Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/17/2020 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Regular MeetingPlanning and Zoning Board Page 1 December 17, 2020 Jeff Hansen, Chair Virtual Hearing Michelle Haefele, Vice Chair Zoom Webinar Per Hogestad David Katz Jeff Schneider Ted Shepard Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & Channel 881 William Whitley on the Comcast cable system The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Hearing December 17, 2020 6:00 PM Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Agenda Participation for this remote Planning and Zoning Board meeting will be available online or by phone. No one will be allowed to attend in person. Public Participation (Online): Individuals who wish to address the Planning & Zoning Board via remote public participation can do so through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/99096373614. Individuals participating in the Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site. The meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:45 p.m. on December 17, 2020. Participants should try to sign in prior to 6:00 p.m. if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board. In order to participate: Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). You need to have access to the internet. Keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the hearing, please email smanno@fcgov.com. Public Participation (Phone): If you do not have access to the internet, you can call into the hearing via phone. Please dial: 253-215-8782 or 346-248-7799, with Webinar ID: 990 9637 3614. (Continued on next page) Packet pg. 1 Planning and Zoning Board Page 2 December 17, 2020 • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Individuals may comment on items not specifically scheduled on the hearing agenda, as follows: • Those who wish to speak are asked to state their name and general address before speaking. • The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker. • Each speaker should state their name and address and keep their comments to the allotted time. • Any written materials should be provided to the Secretary for record-keeping purposes. • A timer will beep once and the time light will turn to yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time remain and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time to speak has ended. • CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the Planning and Zoning Board to quickly resolve items that are non-controversial. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request that an item on this agenda be “pulled” for consideration within the Discussion Agenda, which will provide a full presentation of the item being considered. Items remaining on the Consent Agenda will be approved by the Planning and Zoning Board with one vote. The Consent Agenda generally consists of Board Minutes for approval, items with no perceived controversy, and routine administrative actions. The meeting will be available beginning at 5:45 p.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 6:00 p.m., if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time – phone participants will need to hit *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Committee. Once you join the meeting: keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the hearing, please email smanno@fcgov.com. Documents to Share: If residents wish to share a document or presentation, City Staff needs to receive those materials via email by 24 hours before the meeting. Please email any documents to smanno@fcgov.com. Individuals uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or unable to participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments you may have to smanno@fcgov.com . Staff will ensure the Board or Commission receives your comments. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send 24 hours prior to the meeting. As required by City Council Ordinance 079, 2020, a determination has been made by the chair after consultation with the City staff liaison that conducting the hearing using remote technology would be prudent. Packet pg. 2 Planning and Zoning Board Page 3 December 17, 2020 1. Draft Minutes for the P&Z November Hearing The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes of the November 19, 2020, Planning and Zoning Board hearing. 2. Draft Minutes for the P&Z November 5 Special Hearing The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes of the November 5, 2020, Planning and Zoning Board Special hearing. 3. Springer-Fisher Annexation and Zoning (Wray) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a series of two annexations and zoning of 76.8-acres, located northwest of the East Mulberry Street and Greenfields Court intersection. In accordance with the City’s Structure Plan Map and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan, the requested zoning for this annexation is General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N). A specific project development plan proposal is not included with this annexation application. APPLICANT: Norris Design Ryan McBreen 244 N College Ave #130 Fort Collins, CO 80525 STAFF ASSIGNED: Pete Wray, City Planner 4. FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line SPAR PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) for the installation of approximately 5,000 feet of new 20-inch diameter water line construction to feed the Fort Collins Loveland Water District (FCLWD) Foothills tank location. This water line will replace the older line currently connected to the tanks. APPLICANT: Chris Fletcher, PE Fort Collins Loveland Water District 5150 Snead Dr Fort Collins, CO 80525 STAFF ASSIGNED: Will Lindsey, Associate City Planner • DISCUSSION AGENDA 5. Land Use Code Amendements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding two changes to the Land Use Code. These two changes are described as follows: Regulations to allow a second kitchen in a dwelling unit without increasing the occupancy limits. Standards for an appeal of a Minor Amendment and Basic Development Review application. These two items were part of the annual Land Used Code Update but have been separated out as separate changes. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Packet pg. 3 Planning and Zoning Board Page 4 December 17, 2020 STAFF ASSIGNED: Noah Beals, Interim Development Review Manager • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Packet pg. 4 Agenda Item 1 Item 1, Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY December 17, 2020 Planning and Zoning Board STAFF Shar Manno, Customer and Administrative Manager SUBJECT MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 19, 2020 P&Z HEARING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is the consideration and approval of the draft minutes of the November 19, 2020 Planning & Zoning Board hearing. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft November 19, 2020 P&Z Minutes Packet pg. 5 Jeff Hansen, Chair Virtual Hearing Michelle Haefele, Vice Chair Zoom Webinar Per Hogestad David Katz Jeff Schneider Ted Shepard Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & William Whitley Channel 881 on Comcast The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Hearing November 19, 2020 Chair Hansen called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call: Haefele, Hansen, Hogestad, Katz, Schneider, Shepard, Whitley Absent: None Staff Present: Sizemore, Yatabe, Lindsay, Smith, Wray, Overton, Stephens, Claypool, Holland, Mounce, Gloss, Smith, Evans, Beals and Manno Chair Hansen provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. He described the following procedures: •While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration, citizen input is valued and appreciated. •The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for each item. •Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with city Land Use Code. •Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will be allowed for that as well. •This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard. Agenda Review Interim PTD Director Sizemore reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion Agendas stating all items will be heard as originally advertised. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 6 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 2 of 12 Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda: Eric Sutherland stated the planning function in the City is functioning poorly and commented on the Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) process being inconsistent with the requirements of the City Charter. He stated CSU made an erroneous legal interpretation of the use of the process for the Hughes Stadium property and the City failed to correct it. Chair Hansen acknowledged Mr. Sutherland's concerns and noted the Site Plan Advisory Review process has been on the Board's radar for quite some time. Member Whitley requested staff input on the legal limitation of the SPAR process. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied SPAR is limited in scope and a denial of a SPAR can be overruled by the Board of Governors of Colorado State University. Vice Chair Haefele stated she would not be averse to having some time to review the Land Use Code to determine when the SPAR process is applicable then allowing the Boardmembers to make a statement on its appropriateness. Member Hogestad noted there has been a great deal of citizen comment on the SPAR review process and asked Mr. Yatabe if he has any opinion on its appropriateness in this case. Mr. Yatabe replied it is very early in the process and the conceptual review meeting was just this morning. He stated the information submitted thus far has had little detail. He stated he could not share a legal opinion in open session. Chair Hansen noted any broad changes to the SPAR review process must happen at a state level. Member Hogestad stated the Board needs to discuss the appropriateness of the use of the process in this case at some point. Vice Chair Haefele suggested the Board could receive some legal guidance at its next worksession. Chair Hansen noted the first time the Board would be able to provide input on a project and comment on the appropriateness of a process would be when a project comes before the Board. Member Shepard stated this conversation is premature and noted a great deal of the SPAR process is determined by state statute. Member Hogestad suggested the Board could discuss the process and what makes a project eligible for a SPAR review at a worksession. Sizemore stated staff has heard the conversation and will determine a strategy for the best way to try to provide the right information to the Board at the right time. Consent Agenda: 1. Draft Minutes from September 17, 2020, P&Z Hearing 2. Draft Minutes from October 15, 2020, P&Z Hearing 3. P&Z Annual Work Plan 4. Precision Technology 5. Three-Mile Plan 2020 Update Public Input on Consent Agenda: Member Whitley made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Consent agenda for the November 19, 2020 Planning and Zoning Board hearing as originally advertised. Member Katz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 7 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 3 of 12 Member Shepard complimented the applicant, consulting team and staff on the Precision project. Discussion Agenda: 6. Maverik Project Description: This is a request for a Project Development Plan (PDP) to build a 6,132 square foot convenience store with fuel sales at the northwest corner of I-25 and Highway 392. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported on the submission of an updated architectural plan set that includes a rendering of the proposed project as viewed from the I-25 off-ramp and details of the rooftop equipment in addition to the previously included architectural elevations, building floorplan, and materials with color palette. In addition, a proposed landscape plan for the project was submitted. Member Shepard disclosed he is familiar with this site as well as with the existing Maverik on Mulberry. Staff and Applicant Presentations Will Lindsay, Associate City Planner, noted this presentation has been updated to address questions raised at last Friday's worksession. He discussed the 2.8-acre property and showed images of the site, which was annexed in 2017, and is in the General Commercial (CG) zone district. The proposed project is a 6,132 square foot convenience store with fuel sales and two modifications of standard are being requested. Lindsay outlined the proposed modifications: one to the 80-foot landscape buffer standard for properties abutting the I-25 right-of-way and one to the interior parking lot landscaping standard. He also noted the provision of an attached sidewalk in lieu of a detached public sidewalk, which would have required an engineering variance, was also a significant component of the plan. Cassie Younger, Maverik, discussed the company's response to COVID-19 in terms of it providing paid leave for any employee who gets sick from COVID or who must take leave to care for a COVID individual. Additionally, hourly pay has been increased for employees who cannot work from home, pre-work health checks have been instituted, and sanitation efforts have been increased. Ms. Younger discussed the proposed site plan noting the site is 20-30 feet lower than the highway and a bioswale surrounds the property which necessitated the attached sidewalk. She discussed the proposed modifications of standard and stated no additional evergreen trees can be added to the landscape plan due to the number of required trees and shrubs that must be located in the smaller area around the building. She stated they would be willing to change out some deciduous trees for evergreen trees if necessary; however, her teams feels the slope and landscaping provided is adequate. Ms. Younger discussed the rooftop equipment and noted it would be difficult to see unless viewed from directly above the store. She showed a photo of the existing Maverik store on the Mulberry frontage road and stated architecture and design standards have changed since then. She showed illustrations of standard elevations noting the proposed Fort Collins store is quite different and includes additional fenestration and cultured stone and fiberboard has been substituted with brick. The color palette has also been modified to be more muted and earth- toned. Staff Analysis Lindsay discussed staff's analysis of the modification requests. The first relates to the standard for site perimeter landscaping abutting the I-25 right-of-way which requires an 80-foot landscaped buffer between the parking lot edge and the I-25 right-of-way. The applicant is proposing an alternate 16.5-foot landscaped buffer yard with fewer trees and shrubs than what is required. Lindsay discussed the visibility of the site from the I-25 right-of-way, which is important to understand when considering this modification. He noted there is limited visibility of the site from the interstate itself. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 8 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 4 of 12 Lindsay noted the applicant team has stated it feels the proposed modification is as good or better than a complying plan stating the reduced buffer makes the required number of shrubs infeasible and the reliance on trees over shrubs provides for superior longer-term screening and appearance at this activity center. The applicant has also stated the modification is adequate given unusual and practical difficulties in developing the site. The second modification request relates to a parking lot interior landscaping standard that requires that parking bays extend no more than 15 parking spaces without intervening tree, landscaped island, or peninsula. Lindsay stated the applicant is proposing a tree location 5 feet and 7 inches directly behind the edge of the proposed flush curb line and directly behind where the area would be required by Code in lieu of a landscaped island or peninsula. The applicant states this option is still provides adequate shade and is functionally better due to the tree grate being on the walkway and it removes a potential vertical curb conflict next to the handicap parking provided at the front of the building. Lindsay stated staff found this modification was nominal and inconsequential when considered from the perspective of the entire plan and does not detract from the intent of the Land Use Code section. Lindsay reviewed other applicable standards and stated staff finds the proposal meets the landscaping, access, circulation and parking, trash and recycling enclosure, building standards, and contextual requirements outlined in the Land Use Code. Lindsay noted the question was brought up regarding how this project compares to other Maverik locations and he discussed the differences between the existing Maverik in Fort Collins, other standard Maverik's in Colorado, and the proposed plan in terms of building materials, color palette, and fuel canopy. Lindsay discussed the traffic impact study submitted with the plan and stated staff found the plan complies with level of service requirements in the city. He went on to discuss building design standards which are met by the proposed plan. He concluded by stating staff finds the PDP is consistent with the policies and guidance of the adopted plans, the Northern Colorado I-25 Corridor Plan, and the I-25 Subarea Plan. Additionally, staff finds the modifications of standard meet the application requirements and would not be detrimental to the public good. Staff recommends approval of the PDP with the modifications of standard. Member Shepard asked about cross-hatching on one of Lindsay's slides. Lindsay replied that is designated as a loading zone. Member Katz requested clarification regarding the need for the modification related to the internal parking landscaped peninsula. Ms. Younger replied there is no curb between the parking area and the store entrance; therefore, adding a landscaped island in the middle of a row of parking creates a trip hazard, particularly when it is near an ADA parking stall. She stated there is adequate landscaping on the edges of the parking lot. Public Input (3 minutes per person) None. Board Questions / Deliberation Member Shepard asked if the brick is located between the cultured stone and the roof line on all four sides of the building. Lindsay replied in the affirmative. Member Hogestad asked when the existing trees were planted. Lindsay replied they were planted in 2017 and they are currently irrigated and cared for by the City. There are three trees which straddle the property line and care for those will be handed over to the applicant. Member Hogestad asked if the new trees will be irrigated. Lindsay replied in the affirmative. Member Hogestad asked what the minimum required caliper of the new trees will be. Lindsay replied a 1.5-inch caliper is required for ornamental trees and a 2-inch caliper is required for other deciduous trees. Member Hogestad asked about the prairie dogs on the site. Ms. Younger replied they will be ethically euthanized and a payment in lieu will be made. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 9 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 5 of 12 Member Hogestad asked about the horizontal distance from I-25 to the existing trees. Ms. Younger replied it is between 108 and 137 feet. Member Hogestad asked if the applicant has researched moving the prairie dogs. Ms. Younger replied in the affirmative but noted it is cost prohibitive. Member Katz stated there is a local prairie dog coalition that has worked on relocation projects. He asked if the applicant explored getting permission from CDOT to plant ornamental shrubs in the sloping buffer from an aesthetic standpoint. Ms. Younger replied that was not explored. Member Katz stated it could help with the overall feel of the site and encouraged the applicant to research that with CDOT. Ms. Younger stated they could look into that and noted the drainage would need to be considered. Member Shepard asked about the effective width of the attached sidewalk given the tree grates. Manny Nuno, DCI Engineers, replied the sidewalk is seven feet wide including the tree grates and there is at least 36 inches between the tree grates and the back of the sidewalk for ADA compliance. Member Sheparad asked about the dimensions of the tree grates. Shelly LaMastra, landscape architect, replied the are four feet by four feet and were designed with input from Forestry. Member Shepard asked about the dimensions of the mansards that will be screening the rooftop equipment. Ms. Younger replied they are five feet long and five feet tall. Member Shepard asked if the roof deck is sunken. Ms. Younger replied in the affirmative and showed renderings to illustrate the roof and its design. Member Shepard asked about the driveway width. Spencer Smith, Engineering, replied there was no discussion about varying the driveway width, but noted the Final Development Plan review will ensure its compliance with standards. Member Shepard asked if fuel tankers have enough turning radius on the site. Ms. Younger replied in the affirmative. Member Shepard asked if the rear fueling area is viewable from the clerk and, if not, how it will be managed. Ms. Younger replied she would need to check with operations, but noted most transactions are done by credit card and there are multiple security cameras around the building roof. Member Shepard asked if the rear fueling area is meant to be only for truckers. Ms. Younger replied the fueling area is designed for trucks as it is high-flow diesel. Member Shepard encouraged the applicant team to disperse the evergreen trees a bit more around the site to help mitigate the hard surfaces. Ms. Younger stated some planned deciduous trees could be swapped out for evergreen trees. Smith clarified the tree grates are actually four feet by six feet and the drive width is 36 feet, which would meet the engineering standard. Chair Hansen stated this is an expected and appropriate use for the site and the applicant team has done a good job of mitigating negative impacts. Member Katz noted this site is not an easy one for development and he commended the applicant team and planning staff on their work. Member Katz made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Haefele, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the modification of standard to Land Use Code Section 3.9.4(B)(1) regarding the reduction of the buffer yard from 80 feet to 16.5 feet between the eastern parking lot edge and the I-25 right-of-way, based upon the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during the worksession and this hearing, and the Board discussion on this item. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 10 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 6 of 12 Member Shepard stated he would support the motion and noted the modification is appropriate due to the exceptional physical conditions of the site and is not detrimental to the public good. Member Katz and Vice Chair Haefele accepted that information as a friendly amendment to the motion. Vote: 7:0. Member Schneider made a motion, seconded by Member Katz, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the modification of standard to Land Use Code Section 3.21(E)(5)(e) based on the proposed project development plan, it meets the applicable requirements for Section 2.8.2(H)(1)(4), and granting the modification of standard will not be detrimental to the public good, based upon the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during the worksession and this hearing, and on the conclusion of the staff report. Member Shepard suggested it would be more accurate to suggest the modification complies with Section 2.8.2(H)(1) and (H)(4). Members Schneider and Katz accepted the language as a friendly amendment. Vote: 7:0. Member Katz made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Haefele, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the Maverik PDP 20001, based on the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during the worksession and this hearing, and the Board discussion on this item. Member Schneider noted the motion should be based on the findings of fact and the conclusions made the staff report. Member Katz and Vice Chair Haefele accepted the amendment as friendly. Member Whitley requested a friendly amendment to encourage the applicant to make a good faith effort to rehome the prairie dog population before euthanizing it. Member Katz agreed from an ethical standpoint, but did not accept the amendment as friendly. Member Whitley stated he could not support the motion without that amendment. Member Shepard stated the prairie dog plan is in compliance with Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code as described in the staff report. Member Hogestad stated he would not support the motion without some mention of the team making some effort to rehome the prairie dogs as it is not only ethically correct, it is a matter of good will. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe noted a formal motion to amend could be put forth and voted upon rather than a friendly amendment being put forth. Member Whitley made a motion to amend the motion to request a good faith effort to rehome the prairie dogs before the development moves forward. He stated he believes a condition of approval is appropriate; however, he is struggling with a way to word the motion so it is indicative of a good faith effort rather than a requirement. Member Katz agreed from an ethical standpoint, but stated he would prefer the motion to stand as is. Member Shepard suggested the possibility of going through with the existing motion and then addressing the applicant about a good faith effort. Member Hogestad noted there is an existing prairie dog mitigation plan and suggested Member Whitley is requesting the applicant make a good faith effort to relocate the prairie dogs before enacting that plan, which could be a motion. Member Whitley agreed that is his request. Member Whitley withdrew his motion. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 11 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 7 of 12 Member Hogestad made a motion, seconded by Member Whitley, to amend the existing motion to include a requirement that a good faith effort be made to relocate the prairie dogs as an addition to the mitigation plan. Vice Chair Haefele expressed support for the amendment. Member Katz suggested adding a condition that the applicant contact the local prairie dog coalition to explore options and the contact could be documented through email. Member Whitley accepted that language and Member Hogestad accepted the language as long as the communication seeks alternative solutions. Members Hogestad and Whitley withdrew the motion to amend and supported the language as proposed by Member Katz. Member Katz suggested a friendly amendment to the original motion to add a condition of approval that the applicant contact the local prairie dog coalition to explore alternatives to euthanizing the prairie dogs on the site. The communication must be documented and presented to Planning staff at or before the Final Development Plan review. Vice Chair Haefele accepted the language as a friendly amendment. Member Schneider stated he does not see that the amendment improves anything. Member Shepard stated Fort Collins has struggled with the prairie dog issue for decades and there is no elegant solution. He noted there is no place to rehome prairie dogs and they frequently end up at the raptor center. He stated this issue is why Section 3.4.1 is written the way it is. Member Whitley reiterated his original intent that a good faith effort be made. Member Shepard reiterated his former point that a better way to communicate this desire would be in a post-vote conversation as there is no Code requirement for such a condition. Vote: 7:0. Member Whitley requested the applicant find a way to at least attempt to rehome the prairie dogs before euthanizing them, not based on Land Use Code standards, but based on being good neighbors and ethical stewards. Ms. Younger stated she is happy to put forth an effort to rehome the prairie dogs and requested anyone with information about an organization contact her. (**Secretary's Note: The Board took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Secretary Manno took roll call to ensure all Members were present given the hybrid meeting format. 7. H-25 Multi-Family Project Description: This is a request for consideration of a Project Development Plan (PDP) for the construction of 304 apartments and an amenity center across 12 buildings on a 15.7-acre site. The site is at the southeast corner of the intersection of Harmony Road and Strauss Cabin Road in the Harmony Corridor (HC) zone district. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported staff has received an inquiry regarding escrow funds from Boardmember Katz, a traffic memo response from Delich Associates and the Traffic Department regarding that inquiry, and a letter from Carolynne White, legal counsel for the applicant, since the worksession. Member Shepard stated he was contacted by a member of the ownership group who explained the architectural team will be making a presentation that will reveal the difference between the proposed project and the Wyatt DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 12 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 8 of 12 project. He stated he responded that he would not discuss the project over the phone and the conversation quickly ended. He stated he would be able to remain unbiased and fair in reviewing the project. Member Katz disclosed he has a piece of development land listed for sale near this project and its development will also be required to contribute to intersection improvements at Kechter Road and Strauss Cabin Road. He stated he would be able to remain unbiased in review in the project. Chair Hansen disclosed the architectural design firm that worked on the project is his employer and he recused himself from the discussion of the item. Staff and Applicant Presentations Megan Overton, Senior City Planner, reviewed the proposed project and its location on 15.7 acres zoned Harmony Corridor (HC). She noted the project is part of an Overall Development Plan (ODP) and stated the proposal is for 304 multi-family apartments across eleven three-story buildings and one two-story building, a one-story clubhouse and pool amenity, and two one-story garage buildings. She stated the net density of the project would be 27.9 dwelling units per acre. Overton noted the site includes a 104,000 square foot natural habitat buffer zone and the applicants are requesting one modification of standard to Land Use Code Section 3.5.2(D)(1)(b), which relates to orientation to a connecting walkway. This modification would allow one of the buildings to be located more than 350 feet away from a street sidewalk. Jacob Steele, Terra Development Group, introduced his presenting team: Ryan McBreen, Norris Design, Chris Aronson, VFLA, and Carolynne White, land use counsel. He commented on the need for additional housing in Fort Collins and on the design of the project. Ms. White noted the standards in the 2006 version of the Harmony Corridor Plan will apply to this project as this application predates the effective date of the recently adopted amendment to that Plan. She noted the property has relatively low habitat value in terms of the types of existing vegetation and its ability to be used by wildlife. Additionally, there are significant floodplain issues in this vicinity and floodplain remapping will be required. Mr. McBreen discussed the overall layout of the plan and detailed the proposed network of street-like private drives. Mr. Aronson discussed the variety of building types proposed and further detailed the proposed site plan. He discussed the integration of the architectural elevations into the landscape and detailed proposed materials and color palettes. He thanked staff for their availability and responsiveness. Mr. McBreen noted this development is in accordance with all applicable standards and plans and noted the landscaping plan meets and exceeds applicable standards. He stated the one modification request meets three of the four necessary requirements for the granting of a modification. He went on to detail the proposed modification and stated the mitigation proposed more than adequately meets the intent of the Code. Staff Analysis Overton discussed the alignment of the proposal with relevant adopted City plans and policies and stated, overall, staff finds the proposal aligns with the direction contained in City Plan and the Harmony Corridor Plan. She noted the ODP does meet the overall 25% maximum residential requirement that is part of the Plan. Overton discussed the development history of the site. Overton stated staff finds the site plan complies and meets applicable standards related to traffic, parking, and landscaping. She discussed the plans for revegetating and restoring the natural habitat buffer zone and noted those mitigation efforts exceed Land Use Code requirements. She discussed other ways in which the proposal meets design and site requirements. Regarding the requested modification to the standard for orientation to a connected walkway, Overton stated staff found the request meets the standards in Section 2.8.2(H) in multiple ways and would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the modification was found to be justified in that it would address a community need, DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 13 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 9 of 12 which is the reconstruction of the Harmony Road frontage in accordance with the Harmony Corridor standards and guidelines. She discussed necessary easements on the property which preclude development activity in those areas. Overton concluded by stating staff recommends approval of the PDP for H-25 Multi-Family. Member Shepard asked about the width of the major walkway spine. Overton replied the requirement is for a 35- foot landscaped area with a minimum 5-foot walkway; however, a 6-foot walkway has been proposed. Member Shepard asked if the CLOMR/LOMR (conditional letter of map revision/letter of map revision) process will be an exercise that brings the project out of the floodplain or if physical dirt will be moved. Vice Chair Haefele also requested input regarding what is meant by an area being grandfathered out of a floodplain. Dan Evans, Utilities, replied this is a complicated area as it was previously in the County and their standards allow LOMR fills in the flood fringe, which is not allowed by the City. The City is requiring the applicant to go through an actual LOMR process for the entire site. Member Shepard asked if there will be any other physical disturbance of the land as a result of this project. Evans replied the site is now elevated out of the flood fringe and is completely out of the floodplain, which allows for the construction of a residential project. Member Shepard asked if the developer would be prohibited from planting any new trees in a floodway. Evans replied he did not believe the developer requested an addition of trees in that area. Member Shepard asked if this project will be marketed to college students. Mr. Steele replied this project will not necessarily be marketed to students. Member Shepard asked if a tot lot will be an included amenity. Mr. Steele replied there is not one on the current plans. Member Shepard asked if there will be a connection out to Strauss Cabin at the emergency access lane. Overton replied in the affirmative. Public Input (3 minutes per person) None. Board Questions / Deliberation Member Hogestad asked about the parking on the street-like private drives. Overton replied the Code allows for either angled or parallel parking. Member Hogestad asked about the width of the drive aisle and its comparison to a regular city street. Mr. McBreen replied the two-way drive aisle is 26-feet wide. Spencer Smith, Engineering, replied a typical residential street cross-section would be 30 feet which includes parallel parking. Member Shepard suggested it would be 36 feet; however, he noted it is difficult to make comparisons with diagonal parking. Mr. McBreen noted the drive aisle widths have been approved by both Engineering and Poudre Fire Authority. Member Schneider expressed concern about the lack of variation in architecture between the building types. Mr. Aronson replied the goal was to create a cohesive design through the community and he detailed the articulation of the various buildings. Member Schneider stated the materials seem to change; however, the architectural features seem repetitive. Mr. Aronson disagreed and showed renderings providing additional details. