HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN NORTH, 3RD FILING - PDP - PDP160017 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS (3)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 19, 2016
Terry Palmos Intermill Land Surveying
Greeley Associates Shear Engineering
419 Canyon Ave #200
Fort Collins, CO 80521
RE: Old Town North 3rd Filing, PDP160017, Round Number 2
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about
any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through
the Project Planner, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343 or tshepard@fcgov.com.
Ripley Design
Shear Engineering:
11x17 Attachments (full size versions available digitally on project disc):
concept site section
NECCO plan Sheet 18 of 69
NECCO plan Sheet 41 of 69
NECCO plan Sheet 52 of 69
Comment Summary:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/19/16: 7. My recommendation for the vacation Note is that is reads: By
approval of and recording of this plat by the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. All
Previous Easements Dedicated by Old Town North plat within the boundaries of
this plat are hereby vacated.
R Plat revised accordingly.
06/15/2016: 7. Plat - Need to address the vacation of the existing easements
on the property.
R Plat revised accordingly.
2
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/19/16: 23. We discussed this at the Wednesday morning meeting and
sidewalk chases are going to be needed to get the drainage from the alley into
the parking lots. Please let me know if there are still questions about this.
R No questions. Alley has been redesigned with north gutter flowline stations and
flowline profile. Low points and all other design concerns regarding the alley design
have been accommodated.
R Sidewalk chases have been added. Construction directives have been added to the
Master Improvements Plan. Sidewalk chase detail Drawing 709 (STANDARD
DETAILS FOR DRAINAGE UNDER SIDEWALK) has been added.
06/15/2016: 23. Per the City’s driveway details the drainage as you have
shown it going into the parking lots off of the alley will not work as the area will
slope back into the alley rather than into the parking lot. Probably need to do a
driveway chase in these areas in order to get the drainage to the north, provide
the driveway requirements and meet ADA requirements on the sidewalk you
have planned along here.
R Acknowledged. Alley has been redesigned. Low points and all other design concerns
regarding the alley design have been accommodated.
R Drawings have been revised to represent a standard drive approach at the intersection of
the Emmaus Lane and the parking lots in accordance with Drawing 706.2.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: 28. The driveways into the parking lots need to be built per detail
706.2 with the flare in order for the sidewalks to meet ADA standards.
R Drawings have been revised to represent a standard drive approach at the intersection of
the Emmaus Lane and the parking lots in accordance with Drawing 706.2.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: 29. Reminder minimum flowline grade is .5% and that is what is
required going into a low point in the street or alley.
R Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: 31. The intersection detail will be checked when full profiles are
provided. Transition lengths will need to be labeled on the intersection details.
Will need intersection details for the street/ alley and alley/alley intersections as
well.
R Intersection details have been updated. Transition lengths have been shown and match
the transition lengths noted on the Osiander Street Plan and Profile sheet.
R Additional intersection details have been added.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/19/16: 32. Looks like the sidewalk chase detail is still needed.
R Because of the alley typical section and standard drive accesses to each parking area,
there will be several sidewalk chase sections. Drainage Basin delineation and Low
Impact Development (LID) requirements also dictate several sidewalk chases.
R Sidewalk chase detail Drawing 709 (STANDARD DETAILS FOR DRAINAGE
UNDER SIDEWALK) has been added.
3
06/15/2016: 32. Based on the plans right now the following additional details
are needed: 702 roll curb for alley section, 1202, 1201, 1606a, 706.2,
sidewalk chase if in City ROW City detail must be used - if on private
property you can use D-11 or create your own detail.
R All LCUASS details noted here have been added to the plans.
R Sidewalk chase detail Drawing 709 (STANDARD DETAILS FOR DRAINAGE
UNDER SIDEWALK) has been added.
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: 33. The site has shallow water – Please know that sump pumps
can only be tied into an approved drainage facility and cannot be drained out
across sidewalks or into the curb and gutter or into the streets/ alleys. A
paragraph will be added into the development agreement giving builders and
property owners notice of this. This needs to accounted for in your design and
plans.
R The geotechnical investigation report indicates groundwater depths of six feet (6') to
seven feet (7'). Bore logs were provided in April, 2016.
