HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK STATION (2105 S. COLLEGE AVE.) - PDP - PDP160020 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSkimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
August 18, 2016
Ted Shepard
City of Fort Collins – Community Development and Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522
RE: Spring Creek Place, PDP 160020, Round 1
Dear Mr. Shepard:
Thank you for the comments on August 5, 2016 for the above-mentioned project. In an effort to address
your comments concisely and simplify your review of the utility plans, we have summarized your
comments and our responses below.
COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER
DEPARTMENT: ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Contact: Marc Ragasa, 970.221.6603, mragasa@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
08/01/2016: Existing (that will remain) and proposed easement need to be shown on the Utility Plans.
Response: Acknowledged. All existing proposed easements are shown.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
08/01/2016: An emergency access easement will be needed for the fire lane and an access easement
will be needed for the 10' multi-use path to the south. These will need to be dedicated on the plat with
any other easements that will be needed for drainage and utilities.
Response: Acknowledged. 20’ emergency access easement and 15’ sidewalk easement
added to plans.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
08/01/2016: There are portions of the building to the west that encroach into the Utility easement.
There is also the existing 12' utility easement that runs through the building. No easements can be
within the building's footprint.
Response: Acknowledged. Linework within easement represents concrete pavement with a
metal fence for screening.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
Page 2
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
08/01/2016: More information is needed for the two sidewalks connecting to the MAX station. It
appears that these walks will be crossing the existing drive aisle. Will this development propose
removing the access? Based on existing conditions, ramps will be needed to get to the MAX station.
Response: Incorrect. Existing drive will be removed and replaced with landscaping.
Proposed sidewalk with connect directly with existing sidewalk/hardscape at the MAX Station.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
08/01/2016: An offsite access easement will be needed to connect to the whole foods site to the
south. This agreement will be needed prior to hearing.
Response: In contact and conversation with the property management company that owns
the Whole Foods parcel.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
08/01/2016: 3. Add the following note to the plat:
"There shall be no private conditions, covenants or restrictions that prohibit or limit the installation of
resource conserving equipment or landscaping that are allowed by sections 12-120 – 12-122 of the
City Code."
Response: Noted added.
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/11/2016
07/11/2016: The project owes an additional $54.75 for the TDRF PDP fees. The acreage included in
the application did not match that on the subdivision plat.
Response: Check has been written and mailed to the City for payment.
DEPARTMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: The northern lot next to Sherwood lateral is no longer on the plan thus an Ecological
Characterization Study (ECS) is no longer needed to determine existing natural resources on-site and
buffer standards for those resources per Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.4.1.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: A more detailed Landscape Plan will be required and should include scientific names of
all species proposed, including detailed information (species and seeding rate) for ¿Native Seed Mix¿
Page 3
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
denoted on current plan. Note the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code requires that to the extent
reasonably feasible, all plans be designed to incorporate water conservation materials and techniques
[3.2.1E(3)]. This includes use of low- water-use plants and grasses in landscaping or re-landscaping
and reducing bluegrass lawns as much as possible. Native plants and wildlife-friendly (ex: pollinators;
songbirds) landscaping and maintenance are also encouraged. Please refer to the Fort Collins Native
Plants document available online and published by the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department
for guidance on native plants; the link is: http://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativeplants2013.pdf.
Additionally, Environmental Planning can provide recommended native seed mixes appropriate for this
site and context.
Response: Detailed information has been provided for all landscape materials.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: Note that in approving the required Landscape Plan, the decision maker shall have the
authority to determine the optimum placement and interrelationship of required landscape plan
elements such as trees, vegetation, turf, irrigation, screening, buffering and fencing, based on the
following criteria outlined in LUC Section 3.2.1(H):
1. protecting existing trees, natural areas and features;
2. enhancing visual continuity within and between neighborhoods;
3. providing tree canopy cover;
4. creating visual interest year round;
5. complementing the architecture of a development;
6. providing screening of areas of low visual interest or visually intrusive site elements;
7. establishing an urban context within mixed-use developments;
8. providing privacy to residents and users;
9. conserving water;
10. avoiding reliance on excessive maintenance;
11. promoting compatibility and buffering between and among dissimilar land uses;
12. establishing spatial definition.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: If significant trees are on site, note Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.2.1(C) that requires
developments to submit a landscape and tree protection plan, and if receiving water service from the
City, an irrigation plan, that: "...(4) protects significant trees, natural systems, and habitat, and (5)
enhances the pedestrian environment". Note that a significant tree is defined as a tree having DBH
(Diameter at Breast Height) of six inches or more. If any of the trees within this site have a DBH of
greater than six inches, a review of the trees shall be conducted with Tim Buchanan, City Forester
(970-221-6361 or tbuchanan@fcgov.com) to determine the status of the existing trees and any
mitigation requirements that could result from the proposed development.
Page 4
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: A Meeting with city forester has been scheduled.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: Add the following note to the landscape 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: The Note has been added to the plans
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: Regarding site lighting and light fixtures, please note that The American Medical
Association (AMA) and International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) both recommend using lighting that
has a corrected color temperature (CCT) of no more than 3000 degrees Kelvin, in order to limit the
amount of blue light in the night environment. Blue light brightens the night sky and creates more glare
than any other color of light. Both LED and metal halide fixtures contain large amounts of blue light in
their spectrum, and exposure to blue light at night has been shown to harm human health and
endanger wildlife, in part through influence on circadian rhythms. Therefore, use of warmer color
temperature (warm white, 3000K or less) for light fixtures is preferred in addition to fixtures with
dimming capabilities. For further information regarding health effects please see:
http://darksky.org/ama-report-affirms-human-health-impacts-from-leds/
Response: Exterior lighting is proposed to be Eaton Arbor LED series fixtures with 3000
Kelvin type lamps. Fixture cut sheets and a fixture schedule have been added to the
submittal package identifying these fixtures
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
07/26/2016: Our city has an established identity as a forward-thinking community that cares about the
quality of life it offers its citizens now and into the future. Thus, the City of Fort Collins has many
sustainability programs and goals that may benefit this project. Of particular interest may be the:
1) ClimateWise program: fcgov.com/climatewise/
2) Zero Waste Plan and the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program (WRAP):
fcgov.com/recycling/pdf/_20120404_WRAP_ProgramOverview.pdf, contact Caroline
Mitchell at 970-221-6288 or cmtichell@fcgov.com
3) Green Building Program: fcgov.com/enviro/green-building.php, contact Tony Raeker at
970-416-4238 or traeker@fcgov.com
4) Solar Energy: www.fcgov.com/solar, contact Norm Weaver at 970-416-2312 or
nweaver@fcgov.com
5) Integrated Design Assistance Program: fcgov.com/idap, contact Gary Schroeder at
970-224-6003 or gschroeder@fcgov.com
6) Nature in the City Strategic Plan: http://www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity/, contact Justin
Scharton at 970-221-6213 or jscharton@fcgov.com
Please consider City sustainability goals and ways this development can engage with these efforts. Let
me know if I can help connect you to these programs.