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 14 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 10 of 12 Member Hogestad agreed with Member Schneider's concerns stating the pilaster element keeps repeating itself. Mr. Aronson commented on the balance between creating a cohesive community and providing a variety of architecture. Member Katz agreed with Member Schneider's comments but also acknowledged there is a balance to be had between consistency and variety. Member Shepard asked about the different between a portal and an entry and asked how they contribute to the project's variety. Mr. Aronson replied portals are larger elements whereas entry elements are more at a pedestrian scale. Member Hogestad noted there are many ways that would make a project cohesive other than repetition of elements. He commented on the need for clear pathways from buildings to amenities. Member Shepard echoed the need for appropriate pedestrian navigation throughout the site and suggested the use of a raised or enhanced sidewalk at the intersection of the two street-like private drives may assist with that. Mr. McBreen replied his team would be happy to look at that possibility. Member Shepard complimented the team on the design of the street-like private drives. Member Schneider expressed concern the massing and scaling is very repetitious. Mr. Aronson replied his team collaborated with staff and the fire department on providing sufficient fire access to the building roofs and the majority of eave heights are at less than 30 feet for that reason. He commented on the architectural differences between the buildings that front Harmony and those that do not. He stated the repetition provides proper shade and shadow and commented on the façade articulation. Member Hogestad stated there seems to be an overuse of vertical pilasters and commented on the use of materials as being a strong, powerful way to tie buildings together. Mr. Aronson discussed the possibility of creating deeper roof overhangs. Member Shepard agreed with Members Schneider and Hogestad and asked if the roof pitch could be steepened to create variation. Mr. Aronson replied in the affirmative. Member Shepard stated the project would benefit from each building having a unique entry feature. Mr. Aronson replied those options could be considered to add variety. Member Hogestad complemented the design of the clubhouse. Mr. McBreen concurred with Member Shepard's comments about creating social gathering areas and other elements to differentiate entries. Member Shepard expressed support for the requested modification of standard noting the easement language does not allow for walkways. Member Shepard made a motion, seconded by Member Schneider, that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the request for the modification to Standard 3.5.2(D)(1)(b) stating the request is not detrimental to the public good and is warranted by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary exceptional situations as supported by the staff report and attachments and based on the findings of fact, the evidence in the staff report, and public testimony provided to the Board. Vote: 7:0. Member Shepard suggested the Board may want to consider a condition of approval related to Section 3.8.30(F)(2) which speaks to variation, entry features, and roof lines. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 15 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 11 of 12 Assistant City Attorney Yatabe noted the Board must consider whether the project meets that standard or not; however, it does have the ability to continue the matter to provide the opportunity for the applicant to make some modifications to the application in terms of building variation. Member Shepard stated it might be less vague for the Board to consider the standard as not having been met. Member Schneider agreed and stated the application meets some, but not all of the requirements of the standard. Member Hogestad also agreed. Yatabe outlined the Board's options. Member Shepard stated his inclination would be to approve the project with a condition that includes language related to roof pitch, entrances, and materials. Member Katz stated he is inclined to continue the item. Member Schneider requested staff input regarding the options. Overton replied she would be able to work with the applicant team to develop a reasonable solution that does meet the standard if the Board were to condition the approval. Mr. Steele stated his team is happy to work with staff and is confident it can make alterations to the architecture to better meet the standard. Vice Chair Haefele stated she would prefer to continue the item to allow the Board the opportunity to see the changes. Member Hogestad agreed. The Board and staff discussed options for a hearing date to which the item could be considered. Member Schneider asked if the January hearing would be amenable for the applicant team. Mr. Steele replied in the affirmative. Member Schneider made a motion, seconded by Member Shepard, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board continue the H-25 Multi-Family Project Development Plan PDP200004 to January 21st, 2021 to consider the ways in which the applicant made modifications for the project to be more in compliance with Section 3.8.3(F)(2). Vote: 7:0. Other Business Member Shepard discussed a newspaper article indicating Loaf n' Jug will be purchasing all Schrader Country Stores in the community and noted that will likely result in a number of reimaging amendments. He requested a future staff memo or discussion around the plan for those requests. Vice Chair Haefele asked if these amendments would come before the Board. Member Shepard replied they are typically minor amendments as they do not result in a change of character; however, he suggested the Board may be able to provide some informal direction in a conversation with staff. He noted there are procedures that would allow staff to refer minor amendments to the Board. Chair Hansen noted CSU has opted to move back its spring break this year and the new date happens to coincide with the Board's regularly scheduled April hearing. Sizemore stated the only April Thursday that would work to reschedule the meeting is April 1st; however, he noted the March meeting date has also been moved up to March 11th. Members discussed various considerations around moving the meeting dates and generally agreed April 1st will work. DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 16 Planning & Zoning Board November 19, 2020 Page 12 of 12 Adjournment Chair Hansen moved to adjourn the P&Z Board hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 11:08 p.m. For more complete details on this hearing, please view our video recording located here: https://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php?search=PLANNING%20ZONING Minutes respectfully submitted by Shar Manno. Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on: ____________. Paul Sizemore, Interim PDT Director Jeff Hansen, Chair DRAFTITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 17 Agenda Item 2 Item 1, Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY December 17, 2020 Planning and Zoning Board STAFF Shar Manno, Customer and Administrative Manager SUBJECT MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 5, 2020 P&Z SPECIAL HEARING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is the consideration and approval of the draft minutes of the November 5, 2020 Planning & Zoning Board Special hearing. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft November 5, 2020 Special P&Z Minutes Packet pg. 18 Jeff Hansen, Chair Hybrid Hearing Michelle Haefele, Vice Chair City Council Chambers Per Hogestad 300 Laporte Avenue David Katz Fort Collins, Colorado Jeff Schneider Ted Shepard Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & William Whitley Channel 881 on Comcast The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Special Hearing November 5, 2020 Chair Hansen called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call: Haefele, Hansen, Hogestad, Katz, Shepard, Whitley Absent: Schneider Staff Present: Sizemore, Yatabe, Holland, Gloss, Beals, Stephens, Claypool, Virata, Lindsey, Van Zee, Mapes, Beals and Manno Chair Hansen provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. He described the following procedures: •While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration, citizen input is valued and appreciated. •The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for each item. •Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with city Land Use Code. •Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will be allowed for that as well. •This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard. Agenda Review Interim PTD Director Sizemore reviewed the items on the Discussion Agenda, stating all items will be heard as originally advertised. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 19 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 2 of 8 Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda: None noted. Consent Agenda: None Discussion Agenda: 1. Rezoning to Manufactured Housing Zone District Project Description: This is a City-initiated request to rezone six properties containing manufactured housing communities from the Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone district to the Manufactured Housing (MH) zone district. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno stated staff has received one email since the worksession from Dave Osborn who opposes the rezoning and an inquiry from Member Shepard about pricing details for mobile homes. Member Shepard disclosed that he is a volunteer member of the Partnership for Age-Friendly Communities which has received a small grant from the Home to Help program to do some interviews and focus groups to discussion housing and health. He stated he has done some facilitations at the Skyline Mobile Home Park; however, the City- initiated rezoning was never discussed with residents nor management and as a result, he feels he can be fair and unbiased in considering the topic. Staff and Applicant Presentations Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager, stated this is a City-initiated request to rezone six different properties that contain manufactured housing, and the Board will be making a recommendation to City Council. He stated the properties range in size and are all currently zoned LMN. He provided details about the location of each of the six properties and noted correspondence from two other individuals expressing concerns about the rezoning was received. He noted two of the properties would retain some of their LMN zoning while the other four would be completely MH zoning. Gloss discussed the relative affordability of manufactured housing and stated there is a demonstrated need for it in the community. He stated staff evaluates rezoning requests for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, or requests can be warranted by changing conditions in the neighborhood. He also noted the Board can consider additional factors including compatibility, adverse natural environment impacts, and whether the change would be part of a logical and orderly development pattern. He stated staff has found the rezonings to be consistent with adopted policy noting this change would preserve the much-needed stock of manufactured housing in the community. Gloss discussed the place types supported by each of the manufactured housing communities and discussed the ways in which the rezonings support adopted policies. He detailed the public outreach process and noted conversations were held with all but one of the property owners. Vice Chair Haefele asked if the two properties that would retain some LMN zoning are each owned as an entire property. Gloss replied in the affirmative. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Corina (indecipherable last name) supported the rezonings as they will preserve the manufactured housing stock. ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 20 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 3 of 8 Rebecca Mendoza supported the rezonings as they will preserve the manufactured housing stock and will allow for residents to provide an inheritance for their children. Theresa Gonzales supported the rezonings as they will preserve the manufactured housing stock. Theresa Ramirez supported the rezonings as they will preserve the manufactured housing stock. Peter Goldstein, Northstar Mobile Home Park owner, expressed support for the rezoning but expressed concern regarding the potential split zoning for his property noting it is difficult to find tenants for the commercial building that fits within the allowed uses. Charlotte Lopez stated she would like to be able to leave a legacy for her children and requested clarification this change would mean she does not have to move. Tawny Payton, Rocky Mountain Home Association Executive Director, stated the preservation of affordable housing, specifically manufactured home communities, was achieved through the passage of House Bill 20-1201, which provides residents the opportunity to purchase communities should they be offered for sale. She stated zoning of this nature discourages investment in this space. She stated the rezonings constitute an illegal taking and decrease the quality of life for residents. Staff Response Gloss noted staff has previously had conversations with Mr. Goldstein regarding his concerns about the permitted uses within the LMN district. He noted the LMN neighborhood center designation was assigned to this property through a previous interpretation by the zoning administrator and it allows a wide variety of non-residential uses, including retail, financial services, daycare, worship, and other services. He noted the physical layout of the site may prove difficult to provide adequate circulation and parking. Board Questions / Deliberation Chair Hansen noted the intent of these rezonings is to help residents keep their homes. Member Katz thanked the citizens for their comments and clarified there are no proposed developments threatening any of these communities at this time. Member Shepard noted music studios, micro-breweries, micro-distilleries, and micro-wineries are also allowed uses in the neighborhood center. Vice Chair Haefele clarified this is not the only opportunity for these rezonings to occur. Gloss stated there are nine manufactured housing communities in Fort Collins and the three not being considered as part of this item have either commercial or split zoning. He noted it is always the right of a property owner to initiate a rezoning through a petition, or the City can initiate the process as is the case with this item. Chair Hansen noted the MH zone does allow some commercial or retail uses as support for manufactured housing communities and asked if the LMN zoned segment of the Northstar property could be expanded to allow for a more functional space. Gloss replied that would not be prohibited, but the use would need to fall under an MH use. Member Katz asked if all these properties meet density requirements as they exist currently. Gloss replied in the affirmative. Member Shepard requested staff discuss the comments provided by Dave Osborn. Gloss replied three individuals have provided comments regarding the Cottonwood site, which is the smallest of the six. The comments were related to the condition of the park, lack of landscaping, and a concern that the City previously adopted a policy that there be a minimum of 50 units necessary for the retention of a community. Member Katz stated he is struggling to recommend approval of these rezonings citing the rights of property owners. ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 21 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 4 of 8 Member Shepard asked if property owners would have the right to petition the City to rezone their properties at some point in the future if this were to move forward. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied in the affirmative and reminded the Board it is being asked to make a recommendation based on Land Use Code standards and whether the rezonings are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and/or are warranted by changed conditions. Vice Chair Haefele noted the entire point of establishing this zone district was to ensure there was at least some protection for the residents for whom this is the only affordable option. She noted it cannot be constituted as a taking because it does not eliminate all economic use. Chair Hansen noted the proposed rezonings are not in anticipation of any redevelopment, but are rather an attempt at matching the zone district to the existing use and asserting the City's recognition that preserving this type of housing is important. Member Katz agreed, but stated there should be other measures afforded to property owners. Member Shepard noted the Board packet contains an attachment entitled the affordable housing redevelopment displacement mitigation strategy report which contains a great deal of information related to the unique niche filled by this housing type. Vice Chair Haefele stated this is not symbolic and this change would at least slow down the prospect of a property owner using a manufactured housing community as a placeholder for a future more lucrative development that would come at the expense of hundreds of families. Member Whitley agreed with Vice Chair Haefele and expressed support for the rezonings. Member Shepard stated there is a point to be taken from Mr. Osborn's letter regarding the cycle of this investment. He commented on the need to work with the Building Department, Neighborhood Services, and Social Sustainability to ensure residents do not experience a declining quality of life. Chair Hansen commented on his experience living in a mobile home park as being key to establishing his success in Fort Collins. He stated that while this is one step, more needs to be done to protect this housing type asset. Member Hogestad stated he hopes these rezonings will help provide stability to these neighborhoods. Vice Chair Haefele made a motion, seconded by Member Shepard, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council approval of the Manufactured Housing Rezoning, REZ200003, based on the findings of fact in the staff report and the input received at this hearing. Vice Chair Haefele stated she would not like this to be the end of this process and encouraged the City to ensure better maintenance and living conditions. Member Shepard concurred and encouraged staff to be very flexible when an applicant attempts to redevelop, create a new tenant mix, or provide an addition in the LMN-zoned parcels so as to create more economic viability and to create an incentive to reinvest in the park infrastructure. Member Katz stated he hopes this sparks more conversation about increasing and improving the standard of living for all manufactured housing communities in the city; however he is not comfortable rezoning someone's land involuntarily and possible devaluing it in the future. Member Shepard suggested a friendly amendment to include in the motion that this proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, is warranted by changed conditions of the neighborhood, is compatible with existing and proposed uses, is an appropriate zone district for the land in question, offers no adverse impacts on the natural environment, and will result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Vice Chair Haefele accepted the amendment as friendly. Vote: 5:1 with Member Katz dissenting. ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 22 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 5 of 8 2. Annual Land Use Code Update Project Description: This is a request for a recommendation to City Council regarding an update to the Land Use Code. There are proposed revisions, clarifications, and organization to the Code that address specific subject areas that have arisen since the last update in the fall of 2019. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno stated no communications have been received on this topic since the worksession. Member Shepard stated he was contacted by an individual in Fort Collins who owns vacant land, and he referred the individual to the Zoning Department. No aspects of the proposed Code revisions were discussed. He also disclosed he had a conversation with a general contractor who builds accessory buildings with habitable space; therefore, he would not be impacted by these changes. Additionally, he disclosed he had a conversation with a local architect who does build carriage houses and who allayed some concerns which he will discuss when that item comes up. (**Secretary's Note: The Board took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Secretary Manno took roll call to ensure all Members were present given the hybrid meeting format. Staff Presentation Noah Beals, City Planner, stated this item is a recommendation on the annual Land Use Code update. He noted the Board has been discussing these updates over the past several worksessions. He noted one Code change that garnered significant discussion was related to wetland boundary delineation. Scott Betton, Environmental Planner, stated this change is an effort to clarify that all wetlands, not just those declared by the Army Corps of Engineers, will be delineated in the same manner using the industry standard 1987 wetland delineation manual and the appropriate regional supplement. Member Shepard mentioned the item related to connecting walkways for carriage houses and thanked Beals for clarifying this would not apply to accessory buildings with habitable space, or a carriage house without a kitchen. He stated concerns passed along to him by a local architect had to do with the cost of the walkway and issues with gas meters, extended downspouts, slopes, air conditioning units, and shrubbery. He asked if corner lots would be able to comply by running the walk to the side street and not the front street. Beals replied in the affirmative. Member Shepard asked if a carriage house located on a corner lot would be able to get an address on the side street or if it would have to take an address off the front street. Beals replied it may be possible to take an address from a side street as the part of the requirement is ensuring the address is visible from the public right-of-way for first responder access. Member Shepard asked if the walkway could be run to paved alleys. Beals replied that would not likely be allowed as alleyways are typically cluttered with dumpsters; therefore, Poudre Fire Authority does not count them as places they can stage in an emergency. Chair Hansen asked if the walkway must be concrete or if it can be any other material. Beals replied it does not have to be concrete. Chair Hansen asked if there are any regulations addressing how the carriage house address is to be displayed. Beals replied the Sign Code would apply if the signage were larger than 6 inches, which is large enough to be visible from the public right-of-way. Member Shepard questioned whether the connecting walkway standard should be broken out so a specific standard for the carriage house exists as it is currently written in a way that would make it seem to apply to many ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 23 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 6 of 8 different kinds of housing types. Beals replied the Code speaks specifically to a single-family detached unit and duplex would already have the walkway requirement. Member Shepard stated this will be a significant change in the existing development pattern the community has experienced over the last several decades and he encouraged staff to be flexible in enforcing it. Vice Chair Haefele questioned how this standard would apply to existing non-compliant dwellings. Beals replied any structure built under a Code that then changes becomes a legal, non-conforming use and would not trigger the need for a permit unless it went through a development review process. Member Hogestad stated there are a few items that are new or extensively rewritten and questioned whether their scope is beyond the intent of the annual update. He suggested they should be sent to Council as new Code items rather than updates. Vice Chair Haefele agreed. Member Hogestad stated items 3, 13, 16, 21, and 25 are either radically rewritten or are brand new. Chair Hansen suggested the possibility of making separate motions to bring more attention and scrutiny to those specific items. Member Hogestad expressed concern the Board is not getting enough discussion on these items and stated they should come before the Board entirely separately. He proposed sending Council a recommendation on all but the five items he mentioned. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe suggested the Board ask for public comment before additional discussion. Vice Chair Haefele asked if the changes proposed to the wetland delineation item in any way diminish or limit the ability to define a wetland. Betton replied it would not and language was added to clarify the City claims jurisdiction over any wetland not claimed by the Army Corps of Engineers. Public Input (3 minutes per person) None. Board Questions / Deliberation Assistant City Attorney Yatabe suggested the Board may want to form a recommendation to Council that it not adopt these five specific changes as they are substantive changes outside the scope of the Land Use Code update. Boardmembers discussed the appropriate way to have the discussion around these items. Chair Hansen requested discussion around item number 3. Beals stated appealing a minor amendment is not brand new and this language intends to make that a clearer process. Member Hogestad stated the item is an extensive piece of information new to the Land Use Code. Member Shepard asked if this is considered to be a process improvement. Beals replied in the affirmative and stated that while the language is new in this section, much of the language is taken from other appeal processes. Vice Chair Haefele stated the issue that needs additional vetting is around who is eligible to file an appeal. She stated she asked at the worksession how minor amendments are advertised and was told notification is not mailed to adjacent property owners nor are the minor amendments part of an agenda; therefore, there is a question as to how anyone would be able to provide written comment and therefore become a party-of-interest. Chair Hansen requested discussion around item number 13. ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 24 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 7 of 8 Member Hogestad stated the concept is brand new and needs additional discussion and public input. Member Shepard agreed the topic looks brand new from an outside perspective; however, the topic of second kitchens has been discussed at the staff level for quite some time. Beals stated second kitchens have been allowed in practice under the standards outlined in this proposed section and this codifies that language for applicants and staff. Member Hogestad stated he could see ways around this and suggested graphics could help. Vice Chair Haefele expressed concern about homes getting an affidavit-certified second kitchen and stated neighbors should be notified. Chair Hansen requested discussion around item number 16. Member Shepard stated this item is not new and does not provide any content change. He suggested this is a semantic change that clarifies the Code and removes an antiquated reference to something that has never been built. Beals agreed with Member Shepard's summary and stated the item rearranges the language in the section. Clark Mapes, City Planner, stated there is no new language here but only removes the term 'street-like private drive' and puts the same language under the heading 'private streets.' Vice Chair Haefele stated she is comfortable leaving this item in as an update. Chair Hansen requested discussion around item number 21. Mapes stated section B, the half-story, is a definition in Article 5 and this item copies and pastes the definition to this section. Regarding section C related to 25 feet from floor to floor, the proposed language brings in the idea of using the eave or wall plate height as a floor to floor portion of the building does not always exist in the case of single-story buildings or the top story of a building for example. The proposed section D attempts to clarify the intent that the 12-foot, 8-inch measurement is a wall measurement and does not include the roof. Chair Hansen requested discussion about item number 25. Member Hogestad expressed concern about the new information. Beals replied the item consolidates all the standards around building height into one area. Mapes clarified this is not new language and the majority of it is copied and pasted from different subsections. He stated the goal is to make the Code more user-friendly. Member Katz stated he is comfortable with all of the items being discussed this evening and having none of them moved to be discussed at a different time. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe reiterated the Board should make some type of recommendation on each item. Vice Chair Haefele made a motion, seconded by Member Hogestad, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board recommend that City Council adopt the Land Use Code changes as presented by staff with the exception of the changes to Land Use Code Section 2.2.10(A)(5) regarding appeals of minor amendments and basic development reviews and with the exception of changes to Land Use Code Section 3.5.2(H) regarding second kitchens because these changes are not inconsequential clarifications but rather substantive changes that should be considered as separate Code changes following additional analyses by staff and appropriate public input. Member Shepard stated he would support the motion and expressed appreciation for the staff work. He noted the Board may need to be more accepting of the fact that new language is sometimes part of the annual update. Member Hogestad stated he is not opposed to new language, just entirely brand new topics being part of the update. Chair Hansen commended the changes that make the Code more user-friendly. Vote: 6:0. ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 25 Planning & Zoning Board November 5, 2020 Page 8 of 8 Other Business Chair Hansen noted the Board has many upcoming items and suggested there may be a need for additional hearing dates. Sizemore outlined the available dates for FCTV and Council Chambers and reviewed upcoming discussion items. Chair Hansen stated having two hearing dates scheduled each month could be more clear and predictable. Members discussed the desired way to proceed given notice requirements. Sizemore summarized the Board will keep the November 19th meeting as is and prior to finalizing the December 17th agenda, the number of items should be evaluated and another January hearing should be considered if necessary. Member Shepard requested staff provide a one-page memo regarding the status of the railroad quiet zones at an upcoming worksession as time permits. Adjournment Chair Hansen moved to adjourn the P&Z Board hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. For more complete details on this hearing, please view our video recording located here: https://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php?search=PLANNING%20ZONING Minutes respectfully submitted by Shar Manno. Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on: ____________. Paul Sizemore, Interim PDT Director Jeff Hansen, Chair ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFTPacket pg. 26 Development Review Staff Report Agenda Item 3 Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com Planning & Zoning Board Hearing: December 17, 2020 Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and No. 2 (ANX200001), and Zoning Summary of Request This is a request for a series of two annexations and zoning of 76.8- acres (Parcel #8709000006), located northwest of the East Mulberry Street and Greenfields Court intersection. In accordance with the City’s Structure Plan Map and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan, the requested zoning for this annexation is General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N). A specific project development plan proposal is not included with this annexation application. Zoning Map Next Steps The Planning and Zoning Board’s zoning recommendation and any comments related to the annexation will be forwarded to City Council for their consideration. Staff Recommendation Approval of the annexations 1 and 2, and the request to place the property within the General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) zone districts. Staff recommends that this property be included in the Residential Neighborhood and Non- Residential Sign Districts. Site Location The site is located on the northwest corner of the East Mulberry Street and Greenfields Court intersection. Zoning General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M- M-N). Property Owner Springer-Fisher Inc. Pat McMeekin 4801 Goodman Road Timnath, CO 80547 Applicant/Representative Norris Design Ryan McBreen 244 N. College Ave, #130 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Staff Pete Wray, Senior Planner p. (970) 221.6754 e. pwray@fcgov.com Contents 1. Project Introduction .................................... 2 2. Public Outreach ......................................... 4 3. Article 2 – Applicable Standards ................ 5 4. Article 4 – Division 4.5 – Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (L-M-N) Applicable Standards .......................................................... 5 5. Article 4 – Division 4.6 – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (M-N-N) Applicable Standards .......................................................... 6 6. Article 4 – Division 4.21 – General Commercial (C-G) Applicable Standards .......... 6 7. Article 4 – Division 4.23 – Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) Applicable Standards .......... 7 8. Article 4 – Division 4.27 – Employment (E) Applicable Standards ........................................ 7 9. Findings of Fact/Conclusion ...................... 8 10. Recommendation ....................................... 8 11. Attachments ............................................... 8 Packet pg. 27 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 2 of 8 Back to Top 1. Project Introduction A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is a request to annex and zone the Springer-Fisher property (76.8-acres), located northwest of the East Mulberry Street and Greenfields Court intersection. 1. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins as contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. 2. The area meets all criteria included in Colorado Revised Statues for voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 3. The requested General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) zone districts are in conformance with the policies of City Plan, Structure Plan and East Mulberry Corridor Plan Land-Use Framework Maps. On December 15th, 2020, the City Council is scheduled to consider a resolution to accept the annexation petition and determine that the petition is in compliance with State law. The resolution would also initiate the annexation process for the property by establishing the date, time, and place when a public hearing would be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing and zoning the area. B. ANALYSIS The requested annexation does not create an enclave. 