Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWILLOW BROOK - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-09-01PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collirts Current Planning DATE: May 91, 2001 PROJECT: Willowbrook PDP PLANNER: Ted Shepard ENGINEER: Marc Virata DEPT: ENGINEERING General Comments: 1. Remove all instances of private alley and replace with private drive in the PDP submittal. There is no standard or definition of private alley in the City Code or the Land Use Code. 2. Per Voneen Macklin in the Current Planning Department, the following street names are duplicates and cannot be used for the project: Yellowhom Drive, Buckland Way, and Paper Birch Lane. The remainder of the streets in the project have been "reserved" to ensure other developments do not use them. As Cambridge Drive will be changed at some point, if this change occurs prior to the completion of the project, the plat will need to be revised to reflect the new street name. 3. The site plan shows curb & gutter on the west side of Cambridge Avenue, the utility plan does not, please coordinate. 4. The City does not want certain sections of roadway built at this time, as noted below. Please ensure that all plan documents are reflective of certain street connections not being built innnediately. This will also be addressed in the Development Agreement. 5. "[ ]" indicate utility plan sheet numbers where applicable. Plat Comments: l . Notes 5 & 7 conflict with regards to the designation of a private drive, please correct. 2. Add a note restricting vehicular (driveway access) out to Cambridge Drive and Rock Creek Drive. (Lots 26-28, 54-56, 77, 86,110 & 126 shall have no vehicular (driveway access) to Cambridge Avenue and lots I & 25 shall have no vehicular (driveway access) to Rock Creek Drive. 3. Revise the Notice of Other Documents language as redlined. 4. Because of not building sections of roadways along the boundaries of the development, add the following notes to the plat: Add the following note to Sheet 5 of the plat: l . Paper Birch Lane and Pine Brook Way are designed as fixture street connections and will be built with the development of adjacent property or properties. 2. No access for lots 179 & 200 shall be allowed from Paper Birch Lane until such time as Paper Birch Lane is constructed and/or a temporary turnaround is provided. 3. No landscaping other than grass shall be allowed within Pine Brook Way and Paper Birch Lane right-of-way. This shall include but not be limited to, fences, sprinkler systems, or structures. Date: June 13, 2001 Signature: PLEASE SEND SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISfONS 2 Plat 2 Site 2 Utility 21 Landscape ❑ Drainage eport 0 NO COMMENTS -SUBMIT MYLARS PROJECT (109mim-1 COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: October 5, 2000 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #8-99C Willow Brook PDP PLANNER: Ron Fuchs ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: Wednesday, November 1, 2000 General Comments ♦ See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility. plat, site, and landscape plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. ♦ Offsite Requirements, Phasing and Other Street Improvements (Below is excerpt from a letter by Gary Diede, TOYS Director): The main issue with Willow Brook has always been providing at least two points of access from the public street network with one of the connections providing an adequate improvement to the city's Improved Arterial Street Network, as described in Section 3.32(F) of the Land Use Code. The difference between this project and Brookfield is that it has frontage on Kechter Road. Therefore, depending on the phasing for this project the City could have a variety of comments. If the development begins construction on the north property Tine as was discussed in the Willow Brook ODP Planning and Zoning Board meeting on September 21, 2000, the City will require the connection of Rock Creek Drive to Ziegler Road to meet Section 3.3 2(F) of the Land Use Code. The basis for this decision is primarily in the interest of providing adequate allocation of traffic to the full arterial network with the emphasis of not over burdening Harmony Road. The second point of access could either be provided through the development or with the construction of Cambridge Road. If development begins construction adjacent to Kechter Road, then it will have to construct Kechter Road to Ziegler Road to meet Section 3.32(F) of the Land Use Code. In addition, the two points of access to the development could be satisfied with an adequate phasing plan. However, at some point, as this project develops to the north, Rock Creek Drive will have o be constructed from the 6 -iSignature:f�yr �' u Date: _ PLEASE SEND COPIES CJ-�PLAT t OF MARKED REVISIONS: SITE Dr-'J TILITY El NO COMMENTS — SUBMIT MYLARS 0 LANDSCAPE development's eastern property line to Ziegler Road to distribute the traffic impacts generated from this development the arterial network. ♦ Will there be a phasing plan? Utilitv Plan Comments Cover Sheet, Sheet I of 93. ♦ Please include a signing and striping plan for the entire site. Grading Plan, Sheets 11-17of93. ♦ It is the applicant responsibility to provide and accurately label all necessary offsite easements and rights -of -way. Please indicate on the grading plans all the necessary easements and rights -of - way. Prior to public hearing, please provide letters of intent for all easement and right-of-way dedications. ♦ Please show all trail connections throughout the development. In the eastern detention ponds, provide at least one cross section, in addition to showing the trail per the site and landscape plans. Utility Plans, Sheets 18-24 of 93, Let me know if you need a utility coordination. ♦ Please show all trail connections throughout the development. Local & Collector Street Plan & Profile, Sheets 52-77 of 93. ♦ The main issue with the Local and Collector streets is the design of the intersections. Please apply the following comments to the intersections and check all redlines. I . Please clearly show all crown transitions and determine the through streets. In regard to the crown transitions, the PCR elevations should not match on either side of the transitioning street due to the fact the minimum crown transition is 30 feet. 2. Please make the higher classified street the through street. At Rock Creek and Cambridge Drive, please choose one street to be the through street. If based on traffic volumes, Cambridge Drive would be the through street. Also, the through street should maintain the crown through the intersection and the cross street should transition at a minimum of 30 feet before the flowline of the through street. 3. Please check all PCR elevations. Throughout the plan and profile sheets, the elevation are either not correct or make it so that the intersection does not drain. 4. Please cross check all intersections. 