Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWATERFIELD FOURTH FILING - MAJOR AMENDMENT / PDP - PDP180009 - 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 August 10, 2018 Jay Garcia Thrive Home Builders 1875 Lawrence St Suite 900 Denver, CO 80202 RE: Waterfield Fourth Filing, PDP180009, 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: Ripley Design, Northern Engineering, Thrive, APS, Delich Associates, Mike Phelan Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: In general, staff is concerned about the concept of dwelling units fronting not on public streets but private green belts, or green courts, with private alleys serving the garages. With the garage being along the alley and attached, this results in no private outdoor gathering space in the form of a small backyard or back porch or patio. Instead, outdoor areas are shifted to the front by use of a small front porch or, in some cases, small front yards where there is less privacy. As discussed at the project review meeting, this arrangement requires the use of small pocket parks, or small outdoor gathering areas that are properly distributed that have amenities and features that make up for the lack of private outdoor gathering areas on an individual lot basis. Response: Lot typicals have been updated to show shared side yards which will provide private space for single family detached units. All single family attached units have a small front porch, and there are several pocket parks distributed throughout the site to provide residents a gathering space. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 2 08/08/2018: The area south of Suniga Road, between Street H and Alley 16, the green courts, or green belts, upon which the units front, are only 10.5 feet wide. As noted at the project review meeting, this common area is supplemented by adjoining private front yards such that there would be approximately 30 to 40 feet between the facing units. Please indicate on the plans or on a Lot Typical this condition. Also, please indicate that each unit has a direct walkway to the common walkway. Also, please investigate whether or not any of these private front yards will need to also be dedicated as utility easements. Response: The site plan has been updated to show all building footprints, which shows approximately 40’ between units along walk streets south of Suniga Road between Street H and Alley 16. Walkways have been added to lot typicals. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: This is also the case between Street B and Alley 8. Response: See site plan for building footprint locations and dimensions between units. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Also, regarding this 10.5-foot width, is this sufficient for the utilities that cannot be accommodated in the alleys? Please be aware that utilities may need to be installed in the greenbelts where units do not front on public streets, or, as noted above, utilities may need to be installed in private front yards. Please note that Light and Power cannot serve from a greenbelt. Response: All utilities are proposed to run through the alleys or public streets. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Please note that the Lot Typicals do not include units that front on the green belts. Please add. Also, the response to Conceptual Review comment number 10 indicates a number of Single Family Attached units will have small front or back yards. Please add Lot Typicals that indicate this condition. Response: All footprints are being shown on the site plan to illustrate each unique condition throughout the site. Distance from building to building is being shown on site plan. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: On sheet 6 of 20, Alleys 16 through 22 will need to be named for addressing and wayfinding. (Note there are two Alley 16's.) Please consult the Larimer County Street Name Inventory to ensure that duplicate names are not selected. Response: A list of proposed street names has been included with this submittal. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Please label Street E as Merganser Drive. Response: Labeled. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: In general, on all site plan enlargement plans, please label all green courts wherever a unit does not front on a public street. Staff would like assurance that these are to be dedicated as common open space and that they do not double as stormwater facilities. Staff takes the position that a green belt must be of a different character than a stormwater detention pond or conveyance channel. Again, as noted, fronting units on stormwater facilities diminishes the overall quality of the green belt concept. If these areas also double as stormwater facilities, then their side slopes will prevent or discourage any active usage by the residents of the dwellings fronting on these areas. If 3 such is the case, then additional outdoor pocket parks, common amenity areas and landscaping must be provided as compensation. Response: Green courts have been labeled. No stormwater detention is proposed in any greencourts. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Staff is concerned about the length of Alley 10 number of lots it serves, particularly the lots that face north. There are seven lots that are greater than 350 from Street C and five lots that are greater than 350 feet from Timberline Road. As you know, 350 feet is the maximum length of a major walkway spine and such a walkway is cannot be counted if it crosses an alley. The applicant and design team are encouraged to explore design solutions that meet the overall intent of the standard versus seeking a Modification of Standard that appears to be self-imposed. Response: Per our measurements, there are 4 lots which exceed the 350’ requirement for a Major Walkway Spine, which we have provided a modification for with this submittal. To help provide a safe alley crossing, we are proposing enhanced crosswalks at each location where a trail crosses an alley. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: The comment response letter refers to several community spaces. Please label on the plans and indicate what attributes and amenities are being provided and what makes these spaces active. Response: Amenity spaces such as pocket parks, green courts, and walk streets have been labeled throughout the site plan. See note on site plan for proposed amenities within each area. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: As you are aware, every front entrance to a dwelling must, in order of preference, (1) face directly onto a public street or street-like private drive, (2) or be connected by walkway to a street that does not exceed 200 feet in length, (3) or be connected by a major walkway spine that complies with the definition in Section 5.1.2 and does not exceed 350 in length. There are areas on the plan where there is an over-reliance on the major walkway spine where, instead, a walkway could be introduced that is within 200 feet of unit entrances. Response: The proposed site plan has been developed with the concept of creating a very “walkable community”. While there are locations throughout the site where we exceed the 200’ length requirement, we feel that we have taken extra lengths to provide an extensive trail/sidewalk system throughout the site. Every unit is able to access this trail system from their front door. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Staff remains very concerned about the lack of person-doors along the alleys that would connect directly into the units that do not front on a public street without having to either go through the garage or around the structure to the only door. It seems obvious that failing to provide this access for emergency providers increases response time. If person-doors cannot be provided, then the three other sides of the structure must have a walkway. (The comment response letter indicates a key pad access system to the garage but this does not solve the problem of emergency providers being encumbered by cars, bikes and other miscellaneous objects typically found in garages.) Response: Person doors will be provided to each detached unit. For single-family attached units where person doors cannot be provided, a sidewalk along all 3 sides of the building has been included to access the front of the unit. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: The response to Conceptual Review comment number eight is that all front porches will have minimum dimensions of 7-feet by 9-feet. For the single family attached units that do not front on a public street, why not simply allow the length of the porch to reflect the entire width of the unit? This would 4 seem practical and allow for greater enjoyment of outdoor space. Response: The break in porches along the fronts of all units is intended to provide visual relief along the fronts of buildings. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/13/2018 08/13/2018: There are three areas on sheet six where units are out of compliance with being within 200 feet of a public street sidewalk. These areas will need to be upgraded with a major walkway spines in order to comply with Section 3.5.2(D)(1)(b). (See redlines.) Response: Walks have been upgraded to major walkway spines. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/13/2018 08/13/2018: For the seven buildings on the south side of Suniga and face north, please note that emergency providers prefer to not stage on an arterial street. If these units don't have person-doors on the alley, please provide walkways on all three sides of these structures so emergency responders can get around from the alley to the front door. Response: Walkways have been provided. See site plan for locations. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/13/2018 08/13/2018: Along the west side of the property, between Vine Drive and Suniga Road, please verify with the property owners to the west (Don and Beverly Weiss) as to the status of the existing farm access road. Does this road need to be preserved in some form for their benefit? Response: We acknowledge the existing farm access road that is used by the owners to the west, and intend to maintain this access through our development. Further exploration is needed as to the status of this easement, as we are unsure whether the document was recorded. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/13/2018 08/13/2018: As discussed at the review meeting, Alley 9 is excessively long resulting in monotonous dead space. Staff recommends that the applicant and design team explore options that enhances this alley with landscaping. Response: Landscaping will occur along alleys between driveways and outside of fences. See lot typicals for additional information. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/13/2018 08/13/2018: Staff is concerned about the response to PDR comment number 30 which requires three distinctly different building designs for the single family attached structures. The response indicates that only two will be provided but that the intent of the standard will be addressed by groupings ranging from 3 to 5-plex buildings. This solution does not meet the intent of the standard and further discussion on this aspect is needed. Response: Three building types are being proposed for single family attached structures—2 story townhomes, 3-story townhomes, and staggered townhomes (oriented around island medians, see site plan). Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Spencer Smith, 970-221-6603, smsmith@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Make sure that all proposed grading will tie into existing. There are many areas where the proposed contours are not tied in. Also some areas of proposed grading exceed the 4:1 max. Response: Contours are now shown to tie into existing along the property boundary now. 4:1 slopes have been 5 revised. At this point though there is no fine grading, no sidewalk grading, etc associated with the proposed surface. As we move into FDP the grading will be a lot more refined and additional grading sheets will be provided to show these fine grading areas. At first round final there will be no slopes greater than 4:1 and additional Landscaping walls may be placed throughout the site to help achieve these stabilized slopes. Thanks. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Offsite future street design needs to show existing contours in plan and profiles. Response: Offsite contours are now shown in the profiles. We did not show any contours in plan view on the street Sheets but we would be more than happy to include them we just typically don’t. Let us know if you would like Northern to start including these on the street sheets. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Site and Utility Plans will need to incorporate all adjacent roadway improvements to Timberline Rd. and E. Vine Dr. as indicated in the TIS. Response: Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Any proposed alleys will need to be private. All necessary easements for emergency access, access, utilities, etc. will need to be dedicated with the plat. I will confirm if the City has a preference as to how the private alley intersections with public streets need to be configured (mainly for drainage purposes). Response: All alleyways are now private, and all associated easements are now depicted on the Plat. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Any alleys that will need to be utilized by PFA for emergency access, will need to meet PFA minimum standards. There may be some instances of 16' wide alleys that will not work (to be determined by PFA). Response: All alleys where fire access cannot otherwise be provided by an adjacent public street meet PFA’s minimum standards for width. In locations where alleys are not required by PFA, steps have been taken to still allow access to PFA trucks by increasing radii at entrances. Response: Ripley has been in communication with Jim at PFA. Please refer to their response. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: There are a couple proposed typical street sections that do not meet City standards. Variances will need to be approved for these. I recommend that these be submitted as soon as possible to confirm that the varied sections will be acceptable. Response: Variances will be submitted for drive aisles that are not LCUASS standard. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 The narrow alleys (16' width) seem like they may be problematic in many areas, aside from the emergency access aspect. In many instances, there are multiple utilities within the alleys and it seems like there may be issues with constructability, maintenance, etc. There will need to be some further coordination with appropriate City staff, ELCO, Boxelder San. Dist. and the applicant. The project Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan will coordinate a meeting. 6 Response: Further coordination is still needed to resolve this. An exhibit will be provided to the City, Boxelder, and ELCO depicting the cross sections of the roadways with utilities in place to give a better since of separations. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: The typical lot diagrams need to contain more information. We will need to see driveways, all utilities (wet and dry) and any other above and below grade improvements to ensure that the narrow lots are feasible. This information would be helpful when we have our utility coordination meeting. Please send exhibits to Engineering prior to meeting, so that I may review and distribute to all City and outside municipal staff as necessary. Response: Exhibits were sent but to services have been included with this submittal. Services are typically Shown at first round final but they can be shown next submittal if requested. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Please show that all turnarounds that will be utilized by PFA, will meet PFA criteria. Some of the turnarounds have angles that may pose an issue to fire truck movements. Response: Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: This project will need to provide an interim and ultimate Timberline Rd. design. We will need to see preliminary design for both conditions prior to approval of the PDP. Response: Cross sections have now been provided for both interim and ultimate design for Timberline. Line work is currently depicting what the interim and future designs will look like. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: At final design, we will need to see enough design of the site connection to future Conifer to know that what is being shown can be built. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Any ROW vacation must be done through an ordinance by City Council. Easements can be vacated via the plat. Please coordinate with Engineering to begin that process. You can find more information about the process and requirements at the following link: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php Response: Noted Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Will the HOA/Metro District be maintaining the enhanced (widened) medians in Street G and Street D? I will need to confirm whether these would need to be included within Tracts on the plat or not. Response: Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Please see accompanying redlines for additional comments and clarification of these written comments. Response: Redlines have been addressed. Thank you. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: This project will need to dedicate any additional ROW necessary to accommodate interim and/or ultimate Timberline Rd. improvements adjacent 7 to this site. Response: Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Please verify that all street centerline geometry meets LCUASS criteria. Variances will need to be requested for any instances where the standards are not met. Some alley centerline radii look to be less than min. as well as a couple of the widenings (see redlines). Response: Centerlines were updated to meet LCUASS criteria regardless that the alleys are private. Variances will be submitted for those two main “enhanced boulevards prior to next submittal. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Lots 9-11, Block 12 encroach into the adjacent roadway utility easement. Response: Lot lines have been revised Topic: Reports - Soils, Subdrain Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: An updated/revised subsurface exploration report should be submitted for this project. Response: Piezometer devices are on site and the groundwater study is in-progress. See memo included in this submittal for progress of the study. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, 970-221-6820, TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Traffic Operations will need to work with you on the alternative mitigation that will be needed for the Vine and Lemay intersection once the new APF code language is in place. Response: We will work with City staff once the new APF code language is in place. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Please provide signing and striping plans for the development. An interim striping plan will be needed to show traffic operation in the short term as well as an ultimate plan to show operation at full build out. Response: Stripping and signage sheets have been provided for Timberline and Suniga. Suniga does not have stripping depicted as this is still being working through at this moment. Next round will be presented. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Traffic Operations will work with you during FDP on the proportional amount of funding for the Timberline and Vine signalization. Response: Acknowledged. Response: We will work with City staff on proportional funding for the Timberline/vine signalization Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: What Traffic related variances will be needed? For example Pedestrian LOS and intersection LOS at Vine and Lemay. Response: Updated in revised TIS. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Street D or Garganey Drive from the previous submittal was 8 shown as a right in right out however the TIS assumes full movement, please clarify. Response: Street D is proposed as full movement in the short range and right-in/right-out the long range. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Please clarify the type of control in the TIS for the Timberline - Suniga intersection in the short range. Response: Updated in revised TIS. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: ALLEY DEDICATION > All private alleys required to meet minimum fire access shall be dedicated as Emergency Access Easements and be constructed to minimum fire lane specifications. > Fire lanes shall support 40 tons. > Minimum inside and outside turning radii are 25' & 50' respectively. > All dedicated fire lanes shall be identified with No Parking - Fire Lane signage and/or red curbing. Sign locations shall be labeled on plans. > As previously indicated, PFA will only support 16' wide private alleys where they are designated as one-way. Two-way alleys require 20' in width. > As previously indicated, PFA has substantial concern regarding the ability of fire apparatus to turn into and out of the proposed 16' wide alleys. There is a reasonable expectation that fire apparatus are able to arrive at the front or back door of any unit. No alley should prohibit the ability of fire apparatus to access a residence. All alleys shall be designed to allow for fire truck movements within all areas of the site. An AutoTurn exhibit will be required for verification of all alley turning movements. Response: Fire lanes required by PFA have been designed to meet the fire lane specifications. In addition, we have increased the radius of all 16’ alleys to allow for a B-40 sized truck to turn in and out of the alleys. Auto-turn exhibit was sent to PFA on 8/28. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: ALLEY LOADED UNITS As already stated, there is a reasonable expectation that emergency services personnel can quickly arrive at a man door to the residence. This is usually the front door; however, plans containing alley loaded lots present an added obstacle to access. PFA recommends that alley loaded units be provided with a man-door off the rear (alley) side of the structure. In lieu of a rear-facing man-door, front doors onto a greenbelt or other landscape feature shall be provided with an approved sidewalk to the front door that connects to with the alley so as to provide direct and efficient access to any individual unit. Future plans should include all walkways to the front door. Response: All detached units will have a man door provided for emergency personnel. For single family attached units, a sidewalk has been added which extends around all 3 sides of the building to provide direct access to the front door. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: ALLEY NAMING 9 All alleys required for fire access shall be named or otherwise provided with a detailed monument signage plan to allow for wayfinding throughout the site. Response: All alleys will be named; a list of proposed names has been included with this submittal. A detailed signage plan will be included in Final Plans. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 30' IN HEIGHT > Proposed elevations appear to indicate that building height may exceed 30' in height on some building types. In order to accommodate the access requirements for aerial fire apparatus (ladder trucks), building exceeding 30' in height required fire lanes shall be 26 foot wide minimum on at least one long side of the building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. Response: Per the meeting held with PFA on 8/17/18, access to 3 story buildings will be provided via a minimum 20’ alley with a minimum 15’/ maximum 40’ distance between the flowline and building. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: WATER SUPPLY > A hydrant capable of providing 1000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure is required within 400' of any Residential Building as measured along an approved path of vehicle travel. This maximum allowable separation distance has not been achieved in all portions to the project. > The project is also responsible for meeting hydrant separation distances along all bordering roads associated with this project to include Suniga Drive, Old Vine Drive, Timberline Road, Conifer Street, Street E (Merganser), and any road bordering the western limits of the ODP. > See Redlines. Response: Redlines were addressed and hydrants were relocated. Thanks. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: CLUBHOUSE > The drive aisle to the Clubhouse shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement. > Perimeter access to this building is not able to be met with the current Site Plan and this building will require a NFPA13 automatic fire sprinkler system. > A building in excess of 5,000 sq. ft. will require a fire sprinkler system. So shall an A-2 assembly group occupancy with an occupant load greater than 99 persons. Response: An emergency access easement is now provided in that turn around. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: ADDRESS POSTING & WAYFINDING Even though addresses are yet to be assigned, the project shall provide a detailed posting plan not later than at time of FDP. As previously indicated, and residence that has fire lanes on sides other than the addressed street side, shall have the address numbers and street name on each side that fronts the 10 fire lane. Response: Acknowledged Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Updated ECS from June 2018 reports: A. The single, isolated wetland delineated on the property has decreased since the 2012 wetland survey from 8.46 to 5.45 acres. B. The reduction of the wetland has occurred mostly in the north, east and south portions of the 2012 wetland perimeter; mostly Canada thistle now. C. Sample points W-1 and W-4 are the only ones meeting all three criteria for wetlands (soils, hydrology, vegetation). Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/10/2018: A friendly reminder that Rebecca Everette, then Senior Environmental Planner, delivered this comment for the project in DEC 2017... FOR PHASES 2 & 3: Environmental Planning staff has concerns about the proximity of the townhome lots and greater concentration of human impacts on the eastern edge of the wetland. Please consider locating the higher intensity uses to a less sensitive area of the site. Impacts related to noise, headlights, building lighting, and foot traffic will need to be mitigated near both the wetland and the canal buffer. Response: 2-story townhome units have been oriented adjacent to the wetland so as to provide a visual and noise buffer from the wetland. In addition, screening is proposed between all units and the wetland in the form of dense landscaping. All of the spaces between townhome clusters will be maintained as NHBZ with native grasses and raised boardwalks. This is intended to portray this portion of the site as a natural “preserve” of sorts which will help to instill the idea that this is a sensitive natural area. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: The isolated wetland at the site has the highest ecological value for the site with greatest opportunity for habitat enhancements; the setback requirement for wetlands larger than 1/3 acre (without significant use by waterfowl and/or shorebirds) is 100ft from edge of wetlands. Currently submitted site plan shows significant encroachment within 100ft wetland buffer setback; remove units and parking spaces from the eastern edge of wetland. Ensure 1:1 mitigation of wetlands and/or buffer. Sometimes a 1:2 wetland to upland buffer is appropriate for NHBZ design. Response: The NHBZ has been updated to provide 1:1 mitigation for the wetland buffer directly adjacent to the wetland itself. See response above. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: The setback for both irrigation ditches that serve as wildlife corridors and for naturalized storm drainage channels is 50ft from top-of-bank. Remove units on north side to be located outside of the 50ft buffer for the Larimer and Weld Canal, or, ensure the encroachment area is offset elsewhere along the ditch. Response: The 50’ buffer zone has been averaged along the canal to provide 1:1 mitigation for the canal buffer in places where it encroaches into private lots. 11 Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: 08/06/2018: Clarify how "scrub trees" groves will be mitigated for; City Forestry and Environmental Planning have coordinated on this in the past. Reach out to us for assistance if necessary. Mitigation for these grove areas should be included in overall NHBZ design. Response: Per the tree inventory walk with Molly Roche on 8/24, additional mitigation points may be necessary for Russian Olives and Siberian Elms. Molly has indicated that further coordination will be needed with Environmental Planning. No further direction has been provided. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: The 2013 Ecological Characterization Study completed for this site identified significant natural habitat features that should be protected, buffered, and/or mitigated as part of any future development: 1. Central wetland area 2. Larimer and Weld Canal 3. Potentially significant cottonwood trees 4. Relatively unobstructed views of the Front Range foothills Response: See landscape and mitigation plans for proposed solutions in protected these features. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: City of Fort Collins Environmental Planning staff does not support currently proposed natural habitat buffer zone (NHBZ) and does not believe it does or can meet the 9 criteria outlined in LUC 3.4.1 performance standards. See LUC 3.4.1(E)(1)(a-i). The site design and programming need to adjust significantly to accommodate natural habitats and features as defined by City Land Use Code. Response: Please see response to the 9 performance standards included in this submittal. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: It appears the hatching showing required NHBZ is not (and assuming informs baseline calculation shown of 386,061 sf) is cutting out on the landscape plan page 7 of 20. The entire wetland area, plus the 100ft setback area, should be included in total baseline calculation of NHBZ minimum size requirements. This is the starting point for decision-making especially when NHBZ performance standards for design will be utilized. Response: The NHBZ has been updated to include the wetland in the required buffer calculation. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Sometimes co-location of stormwater/detention features and natural habitat buffer zones make sense, and other times it does not. There is plenty of room on this site to meet the standards separately. This site is not so constrained that it is unreasonable to feasibly meet both stormwater and environmental planning LUC standards separately. Attempts to "double dip" will not be supported. Please adjust concept plan accordingly. Thank you in advance for your cooperation on this matter. Response: The NHBZ has been removed from the detention area to the south of the site and is now located exclusively adjacent to the resource. Response: The wetlands will be used for both detention purposes and LID purposes. At the moment the wetlands Are dying and if nothing is done to enhance this area it will cease to exist and those thorn bushes will Cover all the land. By utilizing this wetland for detention and water quality it will bring life back and restore the wetlands. Treating water within the wetland will allow water to infiltrate and saturate the surrounding grounds 12 restoring life to the dying wetlands. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Under Plant List on Landscape Plan sheet 8 of 20 it says: Plant quantities and locations will be detailed and called out at final. However, this approach would NOT be appropriate for this project. The landscape design of the NHBZ will need to be detailed prior to scheduling a Hearing and especially to demonstrate project can meet LUC 3.4.1 performance standards. That being said, for this site it seems to make most sense and seems easiest, actually, to simply meet straight quantitative buffer setbacks and provided enhancements within them. This approach would create the best NHBZ. Response: A plant list has been provided for the NHBZ for both the wetland and the canal buffers. See landscape plan for details. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Please submit site photometric plan for entire site and including proposed natural habitat buffer area; current plan is showing only a portion. Thank you for selecting 3000K color temperature for outdoor luminaires. Response: The only site lighting that is proposed at this time is located around the clubhouse. Street lighting typically is not included in the site photometric plan. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/10/2018 08/06/2018: For such a large site, there is ample opportunity to incorporate Nature in the City concepts and designs. Included here are a few resources for design ideas supporting Fort Collins Nature in the City program efforts. a. Making Urban Nature / Stads Natuur Maken , J. Vink, P. Vollaard, N. de Swarte b. Planting in a Post-Wild World, T. Rainer and C. West c. Habitat Network, Bat Houses, TNC/Cornell d. Toward an Urban Ecology, SCAPE, 2018 e. Attracting Native Pollinators, The Xerces Society, 2011 f. Restorative Commons: Creating Health and Well-being through Urban Landscapes, USDA, USFS, Northern Research Station, Meristem, 2009 Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/10/2018 08/06/2018: Environmental Planning needs another formal round of PDP review. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/10/2018 08/07/2018: Per meeting on 8/7/2018: A. Todd Sullivan to schedule an onsite meeting with: City Forestry, City Environmental Planning, Thrive Homes representative and ecological consultant, Mike Phelan. B. Submit concept plans showing a 50 ft wetland buffer and an 80 ft and a 100ft wetland buffer around the main isolated wetland and corresponding mitigation incorporated into design elsewhere. C. There is opportunity here to be creative and significantly enhance the isolated wetland with addition of wetland plugs, removal of Canada thistle, and overall addition of much more vegetation species diversity including woody 13 species; City staff are open to negotiating workable solutions, including potential wetland water quality features inside buffer setback. D. Inclusion of water quality treatment will be needed to treat any water running into the buffered wetland area. E. The main goal from Environmental Planning perspective is to protect and enhance the highest value ecological feature at the site, which, for this site is the isolated wetland feature. F. Please ensure inclusion of explanations of LEED and other environmentally friendly solutions in built environment design, as this is also important to holistic environmental planning for site. Response: The applicant fully understands the importance of protecting the ecological resources located on site, and are eager to help to restore and enhanced their presence. Significant wetland remediation is proposed through this application to include removal of Canadian thistle (NHBZ plan for specific locations and quantities). In addition, significant enhancements are proposed to the wetland through the addition of trees and shrubs and a raised boardwalk along the eastern perimeter. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Regardless of the species on-site, City Forestry would still like to schedule an on-site meeting to inventory all existing trees on the property. Please complete this step prior to next submittal. Stephanie Blochowiak with Environmental Planning would like to attend as well. 1/3/2018: Please schedule an on-site meeting with City Forestry to obtain tree inventory and mitigation information, which is to be included on the landscape plans. Response: A tree inventory occurred on 8/24. See mitigation plan for details. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: 8/6/2018: I WILL NEED MORE LANDSCAPE DETAIL ON THE NEXT SUBMITTAL. PLEASE PROVIDE A LIST OF PROPOSED TREE SPECIES, QUANTITY, CALIPER SIZE, AND DIVERSITY PERCENTAGE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE SPECIES COUNT AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION ALTERS FROM ROUND TO ROUND. HOWEVER, I NEED TO REVIEW PLANT LISTS, SPECIES LOCATION AND SEPARATION AS WELL AS DISTANCE FROM UTILITIES, AND STREET LIGHTS, STOP LIGHTS. PLEASE SHOW SPECIES SPECIFIC SYMBOLS OR LABELS OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH. ADDITIONALLY, PLEASE SCHEDULE A TREE INVENTORY WITH CITY FORESTRY STAFF TO OBTAIN TREE INVENTORY AND MITIGATION INFORMATION TO INCLUDE ON THE NEXT SUBMITTAL. 1/3/2018: Please provide a landscape plan that meets the Land Use Code and 3.2.1 requirements. Response: A detailed landscape plan has been provided indicating proposed tree species, quantities, caliper size, and diversity. 14 See Sheet 10 of 30 for legends and tables. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: 8/6/2018: Continued: Tree Protection Notes not included on the plans. Please include these on the plan set. 1/3/2018: Please include the City of Fort Collins General Landscape Notes, Street Tree notes, and Tree Protection Notes on the landscape plans. These notes are available from the Project Planner or City Forestry (mroche@fcgov.com). Response: Tree protection notes added. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Continued: This comment was acknowledged by the applicant; however, it does not appear that all utilities have been labeled on the plan set. Please address. 1/3/2018: Include locations of any water or sewer lines on the landscape plan. Please adjust street tree locations to provide for proper tree/utility separation. 10’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines 6’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer service lines 4’ between trees and gas lines Response: A utility legend has been added to all landscape sheets. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: 8/6/2018: Continued: This comment was acknowledged by the applicant; however, it does not appear that stop signs and street lights have been incorporated into the plan set. Please address. 1/3/2018: 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: Luke Unruh has indicated that the City of Fort Collins street light design will not be provided until final. Tree separation from stop signs has been provided. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Please use a smaller scale (1”=30’ or 1”=40’) on landscape sheets 10, 11, 12, and 13. Reviewing plans at 1”=60’ does not provide the most accurate measurements of tree/utility separation, lot width, tree separation distances, etc. Response: Acknowledged. 15 Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/02/2018 08/02/2018: At first FDP submittal please provide updated Erosion and Sediment (ESC) Control Materials (Report, Plan, and Escrow). No ESC materials required at the PDP level. Response: Noted Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: The outfall for the entire development area appears to have never been completed per the originally approved Waterfield Filing 1 and 2 development documents. This development will be required to complete these improvements per the original plan or have another outfall option approved by the City. Response: Callouts for this outfall to be constructed per Waterfield Filing 1 ha been included on the utility sheets. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: The LID design needs to have further clarification and documentation to show it meets City Criteria. As shown in the plans, the rain gardens are in series and it is unsure if they are sized correctly for the area draining to them. Response: Raingardens are gone. LID will now be treated within the wetlands with forebays treating the initial flush Events prior to runoff going into the wetlands. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: The LID calculations need to show the area required to be the media section and to have this area shown within the rain gardens on the plans. Response: Rain Gardens are gone. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: As discussed in the project meeting held on August 6th, 2018 with the Applicant, coordination is required with Environmental Planning to determine what is required for storm flows to enter the existing wetlands and if this area can be used for LID treatment. Response: After talking to environmental, it is our understanding this area has been approved to allow for LID treatment. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/09/2018 08/09/2018: The proposed public storm sewers in some locations are not meeting the 10 feet separation requirement from other utilities. There may be some circumstances where the alleys become private and the storm sewers in these private alleys can become private as well. Please provide 10 feet separation for any remaining storm sewers that stay public. Response: 10’ separations are met throughout the entire site other than the alleys. Further utility coordination meetings 16 are required to figure out how to make all these spacings work. However, all the alleys have now been made private at this point. Department: Park Planning Contact: Suzanne Bassinger, 970-416-4340, sbassinger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Park Planning & Development would be interested in discussing the possibility of sharing the use of the west stormwater detention area adjacent to the future park site. Response: We would be more than happy to sit down and discuss sharing this area. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 08/08/2018: Please contact Park Planning & Development to discuss these comments in more detail, if desired. Thank you. Response: Northern will reach out to Suzanne prior to next submittal to start coordinating. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/03/2018 08/08/2018: To accommodate the construction of future multi-use trails by the City of Fort Collins please add 50¿-foot wide easements labeled as Public Access and Trail Easement¿s, located along the north and east property boundaries. The north easement should parallel the Larimer & Weld Canal, but should not encroach in the L&W Right-of-Way. The easement along the east property boundary shall be located parallel to and west of the Timberline Drive Right-of Way. Response: Acknowledged. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/08/2018 8/08/18: Show 50-foot wide recreational trail easements on the north and east property boundaries, as indicated in the comment associated with the plat. The trail easements must not encroach on the existing L&W Canal ROW or the proposed Timberline Drive ROW. Response: 50’ easements have been added to the site plan. L&W Canal ROW has no ownership of this property, therefore the easement can co-exist. Department: Light And Power Contact: Luke Unruh, 9704162724, lunruh@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Please provide a transformer location for the community clubhouse. The transformer must be within 10 ft of a drivable surface and have 8 ft clearance in front and 3 ft along the sides and rear. Response: Additional utility coordination meetings are required to help Northern place transformers in the most Optimal spots for both the City and the site plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 17 08/06/2018: Will the water service lines be paired on the lot lines? Please show the water service stubs on the utility plans. Response: Water services will be paired on lot lines. Services will be provided next round regardless if its PDP round 3 or FDP round 1 once we have finalized the water and sewer main locations. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Light & Power only installs electric services to single family detached dwellings. The electric service to all other building types will be the responsibility of the owner. Please gang electric meters on single family attached and multifamily buildings on the opposite side of gas. Please coordinate meter locations with L&P. Response: The architect and Northern will coordinate these ganged meter locations. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Streetlights will be placed along public streets. A 40 feet separation on both sides of the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. A 15 feet separation on both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and streetlights. Light and Power does not provide streetlighting along alleys and private drives. Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/06/2018 08/06/2018: Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges, and any necessary system modification charges will apply at owners expense. Please see the Electric Estimating Calculator and Electric Construction Policies, Practices & Procedures at the following link: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers Response: Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: The Benchmark Statement has been updated. Please provide the following information for the Benchmark Statement in the EXACT format shown below. PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. 18 IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) = NAVD88 - X.XX¿. Response: Updated to match this exactly. Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: A complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: Please make sure all references to Suniga, are labeled as Suniga Road. This is the official name per City resolution 2015-011. Response: All references changed. Response: Updated. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/07/2018 08/07/2018: 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. Response: Changes have been updated per redlines.