1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use North South East West Zoning Low Density Mixed-Use (L-M-N) Larimer County C – Commercial Larimer County C - Commercial Larimer County C/I – Commercial/Industrial Land Use Vacant land, future residential Commercial Vacant land, future commercial FR Veterinary Clinic, Barker Construction Because this is a sequential annexation, the Springer-Fisher property achieves required contiguity (Minimum 16%) through a series of two consecutive annexations described below:  Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 has a total contiguous perimeter of 1,323.29 feet of the total perimeter of 7,484.15 feet (17%), which satisfies the one-sixth (1/6) area required (16%) of its perimeter boundary contiguous with existing City limits to the north, established by the 1995 Fisher-Lemay Avenue, Third Annexation.  Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 2 has a total contiguous perimeter of 626.67 feet of the total perimeter of 2129.43 feet (29%), which satisfies the one-sixth (1/6) area required (16%) of its perimeter boundary contiguous with the Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1. The requested zoning for this annexation is General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N). The requested zoning is based on the future land use policy direction in the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. Packet pg. 28 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 3 of 8 Back to Top City of Fort Collins Structure Plan Mixed Neighborhoods: Principal Land Use: Single-family detached homes, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes. Supporting Land Use ADUs, small scale multifamily buildings, small-scale retail, restaurants/cafes, community and public facilities, parks and recreational facilities, schools, places of worship. Density Between five and 20 principal dwelling units per acre (typically equates to an average of seven to 12 dwelling units per acre). Opportunity to provide alternatives to the more typical single-family detached homes or apartments available in Fort Collins, such as duplexes, townhomes and ADUs. Higher densities are more likely to support higher-frequency transit service and additional neighborhood services in adjoining districts. Specific opportunities should be explored as part of future subarea and neighborhood planning. Where greenfield opportunities remain, new Mixed-Neighborhoods should be required to provide a mix of housing options. Suburban Mixed-Use: Principal Land Use: Retail, restaurants, office, and other commercial services. Supporting Land Use: High-density residential, entertainment, childcare centers, and other supporting uses. Densities and building heights will vary; building heights will generally be between one and five-stories but may be higher in some locations. Mixed-use districts provide opportunities for a range of retail and commercial services, office and employment, multifamily residential, civic, and other complementary uses in a compact, pedestrian and transit-supportive setting. Suburban Mixed-Use Districts help meet the needs of surrounding neighborhoods and populations beyond. Although largely auto-oriented today, the integration of higher-density residential and a broader mix of retail/ restaurants, office and entertainment uses is encouraged to help reinvigorate underutilized centers, expand housing options where transit exists or is planned, and improve access to services and amenities in both existing and new districts. The Structure Plan map shows approximately 75% of the area within the Springer-Fisher property as Mixed-Neighborhoods, and 25% Suburban Mixed-Use designations (see attached Structure Plan map). The proposed zoning includes approximately 50% Mixed-Use Neighborhoods with the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods, and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods zone areas. There is a potential for an additional 25% residential uses as part of secondary uses within the Employment and Neighborhood Commercial zones. The Springer-Fisher property includes a combination of General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial and Employment zoning within the lower half of site. The proposed non-residential zoning is consistent with the Structure Plan designation of Suburban Mixed-Use designation (see attached proposed zoning map). The Structure Plan future land use designations represent general citywide policy guidance. The Land Use Code does not include zoning to reflect these new designations in City Plan, until an update is completed. The East Mulberry Corridor Plan (EMCP) reflects more detailed and specific land use policy guidance than City Plan. The proposed Springer-Fisher zoning is based on the future land use designations in the EMCP Framework Plan map. East Mulberry Corridor Plan Future residential neighborhoods will be integrated with existing residential subdivisions, and be within proximity to shopping, recreation, and employment destinations. A neighborhood commercial center will be located at Greenfields Court and north of East Mulberry Street to provide neighborhood-oriented services within proximity to the existing and future residents. The Employment District’s primary uses will include offices and institutions, light industrial uses, and research and development activities. Secondary uses, such as hotels, restaurants, convenience shopping, and housing, will complement or support the primary employment workplace uses. The EMCP includes five future land use designations within the Springer-Fisher property, including General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood (M-M-N). These designations reflect the policy direction of the plan for a commercial mixed-use district and Packet pg. 29 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 4 of 8 Back to Top supporting higher-density mixed-use neighborhoods within walking distance to the commercial hub located northwest of the East Mulberry and Greenfields Court intersection (see attached EMCP map). The proposed Springer-Fisher property residential zoning for the L-M-N and M-M-N areas is consistent with the EMCP designation areas both at approximately 40 acres. Of this amount, the proposed zoning includes a greater percentage of M-M- N (30-acres) than L-M-N (10-acres), to more closely match the M-M-N zoning east of Greenfields Court and provide a larger mix of higher density residential adjacent to the Neighborhood Commercial zone to the south. The EMCP includes a total of approximately 36-acres of non-residential uses including GC (7-acres), NC (10-acres), and E (19- acres) land use designations. The Springer-Fisher proposed zoning includes a total of approximately 37-acres of non-residential zoning areas, consistent with the EMCP. Of this total, the proposed NC zoning is equal to the EMCP total area (10-acres). This proposed NC zoning area is more centrally located than the EMCP to better support a potential future neighborhood commercial center. In addition, the proposed non-residential zoning includes GC (17-acres), and E (10-acres). Of these totals, this represents a 10-acre increase for the CG and about a 9-acre reduction for the E zoning as compared to the EMCP. Staff finds that the proposed Springer-Fisher zoning is consistent with the City Structure Plan and East Mulberry Corridor Plan future land use policy direction. Sign District Staff recommends that portions of the property located in the M-M-N and L-M-N zone districts would be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, while the portions of the property located in the E, N-C, and C-G zone districts would be in the Non-Residential Sign District. The Sign Districts are established for the purpose of regulating signs for non- residential uses in areas of the community where the predominant character of the neighborhood is residential. 2. Public Outreach A. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting was held on August 19, 2020 for the proposed annexation. Meeting attendees inquired about timing of annexation, future streets and parks in area, and what type of development can occur here, with no observed concerns or opposition to the annexation. All other notification requirements as required by state and local law have been met. Packet pg. 30 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 5 of 8 Back to Top 3. Article 2 – Applicable Standards A. BACKGROUND This project was submitted on September 18, 2020 for annexation and zoning. A specific Project Development Plan has not been submitted. The project is in compliance with Section 2.12 Annexation requirements. B. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW 1. Preliminary Design Review # PDR170014 (September 22, 2017) A preliminary design review meeting was held on September 22, 2017. The original proposal consisted of information on the proposed annexation and preliminary zoning concept plan. 2. First Submittal (ANX200001) As previously mentioned, the first submittal of this project was completed on September 18, 2020. 3. Neighborhood Meeting (August 19, 2020) A neighborhood meeting was held remotely on August 19, 2020. There were approximately 5 attendees at the remote meeting. Most comments received related to the future development, not specifically on the annexation. The second submittal was received on October 21, 2020 and a third (quick check) submittal on November 25, 2020. 4. Notice (Posted, Written and Published) Posted Notice (ANX200001): August 5, 2020 (Sign #549) Written notice: December 3, 2020, 319 letters sent. Published Coloradoan Hearing Notice: December 6, 2020 - #0004497217 4. Article 4 – Division 4.5 – Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (L-M-N) Applicable Standards A. PURPOSE The requested zoning for this annexation is Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), which is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. The Land Use Code describes the Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood zone district as follows: Purpose. The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by the pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. B. LAND USE A project development plan has not been submitted. The future land uses are subject to the list of permitted land uses in Division 4.5 – Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. Packet pg. 31 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 6 of 8 Back to Top 5. Article 4 – Division 4.6 – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (M-N-N) Applicable Standards A. PURPOSE The requested zoning for this annexation is Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N), which is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. The Land Use Code describes the Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood zone district as follows: Purpose. The Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for concentrated housing within easy walking distance of transit and a commercial district. Secondarily, a neighborhood may also contain other moderate-intensity complementary and supporting land uses that serve the neighborhood. These neighborhoods will form a transition and a link between surrounding neighborhoods and the commercial core with a unifying pattern of streets and blocks. B. LAND USE A project development plan has not been submitted. The future land uses are subject to the list of permitted land uses in Division 4.6 – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. 6. Article 4 – Division 4.21 – General Commercial (C-G) Applicable Standards A. PURPOSE The requested zoning for this annexation is General Commercial (C-G), which is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. The Land Use Code describes the General Commercial zone district as follows: Purpose. The General Commercial District is intended to be a setting for development, redevelopment and infill of a wide range of community and regional retail uses, offices and personal and business services. Secondarily, it can accommodate a wide range of other uses including creative forms of housing. B. LAND USE A project development plan has not been submitted. The future land uses are subject to the list of permitted land uses in Division 4.21 – General Commercial. Packet pg. 32 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 7 of 8 Back to Top 7. Article 4 – Division 4.23 – Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) Applicable Standards A. PURPOSE The requested zoning for this annexation is Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), which is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. The Land Use Code describes the Neighborhood Commercial zone district as follows. Purpose. The Neighborhood Commercial District is intended to be a mixed-use commercial core area anchored by a supermarket or grocery store and a transit stop. The main purpose of this District is to meet consumer demands for frequently needed goods and services, with an emphasis on serving the surrounding residential neighborhoods typically including a Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. B. LAND USE A project development plan has not been submitted. The future land uses are subject to the list of permitted land uses in Division 4.23 – Neighborhood Commercial. 8. Article 4 – Division 4.27 – Employment (E) Applicable Standards A. PURPOSE The requested zoning for this annexation is Employment (E), which is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. The Land Use Code describes the Employment zone district as follows: Purpose. The Employment District is intended to provide locations for a variety of workplaces including light industrial uses, research and development activities, offices, and institutions. This District also is intended to accommodate secondary uses that complement or support the primary workplace uses, such as hotels, restaurants, convenience shopping, child-care, and housing. B. LAND USE A project development plan has not been submitted. The future land uses are subject to the list of permitted land uses in Division 4.27 – employment. Packet pg. 33 P&Z Agenda Item 3 ANX200001 | Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2 Thursday, December 17, 2020 | Page 8 of 8 Back to Top 9. Findings of Fact/Conclusion In evaluating the request for the Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 and 2, ANX200001, staff makes the following findings of fact: 1. The property meets the State law eligibility requirements to qualify for a voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 2. The requested placement into the General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) zone districts is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan Map and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. 3. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement - Growth Management Area. 4. On December 15th, 2020, the City Council is scheduled to consider a resolution to accept the annexation petition and determine that the petition is in compliance with State law. The resolution would also initiate the annexation process for the property by establishing the date, time, and place when a public hearing would be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing and zoning the area. 10. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the annexations No. 1 and No. 2, and the requested zoning of General Commercial (C- G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N), consistent with the Structure Plan and East Mulberry Corridor Plan. Staff recommends that portions of the property located in the M-M-N and L-M-N zone districts would be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, while the portions of the property located in the E, N-C, and C-G zone districts would be in the Non-Residential Sign District. 11. Attachments 1. Vicinity Map 2. Structure Plan Map 3. East Mulberry Corridor Plan – Framework Plan Map 4. Zoning Map 5. Project Narrative 6. Annexation Maps 1-2 7. Annexation Sequence Map-1 8. Annexation Sequence Map-2 9. Proposed zoning map 10. Neighborhood Meeting Summary 11. Staff Presentation Packet pg. 34 FAIRCHILDSTVICOTWAYGREENFIELDS CTDAWN AVES S UMM I T V I EW D R DARRENSTVERDE AVEE LOCUST STSKYRAIDER WAYT R A C E Y P KW Y CONQUE S T S T S S UMM I T V I EW D R CRUSADER ST COMET ST QUINBY STZEPPELINWAYDELOZIER RDDASSAULT STE LOCUST STVICOT WAYPLEASA N T ACRES D R CLIFFORD CTA L A N S T P L E A S A N T A C R E S D R LAKE CANAL CT TRACEYPKWYFRONTAGE RD N E LINCOLN AVE WEICKER DR COUNTRYSIDE DR FRONTAGE RD S RIVERBEND DRSYKES DR E MULBERRY ST E MULBERRY STFRONTAGE RD S SHERRY DRTIGERCATWAYSUMMIT CTGREENBRIARDRDELOZIER DRSUNRISE AVEKIMBERLY DRCENTRO WAYHORIZON AVECLIFFORD DRCRUSADER ST RELIANT ST COMET ST RENE DRC A N A L D R Springer-Fisher Annexation Vicinity Map Printed: November 25, 2020 ©These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts same AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. SITE ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet pg. 35 Suburban Mixed Use District Single Family Neighborhood Mixed Employment District Parks and Natural/Protected Lands Industrial District Mixed Neighborhood Neighborhood Mixed Use DistrictFAIRCHILDST GREENFIELDS CTDAWN AVES S UMM I T V I EW D R DARRENSTVERDE AVEE LOCUST STSKYRAIDER WAYCO N Q U E S T S T S S UMM I T V I EW D R COMET ST QUINBY STZEPPELIN WAYDELOZIER RDDASSAULT STE LOCUST STVICOT WAYPLEASANT ACRES DR A L A N S T P L E A S A N T A C R E S D R LAKE CANAL CT TRACEYPKWYFRONTAGE RD N WEICKER DR COUNTR Y S ID E DR FRONTAGE RD S RIVERBEND DRSYKES D R E MULBERRY STE MULBERRY ST FRONTAGE RD S SHERRY DRTIGERCAT WAYSUMMIT CTGREENBRIARDRDELOZIER DRKIMBERLY DRCENTRO WAYHORIZON AVECLIFFORD DRCRUSADER ST RELIANT ST COMET ST RENE DRC A N A L D R Springer-Fisher Annexation Structure Plan Map Printed: November 25, 2020 Parcels Community Separator Adjacent Planning AreasStructure Plan TYPE Industrial District Mixed Employment District Mixed Neighborhood Neighborhood Mixed Use District Parks and Natural/Protected Lands Rural Neighborhood Single Family Neighborhood Suburban Mixed Use District ©These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts same AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Annexation Area 1 Annexation Area 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 36 Annexation Area 1 Annexation Area 2 Springer-Fisher Annexation East Mulberry Corridor Plan Map ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 37 FAIRCHILDSTGREENFIELDS CTDAWN AVES S UMM I T V I EW D R DARRENSTVERDE AVEE LOCUST STSKYRAIDER WAYT R A C E Y P KW Y CONQUE S T S T S S UMM I T V I EW D R CRUSADER ST COMET ST QUINBY STZEPPELINWAYDELOZIER RDDASSAULT STE LOCUST STVICOT WAYPLEASA N T ACRES D R CLIFFORD CTA L A N S T P L E A S A N T A C R E S D R LAKE CANAL CT TRACEYPKWYFRONTAGE RD N E LINCOLN AVE WEICKER DR COUNTRYSIDE DR FRONTAGE RD S RIVERBEND DRSYKES DR E MULBERRY ST E MULBERRY STFRONTAGE RD S SHERRY DRTIGERCATWAYSUMMIT CTGREENBRIARDRDELOZIER DRSUNRISE AVEKIMBERLY DRCENTRO WAYHORIZON AVECLIFFORD DRCRUSADER ST RELIANT ST COMET ST RENE DRC A N A L D R URBANESTATEDISTRICT LOW DENSITY MIXED-USENEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT INDUSTRIALDISTRICT Springer-Fisher Annexation Zoning Map Printed: November 25, 2020 Parcels City ZoningZONE Industrial Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood Public Open Lands Urban Estate ©These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts same AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Annexation Area 1 Annexation Area 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 38 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com October 21, 2020 City of Fort Collins – Planning & Development Services Attn: Mr. Pete Wray, Senior City Planner 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: Springer – Fisher: Annexation and Zoning Dear Mr. Wray, On behalf of the applicant, Hartford Acquisitions, LLC, we are pleased to provide to the City of Fort Collins these Annexation and Initial Zoning application materials for the approximately 78-acre property known as Springer-Fisher presently located in unincorporated Larimer County. Located at the northwest corner of Mulberry and Greenfields Court, along the Mulberry corridor, the requested annexation and zoning for Springer-Fisher is consistent with City planning documents and along with the additional application requirements outlined below, we are looking forward to working with the City to incorporate Springer-Fisher into the greater Fort Collins community. The following application documents, as required by the City of Fort Colins for Annexation and Zoning have been provided: 1.Application form (1 copy), filing fee, sign posting fee, and $.75 for each APO label. Included within these application materials are the required signed Application form and fees. 2.Transportation Development Review Fee The Required TDR fee has been included as part of this application submittal. 3.Names and address of all owners of record of real estate property within one thousand (1000’) feet of the property lines of the parcel of land proposed to be annexed, exclusive of public right-of-way. Per discussions with Brandy Bethurem Harras on August 26, 2020, it was determined that City Staff had previously procured the necessary adjacent property owner information and that it was unnecessary for the application to include this information. The APO label fee was provided as part of this application. 4.Petition for annexation with the following inclusions: a.A statement indicating that the requirements of the Colorado Annexation Act have been met. The requirements of the Colorado Annexation Act have been met by this application. b.A statement indicating the signers of the petition comprise more than 50% of the landowners in the area and own more than 50% of the area. The signers of the petition comprise more than 50% of the landowners and own more than 50% of the area. c.The signatures and addresses of such owners. The signature and addresses of the owners have been included within the Annexation Petition. d.The date of signing each signature. The date of signing is included with each signature within the attached Annexation Petition. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 39 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com e. The affidavit of each circulator of such petition that each signature is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be. The affidavit of each circulator is included within the attached Annexation Petition. f. A request of the City of Fort Collins to approve the annexation and zoning as indicated. With this application for Annexation and Zoning, the Applicant, Hartford Acquisitions, LLC, respectfully requests approval of these applications for Annexation and Zoning by the City of Fort Collins. g. A statement as to why it is necessary and desirable for the City of Fort Collins to annex the area. The Applicant request this property to be annexed into the City of Fort Collins in order to develop the property. To this point the property, currently rural and undeveloped, has great potential to be developed into a mixed-use neighborhood consistent with the City of Fort Collins’ City Plan and East Mulberry Corridor Plan. This annexation will permit its development into the community the Applicant as well as the City have envisioned for this property. The property is approximately located at the northwest corner of Mulberry and Greenfields Ct, along the Mulberry corridor. This property is adjacent to land already annexed into the City (to the north) and within future planning documents, City Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan, the City has always considered this property when it comes to future land planning and eventually incorporating it into the City. It is the Applicant’s understanding that it is the City’s desire to annex the majority of, if not all, properties in this vicinity. The applicant would like to continue the process of annexation for this Springer-Fisher property and to work with the City to develop its potential to flourish as well as contribute to the greater Fort Collins community. h. A description of the zoning classification being requested, and any conditions requested for that zone district classification. The zoning classifications being requested are as following o Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) o Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (MMN) o Employment (E) o General Commercial (CG) o Neighborhood Commercial (NC) At this time, no conditions are being requested as part of this application. i. A statement of consistency of the requested zoning to the structure plan. The designated land uses of the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan Map for this property are Suburban Mixed-Use District and Mixed-Use Neighborhood. The proposed General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Employment zone districts are consistent with the Suburban Mixed-Use District designation and its goal to include a variety of non-residential and commercial business opportunities. The proposed LMN and MMN zone districts are consistent with the Mixed- Use Neighborhood District designation and its goals to include a variety of residential types and densities along with supporting land uses. The designated land uses of the East Mulberry Corridor Plan Framework Plan for this property are Office/Employment, Neighborhood Commercial, Medium Density Residential, and Low Density Residential. The proposed General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Employment zone districts are consistent with the Office/Employment and Neighborhood Commercial ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 40 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com designations and their desire to provide employment opportunities to serve and assist in establishing nearby residential districts as well as provide commercial/retail services that serve the surrounding community. The proposed LMN and MMN are consistent with the Medium Density Residential and Low Density Residential designation and their goal to provide a variety of lower to medium intensity residential uses. 5. Statement of Principles and Policies This Annexation and Zoning Application are in conformance with the policies and goals of both the City of Fort Collins City Plan and the applicable East Mulberry Corridor Plan. In addition to compliance with the Fort Collins City Plan Structure and East Mulberry Corridor Plan Framework Plan as previously outlined, this Annexation and Zoning is consistent with the following Principles, Policies, and/or Goals of these guiding master plan documents: Fort Collins City Plan Principle LIV 1: Maintain a compact pattern of growth that is well served by public facilities and encourages the efficient use of land. Policy LIV 1.1 - GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA Continue to utilize the GMA surrounding Fort Collins as a tool to guide and manage growth outside of the City limits and delineate the extent of urban development in Fort Collins. The Springer-Fisher property is within Fort Collins Growth Management Area and has been identified as one of several properties throughout this corridor as being desirable for annexation into the City of Fort Collins. With existing City infrastructure located nearby and development in the surrounding area, this property makes logical sense for inclusion into the City of Fort Collins and respects the desire for a compact pattern of growth. Principle LIV 3: Maintain and enhance our unique character and sense of place as the community grows. Policy LIV 3.3 - GATEWAYS Enhance and accentuate the community’s gateways, including Interstate 25 interchanges and College Avenue, to provide a coordinated and positive community entrance. Gateway design elements may include streetscape design, supportive land uses, building architecture, landscaping, signage, lighting and public art. The annexation and zoning of this property will allow development that will serve to further enhance the Mulberry corridor, a major gateway into the City, specifically the downtown of Fort Colins. The mix of uses permitted by the zoning will not only provide the opportunity to develop a multi-faceted community on this property but also provide for the opportunity to enhance the Mulberry corridor. Principle LIV 4: Enhance neighborhood livability. Policy LIV 4.1 - NEW NEIGHBORHOODS Encourage creativity in the design and construction of new neighborhoods that:  Provides a unifying and interconnected framework of streets, sidewalks, walkway spines and other public spaces;  Expands housing options, including higher density and mixed-use buildings;  Offers opportunities to age in place;  Improves access to services and amenities; and ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 41 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com  Incorporates unique site conditions. The proposed zoning categories of LMN and MMN permit and encourage a variety of residential types and densities, and even the proposed General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Employment areas permit opportunity for unique and varied residential types. Together this property will offer a variety of residential opportunities that will further enhance the character of the Fort Collins community. The extension of Greenfields Court to the north will provide connectivity to the north not only for this project but for others in the area. Additional connectivity to the west and east will also be provided for with the development of this property. Policy LIV 4.2 - COMPATIBILITY OF ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT Ensure that development that occurs in adjacent districts complements and enhances the positive qualities of existing neighborhoods. Developments that share a property line and/or street frontage with an existing neighborhood should promote compatibility by:  Continuing established block patterns and streets to improve access to services and amenities from the adjacent neighborhood;  Incorporating context-sensitive buildings and site features (e.g., similar size, scale and materials); and » Locating parking and service areas where impacts on existing neighborhoods—such as noise and traffic—will be minimized. The proposed zoning of Springer-Fisher will allow for a development pattern that is compatible within its boundaries as well as in the surrounding areas. The zoning allows for a gradation of densities from Mulberry that gives way to less intensity as one moves north and is compatible with the existing developments in the area, such as the adjacent community of Mosaic. Principle LIV 5: Create more opportunities for housing choices. Policy LIV 5.1 - HOUSING OPTIONS To enhance community health and livability, encourage a variety of housing types and densities, including mixed-used developments that are well served by public transportation and close to employment centers, shopping, services and amenities. Policy LIV 5.2 - SUPPLY OF ATTAINABLE HOUSING Encourage public and private sectors to maintain and develop a diverse range of housing options, including housing that is attainable (30% or less of monthly income) to residents earning the median income. Options could include ADUs, duplexes, townhomes, mobile homes, manufactured housing and other “missing middle” housing types. Policy LIV 5.3 - LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Use density requirements to maximize the use of land for residential development to positively influence housing supply and expand housing choice. Policy LIV 5.4 - LAND SUPPLY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING Continue to grow and utilize the Affordable Housing Land Bank Program and other programs to create permanently affordable housing units. As previously noted, the chosen underlying zoning for the Springer-Fisher property allows and encourages a wide variety of housing types and densities, including providing opportunities for the inclusion of affordable housing options. This will allow for a range of options and price points that will serve the overall Fort Collins community. East Mulberry Corridor Plan Goal LU-1 Residential neighborhoods will be linked and integrated with supporting neighborhood commercial uses, providing such immediate daily needs as groceries, laundry, day care, clinics, and other retail goods. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 42 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com The zoning proposed within the Springer-Fisher Annexation will allow for an array of land uses that will serve future residents, be interconnected to provide neighborhood services while also meeting the needs of the surrounding communities and land uses. Goal LU-3 A variety of commercial uses serving residents, businesses and travelers will be located along East Mulberry Street/SH 14 between I-25 and Lemay Avenue. The zoning proposed will permit commercial, retail, and employment land uses that will serve the residents of this immediate community as well as residents, consumers and travelers throughout the greater Mulberry corridor. Goal T-4 New additions to the street network will provide increased connectivity between existing and proposed development. The extension of Greenfields Ct to the north will allow for the eventual connection to Vine Dr, and within the development of the Springer-Fisher property there will be increased connectivity to the properties both to the east and west. Goal H-1 A variety of housing types will be provided to both provide housing close to employment and shopping and to add diversity. The proposed zoning categories of LMN and MMN permit and encourage a variety of residential types and densities, and even the proposed General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Employment areas permit opportunity for unique and varied residential types. Together this property will offer a variety of residential opportunities as well as opportunities to work close to home that will further enhance the character of the Fort Collins community. 6. List of Names, Addresses, and Phone numbers of any retailers located within the boundaries of the annexation There are no retailers currently located within the boundaries of the annexation. 7. Annexation Map Per discussions with Brandy Bethurem Harras on August 27, 2020, it was determined that 4 printed copies, along with digital copies are required as part of the initial submittal. This requested number of copies have been included as part of this submittal. We look forward to working with the City of Fort Collins through this process. Please feel to reach out should you have any questions or need anything else as part of this process. I can be reached at rmcbreen@norris-design.com or 970.409.3414 Sincerely, Norris Design Ryan F. McBreen Principal ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 43 --------------H:\Hartford Homes\CO, Fort Collins - HFH000008.01 Springer Fisher\Survey\CADD\Final\HFH08-Spring-Fisher-Annex1-plat.dwg - Armando Nunez - 11/13/2020Init.# Issue / DescriptionDate------Date:Drawn By:Project No:Checked By:8/25/2020SCALE: 1"=100'0 50 10020SPRINGER FISHERANNEXATION 1PART OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWESTQUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADOSHEET 1 OF 1TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADOFAKANHFH000008.10ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6Packet pg. 44 --------------H:\Hartford Homes\CO, Fort Collins - HFH000008.01 Springer Fisher\Survey\CADD\Final\HFH08-Spring-Fisher-Annex2-plat.dwg - Armando Nunez - 11/13/2020Init.