HomeMy WebLinkAboutZIEGLER - HARVEST PARK PDP - PDP120033 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - (3)1
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 31, 2012
Steve Steinbicker
Architecture West LLC
4710 S. College Ave
Fort Collins, CO 80525
RESPONSES, ARCHITECTURE WEST LLC, MARCH 20, 2013
RE: Ziegler-Harvest Park, PDP120033, 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, Sherry Albertson-
Clark, at
970-224-6174 or salbertson-clark@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Sherry Albertson-Clark, 970-224-6174, salbertson-clark@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The finish material list on the exterior elevations note R-3 as pre-finished sun shades,
but this
item does not appear to be noted on the elevations. Please identify the sun shade
location.
Please identify the material for the chimney and patio surrounds (appears to be brick)
and
address how rooftop mechanical equipment would be screened from view. The
elevations have been
updated to show sunscreen locations on the south and west elevations.
Topic: General
2
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
Comments have been received from the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District/South Fort
Collins
Sanitation District and are attached to these comments. The comments have been
reviewed and landscaping
revised to not conflict with the utilities, required easements. See separate response
letter
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
A letter of intent regarding the landscaping proposed on the Harvest Park detention
pond will
be needed prior to hearing. The HOA Boards have approved the additional trees, see
attached.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The water budget numbers appear to be switched between the High and Moderate
hydrozones. Please re-check numbers. The hydrozone numbers have been corrected
in the landscape
plan.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The proposed seating walls and some trees are located within easements. The utilities
will
need to comment as to whether this is allowable. The walls & trees have been
relocated outside of
easements.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The species and size of the existing trees needs to be noted on the Landscape Plan.
Also,
the minimum shrub size is 5 gallon (see Coniferous Shrubs which show as 1 gallon).
Existing landscape
plan added as sheet PL-4. Minimum shrub sizes are noted on plant list.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
Several proposed tree species are not noted on the site plan (1 on west side, 3 on south
side)
and "ABS" is noted on the site plan but not on the plant list. Please re-check all
numbers on
plant list with the Landscape Plan graphic. Mitigation is required for existing trees on
the site
that will be lost and will be determined by the City Forester. Plant list numbers have
been updated and
corrected.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
The maximum tree diversity requirements (no more than 25% where there are 40 - 59
3
trees
proposed on site - plan shows 50 trees proposed) would allow a maximum of 13 trees of
any
one species. The plan currently meets this. If there are changes in tree counts or
species,
keep in mind the species diversity limits. Plant list numbers have been updated.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
Maximum lighting levels on-site can be 10.0 fc, however, the chart on the photometric
plan
indicates 13.0 fc as the maximum for the building surrounds and parking. I did not find
lighting
levels on the plan that exceeded 10.0 fc. A couple of calculation points that were
against the buildings at the
entrances that were over 10 fc. These points should be trimmed out because they aren’t
really on the ‘site’,
they are inside the entrances. When these get removed, the maximum levels will be
under 10 fc..
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
An alternative type of light is recommended over the use of flood light fixtures at the
corner of
the site, near County Fair Lane and Ziegler Road. Of concern is the potential for light
spillage
from a flood light. The plan will require an internally lit signage, the flood lights have
been eliminated. flood
lights need to be provided with shields to prevent light spillage and see if that takes care
of the
concern. Another option may be to use an internally lit sign.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The vicinity map on the Subdivision Plat should be revised to correct street names
(Kechter;
replace Cambridge with Lady Moon). The plat also needs to include the zoning on the
subject
property, as well as the surrounding zoning. The Plat has been revised, see attached.
Reference King Plat
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The LMN district has a maximum density of 12 DU per gross acre of residential land for
4
any
phase in a multiple-phase development. The proposed density appears to be within this
density, however, the density shown on the Site Plan does not appear to be correct.
