Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPARKING AT 620 S. LEMAY AVE. - MJA/FDP - FDP150009 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS (3)Page | 1 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design Parking at 620 S. Lemay Ave. Responses to the comments provided in the letter below: June 2, 2015 Cara Scohy CS Design, Inc. 2519 S. Shields St. #129 Fort Collins, CO 80526 RE: Parking at 620 S Lemay Ave, FDP150009, Round Number 2 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Noah Beals, at 970-416-2313 or nbeals@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/31/2015 03/31/2015: This is a major amendment, there needs to be a sheet showing the original boundaries of the approved plan and how this proposal is expanding the boundaries. There needs to be a Use table showing existing and proposed uses. Response: A Boundary Line Exhibit has been provided (sheet S3) to show the original boundary for Lot 1, Poudre River Business Park, Third Filing (Concentra) and the expansion of that approved plan with this project (Lot 1, Poudre River Business Park, Fourth Filing). Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 05/19/2015: I'd suggest verifying the civil linework with the plat information. The 9 foot utility easement depiction around the curve to the south appears to widen greater than the plat specifies. 04/01/2015: The civil drawings don't appear to be in sync with the plat in terms of lot line information along Hoffman Mill Road and should be consistent with the plat. Our City Surveyor would concur with the plat on the property line boundary, with no angle point being created in the dedicated right-of-way, and that there is no excess Page | 2 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design right-of-way needing to be vacated. Response: All civil linework has been verified with the linework from the plat. All linework is the same. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 05/19/2015: The drawings should be depicting truncated dome detection across the driveway (north-south) as indicated in the driveway detail. 04/01/2015: Please ensure the drive approach is indicated in details and plan view as a Type IV driveway approach. This link is the most recent updated version of the construction detail and should be used: http://larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/2014%20Changes/NoRedlines/707.2.pdf Response: Truncated dome detection has been added across the driveway (north-south) as indicated in the driveway detail. Additionally (as previously shown), truncated dome detection points west to facilitate movement from the parking lot to the Concentra facility. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 05/19/2015: The response indicates minimal discharge so as not to be of impact. There should still be 2 feet of recycled asphalt provided behind the additional asphalt being added for the transition back to the existing asphalt. 04/01/2015: Are there implications from a Stormwater perspective on the curb and gutter point discharge to existing asphalt that would need to be considered? Response: 2 feet of recycled asphalt has been provided behind the additional asphalt being added for the transition back to the existing asphalt. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 05/19/2015: Carried over for reference. I'm understanding as of new information from last week that City Natural Areas may end up being the future owner of this property. 04/01/2015: With the offsite grading and waterline extension shown occurring on the property to the east, a letter from of intent is needed from that property owner (shown on Larimer County records as "Springer Fisher Inc.") prior to a hearing, with an actual construction easement required at time of development approval, as well as presumably a utility easement for the waterline extension. Response: As discussed in the review meeting, due to the new owner, the utilities and roadwork will be terminated approximately 10’ before the property line, as to not require any temporary construction or permanent utility easements on the neighboring property. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 Page | 3 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design 05/19/2015: The response indicates that the street improvements are to continue to the property line. The civil drawing proposal stops short of the property line, which is acceptable given the circumstances with the "Laurel Street" access points. The 10 asphalt foot transition shown on the northbound movement isn't depicted to existing asphalt however, the offset from existing asphalt is greater and should reflect a longer transition than 10 feet. Are there any anticipated drainage concerns or drainage easements needed at the termination of the curb and gutter section for Hoffman Mill Road? The local street portion of Hoffman Mill Road (minus sidewalk) will need to be provided in-lieu of constructing Hoffman Mill Road to the property line. 04/01/2015: The drawings (site, landscape and civil) appear to show the continuation of Hoffman Mill Road street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) past the property boundary, but I believe the actual intention is to end the improvements at the property boundary. The plans (especially the Civil plans) need to show both where the limits of proposed improvements end, how the proposed improvement will tie into the existing condition (no curb and gutter, existing edge of pavement, transitioning from widened road to paved road, etc.), and how the extension of additional improvements in the future would be situated in terms of being within right-of-way or would additional right-of-way/easement be needed? Response: The transition on the northeast side has been lengthened to 25’ and now meets the existing asphalt edge. There is no drainage easement necessary, as the drainage patterns still follow historic patterns and the amount of flow within this section of gutter is very minimal. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 05/19/2015: The civil plans reflect stopping the improvements short as indicated in the previous comment, but note that the site and landscape plans appear to show improvements to the property line, including the placement of turf partially over the existing driveway. 04/01/2015: Continuing on the previous comment, there is an existing driveway for what's indicated on signage as Laurel Street. How will the proposed street improvements tie into the existing driveway condition? Response: The landscape plans have been adjusted to correctly show the landscaping stopping short of the existing driveway. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 05/19/2015 05/19/2015: Could there be an option to have the project name not be "Parking at 620 S. Lemay Ave." and instead the title just be the platted name of Poudre River Business Park Fourth Filing? It would seem to reduce potential future confusion on having the project known with two different titles. It also simplifies the development agreement in making the project name coincide with the platted name. Page | 4 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design Response: As discussed in the review meeting, we will move forward with the current project name unless it is determined that we should change the name after public hearing. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Kelly Kimple, , kkimple@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/14/2015 05/14/2015: All environmental planning comments have been resolved. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/21/2015 05/21/2015: Final Comments: Please change the following plants used in the habitat area to native species. Austrian Pine changed to Ponderosa Pine Shubert’s Chokecherry changed to the native chokecherry which is Prunus virginiana. Specify the choke cherry as 6 foot clump. Response: Plants on the plant list have been changed to the native species listed above. Check the trees marked as mitigation trees in the plant list. The direct labeling on the plan is correct but differs from what is recorded in the plant list. The following appears to be the list of the mitigation trees that should be recorded in the plant list. 6 Kentucky Coffeetree 5 Sensation Boxelder Response: After a written explanation via email of what is shown on the planting plan and plant list, the drawings are approved as-is per the email response on June 2. Add this sentence to note number 2 on sheet L1 that describes the tree mitigation. Habitat planting around the perimeter of the parking lot provides an equivalent of 8 mitigation trees. Response: Sentence has been added to the note. Department: Internal Services Contact: Todd Reidenbach, , Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/20/2015 03/20/2015: There are no comments from GIS for this project. Page | 5 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design ………………………… TODD REIDENBACH, GISP GIS Mapping Specialist – Information Technology City of Fort Collins 215 N. Mason St, 3rd Floor 970-416-2483 office 970-221-6329 fax treidenbach@fcgov.com Department: Light And Power Contact: Janet McTague, 970-224-6154, jmctague@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 04/01/2015: Light and Power has existing facilities along Poudre River Drive. We will need a C-1 form to define electric requirements and will also need to coordinate a location for a transformer within 10' of a paved surface. Normal development fees will apply. Response: A C-1 form is being provided with this submittal and the transformer location is being coordinated with the City. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Megan Harrity, , Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/17/2015 03/17/2015: This comment is in reference to the title of the plat and the dedication of the plat. The Title reads; POUDRE RIVER RANCH BUSINESS PARK FOURTH FIL and the dedications reads; POUDRE RIVER BUSINESS PARK FOURTH FIL Please double check these as I believe that these should be the same. Thank you, Megan Harrity Subdivisions Larimer County Assessor 970-498-7065 mharrity@larimer.org Response: This comment was addressed with the previous submittal. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Page | 6 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 04/01/2015: Please provide in the report a set of maintenance notes with Standard Operating Procedures for the bioretention system and for the pervious pavement system. Response: An SOP was provided with the first round of comments. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/20/2015 05/20/2015: Please provide a forebay at the inflow point from the parking lot into the bioretention area. The biortention detail should use actual elevations and depths especially for the subsurface areas. Please use the correct page reference for the bioretention detail on the grading plan as it currently references sheet 8.4 rathaer than 8.5 for the details. Response: A sediment forebay has been provided at the inflow point from the parking lot into the bioretention area. The bioretention detail has been modified to use actual elevation and depths. The correct page reference has been made. Topic: Drainage Report Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 04/01/2015: Please clarify the capacity of the downstream pipe and if the entire overflow from the bioretention pond and the pavers will be able to drain through the dowstream pipe system. What happens when the paver system overflows, in case of plugging how will the overflow be directed back into the drainage system ? Will the overflow pipe in the bioretention area be able to handle the 100 year flows ? if not where will the spill be directed to ? Response: This was addressed in the Drainage Report with the first round of comments. The downstream pipe does have the available capacity to convey the entire overflow from the bioretention and the pavers. If the pavers overflow, the runoff will be conveyed to the bioretention via the gutter system. The overflow pipe/structure has the available capacity to capture the entire 100-year storm event, maintaining the entire storm onsite. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/01/2015 04/01/2015: Please clarify what planting will be done at the bottom of the rain garden. Specify if a rock mulch will be used there as well. Response: Prairie Dropseed will be planted on the bottom of the rain garden and it will be mulched with a shallow layer of 4”-8” river cobble. This is shown on sheet L1. Contact: Glen Schlueter, 970-224-6065, gschlueter@fcgov.com Topic: Fees Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/17/2015 Page | 7 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design 04/17/2015: There are Stormwater fees due for the increase in impervious area. The city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $7,817/acre ($0.1795 sq.-ft.) for new impervious area over 350 sq.-ft., and there is a $1,045.00/acre ($0.024/sq.-ft.) review fee. Please contact Jean Pakech at 221-6375 or jpakech@fcgov.com to determine the fee for this project. Since a building permit is not required for parking lots this will be billed seperately. Response: Stormwater will be contacted on June 4 to determine fees. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/18/2015 05/19/2015: Erosion Control Plans have redlines that were not addressed. Erosion control Report has relines that were never addressed. Please correct and return with next submittle. 03/18/2015: Erosion Control Plans and Erosion Control Report have significant redlines, Erosion Control Escrow Will need to be recalculated after Erosion control plan is acceptable. 