HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHERRY STREET COTTAGES - PDP - PDP160041 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - REVISIONS1901 Bear Court / Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
(970) 590-1579 / PaulS51@comcast.net
Sorensen Engineering & Construction, LLC
Civil/Environmental Engineering
June 5, 2017
Mr. Ted Shepard
Project Planner
Community Development and Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Subject: Cherry Street Cottages, PDP 160041
Dear On behalf Ted, of Evan Responses Gilmartin, to Round owner Number of the referenced 1 Comments property, Sorensen Engineering &
Construction, LLC (SEC) is pleased to submit our responses to comments offered by City
Departments during the Round 1 Project Review for the referenced project. For your
convenience, our responses are provided in italicized print following each comment.
Comment Summary:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Katie Andrews, 970‑221‑6501, kandrews@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: ROW will need to be dedicated to the back of the public sidewalk
and the 9 foot utility easements will be dedicated behind the ROW.
In response to this comment, all applicable project drawings have been revised to show the ROW
dedicated to the back of the public sidewalks, and the 9-foot utility easement dedicated behind that.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please design the driveway for the private alley according to
LCUASS Detail 706.1 for low volume driveways.
As requested, the driveway for the private alley on the north side of the project is designed in accordance
with LCUASS Detail 706.1, and that detail drawing is incorporated into Sheet DE-1, City Details, of the
design drawing set.
2
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please note that the utility plan set is separate from the site plan
set. The utility signature approval block only needs to be on the utility set and the
utility pages should not be included in the index for the site plan set – the utility
set should have its own cover/index.
So noted; the design drawing package for the project has been reorganized as directed.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: See redlines for additional comments. Please return redlines with
next round submittal.
All applicable drawings have been revised in accordance with the redline remarks from the Round 1
review, and the redline remarks are included with this Round 2 submittal.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please remove utility signature block from the landscape plan.
The utility signature block has been removed from the Landscape Plan.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please dedicate tracts for the detention area and alley.
As shown on the revised plat, the detention pond is dedicated as “Tract A,” and the alley is dedicated
as “Tract B.”
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please dedicate utility, access, and drainage easements and any
other necessary easements on the plat.
In response to this comment, the Applicant believes that all necessary easements are dedicated on the
revised plat.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Please dedicate the appropriate amount of ROW per the
LCUASS Chapter 7 local street cross section.
As shown on the Plat and Site Plans, the amount of ROW dedicated meets the requirements of Figure 7-9,
Residential Local Street of the LUCASS. Specifically, an 11-foot ROW is provided, including a 7-foot
parkway plus a 4-foot sidewalk. Behind the ROW is a dedicated 9-foot Utility Easement.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/19/2016
12/19/2016: Lot 7 (detention pond) is listed as having a dwelling unit with 4
bedrooms. Please correct this table for accurate TDRF calculations.
3
Thank you for catching this error. In response, the Site Data table on Sheet S-1 has been revised
to correctly indicate that there is, in fact, no dwelling unit on the previously identified “Lot 7” (now
dedicated as Tract A).
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970‑221‑6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/14/2016
12/14/2016: The TDRFees will be reviewed again with the next submittal as I
am thinking that things will change. For example the site plan indicates that
there will be a dwelling unit in the detention pond ‑ which is unlikely. Any
adjustments needed will be made at that time.
You are correct, there is no dwelling unit in the detention pond. The applicant anticipates that the information
provided with this submittal is correct for TDRF calculations.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970‑416‑4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: 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) Green Building Program: http://www.fcgov.com/enviro/green‑building.php,
contact Tony Raeker at 970‑416‑4238 or traeker@fcgov.com
2) Solar Energy:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/residential/renewables/solar‑contractors‑resource
s
3) Integrated Design Assistance Program: http://fcgov.com/idap, contact Gary
Schroeder at 970‑224‑6003 or gschroeder@fcgov.com
4) Urban Agriculture: http://www.fcgov.com/urbanagriculture, contact Spencer
Branson at 970‑224‑6086 or sbranson@fcgov.com. In addition, the Northern
Colorado Food Cluster is sponsored and supported by the City of Fort Collins.
