HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK FARMS NORTH FILING NO. 2 - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2014-08-28Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 2
Spring Creek Farms North Filing Number 2
Initial Project Development Plan Submittal
Responses to Comments Dated December 5, 2011
Submitted. February 8, 2012
Comment Originated: 11/23/2011
You must have at least three (3) distinctively different building designs for this project. Along
East Drake Road and South Timberline Road and including the private drives, you can not have
the same two building designs next to each other. The buildings should very in footprint size,
shape, elevations etc. Also, to meet this standard, simply switching out different combinations
of the same features is inadequate. Please see LUC 4.6(E)(b) for details. The elevations
provided do not meet this requirement.
Response: The elevations have been revised to meet LUC 4.6(E)(b). The architecture has a Craftsman theme, and
includes (3) building types that vary in footprint size, shape and elevation. No more than two buildings with the
same style will occur next to each other. Each craftsman style will include varied materials, balcony designs, and
roof detailing while maintaining a common massing and theme.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/23/2011
For this project, you must have three distinctive color schemes for structures in the
development. LUC 4.6(E)(c). The elevations provided do not meet this requirement.
Response: Three distinctive color schemes have been provided.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 11/23/2011
According to the Spring Creek Farms North Overall Development Plan of record, the parcel in
question is 17.4 gross acres, not 15.85 acres. This project will be required to comply with the
mix of housing types standard set forth in 4.6(D)(2). Joseph Allen Drive can not be a separately
platted project.
Response: The project will have two housing types. Outlot A from the Spring Creek Farms North Plat will be
subdivided for this project and right-of-way will be dedicated for Joseph Allen Drive with the plat. The remaining
site acreage for this site will be 16.01 acres.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Parking spaces located in detached garages may be credited toward meeting the
minimum number of parking spaces only if such spaces are made available to dwelling unit
occupants at no additional rental cost (beyond the dwelling unit rental rate). (Section 3.2.2(K)(1)
(a).
Response: Understood.
1
be required.
Response: The 8"main in Joseph Allen is shown to be extended to connect to the 12" m '
Preliminary Utility Plans, The additional connection to the 24" main in Timberline has been
is Drake Road in the
Buffington. He will be modeling the connection to see if it's warranted. The Preliminary Utility discussed with Roger
this connection, ry Plans do not show
Comment Number: 4
11/28/2011: The water conservation standards for landscape and i Comment at onOinatedwiilll apply
Response: It is 11/28/2011
Information on these requirements can be found at: htt ://www.fc ovc om/standards
understood that water conservation standards will apply for landscape and nd irrigation,
Comment Number: 5
Comment 11/28/2011: Development fees and water rights will be due at time of bui tlOrigin permit.
11/28/2011
addition, there is a repay due for the developer's portion of the 24-inch water main init. In
Timberline.
Response: It is understood that development fees and water rights are due at time of building
is a repay due for the water main in Timberline. Idmg permit and that there
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970.416.2313, nbeals(c�fcgov com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
11/28/2011: The multi -family use is permitted as a Type 1 (adm Comment n strat ve Originated: 28/2011
w)process.
Response: It is understood that multi -family is permitted as a Type 1 process,
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970.416.2313, nbeals(a fcgov co,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
Comment
11/28/2011: LUC 4.6(D)(1) Requires that a development plan for 20 acres or lesstme 11/28/2011
et t
minimum density of 7 units per acre. For 15.85 acres at least 111 units since the development
plan Proposes 315 s the
Response: It is understood that the LUC requ
ires tuires alan meets the minimum,
minimum density of 7 du/ac for this site and that the current
site plan meets this requirement. q
Comment Number: 3
Com
11/28/2011: LUC 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) This section regulates the minimum rre gnuirrermen for 11/28/2011
parkin
spaces for mutli-family. Since the development plan did not provide the number of bedrooms
per each of the 315 units it is unclear if the grand total of 560 parking spaces is adequate.
(Note that spaces in detached garages may count toward the minimum parking requirements
only if such spaces are made available to dwelling unit occupants at no additional rental or
purchase cost (beyond the dwelling unit rental rate or purchase cost).
LUC 3.2.2(K)(5)(d) At 500+ parking spaces at least 2% of that is required to be Handicap
spaces provided and at least one of these shall be a van -accessible space.
10
Response: Noted, a matrix of bedrooms and parking compliance is included with the PDP submittal. See Sheet X.
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 4.6(E)(3) Design standards for multi -family dwellings is covered in the
Comments provided by Current Planning.
Response: It is understood that design standards for multi -family dwellings are covered in the comments by
Current Planning.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970.416.2313, nbealsefcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 4.6(D)(3) Requires that 90% of the units to be with a 1/4 of a mile of a public
park/gathering place Publicly or Privately owned. If the park is privately owned other
conditions do apply such as: the park is a minimum of 10,000 sq ft, open to the public, facilities
consist of multiple -use turf areas for various age groups to utilize, maintenance will need to be
established and documented, and if such park is also a storm drainage then slopes, gradients,
and structures shall not conflict with the recreational/civic purposes of the park.
Response: Understood.
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 3.2.2 Requires access and circulation accommodations be made for the
vehicle, bicyclist, and pedestrian and these are separate to the extent reasonably feasible
LUC 3.2.2(C)(4)(a) Bicycle parking is required at a minimum of 5% of the vehicle parking.
Response: It is understood that vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic must all be accommodated and that
bicycle parking is required at a minimum of 5% of the vehicular parking.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Number: 5
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 4.6(E)(1)(c) Requires a minimum building frontage of 40% of each block side
or 50% of all the total block face.
Response: The revised site plan is in compliance with the minimum building frontage requirements.
LUC 4.6(E)(2)(c) There is no minimum setback from street right-of-way
Response: It is understood that there are no minimum setbacks.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 4.6(E)(1)(d) Max building height is 3 stories LUC 4.6(E)(2) This is an allowance
for an additional fourth story for portions of buildings near intersections and arterial streets
Response: Noted; buildings are no more than 3 stories.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: The rendering provide in the development shows at least three buildings fronting
a common green space this does not match the site plan provided.
Response: Understood; future renderings will accurately depict the layout as shown on the site plan.
11
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 3.2.5 Trash/Recycling areas shall be enclosed and designed to allow walk-in
access without having to open the main enclosure service gate. Also such areas shall be
constructed on a cement pad.
Response: Trash/recycling areas will be enclosed, allow walk-in access without opening the main gate, and be
constructed on a cement pad.
Design Guidelines can be found at
http://www.fcgov.com/recycling/pdf/enclosure-guidelines0804.pdf
3.5.1(1) Trash/Recycling enclosures shall be a minimum of 20 ft from a public right of way.
Please see http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/trash_enclosure_desian auidelines.pdf
for design considerations for trash and recycling enclosures.
Response: Trash/recycling areas will be a minimum of 20' from public ROWs.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 3.5.1(3) Mechanical and Utility equipment shall be painted to match building
surface.
Response: Mechanical and utility equipment will be painted to match building.
Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: LUC 3.2.1 Landscaping plan will need to be provided
Response: A landscape plan will be provided with the PDP submittal.
LUC 3.2.4 Lighting plan will need to be provided generally no up -lighting is allowed.
Response: A photometric plan is include with the PDP submittal. It is understood that no up -lighting is allowed.
12
F6rt Collins
�Curr�e
Planning
PO Box 580 * Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6750 * 970.224.6134 - fax
DATE: February 10, 2012
PROJECT
COMMENT
SHEET
TO: Development Review Engineering
PROJECT PLANNER: Courtney Levingston
PDP120004 Spring Creek Farms North
Second Filing - Type I
Please return all comments to the project planner no later than the staff
review meeting:
February 29, 2012
Please enter comments in Accela V360
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
❑ No Problems
❑ Problems or Concerns (see below, attached, or Accela)
Name (please print)
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other.
_Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape
Engineering Development Review's Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Initial Date: 02/28/2012 Issue ID: 2 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 9/13/12: Per the notes on C.7 and C.25 we are to refer to the construction drawings by Aspen
Engineering for the sidewalk on the west side of Joseph Allen. This sidewalk is not shown on sheet 1 (the Aspen sheet) in this
plan set. So either revise the note so it doesn't refer you this sheet or get the design added to the sheet(s) Aspen has as a part of
this set. 7/27/12: The connection is shown on the UP as the permanent sidewalk, but is labeled as temporary asphaslt sidewalk
on the site plan. It can be either, just make sure the plans match. 5/10/12: This connection is now being shown as a detached
asphalt path. With final plans we will need to see the tie in point shown as well. 02/28/2012: General An off -site pedestrian
connection is needed to connect this site to the Power Trail. This connection can be a temporary asphalt path or can be the
concrete sidewalk built in the ultimate location. If it is to be built in the ultimate location the design for Drake will need to be done
to verify location and elevations.
Initial Date: 02/28/2012 Issue ID: 36 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 09/13/12: The radii for the Timberline Driveway entrance needs to be labeled someplace. In the
intersection detail is fine. 07/27/12: The radii on the entrances are shown larger than allowed. The radii need to be in
accordance with table 8-2. Which identifies a 15' radius on the driveways off of Joseph Allen and 20 feet for the entrance off of
Timberline. 02/28/2012: Provide 15' radiuses on approaches to driveways along Joseph Allen and min. 20'
radiuses on approaches to the driveway along Timberline Road.
#54 09/13/12: As soon as drafts of the deeds and legals are prepared please get these into me so we can start reviewing these.
The mylars cannot be signed until the easements have been provided signed in final acceptable format. In addition to the utility
easement along the west side of Joseph Allen that is identified on the plat to be dedicated by separate document, easements by
separate document also need to be dedicated for the stormdrainage pipes and ponds, the water and sewer stubs that extend west
past the row and for the grading along Drake and any grading that may need to be done west of Joseph Allen Drive row that is
outside of the utility and drainage easements that need to be dedicated.
The off -site easement limits are being shown on the plat, but they also need to be shown on the utility plan sheets so it can be
verified that they encompass the areas for which they are needed.
# 57 The west one should be labeled as .72% which is the cross pan grade. Please provide the existing slopes that are being
tied into for the extension of Joseph Allen Drive.
# 61 1 am okay with the crown line location based on your response and what is shown on the plans, A centerline profile has not
yet been provided. Where is the existing crown line in Drake? Does it change with the removal of the median and/ or with the
change to the east median nose? Please show and label it on the plans. Also provide a centerline profile for the area where you
are removing the median.
# 65 Here is the note that Parks would like to see on the plans. It would replace note #4 on C27. City Parks Department shall be
contacted 2 weeks prior to removal of the median. This notice is to be provided so that the City has adequate time to cap the
water service into the median and salvage, remove, and/or relocate any of the plant materials within the median area. Will need
to add a note to the Drake Road plan and profile sheet regarding the existing water service to the median, what needs to be done
with that and how. I have sent an email to Parks to find out what this note should say. Obviously the note will be different
depending on if there is any landscaping or not to remain, so if you could let me know the plan that would be great.
May 08, 2012
# 68 Drake Road Cross sections. Need to provide elevations for the flowlines (medians and edges) and existing and proposed
slopes on all sections. As part of the cross section review I am going to be looking at is what the overall x-section will be when the
street is milled and overlayed and we ideally get one slope from median or crown to gutter. Without knowing what the elevations
of these points are and doing the manual calculations I can not fully determine that.
# 73 The transition point and several other elevations are still needed (points to be provided as per figure 7-28). Intersection
details. For the Joseph Allen/ Drake intersection. Additional elevations are needed, the transition point (distance and elevation is
needed) and additional information on the changes at the center of the road are needed.
# 74 The details don't match what I am assuming you are proposing to be constructed. The standard detail should be revised to
reflect what is to be done or you can draw up a detail that reflects what is to be done. Additional details are needed for the
median work. #703 for the curb type and then 704-B, 705, or 705a as appropriate.
#76 Due to the change in area being platted the TDRF have been adjusted and $2,415.12 is due back to the applicant. This
dollar amount can be applied to the fees due for the off -site easements or I can process a refund and new checks can be provided
for the off -site easement processing costs. Just let me know what is preferred.
#77 09/13/2012: The off -site easement limits are being shown on the plat, but they also need to be shown on the utility plan
sheets so it can be verified that they encompass the areas for which they are needed.
# 78 On the site plan, overall utility plan sheet and the overall grading plan sheet behind the name of the driveway (private drive)
needs to be provided. This was done on the plat, but so far has not been transferred over to the site plan and the overview sheets
of the utility plan set (I do not need it on every page that has the drive name on it as long as it is labeled on the overall sheets).
# 79 Sheet C.26. On the centerline profile the slope is cut off by the match line.
# 80 Sheet c.36. Detail D-6 needs to be removed from the plan set or labeled for on -site work only. Your response indicated that
you want to keep this because of detached walk information. This detail has too much incorrect information to be kept and used
as a detail for the public street sidewalk. You can add detail 702 if you want.
# 81 Sheet C.40. Standard drawing 704-B. This detail does not match what I am assuming you are proposing for the median
reconstruction. You can create a detail or this one can be modified. As per your notes on the design pages the curb needs to be
changed to refer to the outflow c& g on drawing 703 not the barrier curb. The note regarding the cover for the median should
identify that the color, texture and pattern should match the existing median being tied into.
#82 A note should be added to the site plan that indicates the HOA shall be responsible for the adjacent parkway maintenance.
#83 Plat - waiting to hear the results of the attorney discussion regarding the requested changes to the dedication language.
#84 Aspen Engineering sheet — change the way the sheet is numbered. It can be 1 of the total number of sheets in this set, but it
is not 1 of 1.
# 85 Sheet C41 detail 1602 this is an old detail update to detail with a date of 4/1/07
Sheet C42 detail D-14 either label for on —site use or remove this detail. This does does not have any public street intersections
with cross pans.
May 08, 2012
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel 131 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 2 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: The connection is shown on the UP as the permanent sidewalk, but is labeled as
temporary asphaslt sidewalk on the site plan. It can be either, just make sure the plans match.