R Residence structures along Osiander Street and on the south side of the alley have been
designed with garage slabs and basement finished floors above alley levels. Residence
structures on the north side of the alley have been designed with garage slabs and main
level finished floors above alley levels. Refer to attached concept site section
R Groundwater levels have been drawn down over time with development construction
items including the 60" City of Greeley water line, the NECCO storm sewer, the interim
NECCO regional detention pond (high water elevation = 4959.68.
R There is a drainage channel to the north which conveys runoff to the east directed to
the NECCO outfall and ultimately to the NECCO regional detention pond. The defined
Lot 41 finished floor slab elevation = 4966.12. The invert of the channel north of Lot
41 is 4962.97, 3.15' below the Lot 41 FF elevation. The current NECCO regional pond
water surface elevation is 4959.68. The Ultimate 100-year water surface elevation for
the NECCO regional pond will be 4957.17 (8.95' below the Lot 41 finished floor
elevation). Refer to NECCO plan Sheet 52 of 69 attached.
R When the NECCO regional detention pond the is complete, the storm sewer outfall will
be at elevation 4747.00 (substantially below all Suniga Road utilities). Refer to
NECCO plan Sheet 18 of 69 attached.
Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: 34. See plans for additional comments.
R Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 35. Plat – The note under note 4 of the General Survey Notes has
a misspelling. It should be BY the City of Fort Collins – not BE the City of Fort
Collins.
R Plat revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 36. Plat - In the easement description legends – ESMT A needs
to be as dedicated on this plat. As the plat has a note that all easements
4
dedicated by the Old Town North plat are being vacated. Thus the easement
needs to be rededicated by this plat. ESMT G it would be sheet 3 of 4 not 3 of
3.
R Plat revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 37. Our standards Street Cut Note below needs to be added to
the following plan sheets. 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, and 14. Basically any sheet
that is showing work for which the street will be impacted. Limits of street cut
are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City
Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with City street repair
standards.
R The following note has been added to Sheet 3 Overall Master Utility Plan, Sheet 4
Master Utility Plan West, Sheet 5 Master Utility Plan East, Sheet 6 Osiander Street
Sanitary Sewer Plan and Profile, Sheet 8 NECCO Storm Sewer Plan and Profile, Sheet
10 Master Improvements Plan West, Sheet 11 Master Improvements Plan East, Sheet
12 Osiander Street Plan and Profile, Sheet 13 Emmaus Lane (Alley) and Sanitary Sewer
Plan and Profile, Sheet 14 Emergency Access Plan and Profile and Sheet 15
Intersection Details.
Note: Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field
by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with City street
repair standards.
We have identified sheet titles because there have been some sheet number changes
due to additional sheets. Please note that the actual note on the Master Utility Plan and
the Master Improvements Plan are in the General Notes just above the construction
notes.
Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 38. For the pull offs. As was discussed at the meeting when we
decided to use the pull offs a modified shorter roll curb is to be used. The plans
are currently showing these areas as being flush with the street. We do not want
that. I am suggesting the curb design that Longmont uses as a modified shorter
curb. The detail does need to be modified to have our standard 2 foot pan with
a 2 inch drop. But this curb will provide a lower profile (4.5 inches) and is
something that is already being built in Colorado. I will email the curb detail to
Shear.
R Pull outs have been detailed according to your plan redlines and supplemental e-mail
information using the City of Longmont modified mountable curbwalk with 24" gutter
pan. Refer to Sheet 9, Typical Street Sections. A detail for the modified mountable
curbwalk with 24" gutter pan has been added to the Streets and Concrete detail sheet.
Comment Number: 39 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 39. Osiander Design – Is this the centerline profile – it is not
labeled. Will need to provide flowline profiles at final. You have two different
slopes labeled on a portion of the profile – which is it? Change could impact the
VC. I think for Osiander the horizontal curve is within the existing pavement
area, but since you have chosen to do centerline stationing you will need to
identify true slopes and grades for the areas within the curve. Need to provide
existing elevations for the cross pans.
5
R An Osiander Street Plan and Profile sheet has been added. It includes north flowline
stationing and profile, centerline stationing and profile and south flowline stationing
and profile.
