HomeMy WebLinkAboutLEGACY AUTO - PDP - PDP120001 - CORRESPONDENCE - (10)Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/05/2013
04/05/2013: Please make sure the bus stop is located in a "transit easement" on your plat.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970.221.6854, rbuffington(cbfcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
10/22/2013: Re -align the south water main connection in College as shown on the redlined plans.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated:
10/22/2013
10/22/2013: The Phase 2 water main must be 8".
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated:
10/22/2013
10/22/2013: Provide more detail on the two connections to the existing water mains.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated:
10/22/2013
10/22/2013: The curb stop and meter pit for the Phase 4 building must be within a utility easement.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated:
10/22/2013
10/22/2013: Provide 10 foot separation between the water main and the underground electric.
Page 9 of 9
Comment Number: 41 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: There are line over text issues on sheets PDP-C3.1A, PDP-C3.1B & PDP-C3.3. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 42 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: There are cut off text issues on sheets PDP-C3.1 A & PDP-C3.1 B. See redlines.
Comment Number: 43 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: The smaller text in the phasing plans on sheet PDP-C3.3 is hard to read. It will not scan or
reproduce well. See redlines.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 44
10/2312013: No comments.
Topic: Plat
Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: Please talk with Glen Schlueter and/or Mark Taylor with Stormwater about this easement.
What are the provisions to extinguish the temporary construction easements? See redlines.
04/03/2013: Please add the easement information for the pending Stormwater easement at the
northeast comer of the property.
02/08/2012: Please add easement descriptions to sheet 2.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: This has been addressed, but "Hall" is spelled wrong. See redlines.
04/03/2013: This has not been added.
02/08/2012: Please label & define the R.O.W. dedicated by the Hall Addition plat.
Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10123/2013: If/when a new title commitment/update is issued, please change the information. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: Please define terms of the Transit Easement.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10123/2013: The reception number for the off -site Drainage Easement will need to be added prior to
mylar.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 19
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: There are still issues on sheets PDP-C1.1A & PDP-C1.1 B. See redlines.
04/02/2013: There are still line over text issues.
02108/2012: There are line over text issues.
Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: Please make the marked corrections to the legal description. See redlines.
Comment Number: 39 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: Please rotate the marked text on sheets PDP-C1.1A & PDP-C1.1 B. See redlines.
Department: Transportation Planning
Contact: Emma McArdle, 970-224-6197, emcardle(a)fcaov.com
Page 8 of 9
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 02/07/2012
10/22/2013: Please provide a letter stating acknowledging the owner has agreed to this design.
02/07/2012: The designed flows that would leave the pond over the emergency spillway need to be
analyzed and shown how they can pass through the properties to the south and west without inundating
any structures to the nearest public right-of-way.
Comment Number: 5
10/22/2013: Not on plat yet.
Comment Originated: 02/07/2012
02/07/2012: A drainage easement is required for the existing storm sewer outfall which drains the
mobile home park to the north. This storm sewer is located in the northeast part of the site.
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 04/08/2013
10/22/2013: Not on plat yet.
04/08/2013: A drainage easement is required for the storm sewer outfalling the property to the north. It
is located in the northeast portion of the site. The City will provide survey information on the exact
location of the storm sewer.
Comment Number: 15
10/2212013: Stormwater is ready for a hearing.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221.6588, icountv(&fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: There are line over text issues on sheets PDP-A4.2 & PDP-A4.3. See redlines.
04/02/2013: These plans were not resubmitted.
02/08/2012: There are conflicting notes on sheet PDP-A4.1.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 24
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: There are problems with the new benchmarks. See redlines.
04/02/2013: Both benchmarks listed have been destroyed by road construction, and have been
replaced with new benchmarks. Sheet 2 still needs a second benchmark added.
02/08/2012: Please add a second benchmark to sheets 1 & 2.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: There are still line over text issues on sheets 3-5 & 7. See redlines.
04102/2013: There are still line over text issues on these sheets.
02108/2012: There are line over text issues on sheets 3-5.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
10/23/2013: There are still issues on this sheet. See redlines.