Please
provide both gross and net densities on the Site Plan and make sure the density
matches with
that of the ODP. The ODP information has been revised, see attached. The site plan
has been revised.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
Please clarify where and how the bicycle parking is intended to work (covered and
uncovered). A total of 52 bicycle parking spaces are required (1 per bedroom), with 31
to be
covered and 21 to be uncovered. The site plan shows 10 uncovered and 42 covered
bicycle
spaces. The requirement for auto parking is 41 spaces (based on a per-bedroom
number)
rather than 39 spaces. Revised on site plan.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
Sidewalk connections 6 feet in width should be provided from the two 5-plex buildings to
Ziegler Road. Revised on site plan.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The 5-plex buildings have unit entrances along the east side of the property (to address
relationship of dwellings to streets), but the 6-plex buildings do not. The addition of a
walkway
spine from County Fair Lane to both of these buildings will meet this requirement.
Revised on site plan.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 12/21/2012
The drainage easement on the southern edge of the site and McClellands Creek need
to be
shown on the Site Plan. Revised on site plan.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: A signing and striping plan will need to be provided. A detailed signing
and striping
plan will be provided with final plan submittal. Pursuant to our conversation, striping
can be shown
on the PDP to satisfy this comment.
5
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please provide slope information behind the curb and gutter on the road
cross
sections sheets. it appears that there are some slopes on the north side of County Fair
Lane
that might exceed 4:1 and additional grading will need to be provided on the north side
to get
the slopes to 4:1 minimum. The slopes have been labeled and do not exceed 4:1.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please label the proposed sidewalk widths on the construction drawings.
Added to site plan
and utility plan.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: The indication on the utility plan of the telephone pedestal behind the curb
at the
northwest corner of County Fair Lane and Ziegler Road as being done by others should
be
clarified. Is it not the intention of this telephone pedestal being relocated with the
development
of this project? With the defining of the curb and access ramp along with a portion of
sidewalk,
the telephone pedestal relocation needs to occur at this time and should not be tied with
the
development of the Lot 1 parcel to the north. Noted to relocate telephone pedestal with
street
improvements, contractor to coordinate relocation with Century Link.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Indicate a street patch for the work on Ziegler Road. Provide the standard
street
repair note: "Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in
the field
by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with City street repair
standards." A street patch at Ziegler and County Fair has been added, note 13 on the
utility plan and note 5
on the grading plan reference the standard street repair note.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: With a final plan submittal, the construction plans will need to show
concrete joint
6
pattern detail from County Fair Lane. To be provided with final plan submittal.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: With the drive approach onto County Fair Lane having a sidewalk across
the
driveway per our standard drive approach detail, the storm sewer manhole will need to
be
located outside of this sidewalk extension across the driveway. The manhole has been
moved outside
of the walk across the driveway.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: The plans will need to add an access ramp on the east side of Ziegler Road
to
receive the directional crossing from the access ramp directed from this property across
Ziegler Road.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Further discussion may be needed on the titles of the drawings. The
subdivision
plat has a title of Harvest Park Subdivision Sixth Filing, which tends to imply that this
area was
part of the original Harvest Park Subdivision and this is a filing within that overall
subdivision,
when in actuality it's an unplatted parcel. The use of the forward slash "/" title in the
drawings
other than the plat may be awkward in terms of it being a symbol that isn't commonly
used and
may make electronic searches more difficult, in fact it may lead to confusing results
since the
forward slash is also used to denote the date and may bring up excess queries. I would
suggest that the subdivision plat be labeled as Harvest Park Ziegler Mixed Use. The
site,
landscape, and construction drawings would then be titled Harvest Park Ziegler Mixed
Use, Lot
2. The development agreement would then call out that the area being subject to the
entitlement is Harvest Park Ziegler Mixed Use, Lot 2. (Interestingly, since Harvest Park
is
known as Harvest in the community, Harvest Ziegler Mixed Use might be another
option.)
The Title has been updated on the drawings to Harvest Park – Ziegler
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: The applicant should be aware that with the concept of the north Lot 1
property not
7
being entitled that the Lot 1 property cannot be used for temporary uses related to this
Lot 2
project (such as a temporary sales trailer). The applicant may want to check with zoning
on
further implications if utilizing Lot 1 on temporary basis or this property is being
considered.
Noted
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: In looking at Traffic Operations comments, and the TIS, the TIS does show
a
roadway geometry where the eastbound County Fair Lane has a combined through,
right, and
left movement, but with the intersection being built to 36 feet in width, the intention is to
allow for
a three lane cross section at the intersection. It seems the information in the TIS should
be
clarified, unless there's an intention to create a median at County Fair Lane, which may
have its
own questions/concerns.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: The geotech report provided the recommendation of a perimeter drain
system.