5/10/12: This connection is now being shown as a detached asphalt path. With final plans we will
need to see the tie in point shown as well. 02/28/2012: An off site pedestrian connection is needed
to connect this site to the Power Trail. This connection can be a temporary asphalt path or can be
the concrete sidewalk built in the ultimate location. If it is to be built in the ultimate location the
design for Drake will need to be done to verify location and elevations.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 13 Topic: Plat Round: 1 Status: Active
4 Issue: 07/27/2012: These easements are still needed and have not been shown on the plat or the plat.
G • it Because this property is no longer included in the boundary of the plat these easements will need to
c 4a be dedicated by separate document. There is a processing fee of $250 plus recording fees for each
easement to be dedicated. Due to the boundary change the project will have a credit on the fees I
have not had a chance to calculate what that is yet, but do not pay for the easement dedications
until I can get that calculated. 05/10/12: Per the utility plans drainage easements are still needed
on the east side of Joseph Allen and are not yet being shown. 02/28/2012: At the northwest corner
of East Drake Road and Joseph Allen Drive where the drainage pipes extend into Outlot A a
drainage easement(s) are needed.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 18 Topic: Plat Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: 02/28/2012: If Poudre Fire Authority requires the private drives to be named, those
names will also need to be placed on the plat with private drive or street like private drive in
parenthesis after.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 26 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: 1 think that there might be just one of these, but it is not labeled and a similar looking
mark is shown on Joseph Allen right behind the inlet, but that doesn't make sense as a sidewalk
chase. 02/28/2012: Need to show proposed sidewalk chases out to existing and proposed streets.
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2012
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel B1 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 28 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: 07/27/12: Unless there is several feet of extra width on the existing bike lane the cut
and match line for the curb along Drake will need to be the stripe between the bike lane and the
travel lane. I spoke to Rob Mosbey, Engineering Project Manager who along with the Engineering
Inspector who will make the decision regarding the limits of patching briefly about this. And the bike
lane line seems to be the edge for the patch. If you have questions about the patching limits I would
ask that you talk to him since he will be the decision maker on this in the field. 02/28/2012: Drake
Road design; See standards for saw cutting existing asphalt; sawcut at lane line or center of a travel
lane. Two foot from the existing edge of asphalt isn't adequate unless it happens to fall along the
existing lane line.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 32 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: The storm drain in Joseph Allen Drive does not appear to have adequate cover at the
ii $At �v low point in the street. A minimum of 3 feet from top of pipe to top of asphalt is needed to meet
minimum cover requirements. 02/28/2012: Drake Road design; When cross sections are provided
you will need to show the storm drain pipe elevations and the cover over it. Need to verify it meets
minimum cover requirements.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 36 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: 07/27/12: The radii on the entrances are shown larger than allowed. The radii need to
be in accordance with table 8-2. Which identifies a 15' radius on the driveways off of Joseph Allen
and 20 feet for the entrance off of Timberline. 02/28/2012: Provide 15' radiuses on approaches to
driveways along Joseph Allen and min. 20' radiuses on approaches to the driveway along Timberline
Road.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 52 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Please see the couple of comments on the general notes.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2012
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel 131 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 53 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
✓ Issue: 07/27/2012: Garage 1 based on the building envelope on the plat is not within the building envelope
L> * (,3 (guessing either the envelope or the garage location changed at some point). This also means that
C'7 as shown the water main runs through the building envelope and is not within an easement.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 54 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: In addition to the utility easement along the west side of Joseph Allen that is identified
o 4W % 13 on the plat to be dedicated by separate document, easements by separate document also need to
L,) cC, 7 be dedicated for the stormdrainage pipes and ponds, the water and sewer stubs that extend west
past the row and for the grading along Drake and any grading that may need to be done west of
Joseph Allen Drive row that is outside of the utility and drainage easements that need to be
dedicated.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 55 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Please place the couple of notes I added on the grading plan indicating what sidewalk
is to be built with this plan. I think I know what you are intending to do, but these notes will help to
make it clear what the intent is.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 56 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: For the stormline that will run under the future extension of Charles Bockman Drive
please show the planned roadway elevations so I can verify that minimum cover is being provided. I
assume that the prior project showed a preliminary design for this extension - that can be used,
you do not need to design the road.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 57 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Please provide the existing slopes that are being tied into for the extension of Joseph
Allen Drive.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8
July 27, 2012
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel 61 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 58 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Need to identify the location of the Loop Drives on Joseph Allen Drive. You can id the
centerline and label the width of the drives or sta each side of the drive. Either works.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 59 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Showing a curb return grade that doesn' meet minimum grade at Drake/ Joseph Allen.
The profiles and intersection detail also do not match.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 60 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
l- 47 Issue: 07/27/2012: Need to provide a detail for the changes to the east median that you are proposing.
How are you proposing this to be done? Will want enough of the section replaced that it is a solid
mass.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012
Issue: 07/27/2012: Where is the existing crown line in Drake? Does it change with the removal of the
(47 median and/ or with the change to the east median nose? Please show and label it on the plans.
Also provide a centerline profile for the area where you are removing the median.
Issue ID: 61 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 62 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Add the street cut note to the Drake Road plan and profile plan.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 63 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: The limited pavement patch you are showing for the median removal maybe possible if
the contractor is really carefull and doesn't have any edges that break or ravel. It is quite possible
that the patch will have to go out to the middle of the lane. At the west end you will have a patch
out to the middle of the adjacent lane since the minimum patch width is 6 feet.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Jlnitial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 64 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
L�� t,�-7 Issue: 07/27/2012: Need a detail for how you are going to end the west median. What are you proposing
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2012
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: The minimum number of parking spaces is based on a per bedroom per unit
basis. Parallel parking on the internal L-shaped street, whether a public street or a street -like
private drive, may count towards meeting the minimum.
Response: The parking count is calculated accordingly. Diagonal parking on the internal private drive has been
counted toward meeting the minimum requirements.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Will there be any four -bedroom units? if so, the P.D.P. must demonstrate
compliance with Section 3.8.16.
Response: There are no four -bedroom units.
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Keep in mind that a limited, mixed -use restaurant is permitted as a Type One land
use in the M-M-N zone district. This would a small coffee shop or snack shop as part of the
project.
Response: It is understood that a limited, mixed -use restaurant is permitted as a Type One land use in the MMN
zone district.
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: A photometric plan will be required at time of submittal. All site lighting must be
fully shielded and down directional.
Response: A photometric plan is included on in this PDP submittal package.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Are there any dwelling units in the clubhouse?
Response: Yes, the club house has a duplex residential unit attached.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 12/05/2011
If there is intention to use the park called out on the Overall Development Plan to meet the
MMN park requirements, then that park must be completed by this project.
Response: Understood.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/23/2011
Block 3 does not meet the block standard minimum building frontage requirement. You will
2
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel 131 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
to do? Is there any landscaping that will be left? The landscape plan does not show this area.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 65 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Will need to add a note to the Drake Road plan and profile sheet regarding the existing
water service to the median, what needs to be done with that and how. I have sent an email to
Parks to find out what this note should say. Obviously the note will be different depending on if
there is any landscaping or not to remain, so if you could let me know the plan that would be great.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 66 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Please label the limits of the concrete at the Drake/ Timberline intersection. If it is not
right at the PC where you are tying in it will impact the tie in and pavement patch.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 67 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: For the left turn lane and the right turn lane I need the taper length and storage/ bay
4071c•;% length labeled so I can check the design. It looks like you may have intended to do this on the
cross section sheet, but the numbers are too small for me to read.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 68 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Drake Road Cross sections. Need to provide elevations for the flowlines (medians and
edges) and existing and proposed slopes on all sections. As part of the cross section review I am
going to be looking at is what the overall x-section will be when the street is milled and overlayed
and we ideally get one slope from median or crown to gutter. Without knowing what the elevations
of these points are and doing the manual calculations I can not fully determine that.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 69 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Drake Road Cross sections. Whey doesn't this stationing match the design
stationing? All three plans have different stationing. This makes it incredibly difficult to compare
things between sheets. It all needs to be the same stationing or at least if not numbered the same
start at the same point.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 70 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2012
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel 131 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
Issue: 07/27/2012: Drake Road Cross Sections. I know that you are two different firms doing the design,
but I need to see the north flowline and curb location on these cross sections. As much as I can
match things up the slopes shown on the cross sections do not always seem to match those
shown on the north drake curb plan by Aspen Eng.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 71 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Intersection details. For the Loop Drive details. The grades shown are okay provided
you realize that these driveways will need to be built per drawing 707 and the maximum slope
across the walk area is 1:48 and it will work with the elevation points you have provided.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 72 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Intersection details. For the Timberline Driveway. With this detail it looks like all the
drainage from Timberline is going to be coming in this driveway across the sidewalk. Is that the
intent? If so the drainage needs to be brought into the site using sidewalk culvert not in the driveway
over the sidewalk. If that is not the intent then just make sure that a pan is clearly shown on the
crosee section of the driveway that you provide. Since this will not match the standard section
shown on the driveway cut a section is needed to show what the grades are and how this works.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 73 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Intersection details. For the Joseph Allen/ Drake intersection. Additional elevations
���are needed, the transition point (distance and elevation is needed) and additional information on the
changes at the center of the road are needed.
Engineering Development Review's Active Issues:
Made By: Sheri Langenberger
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 74 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: Additional details are needed for the median work. #703 for the curb type and then
704-13, 705, or 705a as appropriate.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 75 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012: The Drake Road plan by Aspen. In addition to the comments already noted that also
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2012
Project: Spring Creek Farms North Second Filing
Project Description: This is the final development plan for a 3 story multi -family project consisting of
314 dwelling units distributed amongst 12 buildings on 16 acres located on the
northwest corner of South Timberline Road and East Drake Road. The parcel is
located in the Medium Density Mixed Use (M-M-N) zone district and also
identified as Parcel 131 of the Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall
Development Plan.
The 314 dwelling units would be distributed among twelve buildings and include
a mix of studio, one, two, and three -bedroom units, and would be divided in the
following manner: 18 studio (6%); 144 one -bedroom (46%); 133 two -bedroom
(42%) and 19 three -bedroom (6%) for a total of 485 bedrooms leased by the
unit rather than individually. There would be 536 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, 52 exterior bicycle parking spaces are proposed. The project takes
access off of South Timberline Road as well as Joseph Allen Drive. The project
includes amenities such as a pool, fitness center, outdoor yoga room and
community and kitchen gardens.
apply to this sheet. This sheet is not correctly showing the removal of the median in the roadway.
Initial Date: 07/27/2012 Issue ID: 76 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/27/2012:
Light And Power's Active Issues:
Made By: Doug Martine
Initial Date: 07/13/2012 Issue ID: 1 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active
Issue: 07/13/2012: No further comments.
* Resolved Issues displayed with a gray background
Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2012
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416-2283, clevinaston(a)fcaov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 1
Spring Creek Farms North Filing Number 2
Initial Project Development Plan Submittal
Responses to Comments Dated March 9, 2012
Re -Submitted: April25, 2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: The intent of LUC Section 4.6(E)(3)(b) is not quite being met here in terms of
variation among repeated buildings. When adopting this section, the dialogue was centered
around divergence from a prototypical and formulaic multifamily development that could be
found in other communities.
(b) Variation among repeated buildings. For any development containing at least five (5) and
not more than seven (7) buildings (excluding clubhouses/leasing offices), there shall be at least two
(2) distinctly different building designs. For any such development containing more than seven (7)
buildings (excluding clubhouses/ leasing offices), there shall be at least three (3) distinctly different
building designs. For all developments, there shall be no more than two (2) similar buildings placed
next to each other along a street, street -like private drive or major walkway spine. Buildings shall be
considered similar unless they vary significantly in footprint size and shape, architectural
evaluations and entrance features, within a coordinated overall theme of roof forms, massing
proportions and other characteristics. To meet this standard, such variation shall not consist solely
of different combinations of the same building features.
RESPONSE: There is a balance between acknowledging multi -family residential occupancy
have a indispensable bay and rhythm of windows and balconies founded on the lifestyle,
and creating architectural diversity. Residential buildings compared to business or
libraries, each have their own rhythm that is a necessary part of architecture responding to
function. I would not call a residential rhythm 'Yormulaic", since the fact is we do not want
any of our buildings to look like an office. The zoning code acknowledges this reality asking
for the buildings to maintain a common massing and roofs, which we agree provides a level
of continuity that keeps a project from looking random or non-residential.
To strike a balance that brings architectural diversity to the project, we have created three
distinct architectural responses. Each of three building types have different size footprints,
by 2 and 3 times. Each of three building types have a different architectural expression:
1) A small 12 unit building with "rustic" appearance with stick framed open balconies, open
gable roofs and heavier textured materials. The rustic style is matched with darker subdued
earth tone colors.
2) The 24 unit buildings have a prairie style horizontal architecture including punched
windows and solidified balcony expression. The contiguous roof massing and single eave
line create a more singular building appearance. The prairie style and horizontality of this
architecture is strengthened by base plinth and 3rd story frieze in color and materials, and a
light color palette.
3) The large 36 unit buildings have a refined craftsman style. The massing of the roof is
broken into four segments, with discontinuous save lines, and varied color per bay, creates
a much different expression appearing as four masses. This building also emphasizes a
vertical expression with contiguous vertical bay windows and materials. This building uses
richer earth tone color palette with more light and dark dramatic contrast appropriate for
the craftsman style.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 03/06/2012
03/06/2012: As opposed to "right, left, back, front" please name each elevation using cardinal
directions.
RESPONSE: Noted, the elevations have been re -labeled.
Department: Current Planning Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416.2283, clevingston(Wcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
02/28/2012: If utility meters are located on the building elevations facing E. Drake Rd. or S.
Timberline Rd. they should be relocated or screened as to be less visually intrusive. Please show
on each building where they are and how they will be screened.
RESPONSE: The meters locations will be shown on the FDP. They will be properly
screened.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Is there a water tap for the community and kitchen garden?
RESPONSE: The community garden will be tapped off of a building — it will not require a
separate tap. Irrigation taps will be provided with the FDP.
An irrigation plan is required. Please provide for the second round of review.
RESPONSE: Per direction from planning, the Irrigation Plans will be provided with the FDP
submittal.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: LUC Section 4.6(D)(2) Mix of Housing Types. As proposed, the clubhouse will have a
duplex and be considered a mixed -use building per LUC definition. As a mixed use building, it is
subject to the standards in 3.5.3, such as a 15' build -to line from the street like private drive. The
parking area in front of the mixed -use building is problematic. The diagonal parking on the street
like private drive may be able to service the parking needs of the mixed -use building.
RESPONSE: The building orientation and parking was reviewed with City Staff, concluding
that the feature building appropriately addresses the street entry of the project with the
2
addition of a "drive-thru "pedestrian plaza that connects the building to the streetscape.
