HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE GREEN SOLUTION - PDP/FDP - FDP150045 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSFebruary 2, 2016
Ryan Mounce
Project Planner
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: 810 North College Avenue – Retail Marijuana Store and Cultivation Facility
FDP Comment Response Letter
The following are the responses to the FDP Review letter, dated January 8, 2016, for the above
referenced property. For ease of review, we have provided all of the original comments with the response
in italics below. If no response is provided, the comment has been noted or addressed and reflected in
the design.
Comment Summary:
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Ryan Mounce, 970-224-6186, rmounce@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/05/2016: Please add a sheet index to the site plan. Please add our standard site and
landscaping plan notes to the respective sheets (see handout; a digital copy is also available).
Manhard Response: The sheet index is located on the cover sheet for Final Development
Plan. The standard site plan notes have been added to the cover sheet. The landscaping
plan notes have been added to the landscape plans.
Comment Number: 2
01/05/2016: Expand the project information table on the site plan to include all of the following
information:
- Zone District: CS (Service Commercial) - Land Use:
- Lot Size:
- Building Area: (Existing & Proposed) - Building Height:
- Parking Spaces:
- Bike Parking Spaces:
- Legal Description:
Please consolidate the two site plans into one sheet, including the above-listed information.
Manhard Response: The project information table has been revised to include the requested
information. The site plans have been consolidated into one sheet.
Comment Number: 3
01/05/2016: Please add an owner's certification and city approval signature blocks on the site
plan (see handout).
Manhard Response: The owner’s certification and city approval signature blocks have been
added to the cover sheet.
Comment Number: 4
01/05/2016: The walkway along the parking area needs to be widened by 1-foot to allow for vehicle
overhang given the size of the parking stalls being utilized.
Manhard Response: The walkway along the parking area has been increased to 6’wide as
requested
Comment Number: 5
01/05/2016: Prior to scheduling the public hearing, we need documentation for the shared drive and
legal access to the parking spaces.
Manhard Response: The deed for the property to the north, which indicates legal access, has
been included.
Comment Number: 6
01/05/2016: Please provide catalog cut-sheets for the new lighting fixtures on a separate sheet.
Sickbert Associates Response: See sheet E1 for exterior light fixture cut sheets and lighting
plan.
Comment Number: 7
01/05/2016: Given the length of the building addition, additional design features or embellishments are
needed along the north facade facing the walkway. Consider more pronounced recessed or
projecting elements (ie increasing projection of the pilasters), investigating false windows, awnings,
etc.
Sickbert Associates Response: The brick pilasters on the north elevation have been
increased to 1’-6” deep with a 1’-8” deep by 4’-5” high cornice. The trim band around the
addition has been removed and replaced with this cornice element. The cornice depth is
decreased to 4” on the east and south facades.
Comment Number: 8
01/05/2016: The new addition also needs to feature a recognizable base and top treatments. The
base is covered with the brick, however, the Land Use Code discourages using trim or bands as a
building top. Please explore options for parapets, cornices, or sloping or varied heights of the roof-
line.
Sickbert Associates Response: See response to comment #7 above.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Katie Sexton, 970-221-6501, ksexton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/05/2016: Please see LCUASS Appendix E-4 which contains requirements for all Final
Development Plan submittals. All applicable requirements will need to be met for FDP approval.
Manhard Response: A General Notes sheet has been added to the FDP set and a Utility
Plan set has been created.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
12/30/2015: On the Landscape Plan, please update the dryland seed mix area to match the
symbology in the legend.
Sickbert Associates Response: The landscape plan has been corrected.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 2
12/30/2015: Please include specifications for the light fixtures that will be used. If LED light
fixtures are proposed, note that cooler color temperatures are harsher at night and cause more
disruption to circadian rhythms for both humans and wildlife. Please consider a warmer color
temperature (closer to 2700K) for your LED light fixtures. Please also consider fixtures with
dimming capabilities so that light levels can be adjusted as needed.
Sickbert Associates Response: See sheet E1 for exterior light fixture cut sheets and lighting
plan. The light fixtures are LED with color temperatures of 2700K and 3000K
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1
01/05/2016:
Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting:
Pre-Submittal meetings are required to assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the
design, that the new commercial or multi-family projects are on track to complying with all of the
adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The proposed project should be in the early to
mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective and is typically scheduled after the Current
Planning conceptual review meeting.
Applicants of new commercial or multi-family projects are advised to call 416-2341 to schedule a
pre-submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to present site plans, floor plans, and
elevations and be able to discuss code issues of occupancy, square footage and type of
construction being proposed.
Sickbert Associates Response: We have been in contact with the Fort Collins Building
Department, they suggested that a pre-submittal meeting would not be required for this project
due to its limited scope. .
Construction shall comply with the following adopted codes as amended: 2012 International
Building Code (IBC)
2012 International Residential Code (IRC)
2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC)
2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC)
2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC)
2012 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2014 National
Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado
Fort Collins has amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the fcgov.com web page to
view them.
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A1 17.1-2009.
Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF.
Frost Depth: 30 inches.
Wind Load: 100- MPH 3 Second Gust Exposure B.
Seismic Design: Category B.
Climate Zone: Zone 5
Energy Code Use
1. Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2012 IRC Chapter 11 or 2012 IECC.
2. Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2012 IECC residential chapter.
3. Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2012 IECC commercial chapter.
Green solution ¿ project specific concerns:
1. Fire-sprinkler systems are required for buildings over 5000 sq.ft. or fire-containment must be
provided.
2. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling.
3. Exterior walls and roof must meet a STC (sound resistance) rating of 40 min. if building located
within 1000ft to train tracks.
4. Low-flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are required.
5. Special combustion safety requirements for natural draft gas appliances.
6. Low VOC interior finishes.
Sickbert Associates Response: All applicable codes referenced above are acknowledged.
The remodel and addition will be designed to meet or exceed these codes.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/06/2016: An existing 50 KVA open delta bank feeds the building from the south. New
development and system modification charges will apply if additional electrical capacity is
needed. There is existing single and three phase power in the area. Please contact Light
and Power Engineering if additional capacity is anticipated.
Sickbert Associates Response: Excel has been contacted. The existing transformer set will
provide adequate capacity for our design loads.
Comment Number: 2
01/06/2016: If additional capacity is needed please provide a one line diagram and a C-1
form to Light and Power Engineering. The C-1 form can be found at:
http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf
Sickbert Associates Response: No additional capacity will be required.
Comment Number: 3
01/06/2016: Any changes to the existing electric capacity and or location will initiate new
electric development and system modification charges. Please follow the
below link to our online fee estimator or contact us if you have any questions regarding the fees
for the project. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-
development-fees
Sickbert Associates Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4
01/06/2016: Please contact Tyler Siegmund at Light & Power Engineering if you have any
questions at 970.416.2772. Please reference our policies, development charge processes, and
use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/03/2016: FIRE ACCESS
A "Shared Drive Emergency Access" drive lane has been labeled on the Site Plan but does
not appear to be labeled as an Emergency Access Easement on the Plat. Further details
concerning the limits of access for this easement are requested.
Manhard Response: The deed for the property to the north, which indicates legal access,
has been included.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com
Topic: Drainage Report
Comment Number: 3
01/04/2016: A Drainage Report is required and must be prepared by a Professional Engineer
registered in the State of Colorado. The drainage report requirements are provided in the Fort
Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Section 6.7. The link can be found at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/COFC_Amendments_V_1Chapter_1_Drai
nage_Policy. Pdf
Manhard Response: A drainage report has been prepared and submitted as part of this
package for review.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
01/04/2016: Grading Plans
- Additional detail needs to be provided on the grading plans that should include: spot elevations
and slope information to ensure that adequate drainage and fall away from the building is
provided.
Manhard Response: Additional detail has been added to the grading plan.