R Existing cross pan elevations are noted on the intersection detail on the Intersection
Details sheet. A note has been added to the Osiander Street Plan and Profile sheet to
reference the intersection detail.
Comment Number: 40 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
40. The new storm pipe at the east end of Osiander is not meeting minimum
cover requirements. A minimum of 3 feet from the top of pipe to the top of
street is required.08/19/2016:
R A variance request was made and approved with conditions. Those conditions have
been incorporated into the revised plans. Sheet 2 general note 48 variance requests, was
updated to read:
48. A variance request from Chapter 12 of the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards (12.2.2 Minimum Depth) for minimum depth of cover over all utilities,
in this case storm sewer, was approved on September 19, 2016 with conditions.
Condition: Osiander Street shall be constructed in concrete from the cross pan
at Redwood Street to the western edge of inlet 3 or 4 (whichever extend further
west). The limits and extent of this will need to be shown and labeled on the utility
plans.
Condition: 24 inch Arch RCP pip shall be used as shown on Exhibit A.
Condition: The cover amounts as shown on exhibit A shall be shown and
labeled on the utility plans
These conditions have been incorporated into these plans.
Comment Number: 41 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 41. Alley Design – I am guessing that the profile provided is for
the centerline, since this alley doesn’t have a center V-pan we just need the
flowline and outside edge of alley profile. Since you have chosen to use
centerline stationing rather than flowline stationing you will need to label and
identify on the plans what the true lengths and slopes are around the curves.
R We have revised the Emmaus Lane (alley) design for north flowline stationing and
flowline elevations. The alley typical street section has also been revised to identify
flowline stationing and elevations.
Comment Number: 42 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 42. Alley Design – you are showing grade breaks at the alley
entrances that don’t meet standards. Either need to use VC in these locations
or you can submit a variance request with your design information and
justification for consideration.
R Vertical design has been adjusted to meet standards.
6
Comment Number: 43 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 43. Alley Design – at the flowline the low point in any street is
required to have .5% going in and out of the low point. Since the alley slopes to
one side – I would use the VC along the south edge to reduce the dip effect, but
the flowline needs to meet the minimums. Need s sidewalk culvert or inlet at the
low point in order to get the flows into the parking lot.
R Refer to revised alley plan and profile design. Because of the alley typical section and
standard drive accesses to each parking area, there will be several sidewalk chase
sections. Drainage Basin delineation and Low Impact Development (LID)
requirements also dictate several sidewalk chases.
R Sidewalk chases have been added. Construction directives have been added to the
Master Improvements Plan. Sidewalk chase detail Drawing 709 (STANDARD
DETAILS FOR DRAINAGE UNDER SIDEWALK) has been added.
Comment Number: 44 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 44. The emergency access will need to be a roll curb - not a
driveway. Our standard roll curb can be used or the modified lower curb that is
to be used at the pull-out can be used. We do not allow grass pavers within the
ROW, so the area between the roll curb and the sidewalk needs to be concrete.
R The emergency access has been updated to use City of Longmont modified mountable
curbwalk with 24" gutter pan and concrete between the curb and the detached walk.
Refer to Master Improvements Plan construction note 5.
Comment Number: 45 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 45. Site and Landscape plans – no grass pavers in the ROW.
For the emergency access - concrete between the back of curb and sidewalk. If
the emergency access drive is to have a gate or anything like that I will want to
see details on the design. We want it restricted so it cannot swing out into the
ROW across the sidewalk or into the street.
R The emergency access has been updated to use City of Longmont modified mountable
curbwalk with 24" gutter pan and concrete between the curb and the detached walk
Comment Number: 46 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 46. Site plan – have a note along Blondel at the alley that says
Wayfinding and no parking sign. If the wayfinding is the street sign with the alley
name on it that is fine. I don’t know what is intended by Wayfinding sign, but
only regulatory signs are allowed within the ROW. So if it is intended to be
some sort of sign with addresses or information on where to go it will need to be
located behind the sidewalk and outside of the ROW.
Comment Number: 47 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: 47. The only comment above that needs to be resolved prior to
hearing is the storm cover.
R A variance request was made and approved with conditions prior to hearing.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com
Topic: General
7
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
08/08/2016: Previous Round 1 comment still applies regarding prairie dogs,
with a few additional notes added.
