Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP - 02-08 A - CORRESPONDENCE -Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS Final Compliance Review Request to develop the property located on the northwest section of S. College Ave. ( Hwy 287) and Triangle Dr into a 90,000 sq ft Senior Assisted Living and Memeory Care Facility. Zoning - MMN - Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (Returned for 2nd P & Z hearing, 08/21/08 for replat request) Project Type: Project Desc: File ID: 02-08/A Planner: Steve Olt DMS Project Num: CP082080 ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 1 General [2/14/08] Existing 3-phase power along the south side of Triangle Drive with a conduit stubbed under the road to feed this site. Any relocation or modification to existing electric facilities will be at the developers expense. Resolved 1 Rob Irish 02/14/2008 2 General [4/29/08] Still need to show the proposed transformer location on the site plan and utility plan. Must maintain a 10' seperation from other utilities. Depending on where you place the transformer there could be some conflicts with fire, water and gas. [2/14/08] Developer will need to coordinate a transformer location with Light & Power on the plans. This location will need to be within 10' of an all weather drive over surface. Active 1 Rob Irish 02/14/2008 3 General [4/29/08] This is still shown on the utility plan. [2/14/08] The utility plan is showing an existing power transformer near the southwest corner of the site. I do not think this transformer exists and does not show on our system. Active 1 Rob Irish 02/14/2008 4 General [4/29/08] [2/14/08] Developer will need to provide a C-1 form and One-line diagram with power requirements to Light & Power. Active 1 Rob Irish 02/14/2008 5 General [2/14/08] Developer will be responsible for Electric Capacity & Building Site charges. Resolved 1 Rob Irish 02/14/2008 6 Zoning [2/15/08] Remove the "setbacks" from the Land Use Breakdown table on the site plan. The setbacks listed on the plan aren't what's shown, and they aren't what's required by the code. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 3/7/2011 Page 1 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 7 Zoning [2/15/08] In the MMN zone, only portions of buildings that are within 50' or 75' of the ROW of intersections are allowed to be 4 stories. Otherwise, 3 stories is the max. height allowed. (Section 4.6(E)(1)(d) and 4.6(E)(2)(a) and (b), Land Use Code). Unless the Building Department determines that the portions of the building which appears to have 4 stories are really only 3 stories with a garden level/basement, then I don't believe what's shown meets code. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 8 Zoning [2/15/08] The maximum number of parking spaces allowed is .33 spaces per bed (Section 3.2.2(K)(2)). Assuming one bed per unit, plus an additional bed in each of the 8, two bedroom units, there should be 98 beds. This means the max. number of parking spaces based on beds is only 32. The Code allows an additional parking space for every two employees on the major shift. So in order to be allowed 48 spaces, we'll need to know whether or not there will be at least 32 employees on the major shift. If there won't be that many, then they'll either need to reduce the number of spaces or do alternative compliance per Section 3.2.2(K)(3). 4-30-08 There are still too many parking spaces unless alternative compliance is being requested. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 9 Zoning [2/15/08] Need to label the depth of the parking stalls in the permiter parking rows. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 10 Zoning [2/15/08] Is there going to be a trash enclosure or compactor? If so, show location. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 11 Zoning [2/15/08] Need a bike rack or racks. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 12 Zoning [2/15/08] There are 2 project signs shown on the site plan along Triangle Drive which don't appear to be attached to the building. Therefore they are monument signs. This is in the residential neighborhood sign district, where only one such sign is allowed along each street. Also, since this is in the neighborhood sign district, any proposed wall sign locations must be shown. Resolved 1 Peter Barnes 02/15/2008 3/7/2011 Page 2 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 13 Transportation Planning [2/26/08] If possible, the northern sidewalk should connect with existing sidewalk on College Ave to the east as well as continue to the edge of property on the west. Need crosswalks along driveway entrances for pedestrian safety. Need bicycle racks located near the building, with easy access. Concerned that this type of facility is not located within the Transfort para-transit boundary. Active 1 Denise Weston 02/26/2008 3/7/2011 Page 3 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 14 General [4/30/08] New calculation was provided however, based on the new calculation, each unit would be approximately 983 SF in size. Are the units truly this large ? [2/26/08] The Transportation Development Review Fee (TDRF) for this project was not calculated correctly on the application that was submitted with the project. There are two ways that the application fee can be calculated and to know which way would be more beneficial (cheaper) to the applicant we need some additional information. 