5. The elevation just off the flowline in the center of the PCR should be 0.2 feet higher than the flowline elevation so that a "dip" is not created. ♦ The utility plans generally show all access ramps, enhanced crosswalks; etc. in the plan view; However, see the landscape plan for more information as to locations of all access ramps and enhanced cross walks. Please incorporate this information into the signing and striping plan for the site. ♦ Show all cross pans in profile view. ♦ Please show how all streets will tie into existing conditions with a 4:1 maximum slope. ♦ (See comments made above regarding offsite design for Rock Creek Drive and Cambridge Avenue.) ♦ The local residential streets that intersect with Kechter Road shall be designed with a 36-foot cross section and than transition to the 30-foot local residential cross section. The reason for this is to provide a safer intersection for vehicles turning on and off of Kechter Road. The cross section would have a 13-foot through, 10-foot left turn, & 13-foot through (See the intersection standard cross section for a connector local street, Detail D-2-a, " SDM"). The transition taper is based on the following equation (equation is from MUTCD, 1988 Edition, page 6C-3): 40-mph or less (speed limit) L=WS'/60 Where: L = Taper Length in feet W = Width of offset in feet S = Posted speed or off-peak 85%ile speed in MPH ♦ The actual taper length per side would be 31.25 feet. Please include 25 feet for storage. The total transition length is 56.25 feet. ♦ Sheet 53: Provide an offsite design for stubbed street east of Water Twine Way. ♦ Sheet 66: Please add a note to this sheet and the plat stating that access to Lots 177, 178, and 199 can not be from Oak Creek Way. In addition, Lot 177 can not be built until Oak Creek Way connects to the west or a temporary turn around is provided. ♦ Sheet 69: What type of intersection confieuration should be shown for the intersection of Rock Creek Drive and Cambridge Avenue? What does the traffic study recommend? Again, provide a signing and striping plan for the entire site and base it on the traffic study. ♦ Sheet 71: Does the McClelland Channel bridge design work for the proposed re -grading of the channel? Will the Stormwater Utility allow storm flows to drain directly into the channel without water qual ity? ♦ Sheet 72A: Please show the offsite design for Pine Brook Way to the future intersection with Kechter Road. County Road 36 Design; Sheets 78 & 87 of 93: ♦ The design of Kechter Road should transition into existing conditions with 50:1 transition lengths (See Sheet 81 of 93). ♦ Currently, the City does not know whether to require Keether Road to be completed to Ziegler Road as part of the offsite improvements (See comments made above for Offsite Requirements, Phasing and Other Street Improvements). Whatever the final outcome will be for the offsite improvements, the City would like to work with the applicant to build a pavement section through the out parcel due west of the development. ♦ Please label all flowline elevations with EOP, future and existing elevations every 50 feet. ♦ one thing I noticed is that the pavement width is almost to the minor arterial street standard. Do we need that width of pavement? The short-range geometry in the traffic impact study does not show that that width of pavement is needed. I guess this is an item that I would like to discuss with the applicant. Also, be aware that the pavement width is shown differently between the plan & profile and the signing and striping plan. ♦ Please provide more detail for the cross sections for both the ultimate and the interim designs. Also, see redlines comments. ♦ Good job on Sheet 84. It appears that a variety of offsite easements will need to be obtained to build Kechtcr Road. I realize that this grading plan is for the ultimate street section, so I need to see a grading plan for the interim street section, as well. Plat Comments ♦ The Developer should sign the plat. ♦ Please show all sight distance easements and add sight distance easement language to the plat. ♦ Add a note that states the k IOA will maintain all Tracts/ Parcels; etc. ♦ All Parcels shall clearly label their easement designation. All private alley parcels shall be dedicated as access easements. All parcels that have a pedestrian/ bicycle trails through them shall be dedicated as access easements. ♦ Does an 8-foot utility casement need to be provided adjacent to the private alley? If so, please show the utility easement on the plat. Site and Landscape Plan Comments ♦ On the sheet 10 of 19, I have shown with a bold red pen the areas where the transportation services department will require an enhanced crosswalk. ♦ Please make sure the utility plans show the same trail network with access ramps and enhanced sidewalks. ♦ Please show all access ramps. ♦ The signing and striping plan should not be shown on the site and landscape plans. The signing and striping plan should be shown in the utility plans. ♦ The applicant wihl have to submit alternative compliance to LUC Section 3.6.2(E) with regard to lots backing up to an arterial street. ♦ The owner of the irrigation water that flows through this site will have to sign the plat and all pertinent sheets of the utility plans. ♦ An asphalt path should be shown through the offsite right-of-way for Willowbrook Drive to County Road 7. Soils Report Comments ♦ For the record the consulting engineer stated that no subdrain system would be used in this development. REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: October 5, 2000 TO: Tech Svs PROJECT: #8-99C Willowbrook PDP- Type II LUC All comments must be received by Ron Fuchs in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, November 1, 2000 ❑ No Comment ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** � t�U�-r 4 Lir�FC. C[,osE �r�o1K.slci<� ©r ��ca Sire®T Nay-�n�1 so i,S S 0. fdkP � 4,0 �i Pam- %e roC�LCce . � e >re. 1-k Ke�117or Rd. C4 �"e �• Ea5&P"ev � 9II R/ws1 gY�) 1^c�e_Inved t J44ec Self` tra� 40r-(fP �. njSo Lc)-}. q+- YJOCUvvtPvt./� =i Y'� t /s s�> C, P fSes �� l aG 4N� (�Grcei Date: Signature: __ CIIKK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS .Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility Redline Utility _ Landscape City of Fort Collins PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: May 3, 2000 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #8-99C Willow Brook PDP PLANNER: Ron Fuchs ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by. - Wednesday, May 31, 2000 General Comments See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility, plat, site, and landscape plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. Offsite Requirements, Phasing and Other Street Improvements: All developments most have adequate access to the city's Improved Arterial Street Network per Section 3.32(F)(I) of the Land Use Code. "I he utility plans, as shown, do not address this issue. Prior to the next submittal contact me (Mark McCallum) at 221.6605 to set up a meeting with other city staff to discuss some options. It may be helpful to provide a context plan showing the proposed improvements. The comments below are provided to help the applicant determine adequate access to the city's Improved Arterial Street Network and to provide street design requirements and guidelines. I . The proposed street connections may dictate phasing or vice versa. The proposed street connections may require that this development provide a second point of access (i.e. Cinquefoil and Cambridge would be one potential option). Also, note that most of the comments are assuming that this project will start its phasing at the north property Tine. If the phasing were to start along County Road 36, then the design and improvements to the nearest improved arterial would have to be made for County Road 36. 