Information needs to be provided on the construction drawings with how dewatering
around the
foundations of the units will be designed with the geotech report recommendation in
mind. If
each building (with multiple units in each) has a single perimeter drain system around
the
foundation, where will this outfall? If the intention is a sump pit, would there be a single
sump pit
whereupon one homeowner in each building has the sump pit, or will each unit have
their own
individual sump pit? If the intention is a sump pit and only one unit in each building will
have a
sump pit, the location of the sump pit should be clearly identified on the plan set. Rather
than
providing a sump pit (and then leaving it to question as to how the pump will discharge,
is there
an opportunity to design the pump discharge of each building to either tie into the storm
water
system (perhaps the rain garden?) Of, could the perimeter drain system tie directly into
the
storm water system (and still avoid surcharging of the stormwater system outfall back to
the
perimeter drain system?) We'd want to ensure that the dewatering system for this
8
development
is designed up front to prevent nuisance water daylighting onto roadways, especially
onto the
public street system. Perhaps there's also an option to explore tying into the subdrain
system
that was designed and constructed for both Harvest Park and Sage Creek. The
perimeter sub-drain will be
designed to tie directly into the center storm drainage system, see revised Engineering
site plan.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Per Figure 7-16 of LCUASS, a sight distance easement may be needed,
by my
estimation, specific to the driveway on the undeveloped Lot 1 property. Exact
verification in
comparison to the standard cannot be made with the limited off-site information for
existing
County Fair Lane to the west as it relates to the proposed driveway. Any required site
distance
easement should be shown on the plat and dedicated at this time, rather than creating
an
expectation that it can be dedicated with the development of the Lot 1 parcel. A sight-
distance variance was
submitted and approved by City Engineering Staff. A variance request has been
submitted by Matt Delich regarding the sight distance easement needed off our
property.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Both the site and the landscape plan seem to show some curves at the
southern
boundary of the site that could be construed to be driveway access off of Ziegler Road.
Is there
an intention to have emergency (or general driveway) access off of Ziegler Road? If this
is
intended, it isn't apparent on the construction plans and would seem to be at odds with
the
water quality outlet at the end of the concrete private drive. Updated plan to show this
curb cut as removed.
Topic: Variance Request
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: The submitted variance request(s) identifies elements of the design that do
not
meet LCUASS requirements and justification in the granting to the request(s), however
the
justification does not provide an analysis and/or conclusion that the granting of the
9
variances
would not be detrimental to the public as outlined in 1.9.4.A.2.d. While I do not
anticipate a
concern with the design and ultimate granting of the request, the variance will still need
to
address this for further review and evaluation. A sight-distance variance was submitted
and approved by City
Engineering Staff. The variance letter has been updated.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970-224-6143, lex@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please see the construction drawing redlines, including labeling the
Natural Habitat
Buffer Zone, adding an Environmental Planner signature, and adding note #9 from the
site plan
to the utility plans, where noted. Both items noted on site plan. Environmental Planner
signature is under
“Planning”
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: An Ecological Characterization Study was provided for the project in May
of 2012.
The ECS notes concerns associated with the timing of development, but only for the
parcel to
the north. The ECS recommends native plantings within the proposed buffer zone to
further
enhance the value of the McClellands Creek corridor. Noted, the development of the
north parcel will be
coordinated with Staff. Native plantings have been included / updated on the
Landscape plan.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please see the landscape plan redlines - as with the Construction
Drawings, a line
will need to be established (and added to the legend) for the Natural Habitat Buffer
Zone
(NHBZ). Note #9 from the site plan will also need to be on the landscape plans. Note #9
added to landscape
Plans.
10
Please also provide the acreage provided through the proposed buffer, and what the
buffer
acreage would have been if the 100' buffer had been used. BUILDING AREA 2,702
SF., NATURAL
HABITAT BUFFER ZONE, 18,574, WETLANDS BUFFER 13,772 S.F.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: In general, the planting pattern in the NHBZ shall mimic a more natural
vegetation
pattern, e.g., patches of trees/shrubs, instead of a more random distribution. See sketch
on the
landscape plan for an example. Updated tree/shrub design.
