HomeMy WebLinkAboutCITY OF FORT COLLINS UTILITIES CUSTOMER SERVICES BUILDING - PDP - PDP140005 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS (3)• RNL RE_ JNSE: Please see attached shadow study
1
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Sheet index should include all sheets not included in the utility plans or
plat.
• RNL RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP Submittal.
Contact: Peter Barnes, 970-416-2355, obarnes fcaov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/16/2014
01 /13/2015: Repeat comment additionally add dimensions for the Mechanical
Enclosure
05/16/2014: Show the building footprint dimensions.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Please see attached Site Plan,
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/16/2014
01/13/2015: Please provide a bicycle parkin table. Are there not any bike racks
located near the south entrance? Where are the enclosed bike spaces?
05/16/2014: The plan shows 9 bike 'racks'. Is each rack a multi -bike rack, or an
individual bike rack?
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Bicycle parking provides 6 bicycle spaces at the south
building entrance. 12 bicycle spaces at the north entrance and 20 bicycle spaces within
the interior of the building.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/16/2014
01/13/15: Repeat comment
05/16/2014: Need to add a notes table to plan indicating building use. building
square footage (total and per floor), number of stories, overall height, number of bike
parking spaces, etc. With regard to bike parking, at least 1 bike per 4000 sf. of floor
area is required, with 20% enclosed.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Please see attached Site Plan.
Page 18 of 18
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
01/13/2015: The response for this comment indicated that an intersection detail has
been provided. I can't seem to find that. Can you point me in the right direction?
05/27/2014: Sheet C200. There are some changes shown on the adjacent street
(Howes and LaPorte) in terms of parking without a clear understanding of how this
impacts the street width, striping etc. Please provide a signing and striping plan that
details how the width of the street will be used. For instance, there may not be
enough street width to allow any kind of diagonal parking (head -in) on Howes. Will
lanes need to be narrowed on LaPorte to accommodate the new parking?
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FDP submittal.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffinatononfcaov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
05/27/2014: How will water and wastewater service be provided to the Butterfly
Building?
• NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Please refer to design drawings as proposed
water and wastewater services are shown..
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamaraueQfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015
01 /16/2015: Ready for a hearing
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals fcoov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Need to add Director of Community Developemtne and Neighborhood
services and the Owners Certification signature blocks to sheet SD1.3
• RNL RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Where are the catalog cut -sheets of the lighting fixtures?
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see attached cut sheets.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Where is the shadow and visual analysis for the building over 40ft in
height.
Page 17 of 18
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
01/13/2015: This legal description needs to match the Subdivision Plat, or be
replaced with "Lot 1, COFC Utilities Administration Building".
05/27/2014: Please add "COFC Utilities Customer Services Building" in front of the
legal description shown on sheet SD1.1.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE., To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
01/13/2015: There are still line over text issues. See redlines.
05/27/2014: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE. To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
01/13/2015: There is still text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched
areas. See redlines.
05/27/2014: Please mask all text within hatched areas. See redlines.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE. To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: The sheet numbering in the index for the Existing Conditions,
Landscape & Lighting plans does not match the titles on those sheets. See redlines.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE. To be addressed at FP submittal.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinsonQfcoov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Please work with Transportation Planning (Aaron Iverson) to discuss
the reduction of non -road space (parkway and sidewalk) to create parking along the
front of the building. His original recommendation was that LaPorte be re -striped
with slightly narrower lanes to provide enough space for the parking. This would
keep the same number of lanes, keep the same width for sidewalk/parkway, and
allow for larger bulbs to shorten pedestrian distances across LaPorte at the
crossings.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE., To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Will there be indoor bike parking?
• RNL RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Page 16 of 18
Comment NL aer: 17 Cc, .nent Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: The benchmark statement in Note #4 is not necessary. If it is to
remain, it must match the following format.
PROJECT DATUM: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (OLD CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DATUM)
BENCHMARK #1 w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK #2 w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
NOTE: IF NAVD 88 DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE
FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NAVD88 = NGVD29 UNADJUSTED
+ X.XX
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: The lighter text & linework marked is not acceptable. It will not scan or
reproduce. Please darken it up. See redlines.
NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: The alley north of the property was platted as 20'. Please explain the
25' alley.
NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The plat has been revised to reflect a 20-ft
wide alley.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01 /13/2015: Please revise the dedication information for the alley north of the
property. See redlines.
NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Howes Street was platted as 140' of right of way. We show a vacation
at Book 69, Page 261, but please verify.
NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Page 15 of 18
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/30/2014
01/13/2015: Repeat Comment.
05/30/2014: The City would like the landscaping to be enhanced in the north water
quality pond.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Please label the northern water quality pond Porous Landscape
Detention on the plans.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Underdrains are required for the southern rain gardens.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icounty fcaov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 1
01/13/2015: No comments.
05/27/2014: No comments.
Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Please change the sub -title to match the Subdivision Plat. See
redlines.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: The sheet numbering does not match the index on sheet SD1.1, and is
in conflict with the Existing Conditions sheet. See redlines.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Please add "City Of Fort Collins" as marked to the sub -title. See
redlines.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Page 14 of 18
Comment NL oer: 2
Cc. .nent Originated: 05/13/2014
05/13/2014: After plans are final, an AutoCad (v.2008) drawing of the utility plan
needs to be sent to Terry Cox at TCOX@FCGOV.COM.
• RNL RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlvnxwilerla�ooudre-fire.ora
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
01/14/2015 (active item from 05/27/2014): ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF CODE
COMPLIANCE
As the building will have an automatic fire sprinkler system, general fire access to
the UCS building's exterior is acceptable under the proposed development plan.
However. due to site constraints as well as building height, fire code requirements
relative to aerial fire apparatus access cannot be met either in the short-term or
long-term plans for the site. It is recognized the site will not allow the placement of a
30' wide EAE spaced 15' from the building and adjacent to the longest side of the
building. The current plan therefore creates a condition with firefighter access
obstacles similar to those of high rise buildings. The intent of the fire code shall be
preserved and as such, offsetting measures must be added so as to mitigate the
current 'out of access' condition. Further building design considerations are required
to offset the lack of aerial fire apparatus access. These offsetting measures will
ultimately require the approval of the fire marshal.
• RNL RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, ischlamQfcaov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 01/02/2015
01/02/2015: The site disturbs more than 10.000 sq-ft therefore Erosion and
Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FP. The erosion control
requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of
Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted
does not meet requirements. Please submit, Erosion Control Plan, Erosion Control
Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need clarification concerning
this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam
970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamaraue(@fcaov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 05/30/2014
01/13/2015: This includes the rain gardens south of the building.
05/30/2014: Pleae provide a drainage easement for all drainage features.. including
the bio-swale.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Page 13 of 18
proposed prof.-, should be in the early to mid -design st, forth is meeting to be
effective and is typically scheduled after the Current Planning conceptual review
meeting. Applicants of new commercial or multi -family projects are advised to call
416-2341 to schedule a pre -submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to
present site plans, floor plans, and elevations and be able to discuss code issues of
occupancy, square footage and type of construction being proposed.
Construction shall comply with the following adopted codes as amended:
2012 International Building Code (IBC)
2012 International Residential Code (IRC)
2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC)
2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC)
2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC)
2009 International Plumbing Code ([PC) as amended by the State of Colorado
2011 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI Al 17.1-2009.
Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF.
Frost Depth: 30 inches.
Wind Load: 100- MPH 3 Second Gust Exposure B.
Seismic Design: Category B.
Climate Zone: Zone 5
Energy Code Use
1. Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2009 IRC Chapter 11 or 2009 IECC Chap
4.