2. My original ODP comments addressing this issue still must be resolved (see pertinent CDP comments dated 3/29/00). 3. The final authority for allowing access to State Hwy. 68 belongs to CDOT. With that in mind, there is no guarantee that this project (and/ or Brookfield) can assume using Cinquefoil and Cambridge Drive for two points of access. Date: t! Signature: PLEASE SEND COPIES PLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: SITE ,Q UTILITY NO COMMENT S —SUBMIT MYLARS ,1E4ANDSCAPE 4. Street Classifications: The Memorandum Traffic Study prepared by Matt Delich on May 2, 2000 projects that Cambridge Drive north of Rock Creek Drive and Rock Creek Drive west of Cambridge Drive will have average daily traffic volumes of a minor arterial street (see Detail D- I -c —Where Used). The City's Master Street Plan anticipated that Rock Creek Drive and Cambridge Drive would adequately serve average daily traffic volumes as a collector street. As a result, it is the City's position that the streets mentioned above are to be designed to the collector street without parking standard (Detail D-I-d) with additional width designed into the intersections as traffic volumes dictate (i.e. At Harmony Road, at the intersection of Rock Creek Drive and Cambridge Drive, and at County Road 9 and Rock Creek Drive). On the other hand, the city will require that the parkway and sidewalk for the streets mentioned above are to be designed to a minor arterial standards (see Detail D-1-c). Utility Plan Comments Cover Sheet, Sheet I of 85: ♦ Minor revisions to the "General Notes". ♦ Include the Plat in the Utility Plan as a separate document after the cover sheet. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, Sheets 11-17 of 85. ♦ The Cover Sheet labels sheets 11-17 as Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. The last few sheets in this plan are labeled as the Developed Drainage Plan. Please clarify and label appropriately. ♦ It is the applicant responsibility to provide and accurately label all necessary offsite easements and rights -of -way (sec redlined plans). ♦ All offsite street work within the existing right-of-way shall be repaired in accordance with the city's "Street Repair and Reconstruction Standards and Guidelines". In addition, the County shall review any offsite construction within the County's right-of-way. Add the following 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 Guidelines". The city inspector and/ or the City Engineer shall have final authority in regard to the limits of the street repair." ♦ The private drives (for the alley product homes) channels storm water to the public street over the public sidewalk. This is not allowed per Section 3.6.2(L)(2)(f). In addition, the driveways should not be built with curb returns (see the driveway details in the street design manual). Utility Plans, Sheets 18-24 of 85. ♦ Due to the narrow lots sprinkled throughout this development, a utility coordination should be held to work out placement of utility services, driveways, and trees for each lot. Local & Collector Street Plan & Profile; Sheets 52-77 of 85: ♦ The number of streets in this development makes it difficult to have a complete design with the first submittal. Therefore, please realize that further comments may arise after all the appropriate information is provided per these comments. The comments below are shown (redlined) throughout the utility plans. Please address all redlined comments even if they are not specifically spelled out below. ♦ Provide flowline curve information for all street curves (including arc length, angle, radius, tangent length, etc.). ♦ Provide intersection spot elevations for all intersection in accordance with Detail D-18 & D-19 (as redlined). Please clearly show all crown transitions and determine the through streets. In regard to the crown transitions, the PCR elevations should not match on either side of the transitioning street due to the fact the minimum crown transition is 30 feet. ♦ Show all access ramps, enhanced crosswalks; etc. in the plan view. ♦ Show all cross pans in the plan and profile view. ♦ Please provide profile elevations on the right and left sides of all sheets. ♦ Please label where all construction begins and/ or ends on the plan and profiles sheets. ♦ Please show all proposed work with dark, solid lines (not with lines that are ghosted). ♦ Please see Plat Comments for tangent length comments. ♦ All driveways should not be built with curb returns (see the driveway details in the street design manual). ♦ Please see required sight distance easements (as redlined). ♦ Sheet 53: Please show the flowline profile through the intersections of the intersected streets and provide vertical curves as redlined. ♦ Sheet 54: The proposed street does not tie-in to existing conditions offsite. Please provide a 4:1 tie-in and a construction easement. ♦ Sheet 60: "No cross pans are allowed on collector streets except in extreme cases..." (SDM 1.02.03.12 b). ♦ Sheet 66: Please provide a vertical alignment for 500 feet offsite (SDM 1.02.03.06b). In addition, a temporary turn around should be installed at the west property Tine (as redlined). ♦ Sheet 69 & 70: The proposed street does not tie-in to existing conditions offsite. Please provide a 4:1 tie-in and a construction easement. ♦ Sheet 71 (Pine Brook Way): Please provide a vertical alignment for 500 feet offsite (SDM 1.02.03.06b). Secondly.. a temporary turn around should be installed at the west property line (as redlined). Thirdly, the mid -block cross pan should be 12 feet wide. Finally, the proposed street does not tie-in to existing conditions offsite. Please provide a 4:1 tie-in and a construction easement. County Road 36 Design, Sheets 78 & 79 of 85. ♦ The design for County Road 36 is not complete. Please see redlined comments for all required information. ♦ See redlined comments. Plat Comments Site and Landscape Plan Comments ♦ In general, provide more detail on the site and landscape plans, and be sure that they match each other and the utility plans. See all redlined comments. ♦ Please show all access ramps. ♦ The curb returns (for the street stubs) on the west side of Cambridge Drive and on the north side of Rock Creek Drive should be constructed with this development. ♦ The private driveways (for the alley product) should not be designed with curb returns (see the driveway details in the street design manual). ♦ The signing and striping plan should not be shown on the site and landscape plans. The signing and