1) City Code and the Land Use Code require that any prairie dogs inhabiting a
site shall be relocated or eradicated by the developer prior to any site grading
or construction activities. If prairie dogs are to be eradicated, this must be done
humanely using city-approved and Colorado Division of Wildlife approved
methods [see LUC Section 3.4.1(N)(6)].
2) A prairie dog removal plan will need to be provided at the time of Final Plans,
and documentation of the removal activities provided prior to the issuance of a
Development Construction Permit. If prairie dogs are to be eradicated rather
than relocated, City Staff recommend use of carbon monoxide fumigation as
opposed to other eradication methods. Documentation of removal should be in
the form of a dated and signed letter or memo from the contractor.
3) Should this project gain approval and proceed to construction, a burrowing
owl survey, in accordance with the Division of Parks and Wildlife standards,
shall be conducted prior to construction by a professional, qualified wildlife
biologist and prior to prairie dog relocation or eradication. Documentation can
be in the form of a letter or memo from the wildlife biologist (in the case of the
burrowing owl survey) and contractor (in the case of prairie dog eradication).
Response: Noted.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
08/08/2016: Previous Round 1 comment still applies regarding Landscape
Plan plantings: will review details of planting plan for shrub/perennial areas
when provided - receipt at final plan is okay for Environmental Planning.
Response: Landscape plans now show full planting bed detail
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/08/2016
08/08/2016: Both the water quality and native seed mixes include a nice
diversity of native species suited to this eco-region. City Staff would like to see
the following forbs to the dryland seed mix:: H. annuus (common sunflower); C.
tinctoria (Plains coreopsis); C. serrulata (Rocky Mountain beeplant); (M.
tanacetifolia (tansyaster); R. columnifera (Mexican hat). This will aid in more
rapid establishment, help the native plants out-compete weeds, and provide
nutritional resources for local pollinator species.
Response: Noted species have been added to the dryland mix
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/08/2016
08/08/2016: Currently on proposed plans, approximately 18% of proposed
trees are Gleditsia spp., both Imperial and Skyline varieties of honey locust.
8
While these trees are hardy and urban-adapted, they are often overused in
urban landscapes. In addition, honey locust varieties sold are cultivated to be
seed-less and thorn-less, thus greatly decreasing their value to wildlife. City
Staff would like to see a re-distribution of the project tree species diversity
through a decrease in number of honey locust trees and corresponding
increase in: G. dioica (Kentucky coffee tree), Q. macrocarpa (Burr oak), and/or
T. cordata (Littleleaf linden).
Response: Tree species have been updated
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/08/2016
08/08/2016: THANK YOU for selecting 3000K (or less) corrected color
temperature light fixtures in accordance with The American Medical Association
(AMA) and International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) recommendations. For
further information regarding health effects and night lighting please see:
http://darksky.org/ama-report-affirms-human-health-impacts-from-leds/
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016:
Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting:
Pre-Submittal meetings are required to assist the designer/builder by assuring,
early on in the design,
that the new commercial or multi-family 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 and is typically scheduled after the Current Planning
conceptual review
meeting. Applicants of new commercial or multi-family projects are advised to
call 416-2341 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.
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 web page to view them.
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009.
9
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.
Old town north 3rd – project specific concerns:
1. Fire-sprinkler systems are required for townhomes and duplexes.
2. 3. All windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24”
3. Building code and State statute CRS 9-5 requires project provide accessible
units.
4. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling.
5. 7. Low-flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are
required.
6. Special combustion safety requirements for natural draft gas appliances.
7. Low VOC interior finishes.
Response: Noted.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Coy Althoff, , CAlthoff@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/10/2016
06/10/2016: Single phase electric facilities exist along the N. side of Osiander
St. and also dead-ended at the end of Blondel St.
R Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/10/2016
06/10/2016: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site
charges and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this
development.
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/10/2016
06/10/2016: Contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the
transformer and electric meter locations, please show the locations on the utility
plans.
Response: Building design is still determining best locations for meters and transformer. This will
be coordinated before Final Plans are approved.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/10/2016
06/10/2016: 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.
