HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK FARMS NORTH SECOND FILING - FDP - FDP120005 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 -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been replaced by freestanding bicycle racks throughout the site.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, nbealsna 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 landowner 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.
UPDATED RESPONSE. A parking modification has been submitted and approved by the
City.
26
r
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, nbealsna.fcaov.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
02/1712012: 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
w
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 fcaov.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 1"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
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970.221-6854, rbuffington(a.fcoov.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
RESPONSE: The titleblock has been corrected.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970.221.6820, wstanford(fcaov.com
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
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
04112/2012: 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: 04112/2012
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
22
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 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
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 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
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.
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
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.
UPDATED RESPONSE: Line -over -text issues have been corrected.
Comment Number: 15
02/29/2012: Please correct the project name in the title & title block on sheet SP-1
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Comment Originated: 02/2912012
21
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 cut off 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
02/29/2012: 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
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, jcounty(afcgov.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 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: All easements must be locatable.
RESPONSE. Understood.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/29/2012: Please provide monument records for all public land corners shown on the plat.
rI7
Department: Stormwater Engineering Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970.416.2418, wlamaraue(a)fcaov.com
Topic: General
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, icountv(cDfcaov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 21
02129/2012: 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
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/1012012: 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, wlamargueOfcaov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/2812012
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
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.
18
Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224.6152, dmartinena.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.
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
02/1512012: 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(a)FCGOV.COM).
RESPONSE. Understood.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Courtney Lev ingston, 970-416-2283, clevingstonaafcgov.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, rgonzales(c poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
17
u
• 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 18.
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:
hftp:i/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.fogov.com/building/pdf/green-voc.pdf for details.
RESPONSE. Understood.
Department: Light And Power
16
11
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 IComment 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
41
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.
h
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970-224-6143, lex 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)fcaov.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
E
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
02/2812012: 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, slangenberuer(a)fcuov.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
y
Department: Engineering Development Review Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger(7a.fcgov.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
02128/2012: 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
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
40
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, slanaenberger .fcaov.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 be 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
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.
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
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, slannenbernerna fcaov.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 FOP.
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 1' 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
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, slangenberuer(a)fcaov.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
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/29/2012
02/2912012: 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. 'Year walls of multi -family garages"
have been properly detailed per 1 B 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, clevingston(aDfcgov.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.
0
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416.2283, clevinoston(cDfcaov.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'/2) 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)
hftp://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.
5
Department: Current Planning Comment Originated: 02/28/2012
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970.416.2283, clevingston cDfcgov.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 spectrums, 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
4
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 quantifies 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
02/2812012: 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
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
03/06/2012: 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(afcgov.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
FN
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416.2283, clevinastonna fcuov.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. I 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