The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFREEDONIA BREWERY - BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - BDR160005 - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSDepartment: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.orq Topic: General Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016 08/03/2016: PRIOR PFA COMMENTS RESOLVED Department: Planning Services Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 07/29/2016: Staff has agreed to an alternative layout and alternative compliance to meet landscaping requirements on the site within the proposed planting beds. The revised landscape plan does not provide sufficient plant coverage, and the design and species selection does not meet city standards and must be revised. Additionally, staff has agreed to allow landscape beds on the property to be hand watered. Please see suggested landscape design changes that provide an example for sufficient plant coverage with species that are highly xeric, provide more evergreen screening and are better suited to survive without an automatic irrigation system. Plants will still need to be hand watered, and staff would recommend that an irrigation system be installed as we typically see that hand watering is difficult to manage and that plants that are installed may not survive with hand watering. Please address redline comments. 03/09/2016: We need a better landscape design. The RMJ's will get too big along the alley, width issues and also potential height issues with power line. Need more variety than just miscanthus, which also gets very large and is generally not a good choice for confined areas or is best as an accent plant along with other lower shrubs. Add more shrub variety and also more evergreen varieties. Sandstone boulders are also recommended to add variety. Also does not work to have RMJ's in a water quality area. Would suggest that you hire a landscape architect to complete your review more efficiently. Also need standard site and landscape notes on the plans. See PDP standard notes word file at this page: http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 07/29/2016: Per the City Forester and zoning staff: Hand watering of the shrubs beds on the site is minimally acceptable, but not advised. However the parkway turf in the city right-of-way must be irrigated. An irrigation plan is required to be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of any C/O. I have given Ralf the contact information and the city's irrigation standards to coordinate these plans. I wouldsuggest hiring a local irrigation company who is familir with the city standards to expedite the drafitng of the plans. Please send me and Eric Olson PDF's of the plans once they are ready. 03/09/2016: All landscape areas including parkway must be irrigated per the city design standards. An irrigation plan will need to be reviewed an approved prior to C/O. Recommend that this be started with the BDR process when the Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 tuchanan@fcqov.com Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 08/05/2016: Continued: Providing permanent automatic irrigation for parkways is the typical standard. This is an efficient method to irrigate parkway lawns and provide adequate irrigation for trees. Review with Jason Holland. 03/01 /2016: The existing lawn area in the parkway by 208 Remington is described as: Existing lawn areas are already irrigated and require no new upgrades or alterations. There are places in the parkway between the sidewalk and curb along Remington that are bare ground with no grass. Generally the lawn appears stressed and is thin. Sprinkler heads are not readily visible in the parkway so the irrigation status could be be uncertain. Review this comment with Jason Holland City Project Planner to receive direction on improvements that might be needed in the parkway. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/05/2016 08/05/2016: Please change the species of the new street tree to Chinquapin Oak Quercus muehlenbergii 2.0 inch caliper B&B. The hardy pecans at this location are very rare in the city and not available at nurseries. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221-6206, mbzdek@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016 07/29/2016: On July 28, 2016. the CDNS Director determined there is no effect on historic properties within the area of adjacency for this proposed work. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016 07/29/2016: On March 31, 2016, the Director of CDNS and the Chair of the Landmark Preservation Commission determined that the building at 208 Remington is not eligible for individual designation because the integrity of the original design has been compromised with the extensive 1969 remodel of the faqade. The changes resulting from the remodel are not yet 50 years old. No further review of the proposed changes by Historic Preservation is needed. Department: Light And Power Contact: Todd Vedder, 970-224-6152, tvedder@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Please coordinate with Todd Vedder regarding electrical service. Currently power is fed from an open -delta bank transformer. Light & Power is looking to improve this 3 phase area and could be fed better quality power coming across the alley located at 215 Mathews St. and presumed was never dedicated. This should still be provided, additional info can be found in the Easement Dedication process outlined in the following link: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php 03/04/2016: In accordance with the cross section for public alleys, an 8' utility easement behind the right-of-way is specified. This would need to be dedicated with through a utility easement dedication with associated review ($250) and Larimer County recording fees (amount to be determined). The undergrounding of the overhead line (or conduit provided) should be within this utility easement dedication. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 07/29/2016: The response indicates that the existing steps are in right-of-way and shows additional expansion of the entrance. The improvement survey plat measures 4 feet (48 inches) of additional right-of-way behind the street sidewalk, and I measure a distance of 49 inches from the face of the first step, to the back of sidewalk. The steps appear to be 1 inch out of the right-of-way, fully on private property. Any altering of the entrance should not result in the placement of the stairs in right-of-way and would need to remain no further than current. 03/04/2016: The plan appears to show the renovation of the entrance such that stairs would be placed in public right-of-way. The plan should be revised such that stairs are not within right-of-way and remain on private property as is the case in the existing condition. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016: 1 had made an error in the previous comment, leaving in a portion of a standard note that should be removed. Please remove this portion of text from the note that was added: "The existing driveway will need to be evaluated to determine if the slopes and width will meet ADA requirements or if they need to be reconstructed so that they do." 03/04/2016: Please add the following note to the site plan (and civil plan if ultimately part of the submittal): "As a part of this review and/ or any associated building permit for this review the applicant will be required to repair or replace any damaged public curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to this construction, as well as public streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of this project. All public sidewalk, driveways and ramps existing or proposed adjacent or within the site need to meet ADA standards, if they currently do not, they will need to be reconstructed so that they do meet current ADA standards as a part of this project. The existing driveway will need to be evaluated to determine if the slopes and width will meet ADA requirements or if they need to be reconstructed so that they do. The work shall be at the Developers expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy." Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General 03/04/2016 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/16/2016 02/16/2016: The project owes an additional $515.50 for the TDRF. The acreage and full first floor square footage was not included in the application submitted. City of aFort Collins Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview August 05, 2016 Walt Gantt KENNEY LEE ARCHITECTURE GROUP INC. 209 E 4TH STREET Loveland, CO 80537 RE: Freedonia Brewery - Basic Development Review, BDR160005, Round Number 2 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Jason Holland, at 970-224-6126 orjholland@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 07/29/2016: The plans do now reflect the installation of conduit. City staff has had additional discussion on this, and is willing to support a modification to this code requirement, which wouldn't require the conduit to be installed (part of this rationale is with the understanding that the parking lot area isn't being torn up as was previously envisioned). The dedication of the 8 foot utility easement (next comment) to help facilitate this undergrounding by the utility in the future would be additional justification in not installing the conduit at this time. Note that if the applicant would still wish to proceed with the installation of conduit, the dedication of easement is still necessary (and further important) to ensure legal right for the undergrounding in the future. 03/04/2016: The existing overhead line running along the alley for the portion abutting the property would need to be undergrounded abutting the property in accordance with 3.3.2(D)(7) of the Land Use Code. An exemption to this exists in subsection (b) that allows the line to remain if conduit is installed to accommodate future undergrounding. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 07/29/2016: The response indicated that there was a belief that a utility easement already exists. This did not appear in the improvement survey plat Comment Number: Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The landscape setback of 5ft for vehicle use areas is needed along the north property line. This is area still shows concrete all the way to the property line. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The site plan needs to show bike rack location, this more than a note that state bike area. The bike rack should be sized for 4 spaces. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The trash/recycling enclosure needs to be designed with walk-in access separate from the main service gate. Trash/recycling enclosure is required to be setback 20ft from a public sidewalk. The proposed located is to not in compliance. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: Please label the dimensions of the handicap spaces. Handicap spaces require a vertical sign. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: Is there curb and gutter around the landscaped areas? If not what prevents vehicles driving over these areas? Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The landscape setback for vehicle use area along Remington is 10'. The proposed landscaping setback is not in compliance. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The light fixture labeled A is not down direction and is prohibited. This is considered up lighting and not in compliance. Revise plans to eliminate any up -lighting. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The plans and the plat are missing signature blocks. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: The plans are missing a sheet index. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 02/26/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 02/26/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 08/02/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 02/26/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 9 08/03/2016: No comments. 02/26/2016: No comments. Topic: Site Plan Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 08/02/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 02/26/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 08/02/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. 02/26/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/02/2016 08/02/2016: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970416-24189 wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Are any improvements to the water or wastewater service being proposed? Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please show the services on the site/landscape plan. Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General landscape plan is resolved. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016 07/29/2016: The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com. He will be reviewing these plans which must bne approved prior to C/O. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016 07/29/2016: Per City Engineering comments, an easement dedication in the alley is required prior to final approval of the BDR. Please also send me a copy of the modification request via an email letter, aslking that the conduit not be a requirement. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016 07/29/2016: Per engineering, move the proposed stairs out the R.O.W. This will likely mean that the ramp will move to the south. If the landscape area south of the building is removed to accommodate the ramp. I am okay with this based on the suggested alternative compliance landscape plan or an appropriate revision. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, ischlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/18/2016 02/18/2016: No Comment from Erosion Control. This site; disturbs less than 10,000 sq-ft, is not in a sensitive area, and is not in a larger development under construction. Therefore, no submittal of erosion control material is needed. However, the site still must be swept and maintained to prevent dirt, saw cuttings, concrete wash, and other pollutants from entering the storm sewer at all times or BMPs will be required of the site. If you need clarification concerning this, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ ischlam@fcgov.com Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: The development is required to meet the City's LID requirements. This would include 50% of the sites impervious area treated by a LID technique and 25% of newly constructed vehicular impervious area to be porous pavement. Newly constructed vehicular impervious area is defined as existing pavement removed to subgrade and replaced or new pavement area that was not in that location before. Please call Wes Lamarque with any questions. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: The rain garden locations shown are adequate. The City's soil media specifications will need to be used for this application. Please add these details to the drainage plan. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations