HomeMy WebLinkAbout320 MAPLE MIXED-USE - FDP - FDP160032 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - REVISIONS17
ensure these items are outside of the sidewalk.
Response: The vault shifted so that it is not located under any concrete paving.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: There is another existing'/<" water service and sanitary sewer
service to the single family residence located at the north side of the site. What
are your plans for these services? If you don't plan to reuse them, then a note on
the plans needs to be added to abandon at the main per City requirements.
Response: These services will be removed and abandoned at the main per City requirements.
Our plans have been updated accordingly.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970-416-2743,
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1
avandeutekom a()fcgov.com
Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: Please breakdown the multi -family vs. commercial square footage
on the Land Use Data chart.
Breakdown has been added.
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: 1 calculated 26 parking spaces are required for the multi -family
units. How did you calculate the commercial parking requirements? What kind
of uses will be on the first floor? The parking requirements per use would be
helpful on the Land Use Data chart.
Calculation ws wrong for parking, 26 spaces is correct and has been updated. Building usees by floor has
been added to the land use chart. For commercial parking requirements the following section from the LUC
was applied.
Based on LUC 3.2.2(K)(2)(b):
"Existing Buildings Exemption: Change in use of an existing building shall be exempt from minimum parking
requirements. For the expansion or enlargement of an existing building which does not result in the material
increase of the building by more than twenty-five (25) percent, but not to exceed five thousand (5, 000) square
feet in the aggregate, shall be exempt from minimum parking requirements. For the redevelopment of a
property which includes the demolition of existing buildings, the minimum parking requirement shall be
applied to the net increase in the square footage of new buildings. "
Our Rationale based on LUC 3.2.2(K)(2)(b):
The existing building on site currently is 10,284 sf. The proposed area of commercial/retail use is 4,900
S.F. Since the proposed commercial/retail S.F. area is less than the existing building use on site and there is
no net increase in square footage with the new building, this project would be exempt from minimum parking
requirements. In addition to this, this project is providing another 5 on -street parking spaces on N Meldrum
Strreet that do not currently exist.
IN
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970.221-6887, mwilkinson(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/17/2015
12/17/2015: Comment reponse from the concept review was that sight
triangles are provided. I didn't see those on the plans. Can you point me in the
right direction? (Original comment: The alley will see quite a bit of traffic, and
we'll need to be careful that the alley access points at Maple and Cherry have
good sight distance.)
Response: A sight distance exhibit has been provided with this submittal for the intersection of the
alley with Maple. The intersection with Cherry is an existing condition well outside of the limits of
this project and as such, limited existing information is available to create the requested
information. Furthermore, it is unclear what action could be taken by the applicant should a
deficient condition be uncovered, which is admittedly likely. If this information is going to be
required, significant offsite survey work will be needed which will incur significant costs and delays
for the applicant. Please confirm that there are no alternatives to this request.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/17/2015
12/17/2015: Any chance we can do bulbouts at the comer to make pedestrian
crossing distance less?
Construction budget does not allow for bulbout construction Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/17/2015
12/17/2015: Is there curb and gutter shown to finish the road edge along
Maple?
Response: Yes, portions of Maple and Meldrum that do not currently have curb and gutter will
have it added.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221.6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building
permit. 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
Comment acknowledged.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowellofcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: The proposed water service needs to be separated from the
sanitary sewer service by a minimum of 10' and should be aligned
perpendicular to the meter vault. Please revise.
Response: The services have been revised.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: The meter vault is partially located below the proposed sidewalk.
Please revise the location to be outside of the sidewalk limits if possible. If not,
show the location of the manhole lid and AMR pods, per the City details that
15
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Please change titles on all sheets to "Maple Mixed Use". See
redlines.
Title has been updated.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: The legal description is not necessary with the title being "Maple
Mixed Use".
Legal description has been deleted.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Line over text addressed.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Please correct the quarter section in the sub -title & legal
description. See redlines.
Response: Requested info has been corrected.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015. Please label all surrounding properties with "Unplatted" or the
subdivision name. This includes properties across right of ways. See redlines.
Response: Labels have been updated.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: The Solar Village Maple plat shows floodway & floodplain limits
that may affect this plat.
Response: Current floodplains are included with our plat.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: All easements must be labeled & locatable. See redlines.
Response: Final easement labels and locations will be provided with the final
plat.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Please change titles on all sheets to "Maple Mixed Use". See
redlines.
Title updated.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: The legal description is not necessary with the title being "Maple
Mixed Use".
Legal description removed.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: The titles in the sheet index do not match the titles on the noted
sheets. See redlines.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015
12/15/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Line over text addressed.
Department: Traffic Operation
14
Response: The requested info is now shown in the legend along with the pending corrected
floodplain.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970.221.6588,
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 1
12/15/2015: No comments.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 2
jcountvna.fcciov.com
Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Please correct the sub -title as marked. See redlines.
Response: Subtitle has been changed.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: The 2 notes are missing from the Benchmark Statements. The
Benchmark Statements should be in the EXACT format shown below.
PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL
DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29
UNADJUSTED FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS.
IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE,
THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED
= NAVD88 - X.XX4.
Response: Benchmark equation and statements have been updated.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015: All benchmark statements need to match on all sheets.
Response: All benchmark statements have been updated.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated:
12/15/2015: All Basis Of Bearings statements need to match on all sheets.
Response: All basis of bearing statements have been updated.
12/15/2015
12/15/2015
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched
areas. See redlines.
Response: There are no lines in the vicinity of the requested masking, and contrast between the
text allows for clear scanning. With this in mind, please advise on the need for additional white
boxes to be provided.
Topic: Landscape Plans
13
12/07/2015: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft, therefore Erosion and
Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. 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 do 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 @ ischlam(cDfcgov.com
Response: Erosion documents will be provided with Final.
Contact: Mark Taylor, 970-416-2494, mtaylor(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/10/2015
12/10/2015: Please change the labeling on the floodway and floodplain
boundaries on all sheets. This is not a FEMA regulated floodplain, it is City
regulated. Please describe them as requested on the plat.
Response: The labels have been updated.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/10/2015
12/10/2015: With the current information, the proposed building will be located
in the flood fringe and must either be elevated 18-inches or floodproofed. I am
not providing full comments for either of these options until we determine if a
LOMA is possible.
Response: Efforts are underway to provide a corrected floodplain limit for the Old Town
Floodplain adjacent to our site. Preliminary results indicate that the floodplain limit will coincide
with the existing sidewalk along Maple. We understand that this corrected limit has not been
approved by the City at this time, and as such, we are providing both the corrected line and the
existing line on our plans.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/10/2015
12/10/2015: Please show the floodplain cross -sections on the Drainage Plan.
Response: A floodplain exhibit has been added to the plan set showing cross sections as well as
applicable notes regarding floodplain permits and activities.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 12/10/2015
12/10/2015: Please include the proper notes on the Drainage Plan regarding
the need for floodplain use permits and no -rise certifications for any utilities,
concrete flatwork, curb and gutter, etc. that will be proposed within the floodway.
Response: See response #5.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 12/10/2015
12/10/2015: Please show and label the floodplain and floodway boundaries on
the plat. They should be noted as the 'City -regulatory Old Town 100-year
floodway' and 'City -regulatory Old Town 100-year flood plain'.
Response: The labels have been updated.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/10/2015
12/10/2015: Please show the floodway boundary and label the floodplain and
floodway boundaries on the site plan as requested for the plat.
12
Topic: Drainage Report
Topic
Topic
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
12/08/2015: The drainage report is titled "Meldrum Mixed Use" and this naming
convention is used throughout the report. This name isn't consistent with the
name on the plans. Please make these consistent.
Response: The erroneous title info has been corrected.
Comment Number: 2
12/08/2015
Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: Items required prior to recommendation for P&Z hearing:
- Floodplain regulations compliance: The LOMA, or updated topography
exercise needs to be discussed in the drainage report.
Response: A summary of the current floodplain status and approach has been provided in the
report.
- 85% of the site is being routed through LID planters. FCSCM requirements
stated that 50% of the site runoff is required to be treated using standard water
quality treatment, and LID requirements are to treat 50% of the site with an
enhanced water quality treatment technique. Since you are only treating 85% of
the site, instead of 100%, the reasoning will need to be explained in the
drainage report.
Response: A section on water quality compliance has been added explaining the site constraints
responsible for treating less than 100% of the site.
- The underground detention vault needs to be shown on the plans with the
approximate dimensions and its connection to the municipal storm sewer.
Response: The vault is now shown throughout the plans with a storm sewer connection provided
to the storm drain in Maple.
- An LID exhibit showing the location of the planter boxes and the portion of the
roof that drains to each planter box is required.
Response: An LID exhibit has been provided.
General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated. 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: See redlines for other comments. A redlined copy of the electronic
drainage report will be returned via email to Andy Reese,
Response: Redlines have been received and have been addressed.
Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated
12/08/2015: Drainage easements will be needed for the underground detention
vault and for the bioretention planter boxes (all volume based stormwater
facilities). Staff needs to discuss how to dedicate easements on a second floor
facility.
12/08/2015
Response: A drainage easement has been added to the plat for the vault and outfall pipe.
Applicant would like to discuss in more detail the need for an easement on the planter boxes,
particularly since they are part of the second level courtyard, and how this easement would be
defined.
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam(d�fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/07/2015
11
meeting the intent of the fire code via alternative means. The challenge for the
project will be in finding a way to provide an acceptable plan equal to or better
than required by the fire code and further discussion may be warranted. Refer to
2012 IFC Appendix D for more information.
Comments acknowledged. Based on a preliminary meeting with Jim Lynxwiler on 1116115, in lieu of meeting
the 30' distance/access requirement for aerial fire apparatus, we proposed to provide access to the roof
from the east stair via a penthouse, extending the standpipe of the east stair to the roof and to provide an
area of refuge at the west stair landings as well as a roof access hatch with ships ladder. We will make a
formal request with these proposed items to PFA for consideration of approval.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: FIRE PITS
Fire pits fueled by natural gas are allowed. Wood burning or smoke producing
fire pits are prohibited. Fire pits and gas grills shall be located a minimum of 10'
horizontally and vertically from any combustible construction, vegetation, etc.
Comment acknowledged. No fire pits are anticipated at this time. Gas grill on second story is 10' front
vegetation in LID planters. Tables within 10' clear zone are metal.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: ROOFTOP VEGETATION
Rooftop gardens and landscaped roofs shall be shown to comply with IFC 317.
Comment acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: KEY BOXES REQUIRED
2012 IFC 506.1 and Poudre Fire Authority Bureau Policy 88-20: Poudre Fire
Authority requires at least one key box ("Knox Box") to be mounted in an
approved, exterior location (or locations) on every new or existing building
equipped with a required fire sprinkler or fire alarm system. The box shall be
positioned 3 to 7 feet above finished floor and within 10 feet of the front door, or
closest door to the fire alarm panel. Exception can be made by the PFA if it is
more logical to have the box located somewhere else on the structure.
All new or existing Knox Boxes must contain the following keys as they apply to
the building:
> Exterior Master
> Riser room
> Fire panel
> Elevator key if equipped with an elevator
The number of floors determines the number of sets of keys needed. Each set
will be placed on their own key ring.
> Single story buildings must have 1 of each key
> 2-3 story buildings must have 2 of each key
> 4+ story buildings must have 3 of each key
For further details or to determine the size of Knox Box required, contact the
Poudre Fire Authority Division of Community Safety Services.
Comments acknowledged.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224.6065, hmcdowell(&fcgov.com
10
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Electric Capacity Fee and Building Site charges will apply to this
development. Please click on the following link for Estimated Light & Power
charges and the Light & Power Fee calculator.
hftp://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen
t-development-fees
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Light & Power has existing electric facilities located along the
East edge of the alley way and adjacent to this property along Maple Street.