10
R Acknowledged. Street lights exist on the south side of Osiander Street as communicated
with you via e-mail exchange. When you have determined the location of the street
light at the intersection of Osiander Street and Redwood Street, please advise.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/10/2016
06/10/2016: The location of the water and electric services will need to be
coordinated with Light and Power Engineering.
R Please note that water services on the north side of Osiander Street exist.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/10/2016
06/10/2016: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any
questions at 221-6700. Please reference our policies, development charge
processes, and use our fee estimator at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/16/2016
08/16/2016: No changes on behalf of Light & Power since June 10, 2016
review. Please contact us if there are any questions.
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/10/2016
08/10/2016: HOA AGREEMENT
The HOA agreement will need to account for snow removal and long-term
maintenance on the fire lane between Lots 15 & 16.
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
Signage is required on both south and north connections of the EAE (between
Lot 15 and 16). As the intent is to restrict pass-through traffic at this location,
signs should read, "Emergency Access Only". Otherwise, "Fire Lane - No
Parking" is the standard. Code language provided below.
R Signage has been added on both the south and north connections (2 signs at each
connection) of the Emergency Access. A construction note has been added to the
Emergency Access Plan and Profile Sheet referencing Drawing 1418 FIRE ACCESS
ROAD SIGNS and specifically directing use of the Standard Fire Lane Sign Detail
(Fort Collins Only).
MARKING
> IFC503.3: Where required by the fire code official, approved signs or other
approved notices that include the words NO PARKING - FIRE LANE shall be
provided for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the
obstruction thereof. The means by which fire lanes are designated shall be
maintained in a clean and legible condition at all times and be replaced or
repaired when necessary to provide adequate visibility.
OBSTRUCTION OF FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS
>IFC 503.4 Fire Apparatus access roads shall not be obstructed in any manner
including the parking of vehicles. The minimum widths and clearances
established in 503.2.1 shall be maintained at all times.
11
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: For the single family detached elevations, there is no scale. But it
appears that houses are exceptionally narrow. Please note that on a 35-foot
wide lot, minus the two 5-foot wide sideyard setbacks, there remains 25 feet of
lot width for a building envelope. The elevations appear as if the width of the
houses is considerably less than 25 feet. The applicant is encouraged to take
advantage of the parking being in the alley and make the front porches as wide
as the house.
August 17, 2016 - Carried Over: See comment regarding housing model variety.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: For the two-family attached dwellings, Staff appreciates the effort
to provide two building styles. Please indicate on the site plan how these two
styles are distributed. In order to mitigate the potential of the alley becoming
overly repetitive, Staff encourages the design team to consider either
introducing and additional building style or further individualizing the Unit A
entrances so that there is a greater degree of distinctiveness among the 24
entrances divided among the 12 buildings.
August 17, 2016 - Carried Over: See comment regarding building model
variety.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
06/15/2016: Since Unit A does not really have any available and functional
outdoor space, please provide a dimension for the second floor balconies and
decks.
August 17, 2016 - Carried Over: See comment regarding the open space.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: On the Site Plan, please add a label that clarifies the usage of
Tract B. Please state that this access is restricted and equipped with a gate
such that it can only be used by emergency vehicles and equipment,
pedestrians and bicycles and not available to the general public in vehicles.
Further, please add a detail for the gate that shows how such gate will not
impede access by pedestrians and bicycles.
Response: Tract B label has been updated. A gate at this location would deter pedestrian and
bicycle movement through the site as intended. Signage has been shown on all four sides of the
emergency access to limit public vehicular movement.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
12
08/17/2016: On the Site Plan, please add line work or show a broader context
that labels and indicates the existing alleys and streets that intersect Osiander
on the south side of the street. These intersections will also provide “bump-out”
capability for drivers who are not comfortable passing an oncoming vehicle
when cars are parked on the south side of the street. The narrative states that
there are three bump-outs on the north side of the street and one alley and
Baum Street on the south side creating five opportunities for an opposing
vehicle to pull over. But, there are three more intersections on the south side.
Note that one intersection is labeled Baum Alley but it is really Baum Street.
The Site Plan should indicate that there are more than five opportunities to pull
over when combined with the intersections on the south side of the street.