1. The fee can be calculated by just using the square footage of the project, the acreage and the flat $2000. Calculating the fee this way the application fee would be: (90,000 sq ft x .25 cents/ sq ft) + (3.86 acres x $250/ sq ft) + $2,000 = $ 25,465 Calculating the fee this way the applicant owes $10, 825 more for the submittal. 2. The fee can be calculated by using a combination of square footage and number of dwelling units in the project. We do not have enough information at this time to be able to fully calculate the fee in this manner, but the formula to do so would be as follows: (57 dwelling units (units that have kitchens) x $115/ unit) + ((total building square footage – the square footage area of the 57 dwelling units) x .25 cents/ sq ft) + (3.86 acres x $250/ sq ft) + $2,000 = the total fee. If you have questions on how to calculate the fees please call Sheri Langenberger at 221-6605. Please provide a check for $10,825 or the difference of the other calculation from what was paid at the time of next submittal. If you choose to go with the second calculation we will need the information that was used to make that calculation also provided at the time of the next submittal to verify the fee calculation. Resolved 1 Sheri Langenberger 02/26/2008 15 Engineering [2/26/08] Please provide two (2) City of Fort Collins Bench Marks per LCUASS requirements. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 3/7/2011 Page 4 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 16 Engineering [2/26/08] Please list all consultants information on the cover sheet (i.e. Geotechnical, Traffic, Architect etc …) Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 17 Engineering [6/27/08] No comments have been provided to the City by the Louden Ditch Company. It should be understood that the Ditch Company will be required to sign the final plans prior to the City and any revisions requested by the Ditch Company must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to plotting any mylars. [4/30/08] Nothing was provided from the louden Ditch Company. Louden Ditch has been routed plans and will be required to sign the final plans. Please be sure to provide any comments from Louden Ditch with your next submittal. [2/26/08] Please provide plan review comment letters from the Louden Ditch Company and Fort Collins-Loveland District with your next round of review, prior to scheduling a hearing. Active 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 18 Engineering [2/26/08] Please place a bold note on both sheets of the Plat reading – For Reference only. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 19 Engineering [4/30/08] The correct new ROW dedication on College Avenue has been shown correctly on the plans. Please submit a deed of dedication, legal description and exhibit map for review. The City review fee for dedications of easements and ROW is $250 per document. [2/26/08] There will be additional right-of-way needed on College Ave. in order to construct widening improvements. The City needs to coordinate with CDOT to determine exactly how much will be needed and that information will be provided to you as soon as possible. It does not appear at this time that the R.O.W. dedication will interfere with the detention pond as shown on the plans. Any new R.O.W. dedication can be done by a re-plat or by separate document. The City review fee for dedications is $250 per document + any County recording fee. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 20 Engineering [2/26/08] Please clearly label and dimension the existing ROW on College and on Triangle on the Dimension Control Plan, Sheet C2. Dimension the existing sidewalks. Label existing driveways and pedestrian ramps on this sheet as well. See redlines for clarification. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 3/7/2011 Page 5 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 21 Engineering [2/26/08] Please provide cross sections on the grading plan as shown on the redlines. Clearly label all retaining walls and provide top and bottom of wall elevations at reasonable intervals. If any of the retaining walls are more than 40 inches from bottom of footing to top of wall, please place a note that the wall is under separate permit by the Building Department. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 22 Engineering [4/30/08] Please clearly show the off-site drainage easement limits on the nursery property and submit a deed of dedication, legal description and exhibit map for review. [2/26/08] Off-site grading is shown on the nursery property to the north. A deed of dedication or letter of intent for a construction easement must be submitted prior to scheduling a hearing for this project. The easement will be dedicated to the City and recorded by separate document. The review fee for said easement will be $250 + County recording fees. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 23 Engineering [2/26/08] The font size for the new grading contour elevation information is too small. Please enlarge all text to minimum size as required by LCUASS Appendix E for scanability. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 24 Engineering [2/26/08] Please call out all drainage improvements (inlet types, pipe & size etc …) on the Grading Plan and provide adequate details. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 25 Engineering [2/26/08] Please show and label all existing pedestrian ramps on all sheets (TYP). Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 26 Engineering [4/30/08] There are still some line over text conflicts that need to be corrected. Please go through the plan set and correct all conflicts. I have circles some on the redlines. [2/26/08] Please fix all line over text conflicts throughout the plan set to meet LCUASS Appendix E scanability requirements (TYP). Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 27 Engineering [4/30/08] Please use the City standard street cut note on all utility plans showing utility connections on Triangle. I have attached the standard note to sheet C5.0. [2/26/08] On Sheet 5, Utility Plan, please clearly show and label the approximate limits of street cuts needed to connect utility services and provide the standard street cut note provided. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 3/7/2011 Page 6 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 28 Engineering [4/30/08] The high volume driveways are not shown correctly on the plans. Please revise the drawings to show a concrete driveway poured to the back of sidewalk. The driveway details on sheet C6.0 should be removed and the driveways will be constructed per LCUASS 707 which has been provided. You may provide spot elvation information and drainage patterns on the grading plan sheet. [2/26/08] For both driveway Entrance Details on Sheet C6, please call out the construction of new high volume driveway per LCUASS Detail 707. The ramps are also constructed per Detail 707. Show truncated dome panels on the ramps and call out the radius of the curb return. See redlines for clarification. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 29 Engineering [2/26/08] Site Plan – Please label all retaining walls, unknown lines and existing pedestrian ramps. See redlines. Resolved 1 Randy Maizland 02/26/2008 30 Fire [2/27/08] STANDPIPES AND FIRE PUMP Buildings four or more stories in height are required to be equipped with firefighting standpipes in every stairwell. The standpipe system must be capable of supplying a minimum 100 psi to the top floor; an approved fire pump may be required to obtain this minimum pressure. IFC 905.3.1 Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 31 Fire [2/27/08] STAIRWELL SIGNAGE Approved stairwell identification signs shall be posted at each floor level in all enclosed stairways in buildings four or more stories in height. 97UFC1210.4 and Appendix I-C Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 32 Fire [2/27/08] FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION Fire department connections shall be installed remote from the buildings, and located on the street or fire lane side of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department vehicle access or as otherwise approved by the fire code official. If possible, a fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of the FDC. PFA Bureau Policy Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 33 Fire [2/27/08] FIRE LINE REQUIREMENT Buildings that are required to be fire sprinklered shall have a minimum 6-inch fire line unless hydraulic calculations can support a smaller fire line. Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 3/7/2011 Page 7 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 34 Fire [2/27/08] KNOX BOX REQUIRED Poudre Fire Authority requires a “Knox Box” to be mounted on the front of every new building equipped with a required fire sprinkler system or fire alarm system. 97UFC 902.4; PFA BUREAU POLICY 88-20 Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 35 Fire [2/27/08] SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS This proposed building shall be equipped with aan pproved, automatic fire-sprinkler system. Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 36 Fire [2/27/08] TURNING RADII Minimum turning radii for emergency-response apparatus on any fire apparatus roadway is 25 feet inside, 50 feet outside. (This comment pertains to the parking lot drive aisles.) Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 37 Fire [2/27/08] ADDRESS NUMERALS Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6 inch numerals on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). 97UFC901.4.4 Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 38 Fire [2/27/08] WATER SUPPLY Fire hydrants, where required, must be the type approved by the water district having jurisdiction and the Fire Department. Hydrant spacing and water flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. Minimum flow and spacing requirements include: Commercial, 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter; residential within Urban Growth Area, 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter; residential outside Urban Growth Area, 500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter. These requirements may be modified if buildings are equipped with automatic fire sprinkler systems. 