- Floodplain and floodway boundaries with BFE’s are to be included on the grading plan.
Manhard Response: The FEMA floodplain boundary is shown near the northwest side of the
site and the BFE information has been added.
- LID systems need to be designed and shown within the grading plan.
Manhard Response: The location of the Contech Filterra system has been added to the
grading plan.
- Storm pipe information including size, material and slope to be included within the grading plan
and separately on a Storm Plan and Profile sheet.
Manhard Response: Storm pipe information has been added to the grading plan and a Storm
Plan and Profile Sheet has been added.
- Storm outlet structure information to be included within the grading or drainage plan.
Manhard Response: An outlet structure is no longer required with the use of the Filterra
system.
Comment Number: 4
01/04/2016: A Drainage Plan needs to be provided as a part of a Drainage Report. The
Drainage Plan requirements are provided in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Section
6.7.2
Manhard Response: A drainage plan has been included in the Drainage Report.
Comment Number: 5
01/04/2016: The drainage memo provided with the project submittal will need to be expanded to
meet the criteria requirements stated above as well as the specifics noted here:
- This project site is located within basin 517 of the Northeast College Corridor Outfall
(NECCO) Project and as such the amount of runoff from the site is restricted to existing
conditions, but stormwater quantity detention and quality detention is provided in a regional
pond. NECCO fees will be required to be paid. These are $31,846 per acre.
- WQCV calculations will not be required, but Low Impact Development (LID) systems are
required on all new or redeveloping property which includes sites required to be brought into
compliance with the Land Use Code. These require a higher degree of water quality treatment
for 50% of the new impervious area and 25% of new paved areas must be pervious. Standard
operating procedures (SOPs) for all onsite drainage facilities will be included as part of the
Development Agreement. More information and links can be found at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/stormwater-quality/low-impact-
development
- Contributing area draining to each LID system will also need to be provided as a part of the
Drainage Report
- Documentation of the existing impervious area and runoff will be required to show that you are
not increasing runoff from the site. In addition, stormwater impact fees are based on new
impervious area so an exhibit showing the existing and proposed impervious areas with a table
summarizing the areas is required prior to the time fees are calculated for each building permit.
Manhard Response: A Drainage Report has been provided to replace the Drainage Memo
and includes the above information.
Comment Number: 6
01/04/2016: Per Colorado Revised Statute §37-92-602 (8) effective August 5, 2015, criteria
regarding detention drain time will apply to this project. As part of the drainage design, the
engineer will be required to show compliance with this statute using a standard spreadsheet
(available on request) that will need to be included in the drainage report. Upon completion of
the project, the engineer will also be required to upload the approved spreadsheet onto the
Statewide Compliance Portal. This will apply to any volume based stormwater storage,
including extended detention basins and LID volume-based systems such as bio-retention
cells.
Manhard Response: The Filterra system that is being used for this project is a flow based
stormwater BMP.
Comment Number: 7
01/04/2016: The 2016 city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $8,217/acre for new
impervious area over 350 sq.-ft., and there is a $1,045.00/acre review fee. No fee is charged
for existing impervious area. These fees are to be paid at the time each building permit is
issued. Information on fees can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-
developers/plant-investment-development-fees or contact Jean Pakech at 221-6375 for
questions on fees. There is also an erosion control escrow required before the Development
Construction permit is issued. The amount of the escrow is determined by the design engineer,
and is based on the site disturbance area, cost of the measures, or a minimum amount in
accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual.
Manhard Response: Noted. The fees will be paid prior to obtaining the building permit.
Contact: Heidi Hansen, 970-221-6854, hhansen@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 8
01/05/2016: This property is located in the FEMA-regulated, 100-year Poudre River
flood fringe and must comply with the safety regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal
Code. The Floodplain Site Plan submitted mentions a Flood Study by High Point Engineering
that should be reviewed with the plans but a flood study was not a part of the submittal. A flood
study is not typically required for a site such as this. A full review of floodplain compliance
could not be completed with the information provided.