04/02/2013: This is still an issue.
02108/2012: The profiles on sheet 6 could be easier to read, if the linework & text are brought in front
of the profile gridlines.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 40 Comment Originated: 10/23/2013
10/23/2013: Please rotate the marked text on sheets PDP-C3.1 A, PDP-C3.1 B & PDP-C3.3. See
redlines.
Page 7 of 9
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218.2932, ischlarriMcaoy.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
10/22/2013: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft and in a sensitive area, 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 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
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416.2418, wlamargueLftgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
02/10/2012: Erosion Control Report:
Please use City Ordinance 174, 2011, specifically, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3.3 Titled "PDP
Erosion Control Report and Drawings Submittal Requirements." To assure your supplying the correct
information for you Erosion Control Report.
Comment Number: 12
02/10/2012: Erosion Control Drawing (Plans):
Comment Originated: 02/10/2012
a) On your General Details Page (2 of 10) says on line #11 that BMPs cannot be removed except
under the direction of a "Local Entity Engineer" who might this be? I believe you mean Local Erosion
Control Inspector? Double check all the written details to assure you are talking about the correct
person in the City.
b) On the General Details Page (2 of 10) on #13 your sheet says 90 Days which for the city is 30
days. This also is confusing because your Details on the Erosion Control Sheet (7 of 10) says 30 days,
make sure you clarify the 30 Days in all locations.
c) VTC Details, Use larger Rock, 3-6" is better for a purpose of a tracking pad. Also if the tracking
pad is to be truly 50ft long, you might want to try drawing the VTC to scale on the plans. Also on the
detail it says to remove the soil at % the filter depth, how do you measure a filter depth on a tracking
pad? Also describe how to maintenance the tracking pads? If you simply mean stir the rocks and
remove excess sediments, say that, you want to make this document pretty clear to the builder what is
expected on site.
d) Your drawings did not contain any of the sequence drawing as prescribed in the requirements.
Look over ordinance 174 to help clarify.
Please use City Ordinance 174, 2011, specifically, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3.3 Titled "PDP
Erosion Control Report and Drawings Submittal Requirements." To assure your supplying the correct
information for you Erosion Control Drawings.
Topic: General
Page 6 of 9
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/01/2012
10/09/2013: Final routing of the high voltage power lines MAY not be as shown on the utility plan.
Routing may be from the existing electric vault on College, around the south side of the existing
building instead of from the N.E. corner of the site as shown on the utility plan. In order to size the
electric transformers, Light & Power will need a Commercial Service Information (C-1) form identifying
the voltage and amperage capacity required for each building. Please coordinate with Light & Power
Engineering at (970)221-6700.
03/25/2013: At least a basic design of the electric system needs to be coordinated with Light & Power
Engineering to confirm that there are no conflicts and that the electric utility utility system can be
installed. For example, it appears that it makes both electrical and economic sense to consolidate
both buildings from one transformer.
02/01/2012: Electric development and system modification charges will apply. Please coordinate
power requirements with Light & Power Engineering at (970)221-6700.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 03/25/2013
10/09/2013: The utility plan still shows this conflict.
03/25/2013: A new 6" water main is shown near the N.E. corner of the site. This water main appears to
be virtually on top of a F.O. line. My records show that this F.O. line belongs to the City Traffic Dept.
Please verify with them that the water main location is acceptable. Also, there is a high voltage power
line running N-S along College Ave. The water main must be a minimum of 10 feet from the power
line.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 10/09/2013
10/09/2013: The utility plan shows "Existing power poles to be removed & overhead lines to be
undergrounded". This line is not a power line, but likely a telephone line belonging to Century Link.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Craig Foreman, 970.221.6618, cforeman(a.fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/23/2012
01/23/2012: No comments
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416.2869, ilynxwiler(dpoudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/03/2013
04/03/2013: WATER SUPPLY
Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy.
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS: Hydrants to provide 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced
not further than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter.