# Issue / DescriptionDate------Date:Drawn By:Project No:Checked By:8/25/2020SPRINGER FISHER ANNEXATION 2TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADOPART OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADOSPRINGER FISHERANNEXATION 2PART OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWESTQUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADOSHEET 1 OF 1SCALE: 1"=100'0 50 10020FAKANHFH000008.10ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6Packet pg. 45 FAIRCHILDSTVICOTWAYGREENFIELDS CTDAWN AVES S UMM I T V I EW D R DARRENSTVERDE AVEE LOCUST STSKYRAIDER WAYT R A C E Y P KW Y CONQUE S T S T S S UMM I T V I EW D R CRUSADER ST COMET ST QUINBY STZEPPELINWAYDELOZIER RDDASSAULT STE LOCUST STVICOT WAYPLEASA N T ACRES D R CLIFFORD CTA L A N S T P L E A S A N T A C R E S D R LAKE CANAL CT TRACEYPKWYFRONTAGE RD N E LINCOLN AVE WEICKER DR COUNTRYSIDE DR FRONTAGE RD S RIVERBEND DRSYKES DR E MULBERRY ST E MULBERRY STFRONTAGE RD S SHERRY DRTIGERCATWAYSUMMIT CTGREENBRIARDRDELOZIER DRSUNRISE AVEKIMBERLY DRCENTRO WAYHORIZON AVECLIFFORD DRCRUSADER ST RELIANT ST COMET ST RENE DRC A N A L D R Springer-Fisher Annexation Area No. 1 Map Printed: November 25, 2020 ©These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts same AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Annexation Area 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet pg. 46 FAIRCHILDSTVICOTWAYGREENFIELDS CTDAWN AVES S UMM I T V I EW D R DARRENSTVERDE AVEE LOCUST STSKYRAIDER WAYT R A C E Y P KW Y CONQUE S T S T S S UMM I T V I EW D R CRUSADER ST COMET ST QUINBY STZEPPELINWAYDELOZIER RDDASSAULT STE LOCUST STVICOT WAYPLEASA N T ACRES D R CLIFFORD CTA L A N S T P L E A S A N T A C R E S D R LAKE CANAL CT TRACEYPKWYFRONTAGE RD N E LINCOLN AVE WEICKER DR COUNTRYSIDE DR FRONTAGE RD S RIVERBEND DRSYKES DR E MULBERRY ST E MULBERRY STFRONTAGE RD S SHERRY DRTIGERCATWAYSUMMIT CTGREENBRIARDRDELOZIER DRSUNRISE AVEKIMBERLY DRCENTRO WAYHORIZON AVECLIFFORD DRCRUSADER ST RELIANT ST COMET ST RENE DRC A N A L D R Springer-Fisher Annexation Area No. 2 Map Printed: November 25, 2020 ©These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts same AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Annexation Area 1 Annexation Area 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet pg. 47 HARTFORD MULBERRY ANNEXATION CONCEPT BUBBLE PLAN 10/21/20 CGCG GENERAL COMMERCIALGENERAL COMMERCIAL 11.7 AC11.7 AC EE EMPLOYMENTEMPLOYMENT 10.0 AC10.0 AC NCNC NEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL 10.0 AC10.0 AC CGCG 5.9 AC5.9 AC MMNMMN MEDIUM DENSITY MIXEDUSEMEDIUM DENSITY MIXEDUSE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTNEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT 30.1 AC30.1 AC LMNLMN LOW DENSITY LOW DENSITY MIXEDUSEMIXEDUSE NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTDISTRICT 10.1 AC10.1 AC NORTH SCALE 0 50 100 200GREENFIELD CT.GREENFIELD CT.E MULBERRY ST.E MULBERRY ST. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 48 Mulberry/Greenfields Annexation & Zoning – Neighborhood Meeting Summary (8-19-20) Overview City Staff: Pete Wray, Senior City Planner and Project Planner Alyssa Stevens, Development Review Liaison Dave Betley, Manager, Civil Engineering Marc Virata, Civil Engineer III Applicant: Ryan McBreen, Norris Design Pat McMeekin – Hartford Homes Hunter Donaldson – Hartford Homes Neighborhood Meeting Date: Wednesday August 19, 2020 Proposed Project Review Process Purpose of meeting is to share conceptual plans at an early stage in process and gather feedback from neighbors for inclusion in record. A formal project development plan application has not been submitted to the City. This proposed annexation and zoning review will include a hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board for recommendation to City Council. Residents who receive this meeting notice will also receive a letter for the Planning and Zoning Board Hearing. Applicant Presentation Hartford Company is a local group and has built multiple projects in area including Eastridge/Mosaic just NW of this site. This initial project includes annexation and zoning. The parcel to the north is already annexed and zoned Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (LMN). A future development project will include coordination of roadway network – Greenfields and E/W connections. Council approved Metro District service plan. Norris Design is the applicant to navigate development review process. Proposed land use plan approximately 70 acres based on East Mulberry Corridor Plan. The land use designations including LMN, Median Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (MMN), Employment, and General Commercial determine future zoning. Community Development and Neighborhood Services Planning Services 281 North College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 Packet pg. 49 Neighborhood Meeting Notes – Mulberry-Greenfields Annexation & Zoning Page 2  The proposed zoning reflects more intense commercial development closer to Mulberry then transition north to lower density residential.  Will include PUD overlay for future applications. Questions/Comments and Answers Question: Describe mixed use neighborhoods? City Staff: City Plan identifies a range of residential land uses and density. The Mixed-Use Neighborhoods designation includes options to combine single-family and multi-family residential with other supporting non-residential uses for new neighborhoods. Question: Will there be a park in design? Applicant: The proposed annexation is not a development project. A future project development plan (PDP) will meet park requirements. Question: What is the green corridor on SW corner? Applicant: In the bubble diagram we are showing the existing green corridor and ditch is not part of annexation. Question: How will Delozier Drive extend of connect to north or east? Staff: In looking at the Master Street Plan, the collector street is shown to connect further north to East Ridge. Question: What is the timeline for annexation process? Applicant: Two years for initial annexation and development phase, then remaining portions with be built out in multiple phases over approximately 7-10 years. Question: What are building height restrictions for each zone? Applicant: The maximum building heights are as follows based on Land Use Code Standards: LMN: Single-family = 2.5 stories, Multi-family = 3 stories MMN: 4 stories General Commercial = 4 stories Employment: 4 stories Staff: Next steps – the neighborhood meeting comments will be part of the public record with the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation Hearing and City Council who is the decision maker. From this meeting the applicant will continue to work on their plan and submit for an annexation petition and related documents. Staff will review the submittal to ensure if it complies with the LUC and then if it is ready for hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board, then City Council. If you got notice for this meeting you will get notice for these hearings. We encourage you to attend these meetings and participate. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 Packet pg. 50 1 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - 12/17/2020 Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1-2 and Zoning Pete Wray, Senior City Planner 2 SPRINGER-FISHER ANNEXATION NO. 1 AND 2: Request for voluntary annexation/zoning for the Springer-Fisher parcel #8709000006, to include a total of 76.8-acres Annexation includes a series of two sequential annexations to gain contiguity to municipal boundaries Proposed zoning –General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N- C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N), consistent with Structure Plan and East Mulberry Corridor Plan land use maps SPRINGER-FISHER ANNEXATION NO. 1 AND 2 1 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 51 2 Site Area 3 4 SITE E Mulberry Street I-253 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 52 3 5 Annexation No. 1 Total area – 71.34-acres Contiguity is gained from the 1995 Fisher- Lemay Avenue, Third Annexation. Contiguous perimeter (1,323.29 feet) of 17%, which satisfies the one-sixth (1/6) area required. Zoning: General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) 6 Annexation No. 2 Total area – 5.46-acres Contiguity is gained from the Springer-Fisher Annexation No. 1 Contiguous perimeter 626.67 feet (29%), which satisfies the one-sixth (1/6) area required. Proposed Zoning: General Commercial (C-G) 5 6 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 53 4 City Structure Plan 7 Future Land Use Designations: Mixed Neighborhoods - Higher densities - Variety of housing types Suburban Mixed-Use - retail/commercial services, office and employment, multifamily residential, civic, and other complementary secondary uses 8 Future Land Use Designations: General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) Commercial mixed-use district and supporting higher-density mixed-use neighborhoods East Mulberry Corridor Plan 7 8 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 54 5 Existing Zoning 9 Proposed Zoning /Structure Plan 10 9 10 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 55 6 Proposed Zoning/ EMCP 11 Zoning Comparison 12 11 12 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 56 7 EMCP/Proposed Zoning Comparison 13 EMCP Proposed +/- LMN 26.6 10.1 -16.5 MMN 14.5 30.1 15.6 NC 10.0 10.0 0.0 E 19.6 10.0 -9.6 GC 7.1 17.6 10.5 Total 77.8 77.8 0.0 Mixed-Use Neighborhoods: (LMN/MMN) +/- 40 acres Non-residential Mixed-Use District: (C- G), N-C), (E) +/- 36 acres Proposed zoning consistent with the EMCP and Structure Plan policy direction Staff Recommendation 14 Staff recommends approval of the annexations No. 1 and No. 2, ANX200001, and the requested zoning of General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) consistent with the Structure Plan and East Mulberry Corridor Plan. Staff recommends that portions of the property located in the M-M-N and L-M-N zone districts would be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, while the portions of the property located in the E, N-C, and C-G zone districts would be in the Non-Residential Sign District. 13 14 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 57 8 15 16 15 16 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 58 9 17 17 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 11 Packet pg. 59 Mulberry & Greenfields: Annexation & ZoningFORT COLLINS PLANNING & ZONING BOARDDECEMBER 17, 2020ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 12Packet pg. 60 The PlanƒPermits variety of Uses & Land Development OptionsƒMore intense uses adjacent to Mulberry ƒGive way to less intense uses to the northƒResidential to support Non-Residential OpportunitiesƒGateway OpportunityƒCatalyst for growth along MulberryƒEntry to Fort CollinsITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 12Packet pg. 61 Conformance ƒAnnexation ƒAdjacency to City on North SideƒWithin City’s Growth BoundaryƒConformance with Master PlansƒCity Plan (2019)ƒEast Mulberry Corridor Plan (2003)ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 12Packet pg. 62 EMCP(‘03)ƒCommercialƒNeighborhood CommercialƒEmploymentƒIndustrial ƒMedium Density ResidentialƒLow Density ResidentialITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 12Packet pg. 63 City Plan (‘19)ƒMixed neighborhoodƒVaried Residential types and DensitiesƒSupporting non-residential uses and community orientedƒSuburban Mixed-useƒRetail, restaurants, office and other commercial services ƒSupporting HDR, entertainment, etc. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 12Packet pg. 64 The VisionNote: Plan is Conceptual and subject to changeƒNext Steps:ƒPUD OverlayƒTo include Whitham parcel to the northƒPlattingƒPDP/FDP (multiple)ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 12Packet pg. 65 Development Review Staff Report Agenda Item 4 Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com Planning and Zoning Board Hearing: December 17, 2020 Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line Site Plan Advisory Review SPA200002 Summary of Request This is a request for a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) for the installation of approximately 5,000 feet of new 20-inch diameter water line construction to feed the Fort Collins Loveland Water District (FCLWD) Foothills tank location. This water line will replace the older line currently connected to the tanks. The SPAR process allows the Planning and Zoning Board to provide comments on the plan to the governing body (Fort Collins Loveland Water District) per State statutes. Zoning Map Next Steps If the Planning and Zoning Board is not satisfied with the response to its comments by the governing body, the Planning and Zoning Board can request a hearing before the governing board of the Fort Collins Loveland Water District. Site Location The water line originates at the intersection of W Prospect Rd and S Overland Trail and runs westward through the Ponds at Overland Trail Subdivision and Fort Collins Maxwell Natural Area until ultimately arriving at the Foothills water storage tanks. Zoning Low Density Residential (R-L) / Residential Foothills (R-F) Property Owner Fort Collins Loveland Water District 5150 Snead Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 Applicant/Representative Chris Pletcher, PE Fort Collins Loveland Water District 5150 Snead Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 Staff Will Lindsey, Associate City Planner (970) 224-6164 Contents 1. Project Introduction....................................... 2 2. Public Outreach ............................................ 4 3. Procedural Requirements – Land Use Code Article 2 ......................................................... 4 4. Staff Evaluation ............................................ 5 5. Staff Conclusions and Recommendation ..... 6 6. Attachments .................................................. 6 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval. Packet pg. 66 P&Z Agenda Item 4 SPA200002 FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line, December 17, 2020 | Page 2 of 6 Back to Top 1. Project Introduction A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is a request to construct a new 20-inch diameter water line approximately six-feet underground for the Fort Collins Loveland Water District’s Foothills water storage tank location. The intent of this project is to provide reliable water to customers within the water district as the existing water line is fifty years old and deteriorating quickly. The area under SPAR review south and west of the Ponds at Overland Trail Subdivision (parcel #’s 9717406003, 9717408002, 9717408003, 9717408004, 9717000905, 9717400912) has already accommodated the existing water-line. The proposed realignment of the water line through the HOA’s greenspace on the south side of the subdivision mitigates the impact of the project, and the potential impacts of any future repairs needed. As a public utility which crosses lots and tracts of land held in both public and private ownership this project is subject to review by the Planning & Zoning Board. The SPAR review contains 5 parcels that are of different ownership within the City of Fort Collins: parcels 9717406003, 9717408002, 9717408003, 9717408004, 9717400912 are owned by the Ponds at Overland Trail Homeowners Association. Parcel 971700090 which includes the northern portion of the Maxell Natural Area is owned by the City of Fort Collins. Packet pg. 67 P&Z Agenda Item 4 SPA200002 FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line, December 17, 2020 | Page 3 of 6 Back to Top B. SITE CHARACTERISTICS 1. Development History a) The project area is within the boundaries of the Overland Trail Annexation from 1994. 2. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use The zoning and land uses surrounding the project area are as follows: North South East West Zoning Low Density Residential (RL) & Residential Foothills (RF) Medium Density Mixed- Use (MMN) & Public Open Lands (POL) Low Density Residential (RL) Residential Foothills (RF) Land Use Single-Family Dwellings Ponds at Overland Trail Subdivision Single-Family Dwellings Westgate Second Subdivision Maxwell Natural Area Single-Family Dwellings Von Vihl Heights Subdivision Open Space / Foothills Maxwell Natural Area C. REVIEW PROCEDURES 1. State Requirements for City Review Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended (C.R.S.), govern the City’s review of development plans for public facilities, these supersede the City’s typical processes for development plan review of private land. • Section 31-23-209, C.R.S. generally governs all public facilities with the following pertinent provisions: o “no street, square, park or other public way, ground or open space, public building or structure, or publicly or privately owned public utility shall be constructed or authorized in the municipality or in such planned section and district until the location, character, and extent thereof has been submitted for approval by the commission.” o “In case of disapproval, the commission shall communicate its reasons to the municipality's governing body, which has the power to overrule such disapproval by a recorded vote of not less than two-thirds of its entire membership.” o “The failure of the commission to act within sixty days from and after the date of official submission to it shall be deemed approval.” 2. Land Use Code Requirements The Land Use Code incorporates the statutory requirements above into Sections 2.1.3(E) and 2.16(H) under the Site Plan Advisory Review Process (“SPAR”). Following are pertinent excerpts for convenient reference: “2.1.3(E) Site Plan Advisory Review. The Site Plan Advisory Review process requires the submittal and approval of a site development plan that describes the location, character and extent of improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities. In addition, with respect to public and charter schools, the Packet pg. 68 P&Z Agenda Item 4 SPA200002 FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line, December 17, 2020 | Page 4 of 6 Back to Top review also has as its purpose, as far as is feasible, that the proposed school facility conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan.” “2.16.2 Site Plan Advisory Review Procedures (H) Standards: [LUC standards are] Not applicable, and in substitution thereof, an application for a Site Plan Advisory Review shall comply with the following criteria: (1) The site location for the proposed use shall be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. (2) The site development plan shall conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant's governing body. Absent adopted design standards and guidelines, the design character of the site development plan shall be consistent with the stated purpose of the respective land use designation as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. (3) The site development plan shall identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of- way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible.” 2. Public Outreach A. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING It was found that the project being the construction of an underground waterline did not have significant neighborhood impact. Therefore, a neighborhood meeting was not required. B. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment has been received. 3. Procedural Requirements – Land Use Code Article 2 A. SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW 1. Conceptual Review Conceptual Review meeting waived 2. Neighborhood Meeting Neighborhood meeting was determined not to be required. 3. Submittal The project development plans were submitted and accepted on October 30, 2020, and subsequently routed to all reviewing departments. 4. Notice Posted notice: November 13, 2020, Sign #584 Written notice: December 3, 2020, 625 letters sent. Published Coloradoan Hearing Notice: December 6, 2020 - #0004497217 Packet pg. 69 P&Z Agenda Item 4 SPA200002 FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line, December 17, 2020 | Page 5 of 6 Back to Top 4. Staff Evaluation A. BACKGROUND The City’s review of a public facility is governed by State statutes. Plans are evaluated based on the requirements explained below. Location Criterion: (1) The site location for the proposed use shall be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Character Criterion: (2) The site development plan shall conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant's governing body. Absent adopted design standards and guidelines, the design character of the site development plan shall be consistent with the stated purpose of the respective land use designation as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Extent Criterion: (3) The site development plan shall identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible.” B. LOCATION The first criterion for the review of the application is ‘location.’ This criterion requires that the site location for the proposed public facility be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The location and alignment of the underground utility anticipates current and future development in accordance with the City’s Structure Plan Map which assigns a place type of Single Family Residential and Parks and Natural/Protected Lands. C. CHARACTER The second criteria for review is “character” which requires the plan to conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant’s governing body. The proposed water pipeline meets this requirement by reseeding all disturbed areas in like vegetation to existing conditions as well as replacing all trees impacted by the installation of the new water line. D. EXTENT The third criteria for review is “extent” which requires the plan to identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible. The proposed project meets this requirement through construction methods and ensuring minimal conflicts with existing underground utilities and trees. A segment of the pipe will run under the intersection of W Prospect Road and Bryant Drive, while the majority of the water line will run along the greenspace area on the southside of the Ponds at Overland Trail subdivision and through the Maxwell Natural Area before it arrives at the water storage tanks. Any sidewalks, roadways, and trails impacted by the project will be returned to their existing conditions. Packet pg. 70 P&Z Agenda Item 4 SPA200002 FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line, December 17, 2020 | Page 6 of 6 Back to Top Additionally, sediment control measures will be taken around sensitive aquatic resources. The siting of the piping alignment will minimize adverse impacts to environmental resources and public infrastructure. 5. Staff Conclusions and Recommendation Staff recommends Planning and Zoning Board approve the Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line – SPA200002 with the following motion: The Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board finds that the location, character, and extent of the proposed development plan for the Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line #SPA200002, is consistent with the City’s Land Use Code and mitigates its functional and visual impacts to streets, sidewalks, utilities, and environmental resources, to the extent reasonably feasible. 6. Attachments Applicant’s Project Narrative Preliminary Construction Plans Geotechnical Investigation Biological Memorandum Archaeological Report Staff Memorandum Recorded Maxwell Easement documentation FCLWD Golden Currant Replacement_11.13.2019 Staff Presentation Applicant Presentation Packet pg. 71 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1Packet pg. 72 CS01GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20VICINITY MAPPROJECT TEAM1" = 500'PROJECTSITEGOLDEN CURRANT WATER LINEFORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO.PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION PLANSCIVIL ENGINEERCIVILWORX, LLC4025 AUTOMATION WAY, SUITE B2FORT COLLINS, CO 80525OFFICE PHONE: 970-698-6046CONTACT: AUSTIN SNOW, PECELL PHONE: 970-825-9740OWNERFORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT5150 SNEAD DRIVEFORT COLLINS, CO 80525OFFICE PHONE 970-226-3104CONTACT: CHRIS PLETCHER, PECELL PHONE: 970-218-5546SURVEYORWASHBURN LAND SURVEYING, LLC4025 AUTOMATION WAY SUITE C4 SOUTHFORT COLLINS, CO 80526OFFICE PHONE: 970-232-9645CONTACT: CHAD WASHBURN, PLSCELL PHONE: 970-685-8836PROJECT TEAMPROSPECT RDOVERLAND TRAIL PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER CERTIFICATIONTHESE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE FORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATERDISTRICT - GOLDEN CURRANT WATER LINE WERE PREPARED BY ME (ORUNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE ROAD STANDARDS AND THE STORMWATER DESIGN STANDARDS FORLARIMER COUNTY, AND THE FORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICTDESIGN CRITERIA.AUSTIN SNOW, PECIVILWORX, LLCREQUIRED PERMITS BY CONTRACTORCITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL AREAS- RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMITCITY OF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING- TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANCOLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT- CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING PERMIT- PERMIT FOR STORMWATER DISCHARGEFORT COLLINS-LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT- PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGCALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OFCOLORADOKnow what's below.RCS01COVER SHEETELIZABETH STAll changes, addendums, additions, deletions andmodifications to these drawings must be approved,in writing, by the Fort Collins-LovelandWater District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation District.District EngineerDateFORT COLLINS - LOVELANDWATER DISTRICTSOUTH FORT COLLINSSANITATION DISTRICT110/16/20ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 73 GN01GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20GN01GENERAL NOTESLARIMER COUNTY URBAN AREA ROAD STANDARDS - GENERAL NOTES (4/1/2017)("DEVELOPER" SHALL REFER TO THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR FORT COLLINS LOVELANDWATER DISTRICT)GENERAL NOTES1. All materials, workmanship, and construction of public improvements shall meet or exceed thestandards and specifications set forth in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards andapplicable state and federal regulations. Where there is conflict between these plans and thespecifications, or any applicable standards, the most restrictive standard shall apply. All work shall beinspected and approved by the Local Entity.2.All references to any published standards shall refer to the latest revision of said standard, unlessspecifically stated otherwise.3. These public improvement construction plans shall be valid for a period of three years from the dateof approval by the Local Entity Engineer. Use of these plans after the expiration date will require anew review and approval process by the Local Entity prior to commencement of any work shown inthese plans.4.The engineer who has prepared these plans, by execution and/or seal hereof, does hereby affirmresponsibility to the Local Entity, as beneficiary of said engineer's work, for any errors and omissionscontained in these plans, and approval of these plans by the Local Entity Engineer shall not relievethe engineer who has prepared these plans of all such responsibility. Further, to the extent permittedby law, the engineer hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Local Entity, and its officersand employees, from and against all liabilities, claims, and demands which may arise from any errorsand omissions contained in these plans.5. All sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water line construction, as well as power and other “dry” utilityinstallations, shall conform to the Local Entity standards and specifications current at the date ofapproval of the plans by the Local Entity Engineer.6. The type, size, location and number of all known underground utilities are approximate when shownon the drawings. It shall be the responsibility of the Developer to verify the existence and location ofall underground utilities along the route of the work before commencing new construction. TheDeveloper shall be responsible for unknown underground utilities.7. The Engineer shall contact the Utility Notification Center of Colorado (UNCC) at 1- 800-922-1987, atleast 2 working days prior to beginning excavation or grading, to have all registered utility locationsmarked. Other unregistered utility entities (i.e. ditch / irrigation company) are to be located bycontacting the respective representative. Utility service laterals are also to be located prior tobeginning excavation or grading. It shall be the responsibility of the Developer to relocate all existingutilities that conflict with the proposed improvements shown on these plans.8. The Developer shall be responsible for protecting all utilities during construction and for coordinatingwith the appropriate utility company for any utility crossings required.9. If a conflict exists between existing and proposed utilities and/or a design modification is required, theDeveloper shall coordinate with the engineer to modify the design. Design modification(s) must beapproved by the Local Entity prior to beginning construction.10. The Developer shall coordinate and cooperate with the Local Entity, and all utility companiesinvolved, to assure that the work is accomplished in a timely fashion and with a minimum disruptionof service. The Developer shall be responsible for contacting, in advance, all parties affected by anydisruption of any utility service as well as the utility companies.11. No work may commence within any public storm water, sanitary sewer or potable water system untilthe Developer notifies the utility provider. Notification shall be a minimum of 2 working days prior tocommencement of any work. At the discretion of the water utility provider, a pre-construction meetingmay be required prior to commencement of any work.12. The Developer shall sequence installation of utilities in such a manner as to minimize potential utilityconflicts. In general, storm sewer and sanitary sewer should be constructed prior to installation of thewater lines and dry utilities.13. The minimum cover over water lines is 4.5 feet and the maximum cover is 5.5 feet unless otherwisenoted in the plans and approved by the Water Utility.14. A State Construction Dewatering Wastewater Discharge Permit is required if dewatering is requiredin order to install utilities or water is discharged into a storm sewer, channel, irrigation ditch or anywaters of the United States.15. The Developer shall comply with all terms and conditions of the Colorado Permit for Storm WaterDischarge (Contact Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Control Division, (303) 692-3590),the Storm Water Management Plan, and the Erosion Control Plan.16. The Local Entity shall not be responsible for the maintenance of storm drainage facilities located onprivate property. Maintenance of onsite drainage facilities shall be the responsibility of the propertyowner(s).17. Prior to final inspection and acceptance by the Local Entity, certification of the drainage facilities, by aregistered engineer, must be submitted to and approved by the Stormwater Utility Department.Certification shall be submitted to the Stormwater Utility Department at least two weeks prior to therelease of a certificate of occupancy for single family units. For commercial properties, certificationshall be submitted to the Stormwater Utility Department at least two weeks prior to the release of anybuilding permits in excess of those allowed prior to certification per the Development Agreement.18. The Local Entity shall not be responsible for any damages or injuries sustained in this Developmentas a result of groundwater seepage, whether resulting from groundwater flooding, structural damageor other damage unless such damage or injuries are sustained as a result of the Local Entity failureto properly maintain its water, wastewater, and/or storm drainage facilities in the development.19. All recommendations of the final drainage and erosion control study, if applicable, shall be followedand implemented.20. Temporary erosion control during construction shall be provided as shown on the Erosion ControlPlan. All erosion control measures shall be maintained in good repair by the Developer, until suchtime as the entire disturbed areas is stabilized with hard surface or landscaping.21. The Developer shall be responsible for insuring that no mud or debris shall be tracked onto theexisting public street system. Mud and debris must be removed within 24 hours by an appropriatemechanical method (i.e. machine broom sweep, light duty front-end loader, etc.) or as approved bythe Local Entity street inspector.22. No work may commence within any improved or unimproved public Right-of-Way until aRight-of-Way Permit or Development Construction Permit is obtained, if applicable.23. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for all applicable agenciesprior to commencement of construction. The Developer shall notify the Local Entity EngineeringInspector (Fort Collins - 221-6605) and the Local Entity Erosion Control Inspector (Fort Collins -221-6700) at least 2 working days prior to the start of any earth disturbing activity, or construction onany and all public improvements. If the Local Entity Engineer is not available after proper notice ofconstruction activity has been provided, the Developer may commence work in the Engineerabsence. However, the Local Entity reserves the right not to accept the improvement if subsequenttesting reveals an improper installation.24. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining soils tests within the Public Right- of-Way after rightof way grading and all utility trench work is complete and prior to the placement of curb, gutter,sidewalk and pavement. If the final soils/pavement design report does not correspond with the resultsof the original geotechnical report, the Developer shall be responsible for a re-design of the subjectpavement section or, the Developer may use the Local Entity's default pavement thicknesssection(s). Regardless of the option used, all final soils/pavement design reports shall be prepared bya licensed Professional Engineer. The final report shall be submitted to the Inspector a minimum of10 working days prior to placement of base and asphalt. Placement of curb, gutter, sidewalk, baseand asphalt shall not occur until the Local Entity Engineer approves the final report.25. The contractor shall hire a licensed engineer or land surveyor to survey the constructed elevations ofthe street subgrade and the gutter flowline at all intersections, inlets, and other locations requestedby the Local Entity inspector. The engineer or surveyor must certify in a letter to the Local Entity thatthese elevations conform to the approved plans and specifications. Any deviations shall be noted inthe letter and then resolved with the Local Entity before installation of base course or asphalt will beallowed on the streets.26. All utility installations within or across the roadbed of new residential roads must be completed priorto the final stages of road construction. For the purposes of these standards, any work except c/gabove the subgrade is considered final stage work. All service lines must be stubbed to the propertylines and marked so as to reduce the excavation necessary for building connections.27. Portions of Larimer County are within overlay districts. The Larimer County FloodPlain Resolutionshould be referred to for additional criteria for roads within these districts.28.All road construction in areas designated as Wild Fire Hazard Areas shall be done in accordancewith the construction criteria as established in the Wild Fire Hazard Area Mitigation Regulations inforce at the time of final plat approval.29. Prior to the commencement of any construction, the contractor shall contact the Local Entity Foresterto schedule a site inspection for any tree removal requiring a permit.30.The Developer shall be responsible for all aspects of safety including, but not limited to, excavation,trenching, shoring, traffic control, and security. Refer to OSHA Publication 2226, Excavating andTrenching.31. The Developer shall submit a Construction Traffic Control Plan, in accordance with MUTCD, to theappropriate Right-of-Way authority for approval, prior to any construction activities within, or affecting,the Right-of-Way. The Developer shall be responsible for providing any and all traffic control devicesas may be required by the construction activities.32. Prior to the commencement of any construction that will affect traffic signs of any type, the contractorshall contact Local Entity Traffic Operations Department, who will temporarily remove or relocate thesign at no cost to the contractor; however, if the contractor moves the traffic sign then the contractorwill be charged for the labor, materials and equipment to reinstall the sign as needed.33. The Developer is responsible for all costs for the initial installation of traffic signing and striping forthe Development related to the Development's local street operations. In addition, the Developer isresponsible for all costs for traffic signing and striping related to directing traffic access to and fromthe Development.34. There shall be no site construction activities on Saturdays, unless specifically approved by the LocalEntity Engineer, and no site construction activities on Sundays or holidays, unless there is priorwritten approval by the Local Entity.35. The Developer is responsible for providing all labor and materials necessary for the completion of theintended improvements, shown on these drawings, or designated to be provided, installed, orconstructed, unless specifically noted otherwise.36. Dimensions for layout and construction are not to be scaled from any drawing. If pertinentdimensions are not shown, contact the Designer for clarification, and annotate the dimension on theas-built record drawings.37. The Developer shall have, onsite at all times, one (1) signed copy of the approved plans, one (1)copy of the appropriate standards and specifications, and a copy of any permits and extensionagreements needed for the job.38. If, during the construction process, conditions are encountered which could indicate a situation that isnot identified in the plans or specifications, the Developer shall contact the Designer and the LocalEntity Engineer immediately.39. The Developer shall be responsible for recording as-built information on a set of record drawingskept on the construction site, and available to the Local Entity's Inspector at all times. Uponcompletion of the work, the contractor(s) shall submit record drawings to the Local Entity Engineer.40. The Designer shall provide, in this location on the plan, the location and description of the nearestsurvey benchmarks (2) for the project as well as the basis of bearings. The information shall be asfollows:Benchmarks--Local Entity survey.B.M.Number 32-92,Elev.