The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTHE RETREAT AT FORT COLLINS (FORMERLY REDWOOD STREET MULTI-FAMILY) - PDP - PDP180002 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS1 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 Linda Ripley Ripley Design, Inc. 419 Canyon Ave Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Redwood Street Multi-Family, PDR170011, Round Number Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Ted Shepard, at (970) 221-6343 or tshepard@fcgov.com. Ripley Design, Northern Engineering, Landmark Properties, W&A Engineering, Lighting Engineer, Architect, Delich Associates, Terracon Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Larimer County Road Impact Fees and Transportation Expansion Fees are due at the time of building permit. Please contact Kyle Lambrecht at 221-6566 if you have any questions. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The City's Transportation Development Review Fee (TDRF) is due at the time of submittal. For additional information on these fees, please see: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/dev-review.php Response: Acknowledged and provided with the submittal. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of this project, shall be replaced or 2 restored to City of Fort Collins standards at the Developer's expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. All public sidewalk, driveways and ramps, existing or proposed, adjacent or within the site, need to meet ADA standards. If they currently do not, they will need to be reconstructed so that they do meet current ADA standards as a part of this project. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Any public improvements must be designed and built in accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). They are available online at: http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/UrbanSt.htm Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: This project is responsible for dedicating any right-of-way and easements that are necessary or required by the City for this project. Most easements to be dedicated need to be public easements dedicated to the City. This shall include the standard utility easements that are to be provided behind the right-of-way (15 foot along an arterial, 8 foot along an alley, and 9 foot along all other street classifications). Information on the dedication process can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php Response: Acknowledged. Easements have been added behind all dedicated right-of-way. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The extent of the required public street improvements that will need to be done with this project will rely heavily upon the timing of this project in relation to the timing of the project on the adjacent property. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please coordinate ditch crossing(s)/street alignment(s) with the project on the neighboring property – it sounds like this coordination has already begun. Response: The ditch crossings have been coordinated with the latest plans for Northfield. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: A repayment will be due for the improvements to the property’s Redwood Street frontage, including the cost of constructing the curb, gutter, and local asphalt. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Redwood Street parkway and sidewalk will need to be installed with this project along the property’s frontage and ROW will need to be dedicated to the back of the public walk. Response: A sidewalk has been proposed along Redwood Street. Response: Acknowledged 3 Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: A repayment will be due to the City for the Suniga Road ROW, if the City purchases the ROW prior to this project coming through the Development Review Process. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The property is responsible for the design and construction of Suniga Road that runs through the property. If the property to the east develops first, a repay for Suniga Road will be due to that development. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Public street connection to Redwood Street may be allowed as long as spacing requirements are met. Response: The distance between Suniga Drive and the Redwood Street access is 238 feet, while the spacing requirement between intersections on a minor collector s is 250 feet. We are proposing the right-in/right-out access at this location to allow for additional buffer distance between the multi-family housing project and the adjacent single-family neighborhood. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Public street connection to Suniga Road will also need to meet spacing requirements. Response: 442 feet has been provided between the intersection of Redwood Street and the southern entrance to the project. Due to the unique shape of the project and the limited frontage on Suniga, we could not push the driveway entrance any further to the east to meet the 460-foot minimum spacing requirement. The entry drive is proposed as a right-in/right-out access. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: ROW on site that is currently dedicated that is not in the ultimate configuration will need to be vacated through City Council. There will be a condition of approval by the Planning and Zoning Board to vacate the public ROW. For more information on this process please go to: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Public streets adjacent to multifamily developments shall be built to local connector standards with a 36’ roadway width Response: The public streets are designed with 36’ roadway widths. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Cut through traffic may be an issue through the proposed parking lot. The parking lot will need to either be reconfigured or this will need to be a public street. Response: The site layout has been revised and speed tables are proposed to further deter cut through traffic into Redwood Meadows. 4 Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Utility plans will be required and a Development Agreement will be recorded once the project is finalized. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: As of January 1, 2015 all development plans are required to be on the NAVD88 vertical datum. Please make your consultants aware of this, prior to any surveying and/or design work. Response: All survey and design are on the NAVD88 vertical datum. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: A Development Construction Permit (DCP) will need to be obtained prior to starting any work on the site. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: LCUASS parking setbacks (Figure 19-6) apply and will need to be followed depending on parking design. Response: Acknowledged. Parking setbacks are met. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: All fences, barriers, posts or other encroachments within the public right-of-way are only permitted upon approval of an encroachment permit. Applications for encroachment permits shall be made to the Engineering Department for review and approval prior to installation. Encroachment items shall not be shown on the site plan as they may not be approved, need to be modified or moved, or if the permit is revoked then the site/ landscape plan is in non-compliance. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The development/site cannot use the right-of-way for any Low Impact Development to treat the site’s storm runoff. We can look at the use of some LID methods to treat street flows – the design standards for these are still in develop pment. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Bike parking required for the project cannot be placed within the right-of-way and if placed just behind the right-of-way need to be placed so that when bikes are parked they do not extend into the right-of-way. Response: Acknowledged, bike racks are located 6’ outside of the ROW in all locations to avoid conflicts. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: In regards to construction of this site, the public right-of-way shall not be used for staging or storage of materials or equipment associated with 5 the Development, nor shall it be used for parking by any contractors, subcontractors, or other personnel working for or hired by the Developer to construct the Development. The Developer will need to find a location(s) on private property to accommodate any necessary staging and/or parking needs associated with the completion of the Development. Information on the location(s) of these areas will be required to be provided to the City as a part of the Development Construction Permit application. Response: Acknowledged Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: An Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) is required by City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.4.1 (D)(1) as the site is within 500 feet of natural habitats and features (Lake Canal; wetlands; wet meadows; riparian forest). Note buffer zone standards for these features range from 50 to 100 feet, as identified in Section 3.4.1(E) of the LUC, as you proceed with site design process. Additionally, this site is uniquely located within a network of public natural features (Udall, Gustav Swanson, Goose Hollow, and Redwing Marsh Natural Areas). Project design should include sensitivity to the natural features within the project boundaries and within the network context including ways to provide micro-habitat connectivity for small wildlife (e.g. pollinators, songbirds). Response: Comment Acknowledged. An ECS was submitted to the City on 3/7/2018 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: The ECS document informs this decision-making process including design of natural habitat buffer zones. The ECS is due a minimum of 10 days prior to the PDP submittal. The ECS shall assess the ecological value of the site and the site in relation to its natural features context, including documentation of any active or formerly active black-tailed prairie dog burrows. See LUC 3.4.1(D)(1)(a-l) for a comprehensive list of specific topics to be addressed in the ECS. The ECS must be prepared by a qualified and professional ecological consultant. Please contact me directly or have the hired ecological consultant contact me to discuss the scope and requirements of the ECS further, if desired. The Ecological Characterization Study is due a minimum of 10 days prior to the PDP submittal. Response: Comment Acknowledged. An ECS was submitted to the City on 3/7/2018 Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: During a 10-min site visit by the Environmental Planner at 10:30am on Monday, July 24, 2017, no black-tailed prairie dogs or burrows were observed within or adjacent to the proposed project area. However, please have the ECS consultant confirm presence or absence of prairie dogs or burrows within the project area. This site is within range of an historical 50 to 6 100 acre black-tailed prairie dog colony. Response: Comment Acknowledged. An ECS was submitted to the City on 3/7/2018. No prairie dogs or nests were found on site. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: Thank you! Current proposed site design seems to accommodate setbacks and sensitivity to on-site natural habitats and features including the 50 ft Canal Setback, setback of the northwest parking area adjacent to wetland (beside property), and through inclusion of pocket stormwater management area features. Environmental Planning will look to detailed landscape plans further in the process to ensure project planting plans meet 3.4.1 LUC standards and aligns with the Nature in the City Strategic Plan and City Plan. Response: Acknowledged. More detailed landscape plans will be provided at FDP. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: Natural Habitat Buffer Zones (NHBZs) can be established according to quantitative and/or qualitative performance metrics. Note that within a designated NHBZ, the City has the ability to determine if the existing landscaping within the zone is incompatible with the purposes and intent of the buffer zone [Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(g)]. Please ensure the ECS discusses existing vegetation on-site and identifies potential restoration options. If existing vegetation is determined to be insufficient, then restoration and mitigation measures will be required. Response: Acknowledged. NHBZ quantity has been delineated, the locations and extent will be coordinated as to accommodate the most efficient design possible in term of maintenance and the ultimate success of the buffer zone. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: 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) ClimateWise program: fcgov.com/climatewise/ 2) Zero Waste Plan and the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program (WRAP): fcgov.com/recycling/pdf/_20120404_WRAP_ProgramOverview.pdf, contact Caroline Mitchell at 970-221-6288 or cmtichell@fcgov.com 3) Green Building Program: fcgov.com/enviro/green-building.php, contact Tony Raeker at 970-416-4238 or traeker@fcgov.com 4) Solar Energy: www.fcgov.com/solar 5) Integrated Design Assistance Program: fcgov.com/idap, contact Gary Schroeder at 970-224-6003 or gschroeder@fcgov.com 6) Nature in the City Strategic Plan: http://www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity/, 7 contact Justin Scharton at 970-221-6213 or jscharton@fcgov.com 7) 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. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: Per conversation during staff review, suggest reaching out directly to Caroline Mitchell, Senior Environmental Planner in charge of the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program (WRAP). To discuss trash and recycling enclosure(s) location and design on the site. Caroline Mitchell at 970-221-6288 or cmtichell@fcgov.com Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/28/2017 07/28/2017: Per discussion during staff review meeting 7/26/2017, Environmental Planning is open to further discussion, along with Utilities staff, Heather McDowell, of opportunities for co-locating portions of NHBZ and LID features, as appropriate. Regardless, down the line and once the ECS has been received and reviewed, staff will ask for a table to be included on site and landscape plan communicating: total acreage required by standard quantitative buffer(s) for onsite natural resources; total acreage of proposed natural habitat buffer zone(s) incorporated into site. Response: Table and conceptual NHBZ delineations have been provided in the landscape plans. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: 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, songbirds) landscaping and maintenance are also encouraged. Landscape plans need to include both scientific and common names of plant species. 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: http://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativeplants2013.pdf. Also see the City of Fort Collins Plant List : https://www.fcgov.com/for estry/plant_list.pdf. Response: Acknowledged. A plant palette will be selected from the approved City of Fort Collins plant list and provided at FDP. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: Note LUC Section 3.2.1(C) requiring developments to submit a 8 landscape and tree protection plan, and if receiving water service from the City, an irrigation plan, that: "...(4) protects significant trees, natural systems, and habitat, and (5) enhances the pedestrian environment.” A review of the trees shall be conducted with Tim Buchanan, City Forester (970-221-6361 or tbuchanan@fcgov.com) to determine the status of the existing trees and any mitigation requirements that could result from the proposed development. City Staff highly recommends keeping healthy, mature growth trees in place, as our urban tree canopy helps reduce energy costs in summer months, mitigates heat island effects, adds to the pedestrian environment, and provides habitat for local wildlife including songbirds and pollinators. Maintaining and enhancing the urban tree canopy aligns with City of Fort Collins Nature in the City and City Plan goals. Response: Tree Inventory has been conducted and a preliminary tree mitigation plan has been provided. See planning set. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: With respect to lighting, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, Section 3.2.4(D)(6), requires that "natural areas and natural features shall be protected from light spillage from off site sources." Thus, lighting from the parking areas or other site amenities shall not spill over to the NHBZ areas. Response: Fixtures placed to comply Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/24/2017 07/24/2017: In regard to LED light fixtures, The American Medical Association (AMA) and International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) both recommend using lighting that has a corrected color temperature (CCT) of no more than 3000 degrees Kelvin in order to limit the amount of blue light in the night environment. Cooler color temperatures are harsher at night and cause more disruption to circadian (biological) rhythms for both humans and wildlife; blue light brightens the night sky and creates more glare than any other color of light. Therefore, use of warmer color temperature (warm white, 3000K or less) for light fixtures is preferred in addition to fixtures with dimming capabilities. Site light sources shall be fully shielded and down-directional to minimize up-light, light spillage and glare [see LUC 3.2.4(D)(3)]. Response: Fixtures placed to comply Several departments within the City of Fort Collins have been working together to address lighting issues; 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/ Response: Acknowledged Department: Forestry 9 Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: If there are any existing trees on-site, please contact City Forestry to schedule an on-site meeting to obtain tree inventory and mitigate.on information. Response: Tree inventory walk was conducted on 2/13/2018. Tree mitigation plan provided Department: Internal Services Contact: Sarah Carter, 970-416-2748, scarter@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: 2015 International Building Code (IBC) 2015 International Residential Code (IRC) 2015 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2015 International Mechanical Code (IMC) 2015 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) 2015 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2017 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Fort Collins has amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the fcgov.com/building web page to view them. Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF. Frost Depth: 30 inches. Wind Load: 129vult Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2015 IRC Chapter 11 or 2015 IECC. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: A building code pre-submittal meeting is not required for this project. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Light And Power Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Light and Power has single phase electric facilities stubbed to the north edge of the property from Mullen Dr. We also have conduit stubbed at the proposed Suniga/Redwood intersection that will need to be extended down Suniga. This stub will have 3phase electric facilities that can be extended into the site. Response: This project will require 3-phase power at the parking garage and potentially the clubhouse. We show a connection to the electric in the intersection of Redwood Drive and Suniga Drive. 10 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: 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 to discuss our fee structure. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. Transformers must also have a front clearance of 10ft and side/rear clearance of 3ft minimum. Please show proposed transformer locations on the utility plans. Response: Transformers will be placed 10’ from a drivable surface. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please provide adequate space along the private drives to ensure proper utility installation and to meet minimum spacing requirements. Utility easements may need to be dedicated to route primary power into private drive locations to feed transformers. Response: Electric feed will be routed within the Utility Easement. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Each residential unit will need to be individually metered. Please gang the electric meters on one side of the building, opposite of the gas meters. All units larger than a duplex or 200 amps is considered a commercial service, therefore the owner is responsible to provide and maintain the electrical service from the transformer to the meter bank. Response: Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: A commercial service information form (C-1 form) and a one line diagram for all commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power Engineering. A link to the C-1 form is below: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development- forms-guidelines-regulations Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Streetlight placement will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Shaded trees are required to maintain 40 feet of separation and ornamental trees are required to maintain 15 feet of separation from streetlights. Below is a link to the City of Fort Collins street-lighting requirements: http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/Ch15_04_01_2007.pdf 11 Response: Streetlight (public) locations provided by Light and Power Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: 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: Acknowledged Department: Park Planning Contact: Suzanne Bassinger, 970-416-4340, sbassinger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The proposed Lake Canal Regional Trail is identified in the 2013 Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan, and will follow the Lake Canal ditch alignment from Redwood Street to Lemay Avenue. The link to the Master Plan is: http://www.fcgov.com/parkplanning/pdf/2013-paved-recreational-trail-master-pla n-3-3-14.pdf Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The Lake Canal Regional Trail will provide a connection between the existing Poudre River Trail and the proposed Northeast Trail system. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The Master Plan provides a conceptual alignment. The trail alignment has not been finalized, and may potentially be located on either the east or west side of the Lake Canal ditch. Park Planning & Development would be interested in meeting with the applicant to determine the best location for the regional trail. Response: Meeting held on 3/8/2018. The best location for regional trail has been determined and is now conceptually shown on the plans. Coordination will continue with Parks Planning, Engineering, and Traffic Operations Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: A trail connection to Redwood or Suniga would need to be integrated within the trail alignment. Trail crossings of public streets require adequate traffic control protection and crossing signals are preferred. Trail alignments and street crossings should be coordinated with the Traffic Department to best determine appropriate locations of trail crossings of streets. Response: Crossing will be coordinated with Traffic Operations and Engineering Staff. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The Trails Master Plan contains general design requirements and 12 guidelines. Regional trails generally require a 30'easement, a 10' wide paved trail surface with horizontal and vertical clearance requirements, and potentially a parallel soft path. Response: Acknowledged. These will be considered as we finalize the layout and location of the trail along the ditch. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The City of Fort Collins constructs and maintains the trails identified in the Master Plan. Opportunities to cost-share trail construction with developing properties may be considered on a site-by-site basis. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The Developer is responsible to provide on-site and potentially off-site bike & pedestrian spur connections to the regional trail system as per Section 3.2.2(6) & (7) of the Land Use Code. Response: Acknowledged. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: REVISED COMMENTS Please note: The following fire department comments have been updated and modified from those provided during the city staff review meeting of 07.26.2017. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: 2015 IFC CODE ADOPTION Poudre Fire Authority and the City of Fort Collins have adopted the 2015 International Fire Code. Building plan reviews shall be subject to this adopted version of the fire code for the plan review submittal and permit application. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: FIRE LANES Fire access is required to within 150' of all exterior portions of any building, or facility as measured by an approved route around the perimeter. For the purposes of this section, fire access cannot be measured from an arterial road (Suniga) but may be measured from proposed public roads internal to the site. Where fire access cannot be met from a public road, a fire lane will be required. The Conceptual Plan would indicate that all private drives will be required for fire access. Any private drive serving as a fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) and be designed to minimum fire lane specifications. Response: A revised site plan has been provided. 13 Based upon the proposed Conceptual Plan, perimeter access requirements have not been achieved at all buildings. Buildings with courtyard-like areas facing away from fire lanes appear to be most at risk of being non-compliant. In addition, any required fire lane in excess of 150' in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. At this time, there appears to be 2 dead-end fire lanes of approximately 300' that do not meet minimum standards. Response: A revised site plan has been provided. Dedicated fire lanes shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 20' throughout and no parking will be allowed within this width at any time. No Parking-Fire lane signage will be required throughout. In addition, aerial apparatus access requirements are triggered for buildings in excess of 30' in height. Code language provided below. > IFC 503.1.1: Approved fire Lanes shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. When any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access, the fire code official is authorized to increase the dimension if the building is equipped throughout with an approved, automatic fire-sprinkler system. Response: A revised site plan has been provided. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: 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 roads shall not exceed 660' in length without providing for a second point of access. > 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. Turning radii shall be detailed on submitted plans. > 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. 14 Response: A revised site plan has been provided. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 30' IN HEIGHT Aerial apparatus access requires wider fire lanes adjacent to qualifying buildings in order to support ladder truck functions. This applies to any building in excess of 30' in height as defined by 2015 IFC Appendix D. Code language provided below. > IFC D105.1: WHERE REQUIRED Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. > IFC D105.2: WIDTH Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. > IFC D105.3: PROXIMITY TO BUILDING At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Response: A revised site plan has been provided meeting the above requirements. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: FIRE LANE SIGNS The limits of the fire lane shall be fully defined. Fire lane sign locations should be indicated on future plan sets. Refer to LUCASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of fire inspection. Code language provided below. > IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. Response: Signage will be placed upon Final Design. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM 15 > IFC 903.3.1.2: New multi-family buildings shall be provided with full NFPA-13 fire suppression systems in compliance with local amendment. Please contact Assistant Fire Marshal, Joe Jaramillo with any fire sprinkler related questions at 970-416-2868. In addition: > IFC 903.3.1.2.1: Sprinkler protection shall be provided for exterior balconies, decks, and ground floor patios of dwelling units where the building is of Type V construction. > IFC 912.2: Fire Department Connections shall be installed in accordance with NFPA standards. Fire department connections shall be located on the street side of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department vehicle access. The location of the FDC shall be approved by the fire department and the location labeled on Utility Plans. Response: Acknowledged Response: Fire services a proposed to each multi-family building. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: WATER SUPPLY Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. A hydrant is required within 300' of any Commercial Building and at 600' intervals as measured along an approved path of vehicle travel. Code language provided below. > IFC 507.5 and PFA Policy: Hydrants to provide 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter. Response: Fire hydrants have been spaced to provide 600-foot separation. A fire hydrant has been placed at both the parking structure and the clubhouse. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: SIDEWALK CONNECTIVITY Although it's not entirely clear, it appears that some buildings may have portions with front doors connecting to green spaces rather than the nearest access drive. If such is the case, the project team is asked to consider the ability of medical resources getting an ambulance stretcher to the front door of any unit in lieu of managing a cot across grass and landscaping. Response: A revised site plan has been provided. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: CLUBHOUSE Should the proposed clubhouse exceed 5,000 square feet, it shall be sprinklered or fire contained. If containment is used, the containment construction shall be reviewed and approved by the Poudre Fire Authority prior to installation. In addition, should the building contain A-2 Group Occupancy with an occupant load exceeding 99 persons, a sprinkler system will be required for 16 the entire building. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/27/2017 07/27/2017: PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: ADDRESS POSTING & WAYFINDING Addresses shall be posted on each structure and where otherwise needed to aid in wayfinding. The naming of private drives is often recommended to aid in wayfinding or a system of monument signage will need to be submitted to PFA for review and approval before final plan approval. Where buildings are accessible from multiple roadways, the posting of address AND street name will be required. Code language provided below. > IFC 505.1: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible, visible from the street or road fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. ADDRESS POSTING - M-F - 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. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: There is an overall qualitative aspect to this project that could lead one to conclude that it is not appropriate either in the L-M-N zone district in general, or at this location in particular, based on City Plan Principles and Policies. For example, 29 acres of single-use, student-oriented housing, arranged in a complex of buildings and parking lots, does not meet the L-M-N Purpose and Principle LIV 28, Policy LIV 28.2 - Mix of Uses, and Policy LIV 28.3 - Mix of Housing Types (City Plan page 79). The applicant is encouraged to consider other zone districts that are more conducive to cottage-style student-oriented type of development. For example, other cottage-style projects include Aspen Heights, zoned C-C-N and Capstone Cottages zoned M-M-N, two zone districts that are more suitable for this type of proposal. Response: Comment resolved. See attached “white” paper for reference. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The site is awkwardly shaped which causes the site plan and the street network to be disjointed and non-continuous. The circulation system features a number of dead-end parking lots. In general, the site plan should be 17 simplified with an emphasis on buildings facing public streets to the maximum extent feasible. Where public streets are not possible, the buildings should front on Street-Like Private Drives per Section 3.6.2(N) and not have to rely on parking lot drive aisles which necessitates Major Walkway Spines in order to comply with connectivity standards. Response: A revised site plan has been developed that better promotes a continuous circulation system and where all buildings front public streets or a street-like private drive. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: For example, other student-oriented, rent-by-the-bedroom projects are more integrated into the public street system and are not isolated pods or complexes but, rather, more logical extensions of the town-like pattern. Both The Grove and Aspen Heights orient buildings and entrances to public streets to the maximum extent feasible allowing for direct connecting walkways, and parking lots to be placed to side and rear of buildings. This project, in contrast, includes multiple buildings separated from public streets, and places most of the buildings behind parking lots and drive aisles which is uncharacteristic of an L-M-N neighborhood as envisioned by City Plan. Response: The new site plan provided addresses this comment – all buildings now front on public streets or a street-like private drive. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The impact of the project on the existing neighborhood may be insurmountable. As shown, there is no significant buffer or a land use transition which are techniques that may be used to accomplish compatibility. A uniform 25-foot wide buffer may be insufficient depending on the size and orientation of the proposed buildings. Given the single use aspect of the project (student-oriented housing, Extra Occupancy Rental Houses, rent by the bedroom) at the proposed scale, there appears to be little in the way of effective mitigation that preserves the quality of life for the residents of the Meadows at Redwood neighborhood. Response: The new site plan provides 30’ minimum setback, where majority of the buildings on the plan are actually located even further away than 30’ – as a result the average buffer is approximately 70’. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The two streets crossing the Lake Canal must be public streets and align with the public street network in the proposed project east of the Canal. Combined, these two projects will be required to demonstrate inter-connectivity with multiple points of access to the surrounding arterial and collector network. Response: Two streets are proposed to cross the canal aligning with proposed streets in the Northfield development. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Please note that along Street-Like Private Drives, there must be detached sidewalks and street trees in parkways no less than six feet wide. Otherwise, they become on par with parking lot drive aisles. Response: The proposed street-like private drives include detached sidewalks and street trees. 18 Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: The narrative indicates that there will be a variety of building type configurations. In the L-M-N zone, for a parcel between 20 and 30 acres, a minimum of three housing types are required. The menu of housing types is contained in Section 4.5(D)(2). Also, no one housing type can be greater than 80% or less than 5% if the total. Besides multi-family dwellings, it is not clear from the submittal which other housing types are proposed. Be sure to review the definitions of the housing types per Article Five. Response: Four housing types are being provided: Two-Family dwellings, Multifamily Dwellings containing three (3) to four (4) units, Multifamily Dwellings containing five (5) to seven (7) units, and Mixed-use dwelling units in the clubhouse. The clubhouse is a mixed-use building by virtue of the fact that it contains 1,500 square feet of publicly accessible commercial use (a small coffee venue and yoga studio). Each housing type comprises at least 5% and no more than 80% of the total units. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017:For multi-family buildings in the L-M-N, no building can exceed 14,000 square feet, with a maximum of 12 units per building and a maximum of three stories in height. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: For the clubhouse / leasing office, the building must not exceed 20,000 square feet. Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: For the Extra Occupancy Rental Houses (greater than three bedrooms per unit), the project must provide a sufficient amount of amenities to accommodate the denser population. Please refer to Section 3.8.16(E)(2). These amenities must go beyond that which otherwise would have been provided. Response: A Request for High Occupancy Units has been submitted with this application. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: In the L-M-N zone district, no single block is allowed to exceed 12 acres. Response: No block exceeds 12 acres. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: If any block face exceeds 700 feet, then a mid-block crossing is required. Response: A mid-block crossing is provided where the block face exceeds 700 feet. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: In the project data table, the number of parking spaces is listed as 663. Please note that per Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(a), the required minimum number of spaces is based on the number of bedrooms per unit on a per unit basis. 19 Without this breakdown, we have no way of verifying compliance. Please note that since the project is not in the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay District (TOD), the ratio of .75 spaces per bedroom is not applicable. Response: Our parking requirement based on number of bedrooms/dwelling unit in 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) is 513 parking spaces. Six additional spaces are required for the 1500 square foot commercial component bringing the total required parking to 519 spaces. We will be providing 744 parking spaces, which exceeds the Land Use Code requirement by 225 spaces. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Will the developer be providing a shuttle bus to the C.S.U. campus? (See 3.8.16.) Response: The developer will be providing a shuttle bus for its residents both during the day and as a late-night option on the weekends. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: One bike parking space is required per bedroom. Of this total, at least 60% must be enclosed. Remaining parking may be exterior and must be placed in fixed racks, permanently attached to concrete and not interfere with walkways or landscaping. Bike parking must be distributed throughout the entire project including the clubhouse and park. The location and edifice of enclosed bike parking must be carefully considered. For example, there is limited area underneath stairwells for racks. Balconies, patios and porches do not qualify. All bike parking will be counted on a per rack basis. Therefore, the type of rack must be specified as to manufacturer so that capacity can be determined. Response: 449 Enclosed bike parking spaces will be provided on the first level of the parking structure for ease of access. The fixed racks are located throughout the site in convenient locations and will provide an additional 295 spaces, for a total of 744 bike parking spaces. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: A bike repair station is recommended in the clubhouse area. (See 3.8.16.) Response: A bike repair station is located along the regional trail near the clubhouse. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: A pet station is recommended for the one acre park and throughout the project as needed. (See 3.8.16.) Response: Pet stations will be provided on site at convenient locations. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Per Section 3.6.5, a bus stop may be required along Suniga Road. Please verify with Transfort as to the possibility that this improvement may be required. Response: A Type III bus stop was identified as necessary for this project and will be located on Redwood Street just south of the Redwood Meadows neighborhood. See plan for proposed location. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Response to Question One: It is difficult to imagine a site plan that complies with the Principles and Policies of City Plan for the L-M-N zone district if Lupine and Mullein do not connect to serve these 29 acres. The site is 20 already challenged with connectivity and removing these two public street connections would simply isolate the parcel to a greater degree. If the traffic levels on these two existing local streets are too impactful, then perhaps a lessening of the density / intensity would be in order. Response: Lupine and Mullien Drives will extend and connect into the project site as required by the City. Access to the project site is designed to minimize trips through the existing residential area to the extent feasible. The signed primary entrance to the project site will be from Suniga Drive and Redwood Street. The project proposes a neck down/ pedestrian crosswalk and speed tables on Lupine at the entrance to the existing neighborhood and at other locations within the project to slow traffic as it enters the single-family neighborhood. Traffic signage will be installed as an additional measure to alert drivers that they are entering the Redwood Meadows neighborhood. Additional speed tables are proposed in the project to calm traffic and increase pedestrian safety. In addition, the developer has offered to create a painted crosswalk at the intersection of Lupine and Mullein (near the central mailbox) to enhance pedestrian safety in the existing neighborhood. See EXHIBIT ‘A’. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 07/26/2017 07/26/2017: Response to Question Three: Staff is willing to work with the applicant if the spacing of sub-arterial streets to the adjoining development across the Lake Canal exceeds 660 feet. It appears that two crossings of the Lake Canal, not three, may be sufficient. A third crossing may impact the natural characteristics of Lake Canal and the 50-foot buffer zone on either side. Since there are no schools, public parks, Neighborhood Center District or employment uses that would be served by a third crossing, there is likelihood that Staff could support either a finding of Alternative Compliance or a Request for a Modification to Section 3.6.3(F). Response: A Request for Alternative Compliance to Section 3.6.3(F) is provided with this Submittal. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: The design of this site must conform to the drainage basin design of the Dry Creek Master Drainage Plan, the NECCO regional plan, as well the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Response: The design is in conformance with Dry Creek Master Drainage Plan and NECCO Regional Plan. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: NECCO information: A. This project site is located within the NECCO area within sub-basins 113 and 313 (yellow sub-basins). The detention and water quality requirements the yellow sub-basins are to detain and release at 0.2 cfs per acre and provide water quality on site. The majority of the existing Redwood Meadows neighborhood is located in sub-basin 213 (gold sub-basin). The requirement for this sub-basin is to restrict the amount of runoff to existing conditions and future water quality will be required with redevelopment. Please see the provided map for information. Response: Per the NECCO Regional Plan, Redwood Village PUD Phase 1 is being routed directly to the stormsewer within Suniga Drive. The project site is being release at a maximum rate of 0.2 cfs per acre B. There will be NECCO fees associated with this site. Fees for the yellow sub-basins are $7,709 per acre. The fees will go toward the construction of the 21 NECCO regional stormwater management system and outfall piping to the river. Response: Acknowledged C. The NECCO backbone along the Suniga Road alignment (12’x4’ RCBC) from the Vine Detention Pond to Redwood is currently under construction. NECCO storm line A2 runs north from this backbone storm line through the subject property to the existing Redwood Pond. This storm pipe will need to be accommodated in the design of the site and constructed as a part of this development. It can be re-payed through the developer repay process. Response: Storm Line A2 has been designed with this project and is shown in the plans.v Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Per the question in the PDR application regarding drainage from the Redwood Village PUD Phase 1, drainage from this neighborhood appears to drain toward and onto your proposed project site. The majority of the existing Redwood neighborhood is located in NECCO sub-basin 213 (gold sub-basin). The requirement for this sub-basin is to restrict the amount of runoff to existing conditions and future water quality will be required with redevelopment. Thus, the drainage from this neighborhood will need to be accepted and routed through your project (into the NECCO storm line A2), releasing at the existing conditions rates. The amount of drainage coming from this subdivision will need to be determined using current rainfall data. Response: The drainage from Redwood Village PUD Phase 1 will be captured by Storm Line A2 and routed to the NECCO Storm Line in Suniga Drive. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: A drainage report and construction plans are required and they must be prepared by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Colorado. The drainage report must address the four-step process for selecting structural BMPs. Response: A drainage report and construction plans have been prepared. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Water quality treatment will be required for this project site: fifty percent of the site runoff is required to be treated using the standard water quality treatment as described in the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual, Volume 3-Best Management Practices (BMPs). (http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-f orms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria) Extended detention is the usual method selected for water quality treatment; however the use of any of the BMPs is encouraged. Response: LID has been designed through the project through use of underground chambers. Standard water quality treatment is proposed for the remaining areas not draining to underground chambers. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Low Impact Development (LID) is required for the site. LID is a higher degree of water quality treatment with one of the two following options: A. 50% of the newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID 22 techniques and 25% of new paved areas must be pervious. B. 75% of all newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID techniques. Response: LID has been designed through the project through use of underground chambers. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: There will be a final site inspection of the final grading and stormwater facilities when the project is complete. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) for on-going maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities will be included as part of the Development Agreement. More information and links can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/stormwater-quality/low-im pact-development Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Per Colorado Revised Statute §37-92-602 (8) effective August 5, 2015, criteria regarding detention drain time will apply to this project. As part of the drainage design, the engineer will be required to show compliance with this statute using a standard spreadsheet (available on request) that will need to be included in the drainage report. Upon completion of the project, the engineer will also be required to upload the approved spreadsheet onto the Statewide Compliance Portal. This will apply to any volume based stormwater storage, including extended detention basins. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: The 2017 city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $8,217/acre for new impervious area over 350 square feet and there is a $1,045/acre of site review fee. No fee is charged for existing impervious area. These fees are to be paid at the time each building permit is issued. Information on fees can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen t-development-fees or contact our Utility Fee and Rate Specialists at (970) 416-4252 for questions on fees. There is also an erosion control escrow required before the Development Construction permit is issued. The amount of the escrow is determined by the design engineer, and is based on the site disturbance area, cost of the measures, or a minimum amount in accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual. Response: Acknowledged Contact: Heidi Hansen, 970-221-6854, hhansen@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: A portion of this property is located in the FEMA regulated, 100-year Dry Creek floodplain. Any development within the floodplain must obtain a floodplain use permit and comply with the safety regulations of Chapter 23 10 of City Municipal Code. A FEMA Flood Risk Map is attached. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The NECCO project is currently under construction and the LOMR for that project will modify the floodplain and floodway in this area in the future. We cannot regulate to the new mapping until the NECCO project is complete and the LOMR has been fully approved by the City and FEMA. The project must meet the floodplain regulations based on the adopted regulatory floodplain map at the time of building/construction permit issuance. If the design of the development is based on the expected NECCO floodplain boundaries, the project can move through the planning process with notes on the plans stating that the applicant is aware that building/construction permits may be held up until the NECCO LOMR is fully approved and that moving forward with plans that do not meet the current regulatory floodplain requirements is at their own risk. If for any reason NECCO did not alter the floodplain boundary as planned, the applicant may need to revise their plans to meet the requirements of the current regulatory floodplain prior to the release of building/construction permits. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Per Section 10-108 of the City Code, construction of a residential structure is allowed in a FEMA 100-year flood fringe, as long as the lowest finished floor of the building, and all duct work, heating, ventilation, electrical systems, etc. are elevated 18-inches above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). This elevation is known as the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE). RFPE = BFE + 18-inches. No basements are allowed in the floodplain. A crawl space less than 4’ high is allowed if it is flood vented and no equipment or ductwork is below the RFPE. An approved FEMA Elevation Certificate completed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer and showing that the addition is constructed to the required elevation, is required post-construction prior to a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) being issued. Please note: If any part of the building is within the floodplain boundary then the entire structure is considered to be in the floodplain and the entire building envelope must meet the requirements of elevating to the RFPE. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Construction of mixed-use structures is allowed in the flood fringe provided the structures meet all the requirements of Chapter 10 including elevating or floodproofing the lowest floor of the building, and all duct work, heating, ventilation, AC, electrical systems, etc. to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE). The RFPE is the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) plus an additional amount for safety. RFPE = BFE + 18-inches for mixed-use structures. If there will be residential units on the first floor then the building must be elevated as floodproofing is not allowed for residential. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 24 07/25/2017: Construction of commercial structures is allowed in the flood fringe provided the structures meet all the requirements of Chapter 10 including elevating or floodproofing the lowest floor of the building, and all duct work, heating, ventilation, AC, electrical systems, etc. to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE). The RFPE is the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) plus an additional amount for safety. RFPE = BFE + 18-inches for commercial structures. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Nonstructural development (grading, fencing, detention ponds, hard surface paths, trails, walkways, vegetation, etc.) is allowed in the floodplain as long as a floodplain use permit is obtained prior to construction. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please be aware that per Section 10-103 (9), Critical Facilities are prohibited in the floodplain. The definition for Critical Facilities includes facilities for at-risk populations (daycares, schools, nursing homes, etc.), facilities utilizing hazardous materials (gas stations, auto repair, laboratories), emergency services facilities (urgent care, hospitals, fire, police) and government services (municipal offices, library). Response: There are no critical facilities proposed with this project. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Any development within the floodplain boundary including, site work, structures, utilities, and landscaping must be preceded by an approved floodplain use permit and comply with the safety regulations of Chapter 10 of the City Municipal Code. The permit for can be obtained at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Development review checklists and permit application forms for floodplain requirements can be obtained at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents . Please utilize these documents when preparing your plans for submittal. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please show the boundaries of the floodplain on site drawings as applicable. Contact Beck Anderson of Stormwater Master Planning at banderson@fcgov.com for floodplain CAD line work. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please contact Heidi Hansen with any questions about 25 requirements for development in the floodplain. hhansen@fcgov.com 970-221-6854. Response: Thank you! Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/18/2017 07/18/2017: 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. 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: An Erosion Control Plan and Report will be provided at Final Design. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: As of January 1, 2015 all development plans are required to be on the NAVD88 vertical datum. Please make your consultants aware of this, prior to any surveying and/or design work. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: This property is only partially platted. When submitting a Subdivision Plat/replat for this property/project, addresses are not acceptable in the Plat title/name. Response: A plat has been prepared and is included with this submittal. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: The anticipated traffic volume from this development meets the threshold for needing a full Traffic Impact Study. Please have your traffic engineer contact me to scope the study. Note that any proposed phased implementation will need to be reflected as phases in the study. Response: Project was scoped and a full Transportation Impact Study was prepared and included with this Submittal. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Previous developments in the area have indicated that the intersection of Lemay and Vine is constrained by Adequate Public Facilities. If 26 so, then projects moving forward must either show an exemption to APF due to limited traffic from the development through the intersection, wait for anticipated changes to the APF ordinance expected later this year, or wait for improvements to be funded. Note that if/when APF constraints are addressed, Level of Service under LCUASS must still be met and/or mitigated. Response: The Development is anticipating changes pertaining to the APF standard. If these changes are approved, the development as designed could potentially move forward with some determined mitigation based on the size/impact of the development. If the APF changes are not approved, the developer will have to phase the development to be less than 50 peak hour trips through the Lemay/Vine intersection, make improvements to the existing Lemay/Vine intersection, or provide funds to construct the grade separated improvements. Mitigation for the Lemay/Vine intersection level of service will be determined through discussions with the City of Fort Collins. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: As indicated on the submitted conceptual site plan, this development will be required to connect Suniga Rd. from Redwood to the future Suniga connection to Lemay. This development will also be required to complete the street frontage along existing Redwood. Please work with engineering to determine the extent of these improvements. Response: It is assumed that Northfield will build Suniga from Redwood to Lemay, since it is already in process and it is assumed that it will be approved. The scope of the TIS was approved with this assumption. The Retreat will reimburse Northfield for Suniga from Redwood to the center of the Lake Canal and 50% of the estimated cost of the crossing itself. In addition, the Retreat will complete the street frontage along Redwood Street by providing a detached sidewalk and street trees. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Please provide two transportation connections to the south east across the lake canal. Response: The Retreat project proposes two street connections across the Lake Canal aligning with Snyder Drive and Meadow Spring Drive in the Northfield development. It is assumed that whichever developer starts construction first will build the streets up to the Canal edge and escrow funds for 50% of the estimated cost of the crossing itself. When the second project is constructed, that developer will be responsible for constructing the crossing of the Canal and receive a payback for 50% of the cost from funds the first developer provided in the escrow. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: There are several existing water mains in the area. These include an existing 24-inch waterline in Lemay Avenue, a 12-inch waterline in future Suniga Drive, and there are several 6-inch waterlines serving the Redwood neighborhood. This project site technically sits within the ELCO water district, but will end up being serviced by the City. Response: The project is petitioning out of ELCO Water District and will be serviced by the City of Fort Collins. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: There are sanitary sewer collection mains in the area. These include an 18-inch main around the Alta Vista neighborhood, a 15-inch main along Lemay Avenue and a 15-inch main in Redwood. With 29 acres of proposed development in this area, sanitary sewer capacity will need to be analyzed to determine adequate capacity exists in the system downstream of this site. Early coordination with Fort Collins Utilities by the team’s Civil 27 Engineer is requested in order to incorporate anticipated flow rates from this development into the City’s sanitary sewer model. Please provide calculations for the estimated sewer flows from this development. Response: A private pump station will be required for this project to achieve service to the north. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: There is an existing 60-inch Greeley water transmission main and a 42-inch ELCO water transmission main in the Suniga roadway alignment. Any needed details or construction impacts on those water transmission mains will need to be coordinated with Greeley and/or ELCO by the development team. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Please note required separation requirements and easement widths for utilities: 10’ of separation is required between water and sewer and all other utilities including storm lines and dry utilities. Utility easement requirements include: 20’ minimum width for water mains, 30’ minimum width for sewer mains, 35’ minimum width for combined water and sewer mains running parallel. If utilities are aligned within public rights-of-way they are still required to meet the required separations from each other and from buildings or structures (i.e. sewer mains must be a minimum of 15’ away from buildings) Response: The alignment of the water and wasterwater utilities have been design to allow for minimum separation. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: The water conservation standards for landscape and irrigation will apply. Information on these requirements can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/standards Response: Acknowledged Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 07/21/2017 07/21/2017: Development fees and water rights will be due at building permit. Response: Acknowledged Department: Zoning Contact: Ryan Boehle, 970-416-2401, rboehle@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Handicap spaces will need to be dispersed throughout the development. The minimum amount of required spaces will be 2% of the total amount of spaces provided. Regardless of the number of handicap spaces required at least 1 space shall be designated as van accessible, and must be a minimum 8' wide, and adjoin a minimum 8' wide access aisle. Response: Seventeen handicap spaces are provided distributed throughout the site and within the parking structure. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: All developments shall provide adequately sized, conveniently 28 located, accessible trash and recycling enclosures and are required to be fully screened from public view. Each enclosed area shall be designed to have a separate pedestrian walk-in access as per 3.2.5. Response: Acknowledged. See elevations for trash enclosure structure. Trash enclosure will also have selected shrubs planted around it for additional screening. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: All mechanical equipment, meters, conduit, vents and RTU’s shall be screened from public view both from above and below by integrating it into the building and roof design as per 3.5.1(I)(6). Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/25/2017 07/25/2017: Site lighting shall be provided as per 3.2.4 (C). A lighting plan is required, including photometrics and fixture cut sheets. Use of warmer color temperatures (3000 Kelvin) in site light fixtures is preferred. Light levels measured 20' beyond the property line of the development site(adjacent to residential uses or public rights-of-way shall net exceed 0.1 foot-candles a direct result of the on-site lighting Response: Proposed plan complies 29 EXHIBIT ‘A’ 30 EXHIBIT ‘B’ September 11, 2017 Redwood Street Multi-Family Landmark Properties submitted Redwood Street Multi-Family for Preliminary Design Review (PDR) July 12 th and attended the PDR Staff Review Meeting on July 26 th to receive comments from various City departments. While there were comments from 15 departments, the comments from Planning Services were the most onerous. This “white paper” is intended to respond to the most serious concerns raised in the planning comments. Comment Number 1 suggests that the project as proposed may not be appropriate in the LMN zone district, citing City Plan Livability Policy LIV 28. Comments Number 2-22 address site plan issues related to orienting buildings to public streets or street- like private drives, integration into the public street system, land use buffers and transitions, canal crossings, building types, square footages, mid-block crossings, parking requirements, bike parking, pet stations and the need for a bus stop. It is the Applicant’s intent to meet Land Use Code requirements in regard to these specific site plan issues. Many were already addressed with the site plan presented at the PDR Meeting and the most current site plan rendition attached to this paper addresses all of them. Furthermore, we believe the current site plan conforms to the applicable General Development Standards contained in LUC 3.1-3.8. A memo from Lucia Liley addressing legal aspects of policy versus regulatory requirements accompanies this letter and should be reviewed as well. The focus of this paper is to demonstrate that the proposed project is supported by City Plan Principles and Policies and achieves goals and objectives included in the Northside Neighborhoods Plan. Also to show that it is consistent with the Purpose of the LMN District, is a permitted land use, and meets the applicable land use standards in regard to density, mix of housing types, facing uses and small neighborhood parks per Division 4.5 in the Land Use Code. City Plan Policies under LIV 28 cited in the PDR planning comments are included below: Policy LIV 28.1 – Density Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods will have an overall minimum average density of four (4) dwelling units per acre, excluding undevelopable areas. This minimum density for parcels 20 acres or less will be three (3) dwelling units per acre. Policy LIV 28.2 – Mix of Uses Include other neighborhood-serving uses in addition to residential uses. Although the actual mix of uses in each neighborhood will vary, Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods may include the following: •Principal uses: Predominantly detached single family homes; however, may include a range of duplexes, townhomes, and small scale multi-family dwellings (twelve or less units per building). •Supporting uses: Places of worship, day care (adult and child), parks and recreation facilities, schools, and small civic facilities. In addition to these uses, a mix of other complementary uses is permitted within a designated Neighborhood Center, including the following: neighborhood-serving market, shops, small professional offices or live-work units, clinics, or other small businesses in addition to the list of secondary uses listed above. Retail uses will be permitted only in a designated Neighborhood Center. Home occupations are permitted provided they do not generate excessive traffic and parking or have signage that is not consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood. Policy LIV 28.3 – Mix of Housing Types Distribute a variety of housing types to make an attractive, marketable neighborhood with housing for a diversity of people. Include a minimum of four (4) distinct housing types in any residential project containing more than thirty (30) acres. As the acreage of the residential project increases, so should the number of housing types. 