HomeMy WebLinkAboutHANSEN FARM - PDP - PDP170036 - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSCommunity 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
October 13, 2017
TB Group
444 Mountain Ave
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Hansen Farm, PDP170036, Round Number 1
Comment Summary:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/10/2017: The project will need to design the roadway and bike/ped connections
to adjacent developable properties to the south and west. As part of the PDP,
preliminary offsite design 500 feet from the property boundary is required.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: There appears to be a different lineweight designation on the plans for
the roadway network south of the Street A/Street B intersection on the site and civil
plans. Is this to imply that this portion of roadway network is not to be constructed at
the time of this PDP?
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The roundabout depicted on the plans City Transportation staff as a
whole, has some general concerns on the operational characteristic. Its close
proximity to the Zephyr Road/Timberline Road intersection we believe will not
function very well. The first intersection from the Zephyr/Timberline intersection
would need to be placed further west/northwest.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The "Commercial Connection" street south of the roundabout appears
to not be designed to a commercial local standard width and additionally the
centerline radius and awkward termination would not appear to meet criteria. Its full
design and right-of-way dedication to commercial local standards should occur and
the construction of the roadway to the property boundary with proper cul-termination
or planned connection to another street, occur with the development.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for
your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may
contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Pete Wray, at
970-221-6754 or pwray@fcgov.com.
Page 1 of 16
10/10/2017: As a heads-up, the Crowne on Timberline project established a
reimbursement agreement with the City for installing roadway infrastructure abutting
the development. The reimbursement to Crowne for the abutting Rosen Drive will be
required prior to the first building permit.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: What are the implications on the infrastructure shown on Tracts C & D.
There are detention ponds and a sanitary main that would seem to cause
restrictions on the amount of area that can be developed on these tracts. The
establishment of utility and/or drainage easements would be needed on the plat and
it seem that the detention ponds themselves should be on their own distinct tracts.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: In general there are additional access ramps that should be provided
on street turns and consideration for access ramps for the sidewalk/bike paths that
extend from the public streets. There some instances where depicted trails can
better align with proposed paths without offsets.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The use of mid block crosspans appear to be problematic in several
locations as these coincide with the pedestrian paths that need access ramps, the
plans appear to be directing bikes and peds from these paths to the crosspans. The
use of inlets and pipes offset from the access ramps would appear to be more
appropriate. Note that any use of culverts require the metal plate extended out to the
flowline of the street.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The design for Timberline Road should be including an ultimate design
that establishes the flowline, curb gutter and sidewalk on the east side of Timberline
north of Bacon Elementary as evidence of the sufficient establishment of
right-of-way and road width. Coordination on this design information with the
Timberline Road capital improvement project would be important as well, as there
may need to be additional offsite design to the north to consider existing restrictions
(existing trees, etc.) that would alter centerline roadways alignment and impact the
ability to implement ultimate improvements along Timberline. At time of final plan this
would also require cross sections at 50 foot intervals to demonstrate that the
additional widening on the west side is in the ultimate condition upon the
construction of the widening on the east side.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The right turn lane from Timberline Road onto Street D falls short of
taper requirements and would need to be extended north in accordance with Figure
8-5 of LCUASS.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: With the widening of Timberline Road frontage there is a general
concern on the interim striping that would be installed to allow the operation of the
Timberline Road in the interim until the City capital project to widen Timberline With
the widening of Timberline Road frontage there is a general concern on the interim
striping that would be installed to allow the operation of the Timberline Road in the
interim until the City capital project to widen Timberline north and south of the
development. This interim striping would need to be milled as it would not be in the
proper location in the ultimate condition after the City project. Coordination with
Capital Projects and Traffic Operations on the implications of the interim striping
should ensue. A solution in this regard is that the project would need to provide
funds for the milling of Timberline Road for striping that is interim as reimbursement
to the City for the work that would ultimately need to occur to establish the final lane
lines with the capital project.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Page 2 of 16
10/10/2017: The use of buffered bike lane striping on Zephyr, Timberline, and the
Commercial Local street should be depicted on the plans.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: A subsurface water investigation report in accordance with 6.6.2 With
the groundwater being found in depths from existing grade at depth of 9 to 15 feet
below ground surface, along with excavation in areas of depths of in excess of 5
feet, combined with the borings having taken place outside of the wet/ditch running
season, and the report indicating consideration of an underdrain system, the report
should be prepared for review. In general, is an underdrain system being considered
for the overall development?