Page 5
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Acknowledged.
DEPARTMENT: FORESTRY
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016:
Contact the City Forester for an on-site meeting to conduct an existing tree inventory and receive
information for a tree mitigation plan. This information will need to be placed on the landscape plan.
Existing trees will need to be identified by species, size, condition and the mitigation requirement.
Response: A Meeting with city forester has been scheduled.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016:
The large existing honeylocust at the south east corner of the site is in good condition and warrants
retention. Review the design around this tree for accommodating its retention.
Response: Acknowledged, sidewalk layout revised to accommodate existing tree.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016:
Along the south perimeter planting use canopy shade trees in place of the 6 Radiant Crab.
Response: Radiant Crabapples have been replaced with English Oak.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016:
Use the standard City of Fort Collins Landscape notes. These notes are available from the City
Forester or from the project planner.
Response: Notes have been added to the plans.
DEPARTMENT: INTERNAL SERVICES
Contact: Sarah Carter, 970-416-2748, scarter@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/22/2016
07/22/2016: Please schedule a pre-submittal meeting with Building Services for this project.
Pre-Submittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new
Page 6
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
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: A pre-submittal meeting is scheduled for August 18, 2016.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/22/2016
07/22/2016: Adoption of the 2015 I-Codes is anticipated for January 2017. Be advised that permit
applications submitted after the code adoption date will be subject to the new codes and standards, as
amended. For more information, contact Sarah Carter, Plans Examiner at 970-416-2748 or
scarter@fcgov.com.
Response: The intent is to design the building in compliance with the 2015 I-Codes.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/22/2016
07/22/2016: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended.
Current adopted codes are:
2012 International Building Code (IBC)
2012 International Residential Code (IRC)
2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC)
2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC)
2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC)
2012 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado
2014 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Fort Collins has
amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the fcgov.com/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
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.
Response: The building will be designed in compliance with the 2015 I-Codes and their
associated adopted loads.
Page 7
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/22/2016
07/22/2016: 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 5000 sqft per floor.
Response: A full NFPA-13 fire sprinkler system will be provided.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/22/2016
07/22/2016: 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: Four fully accessible Type-A units will be provided within the building and all units
will be visitable in conformance with the IBC and the federal Fair Housing standards.
DEPARTMENT: LIGHT AND POWER
Contact: Coy Althoff, , CAlthoff@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016: Both single phase & 3-phase power facilities are running along the south and the west
side of the property lines.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016: Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges and any system modification charges
necessary will apply to this project.
Response: Acknowledged and calculated.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016: Contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the transformer and electric meter
locations, please show the locations on the utility plans. ***Please note that minimum clearances
around transformers are 3' around the back and sides and 8' clearance from the front.***
Response: Acknowledged. Transporter to be located at the southwest corner of site, as
shown on plans.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016: Multi-family buildings are treated as commercial services; therefore a(C-1) form must be
filled out and submitted to Light & Power Engineering. All secondary electric service work is the
responsibility of the developer and their electrical consultant or contractor.
Please provide a one-line diagram and a C-1 form to Light and Power Engineering. The C-1 form can
Page 8
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
be found at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf
Response: Acknowledged. Requested items to be provided when available.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016: You may contact FCU Light & Power, project engineering if you have questions. (970)
221-6700. Please also reference our Electric Services Standards (ESS) document at the following link.
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_FINAL_17June2016.
pdf
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/29/2016
07/29/2016: 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
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/08/2016
07/08/2016: STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 30' IN HEIGHT IFC Appendix D105 and local amendments:
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 at least one entire side of the
building. As this requirement does not appear it can be met via the prescriptive measure of the code,
the intent of the code shall be maintained via alternative means of compliance. These alternative
means shall include applicable provisions of the high rise code and should include but may not be
limited to multiple roof access points via stairwells, pressurized stairwells, areas of refuge with
communication in stairwells, walk out roof access, standpipes in the stairwells with hose connections
for roof operations, occupant notification, and possibly a fire department command center. A letter to
the fire marshal shall be submitted with a proposal for meeting the intent of the code and further
discussion is advised.
Response: We are meeting with Poudre Fire District on August 18th to discuss alternate
compliance requirements. These requirements will be accommodated in the final building
design.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/08/2016
Page 9
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
07/08/2016: EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT
The limits of the fire lane shall be fully labeled on the plat and shown on the plans as an Emergency
Access Easement (EAE).
Response: Acknowledged. Proposed 20’ emergency access easement shown on plans and
plat.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/08/2016
07/08/2016: FIRE LANE CONNECTION TO THE MAX TRANSIT LINE
> The proposed fire lane connection to the Max Transit line will have to be approved by the City
Transportation Department and Poudre Fire Authority. Currently, the connection point is undersized at
approximately 8'. Any gate design less than 20' width will require approval by the fire marshal, but shall
be no less than 16' wide. Turning radii may need to be adjusted so as to allow full vehicle movement.
> In addition, the connection will require an approved electric, functioning gate for emergency access
only. The opening mechanism should comply with existing Max corridor access standards although an
Opticon function may also be warranted. Further discussion will be needed.
Response: Acknowledged. Intention to provide a 20’ connection to the MAX right-of-way.
Currently coordinating access with BNSF.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/13/2016
07/13/2016: FIRE LANE CONNECTION TO MAX LINE - UPDATED
I contacted Transit Planner Emma Belmont at FC Transportation Dept. to get a read on the possible
emergency access connection to the Max Line. She informed me that is on Railroad ROW and
permission to access would have to come from the railroad. She considers it highly unlikely that the
railroad will approve the connection. If so, the proposed access plan will need to be reconsidered.
Response: Acknowledged. Currently coordinating access with BNSF.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: FIRE LANE ON SOUTH SIDE
The city staff meeting today mentioned that negotiations are underway with Whole Foods to create
better cross-site access and clean up exiting easements between the properties. PFA would like to
once again entertain the idea of providing for an Emergency Access Easement on the south side of
Spring Creek Station to help mitigate perimeter access problems inherent at the site.
