Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY CAMPUS - FDP - FDP180004 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - 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 March 16, 2018 Angela Milewski BHA Design 1603 Oakridge Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Platte River Power Authority Campus, FDP180004, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343 or tshepard@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: Although it’s not adjacent to the property – we do need a receiving ramp for the other side of the driveway on Danfield Court. Response: The design has been revised to include a pedestrian ramp on the east side of the intersection. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: I believe that the driveway details for each entrance would be as follows: temporary construction access from Horsetooth would be 706.1 (included), the driveway from the cul-de-sac would be 707.2 (included), and the main entrance would be 707.1 (not included). Please add drawing 707.1 to the site construction details. I don’t believe we need the cross-pan intersection details, just 707.1. If I’m misunderstanding the intent for these, please let me know. Response: Grading has been adjusted at Danfield Court and details have been revised. 2 Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: On the detailed utility sheets, I don’t see any saw cut lines, but I see that there are labeled approximate areas of disturbance where the utility connections are being made. Please add the following note to the utility plan: “Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City of Fort Collins Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with city street repair standards.” Response: The note has been added to the Utility Plan. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: Please label ROW and easements on the site plan. Response: ROA and easements have been added to the site plan. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: Now that we’re at final plan, I’ll be sending over information about the development agreement and development construction permit processes – let me know who to send this to or contact me for the information. Response: Please coordinate with Will Welch (970) 215-4099, wwelch@wmtwelch.com Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: LIGHTING PLAN: For any of the selected fixtures that offer a "dimmable" version, we highly recommend selecting that version. Given the number of fixtures proposed for the site, there may be a desire to reduce light levels post-installation. If motion-sensing makes sense in any locations, please consider that option as well. Response: Step dimming drivers are being provided for all parking lot pole mounted fixtures to give the Owner the ability to reduce light levels after business hours. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: TREE REMOVAL: After the final plans are recorded, but prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit, a nesting survey must be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist or ecologist. All trees on the property must be surveyed, and the results of the survey shall be submitted to Environmental Planning for review. If any migratory bird nests are identified, coordination with Colorado Parks and Wildlife and/or the US Fish and Wildlife Service will be required. Response: Noted Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: TREE REMOVAL: Land Use Code Section 3.2.1(F) specifies that "existing significant trees...shall be preserved to the extent reasonably feasible and may help satisfy the landscaping requirements of this Section as set forth 3 above... Streets, buildings and lot layouts shall be designed to minimize the disturbance to significant existing trees." While this site will meet its tree planting requirements through mitigation replacement trees, disturbance to existing significant trees has not been minimized on this site. The disposal of 125 trees will create a significant amount of waste, which does not align with the community's goals for waste reduction and recycling. What is the plan for disposing of the trees to be removed? Will they be sent to the landfill, or have you partnered with someone to utilize the material? Given how many trees are being removed from the site, please provide a waste reduction plan for the tree removal that demonstrates a significant effort has been made to divert tree material from the landfill. Staff strongly recommends consideration of the following options to give the trees a second life: - Chip into mulch to reuse on site or give away - Mill large trees into lumber to reuse on the site or give away - Incorporate larger logs into the landscape design to provide additional wildlife habitat - Partner with the Front Range Community College Forestry Department, CSU Forestry Department, or CSU logging sports teams to remove and re-use the trees - Other creative solutions for diverting tree material from the landfill Response: The arborist removing the trees will chip them into mulch and give away. We will be donating some of the larger trunks to the Nature in the City program for pollinator projects. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 Continued: 3/12/2018: There are a handful of trees that still need a “X” on the symbol to mark their removal (T13, T50, and T51). There are also a handful of trees that have a “X” on the symbol that need to be red to remain consistent with the rest of the Tree Mitigation Plan. There are also some trees that do not have inventory information associated with their symbol (SW corner of lot south of T105, 1 tree south of T148, and 1 tree just east of T126). Please include their inventory information on the plan. Response: These corrections have been made. 12/4/2017: Tree Mitigation Plan For additional clarity on Sheet 4, please show all trees to be removed marked with a “X” on the symbol. Please use a unique symbol for trees to remain. 4 On Sheet 5, please add a column that details if the tree is to be removed or to 4 be retained. The “reason for removal” column should explain why the project needs to remove the tree (ex: building footprint, grading, etc). Please place a cloud around the perimeter tree groves which are to be preserved and protected. Please explain why some trees on the Tree Mitigation Summary are “grayed out”. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 Continued: 3/12/2018: Thank you for providing the correct number of mitigation trees. It might be helpful to make a note on the Plant List or in the legend to clarify that all trees on the plans are upsized mitigation trees. Response: Note has been added. 12/4/2017: Thank you for providing 139 upsized mitigation trees in the plant schedule. Please address how the remaining 37 mitigation trees will be provided, whether it be fitting additional trees on-site, planting off-site or making a payment in lieu to City of Fort Collins Forestry. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 Continued: 3/12/2018: There still appears to be discrepancies between the number of trees on the plant list versus the number of trees that are on the landscape plans. Please verify that all plant counts are consistent between the plant list and the plans. GYDI – (5) extra trees on landscape plans POAC – missing (5) trees on landscape plans Response: Corrections have been made to the plant list. 12/4/2017: There appears to be some discrepancies with the number of trees that are listed in the plant list versus how many are accounted for on the Landscape plans. CEOC - missing (2) trees from the landscape plans POAC - one extra tree shown on landscape plans ULAC - one extra tree shown on landscape plans SYPE - missing (3) trees from landscape plans PIPO - missing (1) tree from landscape plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 Continued: 3/12/2018: There is a CEOC less than 6’ from the storm sewer line on sheet 2 (planting bed north of Horsetooth). There are also several trees that are on top of or less than 10’ from electric lines. Please adjust tree locations to provide for proper 5 tree/utility separation. Response: Tree locations have been adjusted to provide required separation. Please note that electrical lines shown are diagrammatic. Utilities will be field located prior to planting and proper separation provided. 12/4/2017: 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 For example, there are a few ornamentals in close proximity to the storm sewer line on sheet 1. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 3/14/2018: Of the 9 transplantable trees, 2 of them are memorial trees. Please coordinate the transplanting of all 9 trees with PRPA, Parks, and Forestry. Response: We will coordinate tree transplanting with construction efforts. Continued: 3/12/2018: Since these are memorial trees, it is important that we try to preserve them through transplanting. City of Fort Collins Parks would be willing to adopt these trees and have them transplanted off-site at Roselawn Cemetery. Please coordinate the transplanting of these 9 trees with PRPA, Parks, and Forestry. 12/4/2017: Please consider transplanting the 9 transplantable trees back on-site, especially the memorial trees. Add a note that says: Transplanting trees #53, 72, 73, 93, 105, 110, 115, 116, and 117 shall follow the recommendations of a qualified tree transplanting contractor in terms of size, staking, mulching, and irrigation. Additionally, please display the transplanted locations with a bolded, capital ¿T¿ on the landscape plans. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 Continued: 3/12/2018: Please show the following note on sheet 4: City Forestry to transplant Freemont Mahonia off-site in coordination with PRPA and Gardens on Spring Creek. Response: Note has been added. 12/5/2017: During the tree inventory session, the City Forester identified some rare native plants, including Turbinella Oak and Mahonia. Forestry is interested in having a discussing with PRPA if these plants will be impacted and possibly transplanting them to a public property. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 3/12/2018: Please verify that all trees on-site receive irrigation, whether in mulch beds or detention basin seed mix/upland seed mix/wetland seed mix. 6 Response: All proposed trees will be irrigated. Note 2 in the General Landscape Notes also indicates that all trees, including in native seed areas, shall be irrigated with an automatic drip irrigation system. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 3/12/2018: Please position all cottonwoods at least 40’ apart. Please also note that canopy shade trees should be at minimum 30 feet apart – there are some trees that are positioned closer than 30 feet. These separation distances should also be followed when positioning new trees near existing trees. Response: Tree spacing has been revised. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 3/12/2018: There are quite a few redbuds proposed on the plans. Redbuds are not well adapted to Fort Collins soils. To ensure survivability of total species on the project, please limit the number of this species on the plans and incorporate additional ornamental varieties, such as Japanese Tree Lilac and Thunderchild Crabapple. Response: Eastern Redbuds have been reduced to locations in the plaza areas. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 3/12/2018: Please specify ‘Rocky Mountain Glow’ Bigtooth Maple on the Plant List. Response: Plant specification has been revised. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/14/2018 3/14/2018: As discussed in the staff review meeting on 3/14/18, please clarify which two trees might need to be removed for Stormwater Engineering? – This was mentioned by Shane Boyle on behalf of Heather McDowell. Response: The trees affected by proposed utilities Department: Internal Services Contact: Jonathon Nagel, , jnagel@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/23/2018 02/23/2018: Please provide labels on the plan enlargement for the trash/recycle enclosure for the proposed trash compactor and recycling containers, including their capacities. Response: Labels and capacities have been provided. Department: Light And Power Contact: Janet McTague, 970-224-6154, jmctague@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: 7 Light and Power is working with the applicant on relocation/addition of electric facilities. Response: Noted Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: FIRE LANE SIGNS Please add fire lane signs as indicated on PFA redlines provided. Response: Additional signs have been added per the redlines. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: VEHICLE GATING All gate details shall be included with construction plans at time of building permit. Plan details shall include an approved means of providing fire department access. Response: Noted. Knox keyswitches are planned at vehicular gates and man gate east of HQ Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: PRIVATE HYDRANTS A testing and maintenance plan will need to be developed and implemented in conjunction with the installation of a private hydrant system. Records will need to be maintained on site and readily available for inspection. In addition, a copy of service/maintenance records shall be submitted to the fire department annually, but no later than August 1st of any given year. Private hydrants may require color coding to differentiate them from publicly maintained hydrants. A maintenance/inspection plan template is available upon request. Code language provided below: > IFC 507.5.3: Private fire mains shall be periodically inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with NFPA 25 at the following intervals: 1. Private hydrants: Inspected annually and after each operation; flow test and maintenance annually. 2. Fire service main piping: Inspection of exposed, annually; flow test every 5 years. 3. Fire service main piping strainers: Inspection and maintenance after each use. Response: The testing and maintenance plan is being created and the development team will follow up with the document once complete. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: ROOF ACCESS 8 > Roof Hatch (07 72 00.AOO): The size of the roof hatch shall be adequately sized to allow for firefighters with full turn out gear and equipment to gain easy roof access. The hatch size and design shall be reviewed and approved by the fire authority at time of building permit. > Crossover Stairs (05 51 19.A8O & 05 52 13.A80): Rather than one crossover connection as shown, two shall be provided. This will help to mitigate the non-compliant aerial access condition present at this building. Response: Two crossover stairs shall be provided. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: WAYFINDING PLAN The plan for wayfinding has been received and is under review. Response: Noted Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: MAN-GATE The man-gate in the perimeter fencing, east end of HQ shall include an approved means of fire department access. Response: A knox key switch will be provided at the pedestrian fence gate at the east end of the HQ. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: On both the Site and Landscape Plans, please label the outdoor patio / gathering area along the east side of the headquarters building. Also, the fence graphic that encloses this space does not match graphics for either the existing fence or the perimeter fence. Is there a third fence type here? If so, please provide a detail. Response: Label has been added and fence types have been clarified. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: In the employee parking area, there are two transformers that close to and flank the walkway. Please consider adding a screen wall to the walkway side of each transformer to provide a measure of safety for pedestrians. Also, these transformers need to be labeled on the Landscape Plan. Response: 4’ solid metal fences buffered by landscaping have been provided Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: On the Site Plan, please label the area north of the employee parking lot in the southwest area of the site. Response: This is the location of the existing operations building. That building will need to keep running while they construct the new HQ building and then move the operations into that building. Then they will deconstruct that building. In our project it will just be a place for excess fill dirt that we will seed and temporary irrigation capabilities will be provided. Long term it could be another building or more parking. 9 Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: Please use heavier line weight or darker line to graphically depict the property line on the Site Plan. As it appears now, it is hard to differentiate from other line work. Response: Property line has been represented with a thicker lineweight. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: On the Site Plan, it would be helpful to move the two depictions of the fence types and instead show how Danfield Court extends east to Timberline Road. This will help demonstrate the onsite and offsite circulation system. Response: Addition site plan context has been provided Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: On the Site Plan, please label the existing buildings and drives on the former LSI property to the north and east. Response: Addition site plan context has been provided Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C1.00 – Please include labels for the existing detention basins and their outlet structures and the existing concrete irrigation pipe along Horsetooth. Response: Labels have been added. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C1.04 – please specify if the existing storm mh in Timberline road is to remain in place or be replaced? Response: A note has been added. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C1.06 – please note on the plans that the existing storm outlet structure and chase to Danfield Court to remain in place and be protected during construction. Response: A note has been added. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.00 – It would be helpful to have all of the storm line ID labels on this overall utility plan sheet. Where does the water meter and backflow vaults sit relative to the existing trees and proposed contours? Response: Additional storm line ID labels have been added. The existing tree adjacent to the proposed water meter vault has been removed (trees are shown on C4.01). The vaults have been added the 10 grading plans for reference. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.30 – How Is the new outfall from detention basin A to be constructed with all of the existing trees in the vicinity? Response: The outfall location has been revised. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.36 – For the bioswale, let’s discuss the option of raising the rim elevation of the two inlets up a foot and making this a bioretention basin (rain garden) instead. Response: The bioswales will continue to be provided as discussed in the meeting on 3/19/18. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.50 - The stormtech system will be required to have an underdrain system incorporated. Otherwise, the water that has infiltrated into the gravel layer will have no way of draining out and may create minimized capacity in the overall system. The weir and orifice outlet from the stormtech system should probably also be reconfigured or eliminated altogether. With the inclusion of an underdrain system, you don’t need this flow controlled outlet pipe/manhole because the underdrain system will control the flow for you. The roof drain connections to the stormtech system will also need to be connected to a diversion manhole to allow for the major storm to bypass the water quality system. Response: The stormtech system has been revised as discussed in the meetings on 3/19/18 and 4/2/18. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C6.00 – Please label the existing outlet structure on the north side of the site. Also, please delineate the extents of the existing parking lot detention pond. Response: The plan has been revised. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C7.33 – How did you determine the weir elevation in the diversion manholes? Response: The weir elevations have been revised as discussed in the meeting on 3/19/18. Topic: Drainage Report Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: Page 9 – Please verify that the existing outlet control for the parking lot detention basin is in place and that the release rate is not increased with the slight increase in the basin size draining to it. Response: The report text has been revised. The basins have been adjusted to ensure no increase to the parking lot detention area. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 11 03/08/2018: Page 11 – The stormtech system is being utilized on this project site for water quality only. Please refer to this as water quality detention or just water quality. Response: The report and plans have been revised to refer to water quality. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: Page 15 – I think there is a typo in the overall peak discharge Q2 in the proposed condition table. Response: The table has been revised. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: Appendix B – How did you determine the 53 cfs Q100? Also please note that we don’t require that you use the adjustment factor in the modified FAA method for calculating detention pond sizing. You can use it if you want to, but don’t have to. Response: The flowrate is the entire flows draining to the pond. The appendix has been revised to add clarification. The detention pond calculations have been revised. Please also include the CRS spreadsheet showing compliance with state drain time requirements. I can provide the spreadsheet that includes Fort Collins rainfall data embedded if you need it. Response: The spreadsheet has been added. On the LID Summary page, basin A12 is included in the 75% of the site that is treated, but earlier in the report it states that LID will be provided later. Perhaps just remove basin A12 acreage from the overall acreage and remove it from the table altogether so that you can still show that you meet the 75% requirement, or include a note here that clearly states that LID for this basin will have to be provided in the future. Response: The LID calculations have been revised. Underground system – how did you arrive at the release rate? Generally, stormtech systems are sized and controlled through infiltration through the subgrade. I believe that stormtech does this calculation for you. We have not seen an orifice release from these systems before. Response: The underground water quality system has been revised. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: Appendix E – Drainage Map – How have you sized the bioswale? Our new (not yet adopted) criteria has eliminated the bioswale option and modified it to be a bioretention cell that is sized for the WQCV. I’m ok with you using a bioswale if you cannot do a standard bioretention cell, but generally we limit the run-on ratio to 10:1. Let’s discuss. Response: The bioswale has been sized with a 9:1 run-on rate (pavement area to bioswale area). Clarification to the report has been provided on page 12. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: The proposed outfall pipe from the detention pond is located 12 approx. 5’ from an existing tree. Is this going to work? Response: The outlet piping has been modified, utilizing a 22.5-degree bend, as discussed in the meeting on 3/19/18. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: There is a proposed tree located within a couple of feet of the storm pipe and the bioswale. Please provide at least 6’ separation from the tree to the pipe. Response: This tree has been moved. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: Plat – The City will require that drainage easements also be dedicated for the existing detention basin located within the northern parking lot, the underground water quality chambers and the bioretention area. Generally, drainage easements are required for all volume-based drainage infrastructure. Response: The plat has been revised. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/07/2018 03/07/2018: Please resubmit an Erosion Control Report as the recently received materials has comments and redlines that needed to be addressed to meet City Criteria. Erosion Control Plan on this project was reviewed and found acceptable to City Erosion Control Criteria. Please resubmit an Erosion Control Escrow / Security Calculation as the recently received materials has comments and redlines, that needed to be addressed to meet City Criteria and would require a recalculation of the Escrow. 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 Response: The Erosion Control Report and Escrow calculations have been revised per the redlines and are included with this resubmittal. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: BWG Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Response: BWG Topic: Construction Drawings 13 Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. Response: The sheet index has been revised. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: The line over text redlines have been addressed. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Response: The text masking redlines have been addressed. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response letter. Response: The redlines have been addressed. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: Please revise the legal description to match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Legal description has been revised. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, , TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/13/2018 03/13/2018: The temporary access location shown is not ideal for allowing left turns into the site. After discussing the meeting that was held with Syl Mireles, it was his understanding that no agreements were made and there was going to be a follow-up meeting on-site to discuss the temporary access location and allowed movements. Please contact Syl to set up an on-site meeting to discuss the details of the temporary access. Also during the closure of the main access on Horsetooth, the existing left turn lane will need to be officially closed by either restriping or installing and maintaining traffic control devices. Response: The temporary access has been revised per the onsite meeting on 3/26/18. A temporary traffic control plan will be submitted with the right-of-way work permit. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/12/2018 03/12/2018: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building 14 permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com Response: Noted Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C1.04 – Please include a note that states that the existing water meter vault to remain in place during phase 1 demo since it is technically located within the limits of phase 1 demo. Response: A note has been added to the plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C1.10 – Please note that the existing hydrant on Timberline is to remain in place throughout the project. Response: A note has been added to the plan. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.00 – Please note that the City will inspect the connection of the new sewer service to the existing sewer service that is located within the ROW. The City will not inspect the sewer service beyond what is located in the ROW. Response: A note has been added to the plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.00 – There is an existing 6-inch public water main located on the west side of the site that goes to the existing E&O building. Can you incorporate this existing main into the private water system on the site and eliminate the new connection in Horsetooth? The city would prefer that this existing 6-inch main become private along with the rest of the system on the site. If you want to keep it public, the City will need access and an easement for this main. Response: Per the 3/19/18 meeting, the existing water main will be removed/abandoned with Phase 2 of the project; therefore, no revisions are required. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.01/4.02 – Please label the city-owned valve in Timberline and in Horsetooth. Add a note to this sheet that states that the water main and appurtenances downstream of the city valves are privately owned and maintained. Response: Notes have been added. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.02/4.03 – It is recommended that you provide a minimum of 5’ of separation between the fire and water services for future serviceability. Response: Clearance of 5’ has been provided where it does not create conflicts with internal building 15 plumbing. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.10 – The maximum allowable drop into a manhole is 2’ (as you have shown), but please also include a note in the plans that states that if the 2’ is exceeded then an outside drop will need to be constructed, per City requirements. Also, please note that the City will inspect the connection of the private sewer main to the public main/manhole and the portion of the private sewer main that is located within the utility easement. The City will not be inspecting the private sewer main beyond that. Response: Notes have been added. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.20 – Please specify if the bends shown in the profile are horizontal or vertical. Is the tie-in location to the existing waterline in Horsetooth a verified elevation or potholed? Response: Profile callouts for bends have been revised. The connection locations (horizontal and vertical) are approximate and have been noted as such in the profile view. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C4.21 – The proposed vaults are located fairly close to an existing tree. Is this going to work? Also, is the intent to keep the existing water meter and service in operation during the installation of the new vaults? The existing service is only 5’ from the edge of the existing vault. Is this going to work? The redlines include some suggested profile modifications. Response: The existing tree has been added to the demolition plans. The proposed vaults have been moved further west, away from the exiting water meter vault and service. Responses to suggested profile modifications have been provided on the redlines. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: C7.21 – For the water vault details – •Please label the size of the bypass line. Please note that the bypass line is optional for this system because you technically have a feed from the other direction if the meter or bypass ever need to be removed and/or serviced. Beware, however, that without a bypass line, water feeding from a different direction may create some intermittent water quality issues in the system. •The bypass line tees are shown outside of the vault, which is fine, but please check to make sure the tee (properly sized) can fit in the 4’ space you have allocated from the edge of the vault to the vertical bend. •The access at the top of both vaults will need to be big enough to fit the meter and the backflow assembly. It looks like both vaults will need hatches instead of 24-inch openings. •The backflow assembly will also need to have an isolation valve located on both ends of it for isolation. •The fittings will need to be mechanically restrained. Please plan for room for megalugs. Response: The water meter vault details have been revised per the meeting on 3/19/18. 16 Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: Please provide 10’ of separation from the proposed water meter vault near Horsetooth Road to the proposed trees. Response: Tree locations have been revised Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/08/2018 03/08/2018: The proposed water meter vault on Timberline Road is located approximately 5’ from an existing tree. The vault depth is going to be almost 10’ deep. I can’t see how you are going to preserve this tree with this deep of an excavation happening 5’ away. Response: This tree will be removed.