striping plan should be shown in the utility plans. ♦ Please see street plan and profile sheets in the utility plans for sight distance easements. Please add the citv's sight distance easement language to the Plat and landscape plans. ♦ Please see the Plat for tangent length comments. ♦ Please label the type of curb and gutter used for all streets. If residences are to have a driveway on street with vertical curb and gutter, then all drives shall be shown. ♦ The safe route to school issue in the Traffic Impact Study and in these plans, still needs to be addressed. ♦ The applicant will have to submit alternative compliance to LUC Section 3.6.2(E) with regard to lots backing up to an arterial street. ♦ The landscape plan is showing a meandering sidewalk along County Road 36. This will not be allowed. The applicant may consider a wider parkway strip instead. ♦ The owner of the irrigation water that Flows through this site will have to sign the plat and all pertinent sheets of the utility plans. Soils Report Comments ♦ The subsurface exploration report indicated that a subdrain system would have to be used for this project. A hydrogeolovical engineer will have to create a design for the subdrain system. I have included the "City of Fort Collins Criteria for Engineered Subdrain System". PROJECT lal COMMENT SHEET City of rmi Collin.: Current PlanninE DATE: May 3, 2000 TO: Mapping/Drafting PROJECT: #8-99C Willowbrook PDP — Type I I (LUC) All comments must be received by RON FUCHS IN CURRENT PLANNING no later than the staff review meeting: !�IL�No�KF:L W LVi 3 ?Z Wednesday, May 31, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference 7 lcs (-�;aVC- C t-+A ti�c� e n - �cs ,11jTT1+c�L5LD t !_L. C--Zr-! C>f �l. /Z __ _IBC CI.�t� N� --r J -T JS tw ` Z �ARcc'_ c>>vcs MCc} 7S A �tacR19TtC,j Tffi+ - //\,iCC.o'r-5 "7 �{CF� :S. J�eve iSc,,Ca ��i�qe 1]}- �y lt�oodCOq�d (��0U<nY� ar. na�P3 j j 11 S�"YEe�� S%1pu�L� be GLlect�Pa YJ�/ ���ev, Se✓Ur'cPS /alle�5 11 1 / �'. lil -rVCzJS 45 w tia} t) ,I q re, .7. I l ere_ i5 q,1 Xis ,"q of, t- c L,.O oT ITovse`F00111 P65 1 J(' 8 O S; R�4JS hoed rC-C'oY v 4Ll signature IECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site _Drainage Report Other (Mw� Utility Redline Utility Landscape Citv of Fort Collins 4. If landscape grass is installed in Pine Brook Way or Paper Birch Lane right-of-way, all maintenance responsibilities shall belong to the adjacent property owners or the Homeowners Association. 5. The City of Fort Collins is not responsible for any damage that may occur as a result of landscaping removal at the time of street construction. Add the following note to Sheet 6 of the plat: I . Rock Creek Drive and Tanana Drive are designed as future street connections and will be built with the development of adjacent property or properties. 2. No building permits shall be issued for any development within Parcel E until such time as Tanana Drive is constructed and/or a temporary turnaround is provided. 3. No landscaping other than grass shall be allowed within Rock Creek Drive and Tanana Drive right-of-way. This shall include but not be limited to, fences, sprinkler systems, or structures. 4. If landscape grass is installed in Rock Creek Drive or Tanana Drive right-of-way, all maintenance responsibilities shall belong to the adjacent property owners or the Homeowners Association. 5. The City of Fort Collins is not responsible for any damage that may occur as a result of landscaping removal at the time of street construction. Add the following note to Sheet 7 of the plat: I . Willow Brook Drive is designed as a future street connection and will be built with the development of adjacent property or properties. 2. No landscaping other than grass shall be allowed within Willow Brook Drive right-of-way. This shall include but not be limited to, fences, sprinkler systems, or structures. 3. rass is installed in Willow Brook Drive right-of-way, all maintenance If landscape g responsibilities shall belong to the adjacent property owners or the Homeowners Association. 4. The City of Fort Collins is not responsible for any damage that may occur as a result of landscaping removal at the time of street construction. Add the following note to Sheet 8 of the plat: L Paper Birch Lane is designed as a future street connection and will be built with the development of adjacent property or properties. 2. No landscaping other than grass shall be allowed within Paper Birch Lane right-of-way. This shall include but not be limited to, fences, sprinkler systems, or structures. 3. If landscape grass is installed in Paper Birch Lane right -of --way, all maintenance responsibilities shall belong to the adjacent property owners or the Homeowners Association. 4. The City of Fort Collins is not responsible for any damage that may occur as a result of landscaping removal at the time of street construction. Utility Plan Comments: l . Fix sheet numbers in a consistent numbering system (52, 52A, 52B, etc.) 2. Please provide two benchmarks in the General Notes. 3. Add a note on they General Notes that all recommendations of the Subdrain Report by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc. Shall be complied with. 4. Add Natural Resources to the Utility Plan approval block. 5. Show contour elevations in areas where the elevations aren't clear, such as on Sheet 12 on the northwest comer of the site. 6. On Sheet 14 and wherever irrigation pipe is shown, the pipe should be a Type R watertight joint when located within public right-of-way. It is suggested that at the end of each pipe, a flared end section is made to ensure better flows into the pipe. Development Review Comments — Page 2 PROJECT /—MM COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Plannina DATE: May 3, 2000 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: #8-99C Willowbrook PDP — Type I I (LUC) All comments must be received by RON FUCHS IN CURRENT PLANNING no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference _D 0s P,�,►�d . Pa�� �,� w,ll 6e r �r -ile V Q>,e Signature CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS __Plat Site Drainage Report _other Utility _Redline utility _Landscape 4 Citv of Fort Collins vCEPTUAL PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: 8/25/99 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: Willow Brook Conceptual Project PLANNER: Ron Fuchs ENGINEER: Mark McCallum Conceptual Comments: As headlined, the comments listed below are conceptual comments with the review based upon the question sheet provided by the applicant at the October 4, 1999 conceptual review. The applicant is expected to apply all pertinent Land Use Code, Fossil Creek Subarea Plan, and Street Design Standards in their final design. The answers below to the applicant's questions are to provide a reasonable amount of direction prior to the submittal of a project development plan. The answers shall not preclude the Engineering Department from making additional comments in the future in regard to overall layout of the site. The Engineering Department reserves this ability due to the limited information provided for review (i.e. Transportation Impact Study & Utility Plans). Also, the Engineering Department would prefer to make comments on an Overall Development Plan with regard to street layout due to the constraints attributed to the area as a whole. As I understand it, the city has required that an CDP be submitted, which is to include the surrounding proposed developments. This is to better define the land uses, street connections, and storm drainage facilities for this area of the city. To conclude this introduction, the comments listed below are not committing the Engineering Department to approving the horizontal layout as shown on the "Preliminary Site Plan" nor does this comment letter relieve the applicant from off -site construction and design responsibilities. Answers to Street Questions: ♦ (Number 4) — Alleys shall only be used in conjunction with narrow residential streets (LUC Section 3.6?