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/11/2017: Street D is shown as a full movement access which was viewed as a
concern with the ODP. A restricted limited access should be designed with the
project, perhaps with the use of a porkchop for right-in, right-out access, until such
time as the likely median to restrict access on Timberline is implemented as part of
the capital project.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/11/2017: Has there been any feedback from the Rennat property on the
establishment of the roadway and bike/ped network that would continue on their
property?
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
09/27/2017: the project owes an additional $9,390.13 for the TDRF PDP fees. The
acerage was not included on the form or in the calculation and once that is
calculated in and the adjustment for the fee being over $30,000 the total fee amount
due is: $38,040.13 and with $28,650 paid $9,390.13 remains due.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/13/2017: Unfortunately, the majority of the Ecological Characterization Study
(ECS) document provided largely contains outdated field data that is 5 years old and
in some cases more than 10 years old. City Environmental Planning Development
Review Staff need updated field data documenting current existing conditions,
collected at the most appropriate time of year, and as soon as possible. Current,
existing conditions or baseline field data is needed in order for staff to make the
most appropriate and accurate decisions in applying City of Fort Collins Land Use
Code standards outlined in Section 3.4.1 Natural Habitats and Features. The ECS
submitted with this PDP first round submittal is not detailed enough or up-to-date
enough to be accepted.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
Page 3 of 16
10/13/2017: Because the Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) submitted 10
days prior to this PDP submittal cannot be accepted, this project has not complied
with Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.4.1 (D)(1), as the site is within five hundred
feet (500 ft) of known natural features (wetlands; Mail Creek Ditch; riparian habitat;
unnamed lateral ditches; potential roosting site). Buffer standards range from fifty to
one hundred feet (50 to 100 ft) for these features [LUC 3.4.1(E)]. The ECS must
meet all criteria outlined in LUC 3.4.1(D). Note for this project site:
a. As it is currently mid-October, meaning the growing season is ending, the fully
updated wetland delineations for the entire proposed project site must now be based
upon 2018 growing season (May to October) data.
b. The fully updated ECS shall also include fully updated raptor and other bird of prey
surveys to be completed January through March 2018.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: Regarding the Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) that was
submitted with this first round PDP submittal and that is not acceptable for use to
inform the design of the proposed project:
a. The ECS states ¿the grass/alfalfa and grass hayfields are non-native habitats
that have been planted after clearing native vegetation and woody species, and as a
result, support no natural habitat features and have minimal ecological and wildlife
habitat value.¿ During an onsite visit by Environmental Planning staff on August 23,
2017, the hayfields and alfalfa were supporting several native pollinator species
including bees and many butterflies, including several of the Nature in the City bird
and butterfly indicator species. For more information about Nature in the City wildlife
survey data see this online blog written by Liba Pejchar and Sarah Reed,
Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology and principal investigators
for Conservation Development Global Challenges Research Team:
http://blog.sustainability.colostate.edu/?q=conservation-development
b. A large stick-nest was observed along southern property boundary by staff on
August 23, 2017, during an onsite visit. Please have the ecological consultant
reference this stick nest and report back on what species might be utilizing this
nest.
c. Wetlands associated with all ditches must be delineated for soils, hydrology and
vegetation especially as there may be impacts to these areas due to regional trail
connections and/or street crossings and bike and pedestrian crossings of the
ditches.
d. The small wetland must be delineated and the soils, hydrology and vegetation
assessed. Data provided in the ECS submitted is five years old AND that data
reported the wetland as 0.29 acres, which, is near the threshold to trigger a larger
buffer (less than third acre is 50 feet whereas greater than a third acre is 100 feet).
e. The ECS states the ¿Corps letter is incorrect and should be January 16, 2013 not
January 16, 2012,¿ however, City staff need verification it was simply a mistake,
human error or typo. Please have the ecological consultant provide evidence to
support the ECS statement regarding the Army Corps of Engineers letter date.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
Page 4 of 16
10/13/2017: The ECS informs the design of the natural habitat buffer zone(s) for a
development site according to quantitative standards and/or qualitative performance
standards outlined in LUC 3.4.1(E). Since City staff has not received an ECS
document informed by acceptable data, staff cannot make necessary decisions
regarding this proposed development project at this time.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: Prior to Hearing and once updated 2018 field data has been collected
to inform an acceptable ECS is received, please provide the following in a table on
the site plan:
1) The total acreage required by a standard 50 ft (or 100 ft as appropriate) buffer
zone for the Mail Creek Ditch, all other ditches and associated wetlands and the
small wetland in the middle of the property (e.g. the minimum buffer square footage
required).
2) The total acreage or square footage of the proposed natural habitat buffer zone
that will be provided by the site design and layout.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: The “top of bank” for each ditch needs to be clearly delineated and
labeled on site, grading, utility and landscape plans. Top of bank refers to the
topographical break in slope between the bank and the surrounding terrain. When a
break in slope cannot be found, the outer limits of vegetation shall demark the top of
bank. Currently it is not clear on the site plan where the line labeled “natural area 50’
buffer offset” is being measured from; clarification is needed.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: The Natural Habitat Buffer Zone will need to be delineated and labeled
on the site, grading, utility, and landscape plan. Please add an Environmental
Planner signature to all utility plans that show the buffer zone.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: Add the following note on all sheets of the site, landscape, photometric
and utility plans that show the Habitat Buffer: “The Natural Habitat Buffer Zone is
intended to be maintained in a native landscape. Please see Section 3.4.1 of the
Land Use Code for allowable uses within the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone.” This will
help preserve the intention behind the buffer zones and the natural features into the
future.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: There shall be no encroachment into the 50 ft natural habitat buffer
zone please remove the following lots from the buffer zone by shortening/lessening
their size:
a. Sheet 8 LP – lot 18
b. Sheet 9 LP – Lots 25, 26
c. Sheet 10 LP – Lots 12, 11, 9, 8, 7, 6
d. Sheet 17 LP – Lots 3, 2, 1
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: Please clarify what is meant by “tree by owner” note on Sheet 10 LP
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: This project will require an entirely separate landscape sheet showing
only natural habitat buffer zone design and specs including cross-sections.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
Page 5 of 16
10/13/2017: Much more plantings and enhancements will be needed in the natural
habitat buffer zone design than is currently proposed.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: Clarify in Tract F where the wetland is, its size and delineation and
standard buffer drawn from its edges.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: A separate in-person design meeting for the natural habitat buffer zone
is necessary prior to another round of submittal and review. In addition, this meeting
should be informed by a fully updated ECS reporting on current and existing onsite
natural resource conditions.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: 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 interest may be:
1) ClimateWise program: http://fcgov.com/climatewise, contact Heidi Wagner
at970-416-2230 or climatewise@fcgov.com
2) Zero Waste Plan and the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program
(WRAP): http://fcgov.com/recycling/wrap.php, contact Jonathon Nagel at
970-416-2701 or jnagel@fcgov.com
3) Green Building Program: http://fcgov.com/greenbuilding contact Tony Raeker at
970-416-4238 or traeker@fcgov.com
4) Solar Energy: www.fcgov.com/solar, contact Rhonda Gatzke at 970-416-2312 or
rgatzke@fcgov.com
5) Integrated Design Assistance Program: http://fcgov.com/idap, contact Gary
Schroeder at 970-224-6003 or gschroeder@fcgov.com
6) Nature in the City Program: http://fcgov.com/natureinthecity, contact Justin
Scharton at 970-221-6213 or jscharton@fcgov.com
7) Bike Share Program: http://fcgov.com/bikeshare, contact Stacy Sebeczek at Bike
Fort Collins at stacy@bikefortcollins.org or 970-481-5577
8) Urban Agriculture: http://fcgov.com/urbanagriculture, contact Spencer Branson at
970-224-6086 or sbranson@fcgov.com. In addition, the Northern Colorado Food
Cluster is sponsored and supported by the City of Fort Collins. The executive
Director, Brad Christensen, can be reached at director@nocofoodcluster.org.
