Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLANDMARK APARTMENTS EXPANSION - PDP - PDP160013 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS1 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 April 29, 2016 Cathy Mathis TBGROUP 444 Mountain Ave Berthoud, CO 80513 RE: Landmark Apartments Expansion, PDP160013, 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, Clark Mapes, at 970-221-6225 or cmapes@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Record in the plant schedule tree sizes, method of transplant, quantity, percentage used. Check to see that minimum tree diversity is provided as described in 3.2.1 D 3. RESPONSE: The plans have been updated to include the requested information. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Provide a tree inventory and mitigation Plan. Existing trees will need to be identified by species, diameter, mitigation and intent to retain or remove. Also include in the table a column with a brief description for the reason why a tree is to be removed. Significant trees need to be retained to the extent reasonably feasible. Explore options. Tree retention and removal shown on the Utility plan should be consistent and follow what is shown on the tree mitigation and protection plan. RESPONSE: Tree inventory and mitigation information has been provided on sheets 3 and 4. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Place trees at least 10 feet from the sewer main located on the east boundary of sheet 3 of 3. RESPONSE: Trees are placed farther than 10 feet away from 6” sewer main. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Review tree planting standards in LUC 3.2.1 and evaluate opportunities to place additional trees on site. RESPONSE: We have added additional trees on this round, including Cottonwood trees in the 50’ buffer zone. We have also added additional evergreen, deciduous and ornamental trees along the 25’ buffer areas between the site in and the existing neighborhood. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: General 2 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Provided that PFA is satisfied with the emergency access onto Prospect Road not requiring an emergency access easement through the existing Landmark Apartments, the need for a letter of intent from the property owner specific to the emergency access easement would not be needed. We would still need a letter of intent from that property owner however, as evidence that they are okay with the plans being shown for the work that is occurring on their property (connecting the drive aisle, connecting new sidewalks, etc.) RESPONSE: An off-site emergency access easement will be provided through the existing Landmark Apartments. A letter will be provided prior to hearing. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: In general what sort of easements are contemplated/needed from the existing Landmark Apartments property as part of the development? RESPONSE: Utility, Access, and Emergency Access easement are proposed as off-site easements from the existing Landmark Apartments owner. Additionally, Grading and Drainage easement and access easements will be obtained from the property to the south (Owner: Blue Ocean). Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: There is a bridge shown across Tract B. On the civil plans it is indicated as not being a part of the project. What is the intention on the bridge in terms of who is constructing it and is it part of the development plan/development plan requirements? RESPONSE: This label has been revised. Plans for bridge will be provided with final design. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The termination of Hobbit Street is depicted with a turnaround bulb of about 50 feet in diameter. 3.6.2(D) requires that the diameter be a minimum of 100 feet. As currently designed, the project would not be in conformance with the Land Use Code specific to this section. RESPONSE: Turnaround has been revised to 50’ radius per code. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The drive access off of Hobbit Street to this development appears awkward as it doesn't intersect the turnaround bulb at a right angle and seemingly almost directs the westbound driver into the driveway intersecting Hobbit Street to the north. Both the new driveway and existing (but reconfigured) driveway need to be separate and distinct driveways meeting driveway separation standards and angle of intersection in LCUASS. In addition, if the Hobbit Street turnaround isn't designed and built in a manner that's considered permanent, there may need to be funds provided that would allow the finishing of the frontage at the time the property to the south ultimately either extends, or elects not to continue Hobbit Street onto their property. RESPONSE: Driveways have been reconfigured to be separate. Driveways meet LCUASS spacing requirements. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Hobbit Street is platted through the property, terminating into a cul-de-sac bulb as part of Young's Creek.. With the project proposal, Hobbit Street would need to be vacated through the property. The project at a public hearing, will need to have a conditional approval, subject to City Council approval of the right-of-way vacation. The ordinance that would authorize right-of-way vacation would not be effective until the subdivision plat and ordinance are concurrently recorded at Larimer County, which would occur upon a final plan approval. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. We will work through the right-of-way vacation. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Previous site plan versions showed an offsite trail connection(s) to the southeast.That doesn't appear to be depicted here. Should that be proposed/required as part of the review of the project, there may need to be letters of intent from the property owner(s) indicating their okay to the connection prior to hearing. RESPONSE: Off-site trail connection and easement is now shown. We are currently working with Blue 3 Ocean regarding a letter of intent for the trail easement. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The plat is using older certificate of dedication language and would need to be updated. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: It is suggested that at some point before final plans are approved, that a discussion on addressing of the buildings ensue. I'm not sure if GIS, PFA and/or emergency services would envision all the buildings be addressed of Hobbit, some off of Prospect, and/or the naming of the interior private drives? An addressing scheme might be worth contemplating with GIS and PFA at this time. RESPONSE: Addressing will be discussed and worked through with GIS and PFA at final design. Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/13/2016 04/13/2016: the project owes an additional $147.50 for the TDR Fees. The acreage identified on the application was less than that shown on the plat. RESPONSE: See revised TDR application sheet. The number of units has been reduced from 72 to 68; however, the acreage went from 2.410 to 3.006 acres. The difference is Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The utility plan set indicates that the bridge over the wetlands is not a part of this project. The bridge should be included in this project as shown on the site plan. RESPONSE: This label has been revised. Plans for bridge will be provided with final design. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The drainage plan shows the trash enclosure on the southern portion of the site draining into the buffer zone and wetland, which is problematic. The drainage should either be redirected or filtered through a water quality feature (e.g., rain garden, bioswale) prior to reaching the wetland. RESPONSE: The trash enclosure has been relocated. Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The boundary of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone may be adjusted by the decision maker if the performance standards in LUC section 3.4.1(E)(1) are met instead. If the project is proposing to use the qualitative performance standards rather than the standard 50-foot buffer, please provide a narrative analysis that details how the proposed project meets each of these performance standards. Please also provide a calculation of the acreage of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone that would have been provided via the 50' buffer vs. what is proposed with the performance standards. RESPONSE: We are preparing to use the qualitative performance standards for this project. A natural habitat buffer zone has been created which exceeds the area of impact. Statistics regarding this buffer zone are included on sheet 2. We also used the plant palette recommended by Mike Phelan utilizing native Cottonwood trees and native shrubs. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: LUC section 3.4.1(E)(2) specifies the development activities allowed within a buffer zone. Please note that buildings, parking lots, trash enclosures, and other features that are incompatible with the ecological character and function of the buffer zone are not allowed. The site will either need to be reconfigured to protect the buffer zone or the applicant must demonstrate that the buffer zone performance standards can be met with a reduced buffer. RESPONSE: A natural habitat buffer zone boundary is provided on our plans. This boundary does not 4 include buildings, trash enclosures, parking lots or other features that are incompatible. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The Natural Habitat Buffer Zone and edge of wetlands need to be delineated and labeled on all sheets of the site, landscape, and utility plans that show that portion of the site. RESPONSE: Natural Habitat Buffer Zone and wetlands are shown on the Site, Landscape and Utility Plans. On the landscape plans, the information is included in the legend. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please add the following statement to the notes on any sheets that show the Habitat Buffer: "Please see Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone. The Natural Habitat Buffer Zone is intended to be maintained in a native landscape." This will help preserve the intention behind the buffer zones and the natural features into the future. RESPONSE: A notes has been added to the utility plans. Please refer to the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone Statistics on Sheet 2 of the Site/Landscape Plans and the landscape legend on Sheets 2,3 & 4 for this information. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please provide additional information for the neighborhood gathering area. What types of features will be included and how will the area be used by residents? A detail or vignette for this area would help staff determine whether this meets the requirements in 3.8.30(C) and is compatible with the buffer zone. RESPONSE: We have labeled the amenities for the neighborhood gathering area in an exhibit, which is included with the resubmittal. The amenities are also labeled on the Site Plan. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please provide a detailed planting plan for the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone, including all trees, shrubs and perennials. Note that only native species should be planted within the buffer. For example, Amelanchier alnifolia should be used instead of Amelanchier grandiflora. Please reference the ECS for recommended plant species. RESPONSE: A revised planting plan has been provided. Please note, while some species on the plant list are not native plants, only native species and/or species recommended in the ecological character study were used within the natural habitat buffer zone. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Is there an opportunity to improve the area along the stormwater channel on the existing Landmark Apartments property to the west? Off-site plantings and enhancements could offset a reduced buffer for the proposed project. RESPONSE: A natural habitat buffer zone has been created which exceeds the area of impact. Statistics regarding this buffer zone are included on sheet 2. We also used the plant palette recommended by Mike Phelan utilizing native Cottonwood trees and native shrubs. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please add and label the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone to the lighting plan. RESPONSE: The Label has been added. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: It appears that light from some fixtures will spillover into the buffer zone. Land Use Code section 3.2.4(D)(6) requires that "natural areas and natural features shall be protected from light spillage from off site sources." Thus, lighting from the parking areas or other site amenities shall not spill over to the buffer areas. Please ensure that the light fixtures are placed and/or shielded to prevent spillover lighting. RESPONSE: The lighting plan has been updated to eliminate the light spill into the natural area. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 5 04/26/2016: In regard to LED light fixtures, cooler (higher) color temperatures are harsher at night and cause more disruption to circadian rhythms for both humans and wildlife. Please consider a warmer color temperature (warm white, 3000K or less) for your LED light fixtures, particularly on the southern portion of the site near the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone. RESPONSE: Warmer color temperature LED light fixtures will be utilized. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Record in the plant schedule tree sizes, method of transplant, quantity, percentage used. Check to see that minimum tree diversity is provided as described in 3.2.1 D 3. RESPONSE: The plans have been updated to include the requested information. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Provide a tree inventory and mitigation Plan. Existing trees will need to be identified by species, diameter, mitigation and intent to retain or remove. Alsoinclude in the table a column with a brief description for the reason why a tree is to be removed. Significant trees need to be retained to the extent reasonably feasible. Explore options. Tree retention and removal shown on the Utility plan should be consistent and follow what is shown on the tree mitigation and protection plan. RESPONSE: Tree inventory and mitigation information has been provided on sheets 3 and 4. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Place trees at least 10 feet from the sewer main located on the east boundary of sheet 3 of 3 LUC 3.2.1 K. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: Review tree planting standards in LUC 3.2.1 and evaluate opportunities to place additional trees on site. RESPONSE: Additional trees have been added. We have added additional trees on this round, including Cottonwood trees in the 50’ buffer zone. We have also added additional evergreen, deciduous and ornamental trees along the 25’ buffer areas between the site in and the existing neighborhood. Department: Historical Preservation Contact: Karen McWilliams, 970-224-6078, kmcwilliams@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/25/2016: This project is located immediately adjacent to the Sheely Drive Neighborhood Landmark District. Containing eleven mid-century residential properties, it was designated as a Landmark District by Ordinance No. 012,2000. Therefore, the project will need to comply with the standards contained in LUC Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources. RESPONSE: The design team has made many changes to the building design to meet the standards of 3.4.7. The revised submission reflects these changes. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/25/2016: The Area of Adjacency has not been established. The buildings and structures near this project that are either already officially designated or are 50+ years old include the Sheely Drive District to the east, and four individual properties along Prospect Road to the north. To establish an Area of Adjacency, the eligibility of the four Prospect Road properties will need to be evaluated. The applicant is responsible for submitting good quality, labeled photographs of all elevations (and partial elevations) visible from public rights of way, of each of the buildings and structures. RESPONSE: The area of adjacency has been established as the Sheely Neighborhood only. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/25/2016: The Sheely Drive ordinance and attachments emphasize the district's "innovative 6 architecture." The documents describe these custom Ranch homes as a low profile architectural style, designed to follow the contours of each individual lot, and paying particular attention to views...a one story, ground-hugging house, with a low roof and deep eaves; walkout or daylight basements and terraced landscape allow the homes to blend into the terrain, rather than dominate it; rear elevations feature large expanses of glass, decks merging indoors with outdoors, spacious yards; layout of the subdivision designed to take advantage of the natural topography, with the houses fit in to the terrain, emphasizing the sense of spacious nature; houses are oriented to take advantage of the views and do not always sit parallel to the street; a conscious choice to have lampposts rather than standard street lights-this less intrusive lighting choice protects the neighborhood's view of the night sky, representative of the emphasis placed upon the natural environment. Houses are generally one room deep and shaped like an L or U. Design relies on the expression of material connections, finishes and relationships. Designs are asymmetrical rather than symmetrical. Bands of windows and solid planes create a horizontal feeling. Windows are often mitered together to create glass corners. Cantilever eaves and overhangs are commonly used. Hipped roofs have broad eaves and overhangs. Walls and terraces often extend from the main structure emphasizing a horizontal appearance. Roofs are low pitched with deep and cantilevered eaves. Designs may include balconies. Windows are geometric compositions. RESPONSE: The revised submission takes into consideration the characteristics of Mid Century Modern design and that of the neighborhood. The following are elements of the design that directly relate to these characteristics: 1. The design utilizing long, low-sloped roof lines that extend beyond the building structure 36” to 48” to enhance the horizontality of the design. 