Please see the attached sketches, Exhibit 05.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please provide quantities and location of each species of plant on the landscape plan.
As submitted, I am unable to determine if the landscape plans are in compliance with LUC Section
3.2.1.
RESPONSE: Per direction from the planning department, the fully detailed landscape plan
will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: The front range tree recommendation list that includes information regarding critical
factors created by industry professionals that have decades of experience growing and caring
for trees in Fort Collins can be found at: http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/garden/treereclist.pdf
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please provide a chart illustrating compliance with section 3.2.2(M)(2). The chart
should show square footage of parking area, square footage of landscaping in parking area and that
percentage.
RESPONSE: The chart has been provided per the comments. Please see sheet L-2 for 3.2.2
Compliance Chart.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: It appears that the lighting plan does not meet 3.2.4(C) minimum lighting levels for the
pedestrian areas of the development. The photometric plan must be calibrated such that the light
loss factor is 1.00. If not done so already, this may require re -submitting the photometric so that it is
properly calibrated.
RESPONSE: Light loss factor has been changed. Exterior breezeway lights have been added
as well as street lights and bollards along some walkways. Please see Sheet E-1 for revised
Photometric Plan.
Department: Current Planning Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416.2283, clevingston cDfcaov.com
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 2
02/28/2012: The Lighting Plan shows predominantly Metal Halide lighting. A High Pressure
Sodium light source is preferred, assuming that the necessary level of security is being met. LUC
3.2.4(D)(5).
Additionally, metal halide lamps produce light in the white and blue spectrum's, while high pressure
sodium lamps produce light in the yellow, orange and red spectrum's. High pressure sodium lamps
last longer than metal halide; they also produce more lumens per watt. Metal halide lamps produce
more of a glare compared to high pressure sodium lamps.
RESPONSE: The lights remain Metal Halide because it is our stance that the Metal Halide
lights produce a more desired light color for our purposes. We feel they are better for
personal safety and for identifying your vehicle with true color rendition, HPS tends to make
all vehicles look a shade of grey or black. HPS are more typically used in industrial settings
due to their intensity, but Metal Halide is more appropriate, in our view, for residential
projects.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: While it appears "fixture a" is anodized, I am not clear on if the lighting pole is or not.
Poles must be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source per LUC
3.2.4(D)(4).
RESPONSE. All poles will be anodized.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
O2/28/2012: Please provide detail for "type c" lighting.
RESPONSE: A "type c" detail has been added. Please see Sheet E-2.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please remove the utilities from the site plan. This makes the site plan difficult to read.
RESPONSE: Utilities have been removed from the site plan.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Dog waste receptacles/ bag stations are strongly urged and should be
considered. Please add a symbol to the site plans to illustrate location and quantity.
RESPONSE: Pet Waste Stations have been added to the site and landscape plans. Please see
Sheets SP-2 and L-1 through L-3.
Department: Current Planning Comment Originated: 02/4
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416-2283, clevingston(cMcaov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3
02/28/2012: 1 am echoing zoning's comment regarding bicycle parking. a)
The symbol used for a bike rack is somewhat confusing.
b) How was 26 bicycle spaces arrived upon? The site plan appears to have 3 bike racks
called out. Is 26 bike spaces enough for 456 bedrooms?
4
c) Please provide bike rack detail. Bicycle parking facilities shall be designed to allow the bicycle
frame and both wheels to be securely locked to the parking structure. The structure shall be of
permanent construction such as heavy gauge tubular steel with angle bars
permanently attached to the pavement foundation. Bicycle parking facilities shall be at least two (2)
feet in width and five and one-half (5'/z) feet in length, with additional back -out or maneuvering space
of at least five (5) feet.
d) For convenience and security, bicycle parking facilities shall be located near building entrances,
shall be visible from the land uses they serve, and shall not be in remote automobile parking areas.
Such facilities shall not, however, be located so as to impede pedestrian or automobile traffic flow
nor so as to cause damage to plant material from bicycle traffic. Two bike racks are located in
shrub/perennial beds. Another bike rack is remotely looked next to the dog park, with no access, in
a perennial bed behind a garage. This location needs to be re -thought out in terms of safety, code
compliance, theft issues. Bike racks should not be visually or physically isolated.
For more information on the design, selection and installation of bicycle parking, we recommend
looking at the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals Guidelines (2010)
http://www.apbp.org/?page=Publications
RESPONSE. Per 3.2.2.c.4.a: Bike parking space count shall be 5% of required vehicle
parking. There are 514 required parking spaces for this site and 26 required bicycle parking
spaces based on the code requirements. This has been provided on the site as submitted.
In addition to the bike parking shown on the site, each building breezeway that serves 12
units has bike parking adjacent to the stair per the photo attached to this document, see
Exhibit 01 and Sheet L-5, Note 17. These breezeway racks are found in 15 locations
throughout the site and hold 3 bicycles each, for a total of 45 additional bicycle parking
spaces. Also, there are 12 freestanding bike racks in breezeways, which also hold 3 bicycles
each, for a total of 36 additional spaces. The total bike parking spaces provided is 107.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Garage #1 is approx. 73 feet in length does not comply with section 3.5.2(F). This
standard requires garages along the perimeter of a development and within 65 feet of a public
R.O.W. (in this case Joseph Allen Drive) or the property line of the development to not
exceed 55 feet in length. Garage #1 is exceeding the standard by 18 feet or by 33%.
RESPONSE: Noted. The subject garage has been reduced in length.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Loop Street is not meeting the intent of a street- like private drive. Where is the
sidewalk on the south side of Loop Street?
A street -like private drive shall be allowed as primary access to facing buildings or to parcels
internal to a larger, cohesive development plan, or for the purposes of meeting other requirements
for streets. Street -like private drives shall be designed to include travel lanes, on -street parking,
tree -lined border(s), detached sidewalk(s) and crosswalks.
Such street -like private drives must be similar to public or private streets in overall function and
buildings shall front on and offer primary orientation to the street -like private drive.
5
One design consideration to help meet the standard would be to activate the space behind the
garages with providing a different type of garage product. The garages should have doors allowing a
thru movement. Care should be taken with the rear elevations of the garages so they do not look like a
back of a garage at all. Thoughtful design and good architecture on the garages is key to meeting the
street -like private drive intent.
RESPONSE: Noted. The street like private drive now has sidewalks on both sides. The
garages have been designed per LUC Section 3.5.2.F. "rear walls of multi family garages"
have been properly detailed per IS of this section. This section lists 7 details for these back
walls of which one needs to be selected and applied twice per garage. In deference to the
street like private drive, we have included all seven of these details listed on the largest
garages, and nearly all seven even on the smallest garage. In addition, we more than satisfy
referenced Figure 9A in this section.
Department: Current Planning Comment Originated: 02/6
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416-2283, clevinastonr?o.fcgov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 6
02/29/2012: 4.6(E) Block Standards. It is difficult to determine if the "middle block" meets the block
standard requirement of 50% building frontage, especially with the mixed -use building having the
parking in front of it. Please call out dimensions of each block face and the areas that you are using to
satisfy this requirement, such as the lawn and other active areas to satisfy LUC Section 4.6(D)(3).
RESPONSE: All three blocks comply. A compliance diagram has been attached to this
document, please see Exhibit 02.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: 3.5.2(C)(2) Street facing facades. Building 1.1 is not satisfying this standard. Please add
an entrance on to Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE: Entries, porches, and walks have been included on the west facing Joseph
Allen fagade of Building 1.1.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 03/06/2012
03/06/2012: It is hard to tell if this plan is meeting 4.6(E)(1)(c) Minimum building frontage. Please
call out each block, the length of each block side, then the lengths of the structures or functional
open space you are using to meet this standard.
If using the 50% building frontage standard, please know that building frontage is defined as
meaning that side of a building which faces and is parallel to or most nearly parallel to a public or
private street. There can be only one (1) building frontage for each street upon which a building
faces.
RESPONSE: All three blocks comply. A compliance diagram has been attached to this
document, please see Exhibit 02.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenbergert?a.fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Provide two project benchmarks
RESPONSE: Benchmarks will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Additional grading work and information is needed on the plans. What do the
contours along the west side of Joseph Allen Drive tie to?
RESPONSE: Additional grading will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 22
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Show the sidewalk Chases and associated contours (all sheets).
RESPONSE: Sidewalk chases and associated contours will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 23
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Driveway entries needs to be provided with concrete to property line per driveway
detail. These can be the high -volume driveways.
RESPONSE. Driveways have been modified accordingly.
Comment Number: 24
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: No more than 750 square feet of pavement can drain out a driveway across the
sidewalk and into the street. It is difficult to tell if this is being met. If more than 750 square feet is
draining this way than you may need to provide additional inlets or use a sidewalk culvert to get it to
the street.
RESPONSE: As designed, 750 SF or less is draining across sidewalks to Joseph Allen.
Comment Number: 25
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-6; Handicap ramps should be provided on existing sidewalk along
Timberline Road at the "Entry Drive"
RESPONSE: It is intended that handicap ramps will be provided at all access points.
Department: Engineering Development Review Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slanaenbergera(D.fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 26
7
need at least one unit accessing Joseph Allen Drive.
Response: The site plan has been revised to comply.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/23/2011
Orientation to a connecting walkway standard. I do not see sidewalks called out so I can not
comment on how this does or does not meet this standard. Your street like private drive will
need to have sidewalks.
Response: Sidewalks are clearly delineated on the PDP submittal.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: There is a design opportunity by possibly shifting the lawn/club house area south
and utilizing a greenway connection up to the future proposed park.
Response: We are aware of the park west of Joseph Allen and the intent is to provide a pedestrian connection to
this park.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Larimer County Road Impact Fees and Street Oversizing Fees are due at the time
of building permit. Please contact Matt Baker at 224-6108 if you have any questions.
Response: Noted; these fees will be paid at the time of building permit.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenberger fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: The City's Transportation Development Review Fee (TDRF) is due at the time of
submittal. For additional information on these fees, please see:
http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/dev-review.php
Response: Noted, this fee is included with this PDP submittal package.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as
streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of
this project, shall be replaced or restored to City of Fort Collins standards at the Developer's
expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of
the first Certificate of Occupancy.
Response: Understood.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Please contact the City's Traffic Engineer, Joe Olson (224-6062) to schedule a
scoping meeting for the traffic study needed for this project. In addition, please contact
3
02/28/2012: Need to show proposed sidewalk chases out to existing and proposed streets.
RESPONSE. Sidewalk chases will be provided with FDP.
Comment Number: 27
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; Keep in mind standards regarding quarter crowns and tieing into
cross slopes.
RESPONSE: As currently designed, the Drake Road eastbound turn lane grading projects
the existing grade to the curb and gutter.
Comment Number: 28
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; See standards for saw cutting existing asphalt; sawcut at lane line or
center of a travel lane. Two foot from the existing edge of asphalt isn't adequate unless
it happens to fall along the existing lane line.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 29
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design will need to be reviewed in greater detail once cross sections have
been provided.
RESPONSE. Noted.
Comment Number: 30
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; How wide is the nose of the median? If the median is wide enough
to accommodate any landscaping I imagine it will need to. The City has been working on updating
and clarifying the median landscape design standards. I will need to know who you want involved in
a meeting to discuss the median landscaping.
RESPONSE: The median nose is 5.8' FL to FL at the storage bay. The median is too narrow
to provide any landscaping, per current City Code requirements. Please see Exhibit 03
attached to this document.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; How narrow does the width of the median get?
RESPONSE: The minimum width is 2.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; When cross sections are provided you will need to show the storm
drain pipe elevations and the cover over it. Need to verify it meets minimum cover requirements.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 33
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; We will need an exhibit (doesn't need to be part of the plan set)
that shows the turning templates for the intersection — need to see that we do not have conflicting
lefts and need to verify nose design and placement.
RESPONSE: Noted.
8
Comment Number: 34
02/28/2012: Where will irrigation tap(s) be provided?
RESPONSE: Irrigation tap locations will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 37
02/28/2012: Make sure that manhole lids are not within vehicle wheel paths.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 38
02/28/2012: Do you intend to build sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen?
RESPONSE: Design for sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen is now provided.
Comment Number: 40
02/28/2012: Remove crosswalks on Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE: Crosswalks across Joseph Allen have been removed.
Comment Number: 41
02/28/2012: Add street cut note to the Overall Utility Plan sheet.
RESPONSE: The street cut note has been added to the Overall Utility Plan.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221-6573, slanaenberaeraVcaov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 42
02/28/2012: You can certainly build the sidewalk on the west side of the road, but the only portion
you need to build is that portion at the intersection of Drake and Joseph Allen Drive to
accommodate the connection to the trail. I did see this noted somewhere in the plan set on one
sheet, but it is certainly not clear if that is the intent.
RESPONSE. This will be clarified; the intent is to build only on the East side.
Comment Number: 43
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-11 (Joseph Allen Drive Plan and Profile Sheets); Minimum length for both the
sag and crest vertical curves is 90 ft, per 7-17 and 7-18. This is using 30 mph design
speed, since based on the volumes the road is a Connector Local.
RESPONSE: 90' vertical curves are now provided where curves are used away from the
intersection. Intersection design will be clarified with the FDP. During the FDP process, a
variance will be requested for the vertical curve at the intersection if still used for crown
transition.
Comment Number: 44
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
W7
02/28/2012: Sheet C-11 (Joseph Allen Drive Plan and Profile Sheets); Please show a greater
length of existing grades and the exact point in which this will tie into the existing grades.
RESPONSE: A greater length of existing grades and tie-ins to existing grades are now
provided.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: General
An off -site pedestrian connection is needed to connect this site to the Power Trail. This connection
can be a temporary asphalt path or can be the concrete sidewalk built in the ultimate location. If it is
to be built in the ultimate location the design for Drake will need to be done to verify location and
elevations.
RESPONSE: This path is to be completed by the adjacent landowner, please see Sheet SP-2
for approximate location.
Comment Number: 35
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: See figure 19-6 regarding parking setbacks off a public street, these apply and impact all
3 driveways. 75' setback for Timberline Road and 50' setback for Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE: The parking has been revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 36
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Provide min. 15' radiuses on approaches to driveways along Joseph Allen and min.
20' radiuses on approaches to the driveway along Timberline Road.
RESPONSE: As designed, these minimum radii are being met.
