Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutALLIED BUILDING PRODUCTS - FDP190004 - 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 February 11, 2019 Jessie Stonberg Baseline Engineering 112 N. Rubey Drive, Suite 180 Golden, CO 80403 Comments Letter Final Submittal RE: Allied Building Products, PDP180015, Round Number 2 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 Development Review Coordinator, at 970-224-6119 or tbeane@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Kai Kleer, 970-416-4284, kkleer@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/30/2018 12/10/2018 BEFORE HEARING: Once a site plan is received, review of this comment will be performed. 10/30/2018 BEFORE HEARING: A connecting walkway to the main building's existing walkway is required from Midpoint Drive. Please show on plan how this will extend through the west side of the site, cross the drive aisle and connect into the existing walkway. Code reference 4.27(E)(2) Response – Connecting sidewalk has been shown on the site plan. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/30/2018 12/11/2018 BEFORE HEARING: Please provide more detailed callouts of materials on the elevation plan. Planning services will provide an example of a plan that demonstrates what needs to be provided. Response: Revised elevations have been provided. 2 10/30/2018 BEFORE HEARING: Please provide material and color details for what is being proposed for the building. Is the base CMU? What color will the walls and roof be? Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 BEFORE HEARING: There is some concern over how this building meets the minimum wall articulation as required by the code. Please provide wall details that demonstrate differences in wall plane between the stone and corrugated steel. Example will be provided. Response: Revised elevations have been provided. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 BEFORE HEARING: Site plan is missing from planning set. Round 1 it was present, round 2 it's missing. Please submit a site plan for review. Response – Site plan has been submitted with this round. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 BEOFORE HEARING: The fence detail on the site plan is different than the other plans that were submitted and does not address comments from the previous round. Please update site plan accordingly. Response – Fence detail has been shown on site plans. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 BEFORE HEARING: The site plan shows several lights that are not part of the photometric plan. Please update plan to show what is actually proposed. Response – plans have been updated to show the correct location of lights. Please update landscape plan to indicate correct location of water service. Response – landscape plan has been updated. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 12/10/2018: FOR FINAL: I still have a couple of questions on the outlet structure detail. See the redlined notes. Response: Additional detail of the outlet structure modification have been provided. 10/29/2018: FOR FINAL: The outlet structure detail is hard to follow. The detail needs to more clearly illustrate the existing outlet box and how it’s being modified. Also, the WQCV perforation holes are incorrect. See the note in the redlines. Response – The outlet box is proposed to be modified in the field by removing the wingwalls and 3 cutting the WQC plate, front and sides of the box to the elevation of the WQCV, then modifying or fabricating a new trash rack. The perforation holes shown are the existing diameter of the plate per the attached DMW detail. Analysis of the WQV release for perforation diameter determined an insignificant change in diameter. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 12/10/2018: BY HEARING: It appears as though the 100-yr developed runoff routed toward the WQ pond and calculated in the Centerpoint Plaza drainage report is 17.6 cfs and the 100-yr developed runoff calculated in this report is 4.61 cfs + 11.71 cfs = 21.36 cfs. With the additional 3.76 cfs routed into the WQ pond and downstream, you will either need to provide detention and modify the outlet structure to match the existing runoff downstream, or run a hydraulic analysis on the pipe, all the way downstream to the river to verify that it is sized adequately. You can run the analysis at final plan stage, but the drainage report needs to acknowledge that pipe sizing and/or detention will need to be analyzed and potentially improved based on the hydraulic results. Response – see response to comment 7 for information on the modification of the outlet box. An analysis of the pipe was not run due to calculated flows being less than design flows. 10/29/2018: BY HEARING: The report does not appear to show that the developed runoff from this development project is equal to or less than the assumed runoff shown in the Centerpoint Plaza drainage analysis. This comparison needs to be clearly shown to verify that no detention is needed. Response – A table has been added to the report comparing DWM design flows and BEC Calculated flows. DMW design sheets are located in the appendix. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/10/2018 12/10/2018: FOR HEARING: LID requirements: In tabular form in the drainage report AND on the drainage map, please show total impervious area on the site = ; 75% of the impervious area on the site = ; vegetated buffer is treating how much area = ?; bioswale is treating how much area = Response – A table has been added in the report and on the Grading and Erosion Control Plan. Extents of LID systems need to be clearly delineated on the plans. This means that the extents of the vegetated buffer and the bioswale - with the amended soil cross-section needs to be outlined on the plans. Response – The gross area table was added to drainage report. Hatches have been added to the plans to indicate the extents of LID systems. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 12/10/2018 12/10/2018: FOR FINAL: LID requirements: Vegetated buffer requirements need to be shown to be met (i.e – no sod or highly manicured landscape, area of minimal traffic or disturbance, 14’ wide in the direction of flow, level spreader detail, area of buffer equal to or greater than area draining to it) 4 Bioswale requirements need to be shown to be met (i.e. run-on ratio is 10:1 max – this ratio is the impervious area running on to the area of the bottom of the swale. The swale needs to have a flat bottom of at least 2’ wide, not a v-channel); or can be designed as a volume-based system showing that the WQCV can be provided in the space allotted. Response – Additional detail has been added. The run-on ratio is listed on the Drainage and Erosion Control sheet. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 12/10/2018 12/10/2018: FOR FINAL: Erosion Control Plans: If the CWA and the onsite waste management areas are to be used and removed prior to the excavation and installation of the bio-swale, then what is shown is fine. Otherwise, the CWA and onsite waste storage areas will need to move. Either way, a note on the plans will need to be provided to clarify this requirement for the contractor. Response – A note has been added to the erosion control plans. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/24/2018 11/28/2018: For Final: Please resubmit Erosion Control Plans based upon redlines to meet City Criteria. Standard details were not added and some details need to be added. Also some comments were repeated from prior review. Response: The ECP has been revised per comments. 10/24/2018: For Final: Please resubmit Erosion Control Plans based upon redlines to meet City Criteria. Response: Erosion Control plans have been updated per redlines. A note has been added to the detail sheets. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/24/2018 11/28/2018: Development Agreement: Repeat Prior comments based upon plan comments not being revised. 10/24/2018: Development Agreement: Please resubmit an Erosion Control Escrow / Security Calculation based upon changes to the Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria. Response: Erosion control escrow has been updated per new plans and inserted in the report. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 12/10/2018: FOR FINAL: The existing curb stop and meter will need to be located and shown on the final 5 plans. We can try to help find these things if needed. Waiting to find them until construction starts won’t be allowed. Response: The existing curb stop and meter have been located, the meter Is located inside the existing building and therefore only the curb stop is shown. 10/29/2018: FOR FINAL: There is an existing water service to the existing building on this lot. The existing curb stop, meter and service line should be shown on the plans to verify that this line is not going to be disturbed with the proposed improvements to the front of the lot. Response – The existing curb stop and meter have been shown on the site and utility plan. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 12/10/2018: FOR FINAL: You will need to show the extents of asphalt removal and replacement for this work. 10/29/2018: FOR FINAL: There is an existing future fire service line stubbed into this lot. If this future fire service stub is not to be used with this improvement project, it is required to be abandoned at the main. A note shall be added to the plans that states this. Response – A note has been placed on the plans and extents of asphalt removal and replacement is shown on the site. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 12/7/2018: INFORMATION ONLY: Engineering is ready for the project to go to hearing. 10/29/2018: INFORMATION ONLY: Please note that there may be additional final plan level comments for this project with the final plan (FDP) submittal. Response – Noted. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/24/2018 10/24/2018: Environmental Planning is READY FOR HEARING. Response – Noted. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, 224-616-1992, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 6 11/29/18: FOR FINAL/FOR APPROVAL: Continued: The total number of trees includes all shade, ornamental and evergreens. Since the last submittal, the total number of trees on-site equals 21 trees. The species diversity percentages provided are incorrect. Please note that if there are between 20-39 trees on-site, the maximum percentage of any one species cannot exceed 33%. Please update the plant list to show the following: SHADEMASTER HONEYLOCUST: QTY 5; 24% NORTHERN CATALPA: QTY 5; 24% KENTUCKY COFFEETREE: QTY 5; 24% ACCOLADE ELM: QTY 3: 14% AUSTRIAN PINE: QTY 3: 14% 10/29/2018: PRIOR TO NEXT SUBMITTAL (BEFORE FDP) The percentage of Catalpa trees proposed on the plans exceed the maximum percentage of any one species. There are 11 trees proposed on-site. Per the LUC requirements, if there are 10-19 proposed trees, the maximum percentage of any one species is 50%. Catalpa trees make up 55%. Please incorporate a third canopy shade tree to the plant list and adjust these numbers. Response: Species diversity has been updated so that numbers reflect the inclusion of evergreen trees. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 11/29/18: FOR FINAL/FOR APPROVAL: Continued: Please show locations of street lights and stop signs on the landscape plan. 10/29/2018: COMPLETE DURING FDP Please include any existing or proposed street lights per Light and Power recommendations. Space street trees at the following distances from street lights: Canopy Shade tree: 40¿ Ornamental tree: 15 Response – Locations of lights and signs are shown on the plans. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/29/2018 11/29/18: FOR FINAL/FOR APPROVAL: Please specify Kentucky Coffeetree ‘Espresso’ as this is a seedless variety. Response: Kentucky Coffeetree has been updated to Kentucky Coffeetree ‘Espresso’ to make it the seedless variety. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/29/2018 11/29/18: The two proposed Austrian Pines on the south side of the building are spaced 15’ apart. These are large maturing conifer trees and should be spaced at least 25’ apart. Please adjust. Response: The two Austrian Pines on the south side of the building are now spaced further apart at 28 feet apart. 7 Department: Light And Power Contact: Luke Unruh, 9704162724, lunruh@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/29/2018 10/29/2018: If a new electric service is anticipated for the new lean-to structure, Please call Luke Unruh to discuss power requirements and fees that will be associated. Response – Noted. Department: PFA Contact: Andrew Rosen, 970-416-2599, arosen@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2018 12/12/2018: FOR INFORMATION 2018 IFC CODE ADOPTION Poudre Fire Authority and the City of Fort Collins (Town of Timnath, Larimer County) are in the process of adopting the 2018 International Fire Code. Code adoption is anticipated in early 2019. Building plan reviews shall be subject to the adopted version of the fire code in place at the time of plan review submittal and permit application. 12/06/2018: FOR NEXT ROUND >The proposed Fire Lanes are shown as access easements for Lot 3 and the new building. The required fire lanes shall be shown as Emergency Access Easements on the Plat or dedicated by separate legal document. 10/25/2018: ACCESS >Access is required to within 150ft of all exterior portions of the perimeter of this building. Midpoint drive is a collector street so can be used for this measurement. However, this planned building is approximately 90ft out of compliance for this requirement therefore a fire lane will be established on the property to provide this required access. The driveway to the existing building would be appropriate if it complies with the fire lane specifications shown in comment 2 and shown on the Plat as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) or dedicated by separate legal document. >This proposed storage building development triggers a re-evaluation of the fire access for the existing building which is also required to be in compliance with the 150ft access. If there is no pre-existing EAE for the existing building, then one shall be established to provide access to within 150ft of all external portions of that building. Response: Fire lanes are now shown as emergency access easements and will be dedicated prior to approval of the FDP. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2018 12/12/2018: FOR APPROVAL A 16ft wide fire lane will be added to the south edge of the parking area in front of the new structure. Response: This has been added along with signage. 10/25/2018: 8 FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS >The Access Easement shown on the site plan should be shown as an Emergency Access Easement. >There are no signs shown on the Site Plan but it is understood signage will be provided by FDP. Prior response: Requirements and signage noted. This will be finalized once the site plan has been fixed by City and Owner review. An Easement is shown access to access, signs are noted on the site plan. Response – Fire lane has been added in front of the new structure and labeled on access. Signage has been labeled and detail added to plan set. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2018 10/25/2018: GATES The gate shown at the Northeast corner shall be fitted with a Knox Key Switch. Response – A note has been added to the plans. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2018 12/12/2018: FOR APPROVAL GIS will determine whether the proposed structure will maintain the 2145 address or, since the same owner owns both Lots, 2155 Unit A and B can be used. Comment notes, plans will reflect final determination of address. 10/25/2018: ADDRESSING/WAYFINDING >It is noted on GIS that this lot is actually addressed as 2145 Midpoint Drive but owned by the same entity as 2155 Midpoint Drive. It is suggested that 2155 be used until such time as the property is sold or developed further . >To assist with prompt emergency response, the address shall be clearly visible from the street on the existing building and proposed new building. Due to the setback of the existing building, the full address in 14" high letters and numerals should be attached to the north elevation of the existing building so it is clearly visible from Midpoint Drive. The proposed storage building should have the address in 8" numerals including unit identifier. Response – Noted. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/26/2018 12/04/2018: FOR INFORMATION: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. 10/26/2018: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. Response: Noted Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/04/2018 12/04/2018: FOR APPROVAL: The Elevation & Lighting Plan titles will need to match the rest of the plan sets. 9 Response – Plans have been updated.