp cc: Mr. Rod Cerkoney, President, OakRidge Village II HOA Mr. Jim Nichols, President, Spanish Oak Court HOA Mr. Wayne Nelson, President, OakRidge Village VIZ HOA c�.......... RCE A November 25, 1992 Mr. Mike Herzig, P.E. City of Fort Collins Engineering Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 CE CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS, INC. ngineering Group Company Re: Miramont PUD Subdrain (RCE Project Number 92-896) Dear Mr. Herzig: Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc. (RCE) Is submitting three copies of this letter on behalf of our client, the Nordick-Neal Company, in order to provide our comments on a proposed change in subdrain connection details at the proposed Miramont PUD development. We understand that direct tee connections between the 8-inch subdrain main and the 4-inch service lines, originally intended as part the overall design of the subdrain system per our October 1992 report, are to be eliminated in favor of simply terminating each service line within the gravel bedding of the subdrain main. Therefore, this letter is submitted as an addendum to our October report to reflect our comments on this potential design change. We have confirmed that CDOH #67 gravel bedding, proposed for use at the Miramont project, is capable of hydraulically transmitting groundwater flows from the service line to the subdrain main without inundation of the sanitary sewer. Our analysis considered extreme hydrologic conditions (seasonal high recharge) combined with the conservative assumption that all percolation from each residential service line occurs within a confined area of the main trench. The long-term permeability of bedding gravel relies on the exclusion of fine sediments which may tend to invade the gravel over time. It is to be understood that since RCE has no control in the project during the actual construction of the subdrain system or perimeter foundation drains, RCE will not accept responsibility for any future damages caused by inadequate performance of the system where direct connection was not provided and mainta9ned. Maintenance of individual perimeter drain systems will also be hampered by a lack of a direct connection. Proper functioning of the system under this design change will depend on both a clear pipe and clear gravel. With this understanding, the following guidelines are suggested to help achieve this goal: 1. Every effort should be taken to preclude the entry of dirt, rocks, and foreign matter into the subdrain main, subdrain service line, or foundation perimeter drain during all stages of construction. 2. Individual services can be terminated inside the filter fabric wrap which encloses the subdrain main in order to minimize possible sediment overloading at localized points on the filter fabric, and to minimize the distance for flow through the bedding gravel; 3665 JFK Parkway, Building 2, Suite 300 • P.O. Box 270460 • Fort Collins, CO 80527 (303) 223-5556 • Denver Metro (303) 572-1806 • FAX (303) 223-5578 Fort Collins, CO • Davis.. CA • Laramie, WY Mr. Mike Herzig 2 November 25, 1992 3. The penetration of the filter fabric around the subdrain main by the service line should be patched with a fabric collar and band to prevent the inflow of soil into the bedding gravel at the point of penetration. 4. All slotted or otherwise perforated service lines and perimeter foundation drains should be installed with a standard filter fabric sleeve or wrap. We have met with the developers engineer, RBD Inc. of Fort Collins, and understand that they will transfer the information contained in these guidelines to the design plans upon the Citys approval. We also understand that responsibility for future maintenance of the subdrain system will be bome by the Miramont PUD Homeowners Association, as recommended in our October 1992 report. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to provide you with our comments on this matter. Please feel free to call with any questions or comments, or if you require additional information. \\,\\apIunuuuiq 0 ^d REG/°j''% CI.Op •�q C J 23543 ° K a;, PEC/DMF/sp Enclosures cc: Mr. Gary Nordick Mr. Bud Curtis Mr. Dennis Donovan Mr. Lester Litton CADATA\WP51 \HERZIG.L'rR Sincerely, RESOURCE CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS, INC. ?u �- C�'� Paul E. Clopper, P.E. Senior er Resource gineer David M. Frick, Ph.D., P.E. Vice President RCE RESOURCE CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS, I_NC.RCE A KLH Engineering Group Company��~� November 12, 1992 Mr. Mike Herzig, P.E. City of Fort Collins Engineering Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Re: Miramont PUD Subdrain (RCE Project Number 92-896) Dear Mr. Herzig: This letter is submitted in response to your November 11, 1992, meeting with our client, the Nordick-Neal Company, in order to clarify certain recommendations contained in our October 1992 report regarding the Miramont PUD subdrain system. This letter is supplied as an addendum to that report. We understand that the line and grade of the proposed subdrain downstream of Manhole No. 6 has been revised by project engineers, RBD, Inc. of Fort Collins. This was done to preclude the need for a pumping station at the downstream end of the system; the revision will allow gravity flow from the subdrain system to the outfall in the detention pond. We agree with the minimum basement floor elevation of 4962.5 feet recommended by RBD, Inc. This elevation corresponds to detention pond overflow across Lemay Avenue and exceeds the anticipated 100- year level. During storm events of 100-year magnitude or greater, the subdrain system will temporarily surcharge along Boardwalk Drive to approximately the location of Manhole No. 6. During normal operation, the subdrain will be free -flowing to its outlet; however, due to the difference in grade between the subdrain and the sanitary sewer, the sanitary sewer will be located below the water table for approximately 500 to 600 feet along Boardwalk Drive upstream from Lemay Avenue. Upstream of Manhole No. 6, the subdrain system will be installed within the sanitary sewer trench, maintaining horizontal and vertical offsets from the sewer as originally intended. Sincerely, RESOURCE CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS, INC. Paul E. Clopper, P.E. Senior Water Resources Engineer David M. Frick, Ph.D., P.E. Vice President PFL:sp C A DATA\ W P511 H E RZ1 G 11. VTR 3665 JFK Parkway, Building 2, Suite 300 • P.O. Box 270460 • Fort Collins, CO 80527 (303) 223-5556 • Denver Metro (303) 572-1806 • FAX (303) 223-5578 Fort Collins, CO • Davis, CA • Laramie, WY Ar i MEMORANDUM DATE: November 3, 1992 TO: Mike Herzig, Development Engineering Manager FROM: Mark Taylor, Civil Engineer 11 RE: Subdrain design for Upper Meadow at Miramont PUD I have completed my review of the utility plans and Resource Consultant's (RCE) Groundwater Analysis and Subdrain Recommendations for the Upper Meadow at Miramont subdivision. In addition to the red -lined comments on the utility plans, I have summarized the following questions: 1. RCE's analysis calls for the construction of a pump station to deliver groundwater from the Subdrain to the temporary detention pond at the corner of Lemay and Boardwalk. Who will maintain this pump station? Will the City review the design of the pump station? Does the existence of the clear well and the pump station satisfy RCE's condition that "... the Subdrain will not be surcharged and will flow freely via gravity drainage" (Pge. 3.2)? Has anyone evaluated the impact on houses in this subdivision if the pump station fails, or is inoperable for an extended length of time? How will the homeowners association know if the pump station fails? (1 can envision the pumps failing and a week or two passing before anyone becomes aware of the failure.) 2. Could the wet well and pump station be considered a well, and if so what affect would that have on ground water rights in this area? 3. As designed, the Subdrain will discharge into a temporary detention pond at the corner of Lemay and Boardwalk. Are the detention pond, the pond's outlet structure, and the downstream channel designed to handle the additional flow from the subdrain? Will this additional flow change the detention pond to a retention pond? Has the City's Storm Drainage Department reviewed the subdrain report and the utility plans to determine the impact on the City's storm drainage system?