=5119.42 NAVD88, Description COFCBM: NORTHEAST CORNEROF LAKE ST. AND OVERLANDTRAIL, IN THE EAST HEADWALL OF THE BRIDGE OVERTHE PLEASANT VALLEY AND LAKE CANAL.GENERAL NOTES CONTINUED41. All stationing is based on centerline of the pipe unless otherwise noted.42. Damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as existing fences, trees,streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, landscaping, structures, and improvements destroyed,damaged or removed due to construction of this project, shall be replaced or restored in like kind atthe Developer's expense, unless otherwise indicated on these plans, prior to the acceptance ofcompleted improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.43. When an existing asphalt street must be cut, the street must be restored to a condition equal to orbetter than its original condition. The existing street condition shall be documented by the LocalEntity Construction Inspector before any cuts are made. Patching shall be done in accordance withthe Local Entity Street Repair Standards. The finished patch shall blend in smoothly into the existingsurface. All large patches shall be paved with an asphalt lay-down machine. In streets where morethan one cut is made, an overlay of the entire street width, including the patched area, may berequired. The determination of need for a complete overlay shall be made by the Local EntityEngineer and/or the Local Entity Inspector at the time the cuts are made.44. Upon completion of construction, the site shall be cleaned and restored to a condition equal to, orbetter than, that which existed before construction, or to the grades and condition as required bythese plans.45. Standard Handicap ramps are to be constructed at all curb returns and at all “T” intersections.46. After acceptance by the Local Entity, public improvements depicted in these plans shall beguaranteed to be free from material and workmanship defects for a minimum period of two yearsfrom the date of acceptance.47. The Local Entity shall not be responsible for the maintenance of roadway and appurtenantimprovements, including storm drainage structures and pipes, for the following private streets: (list).N/A48. Approved Variances are listed as follows: (Plan set must have a list of all applicable variances for theproject). N/ACITY OF FORT COLLINS GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES1. The erosion control inspector must be notified at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to any constructionon this site.2. There shall be no earth-disturbing activity outside the limits designated on the accepted plans.3. All required perimeter silt and construction fencing shall be installed prior to any land disturbingactivity (stockpiling, stripping, grading, etc). All other required erosion control measures shall beinstalled at the appropriate time in the construction sequence as indicated in the approved projectschedule, construction plans, and erosion control report.4. At all times during construction, the Developer shall be responsible for preventing and controllingon-site erosion including keeping the property sufficiently watered so as to minimize wind blownsediment. The Developer shall also be responsible for installing and maintaining all erosion controlfacilities shown herein.5. Pre-disturbance vegetation shall be protected and retained wherever possible. Removal ordisturbance of existing vegetation shall be limited to the area(s) required for immediate constructionoperations, and for the shortest practical period of time.6. All soils exposed during land disturbing activity (stripping, grading, utility installations, stockpiling,filling, etc.) shall be kept in a roughened condition by ripping or disking along land contours untilmulch, vegetation, or other permanent erosion control BMPs are installed. No soils in areas outsideproject street rights- of-way shall remain exposed by land disturbing activity for more than thirty (30)days before required temporary or permanent erosion control (e.g. seed/mulch, landscaping, etc.) isinstalled, unless otherwise approved by the Local Entity.7. In order to minimize erosion potential, all temporary (structural) erosion control measures shall:a. Be inspected at a minimum of once every two (2) weeks and after each significantstorm event and repaired or reconstructed as necessary in order to ensure the continuedperformance of their intended function.b. Remain in place until such time as all the surrounding disturbed areas are sufficientlystabilized as determined by the erosion control inspector.c. Be removed after the site has been sufficiently stabilized as determined by theerosion control inspector.8. When temporary erosion control measures are removed, the Developer shall be responsible for theclean up and removal of all sediment and debris from all drainage infrastructure and other publicfacilities.9. The contractor shall clean up any inadvertent deposited material immediately and make sure streetsare free of all materials by the end of each working day.10. All retained sediments, particularly those on paved roadway surfaces, shall be removed anddisposed of in a manner and location so as not to cause their release into any waters of the UnitedStates.11. No soil stockpile shall exceed ten (10) feet in height. All soil stockpiles shall be protected fromsediment transport by surface roughening, watering, and perimeter silt fencing. Any soil stockpileremaining after thirty (30) days shall be seeded and mulched.12. The stormwater volume capacity of detention ponds will be restored and storm sewer lines will becleaned upon completion of the project and before turning the maintenance over to the Local Entityor Homeowners Association (HOA).13. City Ordinance and Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) requirements make it unlawful todischarge or allow the discharge of any pollutant or contaminated water from construction sites.Pollutants include, but are not limited to discarded building materials, concrete truck washout,chemicals, oil and gas products, litter, and sanitary waste. The developer shall at all times takewhatever measures are necessary to assure the proper containment and disposal of pollutants onthe site in accordance with any and all applicable local, state, and federal regulations.14. A designated area shall be provided on site for concrete truck chute washout. The area shall beconstructed so as to contain washout material and located at least fifty (50) feet away from anywaterway during construction. Upon completion of construction activities the concrete washoutmaterial will be removed and properly disposed of prior to the area being restored.15. To ensure that sediment does not move off of individual lots one or more of the followingsediment/erosion control BMPs shall be installed and maintained until the lots are sufficientlystabilized, as determined by the erosion control inspector, (Within Loveland GMA and City LimitsOnly).a. Below all gutter downspouts.b. Out to drainage swales.c. Along lot perimeter.d. Other locations, if needed.16. Conditions in the field may warrant erosion control measures in addition to what is shown on theseplans. The Developer shall implement whatever measures are determined necessary, as directed bythe City/County.17. A vehicle tracking control pad shall be installed when needed for construction equipment, includingbut not limited to personal vehicles exiting existing roadways. No earthen materials, i.e. stone, dirt,etc. shall be placed in the curb & gutter or roadway as a ramp to access temporary stockpiles,staging areas, construction materials, concrete washout areas, and/or building sites.SEED MIX1. The city of Fort Collins' upland native seed mix should be used for this site. The seed mix details canbe found on page DT02 of this plan set.FORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT NOTES1. This project shall be constructed to the most current edition (June 2010, revision 2.0) of the FortCollins-Loveland Water District Standards and Specifications unless indicated otherwise on theseplans.2. Waterlines should have 5 to 6 ft of cover unless otherwise noted on the construction plans.3. Waterlines should have 18 inches vertical separation from all other utilities. If 18" of clearance is notpossible, contact the district engineer to discuss alternatives.4. Maximum deflection of 20-foot lengths of of 20" C900 PVC pipe shall be approximately 4.2" (1.0degrees) at the joint.5. Individual lengths of 20" C900 PVC pipe shall not be longitudinally bent (i.e. no barrel bending).6. All waterlines shall be installed with tracer wire.7. Contractor shall grade the project through substantial completion, including trench backfill anddesigned finished grade.8. Contractor is responsible for any necessary temporary re-vegetation during construction and throughsubstantial completion.2ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 74 GOLDEN CURRANT BLVDS OVERLAND TRAILREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING ASPHALT FORABANDONMENT OF EXISTING 16" WLSEE SHEET AB01WOODROSE CTWHEATGRASS CTW PROSPECT RDBANYAN DRS OVERLAND TRAILREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING CONCRETE PANREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING CONCRETE TRAILREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING GRASS / SODREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALKREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALKREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING CONCRETECURB AND GUTTERREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING CONCRETECURB AND GUTTERREMOVE AND REPLACECONCRETE CROSSPANREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING ASPHALTREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING ASPHALTREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING FENCEREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING STORM PIPEREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING TREEREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING TREESREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING ASPHALT FORABANDONMENT OF EXISTING 16" WLSEE SHEET AB01PROPOSED 20"FCLWD WATER LINERM01030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'DEMOLITION AND REMOVALS PLANGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEADPUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN AREINDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BESTINFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALLEXISTING FEATURES THAT ARE NOT TO BEREMOVED ADJACENT TO THE CONSTRUCTIONAREA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,PAVEMENT, PRIVATE FENCES, ABOVE GROUNDOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, STRUCTURES,AND UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS. THECONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYDAMAGE THAT SHOULD OCCUR TO ANY ON-SITE,OFF-SITE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY ORFEATURE AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTIONPROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT.3. CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK, AND CONCRETEPANS SHALL BE REMOVED TO THE NEARESTJOINT.4. LIMITS OF STREET CUT AS REQUIRED FORUTILITY CONSTRUCTION ARE TO BE DETERMINEDIN THE FIELD BY THE CITY ENGINEERINGINSPECTOR. ALL REPAIRS TO BE INACCORDANCE WITH CITY STREET REPAIRSTANDARDS.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALLCONSTRUCTION ITEMS IMPACTING ADJACENTPROPERTIES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS ANDPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAIL HOA (ON-SITEMANAGEMENT: (970) 282-8281) PRIOR TOBEGINNING ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE ARE ASSUMED TO BEUP TO APPROXIMATELY 25-FEET TO EITHER SIDEOF THE PROPOSED UTILITY ALIGNMENT UNLESSOTHERWISE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.7. AREAS WITHIN LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE WITHOUTSPECIFIC REMOVAL/REPLACEMENT DIRECTIONSSHALL BE RE-SEEDED WITH SEED MIX ASDIRECTED IN GENERAL NOTES.LEGENDNOTESLOT LINESEASEMENT LINESCENTERLINEEXISTING MAPPING AND SITECURB AND GUTTERINTERMEDIATE CONTOURINDEX CONTOUREXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERWSSSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER M.H.STORM SEWER M.H.WATER VALVEFIRE HYDRANTELECTRIC POLEWATER / SANITARY PLUGWATER METERWATER VAULTFENCEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAY50785080REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTINGCONCRETE DITCHREMOVE EXISTING CURB &GUTTER & SIDEWALKSAWCUT LINEREMOVE EXISTING ASPHALTLIMITS OF DISTURBANCEREMOVALSELECTRIC LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINEFIBER, GAS, ELECTRIC, ORTELEPHONE PEDESTALSREMOVE EXISTING CONCRETEREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTINGGRASS / SODREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTINGUTILITY PIPINGREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTINGTREEREMOVE AND REPLACE DIRT ROADAND PATH3ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 75 PROPOSED PIPE ALIGNMENT LIES WITHIN EXTENTS OF ACCESS ROAD IN THIS AREAACCESS ROAD TO BE EXCAVATED AND REPAIRED FOR PIPE INSTALLATION AS NECESSARYSPRUCE DR SPRUCE DR REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING TREERM02DEMOLITION AND REMOVALS PLANGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEADPUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN AREINDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BESTINFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALLEXISTING FEATURES THAT ARE NOT TO BEREMOVED ADJACENT TO THE CONSTRUCTIONAREA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,PAVEMENT, PRIVATE FENCES, ABOVE GROUNDOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, STRUCTURES,AND UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS. THECONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYDAMAGE THAT SHOULD OCCUR TO ANY ON-SITE,OFF-SITE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY ORFEATURE AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTIONPROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT.3. CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK, AND CONCRETEPANS SHALL BE REMOVED TO THE NEARESTJOINT.4. LIMITS OF STREET CUT AS REQUIRED FORUTILITY CONSTRUCTION ARE TO BE DETERMINEDIN THE FIELD BY THE CITY ENGINEERINGINSPECTOR. ALL REPAIRS TO BE INACCORDANCE WITH CITY STREET REPAIRSTANDARDS.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALLCONSTRUCTION ITEMS IMPACTING ADJACENTPROPERTIES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS ANDPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAIL HOA (ON-SITEMANAGEMENT: (970) 282-8281) PRIOR TOBEGINNING ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE ARE ASSUMED TO BEUP TO APPROXIMATELY 25-FEET TO EITHER SIDEOF THE PROPOSED UTILITY ALIGNMENT UNLESSOTHERWISE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.7. AREAS WITHIN LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE WITHOUTSPECIFIC REMOVAL/REPLACEMENT DIRECTIONSSHALL BE RE-SEEDED WITH SEED MIX ASDIRECTED IN GENERAL NOTES.LEGENDNOTESLOT LINESEASEMENT LINESCENTERLINEEXISTING MAPPING AND SITECURB AND GUTTERINTERMEDIATE CONTOURINDEX CONTOUREXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERWSSSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER M.H.STORM SEWER M.H.WATER VALVEFIRE HYDRANTELECTRIC POLEWATER / SANITARY PLUGWATER METERWATER VAULTFENCEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAY50785080REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTINGCONCRETE DITCHREMOVE EXISTING CURB &GUTTER & SIDEWALKSAWCUT LINEREMOVE EXISTING ASPHALTLIMITS OF DISTURBANCEREMOVALSELECTRIC LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINEFIBER, GAS, ELECTRIC, ORTELEPHONE PEDESTALSREMOVE EXISTING CONCRETEREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTINGGRASS / SODREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTINGUTILITY PIPINGREMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTINGTREEREMOVE AND REPLACE DIRT ROADAND PATH030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'4ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 76 0100' 200'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'CITY OF FORT COLLINSMAXWELL NATURAL AREAPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILHOA OPEN SPACECITY OF FORT COLLINSWATER TANKFCLWD WATER TANKSTREES TOBE PROTECTEDPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEFCLWD TANK ACCESS ROADDIXON CANAL ANDACCESS ROAD CROSSINGGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20EROSION CONTROL PLANEC01N/A1" = 100'5GOLDEN CURRANT BLVDCATALPA C T CITY OF FORT COLLINS TANKACCESS ROADCONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE MUST BECONTAINED WITHIN THE 50'CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT. ACCESS TOTHE TANK TO BE MAINTAINED AT ALLTIMES.1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FORVERIFYING THE FIELD CONDITIONS ARE ASSHOWN IN THE DRAWINGS. IF THECONTRACTOR FINDS DISCREPANCIES THECONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THEENGINEER.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FORNECESSARY TEMPORARY RE-VEGETATIONDURING CONSTRUCTION AND THROUGHSUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.3. EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES, SITEPROTECTION, AND REVEGETATION METHODSSHALL FOLLOW CITY REGULATIONS.4. IN ADDITION TO THE EROSION CONTROLMEASURES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING, THECONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE,COORDINATE WITH, AND UPDATE ASREQUIRED, THE STORMWATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLAN (SWPP) FOR THISPROJECT.5. ANY AREAS USED FOR STOCKPILING AND/ORSTAGING SHOULD ALSO HAVE SEDIMENT ANDEROSION CONTROL MEASURES ASNECESSARY. THESE AREAS SHOULD BELOCATED AT LEAST 100' AWAY FROMDRAINAGE WAYS. THE SWMP SHOULD BEUPDATED TO SHOW THESE AREAS ANDSEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL ITEMS.THE ITEMS MAY INCLUDE BUT ARE NOTLIMITED TO VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL,SILT FENCE, CONSTRUCTION FENCE,CONCRETE WASHOUT, AND SEDIMENT TRAP.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT,MUD, CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS, OR OTHERPOTENTIAL POLLUTANTS THAT MAY HAVEBEEN DISCHARGED TO OR, ACCUMULATE IN,THE FLOW LINES AND PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAYOF THE CITY, AS A RESULT OFCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATEDWITH THIS DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTIONPROJECT. SAID REMOVAL SHALL BECONDUCTED DAILY, AS MAY BE REQUIRED.SUCH MATERIALS SHALL BE PREVENTEDFROM ENTERING THE STORM SEWER.NOTESLEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSSTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM INLETSILT FENCESLOPE PROTECTIONVEHICLE TRACKINGCONTROL PADWATTLE DIKEROCK SOCKTEMPORARY SEDIMENTINLET PROTECTIONTURF REINFORCEMENTMATEROSIONITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 77 0100' 200'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'PONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILHOA OPEN SPACEPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILDETENTION PONDBANYAN DRIVEWEST PROSPECT ROADOVERLAND TRAILGOLDEN CURRANT BLVD.GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20EROSION CONTROL PLANEC02N/A1" = 100'6BANYAN DRIVEREEDGRASS CT.HONEYSUCKLE CT.GOLDE N C U R R A N T C T.1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FORVERIFYING THE FIELD CONDITIONS ARE ASSHOWN IN THE DRAWINGS. IF THECONTRACTOR FINDS DISCREPANCIES THECONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THEENGINEER.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FORNECESSARY TEMPORARY RE-VEGETATIONDURING CONSTRUCTION AND THROUGHSUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.3. EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES, SITEPROTECTION, AND REVEGETATION METHODSSHALL FOLLOW CITY REGULATIONS.4. IN ADDITION TO THE EROSION CONTROLMEASURES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING, THECONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE,COORDINATE WITH, AND UPDATE ASREQUIRED, THE STORMWATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLAN (SWPP) FOR THISPROJECT.5. ANY AREAS USED FOR STOCKPILING AND/ORSTAGING SHOULD ALSO HAVE SEDIMENT ANDEROSION CONTROL MEASURES ASNECESSARY. THESE AREAS SHOULD BELOCATED AT LEAST 100' AWAY FROMDRAINAGE WAYS. THE SWMP SHOULD BEUPDATED TO SHOW THESE AREAS ANDSEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL ITEMS.THE ITEMS MAY INCLUDE BUT ARE NOTLIMITED TO VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL,SILT FENCE, CONSTRUCTION FENCE,CONCRETE WASHOUT, AND SEDIMENT TRAP.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT,MUD, CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS, OR OTHERPOTENTIAL POLLUTANTS THAT MAY HAVEBEEN DISCHARGED TO OR, ACCUMULATE IN,THE FLOW LINES AND PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAYOF THE CITY, AS A RESULT OFCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATEDWITH THIS DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTIONPROJECT. SAID REMOVAL SHALL BECONDUCTED DAILY, AS MAY BE REQUIRED.SUCH MATERIALS SHALL BE PREVENTEDFROM ENTERING THE STORM SEWER.NOTESLEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSSTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM INLETSILT FENCESLOPE PROTECTIONVEHICLE TRACKINGCONTROL PADWATTLE DIKEROCK SOCKTEMPORARY SEDIMENTINLET PROTECTIONTURF REINFORCEMENTMATEROSIONITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 78 0180' 360'SCALE: 1" = 180'90'GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20OVERALL UTILITY PLANUT01N/A1" = 180'7LEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINE MAINSANITARY SEWER MAINSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWERMANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLEOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEPROPOSED UTILITIESSANITARY SEWER MAINSANITARY SERVICESANITARY SEWERMANHOLEWATER LINE MAINWATER SERVICEFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE FITTINGSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVESTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTORM DRAIN INLETFLARED END SECTONRIPRAP1. MINIMUM HORIZONTAL EDGE TO EDGESEPARATION BETWEEN SANITARY &WATERLINES IS 10 FEET.2. WATER MAINS CROSSING OVER A SANITARY ORSTORM SEWER SHALL MAINTAIN AN 18"VERTICAL EDGE TO EDGE CLEARANCE. WATERMAINS CLOSER THAN 18" OR UNDER SEWERSSHALL BE DISCUSSED WITH THE ENGINEER.3. MINIMUM COVER ON WATERLINES IS 5.0 FEETUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.4. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE FIELD VERIFIEDPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.NOTESSEE SHEET UT02SEE SHEET UT03 GOLDEN CURRANT BLVDCATALPA CTHONEYSUCKLE CTREEDGRASS CTWEST PROSPECT ROADGOLDE N C U R R A N T C T BANYAN DRIVEOVERLAND TRAILLEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINE MAINSANITARY SEWER MAINSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWERMANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLEOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEPROPOSED UTILITIESSANITARY SEWER MAINSANITARY SERVICESANITARY SEWERMANHOLEWATER LINE MAINWATER SERVICEFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE FITTINGSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVESTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTORM DRAIN INLETFLARED END SECTONRIPRAP1. MINIMUM HORIZONTAL EDGE TO EDGESEPARATION BETWEEN SANITARY &WATERLINES IS 10 FEET.2. WATER MAINS CROSSING OVER A SANITARY ORSTORM SEWER SHALL MAINTAIN AN 18"VERTICAL EDGE TO EDGE CLEARANCE. WATERMAINS CLOSER THAN 18" OR UNDER SEWERSSHALL BE DISCUSSED WITH THE ENGINEER.3. MINIMUM COVER ON WATERLINES IS 5.0 FEETUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.4. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE FIELD VERIFIEDPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.NOTESITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 79 0100' 200'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'CITY OF FORT COLLINSMAXWELL NATURAL AREAPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILHOA OPEN SPACECITY OF FORT COLLINSWATER TANKFCLWD WATER TANKSTREES TO BE PROTECTEDEXISTING COFC 24" WATERLINEPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEEXISTING FCLWD 16" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED,SEE SHEET AB01)PROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEEXISTING COFC 24" WATERLINEOVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINESFCLWD TANK ACCESS ROADDIXON CANAL ANDACCESS ROAD CROSSINGEXISTING FCLWD 8" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED, SEE SHEET AB01)GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20UTILITY PLANUT02N/A1" = 100'8GOLDEN CURRANT BLVD20"X8" TEESOUTH - 8" GATE VALVE AND8"X6" REDUCER. INSTALL 199 LFOF 6" PVC PIPE TO CONNECT TO6" LINE WITH 6" TRANSITIONCOUPLERCATALPA C T CROSSING UNDER FORTCOLLINS 24" WATERLINECITY OF FORT COLLINS TANKACCESS ROADPROPOSED FCLWD 20' WATERLINE EASEMENTEXISTING FCLWD 16" WATERLINE (TO BE ABANDONED,SEE SHEET AB01)CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE MUST BECONTAINED WITHIN THE 50'CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT. ACCESS TOTHE TANK TO BE MAINTAINED AT ALLTIMES.LEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINE MAINSANITARY SEWER MAINSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWERMANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLEOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEPROPOSED UTILITIESSANITARY SEWER MAINSANITARY SERVICESANITARY SEWERMANHOLEWATER LINE MAINWATER SERVICEFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE FITTINGSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVESTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTORM DRAIN INLETFLARED END SECTONRIPRAP1. MINIMUM HORIZONTAL EDGE TO EDGESEPARATION BETWEEN SANITARY &WATERLINES IS 10 FEET.2. WATER MAINS CROSSING OVER A SANITARY ORSTORM SEWER SHALL MAINTAIN AN 18"VERTICAL EDGE TO EDGE CLEARANCE. WATERMAINS CLOSER THAN 18" OR UNDER SEWERSSHALL BE DISCUSSED WITH THE ENGINEER.3. MINIMUM COVER ON WATERLINES IS 5.0 FEETUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.4. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE FIELD VERIFIEDPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.NOTESPROPOSED 20' EASEMENTPROPOSED 20' EASEMENTPROPOSED FCLWD 50' TEMPORARYCONSTRUCTION EASEMENTPROPOSED 20' EASEMENTPROPOSED 50' CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTOHEFORT COLLINS NATURAL AREA /HOA OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BOUNDARYWEST SIDE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTFOLLOWS PROPERTY BOUNDARY IN THIS AREAEXISTING FCLWD EASEMENTITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 80 0100' 200'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'PONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILHOA OPEN SPACEPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEEXISTING COFC 24" WATERLINE20' EASEMENTPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILDETENTION PONDPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEBANYAN DRIVEWEST PROSPECT ROADOVERLAND TRAILGOLDEN CURRANT BLVD.EXISTING FCLWD 36"TRANSMISSION MAINEXISTING FCLWD 20"TRANSMISSION MAINEXISTING FCLWD 16" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED SEE SHEET AB01)GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20UTILITY PLANUT03N/A1" = 100'920" x 0.75" CC SADDLE FOR0.75" PEX-A SERVICE LINEREPLACE METER PITBANYAN DRIVEREEDGRASS CT.HONEYSUCKLE CT.GOLDE N C U R R A N T C T.PROPOSED FCLWD 20' WATERLINE EASEMENTLEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINE MAINSANITARY SEWER MAINSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWERMANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLEOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEPROPOSED UTILITIESSANITARY SEWER MAINSANITARY SERVICESANITARY SEWERMANHOLEWATER LINE MAINWATER SERVICEFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE FITTINGSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVESTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTORM DRAIN INLETFLARED END SECTONRIPRAP1. MINIMUM HORIZONTAL EDGE TO EDGESEPARATION BETWEEN SANITARY &WATERLINES IS 10 FEET.2. WATER MAINS CROSSING OVER A SANITARY ORSTORM SEWER SHALL MAINTAIN AN 18"VERTICAL EDGE TO EDGE CLEARANCE. WATERMAINS CLOSER THAN 18" OR UNDER SEWERSSHALL BE DISCUSSED WITH THE ENGINEER.3. MINIMUM COVER ON WATERLINES IS 5.0 FEETUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.4. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE FIELD VERIFIEDPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.NOTESPROPOSED FCLWD 50'TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTIONEASEMENTEXISTING FCLWD 8" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED, SEE SHEET AB01)CONNECT TO EXISTING36" FCLWD WATER MAINITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 81 0150' 300'SCALE: 1" = 150'75'BANYAN DRIVEOVERLAND TRAILGOLDEN CURRANT BLVD.GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20OVERALL SHEET INDEXOA01N/A1" = 100'10SEE SHEET WT01SEE SHEET WT02SEE SHEET WT03SEE SHEET WT04SEE S H E E T WT05 SEE SHEET WT06SEE SHEET WT07ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 82 WOOW PROSPECT RDBANYAN DRS OVERLAND TRAILBANYAN DR8" FCLWD WATER LINETO BE ABANDONEDEXISTING COFCSTORM SEWEREXISTING COFCSTORM SEWEREXISTING COFCSTORM SEWEREXISTING COFC 24" WATER LINESTA: 18+19.5211.25° BENDN. 1450297.56E. 3101785.05STA: 17+85.9011.25° BENDN. 1450291.42E. 3101818.11STA: 17+05.5122.5° AND45° BENDSN. 1450293.72E. 3101898.46STA: 16+69.3111.25° BENDN. 1450328.86E. 3101907.12STA: 15+34.9190° BENDN. 1450452.15E. 3101960.65STA: 13+28.6911.25° AND22.5° BENDSN. 1450375.25E. 3102151.99STA: 12+25.4522.5° BENDN. 1450393.61E. 3102253.58STA: 11+59.4411.25° AND22.5° BENDSN. 1450432.05E. 3102307.25STA: 11+55.15AIR/VACUUM VALVEN. 1450432.00E. 3102311.54STA: 15+16.91BLOWOFFN. 1450445.44E. 3101977.35STA 10+00.00BEGIN CONSTRUCTIONCUT IN 36"x20" TEEINSTALL 20" BFV@ STA 10+05CLOSE UPON INSTALLSO 36" MAIN CAN BEPUT BACK IN SERVICEN. 1450430.33E. 3102466.66STA: 9+50.00BEGIN ALIGNMENTN. 1450429.79E. 3102516.67S79°28'35"E33.62'N88°21'51"E80.39'N13°50'50"E36.20'N23°27'59"E134.41'S68°06'19"E206.22'N79°45'24"E103.24'N54°23'15"E66.01'S89°22'59"E159.43'9+5010+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0051005105511051155120512551305135514051455150510051055110511551205125513051355140514551509+5010+0010+5011+0011+5012+0012+5013+0013+5014+0014+5015+0015+5016+0016+5017+0017+50STORMDRAIN CROSSING18" RCP @ BOP 5124'REMOVE AND REPLACETO INSTALL WLCOMCAST AND FC ELECTRIC45" BELOW GRADE12" DIP COFC WATERAPPROX 71" BELOW GRADE5-2", 1-4" WHITE PVC ELEC35" BELOW GRADEGAS LINEDEPTH AND SIZE UNKFC SANITARY SEWERAPPROX INV 5114.24 FTPLASTIC GAS LINE31" BELOW GRADECOMCAST14" BELOW GRADE2-2" ELEC CONDUIT20" BELOW GRADECONDUIT AND DIRECT BURY31" BELOW GRADE1-4", 3-2" COMCAST/A/V36" BELOW GRADE5' MIN BURY DEPTHEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINE20" PVC WATERLINE2' CONCRETE PANJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 10+00 TO STA 11+76JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 12+25 TO STA 12+36JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 13+13 TO STA 13+44JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 14+86 TO STA 15+83JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 16+64 TO STA 18+40MIN 18"SEPARATIONSTA = 10+00.00TOP. = 5110.60'CONNECT TO FCLWD WATER LINE WITH36" X 20" TEESTA = 11+55.15TOP = 5117.61'11.25° VERTICAL BEND FITTINGCOMBINATION AIR/VACUUM VALVEIMMEDIATELY UPSTREAM OF FITTINGSTA = 11+28.76TOP = 5112.59'11.25° VERTICAL BEND FITTINGSTA = 11+59.56TOP = 5117.62'11.25° AND 22.5°HORIZONTAL BENDSSTA = 12+25.45TOP = 5117.80'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 13+28.69TOP = 5118.07'11.25° AND 22.5°HORIZONTAL BENDSSTA = 15+34.91TOP = 5118.62'90° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 16+69.31TOP = 5118.98'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 17+05.51TOP = 5119.07'22.5° AND 45°HORIZONTAL BENDSSTA = 12+96.02TOP = 5117.99'SAMPLE STATIONWT01030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINE20" WATERLINE PROFILESEE SHEET WT02MATCHLINE STA: 17+5011ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 83 18+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+0024+0025+00BANYAN DRPROPOSED 3/4" - PEX-AWATER SERVICE111 FT8" FCLWD WATER LINETO BE ABANDONEDREPLACE METER PITCUT AND REPAIRGRAVEL ROADOHE CROSSINGEXISTING 24" COFC WATERLINESTA: 18+19.5211.25° BENDN. 1450297.56E. 3101785.05STA: 17+85.9011.25° BENDN. 1450291.42E. 3101818.11STA: 24+03.9434" PEX-A SERVICE CONNECTIONVIA 20" x 34" SADDLEN. 1450252.00E. 3101202.41S79°28'35"E33.62'N88°21'51"E80.39'18+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+0024+0025+00511551205125513051355140514551505155516051655115512051255130513551405145515051555160516517+5018+0018+5019+0019+5020+0020+5021+0021+5022+0022+5023+0023+5024+0024+5025+0025+5020" PVC WATERLINE5' MIN BURY DEPTHEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINEJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 16+64 TO STA 18+40STA = 18+25.13TOP = 5123.75'11.25° VERTICAL BEND FITTINGSTA = 21+57.33TOP = 5132.04'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 18+88.74TOP = 5124.52'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 18+04.33TOP = 5119.33'11.25° VERTICAL BEND FITTINGSTA = 23+82.53TOP = 5142.10'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.1°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSBEGIN 1° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (1) JOINT AFTER STA 21+50BEGIN 1.1° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSS NEXT (2) JOINTS AFTER STA 23+50BEGIN 1° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (1) JOINTAFTER STA 18+75STA = 17+85.90TOP = 5119.28'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 18+19.49TOP = 5122.54'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 24+03.94TOP = 5143.48'SERVICE CONNECTIONWT02030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINE20" WATERLINE PROFILE SEE SHEET WT03 MATCHLINE STA: 25+50MATCHLINE STA: 17+50SEE SHEET WT0112ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 84 26+0027+0028+0029+0030+0031+0032+0033+00SPRUCE DR8" WATER LINETO BE ABANDONED IN PLACESEE SHEET AB-018" WATER LINETO BE ABANDONED IN PLACESEE SHEET AB-01EXISTING 24" COFCWATERLINEEXN85°31'42"E2152.29'26+0027+0028+0029+0030+0031+0032+0033+00515051555160516551705175518051855190519552005150515551605165517051755180518551905195520025+5026+0026+5027+0027+5028+0028+5029+0029+5030+0030+5031+0031+5032+0032+5033+0033+5020" PVC WATERLINE5' MIN BURY DEPTHEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINESTA = 25+97.34TOP = 5155.91'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.2°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 29+18.86TOP = 5171.21'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.2°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 31+61.01TOP = 5178.59'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 3°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (3) JOINTSSTA = 32+64.91TOP = 5187.13'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.2°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 27+50.48TOP = 5162.69'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 0.4°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (1) JOINTBEGIN 3° TOTAL DEFLECTIONACROSS NEXT (3) JOINTSAFTER STA 31+25BEGIN 1.2° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTS AFTER STA 29+00BEGIN 0.4° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (1) JOINT AFTER STA 27+25BEGIN 1.2° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTS AFTER STA 25+75BEGIN 1.2° TOTALDEFLECTIONACROSS NEXT (2)JOINTS AFTERSTA 32+25WT03030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINE20" WATERLINE PROFILESEE SHEET WT04MATCHLINE STA:33+50MATCHLINE STA: 25+50SEE SHEET WT0213ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 85 33+0034+0035+0036+0037+0038+0039+0040+0041+0042+00SPRUCE DRCONNECT REDUCERTO 100 LF OF 6" PVC8" WATER LINETO BE ABANDONED IN PLACESEE SHEET AB-01CONNECT TO EXISTING6" PIPE WITH 6" SLEEVECUT AND CAP EXISTING8" WL ABANDON IN PLACEEXISTING 24" COFCWATERLINEFIELD VERIFY DEPTH OF EXISTING 24" COFC WATERLINEDEFLECT OR LOWER 6" PVC WATERLINE IF NECESSARYSTA: 39+71.7045° BENDN. 