In addition, non-native trees and shrubs should be removed from the NHBZ, e.g.,
Kentucky
Coffee Tree. More willows, dogwood, and other shrub species, as currently exist in the
creek
corridor, should be provided for in the plan. Changed to a native tree.
The Native Seed Mix symbol should also be added to the legend. Added to legend.
Also, there are portions of the planting labels that are "blocked out" and cannot be
evaluated. These notes
have been “unblocked”
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Also, the areas between the buildings and the buffer zone should be
viewed as
more transitional and not completely formal right up against the building - consider
planting
more native trees and shrubs to enhance this transition. Revised tree layout is on PL-
2
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: In accordance with my conceptual review comments back in March, no
lighting
can spill over into the buffer zone.
04/04/11: With respect to lighting, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, in Article
3.2.4(D)(6)
requires that "natural areas and natural features shall be protected from light spillage
from off
site sources." Thus, lighting from the parking areas or other site amenities shall not spill
over to
the buffer areas.
11
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: There seems to be a mislabeling of turf on the site plan. The buffer zone
line
should also be added to the site plan. Turf has been re-labeled to Native Grasses .
Wetland buffer line is
added to site plan.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
1. To add greater diversity for the street tree planting along Ziegler consider changing
the
three middle street trees from Accolade Elm to Bur Oak. Three trees switched to Burr
Oak Trees
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
2. Some local Designers and Horticulturist prefer using Hotwings Tatarian Maple in
place of
Ginnala Maple. They are similar but Tatarian Maple is better adapted to Fort Collins
soils.
Consider using Hotwings Tatarian Maple in place of Ginnala Maple. Trees changed to
Hotwings Tatarian
Maple trees – see plant list
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
3. The following are the LUC utility separations to incorporate into General Note # 14.
Please
provide these separations on the landscape plan. Notes added to landscape notes.
a. Forty feet between shade trees and streetlights. Fifteen feet between ornamental
trees and
street lights.
b. Twenty feet between shade and/or ornamental trees and traffic control signs and
devices.
c. Ten feet between trees and water or sewer mains.
d. Six feet between trees and water or sewer service lines.
12
e. Four feet between trees and gas lines
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
4. Please include the information on the tree site survey (1-11-12) as a sheet with the
landscape plan. On that sheet include a table with the existing trees numbered. Provide
columns in the table that include the following. Existing tree plan included – see Sheet
PL-4.
a. Species; size; condition; number of mitigation trees; to be removed with the south
Lot
development Y or N; and intent to remove, retain, or transplant. Russian Olives can be
listed as
a clump with one number without a mitigation number and condition information. Trees
noted as
dead/dying can be identified with a number and listed as dead/dying but species, size,
condition and mitigation number do not need to be included on dead and dying trees.
Added schedule of
existing condition trees to PL-4.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
5. The south lot current plan includes 24 mitigation trees (7 planted in the Harvest Park
Detention Pond and 15 others on the south lot). These are the anticipated number of
mitigation
trees required for the development of both the north and south lots. There may be minor
adjustments to mitigation numbers when the north lot plans are submitted if some
anticipated
trees cannot be retained or tree conditions have changed.
Mitigation trees should be upsized as follows and recorded in the Plant List. Canopy
shade
trees currently shown as mitigation trees are at 2.5 inch caliper. Noted on landscape
plan.
Canopy Shade trees 3.0 inch caliper
Ornamental trees 2.5 inch caliper
Evergreen trees 8 feet height
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
6. The 7 trees shown in the HOA Detention area to the west of the project are very
close to a
sewer line. Please move locations away from the sewer line to meet the LUC utility tree
separation standards. These trees would need to be irrigated with an automatic drip
13
system or
equivalent form the Harvest Park 6th filing. Added note to landscape drawing.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
7. Please add the tree protections specifications in LUC sub- section 3.2.1 G to the
landscape
plan. Added LUC section to landscape drawings.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
8. Please add these General Notes. These notes have been added to the Landscape
Notes.
a. A permit must be obtained from the City forester before any trees or shrubs as noted
on
this plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way. This includes
zones
between the sidewalk and curb, medians and other city property. This permit shall
approve the
location and species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may result in replacing
or
relocating trees and a hold on certificate of occupancy.