Response: Context line work and labels added.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: Please further describe any planned improvements within the
10,000 square foot central feature / gathering area. This common area will be
important as the two-family attached dwellings essentially have no private
outside space except for decks and balconies. As indicated, the area appears
passive with no active amenities. Are there any plans for picnic table(s), grills,
shade structure, seat walls, pet stations, etc.?
Response: Central gathering area has now been designed to show open turf, picnic tables, shade
structure and grills.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: By being located on the north side of the walkway, the exterior
fixed bike racks look remote from the units. Staff recommends these be placed
on the south side of the walkway, closer to the front doors, to provide a better
sense of security. Or, perhaps a logical location would be adjoining the three
parking lots. On Site Plan Note number 11, please add “…to concrete and not
interfere with landscaping and walkways.”
Response: Bike racks are positioned to give the most visibility from units in order to increase
security. Note 11 updated.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: On the Site Plan, please indicate whether or not Emmaus Lane is
public or private.
Response: Label updated.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: On the Landscape Plan, please fill in the 80-foot gaps in street
trees along Suniga by placing Ornamentals to within 15-feet of the streetlights.
Response: Ornamental trees have been added.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: On the Landscape Plan, please consider how landscaping and
land form can contribute to attenuating the potential road noise that will be
associated with Suniga Road as a four-lane arterial street. With this
classification, Suniga is expected to carry between 15,000 and 35,000 vehicles
per day.
Response: Native shrubs have been placed in beds along north side of development in order to
buffer units from Suniga as well as provide “Nature in the City” benefits.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: At Final, on the Landscape Plan, the area at the head of the
13
parking lots described as “planting area to screen parking lot” will be required
to be planted in a dense fashion, with the appropriate species, to achieve 75%
opacity on a year-round basis.
Response: Parking lot planting beds are now shown in detail.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: Regarding the two-family attached dwellings, please note that
Sections 3.5.2(C)(2)(a,b) require that for any such development containing
more than five buildings, there must be at least three distinctly different building
designs. The standard goes on to clarify that building designs shall be
considered similar unless they vary significantly in footprint size and shape, and
that such variation among buildings shall not consist solely of different
combinations of the same building features. Staff is concerned that while four
rear elevations are provided, on an overall basis, all 12 buildings feature
essentially the same building envelope. Staff recognizes that with the odd
configuration of the parcel, it may be challenging to significantly vary the building
footprint size. As mitigation, therefore, the applicant is encouraged to add
variety to the architectural aspects and components of the buildings in order to
comply with the standard.
Response: two-family attached building elevations show 4 different building designs. 1A, 1B, 2A
and 2B. Elevations were approved by Ted Shepard per meetings prior to the Hearing.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: Similarly, Staff is concerned about the potential repetitive
character of Osiander, particularly with its narrow cross-section. As a narrow
local street, with lots that are only 35 feet wide, there is a critical need to ensure
that the character of the street is considered and designed in such a way as to
mitigate the overall density of the street. Section 3.5.2(C)(1)(a,b) requires that
there be at least three single family detached housing models. Toward this end,
Staff encourages the applicant to provide a baseline minimum of at least six
front porch designs and styles so that there is a rich variety of building forms that
break up the potential monotony.
Response: See notes on Building Elevations that satisfy this requirement.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: On the Lighting Plan, please delete the performance data and
enlarge the fixture description. The schedule indicates a quantity of zero for C
fixture in which case the line item for this fixture can be deleted.
Response: Noted.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/11/2016
08/11/2016: The Erosion Control Report (Stormwater Management Control)
submitted was incomplete and not current neither for City Erosion Control
Requirements nor for State SWMP requirements please submitted at FDP. The
current erosion control measures as shown on the submitted plans are still
lacking some protection along pipe inlets as well as a few other minor redlined
issues. Please refer to redlines for further detail. The erosion control escrow
calculations will need to be revised based on modifications made to the plan.
14
R Refer to revised Drainage, Erosion/Sediment Control and Water Quality Report.
R No redlines were provided.
R Erosion Control Escrow calculations have been revised.
Contact: Mark Taylor, 970-416-2494, mtaylor@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
06/14/2016: Add notes to the appropriate pages stating that an approved
floodplain use permit prior to beginning any work proposed within the existing
floodplain.
