HomeMy WebLinkAboutVILLAGE COOPERATIVE FORT COLLINS - PDP - PDP160036 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)12/19/2016: Please revise the leader for the Sight Distance Easement as
marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12119/2016: Visually it appears that the new right of way line does not touch the
old right of way along Stanford Road. Please verify that these do touch. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please move the bearing & distance as marked to the left(west),
so that the easterly end of the 20' Sanitary Easement shows. See redlines.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/19/2016: This has not been corrected.
11/16/2016: Please revise the legal description to match the corrected legal
description on the Subdivision Plat.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet
titles on the noted sheets. See redlines.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 12119/2016
12/19/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn(afcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/20/2016
12/20/2016: Please include signing and striping plans with your next round.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolsonapfc-qov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/11/2016
11/11/2016: 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
Department: Zoning
Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416.2338, mglasgowanfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/09/2016
11/09/2016: The number of Parking Spaces provided does not meet the
minimum requirements. A modification will be required to approve proposed
parking.
12/19/2016: No modification was received for this request.
being used
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/15/2016
12/20/2016: Holding over for reference. This can be addressed fully at Final
11/15/2016: As shown, the Landscape Plan does not meet the Detention Pond
Landscape Guidelines. Technically, neither does the grading, but it is
recognized that there is a significant grade issue on this site that makes
grading difficult. In light of that, additional and robust landscaping (i.e.
screening) will be needed around the detention ponds to mitigate the slopes
and lack of naturalistic shaping of these areas.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221.6588, icounty(ZDfcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/19/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched
areas. See redlines.
11 /16/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched
areas. See redlines.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 12/20/2016
12/20/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 12/20/2016
12/20/2016: SHADOW STUDY: Please add sheet numbers to these plans.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/21/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
11/16/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/19/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
11/16/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/21 /2016: No plans were provided for review.
11/16/2016: No comments.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/19/2016: This has not been corrected.
11/16/2016: Please make changes to the Owners & Lien holders signature
blocks as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please add the "Sight Distance Easement Restrictions"
statement.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
site plan only shows 75 parking spaces, which is 13 spaces short. Staff did not
find a modification request as part of this round of review. Please submit a
modification request as part of your next round of review.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 11/14/2016
12/19/2016: Thank you for also submitting a modification request to the bicycle
parking standard. Do you have any data that supports the number of bicycle
parking spaces provided? Other senior housing projects have provided higher
ratios of parking and target an older demographic. Would it be possible to
provide one bicycle parking space per unit? This would be easier to justify than
what the modification request shows.
11 /14/2016: The site is also 56 bicycle parking spaces short of meeting the
minimum bicycle parking requirement. Please also submit a modification
request to this standard.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please show the walkway leading from the patio to the sidewalk
along Horsetooth.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, ischlam(a�fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
12/20/2016: Repeat.
Comment Originated: 11/01/2016
11/01/2016: 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, an Erosion Control Plan,
an Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need
clarification concerning the erosion control section, or if there are any questions
please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com
Contact: Shane Boyle, 970-221-6339, sboyle a fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 11/15/2016
12/20/2016: See minor redlines in the latest submittal.
11/15/2016: Please see redlines for additional minor comments.
Topic: Drainage Report
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 11/15/2016
12/20/2016: This has been explained acceptably in the Report. Please note,
WQCV for extended detention requires a 40-hour drain time and a minimum
depth of 1.0'. Please revise the WQCV calcs for the WQ pond accordingly.
11/15/2016: More detail will be needed on how the combination water quality in
the chambers/Pond A works together.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 12/20/2016
12/20/2016: The calculations for the Stormtech Chambers also need to include
the Modified FAA calculation to ensure the correct number of chambers are
forcible entry tools or when a key box containing the key(s) to the lock is
installed at the gate location.
7. Gate design and locking device specifications shall be submitted for
approval by the fire code official prior to installation.
8. Electric gate operators, where provided, shall be listed in accordance with
UL 325.