2. Multi -family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2009 IECC Chapter 4.
3. Commercial and Multi -family 4 stories and taller: 2009 IECC Chapter 5.
Fort Collins Green Code Amendments effective starting 1-1-2012. A copy of these
requirements can be obtained at the Building Office or contact the above phone
number.
Project specific concerns:
1. Fire -sprinkler systems are required.
2. New Green Code requires:
a. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling.
b. Low -flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are
required.
c. Low VOC interior finishes.
• RNL RESPONSE. To be addressed at FP submittal.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224-6152, dmartine(&fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 05/13/2014
05/13/2014: A completed Commercial Service Information (C-1) form will need to
be provided to Light & Power Engineering before the electric system can be
designed. Even though this is (in part) a Light & Power building, normal electric
development charges will apply.
• RNL RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Page 12 of 18
Comment NtA. jer: 6 Co, _gent Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
The plaza area needs to be better developed. Stairs leading to the Laboratory
Building from the south (Laporte) side should be added. Additional 1960s-era
landscaping should be developed, with hardscape, trees, and plantings evoking the
era. This 1960s landscaping should be continued down the pedestrian spine
between the Laboratory Building and 215 Mason for a distance.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE. Please see revised site plan based on input from LPC
and Planning.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
The design of the Utilities Building does not reflect the historic context of the Old City
Hall and the Laboratory Building. The Commission did not feel that the
characteristics of either historic building were represented in the Utilities Building in
any substantive manner, required to meet the compatibility standards of LUC
Section 3.4.7 and which had been noted and promised at the October 8, 2014
meeting. The Commission established a subcommittee to work closely with
Facilities to help ensure plans that will meet this standard.
• RNL RESPONSE. Please see revised elevations based on input from LPC and Planning.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
The Commission commented that the design of the Utility Building was not
representative of the advanced technology that will be used in the building, and
suggested the City consider this in the building's exterior architecture, taking design
inspiration from the Laboratory and Old City Hall.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPC and Planning.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
At its October 8, 2014 meeting, the Commission noted that the relocation of the
Laboratory Building does not by itself comply with the "maximum extent feasible"
standard contained in LUC 3.4.7, but that this can be mitigated by drawing design
inspiration from the Old City Hall and Laboratory Building. While no formal action
was taken at the January 14, 2015 meeting, the Commission appears to be united in
its comments that this has not occurred.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPC and Planning.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland0fcaov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014
05/27/2014:
Building Permit Pre -Submittal Meeting
Pre -Submittal meetings are offered to assist the designer/builder by assuring, early
on in the design, that the new commercial or multi -family projects are on track to
complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The
Page 11 of 18
Department: Historical .-eservation
Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, siorson fcaov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
05/27/2014:
Revised plans were discussed by the Landmark Preservation Commission at its
May 14, 2014 meeting. The plans call for the historic Butterfly Building to be retained
in its current location, and for the new Utilities Building to be moved farther to the
north and to the west than previously shown, to provide more separation between
the two buildings. Although no vote was taken, the Commission members were
unanimously supportive of the revised plans.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPC and Planning
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
Revised plans were reviewed by the LPC at its January 14, 2015 meeting, following
presentations at the Commission's September 24, 2014 work session and October
8, 2014 meeting.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPC and Planning.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01/16/2015:
The Dairy Gold sign should be reconstructed to match the dimensions, placement
and design of the sign as it appears in the c. 1965 parade photograph. Facilities
should arrange with the Attorney's office to verify if the name "Dairy Gold" is still in
use and/or is copyrighted, which will determine if the name could be used on the
sign.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPC and Planning.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
The interior features of the Laboratory Building will need to be assessed to
determine if they contribute to the building's historic or architectural significance and,
if so, should be retained following the building's relocation.
• RNL RESPONSE: To be reviewed by the City.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015
01 /16/2015:
Commission members liked the plinth or pedestal plaza concept. While it does
raise the Laboratory Building above its original height, it also causes the building to
stand out and be more visible. The original footprint of the Laboratory Building
needs to be marked, likely through the use of different colored or textured pavers.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Please see revised site plan based on input from LPC
and Planning.
