Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY COMMONS, LOT 5 - FDP - FDP170036 - 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 January 16, 2018 TB Group 444 W Mountain Ave Berthoud, CO 80513 RE: Harmony Commons Lot 5 - Child Care, FDP170036, 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: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: We'll want to discuss timing of the vacation of utility related easements in conjunction with the impacted utility provider(s). Typically we coordinate these documents prior to plan approval, but with the utilities being existing, I suspect the utility providers would not prefer to vacate easement(s) until the utilities are physically relocated. (Any newly dedicated utility easement can at least be coordinated prior to plan approval). Ultimately I'm looking to ensure that the timing of the dedications and vacations of easements are processed such that the dedications are completed prior to plan approval and the vacations are typically completed upon the work being done to relocate them. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: I'll want verification from Stormwater/Water Utilities on whether a new development agreement or amendment to the existing development agreement will be needed. RESPONSE: As discussed at staff review, Stormwater will not need a new DA. An escrow amount will be determined. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/03/2018 01/03/2018: LIGHTING PLAN: The light fixtures previously approved for Harmony Commons Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 all had color temperatures of 3000K. Please update all light fixtures to match (all fixtures are currently shown as 4000K). Lots 3, 4 & 5: http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=51&docid=2735495&dt=L-LIGHTING+PLAN Lot 6: http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=51&docid=2950361&dt=L-LIGHTING+PLAN RESPONSE: This site needs to be evaluated with the context of the overall development. Changing colors for this site is not the appropriate break point. These lot share common private drives. One of these private drives is already illuminated and a 2nd intersecting private drive is being illuminated as part of the lot 5 development. Since the lights are in a common development and literally illuminate common intersecting private streets that feed into this property it is our desire to maintain uniformity throughout the development. Therefore we want to match the color of the adjacent development lighting that this property is a part of. 2 A note has been added to the photometric submittal addressing building mount lighting control. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/03/2018 01/03/2018: LIGHTING PLAN: For the BB light fixture, please consider the motion/ambient light sensor option to reduce unnecessary lighting at night. Alternatively, automatic dimming or shut-off after a certain time of night could be considered. The surrounding street and parking lot lighting in this area should provide adequate security when the building is not in use. RESPONSE: Exterior lighting control is function of design and building code requirements and is included in the building department permit submittal process. Thus is implemented by the Electrical Engineer of Record creating the permit documentation. This is a photometric submittal to evaluate worst case exterior lighting contribution from proposed fixtures used on the site of the project. Per building code exterior egress lighting is to be maintained during all occupied hours or operations, this typically eliminates the use of motion sensors. Per the IECC astronomical time clocks or photoelectric control is code required so these will definitely be implemented into the control design. A note has been added to the photometric plan. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/03/2018 01/03/2018: NATURE IN THE CITY: This location could be a great opportunity to partner with Nature in the City or other community programs to install a habitat garden and/or vegetable garden as a site amenity. Other child care centers in town have made similar improvements, in some cases funded by local non-profits or the Nature in the City program. Please contact me if you would like to discuss this opportunity further. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: It appears the number of Kentucky Coffeetree and Bur Oak exceed the maximum percentage species diversity on the landscape plans. According to LUC 3.2.1 (D) 3, if there are 60 or more trees on-site, the maximum percentage of any one species allowed is 15%. Because there are 66 trees proposed on the plans, all species must fall below 15% diversity. Please incorporate additional species such as Hackberry and Accolade Elm to balance out the diversity percentages. RESPONSE: Noted; a new species has been incorporated and the percentages have been altered. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Please label all public streets on the landscape plans. RESPONSE: Public streets have been labeled. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Are there street lights or stop signs proposed in the right-of-way? If so, please provide proper tree separation: Street light: 40 feet from canopy shade trees and 15 feet for ornamental trees Stop sign: 20 feet from sign RESPONSE: All stop signs in the right-of-way are being shown and trees have been moved away/deleted accordingly. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: If there are any existing trees on-site, please schedule an on-site meeting with City Forestry to obtain tree inventory and mitigation information. RESPONSE: There are no existing trees on-site. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Please verify that all trees meet the required tree/utility separation. There is one Catalpa north of the proposed building that might be too close to the existing storm line and one Honeylocust south of the building that is placed between a water and sewer line.10’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer service lines 4’ between trees and gas lines RESPONSE: Noted; all trees have been distanced from utilities accordingly. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Please place the bolded street tree permit note on Sheet L1 to emphasize importance. RESPONSE: Updated. 3 Department: Internal Services Contact: Jonathon Nagel, jnagel@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/03/2018 01/03/2018: The Community Recycling Ordinance (No. 109 2016) requires that all new business and multifamily complexes subscribe to recycling service that is at minimum 1/3 of their overall service capacity(total bin capacity x number of weekly pickups, include both trash and recycling when calculating overall service capacity). In general recycling containers must be at least 50% the size of proposed trash containers to meet this requirement. Please make sure proposed containers meet this requirement and that adequate space is provided in all enclosures. RESPONSE: The trash enclosure is dimensioned on Sheet A-3.0. It should be adequately sized at 16’-8” x 15’-4”. We have also been told that the day care use does not generate a lot of trash as compared to an office or restaurant use. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/03/2018 01/03/2018: Please provide drawings of the proposed trash/recycling enclosure showing overall dimensions, widths of service gates and required pedestrian entrance along with proposed containers and their capacity. RESPONSE: The trash enclosure is dimensioned on Sheet A-3.0. It should be adequately sized at 16’-8” x 15’-4”. Department: Light and Power Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Proposed transformer location shown is considered to be out-of-access. The transformer needs to be no more than 10' from the asphalt. Also, it needs to be a minimum of 2' behind the sidewalk. A concrete pad, able to support a line truck, could be poured in the parkway for access. This would have to be a minimum of 9' wide. RESPONSE: The transformer location has been moved to be within access of the asphalt drive. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Proposed transformer location does not meet clearance requirements from doors. "Oil insulated, pad-mounted transformers shall not be located within a zone extending 20' outward and 10' to either side of a building door". Please go to Electric Service Standards @ http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-fo rms-guidelines-regulations RESPONSE: The transformer has been moved away from the access door. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Any proposed Light & Power electric facilities or existing electric facilities that will remain within the limits of the project must be located within a utility easement. RESPONSE: Noted. A utility easement will be dedicated by separate document. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Transformer locations need to be within 10’ of an asphalt surface accessible by a line truck. A minimum clearance of 8’ must be maintained in front of the transformer doors and a minimum of 3’ on the sides Transformer and meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power Engineering. Certain building materials and or building design may require more clearance. Please click on the following link for Electric Service Standards. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations RESPONSE: Noted. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: A commercial service information form (C-1 form) and a one line diagram will need to be submitted to Light & Power Engineering for all proposed commercial buildings and multi-family (commercial) buildings larger than a duplex or greater than 200amps. A link to the C-1 form is below: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations RESPONSE: Noted. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Any relocation or modification to existing electric facilities will be at the expense of the owner/developer. If Light & Power’s existing electric facilities are to remain within the limits of the project they must be located within a utility easement. RESPONSE: Noted. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges, and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development. Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 970-221-6700. Please reference our Electric Service Standards, development charges and fee estimator at the following link: 4 http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers RESPONSE: Noted. Department: PFA Contact: Andrew Rosen, arosen@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: ACCESS The 'Flares' of the Fire Lanes should be included as integral to the Fire Lane where they meet the street entrances The fire lanes on the provided Site Plan do not appear to be denoted as Emergency Access Easements on a separate legal document. RESPONSE: The fire lane easement will be changed to include the flares. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/10/2018 01/10/2018: At the Staff Review meeting today, 1-10-18, the Project Team and PFA discussed the Fire Lane plan and signage. The Fire Lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement by a separate Legal Document. Should an entrance be considered off Timberwood, the full street and address will be required to be readily visible on the building from this new accessway. RESPONSE: Noted. The owner has decided not to pursue the access off Timberwood. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: A Child Care Center is a permitted use in the Harmony Corridor zone, subject to Administrative Review (Type One). But, Lot 5 of Harmony Commons is within a designated Convenience Shopping Center which is a permitted use within the H-C, Harmony Corridor zone, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review (Type Two). The original P.D.P. for Lots 3,4 and 5 was approved by the P & Z Board. Therefore, the Major Amendment is also subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. RESPONSE: Noted. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Both Child Care Center and Convenience Shopping Center are further defined by the Harmony Corridor zone as Secondary Uses. Within Harmony Commons, Parcel S of the O.D.P., there can no more than a total of 7.57 acres of secondary uses. The table that describes the breakdown between primary and secondary uses must use all of Tract S as the basis as this is how the O.D.P., Seventh Amendment, was approved. Please adjust the table to include all seven lots and use the Replat as the basis for the lot sizes. Please note that this will require that Lots 1 and 7 be developed as Primary Uses. RESPONSE: Table has been adjusted for the calculations as discussed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: If there was a curb cut on Timberwood that aligned with the north-south drive in front of the building, then three sides of the parking lot drive would not be needed to be dedicated as fire lanes. As such, in any location where the drive aisles do not serve double-loaded parking, these drives could be reduced in width from 24 to 20 feet in width and there would be less impervious surface and less area needed to be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement. It appears that such a driveway would comply with the spacing requirements from the intersection. RESPONSE: Brinkman and the day care operator have decided not to pursue access off Timberwood at this time, although this might be re-visited at Final Plan review. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: What is the expectation for cross-access to allow the lunch crowd to be able to park on Lot 5? If the expectation is to allow for cross-access for parking, please indicate on the Site Plan with an explanatory note. RESPONSE: Note added under the parking statistics. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Regarding parking lot perimeter landscaping, there are gaps along the northwest portion of the parking lot. These gaps need to be filled in to comply with Section 3.2.1(E) (4). RESPONSE: It is our preference not to add more shrubs to this area. We are trying to be consistent with the existing parkway treatment on the north side of the private drive, which is mainly irrigated turf and street trees. See landscape plan 5 for Lots 3 and 4. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: The fence linework is hard to follow and distinguish from other lines. On the site plan it appears that the area southwest of the building is not fenced but shows as being fenced on the landscape plan. Both plans use a different graphic depiction for the fence. Please label all linework and use a consistent, distinctive graphic so the extent of the fence can be followed. RESPONSE: Fencing is now shown clearly on the site and landscape plans. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Regarding the extent of the fence, Staff is concerned about the fence along not only a portion of the west and south sides but also along the entire east and most of the north sides of the building as well. This results in a significant exposure along Lady Moon Drive. Staff has learned that the east sidewalk provides access from the building to the outdoor play areas. With this being a walkway and not an outdoor play area, Staff recommends that the fencing along Lady Moon be softened in both material and height. Perhaps wrought iron (or its visual equivalent) could be considered. And, at six feet in height, this fence would comprise approximately one-third of the total building height (18' 10" to the top of the parapet). Staff encourages the applicant to consider a lower height along this area, especially since the site is slightly elevated above the grade of the public right-of-way. RESPONSE: The applicant is proposing a 6’ metal ornamental fence along the length of the east side of the building which will enhance transparency through to the building beyond and soften the visual impact of the fence in this area. The fence would transition to a 6’ vinyl semi-private fence for the southernmost 40’ of the east property line where it abuts the play area to provide required privacy and security for the children. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Section 3.8.11 requires that fences along collectors (Lady Moon Drive) that exceed 100 feet must vary in alignment or setback at least one-third of the length of the fence by a minimum of five feet. The standard also includes a qualitative aspect that fences must be made visually interesting by integrating architectural elements such as brick or stone columns, incorporating articulation or openings into the design varying the alignment or setback or softening the appearance with plantings or similar techniques. RESPONSE: The applicant is proposing approximately 100’ feet of metal ornamental fencing and 40’ of vinyl semi-private fencing as described in the response to Comment Number 7 above. We request that the change in fencing material together with the extensive landscaping proposed adjacent to the fence been deemed sufficient to address the requirements of Section 3.8.11. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Please provide more detail on the specifications of the proposed fence. I could not find any references on the internet to the Rahab, Inc. It is not clear what exactly is proposed with references like “semi-private” or “Danbury.” The color must be specified. Staff recommends that white not be selected as PVC white causes glare. With the extent of fencing proposed, an earth-tone color would be more compatible with the center. RESPONSE: Brochures for proposed fencing have been submitted to Ted Shepard under separate cover. Sheet A-3.0 has an elevation of the Rafab, Inc. vinyl semi-private fence in the “Danbury” style. We propose the “almond” color for this fence, subject to City and private Design Review Board approval. Both fence types are shown on Sheet L2. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: With regard to the fence alignment along Timberwood, please reconcile the Site and Landscape plans. RESPONSE: Fencing line types are now consistent. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Fences cannot exceed 42 inches in any sight distance triangle. There may be a sight distance triangle at the north driveway. RESPONSE: one will not be needed as the fence on the east stops at the eastern entry door. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Please indicate if there will be rooftop mechanical equipment. If so, please provide a building cross-section that indicates the equipment mounting height relative to the height of the parapet to ensure proper screening. If the parapet is insufficient, then a roof-mounted mechanical screen wall will be required to screen the equipment from the public streets. The elevations indicate what appears to be a rooftop screen but it’s not labeled. If this is a screen wall, then it appears to be relatively sizable (27 feet long by 4.5 feet high). Staff will need a sample of the material for this screen wall. RESPONSE: The roof top equipment is now labeled on Sheet A-2.0 as is the height of the top of the roof. Roof top equipment is fully screened by the parapet. There is no rooftop screen proposed – the extent of the view of the parapet is now labeled on the elevations to clarify this depiction. 6 Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Utility meters, electrical panels, gas valves, phone and cable pedestals and outdoor condensing units will likely be located along the east elevation facing Lady Moon Drive. Since the exact location and extent of these appurtenances are not yet determined, please add a Site Plan Note and General Landscape Note that ensures these various devices must be screened by landscaping or by a screen wall or any combination thereof and that adjustments in the field may be necessary to achieve compliance prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Staff has learned that the transformer will likely be moved either off-site to the north, or remain on-site but closer to the intersection of Lady Moon and the private east-west drive. Please note that both locations will end up being highly visible and will need to be landscaped in accordance with the clearance requirements of Light and Power. RESPONSE: Note added to Site and Landscape Plans. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: On the architectural elevations, the brick color BR-1 is not specified. Please be sure to make a selection prior to either the next round of review or the public hearing. As noted, it may be helpful to provide a material sample board prior to public hearing. RESPONSE: BR-1 is now specified as “Red Centennial Velour”. We are preparing a material sample board which will be submitted prior to public hearing. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: On the trash and recycling enclosure, staff prefers that the person door not have a gate. This allows for hands-free access. RESPONSE: As discussed, it is the day care’s desire to have a door. The type and amount of trash generated by a child care center is minimal. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: On the Lighting Plan, please decrease the Kelvin temperatures on the exterior lighting from 4,000 to 3,000 degrees. Higher Kelvin temperatures for the commercial areas of Harmony Commons were allowed based on the anticipated level of evening patrons visiting the various restaurants and brew pub. Since the child care center will not experience this level of night time activity, there is no comparable justification for 4,000 degrees Kelvin. Staff recommends that building mounted lighting be equipped with automatic dimming capability after hours. RESPONSE: Thank you for your recommendations. This site needs to be evaluated with the context of the overall development. Changing colors for this site is not the appropriate break point. These lot share common private drives. One of these private drives is already illuminated and a 2nd intersecting private drive is being illuminated as part of the lot 5 development. Since the lights are in a common development and literally illuminate common intersecting private streets that feed into this property it is our desire to maintain uniformity throughout the development. Therefore we want to match the color of the adjacent development lighting that this property is a part of. A note has been added to the photometric submittal addressing building mount lighting control. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/10/2018 01/10/2018: Staff is concerned that the east elevation facing Lady Moon lacks horizontal relief. The length of the east side of the building is 130 feet. Please note that Section 3.5.3(D) – Variation in Massing – requires that horizontal masses must not exceed a height : width ratio of 1 : 3 without substantial variation in massing that includes a change in height and a projecting or recessed elements. RESPONSE: The East elevation has been revised to show a Variation in Massing per City requirements. The parapet has been extended up at the classroom doors and pushed out 6”. A clear anodized sun screen canopy has been added above these doors and windows to provide a purpose of function with the massing change as required by the City code. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/10/2018 01/10/2018: Also, with regard to the east elevation, Section 3.5.3(E)(2)(a) addresses minimum wall articulation and requires that building bays be a maximum of 30 feet and visually established by architectural features such as columns, ribs, or pilaster, piers and fenestration pattern. The standard goes on to state that no wall that faces a street shall have a blank, uninterrupted length exceeding 30 feet without including at least two of the following: change in plane, change in texture or masonry pattern, windows, treillage with vines, or an equivalent element that subdivides the wall into human scale proportions. RESPONSE: Please see Response to Comment Number 17 above. 7 Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/10/2018 01/10/2018: On the Site Plan, please add building envelope dimensions and distances to the nearest property lines. RESPONSE: Dimensions added. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/10/2018 01/10/2018: Staff has learned that several trees will need to be removed or relocated due to conflicts with existing underground utilities. Please be sure to make the necessary adjustments, but, at the same time, find other opportunities to add landscaping in areas where conflicts do not exist. RESPONSE: Trees have been adjusted. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/03/2018 01/03/2018: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft. and therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted. 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 resubmit an Erosion Control Plans as the recently received materials have comments and redlines that needed to be addressed 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. 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: Acknowledged. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Please remove the sidewalk chase detail if it is not being used. RESPONSE: Removed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: The drainage report has the release rate from the paver section as 1.8 cfs in the calculations and 2.3 cfs in the text. Please clarify RESPONSE: Reconciled. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Please include a note on the Grading Plan that states the porous pavement installation shall meet all the specifications of the ICPI. RESPONSE: No longer applicable, sand filtration system is now proposed. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Please revise the legal description in the title block to Lot 5, Harmony Commons. See redlines. RESPONSE: Title Block has been changed.Utility Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Please revise the titles & title blocks to Lot 5, Harmony Commons. See redlines. RESPONSE: Revised. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Corrected. opic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Noted and updated. 8 Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: There are Lot numbering issues. See redlines. RESPONSE: Lot numbers have been corrected. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. RESPONSE: This has been corrected. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: The northwest corner should have directional curb ramps instead of the corner ramp that is shown. Please work with Engineering on the appropriate design for the curb ramps on the site. RESPONSE: This ramp is not actually required by ADA or LCUASS – the hotel added a ramp on the west side of the drive and this proposed ramp mirrors that geometry. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/08/2018 01/08/2018: Any final signing and striping comments will be provided at the planning review meeting. RESPONSE: Noted. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: The plans show that two conflicts may be present with the waterline and the storm sewers. Please document how these will cross while still providing the 18 inches of separation. RESPONSE: Crossings are now shown in storm profile. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: The proposed trees have conflicts with the waterline and water meter. Please provide 10 feet of separation between the trees and all utilities. RESPONSE: Trees have been adjusted. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Please provide a utility easement for the new alignment of the waterline. RESPONSE: Addressed, refer to easement exhibit in the Utility plans. Department: Zoning Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2338, mglasgow@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: All fences must be at least 2 ft. from a public sidewalk. RESPONSE: As discussed in staff review, the line work for the fence was incorrect on the landscape plan. This has been corrected.plot Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/09/2018 01/09/2018: Existing street lighting will need to be removed from photometric site plan. Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct result of the on-site lighting. RESPONSE: We will shut off the existing private drive street lighting to the north as requested. However, this lot needs to be evaluated in the overall context of the development. The private street to the West of Lot 5 is being illuminated as part of the Lot 5 improvements and is part of the access to the overall development.