2. The Buildings are sunken into the ground 30” to help create the sense that they integrated into the landscaping, not merely sitting on top. 3. The plans and elevations are asymmetrical with no mirroring of the plans and elements of the design. 4. We have shifted and skewed the footprints to create unique facades that create voids and protrusions along the facades. 5. Strong vertical elements are brought down and into the site to create courtyards for the residents and a sense that the buildings are extending into the landscape. 6. The building placement is random and creates view corridors for the neighboring homes. Each individual structure is unique in its shape, materials placement and color. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/25/2016: The Purpose of 3.4.7 is to ensure that, to the maximum extent feasible, new construction is designed to respect the historic character of historic properties in the surrounding neighborhood. The site plan shows a very dense project that is out of character with the Historic District; building heights that are significantly taller than the existing walk-out ranch homes; and building designs, materials, and architectural details that do not respect the architectural significance of the Historic District. RESPONSE: The new building design incorporates low sloped roof lines and is sunken into the ground enabling the buildings to be 2 ½ story and 1 ½ story structures. The 2 ½ story structures are not as tall as the existing Landmark structures and are located on the site near Landmark and away from the neighborhood homes. The 1 ½ story structures are located closest to the neighborhood and create a transition to the 1 story street-side, 2 story rear side facades of the adjacent homes. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: 3.4.7(F)(1) discusses height, setback and width. To comply with this standard, the apartment buildings should be broken into smaller masses, with more articulation to mitigate the bulk and width. Three story buildings are not consistent with the District. Building heights should be reduced to 2 stories, with 1 story elements, or possibly 2 1/2 stories if sunk into the ground. The building setbacks should at a minimum meet, and ideally will exceed the required 25' buffer. At its February 10, 2016 meeting, the applicants were asked to explore the scenario of more buildings with smaller footprints and lower heights. This information was again requested at the April 27, 2016 meeting. RESPONSE: The new building design sinks the structures into the ground 30” creating 2 ½ and 1 ½ story 7 Buildings reducing the overall height and allowing more view corridors for the neighbors. The new Design maintains a 25’ buffer to any improvement adjacent to the neighborhood. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: 3.4.7(F)(2)addresses character. The apartment buildings appear more vertical than horizontal, and are not in character with the District. The buildings are very symmetrical, which is the opposite of the design of the Sheely Drive homes. Attention should be given to changing the site plan and building design to not line up the apartment and to shape each building to be moreorganic. RESPONSE: In addressing comment 8 we have redesigned the facades to enhance the horizontally of The design. These are the changes made to address this issue: 1. The structures have been sunken into ground to reduce the overall height, but to also enhance a horizontal design. 2. The material patterns are placed to enhance this with horizontal siding that extends the full length of the façade at its base. These band are only broken by vertical elements that are consistent with the neighborhood design. The strong masonry elements extend above the roof lines and down into the landscape connecting the structure to the ground. 3. The eave are deep and extend out beyond the structure to enhance the horizontality at the roof line as well. Balconies, window patterns and detail bands carry the horizontal character across all facades. 4. 1-story elements are extended from the main building structure to help ground the taller structures. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: 3.4.7(F)(3) discusses materials. The Sheely Drive houses provide lots of material choices. While staff has no issue with the applicant's choice of materials, the placement is not consistent with the character of the District. Each Sheely Drive building is unique in both design and materials, and each apartment should have its own character rather than being so replicative. Additionally, material choice and placement should emphasize horizontality, rather than verticality. RESPONSE: The new design seeks to create an individual feel to each of the structures. We have Changed the design to address comment 7 in these ways: 1. Each individual structure is unique in its shape, materials placement and color. The design elements of each building are unique in its placement. 2. The plans and elevations are asymmetrical with no mirroring of the plans and elements of the design. 3. We have shifted and skewed the footprints to create unique facades that create voids and protrusions along the facades. This helps to enhance the unique characteristics of each Structure. 4. We have shifted and skewed the footprints to create unique facades that create voids and protrusions along the facades. 