9. Gates intended for automatic operation shall be designed, constructed and
installed to comply with the requirements of ASTM F 2200.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated
12/12/2016: KNOX PADLOCK
If secured, each gate shall be equipped with a Knox Padlock.
Comment Number: 6
12/12/2016
Comment Originated: 12/12/2016
12/12/2016: FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
With the addition of gates, some discussion remains regarding sign placement.
This can be worked out in future plans.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 11/15/2016
12/19/2016: Thank you for providing perspective renderings of the building.
The patio addresses Horsetooth well. With that being said, staff would still
prefer to have individual walks leading up to the units that front on Horsetooth. Is
this possible to accommodate?
11/15/2016: Please provide color, perspective renderings of the building. This
will help staff to evaluate the articulation of the building in conjunction with the
quality of the porch facing Horsetooth. Staff wants to ensure the building is not
turning its back onto Horsetooth.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 16
Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: The perspective elevations show a walkway leading from the patio
to the sidewalk along Horsetooth. Neither the Landscape nor Site Plan show
this connection. You must provide this walkway connection to the sidewalk on
Horsetooth. Please show this connection on both the Site and Landscape
Plans.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 17
Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: To achieve the walkway connection from the patio to the sidewalk
on Horsetooth, some of the shrubs will need to be relocated.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/14/2016
12/19/2016: Thank you for submitting a modification request to this standard. Is
there a reason why this project is parked at the lowest ratio when compared to
your other developments around the country? Staff will be conducting their own
analysis of similar projects in Fort Collins and northern Colorado to see if the
modification request meets one of the modification criteria.
11/14/2016: 88 parking spaces is required for this development. The proposed
Please evaluate using fewer Accolade Elms on this project. For greater street
tree diversity, switch the (3) Accolade Elms on the east end of Horsetooth Rd to
(3) Western Hackberry and move them into the right of way.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey(a)fcpov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/15/2016
11/15/2016: Comment from Comcast:
"Comcast Cable has no issue with the plat map.
Comcast will need a right of entry agreement to service this development.
Comcast will need to coordinate with the developer on how to have the units
pre -wired with conduit from the demark point to a media panel in the unit.
Comcast will be planning on building this with a fiber to the unit design and will
work with the developer on demarcation points.
Please call Don Kapperman with questions."
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, ►lynxwiler(a)poudre-fire.orq
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated
12/09/2016: SECURITY GATES
Two gates have been added to the site plan on the fire lane connection to
Horsetooth Rd. For planning purposes, gates shall comply with the following
criteria.
> IFC 503.6: The installation of security gates across a fire apparatus access
road shall be approved by the fire chief. Where security gates are installed, they
shall have an approved means of emergency operation. The security gates and
the emergency operation shall be maintained operational at all times.
> IFC D103.5: Gates securing fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all
of the following criteria:
1. The minimum gate width for vehicle access shall be 20 feet.
2. Gates shall be of the swinging or sliding type.
3. Construction of gates shall be of materials that allow manual operation by one
person.
4. Gate components shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times
and replaced or repaired when defective.
5. Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening the gate by fire
department personnel for emergency access. Emergency opening devices shall
be approved by the fire code official.
6. Manual opening gates shall not be locked with an unapproved padlock, or
chain and padlock, unless they are capable of being opened by means of
12/09/2016
porkchop and then consider borrowing from the material used on the outer edge
of the median in center of Horsetooth west of the intersection to frame around
the outer curb and gutter. The overall design needs to be on both the landscape
and civil plans.
Comment Number: 18
Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Along Horsetooth Road there is a tiny wedge of landscaping just
west of the new proposed curb inlet where the sidewalk is still shown as
detached just west of that inlet. It seems unlikely that this small wedge of turf
would thrive in such a small area, it would seem to be more efficient if this area
just west of the inlet was also concrete, and to add concrete just north of the
northeast edge of the inlet.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970.416-4290, sblochowiak(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 12/20/2016
12/20/2016: All comments to date have been addressed. Environmental
Planning has no further comments. Thank you.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, mroche(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
12/21/2016:
Continued
Thank you for providing the locations of street lights on the plans. Are there
streetlights along Horsetooth Road? Please adjust the spacing of the trees to
meet the LUC 3.2.1. requirements:
40 feet for canopy shade trees and 15 feet for ornamental trees
11117/2016:
Please show locations of street lights and adjust tree spacing according to
street tree separation requirements if necessary.