(J)(1)(b) & SDM Detail D-3-a&b). A Local street is appropriate to use with a mix of alley and conventional housing products, however an alley ust still be used in conjunction with a narrow reside ial stree Date: 9 Signature: , PLEASE S�tPIES PLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: — SITE . UTILITY NO COMMENTS — SUBMIT MYLARS X LANDSCAPE The narrow street can only be used in conjunction with an alley where (1) The dwelling units all have parking accessed from an alley; (2) Blocks do not exceed 660 feet in length and; (3) Traffic Volumes on the street is anticipated to be less than 700 vpd. Therefore, an alley can not be used with in sections at single loaded streets or next to an open space. (The applicant should note that a private drive could be used with any combination ofstreets except a narrow residential street.) (Number 5) — The minimum centerline horizontal radius for a local and connector street is 240 feet. Please see SDM Section 1.02.03.03 and Table 2 for the minimum centerline horizontal curve requirements. ♦ (Number 6) — The only criteria that prevents 90-degree (or elbow) type comers on local streets is the centerline horizontal radii criteria (mentioned above). In the past, the Engineering Department has permitted elbow type corners on local streets provided that the corner has sufficient pavement width for parking and traveling vehicles (please see attachment labeled "Bump -Out'). Recently, we have expanded ourjustification for elbows to include that the elbow should not inhibit the intent of the LUC connectivity criteria, which specifies that "local streets must provide for both intra- and inter - neighborhood connections to knit developments together, rather than forming barriers between them" (Please review LUC Section 3.6.3). (Number 7) — The Street Design Manual (section 1.02.03e) specifies that "streets intersecting on opposite sides of a residential or collector street shall be directly across from each other or offset by at ]cast 200 feet between centerlines". A technical interpretation of this standard would deem this comment irrelevant due to the phrase "...on opposite sides... street'. However, in this case, the Engineering Department has the authority under section 1.02.01 of the Street Design Manual "...to require more than is presented in this document'. I feel this requirement is justifiable based on the fact that the Engineering Departments is responsible for maintaining that street designs are safe. If the applicant would prefer they can justify a decreased offset in the variance request with special note that this requirement is more than what is specifically required in section 1.02.03e. (Number 9) — Arterial, collector, commercial, and industrial streets shall use vertical curb & gutter SDM Section I.02.03.09.b&c). Residential streets can use either rollover or vertical curb and gutter. If a residential street is to be designed and constructed with vertical curb &gutter then the utility plans shall show all driveway locations. (Number 10) — Public Alleys shall be dedicated in conformance with standard Details D-3-a or D-3- b. All public alleys shall be dedicated as right-of-way. The applicant may consider a private drives, which the city does not maintain or need dedicated as right-of-way. ♦ (Number 11) — The garage setback is not a flexible requirement for it is an 8-foot utility easement. ♦ (Number 12) — If there are utility questions, please contact each utility company or department. If the applicant desires, I could coordinate a utility coordination meeting to discuss utility locations. ♦ (Number 13) —" All alleys shall be constructed in conformance with the `Design and Construction Criteria, Standards and Specifications for Streets, Streetscapes, Sidewalks, Alleys and Other Public Ways' as adopted by the City Council by ordinance it resolution" (LUC Section 3.6.2(J)(3)). To answer the question, yes all alleys have horizontal and vertical design standards. ♦ (Number 14) — Alley spacing on streets is viewed more as driveways. Therefore, alleys do not need to meet the 200-foot spacing requirement. However, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer shall reserve the ability to change the location of an alley intersecting a street for safety and operations purposes. ♦ (Number 15) — Please review the Pavement Design and Technical Criteria in the "Design and Construction Criteria, Standards and Specifications for Streets, Streetscapes, Sidewalks, Alleys and Other Public Ways". Also, contact Rich Richter the city's Pavement Engineer at 221-6605. ♦ (Number 16) — Please confirm that the Current Planning Department (Ron Fuchs at 221-6750) has no requirement to restrict the number of units served by an alley. With regard to the Engineering Departments requirements, please review and apply Detail D-2-c(Where Used). ♦ (Number 17) — The intersection design and stacking at County Road 36 depends on the traffic volumes. The Engineering Department prefers a 36-foot flared section at local street intersections with arterials. When the city receives the Traffic Impact Study the applicant will be made aware if this will be a requirement. ♦ (Loop Road) — The Loop Road will need to be submitted as a variance to the City Engineer, which should be coordinated through the Development Review Engineer. At that time the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer will determine if the Loop Road is designed properly. ♦ (Connector Roads as shown on the Fossil Creek Subarea Plan) — Please reference Pete Wray's Comments from the Advanced Planning Department. ♦ (East/ West Collector Street) — The Engineering Department would prefer to review an Overall Development Plan before committing an answer to this question. The Engineering Department concurs with the applicant's engineer that the Collector Street will have to be realigned to intersect with County Road 7. (The Engineering Department would prefer to make comments on an Overall Development Plan with regard to street lavout due to the constraints attributed to the area as a whole. As I understand it, the city has required that an ODP be submitted. If we review the layout of this site without Considering the ODP then