Response: Acknowledged. Permeant emergency access easement from Whole Foods
unlikely. Currently coordinating access with BNSF.
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING SERVICES
Page 10
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: The site plan needs to be expanded to the south and east in order to provide a broader
context in relationship to South College Avenue to the east and the shopping center circulation system
to the south. It would be helpful to see the relationship of the subject site to the intersection of S.
College and Rutgers. We need to see how the vehicular and sidewalk networks tie into the
adjoining developments. Perhaps a separate Contextual Site Plan would be a good idea.
Response: Acknowledged, Contextual Site Plan included with resubmittal.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
Also, on the west, the site plan needs to indicate what the sidewalk on the north side of the public
courtyard ties into as it leaves the site.
Response: Acknowledged, note added to Site Plan clarifying that sidewalk connects to
existing MAX sidewalk.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: On the site plan, please use a graphic that highlights the 35-foot wide Ingress-Egress
Road Right-of-Way. This circulation is critical in depicting how access is gained to and from the site.
Without a graphic, this system gets a little lost.
Response: Acknowledged, refer to Contextual Site Plan.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: On the site plan, pleases label all sidewalk widths.
Response: Acknowledged, labels added to Site Plan.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: Is there any opportunity to add east-west sidewalks in the existing east-west access drive
between S. College and the subject site? Perhaps these walks could be attached. If the existing
roadway width is not sufficient for walks on both sides, then it appears that a walk on the south side
would better align with the building entrance than the north side.
Response: No, existing easement requires access width be maintained. Any sidewalk at this
location would also excess ADA slope requirements. Pedestrians to access site via existing
and proposed sidewalk along southern property line.
Comment Number: 6 Comment
Originated: 08/03/2016 In the site data table, please add a column for the minimum required parking
based on the number of bedrooms per unit (Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(a)1. so this number can be compared
to the number of spaces provided.
Page 11
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Info added.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: Bicycle parking is required at a minimum ratio of one space per bedroom. There is no
data provided as to the number of bike parking spaces. Also, please note that a minimum of 60% of
the total must be enclosed and the balance may be outside in fixed racks. This data needs to be
added to the table. Also, please indicate the locations of the enclosed spaces and exterior racks.
Response: Info added.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: Standard notes will be provided to be added to the Site Plan.
Response: Acknowledged, standard notes added to the Contextual Site Plan.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: The plaza on the west complies with the Midtown Plan. Please consider upgrading the
plaza to include seat walls.
Response: Acknowledged, seat walls added to plaza.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: Please label the trash and recycling area. If these are to be located internally, please
note on the Site Plan. Please be aware to size these containers properly as it is illegal to deposit
cardboard products in the trash. With regard to a best practice approach to recycling within multi family
projects, please contact Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Planner, 221 6288.
Response: Acknowledged. Trash and recycling area are located in parking structure and
labeled on Site Plan.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: In designing the entrance to the below grade and at grade under structure parking, please
note the standards found in Section 3.10.4(D) (3)(a f).
These standards are intended to add a measure of safety and reduce any conflicts between vehicles
entering and exiting the structure and pedestrians.
Response: Noted. No pedestrian access proposed across entrance to at-grade parking
structure.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: There is an existing mature Honey Locust at the southeast corner of the site that looks
like it’s outside the building envelope and the access drive that the Landscape Plan indicates to be
removed. Is there any reason this tree can’t be preserved?
Response: Acknowledged, sidewalk layout revised to accommodate existing tree.
Page 12
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: Due to the grade difference along both north and south property lines, will retaining walls
be needed? If so, please call out on both the site and landscape plans. Also, be sure to specify the
material used for these walls. If needed, please construct these walls out of split-face or textured
concrete masonry units, or other decorative concrete products, but not smooth-face block.
Response: Acknowledged. No new retaining walls anticipated.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: Section 3.10.5(F)(3) requires that buildings in the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay
Zone (T.O.D.) that are greater than two stories must be designed so that upper portions of the building
are stepped back from the base. The adequacy of the upper floor step-backs will be evaluated by the
extent to which they advance objectives related to providing a pedestrian scale along sidewalks,
enhancing compatibility with the scale and massing of nearby buildings, preserving sunshine patterns
in adjacent spaces and preserving views. It appears that the upper floors are not stepped back. Staff is
mostly concerned about the pedestrian experience along the south elevation and the relationship
between the treatment along the garage and the ten foot wide sidewalk. The pedestrian scale and
experience walking along the screen walls for the garage needs to be considered in the architectural
design of the south elevation.
Response: The building façade on the ground level along the pedestrian walk has been
reworked to scale-down the size of the openings and to add additional brick detailing along
the length of this walkway. Openings are now at a scale that relates more to the windows and
patios above, rather than the open air parking lot behind them. This helps to shift the
perceived scale of the building to something more appropriate for a pedestrian and breaks up
the overall length of the façade into a series of experiences along its length.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: On the architectural elevations, we need to be able to evaluate the extent of the recesses
and projections of the building modules. While the perspective renderings are helpful, no dimensions
are provided. Please include a plan view line, with dimensions, that describes the variation in the
massing of the building at the ground level that corresponds to the architectural elevation.
Response: Plan details (wall profiles) have been added above the long north and south
elevations to demonstrate the degree of articulation along the length of these facades. These
details are dimensioned and at a scale that matches the elevations for ease of reference.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: The same comment applies to the roofline. Section 3.10.5(B) requires that flat-roofed
buildings feature a three-dimensional cornice on all walls facing streets or connecting walkways or
otherwise be broken up to avoid a long continuous roofline. It appears the building complies but the
extent of the various roof parapets and overhangs in relation to the wall plane needs to be dimensioned
to assure compliance.
Page 13
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Roof plan details (roof edge profiles) have been added above the long north and
south elevations to demonstrate the degree of articulation along the length of these facades.
These details are dimensioned and at a scale that matches the elevations for ease of
reference.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: One of the main criticisms of The Summit Apartments is the lack of any meaningful
relationship to South College and the broader community. The complex is viewed as being isolated
and out of scale. Staff would like to explore ways for this project to overcome these issues. Please
consider adding a ground-floor architectural feature(s) to the right side of the east elevation to
strengthen the relationship of the building to the South College Avenue and the larger neighborhood
(South College Heights). Perhaps a projecting element or ground floor patios with overhangs or some
other element could be added to introduce an attractive feature at the ground level. Would it be
possible for the ground floor east-facing units to feature individual exterior entries, porches, patios,
stoops or other treatments enhance the relationship to the broader community?