Comment Number: 39
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Per section 9.3.2.0 the driveways need to be a minimum of 28' in width Min the right of
way. The width can be reduced internal to the site to meet parking standards and Poudre Fire
Authority requirements.
RESPONSE. 28' wide access is now provided.
Comment Number: 45
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-11 (Joseph Allen Drive Plan and Profile Sheets); Provide variance request
with justification for lane shift from Joseph Allen Drive to Sagebrush Drive for review and
evaluation.
RESPONSE: The request for the lane shift, as provided by Aspen Engineering, has been
accepted. Please see attached Exhibit 04.
Comment Number: 46
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please see redlined plans and utility plan check sheet for additional comments.
RESPONSE: Noted.
10
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: We have more current plat language than what has been shown on the plat. We can
provide you in email this information if we are given the contact information of whom to send it to.
RESPONSE. Plat language has been updated accordingly.
Department: Engineering Development Review Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slanuenberaera(�.fcaov.com
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 10
02/28/2012: What is note number 2 trying to say? I don't know what is trying to be said with this note.
RESPONSE: The note has been modified.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Include fifteen (15) foot utility easement along the north side of East Drake Road.
Provide nine (9) foot utility easement along the west side of Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE. Easements have been provided along Drake Road and Joseph Allen Drive.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Label easements at the end of west ends of Charles Brockman Drive and Nancy
Gray Avenue.
RESPONSE. Easements have been labeled.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: At the northwest corner of East Drake Road and Joseph Allen Drive where the
drainage pipes extend into Outlot A a drainage easement(s) are needed.
RESPONSE: Drainage easements have been provided accordingly.
Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: As per notations on the Timberline Center Plat, 63' of right of way was dedicated by
separate document #2006-0031327 north of Joseph Allen Drive and Nancy Gray Avenue.
RESPONSE: Dedications have been noted as existing with reception number.
Comment Number: 15
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Label the Street like Private Drives as "Private Drives" or "Street Like Private
Drives".
RESPONSE: Streets have been labeled accordingly.
11
Comment Number: 16
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Change "public and emergency access easement" to "access and emergency
access easement'
RESPONSE: Labels have been changed accordingly.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Label all existing easements with "existing" in front of the callout.
RESPONSE. Existing easements have been labeled accordingly.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: If Poudre Fire Authority requires the private drives to be named, those names will also
need to be placed on the plat with private drive or street like private drive in parenthesis after.
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the Final Plat.
Comment Number: 19
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Need to shown all the utility easements that are needed for the utilities running through
the site. Also need to show drainage easements that are needed for the pond and all the storm
pipes shown.
RESPONSE: On -site easement design has been updated accordingly.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Add Filing No. 2 to "Spring Creek Farms North"
RESPONSE: The title block has been updated accordingly.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Provide pedestrian access from the northwest corner of Joseph Allen Drive and Drake Road north
to the existing trail.
RESPONSE. Pedestrian access has been provided accordingly.
Department: Engineering Development Review Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenbergeranfcaov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 5
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
You do not need to build the portion of sidewalk that is adjacent to the west side of Joseph
Allen Drive,
12
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Remove the crosswalks shown on Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE: Crosswalks across Joseph Allen have been removed.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Label 'Public & Emergency Access Easement' as "Access & Emergency Access Easement'.
RESPONSE: Labels have been changed accordingly.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
See comments on utility plans regarding parking setbacks and entry drive widths.
RESPONSE: Parking has been revised accordingly.
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Transportation Impact Study:
There is missing text at the end of the last sentence on page 27 that is not continued on page 32.
RESPONSE: Page 32 is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970.224.6143, lex(aDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/27/2012
02/27/2012: No comments.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970.221-6361, tbuchanan(a.fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Street tree selection should be from the City Street Tree List.
RESPONSE: Understood. The species shown on the FDP will be from the City's Street Tree
List.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Street trees should be spaced away from street lights. Shade trees 40 feet;
13
ornamental trees 15 feet.
RESPONSE. Street trees have been spaced appropriately per the comment.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Contact the city Forester to discuss your proposed design ideas about continuation of the
street tree spacing and selection pattern found in front of the Police Services Building to the north of
the site. Ornamental trees used as street trees should meet some shape and form requirements. The
planting by Polices Services was to meet a very specific purpose.
RESPONSE: Based on a conversation with Tim Buchanan, the street tree design along Timberline has been
modified.
Department: Forestry Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970.221-6361, tbuchanancDfcpov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 5
02/28/2012: Landscape plan is preliminary, but some shade tree and conifer tree locations are quite
close to buildings.
RESPONSE: Tree locations have been moved away from buildings.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Explore using a mix of ornamental and conifer trees, in addition to shade trees at
appropriate places in the project. Areas along the main streets behind the sidewalks are one area to
consider for greater diversity of tree types.
RESPONSE. Please see revised Landscape Plans, Sheets L-1 through L-3.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: If there are any exiting trees on site schedule an on site meeting with the City Forester to evaluate.
RESPONSE: There are no existing trees on the site.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Tree Species Selection:
Northern Red Oak doesn't not survive or thrive in most Fort Collins Soils. Designers wanting to provide
a similar tree often use Shumard Oak and Texas Red Oak, usually in smaller quantities.
RESPONSE: Understood. Northern Red Oak has been removed from the plant list.
Comment Number: 9
02/28/2012: Please include these landscape notes:
Comment Originated: 02128/2012
• The soil in all landscape areas, including parkways and medians, shall be thoroughly
loosened to a depth of not less than eight (8) inches and soil amendment shall be thoroughly
incorporated into the soil of all landscape areas to a depth of at least six (6) inches by tilling,
14
discing or other suitable method, at a rate of at least three (3) cubic yards of soil amendment per
one thousand (1,000) square feet of landscape area.
• A permit must be obtained from the City forester before any trees or shrubs as noted on this
plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way. This includes zones between the
sidewalk and curb, medians and other city property. This permit shall approve the location and
species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may result in replacing or relocating trees and a
hold on certificate of occupancy.
• The developer shall contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at the
completion of each phase of the development. All trees need to have been installed as shown on
the landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final approval of
each phase. Failure to obtain approval by the City Forester for street trees in a phase shall result
in a hold on certificate of occupancy for future phases of the development.
RESPONSE: The notes have been added to the plans per the comment. See Sheet L-5, Notes
14-16.
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02128/2012: Provide a diversity of tree species. LUC 3.2.1 (D) (3).
RESPONSE. Trees will be labeled with the FDP submittal. It is our understanding that we
will need to adhere to the tree species diversity requirement per LUC 3.2.1(D)(3). Please see
Sheet L-5, Note 18.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russ Hovland, , Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
1. A link to the City's green building code amendments for multifamily is:
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/greencodes-mf.pdf
2. Low flow water -supplied plumbing fixtures. Starting January 2012, the new building code
requires that water -supply fixtures meet the maximum flow rates.
3. Starting in 2012, a construction debris recycling plan is required. Please go to:
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/green-construction-debris.pdf and
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/green-constr-waste-plan.pdf
4. The city has new building codes regarding low Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC's) in
construction materials for all new residential and commercial projects please go to
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/green-voc.pdf for details.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Department: Light And Power
15
Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224.6152, dmartine(&fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/15/2012
02/15/2012: A preliminary layout of the electric utility system has now been prepared. This
layout has some differences from the one prepared by TST as shown on the utility plan. Another
utility coordination meeting is encouraged do discuss potential conflicts with other utilities.
RESPONSE: Electric utility layout has been updated per discussion. Coordination will
continue through the FDP.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/15/2012
02/15/2012: A landscape plan showing planned streetlights along dedicated City streets has been
sent to Norris Design. These streetlights need to be shown on the landscape plan, and tree
locations adjusted to provide 40 ft. minimum clearance between lights and shade type trees, or 15
ft. to ornamental type trees.
RESPONSE: The city streetlights have now been added to the landscape plan and tree
locations have been adjusted accordingly.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/15/2012
02/15/2012: Paper copies or a pdf of the recorded plat and the final utility plan will need to be
provided to Light & Power Engineering (Doug Martine). Also, after the utility/site plan is complete
and approved, an AutoCad drawing to the plan needs to be sent to Terry Cox
(TCOX o(o)FCGOV.COM).
RESPONSE: Noted.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416.2283, clevingston Ofcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/07/2012
02/29/2012: The County Assessor shows that of the four parcels involved in the plat, they currently
have a different ownership for each parcel. Please include also the two following ownerships to the
signature blocks. SC Residential, LLC, SC Farms, LLC. Please contact Megan Harrity at Larimer
County Assessor's office at 970-498-7065 or mharrity@larimer.org for more information.
RESPONSE: The signature blocks have been added accordingly.
Department: PFA
Contact: Ron Gonzales, 970-221-6635, rr onzalesanpoudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02110/2012: Please disclose pool chemistry through a Hazardous Materials Impact Analysis in
16
3.4.5 of the City's Land Use Code.
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/10/2012: Only gas appliances will be allowed for use in the open kitchen and other attached
kitchen cooking appliances. There shall be no wood burning or charcoal or other substance
requiring a flammable liquid/solid for ignition.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/10/2012: This project will be a fully fire sprinklered (NFPA 13) project.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416.2418, wlamarclueMcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please refer to the City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Standards and
Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities for the design of the detention pond.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drainage easements are required for the detention pond and storm sewers.
RESPONSE: Drainage easements have been provided.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: The detention sizing calculations were not included in the drainage report. These need
to be included in the report before PDP approval to ensure the area reserved for detention is large
enough and will accommodate the site plan.
RESPONSE: Detention sizing calculations have been provided.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Timberline Road along the frontage of this development needs to detain for half the
street with the flows being routed into the detention pond. The 20 cfs allowable release needs to be
for the entire area including half of Timberline and Drake along the area's frontage. The prorated
share per acre needs to include the areas of these right-of-ways.
RESPONSE: Stormwater releases have been coordinated with the additional property owner.
See Drainage Report.
Department: Stormwater Engineering Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416.2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com
Topic: General
17
Transportation Planning for their requirements as well.
Response: We sent Ward Stanford, Traffic Operations Engineer (Joe Olson's assistant), the TIS scoping packet on
January 10, 2012 and had a number of phone conversations with him over the next few days. He returned the
signed/accepted scoping form for the TIS on January 18, 2012. We contacted Aaron Iverson, Transportation
Planning, on January 12, 2012. He responded about the alternative modes aspect of the TIS later that day.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Any public improvements must be designed and built in accordance with the
Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). They are available online at:
http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/UrbanSt htm
Response: Understood.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: This project is responsible for dedicating any right-of-way and easements that are
necessary for this project. This may include row and easements for Drake Road, Joseph Allen
Drive and any internal streets and utility locations.
Response: Right-of-way and easements will be dedicated by plat.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Utility plans will be required and a Development Agreement will be recorded once
the project is finalized.
Response: It is understood that utility plans and a Development Agreement will be recorded once the project is
finalized.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: It is unclear what the intention for the internal streets/ drives are. The plan labels
the main internal connections as Private Street, but also identifies the area as row. There are
probably several options for these drives — as I identify them out the use of them may also
depend on whether or not the option meets other code requirements.
Private Street — this is a street that is a separate tract not dedicated row, but the street is design
to LCUASS standards (appearance, width, depth and construction). The tract would be public
access, emergency access, drainage and utility easements. The private street is to be
maintained by the development.
Street like private drive — this is a private driveway that would need to meet the criteria within
the code for a street like private drive. The area under the street like private drive would be a
public access, emergency access, drainage and utility easement. The street like private drive
is to be maintained by the development.
Public Street — this is a public street, designed and built to LCUASS. Upon completion and
acceptance the roadway will be maintained by the city after the warranty period.
Response: Our intent is to provide and design a "street -like private drive" for the main roadway through the site.
The main roadway uses the LCUASS Local Street section as a template (with some modifications — see the typical
cross-section and Poudre Fire Authority requirements for a fire lane.) There will be public access, emergency
access, drainage, and utility easements dedicated along this main roadway as indicated in the Preliminary Utility
Plans submitted.
Department: Engineering Development Review
4
Comment Number: 5
02/29/2012: Onsite basin 3 can by-pass the detention pond, but the 100-year flow needs to be
subtracted from this development's release only, not the release for the entire area, including the
areas west and north of this development, This would be unfair to the other property owners. If this
reduces the site's detention pond release too much, than finding a way to route this basin into the
detention pond is recommended.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: The determination if onsite basin 2 can release into the Police Station's detention pond
needs to take place before PDP approval and not during final compliance. This is to ensure that all
drainage design will work and meet City criteria before any public approval of the development.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970.221-6588, jcounty(cDfcpov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 21
02/29/2012: No comments.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 16
02/29/2012: Please add a second benchmark to sheet C-1.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 17
02/29/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet C-2 through C-12.
RESPONSE: Scan -ability of the drawings will be addressed with FDP.
Comment Number: 18
02/29/2012: There are text over text issues on sheet C-13.
RESPONSE: Scan -ability of the drawings will be addressed with FDP.
Comment Number: 19
02/29/2012: There is a station that looks cutoff on sheet C-13.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 20
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Sheets C-11 & C-12 have their north arrows pointing the wrong direction.
RESPONSE: North arrows have been adjusted accordingly.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet L-2, L-3 & L-4.
18
RESPONSE: The line -over -text issues have been corrected.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 22
02/29/2012: No comments.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, 'county@fcgov.com
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
02/29/2012: Please change the section number in the legal description.
RESPONSE: The section number has been changed.
Comment Number: 2
02/29/2012: What is Note 2 saying?
RESPONSE: Note 2 has been modified.
Comment Number: 3
02/29/2012: Please make sure that all plat language is the most current.
RESPONSE: Current plat language from the City has replaced the old.
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There are differences between the boundary shown and what was platted on the
Spring Creek Farms North plat. Are your bearings & distances and curve data "measured"?
RESPONSE: Corrected linework using recorded bearings and distances has now been used.
Comment Number: 5
02/29/2012: All easements must be locatable.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please provide monument records for all public land corners shown on the plat.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please label all right of way (existing & to be dedicated), and include recording
information where applicable.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: All boundary corners must be shown as found or set with descriptions of the
monument.
RESPONSE. Understood.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please use a heavier lineweight for the curve & line tables.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
19
02/29/2012: The property to the north has been platted as "Timberline Center".