The executive Director, Brad Christensen, can be reached at
director@nocofoodcluster.org.
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.
4
Thank you for this comment; the Applicant appreciates the links you provided. LIke the City, the Applicant
has forward-thinking views, and will encourage the implementation of sustainable building and development
standards.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: City of Fort Collins Land Use Code [Section 3.2.1 (E)(3)], requires
that to the extent reasonably feasible, all plans be designed to incorporate water
conservation materials and techniques. 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,
butterflies, songbirds) landscaping and maintenance are also encouraged.
Please refer to the Fort Collins Native Plants document available online and
published by the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department for guidance on
native plants is: http://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativeplants2013.pdf.
The Applicant concurs with the water-conservation philosophy of the City, and has, where possible,
incorporated low-water-use plants in the landscape plan.
Honeylocust trees, while hardy, are often overused in urban settings. Perhaps
diversify shade trees further with addition of hackberry or linden or additional
bur oak.
In preparing the Landscape Plan, the Applicant met with Mr. Tim Buchanan, City Forester, for his input on
tree species selection. The previously submitted landscape plan is in accordance with Mr. Buchanan’s
recommendations. However, the Applicant would be happy to revise specific species if further requested,
and would be equally happy with hackberry, linden, or burr oak trees in place of the honeylocust.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: When it’s a single‑family, residential conceptual review
Please be aware, the creation or enforcement of covenants that prohibit or limit
xeriscape or drought‑tolerant landscapes, or that require primarily turf‑grass are
prohibited by both the State of Colorado and the City of Fort Collins.
So noted, thank you. The Applicant appreciates the benefits of xeriscaping and the use of drought-tolerant
plants, and will not create covenants prohibiting such use.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: In regard to light fixtures, especially any LED fixtures, cooler color
temperatures are harsher at night and cause more disruption to circadian
(biological) rhythms for both humans and wildlife. Please consider a warmer
color temperature (warm white, 3000K or less) for any LED light fixtures. Please
also consider fixtures with dimming capabilities so that light levels can be
adjusted as needed. Site light sources shall be fully shielded and
down‑directional to minimize up‑light, light spillage and glare [see LUC 3.2.4(D)
5
(3)].
For further information regarding health effects please see:
http://darksky.org/ama‑report‑affirms‑human‑health‑impacts‑from‑leds/
Thank you for this comment. The Applicant agrees to the benefits of using warm white light, 3,000K or less
for LED fixtures. Accordingly, as shown on Sheet L-2 Landscape Plan of the submitted drawing set, lighting
is specified as follows: “Streetlight – ‘Old English Fixture’ with Type 3 Distribution 70W 0.2 Foot Candles
located no closer than 2’ from roadway or sidewalk.”
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Todd Vedder, 970‑224‑6152, tvedder@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Contact Light & Power to coordinate transformer and meter
locations.
In response to this comment, the applicant did contact Light & Power. As shown on Sheet U-2 Utility Plan,
electric service transformers shall be placed on the east side of Lyons Street near the northwest corner of
the property and between Lots 3 and 4 on the south side of the access driveway. Individual meters shall
be placed along the rear access alley in such a location to facilitate easy access for reading by Utility
personnel.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Will breaker panel sizes be 150 or 200 amp services? Will units
have gas or electric heat?
200 amp service will be provided. The units will have electric heat.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Streetlights will need to be placed along public streets. A 40 feet
separation on both sides of the light is required between shaded trees and
streetlights. A 15 feet separation on both sides of the light is required between
ornamental trees and streetlights.
Two street lights are proposed for this project. The stated separation distances between street lights and
shade and ornamental trees are provided on Sheet L-2 Landscape Plan.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Please contact Todd Vedder with Light & Power Engineering if
you have any questions tvedder@fcgov.com or 224‑6700. Please reference
our Electric Service Standards to ensure electrical infrastucture installation is in
compliance with City regulations. A link to this document is below.