Also, there are some secondary services entering this property that will need to
be de -energized and removed.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Any relocation or modification to existing electric facilities will incur
system modification charges.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: Transformer and meter locations will need to be coordinated with
Light & Power Engineering. Transformer location needs to be within 10' of an
asphalt surface accessible by a line truck. A minimum clearance of 8' must be
maintained in front of the transformer doors and a minimum of Ton the sides
and back. Certain building materials and or building design may require more
clearance. Please click on the following link for Electric Construction, Policies,
Practices and Procedures.
hftp://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-fo
rms-guidelines-regulations
Response: The transformer is located at the northeast corner of the project and meets all
clearance requirements.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/15/2015: A C-1 Form and a One -line diagram will need to be submitted to
Light & Power Engineering for review. Please click on the following link for the
C-1 Form.
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-fo
rms-guidelines-regulations
Response: Acknowledged.
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwilergi)poudre-fire.ora
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 12/08/2015
12/08/2015: AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS
The proposed building is required to meet minimum fire access requirements to
allow roof access and rescue operations in the event of a life -threatening
emergency. If the fire code cannot be met via prescriptive means, the project
team recognizes that approval of the plan will be based upon the building
0
2012 International Residential Code (IRC)
2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC)
2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC)
2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC)
2012 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado
2014 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado
Fort Collins has amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the
fcgov.com web page to view them.
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI Al17.1-2009.
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: 2012 IRC Chapter 11 or 2012 IECC,
2. Multi -family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2012 IECC residential
chapter.
3. Commercial and Multi -family 4 stories and taller: 2012 IECC commercial
chapter.
320 maple — project specific concerns:
1. Fire -sprinkler systems are required. A new code amendment effective in
2014 will require a full NFPA-13 sprinkler system and not allow a 13-R system.
2. Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of
fire -sprinkler.
3. All windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24"
4. Building code and State statute CRS 9-5 requires project provide accessible
units.
5. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling.
6. Exterior walls and roof must meet a STC (sound resistance) rating of 40 min.
if building located within 1000ft to train tracks.
7. Low -flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are
required.
8. Special combustion safety requirements for natural draft gas appliances.
9. Low VOC interior finishes.
City of Fort Collins
Building Services
Plan Review
416-2341
Comments Acknowledged. We will be scheduling a pre -submittal meeting in the next coming
weeks.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
LUC 3.4.7(F)(3) Materials: Brick quantity heavy for the residential context of
mostly lap -sided wood frame buildings (applicant offered to consider options for
reducing brick on the west and north elevations, particularly on the 1.5 story
portion on the north end of building); use of lap -siding in proposed design noted
as appropriate
Comments Acknowledged. In addition to revisions made to the west elevation based on our
previous comment no. 7 response above, we have lower the 2-story brick colonnade element
down to a 1 story element to reduce the presence of this heavier element. In addition, we have
also reduced the amount of glazing at the west stair to be more compatible with the residential
character of this neighborhood.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: For the final review, the LPC requested the following additional
information from the applicant:
Elevations with dimensions; include an elevation that shows residence directly
to north in full detail
Comment Acknowledged. This will be included with in our submittal fort the February 10, 2016
LPC Meeting.
A map that shows properties in area of adjacency, marked as eligible/not
eligible according to most recent determinations, accompanied by front fagade
photos of each (staff will provide)
Comment Acknowledged
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416.2341, rhovland cDfcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/15/2015
12/1512015:
Building Permit Pre -Submittal Meeting:
Pre -Submittal meetings are required 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 proposed project should be in the early
to mid -design stage for
this 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)
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: LUC 3.4.7(F)(3) states: "The dominant building material of such
existing historic structures adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed structure shall be used as the primary material for new construction.
Variety in materials can be appropriate, but shall maintain the existing
distribution of materials in the same block."
The historic buildings along Meldum do not contain brick as a primary material,
so the LPC may wish to consider this proposed design element that is used on
the main level, particularly in the 1.5-story section of the building on the west
elevation. The horizontal lap siding on the upper portion of the west fagade
provides an important material connection to the surrounding neighborhood.
Comment Acknowledged. The 1.5 story section of the building has been changed to lap siding
and we have created a flat parapet in lieu of the gabled parapet so that this project will not
compete or be too literal with the context of the historic Malaby Market building across the street.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
LUC 3.4.7(F)(4) states Visual and pedestrian connections between the site and
neighborhood focal points, such as a park, school or church, shall be preserved
and enhanced, to the maximum extent feasible."
