Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT (OLD ELK DISTILLERY) - PDP - PDP140016 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS (5)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 January 8, 2016 Linda Ripley 401 W. Mountain Ave, #100 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: River District Block 8 Mixed-Use Development (Old Elk Distillery), PDP140016, Round Number 3 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. RESPONSES 3/7/16 PLANNING RESPONSE: Ripley Design Inc. CIVIL RESPONSE: Northern Engineering ARCHITECTURE RESPONSE: Oz Architecture TRAFFIC RESPONSE: Delich Associates Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/03/2014 12/03/2014: Please describe the height of the wall and fence combination along the south property line. Response: It is anticipated to be a 6’ tall black metal picket fence. On the south end of the courtyard, an approximate 8’ fireplace serves as the fence/wall. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/06/2016 01/06/2016: Please note that an eight foot high wall will require a building permit. Response: Noted Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/08/2016 01/08/2016: Please be aware that Chapter 20 of the City Code describes the maximum sound levels that are allowed to be received at a neighboring 2 property line as a result of amplified music on a per zone district basis. Response: Noted Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/03/2014 01/05/2016: This comment remains unresolved, but can be addressed at time of final. A flowline profile for the north side of Willow Street in the ultimate was not provided and vertical curve lengths and K-values are short of Figure 7-18 and Table 7-3. 12/03/2014: The ultimate design for Willow Street should be showing the left flowline in addition to the centerline and right flowline. The current design shows vertical curves in the sag and crest condition that do not meet minimum LCUASS requirements for vertical curves (minimum K values of 60). The design should be utilizing K values of 60 in the sag and crest condition. Response: As you suggested, we will resolve this comment with final compliance. I believe there is some confusion on the Willow roadway classification that we need to confirm to address the K-values. Regarding the “left” (aka-North) flowline profile, in our past experience, flowline designs have not been required for future improvements, only centerlines, but again, we can work through this detail at final. Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/15/2014 01/05/2016: Please (still) remove all indications of bike parking in right-of-way. 12/03/2014: Bike parking in right-of-way shown on the site plan should be removed as any bike parking in right-of-way is approved through a separate process outside of the development plan. Since these are approved via a revocable permit, it's indication on the site plan would be contradictory. 10/15/2014: The site plan shows the placement of bike racks along the Willow Street sidewalk. These bike racks appear to be bike racks that are required under the Land Use Code and when required by code, would need to be located outside of public right-of-way. Response: Indications of bike parking in the ROW have been removed from the plan and land use chart. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/15/2014 01/05/2016: The response indicates that the design for Willow has been revised. How was the design revised from the previous submittal? From looking at the present submittal, the findings appear to be similar as previously commented, the interim design looks acceptable from a preliminary standpoint. The pavement appears to be interim and would be removed in the ultimate condition, requiring the local street portion of Willow abutting Lot 1. 12/03/2014: In general the information provided appears to be acceptable. The interim cross sections should however be providing existing cross slopes to compare how the new pavement section ties into existing. With the interim cross-sections appearing to not match with the ultimate, it would be viewed that the new pavement is interim and would be removed in the ultimate condition, requiring the escrow of pavement for the local street portion abutting Lot 1. 10/15/2014: The development plan needs to provide information on how, (with 3 the curb and gutter being installed along Willow Street), would the street layout work from a horizontal and vertical perspective. What would be the striping, parking, bike and travel lane operation for the full Willow Street resulting from this (horizontal control/striping plan) with the railroad track in mind? How will (from a preliminary design information standpoint at this time) the roadway drain and provide typical cross-sections along Willow Street for this. Response: It appears that our previous response was copied from another comment and not properly updated. The Willow Street design remains unchanged from the previous submittal, however we have added the requested cross slope labels. The pavement that is proposed would not be interim in our view. Instead, it would simply need to be milled slightly and could then be overlaid with the final lift for the ultimate Willow improvements. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/15/2014 01/05/2016: Carried over just for acknowledgment of the acknowledgement. I'm again presently viewing that the Willow Street frontage work is interim in its present design. 12/03/2014: Carried over, just for indication that it again appears that the local street portion of pavement for Lot 1 will need to be provided with the interim paving not coinciding with the ultimate paving. 10/15/2014: Under the presumption that ultimate curb, gutter and sidewalk is installed along Willow Street, the local street portion of curb, gutter and sidewalk is satisfied, with the City reimbursing .5 feet of sidewalk width. Depending on whether Willow Street pavement is correspondingly installed in what can be determined is the ultimate location and at local street width will determine whether local street pavement obligation is satisfied or would need to have an established repay collected. The Linden Street repay for the local street portion is required and indicated in the development agreement for the project. Response: Understood. Again, we believe that the pavement that is proposed would not be interim. Instead, it would simply need to be milled slightly and could then be overlaid with the final lift for the ultimate Willow improvements. Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: I'd like to confirm my recollection of the project's intention in that access across Lot 2 from Lot 1 of the site development plan is not intended, and Lot 2 will not be altered or accessed? Under this presumption, and in coordinating with the "Not a Part of PDP" indication on Lot 2 of the drawings, I would take the approach that the development agreement for the project would only apply and be subject to Lot 1 of the subdivision plat. Response: Your recollection is correct. The access to and from Lot 1 is intended to be provided from Lot 1 only. Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Since the last submittal, City Engineering has formalized the adoption of an encroachment permit policy in early 2015. The applicant will need to comply with the adopted policy for any proposed encroachments. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 01/06/2016 01/06/2016: There maybe additional comments after discussion on the City's Lincoln corridor project that has evolved since the project's last submittal. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 01/08/2016 4 01/08/2016: With the understanding from City water that the meter vaults are a private improvement, their installation within the Willow Street sidewalk would be subject to an encroachment permit issued through Rob Mosbey in Engineering Inspection. There is support for its issuance. sure Response: Acknowledged. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: It appears Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co. would need to sign off on the plat as part of the vacation of the easement. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 01/08/2016: Continued 10/14/2014: Provide a final landscape plan identifying all plant material by species and size. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/08/2016 01/08/2016: Contact the City Forester to discuss species selection for street trees prior to Final Landscape Plan submittal. Response: Noted. Department: Historical Preservation Contact: Josh Weinberg, 970-221-6206, jweinberg@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 10/14/2014: Overall, staff is very pleased with this project and its ability to largely meet the intent and provision of the R-D-R Zone District Design Standards and Guidelines and its compatibility with the surrounding Old Town National Register Historic District. The step backs, articulation, and differentiation through the use of durable and high-quality materials all aid in breaking up the building¿s large massing and assist in its compatibility with the surrounding historic agricultural/industrial context. Previous Response on 11/12/2014: Thank you for the affirmation and support of our design and intent to comply with the recently adopted R-D-R Design Standards and Guidelines Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 10/14/2014: Staff has concerns regarding the design of the "pub" element on the building¿s southwest corner. This section of the building does not appear to meet the design intent of the R-D-R Zone, and is not in line with the agricultural/industrial vision for this industrial district. It is important to note that in its discussions 5 regarding the R-D-R Zone District Design Guidelines and Standards, City Council was very clear about its desire to see projects in the area be authentic to the existing historic industrial/agricultural character of this district, rather than the commercial character found in the historic buildings on the other side of Jefferson in the Old Town Historic District. This vision - which is articulated in the R-D-R Zone District Design Guidelines - describes the inappropriateness of elaborate architectural treatments such as decorative cornices, moldings, door and window surrounds, and awnings, in favor of simple, even austere, elements. Additionally, the pub appears to be closely mimicking a faux historic building, one that would not have been built in this District. Buildings and stylistic components should take reference from the historic character of this District, while still clearly distinguishable as products of their own time. Response: The design of the pub element will be further discussed in the upcoming LPC Hearing on March 9th . As we continue to study and evolve the design of the Pub element along Linden to provide the appropriate architectural character and its integration into the building and the character of this district, it is with the understanding that this portion of the site also resides within the Old Town Historic District Boundary per the District Geographic Boundaries Map. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 Before the project is ready for Hearing, it will need to recieve a recommendation from the Landmark Preservation Commission to the Decision Maker. Response: Previous Response on 11/12/2014: The exterior design will be presented to the Landmark Preservation Commission for comment and approval prior to the Hearing. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/01/2014 12/01/2014: Concerns remain regarding the "pub" element on the Linden Street elevation and its compatibility/appropriateness to the R-D-R Zone District, and that it does not meet the intent of the zone district's Design Guidelines and Standards. Additional information on the character and detail of this building has been requested of the applicant. Staff looks forward to receiving this information once it becomes available. Response: Previous Response on 12/02/2015: As we continue to evolve the design of the Pub and integrate design feedback from the Landmark Preservation Commission Meeting, we will provide additional character and detail of this element to Staff. Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221-6206, mbzdek@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: The next available slot for an LPC meeting is on February 10. Materials deadline for this meeting is February 1. Please contact staff to discuss your preferred schedule. Response: This project is currently scheduled for an LPC Hearing on March 9, 2016 and relative materials for this hearing were submitted to the LPC on February 29, 2016. 6 Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/10/2014 10/10/2014: Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting Pre-Submittal meetings are offered 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. 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 Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009. 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. Fort Collins Green Code Amendments effective starting 1-1-2012. A copy of these requirements can be obtained at the Building Office or contact the above phone number. River District – project specific concerns: 1. Fire-sprinkler systems are required. 2. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling. 3. Low-flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are required. 4. Low VOC interior finishes. 7 5. Distillery occupancy requires haz-mat review from Building and Fire depts. Response: Previous Response on 11/12/2014: The above listed provisions have been reviewed and integrated into the design and analysis of this project. We had a very productive pre-submittal meeting with Russel Hovland on 11.05.2014 to present and discuss these issues as they relate to this building and look forward to further collaboration as the design continues to be refined. Department: Light And Power Contact: Janet McTague, 970-224-6154, jmctague@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/15/2014 10/15/2014: Light and Power will need a completed C-1 form indicating size and type of electric power needed. We will also need to coordinate a transformer location that is within 10' of a paved surface and accessible by a line truck. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/15/2014 10/15/2014: Power will be coming from Lincoln Ave. in order to avoid tearing up new facilities in Linden St. We will need to coordinate a route for the power to take. Two possible routes include along Lincoln and Willow to get to the property site or through the property access on Lincoln Ave. Light and Power will work with the property developer/owner to obtain easements if necessary. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/15/2014 10/15/2014: We will need to coordinate streetlighting with street trees. Large shade trees need to be at least 40' from streetlights and ornamental trees need to be at least 15' from the lights. Response: The location of the streetlight along Willow Street was previously coordinated with Light and Power. Smaller ornamental trees are being proposed in the grates adjacent to the streetlight in order to satisfy clearances. Please let me know if a different location for the light is preferred. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/05/2014 12/05/2014: FIRE ACCESS > The concept plan for the dead-ended EAE on the east side of the building with no turnaround is acceptable in principle; however the proposed width of 15’ remains a question. PFA recognizes the delivery and alcohol storage area is notably constrained and not many options are available for widening the EAE under the current plan. PFA wishes to table review of the EAE width until other questions regarding the overall building plan and distillery operation are flushed out so it can be evaluated holistically. Should the project team find it possible to increase the EAE width, PFA is available to revisit this subject sooner. > The submitted plans continue to detail Willow Street with center parking (see both "Cover Sheet and "Willow Street Striping Plan"). PFA will continue to work 8 with city staff to resolve the conflict with the ultimate design plan for Willow Street but as the proposed building height is a condition of aerial apparatus access, it seems appropriate that long term references to center parking be removed from the plan sets. 10/14/2014: Potential problems exist for meeting access requirements. Further discussion is needed for this site. > FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS. The proposed 20' EAE on the east side of the building appears to be in conflict with deliveries and loading/off-loading of large trucks. Fire lanes are to maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance at all times. > AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS. In order to determining if aerial apparatus access requirements can be met at this site, details need to include the ultimate width of Willow Street and if parking is being allowed on either side or down the center of the street. Recent discussions have suggested that a redesign of Willow Street may limit your building height to a maximum of 30'. > ROOF ACCESS. Depending on the design and function of the tower element, roof access may be required. New buildings four or more stories in height shall be provided with a stairway to the roof. Stairway access to the roof shall be in accordance with IFC 1009.12. Such stairways shall be marked at street and floor levels with a sign indicating that the stairway continues to the roof. Response: The design team met with PFA to address many of these issues on 11.05.2014 with follow up meetings relating to the updated design on 12.07.2015 and 02.22.2016 and have provided the following revisions to address the above concerns: Fire Truck Access has been provided with 2 Fire staging locations, 1 along Linden at the Southwest corner of the site and the other along Willow at the Northeast corner of the site. In addition a dedicated access lane to provide an unobstructed path for fire truck access has been provided beyond the loading/unloading trucks for the facility. This fire lane will reside within a 16’ emergency access easement per the request of PFA and has an unobstructed overhead clearance that is greater than 14’. Aerial Fire Apparatus Access was discussed with the consideration of diagonal street parking along the Willow Street curb and no center parking as PFA expressed that their apparatus access aerial angles would likely be sufficient with the proposed layout and current eave heights of the building. Roof Access will be provided from an internal building stairway with an access hatch and alternating tread device to the roof. This stairway will be provided with the required code signage indicating its roof access. Willow Street Improvements: The center parking layout along Willow has been removed from the submitted plans. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/04/2016 01/04/2016: GATES All perimeter gates shall be appropriately designed for emergency egress but must also be approved for fire department ingress/access needs. Response: Per discussion with PFA on 02.22.2016, the courtyard gates will be equipped with the appropriate panic hardware for emergency egress. Additionally measures will be taken to assure fire department access will be provided in the form of a knox box master key access. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/04/2016 01/04/2016: OVERHEAD CANOPY The construction materials and canopy design need to be reviewed and 9 approved by the fire marshal. Response: The overhead canopy over the courtyard is no longer part of the project design. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: BUILDINGS EXCEEDING THREE STORIES OR 30 FEET IN HEIGHT The Willow Street Striping Plan shows the building to be setback 35-37' from the closest point of available fire access. Buildings exceeding 30' in height prompt additional fire access needs for aerial fire apparatus placement and operations. Up to date building elevations will be needed to evaluate if this requirement is being met. Please refer to comment 1, above for more details. Response: Per meeting with PFA on 02.22.2016 Aerial Fire Apparatus Access was discussed with the consideration of diagonal street parking along the Willow Street curb and no center parking as PFA expressed that their apparatus access aerial angles would likely be sufficient with the proposed layout and current eave heights of the building. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Dan Mogen, , dmogen@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/03/2014 01/05/2016: For final, please include additional detail to clarify drainage patterns in the dock area and the courtyard area between buildings 1 & 2. 12/03/2014: Please add spot elevations to driveway area to clarify drainage pattern (see redlined grading plan). Response: Acknowledged. Additional detail will be provided at final. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 12/03/2014 01/05/2016: It is noted that LID strategy is being revised but still includes pavers. Please note the acceptable run-on ratio for final design. Please also review the paver detail provided and add an underdrain if possible. The proposed tree wells in the drainage report appear to be in the right of way; LID techniques such as this cannot count toward treating private development as it is in a public space. Please show how the LID requirements will be met on site. 12/03/2014: A 3:1 run-on ratio is allowed for porous pavers. The current ratio is showing to be approximately 4.5:1. Response: The now “standard” LID exhibit is now provided along with information about treatment areas and run-on ratios. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: It appears the outfall being tied into is the existing pipe that runs across Willow St to the north. Please tie into the Stormwater system referenced in the drainage report to begin construction in January 2016. Response: The stormwater system is tying into an inlet along Willow Street that will connect to the larger storm drain system in Willow that drains to the Udall Natural Area to the east. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 10 01/05/2016: Please see provided construction drawings for the new public storm main to be constructed in Willow St and update reference drawings in the drainage report for final. Response: We are coordinating with City staff on the proposed Willow Street improvements, particularly the storm drain system. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/06/2016 01/06/2016: It is seen that the stormwater pipe running along the south side of Willow is being removed east of Linden. Please flow fill the remaining section of this pipe that runs under Linden. Response: A note to flow fill the remaining portion will be added at final. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 01/06/2016 01/06/2016: Please update the grease interceptor detail provide on Sheet C6.2 to either: - Use the current City-approved Detail WW-10; or, - Use the information provided in the supplied detail while removing the City logo, etc. as well as the 500 gallon capacity as the smallest permitted is 750 gallons. Please note that all City construction detail drawings are to be used in their original, unaltered state. ANY modification(s) must be clearly distinguished and all City logos/identifiers must be removed from the modified detail. Detail drawings can be found in both .pdf and .dwg formats through the links to “Construction Drawings” on www.fcgov.com/utility-development. Response: This detail, along with any others that are outdated, will be updated with final compliance as needed. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 12/09/2015: Erosion Control Plans have a few minor redlines and some detail changes. Erosion Control Report and Escrow are still needing to be submitted for review. 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 12/02/2014: Repeat Requirements Stormwater’s Plan set has redlines included. 10/14/2014: 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 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 Response: The requested info will be provided at final as required. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations 11 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/16/2014 01/05/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 12/03/2014: No plans were provided for review. 10/16/2014: No comments. Response: The line over text issues have been resolved in the updated elevation sheets. Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Please change the title to "Lot 1, River District Block Eight Mixed Use" on all sheets. See redlines. Response: The title in the updated submittal has been revised accordingly. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/16/2014 01/05/2016: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets. Sheet C001 does not match the other Statements. See redlines. 12/03/2014: Please add benchmark descriptions to sheet C0.0. All benchmark statements need to match on all sheets. 10/16/2014: The City has moved to the NAVD88 vertical datum. Please provide the following information in the format shown below. 1) PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK w/ DESCRIPTION (Provide 2 City of Fort Collins benchmarks) ELEVATION: OR, if project has already been surveyed in NAVD29 Unadjusted: 2) PROJECT DATUM: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (OLD CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) BENCHMARK w/ DESCRIPTION (Provide 2 City of Fort Collins benchmarks) 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 benchmark statements have been updated. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Please change the title to "Lot 1, River District Block Eight Mixed Use". See redlines.lot Response: Revised. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/16/2014 01/05/2016: The Lienholder signature block has not been corrected. 12/02/2014: These have not been added. 12 10/16/2014: Please provide names & titles for the Owners & Lienholders signature blocks. See redlines. Response: The requested info has been provided. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 10/16/2014 01/05/2016: No closure was provided. 12/02/2014: No closure was provided. 10/16/2014: The boundary & legal description do not close. Please provide a closure summary. Response: A lot closure report has been provided. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/02/2014 01/05/2016: This was not added. 12/02/2014: The easements being vacated will need an easement holder acceptance block and signature. Response: The Mountain States easement that is set to be vacated by a separate document, not this plat. Language has been added to the note clarifying this intention. Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Please add "Being A Replat Of" to the sub-title. See redlines. Response: The requested info has been added. Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Per Board Rule 6.5.4 you must explain why the monuments are not accepted. See redlines. Response: The notes referring to monuments that were not accepted have been removed. They were carry-over from the ALTA survey that was completed, and should not have been included on this plat. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 10/16/2014 01/05/2016: Not all plans were provided for review, so we can not verify this. 12/03/2014: Not all plans were provided for review, so we can not verify this. 10/16/2014: Please make sure the titles shown in the index on sheet 1 match the titles on each sheet. Response: Sheet titles match Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Please change the title to "Lot 1, River District Block Eight Mixed Use" on all sheets. See redlines. Response: Revised. Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: The legal description can be removed. It is not necessary. Response: Removed. Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: Please make sure the easements shown match the Subdivision Plat. See redlines. Response: Shown. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General 13 Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/29/2015 12/29/2015: Where will the public bike parking be located? There appears to be some bike parking in the back (for employees?) and some shown in the public right of way. Additional parking on the applicants property may be needed. Response: The 26 spaces located near the service area are for employees. For public spaces, there will be at least 2 located indoors, and at least 24 spaces located within the public right-of-way (that will require a separate encroachment permit). Also, 8 new spaces have been added in the publicly accessible alcove to the south of building 1. Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 12/29/2015: This comment was made a year ago when the assumption was that the Lincoln Corridor Plan would be improving the intersection of Lincoln and Willow. The current funding for the Lincoln Corridor Project doesn't include this intersection. Further discussions are needed about next steps. 12/02/2014: The addendum is received and accepted. At this time, no off-site traffic-related improvements are anticipated to be required with the project. 10/14/2014: The study indicates that intersections 'operate acceptably' with existing and future geometry. Please provide an addendum to the study to address what geometry is warranted per the LCUASS standards - both in terms of LOS and the geometric warrants for turn lanes. If auxiliary lanes are warranted with the Old Elk traffic - especially at Lincoln and Willow then that needs to be discussed. Response: The addendum memorandum, dated November 4, 2014, addressed the operation of the Lincoln/Willow intersection with the existing geometry and the improved geometry (shown in the Lincoln Corridor Plan). Acceptable operation was achieved under both circumstances. Since this intersection was not included in the Lincoln Corridor Plan funding, the City has requested further discussions with regard to the next steps to achieve/implement the improvements. It is expected that this development will be involved in those discussions. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/02/2014 10/02/2014: 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 Response: Noted. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffington@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/14/2014 01/05/2016: Acknowledged that this will be provided in a subsequent submittal. 10/14/2014: Provide projected fire flow demands to allow review of the water 14 main sizing. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/05/2016 01/05/2016: The site plan and plat signature block for Planning should be updated to The Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. Response: Updated.