Manhard Response: A flood study has not been performed, and is not part of the submittal;
the note on the plans referring to the study has been removed.
Comment Number: 9
01/05/2016: Construction of a nonresidential addition is allowed in a FEMA 100-year flood fringe,
as long as the lowest finished floor of the building, and all duct work, heating, ventilation,
electrical systems, etc. are elevated 24-inches above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). This
elevation is known as the Regulatory Flood Protection
Elevation (RFPE). RFPE = BFE + 24-inches. An approved FEMA Elevation Certificate,
completed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer and showing that the addition is constructed to
the required elevation, is required post-construction prior to a Certificate of Occupancy (CO)
being issued.
Manhard Response: An Elevation Certificate will be provided upon completion of
construction.
Comment Number: 10
01/05/2016: In lieu of elevating the addition, it may be possible to floodproof the building. When
more detail regarding this project is available, we can determine if floodproofing is a feasible
option. If that option is available, all the requirements of Section 10-38 of City Code must be
met. Floodproofing Guidelines as well as a FEMA Floodproofing Certificate (which will be
required before construction begins, and again after construction is complete and prior to issuing a
Certificate of Occupancy) can be obtained at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-
do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents. FEMA Technical Bulletin 3, “Non-Residential
Floodproofing – Requirements and Certification” can be found at http://www.fema.gov/media-
library-data/20130726-1511-20490-5294/job6.pdf.
Manhard Response: The proposed non-residential addition would be a substantial
improvement. It is intended that the floor of the addition match the elevation of the existing,
which is 4968.9; the BFE at the upstream side of the building is 4969.77. The total structure
is to be dry-floodproofed, with flood resistant materials up to the RFPE, and floodproof
doorways at the exterior walls of the building (doors #101, 102a, 107a & 111;) see
architectural plans for details.
The structure needs to withstand hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, as defined by FEMA
technical bulletin #3; the structural engineer will need to verify that the building can withstand
these loads. It is suggested that these calculations or conclusions be stated on the structural
plans so that post-project flood certification can be accomplished.
Comment Number: 11
01/05/2016: The current plans note that the walls of the addition will be floodproofed below Flood
Protection Elevation with flood resistant materials but it does not detail how openings (doors)
will be floodproofed. Please add this information to the plans.
The lowest elevation of mechanical equipment must be noted on the plans. It appears that
the FEMA Flood Insurance Study NAVD88 elevations were used for the BFE, please be aware
that FEMA uses a 3’ conversion in this area whereas the full conversion from NGVD29 to
NAVD88 is 3.17.
Manhard Response: The vertical datum conversion has been considered; the BFE was
adjusted to the 3.17' difference (up an additional 0.17 feet.) See previous comment about
floodproofing; floodproof doorways are to be detailed on the architectural plans.
Comment Number: 12
01/05/2016: If the cost of remodeling the existing structure will be over 50% of the value of the
existing structure (the structure only, not including land or use value) this would constitute a
“substantial improvement” and the existing structure must be brought into compliance with the
floodplain regulations. The existing structure would need to be either elevated or floodproofed
to 24-inches above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). Substantial improvement is a cumulative
value meaning that any previous building permits for remodels and improvements are added to
the current one to see if the 50% threshold is exceeded. It appears that there have been 3
previous permits totaling $14,300 and the assessor is showing a value for the structure of
$122,000 this means that the current improvements cannot total more than $46,700 without
exceeding the substantial improvement threshold and bringing the existing building into
compliance. Please contact staff for guidance on options for determining the structure’s value
as well as the costs that must be included in the substantial improvement determination.
Manhard Response: The proposed non-residential addition would be a substantial
improvement. It is intended that the floor of the addition match the elevation of the existing,
which is 4968.9; the BFE at the upstream side of the building is 4969.77. Since the existing
floor cannot be elevated to above the BFE, the total structure is to be dry-floodproofed, with
flood resistant materials up to the RFPE, and floodproof doorways at the exterior walls of the
building.