Page 10 of 18
Canyon Maple tre..orm - Acer grandidentatum
Gambel Oak tree form - Quercus gambelii.
Evaluate the following street tree placement scheme along Howes Street. Keep the first
two street trees north of LaPorte Street as canopy shade trees. Evaluate if an
ornamental tree can be placed between the north canopy shade tree and the second
street light.
Evaluate if three ornamental trees at around 20-25 foot spacing can work between the
middle and north streetlights along Howes street.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE. To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015:
Additional species changes to review:
Reducing the number of honeylocust used on the project is desirable. The two
honeylocust shown along Howes street should be evaluated for a species change to
either Chinquapin Oak or Shumard Oak.
Amur Maple is not a favored ornamental tree for planting on City property in Fort
Collins. Maintenance and survival issues have occurred locally. Evaluate changing the
5 Amur Maples to a cultivar of Peking Tree Lilac Syringa pekinensis.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015: Please list the percentage used of each tree species to the planting
schedule. Review the Minimum Species Diversity standard in LUC 3.2.1 3 and make
quantity adjustments if needed to meet this standard.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01 /1312015:
In the Planting Schedule please place Bullet Gall Resistant by the common name
Bur Oak.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 16
Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01 /14/2015:
Add these or equivalent landscape notes to describe how irrigation will be review
and provided on the project.
The irrigation system for landscaped areas shall be reviewed and approved by the
City of Fort Collins Water Utilities. Irrigation plans to be reviewed as part of the
construction permit review process. The irrigation system must be installed
according to approved plans.
All irrigated turf areas shall be irrigated with an underground automatic, pop-up
irrigation system. All shrub and perennial beds shall be irrigated with permanent drip
or bubbler system. Trees located in non -turf areas to be irrigated with a permanent
drip or bubbler system.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Page 9 of 18
phase of the deve—pment. All trees need to have been inst,..ad as shown on the
landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final approval of each
phase.
�, The Developer shall replace dead or dying street trees after planting until final
maintenance inspection and acceptance by the City of Fort Collins Forestry Division.
All street trees in the project must be established, of an approved species and of
acceptable condition prior to acceptance.
� All tree pruning and removal shall be by a business holding a current City of Fort
Collins arborist licensee on the City Forestry Division bid list.
4 Per the code required tree utility separations in LUC 3.2.1 K. Street and
ornamental trees shall be planted no closer than 40 feet and 15 feet respectively
from street lights, no trees shall be planted within 10 feet from water and sewer main
lines, 4 feet from gas lines, 6 feet from storm sewer lines, 6 feet from water
and sewer service lines and 8 feet from driveway or curb cuts. Tree utility and traffic
control separations shall not be used as a means of avoiding the planting of required
street tree.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: The standard notes have been added to plans.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015:
It appears that the east most existing honeylocust along LaPorte Avenue which is 13
inch caliper can be retained without significant construction impact. Review this tree for
retention. This tree can be discussed at the on -site meeting with the City
Forester that will be scheduled in the near future.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Per meeting on site the 13" Honeylocust will be
retained. One parallel parking spot in conflict with tree has been removed from plans.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015:
Tree Transplanting:
Four impacted trees on this project are of a transplantable size.
2 Honeylocust located along LaPorte Avenue
2 Bur Oak located along Howes Street
1 Sensation Boxelder at the NE section of the site.
Provide a transplant plan for these 4 trees. Evaluate as a first option incorporating them
into the landscape plan at this location. Can the two honeylocust be utilized as street
trees where two new honeylocust are shown along LaPorte Avenue? Can the two Bur
Oak trees be utilized where the two English Oaks are currently proposed on the LaPorte
Avenue side of the project? Please evaluate the feasibility of using these existing trees
at these or other locations on the site.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015
01/13/2015:
Please explore adding additional street trees along Howes Street. The current plan
shows only three street trees on Howes. Placing additional canopy shade trees along
Howes Street appears limited by streetlight and utility locations. Street tree numbers
could be increased by using ornamental trees which can be sited 15 from street lights
and placed closer together. Two good xeric species to consider would be the following.