Neighborhood focal points that should be considered include Washington Park
and the pending potential Collamer-Malaby Historic District.
Comments Acknowledged
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: LUC 3.4.7(F)(5) states: "To the maximum extent feasible, existing
historic and mature landscaping shall be preserved, and when additional street
tree plantings are proposed, the alignment and spacing of new trees shall
match that of the existing trees."
The mature trees in good condition on the parcel will be preserved. Seven
existing trees along Meldrum and Maple are identified for preservation in the
landscape plans. They range in diameter from 6 to 35 inches and are in fair or
good condition. Thirty trees ranging in diameter from 3 to 15 inches and rated
from poor to good condition are slated for removal.
Comment Acknowledged, landscape plans have been coordinated with City Forester requests.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015:
At it's 12/9/15 hearing, the LPC offered the following conceptual comments
regarding compatibility with LUC 3.4.7:
Area of Adjacency: LPC agreed with staff -defined area of adjacency and did
not add any additional properties
LUC 3.4.7(F)(1) Massing and scale: comments indicated members thought it
was sensitive and compatible; several commented on the stepdown transition
as effective way to reach compatibility
LUC 3.4.7(F)(2) Character details: window patterns and transition seen as
appropriate nod to residential context
N
N. Meldrum and a set of warehouse buildings at 320/322/324 Maple Street.
They were reviewed in 2012 and none were determined to be individually
eligible for landmark designation. This determination is older than one year and
thus expired; an updated review is required in association with this proposed
project.
Comments Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: LUC 3.4.7(F)(1) New Construction states:
"(1) To the maximum extent feasible, the height, setback and width of new
structures shall be similar to: (a) those of existing historic structures on any
block face on which the new structure is located and on any portion of a block
face across a local or collector street from the block face on which the new
structure is located.... Notwithstanding the foregoing, this requirement shall not
apply if, in the judgment of the decision maker, such historic structures would not
be negatively impacted with respect to their historic exterior integrity and
significance by reason of the new structure being constructed at a dissimilar
height, setback and width. Where building setbacks cannot be maintained,
elements such as walls, columns, hedges or other screens shall be used to
define the edge of the site and maintain alignment. Taller structures or portions
of structures shall be located interior to the site."
Comment Acknowledged.
The existing historic buildings on N. Meldrum are one-story and two-story wood
frame structures with lap siding. The new building is proposed to be
one -and -a -half to three stories with a step down to the north as it approaches
the adjacent residential property. The setback of the proposed building from the
street along Meldrum and Maple is similar to those of existing historic
structures. Applicant materials do not provide exact dimensions of the new
building, so additional information and analysis of height and width should be
required.
Comment Acknowledged. Additional dimensions and analysis of this height will be included with
our LPC submittal to city for the upcoming February 10, 2016 LPC meeting.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: LUC 3.4.7(F)(2) states: "New structures shall be designed to be in
character with such existing historic structures. Horizontal elements, such as
cornices, windows, moldings and sign bands, shall be aligned with those of
such existing historic structures to strengthen the visual ties among buildings.
Window patterns of such existing structures (size, height, number) shall be
repeated in new construction, and the pattern of the primary building entrance
facing the street shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible."
Staff has identified several areas in the design that attempt to create
compatibility with the surrounding historic residential buildings according to
Standards in LUC 3.4.7(F)(2). These include: false front gabled parapet on the
west elevation; projecting bay window on the west elevation; overall window
pattern variety in single, double, and triple configurations.
Comment Acknowledged.
Comment Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: Staff offers the following information for consideration in order to
determine an area of adjacency for the proposed project.
1) Four properties containing a total of eleven contributing buildings have been
identified in a draft landmark nomination form that would establish the
Collamer-Malaby Historic District. These include 303 N. Meldrum, 305 N.
Meldrum, 313 N. Meldrum, and 315 N. Meldrum. This potential district is
immediately west of the proposed development.