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There is 63' of right of way for Joseph Allen Drive that was dedicated by separate
document (2006-0031327) per the Timberline Center plat.
RESPONSE. Understood.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 12
02/29/2012: There is a typo on sheet SP-1.
RESPONSE: The typo has been corrected.
Comment Number: 13
02/29/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet SP-2.
RESPONSE: Scan -ability will be addressed with the FDP.
Comment Number: 15
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please correct the project name in the title & title block on sheet SP-1
RESPONSE: The titleblock has been corrected.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970-221.6820, wstanford(&fcgov.com
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: Volume for existing PM SbR turn in Fig 3 is shown as 113/115 but should be 352. Looks like the
lower value was used in the Existing, Background and Long Range analysis also. Please correct.
RESPONSE: This is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Figure 6, page 15 shows the distribution percentages on Katadin but should be on Nancy Grey.
RESPONSE: This is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Figure 12 has a supplemental geometry shown for the Wb Rt stating Required Geometry. As I
review the TIS analysis and findings I don't find a LOS failure that requires the WbRt lane to mitigate, so I
question the "required" label. Please provide why it's required or I would ask that it be re-stated/labeled through
out the TIS as desirable.
RESPONSE: This is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal along
with additional text.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Traffic Operations is in agreement with the North leg alignment of Joseph -Allen as shown on the
design provided by Mr. John Gooch of Aspen Engineering. Traffic has suggested some minor striping changes
to that leg of which Mr. Gooch would be providing to the developer for inclusion in the formal plans.
RESPONSE: Please see attached Exhibit 04.
20
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Please provide a drawing including (or add to sheet L1) the west leg of the Drake & Timberline
intersection giving the ability to check the sight distance from the east bound travel lanes back to the north.
RESPONSE: Please see Sheet SP-2.
Department: Transportation Planning
Contact: Emma McArdle, 970-221.6197, emcardle(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please provide a 12' by 18' concrete pad for a future bus shelter on Drake,
approximately 55- 80' back from the intersection of Drake and Timberline Roads. The pad shall be
accessible to the cub via a 36' path to the edge of curb if the pad isn't directly adjacent to the curb. If
the pad is not within the ROW, a pedestrian access easement shall be required.
RESPONSE: A pad and pedestrian access easement have been added to the plans. Please
see Sheet SP-2.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970.221.6854, rbuffington(Mcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please schedule a meeting to review some minor adjustments to the utility plans
(valve placements, fire hydrant locations, etc.).
RESPONSE. Noted.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: A portion of the proposed sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen Drive is missing.
RESPONSE. Sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen has been added accordingly.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: How will the area to the west be sewered? It would seem that additional sewer is
needed in Joseph Allen to avoid major street cuts in the future.
RESPONSE: Sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen is now shown.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Can we eliminate the fire hydrant southeast of Bldg 3.5?
RESPONSE: To be addressed with the FDP.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Is PFA okay with the fire hydrant locations with respect to the fire department
connections (FDC's)?
RESPONSE: To be addressed with the FDP.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
21
02/28/2012: Control valves are needed on the fire lines. Fire lines are typically 4" or 6" which would
have a gate valve adjacent to the tee on the City water main.
RESPONSE. To be addressed with the FDP.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: The sanitary sewer in the drive south of Charles Brockman must be a minimum of
15 feet from the garages. Adjust garage and/or utility locations to provide this separation and
adjust the easement widths accordingly.
RESPONSE: Utility alignment has been adjusted accordingly.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: See redlined utility plans for other comments.
RESPONSE: No redlines were received, per the meeting, these are to be addressed with the
FDP.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970.221-6854, rbuffinaton aMcpov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: Provide additional detail on the car center. All drains from the area must connect to
sanitary sewer. The center must be enclosed and constructed in a manner that will prevent rainfall
from entering the drains. A backflow preventer will be required upstream of the frost -free hydrant
(Utilities has a detail available).
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the FDP.
Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: How will the flows from the swimming pool drain be controlled to insure that the
sanitary sewer is not overloaded?
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the FDP.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: Add the 24" water main located in the Timberline R.O.W. to the landscape plan and
adjust tree locations to provide 10 feet of separation.
RESPONSE: The water main is now shown on the landscape plan, Please see Sheets L-1
through L-3.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Is the term "public easement' intended to include utilities? Check with
22
Engineering regarding the labeling.
RESPONSE: Easements and labeling have been revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Additional utility easement is needed where the sanitary sewer crosses the drive west of
Timberline.
RESPONSE: Additional utility easements have been provided.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970.416-2313, nbealsCa7fcpov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/17/2012
02/17/2012: The Elevation drawings should include all buildings (residential, clubhouse, pump
house, maintenance structure, each size of garages, and trash enclosures)
RESPONSE: All buildings have been included, see Sheets A-1 through A-9.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/17/2012
02/17/2012: On sheet A-3 and A-4 building 3.3 is indicated on the Site Key Plan on both.
Which one should it be?
RESPONSE. The key has been clarified.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/17/2012
02/17/2012: On sheet SP-2 include pump house under other buildings.
On sheet SP-2 Under proposed uses the number of dwelling units is 312 and under the parking
requirements when the type of uses are separated the dwelling units total 314, which is correct?
RESPONSE: There are 312 apartment dwellings and 2 townhomes for a total of 314 dwelling
units. The tables reflect this.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/21/2012
02/21/2012: Bike racks shall be located near the primary entrances of buildings. It is difficult to tell
where the bike racks are going and if they are distributed equally throughout the development. Also
please indicate how many bikes will be accommodated at each location.
RESPONSE: In addition to the bike parking shown on the site, each building breezeway that
serves 12 units has bike parking adjacent to the stair per the photo attached to this
document; see Exhibit 01 and Sheet L-5, Note 17. These breezeway racks are found in 15
locations throughout the site and hold 3 bicycles each, for a total of 45 additional bicycle
parking spaces. Also, there are 12 freestanding bike racks in breezeways, which also hold 3
bicycles each, for a total of 36 additional spaces. The total bike parking spaces provided is
107.
Department: Zoning
Comment Originated: 02/21/2012
23
Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
02/21/2012: In the PDR comments it was noted the project is required to have 90% of the units to be
within a 1/4 mile of a public park/gathering place of 10,000 square feet and the
response given by the applicant states they "understood." But it is unclear how this
requirement is being met.
RESPONSE: The current land owner on the west side of Joseph Allen Drive will be
submitting a PDP regarding development of the required park; this will identify the exact
location and design of the park. The park will be located within the required %, mile of The
Trails Apartments and will be built during the construction of The Trails Apartments by the
land owner on the west side of Joseph Allen Drive.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/21/2012
02/21/2012: Since the parking spaces in the garages are being used to meet the parking
requirements a note on the plans should be made that these spaces are not at additional costs.
RESPONSE: Applicant has met with City staff regarding this comment and will be submitting
for a modification in regards to the parking and garage requirements.
24
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416.2283, clevingston(c fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 1
Spring Creek Farms North Filing Number 2
FDP Submittal
Responses to Comments Dated March 9, 2012
Submitted: July 3, 2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: The intent of LUC Section 4.6(E)(3)(b) is not quite being met here in terms of
variation among repeated buildings. When adopting this section, the dialogue was centered
around divergence from a prototypical and formulaic multifamily development that could be
found in other communities.
(b) Variation among repeated buildings. For any development containing at least five (5) and
not more than seven (7) buildings (excluding clubhouses/leasing offices), there shall be at least two
(2) distinctly different building designs. For any such development containing more than seven (7)
buildings (excluding clubhouses/ leasing offices), there shall be at least three (3) distinctly different
building designs. For all developments, there shall be no more than two (2) similar buildings placed
next to each other along a street, street -like private drive or major walkway spine. Buildings shall be
considered similar unless they vary significantly in footprint size and shape, architectural
evaluations and entrance features, within a coordinated overall theme of roof forms, massing
proportions and other characteristics. To meet this standard, such variation shall not consist solely
of different combinations of the same building features.
RESPONSE: There is a balance between acknowledging multi -family residential occupancy
have an indispensable bay and rhythm of windows and balconies founded on the lifestyle,
and creating architectural diversity. Residential buildings compared to business or
libraries, each have their own rhythm that is a necessary part of architecture responding to
function,/ would not call a residential rhythm "formulaic'; since the fact is we do not want
any of our buildings to look like an office. The zoning code acknowledges this reality asking
for the buildings to maintain a common massing and roofs, which we agree provides a level
of continuity that keeps a project from looking random or non-residential.
To strike a balance that brings architectural diversity to the project, we have created three
distinct architectural responses. Each of three building types have different size footprints,
by 2 and 3 times. Each of three building types have a different architectural expression:
1) A small 12 unit building with "rustic" appearance with stick framed open balconies, open
gable roofs and heavier textured materials. The rustic style is matched with darker subdued
earth tone colors.
2) The 24 unit buildings have a prairie style horizontal architecture including punched
windows and solidified balcony expression. The contiguous roof massing and single eave
line create a more singular building appearance. The prairie style and horizontality of this
architecture is strengthened by base plinth and 3rd story frieze in color and materials, and a
light color palette.
3) The large 36 unit buildings have a refined craftsman style. The massing of the roof is
broken into four segments, with discontinuous eave lines, and varied color per bay, creates
a much different expression appearing as four masses. This building also emphasizes a
vertical expression with contiguous vertical bay windows and materials. This building uses
richer earth tone color palette with more light and dark dramatic contrast appropriate for
the craftsman style.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 03/06/2012
03106/2012: As opposed to "right, left, back, front' please name each elevation using cardinal
directions.
RESPONSE. The elevations have been re -labeled.
Department: Current Planning Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416.2283, clevingston(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
02/28/2012: If utility meters are located on the building elevations facing E. Drake Rd. or S.
Timberline Rd. they should be relocated or screened as to be less visually intrusive. Please show
on each building where they are and how they will be screened.
RESPONSE. The meters locations will be shown on the FDP. They will be properly
screened.
UPDATED RESPONSE. Meter locations have been shown on elevations and are screened
with landscape material.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Is there a water tap for the community and kitchen garden?
RESPONSE. The community garden will be tapped off of a building — it will not require a
separate tap. Irrigation taps will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The community garden plots will be irrigated as part of the overall
irrigation system.
An irrigation plan is required. Please provide for the second round of review.
RESPONSE. Per direction from planning, the Irrigation Plans will be provided with the FDP
submittal.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Irrigation Plans have been provided.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
2
02/29/2012: LUC Section 4.6(D)(2) Mix of Housing Types. As proposed, the clubhouse will have a
duplex and be considered a mixed -use building per LUC definition. As a mixed use building, it is
subject to the standards in 3.5.3, such as a 15' build -to line from the street like private drive. The
parking area in front of the mixed -use building is problematic. The diagonal parking on the street
like private drive may be able to service the parking needs of the mixed -use building.
RESPONSE: The building orientation and parking was reviewed with City Staff, concluding
that the feature building appropriately addresses the street entry of the project with the
addition of a "drive-thru"pedestrian plaza that connects the building to the streetscape.
Please see the attached sketches, Exhibit 05.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please provide quantities and location of each species of plant on the landscape plan.
As submitted, I am unable to determine if the landscape plans are in compliance with LUC Section
3.2.1.
RESPONSE. Per direction from the planning department, the fully detailed landscape plan
will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: A detailed landscape plan has been provided.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: The front range tree recommendation list that includes information regarding critical
factors created by industry professionals that have decades of experience growing and caring
for trees in Fort Collins can be found at: http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/garden/treereclist.pdf
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please provide a chart illustrating compliance with section 3.2.2(M)(2). The chart
should show square footage of parking area, square footage of landscaping in parking area and that
percentage.
RESPONSE. The chart has been provided per the comments. Please see sheet L-2 for 3.2.2
Compliance Chart.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: It appears that the lighting plan does not meet 3.2.4(C) minimum lighting levels for the
pedestrian areas of the development. The photometric plan must be calibrated such that the light
loss factor is 1.00. If not done so already, this may require re -submitting the photometric so that it is
properly calibrated.
RESPONSE: Light loss factor has been changed. Exterior breezeway lights have been added
as well as street lights and bollards along some walkways. Please see Sheet E-1 for revised
Photometric Plan.
3
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenber era(),fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: If the internal street is a public street or a private street —
A knuckle needs to be provided at the 90 turn.
The driveway spacing and offset driveways need to meet LCUASS.
Parking setbacks apply and it looks like there are at least a couple of parking lots that this
would apply to.
Response: The internal street is a "street -like private drive". We are proposing to eliminate the knuckle at the 90
degree turn at this point in time.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Charles Brockman Drive
1. You are showing this existing street to have inset parking on the south side of the street.
The street already exists without this condition. It maybe possible to reconstruct the street so
that inset parking is provided. To do so may require additional inlets in order to accommodate
the grade changes and drainage changes due to the relocation of the curb line into the existing
street.
Response: Charles Brockman Drive now shows no additional parking along the southern edge. Therefore, the
existing condition along Charles Brockman Drive will remain as -is and will not require additional inlets or grading
reconfigurations.
2. You are not showing the existing driveway on the north side of this street. The proposed
street/ street like private drive needs to align with this existing driveway or be off -set from that
driveway by 150 feet. The same spacing is needed to the driveway to the west and then from
the street intersection even further west.
Response: The existing driveway into the police station is now shown on our plans for reference; however, our site
plan no longer shows a connection to Charles Brockman Drive, therefore, alignment with the driveway into the
police station is no longer a concern.
Comment Number: 11
11/29/2011: Joseph Allen Drive
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
1. The existing portion of Joseph Allen Drive that is constructed is not constructed with
bump -ins. The plan you submitted shows the inclusion of bump -ins along the frontage of this
property. This is something that is possible, but will need to look at how the transition from no
bump -ins to bump -ins will occur. This may mean that some reconstruction of some of the
existing curb and gutter is needed. Please be aware that it is a bit more work to design a
street with bump -in since in most situations additional inlets and grade changes are needed to
accommodate the design.
Response: Noted; the design plans for Joseph Allen Drive no longer show or call for "bump -ins".
2. To design the bump -in locations on this street maybe a bit tricky as typically bump -ins are
only provided at driveway, intersection locations and midblock crossings. Since we do not
know where the streets to the west will be proposed this creates a bit of a quandary that will
need to be discussed and looked at.
Response: Noted, the design plans for Joseph Allen Drive no longer show or call for "bump -ins".