Others may also be suitable.
Page 8 of 18
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE., Noted hackberry has been relocated to provide
adequate distance from sidewalk.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014
01113/2015:
This comment is continued from 5/28/14. The English Oak should be identified as the
cultivar Skymaster. Also specifying the Honeylocust as Skyline Honeylocust is still
requested. Consider using Skymaster English Oak where the three Bur Oaks are
currently shown along the edge of the pull out on LaPorte Avenue. The narrow and
more upright form of Skymaster would appear to work better at this location. Bur Oak
could work well where the two English Oak are currently shown.
05/28/2014: Species
Selection:
Linden trees have not done well in sidewalk cut outs in the Fort Collins area. Forestry
recommends using Skymaster English Oak as pyramidal cultivar in place of the
Boulevard Lindens.
Ash trees should not be planted due to the threat from Emerald Ash Borer. The have
been moved to the do not plant category on the Front Range Recommended tree
list. Use a suitable substitution.
Please specify honeylocust as Skyline Honeylocust.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE. To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014
01 /13/2015:
This comment is continued from 5/28/15. Please check the current notes. It appears that
the bullets 3-5 below still need to be added. Also the separation of 8 feet from drive ways
or alleys needs to be added to the landscape note placed on the plan that includes
separation distances. The table in LUC 3.2.1 7 will need to be placed on the tree
inventory and mitigation sheet mentioned in comment number 2. All the tree protection
notes in LUC 3.2.1 G will need to be placed on the Tree Inventory and Mitigation sheet
05/28/2014:
Add the standard landscape notes. Standards notes can be obtained from Seth
Lorson the city Planner for this project. Be sure to include the following as well as
other standard notes on the landscape plan.
i 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.
L 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.
4 Contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at the completion of each
Page 7 of 18
Comment N6...oer: 20
Cc..,ment Originated: 01/16/2015
01/16/2015: Additional survey points and profiles of the reconstructed alley off of
Laporte Ave will be needed. ADDRESS AT FINAL
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015
01/16/2015: Please provide a detail of the new alley approach off of Laporte Ave.
ADDRESS AT FINAL
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 22
Comment Originated: 01/16/2015
01/16/2015: Is the concrete forebay needed in the rear alley? Typically private
drainage structures need to be placed on private property and not within the public
right-of-way.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchananla)fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 05/28/2014
01 /13/2015:
This comment is continued from 5/28/15. Please set up an onsite meeting with the
City Forester.
05/28/2014:
Please set up an onsite meeting with the City Forester (Tim Buchanan 221 6361
tebuchanan@fcgov.com) to conduct an existing tree inventory and get information
for the preparation of the mitigation plan. Other aspects of the project such as tree
transplanting. placement and the rain garden tree details will also be discussed at
this meeting. A separate landscape sheet should be provided for the existing tree
inventory and mitigation plan. All existing trees should be identified as to species
size and condition with intent to transplant keep in place or remove. The tree
protection specifications found in LUC 3.2.1 G with the table for specification 7
should be placed on the tree inventory and mitigation plan. Add specification
describing how the tree transplanting will occur to the tree inventory and mitigation
plan. These tree transplanting specifications should include such things as time of
year, ball size, tree space size after care and other important details. Include the
City of Fort Collins manager of the project in this meeting.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Please see sheet SD1.4 for tree mitigation plan
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014
01 /13/2015:
It appears the hackberry is quite close to the sidewalk where the sidewalks join.
Evaluate if the tree can be moved a little further away from the sidewalk junction.
05/28/2014:
Evaluate the trees planted near the corner of Howes and LaPorte for site distance.