b. The developer shall contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at
the
completion of each phase of the development. All trees need to have been installed as
shown
on the landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final approval
of
each phase. Failure to obtain approval by the City Forester for street trees in a phase
shall
result in a hold on certificate of occupancy for future phases of the development.
c. All landscape areas within the site shall be irrigated with an automatic underground
irrigation
system. An irrigation plan will be required prior to issuance of a Building permit.
d. All turf areas (not including dry land turf areas) to be irrigated with an automatic pop-
up
irrigation system. All shrub beds and trees to be irrigated with an automatic drip
irrigation
system or acceptable alternative.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
9. Please evaluate the line of site needs and the impact from existing trees and shrubs
located at the NW corner of Country Fair Lane and Ziegler along Ziegler. The canopy on
14
the
spruce could be elevated by removing some lower branches. These notes have been
added to the
Landscape Notes.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012: 10.If it is not already on the landscape plan please provide a symbol that
identifies
the types of grass surfaces to be used on the project. Added to plant legend.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/28/2012
12/28/2012:
11.Please consider specifying the water basin ridge for trees in dry land areas be at
least 6
inches to allow for some settling of soil over time. These notes have been added to the
Landscape Notes.
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 01 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
12/27/2012: FIRE LANES
Fire Lanes shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement. Noted,
fire lane easement
to be provided. The Emergency Access Easement has been labeled on the plat
Comment Number: 02 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
12/27/2012: AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS REQUIREMENTS
Fire lanes shall maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot
minimum
overhead clearance except where otherwise noted here. Parking lot (east) has been re-
designed to
accommodate fire lanes and turn around
Where required: Buildings or portions of buildings exceeding 30 feet in height above the
lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire
apparatus
access capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility
and power
lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire lanes
shall then
be 30 foot wide minimum on at least one long side of the building and located within a
minimum
15
of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel
to one
entire side of the building.
2006 International Fire Code Appendix D There are no portions of the buildings that
are proposed to
exceed 30 feet in height
Comment Number: 03 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
12/27/2012: DEAD-END FIRE LANES
Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an
approved
area for turning around fire apparatus.
FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006; International Fire Code 503.2.5 and Appendix D
> Further discussion on this subject is required; including proposed alternate and
offsetting
conditions for meeting the intent of this code requirement. Parking lot fire vehicle
’hammerhead’ turn around,
reviewed and provided.
Comment Number: 04 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
12/27/2012: BALCONIES AND DECKS
Sprinkler protection shall be provided for exterior balconies, decks, and ground floor
patios of
dwelling units where the building is of Type V construction. Noted, decks to be sprinkler
protected.
2006 International Fire Code 903.3.1.2.1
Comment Number: 05 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
12/27/2012: KEY BOXES REQUIRED
Poudre Fire Authority requires at least one "Knox Box" to be mounted in approved
location(s)
on every new building equipped with a required fire sprinkler or fire alarm system. The
top shall
not be higher than 6 feet above finished floor.
2006 International Fire Code 506.1 and Poudre Fire Authority Bureau Policy 88-20
Noted, knox-boxes to be
provided, as required.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
16
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012:
1. Please address all the red line comments on the plat, site plan, construction drawings
and
the preliminary drainage report. All redline comments have been addressed
2. If the outlet pipe from the detention pond was connected to the existing pipe to the
east--
-and if that connection was north of the floodway---there would be no need to obtain
either a
floodplain use permit or a no-rise certification. That option should speed up the plan
review
process, reduce engineering costs, and may reduce construction costs. The outlet pipe
has been
connected to the existing pipe to the east and no floodplain use permit is required.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Stormwater is ready for a public hearing.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/27/2012
12/27/2012: Comment may apply during final compliance review. Understood
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please change the title to Lot 2, Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed Use. Plan
has been updated
with new title.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: There are line over text issues. Issues resolved.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please change the title to Lot 2, Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed Use. Plan
has been updated
with new title.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please correct the elevations for both benchmarks shown on sheet 1.
Elevations corrected.
17
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please remove the notes or show the easement lines for Lot 1 on sheets 2
& 4.