Comment Number: 13
01/05/2016: It appears that flood venting is called out for the existing structure. Flood vents are
only allowed for areas such as crawl spaces or storage areas such as garages as they allow
the water into the enclosed space so that the pressure can equalize. Is the existing structure
on a crawlspace or is it slab on grade? If it is slab on grade then flood vents are not allowable
as they would allow water to enter the finished space. Please add the finished floor elevation
for the existing structure. If the finished floor elevation of the existing structure does not meet
the flood protection elevation the existing structure will need to be dry floodproofed. Please detail
how dry floodproofing will be accomplished (walls and openings).
Manhard Response: The previous notes described a wet-floodproofing method; however,
dry-floodproofing is proposed, so notes related to flood vents have been removed. See
previous responses regarding dry floodproofing techniques.
Comment Number: 14
01/05/2016: Life-safety and emergency response critical facilities are not allowed in any portion
of any Poudre River floodplain. Hazardous materials are not permitted in the 100-year
floodplain.
Manhard Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 15
01/05/2016: Floatable materials including trash dumpsters, vehicles, trailers, equipment,
supplies, outdoor furniture (i.e. benches, tables), etc. related to non-residential uses are
prohibited in the 100-year floodplain. All floatable materials, including any existing floatable
materials located onsite, must be stored inside a building, be anchored per an approved
engineered design or be located outside of the 100-year floodplain. This restriction does not
apply to employee and customer vehicles parked on the site during business hours with an owner
onsite to move the vehicle.
Manhard Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 16
01/05/2016: Because this project is located in the Poudre River floodplain, the developer will be
required to have an Emergency Response Preparedness Plan approved prior to starting
construction. Please refer to the Fort Collins City Code Section 10-48 for items that must be
included in the plan.
Manhard Response: An Emergency Response Preparedness Plan has been submitted for
review as part of this submission.
Comment Number: 17
01/05/2016: Any construction activities in the flood fringe (e.g. structure, sidewalk or curb &
gutter installation/replacement, utility work, landscaping, etc.) must be preceded by an
approved floodplain use permit, the appropriate permit application fees, and approved plans.
The permit form can be obtained at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-
do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents.
Manhard Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 18
01/05/2016: Development review checklists for floodplain requirements can be obtained at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents. Please utilize
these documents when preparing your plans for submittal. Contact Beck Anderson of
Stormwater Master Planning at banderson@fcgov.com for floodplain CAD line work, as
required per the floodplain development review check list.
Manhard Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 19
01/05/2016: Please contact Heidi Hansen to schedule a meeting to discuss requirements for
development in the floodplain. hhansen@fcgov.com 970-221-6854
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
12/24/2015: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft, therefore Erosion and Sediment
Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the
Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3.
Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion
Control Plan, Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need
clarification concerning the erosion control section, or if there are any questions please contact
Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com
Manhard Response: An Erosion Control Plan, Details, and Report have been submitted as
part of this submission.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 14
01/04/2016: There is text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Comment Number: 15
01/04/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Comment Number: 16
01/04/2016: The title does not match the titles on other plans. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 17
01/04/2016: The title does not match the titles on other plans. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Comment Number: 18
01/04/2016: Please make changes to the sub-title as marked. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Comment Number: 19
01/04/2016: Please remove the legal description. It is not necessary with the subdivision name in
the sub-title. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and removed.
Comment Number: 20
01/04/2016: The City has moved to the NAVD88 vertical datum, and as of January 1, 2015 all
projects are required to be on NAVD88 datum. Please provide the following information in the
EXACT format shown below.
PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION:
PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM.
SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED FOR THEIR
VERTICAL DATUMS.
IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING
EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = NAVD88 - X.XX’.
Manhard Response: This information has been provided as requested
Comment Number: 21
01/04/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 11
01/04/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Sickbert Associates Response: The line over text issues have been corrected.
Comment Number: 12
01/04/2016: The title does not match the titles on other plans. See redlines.
