Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWORTHINGTON AVENUE RESIDENCES - PDP - PDP160023 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSCommunity Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview September 06, 2016 Cathy Mathis TB Group 444 Mountain Ave Berthoud, CO 80526 RE: Worthington Avenue Residence, PDP160023, 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, Clay Frickey, at 970-224-6045 or cfrickey@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: The driveway to Worthington will need to be designed and constructed to LCUASS standard drawing 707.1 specifications - concrete to the back of the walk/ROW line. The preferred configuration for the ramps at the driveway is the detached directional ramps per 707.1. The sidewalk is already detached on the east side. Directional, detached ramp should also be implemented on the west side with a sidewalk taper back to the existing attached walk. RESPONSE: Acknowledged…modified to match the detail. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: Letters of intent for offsite easements will need to be submitted to the City prior to hearing. RESPONSE: Letters of intent were submitted. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: Thank you for providing the Ecological Characterization Study. Staff agrees with the recommendations in the ECS, including: - Additional habitat plantings in the buffer zones (mix of shrubs and trees) - Placement and shielding of light fixtures to protect the buffer zones from spillover lighting - Mitigation for any wetland loss related to the road crossing at New Mercer Ditch RESPONSE: − Additional plantings have been added. − All of the light fixtures are internal to the site along the loop road. − We are working on the mitigation of the wetlands along the ditch that are being removed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: Will the existing lanceleaf cottonwoods and eastern cottonwoods noted in the ECS be retained and protected on site, or will any be removed? RESPONSE: The existing trees will remain. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: Will the New Mercer ditch and associated fringe wetlands be impacted by the construction of the private drive? RESPONSE: Yes, there will be a box culvert that will disturb the wetlands. The area of disturbed wetlands have been flagged and surveyed and shown on the utility plans. We will work with the City on mitigation. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: Please add the following statement to the notes on any sheets of the site, landscape, photometric and utility plans that show the Habitat Buffers: “The Natural Habitat Buffer Zones are intended to be maintained in a native landscape. Please see Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within the Natural Habitat Buffer Zones.” RESPONSE: Note added. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: Please add the top of bank lines for the New Mercer Ditch and Larimer County Canal No 2 to the site and landscape plans. RESPONSE: Top of bank added. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: SITE PLAN: Please re-label the 50' buffer lines as "50' Natural Habitat Buffer Zones." RESPONSE: Labels have been changed. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: LANDSCAPE PLAN: Please add a mix of shrubs to the tree groupings in the Natural Habitat Buffer Zones to provide additional plant diversity (mid/understory), as recommended by the Ecological Characterization Study. Suggested species include sumac, golden or wax currant, and rabbitbrush. RESPONSE: Additional plantings have been added. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: LANDSCAPE PLAN: Have you considered using the native seed mix for the detention area instead of turf? It would reduce water demand and would create a more consistent landscape aesthetic surrounding the project. RESPONSE: The pond now shows native seed mix. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: LIGHTING PLAN: Please add the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone lines, labels, and standard note to the photometric plan. RESPONSE: Lines and labels added. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: LIGHTING PLAN: The light fixture selected meets City standards. However, staff would prefer the 3000K version over the 3500K version to reduce the amount of blue spectrum light, which has been shown to impact the health of both humans and wildlife, including elderly populations. RESPONSE: The light fixtures have been changed. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: UTILITY PLANS: Please add the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone lines, labels, and standard note to sheets 2 and 3 of the utility plans. RESPONSE: Natural Habitat Buffer Zone lines and labels with standard note has been added to the Utility and Grading plans. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/28/2016 08/28/2016: If there are existing trees on the site contact the City Forester for an on-site meeting to evaluate and obtain tree inventory and protection information. RESPONSE: There are no existing trees on site. There are some existing Cottonwood trees at the northwest corner of the site but they will remain on CSURF’s land undisturbed. Department: Internal Services Contact: Sarah Carter, 970-416-2748, scarter@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/01/2016 09/01/2016: If each dwelling unit will be built on its own individually-platted lot, these will be considered IRC single family attached buildings. If the buildings will all be built on a single lot as shown on the site plan, the buildings will be IRC duplexes and any triplexes (none shown on the site plan) will be IBC multifamily buildings. RESPONSE: The building will be attached single-family or duplexes. The triplexes have been removed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/01/2016 09/01/2016: 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. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. 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. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/01/2016 09/01/2016: 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: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/01/2016 09/01/2016: Single family attached and duplex dwellings are required to be fire sprinkled under current codes. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/01/2016 09/01/2016: 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: Acknowledged. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016:FIRE LANES: The bridge spanning the New Mercer Ditch will need to be rated to support 40 tons and appropriately posted with weight limit signage. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: FIRE LANE SIGNS The limits of the fire lane shall be fully defined. Fire lane sign locations should be indicated on future plan sets however the applicant should understand that additional signage may be required at time of inspection and final CO. Code language provided below. > IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: PREMISE IDENTIFICATION & WAYFINDING Where possible, the naming of private drives is usually recommended to aid in wayfinding. Addresses shall be posted on each structure and where otherwise needed to aid in wayfinding. Code language provided below. > 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. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: HYDRANT SPACING FYI - Commercial spacing requirements call for a hydrant within 300' of any building, rather than 400' as previously stated for owner occupied residential. The proposed hydrant locations still meet the hydrant spacing requirement and no further modification is being requested. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: MISCELLANEOUS The Site Plan does not appear to be printed to scale. The plan states it is printed in a 1-40' scale but it appears it was printed in a 1-50' scale. RESPONSE: The scale is 1” = 40’ and has been corrected. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/01/2016 09/01/2016: TEMPORARY ACCESS Fire access and water supply are required before vertical construction can proceed, same as commercial developments. The temporary road will also need to be constructed prior to stockpiling of combustible materials on site. It will need to meet minimum fire lane standards and support 40 tons. The connection at Center Ave will require a posted address and any other signage needed to properly identify that as the primary point of access into the development. If the access point is to be secured after hours, we will need to agree on a means of access during those times. The temporary connection will need to be maintained available and unobstructed until the main entrance is completed. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Department: Planning Services Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: Please submit a material sample for the stone veneer. RESPONSE: A material sample will be submitted. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: The right elevation on page 4 has very little articulation. Some additional windows would help break up the mass of the building on that side. RESPONSE: The majority of side wall elevations have limited windows where the elevations face another building side elevation. Notes have been added to show additional windows to be installed when the building is located at the end and the elevation will be seen. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: Similarly, the left elevation on page 6, the right elevation on page 10, and the right elevation on page 12 have large, uninterrupted masses that would benefit from further articulation. Additional windows would help in breaking up the mass. RESPONSE: The majority of side wall elevations have simplified material changes and limited windows where the elevations face another building side elevation. At locations visible from the road landscaping will be used to enhance the building elevation. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/24/2016 08/24/2016: Is this project still being proposed as a townhome/single-family attached development? If so, then the plat should reflect the lot lines for each unit. Right now the plat reads like it is a multi-family development with no ownership for an individual townhome. Please clarify this detail. RESPONSE: As discussed, this is single-family attached on one lot. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: There are references to triplexes in the planning objectives and modification requests. Since no triplexes are proposed, please remove those references. RESPONSE: References removed. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: For the secondary use modification request do you have a spreadsheet that provides a breakdown of all of the primary/secondary uses in the Employment district in and around Centre Ave? This will help staff analyze the request for the modification. RESPONSE: Spreadsheet provided with Modification request. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: In the response to conceptual review comments, it says that the landscape plan should indicate the size of the proposed park. The landscape plan does not indicate the size of the park. Please update the landscape plan to include the square footage of the proposed park. RESPONSE: As previously discussed, the park owned by Columbine across the street will count towards this requirement. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: It is difficult to count all of the landscaping elements without leader lines with labels. Please add labels with leader lines to the landscape plan to assist with counting all of the landscaping elements. RESPONSE: We have an office standard and would prefer to keep the symbols and labels as is. We have a plant list on every sheet that lists quantities and species percentages for reference. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: The potential trail shown on the landscape plan is not shown on any of the other documents submitted. This trail should also be shown on the site plan at minimum. Also, what trail will this connect to? RESPONSE: The trail has been removed. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/24/2016 08/24/2016: The scale on the site plan is mislabeled. For all of the dimensions labeled on the site plan to be correct, then the scale should be indicated as 1" = 50'. RESPONSE: Scale has been fixed. It is 50’ scale. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/24/2016 08/24/2016: What is the size of the proposed park area? This development needs to be within 1/4 mile of a public park, private park, or outdoor gathering space without needing to cross an arterial street. For a private park, the park needs to be at least 10,000 sq. ft. in size. It is unclear if the park/community space shown on the site plan meets this code requirement. RESPONSE: As previously discussed, the park owned by Columbine across the street will count towards this requirement. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: As proposed, the site plan does not comply with the garage door standards outlined in section 3.5.2(F). The garage doors should be recessed behind the front facade by at least 4'. RESPONSE: See revised elevations sheets. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: Please label which units have 2-car garages and which units have 1-car garages on the site plan. RESPONSE: Units have been labeled on the Site Plan. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: The elements of each duplex is difficult to decipher. Could you provide a diagram on the site plan that shows the elements typical of each duplex (porch, sidewalk, driveway, etc.)? RESPONSE: See revised elevation sheets. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/25/2016 08/25/2016: How wide is the parking area for guests? Also, will those be parallel parking spaces? Please indicate the dimensions of that area so staff can properly calculate the number of spaces provided in those areas. RESPONSE: The parallel spaces are 7.5’ x 23’. We have added notes on the site plan for the number of spaces. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/22/2016 08/22/2016: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft., therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan (Based off of redlines), Erosion Control Report (was not found in submitted materials), and an Escrow / Security Calculation (May need to be recalculated based on redlines). Also, based upon the area of disturbance State permits for stormwater will be required since the site is over an acre. If you need clarification concerning the erosion control section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam: jschlam@fcgov.com or Basil Hamdan: bhamdan@fcgov.com RESPONSE: Erosion Control report with Escrow calculations is provided. Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Grading Plan – Please also include a cross-section detail of the grass swale in these plans. Please note that we want the bioswale to have some bottom width to it. RESPONSE: Cross-sections now included. Bioswales now have a 2’ bottom width. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Drainage Plan – Thank you for including more than the minimum requirement for LID. Also please note that the entire site is still required to be treated with some form of water quality treatment, so the remaining balance (16%) will need to be treated with standard water quality (WQCV in the form of extended detention is probably the easiest option.) RESPONSE: 100% of the site will be treated using standard WQCV in the pond. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Drainage Plan – Please include run-on ratios for the grass swales (max 10:1) RESPONSE: Run-on calcs are included. Variance from the max 10:1 requested in the report. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Drainage Report – Please note that the allowable release rate for sites within the Spring Creek Basin is the 2-year historic, not 0.20 cfs/acre. For this site, it looks like you can increase your release rate quite a bit. RESPONSE: Release rate has been updated. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Drainage Report – if you decide to provide an extended detention basin with WQCV to meet the “standard” water quality treatment requirements, please make sure to include the WQCV in the detention pond volume and also provide perforated orifice plate calculations. Detailing of the outlet structure can be provided at final. RESPONSE: WQCV is included in the extended detention pond and orifice plate calculations are complete. A detail of the outlet structure is provided. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Drainage Report – see redlined report for other minor comments. RESPONSE: Redlines addressed. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please change the titles of sheets 11 & 12 to "Worthington Avenue Residences". RESPONSE: The sheets have been changed to “Columbine Residences”. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. RESPONSE: Sheet title and Index now match. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please correct the elevations shown in the Benchmark Statement. See redlines. RESPONSE: Corrected. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Resolved. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: No comments. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: No comments. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please revise the Basis Of Bearings as marked. See redlines. RESPONSE: Basis of bearings was not changed. It may change after Chad Dilka discusses it with John VonNeida. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please add a signature block for the New Mercer Ditch Company. RESPONSE: It was decided that this was not needed. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please tie the outer boundary to the section lines. See redlines. RESPONSE: Three ties to aliquot corners were placed on the plat. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: All reception numbers for documents recorded by separate document, must be added prior to producing mylars. RESPONSE: These have not been recorded yet. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please remove "Block 1". This is unnecessary. RESPONSE: “Block 1” removed. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: If you show the found monuments along the ditch, please tie to the subdivision boundary. See redlines. RESPONSE: These monuments were tied to the boundary. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: Please revise the legal description as marked. See redlines. RESPONSE: The legal description now matches the Plat. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: The submitted traffic study information has been reviewed and the conclusions accepted. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/30/2016 08/30/2016: A pedestrian connection to the east would help with connectivity. RESPONSE: The two ownership entities would like to not have a connection at this time. At the time CSURF develops the site to the east, we can explore the possibility of a connection. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/29/2016 08/29/2016: 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: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Utility Plan - Please note that we will require a letter of intent to be submitted to us prior to P&Z from the adjacent property owner where you show the proposed installation of the storm pipe and box culverts. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Utility Plan - Please plan to work with the ditch company for approval of the installation of the box culvert and roadway over their ditch. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Utility Plan - Please show the location of water tap and meters for each unit of each building. RESPONSE: Location of water tap and meters are shown. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Utility Plan - Can you look at making an adjustment to the utility alignment along the southerly roadway to move the sanitary sewer away from the curb as much as possible? RESPONSE: Utility alignment has been adjusted as much as possible. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/23/2016 08/23/2016: Landscape Plan - we typically do not allow trees to be planted within utility easements, however, we will allow them in this case as long as the separation requirements between trees and wet utilities are being met. RESPONSE: Separations have meet met. Department: Zoning Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970-416-2743, avandeutekom@fcgov.com Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016: If you provide guest parking one of these spaces should be a van-accessible handicap space. RESPONSE: We have added one van-accessible ADA parking space.