The easements and notes for Lot 1 have been reconciled. The utility easement along
the
County Fair frontage will be dedicated with this plat. All remaining utility easements for
future Lot 1
will be dedicated as part of the Lot 1 final plans.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: There are line over text issues on sheets 2 & 5. Issues resolved.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please change the title to Lot 2, Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed Use. Plan
has been updated
with new title.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please correct the sheet number (sheet 3) of the landscape details sheet.
Sheet corrected.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: There are line over text issues on sheets 2 & 3. Issues resolved
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: There is cut off text issues on sheets 2 & 3. Issues resolved
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please change the title to Lot 2, Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed Use. Plan
has been updated
with new title.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please correct the spelling of Ziegler in the title. Plan has been updated.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: The sheet number does not match the sheet index on the Site Plan. Plan
has been updated.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: The data sheets have very blurry, fuzzy and pixelated text. Please clean
these up. Plan has
been updated.
Topic: Plat
18
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please change the title to Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed Use. Plat Updated
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: The boundary and legal description close. Acknowledged
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please change "men" to "persons" in the Statement of Ownership And
Subdivision. Also make sure that all Plat language is the most current.
Plat updated
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please add Name and Title to the Owner signature block. Plat updated
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please add "By"and "As" to the Notarial Certificate. Plat updated
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Are there any lienholders? If so, please add the Lienholder signature
block. No leinholders at
this time
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Does the title commitment need to be updated? The updated Title work will
be provided with
the final plat
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please add "Quarter" to the Basis of Bearings statement. Plat updated
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please correct the spelling of "Kechter" in the vicinity map. Plat updated
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please adjust all text so that it is read from the bottom and/or right side of
the
sheet. Plat updated
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please make all bearing directions for the outer boundary match the legal
description. Plat updated
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Is the area marked along the west boundary line intended to be excluded
from the
drainage easement? See redlines. Plat updated
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please provide current monument records for the public land corners
shown on
this Plat. Current monuments were provided with 1st
submittal. Plat Updated
19
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please provide a Quit Claim/Bargain and Sale Deed for the area along the
south
boundary line, and add a note to the Plat. See redlines. Property Description and
exhibit attached
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 12/26/2012
12/26/2012: Please remove the monument symbols along the south boundary line in
question.
See redlines. Plat updated
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please change the legal description to Lot 2, Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed
Use. Plan has been
updated with new title.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: Please change the title to Lot 2, Harvest Park - Ziegler Mixed Use. Plan
has been updated
with new title.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: There are line over text issues on sheet 1. Plan has been updated.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/24/2012
12/24/2012: The sheet number for sheet E-0.1 in the sheet index, does not match sheet
E-1.01. Plan has been updated.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970-221-6820, wstanford@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/23/2012
12/23/2012: Please provide a striping plan for the extension of County Fair Lane. A
striping plan will be
provided with the final plan submittal. Preliminary striping is shown on the PDP for
reference.
.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/23/2012
12/23/2012: Is the west approach of County Fair Lane proposing to have a median
between
20
Ziegler and the site access intersection? Plans show what seems as all concrete but
also
shows some lines that may indicate a median or possibly lane lines that may be for turn
lanes
or a gore area. Please clarify. No median, painted striping plan provided. Lines have
been labeled as
proposed striping.
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/23/2012
12/23/2012: The AWDTE for the medical/office use seems to have an error in the total
trips
generated for the 15K sf. The peak hour volumes match the City's trip generation
figures though
so it looks like the 398 trips is a possible typo. Please review and verify the TIS figure. Using
the equation in
Trip Generation, 9th
Edition, the calculated daily trip generation (398) is correct. [T=40.89(X)-
214.97]
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/23/2012
12/23/2012: From the submitted Planning Objectives document the north parcel does
not have
a defined use yet but it states it could be any combination of residential,..., and other
uses
permitted in LMN district. Those other uses include fast food w/o driveup and
convenience
store w/fuel sales. The TIS evaluated the site as Medical/Dental Office of 15K sf. A 1.5K
sf fast
food use can generate more than double the trips of medical/dental use and leave
plenty of
square footage for other uses. Since the north parcel use is unknown and possibly open
to any
allowable use of the district the TIS should evaluate based upon the most conservative
use(s)
or possibly the north parcel should be removed from the TIS currently and another TIS
completed when the site's use is better known.