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders‑and‑developers/development‑fo
rms‑guidelines‑regulations.
Thank you.
6
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Ted Shepard, 970‑221‑6343, tshepard@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: Please re‑arrange the Sheet Index. The Planning Set is to be
separated from the Utility Plans. The Site Plan Notes sheet should become the
Site Plan Cover Sheet. The Planning Set will then consist of the Site Plan
Cover Sheet, Site Plan, and Landscape Plan. Please delete the City approval
block in the lower right corner of these sheets as this block is for the Utility Plan
only. I’ll send you an example of the proper City approval block.
Thank you for this comment. The plan sets are now arranged accordingly with the appropriate approval
blocks provided on the corresponding sheet.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: Under Site Plan Notes, please delete notes 6, 10 and 12 as these
are not applicable. Please put the Landscape Plan Notes on the Landscape
Plan. Natural Area Buffer Notes can be deleted as these are also not
applicable.
So noted; thank you.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: On the Plat and Site Plan, Lot 7 should be re‑labeled as Tract One
since it is not a buildable lot per se and will be owned in common. Under Plat
Notes, please add a new note that states the purpose, ownership and
maintenance of the Tract.
The previously identified “Lot 7” will contain the detention pond, and has been dedicated as “Tract A.” The
Plat was revised to include the requested note regarding purpose, ownership, and maintenance of Tract A.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: Also, on the Plat and Site Plan, the private alley should be
demarcated, dimensioned and labeled as Tract Two and removed from being
included within the six individual lots. For example, it’s not clear where the
private alley terminates to the east. Under Plat Notes, please add a new note
that states the purpose, ownership and maintenance of the Tract.
The private alley has relabeled as “Tract B” and will be dedicated as such. The requested notes regarding
Purpose, ownership, and maintenance have also been added.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: The garages must be set back from the private alley by eight feet.
So noted; the required set back distance of 8-feet is now provided.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: For Lots one, two and three, please label the garages indicating
7
that they are also planned to include second story carriage units.
As requested, the second story additional dwelling units above the garages on Lots 1, 2, and 3 are now
so labeled on the Site Plan, Sheet S-2.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: For Lot one carriage house, please add a connecting walkway to
Lyons Street.
A connecting walkway to Lyons Street has been added for Lot 1 on Sheet S-2.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: Is there any reason the garages on Lots four and five are so large?
Since these garages will not include carriage units, 800 square feet seems
large and takes up a significant portion of the lot.
In response to this comment, the garages for Lots 4, 5, and 6 have all been down-sized to 500 square feet
with a corresponding reduction in the overall impervious area of the proposed development.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: On the Site Plan, all the line weights are the same. Please use
heavier line weight to demarcate the individual lots.
In response to this comment, line weights have been varied for clarification, with heavier line weights used to
demarcate the individual lots.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: On the Site Plan, please provide a “typical” lot with the house and
garage envelopes and all the setbacks. That way it doesn’t have to be
duplicated for all six lots.
As suggested, a “typical” lot with the house and garage envelopes and all the setbacks has been added to
the Site Plan.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: On the Site Plan, please label the retaining wall. On the
Landscape Plan, please provide a schematic as to the height and materials of
this wall.
On the Site Plan, please label the adjoining use to the north.
So noted; the adjoining land use to the north and the retaining wall have been labeled on the Site Plan, and
a schematic of the wall has been added to the Landscape Plan.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: On the Landscape Plan, it is not clear what is meant by “FS” or
“KB.”
The Landscape Plan includes a Water Budget Chart and a Landscape Planting Schedule has been revised
to indicate that “FS” and “KB” stand for turf grasses “Tall Fescue” and “Kentucky Bluegrass,” respectively.
8
Additionally, in response to another comment, the Water Budget Chart and Landscape Planting Schedule have been
reproduced in a larger type font for better clarity.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/28/2016
12/28/2016: On the Landscape Plan, the detention pond needs additional plant
material. Please add trees and shrubs in areas that will not be impacted by
inundation. Also, please label the ground cover.