R The following note has been added to the appropriate sheets that represent limits of
floodplain. It is also included in the Supplemental General Notes on the Cover Sheet:
An approved floodplain use permit will be required prior to beginning any work
proposed within the existing floodplain.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
06/14/2016: It is difficult to decipher what is proposed and what is existing.
Please do a better job of differentiating.
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/08/2016
08/17/2016: Please label the curb cuts and sidewalk chases.
R Sidewalk chases along Emmaus Lane have been identified with the appropriate profile
station on the Emmaus Lane Plan and Profile sheet.
R Curb openings, rip rap and cutoff walls on the north side of the parking areas are labeled
on the Master Drainage Plan.
06/08/2016: The conveyance for basins 4,5,6 & 9 after flows leave the parking
areas is not depicted on the grading or drainage plan. Please show on the
plans how flows will leave the hard surface and enter the swale. Please label
any curb cuts, inlets, etc. and show the proposed conveyance through the
proposed sidewalk.
R Refer to revised Drainage, Erosion/Sediment Control and Water Quality Report and
revised Master Drainage Plan.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/08/2016
08/17/2016: A meeting is required to discuss the model.
R A meeting was held on Thursday, August 25, 2016. Attendees included Brent Balik,
Fred Ernst, Sam Coutts, Shane Boyle and Wes Lamarque. SWMM model and LID
requirements and options were discussed. Refer to revised SWMM model.
06/08/2016: The drainage report discusses that the SWMM model produced
with this report for the 36-inch storm sewer under Suniga Dr. does not include
the original planned flows to the west. The model needs to include all flows that
are currently planned to flow into this storm sewer and the additional flows of this
development, including the swale just south of Suniga Road. Please revise the
SWMM model.
15
R Refer to revised SWMM model.
Additional conveyance may be required to convey the flows from this
development to the regional detention pond.
R That was the initial proposed approach. Now, the model includes all upstream flows.
Refer to revised SWMM model.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/08/2016
08/17/2016: The LID mitigation proposed does not meet the City's
requirements. A meeting is suggested to discuss options. 50% of the site must
be treated with a LID technique.
R A meeting was held on Thursday, August 25, 2016. Attendees included Brent Balik,
Fred Ernst, Sam Coutts, Shane Boyle and Wes Lamarque. LID requirements and
options were discussed. We were advised that the LID % Impervious treatment
threshold would be 50% due to the project’s classification as residential for LID
purposes. The project will now meet the 50% LID treatment threshold.
06/08/2016: The Low Impact Development standards are required for this
development per the Conceptual Review comments. Please reference these
comments for details.
R Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
06/14/2016: There may be more comments forthcoming upon further review of
the plans associated with this project.
R Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: The outfall storm sewer into the NECCO pond needs to be placed
at it's ultimate position with the permanent pond configuration.
R Thank you for providing the NECCO plans by Ayres. The NECCO storm sewer profile
has now been adjusted to extend to its ultimate position with the permanent pond
configuration based on the storm sewer plan and profile noted on Sheet 41 of 69 (C-
231) of the Ayres NECCO plans. Refer to NECCO plan Sheet 41 of 69 (C-231)
attached.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/17/2016
08/17/2016: A restrictor plate or pipe is required to assist in the tailwater
affects that will fill the detention pond.
R Need Clarification on this: A restrictor plate is placed on the upstream end of a sewer
system to restrict flow going into the sewer. A flap gate is placed at the outfall of a
storm sewer to prevent undesired backwater flow from a source such as a detention
pond, however the NEECO SWMM model for this project demonstrates that a flap gate
is not required at the outfall into the Regional Detention Pond.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
16
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/16/2016: This has not been completely corrected.
06/15/2016: 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¿.
R Benchmark information on the Cover Sheet has been revised based on the redlines
provided by Technical Services.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/16/2016: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets.
06/15/2016: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets.
R All benchmark statements match on all sheets.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/16/2016: There are still issues. Mask all text in line work and/or hatching.
See redlines.
R Accommodated based on redlines.
06/15/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. The sheets marked
are just showing examples of the issues. Please correct all issues throughout
the plan set.
R Accommodated based on redlines.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/16/2016: There are still issues. Mask all text in line work and/or hatching.