They are shown close to the corner and should be evaluated.
Page 6 of 18
12+50). The it...er curb radii for the inset parking needs oe revised to provide
minimum 15ft radii. Please revise. Also, please note on the plans that the inset
parking will be constructed in concrete. See redlines. ADDRESS PRIOR TO
HEARING
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: Submitted previously under separate cover
to Siegmund.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: The proposed sidewalk along Laporte Ave reverses slope at station
12+00. Please revise. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: Submitted previously under separate cover
to Siegmund.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: Please remove the decorative pavers from the Laporte Ave sidewalk at
the alley entrance. See redlines. ADDRESS AT FINAL
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: Please provide the existing FL elevation at the inlet on Howes at
Laporte AND where the curb and gutter ties to existing curb and gutter along Laporte
Ave. See redlines. ADDRESS AT FINAL
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: Truncated domes will be required at the Laporte Ave alley crossing.
ADDRESS AT FINAL
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: Decorative pavers are proposed for the alley reconstruction off of
Laporte Ave, adjacent to the property. For maintenance purposes, current City code
does not allow pavers to be installed within the public right-of-way. Please submit a
variance request and a cross-section of the proposed paver system for review.
ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: Proposed decorative pavers have been
removed from alley.
Page 5 of 18
within tt,- utility separations and land use code requirements t .'rovide visibility of the
Butterfly Building.
Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-221-6501, tsieamund aOfcaov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/16/2015: Please provide documentation from utility owners waiving the need for
utility easements around the property. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING
05/28/2014: Standard utility easements/alignments will be needed around the
property. Current street standards specify 15ft utility alignments along Howes St
and Laporte Ave, and 8ft utility alignments along the alleys. See redlines
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: Submitted previously under separate cover
to Siegmund.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: Engineering never received a copy of the Traffic Impact Study. Please
submit and additional comments may follow after complete review of the TIS.
ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING
05/28/2014: A Traffic Impact Study was not received as part of the PDP project
submittal. Additional comments may apply after the TIS has been submitted and
reviewed.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see attached Traffic Study.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
05/28/2014: The seat walls along Laporte need to be set back a minimum of 2ft
behind the public sidewalk.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: Please provide spot elevations of the existing alley off of Howes St to
determine and document where surface water is draining. Also, please provide
additional detail of the sidewalk and curb and gutter connection into the existing
alley. If the existing alley does not meet ADA standards where the sidewalk ties in
then a temporary sidewalk may be needed across the alley to tie into the existing
sidewalk north of the alley. See redlines. ADDRESS AT FINAL
05/28/2014: How does the new detached sidewalk along Howes St tie into the
exiting sidewalk to the north? The alley approach may need to be removed and
replaced with this project.
• NORTHERN ENGENEERING RESPONSE: To be addressed at FP submittal.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015
01/14/2015: 4. The proposed inset parking along Laporte Ave does not meet
minimum cross slope standards of 1.5% cross slope for reconstruct. (See station
Page 4 of 18
Topic: Landscape Pans
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 01/12/2015
01/12/2015: The existing trees and mitigation plan should be on a separate page.
Please provide a tree mitigation plan. See submittal requirements:
hftp://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/pdp_submiftal_req_l 1.18.14. pdf
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Please see added sheet SD1.4.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 01/12/2015
01/12/2015: Please provide cut sheets for the proposed light fixtures. And, the
photometric measurements need to measure at least 20 feet beyond the property
line. The LUC standard (3.2.4(D)(8)) requires that light levels measured 20 feet
beyond the property line not exceed 0.1 foot candles. Also, the light loss factor for
measurement should be set at 1.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see attached cut sheets and revised photometric
measurements.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 01/12/2015
01/12/2015: The cover sheet should comply with the requirements outlined in the
submittal requirements:
hftp://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/pdp_submiffal_req_l 1.18.14. pdf
Including, parking counts (or an indication of what the requirements are and how
they are being met), building height, signature blocks, building square footage,
correct Floor Area Ratio etc...