5. The footprints of each structure are different not only as an individual structure, but unique across its façade and front to back Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/28/2016 04/28/2016: 3.4.7(F)(4) addresses the preservation of visual connections. Building placement, and height and step-downs, have the potential to affect the views from the Sheely neighborhood homes. One of the significant characteristics of most mid-century architecture, and a key characteristic of the Sheely Drive homes, is the emphasis on the rear of the home. Compared with earlier housing styles, the houses are essentially flipped, with minimal attention placed on the front and great emphasis placed on the rear, which become the focus. The applicants are asked to provide models showing scaled elevations of the new apartment buildings in relation to each of the abutting Sheely houses, to identify what the homeowner will see from their deck, as well as cross-sections of the project from both Sheely Drive and Prospect Road showing how the houses lay in respect to the new apartments. RESPONSE: The requested items will be provided at the next LPC hearing presentation. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/29/2016 04/28/2016: The Landmark Preservation Commission reviewed this project at its meetings on February 10, 2016 and April 27, 2016. Commission members stated that they felt the project was not compatible 8 with the Sheely Drive Neighborhood due to the project's significant density, and the buildings mass and height. Members stated that the buildings are huge, and out of scale with the District. The members are concerned with the proposed heights of 3 and 2 stories; buildings should be scaled lower, most members stating a height of 2-stories with one story portions, with low roofs, to become more compatible with the Sheely Drive, and to transition between the historic district and existing Landmarks Apartments. The Commission discussed the need for a significant reduction in density and scale. In addition to reducing the overall density, other suggestions to mitigate mass and to reduce bulk were provided, including building articulation, emphasizing horizontality rather than verticality, the use of long, low overhangs and incorporating horizontal elements that extend the length of the building and project beyond. The buildings were described as "standard apartment buildings with materials arbitrarily applied," and "boxes with applique." Overall, Commission members stated a strong level of discomfort with the project as presented. Staff will provide additional Commission comments when the meeting minutes are prepared. RESPONSE: The design changes made to the building are directly in response the LPC’s comments. We feel we have made significate strides to address the concerns of the commission. We will be presenting to commission again and will hope to gain their support of our efforts. Department: Internal Services Contact: Sarah Carter, 970-416-2748, scarter@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please schedule a pre-submittal meeting for this project. Pre-Submittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new 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. Applicants of new projects should email scarter@fcgov.com 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. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: 2012 International Building Code (IBC) 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 RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Fort Collins has amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the fcgov.com/building web page to view them. 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: Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2012 IECC residential chapter. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: City of Fort Collins IBC amendments require a full NFPA-13 sprinkler system in multifamily units with an exception for buildings with up to 6 dwelling units that are not more than 2 stories nor more 9 5000 sqft per floor. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: All egress windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24” RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Building code and State statute CRS 9-5 requires project provide accessible units. This project has 72 units and will need to achieve at least 36 points. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Prescriptive energy compliance with increased insulation values is required for buildings using electric heat. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Department: Light And Power Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/21/2016 04/21/2016: Light and Power has single phase and three phase facilities in the area to feed the development. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/21/2016 04/21/2016: Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and any system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development. Please visit the following website for an estimate of charges and fees: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-development-fees RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/21/2016 04/21/2016: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. Please show transformer locations on the site plan, utility plan, landscape plan. RESPONSE: Transformer locations are shown on the site and utility plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/21/2016 04/21/2016: Light & Power will need AutoCAD files of the approved site plan, utility plans, and landscape drawings before design of the electric facilities will begin. RESPONSE: AutoCAD files can be provided during final design. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/21/2016 04/21/2016: Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Each unit will need to be individually metered. Please gang the meters on one side of the building(s) opposite of the gas meters. The owner is responsible to provide and maintain the electrical service from the transformer(s) to the meter bank. RESPONSE: Meter locations will be further refined at final design. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/21/2016 04/21/2016: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 221-6700. Please reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Department: PFA 10 Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: EAE It is not clear from the provided plans how the Emergency Access onto Prospect Road will be constructed. It is required to have a solid surface capable of withstanding 40Tons. Code language provided below RESPONSE: A note has been added to the plans regarding requirements for access roadway. FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements: > Shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement. > Maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance. > Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. > Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. > The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. Turning radii shall be detailed on submitted plans. > Be visible by painting and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. RESPONSE: A note has been added to the plans regarding requirements for access roadway. Signage will be provided with final design. No dead end fire access roads are provided longer than 150’ in length. Turning radius is provided on the Horizontal Control Plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: FIRE LANE SIGNAGE No Parking - Fire Lane signs need to be labeled on the plans. Code language provided below. RESPONSE: Signage will be provided at final design. > IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. RESPONSE: Signage will be provided at final design. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: HEIGHT It appears some buildings may exceed 30ft in height. If this is the case the adjacent Fire Lane shall be a minimum of 30ft in width along the entire side of the building and within 15ft to 30ft from the edge of the affected building. Code language below. RESPONSE: Fire lanes adjacent to +30’ buildings are shown as 26’ wide. PFA is verifying this is acceptable. Fire easement is a minimum 5’ and maximum of 25’ from the buildings. STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 30' IN HEIGHT (Refer to 2012 IFC Appendix D for further details.) > IFC Appendix D; Poudre Fire Authority Administrative Policy 85-5: In order to accommodate the access requirements for aerial fire apparatus (ladder trucks), required fire lanes shall be 30 foot wide minimum on at least one long side of the building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building RESPONSE: Fire lanes adjacent to +30’ buildings are shown as 26’ wide. PFA is verifying this is acceptable. Fire easement is a minimum 5’ and maximum of 25’ from the buildings. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: WAYFINDING If the Private Drive is not named, some method of wayfinding to all 11 buildings in the complex will be required to ensure timely response for Emergency Personnel. The project team is asked to present a plan to PFA for review and approval. Code language provided below. RESPONSE: Wayfinding and addressing will be discussed and worked through at final design. > IFC 505.1: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible, visible from the street or road fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed fromthe public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. RESPONSE: Wayfinding and addressing will be discussed and worked through at final design. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: SECURITY GATE Should the city require a secure barrier, or gate at the Emergency Access connection to Prospect Road, the gate design shall be submitted to PFA for review and approval. Code language provided below to assist with gate design. RESPONSE: Gate designs will be submitted to PFA at final design. SECURITY GATES > IFC 503.6: The installation of security gates across a fire apparatus access road shall be approved by the fire chief. Where security gates are installed, they shall have an approved means of emergency operation. The security gates and the emergency operation shall be maintained operational at all times. RESPONSE: Gate designs will be submitted to PFA at final design. Gates shall have signage posted on both sides to indicate EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY. > IFC D103.5: Gates securing fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all of the following criteria: 1. The minimum gate width for vehicle access shall be 20 feet. 2. Gates shall be of the swinging or sliding type. 3. Construction of gates shall be of materials that allow manual operation by one person. 4. Gate components shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times and replaced or repaired when defective. 5. Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening the gate by fire department personnel for emergency access. Emergency opening devices shall be approved by the fire code official. 6. Manual opening gates shall not be locked with an unapproved padlock, or chain and padlock, unless they are capable of being opened by means of forcible entry tools or when a key box containing the key(s) to the lock is installed at the gate location. 7. Gate design and locking device specifications shall be submitted for approval by the fire code official prior to installation. 8. Electric gate operators, where provided, shall be listed in accordance with UL 325. 9. Gates intended for automatic operation shall be designed, constructed and installed to comply with the requirements of ASTM F 2200. RESPONSE: Gate designs will be submitted to PFA at final design. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: EAE TURNAROUND REQUESTED PFA is requesting the drive lane of the parking area between Buildings A and B to be included in the EAE in order to facilitate safer fire apparatus movements at the north end of the site and provide a turnaround. RESPONSE: An additional turnaround easement has been provided between Buildings A and B. Autoturn analysis has been conducted and an exhibit can be provided to PFA showing the movement. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: EXISTING HYDRANT ON EAST SIDE OF PROPERTY Question about possible existing hydrant on east property line? RESPONSE: Fire hydrants being utilized with this development are located at the intersection of Hobbit and the private access road and north of Building D. 12 Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heidi Hansen, 970-221-6854, hhansen@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: A Floodplain Use Permit will be required prior to installation of any improvements in the floodplain. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. A note has been added to plans. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The proposed development plan shows improvements in the floodway in the form of storm sewer outfall pipes. These improvements will require submittal of a No-rise Certification or modeling documenting no-rise. RESPONSE: No improvements are proposed in the floodway. Storm outfall pipes are located within floodplain. No grading is within the floodway. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please submit a Floodplain Submittal Checklist with future submittals and ensure all appropriate information is shown on all plans per the checklist. For PDP, the 50% checklist can be used if desired. The FDP will require the 100% checklist be used. RESPONSE: A Checklist is submitted with this PDP submittal. Topic: General Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: More floodplain comments may be forthcoming once the checklist has been submitted and a complete floodplain review has been performed. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/19/2016 04/19/2016: 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. Also, based upon the area of disturbance State permits for stormwater will be required since the site is over an acre. 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 RESPONSE: An Erosion Control report will be submitted at FDP. Contact: Shane Boyle, 970-221-6339, sboyle@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: The grading plan will need to ensure that a safe overflow condition can be achieved in areas where there is a swale between the building and the sidewalk in case the sidewalk chase becomes plugged. RESPONSE: Grading has been revised across the site. No longer are swales between the buildings and sidewalks. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Calculations will be needed to show that the drainage from Basin A5 can be contained within the curb and gutter and is not contributing to Basin A4. The amount of water draining along the eastern property line in Basin A4 will need to be less than the historic condition. RESPONSE: Grading has been revised. A swale between the parking lot and property line will collect all runoff and convey it to a rain garden. 13 Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please verify that outfall curb is appropriate in all instances where it is called out. It appears there are locations where the road is crowned but the curb is called out as outfall. RESPONSE: Grading has been revised. All curbs have been relabeled. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: All impervious areas will need to receive water quality treatment prior to being released to the Canal Importation Channel. All UD basins will need to be redesigned so that the impervious area is captured and routed to a treatment facility. Releasing some pervious area untreated is ok. This comment also applies to proposed offsite impervious areas. RESPONSE: All proposed impervious area is being treated with LID and water quality except the following: Trail along drainage channel, and a small section of cul-de-sac off-site of the property. Grading throughout the existing access drive has been revised to collect existing impervious areas and direct them to rain gardens. Rain garden B1 has been sized to treat existing impervious area. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please provide an LID table showing the areas being treated and the overall site treatment percentage. RESPONSE: Provided in the Drainage Report. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please see redlines for additional minor comments. RESPONSE: Redline comments have been addressed. Topic: Drainage Report Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please discuss the treatment area the water quality pond is being sized to treat. The report calculations show 1.93 acres. Which basins does this include? RESPONSE: The site has been revised to treat all impervious areas (other than those listed above) through LID rain gardens. Additional water quality treatment is no longer proposed, though rain gardens are generally oversized. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please include calculations for sizing of all proposed LID treatment areas. Sizing for Basins A2, A5, and A6 is currently not included. RESPONSE: Rain garden sizing is provided in the appendix. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please confirm calculations for Basin B. The proposed rain garden is sized using an area of 11,110 sq. ft., the hydrology calculations show an area of 0.31 acres, and the Drainage Plan shows an area of 0.52 acres. RESPONSE: Calculations for Basin B have been revised and should now be more consistent. Topic: Easements Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: All proposed volume treatment areas (LID and water quality pond) and the associated outfall pipes will need to be within Drainage Easements. RESPONSE: A blanket utility, drainage, and access easement is provided across the site in order to encompass all water quality and outfall pipes. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Line over text fixed. 14 Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Please correct the sub-title as marked. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Please provide the following information for the Benchmark Statement in the EXACT format shown below. RESPONSE: Updated. 