Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN FLATS - PDP - PDP130022 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 -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 August 24, 2013 Dave Derbes Brinkman Development, LLC 3003 E Harmony Rd Fort Collins, CO 80528 RE: Old Town Flats, PDP130022, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343 or tshepard@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Current Planning Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The relationship of the building to Maple Street must be enhanced by making the unit entries more prominent. The entrances to these five units need to be highlighted with more detail by use of more typical front doors, stoops, railings, overhangs, ornamental iron, planters and the like. Please re-design these units so that Maple Street is the active and functional front of the unit, not the back, secondary patio. Addresses or unit numbers/letters should be added to create individuality. Space should be provided for planters. These units, and their entrances, play an important role in activating the street and creating a pedestrian scale that mitigates the height and mass of the building. We have made several changes to the unit entries to make them more prominent, more functional, and to make them feel more like a front door. The balconies over the unit entries have been made more substantial, helping to emphasize these as entries. The sliding glass doors have been replaced with a single door making them feel more like a formal entry than a back door patio. Metal rails will provide a balance of enclosure/privacy and openness. The walks have been shifted off-center to align with the door, providing a stronger focus on the entry as well as making the porch more functional by providing a usable alcove out of the traffic flow. The landscaping also serves to reinforce the sense of entry. (OZ) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The arrangement of the seat walls along Mason Street looks very good but could be improved by introducing more curves or semi-circular forms. As shown, the seat walls and their relationship to the building and sidewalk is very rectilinear and could be softened with more quarter-round or half-round shapes. We believe the mounded garden beds and native planting will create the form that will create a successful streetscape and outdoor rooms, or seating nodes for this area. The human scale pavement treatment will also enhance these areas. We believe the rectangular treatments are a design response needed for an urban street. (RMS) Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The area of the seat walls needs to be upgraded with additional ornamental lighting. The Lighting Plan indicates only one fixture (BB2) along Mason Street. Please add several more of these fixtures to complement the seat walls and to create a more inviting space. We have added additional fixtures. (OZ) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: Please provide more detail as to the material that has been selected to screen the parking lot along Mason Street. It is not entirely clear what this is and what color. The parking lot will be screened with landscape. Mounded earth will reach 2’ in height adjacent to the parking lot. Grasses, perennials and small shrubs planted on the elevated soil will provide a vegetative screen for the parking lot. (RMS) Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The Material Legend on the architectural elevation is difficult to de-code due to the ability of the black and white drawing to convey the distinctions among the materials and colors. Please indicate on the elevations the materials and colors so it is not necessary to refer to the Legend. We have clarified colors and materials to make them more readable. See elevations. (OZ) Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: There appears to be a heavy use of gray color among the various materials. Perhaps this amount of gray is excessive. Staff recommends less reliance on gray. The building should take color ques from the Old Power Plant on North College, now the C.S.U. Engines and Energy Conversion Lab and the historic Trolley Barn. Brick should be carried up higher to the upper floors instead of being limited to the lower floors. The use of gray colors looks repetitive and causes the building to appear more commercial than residential. Staff recommends greater use of brick in the red and orange tones so as to better reflect the older buildings in the Downtown area and to create a softer more residential character. Colors have been revised. The brick is a medium orange, which is the predominant brick color in the surrounding area. Much of the gray has replaced by warmer colors. See elevations. (OZ) Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: Instead of topping the building with a metal coping, why not a real cornice? As depicted, the top of the building is not distinctive, it just stops in space. Please replace the flat metal coping with a projecting cornice that has real and effective depth. A detail should be provided indicating the specifications to ensure that there is three-dimensionality and shadowing. An “eyebrow”, functioning as a cornice, has been added to the projected, raised portions of the façades. These will be very visible when approaching from Mason or Maple Streets. See elevations and perspective. (OZ) Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The top parapet at the corner of Mason and Maple should be repeated at the top of the southeast and northwest corners of the building as well. We agree that a strong corner element is necessary to emphasize the intersection of Maple & Mason, but don’t feel that that the ends of the building merit similar emphasis. At some point in the future, the ends of the building are likely to be obscured by future development, which will drastically reduce the prominence of the southwest and northwest corners. (OZ) Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: Along the west elevation, there is a strong horizontal band shown between the fourth and fifth floors but this band is only depicted along a short segment of the south elevation. This band should