Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGATEWAY AT PROSPECT AMENDED ODP - ODP160001 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSwith LCUASS. Th( 'generally determines the need for turn la. a given street. beyond the standard cross section of Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221.6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2016 The site will be served water by Elco. Please contact Mike Scheid, 493-2044 for further information. The will be served sewer by Boxelder. Please contact Brenda Price, 498-0604 for further information. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Zoning Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970.416-2338, mglasgow@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/24/2016 05/24/2016: LUC 3.2.2(J) Minimum Average of entire landscape setback area: Along lot line- 5ft Along non -arterial street-10ft Along arterial street-15ft Minimum width of setback at any point is 5 ft. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Please follow the design standards outlined in section 4.5(E)(4) Design standards for multi -family dwellings in LMN. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: ODP: Please darken the background line work. Response: Revised. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221.6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2016 05/27/2016: The TIS has been reviewed and provides a good starting point for further discussions. We are awaiting CDOT review and once complete, will coordinate a meeting to discuss further. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/27/2016 05/2712016: The TIS lists 'future' geometry, but doesn't clearly indicate what improvements the development should expect to install with each (or at least the first) phase. Response: Figure 13 in the TIS shows the required lanes in red. This is for Phase 1, as noted on Table 2, Trip Generation. Most of the require lanes are near/adjacent to the site (Prospect/Frontage Road intersection, Access A, Access C). A westbound right -turn lane is shown at the off -site Prospect/Summit View intersection. It was our understanding that the roundabout, on the Frontage Road, was a given. The eastbound right -turn lane at the Prospect/SB 1-25 Ramps intersection is currently required. Left -turn lanes are shown to be required (currently) on the 1-25 bridge, but this improvement would be part of a larger project as discussed in a scoping meeting. There is an expectation that additional TIS reports will be prepared at each PDP, which will show the required geometry for that PDP. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/27/2016 05/27/2016: Please check the analysis and Level of Service of the Frontage Road/Prospect intersection. The TIS reflects a LOS A, when in reality that intersection creates up to a 1/2 mile EB queue almost daily. Response: The actual delay experienced in the eastbound direction is acknowledged. The signal phasing/timing at the Prospect/Frontage Road intersection may have been given more green time to Prospect Road than that which currently exists. The actual signal timing at this intersection was not available for the TIS. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/27/2016 05/27/2016: The collector level internal street network would be helpful to discuss a bit more, and identify the classification (and cross section) expected with the road network. Response: Acknowledged. In a future 'amended' TIS, a section on street classification can be added. It will include Prospect Road, the Frontage Road, and the public street 'stubs' that intersect with Prospect Road and the Frontage Road. The cross section of a specific street classification should be in accordance it is incorrect. In Zc .E, Base Flood Elevations have been dete ed. Response: The floodplain notes have been revised to reflect the correct Floodplain designation. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/24/2016 05/24/2016: Please add the following sentence to the end of Note 4: Building and construction permits must meet the floodplain requirements based on the regulatory floodplain in effect at the time of permit issuance. The revised Boxelder Creek floodplain will not be regulatory until the LOMR is approved by FEMA. Final flood fringe and floodway boundaries may differ from those in the CLOMR. Response: A note has been added regarding construction permits for work within the floodplain. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221.6588, jcounty_@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Revised. Topic: General Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: ODP: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Revised. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: ODP: This is not amending the "Gateway At Prospect" ODR If the title is not changed, please add "Amending Interstate Land ODP" to the title. Response: Revised. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: ODP: We suggest adding a larger title to the top of the sheets. Response: A larger title has been added to the top of Sheet 1. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: ODP: There is text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines. Response: Revised. ✓ Comment Numb. 18 ment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The O.D.P. would benefit from a Zoning Map detail that depicts the four zone districts clearly without other line work. Otherwise, the four zones get obscured on sheet 2. Response: Azoning map has been added to Sheet 1. ,/ Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Sheet One would benefit from a Tract index/table that describes the zone, the anticipated uses, the acreage, etc. Response: A tract index table has been added to Sheet 1. Comment Number: 20 cAtv aE c AComment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Sheet One needs a title block and must indicate that the O.D.P. is an amendment of Interstate Lands Master Plan. Response: A title block is provided along the right