Thank you for this comment. As requested, all ground cover is labeled. The ultimate configuration and
required size of the detention pond for the Cherry Street Cottages project is such that as much of the space
available within Tract A that is outside of the City-designated floodway is needed for stormwater detention
storage. During the 100-year event, both the detention pond and the City-designated “floodway” will be
inundated according to the City Flood Risk Map of the area. If allowed, the Applicant would agree that
additional trees and/or other plant material would be good for the area of Tract A that is within the City
Floodway but out of the detention pond area, and would make this revision for Final Plat submittal.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970‑218‑2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/12/2016
12/12/2016: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft., therefore Erosion and
Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted. 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
(Based on Redlines), an Erosion Control Report (That meet City Criteria), and
an Escrow / Security Calculation (Based upon Criteria). 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
As requested, detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Plans and Reports have been prepared in accordance
with stated criteria, and are added to the PDP submittal materials.
Contact: Mark Taylor, 970‑416‑2494, mtaylor@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheets U‑1and G‑1 of the Utility Plans, please include the
floodplain and floodway boundaries.
So noted and done. Sheet U-1 is the Utility Plan Cover Sheet; the floodplain and floodway boundaries are
Shown on Sheet U-2, Utility Plan and Sheet G-1, Grading Plan.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheets U‑1, G‑1, and D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please include a
note indicating that a floodplain use permit will be required prior to beginning
9
any work in the floodplain.
As requested, a note stating “A Floodplain Use Permit will be required prior to beginning any work in the
floodplain” has been added to Sheets U-1, G-1, and D-1.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheets U‑1, G‑1, and D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please include a
note indicating that a no‑rise certification will be required prior to beginning any
work in the floodway.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please include a note that the
storage of equipment and materials is not allowed within the floodway.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please include a note stating that
a FEMA Elevation Certificate will be required before a Certificate of Occupancy
is issued for each building within the floodplain.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, the squiggly lines and the
associated BFE elevations can be removed.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, if the floodplain use permits for
each building are not going to be submitted until the building permit is applied
for, please add a note stating that.
As requested, a note stating “A Floodplain Use Permit will be required prior to beginning any work in the
floodplain” has been added to Sheet D-1.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please create a table showing
the BFE at the upstream edge of each building, and the RFPE (BFE + 18”), the
FF elevation, and the HVAC elevation for each building within the floodplain.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please include a detail drawing
for each foundation type (slab‑on‑grade or crawl space) showing the BFE,
10
RFPE, FF, and HVAC elevations.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016:On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, please add Finished Floor
elevations for each building.
So noted and done.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: On Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, if the foundations are going to be
crawl space, please include a detail drawing showing the location, size,
number, etc. of the vents, and the location of the sump pump and where it will
discharge.
Spread footing foundations for the homes on Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 – partially or all within the City-designated
floodplain – will support concrete slab-on-grade flooring; no basements are proposed the these lots. Homes
to be built on Lots 1 & 2 - completely outside of the current City-designated floodplain, may have basements
or crawl spaces, but are not within the floodplain, so the Applicant understands that such details should not
be required for homes on those lots at this time.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: In the Drainage Report, under A.3, please reference the FEMA
FIRM Panel #, and include a copy of the FIRM Panel with the site location
outlined in red.
In response to this comment, FEMA FIRM Panel 978 of 1420 is referenced and added to the Drainage Report,
with the subject property outlined in red.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: In the Drainage Report, under A.3, please include the foundation
type that will be used for houses located within the floodplain.
Homes to be built on Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 will be partially (Lot 3) or totally within the floodplain, and will have
spread footing foundations with slab-on-grade concrete floors. As requested, this information is now
presented in the Drainage Report, Section A.3.c.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: In the Drainage Report, A.3.g, I understand what you are saying,
but I cannot just ignore our regulatory requirements. No‑Rise Certifications will
be required for all non‑structural development in the floodway. The No‑Rise
Certifications can be achieved matching pre‑ and post‑construction elevations
within the floodway.