be continued along the entire south elevation. This band on the west elevation is used to provide a horizontal break in a flat section of wall. The south elevationis broken by projecting elements creating a more vertical rhythm. These vertical elements are already broken at level 3 with a material change. We don’t believe that it makes sense to further break this element. (OZ) Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The drawings indicate that the building is arranged in a series of modules allowing for projections and recesses and shadow lines. This arrangement appears, at this time, to be sufficient. In order for this concept to be more defined, the plan sheets should indicate the depth of modules so we can see how the modules are differentiated from each other. Be sure to indicate the depth of the step back between the second and third floors. We have added sections that more clearly show horizontal relationships. (OZ) Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: Please indicate exactly how and where the enclosed bicycle spaces will be provided. How much square footage will be allocated within the unit for bicycle parking? Perhaps a typical floor plan could be provided that indicates the location and size allocated for bike parking. We have added a typical unit plan showing where the bike rack will be located. (OZ) Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: Please add a note that all rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened from view from public streets and sidewalks. We have added the note. For your information, rooftop equipment is fairly small and will be located toward the center of the roof, allowing the parapet to provide the necessary screening. This is evidenced by the views generated for the View Analyses, showing that no mechanical units are visible. (OZ) Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: The north and east elevations are depicted such that there are no windows on the two ends of the building. Is this really the case? Clerestory windows are indicated,which apparently did not show up well in your copy. The gray color has been changed, which helps the window read visually stronger. Note that these windows are in bathrooms and the bed wall of bedrooms, so making the windows larger is problematic. (OZ) Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/24/2013 08/24/2013: Please add to the Data Table the number of bedrooms and provide a ratio of the number of parking spaces to the number of bedrooms. We have added that information to the table. (OZ) Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please indicate the property line on elevations in order to demonstrate whether balconies and other appurtenances above the first floor are possibly encroaching onto public right-of-way. We have added sections that indicate the relationship of the building to the property line. All building elements are within the property line. (OZ) Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Any initial indication as to what the proposed cover of the storm drain outfall under the alley, as well as how much patching would be envisioned in the alley right-of-way? As currently designed, the 15” storm drain running at 0.5% will have 2.65’ of cover from the outside of pipe to the existing grade at the northern manhole (STMH 1). Cover increases over the length of the pipe run, and reaches 2.88’ of cover at the most upstream storm manhole. Opportunities exist to increase this cover, including the use of a smaller pipe size, different material, flatter slopes, or some combination of these options. A final determination on the solution will be provided with our final design. (NE) Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: The storm line along the alley would need to be a public storm line in order to travel within the alley right-of-way. If ultimately allowed, street patching for the storm line in the alley would need to be for the entire alley width. At this time, the storm drain is proposed to be public since it will provide an outfall to adjacent properties in addition to our project. (NE) Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: A repay for alley improvements abutting the property won't be required as commented on the PDR. The age of the alley improvement is such that it's beyond the period in which a repay can be collected. Acknowledged. (NE) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The creation of a separate bike lane for Mason Street is needed. The proposed design does not create a separate bike lane north of Maple Street as bike are still either combined with vehicles on-street, or combined with pedestrians off-street. A distinct bike lane needs to be built with the project, with the goal of aligning with the bikelane along Mason Street on the south side of Maple Street. Transportation Planning has created a sketch of how the bikelane can be accommodated. This has been addressed in the revised TIS. (ELB) Bike lane has been included that allows for a continuous at street grade bike lane that crosses the railroad tracks safely. The existing curb will need to be reinstalled approximately 2’ east of current location. This ensures all existing railroad infrastructure does not need to be relocated. This concept was vetted with City Staff. (RMS) A separate bike lane is now included with the design that attempts to balance the need to align with the improvements to the south while preserving the existing railroad infrastructure on the northeast corner of the intersection. (NE) Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The applicant should be aware that the City is actively looking at installing temporary measures at this time to create a more perpendicular crossing for bicyclists heading north along Mason Street due to heightened awareness on bicycle crashes occurring. Any work that occurs should be considered temporary and would need to be removed and improved with the project per the previous comment. Addressed in revised TIS. (ELB) Acknowledged. Thank you for the information. At this time, there are no plans to preserve the temporary improvements as they do not relate very well to our proposed right-of-way improvements and