Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2620 W. ELIZABETH ST., SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED - PDP - PDP160037 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS (3)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 July 28, 2017 Responses: September 13, 12017 Mike Walker TB GROUP 444 MOUNTAIN AVE Fort Collins, CO 80513 RE: 2620 W Elizabeth St - Single-family Detached, PDP160037, 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, Clay Frickey, at 970-224-6045 or cfrickey@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/26/2017: The signature block that was added does not appear to allow the ditch company to legally accept the easement. 12/06/2016: Please add a spot for the ditch company to sign the plat/accept the ditch easement. RESPONSE: Signature line updated. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Please remove the building setback lines from the plat. RESPONSE: Removed Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: No more PDP level comments. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/23/2016 07/25/2017: TREE MITIGATION: Thank you for including a tree mitigation plan with the latest submittal. Realistically, it is unlikely that homeowners will continue to protect trees #33 and 40-45, particularly since most of these trees would be on/near property lines. An additional 14 mitigation trees should be provided to account for the loss of these trees. Since it may not be possible to accommodate the additional trees on-site, off-site mitigation is an alternative option (either via payment-in-lieu or planting within 1/4 mile of the site). Please coordinate with Forestry on off-site mitigation options. This should be resolved prior to hearing. 11/23/2016: Thank you for submitting an Ecological Characterization Study for this site. Per the ECS, the only significant natural features on the site are mature trees, which provide habitat for songbird and other avian species. An on-site meeting with the City Forester still needs to occur to determine mitigation requirements for the trees proposed to be removed. Please include Environmental Planning staff (Stephanie Blochowiak or myself) in that meeting. A tree mitigation plan should be included with the next submittal. For any native trees that will be removed (cottonwood and boxelder), please mitigate with other native tree species to account for the habitat value that will be lost. RESPONSE: Notes have been added and trees added to mitigation req. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/23/2016 07/25/2017: HYDROZONES: It is not clear which areas of the landscape plan are included in which hydrozone (moderate vs. low). Please either clarify in the tables and text or include a separate plan/sheet that depicts the various hydrozones on the site. This can be addressed after hearing, if necessary. 11/23/2016: Please include a water budget chart with the next submittal that identifies all hydrozones and total annual water use on the site, per LUC section 3.2.1(E)(3). Total annual water use should not exceed 15 gallons/square foot over the site, including all hydrozones used on the landscape plan. RESPONSE: Please see the Hydrozone table on plans. Quantities shown in legend Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/17/2017 07/17/2017: LIGHTING PLAN: Please confirm that the bulb on the street lights is fully concealed within the luminaire. The bulb should not be visible (to ensure that all light is directed downward per code requirements). This should be resolved prior to hearing. RESPONSE: Please see revised plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/17/2017 07/17/2017: LIGHTING PLAN: Please extend the photometrics 20 feet beyond the property line to ensure that no greater than 0.1 foot-candle is spilling over to adjacent properties. This should be resolved prior to hearing. RESPONSE: Please see revised plans Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: EROSION CONTROL: The table on C8.0 (erosion control plan) is not legible. Will any temporary or permanent seeding be used for erosion control? If so, please use the same seed mix(es) specified on the landscape plans. This can be addressed after hearing, if necessary. RESPONSE: Note added referring to the approved LS plans for seed mix information. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/07/2016 7/26/2017: Continued: Please contact Molly Roche at mroche@fcgov.com to receive most recent version of the General Landscape Notes. 12/07/2016: Please use the City of Fort Collins General Landscape Notes, Street Tree Notes, and Tree Protection Notes. Also, please include the Tree Permit note in the bolded box on all landscape sheets. The Street Tree Notes and the Tree Permit box that are currently on the plans are not the right versions. The correct notes are available through the project planner or the City Forester. RESPONSE: Current notes added Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/07/2016 7/26/2017: Continued: Please darken the symbol for trees planted on private property so that it is clear these are a part of the project. Also, please clarify what species will be used in these locations and consider using at least two different ornamental species, such as Red Barron Crabapple and Chanticleer Pear. 12/07/2016: For street tree planting in front of lots, it doesn’t appear feasible to place them in the parkway because of the proposed swale. In lieu of placing the trees in the parkway, please show canopy shade trees behind walk as directed in Land Use Code 3.2.1 2(b). It may be necessary to use an upright ornamental tree, such as Chanticleer Pear and Red Barron Crabapple, if the face of the building and sidewalk are too close. Explore locations of a suitable tree behind the walk. RESPONSE: I believe shade trees will work with these types of Houses Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: 7/26/2017: After conversation with Environmental Planner, Rebecca Everette, it seems as though the grove of cottonwoods (trees #40-45) at the north edge of the property will no longer be able to be retained due to future property layouts. Due to insufficient space, it will not be possible to plant the additional 13 mitigation trees on-site. City Forestry will approve the developer to provide us with a Payment in Lieu of planting the trees on-site. Please add the following note under the Tree Inventory and Mitigation Plan