Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMASON PLACE - MAJOR AMENDMENT - MJA180003 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW 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 May 11, 2018 Klara Rossouw Ripley Design Inc. 419 Canyon Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Mason Place, MJA180003, 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, Clay Frickey, at 970-224-6045 or cfrickey@fcgov.com. RESPONSES 4.25.2018 HOUSING CATALYST; SHOPWORKS; JVA ENGINEERING; DELICH; RIPLEY DESIGN Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: In concept we are okay with the sidewalk configuration at the corner, for FDP we will want to ensure that the existing infrastructure meets ADA requirements and is in acceptable condition to remain. Response: Comment noted. Spot elevations showing ADA compliance of the curb ramp will be shown on the detailed grading plans in the FDP submittal. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please show the existing property line on the horizontal control plan. Response: The existing property lines are shown and labelled (note that the existing property lines on the west and north sides are the centerline of Mason and Creger, respectively). Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please label the parkway width on the horizontal control plan. Response: Parkway width labelled. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please include the ultimate Mason and Creger cross sections which this plan intends to match. Response: Cross sections shown on sheet C3.0. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: The submitted variance request is being evaluated and I will have more information about this for the Wednesday meeting. Response: The City approved the variance request per letter dated May 11, 2018. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Plat: please hatch or differentiate line weights for easements that are being vacated and easements that are being dedicated or exist. Response: Noted and revised. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Plat: it seems that 36 feet of new ROW on Mason and 33 feet of new ROW on Creger are being dedicated with this plat – is that correct? I was under the impression the new ROW dedication was quite a bit less from the existing ROW. Please confirm where the existing ROW lies. Response: Correct, new ROW (half street, along the property frontage) is being dedicated as no ROW currently exists. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Plat: does the 60-foot access and utility easement in Mason still exist? Is this area not existing ROW? Response: Correct, both Mason and Creger currently have 60’ and 30’ access & utility easements, respectively, and no ROW. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Plat: a portion of the existing 15-foot utility easement along Creger lies within the new ROW and should be vacated with this plat. Response: Existing easement is now shown as vacated, with new 9-foot utility easement behind the new ROW as per the LCUASS required Creger street section. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: TREE MITIGATION: Please clarify how many mitigation trees will be planted on-site. 16 mitigation trees are required, but the summary table indicates that only 2 will be planted in total. Please also indicate which trees on the landscape plan will count toward the mitigation requirements. Response: All trees will be fully mitigated as required on-site. The total number mitigated for is 13. Mitigation trees have been highlighted on-site. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 5/7/2018: Continued Please include the City Street Tree Permit note on all landscape sheets. The Tree Diversity Table should be based off “20-39 trees on-site with a maximum percentage of any one species equal to 33%”. Currently, the table show 60+ trees > 15%. 4/2/2018: Please provide a landscape plan that meets the Land Use Code and 3.2.1 requirements. This should include, but is not limited to, including the City of Fort Collins General Landscape Notes, Tree Protection Notes, and Street Tree Permit Note, providing a detailed Plant List – species, quantity, size, method of transplant, and species percentage, and including current and proposed utility lines as well as proper tree separation requirements. Please contact Molly Roche (mroche@fcgov.com) if you have any questions. Response: Code required landscape notes and details now labels and shown on the plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 5/7/2018: The plant schedule on sheet 4 does not show mitigation sizes for the following species/quantities: (5) MRA (3) PGG (1) PCC (4) QS2 (3) UMA Canopy shade trees: 3.0” caliper ball and burlapped Ornamental trees: 2.5” caliper ball and burlapped Evergreen trees: 8’ height ball and burlapped Response: The trees which will be mitigated for are called out on the actual plan with a symbol. This makes the location of the mitigated tree easy to find for the crews on the ground. See revised landscape plans for further clarification. Mitigation sizing chart has now been added to the plans to clarify the sizing charts. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: There are some discrepancies on sheet 5 of the landscape plan: - Tree #9 – Austrian Pine is shown to be removed in the mitigation summary, but shown to retain on the plans. Please retain if possible – this is a very nice specimen. - Tree #16 is shown as #2.0. Please correct. - Tree #22 – Hackberry is shown to retain in the mitigation summary, but shown to remove on the plans. Please retain if possible. - Please update the number of required mitigation trees in the Tree Inventory table, Tree Mitigation Summary, and Provided Tree Mitigation table. In the Provided Tree Mitigation table, the total number of trees shown is 2 – please update. Response: Discrepancies have been corrected with this submittal. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 Please adjust the street trees to be spaced at least 30-40 feet apart. According to my measurements, some trees are closer than 30 feet. Response: Street trees have been placed no closer than 30’ on center.. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: 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 Response: Street lights now shown on the plan and in the legend for clarification – see civil plans for notes and details. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please provide at least 15 feet spacing between the Prairie Sentinel Hackberry trees – they can get up to 12 feet wide. In addition, please provide at least 15 feet spacing between Red Barron Crabapples – they can get up to 10 feet wide. Response: Prairie sentinel trees have been replaced with Swedish Aspen that has better architectural form. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please note that Green Gage Plum produces edible fruits. They do well in Fort Collins and are a good choice for this area. Response: Glad to hear they do well. They will be a nice addition to the site. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please provide at least 5 feet of separation between private property trees and sidewalks. At least one Chanticleer Pear is shown less than 4 feet from the sidewalk. Response: Noted. Thank you for the useful information, we will work with this as best as possible considering the site constraints. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please consider incorporating additional trees within the shrub bed along the west side of the building. Response: The canopy trees have been placed on the west side of the courtyard to promote views of Horsetooth from the units and better compliment architectural elements. Department: Internal Services Contact: Jonathon Nagel, , jnagel@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/30/2018 04/30/2018: Please add the following details to the trash and recycling enclosure plan enlargement: container capacities and a diagram for the pedestrian entrance gate Response: We decided to change from an exterior trash enclosure to trash chutes and a dumpster room inside the building. The dumpster room is designed to hold two 3-yard dumpsters – one for trash and one for recycling. See the new dumpster room door on the south elevation, and the dumpster room plan included in the submittal. The trash enclosure was removed from documents. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/30/2018 The Community Recycling Ordinance (No. 109 2016) requires that all business and multifamily complexes subscribe to recycling service by the end of 2020 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: There will be two trash chutes – one for recycling, and one for trash, each with a dedicated dumpster. So, the recycling capacity will be 50% of the total service capacity. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/30/2018 04/30/2018: A wider overall opening for the service gates will allow for more efficient access for haulers. Consider integrating the pedestrian entrance into one of the service gates (a smaller gate within a larger one) or by locating the two service gates to be adjacent to one another. Response: Interior trash chutes were included into the project to provide easier access by residents. Department: Light And Power Contact: Austin Kreager, , akreager@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: This site is currently being fed by a 277/480 volt 150 kva transformer. Typical residential buildings do not have this large of a power need. This transformer can be changed out for a smaller one at the applicant's expense if need be. Response: Noted. Design team will initiate discussion with electrical consultant prior to FDP. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: 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. Response: Comment noted Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Please provide a one line diagram and a C-1 form to Light and Power Engineering. The C-1 form can be found at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf Response: Noted. C-1 form will be provided prior to permit. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 221-6700. Please reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. Response: Comment noted. Response: Thank you, noted. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges and any system modification charges necessary may apply to this development. Response: Comment noted. Response: Thank you, noted. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Transformer locations shall be within 10' of a paved surface and must have a minimum of an 8' clearance from the front side and a 3' clearance around the sides and rear. (1000 kVA up to 2500 kVA requires 4' around the sides and rear.) Response: Comment noted. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT The EAE is to be added to the plat on the next submittal. Response: EAE now shown on plat. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: FIRE LANE SIGNAGE The limits of the fire lane shall be identified with signage. Sign locations to be detailed on future plan sets. Refer to LCUASS details #1418 & 1419. Response: Fire lane signage shown on sheet C3.0. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS The proposed site plan does not yet fully reflect compliance with fire code requirements relative to Aerial Apparatus Access as defined by IFC Appendix D105.3. > Access to the north side of the building provides one point of access which is positioned at 32' (greater than 30') from the building. > Access points on the south side of the building provide limited roof access to the SW corner and the drive is positioned at 14' (less than 15') from the building. > A conversation with the fire marshal will be required to determine if the current plan is sufficient to meet the intent of the code. Response: EAEs on north and south sides of building have been revised to meet the minimum 15’ and maximum 30’ separation distance from building for aerial access. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: PARAPET HEIGHT What is the parapet height above the roof deck? While not detailed in the fire code, parapet wall heights more than 4' above rood deck to no support fire access from ladder trucks. If the applicant intends to meet aerial apparatus access as defined by the fire code, the parapet height will need to be considered. Response: The parapet is approximately 18” above the roof deck. This will vary slightly with a low-slope roof. Department: Planning Services Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Section 3.10.5(B) requires roofs to have a three dimensional conrnice facing public streets and walkways. You're proposing a prefinished metal parapet, which wouldn't meet the code. We'll either need a modification request for this standard or a tweak to the parapet to make it have more three dimensionality. Response: We will provide a three-dimensional sheet metal cornice. Please see the revised elevations. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: What percentage of the ground floor and upper floors are glazing? Section 3.10.5(G) requires pedestrian oriented facades to be 60% glazing. For this project, staff interprets this to apply towards the west elevation. 40% of the upper floors need to be glazing. Please provide this calculation. This section also allows for alternative compliance through enhanced architectural features, enhanced landscaping, trellises, arcades or shallow display window cases. Response: Glazing on the ground level west façade was increased to 53%, which is about 10 percentage points higher than the first submittal. Glazing on the upper levels throughout the building was also increased; the west façade now has 40% glazing on the second and third levels. This being an existing masonry building, adding more fenestration will be increasingly difficult from logistical and financial standpoints. Exterior landscaping and site structures will add significantly to the pedestrian experience along Mason Street: a large entry canopy signifies pedestrian access to the building, and new trees and shrubs will soften the view of the building from the street. New balconies on the west side will bring residents out of the building and add visual interest. Further, new painted siding inset in the existing CMU façade will add a more human scale to the existing building. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: For hearing, we will need details on the shrub beds proposed on the east edge of the parking lot and within the landscape islands in the parking lot. This is to ensure compliance with Sections 3.2.1(E)(4) & (5). Response: Thanks Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: The label on the tree species diversity table indicates the standards for sites with more than 60 trees. This site contains 29 trees, so you should label that column as 20-39 trees < 33%. Response: Noted, label updated. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Your proposed landscaping exceeds the maximum water budget per 3.2.1(E)(3)(b). Adjust the landscape plan to reduce the water budget. Response: Water use budget now within the allowable amount. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Thank you for submitting a tree mitigation plan. It is unclear how you are mitigating for the loss of trees based on the landscape plan submitted. Please clearly indicate which trees will be counting towards meeting the mitigation requirement. Response: See updated mitigation plan for clarification. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Please provide a detail of the proposed bike racks so staff can confirm the bicycle counts shown on the site plan. Response: Detail provided. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: Where inside the building do you propose bicycle parking? What racks will you be using for those spaces? Please provide more detail on the proposed bicycle parking inside the building. Response: 24 bike parking spaces are provided in a bike room at the south side of the building using a compact bike storage system. Please see the new bike room plan included. This room will also include a bike repair station. This indoor bike parking is in addition to the 40 covered bike parking spaces included near the front entrance. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/04/2018: There's a thick, black, dashed line running along the north end of the site that terminates near the preserved trees. What is this line indicating? Does this line need to be on the site plan? Response: Line removed. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: The erosion control escrow calculation could not be found in this submittal. The erosion control plans and report (shown in SWMP section of the plans) have some significant redlines that will need to be looked at and change or addressed at time of the next submittal. 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: Erosion control report addressing comments, escrow calculation, and sequencing chart will be provided at FDP. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: In order to assess if the LID design is meeting City criteria, documentation is needed on the modified impervious area for the site. This includes removal and replacement of parking areas and other site improvements. The modified impervious area is required to be treated with a LID technique per City standards. Response: Modified impervious area now tabulated on the developed drainage map and documented in the preliminary drainage letter. LID water quality treatment for this area is proposed via a Contech CDS storm filtration unit, see updated plans and drainage letter. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Fixed Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please revise the sub-title as marked. See redlines. Response: Noted and revised. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Some of the right of way & easements shown do not match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Noted and revised. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Noted and revised. Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The titles need to match on all plan sets. See redlines. Response: Noted and revised. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Some of the right of way & easements shown do not match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Easements updated. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Fixed Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: 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: Noted and revised. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please revise the legal description as marked. See redlines. Response: Legal description now updated accordingly. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Some of the right of way & easements shown do not match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Easements now updated. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, , TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: The Traffic Study notes the goal for an easement and sidewalk connection from Mason to the Max Station for a more direct connection. City Staff would support this connection. Also a HAWK signal is recommended in the TIS at the Mason/Creger intersection, however a Feasibility Analysis was not included with the report. The Analysis is required if any type of treatment were to be installed as part of the City's crosswalk policy. Response: Information on the feasibility analysis will be provided by s6taff review. Department: Transportation Planning Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-416-4320, slorson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: PARKING. Please remove the parking reduction notes for proximity to the MAX station (as the project does not meet the minimum distance via ped access) and for provision of transit passes. Neither of them are being used to reduce parking beyond the 50% for affordable housing. Response: Parking reduction notes removed from the site plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: One way to achieve a passing pedestrian LOS is to negotiate an access easement between Mason St. and the Horsetooth MAX Station. There are two properties that could accommodate this access. Please contact me so we can determine next steps. Response: Housing Catalyst is happy to communicate and assist with coordination of an access easement for the City of Fort Collins, Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: The overall water budget for the property exceeds 15 gallons per square foot (gpsf). Please adjust the landscape design so the water demand is less than 15 gpsf. Direct questions to Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com or 970-221-6704. Response: Water budget revised and updated to be under 15 gallons per square foot. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com Response: Noted. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please show the existing water services to the site on the Utility Plan. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please include all fittings on the Utility Plan. See redlines. Response: Noted. Department: Zoning Contact: Ryan Boehle, 970-416-2401, rboehle@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The lighting along the east property line is in excess to the code standard of 0.1 fc, 20' past the property line. Response: Site lighting was revised accordingly, please see new photometrics sheet.