enhancements. (NE) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The placement of the various structures in right-of-way have varying degrees of concern. The elongated seatwall/retaining wall shown on the northwest corner of the property in close proximity to the railroad would need to be placed outside of right-of-way. The smaller concrete seatwalls indicated on the site plan may be approvable through an excavation permit, subject to review of their specific design and review of placement with the finalized streetscape design along Mason Street, looking to ensure sufficient through clearance for the general public occurs. The stairs located along Maple Street right-of-way should ideally be removed at this time and designed without the stairs, if the applicant still wants to pursue the placement of the stairs in right-of-way, additional review and discussion is needed. Additional discussions with city staff have indicated that the site layout as shown will be acceptable. It is understood that revocable encroachment permits will be required for most, if not all, of the structures listed. (NE) Seatwall outside property and adjacent land parcel will be removed. Permits will be sought for seat areas along Mason and stairways along Maple. (RMS) Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The parkways shown between the sidewalks and Mason/Maple street are 5 feet in width and would not meet the minimum the parkway strip width for either street (8 feet for Mason Street, 6.5 feet for Maple Street). It was commented on the PDR that 15 foot wide attached sidewalks were envisioned by Current and Transportation Planning along the public streets and may still be preferred over the detached sidewalks. Note that comments from Tom Knostman with the City Streets Department would ideally want to see 8 foot wide parkway strips, if a parkway strip is to ultimately be installed, or the use of tree grates and an attached sidewalk system. The water line complicates spacing of trees along Mason Street. Original goal was to have an allee of trees on either side of 10’ wide sidewalk, which limited the tree lawn to 5’ for this to occur. Bikeway location limits the parkway to a single row of street trees in the tree lawn behind the curb. As there is not any parking along Mason Street, we feel an 8’ tree lawn is the correct response to this area and the extra wide condition R.O.W. The sidewalk is 10’ wide to help accommodated pedestrian movement to along the street towards Lee Martinez Park, Museum of Discovery and the Poudre River and Trail system. Maple Street tree lawn is now shown at 6.5’. (RMS) The required parkway widths are now provided. (NE) Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The plans don't show the existing truncated dome detection /access ramp installed at the southwest corner of the site (northeast corner of Mason Street and Maple Street). The plans need to reflect how the truncated dome/access ramp is to be situated with the new infrastructure. The truncated domes are now shown along with all improvements proposed at this corner. (NE) Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The transformer and trash enclosure shown off the alley do not indicate the use of doors/fences to protect and screen. If a door and/or fence is to be constructed in either location, they may not swing out into public right-of-way. We have developed the design of the trash enclosure and now indicate doors and a walk-in opening for tenants. (OZ) Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: A truncated dome detection panel would need to be installed on the Maple Street sidewalk just west of the alley in accordance with Drawing 803 of LCUASS. Truncated domes will be installed per LCUASS and are now shown on the plans. (NE) Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: There are two bike racks that are shown within Mason Street right-of-way. These can't be counted towards any required bike parking for the development. The placement of bike racks in right-of-way would need to be coordinated with FC Moves through a separate process. Acknowledged. Bike racks shown on Mason Street frontage are now within the property line. (RMS) Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: I'll ultimately defer to Transportation Planning on the findings in the TIS regarding Bicycle LOS. It was discussed however with Transportation Planning that the analysis and findings of the bicycle system in this section of the TIS might be viewed differently in light of comments #2 and #3. Acknowledged. (ELB) Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970-224-6143, lex@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/13/2013 08/13/2013: No comments. Department: Light And Power Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224-6152, dmartine@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/05/2013 08/05/2013: The site shown for the utility electric transformer appears to be too small. Depending on the electric service size, the transformer will require a minimum depth of 10 feet, and width of 15 feet. Also, the transformer cannot be located under a building overhang or within 20 feet of an emergency exit. Contact Light & Power Engineering at (970)221-6700 with any questions. Currently, a transformer pad measuring 4’-8” x 6’-7”, which is the dimension specified for a 75-500 KVA 3 phase transformer. The pad is surrounded by appropriate landscaping, and does not have any enclosure surrounding it. (NE) Clarified transformer location (Given) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/05/2013 08/05/2013: There is an existing streetlight on Mason, approximately 120 feet north of Maple and one at the N.E. corner of Mason & Maple. The exact locations of these lights needs to be shown on the landscape plan. Street tree locations need to be adjusted as necessary to provide 40 feet of clearance between the tree and the lights (15 feet if the tree is an ornamental type). The existing streetlight on Mason, approximately 120 feet north of Maple, is proposed to be removed and replaced with four (4) new pedestrian-scale pole-mounted light fixtures (by Developer). Additional building-mounted light fixtures will further illuminate the adjacent streetscape to safe levels. The existing streetlight at the N.E. corner of Mason & Maple is proposed to be relocated to the parkway strip approximately 8 feet N.W. of its current location. The proposed street trees have been adjusted to maintain separation requirements. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/05/2013 08/05/2013: Electric development and system modification charges will apply. Acknowledged (BD) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/05/2013 08/05/2013: After the plans are final, an AutoCad drawing (V.2008) of the utility plan will need to be sent to Terry Cox at TCOX@FCGOV.COM. Acknowledged (BD) Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/20/2013 08/20/2013: FIRE LANES Fire Lanes shall be provided to within 150' of all portions of the building, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. When fire lanes cannot be provided, the fire code official is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet if the building is equipped throughout with an approved, automatic fire-sprinkler system. 2006 International Fire Code 503.1.1 Comment No. 3 from the original PDR remains active and requires clarification. A meeting with the project team and PFA staff determined that Maple St. could be used for aerial fire apparatus access which eliminates the need for a 30' wide fire lane internal to the site. However, it must be understood the more general, blanket requirement for 150' fire access to the building remains. Providing for fire access through the alley is thereby necessary and as it will become critical with further development within this site, it seems reasonable that this problem be mitigated in the first phase rather than be put off until later construction phases. The alley shall then maintain a 20' width, drive aisle throughout for fire access. Please contact me to discuss this further. Subsequent meetings with PFA have occurred since these comments were made, and modifications to the site plan have been made. In particular, the layout of the parking area has been modified to allow a fire truck to access the center drive aisle. An emergency access easement has been provided in this location as well. (NE) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: TURNING RADII The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. International Fire Code 503.2.4 and Local Amendments Adequate turning radii at the alley entryway onto Maple Street shall be achieved along with any future needs internal to the site. Site plan has been revised to allow for trucks to access the alley from Maple, and turn into the center drive aisle of the parking lot. (NE) Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft and in a sensitive area, therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted does not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan, Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need clarification concerning this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com. An Erosion Control Report will be provided with the FDP, along with an Erosion Control Plan and Details. (NE) Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/19/2013 08/19/2013: Stormwater is ready for a hearing. Please see minor comments redlined on the plans. Redline comments have been addressed. (NE) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/19/2013 08/19/2013: The area of porous pavers and underground detention which lies underneath the building may not be allowed or will require special consideration. The City will let the applicant know of any determination. The paver extents have been modified. (NE) Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: There are line over text issues on sheet PDP 2. See redlines. This has been corrected. (OZ). Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: There are line over text issues on sheet C200. See redlines. This has been corrected. (NE) Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The index on sheet LP001 does not match the sheet LP101 title. See redlines. Corrected (RMS) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please correct the LP101 sheet number in the index on sheet LP001. See redlines. Corrected (RMS) Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: No comments. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please add the "Name/Title" in the Owners & Lienholders signature blocks. See redlines. We are currently using a standard placeholder for the Owner & Lienholder signature blocks. Once they are confirmed, final entities will be added as requested. (NE) Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please label the remaining portions of Block 23 that surround this Plat. See redlines. This info has been added as requested. (NE) Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please show ties to the boundary from the monumentation found along the east side of the alley. See redlines. This info has been added. (NE) Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please add bearings & distances for all easement lines shown. See redlines. This info has been added. (NE) Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please label alley dedication information. See redlines. This info has been added. (NE) Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: Please add a legal description for the property to sheet LS001. See redlines. Corrected (RMS) Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: The index on sheet LS001 does not match the sheet LS101 title. See redlines. Corrected (RMS) Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/21/2013 08/21/2013: There are line over text issues on sheet LS102. See redlines. Corrected (RMS) Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Ward Stanford, 970-221-6820, wstanford@fcgov.com Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: The intersection of Maple and Mason no longer allows N/S left turns onto Maple. Please revise TIS evaluation at the intersection. The turning movements were analyzed in the existing condition since that is what is occurring at the intersection. Future years were modified in the Revised TIS. (ELB) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: Please include in the TIS the