Sickbert Associates Response: Matching project titles have now been provided.
Comment Number: 13
01/04/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines.
Sickbert Associates Response: All text over hatched areas has been masked.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
01/04/2016: Please make sure all plat language is the most current City language.
Manhard Response: The plat language has been revised to the most current City language.
Comment Number: 2
01/04/2016: There is plat language missing. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Missing plat language has been added.
Comment Number: 3
01/04/2016: Are there any Lienholders for this property? If so, please add a signature block. If not,
please add a note stating there are none, and include response in written comments.
Manhard Response: The lienholder signature block has been added.
Comment Number: 4
01/04/2016: Please show the right of way lines on the opposite side of all adjacent streets. See
redlines.
Manhard Response: The westerly right of way line is shown and has been labeled.
Comment Number: 5
01/04/2016: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See redlines.
Manhard Response: The land surveyor has been unable to locate the dedication information
for the easterly 40 feet of the westerly right of way of College Avenue.
Comment Number: 6
01/04/2016: Please add bearings, distances, and/or curve data as marked. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Additional distances have been added.
Comment Number: 7
01/04/2016: The distances along the north & south boundary lines are confusing. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Crows feet have been added for clarity.
Comment Number: 8
01/04/2016: Please provide current acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown.
These should be emailed directly to Jeff at jcounty@fcgov.com
Manhard Response: The current monument records have been emailed directly to Jeff
concurrently with this response letter.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 9
01/04/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Manhard Response: The line over text issues have been corrected.
Comment Number: 10
01/04/2016: The title does not match the titles on other plans. See redlines.
Manhard Response: Matching project titles have now been provided.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/06/2016: The anticipated change in traffic volume from the existing to the proposed use
coupled with the recent improvements to College Avenue results in no further traffic evaluation
being necessary.
Manhard Response: Noted
Comment Number: 2
01/06/2016: no further comments.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/05/2016: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The
irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use
Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or
eolson@fcgov.com
Sickbert Associates Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/04/2016: The existing 3/4” water service is shown and appears to be proposed to be
adequately sized for the existing building and the building expansion. Please provide the
required flow calculations so we can verify that the existing tap size is adequate for your use. If
the size is not adequate, a new tap will be required and the existing tap will be required to be
abandoned at the main. Coordination with City of Fort Collins Utilities Field Operations will
be required for the abandonment procedures and a note indicating as such is to be added to
these plans.
Sickbert Associates Response: We have reviewed our flow calculations and proposed fixture
units with the water department. IT was agreed that the existing ¾” domestic water tap will be
adequate. The flow calculations with be included in our final construction documents permit
set.
Comment Number: 2
01/04/2016: The existing sewer service is indicated to be abandoned. The abandonment must
occur at the main and a note indicating similar information as required in the note above is to be
included in the plans.
Manhard Response: A note has been added to indicate abandonment at the main.
Comment Number: 3
01/04/2016: What is the proposed size of the new sewer service?
Manhard Response: The sanitary service is a 4” service and has been noted on the plans.
Comment Number: 4
01/04/2016: Project Development Plan package was provided but Utility Plans were not.
Typically the grading, drainage, utility, demo, plan and profile sheets, construction notes,
and construction details are all provided within a set of Utility Plans. Please provide plans
with all the required documentation and within the proper format and include City signature
blocks on each page.
Manhard Response: Noted. Utility Plans have been provided as part of this submission.
Comment Number: 5
01/04/2016: See redlines for other minor comments that may not have been captured in the written
comments.
Manhard Response: Noted and addressed.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970-416-2743, avandeutekom@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 1
01/05/2016: The signage will require approval through a separate permit, please remove them from
the elevations drawings.
Sickbert Associates Response: The signage has been removed from the building elevations.
We acknowledge that a separate sign permit will be required.
Please contact me at (303) 531-3223 or jrentz@manhard.com if you have any questions related to the
above responses.
Sincerely,
Manhard
Julie Rentz
Project Engineer