31 At 5.6 DU/AC the proposed density of the project is above the minimum average densities established in this policy and the principal uses proposed in the project are consistent with the principal uses described in LIV 28.2 (underlined and bolded). The project contains 30.16 acres and will provide 4 distinct housing types or seek a Modification. We believe the above City Plan Policies together with the Purpose statement of the LMN District contained in the Land Use Code and inserted below support the proposed project. Purpose. The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by the pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. A neighborhood center provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development in this District shall be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood. Typically, Low Density Neighborhoods will be clustered around and integral with a Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood with a Neighborhood Commercial Center at its core. For the purposes of this Division, a neighborhood shall be considered to consist of approximately eighty (80) to one hundred sixty (160) acres, with its edges typically consisting of major streets, drainageways, irrigation ditches, railroad tracks and other major physical features. The Purpose states that the LMN District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low density housing. The zone district as outlined in Article 5, Division 4.5 of the Land Use Code defines densities appropriate for the LMN District as follows. The overall average density range allowed in the LMN District is 3-9 dwelling units per gross acre depending on the size of the development. For affordable housing projects the maximum density is 12 dwelling units per gross acre. Redwood Street MF proposes 5.6 dwelling units per acre, close to the middle of the allowable range. Some of the proposed units have four and in some cases five bedrooms. We recognize that this increases the intensity of the development without increasing the number of dwelling units. To remedy this difference, we divide the number of bedrooms by three (as if 3-bedroom apartments were being proposed), and the resulting density is 8.0 dwelling units per acre which is still within the allowable density range. The proposed Northfield residential development to the southeast by contrast proposes 8.7 dwelling units per acre. The Purpose goes on to indicate that developments should operate in harmony with the residential characteristics of the neighborhood. The site is located in a unique neighborhood that includes residential, commercial and industrial zone districts (LMN, RL, CCN, I, MMN and CS) adjacent to the project site or within one quarter of a mile. Single family housing is located to the north with a 45-50 feet wide regional drainage way in between. The Lake Canal borders the property on the eastern edge with medium density multi-family housing (Northfield) planned for the site on the other side of the canal. An industrial area owned by Larimer County is located to the south adjacent to Vine Drive and Old Town North, a residential community with a variety of housing including mixed-use, apartments, condos and single family, is located to the southwest. A small single-family residential project, Redwood Meadows and a City-owned regional detention area border the site on the west side with Aspen Heights, cottage style student oriented housing, located west of Redwood Street. 32 We believe the Redwood Street MF project as proposed utilizes the odd shaped site effectively and is well suited to the diverse mix of land uses that exist in the neighborhood. The project site is well buffered from existing single-family neighborhoods that exist to the north and to the southwest by open space and natural areas. The site plan respects the Redwood Meadows single family development by placing a major walkway spine along the shared property line that ranges from 35 to 75 feet wide and will be planted with deciduous canopy trees along with conifers and ornamental trees for year around interest. This walkway spine exceeds the 25-foot wide required buffer and will provide an excellent transition between the one-story single family homes and the mostly two-story multi-family product. Redwood Meadows residents will be invited to utilize the walkway, adding a new amenity to their neighborhood as well as fostering neighborhood social interaction. While existing residential streets in the neighborhood will extend and connect into the project site as required by the City, access to the project site is designed to minimize trips through the existing residential area. The primary ingress and egress to the project site will be from Suniga Drive and Redwood Street. The LMN District is intended to have a mix of uses that meet the needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, and that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences. Redwood Street multi-family is a cottage-style student oriented housing project that offers students an opportunity to live in a low density neighborhood and share a house with 2-4 other students. This arrangement has proven to be a popular choice for many students who prefer to live in a quiet neighborhood rather than more densely populated student housing projects closer to campus. The community benefits from having cottage-style apartments because students can satisfy their desire to live in quiet neighborhoods while living in a managed housing project where buildings and landscapes are well maintained. It also has the benefit of freeing up more affordable housing in residential neighborhoods currently rented to students. Students living in the project will be within a mile of a large variety of gathering places, conveniences and services, including a King Soopers mega store, Jax Mercantile, restaurants, auto service shops, banks, Lyric Cinema, as well as New Belgium and Odell’s breweries. It’s also located within a mile of a variety of recreational opportunities including Redwing Marsh open space and nature trails, Greenbriar Park, the proposed Whitewater Park, as well as the Poudre River and associated bike trail. Old Town and the 33 Downtown CBD also lie within a mile radius of the site and offer many goods and services along with restaurants and entertainment venues. The ideal LMN District will integrate all these uses into the larger community with a pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. The LMN District in this area of Fort Collins is combined with RL Districts (low density residential existing prior to City Plan) to create an area of low density residential approximately ½ mile east of North College Avenue. The proposed site plan continues the street pattern created when Redwood Meadows was built. The applicant has oriented buildings so that they face public streets or a street-like private drive. In addition, the project incorporates a community trail along the canal and a private trail system surrounds the project, effectively utilizing neighborhood and natural area buffers. The trails combined with the network of public and private sidewalks create a wide variety of walkable blocks within the project. The proposed pedestrian and bike paths link to existing sidewalks and bike lanes along Redwood Street and Suniga Street which connect residents to the plethora of goods and services located along North College Avenue and at the King Soopers store on Willox Street to the north. The project will provide pocket parks and natural areas for residents to enjoy. While the pool/clubhouse complex is for residents only, the trail system and pocket parks are intended to be shared with the larger neighborhood. The proposed site plan includes 176 dwelling units with 729 total bedrooms distributed in 2, 3, 4 and 5 bedroom configurations. The Land Use Code requires multi-family projects with 4 and 5 bedroom units to provide sufficient amenities to sustain the activities associated with the development and to protect the adjacent neighborhood. Approximately 749 parking spaces are provided through parallel on-street, angled on-street, off-street, and structure parking. The applicant plans to run a private shuttle bus to campus and other locations on a regular basis in order to discourage residents from driving their cars. As the project moves forward they will coordinate with Transfort to see how best to serve the transportation needs of the resident population. Bicycle parking will be provided in the quantities required by the Land Use Code. Site amenities include a clubhouse-pool complex with study rooms, fitness center, on site management and leasing offices, and computer lab, along with grilling stations and social gathering spaces. Open space areas totaling approximately 365,650 square feet along with approximately 5,700 lineal feet of trails provide opportunities to get out, take walks and meet other people living in the project or in the neighborhood. The project provides more amenities, trails and open space than mid-rise student housing projects in more urban areas such as Plum Street, West Elizabeth and Lake Street closer to campus with larger student populations. After thoroughly reviewing City Plan Principles and Policies, studying the Northside Neighborhoods Plan and re-examining the LMN District permitted uses and performance standards we conclude that the proposed multi-family project is clearly consistent with the requirements and purpose of the LMN District. Furthermore, the project would have many positive effects on the existing neighborhood and would benefit the larger community in the following ways: • Providing needed student housing in a managed setting where students can use transit and other alternative modes of transportation to access the CSU campus, shopping, services, employment and recreational opportunities. • Increasing the number of students living in managed multi-family developments will make existing rental houses in neighborhoods available for families. 34 • Vehicular and pedestrian connectivity will be improved by extending Suniga Street to the east. • Increasing the number of people living in the neighborhood walking and riding bikes to Old Town via the Redwood/Linden connection will increase both real and perceived safety in the existing neighborhood which has been a concern for existing residential areas. • The project will provide open spaces and trails that can be utilized by the larger neighborhood. Periodic doggie stations will be an added benefit and help to insure responsible pet ownership. • The project will preserve and integrate natural areas adjacent to the Lake Canal and south of Suniga Street where they provide wildlife habitat and have other community benefits. • The consistent and high quality landscape and building maintenance will enhance the image and identity of the larger neighborhood, one of the specific goals of the Northside Neighborhoods Plan. • Increasing the population in the area will benefit the commercial uses along North College Avenue, one of the City’s primary Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas as well as Downtown businesses. Lastly, in the interest of consistent plan review, we reviewed staff comments for Northfield, the multi-family project proposed adjacent to our site, southeast of the Lake Canal. The applicant for Northfield presented their conceptual site plan at a PDR Meeting in July and City Staff comments were provided on July 7 th . The Northfield project has many similarities to the Redwood Street multi-family project. The project proposes 479 dwelling units on 55 acres resulting in a density of 8.71 DU/AC. The project includes products ranging from 4-plex cottages to 12-unit buildings. Both projects are in the LMN District, both provide the requisite mix of housing types and the proposed densities are similar with Northfield’s being higher. Both projects have adequate parking, a centrally located clubhouse and small packet parks for residents to enjoy. Northfield received staff comments reflecting a variety of site plan issues, but rather than a comment saying the project was not appropriate in the LMN District or at this particular location, comment number 6 reads as follows: . Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/30/2017 06/30/2017: The plan complies with being within the L-M-N allowable range of density. The plan complies with the required mix of housing types. Please note that the “Cottage” product – 10 buildings (40 units) is classified in the Land Use Code as “Two Family Attached.” And, the “Cottage” product – 3 buildings (6 units) is classified as “Two Family Dwelling” (a.k.a. Duplex) which actually represents a fifth housing type. If the Northfield project is considered suitable in the LMN District and in this particular neighborhood, then Redwood Street multi-family is also appropriate. 35 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING PROJECT: Redwood Street Multi-Family LOCATION: East of Redwood Street and North of Suniga Road (extended) DATE:November 8, 2017 APPLICANT:Andrew Costas, Landmark Properties CONSULTANTS:Jon Williams, W&A Engineering Linda Ripley, Ripley Design Klara Rossouw, Ripley Design Stephanie Hansen, Ripley Design Nick Haws, Northern Engineering Cody Snowden, Northern Engineering Matt Delich, Delich and Associates Joe Delich, Delich and Associates CITY STAFF:Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, C.D.N.S. Neighborhood Liaison Responses: City of Fort Collins Developer/Consultant Team Project Description As proposed, this is a request to develop the parcel that is to the north, east and south of Meadows at Redwood P.U.D., Phase One which is east of Redwood Street and north of Suniga Road (as it would be extended east of Redwood Street to Lemay Avenue). The Lake Canal forms the southeastern boundary. The request is for student-oriented multi-family housing. There would be 190 dwelling units divided among 46 buildings. Leasing would be rent-by-the bedroom and there would be 739 bedrooms. The plan includes a total 739 parking spaces, a portion of which would be located within a three-level parking structure. This proposal is located in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood zone. The site is 30.16 acres. The neighborhood meeting was conducted using the open house format. This summary is derived from the comments provided to the City Planner, to the developer and to members of the developer’s consultant team. We have tried to capture all the comments we heard at the open house, including those provided on written comment cards. Replies from the City Planner are noted in red. Consultant responses are noted in green. Questions, Concerns, Comments 1. Will the Suniga / Realigned Lemay intersection, north of Vine Drive be signalized or a round-about? I’m concerned about northbound traffic descending an incline on the approach to the intersection with Suniga Road. Reply: This will be a signalized intersection. 