review of the possible west bound left and east bound right turn auxiliary lanes on Cherry into the alley. This has been included. (ELB) Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: Please provide the approach LOS's for each of the four directions in the various LOS tables. This has been included. (ELB) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: Please make sure the analysis is based upon the 2000 HCM (Synchro 6 or 7 HCM). We've found problems in the shared lane analysis of 2010 HCM. The analyses utilized Synchro 6. (ELB) Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: Please revise the east bound arrows on Maple at the Alley, Fig 7. These have been revised. (ELB) Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 08/23/2013: Modeling the alley access on Cherry provides real possibility of west bound traffic queuing back into the College intersection or impeding Sb College right turning traffic onto Cherry. The Cherry St. alley access may need to be restricted to Ri/Ro only. Internal staff needs to discuss the issue. Additional narrative added to TIS. (ELB) Department: Transportation Planning Contact: Aaron Iverson, 970-416-2643, aiverson@fcgov.com Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 - Is there an access easement across the parking lot to and from curb cut on College? This movement is not addressed in the traffic study but should be discussed. Did not address in TIS. (ELB) - The north alley access to Cherry may be closed or moved in the future to implement a railroad crossing quiet zone, this may impact circulation in the future. Added narrative but did not model potential changes. (ELB) - Suggestion: Consider alley improvements to create an enhanced alley experience similar to other downtown alleys. Alley improvements were considered and discussed with the DDA. The alley is part of the Downtown Alley Improvement Master Plan, but it is not seen as a priority at this point. In light of this, we focused pedestrian enhancements to the Mason and Maple Street frontages which serve as a main pedestrian connection between the Max north terminus and the museum. . Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/23/2013 - Disagree with the Bike LOS findings in the Traffic Impact Study, considering the railroad crossing on Mason. This needs to be reflected and addressed. This has been addressed. (ELB) - Disagree with the Ped LOS findings considering there is no sidewalk on Cherry (the north side of the block), needs to be addressed in the study with potential mitigation Done. Added narrative. (ELB) - Ped LOS needs to discuss the pedestrian crossing of Cherry at Mason Done. (ELB) - The TIS did not include the chosen ped and bike destinations, would like to see what the assumptions were. Added narrative on destinations analyzed. (ELB) Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffington@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/20/2013 08/20/2013: Are there other utilities not shown on the utility plans (telephone, cable, etc.)? With the intensity of these infill projects which seem to fill up the entire site, it's important to have ALL underground utilities shown and shown accurately to avoid conflicts and delays during construction. SiteWise has provided utility locates for the project site, and to the best of our knowledge, all utilities are shown on the plans. (NE) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/20/2013 08/20/2013: There does not appear to be adequate space for the fire hydrant located adjacent to the alley. A minimum of 2 feet (3 feet would be better) clear distance is required between the fire hydrant and the curb/curb return. The requested separation has been provided. (NE) Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/20/2013 08/20/2013: Was the 12" main on the east side of Mason potholed to get an accurate location? Potholing was scheduled for 9/16, but had to be delayed due to the flooding. The potholing has been rescheduled for 9/25, and the plans will be updated to reflect that location. (NE) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/20/2013 08/20/2013: The Standard Detail for the Meter vault will be modified to move the MH access out of the sidewalk. This revision will also include the requirement to extend conduits to the face of the building to mount the radio units for the automated meter reading system. Acknowledged. (NE) Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/09/2013 08/09/2013: On the Landscape plan a substantial amount of area is designated "Landscape Planting" what does this mean? Additional details needed. This was defined in the legend. An example planted bed has been added. (RMS) Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/09/2013 08/09/2013: Four parking spaces along the North do not have wheel stops these spaces also need to include wheel stops. The wheel stops have been added. (RMS) Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/09/2013 08/09/2013: Where is the walk-in access on the trash and recycling enclosure? OZ Response: We have developed the design of the trash enclosure and now indicate doors and a walk-in opening for tenants. (OZ) Please label the dimensions of the trash and recycling enclosure on the site plan. We have added dimensions. (OZ) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/09/2013 08/09/2013: The application states that bicycle spaces are located in each unit, is there a designated area in the unit for this that can be seen in a example floor plan? We have added a typical unit plan showing where the bike rack will be located. (OZ) Can bicycle spaces be placed on the West side of the accessibility spaces? Bicycle spaces have been added to the area near the access from the parking. (RMS) Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/09/2013 08/09/2013: The drive direction of an aisle should be designated at the entrances of the aisle. Plans should be revised to make the drive direction clearer at the entrances of aisles. Amended (RMS) Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/09/2013 08/09/2013: A modification request for increase in compact stalls was submitted by the applicant. Due to recent LUC changes this modification is not necessary.