Comment Number: 6
12/21/2016-.
Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
There seems to be a discrepancy on the landscape plans. According to the
Tree List, there should be 4 Spring Snow Crabapples and 3 Royal Raindrops
Crabapples. However, 3 Spring Snow and 4 Royal Raindrops are shown on the
plans. Please correct these numbers on the Tree List or the plans in order to
remain consistent.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016:
Tree Selection:
Typically Lindens do not survive or thrive well along roads treated with deicing
salts. Please evaluate changing the three Lindens along Horsetooth Rd for
another species from the City of Fort Collins Street Tree List, such as Catalpa.
12/23/2016: Please have the area that's identified as a 20' sanitary easement
within the platted boundary of the site also be defined and dedicated as a utility
easement in order to allow other utility uses within this area beyond the sanitary
easement. This area would likely be the location for the placement of dry utilities
and isn't currently covered by a utility easement (but is directly south of a
prescribed 5 foot utility easement).
Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Please have note 6 on the existing conditions and demo plan
sheets also added to the horizontal control plan sheets (regarding limits of
street repair).
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Please depict the patching shown on the demo plan for the street
cuts to Stanford also on the horizontal control and utility plan sheets.
Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: The receiving ramp at the southwest leg of the porkchop (at the
northeast corner of the intersection) needs to be wider and bring truncated
domes around the curve to more clearly accept movements from the south and
from the west.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Please have the following language on the plat pertaining to sight
distance easement language: (this can also be emailed electronically if
desired).
Comment Number: 16
Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Sight Distance Easement— The sight distance easement is an
easement required by the City at some street intersections where it is
necessary to protect the line of sight for a motorist needing to see approaching
traffic and to react safely for merging their vehicle into the traffic flow. The
following are requirements for certain objects that may occupy a sight distance
easement for level grade:
(1) Structures and landscaping within the easement shall not exceed 24 inches
in height with the following exceptions:
(a) Fences up to 42 inches in height may be allowed as long as they do not
obstruct the line of sight for motorists.
(b) Deciduous trees may be allowed as long as all branches of the trees are
trimmed so that no portion thereof or leaves thereon hang lower than six (6) feet
above the ground, and the trees are spaced such that they do not obstruct line
of sight for motorists. Deciduous trees with trunks large enough to obstruct line
of sight for motorists shall be removed by the owner.
For non -level areas these requirements shall be modified to provide the same
degree of visibility.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: The pork chop median needs to have a design for the hardscape
within the median (there is not an expectation that the porkchop median be
irrigated with landscaping, if this is however desired by the developer, it would
raise additional concerns/review regarding underdrain installation, irrigation tap,
maintenance responsibilities, etc). Under the presumed direction of a
hardscape media, the design would need to look at pavers in the center of the
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/developmentreview
December 29, 2016
Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Ave
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Village Cooperative Fort Collins, PDP160036, Round Number 2
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about
any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through
the Project Planner, Clay Frickey, at 970-224-6045 or cfrickey@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
12/23/2016. It appears that the emergency access design may be revised.
We'll want to understand the details of the proposed design before hearing
(bollards/gates, driveable surface type, etc.)
11/16/2016: The emergency access off of Horsetooth requires the specifying of
a driveover curb for the access drive. Plastic delineator/bollards would need to
be specified behind the right-of-way with further onsite design of the emergency
access to meet PFA requirements.
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Station 14 and 15+50 have cross slopes for the widened section
of Horsetooth roadway that fall below minimum cross slope requirements.
Please look at potentially adjusting flowline grades to ensure sufficient cross
slopes.
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 12/23/2016
12/23/2016: Along the flowline, sag vertical curves into inlets are required to
have a .5% straight grade into the inlet and not utilize a sag vertical curve into an
inlet.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/23/2016