Use of Medical/Dental Office was used after discussion with the planning consultant. It was
also shown in the
Base Assumptions packet and signed off by City staff. When/if the north parcel is
proposed for
development, it will require a TIS for that parcel addressing the actual land use
proposed. No
change in the current TIS is intended at this time.
21
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/23/2012
12/23/2012: City HCM LOS's for County Fair Lane (CFL) differs from TIS results. City
gets LOS
F for EbL's and Thru's. TIS indicates raised medians and possibly 2-stage left
acceptance in
the evaluation. An E/W raised median isn't indicated in the plans. Please review input
data
used in analysis. If the space shown on the west approach is not for a median it also
looks like
there will be adequate room for an Eb shared T/L lane and an exclusive Rt lane. City is
modeling the west approach with the turn lane geometry. If a median is planned then
model
west approach as an all-movement single lane.
There is and will be a painted left-turn lane on Ziegler Road at this intersection.
The 2000 HCM indicates that three types of medians are allowed in the
analysis procedure (raised, striped, TWLTL). However, the software
calculation form shows “raised Median” because that is the one that best fits
this situation. Painted median is not an option offered in the software.
Therefore, “raised median” was used. Note that zero (0) median storage is
indicated on the calculation sheets. Therefore, the analysis does not show
any actual two-stage storage, but only the ability for an eastbound minor street
left-turn/through vehicle to begin to move while vehicles are approaching from
the right (south), but NO vehicles are approaching from the left (north). We
have conducted delay studies at numerous intersections with this situation and
have found that this does, in fact, occur. We have found that the software
overestimates the minor street delay at unsignalized intersections. All of the
above being said, according to LCUASS (Fort Collins criteria), at unsignalized
arterial/local street intersections; level of service F for the minor street is
termed acceptable (considered to be normal in an urban environment).
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/18/2012
12/18/2012: Label the setbacks from the ROW on the north for Building A, D and ROW
on the
East for Building C. Plan has been revised, updated.
Label the setbacks on the west property to Building B and label the setback on the
south
property line to Buildings B & C. Plan has been revised, updated.
22
The Elevation seem to be mislabeled in regards to what sides of the building they are,
the
garages doors for the 5 plex are labeled the East and the garage doors for the 6-plex
are
labeled west. Updated to correct titles on elevation sheet
Elevation sheets should include a scale. Updated scales on elevation sheet
The elevations show a trellis that extends into the setback along Ziegler Rd, this will
need to
be revised to meet the setback. Plan has been revised, updated.
The elevations, site plan and landscape plan shall include the locations of the
mechanical/utility
(vents, flues, meters, conduit, HVAC...) equipment with notes on how such equipment is
screened/painted. Noted, all mechanical equipment to be screened.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/18/2012
12/18/2012: Land Use Code (LUC) 3.2.2(K)(5) With 50 vehicle spaces there needs to
be at
least 2 of them accessibility spaces.
The Site Plan Sheet in the Land Use Statistics table has the bicycle parking quantities,
however
these locations are not labeled on the site plan, please label were the 42 bicycle space
locations are on the site plan. Noted site plan
Is there direct access from the inside of the garages to the units? Noted in drawings
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/18/2012
12/18/2012: LUC 3.5.2(C)(1) Every front Facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling
unit shall
face the adjacent street to the extent reasonably feasible. Unit entrances face
frontages, where possible.
LUC 3.2.2(C)(5) Walkways that lead from building entries to the street sidewalk are
required and
shall be raised & at least 6ft in width. Sidewalks increased to 6’-0” in width on Ziegler
frontage.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/18/2012
12/18/2012: LUC 3.2.5 Requires that Multi-family residential provide enclosures that is
adequately sized for both trash and recycling. This enclosure shall be designed with
23
walk-in
access and located on a concrete pad at least 20ft from a public sidewalk. Trash
enclosure not provided,
bins for each resident with trash service curb pick-up, noted on the site plan.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/18/2012
12/18/2012: LUC 3.2.2(C)(6) Direct on-site access to Pedestrian and Bicycle
destinations is
required. Where is the connection to trail along the south of the property? Trail is on
the south side of the
water course / open space, connection provided via Ziegler sidewalk access.