Please consider City sustainability goals and ways this development can engage
with these efforts. Let me know if I can help connect you to these programs.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
10/13/2017: City staff recognize the information delivered during Staff Review on
October 11, 2017, is most likely not ideal for the Applicant. However, staff cannot in
good faith make appropriate decisions regarding this project and appropriately apply
natural resource protections standards outlined in the Land Use Code until a fully
updated ECS with current data and existing conditions is received. Please contact
me directly for any further question or concerns regarding scope and requirements
necessary for the ECS. Stephanie Blochowiak, Environmental Planner,
sblochowiak@fcgov.com, 970-416-4290
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
Page 6 of 16
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
10/10/2017:
Continued:
Please interpret what ‘XXX’ stands for in the Existing Tree Schedule. If trees are to
be removed, state YES. If trees are to be retained, state NO under the TO BE
REMOVED column. Provide the total mitigation required.
In addition, please clarify what ‘xxx’ stands for under quantity in the plant list.
8/23/2017:
A site visit with Kristin Turner occurred on 8/23/2017 to complete the on-site tree
inventory and mitigation meeting. Please include the tree inventory and mitigation
information to the landscape plans.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
There appears to be some discrepancies on Sheet 6 in regards to Tree Inventory
details. Trees L5, L7, L22 should be shown as TO BE REMOVED on the
enlargement. It would be helpful to see trees to be removed marked with an “X” on
the enlargement.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Species Selection:
City Forestry does not recommend using Red Sunset Maple because they do not
reliably survive or thrive in Fort Collins soils. In addition, English Oak suffered some
freeze damage during the 2014 freeze. Forestry would prefer not to use them on
this project. Please incorporate other tree species such as Kentucky Coffeetree,
Catalpa, Shumard Oak, and Texas Red Oak.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Please use the most recent version of the City of Fort Collins General Landscape
notes which are available from City Forestry (Molly Roche – mroche@fcgov.com).
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Include locations of any water or sewer lines on the landscape plan. Please adjust
street tree locations to provide for proper tree/utility separation.
10’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines
6’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer service lines
4’ between trees and gas lines
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Show location of any stop signs and street lights. Identify these fixtures with a
distinct symbol. Space trees if needed as follows.
Stop Signs: 20 feet from sign
Street Light: 40 feet for canopy shade trees and 15 feet for ornamental trees
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Page 7 of 16
10/10/2017:
The majority of the lots are 60 feet or less. The LUC states that only one street tree
per lot is required on lots that are 60 feet or less. The current plan does not
incorporate this comment.
If two (2) or more consecutive residential lots along a street each measure between
forty (40) and sixty (60) feet in street frontage width, one (1) tree per lot may be
substituted for the thirty-foot to forty-foot spacing requirement. Such street trees
shall be placed at least eight (8) feet away from the edges of driveways and alleys,
and forty (40) feet away from any streetlight and to the extent reasonably feasible, be
positioned at evenly spaced intervals.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Please provide a typical lot detail including driveways, street lights, sidewalks, and
street trees. Street trees should be spaced at least 8 feet from curb cuts or
driveways.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Will the interior streets be public or private? Please label all streets on the landscape
plans.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
The symbol for irrigated turf is a little hard to interpret on the landscape plans.
Please darken the symbol and be sure to show irrigated turf within the right-of-ways
throughout the development.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/10/2017:
Please clarify what the TREE BY OWNER symbol stands for.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Department: Historic Preservation
Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221-6206, mbzdek@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/03/2017: Regarding future development plans for the NC portion of the Hansen
Farm, the historic review of eligibility of the brick residence at 6029 S Timberline on
September 7, 2017 concluded that the property is eligible for local landmark
designation under Fort Collins Standards B (association with significant historic
persons) and C (architecture). No appeals of the decision were received during the
two-week public posting. This recent review updates that determination and
underscores that Land Use Code section 3.4.7, which guides how developments
must treat identified historic resources, will come into play for any future NC district
development proposals for that parcel. Staff can provide resources and consultation
for adaptive reuse options when the timing for that discussion is right.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/03/2017
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Sarah Carter, 970-416-2748, scarter@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Page 8 of 16
10/11/2017: 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.
