Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWEST SIDE HOUSE - PDP/FDP - FDP160021 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSCommunity 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 July 15, 2016 Cathy Mathis TBGroup 444 MOUNTAIN AVE Berthoud, CO 80513 RE: West Side House, FDP160021, Round Number 2 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Jason Holland, at 970-224-6126 or jholland@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/08/2016 07/08/2016: See red lines on sheets C301 and C400 for some reference call corrections. RESPONSE: Corrected reference calls Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/08/2016 07/08/2016: Additional detail is needed for the Rain Garden outfall along the shields street frontage. The demo plans identify removing some existing curb in this area, but there isn’t anything on the plans to identify what goes back in this location. RESPONSE: Added concrete channel between rain garden outfall and sidewalk chase Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/08/2016 07/08/2016: As was discussed at our first site visit – rather than having the project try and finish the Plum sidewalk adjacent to the big tree we can collect a payment in lieu for this. That will be added to the Development Agreement Amendment. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/02/2016 07/07/2016: Repeat comment. Note still needs to be added to Landscape Plan and sheet C100 of civil plans under "Tree Protection Notes." RESPONSE: Added comment to C100 05/02/2016: If any trees will be removed, please add the following notes to the landscape and civil plans: "All tree removal shown shall be completed outside of the songbird nesting season (Feb 1 - July 31) or a survey will be conducted of the trees to be removed to ensure that no active nests are present." RESPONSE: No trees will be removed. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/20/2016 05/20/2016: Some new trees shown on the previous landscape plan may not have been installed. Will these be addressed on this proposal? RESPONSE: Yes, we have included a revised landscape plan with this submittal. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/20/2016 07/13/2016: Continued: Current notes on the plan state existing trees to be pruned to City Forestry Standards. RESPONSE: We are working with the current owners to get with Jordan’s to have it pruned. 05/20/2016: The large cottonwood was noted to be pruned on the previous plans. Will this be addressed on this proposal? This was a requirement of the LUC tree protection plans. : Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/13/2016 07/13/2016: There is a rain garden shown around the 9 inch Bur Oak tree along Shields. To adequately protect the tree a significant amount of the root zone of the tree must be retained by not having a cut or fill. Not disturbing the root zone within the drip line area is important. There appears there could be impact in the drip line zone. Please contact the City Forester for an onsite meeting to evaluate the impact to this Bur Oak from the proposed rain garden. RESPONSE: We will set up an on-site meeting with City Forester, TB group and Northern Engineering. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/13/2016 07/13/2016: The tree labeled as a mitigation tree just off the NE corner of the building appears to have died or is dying from lack of irrigation. This tree will need to be replaced or it may be able to be revived if regular irrigation is started immediately. Mark the tree to be replaced unless irrigation is successful in reviving its condition. The species is Texas Red Oak, RESPONSE: We will add the label to landscape plans. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/13/2016 07/13/2016: Will tree grates be installed around the three street trees along Plum Street? If so please indicate on the plans the grates will be placed and note that they will be to the City Engineering specifications. RESPONSE: There are no plans to install tree grates. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Karen McWilliams, 970-224-6078, kmcwilliams@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The building is more than 50 years old (constructed 1960). Please be aware that any alterations or changes to the building's exterior that require a building permit would be subject to Historic Review. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Department: Light And Power Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/24/2016 05/24/2016: Are any changes proposed to the existing electrical service that feeds the building? If an increase in service size is anticipated please contact Light and Power Engineering. RESPONSE: No anticipated changes to electrical service. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/24/2016 05/24/2016: Please contact Tyler Siegmund at Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 970.416.2772. Please reference our policies, construction practices, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Department: Planning Services Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The review history for the current proposed uses is fairly convoluted due to the fact that site plan improvements and code modifications were approved by a hearing officer, and then unauthorized site construction ensued during the final plan review phase. To accommodate this, staff agreed to changes to the final plan to make the site work with the unauthorized construction. This is compounded by the fact that once these final plans were approved, they also were never implemented, and the building continues to be currently occupied in its current use without authorization. This moves us on to the current process, where this current plan set proposes to amend the approved plans that were never implemented. More importantly, the current proposed design does not include any of the landscaping that was used with the plans to support the modifications that were originally approved by the hearing officer. Additionally, the project is not eligible for alternative compliance. Because of this, I will need to present the project at the hearing with a series of code modification requests. These can be consolidated into one request. The six modifications are to: interior parking lot landscaping (assuming to be) less than 6%, parking setback adjacent to south property line less than 5 feet, minimum required tree spacing along walks and driveways greater than 40 feet, full tree stocking, minimum foundation planting, and minimum drive aisle widths for two way traffic. RESPONSE: We are including Modifications with the resubmittal. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: In conjunction with the modification requests, consider how the project can utilize the landscape areas that are remaining along the street frontages, in order to comply and compensate for landscaping deficiencies in the interior, in an equal to or better manner. The current proposed landscape plan does not meet the criteria nor does it comply with the minimum code in the areas that would be enhanced as part of the justification. RESPONSE: We have included a new landscape plan with this resubmittal. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The 5th compact parking space is too small at 14’ in length, for a car to maneuver. This space can be either eliminated or designated as motorcycle or bicycle parking. RESPONSE: We have reconfigured the trash enclosure and parking stall to make more room. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Currently there a lot of weeds on the property, trash is piled up adjacent to the dumpster, and the along the west boundary, the existing privets are in decline and have not been pruned for quite some time. Some of the landscaping in other areas that was planted (and not in accordance with the approved plans), is dead. RESPONSE: The owner will address this. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: None of the rain garden planting choices will work on the north side of the building, there is too much shade. Also there will likely be issues with tolerance to intermittent flooding/saturation adjacent to the downspouts during spring and early summer months. RESPONSE: We added shade tolerant species to these areas. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: For the current overall landscape concept, there doesn’t appear to be one with the current plantings. The current plants on the site which were not planted in accordance to the proposed plans, are for the most part not suitable for their location or not the right types of plants to achieve a cohesive design or provide any significant impact. Also very little evergreen material is used. RESPONSE: The current plants appear to be dying from lack of irrigation. The revised landscape plan reflects the new evergreens, trees and shrubs. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: For the overall landscape concept, new landscaping will need to be placed along the north and west side of the building. I would suggest a simple, limited planting palette and a cohesive planting scheme that pulls these areas together and transitions the building mass, has curb appeal, and provides justification for the modification requests. I would suggest going back to tried and true shrubs that are adaptable and shade tolerant (on the north side especially). A bold, simple statement and mass plantings would be appropriate. This could be euonymus, possibly viburnum, hydrangeas, spireas, barberries, dwarf honeysuckle, burning bush, etc. Possibly some of the more shade tolerant juniper. I would like to see evergreen material incorporated. Consider hiding the water quality walls or integrating plantings around these walls so that the design looks more cohesive. Northern seas oats may be a good choice for the rain gardens since this plant tolerate shade, sun, and water. Along the east side of the building, this would also be good opportunity for evergreen material to soften and frame the building mass. RESPONSE: We have included a new landscape plan with this resubmittal. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Along the west boundary, this is an area of the site where there actually is room for new perimeter landscaping, including a cluster of narrow evergreen trees such as skyrocket or hetzi. RESPONSE: Hetzi junipers have been added along the west property line. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: For the rain garden structure on the north side of the building, the box concept surrounded by concrete walls and gravel mulch seems harsh and is not pleasing. Please consider ways to soften this and provide landscape material that is cohesive. A non-native approach is fine with me and might be a better model for rain gardens in tighter urban areas. Also, I'm not as concerned with reducing higher water use plants. The configuration of the use/site is already low water use. RESPONSE: We have added plants as suggested between the rain gardens and the walk. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The perennial rain garden mix is probably going to have issues and it may be better to plant material that is more suitable for an urban streetscape. I'm concerned that this area will not be maintainable and will become weedy. Is there a ground cover or shrub massing that will tolerate dry and intermittent wet conditions, and is also understandable from a maintenance perspective. Is there an existing example of the proposed mix in a rain garden application that I can look at or existing alternatives? RESPONSE: We added shade tolerant species to these areas. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Also, the existing bur oaks are not located in the right place on the plans, and appear to be closer to the Shields sidewalk, on top of where the rain garden wall will go. RESPONSE: We will schedule an on-site meeting with the civil engineers and the City Forester. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The existing wood fence needs to be repaired in places; the current condition is not good. Consider replacing the fencing and adding vines or a row of compact grasses in front of the fence. RESPONSE: The owner will address this. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The existing wood fence needs to be repaired in places; the current condition is not good. Consider replacing the fencing and adding vines or a row of compact grasses in front of the fence. RESPONSE: The owner will address this. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Add a detail or note describing what the trash enclosure will be made of and the color and height. Also make it wider so that both lids can be accessed more easily. RESPONSE: The trash enclosure detail has been added to the landscape plan sheet. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Text arrows and dimensions here and there on the site and landscape plan need to be adjusted. RESPONSE: These have been corrected. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Two existing trees are shown in the northeast corner and there appears to be only one in this area. RESPONSE: This has been corrected. The Texas Red Oak is the only tree there. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 07/15/2016 07/15/2016: Below is the updated note and condition of approval to be added to the site plan. Replace the current note on the site plan. The note is currently under review by the City Attorney and is in draft form: The development is currently occupied as an Extra Occupancy Rental House (EORH), without authorization from the City, through a Letter of Completion which would confirm that all improvements are complete in accordance with the approved final plans dated September 2, 2014. This is due to the fact that the improvements shown on the final plans, approved September 2, 2014, were not fully completed and the building was occupied as an EORH without any final authorization from the City. These plans propose to amend the final plans originally approved on September 2, 2014. Upon final approval by the Director of these amended plans, within one year, the Owner shall take all necessary actions to apply for all necessary City permits and complete all site improvements in accordance with these plans, and shall submit a request and obtain from the City a Letter of Completion in order to establish either the proposed EORH use or fraternity use. Should these actions not be completed within one year, the City may take all necessary steps to remedy the unauthorized EORH occupancy of the building. The initial Letter of Completion shall designate the occupancy of the development as an EORH use or fraternity use. Should this initial Letter of Completion not be obtained within one year following the final approval date of these amended plans, any subsequent request for a letter of completion or occupancy shall require a major amendment of these plans. Should the initial Letter of Completion designate the building as an EORH use, the Owner may request a change of occupancy to fraternity housing within two years following the issuance of the initial Letter of Completion without an amendment to these plans. After a three year period following the final approval date of these amended plans, any subsequent change of use to Fraternity, EORH or other use must be approved by the City through an amendment to these plans. Furthermore, any change in maximum occupancy shall require an amendment to these plans which documents the designated location of off-street parking to be used by the tenants as well as consideration of any other factors that may be recommended to mitigate the increase in occupancy. All required amendments shall be processed in accordance with the standards in Land Use Code Section 2.2.10. RESPONSE: Note added to the site plan. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Please revise the underdrain to 6-inches instead of 4-inches in the rain garden. RESPONSE: Revised underdrain to 6-inches Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The rain garden media should be more consistent with the City's standard requirements. The weep holes are within the pea gravel. Please revise. RESPONSE: Updated rain garden media section to City’s recommendation at DRT meeting Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The northern rain gardens which release into the landscaped area may cause freezing issues if this drainage flows over the sidewalk. Directing these flows in a swale to the proposed chase or providing additional chases may be an option. RESPONSE: As discussed in DRT meeting, existing downspouts free drain across sidewalk with no issues. Rain gardens will only improve this condition. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: Please revise all references to the rain garden details to sheet C401 instead of C400. RESPONSE: Corrected reference calls Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The LID detail should document each LID feature and then total them for documentation of compliance. RESPONSE: Separated LID features and totaled them on LID detail. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/12/2016 07/12/2016: The east rain garden needs some discussion with the existing tree and excavation/placement of media section. RESPONSE: As discussed in DRT meeting, agreed to try to salvage tree during installation of media section. Grading is such that no cut at base of tree and tapers down towards drip line. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/24/2016 07/11/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Corrected line over text issues 05/24/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.: Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/11/2016 07/11/2016: No comments. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/11/2016 07/11/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: This has been corrected. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/11/2016 07/11/2016: There are sheet numbering issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: This has been corrected. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/20/2016 05/20/2016: no comments. Department: Zoning Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2338, mglasgow@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/17/2016 05/17/2016: LUC 3.2.2(E)(4) Landscaped Islands. To the maximum extent feasible, landscaped islands with raised curbs shall be used to define parking lot entrances, the ends of all parking aisles and the location and pattern of primary internal access drives, and to provide pedestrian refuge areas and walkways. RESPONSE: We will be requesting a Modification for the landscape islands.