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’. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: The Basis Of Bearings statements need to match the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: Updated. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: No comments. RESPONSE: Thank you. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: No comments. RESPONSE: Thank you. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Please make changes to the Statement Of Ownership And Subdivision as marked. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: 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. RESPONSE: No lienholders for this property have been identified to surveyor at this time. A note has 15 not been provided. Prior to mylar updated title commitments will be provided and any lienholders will be identified. At this time, lack of lienholder signature block shall constitute an absence of lienholder. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Please define the boundaries of the easements. See redlines. RESPONSE: Easements are defined. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: All ordinance numbers for right of way vacations must be added prior to mylars. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. A blank space has been provided. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See redlines. RESPONSE: Street Right of way dedication information is revised. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: The easement labels still do not match. We will fix this at next round. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Please revise the legal description to match as marked. See redlines. RESPONSE: We have revised the legal description. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: The submitted traffic study information has been reviewed and the general conclusions accepted. RESPONSE: Thank you. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: The entrance off of Hobbit is awkward as I'm not sure how traffic control would work at this location. Is there a way to better define the two entrances (either separate them more, combine them.) RESPONSE: Driveways have been revised to be separated. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: How is the emergency access controlled? With a gate, chain, or bollards? It would be good to leave a gap for bikes. RESPONSE: Emergency access will be controlled by a gate. Type to be determined at final design. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/27/2016 04/27/2016: Note that the function of the westbound left turn movement at Hobbit and Shields is poor, and will get worse with this development. The mitigation for that will occur when the property to the south develops and provides an public access to a signal. No changes are needed to this plan, but its important to know. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. We are working with the developers of the property to the south. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/25/2016 04/25/2016: 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 RESPONSE: Acknowledged. 16 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Shane Boyle, 970-221-6339, sboyle@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please place all curb stops and the proposed fire hydrant within Utility Easements. RESPONSE: A blanket utility easement is provided across the site. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: If it will provide adequate water supply, the proposed 8" dead end main can be downsized to 6" in order to help with water quality since this main is serving only one building. RESPONSE: Waterline was downsized to a 6”. This size will be verified with MEP at final design. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please see redlines for additional minor comments. RESPONSE: Additional redlines have been addressed. Topic: Easements Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Minimum easement widths are not being met on this project. A minimum 20' easement is required for water mains and 30' for sewer mains. Where the mains are parallel, there should be a minimum of 10' from the center of the water main and 15' from the center of the sewer main. Additionally, it appears the proposed Utility Easement stops short on the northern end of the site and will need to be extended so that the proposed water main is inside the easement. RESPONSE: A blanket utility easement is provided across the site. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please show existing easements on the adjacent parcel and ensure proposed water and sewer improvements are within the appropriately sized easement or dedicate new easements as necessary. RESPONSE: Additional off-site utility easements are proposed to provide enough width for proposed sanitary sewer. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please show all proposed service lines and ensure minimum separations are being met. It appears there are conflicts with the existing water main on the north end of the site, the proposed fire hydrant, and the Building B water service. Please check for other conflicts as there may be others. RESPONSE: Proposed service lines are shown. There still may be some conflicts, but we can work it out with the next round. Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Please provide floor plan of the breezeways and how they will fit the enclosed bike spaces. RESPONSE: We have added a note to the Site Plan regarding how many bike racks are located within the breezeways. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Site plan will need to include a sheet index. RESPONSE: A sheet index has been added. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/26/2016 04/26/2016: Parking requirements are not accurate on the site plan tables. RESPONSE: The note has been fixed and now reads 1.5 spaces per bedroom for i-bedroom units. The total required off-street parking spaces is 138. 17 RESPONSE: We changed the number based on 68 units, which we now have.