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416-2283, clevingston cDfcaov.com
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: The Lighting Plan shows predominantly Metal Halide lighting. A High Pressure
Sodium light source is preferred, assuming that the necessary level of security is being met. LUC
3.2.4(D)(5).
Additionally, metal halide lamps produce light in the white and blue spectrum's, while high pressure
sodium lamps produce light in the yellow, orange and red spectrum's. High pressure sodium lamps
last longer than metal halide; they also produce more lumens per watt. Metal halide lamps produce
more of a glare compared to high pressure sodium lamps.
RESPONSE., The lights remain Metal Halide because it is our stance that the Metal Halide
lights produce a more desired light color for our purposes. We feel they are better for
personal safety and for identifying your vehicle with true color rendition, HPS tends to make
all vehicles look a shade of grey or black. HPS are more typically used in industrial settings
due to their intensity, but Metal Halide is more appropriate, in our view, for residential
projects.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: While it appears "fixture a" is anodized, I am not clear on if the lighting pole is or not.
Poles must be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source per LUC
3.2.4(D)(4).
RESPONSE: All poles will be anodized.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please provide detail for "type c" lighting.
RESPONSE: A "type c" detail has been added. Please see Sheet E-2.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please remove the utilities from the site plan. This makes the site plan difficult to read.
RESPONSE. Utilities have been removed from the site plan.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Dog waste receptacles/ bag stations are strongly urged and should be
considered. Please add a symbol to the site plans to illustrate location and quantity.
RESPONSE. Pet Waste Stations have been added to the site and landscape plans. Please see
Sheets SP-2 and L-1 through L-3.
Department: Current Planning
Comment Originated: 02/4
0
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416-2283, clevingston(Mcaov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3
02/28/2012: 1 am echoing zoning's comment regarding bicycle parking. a)
The symbol used for a bike rack is somewhat confusing.
b) How was 26 bicycle spaces arrived upon? The site plan appears to have 3 bike racks
called out. Is 26 bike spaces enough for 456 bedrooms?
c) Please provide bike rack detail, Bicycle parking facilities shall be designed to allow the bicycle
frame and both wheels to be securely locked to the parking structure. The structure shall be of
permanent construction such as heavy gauge tubular steel with angle bars
permanently attached to the pavement foundation, Bicycle parking facilities shall be at least two (2)
feet in width and five and one-half (5'/z) feet in length, with additional back -out or maneuvering space
of at least five (5) feet.
d) For convenience and security, bicycle parking facilities shall be located near building entrances,
shall be visible from the land uses they serve, and shall not be in remote automobile parking areas.
Such facilities shall not, however, be located so as to impede pedestrian or automobile traffic flow
nor so as to cause damage to plant material from bicycle traffic. Two bike racks are located in
shrub/perennial beds. Another bike rack is remotely looked next to the dog park, with no access, in
a perennial bed behind a garage. This location needs to be re -thought out in terms of safety, code
compliance, theft issues. Bike racks should not be visually or physically isolated.
For more information on the design, selection and installation of bicycle parking, we recommend
looking at the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals Guidelines (2010)
http://www.apbp.org/?page=Publications
RESPONSE: Per 3.2.2.c.4.a: Bike parking space count shall be 5% of required vehicle
parking. There are 514 required parking spaces for this site and 26 required bicycle parking
spaces based on the code requirements. This has been provided on the site as submitted.
In addition to the bike parking shown on the site, each building breezeway that serves 12
units has bike parking adjacent to the stair per the photo attached to this document, see
Exhibit 01 and Sheet L-5, Note 17. These breezeway racks are found in 15 locations
throughout the site and hold 3 bicycles each, for a total of 45 additional bicycle parking
spaces. Also, there are 12 freestanding bike racks in breezeways, which also hold 3 bicycles
each, for a total of 36 additional spaces. The total bike parking spaces provided is 107.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The breezeway bicycle racks are no longer being used. They have
been replaced by freestanding bicycle racks throughout the site. See plans for locations
and quantity.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Garage #1 is approx. 73 feet in length does not comply with section 3.5.2(F), This
standard requires garages along the perimeter of a development and within 65 feet of a public
R.O.W. (in this case Joseph Allen Drive) or the property line of the development to not
exceed 55 feet in length. Garage #1 is exceeding the standard by 18 feet or by 33%.
RESPONSE: Noted. The subject garage has been reduced in length.
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 5
02/29/2012: Loop Street is not meeting the intent of a street- like private drive. Where is the
sidewalk on the south side of Loop Street?
A street -like private drive shall be allowed as primary access to facing buildings or to parcels
internal to a larger, cohesive development plan, or for the purposes of meeting other requirements
for streets. Street -like private drives shall be designed to include travel lanes, on -street parking,
tree -lined border(s), detached sidewalk(s) and crosswalks.
Such street -like private drives must be similar to public or private streets in overall function and
buildings shall front on and offer primary orientation to the street -like private drive.
One design consideration to help meet the standard would be to activate the space behind the
garages with providing a different type of garage product. The garages should have doors allowing a
thru movement. Care should be taken with the rear elevations of the garages so they do not look like a
back of a garage at all, Thoughtful design and good architecture on the garages is key to meeting the
street -like private drive intent.
RESPONSE: Noted. The street like private drive now has sidewalks on both sides. The
garages have been designed per LUC Section 3.5.2.F. "rear walls of multi -family garages"
have been properly detailed per 1B of this section. This section lists 7 details for these back
walls of which one needs to be selected and applied twice per garage. In deference to the
street like private drive, we have included all seven of these details listed on the largest
garages, and nearly all seven even on the smallest garage. In addition, we more than satisfy
referenced Figure 9A in this section.
Department: Current Planning
Comment Originated: 0216
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416.2283, clevingston(E fcgov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 6
02/29/2012: 4,6(E) Block Standards. It is difficult to determine if the "middle block" meets the block
standard requirement of 50% building frontage, especially with the mixed -use building having the
parking in front of it. Please call out dimensions of each block face and the areas that you are using to
satisfy this requirement, such as the lawn and other active areas to satisfy LUC Section 4.6(D)(3).
RESPONSE: All three blocks comply. A compliance diagram has been attached to this
document, please see Exhibit 02.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/2912012: 3.5.2(C)(2) Street facing facades. Building 1.1 is not satisfying this standard. Please add
an entrance on to Joseph Allen Drive.
2
RESPONSE: Entries, porches, and walks have been included on the west facing Joseph
Allen facade of Building 1.1.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 03/06/2012
03/06/2012: It is hard to tell if this plan is meeting 4.6(E)(1)(c) Minimum building frontage. Please
call out each block, the length of each block side, then the lengths of the structures or functional
open space you are using to meet this standard.
If using the 50% building frontage standard, please know that building frontage is defined as
meaning that side of a building which faces and is parallel to or most nearly parallel to a public or
private street. There can be only one (1) building frontage for each street upon which a building
faces.
RESPONSE: All three blocks comply. A compliance diagram has been attached to this
document, please see Exhibit 02.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenbergerAfcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Provide two project benchmarks
RESPONSE: Benchmarks will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Two benchmarks are provided on the cover sheet.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Additional grading work and information is needed on the plans. What do the
contours along the west side of Joseph Allen Drive tie to?
RESPONSE. Additional grading will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The grading along the west side of Joseph Allen Drive ties into the
existing topography.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Show the sidewalk Chases and associated contours (all sheets).
RESPONSE: Sidewalk chases and associated contours will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Sidewalk chases are included in the final grading design provided
in this FDP submittal.
Comment Number: 23
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Driveway entries needs to be provided with concrete to property line per driveway
detail. These can be the high -volume driveways.
RESPONSE. Driveways have been modified accordingly.
Comment Number: 24
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
7
02/28/2012: No more than 750 square feet of pavement can drain out a driveway across the
sidewalk and into the street. It is difficult to tell if this is being met. If more than 750 square feet is
draining this way than you may need to provide additional inlets or use a sidewalk culvert to get it to
the street.
RESPONSE. As designed, 750 SF or less is draining across sidewalks to Joseph Allen.
Comment Number: 25
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-6; Handicap ramps should be provided on existing sidewalk along
Timberline Road at the "Entry Drive"
RESPONSE. It is intended that handicap ramps will be provided at all access points.
UPDATED RESPONSE. Access ramps are shown and called out throughout the site.
Department: Engineering Development Review Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221-6573, slanpenberaerMcaov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 26
02/28/2012: Need to show proposed sidewalk chases out to existing and proposed streets.
RESPONSE: Sidewalk chases will be provided with FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Sidewalk chases are included in the final grading design provided
in this FDP submittal.
Comment Number: 27
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; Keep in mind standards regarding quarter crowns and tieing into
cross slopes.
RESPONSE. As currently designed, the Drake Road eastbound turn lane grading projects
the existing grade to the curb and gutter.
UPDATED RESPONSE. Drake Road eastbound turn lane grading shows a crown located
within the turn lane with cross -slopes that mimic the existing cross -slopes on Drake Road.
Comment Number: 28
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; See standards for saw cutting existing asphalt; sawcut at lane line or
center of a travel lane. Two foot from the existing edge of asphalt isn't adequate unless
it happens to fall along the existing lane line.
RESPONSE: Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Saw cuts along Drake Road fall along a lane line from STA. 10+00 to
approx STA.12+27, then V from the proposed curb and gutter from STA.12+27 to STA.
15+82, which sits approx. 8"south of the lane line.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
8
02/28/2012: Drake Road design will need to be reviewed in greater detail once cross sections have
been provided,
RESPONSE: Noted,
Comment Number: 30
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; How wide is the nose of the median? If the median is wide enough
to accommodate any landscaping I imagine it will need to. The City has been working on updating
and clarifying the median landscape design standards. I will need to know who you want involved in
a meeting to discuss the median landscaping.
RESPONSE: The median nose is 5.8' FL to FL at the storage bay. The median is too narrow
to provide any landscaping, per current City Code requirements. Please see Exhibit 03
attached to this document.
Comment Number: 31
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/2812012: Drake Road design; How narrow does the width of the median get?
RESPONSE: The minimum width is 2'.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The extended "skinny" median has been eliminated.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; When cross sections are provided you will need to show the storm
drain pipe elevations and the cover over it. Need to verify it meets minimum cover requirements.
RESPONSE: Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Storm profile for ST-5 shows the amount of cover over the storm.
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drake Road design; We will need an exhibit (doesn't need to be part of the plan set)
that shows the turning templates for the intersection — need to see that we do not have conflicting
lefts and need to verify nose design and placement.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 34
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Where will irrigation tap(s) be provided?
RESPONSE: Irrigation tap locations will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Irrigation tap location has been provided, see Irrigation Plans.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Make sure that manhole lids are not within vehicle wheel paths.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Do you intend to build sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen?
RESPONSE: Design for sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen is now provided.
0
Comment Number: 40
02/28/2012: Remove crosswalks on Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE: Crosswalks across Joseph Allen have been removed.
Comment Number: 41
02/28/2012: Add street cut note to the Overall Utility Plan sheet.
RESPONSE: The street cut note has been added to the Overall Utility Plan.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenberger(afcgov com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 42
02/28/2012: You can certainly build the sidewalk on the west side of the road, but the only portion
you need to build is that portion at the intersection of Drake and Joseph Allen Drive to
accommodate the connection to the trail. I did see this noted somewhere in the plan set on one
sheet, but it is certainly not clear if that is the intent.
RESPONSE. This will be clarified, the intent is to build only on the East side.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The updated intent is to build the sidewalk on both sides of Joseph
Allen Drive.
Comment Number: 43
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-11 (Joseph Allen Drive Plan and Profile Sheets); Minimum length for both the
sag and crest vertical curves is 90 ft, per 7-17 and 7-18. This is using 30 mph design
speed, since based on the volumes the road is a Connector Local.
RESPONSE: 90' vertical curves are now provided where curves are used away from the
intersection. Intersection design will be clarified with the FDP. During the FDP process, a
variance will be requested for the vertical curve at the intersection if still used for crown
transition.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Vertical curves meet design criteria for this FDP submittal.
Comment Number: 44
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-11 (Joseph Allen Drive Plan and Profile Sheets); Please show a greater
length of existing grades and the exact point in which this will tie into the existing grades.
RESPONSE. A greater length of existing grades and tie-ins to existing grades are now
provided.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
02/28/2012: General
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
10
An off -site pedestrian connection is needed to connect this site to the Power Trail. This connection
can be a temporary asphalt path or can be the concrete sidewalk built in the ultimate location. If it is
to be built in the ultimate location the design for Drake will need to be done to verify location and
elevations.
RESPONSE: This path is to be completed by the adjacent landowner, please see Sheet SP-2
for approximate location.
Comment Number: 35
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: See figure 19-6 regarding parking setbacks off a public street, these apply and impact all
3 driveways. 75' setback for Timberline Road and 50' setback for Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE. The parking has been revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 36
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Provide min. 15'radiuses on approaches to driveways along Joseph Allen and min.
20' radiuses on approaches to the driveway along Timberline Road.
RESPONSE: As designed, these minimum radii are being met.
Comment Number: 39
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Per section 9.3.2.0 the driveways need to be a minimum of 28' in width Min the right of
way. The width can be reduced internal to the site to meet parking standards and Poudre Fire
Authority requirements.
RESPONSE. 28' wide access is now provided.
Comment Number: 45
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Sheet C-11(Joseph Allen Drive Plan and Profile Sheets); Provide variance request
with justification for lane shift from Joseph Allen Drive to Sagebrush Drive for review and
evaluation.
RESPONSE: The request for the lane shift, as provided by Aspen Engineering, has been
accepted. Please see attached Exhibit 04.
Comment Number: 46
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please see redlined plans and utility plan check sheet for additional comments.
RESPONSE: Noted.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: We have more current plat language than what has been shown on the plat. We can
provide you in email this information if we are given the contact information of whom to send it to.
RESPONSE: Plat language has been updated accordingly.
11
. -4 - _ ..�i
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221-6573, slangenbergercDfcgov.com
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: What is note number 2 trying to say? I don't know what is trying to be said with this note.
RESPONSE: The note has been modified.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Include fifteen (15) foot utility easement along the north side of East Drake Road.
Provide nine (9) foot utility easement along the west side of Joseph Allen Drive.
RESPONSE. Easements have been provided along Drake Road and Joseph Allen Drive.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Label easements at the end of west ends of Charles Brockman Drive and Nancy
Gray Avenue.