2006 International Fire Code 508.1 and Appendix B
Hydrant distance and separation are measured along a path of travel. As such, the location of the
proposed building in Phase IV will exceed the allowable maximum distance to the nearest hydrant on
College. Another hydrant will be required along the EAE on the east side of building IV. Please
contact me should you need further discussion on this.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Page 5 of 9
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 01 /27/2012
10/22/2013: This issue has generally been addressed well enough at this time - we can continue to
work on this issue at the time of final plans.
04/0112013: The applicants have indicated that they used the Fort Collins Native Plant Guide for
selecting plant materials within the buffer zone, but neither the Austrian Pine nor the Colorado Blue
Spruce are listed in that document. However, I am fine with these species being utilized, but additional
deciduous trees need also be provided, e.g., cottonwoods, plum, and chokecherry. The four -wing
saltbrush is a good addition, but other shrubs should also be provided for increased diversity, e.g.,
rabbitbrush, serviceberry, and sand cherry, as examples. Additional red -osier dogwood would also
work.
01/27/2012: Within the 50' buffer zone, according to Article 3.4.1(E)(1)(g), the City has the ability to
determine if the existing landscaping within the buffer zone is incompatible with the purposes of the
buffer zone. The landscaping in the buffer zone, as currently proposed, in insufficient to meet the
standards of 3.4.1. For instance, the trees proposed within the buffer area (only three) are lacking both
in quantity (we want more trees and shrubs throughout the entire site) and quality (the proposed trees
are not native, please see the City's Native Plants Guide available at
http://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/native-plants.php for a more appropriate plant palette). Staff would
be happy to meet with you to discuss these issues in more detail.
Department: Historical Preservation
Contact: Josh Weinberg, 970-221.6206, Iweinbergl7fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 02/06/2012
Building not yet 50 years old, so there is no historic preservation review.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Steve Olt, 970.221-6341, solt(&fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
02/0812012: Helen Matson of the City's Real Estate Planning Department offered the following
comments:
a.The acquisition on North College Avenue has been finalized. The Warranty Deed was recorded at
Reception #20110016834 in Larimer County. The property boundary should be moved westerly
accordingly.
b.The Stormwater Utility is planning a project in this area. Real Estate Planning will be contacting the
"owner" to see if projects jive.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
02/08/2012: Russ Hovland of the Building Inspection Department is forwarding a letter to the Applicant
that addresses: 1) a Building Permit Pre -Submittal Meeting; 2) Adopted codes that construction shall
comply with; and, 3) Legacy Auto, project specific concerns.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224.6152, dmartine(cbfcgov.com
Topic: General
Page 4 of 9
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
04/0212013: Add 40-97 after "Benchmark" to the second project benchmark.
02/08/2012: A second project benchmark is needed to be referenced in the construction plan set.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
04/0212013: While it's realized that the metal sidewalk culvert is not being built with this specific
development, to the extent that the construction drawings have the detail, the detail should be
modified to the specification we're currently using.
02/0812012: The metal sidewalk culvert detail if intended to be built with a phase in the development
has since been updated and should be modified as attached.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
04/0212013: I've had further discussion with Engineering, Traffic, and PFA on the emergency access
design for the project. PFA indicated that need for there may no longer be a need for the emergency
access onto College Avenue. If this is the case, the drive approach should be removed and replaced
with vertical curb and gutter closing off the driveway. Should the emergency access remain, the drive
approach should ideally be converted to rollover curb in order to reduce the appearance of the
access being used by the general public. The bollards should be offset 2 feet from the property line
onto private property to reduce the likelihood of bicyclists and pedestrians conflicting with the bollards
while utilizing the sidewalk.
02/08/2012: The use of bollards to block the emergency access should be verified for acceptability
by PFA. If acceptable to PFA, the placement of the bollards should be outside of public right-of-way,
behind the sidewalk on private property.
Comment Number: 12
04/02/2013: Carried over for reference.
Comment Originated: 02/08/2012
02/08/2012: Matt Baker in Engineering Street Oversizing has provided the information that the repay
due for College Avenue improvements is currently $190,935.83. This amount is based on today's
dollars and would be adjusted with inflation at the time of repayment which would be prior to issuance
of a building permit.