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017.
Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF.
Frost Depth: 30 inches.
Wind Load: 129vult or 100- MPH 3 Second Gust Exposure B.
Seismic Design: Category B.
Climate Zone: Zone 5
Energy Code Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2015 IRC Chapter 11 or 2015
IECC.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/11/2017: Colorado State statute CRS 9-5 requires this project provide
accessible units. This project has 62 applicable units (townhomes) and will need to
achieve at least 30 points.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Austin Kreager, , akreager@fcgov.com
Topic: General
09/27/2017: Light and Power can serve this development with either single phase or
three phase electric distribution. Power can be tied in from the north west corner of
the future development as well as further south on Timberline. (If three phase is
going to be needed, notify light and power ASAP)
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
09/27/2017: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges
and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
09/27/2017: As your project begins to move forward please contact Light and Power
Engineering to coordinate the streetlight, transformer and electric meter locations,
please show the locations on the utility plans.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
09/27/2017: Multi family buildings are treated as commercial services; therefore a(C
1) form must be filled out and submitted to Light & Power Engineering. All
secondary electric service work is the responsibility of the developer and their
electrical consultant or contractor.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
09/27/2017: Streetlights will be placed along public streets. A 40 feet separation on
both sides of the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. A 15 feet
separation on both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and
streetlights.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
Page 9 of 16
09/27/2017: You may contact FCU Light & Power, project engineering if you have
questions. (970) 221-6700. You may reference Light & Power¿s Electric Service
Standards at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_F
INAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Terry Ferrill, ,
Topic: General
10/10/2017:
The Fort Collins – Loveland Water District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation
District have reviewed the above mentioned project and submit the following
comments.
The submittal did not meet minimum district requirements for review. The Districts
are working with the engineer to revise references, notes, standard construction
requirements, etc.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 226-3104, ext. 104, if you have any
questions or require additional information.
Respectfully,
Mr. Terry W. Farrill, P.E.
District Engineer
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Suzanne Bassinger, 970-416-4340, sbassinger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Page 10 of 16
10/11/2017:
1. Identify and label a 50’ wide “Public Access Trail Easement” for the future
extension of the Fossil Creek Paved Recreational Trail located on the north property
boundary. The access easement can overlay the Habitat Buffer. The easement
shall be identified on the plat and the utility plans as “Public Access Trail Easement”.
A preliminary alignment of the 10’ wide paved trail surface shall be shown within the
easement and must be approved by Park Planning & Development.
2. The Fossil Creek Recreational Trail alignment will continue south to the
intersection of Timberline and Zephyr Roads, and shall be located on the west side
of Timberline Road, as shown on the PDP. The word “interim” can be removed
from the identifying label. Construction of a future underpass will allow trail users to
continue east across Timberline; the schedule (and funding) for construction has
not been identified. The ADA ramp at the northwest corner of Timberline and
Zephyr should be constructed to allow a full-size pickup with snow plow to access
the trail.
3. Neighborhood parks are ideally 10-aces; they can be reduced in size if it is
determined all required elements can be located within the site. Tract B represents
approximately one-half of the area required for the proposed Fossil Lake
Neighborhood Park located in this area. The presence of the existing irrigation
lateral on Tract B precludes the ability to locate a playing field on the tract as
currently sized. The site needs to be configured to accommodate, at a minimum, a
280’x160’ playing field. In addition a 50’ buffer is required between any adjacent road
ROW and the edge of the field.
4. Sheet U4: An 18” diameter sleeve must be placed along with the construction of
Street A, just north of the intersection with Zephyr Road, and must be shown on the
Utility Plans. The sleeve will extend from Tract B to the utility easement located on
the north side of Zephyr Road. The sleeve will be used for installation of a future
irrigation raw-water line from a raw water storage pond on Tract B (or a future
enlarged neighborhood park site on the adjacent property) to an off-site
neighborhood park north of Bacon Elementary School.