we dictate the ODP with the PDP, decreasing the importance of the ODP.) Answers to Lot and Product Design Issues: (Number 5) — There is no driveway criterion for Connector Local Street other than Detail D-9. izm)m Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments City of T^art Collins Department: Engineering Date: August 12, 2002 Project: WILLOW BROOK, 1ST FILING CLUBHOUSE, FINAL COMPLIANCE All comments must be received by TED SHEPARD in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: July 31, 2002 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: General 5 Why is the parkway narrowing along Observatory Drive approaching Cinquefoil Lane? Shouldn't a consistency be maintained along the street? The narrowing of the parkway will require a revisiion to the Willow Brook plans reflecting this change, this revision should also show the culvert across the sidewalk along the north side of the property. Topic: Utility 6 Provide utility plan approval blocks on all sheets of the utility plan. 7 Provide District Signature blocks on pertinent sheets in addition to the cover sheet (notes and utility sheets.) 8 Coordination should be ensured that improvements along the surrounding streets shown on the overall Willow Brook plan set are done in an orderly manner so as to not result in street cuts to accomplish construction of the clubhouse. S Z Signature Date' CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility - Redline Utility _ Landscape Page I PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: May 3, 2000 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #8-9813 Willowbrook ODP — Type II (LUC) PLANNER: ENGINEER: Ron Fuchs Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: May 24, 2000 General Comments Please see redlined comments on all sheets of the Overall Development Plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. If you have any questions, please call me (Mark McCallum) at 221-6605 ext. 7656. Street Construction/ ObliEations With regard to connectivity to an improved arterial street, maintaining two points of access to this development and other street design and construction related issues, these are all issues that can be addressed with the Willow Brook PDP submittal. (See the previous Willow Brook ODP comment letter for some ofthese related issues.) Date: 5 d-/%a Signature: PLEASE SEND COPIES ❑ PLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: ❑ SITE ❑ UTILITY NO COMMENTS — SUBMIT MYLARS ❑ LANDSCAPE PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: March 1, 2000 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #8-9813 Willowbrook ODP — Type I1 (LUC) PLANNER: Ron Fuchs ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: March 29, General Comments 200` ♦ Overall, it is my opinion that this plan is relatively consistent with our previous discussion in regard to street connections. However, questions still need to be addressed between thilODP and the Harmony Tech. Park Amended ODP. With that in mind, please see redlined cnments on all sheets of the Overall Development Plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. If you have any questions, please call me (Mark McCallum) at 221-6605 ext. 7656. Overall Development Plan ' ♦ The proposed east/ west collector street should be labeled as Rock Creek Drive (or whatever the street is called for the Harvest Park development). ♦ On sheet 1, there are thin lines that appear to represent street connections. Please label all lines or omit them from the plan. s ♦ Please indicate that all arrows shown on the perimeter of the property to be "future street connections". ♦ Please provide another future street connection from the east/ west collector into the Van Fleet property. On sheet 2, a detention pond is shown in that area. Please remove that portion of the detention pond to provide space for the street connection. ♦ Please add notes as redlined on sheet 2. The notes that I have added can be modified, if the applicant desires. However, before deviating from what I have written, please coordinate the desired change with me (see phone number above). t = Date: Signature 7> PLEASE SEND COPIES ❑ PLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: ❑ SITE ❑ UTILITY NO COMMENTS —SUBMIT MYLARS 0 LANDSCAPE ♦ Please add a note that states "The pedestrian circulation routes is not be shown to preclude a street through the development". Conceptual Drainage Plan ♦ Please clarify that the drainage conveyance systems do not prevent street connections. In addition, show all street connections on this plan. Conceptual Utility Plan ♦ What utility, City or District will be serving this development? ♦ How far does the sewer and water main extend offsite west along on County Road 36? ♦ Will the 12-inch water main under the east/ west collector street need to be installed in phase I of the PDP to provide service to this development? Street Construction/ Obligations ♦ Shortly after receiving the Willowbrook CDP for review, Tom Iskiyan, Chateau Development Company, called to discuss street construction obligations for Willowbrook and partially for the Amendment to the Harmony Technology Park ODP (more specifically Brookfield). My response to Tom in that conversation was that I would know more after reviewing the Willowbrook CDP. What is apparent after review is that there are still questions that need to be answered. Below are some thoughts and concerns, which will probably spark further conversations: 1. Currently, Kathleen Reavis, Transportation Planning Dept., is working with a team to update the access plan for State Hwy 68, which should be complete in April. This plan effects the Willow brook ODP and the Harmony Technology Park CDP in that it is reviewing access options for Cambridge Avenue, Cinquefoil Street, and County Road 7. 2. CDOT is preparing design options to State Hwy 68, which may effect grades at the Cinquefoil Street Intersection. As 1 understand it, the redesign and construction of State Hwy 68 may raise or lower that intersection. 3. County Road 36. although it is being improved, it is being improved in disjointed phases. With the Fossil Lakes, 2"d, the City is working with County to have County Road 36 improved from County Road 9 to Fossil Lakes, 2"d eastern property line. If the Willowbrook PDP went forward with improving County Road 36 adjacent to its site, there would be a gap between Fossil Ickes, 2"d and Willowbrook. In addition, there would be a gap between Willowbrook's eastern boundary and County Road 7. 4. Eric Bracke, Traffic Engineer, and Kathleen Reavis, Transportation Planning, had concerns about the Traffic Impact Study. These concerns relate to the State Hwy 68-access plan. Their concerns should be addressed in the traffic study prior to considering any construction improvements. 5. If at all possible, please consider phasing on the ODP. With that in mind, it is difficult to consider which improvements are most reasonable. The City will ask that the applicant review the "knowns" and talk with the City and CDOT staff to determine the improvements that make the most sense and reasonably address traffic and code concerns. 