Response: There are no ground floor apartments. The windows on the ground floor of the
right side of the east elevations look into the parking garage and will likely have a very low
visible light transmittance (dark tinting). Creating on additional projecting elements and
details in this area would be fake and would only serve to eliminate one of the few planting
areas on the lot. We have added further brick detailing to the façade in this area (and on the
left side) to help eliminate the feeling that portions of the façade may be featureless or out of
scale. Additionally, the landscaping in this area should provide good context for the building
and help integrate it into the site.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: There are a series of windows on the ends of the east and west elevation that appear flat
in relationship to the façade. The overall articulation of the building would be improved if these
windows were upgraded with additional trim, or sills or lintels.
Response: Detailing around these windows have been accentuated with stucco heads, sills,
and a panel detail.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: The person doors on the north, south and west elevations are not very well demarcated
on the elevations. They appear as simple recesses without any other components that benefit the
overall articulation. Please consider highlighting these person doors with additional features so that the
ground floor of the building continues to contribute to the pedestrian scale.
Response: Exterior doors at the ground floor are now more articulated. Brick headers have
been added over the fire exit doors and passage doors are shown as full-light doors.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: The steel screen walls for the garage may need to be softened with additional trim such
as sills or lintels. Also, the color may need to be a color tone that is more complementary to the overall
color scheme. Please consider a color that more closely resembles the alternate color brick panels.
Page 14
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: The openings have all been made smaller and the expanded metal screening
has been colored to match the alternate color brick (tan color). Additionally, a frame detail
has been added at panels below window locations (to mimic the windows above) and no
frame was added to the panels below the decks.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: On the south elevation, it is difficult to read the second floor courtyard. Perhaps the
graphics could be more detailed to indicate how this feature contributes to the overall architectural
character of the south façade.
Response: We have incorporated a “fade” effect in the rendering of the elevations. Objects
that are further away are faded. The actual material colors are intended to be the same, this
is only a graphic representation used to describe depth.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: A material and color board would be helpful to see how all the components work together.
Response: A digital material and color sheet is included with this submittal. A physical
material and color board will be available for future meetings, hearings, and submittals.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 08/03/2016
08/03/2016: The Lighting Plan needs a schedule and cut sheets of the selected fixtures. The
point-by-point illuminance plan must be calibrated using a light loss factor of 1.00. Also the Lighting
Plan must include the U.S. Department of Energy - Lighting Facts and provide ratings for Backlight,
Uplight and Glare (B.U.G). Since all fixtures must be fully shielded, the lighting designer should strive
to achieve a BUG rating of B-1, U-0, G-1. If LED is used, all Kelvin temperatures must be limited to no
greater than 3,000 degrees to mitigate glare and harshness.
Response: We are proposing to use Eaton Arbor LED series light fixtures with 3000 Kelvin
lamps. These fixtures are full cut-off. A lighting schedule has been added to the photometric
plans and cut sheets have been provided. The bollard fixtures are fully compliant with the
recommended BUG ratings. The post and sconce lights have a U-1 rating. However, the
uplight is only the result of reflected light from the post or mounting and is measured
assuming a silver colored post or mount. We would propose to use a dark bronze fixture,
post, and mount so any reflected light would be significantly reduced (if not eliminated). This
condition has not been measured for this fixture, but we feel confident it will comply with the
the lighting requirements and the intent of the recommendation.
DEPARTMENT: STORMWATER ENGINEERING
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/01/2016
08/01/2016: No Erosion Control Plans or Report were submitted as part of this original submittal.
These will need to be provided and ESC issues should be addressed at an FDP level submittal.
Response: Acknowledged. Erosion Control Plans and Report to be submitted with FDP.
Page 15
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Grading Plan – It is hard to see what is proposed for the grading plan along the north
property line. Please provide a detail to show that stormwater is being intercepted into the inlets and
the storm pipe and not draining onto the neighbor’s property to the north.
Response: Noted. Proposed 6” curb directing stormwater into two new catch basins. Notes
added to Grading Plan.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Grading Plan – the proposed storm pipe shown along the northern property line is very
close to the property line and would require an easement from the neighbor if you plan to keep it this
close to the property line. (Typical storm pipe easement widths are a minimum of 20’.) Consider moving
the storm pipe at least 10’ south to keep the limits of installation and maintenance of that pipe on your
property.
Response: Acknowledged. Storm pipe shifted to center of drive.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Grading Plan – the sidewalk along the south side of the building looks like its elevated
higher than the finished floor of the building. With the Final Utility Plans, please provide a detail and/or
cross-section of this.
Response: Correct. Sidewalk is above finished floor at center of site. Cross-section to be
included with Final Utility Plans.
Topic: Drainage Report
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Historic Drainage - The inlet located at the northwest corner of the project site was
installed as a part of the Max BRT project. Design information on that inlet and storm pipe should be
included and referenced in this report. (I can email you some of the pertinent pages from that report. If
you want to review the entire report, I can put it on a dropbox link for you.) Please note that the
developed condition runoff toward that inlet and the receiving swale from this project will need to be no
more than what was assumed for the BRT project.
Response: Acknowledged, MAX BRT drainage report referenced in report, and pertinent
sections included in appendix.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
Page 16
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
07/19/2016: Hydrologic Criteria – Please note that runoff coefficient values cannot exceed 1.0. Please
see the Runoff Chapter, Section 2.1 for information on the frequency factor calculations. Please update
your runoff calculations accordingly.
Response: Acknowledged, runoff calculations revised.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Water Quality Requirements -
Standard Water Quality requirements per the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual are: fifty
percent of the site runoff is required to be treated using the standard water quality treatment as
described in the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual, Volume 3-Best Management Practices
(BMPs).
(http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-forms-guideline
s-regulations/stormwater-criteria) Extended detention is the usual method selected for water
quality treatment; however the use of any of the BMPs is encouraged.
Enhanced (or LID) Water Quality requirements per the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual
are: Low Impact Development (LID) requirements are required on all new or redeveloping
property which includes sites required to be brought into compliance with the Land Use Code.
These require a higher degree of water quality treatment with one of the two following options:
a. 50% of the newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID
techniques and 25% of new paved areas must be pervious.
b. 75% of all newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID
techniques.
The existing inlet and pipe system located at the northwest corner of the site is providing
standard water quality treatment for the portion of the site draining toward that inlet. Per the
standard water quality and LID requirements, you will then need to provide LID treatment for
the balance of the site.