See redlines.
R Accommodated based on redlines.
06/15/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. The sheets marked
are just showing examples of the issues. Please correct all issues throughout
the plan set.
R Accommodated based on redlines.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/16/2016: There are still issues. Mask all text in line work and/or hatching.
See redlines.
R Accommodated based on redlines.
06/15/2016: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched
areas. See redlines. The sheets marked are just showing examples of the
issues. Please correct all issues throughout the plan set.
17
R Accommodated based on redlines.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 08/16/2016
08/16/2016: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet
titles on the noted sheets. See redlines.
R All sheet titles now match the sheet titles noted in the index.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/15/2016: These were not received.
06/15/2016: Please provide current acceptable monument records for the
aliquot corners shown. These should be emailed directly to Jeff at
jcounty@fcgov.com
R Monument records were e-mailed to you by Rob Persichitte with Intermill Land
Surveying on Tuesday, January 17, 2017.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/15/2016: This has not been corrected.
06/15/2016: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See
redlines.
R Dedication information for all street rights of way has been added.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/15/2016: This has not been corrected.
06/15/2016: Please label the bearings on the boundary in a clockwise
direction. See redlines.
R Boundary bearings have been labeled in a clockwise direction.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 08/15/2016
08/15/2016: Please revise the vacation statement as marked on sheet 1. See
redlines.
R Vacation statement has been revised.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 08/15/2016
08/15/2016: Please add the reception numbers shown in the Monumentation
Legend. See redlines.
R Reception numbers will be added to the monumentation legend prior to recording of
the final plat.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 06/15/2016
08/15/2016: This has not been completely corrected.
06/15/2016: The title on all sheets needs to match the Subdivision Plat. See
redlines.
Response: Titles now match
Department: Traffic Operation
18
Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/16/2016
The submitted traffic study information has been reviewed and the conclusions
accepted.
Response: Noted.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
06/14/2016: 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: Noted.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970-416-2743, avandeutekom@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/14/2016
08/9/2016: This has not been changed on the Land Use chart 06/14/2016:
Accessory studio units should be called studio dwelling units.
Response: Plans have been updated.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/19/2016
08/19/2016: The community office should have 4 bicycle parking spaces.
Response: 4 bike spaces are now provided for community building.
Engineers/Scientists/Surveyors
P.O. Box 270460
Fort Collins, CO 80527
(970) 223-5556
3665 JFK Parkway, Building 2, Suite 200
69
NORTH EAST COLLEGE
CORRIDOR OUTFALL
VICINITY MAP
NOTES
STORM LINE C2 PLAN & PROFILE
STA 10+00 TO STA 16+50
C-231
41
MATCHLINE STA 16+50
Engineers/Scientists/Surveyors
P.O. Box 270460
Fort Collins, CO 80527
(970) 223-5556
3665 JFK Parkway, Building 2, Suite 200
69
NORTH EAST COLLEGE
CORRIDOR OUTFALL
REDWOOD POND STRUCTURE #2
DETAILS
C-505
52
27.00"
9.00"
16.00"
25.00"
2.00"
6.50"
R1.00"
R9.00"
Ø22.00"
10.00"
24.00" 12.00"
20.00"
R10.00"
R12.00"
1" PVC ANTI-SIPHON
PIPE ADAPTER
REMOVABLE WATERTIGHT
Ø18.00" ACCESS PORT, 6" OPENING
BMP, INC.
53 MT. ARCHER ROAD, LYME, CT. 06371
(800) 504-8008 FAX: (860)434-3195
U.S.PATENT #6126817 ADDITIONAL PATENTS PENDING
09/14/99 NONE
18F
18F SNOUT
OIL & DEBRIS
STOP
FRONT SIDE
PLAN
Engineers/Scientists/Surveyors
P.O. Box 270460
Fort Collins, CO 80527
(970) 223-5556
3665 JFK Parkway, Building 2, Suite 200
69
NORTH EAST COLLEGE
CORRIDOR OUTFALL
VICINITY MAP
NOTES
MATCHLINE STA 57+00
STORM LINE A1
STA 57+00 TO STA 60+10.72
C-208
18
MATCHLINE STA 57+00