7. [ 15] Instead of terminating Rock Creek Drive and Tanana Drive to the east and north ends of the property boundaries respectively, the street should be built past the curb returns of the intersection and stopped. Show the grading that would occur in the temporary situation on the grading plan as well as the ultimate. Funds for the construction should be given to the City to ensure the construction is made in the future. 8. [ 16] As with the previous instance, stop construction of Willow Brook Drive at the intersection of Tanana Drive. 9. [17] As with the previous instances, stop construction of Paper Birch Lane at the intersection of Tanana Drive. 10. [17B] Label contour elevations where not clearly shown. 11. [ 18A] The water lane shown as Phase 1 B will need a Development Construction Pernut prior to its construction (regardless if constructed by the School District or Willowbrook.) Revise Note 1 from "to" to "may" as redlined. 12. I1' 3" subdrain laterals are desired, please provide an addendum to the subdrain report that this size will work from a design and capacity standpoint as 4" is specified in the recommendations. 13. Please provide a symbol in the legend to show cleanouts in the plan view. It is not clear to me where cleanouts are proposed - there are other black dots that are labeled as relief valves , which may confuse the designation. 14. [26A] An additional sheet needs to be provided showing how the subdrain continues to the outfall in both plan and profile view. This will help show if any utility line conflicts are possible as well as demonstrate the grade of the pipe. 15. On all subdrain profile sheets, ensure that a grade for the subdrain is specified on each sheet. 16. The 8" subdrain trunks should be shown to tie into the 10" subdrain at Cinquefoil. Lane and wherever 8" pipe ties into other 8" pipe. It needs to be clear on the profile view that tie-ins to subdrains on intersecting streets occur. it is not evident on the profile sheet that the subdrains tie into each other. 17. Provide a symbol to distinguish the transition point where the crown from a street is transitioned to the crosspan of the intersecting street. It is not clear if spot elevations being shown also correspond to these transitions points. What are the distances from these transition points to the flowline of the intersecting street? 18. [52C, 52 & 69] The intersection elevations of Rock Creek and Cambridge do not match up on these two sheets. 19. 152 and other subsequent sheets] There are instances (such as at the Cambridge/Rock Creek intersection) where the flowline is shown connecting at a street intersection when in fact it connects the PCR's of the intersecting street which is not an accurate representation of the flowline. A break in the flowline should occur. 20. [52 and other subsequent sheets] There are instances (such as the south flowline of Rock Creek Drive across Sow -wood Drive) where the flowline of the crosspan is not shown while the flowline of the PCR's are shown and are connected. Please correct. 21. [53] Two vertical curves are needed on the north side of Rock Creek Drive, the 1" at the T- intersection of Yellowhom Drive (vertical curves required at crest grade break situations), the 2"djust west of the Brookfield Drive intersection as the change in grade from the cross pan to the flowline west of the cross pan is .9%. 22. [54] Grade changes exceed 1 % on both sides of the flowline along Rock Creek east of the Tanana intersection, vertical curves are required here. 23. [54] Show the initial construction of Rock Creek Drive does not continue as previously commented on in the grading plan comments. Development Review Comments — Page 3 PROJECT (iozqm� COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current PlanninE DATE: March 11 2000 TO: Street Oversizing OROJECT: #8-99B Willowbrook ODP — Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Ron Fuchs no later than the staff review meeting: March 29, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for fitture reference i. Sjh'I1laure CHECK ITERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS __Plat Site __Drainage Report Other Utility _Redlinc Utility _Landscape City of Fort Collins PROJECT COlV MENT SHEET Citv of Fort Collins Current Planninu DATE: March 1, 2000 TO: Engineering Pavement PROJECT: #8-99B Willowbrook ODP — Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Ron Fuchs no later than the staff review meeting: March 29, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference NO .Signature — CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS __Plat site Drainage Report _Other _Utility Redlire Utility Landscape city of Fort Collins 24. [60] A driveway location shown conflicts with a mid block ramp and enhanced crosswalk along Willowbrook Drive. Please correct. 25. [61 ] Show initial construction of the Willow Brook Drive stops just east of the Tanana intersection as previously noted, however, ensure that the enhanced crosswalk is constructed at this time. In addition, show that the sidewalk (asphalt?) continuing east of this site is also done at this time. 26. [65A & 66] Paper Birch Lane needs to be designed with a vertical curve for the grade break at the west property line. 27. [67] As previously indicated with other roadways, end initial construction of Paper Birch Lane east of the inlets just past the intersection. 28. [70] Remove the fixture inlet shown on the future continuation of Willow Brook Drive, this is not needed. 29. [72A] Provide a vertical curve for Pine Brook Way at the end of the property line, there should not be a grade break as presently shown. 30. [76] A vertical curve is needed as redlined, the change in grade is 1% which is not allowed in a crest situation. 31. [76] Align the grid with the stationing on the profile view. 32. [77] A vertical curve is needed as redlined, the change in grade is in excess of 1% which is not allowed in a crest situation. 33. [78] Provide infon nation regarding the flowline grading west of the proposed design along Kechter Road to show the how this interim design ties to the west. 34. [78] What exactly is the interim design shown on Kechter Road for? I had thought that the goal would be for the City to construct this roadway with cooperation from surrounding properties in the ultimate condition. If an interim improvement occurs that is not City built, the design of this needs to be carried past the current boundaries 1000 feet in each direction. 35. [88] Ensure the private alley cross section is changed to private drive. 36. [87-91 ] Ensure that the Utility Plan Approval Block is of standard size and has all pertinent City titles (Replace Director of Engineering with City Engineer.) 