36 2. I prefer the other type of a neighborhood meeting where there is a presentation. Also, I like to hear all the questions and answers. The open house format does not allow for a common conversation with affected property owners. Reply: If there is a follow-up neighborhood meeting, City staff will recommend the presentation with Q and A meeting format. Reply: The developer along with their consultant team are discussing with the City of Fort Collins regarding the format of the next neighborhood meeting, probably after we have received our first round of comments from City staff. The purpose of the next open house meeting will be to communicate with all attendees how the plan changed since they initially saw it and how comments were addressed as well as get additional comments from the neighborhood. The developer and their consulting team prefer the open house format which requires the developer/consultant team to spend more time engaging with the community than the presentation/Q and A meeting; we believe the investment is worth it for the following reasons: • Neighbors can drop by at a time that suits their schedule. This increases the numbers of neighbors that we get to hear from. • Neighbors can get specific information about their specific questions from the development/consultant team as well as from City representatives. They can do this in a friendly, non-intimidating way. We are willing to spend as much time as needed to communicate effectively. • The developer/consultant team gets to communicate with everyone that attends the open house. When the “presentation/Q and A meeting” is used, many people come and leave without saying a word. In an open house setting, neighbors are more likely to talk with project representatives on a one-to-one basis and share their thoughts, ideas and concerns. • Neighbors have an opportunity to see written comments made by other neighbors and can talk with their neighbors about the project at the open house. • A list of comments and questions along with responses will be sent to everyone that signed in. This way everybody receives the same information regarding the proposed project, even if they didn’t ask the same questions or participate in every discussion at the open house. 3. I live in Redwood Meadows and I am concerned about all the new traffic that is being directed on Lupine and Mullein. Reply: Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. Initially the development team was told by the City Planner that the proposed streets in the development plan must connect to Lupine and Mullein. If the City staff will allow it, the development team is interested in exploring more creative solutions that would reduce the traffic impact on the existing neighborhood. 4. I oppose student-oriented housing. This will be the third such type of project in the northeast area. Reply: For the 10th year in a row, Colorado State University set an overall enrollment record. In total, the university welcomed 33,413 students to CSU in 2017, of which about 28,000 are on- campus learners. Less than 25% of these students are housed on the CSU campus. The rest need to find privately owned housing in the community. We believe it is in the community’s best interest to have students live in managed student housing projects like the one being proposed. When students rent housing independently in neighborhoods, impacts such as noise, parking violations, occupancy violations, trash, etc. are much more common and difficult to correct. In addition, offering students a well planned and managed student- oriented complex increases the potential for rental houses in neighborhoods to become available for full time community residents and their families. 5. We live near Aspen Heights and we now see more vandalism in the area. 37 Reply: Landmark operates 24,500 student housing beds across the US. As such, our communities benefit from the experience we have gained managing a diverse student housing portfolio. As part of the entitlement process, Landmark is willing to commit to standards such as lease language that penalizes residents who do not abide by our code of conduct. Residents who violate our code of conduct would be subject to these requirements and would face eviction after 3 offenses. 6. Lupine and Mullein are too narrow and can’t handle all the new traffic. There is hardly any room for on-street parking for the folks who live there. Reply: Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. See response Number 3. 7. My input is that there should be no new traffic on Lupine and Mullein. Reply:. Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. See response Number 3. 8. I’m concerned about using out-of-state contractors. During the construction of Aspen Heights, we had problems with trash, construction debris, dust, etc. Reply: We have an in house general contractor who builds all of our cottage-style projects and will be the general contractor for this project. In Ft. Collins, just as we do in all other markets we work in, we will strive to identify qualified local subcontractors to work on the project. Our construction team has already spent time in Ft. Collins meeting with subcontractors with local knowledge and expertise. We are willing to provide the contact information for a member of our construction team to the neighborhood. This person will be accessible to the neighbors should any issues arise during construction. 9. Why do we need more student-oriented housing? Can the units be rented to non-students as well? Reply: Yes, the units are available to anyone who wishes to rent them. See comment response Number 4. 10. Will there be a shuttle? Reply: The developer has indicated that there will be a shuttle to campus. Reply: There will be a shuttle provided along with the completion of the project. 11. How many levels is the parking garage? Reply: Three levels. 12. I live in Redwood Meadows and I’m concerned about privacy and lighting levels behind my house. Reply: In general, the proposed buildings behind Redwood Meadows will be limited to two stories. If three-story buildings are sited adjacent to Redwood Meadows, but not within the proposed 35’ setback, care will be taken to insure privacy and obtrusive lighting levels do not impact adjacent residences. 13. What is the density of the project and does it comply with the zoning? Reply: The density is between 6 and 7 dwelling units per acre and does not exceed 9 dwelling units per acre and thus complies with the L-M-N zoning. 14. We live on the north side of Alta Vista and the new Suniga Road extension will be built near our house. We ask that the traffic noise and pollution associated with this new road be attenuated with an earthen berm and dense landscaping. Reply: The segment of Suniga Road (as extended) that will be near Alta Vista is considerably west of the proposed site and closer to Lemay. This segment will be constructed by the developer of the Schlagel / Northfield project, not this developer. 38 15. Is this parcel a part of the Northside Neighborhoods Plan or the Mountain Vista Plan? Reply: This parcel is part of the Northside Neighborhoods Plan. 16. As a follow up to my question, now that the northeast area of the City is experiencing growth and increased traffic, it seems these two sub-area plans are becoming out of date and need to be updated to address traffic impacts. Reply: The Planning Department and F.C. Moves (Transportation Planning) is beginning a comprehensive update of City Plan. Please contact Ryan Mounce in Planning (224-6186, rmounce@fcgov.com) or Aaron Iverson in F.C. Moves (416-2643, aiverson@fcgov.com) as the citizen participation phase is just beginning and now would be an opportune time address traffic issues in the northeast area. 17. Lupine is unable to handle all the new traffic. The project should have other entrances besides Lupine. Reply: A site plan was developed showing various accesses to the site. Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. See response Number 3. 18. I am the former president of the H.O.A. At the south end of our subdivision (Meadows at Redwood P.U.D., Phase One) there is an east-west gravel roadway that connects Redwood Drive to Mullein Drive. We have always been under the impression that this was our emergency second point of access but now it is blocked off. Is there a reason for this? Reply: Staff will alert the Poudre Fire Authority so they can assess the situation. 19. The proposed project appears to rely too much on Lupine and Mullein for access and circulation. I’m concerned that this will ruin our neighborhood. Reply: A site plan was developed showing various accesses to the site. Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. See response Number 3. 20. Does this project meet the mix of housing types required for projects over 30 acres? Reply: The applicant intends to provide four housing types as required. Three housing types include: two-family dwellings, multi-family dwellings 3-4 units per building and multi-family dwellings 5-7 units per building. The 4 th housing type is under consideration. 21. I would like Mullein to be blocked but remain available for Poudre Fire as a second point of emergency access by use of a gate, chain, bollards or something along those lines. Reply: Street closures/access limitations should be addressed by the City. The future TIS will reflect any access limitations. See response Number 3. 22. Will it be necessary to raise the grade on the 30 acre parcel? Will the new buildings be elevated above our houses? I’m concerned about the new buildings looming over our houses. Reply from Consulting Engineer: We do not expect to raise the grade because we have to accept the stormwater flowing onto to our property from upstream (west). These off-site flows, along with our stormwater, will flow to the northeast corner of the site into a stormwater detention pond. Grades will need to accommodate these storm flows so raising the site is not being proposed. 23. How will the regional trail connect to the exiting stub south of Old Town North? Where will the trail cross Redwood Street and Suniga? Reply: The crossings are not yet solidified at this time. A discussion has been initiated with the Parks Planning department and coordination between all departments will continue to ensure that the trail crosses in a safe and convenient place. 39 24. Is it a feasible option to put a roundabout at Redwood and Suniga? Speeds along Redwood and eventually Suniga will be a concern and a roundabout will be helpful in speed control. Reply: This suggestion will be forwarded to the City’s Engineering and Traffic Operations Departments. Reply: The City’s transportation staff would need to reply to this question. 25. Why isn’t there a street going out to Conifer? Reply: The property does not have any frontage along Conifer. A site plan was developed showing various accesses to the site. Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. 26. Will the pocket parks be maintained by the city or the developer? Will they be public or private? Reply: The pocket parks will be maintained by the developer, and the spaces will remain open to the public. Comment Cards Please don’t ruin the quiet, safe neighborhood of Redwood Meadows by extending Lupine and Mullein. My kids ride their bikes and we enjoy the close knit community – something the City strongly encourages. Find another way, we beg of you! See comment response number 3. Yet another development without the appropriate infrastructure (roads / transportation) in place before development proceeds. Very limited options for connectivity with this project. What about ensuring that Lemay by-pass, re-alignment of Vine, connecting Turnberry is accomplished before approval? Also “student” housing seems to be a euphemism for how many people can be crammed into less area – very top heavy on 4 – 5 bedrooms / unit. Would prefer a more formal “presentation” by applicant and Q & A afterwards; rather than “open house” format. Reply: See comment responses number 2, 3 and 16. I would like Redwood St. Multi-Family to be considered at the same time as Northfield. Because Suniga may need building out from Redwood to Lemay to address traffic and fire access. Outreach to Alta Vista should be immediate. What sub-area plan will Redwood St. M-F and Northfield belong to? Northside Neighborhoods, College Corridor, or Mtn. Vista? Please decide and address an update to all 3 plans because it borders all 3. Reply: The TIS for the Redwood Street MF has not yet been scoped with City staff. It is expected that the TIS will include traffic generated by the Northfield development. Concerned about mostly Suniga Rd and Northfield development on the existing historic Alta Vista neighborhood and how our existing view shed will be impacted. Also, heavy pollution and noise impact from Suniga with such dense development. Counting on City to ensure that developers construct the promised landscape berm adjacent to Alta Vista and ensure building height / mass is at least somewhat compatible with the existing neighborhood. Not opposed to student housing as long as public transportation is in play. Also, promote walking / biking as much as possible. Very concerned about traffic in Redwood HOA. Lupine and Mullein are not wide enough for a lot of traffic. How is the traffic going to be handled with all the trains? How much backup will you get on Lemay, Vine and Redwood? Reply: See comment response number 3. Traffic, traffic, traffic is a major nightmare here. More and more building and there’s no infrastructure. It’s time to move out of Fort Collins. I’m extremely disappointed in the lack of planning and attempting to get 40 around the area on a daily basis. There needs to be a turn lane at Vine and Lemay – should have been a long time ago. Reply: See comment response number 16. There are serious traffic issues, especially at Lemay and Vine that MUST be addressed prior to any new developments that will add traffic to the area. We need a short term solution to the Vine / Lemay intersection. Reply: See comment response number 16. When are you going to quite catering to CSU? Why do you have to open Lupine and Mullein? Why don’t you have a meeting where people can voice? 