LID systems do not include mechanical separator devices.
Response: Underground chamber/filtration system (ADS StormTech) is being proposed.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The drainage report must discuss the four-step process for selecting structural BMP’s.
This process is outlined in the 2011 version of the Urban Drainage Manual, Volume 3, Section 4.0. This
version is posted on the City’s website.
Response: Discussion added to report.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Please include more detailed information in the narrative about how you arrived at the
allowable release rates from both the westerly and easterly basins. It needs to be clear that the
proposed condition release rates do not exceed the existing condition release rates in either direction.
Page 17
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Discussion added to report.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Appendix B – The UD-Detention spreadsheet cannot be used to calculate detention
volumes in the City of Fort Collins because it utilizes Denver rainfall data. Please build your own mass
balance spreadsheet using the Modified FAA Procedure as outlined in the Fort Collins Stormwater
Criteria Manual, Volume 2, Chapter 10, Section 3.2.3.
Response: Spreadsheet modified to utilized Fort Collins, not Denver, rainfall info.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Appendix B – The StormCAD table indicates slightly different flow values than those
shown in the runoff table in the report. Please check to make sure these match. Also, please indicate
on the plans where the roof drain connection into the storm pipe system is to occur.
Response: Acknowledged, StormCAD updated.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Appendix B – Please clarify what specific pipe the Worksheet for Circular Pipe is for.
Response: Acknowledged, worksheet model discharge pipe from proposed BMP to existing
MAX catch basin.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The City’s stormwater criteria have been updated to include LID requirements since your
conceptual review submittal. A meeting to go over stormwater requirements is recommended at this
preliminary stage. Please contact Heather McDowell at (970) 224-6065 or hmcdowell@fcgov.com to
set up a meeting.
Response: Acknowledged, conference call held on August 9th.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Water quality and LID devices/chambers, etc need to be shown on these preliminary
plans.
Response: Acknowledged, water quality and LID devices are shown and labeled.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Standard operating procedures (SOPs) for all onsite drainage facilities will be included as
part of the Development Agreement. More information and links can be found at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/stormwater-quality/low-impact-development
Response: Acknowledged. Understand the Development Agreement will be prepared during
the FDP stage.
Page 18
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Per Colorado Revised Statute §37-92-602 (8) effective August 5, 2015, criteria regarding
detention drain time will apply to this project. As part of the drainage design, the engineer will be
required to show compliance with this statute using a standard spreadsheet (available on request) that
will need to be included in the drainage report. Upon completion of the project, the engineer will also
be required to upload the approved spreadsheet onto the Statewide Compliance Portal.
Response: Acknowledged, spreadsheet will be provided as part of the Final Drainage
Report.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The 2016 city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $8,217/acre for new impervious
area over 350 square feet and there is a $1,045/acre of site review fee. No fee is charged for existing
impervious area. These fees are to be paid at the time each building permit is issued. Information on
fees can be found at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-development-fees or
contact Jean Pakech at 221-6375 for questions on fees.
There is also an erosion control escrow required before the Development Construction permit is issued.
The amount of the escrow is determined by the design engineer, and is based on the site disturbance
area, cost of the measures, or a minimum amount in accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater
Manual.
Response: Acknowledged and calculated.
DEPARTMENT: TECHNICAL SERVICES
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: We would prefer that the project name on all plans be "Spring Creek Station" rather than
an address. With this property being replatted, the address could change.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Acknowledged. Elevations have been revised to resolve line over text conflicts.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: We would prefer that the project name on all plans be "Spring Creek Station" rather than
Page 19
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
an address. With this property being replatted, the address could change.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: The City has moved to the NAVD88 vertical datum, and as of January 1, 2015, all projects
are required to be on NAVD88 datum. Please provide the following information for the Benchmark
Statement in the EXACT format shown below.
PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM. SURROUNDING
DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS.
IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING
EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = NAVD88 - X.XX’.
Response: Acknowledged. Benchmark data reformatted.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: The Basis Of Bearings statement should match the Subdivision Plat.
Response: Acknowledged. Working to resolve discrepancy between the Plat and ALTA.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Text revised to eliminate text conflicts.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: Some of the right of way descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the
plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat.
Response: Descriptions revised to match Plat.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: 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.
Page 20
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Descriptions revised to match Plat.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: SHADOW STUDY: We would prefer that the project name on all plans be "Spring Creek
Station" rather than an address. With this property being replatted, the address could change.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: SHADOW STUDY: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Acknowledged. Elevations have been revised to resolve line over text conflicts.)
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: We would prefer that the project name on all plans be "Spring Creek Station" rather than
an address. With this property being replatted, the address could change.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Text conflicts eliminated.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: We would prefer that the project name on all plans be "Spring Creek Station" rather than
an address. With this property being replatted, the address could change.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: We would prefer that the name be "Spring Creek Station" to match the other plans.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: Please make changes to the Statement Of Ownership And Subdivision as marked. See
redlines.
Page 21
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Revised.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: 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: None that we are aware of.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: Please label the west & east lines of Lot 3, Bankcenter Square First Filing. See redlines.
Response: Acknowledged, label added.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: All easements must be labeled & locatable. See redlines.
Response: (Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: The "Found PK Nail In Asphalt" needs to be upgraded with PLS # attached. See redlines.
Response: Note added.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: Please label the Point of Beginning.
Response: (Label added.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: If you choose to keep existing off-site easements on the plat, you need to label what they
are. See redlines.
Response: (Acknowledged, label added.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: There is plat language missing. See redlines.
Response: Revised.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: The boundary closes.
Response: Acknowledged.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
Page 22
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
07/25/2016: We would prefer that the project name on all plans be "Spring Creek Station" rather than
an address. With this property being replatted, the address could change.
Response: Acknowledged. Project name (Spring Creek Place) added to all plans.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: The bearings & distances on the property boundary should match the Subdivision Plat.
Response: Acknowledged. Working to resolve discrepancy between the Plat and ALTA.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: Some of the right of way descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the
plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat.
Response: Acknowledged, descriptions revised.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: 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: Acknowledged, descriptions revised.
DEPARTMENT: TRAFFIC OPERATION
Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/02/2016
08/02/2016: We will have to work with you as you develop your landscape plans to ensure there is
good sight distance at the entry to the garage. The opposing off set through traffic adds some
complexity to this movement, and we want to make this area as visible as possible.
Response: Acknowledged. Positioning of travel lanes, stop control, etc. all contribute to high
visibility in area.