In response to this comment, and in accordance with the above comment number 4, a note stating that “a
No‑Rise Certification will be required prior to beginning any work in the floodway” for all non-structural
development in the floodway is provided. It should be noted, however, that no fill material that would result
in any change to existing elevations within the floodway is proposed. Development within the floodway will
11
be limited to landscaping and sidewalks in accordance with PDP requirements.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: In the Drainage Report, under A.3, please include a copy of the
table requested on Sheet D‑1 of the Utility Plans, including BFE’s, RFPE’s, FF,
and HVAC elevations for all structures located within the floodplain.
So noted; the required table has been added to the Drainage Report, Section A.3.c. as well as to Sheet
U-2 of The Utility Plans.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: In the Drainage Report, paragraph C.5.c can be omitted, since
no‑rise certifications can be used to satisfy our floodplain regulations for
development within the floodway.
So noted; paragraph C.5.c has been removed.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016
12/21/2016: In the Drainage Report, under E.1.e, please reference Chapter 10
of City Code when discussing floodplain compliance.
So noted and done.
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970‑416‑2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: The quantity detention volume must be within a drainage
easement and a tract. No volume can be located on individual lots.
In response to this comment, Tract A is now dedicated for the detention pond, and it is entirely within
the previously defined Lot 7, with no detention volume located on an individual lot or the access driveway.
None of the required detention volume is located on individual lots. Moreover, Tract B is now dedicated
for the access alley which also serves for stormwater conveyance across the site to the detention pond.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: The detention volume is low per the City's calculations. The
release rate needs to be the 2‑year existing flow. 1 cfs was used in the
calculations in the drainage report. The City calculated around .168 ac‑ft
required for quantity detention.
In response to this comment, the overall site proposed impervious area was reduced to 42% by decreasing
the size of garages on Lots 4, 5, & 6 and the detention pond volume was recalculated using the City of Fort
Collins Detention Pond Sizing spreadsheet per your recommendation. The revised detention pond volume
based on a 2-year release rate of 0.35 cfs/acre is 0.195 acre-feet for the 100-year event. The Water Quality
Control Volume (WQCV) of 0.017 acre-feet is included in the total detention volume (as calculated by the
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District – UDFCD – UD-Detention v3.07 software). A copy of both the
City-provided Detention Volume Spreadsheet and the UD-Detention is provided in the Drainage Report.
12
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: No more than 3 lots can drain through another lot. A tract in the
back of the lots would resolve this issue.
Tract B is now dedicated for the access alley along the back side of the development.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: No LID per the City's requirements was proposed for this
development.
In response to this comment, the following LID measures are now incorporated into the site design:
• Runoff sheet flow across vegetated/grass area on upstream side of detention pond;
• Slight grass swale/infiltration trench at downstream (east) end of access driveway on entrance to the
detention pond; and
• Promote infiltration in slight grassed or rocked swales between each home.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Please provide a drainage plan with all basins shown, including
off‑site basins that drain through the site.
As requested, the Drainage Plan now shows that the entire site is located within a single drainage basin,
including the off-site area to the north that drains through the site.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Please provide a detailed grading plan showing grading around
the proposed structures.
As requested, the grading plan now shows grading around each proposed structure.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Please use and provide the detail for the City's standard water
quality outlet structure.
As requested, the City’s standard water quality outlet structure (Detail sheet D-46) is now provided.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970‑416‑2743, avandeutekom@fcgov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: The site plan is confusing. Does the property line go out to the
street? The setbacks are measured from the property line, please label the
property line.
In response to this comment, all property lines, setbacks, easements, etc, are now labeled on the Site Plan.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016
12/27/2016: Each dwelling unit must provide one parking space so, if the
13
garages on lots 1‑3 convert to dwelling units the 2 car garage must be
maintained unless you there are surface spaces off the alley?
So noted; a note indicating that the garages for Lots 1 – 3 will be maintained for parking or adequate
space will be provided off the alley.