edge of each sheet. A larger title has been added to Sheet 1 as well. ✓ Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Please increase the font size of the General Notes or double space for readability. Response: The general notes have been double spaced. !,"Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: From Justin Green, Superintendent, Lake Canal: Lake Canal runs along the North border of this project and nothing is mentioned or stated on the drawings about access or easement for it. The Timnath inlet and the Boxelder Creek are mentioned but nothing about Lake Canal. Response: Lake Canal is now noted on the ODR Access for Lake Canal will not change from the existing access. ✓ Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: From Justin Green, Superintendent, Lake Canal: 2. As you know the city has just installed a siphon on Lake Canal so the creek can go over the top. There is no mention of this structure in the notes or drawings. Response: Lake Canal is noted on the ODP. Siphons and other structures have not been noted on our plans as the information does not pertain to the ODR Please clarify if a specific note is requested. Justin Green, Superintendent, Lake Canal, 970-420-7503, Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heidi Hansen, 970-221-6854, hhansen@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/24/2016 05/24/2016: Please remove Note 8 on Sheet 2 of the Master Drainage Plan as 05/25/2016: Then ;amily clubhouse should be as close to the xelder Creek buffer as possible and the central point for a bike/ped trail system. Response: The clubhouse was centrally located within the multi -family parcel to provide the best possible access to the majority of residents as well as for visibility from the access road into the property from Prospect Road. This also allows for more green space adjacent to the Boxelder Creek. The schematic site plan for the multi -family will be further refined at the time of PDP/FDP applications as well. ,/ Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Section 2.3.2(H)(4) requires an O.D.P. to provide for the location of transportation connections to adjoining properties to ensure connectivity into and through the O.D.P. from neighboring properties for vehicles, pedestrians and bikes as per Sections 3.6.3 (F) and 3.2.2(C)(6). Since no street connection is proposed north into Sunrise Acres, a Modification of Standard needs to be submitted. Response: Acknowledged. C men' Number: 16 Comment Originated: 0512512016 5/2512016:Since the exceeds 40 acres, the L-M-N zone requires the lowin Section 4.5(D)(3) - Neighborhood Centers. Access to Neighborhood Center. At least ninety (90) percent of the dwellings in all development projects greater than forty (40) acres shall be located within three thousand nine hundred sixty (3,960) feet (three-quarter F14] mile) of either a neighborhood center contained within the project, or an existing neighborhood center located in an adjacent development, or an existing or planned Neighborhood Commercial District commercial project, which distance shall be measured along street frontage, and without crossing an arterial street. Neighborhood centers shall meet the requirements contained in subparagraphs (b) through (e) below. Please indicate the location of the L-M-N neighborhood center and demonstrate how it is functionally integrated into the larger neighborhood. �r001 tj'` 0V%V 9odl��.s t5 L r far 4 Response: The LMN neighborhood center could be located in both/either parcel I or m. The size of parcels I and m will allow for a variety of commercial development. While streets have not yet been designed to determine exact distances, residential located in the farthest corner from the commercial parcels is less than 3,000 feet away. Due to this, we believe we can achieve at least 90 percent of all dwelling located within % mile of the neighborhood center. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The O.D.P. narrative needs to address how the development will comply with the Cooper Slough Drainage Basin Master Plan, per Section 2.3.2(H)(6). Response: The information has been added to Planning Objectives. Response: Acknc Jged. Planting and enhancements will be sidered at the time of PDP/FDP submittals. Comment Number 10 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The 0. .. should make a stronger effort to connect the multi -family area to both the residential neighborhood, the public park and the commercial area, especially the future convenience center. Please explore providing an off-street bike/ped path that connects the multi -family to the neighborhood park. Otherwise, the multi -family area becomes an isolated pod. Response: Additional pedestrian trails have been added to the ODP to provide a good network of connections between various areas of the development. Specifically, there are connections between the multi -family and the neighborhood commercial, a large 'loop' around the development and an east/west connection from the proposed neighborhood park. N a /7 EN; o ti s F ,4iG j Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 l� 05/25/2016: In addition, please demonstrate how the multi -family area ties into the convenience center as discussed in pre -submittal meetings. This will require a bike/ped bridge over Boxelder Creek. Response: A pedestrian/bicycle connection is proposed along the bridge/adjacent to the ROW over Boxelder Creek which would connect to the neighborhood commercial area. The walk would be expanded from a typical 4.5' walk to a 6'-8' walk. We have had preliminary discussions with Engineering and they are in support of this crossing. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: When considering the site plan for the multi -family, please make an effort to front the buildings on public streets to the maximum extent feasible. Buildings should be addressed off these streets and feature multiple entrances. Floor plans should be arranged so that the fronts of the units, not back patios, face the street. Parking lots should be to the rear or, to a lesser degree, the side of the buildings. Inwardly focused apartment complexes that are not fully integrated into the larger neighborhood tend to become isolated. Response: Acknowledged. Additional information will be provided with the applicable PDP submittal. Design considerations for future design of the multi -family parcel has been also been included on the CDR Please reference 'APU Parameters'. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Where it's not possible to serve buildings by public streets, the Street -Like Private Drive may be used as alternative. Please note that such streets must include detached sidewalks for walkability, parkways and street trees and may allow for either parallel or diagonal parking. Head -in (90-degree) parking is not allowed on a Street -Like Private Drive. Such streets can be named for addressing and emergency response. Response: Acknowledged. /Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 trail by protected bi nes or by widened detached sidewalks. 1 urban design element could connect all four zones and allow transitioning from commercial uses to residential areas in a way that is seamless and not abrupt and jarring. Response: Acknowledged. We have included information about the frame work as part of this ODR Specific street and landscape design will be provided with PDP/FDP submittals. ✓ Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The aforementioned boulevard could be alley -loaded which counts as one of four required housing types in the L-M-N zone. Response: Acknowledged. ✓ Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Placing the public park in the west central area of the L-M-N (Parcel g) helps emphasize the residential component of the O.D.P. as opposed to the commercial areas and the impacts associated with being close to 1-25. Response: A park location has been added to the ODP per a meeting the Parks Planning and Planning on 6.9.16. ,/ Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: A west central park could be the focal point for a north -south bike/ped path that closes the loop formed by the regional trail and the trail along the Cache La Poudre Inlet Canal. Response: A park location has been added to the ODP per a meeting the Parks Planning and Planning on 6.9.16. In addition, a N/S pedestrian connection has been added to the ODP to create a loop with the regional trail. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Regarding--tife four housing types, staff encourages that various pes-�d'istributed throughout the L-M-N zone. For example, corner lots could be enlarged to accommodate two-family dwellings. Private alleys could be dispersed. Staff recommends that three separate housing types not be arranged in separate pods (with the exception of the multi -family). Conn - T '7­6 / o/ i w/ o ID / `i 10U Response: Acknowledged. At the time of PDP/FDP submittals, we will work to disperse housing types. �i Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: This urban design framework can be used as a building block for laying out a network of public streets, blocks, private alleys and lots. Response: Acknowledged. Comment tmber:9 NH hD " Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016elder Creek buffer should be enhanc to highlight the regional trail and to mitigate the negative impacts of 12 . �_r ;� le,-6 , ��.✓�►c � �� Comment Numbe.. J ment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: PHASING No portion of the phasing plan should create a dead-end road in excess of 660' in length. At this time, it's unclear if the development of Parcel K is meeting connectivity regarding a second point of access. More information is requested. Code language provided below. > FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006; IFC 503.2.5 and Appendix D: Dead-end fire apparatus access roads cannot exceed 660 feet in length. Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General ✓ Comment Number: 1 IN Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The site is challenged by existing water courses, four oddly shaped zone districts and integrating the potential for a wide variety of land uses so that the various land uses are not arranged in isolated pods. In addition, the close proximity to 1-25 requires mitigation to attenuate road noise and visual intrusion. In general, the O.D.P. needs to respond by establishing a fundamental organizing principle that brings a measure of cohesiveness so that a distinctive, mixed -use neighborhood is formed. Response: Acknowledged. The plan has been revised per comments as well as comments from several meetings with Staff to refine the plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Staff suggests that the design team focus on uniting the O.D.P. with a framework of site plan attributes that takes advantage of Boxelder Creek and by strategically locating the public neighborhood park. For example, an east -west urban design attribute could be anchored by Boxelder Creek on the east and the public park on the west. The east focal point captures the value of the planned regional trail and helps mitigate the commercial aspects of the project. The west focal point captures the value of the residential character and views and could be located at the terminus of Boxelder Drive thus preserving a vista to the west. Response: Acknowledged. The park location has been added to the plan. Additional pedestrian connections have been added to the ODP to create loops and direct connections to the park. While more specific design isn't included as a part of this ODP, these attributes will create the framework for PDP and FDP submittals. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The two focal points could be connected by a tree -lined walkway/bikeway spine, or a local street that features a wide landscape median like a boulevard. Such a local street could enhance connectivity to the regional Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM All multi -family buildings will require a full NFPA13 automatic fire sprinkler system under a separate permit. Please contact Assistant Fire Marshal, Joe Jaramillo with any fire sprinkler related questions at 970-416-2868. Response: Acknowledged. Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: FIRE CONTAINMENT Should the clubhouse exceed 5000 square feet, it shall be sprinklered or fire contained. If containment is used, the containment construction shall be reviewed and approved by the Poudre Fire Authority prior to installation. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: HYDRANTS A hydrant is required within 300' of any commercial building. Code language provided below. > IFC 508.1 and Appendix B: 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. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: PREMISE IDENTIFICATION AND WAYFINDING A preliminary plan for wayfinding within the site will be required at time of PDP. Naming of the private drives is recommended to assist with addressing and wayfinding. Monument signage may be required at intersections. Code language provided below. > IFC 505.1: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible, visible from the street or road fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal. > The required tut. , radii of a fire apparatus access road shall u minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. Turning radii shall be detailed on submitted plans. > Be visible by painting and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. > Additional access requirements exist for buildings greater than 30' in height. Refer to Appendix D of the 2012 IFC or contact PFA for details. International Fire Code 503.2.3, 503.2.4, 503.2.5, 503.3, 503.4 and Appendix D; FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006 and Local Amendments. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS AND SECOND POINT OF ACCESS D106.2: Multiple -family residential projects having more than 200 dwelling units shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads regardless of whether they are equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 30' IN HEIGHT (see 2012 IFC definition) Should any building exceed 30' in height, aerial apparatus access requirements shall apply. Code language provided below or see IFC Appendix D for further information. WHERE REQUIRED > IFC D105.1: Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. WIDTH > IFC D105.2; FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006; and Local Amendments: Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 30 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. PROXIMITY TO BUILDING > IFC D105.3: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: We encourage the Developer to set up a meeting with the Park Planning & Development Department to discuss the location of the city park and the alignment of the public trail as identified by the 2013 Trails Master Plan through this property. Response: Acknowledged. A meeting was held on June 9th, 2016. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416.2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: FIRE LANES Fire access is required to within 150' of all exterior portions of any building, or facility as measured by an approved route around the perimeter. For the purposes of this section, fire access cannot be measured from an arterial road. All fire lanes or private roads serving as fire lanes shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement and be designed to standard fire lane specifications. Code language provided below. > IFC 503.1.1: Approved fire Lanes shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. When any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access, the fire code official is authorized to increase the dimension if the building is equipped throughout with an approved, automatic fire -sprinkler system. Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at the time of the applicable PDP submittal Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/19/2016 05/19/2016: FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS Afire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements: > Shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement. > Maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance. > Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. > Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Comment Number: 4 05/09/2016: Power is available along the frontage road. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Park Planning Contact: Ted Shepard, 970.221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/09/2016 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: As discussed in an earlier meeting with the Developer, a city park is not desirable in areas a or b as shown on the ODP, as these areas are isolated from the development by two canals, and located along the back side of commercial/industrial area. We prefer the city park to be located within the development (parcels g,h,i), providing easy access from residents and visitors, and encompassed with residential or natural amenities such as Boxelder Creek. Response: Updated comments were provided by Parks Planning following a meeting with Parks Planning and Planning on 6.9.16. Responses to the updated comments has been provided in the'Parks Planning Response Letter' included in this submittal. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: As the trail will be a public trail through this site, we encourage separation between the buildings and trail. Currently, the conceptual site plan for Gateway at Prospect Apartments does not provide the separation needed. Also, it is desirable for the trail to follow Boxelder Creek, as shown in the 2013 Trails Master Plan. Response: Updated comments were provided by Parks Planning following a meeting with Parks Planning and Planning on 6.9.16. Responses to the updated comments has been provided in the 'Parks Planning Response Letter' included in this submittal. The trail has been relocated to follow the Boxelder Creek as well. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: The development should provide trail connections through the development to the existing homes to the west. Response: Updated comments were provided by Parks Planning following a meeting with Parks Planning and Planning on 6.9.16. Responses to the updated comments has been provided in the 'Parks Planning Response Letter' included in this submittal. A pedestrian connection to the west is shown where the road terminates in Sunrise Acres Second Subdivision. This road will not continue onto the Gateway at Prospect property. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Trail connectivity to the city park is desirable. Response: A pedestrian connection the park location has been added to the ODP. Comment Numbei. C�...,nent Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: Please delineate and label the buffer zones for the canal and Boxelder Creek on the Master Utility Plan. Please also label the Cache La Poudre Inlet Canal. Response: The Habitat Buffers and labels are now shown on the Master Utility Plan. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: Please note that one or more Ecological Characterization Studies will be required prior to the submittal of any PDPs. A single ECS could be prepared for the entire ODP at the time of the first PDP submittal, if preferred, which could be updated or amended for subsequent PDP submittals. Alternatively, you may submit individual ECS reports for each PDP submittal. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Light And Power Contact: Todd Vedder, 970.224-6152, tvedder@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/09/2016 05/09/2016: New development and system modification charges may apply. A link to our online electric fee estimator is below. hftp://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-i nvestmen t-development-fees/electric-development-fee-estim ator?id=3 Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/09/2016 05/09/2016: Contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the transformer and electric meter locations. Please show these locations on the utility plans. Transformers need to have an 8' frontal and 3' side/rear clearance. It also has to be 10' within a drivable surface and cannot be located under the drip zone of any trees. Please reference our Electric Construction, Policies Practices & Procedures to ensure requirements and policies are met. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers Response: Acknowledged, Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/09/2016 05/09/2016: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 221-6700. Please reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-fo rms-guidelines-regulations Response: Acknowledged. Response: There is no plan to develop parcels a, b and c at this time. We are planning on a pedestrian connection at East Locust Street. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, everette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: Thank you for delineating the approximate location and extent of the Cache la Poudre Inlet Canal, Boxelder Creek and the associated buffer zones on the ODP. However, the delineation of these features/buffers gets lost in all the linework. In particular, please show the 50' and 100' buffers in a more prominent line weight or type. Response: Adjacent line work has been shifted to avoid overlaps. In addition, labels have been added to clarify the line work. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: Please include a note on the ODP that indicates something similar to the following, "This Overall Development Plan shows the general location and approximate size of all natural areas, habitats, and features within its boundaries and the proposed rough estimate of the natural area buffer zones as required by Land Use Code Section 3.4.1(E). Detailed mapping of a site's natural areas, habitats, and features will be provided at the time of individual PDP submittals. General buffer zones shown on this ODP may be reduced or enlarged by the decision maker during the PDP process." Response: Note #3 has been added to sheet 2 under'Notes'. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/12/2016 05/12/2016: Please add the following statement to the notes on any sheets of the ODP, Master Utility Plan and Master Drainage Plan that show the Habitat Buffer: "Please see Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within the natural habitat buffer zones." Response: Note #4 has been added to sheet 2 under'Notes'. A note has also been added to the Master Utility and Drainage Plan regarding the Habitat Buffer. 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 May 27, 2016 Kristin Turner TB GROUP 444 MOUNTAIN AVE Berthoud, CO 80513 RE: Gateway at Prospect ODP/APU (Addition of Permitted Use), ODP160001, 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, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343 or tshepard@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Ragasa, 970.221.6603, mragasa@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: Public streets next to Multi -Family development will need to be designed/constructed with a cross section for a Connector Roadway. (Parcels b, g, h, j, k) Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: More discussion is needed with CDOT to determine if the Right-in/Right-Out movement on the frontage road will be allowed. Response: Acknowledged. Per our previous meetings with CDOT we believe the RI/RO will be permitted. Please notify of us of any referral comments that you receive from CDOT. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/25/2016 05/25/2016: How will parcels a, b and c get access? A connection to E Locus Street will be needed. It may need to end in a culdesac. Please work with PFA to determine if an access is needed from parcels south of the Cache La Poudre Inlet Canal to the north. Show where this vehicle access will be located.