RESPONSE. Easements have been labeled.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: At the northwest corner of East Drake Road and Joseph Allen Drive where the
drainage pipes extend into Outlot A a drainage easement(s) are needed.
RESPONSE: Drainage easements have been provided accordingly.
Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: As per notations on the Timberline Center Plat, 63' of right of way was dedicated by
separate document #2006-0031327 north of Joseph Allen Drive and Nancy Gray Avenue.
RESPONSE. Dedications have been noted as existing with reception number.
Comment Number: 15
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Label the Street like Private Drives as "Private Drives" or "Street Like Private
Drives".
RESPONSE: Streets have been labeled accordingly.
Comment Number: 16
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Change "public and emergency access easement" to "access and emergency
access easement"
RESPONSE: Labels have been changed accordingly.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Label all existing easements with "existing" in front of the callout.
RESPONSE. Existing easements have been labeled accordingly.
12
Comment Number: 18
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: If Poudre Fire Authority requires the private drives to be named, those names will also
need to be placed on the plat with private drive or street like private drive in parenthesis after.
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the Final Plat.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Street names are still being contemplated by the team. It is
understood that street names will need to be chosen and approved prior to final approval
and/or recordation of the plat.
Comment Number: 19
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Need to shown all the utility easements that are needed for the utilities running through
the site. Also need to show drainage easements that are needed for the pond and all the storm
pipes shown.
RESPONSE: On -site easement design has been updated accordingly.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Add Filing No. 2 to "Spring Creek Farms North"
RESPONSE: The title block has been updated accordingly.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Provide pedestrian access from the northwest corner of Joseph Allen Drive and Drake Road north
to the existing trail.
RESPONSE: Pedestrian access has been provided accordingly.
Department: Engineering Development Review Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221-6573, slangenberger fcaov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 5
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
You do not need to build the portion of sidewalk that is adjacent to the west side of Joseph
Allen Drive.
RESPONSE: Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Noted, however, it is our intent to build the sidewalk now.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Remove the crosswalks shown on Joseph Allen Drive.
13
3. On the plan provided you show Joseph Allen Drive as having 70 feet of row. This maybe
necessary at the intersection with Drake Road to accommodate all movements and vehicle
types, but the existing street has 63 feet of row and I would expect that the x-section of the
street along this property would remain the same (other than the bump -ins which would be
accommodated within that width).
Response: The right-of-way provided along the extended stretch of Joseph Allen Drive has been changed to 63.
4. 1 don't know that any are actually proposed but any pedestrian crossing not at street
intersections need to meet Traffic Operations criteria for a midblock crossing in order for it to be
approved.
Response: There are pedestrian crossings shown for Joseph Allen Drive on the preliminary plans. Location of
these crossings is preliminary only and subject to change based upon the location of the community park to be
located on the west side of Joseph Allen Drive. It is anticipated that all pedestrian crossings that do not occur at
intersections will need to meet mid -block crossing design requirements.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970.221.6573, slangenberger(aD-fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11129/2011: Drake Road
1. The left turn into the site will need to be designed and constructed with this project. The
ability to keep some landscaping in this area will be greatly desired.
Response: A left turn into the site from EB Drake Road will be provided. Refer to the Preliminary Utility Plans
submitted.
2. Curb, gutter and sidewalk need to be designed and installed along this frontage and as
necessary to accommodate the Joseph Allen Street intersection.
Response: A westbound right turn lane on Drake Road at Joseph Allen is required; curb, gutter, and sidewalk
design along the north edge of Drake Road will be provided from Timberline to Joseph Allen Drive. Refer to the
Preliminary Utility Plans submitted.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: Any necessary street cuts into existing streets are subject to applicable street cut
fees. Please be aware that fees are tripled for cutting into roadways less than 5 years old.
Response: It is understood that there are fees for street cuts into existing streets.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 11/29/2011
11/29/2011: A Development Construction Permit (DCP) will need to be obtained prior to starting
any work on the site.
Response: It is understood that a DCP will need to be obtained before starting site work.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970.224.6143, lexofcgov.com
0
RESPONSE. Crosswalks across Joseph Allen have been removed.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
Label "Public & Emergency Access Easement" as "Access & Emergency Access Easement'.
RESPONSE: Labels have been changed accordingly.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Site Plan:
See comments on utility plans regarding parking setbacks and entry drive widths.
RESPONSE. Parking has been revised accordingly.
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Transportation Impact Study:
There is missing text at the end of the last sentence on page 27 that is not continued on page 32.
RESPONSE: Page 32 is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970-224.6143, lex a()fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/27/2012
02/27/2012: No comments.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970.221.6361, tbuchanan(a.fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Street tree selection should be from the City Street Tree List.
RESPONSE. Understood. The species shown on the FDP will be from the City's Street Tree
List.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Trees selected conform to the City Plant List.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Street trees should be spaced away from street lights. Shade trees 40 feet;
ornamental trees 15 feet.
RESPONSE: Street trees have been spaced appropriately per the comment.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
14
..... 4x 1. I., .
02128/2012: Contact the city Forester to discuss your proposed design ideas about continuation of the
street tree spacing and selection pattern found in front of the Police Services Building to the north of
the site. Ornamental trees used as street trees should meet some shape and form requirements. The
planting by Polices Services was to meet a very specific purpose.
RESPONSE: Based on a conversation with Tim Buchanan, the street tree design along Timberline has been
modified.
Department: Forestry Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970.221.6361, tbuchanan(a.fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 5
02/28/2012: Landscape plan is preliminary, but some shade tree and conifer tree locations are quite
close to buildings.
RESPONSE: Tree locations have been moved away from buildings.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Explore using a mix of ornamental and conifer trees, in addition to shade trees at
appropriate places in the project. Areas along the main streets behind the sidewalks are one area to
consider for greater diversity of tree types.
RESPONSE: Please see revised Landscape Plans, Sheets L-1 through L-3.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: If there are any exiting trees on site schedule an onsite meeting with the City Forester to evaluate.
RESPONSE: There are no existing trees on the site.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Tree Species Selection:
Northern Red Oak doesn't not survive or thrive in most Fort Collins Soils. Designers wanting to provide
a similar tree often use Shumard Oak and Texas Red Oak, usually in smaller quantities.
RESPONSE: Understood. Northern Red Oak has been removed from the plant list.
Comment Number: 9
02/28/2012: Please include these landscape notes:
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
The soil in all landscape areas, including parkways and medians, shall be thoroughly
loosened to a depth of not less than eight (8) inches and soil amendment shall be thoroughly
incorporated into the soil of all landscape areas to a depth of at least six (6) inches by tilling,
discing or other suitable method, at a rate of at least three (3) cubic yards of soil amendment per
one thousand (1,000) square feet of landscape area.
15
• A permit must be obtained from the City forester before any trees or shrubs as noted on this
plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way. This includes zones between the
sidewalk and curb, medians and other city property. This permit shall approve the location and
species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may result in replacing or relocating trees and a
hold on certificate of occupancy.
• The developer shall contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at the
completion of each phase of the development. All trees need to have been installed as shown on
the landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final approval of
each phase. Failure to obtain approval by the City Forester for street trees in a phase shall result
in a hold on certificate of occupancy for future phases of the development.
RESPONSE. The notes have been added to the plans per the comment. See Sheet L-5, Notes
14-16.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Provide a diversity of tree species. LUC 3.2.1 (D) (3).
RESPONSE. Trees will be labeled with the FDP submittal. It is our understanding that we
will need to adhere to the tree species diversity requirement per LUC 3.2.1(D)(3). Please see
Sheet L-5, Note M
UPDATED RESPONSE. Trees have been labeled and they meet the City's species diversity
requirement.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russ Hovland, , Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
1. A link to the City's green building code amendments for multifamily is:
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/greencodes-mf.pdf
2. Low flow water -supplied plumbing fixtures. Starting January 2012, the new building code
requires that water -supply fixtures meet the maximum flow rates.
3. Starting in 2012, a construction debris recycling plan is required. Please go to:
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/green-construction-debris.pdf and
http://www.fcgov.com/building/pdf/green-constr-waste-plan.pdf
4. The city has new building codes regarding low Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC's) in
construction materials for all new residential and commercial projects please go to
http://www.fcgov,com/building/pdf/green-voc.pdf for details.
RESPONSE. Understood.
Department: Light And Power
16
Contact: Doug Martine, 970.224.6152, d mart! n e(cDfcgov. com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/15/2012
02/15/2012: A preliminary layout of the electric utility system has now been prepared, This
layout has some differences from the one prepared by TST as shown on the utility plan. Another
utility coordination meeting is encouraged do discuss potential conflicts with other utilities.
RESPONSE: Electric utility layout has been updated per discussion. Coordination will
continue through the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The Dry Utility Plan submitted with this FDP package reflects the
previous coordination with the Power department. The Dry Utility Plan also includes more
detail for other dry utility providers, such as gas and telecom.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/15/2012
02/15/2012: A landscape plan showing planned streetlights along dedicated City streets has been
sent to Norris Design, These streetlights need to be shown on the landscape plan, and tree
locations adjusted to provide 40 ft, minimum clearance between lights and shade type trees, or 15
ft. to ornamental type trees.
RESPONSE: The city streetlights have now been added to the landscape plan and tree
locations have been adjusted accordingly.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/15/2012
02/15/2012: Paper copies or a pdf of the recorded plat and the final utility plan will need to be
provided to Light & Power Engineering (Doug Martine). Also, after the utility/site plan is complete
and approved, an AutoCad drawing to the plan needs to be sent to Terry Cox
(TCOX(_ FCGOV.COM).
RESPONSE: Understood.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416.2283, clevingston .fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/07/2012
02/29/2012: The County Assessor shows that of the four parcels involved in the plat, they currently
have a different ownership for each parcel, Please include also the two following ownerships to the
signature blocks. SC Residential, LLC, SC Farms, LLC. Please contact Megan Harrity at Larimer
County Assessor's office at 970-498-7065 or mharrity@larimer.org for more information.
RESPONSE: The signature blocks have been added accordingly.
Department: PFA
Contact: Ron Gonzales, 970-221-6635, ronzales .goudre-fire.org
Topic: General
17
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/10/2012: Please disclose pool chemistry through a Hazardous Materials Impact Analysis in
3.4.5 of the City's Land Use Code.
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Pool chemistry has been provided in a Hazardous Materials Impact
Analysis, see attached to this response document.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/10/2012: Only gas appliances will be allowed for use in the open kitchen and other attached
kitchen cooking appliances. There shall be no wood burning or charcoal or other substance
requiring a flammable liquid/solid for ignition.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/10/2012: This project will be a fully fire sprinklered (NFPA 13) project.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970.416.2418, wlamarguecMcpov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please refer to the City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Standards and
Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities for the design of the detention pond.
RESPONSE: This document has been utilized and the detention pond design follows the
standards and guidelines as closely as possible.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Drainage easements are required for the detention pond and storm sewers.
RESPONSE. Drainage easements have been provided.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02129/2012: The detention sizing calculations were not included in the drainage report. These need
to be included in the report before PDP approval to ensure the area reserved for detention is large
enough and will accommodate the site plan.
RESPONSE: Detention sizing calculations have been provided.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Timberline Road along the frontage of this development needs to detain for half the
street with the flows being routed into the detention pond. The 20 cis allowable release needs to be
for the entire area including half of Timberline and Drake along the area's frontage. The prorated
share per acre needs to include the areas of these right-of-ways.
RESPONSE: Stormwater releases have been coordinated with the additional property owner.
See Drainage Report.
18
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416.2418, waamargue()fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 5
02/29/2012: Onsite basin 3 can by-pass the detention pond, but the 100-year flow needs to be
subtracted from this development's release only, not the release for the entire area, including the
areas west and north of this development. This would be unfair to the other property owners, If this
reduces the site's detention pond release too much, than finding a way to route this basin into the
detention pond is recommended.
RESPONSE. Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE. The release rates have been recalculated. See the Drainage Report
submitted with this FDP submittal.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: The determination if onsite basin 2 can release into the Police Station's detention pond
needs to take place before PDP approval and not during final compliance. This is to ensure that all
drainage design will work and meet City criteria before any public approval of the development.
RESPONSE: Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Basin 2 release into the Police Station was granted approval during
PDP.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty�afcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 21
02/29/2012: No comments.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 16
02/29/2012: Please add a second benchmark to sheet C-1,
RESPONSE: Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE: A second benchmark has been added accordingly.
Comment Number: 17
02/29/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet C-2 through C-12.
RESPONSE: Scan -ability of the drawings will be addressed with FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Line -over -text issues have been corrected.
Comment Number: 18
02/29/2012: There are text over text issues on sheet C-13.
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
19
RESPONSE. Scan -ability of the drawings will be addressed with FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE. Test -over -text issues have been corrected.
Comment Number: 19
02/29/2012: There is a station that looks cutoff on sheet C-13.
RESPONSE: Noted.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The cut-off station has been corrected.
Comment Number: 20
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/2912012: Sheets C-11 &.C-12 have their north arrows pointing the wrong direction.
RESPONSE. North arrows have been adjusted accordingly.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 14
02/29/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet L-2, L-3 & L-4.
RESPONSE: The line -over -text issues have been corrected.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 22
02/29/2012: No comments.
Department: Technical Services
Contact; Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icounty fcaov.com
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
02/29/2012: Please change the section number in the legal description.
RESPONSE: The section number has been changed.
Comment Number: 2
02/29/2012: What is Note 2 saying?
RESPONSE: Note 2 has been modified.
Comment Number: 3
02/29/2012: Please make sure that all plat language is the most current.
RESPONSE: Current plat language from the City has replaced the old.
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There are differences between the boundary shown and what was platted on the
Spring Creek Farms North plat. Are your bearings & distances and curve data "measured"?
RESPONSE: Corrected linework using recorded bearings and distances has now been used.
Comment Number: 5
02/29/2012: All easements must be locatable,
RESPONSE. Understood.
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please provide monument records for all public land corners shown on the plat.
20
RESPONSE: Understood.
UPDATED RESPONSE. There are no section corners or section lines referenced in the Final
Plat submitted with this FDP.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please label all right of way (existing & to be dedicated), and include recording
information where applicable.
RESPONSE: Understood.
UPDATED RESPONSE. ROWS have been labeled accordingly.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: All boundary corners must be shown as found or set with descriptions of the
monument.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 9
02/29/2012: Please use a heavier lineweight for the curve & line tables.