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/02/2016
08/02/2016: The Fort Collins multimodal transportation level of service was not addressed in the study.
This can be found in Appendix H in LCUASS. An addendum memo with a narrative related to the
multimodal LOS can be submitted as a supplement to the traffic study.
Response: Addendum memo provided.
DEPARTMENT: WATER CONSERVATION
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Page 23
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2016
07/25/2016: 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.
DEPARTMENT: WATER-WASTEWATER ENGINEERING
Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Please update contact information on the cover sheet of the Utility Plans, per redlines.
Response: Contact information updated.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The Utility Department recommends conducting a fire flow test, during the course of
design, on the existing 6” waterline that this site is proposing to tap into to verify that adequate fire
flows are available in this location. If there are not adequate fire flows at this location, this project will be
responsible to upsize the main to the extents required to achieve required fire flows.
Response: Fire flow test performed in December 2015. FLOWED 4.5 AT 32 PSI, HOSE
MONSTER CONVERSION CHART=1873 GPM, HYD SIDE GAUGE = 45 PSI. HYDRANT
11983 STATIC = 91 PSI, RESIDUAL = 111 PSI. FLOW TEST FOR 2025 S COLLEGE AVE
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The proposed water meter will need to be placed outside of that easement. (It cannot be
built this close to the water main. It should be at least 10’ away from the main.) These plans will also
need to show and callout the curb stop.
Response: Acknowledged. Water meter relocated and call-outs added.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The proposed fire service will need to be placed such that it is not going through the
proposed water meter. The fire service will also need to have an isolation valve on the service line and
a thrust block at the connection point to the main.
Response: Acknowledged. Fire service relocated and valve added. Thrust block to be
added to Final Utility Plans.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
Page 24
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
07/19/2016: If the proposed sanitary sewer service ends up being sized at less than 8”, it will need to
be connected to the sewer main, not the manhole. Also, since the connection is occurring on the
neighboring property, you will need to get an easement from that neighbor to install your service into
their property. For this preliminary approval, a Letter of Intent from that property owner will be required
to be submitted to the City that indicates their approval of the sewer connection and that they will grant
an easement during the final design and platting of the project.
Response: Acknowledged. 8” connection anticipated.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The existing sewer and water services to the existing buildings will need to be identified
and shown on a demo plan. The demo plan should then clearly show which services will need to be
removed and abandoned at the main.
Response: Acknowledged. A Demolition Plan will be included with Final Utility Plans.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Please indicate on the utility plans the location of the roof drain connection to the storm
pipe system.
Response: Acknowledged. Location of assumed roof drain connection added to Utility
Plans.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Please modify note 5 on the cover sheet of the landscape plans to include storm sewer
lines in the landscape/utility separation requirements, as noted on the redlined plans.
Response: The note has been modified.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Please dedicate a utility easement for the existing waterline. The easement should be 10’
on either side of the waterline, approximately 20’ in width through the parcel included in this plat.
Response: Waterline contained within existing easement. Proposed easement to be
dedicated for new water meter.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: The Plat is showing an existing 12’ utility easement that is located where the proposed
building is going to sit. Are you planning to vacate this easement? Who does the utility easement
belong to?
Page 25
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Correct, existing utility easement dedicated on original plat and contains electrical
lines. Easement to be vacated.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: Site Plan – There are several existing easements shown on the site plan that don’t quite
seem to match the easements shown on the plat. Please reconcile.
Response:
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/19/2016
07/19/2016: It appears as though the proposed building footprint overlaps the 15’ utility easement that
is located on the west side of the site. Generally, this is not allowed. Who does the utility easement
belong to?
Response: Incorrect. Linework with easement represents concrete pavement with a metal
fence for screening. Existing utility easement dedicated on original plat; and contains
electrical, telephone, fiber optic, and natural gas lines.
DEPARTMENT: ZONING
Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2338, mglasgow@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
08/03/2016: LUC 3.2.2(K)(5) The total number of parking spaces (166) will require a minimum of (6)
handicap spaces with at least one van-accessible space.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
08/03/2016: Please show parking stall and drive aisle dimensions for covered parking area as part of
LUC3.2.2(L)
Response: Acknowledged, information added to Site Plan.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
08/03/2016: Please show location of trash enclosure or provide detail of trash and recycling plans.
Response: Acknowledged, information added to Site Plan.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
08/03/2016: Where is the mechanical equipment located?
Response: Mechanical equipment will be located on the flat rooftop and fully screened by the
surrounding roof parapets.
Page 26
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/26/2016
08/03/2016: Bicycle parking required as part of 3.2.2(C)(4)
Response: Acknowledged, bicycle parking (fixed and enclosed) provided and labeled on Site
Plans.
COMCAST (DON KAPPERMAN 970-567-0245)
1. Comcast will need a Right of Entry to this project.
Response: Noted.
DRAINAGE REPORT
Page 3
1. This was installed as part of the BRT project. Excerpts from that report should be referenced and
included here.
Response: Acknowledged, MAX BRT drainage report referenced in report, and pertinent
sections included in appendix.
2. 1.0 max
Response: Acknowledged, runoff calculations revised.
3. Exceed that capacity
Response: Report revised accordingly.
Page 4
1. LID required also- see written comment
Response: Acknowledged. LID BMP provided. Underground chamber/filtration system
(ADS StormTech) is being proposed.
2. Need to address/include 4 step process for selecting BMPs…outlined in UD Manual Vol 3, Chl,
Section 4.0 (2011 Manual- posted on COFC website)
Response: Discussion added to report.
Page 5
1. WQ Requirements include LID Requirements.
Response: Acknowledged. LID BMP provided. Underground chamber/filtration system
(ADS StormTech) is being proposed.
2. We do not like to use mechanical devices. Other options should be explored.
Response: Acknowledged. LID BMP provided. Underground chamber/filtration system
(ADS StormTech) is being proposed.
3. These don’t match
Response: Report revised accordingly.
4. 2-yr required
Response: Report revised accordingly.
Page 27
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
5. Explain how you arrived at these numbers
Response: Explanation provided.
6. BI Q100 = 11.24
Response: Report revised.
7. 11.24 - Basin 25 (undetained) 0.75 = 10.49 cfs
Response: Report revised.
8. Also need to discuss drainage going east. Ex Basins B2 + B3 + B4 = 5.6 cfs
Prop Basin 10 = 3.41 cfs reduction
Response: Report revised.
Page 18
1. Max 1.00
Response: Report revised accordingly.
2. I think you’re using the C factor adjustment here (C x Cf). max valve of C is 1.00. See runoff
Chapter Section 2.10
Response: Report revised accordingly.