5. Sheet U5: To accommodate the construction of the future irrigation delivery line
from Tract B to the offsite location the utility easement shown as 9’ on the south
side of Tract D (north side of Zephyr Road) must be increased to 15’ wide. The
easement language (on both the plat and utility plans) should include the following:
“To include construction of future irrigation delivery line by City”.
6. All easements must be identified and labeled on both the plat and utility plans.
7. Park Planning & Development is available to meet with the project owners and
consultants to discuss these comments in more depth and to review preliminary
documents and/or designs. Contact: Suzanne Bassinger, 970-416-4340.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Page 11 of 16
10/08/2017: HYDRANT SPACING
> Hydrant spacing within the residential portions of this proposed plan are
satisfactory. No further changes are required.
> Hydrant spacing within the commercial portions of the plan do not meet the 600'
maximum separation distances. Hydrants to be relocated and/or added so as to
meet minimum standards.
> Hydrant separation along Timberline exceeds maximum allowable distances. The
existing separation is nearly 1,700' between hydrants. An additional hydrant will need
to be added unless otherwise approved by the fire marshal.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/08/2017
10/08/2017: AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM
> All single-family attached homes will require a residential fire sprinkler system.
Contact the Building Dept. for further details.
> Single-family detached homes may require a sprinkler system based upon Site
Plan non-compliance relative to separation distance between accessible roads. See
comment #5 below.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/08/2017
10/08/2017: 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.
> This requirement cannot be met for all portions of the development without the
alley (Tract H) becoming a fire lane.
> Any private alley serving as a fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency
Access Easement (EAE) and be designed to standard fire lane specifications.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/08/2017
10/08/2017: FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS
Any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements:
> Shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement.
> Maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum
overhead clearance.
> Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40
tons.
> Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with
an approved area for turning around fire apparatus.
> The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of
25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. 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.
> Dead-end roads shall not exceed 660' in length without providing for a second
point of access.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/08/2017
Page 12 of 16
10/08/2017: DEAD-END FIRE LANES (see also #7 below)
The conceptual plan creates a dead-end condition that is non-compliant with
minimum standards as it pertains to separation distances between access points to
this developement. Where compliance with the code is not feasible, the fire marshal
may approve the existing condition as is, or he may approve it with the expectation
that every residence be equipped with a residential fire sprinkler system.
> IFC 503.2.5, Appendix D, and FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006: Dead-end fire apparatus
access roads cannot exceed 660 feet in length.
> IFC D107.2: Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be
placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum
overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line
between accesses.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/08/2017
10/08/2017: 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 75' 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.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/08/2017
10/13/2017: FOLLOW-UP TO CITY STAFF MEETING ON 10/11/2017:
I spoke with Fire Marshal, Bob Poncelow today regarding minimal separation
distance between access points into and out of the proposed Hansen Farm
development. In brief, he believes the two, currently proposed points of access onto
Timberline do not meet minimum code requirements as defined by IFC D107.2.
In order to resolve this non-compliance issue, he would either require Single-Family
homes on the western portion of the site to be equipped with a fire sprinkler system
OR approve a temporary fire lane connection to Rosen Dr. to effectively increase
the separation distance between access points. This would be the same solution
which the project team and I briefly discussed at the end of the city staff meeting on
10/11/17. Please contact me with any questions.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwray@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
For the SF attached buildings, need to have at least three different building model
designs. Building elevations will show all four sides and identify distinct design
features such as architectural design articulation, materials, colors, roof forms,
massing and other characteristics per LUC Section 3.5.2 (C) (2).
