Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOPPERLEAF - FDP - FDP170008 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSCommunity Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.comldevelopmentreview October 31, 2016 Scott Ranweiler Brinkman Partners 3528 Precision Drive, Ste100 Fort Collins, CO 80528 RE: Copper Leaf (formerly known as 3425 South Shields), PDP160026, 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. Comment Summary: Department:-Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Ragasa, 970.221.6603, mragasa@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/24/2016 10/24/2016: The driveway along shields will need to be a minimum of 28' for multi-family units with more than 12 units. RESPONSE: Variance requested. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/24/2016 10/24/2016: The transition from attached to detached along the south property line will need to be modified to final review. The hope is that if the property to the south were to re-develop, they would be able to easily tie to the existing sidewalk. RESPONSE: Sidewalk adjusted. Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/24/2016 10/24/2016: An additional $29.50 is due for the PDP TDR Fee. This is based on the 93 du identified on the site plan and 2.987 acres identified on the plat. RESPONSE: We will provide the additional fees with the Final Plan submittal. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016 10/25/2016: Thank you for providing a photometric plan with this PDP submittal and site luminaire schedule and for selecting many luminaires having a corrected color temperate of 3000K or less. Currently plans still show GG luminaires with a 5000K CCT. RESPONSE: The fixtures have been corrected to be 3000K. Staff highly suggests use of 3000K or less luminaires for all light fixtures due to City resident complaints of both brightness and color of LED lighting in particular. Additionally, selecting 3000K or less luminaires aligns with recommendations from both The American Medical Association (AMA) and International Dark-Sky Association (IDA), and aligns with City of Fort Collins Nature in the City Strategic Plan. RESPONSE: The fixtures have been corrected to be 3000K. For further information see: 5 Popular Myths About LED Streetlights http://darksky.org/5-popular-myths-about-led-streetlights/ AMA Report Affirms Human Health Impacts form LEDs http://darksky.org/ama-report-affirms-human-health-impacts- from-leds/ Save Our Stars: City seeks to preserve night skies in Fort Collins http://www.coloradoan.corn/story/news/2016/09/27/save-our-stars-city-seeks-preserve-night-skies/90970492/ The Agenda Summary (9/20/16) Expressing Council's General Intent and Policy Considerations Regarding Night Sky Objectives. Available upon request and can be downloaded from the City of Fort Collins Public Records (City Docs) webpage. The Illuminating Engineers Society (IES) publication on Recommended Practice on Lighting for the Exterior Environment Current Research and Award-Winning Work done by Colorado IES members Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016 10/25/2016: 2. The site is not currently within a 10-minute walk of any parks or natural areas, which is a priority of the Nature in the City Strategic Plan. LUC 3.8.30(C) requires all development projects be within 1,320 ft (1/4 mile) of a neighborhood park, a privately owned park or a central feature or gathering place that is located either within the project or within adjacent development. Ensuring both neighborhood and urban walkability is increasingly important as It relates to public health, childhood obesity, maintaining the smaller town feel of Fort Collins and in enhancing the pedestrian environment. RESPONSE: Modification approved at P & Z on 1.12.17. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016 10/25/2016: City of Fort Collins Land Use Code requires that to the extent reasonably feasible, all plans be designed to incorporate water conservation materials and techniques [3.2.1E(3)]. This includes use of low- water-use plants and grasses in landscaping or re-landscaping and reducing bluegrass lawns as much as possible. Native plants and wildlife-friendly (ex: pollinators; songbirds) landscaping and maintenance are highly encouraged; plantings should include appropriate native vegetation, species diversity and variety in vertical structure. a. Good progress on updating chosen shrubs - thank you. b. Current landscape plans show over-reliance on feather reed grass and switch grass. Add the following natives to meet visual diversity, species diversity and low-water use objectives: A. gerardii (Big bluestem); S. scoparium (little bluestem); B. curtipendula (Sideoats grama); B. dactyloides (Buffalograss); A. hymenoides (Indian ricegrass) and/or B. gracilis (Blue grama). RESPONSE: Grass species diversity has been addressed Several resources are available online and by request to aid in native plant choices appropriate to our ecotype, climate and urban environment. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016 10/25/2016: Our city has an established identity as a forward-thinking community that cares about the quality of life it offers its citizens now and generations from now. Thus, the City of Fort. Collins has many sustainability programs and goals that may benefit this project. Of particular interest may be the: 1) Zero Waste Plan and the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program (WRAP): fcgov.com/recycling/pdf/_20120404_ WRAP_ProgramOverview.pdf, contact Caroline Mitchell at 970-221-6288 or cmtichell@fcgov.com 2) ClimateWise program: fcgov.com/climatewise/ 3) Green Building Program: fcgov.com/enviro/green-building.php, contact Tony Raeker at 970-416-4238 or traeker@fcgov.com 4) Solar Energy: www.fcgov.com/solar, contact Norm Weaver at 970-416-2312 or nweaver@fcgov.com 5) Integrated Design Assistance Program: fcgov.corn/idap, contact Gary Schroeder at 970-224-6003 or gschroeder@fcgov.com 6) Nature in the City Strategic Plan: http://www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity/, contact Justin Scharton at 970-221-6213 or jscharton@fcgov.com Please consider City sustainability goals and ways this development can engage with these efforts. Let me know if I can help connect you to these programs. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/16/2016 10/28/2016: Continued: See comment number 8 09/16/2016: There appears to be a few things in the tree inventory that needs to be changed or added. 1. Tree number 4 is a cottonwood. RESPONSE: Tree number 4 has been change to be a Cottonwood 2. Some of the trees listed in the table to retain or remove are different then what is stated in the text by existing trees. RESPONSE: Tree table updated to match diagram 3. Check for consistency in species identification. Tree number 5 is listed as a juniper in one place and a Douglas fir in another. Also this tree is shown for retention in one place and removal in another. RESPONSE: Tree number 5 has been changed to proper species in both locations. 4. Place X on trees to be removed to make it easier to see those on the plan. RESPONSE: X has been added to trees to be removed. 5. Add a column to the Tree inventory table that is titled reason for removal and provide a brief statement explaining the reason for removal for those trees. RESPONSE: Additional column has been added to the table 6. There may be a few trees on the south side of the project which were the last ones to be inventoried that are not shown. RESPONSE: Trees are located on neighboring property Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/16/2016 10/28/2016: Continued: See comment number 11 09/16/2016: Check percentage of species-used and make quantity-adjustments-if-needed that meet the LUC 3.2.1 D 3 Minimum Species Diversity Standard. Limited species diversity is provided on this submittal and could be addressed on the next submittal. RESPONSE: Species diversity is being met Comment Number: 6 10/28/2016: Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 Street Tree Species Selection Changes Requested By Forestry: Change the new street tree placed between the two existing coffeetrees to retain along Shields to a Kentucky Coffeetree. RESPONSE: Kentucky Cofeetrees have replaced street trees along Shields Change the other three street trees to Catalpa. This includes the north most new street tree and the two new street trees furthers to the south. RESPONSE: Catalpa trees have been added Comment Number: 7 10/28/2016: Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 Linden trees don't thrive very well in parking lot islands and peninsulas. For the canopy shade trees shown between the two west buildings consider changing the Greenspire lindens to honeylocust and hackberry. RESPONSE: Honeylocust trees have replaced Lindens in the parking islands. Comment Number: 8 10/28/2016: Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 Thank you for making some updates to the tree inventory information. Some of the data appears that it may still need some updates. Please set an on-site meeting with the City Forester to finalize the data in the tree inventory. This should be able to be accomplished with a quick walk through. Also at this site meeting Forestry would like to review the possible construction impact to the three existing trees at the SW comer of the property shown to retain. These include existing trees 22-24. RESPONSE: Tree inventory has been updated, on site meeting was held 2-6-17. Comment Number: 9 10/28/2016: Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 Provide for 21 upsized mitigation trees. Please record these in the plant list and on the direct tree label. It often works best to place an M by mitigation trees as part of the direct label. Canopy shade trees - 3.0 inch caliper Ornamental trees - 2.5 inch caliper Evergreen trees - 8 feet height RESPONSE: Mitigation trees have been provided and recorded in the plant list. Comment Number: 1O 10/28/2016: Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 Skyrocket Juniper is an evergreen tree and should be listed in that plant group in the plant list. RESPONSE: Juniper has been moved to the evergreen section of the plantlist. Comment Number: 11 10/28/2016: Minimum Species Diversity: Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 With the inclusion of the Skyrocket Juniper as a tree there are 86 trees proposed for the project. LUC 3.2.1 D 3 directs th-ta t nomore than15%should be of any one species with this number of trees on a project. The Skyrocket Juniper numbers will need to be reduced from 37 to 13. Consider using some Woodward juniper and Taylor juniper to help adjust the numbers. Also a few Crimson Spire oak might also work in these narrow areas. RESPONSE: Plant species diversity has been met by adding Taylor and Woodward Junipers. Department: Light And Power Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Light & Power has existing single phase electric facilities running along the South edge of the site and feeding an existing dwelling unit on the site. There are also 3phase electric facilities running adjacent to the site along Shields St. Power for this site will most likely come from Shields street. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Any relocation or modification to existing electric facilities will be at the expense of the owner/developer. If Light & Power's existing electric facilities are to remain within the limits of the project they must be located within a utility easement. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft. of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 1O ft. and side/rear clearance of 3 ft. minimum. Please show proposed transformer locations on the utility and site plans. RESPONSE: Transformer locations are shown on the plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Light and Power will most likely need to extend primary lines into the site to feed transformers for the buildings. 10ft minimum separation is needed between all water, sewer, storm water, and gas main lines. Transformer locations are needed to determine the electric primary route. Utility easements may need to be adjusted to accommodate separation requirements. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: A commercial service forms (C-1 form) and a one-line diagrams will need to be submitted to Light & Power Engineering for review. Below is a link for the C-1 Form. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Secondary service feeds from the transformers to the buildings will be the responsibility of the owner to install and maintain. . Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and any system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development. Please visit the following website for an estimate of charges and fees: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen t-development- fees Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Please contact Tyler Siegmund at Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 970.416.2772. Please reference our policies, construction practices, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416·2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 5 10/26/2016: FIRE LANE LABELING Comment Originated: 10/26/2016 No Parking - Fire Lane sign locations have been identified on the plans but not clearly labeled. RESPONSE: Each sign is now labeled. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: To improve pedestrian connectivity to the south, please consider adding a 4.5 foot wide attached walk to the west side of the 40-foot access easement. Sections 3.2.2(B)(C) place an emphasis on linking sites with walkways that are continuous and safe to create a pedestrian-friendly environment. Carried Over: 10/26/2016 As discussed, staff will consider on-pavement striping, to be applied by thermoplastic, not paint, in combination with flexible lane delineators for pedestrian safety. RESPONSE: As discussed, the striped area is 4’ wide and will be applied by thermoplastic in combination with flexible lane delineators for pedestrian safety. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Further discussion is needed with regard to the response to PDR comment number nine from Planning regarding compliance with Section 3.8.30(C). Since the site is greater than one-quarter mile from both Rossborough Park and Rocky Mountain High School, a private park or an on-site central feature or gathering space is required. For sites that are greater than two acres, this private park must be no less than 10,000 square feet. Carried Over: 10/26/2016: Modification Received. RESPONSE: Modification approved at P & Z on 1.12.17. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: The Planning Response Letter indicates approximately 6,000 square feet is available for an on-site central feature or gathering place but there is no detail as to the location or the specific amenities that would be provided. We need to see how close the project comes to meeting the underlying intent of the standard given the size of the site (2.9 acres) and its context within the surrounding area (infill redevelopment). Staff recommends that a combination of active and passive amenities be considered and placed where feasible. Active uses could include any combination of the following: tot lot, picnic facility (gazebo, pergola, picnic tables, grilling), dog walking station, etc. Passive amenities may include irrigated turf, perennial flower beds, living walls (trellis structures with climbing plants,) etc. RESPONSE: The amenities have been added to the plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: As mentioned in the Planning Response Letter, a Modification of Standard may be needed. Please note the criteria by which a Modification may be considered. Section 2.8.2(H)(1, 3,4) are the criteria for a Modification of Standard any one of which would act as a justification. For the next submittal, if the standard cannot be met, please submit a request for a Modification that specifically addresses one of these criteria. Carried Over: 10/26/2016: Modification received. RESPONSE: Modification approved at P & Z on 1.12.17. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: On the south property line, perhaps a case could be made that the owner has indicated re-developing the site and the buffering may not have to be as comprehensive. In any event, a Modification of Standard needs to be requested. Carried Over: 10/26/2016: Modification received. RESPONSE: Modification approved at P & Z on 1.12.17. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: On the Architectural Elevations, please create a distinct entry feature per building. As presently indicated, all three buildings include the identical entry design. Each building must have its own unique entry to avoid repetition and comply with Section 3.8.30(F)(2). Carried Over: 10/26/2016: The architect has indicated revisions will be forthcoming. RESPONSE: Elevations have been modified to create (3) distinct entries. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Please explore other opportunities to create distinctions among the three buildings to comply with the aforementioned standard. As presently indicated, distinctions are subtle and seem to consist of slight variations among repeated elements. Has the applicant considered a material change that distinguishes one building from another? Carried Over: 10/26/2016: The architect has indicated revisions are forthcoming. RESPONSE: Elevations have been modified to distinguish one from another. Comment Number: 22 Comment-Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Please consider selecting fixtures that are equipped with dimming capability. It seems that in a residential setting such as this, with interior parking lots, dimming the fixtures after a certain time at night would create a more pleasing nighttime environment for both residents and neighbors and save energy as well. Carried Over: 10/26/2016: Need to verify. RESPONSE: We are still evaluating this. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Dan Mogen, 970-224-6192, dmogen@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/14/2016 10/25/2016: The 2-year historic rate is shown to be 1.Bcfs. As Basin OS releases at 0.5cfs, the detention basin needs to be sized with a 1.3cfs release rate. RESPONSE: This has been updated. Please refer to the Drainage Report. 09/14/2016: Please provide calculations for the 2-year historic runoff to determine release rate. Note that this site is actually in the Foothills Basin; same requirements apply to both Spring Creek and Foothills Basins. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/12/2016 10/25/2016: Repeat, saw note and will look for material submittal at FOP RESPONSE: Erosion Control Report and Plan has been submitted for review. 09/12/2016: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft., therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FOP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan, Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow/ Security Calculation. 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 970-218-2932 or email@ jschlam@fcgov.com Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: These have been corrected 09/15/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 10/28/2016: Please correct the note marked on sheet 3. See redlines. RESPONSE: Corrected. Topic: Landscape Plan- s Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: Please add "Subdivision" to the title block on all sheets. See redlines. RESPONSE: Subdivision has been added to the sheets 09/15/2016: Please change the titles on all sheets to match the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: Title has been updated on all sheets Comment Number: 18 10/28/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 09/15/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Line over text issues have been resolved Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: No plans were provided for review, so we cannot verify this was addressed. RESPONSE: The lighting plans are included as part of this submission. 09/15/2016: Please change the titles on all sheets to match the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: No plans were provided for review, so we cannot verify this was addressed. RESPONSE: The lighting plans are included as part of this submission. 09/15/2016: Please remove all Building Envelope references. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: Please add new title commitment information as available. RESPONSE: Title commitment information has been added. 09/15/2016: Please add new title commitment information as available. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: With which-Plat/Subdivision was the 0.5' witness comer set? See redlines. RESPONSE: Revised monument note. 09/15/2016: Please explain why the found monuments were not accepted per Board Rule 6.5.4.1. See redlines. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 10/28/2016 10/28/2016: Please notate: To the City of Fort Collins for the 20' Drainage Easement along Shields Street. See redlines. RESPONSE: Added City of Fort Collins to the 20’ Drainage Easement note. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: Please add "Subdivision" to the title block. See redlines. RESPONSE: Corrected. 09/15/2016: Please change the title to match the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 09/15/2016 10/28/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Corrected. 09/15/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016: Please remove the striped- pedestrian walkway through- the shared access drive. The striping is not clear that the space is to be used for a walkway. RESPONSE: As discussed, the striped area is 4’ wide and will be applied by thermoplastic in combination with flexible lane delineators for pedestrian safety. 09/13/2016: Work with engineering to determine frontage improvements. A 7' detached walk would be required along the Shields frontage from our perspective. Also, pedestrian connections through the shared access would help pedestrian connectivity and circulation. Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016 10/25/2016: The submitted traffic study information has been reviewed and the conclusions accepted. RESPONSE: Thank you. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/09/2016 09/09/2016: 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: Zoning Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2338, mglasgow@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/13/2016 09/13/2016: Trash/ recycling enclosures over 6 ft. in height require separate building permits. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2016 10/25/2016: Fences (including fence posts) over 6 ft. in height require separate building permit. RESPONSE: Acknowledged.