2) Several other buildings along Meldrum were reviewed for individual eligibility
for landmark designation in 2004 and 2012. Those determinations occurred
prior to April 2014 and would need to be reviewed again, so their status is
offered here for review only. The residences at 312 N. Meldrum (1910) and 322
N. Meldrum (1921) were determined to be individually eligible for landmark
designation. The residences at 316, 317, 320, and 321 N. Meldrum were
deemed not individually eligible.
3) The Dutch Colonial Revival residence at 329
been reviewed for individual eligibility.
Comments Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3
Meldrum (1900) has not
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/1412015: LUC 3.4.7(B) General Standard states:
"If the project contains a site, structure or object that (1) is determined to be or
potentially be individually eligible for local landmark designation or for individual
listing in the State Register of Historic Properties or National Register of
Historic Places; (2) is officially designated as a local or state landmark or is
listed on the National Register of Historic Places; or (3) is located within an
officially designated national, state or City historic district or area, then, to the
maximum extent feasible, the development plan and building design shall
provide for the preservation and adaptive use of the historic structure. The
development plan and building design shall protect and enhance the historical
and architectural value of any historic property that is: (a) preserved and
adaptively used on the development site; or (b) is located on property adjacent
to the development site and qualifies under (1), (2) or (3) above. New structures
must be compatible with the historic character of any such historic property,
whether on the development site or adjacent thereto."
Comment Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
LUC 3.4.7(E) Demolition states: A site, structure or object that is determined tc
be or potentially be individually eligible for local landmark designation or for
individual listing in the National Register of Historic Places or State Register of
Historic Properties may be demolished only if, in the opinion of the decision
maker, the applicant has, to the maximum extent feasible, attempted to
preserve the site, structure or object in accordance with the standards of this
Section, and the preservation of the site, structure or object is not feasible.
It is unlikely that this section of the code will apply to the proposed project. The
existing structures on the development site include a residential building at 310
4
removed by the project.
On site meeting with forestry was held on January 6, 2016. All plan changes have been made per on site
discussions.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
12/24/2015:
Provide tree mitigation on project by providing the required number of upsized
trees.
2.5 mitigation trees were required, 3 have been provided in the R.O. W.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
12/24/2015:
Explore spacing the Sentry Lindens on Maple at around 30 feet between trees
so a third linden can be included in this section. Placing three street trees in this
general location appears appropriate, considering the narrow crown on the
Sentry Lindens.
Spacing has been adjusted to allow for third Linden tree.
Comment Number: 4
12/24/2015:
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
Explore spacing the Sentry Lindens on Maple at around 30 feet between trees
so a third linden can be included in this section. Placing three street trees in this
general location appears appropriate, considering the narrow crown on the
Sentry Lindens.
Repeat comment, see above.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
12/24/2015:
New Mexican Privets growth from tends to be very shrub like. Consider using
Red Barron Crabapple in its place.
Privet has been replaced with Cleveland Select Pear.
Comment Number: 6
12/24/2015:
List trees as B&B
B&B has been added to legend.
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
12/24/2015:
List the percentage of each tree species used and check that the quantities
used meets the minimum species standard in LUC 3.2.1 D 3.
Note is under trees on legend of the total number of trees on site and the maximum allowed of each species
for the no greater than 33% requirement.
Department: Historical Preservation
Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221.6206, mbzdekcDfcaov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: Several individually eligible properties are adjacent to the project
on Meldrum between Cherry Street and Maple Street, and a potential historic
district borders the project's west elevation along Meldrum. The project
therefore must comply with the standards contained in Land Use Code (LUC)
Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources.
3
Response: At this time, it is understood that the variance request has been denied along Maple
Street but granted along the alley.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: The easements on the site plan do not match those on the replat.
Easements with site and replat have been coordinated.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: Alley access will need to be improved to fulfill Larimer County
Urban Area Street Standards.
Response: The alley access is now shown to have concrete extended to the projected ROW with
all slopes/grades conforming with LCUASS. Improvements to the alley entrance currently end at
the existing concrete pan on the east side of the drive, which is how the Solar Village plans were
approved.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: An encroachment permit would need to be issued for the bench
and tables. Applications for encroachment permits shall be made to
Engineering Department for review and approval prior to installation.
Encroachment items shall not be shown on the site plan because they may not
be approved, they may need to be modified or moved, or if the permit is
revoked then the site/ landscape plan would be in non-compliance.
