Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY 23 - PDP - PDP160031 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 -1 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 +970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview August 24, 2015 RE: SW Corner Strauss Cabin Rd. & Harmony Rd. - Preliminary Design Review, PDR150017 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Clark Mapes, at 970-221-6225 or cmapes@fcgov.com. RESPONSES 9/28/16 PLANNING RESPONSE: Ripley Design Inc. CIVIL RESPONSE: TST, Inc. ARCHITECTURE RESPONSE: VFLA Architects TRAFFIC RESPONSE: Delich Associates DEVELOPER RESPONSE: Harmony 23, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE: David Steinmann Comment Summary: Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Kelly Kimple, kkimple@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/24/2015 At the PDR meeting on August 19, 2015, we discussed the significant environmental factors believed to be present at this site and that when a parcel goes through the development review process, applicants are required to follow the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, and in particular, Section 3.4.1 which addresses “Natural Habitats and Features,” and has the following general standard: 3.4.1(C) To the maximum extent feasible, the development plan shall be designed and arranged to be compatible with and to protect natural habitats and features and the plants and animals that inhabit them and integrate them within the developed landscape of the community by: (1) directing development away from sensitive resources, (2) minimizing impacts and disturbance through the use of buffer zones, (3) enhancing existing conditions, or (4) restoring or replacing the resource value lost to the community (either on-site or off-site) when a development proposal will result in the disturbance of natural habitats or features. Thus, the Land Use Code strongly emphasizes the protection of a parcel’s natural habitat or features in their current state. In addition, buffer zones of 50-100’ may be required on this property to enhance the function of the ditches and wetland and to minimize disturbance of the resource. However, as this property may be significantly encumbered, during the development review process, staff would work with the applicant to 2 identify if development in the buffer zone and/or mitigation for the ditches, wetlands, or other natural features could be an option, as per standard 3.4.1(C)(4) above. In going through the development review process, the following standards would apply: 3.4.1(D)(1) If the development site contains, or is within five hundred (500) feet of, a natural habitat or feature, or if it is determined by the Director, upon information or from inspection, that the site likely includes areas with wildlife, plant life and/or other natural characteristics in need of protection, then the developer shall provide to the City an ecological characterization report prepared by a professional qualified in the areas of ecology, wildlife biology or other relevant discipline. At least ten (10) working days prior to the submittal of a project development plan application for all or any portion of a property, a comprehensive ecological characterization study of the entire property must be prepared by a qualified consultant and submitted to the City for review… and, the ECS shall describe, without limitation, the following: 3.4.1(D)(1)(b) the boundary of wetlands in the area and a description of the ecological functions and characteristics provided by those wetlands, and 3.4.1(D)(1)(i) wildlife movement corridors, and 3.4.1(D)(2) In establishing the boundaries of a wetland, the applicant and the Director shall use soil samples, ecological characterization and hydrological evidence, to the extent that such are in existence or are requested of and provided by the applicant..The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers standards and guidelines shall be used to identify the boundaries of any “jurisdictional wetland.” 3.4.1(E)(2)(b) If the development causes any disturbance within the buffer zone, whether by approval of the decision maker or otherwise, the applicant shall undertake restoration and mitigation measures within the buffer zone such as regrading and/or the replanting of native vegetation. The applicant shall undertake mitigation measures to restore any damaged or lost natural resource either on-site or off-site at the discretion of the decision maker. Any such mitigation or restoration shall be at least equal in ecological value to the loss suffered by the community because of the disturbance, and shall be based on such mitigation and restoration plans and reports as have been requested, reviewed and approved by the decision maker. Unless otherwise authorized by the decision maker, if existing vegetation (whether native or non-native) is destroyed or disturbed, such vegetation shall be replaced with native vegetation and landscaping. Given the site’s known natural habitats and features, it appears difficult to accommodate both development and habitat protection. Given that, it is likely that some level of off-site mitigation would occur, should the property develop and should the wetlands indeed be jurisdictional. As I mentioned in our meeting, the determination of buffering, mitigation and/or restoration, is based on going through the entire development review process, which would include the completion of an Ecological Characterization Study to determine if the ecological values or functions provided on the site. Furthermore, if a rare or sensitive species was found on the site, mitigation may not be an option. Again, all of this would be evaluated through the development review process. Recall that if mitigation is an option, that you will be responsible not only for the design and construction costs for the created wetland and/or ditches, but also for the monitoring costs to ensure that mitigation is successful. I hope this provides clarity as to how the City views our natural habitats and features. Should you choose to develop this property, the City and the applicant would work together to discuss the entire requirements of the Land Use Code, not just those in Section 3.4.1 outlined here. 3 Response: Natural Habitats and Features are addressed in the Ecological Characterization study, and the project will comply with the requirements of the Land Use Code including Section 3.4.1. Department: Planning Services Contact: Clark Mapes, 970-221-6225, cmapes@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Employment-based land use. What is the magnitude of the Modification request? The opportunity cost of the employment-zoned land being used for residential development will need to be addressed. This can be discussed at the meeting, but will also require additional follow up exploration. Staff can assist with that exploration. Issues are city-wide balance of jobs and housing; quality of the site for employment use; magnitude of the modification; and justification for the Modification. Also, the suitability of the residential use may be a consideration.’ Response: A modification for 100% residential (secondary use) was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board on July 14, 2016. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Connecting Walkways. Fundamental code standards require residences to be placed along streets with direct connections to street sidewalks. A neighborhood look and feel, as opposed to an apartment complex oriented to parking lots, is the point and purpose. For this purpose, the streets may be public or private. Those standards would allow for "Major Walkway Spines" to connect to buildings from streets up to 350 feet. Response: A modification request for connecting walkways has been submitted. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Variation Among Repeated Multifamily Buildings. At least three distinctly different building designs are required with no two similar building placed next to each other. The point and purpose is similar to requirements for orientation to neighborhood streets -- to create a neighborhood as opposed to an apartment complex. The concept plan suggests a single 12-plex which adds a second multi-family building design to the 11 24-plexes. Much more variation would need to be explored if the project were to move forward. The garages with duplexes above are not considered multi family buildings for purposes of this requirement. This will require significant attention -- the requirements have been adopted in response to community dissatisfaction with apartment complexes with multiple large buildings in plans that generally look like the concept plan. Response: The architectural elevations are varied on 11 distinct building types. The varied elevations are unified by a similar architectural theme and material palette. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Harmony Road Gateway and River Valley Landscaping. The site is within a "Community Gateway Area", and within the Poudre River Valley. This area has long been envisioned as being characterized by an emphasis on river valley landscaping as a defining characteristic. For example, generous setbacks from Harmony Road with belts and groves of cottonwoods have begun to establish a theme for this area in existing and approved development. A 4 minimum 80-foot landscape setback is required along Harmony Road. This should be landscaped to emphasize the river valley setting and reinforce the gateway character. Any parking abutting the setback area should be thoroughly screened to a height of about 3 feet. Response: An emphasis on a river valley landscape is placed on the northeast corner of the site at the intersection of Harmony Road and Strauss Cabin Road. Buildings are set back from this area, creating a large space with a wetland and surrounding river valley themed landscape. Cottonwoods are placed in informal groupings among native grasses, select shrubs, river boulders and gabion walls. The river landscape theme is envisioned to carry throughout the site in a more manicured form and will be an interesting compliment to the modern building architecture. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Office Building Relationships. The 5-story office buildings shown on the concept plan do not appear to reflect an emphasis on the river valley landscape setting tucked behind cottonwood groves. This emphasis on landscape is unique and different than in other areas of the City. Response: Office buildings are no longer proposed for this project. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Office Building Relationships. The design of the office buildings in response to the setting will be very important given their impact on the gateway area context. This will need additional follow up exploration. Response: The project is 100% residential and will not have an office component, however the architecture is developed to be compatible with the adjacent commercial properties. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Sewer service. I assume the applicant is aware of the sewer situation - need to annex into District? Need lift station coordination with the District and other owners in the area? Response: Yes – we will be applying for inclusion and tying into the lift station proposed with the project on the east side of Strauss Cabin (H25). Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Larimer County Road Impact Fees and Street Oversizing Fees are due at the time of building permit. Please contact Matt Baker at 224-6108 if you have any questions. Response: Noted and will be paid accordingly. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The City's Transportation Development Review Fee (TDRF) is due at the time of submittal. For additional information on these fees, please see: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/dev-review.php Response: Fee is being provided. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of this project, shall be replaced or restored to City of Fort Collins standards at the Developer's expense prior to 5 the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. All public sidewalk, driveways and ramps existing or proposed adjacent or within the site need to meet ADA standards, if they currently do not, they will need to be reconstructed so that they do meet current ADA standards as a part of this project. Response: Noted Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Any public improvements must be designed and built in accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). They are available online at: http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/UrbanSt.htm Response: Noted Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: This project is responsible for dedicating any right-of-way and easements that are necessary for this project. This shall include the standard utility easements that are to be provided behind the right-of-way (15 foot along an arterial – this shall be separate from the easement the district holds for the water main along Harmony, and 9 foot along all other street classifications). Right of Way will need to be dedicated on Strauss Cabin based on the preliminary design that has been identified with the application that is in for review to the east and for any right turn lanes that are needed into this site. Additional Right of Way may be required to accommodate a right turn lane off of Harmony Road onto Strauss Cabin. Response: We have added a new 15’ UE behind the sidewalk along Harmony. The design for the property to the east of Strauss Cabin is the basis of our H23 road design. A 15’ UE has been added to the west side of Strauss Cabin. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Utility plans will be required and a Development Agreement will be recorded once the project is finalized. Response: Noted Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: A Development Construction Permit (DCP) will need to be obtained prior to starting any work on the site. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: This project will be responsible for a Repay to the city for the Harmony Frontage for the local street portion of asphalt and road improvements. Response: Noted Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The frontage of Strauss Cabin will need to be designed and constructed (curb, gutter, parkway and sidewalk) and the medians if not already existing may need to be constructed in order to control access into the site. Response: Please see attached prelim plans for the Strauss Cabin interim and ultimate road design. The median is shown with the ultimate Strauss Cabin design. This will not be required until future phases of the project on the east side of Strauss Cabin (H25) are developed. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 6 08/18/2015: Harmony Road frontage will need to be improved. This includes the detached sidewalk and the pork chop associated with the right turn lane at the SW corner of Harmony and Strauss Cabin Road. Response: These have been added. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: A right turn lane off of Harmony Road onto Strauss Cabin is planed with the project to the east. These plans need to show where that will be and that the detached sidewalk and parkway can be accommodated behind this turn lane. Response: Please see attached plans for design. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Any other improvements needed to support the development will need to be designed and constructed with the development. Response: Agreed Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Plans identify that one of the ditches will be relocated. All ditch crossings across rights-of-way need to occur perpendicularly. The existing angled crossings will need to be modified with the development of the site and sleeved under the roadway per standards. Response: The Box Elder Ditch crossing under Strauss Cabin will need to be relocated to the south of the existing crossing (as shown on the attached plans). A similar angle will be used in the new crossing which is not perpendicular. We have met with the Engineering and Maintenance group and it has been determined that a variance will be acceptance for the angled crossing. This variance request will be submitted at a later date. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The access proposed off of Harmony road west of Strauss Cabin will need additional evaluation to determine if it is feasible. Sight distance will need to be evaluated for vehicles turning into this access and turning out of this access. The hill creates concern regarding the visibility and safety of an access along here. Spacing from Strauss Cabin will also be a concern and where it will fall within the turn lane and what additional length of turn lane will be needed if the access is approved. Any access off of Harmony Rd will require an amendment to the Harmony Road access plan. Response: An access off Harmony Road is no longer being pursed. There will however be an emergency access point as shown on the attached plans. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Access onto Strauss Cabin will need to meet the spacing standards for a minor arterial. A full movement access point will be allowed where it aligns with the full movement access that has been identified as a part of the ODP for the property to the east. This location is roughly 1320 feet from the Harmony intersection. A right-in right–out access could be provided between Harmony and the full movement access point. Any submittal will need to show how the access points proposed on this site align with that ODP. Response: The northern H23 entrance aligns with Hacienda Drive and the southern H23 access aligns with “Road A” from the Harmony & Strauss Cabin Convenience Shopping Center Subdivision Filing No. 1 (H25) plans. As per the H25 OPD, the Hacienda access point will ultimately become a right-in, right-out only. The current H23 TIA shows that during the interim period this access point can function as a full movement intersection with full buildout of H23 and Filing No. 1 of H25. 7 Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The plans for Brookfield show a trail that is shown to go across the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch. I don’t know where it goes from there and whether or not is it to traverse through this site. Response: This crossing is not currently shown in the plans and conversations are ongoing with Clark Mapes concerning whether this crossing is required and if this is the appropriate location. FCRID has recently been contacted and is not in agreement with a pedestrian crossing of their ditch. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: LCUASS parking setbacks (Figure 19-6) apply and will need to be followed. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: All fences, barriers, posts, irrigation lines, or other encroachments within the public right-of-way are only permitted upon approval of an encroachment permit. Applications for encroachment permits shall be made to Engineering Department for review and approval prior to installation. Encroachment items shall not be shown on the site plan as they may not be approved, need to be modified or moved, or if the permit is revoked then the site/ landscape plan is in non-compliance. Response: At this point, no encroachments are anticipated. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Any rain gardens within the right-of-way cannot be used to treat the development/ site storm runoff. We can look at the use of rain gardens to treat street flows – the design standards for these are still in development. Response: At this point, no raingardens are anticipated. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Bike parking required for the project cannot be placed within the right-of-way and if placed just behind the right-of-way need to be placed so that when bikes are parked they do not extend into the right-of-way. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: In regards to construction of this site. The public right-of-way shall not be used for staging or storage of materials or equipment associated with the Development, nor shall it be used for parking by any contractors, subcontractors, or other personnel working for or hired by the Developer to construct the Development. The Developer will need to find a location(s) on private property to accommodate any necessary Staging and/or parking needs associated with the completion of the Development . Information on the location(s) of these areas will be required to be provided to the City as a part of the Development Construction Permit application. Response: Agreed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/24/2015 08/24/2015: In going through the development review process, the following standards would apply: 3.4.1(D)(1) If the development site contains, or is within five hundred (500) feet of, a natural habitat or feature, or if it is determined by the Director, upon information or from inspection, that the site likely includes areas with wildlife, 8 plant life and/or other natural characteristics in need of protection, then the developer shall provide to the City an ecological characterization report prepared by a professional qualified in the areas of ecology, wildlife biology or other relevant discipline. At least ten (10) working days prior to the submittal of a project development plan application for all or any portion of a property, a comprehensive ecological characterization study of the entire property must be prepared by a qualified consultant and submitted to the City for review… and, the ECS shall describe, without limitation, the following: 3.4.1(D)(1)(b) the boundary of wetlands in the area and a description of the ecological functions and characteristics provided by those wetlands, and 3.4.1(D)(1)(i) wildlife movement corridors, and 3.4.1(D)(2) In establishing the boundaries of a wetland, the applicant and the Director shall use soil samples, ecological characterization and hydrological evidence, to the extent that such are in existence or are requested of and provided by the applicant..The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers standards and guidelines shall be used to identify the boundaries of any “jurisdictional wetland.” 3.4.1(E)(2)(b) If the development causes any disturbance within the buffer zone, whether by approval of the decision maker or otherwise, the applicant shall undertake restoration and mitigation measures within the buffer zone such as regrading and/or the replanting of native vegetation. The applicant shall undertake mitigation measures to restore any damaged or lost natural resource either on-site or off-site at the discretion of the decision maker. Any such mitigation or restoration shall be at least equal in ecological value to the loss suffered by the community because of the disturbance, and shall be based on such mitigation and restoration plans and reports as have been requested, reviewed and approved by the decision maker. Unless otherwise authorized by the decision maker, if existing vegetation (whether native or non-native) is destroyed or disturbed, such vegetation shall be replaced with native vegetation and landscaping. Response: The Ecological Characterization Study for the Harmony 23 Property submitted to the City of Fort Collins on September 14 addresses these comments. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/24/2015 08/24/2015: Given the site’s known natural habitats and features, it appears difficult to accommodate both development and habitat protection. Given that, it is likely that some level of off-site mitigation would occur, should the property develop and should the wetlands indeed be jurisdictional. As I mentioned in our meeting, the determination of buffering, mitigation and/or restoration, is based on going through the entire development review process, which would include the completion of an Ecological Characterization Study to determine if the ecological values or functions provided on the site. Furthermore, if a rare or sensitive species was found on the site, mitigation may not be an option. Again, all of this would be evaluated through the development 9 review process. Recall that if mitigation is an option, that you will be responsible not only for the design and construction costs for the created wetland and/or ditches, but also for the monitoring costs to ensure that mitigation is successful. I hope this provides clarity as to how the City views our natural habitats and features. Should you choose to develop this property, the City and the applicant would work together to discuss the entire requirements of the Land Use Code, not just those in Section 3.4.1 outlined here. Response: The Ecological Characterization Study for the Harmony 23 Property submitted to the City of Fort Collins on September 14 addresses these comments. Department: Light And Power Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/11/2015 08/11/2015: Light & Power has existing conduit adjacent to this site along Harmony Rd. and stubbed on the S. side of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet along the W. side of Strauss Cabin Rd. Light & Power will need to get across the Inlet and Boxelder Ditch to creat a loop feed for this development. Coordinating this work with the improvements on Strauss Cabin Rd. will be very important. Response: Noted. We will be in contact with Light and Power to coordinate this looping. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/11/2015 08/11/2015: Any relocation or modification to existing electric facilities will be at the developers expense. Response: Agreed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/11/2015 08/11/2015: Transformer pads will need to be within 10' of a paved surface accessible by a line truck. Meters will need to be ganged on one end of the buildings. Meter locations will need to be shown on the site plan. Response: Please see Site and Utility Plans for locations Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/11/2015 08/11/2015: C-1 Forms and One-line diagrams will need to be submitted to Light & Power Engineering for all commercial services. Response: Noted Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/11/2015 08/11/2015: Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges and system modification charges, where applicable, will apply. See the following link for estimated electric charges and Electric Policies, Practices and Procedures. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers Response: This has been reviewed. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: FIRE LANES 10 General fire access is required to within 150' of all exterior portions of the ground floor. Additional aerial fire access requirements apply to buildings over 30' in height as defined by the 20102 IFC. Code language provided below. > IFC 503.1.1: Approved fire Lanes shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. When any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access, the fire code official is authorized to increase the dimension if the building is equipped throughout with an approved, automatic fire-sprinkler system. Response: All buildings are sprinklered and able to reach all portions of exterior walls with a 200’ hose. In addition, there are corridors through most buildings that provide additional routes for hoses. Perhaps a meeting between the design team and PFA could help to provide more detail and feedback. AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS - WHERE REQUIRED > IFC D105.1: Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. Response: Aerial apparatus access has been provided adjacent to the buildings that are over 30’ in height (buildings O-X). Buildings W and X are rotated to provide more interest along the Harmony frontage (at the suggestion of the Planner). This results in portions of the buildings being beyond 30’ from the drive aisle. AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS - WIDTH > IFC D105.2; FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006; and Local Amendments: Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 30 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. Response: 30’ is provided for all fire apparatus access roads. AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS - PROXIMITY TO BUILDING > IFC D105.3: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Response: Aerial apparatus access has been provided adjacent to the buildings that are over 30’ in height (buildings O-X). Buildings W and X are rotated to provide more interest along the Harmony frontage (at the suggestion of the Planner). This results in portions of the buildings being beyond 30’ from the drive aisle. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: ROOF ACCESS > IFC 504.3: New buildings four or more stories in height shall be provided with a stairway to the roof. Stairway access to the roof shall be in accordance with IFC 1009.12. Such stairways shall be marked at street and floor levels with a 11 sign indicating that the stairway continues to the roof. Response: The project does not have any structures taller than 3 stories, Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM Buildings will require an automatic fire sprinkler system under separate permits. Please contact Assistant Fire Marshal, Joe Jaramillo with any fire sprinkler related questions at 970-416-2868. Response: Understood. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: FIRE STANDPIPE SYSTEM IFC Sections 905 and 913: Standpipe systems shall be provided in new buildings and structures in accordance with Section 905 or the 2012 International Fire Code. Approved standpipe systems shall be installed throughout buildings where the floor level of the highest story is located more than 30 feet above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access, or where the floor level of the lowest story is located more than 30 feet below the highest level of fire department vehicle access. The standpipe system shall be capable of supplying at minimum of 100 psi to the top habitable floor. An approved fire pump may be required to achieve this minimum pressure. Buildings equipped with standpipes are required to have a hydrant within 100 feet of the Fire Department Connection. Response: Understood. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: WATER SUPPLY Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. The installation of private hydrants require special approved and permitting. Private fire hydrants shall have an approved maintenance plan as per IFC 507.5.3. Fire hydrants must be the type approved by the water district having jurisdiction and the Fire Department. Code language provided below. > IFC 508.1 and Appendix B: COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS: Hydrants to provide 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter. Response: This is going to be a residential development and will follow residential standards. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: HYDRANT FOR STANDPIPE SYSTEMS > IFC 507.1.1: Buildings equipped with a standpipe system installed in accordance with Section 905 shall have a fire hydrant within 100 feet of the fire department connections. Exception: The distance shall be permitted to exceed 100 feet where approved by the fire code official. Response: Noted Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/10/2015 08/10/2015: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft and in a sensitive area, therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for 12 FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan, Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. Due to this project's proximity to an irrigation canal running through and adjacent please make sure to give a clear description of how those two features will be prevented from having sediment added to these drainage courses. If you need clarification concerning this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com Response: Erosion control plans, report and security calculations will be provided at a later date. Contact: Mark Taylor, 970-416-2494, mtaylor@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/19/2015 08/19/2015: A portion of this site is located within the FEMA-regulatory Poudre River 500-year floodplain, and any development must satisfy all safety requirements of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code. A FEMA Flood Risk Map will be distributed at the PDR meeting. Response: 500-yr floodplain requirements will be followed. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/19/2015 08/19/2015: Life-safety and emergency response critical facilities are not allowed within the 500-year floodplain. Response: The project is 100% residential. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/19/2015 08/19/2015: FEMA has begun to remap the Poudre River. They are calling this RiskMAP, and it will be a multi-year project. Property owners near the river need to be aware that the floodplain may be remapped and may change on their property. Furthermore, the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 is removing subsidized flood insurance rates. Complete details regarding implementation by FEMA are unknown at this time. However, what we do know is that future structures that are mapped in the floodplain will not be eligible to receive grandfathered or subsidized rates. We encourage you to elevate the structures as much as possible. We are providing you this information to help you plan for possible future change in the floodplain mapping and already adopted changes in flood insurance. Response: Noted. Thank you for the insight. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/19/2015 08/19/2015: Please contact Mark Taylor, 970.416.2494, mtaylor@fcgov.com, with any questions or comments. Response: Noted Contact: Shane Boyle, 970-221-6339, sboyle@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: A drainage report, erosion control report, and construction plans are required and they must be prepared by a Professional Engineer registered in Colorado. The drainage report must address the four-step process for selecting structural BMPs. There is a final site inspection required when the project is complete and the maintenance is handed over to an HOA or another 13 maintenance organization. The erosion control report requirements are in the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual, Section 1.3.3, Volume 3, Chapter 7 of the Fort Collins Amendments. If you need clarification concerning this section, please contact the Erosion Control Inspector, Jesse Schlam at 224-6015 or jschlam@fcgov.com. Response: The drainage report and construction plans are included with this submittal. The erosion control plan and report will be submitted at a later date. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Onsite detention is required for the runoff volume difference between the 100 year developed inflow rate and the 2 year historic release rate. The drainage outfall for the site is through the property to the east. An off-site drainage easement will be required for this development to obtain an outfall. Response: We are planning to store a portion of the required detention on the property to the east of H23 due to site constraints. Please see attached letter agreeing to the detention and conveyance by that landowner. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: 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-f orms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria) Extended detention is the usual method selected for water quality treatment; however the use of any of the BMPs is encouraged. Response: A majority of the site water quality will be achieved through constructed wetlands in the north and south ponds. There is a small portion of the site between the buildings backing onto Strauss Cabin and the ROW along Strauss Cabin that will be routed directly to the existing gravel ponds on the H25 property. The remaining required water quality will be achieved in these large gravel ponds. Please refer the H23 Drainage Report for additional information. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: 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 for 50% of the new impervious area and 25% of new paved areas must be pervious. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) for all onsite drainage facilities will be included as part of the Development Agreement. More information and links can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/stormwater-quality/low-im pact-development Response: The updated code suggests that using LID techniques for treated 75% of the new impervious area will allow us to bypass the pervious paver criteria. The proposed design incorporates constructed wetlands in both of the detention ponds which will treat more than 75% of the new impervious area. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $7,817/acre ($0.1795 sq.-ft.) for new impervious area over 350 sq.-ft., and there is a $1,045.00/acre ($0.024/sq.-ft.) 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-investmen 14 t-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: Noted Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The design of this site must conform to the drainage basin design of the Cache la Poudre River Master Drainageway Plan as well the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual. Response: This design is in conformance with the Master Plan and Stormwater Manual. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/17/2015 08/17/2015: No comments. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The anticipated traffic volume from this development is substantial and meets the threshold for needing a full Traffic Impact Study. Please have your traffic engineer contact me to scope the study. Among other items, the study will need to include the Strauss Cabin intersections of both Harmony and Kechter. Response: Acknowledged. Done. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Regarding access: It is typical that access be taken off of lower classification roads when possible. This means that access should be off of Strauss Cabin instead of Harmony. If further consideration of an access off of Harmony is desired, then the following would need to be evaluated: adherance to adopted plans, spacing requirements, interaction with turn lanes (for this access and the future right turn lane at Strauss Cabin), sight distance, etc. Response: Acknowledged. There will only be public access on Strauss Cabin Road. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The access points along Strauss Cabin need to meet standards, include auxiliary lanes where warranted, and be consistent with the proposal to the east. The northern most access point shown will likely be a right-in, right-out because of the northbound auxiliary lane needs for the Strauss Cabin approach to Harmony. Response: Acknowledged. This is addressed in the TIS. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: This development needs to plan on completing the frontage (curb gutter and sidewalk) along Harmony and Strauss Cabin. 15 Response: These improvements are a part of the attached construction plans. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The concept design of an ultimate layout for Strauss Cabin / Harmony has been completed and includes a right turn pork chop in the SW corner. This development needs to at a minimum accommodate that, and potentially built it if it isn't built by the time this proposal moves forward. Response: Acknowledged. The site plan shows the right-turn pork chop. Comment Number: Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Shane Boyle, 970-221-6339, sboyle@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: This site is in the City of Fort Collins water service area and will be served by the City. Currently, no water mains exist to the site. Development of this site will require the Developer to construct the off-site infrastructure needed to provide water service to the site. The water supply will require a looped main and a route approved by the City of Fort Collins Utility. Response: As shown on the attached, a 12” watermain will be extended north on Cinquefoil and then east under the edge of pavement on Harmony Road. From Harmony it will travel south down the emergency access road to tie into the H23 water network. The second offsite water tie will be an 8” line from the Brookfield Subdivision. This line will run east from the intersection of Le Fever Dr and Northern Lights Drive, through a HOA parcel, and then under the FCRID to tie in to the H23 water network. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The site is in the City of Fort Collins sanitary sewer service area; however the site can be served more economically by South Fort Collins Sanitation District. Please coordinate with the District for an approved design. Response: We will be applying for inclusion to the South Fort Collins Sanitation District and tying into the lift station constructed with the H25 project on the east side of Strauss Cabin. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The water conservation standards for landscape and irrigation will apply. Information on these requirements can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/standards Response: Noted. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: Development fees and water rights will be due at building permit. Response: Noted and will be paid accordingly. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/20/2015 08/20/2015: City standard is 12” water mains in all roadways located on ¼-section lines, which is the responsibility of the development. There may be a desire on the City’s part to increase the size of the main in Harmony, which will be coordinated as development progresses and will be at the cost of the City. There are also other development proposals in the area that will be required to construct some of these improvements, depending on timing of the development approvals and construction. Whichever development ends up building these improvements will have the ability to file a Developer Repay in order to recoup some of the improvement costs from subsequent developments in the area. Response: The attached design shows a proposed 12” line in Harmony, but all other lines are currently 16 shown as 8”. Department: Zoning Contact: Gary Lopez, 970-416-2338, glopez@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The property is located in the less restrictive general sign district. Response: Noted. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The garages along the north property line look like RR box cars on a track so any consideration of adjoining 2 or 3 together and adding articulation varying with at least a couple of elevations differences. This would provide for few add'l outside parking places OR location for some trash enclosures (especially on the ends) and add'l landscaping. Response: These units are two levels with five garages on the bottom and two residences on top. Since the PDR submittal, these buildings have been reduced from 25 to 14 and now provide pockets of landscape and parking. The buildings are well-articulated and act as an interesting retaining wall along this very steep border of the site, please refer to the elevations. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2015 08/18/2015: The drive way and parking area long Harmony Rd. leading to the garages should be tucked behind the buildings . Response: All parking is now located behind the buildings.