RESPONSE: Understood.
UPDATED RESPONSE: A heavier lineweight has been used accordingly.
Comment Number: 10
02/29/2012: The property to the north has been platted as "Timberline Center".
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There is 63' of right of way for Joseph Allen Drive that was dedicated by separate
document (2006-0031327) per the Timberline Center plat.
RESPONSE: Understood.
UPDATED RESPONSE: This area is now outside of the outer boundary of the plat, so is no
longer shown.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There is a typo on sheet SP-1.
RESPONSE: The typo has been corrected.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet SP-2.
RESPONSE. Scan -ability will be addressed with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Line -over -text issues have been corrected.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please correct the project name in the title & title block on sheet SP-1.
21
RESPONSE: The titleblock has been corrected.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970.221.6820, wstanford(Dfcaov.com
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/0112012: Volume for existing PM SbR turn in Fig 3 is shown as 113/115 but should be 352. Looks like the
lower value was used in the Existing, Background and Long Range analysis also. Please correct.
RESPONSE: This is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Figure 6, page 15 shows the distribution percentages on Katadin but should be on Nancy Grey.
RESPONSE: This is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Figure 12 has a supplemental geometry shown for the Wb Rt stating Required Geometry. As I
review the TIS analysis and findings I don't find a LOS failure that requires the WbRt lane to mitigate, so I
question the "required" label. Please provide why it's required or I would ask that it be re-stated/labeled through
out the TIS as desirable.
RESPONSE: This is revised in the Traffic Memorandum included with this submittal along
with additional text.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Traffic Operations is in agreement with the North leg alignment of Joseph -Allen as shown on the
design provided by Mr. John Gooch of Aspen Engineering. Traffic has suggested some minor striping changes
to that leg of which Mr. Gooch would be providing to the developer for inclusion in the formal plans.
RESPONSE: Please see attached Exhibit 04.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/12/2012
04/12/2012: Please provide a drawing including (or add to sheet L1) the west leg of the Drake & Timberline
intersection giving the ability to check the sight distance from the east bound travel lanes back to the north.
RESPONSE: Please see Sheet SP-2.
Department: Transportation Planning
Contact: Emma McArdle, 970.221-6197, emcardle(afcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please provide a 12' by 18' concrete pad for a future bus shelter on Drake,
approximately 55' - 80' back from the intersection of Drake and Timberline Roads. The pad shall be
accessible to the cub via a 36' path to the edge of curb if the pad isn't directly adjacent to the curb. If
the pad is not within the ROW, a pedestrian access easement shall be required.
RESPONSE: A pad and pedestrian access easement have been added to the plans. Please
see Sheet SP-2.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
22
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221.6854, rbuffinaton(@fcaov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Please schedule a meeting to review some minor adjustments to the utility plans
(valve placements, fire hydrant locations, etc.).
RESPONSE. Noted.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: A portion of the proposed sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen Drive is missing.
RESPONSE: Sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen has been added accordingly.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: How will the area to the west be sewered? It would seem that additional sewer is
needed in Joseph Allen to avoid major street cuts in the future.
RESPONSE: Sanitary sewer in Joseph Allen is now shown.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Can we eliminate the fire hydrant southeast of Bldg 3.5?
RESPONSE: To be addressed with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: This hydrant cannot be eliminated because the required hose length
and reach does not meet PFA requirements from the hydrant on Joseph Allen Drive.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Is PFA okay with the fire hydrant locations with respect to the fire department
connections (FDC's)?
RESPONSE: To be addressed with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: PFA will need to review the plans submitted with this FDP submittal.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Control valves are needed on the fire lines. Fire lines are typically 4" or 6" which would
have a gate valve adjacent to the tee on the City water main.
RESPONSE: To be addressed with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Control valves are shown on all fire lines to each building.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: The sanitary sewer in the drive south of Charles Brockman must be a minimum of
15 feet from the garages. Adjust garage and/or utility locations to provide this separation and
adjust the easement widths accordingly.
RESPONSE: Utility alignment has been adjusted accordingly.
Comment Number: 8
02/28/2012: See redlined utility plans for other comments.
Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
23
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: With respect to landscaping and design, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, in
Article 3.2.1 (E)(2)(3), requires that you use native plants and grasses in your landscaping or
re -landscaping and reduce bluegrass lawns as much as possible.
Response: To the extent possible, native plants will be utilized and the amount bluegrass lawns will be reduced.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Doug Martine, 970.224.6152, dmartine .fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/30/2011
11/30/2011: Once the site plan and a preliminary utility plan are prepared a utility coordination
meeting is encouraged. Light & Power electric development charges will apply. Please
coordinate power requirements and electric system locations with Light & Power Engineering
(970)221-6700.
Response: Noted; a utility coordination meeting was held on January 23, 201Z The following departments
attended: WaterMastewater (Roger), Light/Power (Doug), Stormwater (Wes), Engineering (Mark and Matt), Bill from
Century Link, and Don from Comcast.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Craig Foreman, 970-221.6618, cforeman(a)-fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
12/01/2011: No comments
Department: PFA
Contact: Ron Gonzales, 970-221.6635, rr onzales ftoudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Department: PFA
Contact: Ron Gonzales, 970.221.6635, roc onzales(a)-poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
11/30/2011: This will be a fire sprinklered project.
Response: It is understood that this will be a fire sprinklered project.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/01/2011
Comment Originated: 11/30/2011
Comment Originated: 11/30/2011
11/30/2011: Fire lanes are required to be shown as emergency access easements on the plat
throughout the parking lots and the private drive within the project. Fire lanes are required to
be 20 foot wide with 14 foot of clear air space, and visible by painting or signage.
RESPONSE: No redlines were received, per the meeting, these are to be addressed with the
FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Redlines were reviewed and addressed.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970.221.6854, rbuffington(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: Provide additional detail on the car center. All drains from the area must connect to
sanitary sewer. The center must be enclosed and constructed in a manner that will prevent rainfall
from entering the drains. A backflow preventer will be required upstream of the frost -free hydrant
(Utilities has a detail available).
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: The car care center will have a roof over it and the surrounding
grade sloped to prevent rain water from entering the drain. It will be connected to the
sanitary sewer line after a 750 gallon sand oil interceptor. A backflow preventer will be
installed upstream (in the building which the supply is teed off from).
Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: How will the flows from the swimming pool drain be controlled to insure that the
sanitary sewer is not overloaded?
RESPONSE: This information will be provided with the FDP.
UPDATED RESPONSE: There will be a I" evacuation line on the pool/spa
filtration pump discharge line. This 1"line will have a flow control valve on
it that will allow the user to adjust the discharge rate into the drain to
ensure that the drain line is accepting the evacuation water without
flooding. The 1" evacuation line will have an air gap and not directly
connect to the drain. The 1 " line is intended to have a flow of about 25
GPM.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 03/01/2012
03/01/2012: Add the 24" water main located in the Timberline R.O.W. to the landscape plan and
adjust tree locations to provide 10 feet of separation.
RESPONSE: The water main is now shown on the landscape plan, Please see Sheets L-1
through L-3.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Is the term "public easement" intended to include utilities? Check with
24
Engineering regarding the labeling.
RESPONSE: Easements and labeling have been revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
02/28/2012: Additional utility easement is needed where the sanitary sewer crosses the drive west of
Timberline.
RESPONSE: Additional utility easements have been provided.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970.416.2313, nbeals cDfcuov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/17/2012
02/17/2012: The Elevation drawings should include all buildings (residential, clubhouse, pump
house, maintenance structure, each size of garages, and trash enclosures)
RESPONSE: All buildings have been included, see Sheets A-1 through A-9.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/17/2012
02/17/2012: On sheet A-3 and A-4 building 3.3 is indicated on the Site Key Plan on both.
Which one should it be?
RESPONSE: The key has been clarified.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/17/2012
02/17/2012: On sheet SP-2 include pump house under other buildings.
On sheet SP-2 Under proposed uses the number of dwelling units is 312 and under the parking
requirements when the type of uses are separated the dwelling units total 314, which is correct?
RESPONSE: There are 312 apartment dwellings and 2 townhomes for a total of 314 dwelling
units. The tables reflect this.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 02/21/2012
02/21/2012: Bike racks shall be located near the primary entrances of buildings. It is difficult to tell
where the bike racks are going and if they are distributed equally throughout the development. Also
please indicate how many bikes will be accommodated at each location.
RESPONSE: In addition to the bike parking shown on the site, each building breezeway that
serves 12 units has bike parking adjacent to the stair per the photo attached to this
document, see Exhibit 01 and Sheet L-5, Note 17. These breezeway racks are found in 15
locations throughout the site and hold 3 bicycles each, for a total of 45 additional bicycle
parking spaces. Also, there are 12 freestanding bike racks in breezeways, which also hold 3
bicycles each, for a total of 36 additional spaces. The total bike parking spaces provided is
107.
25
UPDATED RESPONSE: The breezeway bicycle racks are no longer being used. They have
been replaced by freestanding bicycle racks throughout the site. See plans for locations
and quantity.
Department: Zoning Comment Originated: 02/21/2012
Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416.2313, nbeals@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
02/21/2012: In the PDR comments it was noted the project is required to have 90% of the units to be
with in a 1/4 mile of a public park/gathering place of 10,000 square feet and the
response given by the applicant states they "understood." But it is unclear how this
requirement is being met.
RESPONSE: The current land owner on the west side of Joseph Allen Drive will be
submitting a PDP regarding development of the required park, this will identify the exact
location and design of the park. The park will be located within the required V4 mile of The
Trails Apartments and will be built during the construction of The Trails Apartments by the
land owner on the west side of Joseph Allen Drive.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/21/2012
02/21/2012: Since the parking spaces in the garages are being used to meet the parking
requirements a note on the plans should be made that these spaces are not at additional costs.
RESPONSE: Applicant has met with City staff regarding this comment and will be submitting
for a modification in regards to the parking and garage requirements.
UPDATED RESPONSE: A parking modification has been submitted and approved by the
City.
26
Response: Noted, TST met with Ron Gonzales on January 17, 2012 to review PFA criteria and discuss hydrant
placement and emergency access way locations. Our team (McWhinney, TST and Oz Architecture) also met with
Ron Gonzales and Bob Poncelow with PFA on January 24m to discuss emergency access routes in more detail. A
minimum width of 20' for fire lanes with 25' inside and 50' outside turning radii have been provided along the main
loop road through the site, and 30' wide lanes have been provided where emergency access is required adjacent to
3-story buildings on the site. Please refer to the site plan for specific roadway widths and their locations on the
site.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 11/30/2011
11/30/2011: Water supply required shall provide a hydrant within 300 feet of all buildings which
can deliver 1500 gpm at 20 psi; thereafter, hydrant spacing is on 600 foot centers.
Response: The required hydrant spacing and fire flow rate stated by PFA has been provided on the site.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/30/2011
11/30/2011: Address is required to be visible from the street on which you front. Numerals to
be posted on contrasting background, minimum 6 inches in size.
Response: Understood.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 11/30/2011
11/30/2011: Any fire lane longer than 150 feet is required to have a turnaround with an inside
radius of 25 feet and outside radius of 50 feet.
Response: There are no dead -ends longer than 150 feet on this site.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Glen Schlueter, 970-224.6065, gschluetercD-fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/30/2011
The narrative submitted with the PDR application describes the drainage requirements
correctly. To be consistent and to provide comments for the new applicant; I am repeating the
comments from the June 13, 2011 conceptual review meeting which also proposed a
multifamily project.
Response: It is understood that the narrative submitted with the PDR describes the drainage requirements
correctly.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/30/2011
A drainage and erosion control report and construction plans are required and must be
prepared by a Professional Engineer registered in Colorado.
Response: A preliminary drainage and erosion control report has been prepared and submitted with the
Preliminary Utility Plans for this site.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/30/2011
This site drains to the North Tributary outfall at the northwest corner of Drake and Timberline.
There is capacity for 20 cfs from the entire Spring Creek Farms development; therefore, each
site is required to detain onsite and release at the prorated share of the outfall capacity.
Please refer to the ODP Drainage Memorandum for Spring Creek Farms North, March 2, 2011,
1.1
by Aspen Engineering for the latest design information.
Response: The ODP Drainage Memorandum for Spring Creek Farms North has been referred to for the proper
Prorated release rates from our site. These are shown in the provided Preliminary Drainage Report for the site.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/30/2011
The site is required to provide onsite water quality treatment for the runoff. Water quality
treatment methods are described in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 3 - Best
Management Practices (BMPs). (http://www.udfcd.org/downloads/down_ critmanual_vollll.htm)
Response: Onsite water quality treatment will be provided in the detention pond at the southeast corner of the site.
The water quality treatment will follow the Urban Drainage prescribed method.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Glen Schlueter, 970.224.6065, gschlueteranfcgov corn
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 12/30/2011
The Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $6,313.00/acre ($0.1449/sq.ft.) for new impervious
area over 350 sq.-ft., and there is a $1,045.00/acre ($0.024/sq.ft.) review fee. No fee is
charged for existing impervious area. These fees are to be paid at the time each building
permit is issued. Information on fees can be found on the City's web site at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-development-
fees or contact Jean Pakech at 221- 6375 for questions on fees. There is also an erosion
control escrow required before the Development Construction permit is issued. The amount of
the escrow is determined by the design engineer, and is based on the site disturbance area or
erosion control measures shown on the site construction plans.
Response: Terms of the stormwater development fee and erosion control escrow are understood.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970.221.6854, rbuffinaton a(�fcgov com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: Existing water mains and sanitary sewers in the area include a 24-inch water main
in Timberline, a 12-inch water main and 12-inch/21-inch sewer in Drake and an 8-inch water main
and 10-inch sewer in Brockman.
Response: Existing water mains and sanitary sewers in the area are understood.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Orin inated• 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: A utility coordination meeting is encouraged early in the project before the layout
is finalized to insure that adequate space has been provided for all underground utilities.
Response: Note; a utility coordination meeting was held on January 23, 2012. The following departments attended.
WaterMastewater (Roger), Light/Power (Doug), Stormwater (Wes), Engineering (Mark and Matt), Bill from Century
Link, and Don from Comcast.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 11/28/2011
11/28/2011: Extend the 8-inch water main in Joseph Allen from Charles Brockman to connect to
the 12-inch main in Drake. A connection to the 24-inch main in Timberline is desirable and may
�1