37. Please ensure that Matt Baker has a copy of the utility plan set, especially with regards to Kechter Road. Development Review Comments — Page 4 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: May 9, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #8-99C WILLOWBROOK PDP - TYPE I (LUC) All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: May 30, 2001 ❑ No Comment ElProblems or Concerns (see below or attached) **tPLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** /. Pz-/iri:- LEG14(- GLos�,ov- ,2• vtct �eeh 0.,p�r0Ve�,� PADK HFRF IF YOU WISH IO RFCE ('opE OR REMMN§ignature: `,`Plat Site _ Drainage Report _ Other Utility Redline Utility Landscape PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: May 2001 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: Willowbrook/Brookfield — Groundwater Report PLANNER: Ted Shepard ENGINEER: Marc Virata In response to the groundwater report submitted by TST Engineers on behalf of Anderson Consulting Engineers, the following comments/concems are offered: l . The accepted report must be stamped by a professional engineer in the state of Colorado. 2. Laterals tying into the subdrain should be provided to each basement. The report should be revised taking laterals to the basements in consideration. 3. The report should demonstrate that positive outfall (gravity discharge) is maintained and surcharging of the subdrain is prevented specific to the development proposal, rather than solely make the recommendation of positive outfall in the recommendations area of the report. (At the outfall of the subdrain, the elevation at a 100 year event should be stated in the report and the lowest basement elevation should be verified in comparison.) 4. The City strongly favors separate subdrain systems and separate outfall systems for Willowbrook and Brookfield. If the Developer(s) intend to tie the two projects to the same system, the City must have a copy of how the maintenance responsibilities are outlined between the two projects (with assumably two separate I IOA's) this should be recorded at the County (the City should see a draft copy of this prior to recordation.) 5. The report does not appear to address potential offsite transport specific to TST's design and whether water rights of others in the vicinity are injured. For example, will the subdrain move offsite of the project and thus require a solid pipe to prevent collecting groundwater from other properties? 6. The report should recommend a specific minimum slope for the subdrain system and in instances where this slope cannot be maintained what additional measures should be undertaken (resize the pipe to a larger diameter?) 7. Note that the City does not allow ADS in the right-of-way. SDR 35 PVC pipe must be used in right - of way meeting ASTM 3034. 8. If the design of the subdrain ties into storm sewer, the Stormwater needs to see the report and how it affects their stormwater system. 9. please clarify section 3.3 on page 7. Does it state that 8 inch is sufficient for future expansion of other developments beyond Willowbrook/Brookfield or is the 8 inch sufficient solely for these two developments. (confused by the statement "...main lines should be sized to accommodate inflow from the northern expansion.") 10. Show the direction of flow for the cleanout detail on page 10. Date: May 3, 2001 Signature: PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins orm Current Planning DATE: February 13, 2001 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #8-99 Willow Brook PDP PLANNER: Ted Shepard ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: Wednesday, March 7, 2001 General Comments ♦ See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility, plat, site, and landscape plans. More specific comments will be mentioned below. ♦ Provide a phasing plan? Remember to show how two points of access will be maintained. ♦ The owner of the irrigation water that flows through this site will have to sign the plat and all pertinent sheets of the utility plans. ♦ Please make sure the site and landscape plans match the utility plans. Utility Plan Comments Grading Plan; Sheets 11-17F of 93: ♦ I have been working with Tom Iskiyan, Chateau Development Company to determine the location of all easements. See comments throughout the grading plans. Please show and label the locations of all offsite easements on all pertinent sheets throughout the utility plans. ♦ Please show street stubs every 660 feet as approved with the ODP along Cambridge Drive. ♦ All grading contours should tie-in with existing grades. ♦ Why is the berm required along eastern property boundary? Local & Collector Street Plan & Profile; Sheets 52-77 of 93: Date: '/� Signature: PLEASE SEND COPIES 0�'PLAT OF MARKED REVISIONS: SITE ❑ NO COMMENTS — SUBMIT MYLARS 5—UTILITY C'LANDSCAPE ♦ The main issue with the Local and Collector streets is the design of the intersections. Please correct the intersections through out the plan and profile sheets. ♦ Show all cross pans in profile view. ♦ Show offsite designs as redlined for Clear Brook Drive, Willow Brook Drive, Cinquefoil Avenue, and Tanana Drive. ♦ Please transition the sidewalk with the pavement transitions for Tanana Drive and Cedar Creek Way at the intersection with Kechter Road. ♦ Sheet 51A: Show the extent of temporary asphalt at the intersection with Zielger Road. Please eliminate the arc points for the ultimate design and label the curb and gutter. ♦ Sheet 60 & 61: Driveways locations are required with vertical curb and gutter. The offsite sidewalk that connects to Strauss Cabin Road should be label to be constructed with asphalt (see comments). County Road 36 Design; Sheets 78 & 87 of 93: ♦ With all the conversations regarding Kechter Road in past weeks I suggest that you revise the drawings before you review my comments. As I understand it, the design for Kechter Road will be for the ultimate design from the Willow Brook eastern property line to the Fossil Lakes eastern property line. Please omit any reference to interim design. Therefore, the plan and profiles, grading plan, irrigation design, and cross sections should all be done to the ultimate design. When a new set of plans are complete, please submit them to me with my redlines for review. Plat Comments ♦ The Developer should sign the plat. ♦ Please show all sight distance easements and add sight distance easement language to the plat. ♦ Who will maintain parcels E, F, and I? ♦ The right-of-way for Cedar Creek Drive and Tanana Drive shall expand with the pavement width and shall be 57 feet. ♦ The owner of the irrigation water that flows through this site will have to sign the plat and all pertinent sheets ofthe utility plans. Site and Landscape Plan Comments ♦ An asphalt path should be shown through the offsite right-of-way for Willowbrook Drive to County Road 7. ♦ Show curb returns, on the western side of Cambridge Drive for Willow Brook Drive and Clear Brook Drive. ♦ The enhanced cross walks shall not be on a skew. DATE: February 13, 2001 TO: Tech Svs ECT PROJECT: #D�E�VE OPMENTBPLAN —T POEJ 1 - (LUC) All comments must be received by Ted Shepard in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: March 7, 2001 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** PLC-T LE&A GLO 64Z_ .6" i i/ I 1�. pp L Q fC. j. Ca w,�h�JgC 5 CL cc D tick-t�7, �- C, 1 I Lk CHECK I RE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS D_atdat Site D aluaee RcpoR Signatufhie Utility Rcdh Utility _ Landscape