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: Sheet SD 1.1 has been revised to show parking counts
and submittal requirements
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 01/12/2015
01/12/2015: The trees to be removed do not need to be on the site plan. Removing
them will clean it up a bit.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: The existing trees to be removed have been deleted
from the Site Plan Sheets.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger0fcaov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 05/13/2014
05/13/2014: Adequate information is not provided on the site plan to determine the
proposed total square footage of the building. Once this information is provided I
can determine if the TDRFees paid are correct.
• LOGAN SIMPSON RESPONSE: The site design has been revised to mark the original
Butterfly Building footprint in a contrasting paving color. Stairs have been added adjacent
to the new Butterfly Building location for better access. Tree locations have been adjusted
Page 3 of 18
con .,.;e which would be fine if it tied into other fetal elements on
the building.
05/28/2014: The cornices at the roof and the base level needs
more architectural detail. Three-dimensional cornices.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations indicating metal cornice.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated:
07/07/2014
01/12/2015: This comment addresses some of the conversation
from the Oct. 10 meeting.
07/07/2014: The new building design does a much better job of
conveying the sense of permanence of a civic building. The Code
requires use of local sandstone, please provide more details as to
how it is being incorporated. The long horizontal entry/cornice
element could use some greater detail, perhaps something above
each column. The entry doors need to be better distinguished. What
will the building look like with the City's typical logo on the facade?
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPG
and Planning.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/12/2015
01/12/2015: The building appears to be the same as the last time we saw it. Many
comments and recommendations were made at a meeting on Oct. 10 where we
reviewed plans dated Sept. 25. Some of the comments were about the building
design and provided a more pronounced entry feature that could tie in with the
Butterfly Building.
• RNL RESPONSE. Please see revised elevations based on input from LPG and Planning.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015
01/16/2015: Landmark Preservation Commission weighed in on the building and
site design at the Jan. 14 meeting. The following are my notes:
- Replace the Dairy Gold sign or another sign with the same style.
- Mark the existing footprint of the butterfly building with paving/landscaping.
- Check the interior of the butterfly building for historic significance.
- Utilize architects from the LPC to help with the design of the UAB building so it
reflects on the butterfly building and the Op Services building: Per and Belinda
volunteered.
- Consider easier access to the butterfly building.
- Landscaping should not hide the butterfly building. (Removal of landscaping and
street trees does not comply with the Land Use Code but sensitivity in its design
should be considered.)
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see revised elevations based on input from LPG and Planning.
Page 2 of 18
City of
Fort Collins
January 21, 2015
Design Team Responses: February 17, 2015
Brian Hergott
City of Fort Collins
300 Laporte Ave
Fort Collins, CO 80521
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
RE: City of Fort Collins Utilities Customer Services Building, PDP140005, 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, Seth Lorson, at
970-224-6189 or slorson@fcgov.com.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, slorson fcaov.com
Topic:
Building
Elevations
Comment Number: 1
05/27/2014
Comment Originated:
01/12/2015: The materials and colors need to be determined prior to
public hearing. Please provide material details. It will be nice to see
the difference between the sandstone (required material) and the
cast stone (used on sills, lintels, and cornice).
05/27/2014: The gray brick conveys a cold feeling. Please try some
different, more traditional, brick colors such as those used on the
other civic buildings in the area. Perhaps blond and/or brown brick
or more natural sandstone. Please provide a sample material board.
What is the brick color of the Butterfly Building, perhaps the paint
could be stripped and the color copied in the proposed building.
• RNL RESPONSE: Please see sample boards for representative materials.
Comment Number: 8
05/28/2014
Comment Originated:
01/12/2015: The rendering from June 5 shows a much more
pronounced three dimensional cornice in the sense that this
comment is addressing. We discussed the use of metal for the
Page 1 of 18