Comment Number: 13
04/02/2013: Project from my perspective is ready for a public hearing.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970.224.6143, lex(a.fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4
10/2212013: Environmental Planning is ready for a Hearing.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Originated: 04/02/2013
Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
Page 3 of 9
Comment Number: 24
Comment Originated: 10/25/2013
10125/2013: PUBLIC HEARING:
standing comments that need to be addressed prior to public hearing are the hydrant location
for PFA nd the Planning comments. I will be discussing the proposed modifications and phasing with
staff on uesday (10/29).
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
10/2212013: The southern landscape buffer between the sidewalk and the building along College (Ua�E
Avenue is required to have one tree per 25 linear feet. The distance of this area is 120' thus requires 'C"<3
4.8 (5) trees. Only two are proposed. Please revise accordingly. 1W tUE
Topic: Modification of Standard
Comment Number: 22
CY( 10/29/2013: Staff does not see how this requested modification could meet the modification
S�s standards. In order to evaluate the siting of the project, please provide a site plan that shows
compliance with this section of the Land Use Code.
10/22/2013:
Staff will discuss your request for an exception to the build -to line standards based on the high -volume
and speed of the 4 lane arterial street.
O�
I?Ei �� F
o G�
C-o*2-Nl�
Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
Additionally, a modification would be required based on a similar circumstance in that the vehicular
use area is between the building and the street (as is prohibited per Sec. 3.5.3(C)(2). Please provide
a written request for a modification of standard with a narrative citing section 2.8.2(H) of the land use
code and explaining the corresponding rationale for requesting a modification.
Q� X�
Cijr� Contact: Steve Olt, 970.221.6341, sottCalfcoov.com
Topic: General
5 Comment Number: 15
Comment Originated: 02/09/2012
10/22/2013: Please remove "Preliminary Design Plans" from all plans.
02/0912012: Please take "PDP" out of the sheet title on all plans (see red -lined plans).
Modification of Standard
Comment Number: 13
Comment Originated: 02/07/2012
10/29/2013: This modification can, most likely, be supported by staff as being nominal and
inconsequential. Nevertheless, please provide information requested.
10/22/2013: Please provide a written request for a modification of standard with a narrative citing'
section 2.8.2(H) of the land use code and explaining the corresponding rationale for requesting a
modification.
04/01/2013: A modification of this standard is required.
02/0712012: As set forth in Section 4.22(B)(2)(d)l & 5 of the CS, Service Commercial District,
warehouses and wholesale distribution facilities must be located at least 200' from North College
Avenue. Just in case the property owner(s) were to want to include these uses on the development
plan please take note that none of the buildings are to be at least 200' from the street.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata(a.fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Page 2 of 9
City of
Fort Collins
October 29, 2013
Don Shields
WG Architects
P.O. Box 270788
Fort Collins, CO 80527
RE: Legacy Auto, PDP120001, Round Number 3
Conn nity Developrne t and
Neighborhood Services
281 North college Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins. CO 80522
970.221.6760
970.224.6134 - fax
rdgov. com/developmentreview
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.
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Seth Lorson, 970.224.6189, slorson anfcaov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 04/01/2013
10/2212013: The west elevation requires building articulation and some architectural detailing per LUC
Sec. 3.5.3(D) & 3.5.3(E)(2).
04/01/2013: Please provide building elevations for all sides of all building for all phases.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 19
Comment Originated: 04/01/2013
10/22/2013: REMOVE ALL PHASING FROM ALL THE PLANS. The only approval that will be given is
for the complete plan. The phasing only complicates the plans. Phasing of improvements can be
(oi'�orked out with the Development Review Engineer at Final Plan during the negotiation of the
Development Agreement.
QahSr N �`
Please make all asphalt the same color. On sheet PDP.C1.1 B there are 4 different colors for asphalt
paving.
04/0112013: This plan shows phasing. Phasing can only be established with an Overall Development
Plan (ODP) which will require PDPs for each phase. The phasing shown in this current proposal will all
have to be completed in the 3 years that the PDP is active. Please see LUC 2.2.11(B) & (C).
Page 1 of 9