All site furnishings have been moved out of R.O. W.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: Horizontal sidewalk clearance may be an issue with the bench and
tables — solid fixed objects need to be set back from the sidewalk at least 1, per
figure 16-1.
All site furnishings have been moved out of R.O.W. Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/14/2015: Access ramps need to be shown on the utility plans on the SW
corner.
Response: Access ramps have been added.
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger(Mcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 11/27/2015
11/27/2015: The site plan does not identify the size of the commercial area
proposed. I need the square footage of the commercial area identified on the
plans in order to be able to check and verify the TDRFee amounts.
Commercial area note has been added on building note.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan(7a.fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 12/24/2015
12/24/2015:
Contact the City Forester for an onsite meeting to verify inventory information
and to determine mitigation numbers for exiting trees that may need to be
2
12/16/2015: Building north side 2nd floor terrace: what is the edge condition,
i.e. railing, low wall, planter? What is the relationship to the neighbor -
overlooking, or partly enclosed?
Response: This condition is comprised of a solid, screen wall from the floor of the terrace up to 22"
high along with a decorative 24" high guardrail above the solid wall (top of the guardrail is 46"
above the terrace floor). There will be freestanding planters used in at the terrace along this
north edge condition for LID water quality and to aesthetically soften this edge.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: Building elevations: Staff understands that this initial submittal is not
fully developed in terms of detailing, trim, etc. Addt'I info on that will be needed
for hearing and/or Final Plan (e.g., @ doors, windows, material changes,
fascias, frieze boards, caps at tops of walls, etc.
Response: Addition refining of the design including additional details have been added.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: Windows are shown as punches -- but shadows are shown -- what
creates the shadows? Are windows recessed in walls? Avoid uniform flat
surfaces; provide depth at windows w/trim, and recessing. This has been a
problem in some recent development projects.
Response: Storefront windows on the main level will be recessed with brick veneer returns at
the jamb, head and sill conditions. The residential window at the upper levels will either use trim
around the openings to create a shadow line.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12116/2015: West elevation: this is a VERY RARE comment that brick is not
needed to the extent shown, esp. on the house -shaped component at the north
end of the elevation. The neighborhood context would be better
compleemtnented by clapboard with trim boards, frieze boards, eaves, some
shaped profiles on trim, etc.
Response: Comment acknowledged. We have refined the west elevation to change the 1-1/2
story transition element on the north to be lap siding as well as reducing the 2-story brick
"colonnade" down to a 1-story height. Based on conversations with both planning staff and
historic preservation staff, this was thought to be a more sensitive approach with the residential
character of Meldrum Street.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: Signature Block: eventually, City signature needs to read "Director
of Community Development and Neighborhood Services", not Current Planning.
Signature block has been updated.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Katie Sexton, 970-221-6501, ksexton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/14/2015
12/29/2015: Request letter has been recieved and still needs to be evaluated.
12/14/2015: If a variance request for utility easements was submitted, I have%t
received it. The request can be emailed to me. Note 48 shall list approved
variances if and when the request is approved. Also, for correctness, the
standard utility easement along an alley is 8� not 6�.
Fort 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/de velopmentre vie w
December 31. 2015
Craig Russell
Russell + Mills Studios
141 S. College Ave Ste 104
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: 320 Maple Street, PDP150025, Round Number 1
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, Clark Mapes, at 970-221-6225 or cmapes@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Clark Mapes, 970.221.6225, cmapes(ofcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: From Comcast, Dennis Greenwalt: Don't see the size of the u.e.
along the alley way, please make note on final plat
Response: We have submitted a request to reduce the utility easement along the alley from 8'
wide down to 5' wide and this has been approved by the Engineering Department.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
12/16/2015: From Excel Energy: Max gas pressure is 14" WC
Response: Comment Acknowledged. We have sent this information to the project mechanical engineer.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015
Site Plan Labels: Add indication of exst, and new concrete flatwork, new
on -street parking spaces. Would be very helpful to understand the whole
development.
New legend item for existing concrete and labels added to plans. On -street parking existing and additional
labels have been added to the site plan.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/16/2015