Page 21
1. This spreadsheet cannot be used because it is hard coded with Denver rainfall. You need to
create your own mass balance spreadsheet.
Response: Spreadsheet modified to utilized Fort Collins, not Denver, rainfall info.
Page 24
1. Make sure the Qs used to determine pipe sizes are in agreement with your calcs in Runoff Table.
Response: Report revised accordingly.
2. 0.53 in runoff table
Response: Report revised accordingly.
3. 1.03
Response: Report revised accordingly.
4. 15.5 in runoff table
Response: Report revised accordingly.
5. Also, plans need to indicate where the roof drain connects into the pipe system.
Response: Acknowledged. Location of assumed roof drain connection added to Utility
Plans.
Page 27
1. What is this calculation for?
Response: Worksheet models discharge pipe from proposed BMP to existing MAX catch
basin.
Page 30
1. On grade
Page 28
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Note added to plan.
2. Sump
Response: Note added to plan.
3. Sump
Response: Note added to plan.
4. Roof drain connection location?
Response: Acknowledged. Location of assumed roof drain connection added to Utility
Plans.
ELEVATIONS- PLANNING
Page 1
1. Upper floor step back?
Response: Significant articulation is provided in the building façade to accommodate the
intent of the upper story step-back. Articulation plan profile details have been provided do
better demonstrate the degree of articulation in the façade.
2. Window/façade relationship is flat, need more 3 dimensionality/articulation. Add sills? Lintels?
Trim?
Response: Sill, head and panel details have been added at these locations.
3. Can the right side of the east elevation feature more detail?
Response: Additional detail has been added to brickwork at this location.
4. Is there a person-door in here? Hard to read, labeling would help.
Response: No door at this location.
5. By how much do these roof features project over wall plane?
Response: All roof overhangs are 24”
6. Add some trim
Response: Garage openings are now trimmed at both head and sill with alternate color brick
details.
7. Describe the sill
Response: Sills in brick locations are a 4” row lock extended 1” beyond the face of the
adjacent brick façade.
8. Will need to see a material sample and color. Recommend a gray tone not be selected as there is
already a lot of gray.
Response: Garage openings are infilled with expanded metal grating painted to match the
alternate brick color (tan).
9. This feature is hard to read with dark graphics/shadow lines. May need a separate detail, or
lighter graphics. How much does it project over courtyard?
Response: This is a cornice over a community room at the edge of the courtyard.
Page 29
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
10. Show all stairwell/garage person doors. May need a detail. Highlighted with painted steel
pergola? Just a recess? Needs more accent/projection/weather protection.
Response: All doors are now shown and trimmed with alternate color brick headers. Greater
projecting details cannot be provided at these locations due to existing and proposed
easements along this face of the building.
Page 2
1. Too flat, need sills/frame details. Continue the lighter brick banding/trim detail.
Response: Head and sill details have been added.
2. Faces max- can this entry be embellished/highlighted? Appears very discreet.
Response: The elevated storefront entry will be very visible when approaching the building
from the MAX. The entry is further highlighted through landscaping in the courtyard creating
a sense of presence and welcome at this location.
3. Shadow lines on north? Graphically harder to read with such heavy shadowing. Please remove.
Response: These shadows have been removed.
Page 3
1. Need to see or describe the extent of the “pergola” projection. How much articulation does it
provide? 2’? 3’?
Response: The kick-bracket mounted pergolas extend 4’ beyond the face of the building.
2. Too flat, need sills.
Response: Heads and sills have been added.
3. Hard to read the depth of recesses and projections of the modules need a matching scale horiz.
Plan view w/ dimensions describing the modulation across the facades. (on sheets 1 & 2)
Response: Plan profile details show wall and roof articulation have been added to the
elevation sheets.
4. In general, south elevation needs to be upgraded for the pedestrians using the 10’ sidewalk.
Looks a bit sterile.
Response: Ground floor detailing has been reworked to provide a more pedestrian scale
finish along the walk to the MAX.
5. Label entry/person door.
Response: Doors are now more clearly identified.
6. Too flat, windows need sills.
Response: Heads and sills have been added.
ELEVATIONS- TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
Page 1
1. Line over text
Response: Text has been shifted to resolve conflict.
LANDSCAPE- PLANNING
Page 1
Page 30
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
1. Retaining wall?
Response: There is not a retaining wall here.
2. Can this honey locust be retained?
Response: Sidewalk layout revised to accommodate existing tree.
3. Seat walls?
Response: Seat walls have been added to the plans.
LANDSCAPE- TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
Page 1
1. Line over text
Response: Addressed.
Page 2
1. All circled are line over text.
Response: Addressed.
LANDSCAPE- UTILITIES
Page 1
1. And storm lines
Response: Addressed.
LIGHTING- PLANNING
Page 1
1. Depth of energy B.V.G. Rating B-1 V-0 G-1 (see table)
Response: Eaton Arbor LED series bollard, pole mount and wall mount fixtures are
proposed. B.U.G. ratings are provided in the included schedule. U-1 is the technical rating
for the pole and wall mounted fixtures due to minimal reflected light from the mount. These
are full cut-off fixtures and are compliant with the intent of the B.U.G. ratings suggested.
PLAT- TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
Page 1
1. Is there a lienholder? If so, there will need to be a signature block.
Response: (None that we are aware of.
2. All existing and/or proposed easements must be “locatable” (easement within boundary of plat)
IE: BRG & Distances
Response: Acknowledged
3. Needs to be upgraded, with PLS# attached
Response: Acknowledged. Note added.
PLAT- UTILITIES
Page 1
1. This easement not shown on the site plan. (This easement goes through middle of building) Are
you vacating this easement? Whose easement is it?
Page 31
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: Existing utility easement dedicated on original plat and contains electrical lines.
Easement to be vacated.
2. Please dedicate a new easement for the ex. waterline through this property. Easement should be
based on actual location of waterline.
Response: Waterline located within existing easement.
SHADOW STUDY- TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
Page 1
1. All circled are line over text
Response: Text has been shifted to resolve conflicts.
SITE PLAN- PLANNING
Page1
1. Easement
Response: Label revised.
2. What does the hash marks mean?
Response: Represents pavement marking for a temporary loading zone.
3. 8’ walk. Describe what this walkway ties into.
Response: Proposed sidewalk will extend to the existing sidewalk adjacent to the MAX.
4. MAX
Response: Label added.
5. What does this dashed line depict? Is this also an elevated courtyard?
Response: Represents the limits of the building (stores 2-5).