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Page 13 of 16
Topic: General
10/13/2017: Another formal round of review is needed. Contact me prior to
submittal for routing information.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/13/2017
Topic: Landscape Plans
10/10/2017: Cover sheet should have overall landscape plan. Move sheet 5 to last
in set.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: All sheets - street trees and parkway landscaping is the responsibility
of the developer, see landscape notes to use on plans and remove reference to
individual homeowners.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: For the upper lots that are adjacent to existing lots in Willow Springs
subdivision, add additional trees along buffer area.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: For SF attached buildings, need more detail for shrub and ground
cover foundation planting, including material type, quantities and sizes on plan and in
legend. This can be
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Topic: Plat
10/10/2017: Enlargement sheets need match lines and index diagram on each
sheet. Why not use this same number of enlargement sheets (7) for the site and
landscape plans as well? These enlargements are better to read than smaller
sections in other sets.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Topic: Site Plan
10/10/2017: Site Plan cover sheet should have overall plan on 1st page with index
of enlargement areas, signature blocks, legal description and land use summary
table showing land and building data, gross and net densities etc. The more
detailed table can be on other sheet. The details can be on last sheet with notes.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
See updated site plan notes I have included with this review.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: SF attached units - front entry walks and how they connect to street
needs more thought. Walks need to be further separated from front courtyards to
maximize entry landscaping and foundation planting. Circle templates are forced in
small space. Angles of walk intersections needs more work.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: Sheets 2-5 that show enlargement plan areas all need index diagram.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: Page 1 - Between lots 12 and 13, add soft surface walk to connect to
perimeter open area, similar to other cut-through paths.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: Sheet 4: See redlines. Label tract B as MMN and 3 ac park. Remove
future drive in NC area.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Page 14 of 16
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
09/27/2017: Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet
requirements. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design
Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. a copy of the
erosion control requirements can be found at www.fcgov.com/eroison. The Erosion
Control Materials will need to be submitted at time of the first round of FDP. Please
submit an Erosion Control Plans as none were included in the recently received
materials and are required to be submitted to meet City Criteria. Please submit an
Erosion Control Report as none was included in the recently received materials and
is required to be submitted to meet City Criteria. Please submit an Erosion Control
Escrow / Security Calculation as none was included in the recently received
materials and is required to be submitted to meet City Criteria. The site disturbs
more than 10,000 sq. ft. and therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need
to be submitted. Based upon the area of disturbance, State permits for stormwater
will be required since the site is over an acre and should be pulled before
Construction Activities begin. Erosion Control Materials will need to be produced,
reviewed, and accepted to meet City Erosion Control Criteria before Development
Agreement Language can be drafted. If you need clarification concerning the
Erosion Control Material Requirements or Comments presented above please
contact myself. Jesse Schlam (970) 224-6015 jschlam@fcgov.com
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/27/2017
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/10/2017: Please include the LID summary table in the text of the Drainage
Report.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: More discussion is needed on how the site is meeting the LID and
water quality requirements. The grass buffers proposed are not meeting the LID
criteria. The development may have to provide another LID method or propose to
include standard water quality treatment.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/11/2017: All plans will be reviewed at the next round of review.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Topic: Plat
10/11/2017: Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you
disagree with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were
not made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Page 15 of 16
10/10/2017: The plans still show 2 full movement accesses. See comments from
the ODP submittal.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The plans show a roundabout less than 300 ft from Timberline. This
should be evaluated in the TIS for feasibility and queuing.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: You'll need to work with parks on trail requirements
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: Work with engineering and planning on the connections (vehicular and
bike/ped) to the south.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Topic: Traffic Impact Study
10/10/2017: The submitted TIS was the same TIS as submitted for the ODP. Our
standards require a full TIS for a PDP, not the master study. It needs to be scoped
with our staff. Please contact me to scope the study. No further review of the TIS
will be provided until a study that meets our requirements is submitted.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
10/10/2017: The timing and phasing of road improvements along Timberline (and
signalization at Zephyr) is a critical piece to figure out. The TIS will need to address
this, and internal conversations at the City regarding timing of the capital project will
also need to be a part.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/10/2017
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/09/2017: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit.
The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of
the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric
Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/09/2017
Department: Zoning
Contact: Ryan Boehle, 970-416-2401, rboehle@fcgov.com
Topic: General
10/11/2017: Please paint all conduit, meters, vents and all other equipment attached
to the building or protruding from the roof to match the surrounding building
surfaces.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
10/11/2017: Street facing garage doors must be recessed behind the front façade
of the ground floor or a covered porch (measuring at least 4¿ x 6¿) by 4 feet as per
3.5.2(F)(1).
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/11/2017
Page 16 of 16