1450129.94E. 3099639.40STA: 35+05.5520"x8" TEE WITH8" GATE VALVE (S)FOLLOWED BY 8"TO 6" REDUCER20" BFV (E & W)N. 1450166.11E. 3100104.15STA: 34+16.31AIR/VACCUM VALVEN. 1450173.41E. 3100193.09STA: 40+19.4722.5° BENDN. 1450160.74E. 3099603.11STA: 40+32.18AIR/VACCUM VALVEN. 1450172.01E. 3099597.23STA: 42+30.0711.25° BENDN. 1450367.67E. 3099573.87STA: 40+44.4722.5° BENDN. 1450182.92E. 3099591.57S5°28'21"E185.63'S27°28'26"E25.00'S49°28'27"E47.63'STA: 35+80.91BLOWOFFN. 1450160.22E. 3100029.0333+0034+0035+0036+0037+0038+0039+0040+0041+0042+00518551905195520052055210521552205185519051955200520552105215522033+5034+0034+5035+0035+5036+0036+5037+0037+5038+0038+5039+0039+5040+0040+5041+0041+5020" PVC WATERLINE5' MIN BURY DEPTHEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINEJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 39+51 TO STA 40+65STA = 37+52.20TOP. = 5200.68'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.6°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (3) JOINTSSTA = 40+32.87TOP = 5210.55'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 2.5°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (3) JOINTSSTA = 34+16.31TOP = 5202.50'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 7°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (7) JOINTS3" COMBINATION AIR/VACUUMVALVE @ HIGH POINTSTA = 35+80.68TOP = 5199.25'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.7°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSBLOWOFF VALVE AT LOW POINTBEGIN 2.5° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (3) JOINTSAFTER STA 40+00BEGIN 1.6° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTS AFTER STA 37+25BEGIN 1.7° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTSAFTER STA 35+50BEGIN 7° TOTAL DEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (7) JOINTS AFTER STA 33+50STA = 39+71.70TOP. = 5208.39'45° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 40+32.18TOP. = 5210.52'AIR/VACCUM VALVESTA = 40+44.47TOP. = 5210.46'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 35+05.55TOP = 5200.73'20" X 8" TEE20 BFV (E & W)STA = 40+19.47TOP. = 5210.07'45° HORIZONTAL BENDJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 33+68 TO STA 36+46WT04030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINE20" WATERLINE PROFILESEE SHEET WT05MATCHLINE STA: 41+50MATCHLINE STA: 33+50SEE SHEET WT0314ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 86 520052055210521552205225523052355240524552505200520552105215522052255230523552405245525041+5042+0042+5043+0043+5044+0044+5045+0045+5046+0046+5047+0047+5048+0048+5049+0049+5020" PVC WATERLINE5' MIN BURY DEPTHEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINEJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 42+25 TO STA 45+07JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 47+44 TO STA 48+9424" CITY WATERLINEAPPROX 4' BELOW GRADE (FIELD VERIFY)MAINTAIN 12" SEPARATION FROM B.O.P.STA = 47+63.24TOP = 5232.33'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 2°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 43+65.92TOP = 5207.95'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 3.4°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (4) JOINTSSTA = 46+09.69TOP = 5220.45'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE UNDEREXISTING CITY OF FORT COLLINS PIPEAPPROX 1.5° TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST(2) JOINTSBEGIN 2° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTSAFTER STA 47+25BEGIN 1.5° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTSAFTER STA 45+75BEGIN 3.4° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (4) JOINTSAFTER STA 43+25STA = 43+72.83TOP = 5208.30'APPROXIMATE PHASE 1 / PHASE 2BOUNDARYSTA = 42+30.07TOP = 5209.01'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 43+60.04TOP = 5207.99'90° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 47+54.12TOP = 5231.63'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 47+84.43TOP = 5234.69'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 48+37.11TOP = 5240.54'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 48+88.92TOP = 5246.30'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 43+62.57TOP = 5207.97'BLOWOFFSTA = 43+70.39TOP = 5208.18'20" BFVSTA = 44+25.62TOP = 5211.01'DIXON CANAL CROSSINGSTA = 43+10.09TOP = 5208.38'45° HORIZONTAL BEND42+0043+0044+0045+0046+0047+0048+0049+0042+0042+42+42+042+042+0+0042+0042+002+0042+002+00+02+0042+2+42+0243+00043+0043+043+0043+43+043+0444400000043+0043+003+003+043+0043+00+00000000+43+003+0043+0043+03+030044+0444+044+044+044+44+0+0040044+44++44+0044444444400000000000044+00+44+004+0044+00+00004+00++0000044+44+004+44+00+0004+00++045+4545+00545+4545+0045+55+0045 045+054545500000000000000045+004555+0045+0045+00+05+00+005+0000+00+0+0045+0045+0005+000+0+46+046+0046+006+6+0046+04446000000046+0046+0046+00+0046+00+00046+0046+0046+00+046+00047+0047+47+047+047+00++04744740000000000047+007+00477+0047+007047+007+00470+074448+008+008+00+00+04488+008+00+00888+00+0088+0+00+000000000004484848484848444844844444444848484888444848+4848+0488+008+008+0044448+0448+0048+08+0488+08+008+0088+0+88+4448484848488+008+000448+00+0488+8+0008+088+49+0049+049+049+049+49+04949+9+04949+09+9+44949444449+0049+049+049+9+0049+049+049+009+009+009+00049+000049+0000009+009+9+049+049+0STA: 43+60.0690° BENDN. 1450494.49E. 3099548.07STA: 47+54.1222.5° BENDN. 1450462.15E. 3099155.38STA: 47+84.4322.5° BENDN. 1450471.27E. 3099126.52STA: 48+37.1122.5° BENDN. 1450504.76E. 3099085.88STA: 48+88.9211.25° BENDN. 1450549.94E. 3099060.53STA: 42+30.0711.25° BENDN. 1450367.67E. 3099573.87STA: 43+10.0945° BENDN. 1450444.70E. 3099552.19S29°17'39" E 51.80'S50°30'20"E52.71'S72°28'15"E30.28'N85°16'22"E393.98'S4°43'38"E50.00'S15°43'38"E79.99'28'21"E5.63'42+0043+0044+0045+0046+0047+0048+0049+00STA: 43+62.55BLOWOFFN. 1450494.29E. 3099545.58STA: 43+70.4020" BFVN. 1450493.63E. 3099537.76STA: 44+28.74APPROXIMATECROSSINGDIXON CANALN. 1450488.83E. 3099479.62WT05WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINE20" WATERLINE PROFILESEE SHEET WT06MATCHLINE 49+50MATCHLINE STA: 41+50SEE SHEET WT040'U.S. SURVEY FEETSCALE: 1" = 30'15' 30'60'15ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 87 525052555260526552705275528052855290529553005250525552605265527052755280528552905295530049+5050+0050+5051+0051+5052+0052+5053+0053+5054+0054+5055+0055+5056+0056+5057+0020" PVC WATERLINEEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINE5' MIN BURY DEPTHJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 50+33 TO STA 50+54JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 51+37 TO STA 51+58JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 52+54 TO STA 53+42JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 55+41 TO STA 55+74STA = 51+17.45TOP = 5271.69'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 6.3°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (7) JOINTSSTA = 53+10.12TOP = 5272.12'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 5°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (5) JOINTSSTA = 54+08.53TOP = 5280.95'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 3.7°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (4) JOINTSSTA = 54+99.42TOP = 5283.23'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 1.3°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (2) JOINTSSTA = 55+55.43TOP = 5285.86'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 5.9°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (6) JOINTS3" COMBINATION AIR/VACUUMVALVE @ STA 55+55.25STA = 56+82.11TOP = 5278.77'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 3.3°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (4) JOINTSBLOWOFF VALVE AT LOW POINTBEGIN 3.3° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (4) JOINTSAFTER STA 56+50BEGIN 1.3° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (2) JOINTSAFTER STA 54+75BEGIN 5° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (5) JOINTSAFTER STA 52+50BEGIN 3.7° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (4) JOINTSAFTER STA 53+50BEGIN 6.3° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (7) JOINTSAFTER STA 50+25STA = 50+43.67TOP = 5263.50'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 51+47.69TOP = 5271.76'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 52+59.78TOP = 5272.01'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 52+82.76TOP = 5272.06'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 53+36.34TOP = 5274.47'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 56+49.58TOP = 5280.59'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 55+69.18TOP = 5285.09'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 56+45 TO STA 56+55BEGIN 5.9° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (6) JOINTSAFTER STA 55+0049+0050+0051+0052+0053+0054+0055+0056+0057+0049+0049+0049+00+0049+009+00+009+009+00+00000000049+049+0049+0009+00049+049+0049+0009+000444449+049+004949+049+44949+009+0049949+0049+049+049+009+0090+00500+00000+0000050+0050+0050+000000055050+0000+0050+5055050+0000+0050+50555550+0050+050+050+050+050+050505555050+0050+00+050+05050+5051+001+001+0051+000000051 0551000051+001+0005055551+001+0005055555551+0051+0051+0051+0051+00155551+0051+0051+000055552+0052+0052+0052+002+00+0000000052+002+000002+000052+0052+052+52++00+000++52+0005252+2522+05252+52+0522+00000+0000555555555555+0+0000+5+55555555+0+0000+5+55555555+00000000+0000++005++55+55+005+0055+005+050000005+55+05555+55+0000055+55555555555555+55+055+000055+55555555556+00+0056+00+00+6+00056+00056+00+000000006+00+0056+0+6+6566+00+0056+0+6+656555555555555555565556 06+06+056+0056+056+056+0056+056+06+56+056+5655556+0056+056+0056+0+5657+0057+007+0057+0057+007+0057+000+007+007+007+0000700000000055555755555555755555557+0057+0057+007+07+057+0+057+057+007757+7+557+0057+0057+007+057+057+057+0057+5+003+0053+00++0053+053+0000055555553+0053+005353+53553+0053+0053+355545455554545554+000054+00000004+004+0400000000005454+0045454+004+54540054+005454+00+5454STA: 55+55.25AIR/VACCUM VALVEN. 1451135.69E. 3098774.38STA: 56+82.92BLOWOFFN. 1451242.37E. 3098705.24STA: 48+88.9211.25° BENDN. 1450549.94E. 3099060.53STA: 50+43.6722.5° BENDN. 1450696.88E. 3099011.95STA: 51+47.6922.5° BENDN. 1450787.58E. 3098961.06STA: 52+59.7811.25° BENDN. 1450898.87E. 3098947.64STA: 52+82.7611.25° BENDN. 1450920.75E. 3098940.59STA: 55+69.1811.25° BENDN. 1451146.36E. 3098765.43STA: 56+49.5811.25° BENDN. 1451216.76E. 3098726.59STA: 53+36.3411.25° BENDN. 1450967.68E. 3098914.71S39°46'29"E102.46'S28°53'08"E80.41'S39°52'34"E232.83'S28°52'34"E53.59'S17°52'34"E22.99'S6°52'34"E112.09'S29°17'39"E104.01'S18°17'39"E154.76'S29°15149+0050+0051+0052+0053+0054+0055+0056+0057+00WT060##'##'SCALE: 1" = ##'##'WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINE20" WATERLINE PROFILESEE SHEET WT05MATCHLINE 57+00MATCHLINE STA: 49+50SEE SHEET WT0716ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 88 55+056+0057+0058+0059+0060+0061+0062+0062+62555555555555555555555555555+055+055+055+055+55+05+05555+55+055+055555+5+55+0+055+55555555+5555+56+0056+0056+0056+006+006+00+0000000000000056+0056+005656+06+0+00+056+0056+005656+06+0+00+0556555555655555656556+0056+056+0056+056+055656566+056+56+06+056+0056+0056+056+005+056+05657+0057+0057+0057+007+007+007+007+007+00757+00+0000000000000055757575575555755757557+0057+57+057+0057+0077+00057+0057+057++057+0057+57+057+0057+0057+0057561+0061+0061+001+061+061+061+06161+06166+0061+0061+0061+0061+00+00+000061+0061+00+061+0+000662+062+062+062+0+00002+00062+062+0+062+062+062+062+062+0+0+062+062+62+2+6662+062+0000000+062+00+062+062+062+0000+0000+00+00000+000062+0+0000000000+000000000+062+062+0000000+062+00+06262+622+6222+62+622+6262222+++6622226262+2+62+622+6626262+2+62+622+66266266266266266262+662+6262+662+2+662+66266262+62+62662+66662+662+6262258+0058+00058+008+0+0000000088+008+00+00000558+058+08+000000+0558+058+08+000000+05555555558+058+058+058+0058+00558+0558+058+0585858+0858+0058+0058+058+058+0+058+0859+0059+0059+0090059+0059+0059+00+009+00+00+00+000000000000000595955959959559+009+009+0059+0059+9+059+5959+059+009+009+0059+005+059+5959+0060+0060+0060+0060+00+0660+000060+0060+0060+0060+0060+60+0060660+000+000+00+0060+00+000+00+00000+00+00+000000000000000000000+060+00+00+0600+00000+0000000N23°19'20.13"W 35.26'STA: 55+55.25AIR/VACCUM VALVEN. 1451135.69E. 3098774.38STA: 61+89.05AIR/VACCUM VALVEN. 1451418.41E. 3098305.69STA: 56+82.92BLOWOFFN. 1451242.37E. 3098705.24STA: 55+69.1811.25° BENDN. 1451146.36E. 3098765.43STA: 56+49.5811.25° BENDN. 1451216.76E. 3098726.59STA: 57+52.0922.5° BENDN. 1451295.54E. 3098661.02STA: 59+10.5045° BENDN. 1451430.72E. 3098583.97STA: 62+08.5922.5° BENDN. 1451417.49E. 3098286.17STA: 62+27.0245° BENDN. 1451422.44E. 3098268.41STA: 62+62.28CONNECT TO EXISTING16" WATER LINEVIA 20"x16" REDUCERAFTER NEW LINE HAS BEENTESTED AND ACCEPTEDN. 1451454.82E. 3098254.45STA: 62+60.4120"x16" REDUCERN. 1451453.10E. 3098255.19STA: 62+01.0520" BFVN. 1451418.26E. 3098293.69STA: 58+25.6422.5° BENDN. 1451365.55E. 3098638.43STA: 62+35.49SAMPLE STATIONN. 1451430.23E. 3098265.06S74°17'40"E18.47'N87°28'28"E298.09'S39°53'13"E84.93'S17°53'13"E73.61'S39°46'29"E102.46'S28°53'08"E80.41'55+056+0057+0058+0059+0060+0061+0062+0062+625275528052855290529553005305531053155320532553305335527552805285529052955300530553105315532053255330533557+0057+5058+0058+5059+0059+5060+0060+5061+0061+5062+0062+5062+7520" PVC WATERLINE5' MIN BURY DEPTHEXISTING GROUNDAT PIPE CENTERLINEJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 60+65 TO STA 62+62.28JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 57+42 TO STA 57+63STA = 58+00.88TOP = 5278.88'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 2.9°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (3) JOINTSSTA = 59+03.31TOP = 5284.02'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 4°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (4) JOINTSSTA = 60+20.01TOP = 5297.85'VERTICALLY DEFLECT PIPE 2.70°TOTAL ACROSS NEAREST (4) JOINTSSTA = 62+08.96TOP = 5329.08'11.25° VERTICAL BEND FITTINGSTA = 61+89.05TOP = 5325.79'3" COMBINATION AIR/VACUUM VALVESTA = 62+62.28TOP = 5329.44'MAKE CONNECTION AT EXISTING PIPINGBEGIN 2.9° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (3) JOINTSAFTER STA 57+50BEGIN 4° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (4) JOINTSAFTER STA 58+50BEGIN 2.9° TOTALDEFLECTION ACROSSNEXT (3) JOINTSAFTER STA 59+75STA = 62+60.41TOP = 5329.42'20"X16" REDUCERSTA = 57+52.09TOP = 5278.84'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 58+25.64TOP = 5280.13'22.5° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 59+10.50TOP = 5284.87'45° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 62+08.59TOP = 5329.02'11.25° HORIZONTAL BENDVERTICALLY DEFLECT 1° IN EACH FITTING (2°)STA = 62+27.02TOP = 5329.20'45° HORIZONTAL BENDSTA = 62+01.05TOP = 5327.78'20" BFVSTA = 62+35.49TOP = 5329.26'SAMPLE STATIONJOINT RESTRAINTSTA 58+15 TO STA 58+36JOINT RESTRAINTSTA 58+90 TO STA 59+31WT07030'60'SCALE: 1" = 30'15'WATERLINE PLAN & PROFILEGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. BURY DEPTH ON WATERLINE SHALL BE 5'TO FINISHED GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISEDEPICTED IN THESE DRAWINGS.2. PRESSURE TEST AND DISINFECT NEWWATERLINE BEFORE CONNECTING TOEXISTING PIPING.3. FITTINGS ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHERSHALL BE CONNECTED VIA FOSTERADAPTER.LEGENDNOTESFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE BENDSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVEPROPOSED UTILITIES8" WATER LINEWATER SERVICEEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER MHSANITARY SEWER MHOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEMATCHLINE STA: 57+00SEE SHEET WT0620" WATERLINE PROFILE17ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 89 CUT AND CAP EXISTING 16" WLAFTER TIE IN OF NEW 20" WLEXISTING 16" WL TO BE FLASH-FILLEDPRIOR TO BEING CAPPED FOR ABANDONMENTGOLDEN CURRANT BLVDS OVERLAND TRAILCUT 36" MIN. OF EXISTING 16" WL AT CROSS CONNECTIONIN OVERLAND TRAIL AND PLUG (CONCRETE)EXISTING 16" WL TO BE FLASH-FILLED PRIOR TO PLUGREMOVE 16" VALVERESTRAINED PLUG ON TEE/CROSS AT CONNECTIONSPRUCE DRREMOVE TEE 24" MIN. OF EXISTING 8" WL AT CONNECTION AND PLUGRE-CONNECT 6" SERVICE LINE WITH 6" SLEEVEW PROSPECT RDS OVERLAND TRAILCUT 24" MIN. OF EXISTING 8" WL AT CROSS CONNECTIONIN OVERLAND TRAIL AND CAP. REMOVE 8" VALVERESTRAINED PLUG ON TEE/CROSS AT CONNECTIONAB01ABANDONMENT PLANGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/201. EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEADPUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN AREINDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BESTINFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALLEXISTING FEATURES THAT ARE NOT TO BEREMOVED ADJACENT TO THE CONSTRUCTIONAREA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,PAVEMENT, PRIVATE FENCES, ABOVE GROUNDOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, STRUCTURES,AND UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS. THECONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYDAMAGE THAT SHOULD OCCUR TO ANY ON-SITE,OFF-SITE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY ORFEATURE AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTIONPROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALLCONSTRUCTION ITEMS IMPACTING ADJACENTPROPERTIES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERSPRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALLNECESSARY APPROVALS, PERMISSIONS, ANDPERMITTING FOR WORK WITHIN ROADWAYS (E.G.TRAFFIC CONTROL, ROAD CLOSURES, ETC.)LEGENDNOTESLOT LINESEASEMENT LINESCENTERLINEEXISTING MAPPING AND SITECURB AND GUTTERINTERMEDIATE CONTOURINDEX CONTOUREXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINESANITARY SEWERWSSSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWER M.H.STORM SEWER M.H.WATER VALVEFIRE HYDRANTELECTRIC POLEWATER / SANITARY PLUGWATER METERWATER VAULTFENCEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAY50785080EXISTING WATER LINES TOBE ABANDONEDABANDONMENTSELECTRIC LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINEFIBER, GAS, ELECTRIC, ORTELEPHONE PEDESTALS0'U.S. SURVEY FEETSCALE: 1" = 30'15' 30'60'EXISTING 8' FCLWD WATER LINE OFF SPRUCE DRIVE - WEST SIDEEXISTING 16' FCLWD GOLDEN CURRANT WATER LINE - EAST SIDEEXISTING 8' FCLWD WATER LINE OFF SPRUCE DRIVE - EAST SIDEEXISTING 16' FCLWD GOLDEN CURRANT WATER LINE - WEST SIDE18ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 90 DT01GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20DT01CONSTRUCTION DETAILS2" VENT PIPE2" PIPE SCREEN4' MIN.19ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 91 DT02CONSTRUCTION DETAILSDT02GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/2020ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet pg. 92              ! "                           !"#"$% & !$" ' " (($%) ( *  ""%"$% +$) (",+  -," . */01 2#3 4 1* 2$) ,#3 1 1*  ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 93  #$#%&'( )&*+,''-%-+'#+  .'&/+&  "  '     0&.+" 0,11-'2&  #*#)0-*&,0#&0 " 0#+&*##&0-*.'&.&0+*&0',#&  #$+0#)-#&  0,30,' -+&*##&0 4 +(-$-#&0  3 56 *+%-+'#)  .#.+0,..&'  . 3 6  . 7   8',0'+0'-#  '+83-9 # " &''&0#&.'&+#& "" ' 7: "" %  0;< 0;=   " '+0&'-#& " #1#-#&0 "4  #),'+">&-#&0& +(.&'-&'23&'#)0 #),'+>0,11-'2&)0& +(.&'-&'23&'#)0 -..+*#(->'+0,0& -3&'-&'2+0#)       ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg. 102  #$#%&'( )&*+,''-%-+'#+  .'&/+&  " 6;?  <  ;< = 6 : "=  5 <B ?  ! ;  =B< 6 B    <  5    566   =   . 7    -  5;H  <7   ;< 7 ?  B !B;B 5 H B B 6   =B< 5 =5B 5- BB;B = " 5  =  57  ; <  7  <7       65B 5 ==? = !<  B : E; 5 57          ;   < 7 7   5;     5 < 7 <:  ;<5 <:=5   =     5    E;  ; =   C=  6=   5  : <   5  :=5=5  ;==5   =6  6; ;=5  =5 7  < ? 6          :   B< B   :  = ==      B   :  5 ==5 ==5=  :5 := B5%  5BB  ; = 5 ==5 ==5=4 =    7   : 5 :      #= B< B     B      7 ;  ; <  ;    7 ;  ; <  =;   ;5  = B @ !.$A=B55 6=   5   : :   .$?  5BB  B !B;B=55 ==5 =<  ; =:5 < 6B   1 5 5    ?5    == 57 =5;  7 < 6=      ;<5 ;<  6 ;;<   4= < ?   6; ;= 5    ;     7    ;   :  ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg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acket pg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acket pg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acket pg. 106  #$#%&'( )&*+,''-%-+'#+  .'&/+&  ""4 - ;  7 B ;< 6  =?6< 5 ==?  5; B 6 ? C 5   ?;5 < < ) 6 ; <   6   ;5     <: B ?    = ? BB    5    &;<6?   5 <    <: 55;  5  5 H  =;<;= 5 5$   ;<;= 5 55   <:;<6   ? :< . 5 B  5B 5==< 5 = ;<6    7 B ;< < 7    <:     7 = ;=B;65;5   % <  7 7 6 ? 5;5 ?  7 =   5  B :; <:6 6 6  55  6  556   B ?  : ! B B  #=? 5 < = =;  75 5;6 5 =    : =  =; 5 = ;<;= 5 5 6= ;5;   5 5  ; 6    8&1.0&#          :8' :    '3FG <  ### 0 ==)  55 +6   0 )  55 +6    8''3 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 107 TH-1TH-2TH-3Water Storage FacilitySouth Overland TrailGolden Currant Blvd.TH-4LEGEND:INDICATES APPROXIMATELOCATION OF EXPLORATORYBORINGTH-1W. DRAKE RD.W. PROSPECT RD.W. ELIZABETH RD.GOLDENCURRANTBLVD.SITETAFT HILL RD.S. OVERLANDTRAILFIGURE 1Locations ofExploratoryBoringsCIVILWORXGOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINECTL I T PROJECT NO. FC08620-1250400'200'APPROXIMATESCALE: 1"=400'VICINITY MAPFT. COLLINS, CONOT TO SCALEITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3Packet pg. 108                                                                                           ! "#$ "# ##%$ $&$  '%#$ # $ #&%"+ #,$#$( #$$ #$ %#$$#  %!$&  !#$($!( ## ( % ("# $(&!(%   !($!( # #$&( !!( ## (#!("# $($("# $(!# "# $) (& * !#$($!( # #$$#$( !!$"( ## (#!("# $(&!(%  "#$& #$$# " ( %$&$   #$$%#%&%&$% - #%$&&%  % $  #% #$$).*$ !$!) *$   $ %$#"%$%).*$ $&$#).*$ '% $  !$,$ %$ #$$ # $&)*$ #%"% #$$).*  #,&#$ %$ $ /#+ $#  ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3Packet pg. 109 Sample of CLAYSTONE, SANDY DRY UNIT WEIGHT=121 PCF From TH - 1 AT 19 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=13.8 % CIVILWORX GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC08620-125 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSFCOMPRESSION % EXPANSIONSwell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE A-1 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 110 Sample of CLAYSTONE, WEATHERED DRY UNIT WEIGHT=111 PCF From TH - 2 AT 9 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=19.7 % CIVILWORX GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC08620-125 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSFCOMPRESSION % EXPANSIONSwell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE A-2 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 111 Sample of CLAYSTONE, SANDY DRY UNIT WEIGHT=122 PCF From TH - 3 AT 9 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=11.4 % CIVILWORX GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC08620-125 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSFCOMPRESSION % EXPANSIONSwell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE A-3 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 112 Sample of CLAYSTONE, SANDY DRY UNIT WEIGHT=121 PCF From TH - 4 AT 14 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=16.7 % CIVILWORX GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC08620-125 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSFCOMPRESSION % EXPANSIONSwell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE A-4 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 113                                               !  !  ! ! ! "           # $ #% ##&## '( )  # * %+ #+# ,& -#)  # (#'& ,%  '& )  # #* ##& #+* + % +'  )   # #( #+% ## ( )* )  * #*' ##, & *# (& )    ( #(' ###, #)##, )    #*%( &'  '&  ) +  ,# + ## * )  + * '*  '+  ) + ( ##* #&##)#-# ) * (+ '  '( )   * #* #&' ##+ #)%% ) * #( #*(*, *(& )           ./0#12#          3 4 %& #,ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3Packet pg. 114 Page 1 Biological Resources Memorandum Date: April 24, 2019 To: Chris Pletcher, PE, Project Manager, CivilWorx, LLC. From: Pam Wegener, Biologist, Pinyon Environmental, Inc. Subject: Biological Resources Memorandum, Golden Currant Waterline Project, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado Introduction The Fort Collins Loveland Water District (FCLWD) is planning to install a new 20-inch waterline directly east of Horsetooth Reservoir in Fort Collins, Colorado (Golden Currant Waterline Project; “project”). CivilWorx, LLC is providing the design services and Pinyon Environmental, Inc. (Pinyon), is completing environmental support services for the project. The project is located mostly within Maxwell Natural Area and an adjacent City of Fort Collins Open Space parcel. As such, the project will require an easement from the City of Fort Collins (City) and must comply with the City’s Resolution 2012-001 City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Conserved Land Easement Policy. To assist with project compliance of federal, state, and local environmental regulations, including the City’s Resolution 2012-001, Pinyon has conducted a biological resource assessment for the project. This Biological Resources Memorandum serves to document the results of that assessment, provide an analysis of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed project on sensitive species, and recommend mitigation measures and next steps based on potential project impacts. Project Description and Location This project will install a new 20-inch-diameter waterline approximately six feet underground. The typical trench section will be about six-feet wide with a trench box. Soil stockpiles, vehicle traffic, and surface disturbance will be limited to 30 feet on either side of the waterline (project area). Conventional excavation equipment, including diesel-powered hydraulic excavators and front-end loaders will be used to construct the new waterline. The project location is shown in Figure 1 and described in Table 1. Table 1 Project Location City/County Fort Collins/Larimer U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Horsetooth Reservoir, Colorado 1962, revised 1992 (USGS, 1992) Section, Township, and Range (6th Principal Meridian) Section 17, Township 7 North, Range 69 West Approximate Average Elevation of Project (feet above mean sea level) 5,200 Center Location of Project in Decimal Degrees (WGS84) 40.568684°, -105.144588° ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 115 Page 2 Methods Pinyon conducted an initial desktop review of biological resources in the project area using Google Earth aerial imagery, the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) Tracking Lists of threatened and endangered species, Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Threatened and Endangered list, CPW Species Activity Mapping data, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System, and the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Mapper (Google Earth Pro, 2019; CNHP, 2018; CPW, 2019; CPW, 2018; USFWS, 2019; USFWS, 2018). Following the initial desktop review, Pinyon visited the site on April 4, 2019, to assess the project area for biological resources. Photos and field notes were used to document the general habitat conditions (Attachment – Photographic Log). Pinyon assessed the following during the site visits: •General habitat and vegetation. •Habitat suitability for federally listed threatened and endangered species. •Habitat suitability for state-listed threatened, endangered, and Species of Special Concern. •Habitat for migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), including raptors within 0.5 mile of the project area. •Den sites for red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), coyotes (Canis latrans), and badgers (Taxidea taxus) within 300 feet of the project area. •Noxious weeds. •Waters of the U.S., including wetlands and non-wetland waters. Wetlands were mapped and delineated in accordance with the 1987 USACE Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region (Version 2.0) (Environmental Laboratory, 1987; USACE, 2010). Wetlands were identified by the presence of hydrophytic vegetation (as determined by vegetation indicators specified in USACE, 2010, in which vegetation may be characterized as “obligate” [OBL], “facultative wetland” [FACW], “facultative” [FAC], or “upland” [UPL]); hydric soils (as determined by soil indicators specified in USACE, 2010); and wetland hydrology (as determined by hydrology indicators specified in USACE, 2010). Boundaries of non-wetland waters were evaluated using field indicators for the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Wetland boundaries and the OHWM were recorded in the field with sub-meter accuracy using ArcGIS Collector paired with an Arrow 100 Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Receiver. Results General Habitat and Vegetation The western end of the project area includes FCLWD water tanks and an access road to the water tanks. The project area continues east through Maxwell Natural Area and an adjacent space open space parcel and ends just northwest of the West Prospect Road and South Overland Trail intersection. Most of this area is used recreationally by hikers and bicyclists. Although there are many pedestrians, the area is generally outside the limits of vehicular traffic and has relatively low levels of noise and light compared with the surrounding landscape. Wildlife noted during the site visit included deer (Odocoileus sp.), Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta). Coyote scat and tracks were also noted within the project area. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 116 Page 3 Except for a small drainage swale northwest of the intersection between West Prospect Road and South Overland Trail, most of the project area consisted of uplands and was dominated by smooth brome (Bromus inermis) (Photo 1 in Photographic Log). Other herbaceous species noted in the upland areas included common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), downy brome (Bromus tectorum), intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium), musk thistle (Carduus nutans), purple threeawn (Aristida purpurea) redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus), twistspine prickly pear (Opuntia macrorhiza), and western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii). Several shrubs and trees were noted in low densities throughout the project area uplands, including rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa), soapweed yucca (Yucca glauca), three leaf sumac (Rhus trilobata), plains cottonwood (Populus deltoides), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). One upland swale was noted within the project area and was vegetated by smooth brome (Photo 2 in Photographic Log). Wetland vegetation was uncommon within the project area, and generally present only within the drainage swale northwest of the intersection between West Prospect Road and South Overland Trail. Wetland vegetation in this area was dominated by coyote willow (Salix exigua) and bentgrass (Agrostis sp.). Federally Listed Species Based on a review of the USFWS online IPaC System, there are 13 federally listed (threatened or endangered) species with the potential to occur in, or be impacted by, projects that occur within or near the project area (USFWS, 2019). Five of these species occur downstream of the project area and could be impacted by projects that result in water depletions to the South Platte River or its tributaries: the interior least tern (Sterna antillarum), pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus), piping plover (Charadrius melodus), whooping crane (Grus americana), and western prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera praeclara). Any potential water use from the project would be from a permitted water source; thus, no further consultation with the USFWS for these five downstream species is required. Pinyon evaluated the potential for each of the remaining species to occur in the project area based on a review of habitat assessment and species distributions. (Table 2). Table 2 Potential for Federally Listed Species to Occur in the Project Area Common Name Species Federal Status Habitat Potential for Occurrence in Study Area Birds Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida Threatened Mature, old-growth forests that possess complex structural components; canyons, riparian and conifer communities. None. Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. Fish Greenback Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki ssp. stomias Threatened Cold, clear, oxygenated streams of moderate gradient. None. Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 117 Page 4 Common Name Species Federal Status Habitat Potential for Occurrence in Study Area Mammals Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Threatened Uneven-aged stands with relatively open canopies and well-developed understories of coniferous forests. None. Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. Elevations in the project area are lower than the species’ range. North American wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed Threatened Boreal forests, tundra, and western mountainous regions distant from dense human populations. None. Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. Preble's meadow jumping mouse Zapus hudsonius preblei Threatened Along permanent or intermittent streams in areas with herbaceous cover and adequate cover of shrubs and trees. None. The project area is not within CPW-mapped occupied range for Preble’s meadow jumping mouse and does not contain USFWS- mapped critical habitat (CPW, 2018; USFWS, 2010). There are no streams with thick vegetative cover within the project area; therefore, suitable habitat does not occur within the project area. Plants Colorado Butterfly plant Oenothera coloradensis Threatened Stream channel sites that are periodically disturbed, sub- irrigated alluvial soils along streams; open meadows on floodplains including riparian areas. Colonies are often found in low depressions or along bends in wide, active, meandering stream channels a short distance upslope of the actual channel. The plant requires early- to mid- succession riparian habitat. None. Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. Wetland vegetation is only found within a roadside drainage swale; there are no open meadows or floodplains within the project area. North Park phacelia Phacelia formosula Endangered Steep-sided ravines and low sandy hills and bluffs on poorly vegetated exposures of the Coalmont Formation. None. There are no known occurrences of the species east of the Continental Divide (CNHP, 2018). Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 118 Page 5 Common Name Species Federal Status Habitat Potential for Occurrence in Study Area Ute ladies'- tresses orchid Spiranthes diluvialis Threatened Sub-irrigated alluvial soils along streams; open meadows on floodplains including riparian areas. None. Suitable habitat does not occur in the project area. Wetland vegetation is only found within a roadside drainage swale; there are no open meadows or floodplains within the project area. State Listed Species and State Species of Special Concern Based on a review of the CPW Threatened and Endangered List, CPW Species Activity Mapping data, and the CNHP Tracking List, there are state listed species and state Species of Special Concern with the potential to be impacted by work occurring in Larimer County (CPW, 2019; CPW, 2018; CNHP, 2018). These species are the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus; Species of Special Concern [SC]), black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus; SC), Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia; State-listed as Threatened [ST]), Iowa darter (Etheostoma exile; SC), Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (ST), mountain sucker (Catostomus platyrhynchus; SC), northern leopard frog (Lithobates pipiens; SC), orangethroat darter (Etheostoma spectabile; SC), and plains minnow (Hybognathus placitus; State Endangered [SE]). Due to lack of suitable habitat within or near the project area, Iowa darter, mountain sucker, northern leopard frog, orangethroat darter, plains minnow, and Preble’s meadow jumping mouse are not expected to occur in the project area. However, Bald Eagle, Burrowing Owl, and black-tailed prairie dogs have the potential to occur near the project area. The Bald Eagle is a state Species of Special Concern (not a statutory category) and is also protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) and the MBTA. The project area is within mapped winter range (CPW, 2018). Winter and summer forage for Bald Eagles are mapped along Horsetooth Reservoir, which is approximately 0.4 mile from the project area (CPW, 2018). However, because the project area footprint is small compared with the area traveled by this wide-ranging species, potential impacts to Bald Eagles are expected to be minor. Black-tailed prairie dogs may also be present in grassland habitats like those noted in the project area. However, no black-tailed prairie dogs or Burrowing Owls were noted during the site visit. Additionally, no burrows were noted during the site visit. As Burrowing Owls require burrows for nesting, no Burrowing Owls are expected to nest within the project area. Migratory Birds The MBTA protects migratory birds, their active nests, and their eggs (except for pigeons, starlings, and some other non-native birds). In Colorado, most nesting and rearing activities occur between April 1 and August 31, but raptors may nest as early as February. These dates are guidelines and nesting birds are protected at all times. Cliff faces within 0.5 mile of the project area may provide potential nesting sites for Golden Eagle (Aqulia chrysaetos) and large trees within 0.5 mile of the project area may provide nesting sites for tree-nesting raptors habituated to human presence. One potential raptor nest was noted during the site visit approximately 0.12 mile south of the project area (“Nest 1” in Figure 2; Photo 3 in Photographic Log). The nest was in good condition and about 40 feet high in a plains cottonwood next to a pond in private property. The nest appeared to be inactive (i.e., did not contain eggs or young) during the time of the site visit. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 119 Page 6 Within the project area, smaller trees, shrubs, and grasses provide numerous potential nest sites for non- raptor migratory birds. One migratory bird nest was noted within the project area near the drainage swale (“Nest 2” in Figure 2; Photo 4 in Photographic Log). The nest was in good condition and was constructed approximately 15 feet high in a plains cottonwood tree. The nest was inactive during the site visit. Noxious Weeds The Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA) classifies the plant species it identifies as noxious weeds into three categories: List A, List B, and List C (CDA, 2017). List A species are designated by the Commissioner of the CDA for eradication. List B species are those species that are managed to stop continued spread. List C species are weed species that are not required to be managed by local jurisdictions but are monitored to provide additional education and research. Noxious weed species noted in the project area included common mullein (List C), downy brome (List C), musk thistle (List B), redstem filaree (List C), and Russian olive (List B). Although these were the only noxious weed species observed during the site visit, it is likely that other noxious weeds are present, as many of these species are difficult to detect in early April when the site visit was conducted. Den Sites No den sites for red foxes, coyotes, or badgers were noted within 300 feet of the project area. Waters of the U.S. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulates WUS, which include wetlands and non-wetland waters. Impacts to these features require permitting through the USACE. During the site visit, one non-wetland water (Dixon Canal) and one wetland feature (WL-1) were noted. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 120 Page 7 Dixon Canal Dixon Canal is an earthen canal oriented north-south along a trail in the central portion of the project area and is represented by a dotted blue line on the USGS Horsetooth Reservoir 7.5 Minute Quadrangle (Figure 2; Photo 5 in Photographic Log; USGS, 1992). At the time of the site visit, the canal had a continuous bed and bank within the project area. The bed was dry and unvegetated and consisted of clay to cobble-sized material. No wetland vegetation or wetlands were noted near the canal. The canal was approximately 0.285 acre (12,408 square feet) and 1,100 linear feet within the project area. When the canal contains water, water flows south past the project area into either Dixon Reservoir or Dixon Creek. Water from Dixon Creek ultimately discharges into the Cache la Poudre River, a traditionally navigable water (TNW). Therefore, Dixon Creek is likely jurisdictional; however, only the USACE has the authority to make final determinations regarding jurisdiction, permitting, and mitigation. Wetland 1 At the time of the site visit, wetland 1 (WL-1) was a 0.017-acre (745 square feet) patch of bentgrass and coyote willow located in a roadside drainage swale northwest of the West Prospect Road and South Overland Trail Intersection (Figure 2; Photos 5 – 8 in Photographic Log). The wetland was classified as a palustrine scrub- shrub (PSS) wetland, with over 30% tree and shrub cover (Cowardin et al., 1979). Soils in WL-1 and the adjacent uplands include both Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes and Altvan-Satanta loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes soil types. These soil series are classified as well drained and are not considered hydric. Parent material includes Pleistocene-aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits, fine-textured alluvium derived from clayey shale, mixed eolian deposits, and mixed alluvium (USDA, 2019). Sampling Point 1 (SP-1) was excavated on the northeast side of the wetland (Figure 2; Photos 7 and 8 in Photographic Log). An upland pit (Sample Point 2; SP-2) was excavated approximately four feet northeast of SP-1, in the same drainage swale (Figure 2; Photo 9 in Photographic log). Vegetation, soil, and hydrology characteristics at SP-1 and SP-2 are described in the Wetland Delineation Data Forms (attached). The herbaceous stratum was dominated by smooth brome (UPL) and bentgrass (FAC or FACW) at SP-1; however, toward the center of the wetland, the herbaceous stratum was dominated only by bentgrass. Dominant shrubs and trees at SP-1 included coyote willow and plains cottonwood. The wetland area passed the Dominance Test for hydrophytic vegetation. The hydric soil indicator at SP-1 was Redox Depressions (F8), and the hydrology indicators were Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) and Geomorphic Position (D2). The wetland does not appear to have a connection with WUS or TNWs, and is therefore likely non-jurisdictional; however, only the USACE has the authority to make final determinations regarding jurisdiction, permitting, and mitigation. Conclusions and Recommendations Pinyon visited the project area to assess biological resources. Based on the habitat and resources present, Pinyon recommends the following: •Project-related activities will have no effect on federally threatened or endangered species. Therefore, no further consultation regarding this resource is required. •Grass, shrubs, and small trees within the project area may provide potential nest sites for migratory birds, and large trees in the project area and within 0.5-mile of the project area may provide potential nest sites for raptors. The nesting season for migratory birds generally occurs from April 1 – August 31, although raptors may nest as early as February. If construction activities occur during the nesting season, Pinyon recommends that the project conduct pre-construction nest surveys for migratory birds, including raptors. If nesting raptors are noted within 0.5-mile of the project area, then the recommendations outlined in ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 121 Page 8 CPW Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors should be followed (CPW, 2008). If birds are noted within the project area, the nest(s) should be avoided until the birds have fledged. •No den sites for red foxes, coyotes, or badgers were noted within 300 feet of the project area. Therefore, no further action regarding these burrowing species are currently required. Per the City’s Resolution 2012- 001, additional den site surveys will be required within 30 days prior to the start of construction to verify these results. •During construction, the project should minimize the spread of noxious weeds. By following general best management practices (BMPs) outlined in the project plans, the potential for introducing and spreading noxious weeds in the project area will be reduced. Pinyon recommends that the plans include requirements for cleaning equipment and other BMPs specific to noxious weed management. •Approximately 0.285 acre (12,408 square feet) of non-wetland waters (Dixon Canal) and 0.017 acre (745 square feet) of wetlands (WL-1) were mapped within the project area. Final design has not yet been completed, and potential impacts are unknown at this time. If impacts to jurisdictional WUS are anticipated from project activities, impacts to WUS should be quantified and submitted to the USACE in a request for authorization under Section 404 of the CWA. Given the limited extent of WUS within the project area, it is likely any impacts would be minimal, and the project would covered under a USACE Nationwide Permit (NWP) 12. Only the USACE has the authority to make final determinations regarding jurisdiction, permitting, and mitigation. Limitations The conclusions and recommendations offered in this report are based on the data obtained from a limited number of samples, within a prescribed project area as described in the text. Soil, hydrologic, vegetation, biological, and ecological conditions typically vary, even over short distances, by season, elevation, and meteorological conditions. Thus, the nature and extent of variations outside this biological investigation may not become evident except through further investigation. It is possible that ecological conditions may change from those observed, particularly over time. Ecological analysis has been performed for specific conditions during investigation, as described in the text. This study makes no attempt to assess ecological/biological conditions not searched for as described in the text. Conclusions stated herein refer only to the specific site at the time of the investigation. Attachments Figure 1 – Project Location Figure 2 – Biological Resources Photographic Log Wetland Delineation Data Forms References CDA, 2017. “Colorado Noxious Weed List”, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/agconservation/noxious-weed- species. List effective March 31, 2017. CNHP, 2018. “CNHP Conservation Status Handbook (Tracking Lists)”, https://cnhp.colostate.edu/ourdata/trackinglist/. Updated in March 2018. Accessed April 2019. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 122 Page 9 Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter V., F.C. Golet, E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report No. FWS/OBS/-79/31.Washington, D.C. CPW, 2008. “Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors,” Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Revised February 2008. CPW, 2018. “CPW All Species Activity Mapping Data,” Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Available at: http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=190573c5aba643a0bc058e6f7f0510b7. Updated November 2018. Accessed April 2019. CPW, 2019. “Threatened & Endangered List,” Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Available at: http://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Accessed April 2019. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. “Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,” Technical Report Y-81-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Google Earth Pro, 2019. Google. Available at: https://www.google.com/earth/download/ge/. Accessed April 2019. USACE, 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region (Version 2.0). Ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. USDA, 2019. “Web Soil Survey,” Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed April 2019. USFWS, 2010. Revised Critical Habitat for the Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) in Colorado. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/mountain- prairie/es/species/mammals/preble/CRITICAL%20HABITAT/12142010TempFR.pdf. Accessed April 2019. USFWS, 2018. “National Wetlands Inventory,” Wetlands Mapper. Updated June 2018. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html. Accessed April 2019. USFWS, 2019. “IPaC- Information for Planning and Consultation System,” United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed April 2019. USGS, 1992. “7.5 Minute Topographic Map, Horsetooth Reservoir, Colorado,” United States Geological Survey. 1962, Revised 1994. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 123 Figure: 1Drawn By: PJWReviewed By: BCAPinyon Project Number: 1/19-1260-01Site Location: Section 17, Township 7 North, Range 69 West, 6th Principal MeridianDate: 4/11/2019Document Path: Z:\PROJECTS\2019\119126001 Golden Currant Waterline - Fort Collins\Figures\ArcMap\MXDs\Bio\Bio01_ProjectLocation.mxdIProject Area02,0001,000FeetGolden Currant WaterlineFort Collins, ColoradoPROJECT LOCATION^_PROJECT LOCATIONLegendService Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubedSources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User CommunityProject AreabNotes:USGS 7.5' Topographic MapHorsetooth Reservoir, 1962 (Revised 1992)ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4Packet pg. 124 Figure: 2Drawn By: PJWReviewed By: BCAPinyon Project Number: 1/19-1260-01Site Location: Sections 16 - 21, Township 7 North, Range 69 West, 6th Principal MeridianDate: 4/11/2019Document Path: Z:\PROJECTS\2019\119126001 Golden Currant Waterline - Fort Collins\Figures\ArcMap\MXDs\Bio\Bio02_BiologicalResources.mxdIProject Area300 Foot BufferHalf Mile Buffer[bBird NestsNon-wetland Waters!(Sampling PointWetlands01,000500FeetGolden Currant WaterlineFort Collins, ColoradoBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES^_PROJECT LOCATIONLegendService Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community© 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS © 2019 HEREllFlow DirectionNotes:Nest 1 was a potential raptor nest and Nest 2 was a potential non-raptor migratory bird nest. Both nests were inactive as of April 4, 2019.S. Overland TrailITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4Packet pg. 125 Golden Currant Waterline Biological Resources Memorandum Photographic Log Photo 1. Representative view of project area uplands. Area is dominated by smooth brome (Bromus inermis). Facing west. Photo 2. Representative view of upland swale within the project area. Swale is completely vegetated by smooth brome. Facing northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 126 Golden Currant Waterline Biological Resources Memorandum Photographic Log Photo 3. Potential raptor Nest in a plains cottonwood (Populus deltoides) tree, 0.12 mile south of the project area in private property. Nest was inactive during the site visit. Facing south. Photo 4. Migratory bird nest in a plains cottonwood tree within the eastern portion of the project area. Nest was inactive during the site visit. Facing north. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 127 Golden Currant Waterline Biological Resources Memorandum Photographic Log Photo 5. View of Dixon Canal. Facing southwest. Photo 6. View of wetland (WL)-1 northwest of the intersection between West Prospect Road and South Overland Trail. Facing northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 128 Golden Currant Waterline Biological Resources Memorandum Photographic Log Photo 7. View of Sampling Point (SP)-1 in WL-1. Photo 8. View of soil profile at SP- 1. Prominent redox is noted. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 129 Golden Currant Waterline Biological Resources Memorandum Photographic Log Photo 9. View of SP-2 in upland area next to WL-1. Facing east toward South Overland Trail. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 130 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is 3.0 1 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Golden Currant Waterline Fort Collins/Larimer 2019-04-04 CivilWorx, LLC/Fort Collins-Loveland Water District CO SP-1 PJW/BCA - Pinyon Environmental, Inc.Section 17, Township 7 North, Range 69West toeslope of drainage swale none 0 Western Great Plains Range and Irrigated Region 40.568023°-105.134669°WGS84 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes none X NN N X N N N X X X X Sampling point was excavated in a depression. The herb stratum was dominated by Bromus inermis and Agrostis sp. at the site of the sampling point; toward the center of the wetland, the herb stratum was dominated only by Agrostis sp. 30 Ft radius Populus deltoides 3 3 YFAC 3 4 7515 Ft radius Salix exigua 30 30 YFACW 00 00 53 159 00 50 250 103 409 3.970873786407767 5 Ft radius Bromus inermis Agrostis sp.* 50 50 100 Y Y UPL FAC X All dominants are FACW and/or OBL. 15 Ft radius N/A 0 0 0 *Agrostis was not identified to the species level as no live individuals were noted. There is only one FACU Agrostis species for the Great Plains Region, and that species only occurs in alpine or wet meadow habitats. The other Agrostis species are either FAC or FACW. FAC was assumed instead of FACW, so that if the vegetation passed for hydrophytic, it would not be due to misidentification. X133= Total Veg Cover D5 - FAC Neutral Test for hydrology. Drop all FAC, cross examine all other dominants. If > 50% remaining are FACW to OBL, then YES to D5. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 131 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SP-1 0-2 2-14 2-14 10YR 4/3 10YR 5/4 10YR 5/4 95 60 60 2.5 YR 4/3 2.5 YR 4/6 10YR 6/8 5 20 20 C C C M M M silty clay silty loam silty loam prominent redox present prominent redox present prominent redox present X none N/A X Soil profile was "splotchy" and exhibited multiple redox color types. Sampling pit was excavated in a closed depression subject to ponding, and soils exhibited 5 percent or more prominent redox concentrations; soils passed for Redox Depressions (F8). Hydric soil is present. X X X N/A X N/A X N/A Culvert empties into toeslope of drainage swale. Passes for Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) and Geomorphic Position (D2). Wetland hydrology is present. X ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 132 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is 3.0 1 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Golden Currant Waterline Fort Collins/Larimer 2019-04-04 CivilWorx, LLC/Fort Collins-Loveland Water District CO SP-2 PJW/BCA - Pinyon Environmental, Inc.Section 17, Township 7 North, Range 69West shoulder of drainage swale convex 3 Western Great Plains Range and Irrigated Region 40.568034°-105.134677°WGS84 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes none X NN N X N N N X X X X Sampling pit was excavated in the shoulder of a depression in a patch of Bromus inermis. 30 Ft radius Populus deltoides 10 10 YFAC 2 3 6615 Ft radius Salix exigua 30 30 YFACW 00 30 60 10 30 00 100 500 140 590 4.214285714285714 5 Ft radius Bromus inermis 100 100 YUPL X All dominants are FACW and/or OBL. 15 Ft radius N/A 0 0 0 Passes Dominance Test for hydrophytic vegetation; hydrophytic vegetation present. X140= Total Veg Cover D5 - FAC Neutral Test for hydrology. Drop all FAC, cross examine all other dominants. If > 50% remaining are FACW to OBL, then YES to D5. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 133 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SP-2 0 - 14 10YR 4/4 98 2.5 YR 3/6 2 C M clay prominent redox present. none N/A X No hydric soil indicators noted. Hydric soil not present. X X X No wetland hydrology indicators noted. Wetland hydrology not present. X ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 134 History Colorado- Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY LIMITED-RESULTS CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY FORM OAHP 1420 Revised 9/98 This form (#1420) is for small scale limited results projects - block surveys less than 160 acres with linear surveys under four miles. Additionally, there should be no sites and a maximum of four Isolated Finds. This form must be typed. I. IDENTIFICATION 1. Report Title (include County): A Class III Pedestrian Survey of the Proposed Golden Current Waterline in Larimer County, Colorado 2. Date of Field Work: April 23, 2019 3. Form completed by: Thomas Carr Date: April 26, 2019 4. Survey Organization/Agency: Pinyon Environmental Address: 3222 South Vance Street, Lakewood, CO, 80227 Principal Investigator: Thomas Carr Principal Investigator's Signature: ______________________________ 5. Lead Agency: City of Fort Collins Land Owner: City of Fort Collins 6. Client: CivilWorx, LLC. 7. Permit Type and Number: Colorado Archaeological Permit, State Wide Survey 2019-73801 Report / Contract Number: 119126001 9. Comments: None II. DESCRIPTION OF UNDERTAKING / PROJECT 10. Type of Undertaking: The project would install a new 20-inch diameter waterline approximately six feet underground. The typical trench section would be about six-feet wide with a trench box. Soil stockpiles, vehicle traffic, and surface disturbance would be limited to 30-feet on either side of the waterline. This 60-foot-wide area along the waterline comprises the project area. Conventional excavation equipment, including diesel-powered hydraulic excavators and front- end loaders would be used to construct the new waterline. 11. Size of Undertaking (acres): 8.26 Acres Size of Project (if different): NA 12. Nature of the Anticipated Disturbance: Excavation of soil to approximately six feet deep for the construction of a water pipeline. 13. Comments: None Thomas Carr Digitally signed by Thomas Carr DN: cn=Thomas Carr, o, ou, email=carr.tom@gmail.com, c=US Date: 2019.05.01 21:49:04 -06'00' ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 135 III. PROJECT LOCATION Please attach a photocopy of USGS Quad. clearly showing the project location. The Quad. should be clearly labeled with the Prime Meridian, Township, Range, Section(s), Quad. map name, size, and date. Please do not reduce or enlarge the photocopy. 14. Description: The project is located at the western edge of the City of Fort Collins, in Larimer County, Colorado within the Maxwell Natural Area. The survey area begins at the entrance to the Maxwell Natural Area and ends at two large water tanks, approximately .73-miles to the northwest. 15. Legal Location: Quad. Map: Horsetooth Reservoir, 1962 Principal Meridian: 6th NOTE: Only generalized subdivision ("quarter quarters") within each section is needed Township: 7N Range: 69W Sec.: 17 SE 1/4s & SW 1/4s If section(s) is irregular, explain alignment method: NA 16. Total number of acres surveyed: 8.26 Acres 17. Comments: Final design has not yet been completed for this project, and potential impacts are unknown at this time. However, several programmatic agreements (PAs) have been developed exempting the USACE from Section 106 consultation for certain project actives for which this project may qualify. IV. ENVIRONMENT 18. General Topographic Setting: The general setting is foothills transition zone with mixed grass and scrubland. The natural drainages have been heavily modified by the Big Thompson Project, but in general the area water feeds into the Cache La Poudre River, located to the north of the project area. Current Land Use: City of Fort Collins Natural Area 19. Flora: The area is mostly mixed grass, generally comprising of these species: blue gramma (Bouteloua gracilis), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), needle-and-thread (Hesperostipa comata), green needle grass (Stipa viridula), scurfpea, scarlet globemallow (Sphaeralcea coccinea), and yucca (yucca glauca). The area also contains mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus) rabbit brush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus), three-leaf sumac (Rhus trilobata) and some woods rose (rosa woodsii). 20. Soils/Geology: The eastern portion of the survey area consists of Nunn series clay loam and Kim series loam, while the western portion is primarily Satanta series loam up against Haplustolls rock outcrop complexes. 21. Ground Visibility: Ground visibility varies between 10% and 50%, with most of the survey area covered by thick grasses. 22. Comments: None ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 136 V. LITERATURE REVIEW 23. Location of File Search: OAHP/COMPASS, USGS online Date: April 25, 2019 24. Previous Survey Activity - In the project area: There have been two previous surveys that crosscut small sections of the study area by Bill Butler (1999) and Mary Painter (2004). In the general region: There was also a large-scale survey of the area around Horse Tooth Reservoir located to the west by Robert Mutaw (1990). 25. Known Cultural Resources - In the project area: A review of the COMPASS database maintained by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) indicated no known or previously surveyed archaeological resources within the study area. Newly identified archaeological resources were not located during a pedestrian survey of the project area. A review of the COMPASS database maintained by OAHP indicated one previously recorded historic resource in the study area – the Dixon Feder Canal (5LR.1346). The Dixon Feeder Canal is a supporting component of the Colorado Big Thompson Project National Register Historic District (5LR.9611). Historic linear resources are typically treated as historic resources, even when they have associated historical archaeological features. No associated historical archaeological features were observed in this survey. The Dixon Feeder Canal was constructed in 1950 under authorization granted by Presidential approval dated December 21, 1937, which approved the Secretary of the Interior's Finding of Feasibility for the Colorado-Big Thompson Project. The canal was constructed to replace private facilities that diverted water from Dixon Creek and were destroyed by construction of Dixon Canyon Dam (CBTE004). The contract for construction of the Dixon Feeder Canal was awarded to Lindstrom & Williams on July 20,1950. The canal was completed by the end of 1950. This resource and other Big Thompson resources in the general area are discussed by Laurie Summons (1999). As of the date of this survey, the condition of the canal appears to be good and appears to have been recently cleared of debris. The newly constructed pipeline would pass underneath the Dixon Feeder Canal and parallel it for approximately 320-meters. Trenching through the canal may be required to accommodate new waterline construction. The pre-construction contours of the ditch would be restored within 30 days of completion of the work. If impacts to jurisdictional Waters of the US (WUS) are anticipated from project activities, impacts to WUS should be quantified and submitted to the USACE in a request for authorization under Section 404 of the CWA. Should a 404 permit be required, project work meets the requirements of “Appendix 1, Item 1: Trenching Through a Ditch” contained in the Programmatic Agreement among the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque District, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Standard Treatment of Ditches Determined Eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places and Certain Exempt Activities in the State of Colorado [USACE Standard Treatment of Ditches PA]. Therefore, this project would be exempt from Section 106 consultation. In the general region (summarize): Some of the resources identified by Mutaw (1990) to the west of Horsetooth Reservoir included various isolated prehistoric lithics such as biface fragments, prehistoric open camps and lithic scatters, historic occupations, historic trash scatters, and stone quarries. No resources of this nature are recorded for the current study area. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 137 26. Expected Results: Based on the previous survey data, the existing Dixon Feeder Canal was the only resource know to be in the study area. Based on the sites documented by Mutaw (1990), there was also the possibility of undocumented prehistoric lithic scatters. VI. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 27. The main objective was to visually survey and identify any cultural resources that might be impacted by the proposed drainage improvements. Any resources would need to be evaluated for their potential eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and to make management and/or mitigation recommendations. VII. FIELD METHODS 28. Definitions: Prehistoric site – any locality exhibiting structures or features (e.g., stone circle or hearth) or having five or more artifacts in apparent association with one another and occurring within a restricted area. Historic site – any structural remnant (e.g., house, outbuilding, root cellar), trash concentration or scatter suggesting residential or industrial use of the area, with a minimum age of 50 years. Prehistoric isolated find – nonstructural remains consisting of four or fewer artifacts. Historic isolated find – individual historic artifacts or small clusters of artifacts that do not represent established refuse dumps, with a minimum age of 50 years. 29. Describe Survey Method: The author walked two survey lines that paralleled the center line of the proposed pipeline course. VIII. RESULTS 30. List IFs if applicable. Indicate IF locations on the map completed for Part III. No isolated finds were observed. 31. Using your professional knowledge of the region, why are there none or very limited cultural remains in the project area? Is there subsurface potential? It is my professional opinion the limited identification of cultural resources in the study area is due to the relatively low site density for the surrounding region. The likelihood of encountering buried archaeological deposits is low. It is recommended to use caution when working around the Dixon Feeder Canal to avoid disturbing this resource. References: Butler, Bill 1999 Cultural Resource Survey of Four Bureau of Reclamation Water Supply Canals in Larimer County, Colorado, LR.R.R38, for Rocky Mountain National Park, on file at Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Denver, CO Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Colorado-Big Thompson Project Technical Record of Design and Construction, Volume I, Planning Legislation, and General Description. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1957. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 138 Mutaw, Robert 1990 Horsetooth Reservoir North Shoreline Cultural Resources Inventory Larimer County, Colorado LR.R.R4 Powers Elevation, on file at Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Denver, CO Painter, Mary W. 2004 A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory of the Proposed Western Area Power Administration Laporte Tap to Dixon Creek And Richard Lake Tap to Timnath Substation 115/230kv Transmission Line Upgrade, Larimer County, Colorado, LR.E.R6, Centennial Archaeology, Inc., for the Department Of Energy, on file at Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Denver, CO Simmons, R. Laurie 1999 Cultural Resource Survey of Four Bureau Of Reclamation Water Supply Canals in Larimer County, Colorado LR.R.R38 Rocky Mountain National Park, on file at Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Denver, CO Locator Map – The project is located in eastern Larimer County, Colorado ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 139 Survey Map – The survey area starts just west of South Overland Trail and ends at the water towers within the Maxwell Natural Area. The legal location is 6th Principal Meridian, Township 7 North, Range 69 West, Section 17, crossing the Southeast and Southwest quarter-sections. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 140 Community Development & Neighborhood Services Planning & Development Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.221.6376 970.224.6111- fax MEMORANDUM Date: December 16, 2020 To: Chairperson Hansen and Board Members of the Planning & Zoning Board From: Will Lindsey, Associate City Planner Re: Clarification of SPAR Applicability to FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line __________________________________________________________________ Clarifying Question A clarifying question was posed at the Work Session on Friday December 11, 2020 by Board member Shepard regarding whether or not the Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line (SPA200002) falls under the definition of “development”, and if not, whether it is subject to the SPAR process. City Staff Response Generally, utilities which are located within public right-of-way and other dedicated utility corridors are not subject to the SPAR process because they do not meet the City’s definition of “development”. However, historically the City has employed the SPAR process for those utility projects which construct transmission lines that are located outside of public right-of-way, and cross discrete lots or tracts held in public or private ownership. In the instance of this application since the majority of the proposed water line runs through property owned by the Ponds at Overland Trail Home Owners Association and the City of Fort Collins then it is appropriate for the project to undergo a Site Plan Advisory Review. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet pg. 141 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 142 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 143 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 144 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 145 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 146 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 147 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 148 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 149 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 150 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 151 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 152 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 153 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 154 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 155 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 156 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 157 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 158 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 159 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 160 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 161 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 162 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 163 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 164 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 165 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 166 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 167 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 168 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 169 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 170 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7Packet pg. 171 EXISTING WATERLINEEXISTING GOLDEN CURRANT16" WATERLINEPROPOSED GOLDEN CURRANT20" WATERLINEMAXWELLNATURALAREAEXISTING TREESTO BEPROTECTEDPROPOSED GOLDEN CURRANTSITE PLAN11/13/20190'300'SCALE: 1" = 300'150'4025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-6046(970) 214-5035NPROPOSED WATERLINE ALTERNATIVEEXISTING FCLWD WATERLINEITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8Packet pg. 172 1 December 17, 2020 Will Lindsey Associate City Planner Planning and Zoning Board Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line - Site Plan Advisory Review (SPA200002) Area Map 2 SITE • Location: W Prospect Rd & S Overland Trail, runs westward through Ponds at Overland Trail and Fort Collins Maxwell Natural Area • Current use: single-family dwelling subdivision / open space • Zoning: Low Density Residential (R-L) and Residential Foothills (R-F) 1 2 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 173 2 Project Overview 3 • Buried Water Line to replace existing FCLWD line • Approximately 5,000 feet long • 20-inch diameter pipe • Extends Westward from S Overland Trail to Foothills water tanks • 20-foot utility easement (50- foot temporary construction easement) 4 3 4 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 174 3 Staff Review • Based on the Requirements for Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) • Utility lines qualify for SPAR review when crossing discrete lots/tracts held in public or private ownership. • Staff recommendation based on three criteria: 1. Location 2. Character 3. Extent 5 Summary of Staff Findings SPAR Criteria -- Location: This criterion requires that the site location for the proposed public facility be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. • The location is within the Single Family Neighborhood and Parks and Natural/Protected Lands Place Type. • The location and alignment of the underground utility anticipates current and future development in accordance with the City’s Structure Plan. 6 5 6 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 175 4 Summary of Staff Findings SPAR Criteria -- Character: The second criteria for review is “character” which requires the plan to conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant’s governing body. • The proposed water pipeline meets this requirement by reseeding all disturbed areas in like vegetation to existing conditions as well as replacing all trees impacted by the installation of the new water line. 7 Summary of Staff Findings SPAR Criteria -- Extent: The third criteria for review is “extent” which requires the plan to identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development. • Runs under public rights of way, Ponds at Overland Trail Subdivision greenspace, and Maxwell Natural Area • Segment of the pipe will run under the intersection of W Prospect Road and Bryant Drive. • All impacted sidewalks, roadways, trails will be returned to existing conditions. • Sediment control measures will be taken around sensitive aquatic resources. • Alignment does not conflict with existing utilities or ROW trees, etc. 8 7 8 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 176 5 9 Staff recommends Planning and Zoning Board approve the Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line – SPA200002 with the following motion: The Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board finds that the location, character, and extent of the proposed development plan for the Fort Collins Loveland Water District Golden Currant Water Line #SPA200002, is consistent with the City’s Land Use Code and mitigates its functional and visual impacts to streets, sidewalks, utilities, and environmental resources, to the extent reasonably feasible. Staff Recommendation Reference Slides • Construction Plan Exhibit – Slides 11-12 • Preliminary Site Plan (Fall 2019) – Slide 13 • Maxwell Natural Area Entry Gate Location – Slide 14 • Maxwell Trail Improvement Map – Slide 15 10 9 10 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 177 6 11 12 11 12 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 178 7 13 14 Maxwell Natural Area Entry Gate 13 14 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 179 8 15 15 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet pg. 180 CS01GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20VICINITY MAPPROJECT TEAM1" = 500'PROJECTSITEGOLDEN CURRANT WATER LINEFORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO.PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION PLANSCIVIL ENGINEERCIVILWORX, LLC4025 AUTOMATION WAY, SUITE B2FORT COLLINS, CO 80525OFFICE PHONE: 970-698-6046CONTACT: AUSTIN SNOW, PECELL PHONE: 970-825-9740OWNERFORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT5150 SNEAD DRIVEFORT COLLINS, CO 80525OFFICE PHONE 970-226-3104CONTACT: CHRIS PLETCHER, PECELL PHONE: 970-218-5546SURVEYORWASHBURN LAND SURVEYING, LLC4025 AUTOMATION WAY SUITE C4 SOUTHFORT COLLINS, CO 80526OFFICE PHONE: 970-232-9645CONTACT: CHAD WASHBURN, PLSCELL PHONE: 970-685-8836PROJECT TEAMPROSPECT RDOVERLAND TRAIL PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER CERTIFICATIONTHESE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE FORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATERDISTRICT - GOLDEN CURRANT WATER LINE WERE PREPARED BY ME (ORUNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE ROAD STANDARDS AND THE STORMWATER DESIGN STANDARDS FORLARIMER COUNTY, AND THE FORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICTDESIGN CRITERIA.AUSTIN SNOW, PECIVILWORX, LLCREQUIRED PERMITS BY CONTRACTORCITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL AREAS- RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMITCITY OF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING- TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANCOLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT- CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING PERMIT- PERMIT FOR STORMWATER DISCHARGEFORT COLLINS-LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT- PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGCALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OFCOLORADOKnow what's below.RCS01COVER SHEETELIZABETH STAll changes, addendums, additions, deletions andmodifications to these drawings must be approved,in writing, by the Fort Collins-LovelandWater District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation District.District EngineerDateFORT COLLINS - LOVELANDWATER DISTRICTSOUTH FORT COLLINSSANITATION DISTRICT110/16/20ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 10Packet pg. 181 0100' 200'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'PONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILHOA OPEN SPACEPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEEXISTING COFC 24" WATERLINE20' EASEMENTPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILDETENTION PONDPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEBANYAN DRIVEWEST PROSPECT ROADOVERLAND TRAILGOLDEN CURRANT BLVD.EXISTING FCLWD 36"TRANSMISSION MAINEXISTING FCLWD 20"TRANSMISSION MAINEXISTING FCLWD 16" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED SEE SHEET AB01)GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20UTILITY PLANUT03N/A1" = 100'920" x 0.75" CC SADDLE FOR0.75" PEX-A SERVICE LINEREPLACE METER PITBANYAN DRIVEREEDGRASS CT.HONEYSUCKLE CT.GOLDE N C U R R A N T C T.PROPOSED FCLWD 20' WATERLINE EASEMENTLEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINE MAINSANITARY SEWER MAINSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWERMANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLEOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEPROPOSED UTILITIESSANITARY SEWER MAINSANITARY SERVICESANITARY SEWERMANHOLEWATER LINE MAINWATER SERVICEFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE FITTINGSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVESTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTORM DRAIN INLETFLARED END SECTONRIPRAP1. MINIMUM HORIZONTAL EDGE TO EDGESEPARATION BETWEEN SANITARY &WATERLINES IS 10 FEET.2. WATER MAINS CROSSING OVER A SANITARY ORSTORM SEWER SHALL MAINTAIN AN 18"VERTICAL EDGE TO EDGE CLEARANCE. WATERMAINS CLOSER THAN 18" OR UNDER SEWERSSHALL BE DISCUSSED WITH THE ENGINEER.3. MINIMUM COVER ON WATERLINES IS 5.0 FEETUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.4. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE FIELD VERIFIEDPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.NOTESPROPOSED FCLWD 50'TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTIONEASEMENTEXISTING FCLWD 8" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED, SEE SHEET AB01)CONNECT TO EXISTING36" FCLWD WATER MAINEXISTING LINE TO BE ABANDONED (FLOW FILL)PROPOSED FCLWD WATER LINEEXISTING LINE TO BE ABANDONED (FLOW FILL)T CTC PROPOSED FCLWD WATER LINEITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 10Packet pg. 182 0100' 200'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'CITY OF FORT COLLINSMAXWELL NATURAL AREAPONDS AT OVERLAND TRAILHOA OPEN SPACECITY OF FORT COLLINSWATER TANKFCLWD WATER TANKSTREES TO BE PROTECTEDEXISTING COFC 24" WATERLINEPROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEEXISTING FCLWD 16" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED,SEE SHEET AB01)PROPOSED FCLWD 20" WATERLINEEXISTING COFC 24" WATERLINEOVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINESFCLWD TANK ACCESS ROADDIXON CANAL ANDACCESS ROAD CROSSINGEXISTING FCLWD 8" WATERLINE(TO BE ABANDONED, SEE SHEET AB01)GOLDEN CURRANT WATERLINE REPLACEMENTPREPARED FOR:DATE SUBMITTED:The engineer preparing these plans will not be responsiblefor, or liable for, unauthorized changes to or uses of theseplans. All changes to the plans must be in writing andmust be approved by the preparer of these plans.CAUTIONFCLWD09/11/2020C18015204025 Automation WaySuite B2Fort Collins, CO 80525(970) 698-60469/11/20UTILITY PLANUT02N/A1" = 100'8GOLDEN CURRANT BLVD20"X8" TEESOUTH - 8" GATE VALVE AND8"X6" REDUCER. INSTALL 199 LFOF 6" PVC PIPE TO CONNECT TO6" LINE WITH 6" TRANSITIONCOUPLERCATALPA C T CROSSING UNDER FORTCOLLINS 24" WATERLINECITY OF FORT COLLINS TANKACCESS ROADPROPOSED FCLWD 20' WATERLINE EASEMENTEXISTING FCLWD 16" WATERLINE (TO BE ABANDONED,SEE SHEET AB01)CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE MUST BECONTAINED WITHIN THE 50'CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT. ACCESS TOTHE TANK TO BE MAINTAINED AT ALLTIMES.LEGENDMAPPING / SITEPROPERTY BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYLOT LINESEASEMENTSCENTER LINECURB AND GUTTEREXISTING CONTOURSPROPOSED CONTOURSEXISTING UTILITIESWATER LINE MAINSANITARY SEWER MAINSTORM DRAIN PIPESANITARY SEWERMANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLEOVERHEAD ELECTRICGAS LINEELECTRIC LINEPROPOSED UTILITIESSANITARY SEWER MAINSANITARY SERVICESANITARY SEWERMANHOLEWATER LINE MAINWATER SERVICEFIRE HYDRANTWATER LINE FITTINGSTHRUST BLOCKGATE VALVESTORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTORM DRAIN INLETFLARED END SECTONRIPRAP1. MINIMUM HORIZONTAL EDGE TO EDGESEPARATION BETWEEN SANITARY &WATERLINES IS 10 FEET.2. WATER MAINS CROSSING OVER A SANITARY ORSTORM SEWER SHALL MAINTAIN AN 18"VERTICAL EDGE TO EDGE CLEARANCE. WATERMAINS CLOSER THAN 18" OR UNDER SEWERSSHALL BE DISCUSSED WITH THE ENGINEER.3. MINIMUM COVER ON WATERLINES IS 5.0 FEETUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.4. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE FIELD VERIFIEDPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.NOTESPROPOSED 20' EASEMENTPROPOSED 20' EASEMENTPROPOSED FCLWD 50' TEMPORARYCONSTRUCTION EASEMENTPROPOSED 20' EASEMENTPROPOSED 50' CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTOHEFORT COLLINS NATURAL AREA /HOA OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BOUNDARYWEST SIDE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTFOLLOWS PROPERTY BOUNDARY IN THIS AREAEXISTING FCLWD EASEMENTEXISTING LINE TO BE ABANDONED (FLOW FILL)PROPOSED FCLWD WATER LINEEXISTING LINE TO BE ABANDONED (FLOW FILL)PROPOSED FCLWD WATER LINEITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 10Packet pg. 183 Development Review Staff Report Item 2 Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com 1. Land Use Code Changes The list of updates are summarized into 2 topics, see attached summary. These include changes to the following areas: • Article 2 Sections: 2.2.10, 2.2.12, 2.11 and 2.18.3, • Article 3 Sections: 3.5.2 • Article Section 5.1.2 Planning and Zoning Board: November 5, 2020 Annual 2020, Revisions, Clarification and Organization to the Land Use Code Summary of Request This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding two changes to the Land Use Code. These two changes are described as follows: Regulations to allow a second kitchen in a dwelling unit without increasing the occupancy limits. Standards for an appeal of a Minor Amendment and Basic Development Review application. These two items were part of the annual Land Used Code Update but have been separated out as separate changes. Next Steps Steps taken when the changes were included in annual Land Use Code Update:  July Planning and Zoning Board Work Session  August Planning and Zoning Board Work Session  September Planning and Zoning Board Work Session  Launched Webpage Land Use Code Changes  October Planning and Zoning Board Work Session  Item tabled at October Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting  November 5th Planning and Zoning Board Special Hearing (These Changes were separated from the other updates by the Board) Steps taken after the November 5th Meeting:  Land Use Code Changes website updated  Office Hours scheduled for public question/comment  Virtual Public Meeting • December Planning and Zoning Board Work Session • December Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting • City Council Meeting to be scheduled Applicant City of Fort Collins PO BOX 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Staff Noah Beals, Interim Development Review Manager Contents 1. Introduction 2. Public Outreach 3. Attachments Packet pg. 184 P&Z - Agenda Item 2 Land Use Code Changes Thursday, December 17th, 2020 | Page 2 of 2 Back to Top 2. Public Outreach A webpage was launched in September dedicated to Land Use Code updates. This page allows a reader to view the updates and provide feedback on any of the changes. This page was published in the Development Review newsletter and linked from other city webpages. An overview of the proposed changes were shared with the Planning and Zoning Board during the July, August, September, and October work sessions, these two changes were included as part of the annual Land Use Code update. In November the Planning and Zoning Board separated these two changes from the annual Land Use Code update. These changes will now be discussed further at the Planning and Zoning Board December work session and regular meeting. Office Hours were posted for the public to speak with staff concerning the two changes. A virtual meeting is scheduled Dec 10th to discuss the changes with the public and gather further input. 3. Attachments 1. Summary of Land Use Code Changes 2. Draft Ordinance LEGAL REVIEW PENDING 3. Public comment 4. Follow up communication with Chairperson Hansen Packet pg. 185 1Minimal standards or appeals of Minor Amendment and Basic Development Reviews2.2.10(A)(5)The basis of an appeal for a Type 1 or Type 2 decision are clear in the Municipal Code. The Land Use Code does not have minimum appeal standards for Minor Amendments and Basic Development Reviews. This would provide guidance for an appellant and the decision maker.Provide a clear process for an appeal of a Basic Development Review and Minor Amendment2Second Kitchens 3.5.2(H)The Land Use Code does not currently provide any guidance on when it is acceptable allow for more than one kitchen in a dwelling unit and there is a lack of clarity for pre-existing second kitchens. At times a second kitchen is allowed with an affidavit.Create standards to clarify how a second kitchen may be integrated into a dwelling without creating a second dwelling unitItem NumberTopicLUC SectionsProblem Statement Proposed Solution ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1Packet pg. 186 ORDINANCE NO. ___, 2020 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE WHEREAS, on December 2, 1997, by its adoption of Ordinance No. 190,1997, the City Council enacted the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the “Land Use Code”); and WHEREAS, at the time of the adoption of the Land Use Code, it was the understanding of staff and the City Council that the Land Use Code would most likely be subject to future amendments, not only for the purpose of clarification and correction of errors, but also for the purpose of ensuring that the Land Use Code remains a dynamic document capable of responding to issues identified by staff, other land use professionals and citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, City staff and the Planning and Zoning Board have reviewed the Land Use Code and identified and explored various issues related to the Land Use Code and have made recommendations to the Council regarding such issues; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the recommended Land Use Code amendments are in the best interests of the City and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That Section 2.2.10(A)(5) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.2.10 Step 10: Amendments and Changes of Use (A) Minor Amendments and Changes of Use. (1) Minor amendments to any approved development plan, including any Overall Development Plan, Project Development Plan, or PUD Master Plan, any site specific development plan, or the existing condition of a platted property; and (2) Changes of use, either of which meet the applicable criteria of below subsections 2.2.10(A)(1) or 2.2.10(A)(2), may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied administratively by the Director and may be authorized without additional public hearings. With the exception of PUD Master Plans, such minor amendments and changes of use may be authorized by the Director as long as the development plan, as so amended, continues to comply with the standards of this Code to the extent reasonably feasible. PUD Master Plan Minor amendments may be authorized by the Director as long as the PUD Master Plan, as so amended, continues to comply with the standards of this Code, as such standards may have been modified in the existing PUD Master Plan, and so long as the ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 187 amendments are consistent with the existing PUD Master Plan. Minor amendments and changes of use shall only consist of any or all of the following: . . . (5) Notification. Written notice must be mailed to the owners of record of all real property abutting the property that is the subject of the minor amendment application at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the Director’s decision. (56) Appeals. Applicable pursuant to Section 2.2.12(C). Appeals of the decision of the Director regarding the approval, approval with conditions or denial of, a change of use, or a minor amendment of any approved development plan, site specific development plan, or the existing condition of a platted property, shall be to the Planning and Zoning Board. Any such appeal shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal of the final decision with the Director within fourteen (14) days after the action that is the subject of the appeal. The decision of the Planning and Zoning Board on such appeals shall constitute a final decision appealable pursuant to Section 2.2.12 (Step 12). Section 3. That Section 2.2.12 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.2.12 Step 12: Appeals/Alternate Review (A) Appeals. Appeals of any final decision of a decision maker under this Code shall be only in accordance with Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3 of the City Code, unless otherwise provided in this Section or Division 2 Divisions 2.3 through 2.11 and 2.16, 2.18, and 2.19 of this Code. . . . (C) Appeal of Minor Amendment, Changes of Use, and Basic Development Review Decisions by the Director. The Director’s final decision on a minor amendment or change of use application pursuant to Section 2.2.10(A) or basic development review application pursuant to Division 2.18 may be appealed to the Planning and Zoning Board as follows: (1) Parties Eligible to File Appeal. The following parties are eligible to appeal the Director’s final decision on a minor amendment, change of use, or basic development review application: (a) The applicant that submitted the application subject to the Director’s final decision; (b) Any party holding an ownership or possessory interest in the real or personal property that was the subject of the final decision; (c) Any person to whom or organization to which the City mailed notice of the final decision; (d) Any person who or organization that provided written comments to the appropriate City staff for delivery to the Director prior to the final decision; ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 188 (e) Any person who or organization that provided written comments prior to the final decision of the project development plan and/or final plan being amended or provided spoken comments to the decision maker at the public hearing where such final decision was made or written comments to the Director prior to the final decision of the amendment. (2) Filing Notice of Appeal. An appeal shall be commenced by filing a notice of appeal with the Director within fourteen (14) calendar days after the date the written final decision is made that is the subject of the appeal. Such notice of appeal shall be on a form provided by the Director, shall be signed by each person joining the appeal (“appellant”), and shall include the following: (a) A copy of the Director’s final decision being appealed; (b) The name, address, email address, and telephone number of each appellant and a description why each appellant is eligible to appeal the final decision pursuant to Subsection (C)(1) above; (c) The specific Land Use Code provision(s) the Director failed to properly interpret and apply and the specific allegation(s) of error and/or the specific Land Use Code procedure(s) not followed that harmed the appellant(s) and the nature of the harm; and (d) In the case of an appeal filed by more than one (1) person, the name, address, email address and telephone number of one (1) such person who shall be authorized to receive, on behalf of all persons joining the appeal, any notice required to be mailed by the City to the appellant. (3) Scheduling of Appeal. A public hearing shall be scheduled before the Planning and Zoning Board within sixty (60) calendar days of a notice of appeal being deemed complete unless the Planning and Zoning Board adopts a motion granting an extension of such time period. (4) Notice. Once a hearing date before the Planning and Zoning Board has been determined, the Director shall mail written notice pursuant to Section 2.2.6(A). Notice requirements set forth in Section 2.2.6(B)-(D) shall not apply. The mailed notice shall inform recipients of: (a) The subject of the appeal; (b) The date, time, and place of the appeal hearing; (c) The opportunity of the recipient and members of the public to appear at the hearing and address the Planning and Zoning Board; and (d) How the notice of appeal can be viewed on the City’s website. (5) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing and Decision. (a) The Planning and Zoning Board shall hold a public hearing pursuant to Section 2.2.7 to decide the appeal, and City staff shall prepare a staff report for the Planning and Zoning Board. The notice of appeal, copy of the ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 189 Director’s final decision, and the application and all application materials submitted to the Director shall be provided to the Planning and Zoning Board for its consideration at the hearing. (b) The hearing shall be considered a new, or de novo, hearing at which the Planning and Zoning Board shall not be restricted to reviewing only the allegations of error listed in the notice of appeal, the Planning and Zoning Board shall not give deference to the Director’s final decision being appealed, and the applicant shall have the burden of establishing that the application complies with all relevant Land Use Code provisions and should be granted. The applicant, appellant or appellants, members of the public, and City staff may provide information to the Planning and Zoning Board for its consideration at the appeal hearing that was not provided to the Director for his or her consideration in making the final decision being appealed. (c) The Planning and Zoning Board shall review the application that is the subject of the appeal for compliance with all applicable Land Use Code standards and may uphold, overturn, or modify the decision being appealed at the conclusion of the hearing and may impose conditions in the same manner as the Director pursuant to Section 2.2.10(A) and Division 2.18. The Planning and Zoning Board decision shall constitute a final decision appealable to City Council pursuant to Section 2.2.12(A). Section 4. That Section 2.11.1(A) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: DIVISION 2.11 APPEAL FROM ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2.11.1 Purpose and Applicability (A) Purpose. The purpose of this Division is to provide for appeals of certain administrative/city staff decisions to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Appeals to the Planning and Zoning Board of Minor Amendment and Change of Use and Basic Development Review decisions made by the Director are addressed in Section 2.2.12(C). . . . Section 5. That Section 2.18.3(L) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.18.3 Basic Development Review and Minor Subdivision Review Procedures ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 190 An application for a Basic Development Review or Minor Subdivision shall be processed according to, in compliance with, and subject to the provisions contained in Division 2.1 and Steps (1) through (12) of the Common Development Review Procedures (Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.12, inclusive), as follows: . . . (L) Step 12 (Appeals): Applicable pursuant to Section 2.2.12(C). Applicable and in explanation thereof, appeals of the decision of the Director regarding approval, approval with conditions or denial of a Basic Development Review and Minor Subdivision shall be to the Planning and Zoning Board. Any such appeal shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal of the final decision of the Director within 14 days after the action that is the subject of the appeal. The appeal hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board shall be considered a new, or de novo, hearing. The decision of the Planning and Zoning Board on such appeals shall constitute a final decision appealable to City Council pursuant to Section 2.2.12 (Step 12). Section 6. That Section 3.5.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new subparagraph (H) which reads in its entirety as follows: 3.5.2 Residential Building Standards . . . (H) Second Kitchen. A maximum of one additional kitchen may be established inside a dwelling unit without creating an additional dwelling unit if the Director determines: (1) That both kitchens are accessible to all occupants of the dwelling unit; (2) That neither kitchen is located in an accessory building; and (3) That both kitchens have non-separated, continuous, and open access with no locked doors separating the kitchens from the rest of the dwelling unit. The property owner of a dwelling unit in which a second kitchen is approved by the Director shall prior to issuance of a building permit sign and record with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder a notarized affidavit stating that the second kitchen will not be used for a second dwelling unit and the property owner acknowledges and agrees that the dwelling shall only be used as a single-family dwelling. Section 7. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Kitchen” which reads in its entirety as follows: Kitchen shall mean a portion of a dwelling unit used for the purposes of cooking, preserving, or otherwise preparing food and contains a cooking appliance such as a stove, microwave, or hot-plate. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 191 Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this ___ day of ____, A.D. 2020, and to be presented for final passage on the ___ day of _____, A.D. 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this _____ day of ____, A.D. 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet pg. 192 1 Katharine Claypool From:Noah Beals Sent:Friday, October 9, 2020 4:46 PM To:beatrice.s.krummholz@gmail.com Cc:Development Review Comments; Kacee Scheidenhelm Subject:2020Land Use Code Changes Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hello Beatrice,  Thanks, for sending  comments.  We will certainly send these comments on to the Planning and Zoning Board for the  public hearing.  Please let us know if you have more questions about the code changes.    Beatrice Krummholz  Comments  I am concerned about the "affidavit" for an extra kitchen. Too many houses throughout the city have illegal  apartments/Airbnb's. Letting people just sign an affidavit saying their not using these as apartments or vacation rentals  is not good enough.  I also thing the most strict definition of a wetland (the US fish and wildlife definition) should be used not the Army Corps  of Engineers.  Thank you  Kind Regards,  Noah Beals  Interim Development Review Manager | City of Fort Collins 970 416-2313  ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet pg. 193 From:Jeff Hansen To:Noah Beals Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: LUC Changes Date:Monday, November 23, 2020 3:59:39 PM Attachments:image004.png image009.png I think my main concern was similar to what Per was getting at. I imagine that a creative designer could manipulate this code language in a way that we ae not considering right now. I would like to look at a few scenarios to test the robustness of the proposed code language. Are you bringing this to the December work session and hearing? JEFF HANSEN Architect AIA, NCARB Phone: 970.224.1191 Direct: 970.498.2973 VFLA ARCHITECTURE + INTERIORS Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. From: Noah Beals <nbeals@fcgov.com> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 10:08 AM To: Jeff Hansen <Jeff@vfla.com> Subject: LUC Changes Hello Chairperson Hanson, I wanted to reach out to you in regards to the 2nd Kitchens. During the conversation at the last P&Z meeting, I believe you mentioned you have additional questions/comments on this topic. We were hoping to understand the questions/comments you may have while we are working on this item to bring them back to P&Z. We will be sure to include this communication into the record. Kind Regards, Noah Beals Interim Development Review Manager | City of Fort Collins 970 416-2313 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 194 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet pg. 195 1 Land Use Code Changes Land Use Code Changes 2 City Council Meeting to be scheduled Steps taken when the changes were included in annual Land Use Code Update: July Planning and Zoning Board Work Session August Planning and Zoning Board Work Session September Planning and Zoning Board Work Session Launched Webpage Land Use Code Changes October Planning and Zoning Board Work Session Item tabled at October Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting November 5th Planning and Zoning Board Special Hearing (These Changes were separated from the other updates by the Board) Steps taken after the November 5th Meeting: Land Use Code Changes website updated Office Hours scheduled for public question/comment Virtual Public Meeting December Planning and Zoning Board Work Session December Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting Timeline Overview 1 2 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 196 2 Land Use Code Changes 3 Appeal of a Minor Amendment or Basic Development Review The basis of an appeal for a Type  1 or Type  2 decision are clear in the  Municipal Code.  The Land Use Code does not have minimum appeal  standards for Minor Amendments and Basic Development Reviews. This  would provide guidance for an appellant and the decision maker. Land Use Code Changes 4 Appeal of a Minor Amendment or Basic Development Review 2.2.12 Step 12: Appeals/Alternate Review (A)Appeals.Appeals of any final decision of a decision maker under this Code shall be only in accordance with Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3 of the City Code, unless otherwise provided in this Section or Division 2 Divisions 2.3 through 2.11 and 2.16, 2.18, and 2.19 of this Code. 3 4 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 197 3 Land Use Code Changes 5 Appeal of a Minor Amendment or Basic Development Review Two comments from the Neighborhood Meeting • Include more information on decision letters for Minor Amendments • Allow those who made comment on the original plan of the project also file an appeal. Land Use Code Changes 6 Appeal of a Minor Amendment or Basic Development Review (1) Parties Eligible to File Appeal. The following parties are eligible to appeal the Director’s final decision on a minor amendment, change of use, or basic development review application: (a) The applicant that submitted the application subject to the Director’s final decision; (b) Any party holding an ownership or possessory interest in the real or personal property that was the subject of the final decision; (c) Any person to whom or organization to which the City mailed notice of the final decision; (d) Any person who or organization that provided written comments to the appropriate City staff for delivery to the Director prior to the final decision. 5 6 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 198 4 Land Use Code Changes 7 Appeal of a Minor Amendment or Basic Development Review (e) Any person who or organization that provided written comments prior to the final decision of the project development plan and/or final plan being amended or provided spoken comments to the decision maker at the public hearing where such final decision was made or provided written comments to the Director prior to the decision of the amendment. Land Use Code Changes 8 Minor Amendment Notification (5) Notification. Written notice must be mailed to the owners of record of all real property abutting the property that is the subject of the minor amendment application at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the Director’s decision. 7 8 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 199 5 Land Use Code Changes 9 Second Kitchen without increasing the occupancy limits The Land Use Code does not currently provide any guidance on  when it is acceptable allow for more than one kitchen in a  dwelling unit and there is a lack of clarity for pre‐existing second  kitchens. At times a second kitchen is allowed with an affidavit. Land Use Code Changes 10 Second Kitchen without increasing the occupancy limits (H) Second Kitchen. A maximum of one additional kitchen may be established inside a dwelling unit without creating an additional dwelling unit if the Director determines: (1) That both kitchens are accessible to all occupants of the dwelling unit; (2) That neither kitchen is located in an accessory building; and (3) That both kitchens have non-separated, continuous, and open access with no locked doors separating the kitchens from the rest of the dwelling unit. The property owner of a dwelling unit in which a second kitchen is approved by the Director shall prior to issuance of a building permit sign and record with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder a notarized affidavit stating that the second kitchen will not be used for a second dwelling unit and the property owner acknowledges and agrees that the dwelling shall only be used as a single-family dwelling. 9 10 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 200 6 Land Use Code Changes 11 Second Kitchen without increasing the occupancy limits Land Use Code Changes 12 Second Kitchen without increasing the occupancy limits Additional compliance checks • Rental Housing Standards inspections • Occupancy investigations • Short Term Rental licensing • Other Building Inspections 11 12 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet pg. 201