with the heading MITIGATION PAYMENT IN LIEU: PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, THE DEVELOPER MUST FULFILL TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS IN THE FORM OF A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF PLANTING UPSIZED MITIGATION TREES ON-SITE. THE FOLLOWING METHOD MUST ACCOUNT FOR THE 13 MITIGATION TREES NOT SHOWN TO BE PLANTED ON THE PLAN. PAYMENT IS MADE TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FORESTRY DIVISION TO PLANT 13 MITIGATION TREES ON CITY PROPERTY. PAYMENT SHALL BE $450 PER UPSIZED MITIGATION TREE. RESPONSE: Note added. Department: Light And Power Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/14/2016 12/14/2016: Light and Power has existing single phase electric facilities stubbed at the north property line from Pear St. Power will most likely need to be extend from Pear St into the proposed development. A utility easement will need to be provided to bring power through the site. RESPONSE: Easements discussed have bene provided Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/14/2016 12/14/2016: Any relocation or modification to our existing electric facilities will be at the expense of the owner/developer. If Light and Power existing facilities are to remain within the limits of the project then they must be located within a utility easement. RESPONSE: Understood Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/14/2016 12/14/2016: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformer must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. RESPONSE: Understood Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/14/2016 12/14/2016: Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and any system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development. Please contact me or visit the following website for questions about fees or for an estimate of charges and fees: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen t-development-fees RESPONSE: Understood Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/14/2016 12/14/2016: 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 RESPONSE: Understood Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please consider adding a standard 9ft utility easement behind the detached sidewalk. Power and communication lines are typically installed in-between back of curb and sidewalk so the utility easement behind the sidewalk is necessary for gas main installation. RESPONSE: Added Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/02/2016 12/02/2016: Comment from Real Estate Services: "In reviewing the plat note 6 identifying the overlap it might be a good idea to add to the language in the note that the East line of the new plat of Elizabeth Street Farms is being revised by this plat to remove the overlap or some such language so it is clear in the language that the overlap is being corrected on the plat." RESPONSE: To be coordinated with John Von Nieda Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 12/06/2016: Comments from property owners that use the irrigation lateral on the north side of the property: 1. It is our understanding Bartlett Drive will be a private road and not be maintained or repaired by the City? Therefor, we are requesting a legal binding agreement be initiated prior to any development which clearly stipulates the HOA and/or all lot owners will be responsible for all expenses incurred by the lateral users, including any attorney fees, for any efforts to unplug and/or repair the lateral should problems arise. This agreement will be binding for as long a time period s the lateral is in use. RESPONSE: Understood. We are currently working on this agreement 2. The concrete pipe used to line the lateral will be a minimum of 14 inches in all segments and sealed according to the same standards as stipulated for the City's storm sewers. RESPONSE: 12” RCP pipe is called out. If necessary will adjust to 14” at FP 3. Three (3) "clean outs" be installed in the lateral; two spaced out from the existing west clean out and the third at the east boundary where the lateral exists the development. RESPONSE: manholes are provided 4. We will be running water in the lateral from the first part of May until the end of September. Our use of the lateral cannot be interrupted or interfered with in any manner during this time period. RESPONSE: Understood We believe it may be beneficial for all parties involved to meet and discuss re-locating the lateral any potential problems which may become occur. RESPONSE: Agree Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/07/2016 12/07/2016: Comments from GIS: 1. Bartlett Dr has been added to the street name reservation list at larimer.org/streets RESPONSE: Thank you 2. Pear St (Private Drive) should be marked on the subdivision plat in place of Drive A. RESPONSE: Understood Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/09/2016 12/09/2016: Comment from Comcast: Developer needs to open trench - rear lot. See image attached to the comment letter. RESPONSE: Easements are provided. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: PFA REVISED COMMENTS Please note: The following PFA comments have been revised and updated from those provided at city staff meeting on 7.26.2017. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/26/2017: HYDRANT PLACEMENT The two proposed hydrants exceed the minimum numbered required. With the hydrant on the south end of Pear Street to remain in place, PFA will not require the additional hydrant currently shown in front of Lot 4. RESPONSE: Hydrant removed. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: FIRE LANE SIGNS As currently indicated on the Horizontal Control Plan, fire lane sign placement does not meet minimum separation distance along length of the private drive. "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs shall maintain a 75' separation distance which will result in at least another 3 signs being added (one on the north side and two on the south). Signage shall include directional arrows indicating the limits of the fire lane. Please update the Horizontal Control Plan accordingly. Refer to LUCASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. The applicant should confirm with city traffic operations regarding sign placement on the back side of the sidewalk, rather than the grass-belt between street and sidewalk as is the more typical location. RESPONSE: Signs moved to grass belt. Signs added. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY DRIVE The following comments refer to the emergency access only drive connecting the private drive to W Elizabeth. > Is the EAE dedication of this drive part of Tract A that is also dedicated or does this area require inclusion in a separate Tract? The Replat does not make this clear. RESPONSE: The EAE is a separate easement called out on the Plat. > The constructed width of the "2-track" fire lane shall be reduced from 18' to 16', with the 6' proposed grass paver system reduced to a 4' width. The flanking, 6' wide concrete surfaces shall maintain as currently detailed. RESPONSE: Updated. > Transitions into or out of the fire only drive shall contain no curbs or may contain rollover curbs. Vertical curbing at these locations will not be permitted. Please indicate such on future plans. RESPONSE: Rollover is shown on Elizabeth and a concrete ribbon is shown at the private drive. > The minimum outside turning radius shall be no less than 50' (for a 20' wide fire lane). It is currently shown with a R-46'. Turning radii are particularly problematic when the width of the fire lane is reduced as in this instance. RESPONSE: An autoturn exhibit is provided to demonstrate adequacy. > Gating is the approved, standard method for access limited fire lanes. Bollards, for many reasons, are not generally approved. Partial gates can be used to promote pedestrian/bike access while restricting vehicle use. General gating standards provided with the December PDP review. RESPONSE: gates added w/ detail Should the project team wish to proceed with bollarding, a formal request should be provided to the FM for review which details the bollard design and indicates why gating is not appropriate in this application. RESPONSE: N/A – gates added Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: AUTOTURN EXHIBIT The turning movement study provided to PFA made use of a B-40 template. PFA is requesting an updated Autoturn Exhibits using the following vehicle dimensions: Overall truck Length: 52.0'. Width: 9.5' Front of bucket to front wheel axle: 14.0' Front axle to midpoint between rear dual axles: 22.0' Midpoint of rear dual axles to rear of vehicle: 16.0' Track: 8.5 Lock to Lock: 6.0 Steering Angle: 45.0 RESPONSE: Provided. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: LANDSCAPE PLAN Two trees along the drive connection to W Elizabeth appear to encroach on the fire lane. As the fire lane is already reduced in width from the typical 20' standard, the applicant should take measures to ensure the fire lane does not become obstructed below 14' in height over the course of time. These two trees should be repositioned or provisions should be put in place with the HOA to keep them appropriately pruned. RESPONSE: Trees have been adjusted to avoid this conflict Department: Planning Services Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Land Use Code section 3.8.11(A) requires fences along arterials to have a change in plane for fences over 100 feet in length. This section also requires the fence to be broken up with articulations, integrating architectural columns, or softening the appearance of the fence with plantings. At present, the proposed fence does not meet these requirements. Please incorporate some of these elements or submit a modification to this standard. RESPONSE: Modification request included Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please note that the maximum fence height between the front building line and the property line is four feet. RESPONSE: Understood Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Thank you for submitting the modification requests to sections 3.6.2(G), 4.4(D)(1), and 4.4(D)(2)(a). Staff supports these modifications based on the plans submitted. RESPONSE: Thank you Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The street trees proposed should be in the tree lawn, not in the front yards of each lot. These trees should also be identified in the plans rather than at the time of building permit for each lot. Please move the street trees to the tree lawn, select species for the trees, and include them on plant list. RESPONSE: Swale doesn’t allow trees to be planted in Tree lawn. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Staff is concerned about the cottonwood trees on lots 6 and 7. Our concern is that once those lots sell, the property owners will remove the trees without any mitigation. An idea we had would be to escrow for replacing those trees. If the trees end up remaining, then you would receive your escrow back but if they are removed, we would be able to replace the trees off-site. RESPONSE: Cottonwood trees will be removed and require additional mitigation as describe don plans Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please indicate the lot widths for all of the lots. Staff cannot ensure compliance with Land Use Code section 4.4(D)(2)(a) at present. This will also allow staff to determine the parking required for each lot per 3.2.2(K)(1)(c) since your parking requirement is based on the amount of street frontage each lot has. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: It looks like the lot line separating Lots 1 and 2 has gone missing. Please add this line back to the site plan. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Related to the comment dealing with lot width, please add a parking table that outlines how many off-street parking spaces will be associated with each lot. RESPONSE: Table added. All Houses will have 2 car attached garages (non-tandem) Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: While the proposal meets the requirement to provide access to off-site pedestrian and bicycle amenities, the path to the sidewalk, bus stop, and bike lanes on Elizabeth could be more direct. You could add a walkway between lots 3 and 4 that would provide more direct access to these amenities for neighbors to the north and residents of this development. This connection could be a simple 8' wide concrete path. Consider adding this connection. RESPONSE: We appreciate the suggestion Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please add the fence to the site plan. Please also include an architectural detail of the fence and column on the site plan. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/23/2016 07/20/2017: Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; an Erosion Control Plan (Based upon minor redlines), an Erosion Control Report (anticipated to be produced at Final) , and an Escrow / Security Calculation (anticipated to be produced at Final). Also, based upon the area of disturbance State permits for storm water 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 11/23/2016: Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; an Erosion Control Plan (Based upon redlines), an Erosion Control Report (was not received in packet or was not submitted) , and an Escrow / Security Calculation (was not received in packet or was not submitted). Also, based upon the area of disturbance State permits for storm water 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: Updated per redlines, SWMP to be provided at final. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/08/2016 07/26/2017: The site is still not meeting the City's LID requirements where a volume based LID feature is proposed. 12/08/2016: The City's Low Impact Development standards are required for the development with 50% of the site's proposed impervious surface treated. RESPONSE: Per the meeting on September 5th , 2017, the project team submitted a Stormwater Alternative Compliance/Variance Application. Refer to the Preliminary Drainage Report for a copy of this document. In summary, the project is requesting alternative compliance because the nearest underground storm drain system is more than one-half mile east on Elizabeth Street, and the bore logs show the on-site soils are unsuitable for infiltrating water. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/08/2016 07/26/2017: This requirement needs to be completed and shown before a hearing. 12/08/2016: The limits of the proposed quantity detention must be in a tract within a drainage easement and not located on individual lots. RESPONSE: A 12” pipe and headwall with a flap gate (design at final) will be provided to the east limit of the easternmost lot line. The 12” pipe traverses the back of the easternmost lot and picks up swale flows from the back of two and a half lots to the west. The revised configuration will prevent detained runoff from flowing into the lots. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/08/2016 07/26/2017: Please document the flows that travel north from basin B1. Please describe where these flows go and that there is enough capacity in the conveyance system to handle the additional 1.7 cfs. 12/08/2016: Basin E1 does not get routed into the detention pond. This 100-year flows from this basin need to be subtracted from the release rate of the pond or routed into the pond. The overall release rate from the site needs to equal the 2-year existing flow. RESPONSE: The undetained runoff (Q2=0.4 cfs and Q100=1.7 cfs) flows into Pear Street. The existing right-of-way drains north along grades averaging 2.0%. The additional runoff should have a negligible Impact on the existing condition (i.e, street and gutter capacity). Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/08/2016 07/26/2017: Reminder for Final Compliance 12/08/2016: The detention pond needs to meet the City's Detention Pond Landscape Standards. This includes more natural grading patterns. RESPONSE: Varying slopes are provided. Additional spots added to demonstrate. The 1’ contours do not represent this well due to the shallow nature of the pond. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: The Benchmark designation is missing. 12/06/2016: 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¿. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 12/06/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: There is text that needs to be rotated 180°. See redlines. 12/06/2016: There is text that needs to be rotated 180°. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: There are text over text issues. See redlines. 12/06/2016: There are text over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated and reviewed Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated and reviewed Topic: Plat Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: This has not been corrected. 12/06/2016: There are spelling issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated per redlines. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: These have not been provided. 12/06/2016: Please provide current acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown. These should be emailed directly to Jeff at jcounty@fcgov.com RESPONSE: Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 12/06/2016: Please explain why the found monuments were not accepted per Board Rule 6.5.4.1. See redlines. RESPONSE: Setting up a meeting with John Von Nieda is in the process. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: Per a 11/29/16 phone call, please call John Von Nieda to discuss the pins in Detail A. See redlines. 12/06/2016: Per a 11/29/16 phone call, please call John Von Nieda to discuss the pins in Detail A. See redlines. RESPONSE: Setting up a meeting with John Von Nieda is in the process. Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: 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 per redlines. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. 12/06/2016: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 12/06/2016 07/21/2017: There is text that needs to be rotated 180°. See redlines. 12/06/2016: There is text that needs to be rotated 180°. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Please remove "Subdivision" from the title block. See redlines. RESPONSE: Updated Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/29/2016 11/29/2016: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com RESPONSE: Understood Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Fire hydrant assemblies can not have bends in them. Please revise. RESPONSE: Fire hydrant at issue has been removed due to PFA comment. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: No sewer service is proposed for Lot 5. If an existing leach field is present, it would need to be abandoned and a new sewer service proposed. RESPONSE: Service added Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Please label the existing water service for Lot 5. If this were to be maintained, than the other proposed water service for Lot 5 can be removed. If the new service is to be used for Lot 5, than the existing water service would need to be abandoned at the main. RESPONSE: Existing service to be maintained.