729 cars on Lupine, plus neighborhood traffic one-way? Reply: See comment responses 2 and 3. I would like to see a landscape and 6-foot fence buffer be used to separate the neighborhoods. There is concern with the noise generated by the new neighborhood after 9:00 p.m. I reside along single family homes that have earlier bedtimes than college students mostly. Please entertain keeping access from new neighborhood only for emergency vehicles. Reply: The developer is committed to providing a minimum 35-foot setback, a new continuous 6-foot privacy fence, and landscape buffering between Redwood Meadows and the nearest proposed buildings. Also see comment response number 3. This area does not need another rent-by-the-bedroom project similar to Aspen Heights. The type of tenants these projects attract are very bad neighbors in general. They have not vested interest in being good neighbors. Rent-by-the-bedroom project shouldn’t be allowed to develop so close to other similar nearby projects so as to not dwarf single family and more permanent multi-family homes. Spread these projects at least one mile away from each other. Reply: See comment response number 4. Will there be cut-off lighting? Will there be fences? Can there be speed bumps on Redwood? Reply: Site lighting shall be full cut-off for the entire site. A fence shall be along Redwood meadows neighborhood to provide privacy and screening from the development. Traffic impacts will be addressed in the future TIS. We at Meadows at Redwood have the following concerns” a. We would like to find alternate solutions to the connecting streets. If this must happen please keep our streets kid safe, possible speed bumps etc. b. Setbacks need to be at least 35’ from property line c. Higher story buildings further away from neighborhood. d. Zero bleed lighting, all lighting pointed down e. Adequate drainage and no build up ground to prevent flooding again. Reply: 35’ setback is already shown and considered along Redwood Meadows In general, the proposed buildings behind Redwood Meadows will be limited to two stories. If three-story buildings are sited adjacent to Redwood Meadows, but not within the proposed 35’ setback, care will be taken to insure privacy and obtrusive lighting levels do not impact adjacent residences. For clarification on the site drainage, see response to #22, above. We hope a stop light goes in on Redwood and Suniga before occupancy. Reply: This suggestion will be forwarded to the City’s Engineering and Traffic Operations Departments. 41 Development Review Checklist Prepared by CSU for Project: Redwood Street Multi-Family, PDR 170011 Bike Parking ☒ Outdoor racks: ● Position close to entrance, for ease of access ● Consider using alternative paving to assist with storm water drainage ● Provide cover ● Well lit at night for safety/ security ● video ☐ Secure, locking cage ☐ Indoor bike parking room Tailored Recommendations: ● To determine the number of rack spaces, refer to City of Fort Collins Land Use Code Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards ● At CSU housing developments, we provide bike rack spaces for 80% of beds. If students don’t have access to adequate outdoor parking, they will want to bring their bike indoors. ● Higher-capacity racks will provide the most efficient use of space. CSU uses Cora Expo 7510 Series Racks (http://cora.com.au/bikeracks/multiplebikeracks/). ● Refer to CSU Aesthetic Guidelines pg 2-11 for landscaping and placement tips for outdoor racks (https://www.fm.colostate.edu/files/forms/aesthetic_guidelines.pdf) Bike Repair Stations ☒ Include tools and air pump, indoors if possible Tailored Recommendations: CSU students are more likely to ride their bikes when they are well-maintained, and may stop riding due to easily-prevented issues such as a flat tire or squeaky chain. Providing a fix-it station with tools and a pump can help students to keep their bikes in working condition. CSU uses the Dero Fixit stands at high-traffic areas on campus (https://www.dero.com/product/fixit/) When you add a repair station, please notify City of FC to add to their list of stations across the City. Bike Share ☐ Zagster station (consistent with FC Bike Share system) or internal fleet of loaner bikes Tailored Recommendations: Consider sponsoring a Zagster bike share station on-site to help connect students to existing bike share stations on campus, in Old Town and throughout the community. Car share ☒ Zipcar: provide dedicated parking space for car share vehicle in a high-visibility area Tailored Recommendations: Certifications ☒ Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) ☒ Bicycle Friendly Business ☐ Best Workplace for Commuters Tailored Recommendations: Find info about the selected recommendations here: ● LEED (https://new.usgbc.org/leed) ● Bicycle Friendly Business (http://www.bikeleague.org/business) Commuter/Inclusive Amenities ☐ Break Rooms ☐ Meditation Rooms ☐ Lactation Rooms Tailored Recommendations: The Commuter/Inclusive Amenities are typically recommended at worksites, and have not been selected for this residential project. Electric Vehicle ☒ 8 single or 4 dual chargers ☒ Conduit: size to accommodate future growth ☒ Signed Spaces ☐ LEV / LEED Parking Tailored Recommendations: Plan for future EV needs. Longboard Racks ☒ Station close to front entrance for ease of access ☒ Recommended rack type: Board Loch Spartan 7 or Spartan 14 (https://boardloch.com/) Tailored Recommendations: n/a Resources/Programs ☒ Recruitment Promotion: Include transportation amenities in brochure and advertising; cost saving associated with non-drive alone commuting ☒ Post Map of nearby Transit Stops ☒ Post Map of nearby Bike Routes ☒ Provide transportation resources on website ☒ Post Carpool matching board ☒ Provide Bike Share Membership to residents (Fort Collins Bike Share) ☒ Provide Car Share Membership to residents (ZipCar) Tailored Recommendations: ● Feature the Transfort Routes 8 and 81 (run on Redwood St. and connects to Downtown Transit Center) ● Help direct residents to nearby bike routes, including Redwood St, Linden St and the Poudre Trail Separated Bicycle and Pedestrian trails ☐ Provide logical, easy, safe connections to existing network. Tailored Recommendations: Provide clear, safe connection to bike lane on Redwood St. For guidance, refer to City and University Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans: ● 2014 City of Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan: https://www.fcgov.com/bicycling/bike-plan.php ● 2014 CSU Bicycle Master Plan: https://www.fm.colostate.edu/files/forms/BikeMasterPlan_2014.pdf Shuttle Service to Campus ☐ Shuttle Service to Campus: Provide private shuttle to CSU campus for residents; CSU will make every attempt to accommodate shuttle space at Campus Transit Center ☐ Uber/Lyft dropoff Tailored Recommendations: Provide location for shuttles and TNCs to drop off at your facility without blocking bike lanes, parking, etc. Identify with signage. Sidewalks/Accessible Routes ☐ Alignment with ADA crossing on opposite side of street, refer to Larimer County LUCAS (Local Universal Design for Sight or Mobility Impaired) Tailored Recommendations: n/a Transit ☒ Shelter ☒ Post schedules and route maps of buses served by stop ☒ Coordination with Transfort to move existing stop ☐ NextBus Digital Screen located in lobby or at bus stop Tailored Recommendations: ● Type III (shelter) stop (new) – includes pad and amenities. ● Post schedule and route maps in common area(s). Note: schedules/maps would be placed in future shelter by the City. ● Provide screen in lobby to show when next buses will arrive. Vehicle Parking ☐ Ratio Parking to Tenants ☐ Covered Vehicle Parking Tailored Recommendations: n/a Wayfinding ☐ Install signage for bicycle and pedestrian routes consistent with City Standards (http://www.fcgov.com/bicycling/wayfinding.php) Tailored Recommendations: n/a RETREAT AT FORT COLLINS CSU DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST RESPONSES March 21st, 2018 1. Bike Parking We will be providing bike racks for 100% of bed on the property as required by City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. 2. Bike Repair Stations We will provide a bike repair station on site. It is currently located near the clubhouse and adjacent to the regional trail. 3. Car Share We are open to providing ZipCar spaces on the site. We will engage with ZipCar to see if they would like to have spaces on our property. 3. Certifications (LEED) See attached Green Letter. 4. Bicycle Friendly Business Our property will meet many of the criteria for this certification and we will certainly be bike friendly, but we will not pursue getting the certification. The Retreat at Fort Collins is providing adequate bike parking on the site, and will have alternative bike and pedestrian paths that provide safe connectivity throughout the neighborhood. 5. Electric Vehicle Either 4 single or 2 dual chargers will be provided on site within the parking structure. 6. Longboard Racks Longboard racks will be provided at the clubhouse. 7. Resources/Programs Post maps of nearby transit stops a. Post Map of nearby Transit Stops – yes b. Post Map of nearby Bike Routes – yes c. Provide transportation resources on website – yes d. Post Carpool matching board – yes e. Bike share – We will approach Fort Collins Bike Share about providing a station at our property. f. ZipCar – We will approach ZipCar about providing spaces on site. g. Feature Transfort Routes 8 & 81 – yes h. Help direct residents to nearby bike routes – yes 8. Seperated Bike/Pedestrian Paths a. Provide clear, safe connection to bike land on Redwood Street – yes 9. Shuttle We will provide a designated location for our shuttle drop off/pick up at our site. 10. Transit a. Our site will be building a Type III bus shelter per the direction of Transfort along Redwood Street. b. Post schedules and route maps of buses served by stop – yes c. Coordination with Transfort to move existing stop – See point “a”. d. Type III stop including pad and amenities – See point “a”. e. Post schedule and route maps in common areas – yes f. Provide screen in lobby to show when next buses will arrive – Residents can access bus/shuttle schedule via our app/ mobile website. 315 Oconee Street , Athens, GA 30601 P: 706.543.1910, F: 706.543.1909 www.landmark-properties.com February 14, 2018 To whom it may concern, In regards to our project, The Retreat at Ft. Collins Clubhouse will be a multi-use clubhouse facility containing property management offices, workout, and recreational facilities, along with study lounges. The clubhouse, which will be constructed with the Green initiative in mind, is within an approximately 30-acre development consisting of residential units, ample open/green space, a swimming pool, outdoor grounds, and native landscaping. In an effort to use as many Green Building Practices as we can, Landmark intends on using the following products and practices throughout the construction process. Some of the materials that we use to increase indoor air quality include formaldehyde free insulation, low VOC paints and sealants, and low VOC floor covering and carpet. Our plumbing fixtures that we use are low consumption. The interior trim that we use is either MDF or finger jointed material, both of which are recycled products. Energy efficient windows and doors, which in most cases surpass current energy requirements, are integrated into the structure. Light fixtures are either LED or Fluorescent, as to reduce energy consumption. HVAC systems that we are currently using meet, and in most cases exceed the current minimum SEER requirements. The plumbing fixtures that we use are low-flow, low consumption. Recycling and the use of recycled products and components are some of the Green exercises that are used in construction of the clubhouse. This is achieved by conscientious waste disposal techniques, as well as the use of materials containing recycled content such as drywall, cultured stone, MDF and finger jointed trim. Landmark also makes every attempt to source and procure materials from vendors that are local and within close proximity of the jobsite in such a way as to reduce the impact of shipping and transportation. Landmark Cottage Construction, LLC is proud to build with an environmental purpose and provide a state of the art facility for the surrounding Ft. Collins community. Respectfully,