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 Response: As discussed with Jesse (06-01-2015), erosion control report redlines were never received. However, all erosion control report and erosion control plan redlines have been addressed. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 05/19/2015: We would prefer that you have 2 benchmarks, but will not rewuire it. Please correct the spelling errors. See redlines. 03/30/2015: The City has moved to the NAVD88 vertical datum. Please provide the following information in the EXACT format shown below. If your project is started on NAVD88 datum: 1) PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: OR, if project has already been surveyed in NAVD29 Unadjusted datum: 2) PROJECT DATUM: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (OLD CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) Page | 8 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: If using NGVD29 UNADJUSTED the following equation statement will be needed. NOTE: IF NAVD 88 DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NAVD88 = NGVD29 UNADJUSTED + X.XX¿ Response: The 2 benchmark preference has been noted for future developments. All spelling errors and redlines have been addressed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 05/19/2015: There are still line over text issues. See redlines. 03/30/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Line over text issues have been resolved. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 05/19/2015: There are still text over text issues. See redlines. 03/30/2015: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Response: Text over text issues have been resolved. Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 05/19/2015 05/19/2015: Please remove the legal description shown on sheet C1.0, unless another department required it. The "Lot 1, Poudre River Business Park, Fourth Filing" in the title is the legal description. Response: The above legal description has been used. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 05/18/2015 05/18/2015: The lighter background text & linework marked is not acceptable. It will not scan or reproduce. Please darken it up. See redlines. Response: The lighter background text and linework has been darkened. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 05/18/2015: No comments. 03/30/2015: No comments. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 05/19/2015: This has not been corrected. Please add a comma to the title in the Page | 9 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design Statement Of Ownership And Subdivision. See redlines. 03/30/2015: Please make sure all titles match. See redlines. Response: Comma has been added. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 05/19/2015: These have not been provided yet, but have been informed that they will be submitted at a later date. 03/30/2015: Please provide current acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown. These should be emailed directly to Jeff at jcounty@fcgov.com Response: Monument records were provided via email on June 2. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 03/30/2015: The title needs to match the Subdivision Plat. See redlines. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 03/30/2015: Please revise the legal description to match the title on the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 03/30/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 03/30/2015 03/30/2015: There is text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines. Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 05/19/2015 05/19/2015: The lighter background text & linework marked is not acceptable. It will not scan or reproduce. Please darken it up. See redlines. Response: The lighter background text and linework has been darkened. Previous comments were addressed with the last submittal. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/31/2015 05/20/2015: Do the directional ramps as shown work with the attached walks? 03/31/2015: The current standard for curb cuts is for them to be directional and not radial into the middle of the intersection. The pedestiran treatment at the intersection of Poudre River Drive and Hoffman Mill Road should reflect the current standard. Response: The sidewalk radii have been adjusted to provide for room to walk behind the directional ramps, rather than walking across the ramps. Topic: General Page | 10 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/20/2015 05/20/2015: I didn't see any signing or striping plans. Perhaps I missed them? Response: Signing and Striping has been added to the street profile sheets, C6.0 Poudre River Drive Plan & Profile/Signing & Striping and C6.1 Hoffman Mill Road Plan & Profile/Signing & Striping. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/24/2015 03/24/2015: A landscape plan shall contain accurate and identifiable hydrozones, including a water budget chart that shows the total annual water use, which shall not exceed fifteen (15) gallons per square foot over the site. If you have questions contact Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com or 970-221-6704. Response: This comment was addressed with the last submittal; see sheet L3. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/02/2015 04/02/2015: Please provide a detail for the fire hydrant assembly. Please provide a profile for the extended sewer line in Poudre River Dr. If no valves are existing at the water line Response: This comment was addressed with the first round of comments. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/20/2015 05/20/2015: Extension of the water and sewer lines will depend on whether the City buys the property to the East and on what facilities might be needed there. This issue will need to be discussed further. If the water line is to be terminated that abandonment of the line will needs to be done at the valve by capping the existing extended line that goes east along Poudre River Drive at the main. Response: As discussed at the review meeting, the services have been extended through the proposed Poudre River Drive, but have been terminated approximately 10’ before the property line, to not require any offsite easements. We are continuing with this route until new information is brought to us. If new information comes to fruition in the future that the services will not need to be extended, the water line will be terminated at the valve, as mentioned above. Topic: Easements Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/02/2015 Page | 11 Landscape Architecture | Planning | Urban Design 04/02/2015: 20-feet wide public easements will be needed for the extended water and sewer line stubs that are outside the Right of Way limits and on private property. These can overlap however a minimum of 10 feet separation must be maintained. Response: This comment was addressed with the last submittal.