97UFC 901.2.2.2 Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 3/7/2011 Page 8 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 39 Fire [2/27/08] COMMERCIAL COOKING FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM An approved fire-protection system shall be installed in hood-and-duct locations where grease-laden vapors are produced from cooking operations. A permit and plan review is required by the Poudre Fire Authority for the installation of required hood-and-duct fire extinguishing systems. Two sets of plans, along with an application, are required to be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau at 102 Remington St. 97UFC 1006.1; 1006.2. Active 1 Carie Dann 02/27/2008 40 Site Plan [2/27/08] Please remove all of the existing landscaping (trees) from the Site Plan. That information on the Landscape Plan is sufficient. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 41 Site Plan [2/27/08] There a number of lines, elements on the Site Plan that are not identified and labeled as to what they are. Please correct, per the red-lined plan. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 42 Site Plan [2/27/08] Please label the widths of the two vehicular accesses into the development. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 43 Site Plan [2/27/08] Any outside trash/recyle enclosure must be shown on the Site & Landscape Plans. The enclosure must be compatible with the building and properly screened. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 44 Site Plan [2/27/08] Please see Peter Barne's comment (#8) about the allowable number of parking spaces. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 45 Site Plan [2/27/08] Under PARKING on the Site Plan it indicates that there will be 26 visitor spaces and 2 handicap accessible spaces, equaling 28. Assuming these to be the surface spaces in the lot at the southwest corner of the building, that lot shows 29 spaces. Please reconcile. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 3/7/2011 Page 9 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 46 Site Plan [2/27/08] The building does not satisfy the requirements set forth in Sections 3.5.3(B)(2)(a) & (b) of the Land Use Code dealing with "build-to" lines for Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings. In this case, the institutional use building shall be located no more than 15' from the right-of-way for Triangle Drive, which is smaller than a full arterial street. At least 30% of the total length of the building along Triangle Drive shall be extended to the build-to line area. A modification of these standards may be requested by the applicant, based on the criteria set forth in Section 2.8.2(H) of the Land Use Code. The Planning & Zoning Board will be the ultimate decision maker on the request. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 47 Site Plan [2/27/08] Section 4.6(E)(1)(d) of the Land Use Code limits the building height to a maximum of 3 stories in the MMN - Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District, except that portion of a building within a 50' radius of the right-of-way of any street intersection (except arterial/arterial) may contain an additional fourth story. No portion of the proposed building is within 50 of the South College Avenue (arterial) and Triangle Drive (collector) intersection. Therefore, based on the Elevations Plans, it would appear to be necessary for the applicant to request a modification of the standard in the aforementioned section of the code. Similar to the previous comment (#46), a modification request must be based on the criteria set forth in Section 2.8.2(H) of the Land Use Code. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 48 Landscape Plan [2/27/08] The 2 scales on the Landscape Plan are conflicting. One says 1" = 30' and the bar scale says 1" = 40'. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/27/2008 49 Landscape Plan [2/28/08] There are 2 street trees, either side of the primary access into the site, that are shown to be removed. Why do these trees have to be removed? They do not appear to conflict with the access drive. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 50 Landscape Plan [2/28/08] Additional street trees are needed on South College Avenue and Triangle Drive. Please see the red-lined Landscape Plan for locations. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 51 Landscape Plan [2/28/08] There are several lines, elements on the Landscape Plan that are not identified and labeled (see red-lined plan). Please label them. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 52 Landscape Plan [2/28/08] Additional trees are needed on the east, north, and west sides of the building to satisfy the "full tree stocking" requirement set forth in Section 3.2.1(D)(1)(c) of the Land Use Code. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 3/7/2011 Page 10 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 53 Landscape Plan [2/28/08] Please label all retaining walls and indicate how high they are. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 54 Landscape Plan [2/28/08] Additional shrub plantings are needed to screen the parking areas from Triangle Drive. Please see the red-lined Landscape Plan. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 55 Building Elevations [2/28/08] Based on the way building heights are detemined in Section 3.8.17(A)(1) of the Land Use Code, Planning & Zoning have determined that the "average" height of this building is less than 40'; therefore, the applicant is not required to provide the Building Height Review information as set forth in Section 3.5.1(G) of the code. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 56 Building Elevations [2/28/08] The scales on the Building Elevations Plans appear to be somewhat different and difficult to use. Please help define what they are. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/28/2008 57 Stormwater [2/28/08] The drainage study needs to compare the previous drainage study's flows into the existing detention pond with the proposed flows under the current rainfall standards and proposed impervious areas. The proposed flows need to be equal or less than to what was calculated in the original study in 1997. If the proposed flows are higher, than additional quantity detention would be required. Resolved 1 Wes Lamarque 02/28/2008 58 Stormwater [2/28/08] Water quality is required for this site. Water quality was not included in the 1997 drainage study. Water quality volume should be in addition to the quantity detention. This will also require the addition of a water quality outlet structure per the City's standard detail. Resolved 1 Wes Lamarque 02/28/2008 59 Stormwater [2/28/08] Please submit documentation showing where the irrigation ditch on the western edge of the property would overtop in a spill condition. Resolved 1 Wes Lamarque 02/28/2008 60 Stormwater [2/28/08] A letter of intent for any off-site drainage or grading easements is required before a public hearing. Resolved 1 Wes Lamarque 02/28/2008 3/7/2011 Page 11 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 61 Lighting Plan [2/29/08] There is some information on the Lighting & Photometric Plan that is not real clear. * Where is it said what the pole heights are for lighting types AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, and FF2? * The information for lighting types FF and B in the LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE appears to be identical. What is the difference between the 2 types? * There is a column in the LUMINAIRE LOCATIONS table headed by MN. What does this column mean? * What does the information in the Max/Min column in the STATISTICS table mean? * On Sheet LP2 there is information on the EPIC COLLECTION. The LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE table does not show any EPIC light fixtures. They are all STS or ECM. Active 1 Steve Olt 02/29/2008 62 traffic [3/3/08] Did not receive a landscape plan. Please provide current plan or provide with the next submittal. Received plan and sight distance review is appreciated. Resolved 1 Ward Stanford 03/03/2008 63 traffic [3/3/08] Conducting a signal warrant study to get the current status of the College and Triangle intersection operation. Currently just meets an EbLt peak hour warrant. Scheduled for 2010 BOB funding. Resolved 1 Ward Stanford 03/03/2008 64 Landscape Plan [4/29/08] The previous landscape plan contained red line comments that were not addressed in this wubmittal. They include: - Landscape within the buffer zone to include trees, understory and low shrubs and grasses; - Native landscape species conducive to creating/establishing wildlife habitat shall be used within the buffer zone; - Use the City of Fort Collins Native Plant List and/or Larimer County's native plant list: http://fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativepl.pdf http://www.co.larimer.co.us/planning/planning/landscape_guide.pdf Resolved 2 Dana Leavitt 04/29/2008 3/7/2011 Page 12 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 65 Engineering [4/30/08] Please be sure to provide standard signature blocks for the City, Water District and Louden Ditch on all of the plan sheets. Resolved 2 Randy Maizland 04/30/2008 66 Engineering [4/30/08] Please show the wall heights either with dimensions or with elevations on sheet C2.4. Show bottom of footing to top of wall. There are also circled number note references on the wall cross sections on this sheet. Please provide the notes on this sheet as well. Resolved 2 Randy Maizland 04/30/2008 67 Stormwater [5/1/08] Stormwater is ready for a hearing. Resolved 2 Wes Lamarque 05/01/2008 68 Stormwater [5/1/08] The Water quality and quantity detention volume needs to be included above the permanent water surface elevation. The water quality outlet structure should be designed as wet extended detention with a 24-hour drain time instead of the 40-hour drain time. Coordination on the design of the outlet structure and on providing only one outlet for the pond can take place during final compliance. Resolved 2 Wes Lamarque 05/01/2008 69 Stormwater [7/18/08] Reminder Comment. [5/1/08] Signed off-site drainage easements will be required before signing of mylars. Active 2 Wes Lamarque 05/01/2008 70 traffic [5/9/08] Landscaping Plan inducates trees near accesses need relocating to clear sight distance. Once relocated sight distance should be adequate. Resolved 2 Ward Stanford 05/09/2008 71 Fire [5/29/08] After speaking with Kevin at Stewarts, he said they will talk with Fossil Creek Nursery, and they plan to grade and gravel the maintenance road/Emergency Access Easement to the west of the Meadowview project. Active 2 Carie Dann 05/29/2008 72 Engineering [6/27/08] A copy of the Site Plan has been added to the Utility Plan set. This is not typically done however, if you wish to have the Site Plan in the plan set please add in clear bold text FOR REFERENCE ONLY on the bottom right hand corner and in the title block. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 73 Engineering [6/27/08] Please clearly show and label existing HC ramps at the intersection with Strasburg Dr. If ramps do not exist at this location, this development may be responsible for installation to meet pedestrian level of service requirements. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 3/7/2011 Page 13 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 74 Engineering [6/27/08] If there is an existing driveway cut for the ditch maintenance road, please cearly show and label it on the plans. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 75 Engineering [6/27/08] Please be consistent with easement labeling throughout the plan set. Remove "pedestrian" from the access easement designation. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 76 Engineering [6/27/08] Please accurately show the truncated dome warning strips on the driveway/ramp drawings. The strips are rectangular and perpendicular to the driveway and ramps. Please also show the sidewalk crossing limits and cross slopes on the driveway construction details on sheet C6.0. 2 percent max. on the sidewalk portion and 1:12 max. on the driveway portion. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 77 Engineering [6/27/08] Please label the on-site parking lot inlets on the grading plan and utility plan sheets. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 78 Engineering [6/27/08] Cross section E as shown on C2.0 is missing from sheet C2.4. Either remove the cross section designation or add the cross section. Your choice. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 79 Engineering [6/27/08] There appears to be a couple small areas behind the retaining wall adjacent to Triangle Drive that could potentially collect water. See comments on sheet C2.1 and revise accordingly to prevent any ponding of water behind the walls. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 80 Engineering [6/27/08] See retaining wall details on sheet C2.4. No wall foundations are permitted to encroach into Utility Easements or cross property lines unless approved by easement holder or property owner. Please provide all bottom of footing and top of wall elevations so we can easily determine which walls must be constructed under a separate building permit. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 81 Engineering [6/27/08] No ROW and Easement dedications were provided with this submittal. All dedication deeds, legal descriptions and associated review fees must be provided, reviewed and approved (ready to record) prior to final plan approval. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 3/7/2011 Page 14 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 82 Engineering [6/27/08] See redlines for any additional minor comments related to drafting, notes or labeling. Revisions will not require another formal round of review. All comments can be addressed by email, telephone and mylars (engineering comments only). The ditch Company and Water District will need to sign the plans prior to the City. Please provide redlines with mylar submittal. Thank you. Active 3 Randy Maizland 06/27/2008 83 Technical Services [7/16/08] Minor line over text conflicts. Please see the redlines provided. Active 3 Randy Maizland 07/16/2008 84 Landscape Plan [7/16/08] A meeting with the preparer of the Landscape Plan will be the best way to resolve the inadequacey of the Landscape Plan. Active 3 Dana Leavitt 07/16/2008 85 General [7/16/08] Show the complete buffer line on the Plat, Site Plan and the Landscape Plan. Label on all plans as such: Natural Feature Buffer. No need to have a reference to the distance. Active 3 Dana Leavitt 07/16/2008 86 Plat [7/16/08] Add a note to the plat to the effect: For allowable uses within a buffer area, refer to Section 3.4.1 (E) of the Land Use Code. Active 3 Dana Leavitt 07/16/2008 87 Fire [7/17/08] EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS: Providing a hard-surface drive on the west side of the campus, via what is labeled as the Ditch Maintenance Road, would improve emergency response capabilities.This maintenance road is shown on the various site drawings, but in actuality it no longer exists; grass has been allowed to grow over any existing road, and there are numerous trees, dirt piles, etc., on the nursery property that affects any possible access from the adjoining drive to the north (an Emergency Access Easement that begins at Strasburg). Vehicular access currently is available only from Triangle Drive, so putting a hard surface on the ditch road would only improve emergency vehicle access. Please contact me so we can discuss options for improving the ditch road. Active 3 Carie Dann 07/17/2008 88 Fire [7/17/08] 3 LEVELS/4 LEVELS: Just an FYI - a three-story building with a walkout basement is considered a four-story building for emergency response purposes, since we measure from the lowest level of fire department vehicle access. Active 3 Carie Dann 07/17/2008 89 Fire [7/17/08] 2 FIRE LINES: Plans show two 6-inch fire lines (to supply the automatic fire-sprinkler system) for the buildings, which I believe is an error. Active 3 Carie Dann 07/17/2008 3/7/2011 Page 15 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 90 Stormwater [7/18/08] All the storm sewers already outlet at the irrigation water surface elevation of the detention pond, so the lowering of the outlets is no longer needed. There will be times when the irrigation level in the pond is lower during the winter, so erosion control is still important for the slopes below the outlet. Please provide a riprap detail and cross-section. The City normally requires the riprap to be buried. Only the riprap for the emergency spillway needs to be buried due to the fact it will be permanently exposed. The irrigation pipe can outlet into the pond higher as discussed in our meeting if erosion concerns are mitigated. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 91 Stormwater [7/18/08] Please show the HGL on the storm sewer profiles. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 92 Stormwater [7/18/08] Please rotate the water quality opening so the vertical dimension is 3 inches and the horizontal is 2 inches. Since the WQ elevation is .4 feet, this will better reflect a staged release. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 93 Stormwater [7/18/08] Please use a 15-inch pipe instead of a 12-inch for the pond outlet which is our minimum. Also, please revise the text in the report to mention 15-inch. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 94 Stormwater [7/18/08] As per Randy's comment, sheet C2.1 shows the drainage to spill over the retaining wall. This is allowed, but may create ponding near the top of the wall and cause problems with the wall's structural capabilities. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 95 Stormwater [7/18/08] Please provide a drainage easement for the storm sewer that drains the parking areas. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 96 Stormwater [7/18/08] Please provide 10 feet of separation between all storm sewers and canopy trees. 6 to 8 feet of separation is OK between storm sewers and ornamental trees. See redlines on landscape plan. Active 3 Wes Lamarque 07/18/2008 97 General [7/29/08] Rick Lee of the building Department indicated that he is forwarding the applicable Codes & Standards that will apply. Please schedule a required Pre-submittal Code Review Meeting prior to applying for a building permit. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/29/2008 98 Utilities [7/29/08] Terry Farrill of the Fort Collins-Loveland Water and South Fort Collins Sanitation Districts indicated that they have no further comments. The mylars may be submitted for signatures. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/29/2008 3/7/2011 Page 16 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 99 Utilities [7/29/08] Don Kapperman of Comcast Cable TV offered the following comments: a.Comcast Cable has fiber on the north side of Triangle Drive to Avondale Road. If the fiber is in the way or needs to be lowered the MeadowView Campus project will need to pay all expenses to relocate the fiber. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/29/2008 3/7/2011 Page 17 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 100 General [7/29/08] The following comments were expressed by City staff at the Staff Review meeting on July 16th: Engineering/Randy Maizland a.The Site Plan does not need to be in the utility plan set. B.An off-site easement is needed and it can be provided by separate document. C.Show truncated domes for the handicap ramps. Stormwater/Wes Lamarque a.The water quality volume appears to be OK. B. No other comments, good set of plans. Light & Power/Bruce Vogel a.The location of the transformer needs to be tweaked a bit. Poudre Fire Authority/Carie Dann a.OPFA needs a surface for the ditch road that is acceptable for fire trucks. B.emergency access to the site is less than ideal. The proposed sprinklers are saving the "bacon". C.By definition, PFA considers the east end of the building to be 4 stories in height. A standpipe is needed in that location. Environmental Planner/Dana Leavitt a.Dana wants to meet with Tory of Alpine Gardens to talk about providing sufficient plantings in the buffer areas. B.On the replat, need a note about "stuff" in the buffer area. Dana will provide the wording for the note. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/29/2008 3/7/2011 Page 18 Project: MEADOW VIEW CAMPUS OF FORT COLLINS PDP- TYPE II AND FINAL PLANS ID Topic Issue Status Round Comment By Initial Date 101 General [7/30/08] What has been decided about a possible replat of the property? As previously stated, a replat would have to go to the Planning & Zoning Board at a public hearing since it was not part of PDP review and approval. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/30/2008 102 General [7/30/08] Please see red-lined Site & Landscape Plans with Current Planning's comments. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/30/2008 103 General [7/30/08] No Building elevations were submitted with the Final Plan. The elevations (3 copies) must be submitted with the next round of review. Active 3 Steve Olt 07/30/2008 3/7/2011 Page 19