Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWATERS' EDGE - PDP - PDP160006 - CORRESPONDENCE -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 March 09, 2016 Terence Hoaglund VIGNETTE STUDIOS PO BOX 1889 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Waters' Edge, PDP160006, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Jason Holland, at 970-224-6126 or jholland@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Building elevations, prior to hearing. Per LUC 3.5.2(C)(2) and 3.8.30 single-family attached and multi-family standards, more variation is needed amongst the buildings. Building variation must be more than variety in color schemes. Suggested options for the single-family attached could include variations in street entrance door styles, garage door styles, porch column styles, masonry styles, paint color palette, etc. There is no formula to address this but if the overall building form stays the same, the intent is to do more than repeat the same unit details throughout the project and to provide subordinant visual interest and uniqueness, within the overall theme. For the multi-family 8-plex buildings, the same comments apply. Also would like to show ground or building mounted screen panels for meter gangs, also possibly for ac units if they are clustered. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Building elevations, prior to hearing. Please include a representative material /color palette information. This could be a separate sheet or incorporated into the existing sheets with a key code. Another issue we see is that elevations on paper often do not reflect grading and there can be issues with how much foundation or porch is exposed and these areas stand out in the streetscape and are visually jarring. With the plans, add notes/callouts showing how exposed vertical concrete areas can be treated and show typical detail enlargements. Areas could be stained/painted/textured, etc. Masonry could follow finish grade, etc. Please feel free to call with questions. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Landscaping, prior to hearing. Landscape plans for the multi-family and single-family attached areas need to be provided. Typical foundation details could be provided at the PDP hearing phase, followed by full plans at FDP. Issues that we’ve seen recently that need to be reflected in the landscape plans include: screening/softening AC units and utilities, full season screening including using evergreen material in addition to deciduous shrubs, overuse and small 1 gallon initial size of perennial grasses used for screening, screening and softening of concrete associated with elevated porches and other exposed turn-down slab areas. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Prior to hearing, will need to coordinate revisions to site/landscape notes. These will need to address overall HOA responsibilities for maintenance, and oil/gas areas. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Need off-street parking information added to the land use table. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: We are recommending that you add conceptual elevation examples and lot configurations for the single-family detached homes into the PDP set, to be listed as character examples. This would establish the general character anticipated and that major changes from proposed would require a plan amendment. This could also help show the intent of the alternative compliance for reduced setbacks. It would also help with the justification for the reduced 100' O&G setback which refernces accommodating accessory dwelling units above the garages for multi-generational living and caretaker suites. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Project has been reviewed/redlined for tree/utility conflicts. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Will need additional details at final plan including landscape details, mail kiosk locations (if large), trash enclosures, fencing, etc. Also note information or details for the retaining walls. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: At Final, consider adding an architectural panel detail for meter screening to have a more finished look than painting to match the façade. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/29/2016 02/29/2016: Need to address through notes process and any general requirements to add solar facilities, gardens etc. to oil/gas areas. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Some of the retaining walls are quite tall, can these be terraced especially at perimeter transitions such as buffer zones and SE retention pond. Retention pond will be the front door view and the edge view to the back of the homes at this corner seems a bit artificial, too hard of an edge. Also are there options for materials or material patterns, gabion walls, ashlar patterns instead of the standard running bond keystone wall pattern. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Abandoned oil well sites are dryland seeded. Please think about the maintenance and programing of these areas as the project moves forward. What recreation uses are expected and should 3 rail fencing be placed in certain areas to restrict foot traffic and degredation of the planted areas. Are these areas expected to be irrigated, perhaps an underground irrigation system can be used intermittantly and do the civil plans need to be changed to accommodate irrigation. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: See redlines for additional minor comments. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The modification requests have been reviewed by planning and are generally acceptable. Notes will need to be added to the plan to generally clarify HOA responsibilities for continued maintenance and operations of these areas. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Sexton, 970-221-6501, ksexton@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Variance request letters will need to be submitted for each variance including variances that had been previously approved. They will be reviewed and evaluated once received. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: The current site layout does not comply with the Land Use Code street spacing minimums in 3.6.3 D. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please submit turning templates for left turns along Morningstar Way east of the roundabout. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please submit a roundabout design report. The roundabout design criteria have changed and we will need more information before the roundabout can be approved to determine if design meets standards. I have an example of a recent report for your use. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please submit a plan for mitigation of high bedrock surfaces and/or an underdrain design to dissipate high groundwater. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: LCUASS require that streets adjacent to multi-family development are widened to a local collector cross-section. Fleet Drive, Cruiser Lane, and Longboat Way shall be widened to the 36¿ roadway (local collector) in order to meet this standard. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Existing ROW shouldn’t be shown on the plat as part of the property. Is the ROW being vacated and then re-dedicated? Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Much of the DA language will remain the same, including the agreements regarding the median maintenance - we can have a more detailed discussion about this later on in the process. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Plank Lane eyebrow: sidewalk (along with all necessary ramps/detectable warnings) will need to be added to the median per LCUASS Figure 7-23. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please demonstrate how the parking requirement of Figure 7-23 is being satisfied for the Plank Lane eyebrow. Current lane width in the Plank Lane eyebrow does not allow for any on-street parking. If the width remains as is, no parking signs/striping will need to be shown on the signing/striping plan. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Comments 13-22 are FDP-level comments that I was able to make due to the high level of detail in the initial submittal. This is not a comprehensive list of final level comments and additional comments will be made throughout the review process. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: For the roundabout splitter islands: ADA requires that detectable warnings are installed on the surface of the cut through on each side, located 6”-8” back from the street. If the cut through is <6’ in length, the detectable warnings cover the entire area. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please add arrows with grade labels on all of the intersection details. Please also add transition points and spot elevations according to LCUASS Figures 7-27 and 7-28. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: On flowline profiles where there is a sump inlet, please show that the grade is at least 0.5% rather than a vertical curve. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please label radii in horizontal road plans. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please update General Notes -see Appendix E. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please update Construction Notes - see Appendix E. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: On Sheet C-110 please revise Note 4 to include the correct lot numbers. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please add Cruiser Lane to the cross sections sheet. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please label private streets/drives as private. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: The following drawings need to be updated: 803, 1601, 1602, 1606, 1607, 1606(a), 1605, 710, 708. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/02/2016: Letters of intent shall be submitted to the City for any offsite easements prior to hearing. Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Information about the ROW vacation process can be found here: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/pdf/VacationofRowinfo2011.pdf. ROW cannot be vacated where the roads are already built and being utilized. Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: The TDRF paperwork that was submitted identifies that there are 249 detached single family homes proposed on this site. Per the site plan 222 are proposed. If the site plan is correct then then the project is due a refund for additional fees paid. We just need to clarify the number of units. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: The Natural Habitat Buffer zone and edge of wetlands need to be delineated and labeled on all sheets of the site, grading, utility, and landscape plans that include this area. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please add an Environmental Planner signature to all utility plans that show the buffer zone. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Please add the following statement to the notes on any sheets that show the Habitat Buffer: Please see Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within the buffer zone. This is already included on some, but not all, of the relevant sheets. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: A note should be added to all sheets of the site, landscape, utility, grading, and storm sewer plan that include the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone noting that the natural habitat area is meant to be maintained in a native landscape. This will help preserve the intention behind the buffer zones and the natural features into the future. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheet 1. The standard notes for site and landscape plans have been recently updated. Please use the latest notes, which the project planner can provide. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheet L15. Will the abandoned oil well area be landscaped with turf, native seed mix, or something else? Please label or add symbology to match the legend. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheets L27 and L28. Please label the path going through the landscaped area south of the single-family lots, and clarify whether the path is existing or proposed and whether it is paved or soft surface. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheets L29 and L35. Please label the areas shown with dashed lines that are not in the legend. Are these paths, utilities, or something else? Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheets L33 and L34. There is an area in the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone labeled as turf, but it appears to be a path. Only native plantings will be allowed within the buffer zone, so turf is not an allowable material to use. Please update and/or clarify. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheets L33, L34, L35. The Natural Habitat Buffer Zone and edge of wetlands should be clearly delineated and labeled. It's hard to tell where the boundaries are, and therefore whether the buffer standards are being met. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheet L33. Please label and provide additional detail for the retaining wall shown in the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone. What material(s) will be used? To ensure that the retaining wall is compatible with the natural character of the buffer zone, a naturalized retaining wall consisting of boulders , stacked rock, or other natural materials would be more appropriate than cement or something similar. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Landscape Plan Sheet 36. What is the circular area shown as turf within the buffer zone? Please clarify. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Native Seed Mix. Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus) is native to Larimer County but not Fort Collins (grows at higher elevations). Please replace with Elymus trachycaulus or Elymus Canadensis in the native seed mix. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: The Natural Habitat Buffer Zone should be protected from spillover lighting. Please provide details on the light fixtures to be used in public/common areas and on multi-family buildings and the clubhouse. Please ensure that lights are placed so has not to create any spillover into the buffer zone or onto Richards Lake. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: Is the trail shown in the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone existing or proposed? The linework for this on sheets 2 and 6 of the site plan is confusing - please show with something other than a dashed line. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: The line delineating the edge of wetlands along Richards Lake is not clear, and it is difficult to determine the width of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone in all locations. Please make sure the arrow is pointing to the correct line, include the symbology in the legend, and/or label the dimensions for the buffer zone. (See sheet 2 of the Site Plan, for example). If the buffer from the wetlands is less than 100 feet in any location, a table will need to be included on the site plan that calculates the amount of acreage required to be protected with a 100-foot buffer compared to the amount of area actually protected within the buffer. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: List the percentage of each tree species used and adjust totals if need to meet LUC 3.2.1 D 3 Minimum Species Diversity. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: Add the following City of fort Collins Notes. These notes are available from the City Planner or City Forester. General Landscape Notes Tree Protection Notes Street Tree Notes Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: Show actual locations of all stop signs with a distinct symbol and also identified the stop sign symbol in a key. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: Provide a typical midblock and corner lot detail that shows the tree separation standard distances. Streetlights: 40 feet shade trees and 15 feet ornamental trees Water and Sewer service lines: 6 feet Driveways: 8 feet Stop signs: 20 feet Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: The fruit trees in the landscape island in Midship Way on sheet L13 will cause a problem with fruit drop over the street. Substitute these fruit trees with and expectable ornamental tree. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: Street tree selection comments: Use Chanticleer Pear in place of Autumn Blaze Pear in all parkway and median locations. Chanticleer has a more upright form and better disease resistance. Use Chanticleer Pear in place of Spring Snow Crab in the few locations where Spring Snow is used as a street tree. This is on sheet L28 and maybe a few others. Skymaster English Oak has been taken out of production. Substitute it with another canopy street tree species. Evaluate using Boulevard American Linden or American Sentry American Linden in place of Skymaster. Some use of both of these lindends could be beneficial. Use Shumard Oak for around half of the Texas Red Oak used as street trees. They are very similar and this would add some diversity. Evaluate if some Catalpa can also be used as Street Trees at appropriate locations. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: Private Tree Comments: Swamp White Oak is not adapted to the soils in Fort Collins so it should be substituted with another species. Narrowleaf Cottonwood produces an abundance of suckers. Using Lanceleaf Cottonwood or Plains Cottonwood in its place is a much better choice to avoid this problem. Scotch pine is being affected by a number of insect and diseases. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: Will there be any existing trees impacted by the project. Clarify on the plans any impact to trees along the shore. Contact the City Forester for an on-site meeting to further evaluate and obtain any inventory and mitigation information. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/09/2016 03/09/2016: There are overhead electric utility lines along the west side of Turnberry north of Brightwater. Will these lines be undergrounded? If they are to remain show their location on the plans. Street trees placed under these lines will need to be smaller ornamental trees. Crabapple trees such as Red Baron or Thunderchild, the Japanese tree lilac or thornless cockspur hawthorn are smaller trees that might work under the lines. There are some existing ash trees planted under the lines just north of Brightwater that will need to be changed out. These ash trees have never established and are small caliper. These ash need to be shown as exiting and to remove and replace. Department: Internal Services Contact: Sarah Carter, 970-416-2748, scarter@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 02/26/2016: Please schedule a pre-submittal meeting for this project. Pre-Submittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The proposed project should be in the early to mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects should email scarter@fcgov.com to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to present site plans, floor plans, and elevations and be able to discuss code issues of occupancy, square footage and type of construction being proposed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 02/26/2016: Construction shall comply with the following adopted codes as amended: 2012 International Building Code (IBC) 2012 International Residential Code (IRC) 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC) 2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) 2012 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2014 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado 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. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 02/26/2016: City of Fort Collins IBC amendments require a full NFPA-13 sprinkler system in multifamily units with an exception for buildings with up to 6 dwelling units that are not more than 2 stories nor more 5000 sqft per floor. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/26/2016 Building code and State statute CRS 9-5 requires project provide accessible units. This project has 130 units (single family attached and multifamily combined) and will need to achieve at least 60 points. A Department: Light And Power Contact: Luke Unruh, 9704162724, lunruh@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: Light and Power has electric facilities on the south side of Brightwater Dr. that could be utilized to provide power to the proposed site. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: Streetlights will be placed along public streets. A 40 feet separation on both sides of the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. A 15 feet separation on both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and streetlights. Please contact Light & Power to coordinate streetlight locations. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges, and any necessary system modification charges will apply. Please see the Electric Estimating Calculator and Electric Construction Policies, Practices & Procedures at the following link: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/03/2016 03/03/2016: Please contact Luke Unruh at Utility - Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 970-416-2724. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Don Kapperman, , Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Don Kapperman with Comcast has responded to the first round of review and has indicated that he has no issues with the first round, and would like to see plans as they are revised. Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Comments from Boxelder and ELCO are pending and will be sent by planning in a follow up comment memo. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Megan emailed me the following comment: I'm sending this comment about the lot numbering for Waters Edge Replat No 1. As far as the lots are labeled, they have skipped lot 121, lot 125 and lot 137 in the numbering sequence. I don't know if this was intentional or not. There must be more that need correcting since the front page legend is calling for 331 total lots and the lot numbering sequence ends at 336. This is the only comment I have at this time for said plat. Megan Harrity Subdivisions Larimer County Assessor 970-498-7065 mharrity@larimer.org Department: Park Planning Contact: Matt Day Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Park Planning has reviewed the plans and we are good with the PDP application for Water’s Edge. I will continue work with Bill Swalling on the raw water delivery system, details, and any needed agreements. Please note, We are currently working on a raw water delivery analysis for the parks in that area and we would like to have that study verify our needs for this project. Contact Matt Day for follow up: (970) 224-6096 Mday@fcgov.com Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: WATER SUPPLY A hydrant is required within 400' of any single family residence and within 300' of any commercial or multi-family building. The current hydrant plan does not cover all areas of the development as per code. Refer to redlines for changes: 4 hydrants relocated & 1 hydrant added. 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 > IFC 508.1 and Appendix B: RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS: Within the Urban Growth Area, hydrants to provide 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT Private drives that are dedicated as EAE's and shall be labeled as such on future plan sets. General fire lane specifications shall apply. Fire lanes shall not be less than 20' in width and are required to be properly identified with no parking signage. Sign placement needs to be labeled on future plan sets. Code language provided below. > SIGNS: IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. > SIGN PLACEMENT: IFC D103.6.1; ROADS 20 TO 26 FEET IN WIDTH: Fire lane signs as specified in Section D103.6 shall be posted on both sides of fire apparatus access roads that are 20 to 26 feet wide. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: CLUBHOUSE Should the building exceed 5000 square feet it shall be sprinklered or fire contained. If containment is used, the containment construction shall be reviewed and approved by the Poudre Fire Authority prior to installation. In addition, an automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies if the occupant load will exceed 99. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: STREET NAMING Jetty Lane is not continuous and the two affected private drives need to be named separately. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: WAYFINDING/ADDRESSING The applicant needs to be aware that the current site plan is likely to promote address confusion in certain areas associated with the SF Attached and Multi-Family products. Some of this confusion may be mitigated with naming of private drives or with adequate route finding signage. A plan for wayfinding needs to be submitted for review and approval by time of FDP approval. Code language provided below. In addition, the dead-end lanes Jetty, Skiff, Squib will require 100 block identification on the street signs to assist with route finding. > PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: IFC 505.1: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible, visible from the street or road fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/01/2016 03/01/2016: LAKE ACCESS The applicant response letter is unclear in explaining how emergency access is being provided to the lakefront and existing boat launch/recreational area. In the event of a water emergency; fire, ambulance and police will be responding to the area and a means of accessing critical areas is required. Code language provided below. > FIRE LANES: 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. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/22/2016 02/22/2016: Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please by FDP submit; Erosion Control Plan (Based upon the redlines from 2-22-2016), Erosion Control Report (Based upon the current drainage criteria), and an Escrow / Security Calculation (Based upon the BMPs depicted in the erosion control plan). If you need clarification concerning the erosion control section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Please provide an update to the SWMM with the new configuration of quantity detention. This will size the conveyance required to transfer the lost volume in detention pond 110 to the property to the east. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: This development is required to meet the current LID standards. This includes 25% of the site's vehicular impervious area of multifamily portions to be porous pavement as well as 50% of the overall site to drain into a LID technique. Please document the development is meeting the requirement per City standards. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The LID techniques will need to be constructed per City criteria and per the City's standard details. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: An off-site drainage easement is required for the conveyance and quantity detention of flows on the property to the east of the site. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The development is required to meet the City's Detention Pond Landscape Standards for all the ponds. Due to detention pond 110 already being constructed, the standards would apply to any alterations in grading and landscaping. Additional landscaping can be used to help mitigate the existing lack of variation in pond grading. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: The retaining walls along the north and west sides of detention basin 110 are near 12 feet high in certain places. Retaining walls of this height create a safety hazard/concern as well as an aesthetic concern. To mitigate the height of these retaining walls regarding safety and aesthetics, the City requires that the walls be tiered to two or more walls with a landscaping bench between each section. This will reduce additional volume in detention basin 110, which will need to be replaced in another location. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Colorado Revised Statute 37-92-602 (8) requires that all quantity detention basins drain within a designated time. Detention basin 110 may not meet this statute due to the restricted release rate of 1 cfs, which was required by the owners of Larimer #8 Irrigation Canal. This issue needs further investigation on what will be allowed if the existing detention basin were to be modified or if the detention basin were to be left in it's current condition. The City suggests the involvement of the ditch company to help in facilitating a solution. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Please change the titles and/or title blocks to "Waters Edge Second Filing". Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Please change the titles and/or title blocks to "Waters Edge Second Filing". Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: 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’. Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Barn Swallow Circle is shown as one word and two. Please be consistent throughout the plan set. Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 03/08/2016 03/08/2016: There are match line issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 03/08/2016 03/08/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 03/08/2016 03/08/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 03/08/2016 03/08/2016: Please tie the coordinate values shown for utilities to the project boundary. We would prefer that this be done by adding property corner values to each sheet, or showing the property corner values on the horizontal control plans and adding a note to each sheet with coordinate values. Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 03/08/2016 03/08/2016: There is text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Please change the titles and/or title blocks to "Waters Edge Second Filing". Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are spelling issues with some text. See redlines. Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are match line issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Depending on street vacations, please make changes as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please change the title & title blocks to "Waters Edge Second Filing". Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please add new title commitment information as available. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please make changes to the vicinity map as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: There are 3 Lot numbers missing. Please number them consecutively. See redlines. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: The center point of the oil wells needs to be locatable. See redlines. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please describe the found monuments. See redlines. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: All Lots must be shown completely on at least one sheet. See redlines. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please add the legend to all sheets, if there is space. See redlines. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: As discussed with Steve Parks, what is the purpose of the bubble out in the Midship Way right of way on sheet 5? See redlines. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See redlines. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Please label all surrounding properties with "Unplatted" or the subdivision name. This includes properties across right of ways. See redlines. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: Lots 147 & 148 are mislabeled. See redlines. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: All easements must be labeled & locatable. See redlines. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/04/2016 03/04/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Why are the 9' easements along the streets, Utility & Drainage? Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Please change the titles and/or title blocks to "Waters Edge Second Filing". Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: Some of the titles in the sheet index do not match the titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: All reference to easements must match the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are cut off text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 03/07/2016 03/07/2016: There are match line issues. See redlines. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The TIS is one of the most comprehensive studies done in the City of Fort Collins in a long time. It is thorough, well organized, and easy to follow. Thank you. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Section 3.7.3.D in the City of Fort Collins City Code details the requirements for Adequate Public Facilities regarding transportation. It indicates that all development shall meet or exceed the transportation level of services standards contained in Part II of the City of Fort Collins Multi-modal Transportation Level of Service Manual. For a signalized intersection that standard is LOS D. The applicant¿'s TIS calculates that the intersection of Vine / Lemay will be at a LOS F with the completion of Phase I of Waters Edge. This triggers the APF threshold and is initially the most significant issue for the development to address before being able to move forward. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: If and when the APF issue is addressed, then there are a number of other off-site intersections that need further discussion, evaluation, and potential mitigation. They include: -Vine and Timberline. With completion of Phase I, this will be LOS F and not meet LCUASS LOS criteria. The TIS notes the recommended improvement is a signal or roundabout. The railroad tracks complicates this, and further review will be required. -Timberline and Mountain Vista. With completion of Phase I, this will be LOS F and not meet LCUASS LOS criteria. The TIS notes the recommended improvement is an all-way stop. Rural, arterial, high speed all-way stops can be a compliance and safety concern. Further review of other options such as a channelized T, or roundabout is appropriate. -Turnberry and Country Club. With completion of Phase I, the TIS notes that this intersection will be LOS F for the eastbound approach with an average delay of more than 4 minutes. No recommended improvements are listed in the TIS, perhaps because Country Club is technically classified as a collector. But with almost 300 left turns in the PM peak hour, very poor level of service, and increasing safety concerns, this intersection should be evaluated for a signal warrant and reviewed for a roundabout. -SH1 and Douglas Road. This intersection has a current safety concern, and with completion of Phase 1, will see increasingly poor levels of service. This intersection should be evaluated for a signal warrant (70% factor due to high speed). Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Further, more detailed transportation related comments may be offered at a later submittal once the above items are better understood. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/19/2016 02/19/2016: A landscape plan shall contain accurate and identifiable hydrozones, including a water budget chart that shows the total annual water use, which shall not exceed fifteen (15) gallons per square foot over the site. If you have questions contact Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com or 970-221-6704. Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Please include a note on the cover sheet concerning approved modifications. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: On the Plat and the site Plan Cover Sheet Please change the planning signature block to Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: Can there be a trail connection between lots 105 and 106? Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The minimum front setback in the LMN is 15ft. Is there a modification request to reduce the front setback? Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The minimum rear setback in the LMN zone is 8ft. Is there a reason to further restrict the rear setback? Increase the setback is going to create confusion in the future. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: The Cover Sheet needs to inClude the landscape plan sheets in the in SHEET INDEX. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/02/2016 03/02/2016: At the time of DCP we will need the Landscape Bond in place.