6. Legal Desc..Bank Center Square Inn….
Response: Legal description revised.
7. *Public Access but privately owned and maintained.. (correct?) STD NOTES
Response: Note added.
8. Signature Blocks
Response: Added.
9. Need to see how sidewalks and drives tie into shopping center.
Response: Notes added.
10. Garage
Response: Revised
11. 15’
Response: Dimension added.
12. Show REQ. PER 3.2.2 so parking required can be compared with parking provided.
Response: Info added.
Page 32
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
13. Bike parking = 168 spaces
60% enclosed = 101
40% fixed rack = 67
Response: Info added
14. = 168
Response: Info added
15. Existing sidewalk 6’
Response: Note added.
16. Label all sidewalks
Response: Labels added.
17. S. College Ave.
Response: Label added
18. Take line work to the west R-O-W line of S. College Ave. need to see how parcel is tied in to
public street.
Response: Acknowledged, refer to Contextual Plan.
19. Graphically depict 35’ ING/EGR road ROW
Response: Acknowledged, refer to Contextual Plan.
SITE PLAN- UTILITIES
Page 1
1. Building overlapping into utility easement here?
Response: Linework within easement represents concrete pavement with a metal fence for
screening, not a building.
2. This not shown in this area on the plat?
Response: Plat revised.
3. These leaders don’t match the plat.
Response: Working to resolve minor discrepancies between Plat and ALTA.
Page 2
1. What is item #14? Where is Page 1 of ALTA?
Response: Item #14 is the original Plat. Page 1 of ALTA included with resubmittal.
UTILITY- TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
Page 1
1. Please match the Benchmark Statement format shown in the comments.
Response: Acknowledged. Benchmark data reformatted.
2. Please match the Subdivision plat.
Response: Acknowledged. Working to resolve discrepancy between the Plat and ALTA.
Page 33
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Page 2
1. See Sheet 1
Response: Acknowledged. Benchmark data reformatted.
Page 3
1. All circled are line over text.
Response: Revised to eliminate conflicts.
UTILITY PLAN COMMENTS- ENGINEERING
Page 1
1. Use plat name
Response: Acknowledged, Plat name added to plans.
Page 4
1. College Avenue
Response: Label added.
2. Show all easements (proposed) & existing
Response: Acknowledged, all easements shown.
3. Size?
Response: Size added to plan.
4. Need access easement from whole Foods
Response: In contact and conversation with the property management company that owns
the Whole Foods parcel.
5. Ramp should be same width as walk
Response: Sidewalk ramp revised to allow preservation of existing tree, per discussion with
Ted Shepard.
6. Should be in an access easement
Response: Sidewalk easement proposed and added to plan.
7. Need ramps
Response: No, existing asphalt/drive will be removed and proposed sidewalk extended to
existing sidewalk adjacent to MAX facilities.
8. More detail on how max connection will work?
Response: Existing asphalt/drive will be removed and proposed sidewalk extended to
existing sidewalk adjacent to MAX facilities. Demolition Plan to be prepared with Final Utility
Plans.
9. Buildings can’t be within easement
Response: Acknowledged. Linework within easement represents concrete pavement with a
metal fence for screening, not a building.
10. Ramps across drive aisle
Page 34
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
Response: No, existing asphalt/drive will be removed and proposed sidewalk extended to
existing sidewalk adjacent to MAX facilities.
11. Emergency access easement
Response: Acknowledged, easement added to plans.
UTILITY PLAN COMMENTS- UTILITIES
Page 1
1. Janet McTague (Doug retired)
Response: Acknowledged, contact updated.
2. Shane Boyle (Roger retired)
Response: Acknowledged, contact updated.
Page 3
1. Show how you are grading at this property line to ensure drainage doesn’t go onto neighbor’s
property and to the north.
Response: Proposed 6” curb and inlets will prevent storm water run-off.
2. ?
Response: Directional flow added, but there will not be any storm water run-off from our site.
3. Sidewalk is above building FF on the south side of building? Provide a detail of this.
Response: Correct. Sidewalk is above finished floor at center of site. Cross-section to be
included with Final Utility Plans.
4. LID and/or WQ systems will need to be shown on plans
Response: LID WQ/detention system shown on plans.
Page 4
1. Service line
Response: Correct. Existing service line.
2. This proposed storm pipe right on the property line- either adjust it to be away from PL or you will
need to get a drainage easement from the neighbor.
Response: Proposed storm pipe adjusted away from PL.
3. Tie service into main, not manhole. If service is an 8” then core drill into the manhole is ok.
Response: Acknowledged. 8” service connection anticipated.
4. This might be a better spot for the water meter and fire service.
Response: Water meter and fire service adjusted.
5. You will need property owner’s approval to access this main on their site. Easement will be
required from them. Letter of Intent will be required at preliminary, prior to P&Z.
Response: Existing 15-ft utility easement provided the required access. Label added to
plans.
Page 35
kimley-horn.com 4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500, Denver, CO 80237 303 228 2300
6. Add a note to the plans regarding existing sewer and water services. These will need to be
utilized with this project or abandoned at the main. Abandonment procedures should be
coordinated with utility Field Operations at 970-221-6700. As such please locate the sewer/water
services for the two existing buildings and show demo on a demo plan.
Response: Acknowledged. Note added to plan regarding abandonment.
7. Ex sewer services locations? These need to be located with this project; either utilize ex services
or cut & cap
Response: Acknowledged. All un-used services will be cut & capped.
8. Proposed storm pipe in same location as existing electric and fiber. Are you proposing to move
the E & FO?
Response: Ex. electrical and fiber optic locations are approximate. Any adjustments will be
made in field.
9. Fire line cannot go through meter
Response: Acknowledged, fire line and water meter revised.
10. Cannot place the water meter vault within 10’ of the water main or within the easement. Also,
cannot place a meter halfway in parking and halfway in sidewalk.
Response: Acknowledged, water meter revised.
11. Easement for this WL will need to be dedicated through this platted parcel.
Response: Water line located in existing easement.
UTILITY PLANS- STORMWATER ENGINEERING
Page 1
1. Please revise
Response: Contacts updated.
2. 8/1/2016 1st Round No ESC Plan submitted.
Response: Acknowledged. Erosion Control Plans and Report to be submitted with FDP.
With Kimley-Horn, you should expect more and will experience better. Please contact me at (303)
228-2318 or dan.skeehan@kimley-horn.com should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Dan Skeehan, P.E. LEED AP
Project Manager