Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEAST RIDGE THIRD FILING (FORMERLY EAST RIDGE - RESIDENTIAL) - PDP - PDP170006 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSPage 1 of 12 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview March 03, 2017 John Beggs Russell + Mills Studios 141 S COLLEGE AVE STE 104 Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: East Ridge Third Filing (formerly East Ridge - Residential), PDP170006, 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, Pete Wray, at 970-221-6754 or pwray@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Ragasa, 970.221.6603, mragasa@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: The north portion of this development is Parts of Phase 8 and 9 and the west portion is Phase 5. Per the development agreement of East Ridge Second Filing, Phase 8 can only be done after or concurrently with Phase 1A, Phase 1B, Phase 3, Phase 4, Phase 6 and Phase 7. Phase 9 can only be done after or concurrently with Phase 1A, Phase 1B, Phase 3, Phase 4 and Phase 6. Phase 5 can only be done after or concurrently with Phase 1A, Phase 1B and Phase 2. Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Prior to the finalizing of this project, Utility Plan revisions will need to be finalized with East Ridge Second Filing. Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Since plans will be approved after the revisions to East Ridge Second Filing, the Existing Conditions sheets should reflect these revisions. Response: These have been updated. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: The private drive on Tract M will need to be in an access easement. More information is needed to see how this portion of the drive will drain. Response: The private drive is within the tract providing the necessary accesses. Additional spots have been provided. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Driveways that serve 12 or more units shall have a minimum width of 28 feet. Low traffic volume streets may be reduced to 24 feet. Page 2 of 12 Response: Driveways have been widened. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: The minimum distance between high volume driveways and intersection is 150 feet. Please adjust the driveway spacing on Barnstormer. Response: Access has been coordinated with City Staff, a variance is being provided with this submittal. Page 3 of 12 Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: The driveways on Vicot Way and Crusader Street do not meet the requirements for allowing Type III Driveways (High Volume Driveway). Since they are not commercial uses and don't meet the traffic warrants, Type I driveways at a minimum width of 28 feet will need to be used. Response: Driveways types have been noted on the plan and profile sheets. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: The entrance angle for all driveway approaches and intersections shall be 90 degrees plus or minus 10 degrees for a minimum of 25 feet. Response: Angles noted. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: What is happening to the temporary turn around on Barnstormer Street and Zeppelin way? Plans show for driveways to intersect the turnarounds, but they will be needed until the streets are extended. Response: These will not be required with the build out provided. A variance to the conditions has been provided with this submittal. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: The meandering sidewalk along Timberline Road will need to be modified with East Ridge Second Filing. The sidewalk will need to be within an access easement. Since second filing plans will be approved prior to this proposal, it will need to be done be separate document. Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Private drive plan and profiles do not need to be in the Utility Plan set. They can be in here, but are not required. Please note that any changes after plans are approved will need to amend the Utility Plans. Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Based on the plan and profiles of the private drives, there are a couple of drives that drain more than the allowable 750 SF across a driveway. Please adjust. Response: Profiles have been updated to minimize this. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Alley intersection detail (LCUASS 803) will need to be replaced with Driveway details-706.1 for Type I driveways and 707.1 for high volume driveways (Type III). Response: Details added and alley detail removed. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/27/2017 02/27/2017: Private Drive signs will be needed at every driveway. It shall read: "Private Drive-Privately Maintained". Insert the actual private drive name if the drive will be named. Response: These will be provided with final design documents. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Please look at the parking setbacks along Vicot Drive. LCUASS 19-6 will need to be used. A minimum of 20' from the flowline to the first parking stall is needed. Response: These meet the 20’ setback from flowline. Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/10/2017 Page 4 of 12 02/10/2017: The project owes and additional $6,068.75 for PDP TDRFees. The project did not include the acreage or the base $2,000 fee in the total paid. Response: The additional payment will be made with the re-submittal. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Landscape plans say “Transition Zone Seed Mix – Refer to wetland enlargement for mix information,” however, did not see a wetland enlargement sheet. By Final Plan and prior to project approval include the seed mix on East Ridge Third filing and technical specs for proper installation and expectations to be achieved prior to acceptance of the area by the City. Response: The note has been removed. Seed mixes will be included during final plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Landscape plan note 16 refers to natural habitat buffer zone (NHBZ) however, do not believe NHBZ is included in any piece of third filing. Please confirm and provide update by Final Plan. Response: The note has been removed. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Unclear as to what luminaires shall be ordered for photometric plan. Include a table calling out clearly which fixtures and bulbs are to be used. In regard to lighting, especially LED light fixtures, cooler color temperatures are harsher at night and cause more disruption to circadian (biological) rhythms for both humans and wildlife thus warmer white 3000K or less are requested. By Final Plan and prior to project approval provide catalog cut sheets for luminaires and identify which specific corrected color temperature shall be ordered. This significantly aids city staff if and when there are post- construction compliance issues or lighting complaints. Response: Additional information has been added to the lighting plan regarding the luminaires. Several departments within the City of Fort Collins have been working together to address this issue; they are referred to as the City’s Night Sky team. Results of the team’s work can currently be viewed on the City’s Public Records website in Resolution 2016-074, a summary of City of Fort Collins City Council Intent and General Policy Regarding Night Sky Objectives. For further information regarding health effects please see: http://darksky.org/ama-report-affirms-human-health-impacts-from-leds/ Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/03/2017 03/03/2017: Please evaluate adding ornamental trees in planting beds along public streets. These are the planting beds that face the street between buildings and the sidewalk. Response: Additional ornamental trees have been added along the sidewalk. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/03/2017 03/03/2017: Please show the existing plum thicket, which is shown to be retained. On the original submittal, it is show on the north edge of the project, and should continue to be shown for reference on the plans. Response: The existing plum thicket is identified on the plan and will be retained. Page 5 of 12 Department: Light And Power Contact: Coy Althoff, 970-224-6150, CAlthoff@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Light and Power will have both single and 3-phase power to this development as a part of the East Ridge 2nd filing subdivision (which is currently under construction.) Response: Noted, Thank You. Page 6 of 12 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development. Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Multi family buildings (anything beyond a duplex) are treated as commercial services; therefore a(C 1) form must be filled out and submitted to Light & Power Engineering. All secondary electric service work is the responsibility of the developer and their electrical consultant or contractor. The C-1 form can be found at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: As your project continues to move forward please contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the streetlight, transformer and electric meter locations, please show the locations on the utility plans. Response: Noted, Thank You. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: 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. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: The location of the water and electric services will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Response: These will be shown with the final design documents. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/03/2017 03/03/2017: You may contact FCU Light & Power, project engineering if you have questions. (970) 221-6700. You may reference Light & Power¿s Electric Service Standards at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_F INAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Brian Zick, , Topic: General Page 7 of 12 Comment Number: Comment Originated: 03/03/2017 03/03/2017: Boxelder Sanitation: The District hereby advises as follows: 0 There is no objection to this proposal. 0 Responses required to comments below. 0 The District will respond at the hearing date of _ Comments: 1) Provisions are needed for maintenance vehicles to access proposed MH north of EXMH 1 on 18 inch sanitary sewer (Sheet UT01). Locate proposed MH further north, away from storm drain inlet; possibly within 30-foot landscape setback area to avoid future disruption of landscaped area when sewer is extended. Response: Extended and 8” sidewalk provided north from the private drive.. 2) Tract F 20-foot utility easement appears to be inadequate for both water and sewer utilities. Location of sewer scales out to be 3 feet from edge of easement and private drive (Sheet UT03). Response: these are now 5’ from centerline and with the additional 6’ utility easement on each side there will be a 32’ easement available. The District has adequate capacity to service the property referenced above. The District is in full compliance with Federal and State water quality requirements. We look forward to review future submittals on this project. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Brian Zick, P.E. District Engineer Department: PFA Contact: Cal Sheesley, 970-416-2599, csheesley@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/20/2017 02/20/2017: RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLER SYSTEM The original CDR plans referenced a Multi-Family (commercial) component. The current plans show only Single-Family Attached (residential) products with no M-F component. The sprinkler system requirements for fee-simple, Single Family Attached units may be met with combination residential sprinkler systems (eg. P-2904), provided there is adequate fire separation between units. Contact the Building Department for further details. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/20/2017 02/20/2017: WATER SUPPLY Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. A hydrant is required within 400' of any Residential Building as measured along an approved path of vehicle travel, on 800' centers there after. > Hydrant separation in Tract B exceeds minimum hydrant separation distances. Response: Hydrants provided on the east and west ends with a maximum space between 2 hydrants of 575 feet. > Hydrant separation in Tract F does not meet minimum hydrant separation distances. An additional hydrant is needed at the NE corner of the intersection of Private Drive AA and Private Drive DD. Response: Hydrants added. > An additional hydrant will be required along Timberline in order to meet minimum code requirements and correct existing hydrant separation deficiencies in this area. This additional hydrant should be located at or about the area west of Lot 15. Response: Hydrant added. Page 8 of 12 Code language provided below for planning purposes: > IFC 507.5 and PFA Policy: RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS: Within the Urban Growth Area, hydrants to provide 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter. CLEAR SPACE AROUND HYDRANTS > IFC 507.5.5: A 3-foot clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants except as otherwise required or approved. PHYSICAL PROTECTION > IFC 507.5.6: Where fire hydrants are subject to impact by a motor vehicle, guard post or other approved means shall comply with section 312. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/21/2017 02/21/2017: FIRE LANES Fire access is required to within 150' of all exterior portions of any building. For the purposes of this section, fire access cannot be measured from an arterial road (Timberline). Any private alley or private drive serving as a fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) and be designed to standard fire lane specifications. The following fire lane comments are relative to the latest Site Plan. > The western end of Tract B creates a dead-end road in excess of 150' which requires an approved turnaround or through connection. The Site Plan refers to a drive connection back to Barnstormer St, indicated as Tract M, at this location. Tract M will require dedication as an EAE either with this plat or as an off-site easement, by separate document. Response: Helldiver drive is completely within an EAE now. > Minimum fire lane width is 20' which is the width of all proposed private drives. As such, no parking will be allowed along any proposed drive. Response: Signage will be provided with final CDs. > Turning radii should be provided on future plans. Response: radii shown. > Fire lane specifications provided below for your planning purposes. FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements: > Shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement. > Maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance. > Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. > Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. > The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. > Be visible by painting and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. Sign locations or red curbing should be labeled and detailed on final plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/21/2017 02/21/2017: FIRE LANE MARKING As fire lanes shall remain unobstructed at all times, fire Lane boundaries shall be fully defined by signage. Please include the limits of the fire lane with clearly marked and approved signage in future plans. Be advised, new signage standards have been adopted and can be found in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LUCASS), specifically Drawing 1418 and 1419. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/21/2017 02/21/2017: PREMISE IDENTIFICATION & WAYFINDING The proposed plans does not indicate naming of the private drives (Tract B, F, & J). A Page 9 of 12 effective means of providing intuitive wayfinding throughout the site will be required. A plan for street naming is requested along with a wayfinding plan to include monument, pole and/or other means of signage to aid in navigating the private drives. Response: Names provided. Due to the orientation of dwelling units on this site, every unit will require address posting on the front and rear of every unit. The posting of the street name will also be required on some buildings, as defined by local amendments provided below. A comprehensive plan will be required prior to final plan approval. Please contact PFA with any questions or to seek assistance with this matter. Code language provided below. ADDRESS POSTING - LOCAL AMENDMENT > IFC 505.1.7: Buildings, either individually or part of a multi-building complex, that have fire lanes on sides other than the addressed street side, shall have the address numbers and street name on each side that fronts the fire lane. ADDRESS POSTING - LOCAL AMENDMENT > IFC 505.1.8: Buildings that are addressed on one street, but are accessible from other streets, shall have the address numbers AND STREET NAME on each side that is accessible form another street. Department: Planning Services Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwray@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/03/2017 03/03/2017: Coordination of sidewalk along Timberline Road. With Filing 2. As discussed at conceptual review and at staff review last Wednesday, we are coordinating inclusion of regional trail with this approved 6' walk. We need to confirm with Filing 3 applicant the upgrade from a 6' walk to a 10' colored path. Parks will fund the additional 4' of pavement and take over maintenance of this path. The additional 4' can be added on west side of sidewalk alignment of split 2' on either side. The landscaping and irrigation will need to be adjusted to accommodate this wider sidewalk. Response: Sidewalk “Trail” updated with the second filing plan set. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Lighting plan needs more information including lighting legend that shows ordering information, quantities, performance standards etc. Need details for all fixtures for walkways, drives, building wall mounted fixtures and any bollards. Response: Detail cutsheets have been included on the lighting plan Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Cover Sheet - separate owner certification signature box from Planning Certification signature box. Response: Detail cutsheets have been included on the lighting plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Updated comments for LS101, LS 401, LS 402. rear facing building entrances that do not comply with LUC Section 3.5.2 (D) for relationship of dwellings to streets (unit entrances are more than 200' from street and not in compliance with LUC Article 5 (page 12) definition for a connecting walkway. The units with entrances facing north have a greater distance to connect to a public street than 200'. This connecting walkway is not a major walkway spine. Given the narrowness of this tract and inability to connect to E. Vine Drive, a Modification is needed. by including this extra row of units on north side, design options are limited to make it work. RESPONSE: The plan has been revised per meetings with City staff. A modification has Page 10 of 12 been submitted per City direction. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Existing Conditions Plan: There are several segments of storm line that were revised recently under the East Ridge Second Filing project. These revised storm lines should be represented here on the existing conditions plan. Also, there are several “proposed” items that don’t belong on the existing conditions plan. It’s difficult to follow what the baseline condition is going to be for these parcels when this plan shows a combination of existing (or soon to be existing) and proposed. See my redlined comments. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. The revised Existing Conditions Plan shows the recent updates mentioned above. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Grading Plan: Please note that all swales less than 2% will need to either be installed with a “soft pan” or a concrete plan. Please include callouts and details for these as needed. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged, note added and further clarification will occur with final design documents. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Grading Plan: for the two temporary turnaround areas it’s unclear which roadway configuration you’re proposing. Are the temporary turnarounds going away with this project? If so, they should be removed from the proposed condition plans. RESPONSE: These will be conditionally removed with the completion of adjacent hardscape for emergency access. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Grading Plan: There are storm lines shown along the west side of the buildings in Tract G. These don’t appear to be placed in conjunction with low points. What is the intent of these lines? Are you connecting roof drains into them? Please include some callouts or labels in the plans to clarify. RESPONSE: This is showing location, fine grading and plan and profiles will further clarify with final and will be used to connect roof drains and landscape areas. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Grading Plan: Please include spot elevations at inlets and low points and slope arrows with percentage labels. RESPONSE: Additional spots and slopes added. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Utility Plan: The proposed storm pipes should be somehow differentiated from the “existing” storm pipes that are being installed with the East Ridge Second Filing project. Callouts to these pipes should reference the 3rd filing not the 2nd. Storm pipes should all be labeled as “private” and approximate sizes should be included in the plans. RESPONSE: Shading adjusted to differentiate and “private” added to callouts. Further clarification will be added with the plan and profiles. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Utility Plan: it looks like the utility easement along the alleyways is overlapping with the building footprint. This should be corrected. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Utility Plan: The proposed storm pipes look close to the building footprints, water lines and to the irrigation pipe in a couple of locations. Please note that storm pipes should be a minimum of 10’ from buildings and other utilities. Page 11 of 12 RESPONSE: Dimensions added where requested. Topic: Drainage Report Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Thank you for including the email summary of how the LID requirements will be met with this project. I think keeping the email as a part of the appendix to this report is a good idea. However, please also include the LID summary and percent calculations in the body of the report narrative. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: The Table included on page 10 shows “proposed” volumes for the various EDB/LID systems. Please clarify/verify that you aren’t proposing to change the volumes in the sand filters and water quality ponds that are being built as a part of ERSF. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. The intent of the table is to show that the proposed East Ridge Third Filing (ERTF) improvements can be accommodated by the ‘proposed’ volumes designed with East Ridge Second Filing (ERSF). I’ll revise the language. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Area inlet calculations look to include 3 grates in the rating table. Are you assuming three inlets/grates at every inlet location? Please clarify. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Street capacity calculations table doesn’t make sense to me. It looks like there is not adequate street capacity at the low point. Please clarify. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. In several cases, the low point of the tributary area is the confluence of two or more private alleys. In a case where the low point is situated in the middle of a basin and two alleys of equal length approach the low point, the calculated flow (e.g., 16 cfs) was divided in half (e.g., 8 cfs) and compared to the alley capacity (e.g., 10 cfs). The more rigorous approach includes delineating a basin for each alley, calculating the developed flow and then comparing it to the available alley capacity. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Many of the storm design sheets from ERSF that are included in the appendix are now older versions of the design as revision sheets have been submitted and approved. Please include those revised sheets in this report instead. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Drainage Map: It would be helpful to also include the original basin labels (maybe ghosted back) on the map since these original basins are referenced in this report (i.e. Fut A, Fut B, Fut H, Fut I) RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Drainage Map: It looks like the basins fronting Barnstormer Drive and Timberline Road drain onto the roadways. For Barnstormer, street capacity and inlet capacities should be re-analyzed to verify that they can handle the additional runoff. For Timberline, the original report did not show or assume runoff onto Timberline and we won’t allow developed runoff onto Timberline. Please clarify your intent and the design along Timberline. RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. During final design, we will grade low points along the frontage to capture local runoff. The roof drainage will likely be tied directly into the proposed ERTF storm drain system. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/28/2017 02/28/2017: Please include the proposed storm pipes in these plans and ensure that you’re meeting the required separation distances between the storm lines and trees and shrubs. Also, swale centerlines should be shown on these plans and trees should not Page 12 of 12 be placed along the centerline. RESPONSE: All utilities have been shown and separation distaces have been met. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/15/2017 02/15/2017: 2/15/2017: 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; an Erosion Control Plan, an 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 RESPONSE: This will be provided with final design. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/02/2017 03/02/2017: Please change the sub-title to match the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/02/2017 03/02/2017: Please revise the Benchmark Statement as marked. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/02/2017 03/02/2017: There are text over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/02/2017 03/02/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Please remove the "Dash" from the title & title blocks. See redlines. Response: The dash has been removed. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Line over text issues have been resolved. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response letter. RESPONSE: Updated as requested. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 Page 13 of 12 03/01/2017: Please remove the "Dash" from the title & title blocks. See redlines. Response: The dash has been removed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Line over text issues have been resolved. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Response: Acknowledged Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Please include an accounting of reserve trips at Vine and Lemay. If the previously approved trips plus the trips from this development are under the reserved capacity no additional traffic analysis is needed. Response: The approved ODP outlined 361 SFA units before any additional traffic analysis would be required. Filing 2 and Filing 3 include 345 units – under the amount outlined in the ODP. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Please provide raised crosswalks along barnstormer. Response: Acknowledged – this will be further studied and included in the final plan submittal. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: 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: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: How will trash be handled? If there are trash enclosures, this will need to be shown on the site plan with elevations. Response: Trash will be handled by individual homeowners. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: The photometric site plan does not include cut sheets for proposed light fixtures. Please include cut sheets of the proposed fixtures. Response: The lighting plan now includes cut sheets. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Please include detailed elevations of all proposed building types. Page 14 of 12 Response: The building elevations are still being developed by the owner. The previously submitted building elevations have been resubmitted. Additional building elevations will be submitted with final plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/01/2017 03/01/2017: Elevations will need to include how mechanical equipment is screened from public view and how conduit, meters and vents are painted to match surrounding building surfaces. Response: The future building elevations will address the mechanical equipment screening.