Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMASON PLACE - FDP190005 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - 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 25, 2018 Klara Rossouw Ripley Design Inc. 419 Canyon Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Mason Place, MJA180003, 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 Project Planner, Clay Frickey, at 970-224-6045 or cfrickey@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/21/2018 05/21/2018: Thank you for addressing all PDP level comments, Engineering is ready for the project to go to hearing. Please note there may be additional/FDP level comments at the time of FDP submittal. Response: Comment noted. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 05/22/2018: On sheet C0.3 of the Civil Utility Plans, the demolition plan is not consistent with the Tree Mitigation Plan (sheet 5) of the Landscape Plans. For instance, tree 1 is shown to remove (it should be retained and protected), tree 21 is not shown on the plan (should be indicated as to be removed), and tree 22 is not shown on the plan (should be indicated as to be retained and protected).\ Response: The discrepancy between the plans have been corrected. The Mitigation Plan now shows the updated information. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 05/22/2018: Please provide a detail on both the Landscape and Civil Utility Plans specifying the grading and distance between the existing trees (#1-3) and the proposed sidewalk. Response: Trees are more than 5 feet away from the proposed walk. The difference in grading …. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 5/22/20118: Continued: There is one GDI that is shown as a mitigation tree on the plans. Please show one of the two GDI in the plant schedule as 2” caliper. Please also note that 14 mitigation trees are provided, yet only 13 are required. 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: Landscape plans revised to show 14 mitigations trees as required with the updated tree removal. We have upsized all of the street trees to 2”, which we agree, will strengthen their presence along Mason Street. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 5/22/2018: Continued: Thank you for adjusting the street trees along Mason. The (3) Redmond Linden trees along Creger Drive are 20 feet apart. Please space these trees, at minimum, 30 feet apart. 5/7/18: 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: The street trees along Creger have now been spaced to meet the separation requirements. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 5/22/2018: Please explore incorporating two ornamental trees 15 feet on both sides of the street light along Mason. I believe there is enough space to set ornamental trees 30 feet from the shade trees while still maintaining the proper distance from the street light. Response: In lieu of the ornamental trees, we were able to upsize the street trees along Mason Street. The street tree visibility and durability are strengthened in this way, as well as enhancing the pedestrian experience. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 05/22/2018: There is a gas line that runs through two parking lot islands and is close to two proposed Kentucky Coffeetrees. Please verify that these trees are positioned at minimum 4 feet from the gas utility. Response: Separation requirements are met and verified at this time. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 05/22/2018: Please consider selecting the street trees as some of the upsized mitigation trees on-site. Although the Affordable Housing minimum caliper for street trees is 1.25”, due to this heavily trafficked corridor by pedestrians, you might want to consider selecting these to receive mitigation caliper (2”). Response: We have upsized all of the street trees along both Mason and Creger. Department: Internal Services Contact: Jonathon Nagel, , jnagel@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/18/2018 05/18/2018: Please show where the internal trash/recycling enclosure will be located on the site plan (similarly to how the location of the bike room is shown). Make sure there is an unobstructed path between the internal enclosure and the parking lot including curbs, etc. that would prohibit the dumpsters from rolling smoothly. Response: See the revised site plan with the interior trash/ recycling dumpster room labeled, and dumpster room plan on ‘ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS’. A curb cut is provided from the sidewalk to allow for rolling dumpsters to parking lot grade. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/18/2018 05/18/2018: With 60 units you are likely to need ~25 cubic yards of trash service per week and ~ 16 cubic yards of recycle service. With the proposed bin sizes this will be very challenging with ~8-9 pick-ups per week for trash and ~5 for recycling. Consider increasing the capacity or number of dumpsters provided. Response: The proposed dumpster capacity for the building is (1) 3-yard dumpster for trash, and (1) 3-yard for recycling. This population, with 97% single occupancy units, will generate much less trash and recycling than a typical apartment building. Redtail, a similar Housing Catalyst building with the same population and same number of units has (2) 2-yard dumpsters for trash and recycling that are emptied twice weekly. The proposed capacity for this project is 50% higher than this, so we anticipate that the proposed capacity will be more than sufficient. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/18/2018 05/18/2018: On the plan enlargement for the trash/recycling enclosure please update the label for "Trash Chutes from levels 2 & 3 Above" to include mention of a separate trash and recycle chutes. Response: Revision made as requested. See the dumpster room plan on ‘ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS’ with separate trash and recycling chutes labeled. Department: Light And Power Contact: Austin Kreager, , akreager@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/17/2018: 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: The existing transformer will be replaced with a 120/208 V 100 KVA transformer in new location as shown on the site plans. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/17/2018: 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: A C-1 form has been submitted. A copy is included with this submittal. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/17/2018: 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: A C-1 form has been submitted. Please see one-line diagram provided. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/17/2018: 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. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/17/2018: 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. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/17/2018: 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: Please see proposed 100 kVA transformer location in site plan provided. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 05/22/2018: All comments stand from the previous round. I am looking forward to working with you as the plan progresses to the upcoming stages. Response: Comment noted. Department: PFA Contact: Andrew Rosen, , arosen@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/23/2018 05/23/2018: AERIAL ACCESS UPDATE After considering the feedback from the City meeting and to ensure that the intent of the alternative means and methods for aerial access are being met for this project, the Fire Marshal is requiring a letter from the project team that summarizes their proposal. The project team can refer to IFC 104.8 & 104.9 for guidance. 05/21/2018: AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS The fire marshal has reviewed the site plan in relation to code requirements for aerial apparatus access as defined by IFC D105.3. The fire marshal recognizes the limitations inherent in this site with regard to meeting this code requirement and while a best effort has been made on the part of the project team to improve the condition to the best extent possible, the fire marshal has determined that those improvements are not sufficient in meeting the prescriptive requirements of the code. In order to proceed with the current Site Plan proposal, the fire marshal will require alternative means and methods for meeting the intent of the code. As the building is proposed at 3-stories, he is NOT requiring areas of refuge in the stairwells or stairwell pressurization. He is requesting the following: > Both stairwells to extend to the roof with the ability to walk out. > Stairwell locations would ideally be located in the NW and SE corners of the building where aerial access is not provided. > Stairwells should have direct access to the building exterior at ground level and be labeled for roof access. > Stairwells to be provided with standpipes with hose connections at intermediate landings. Response: Please see the attached letter summarizing our approach to meet these requests. This approach was developed as a result of multiple conversations with the fire officials at the City. We have provided two fire access easements: one at the north parking lot, and one at the south lot. The entirety of the building can be accessed with 150’ hose pulls from the ends of these easements. (See site plan provided.) We will provide walk-up access to the roof from Stair 2, and a roof hatch at Stair 3. The two egress stairwells are located centrally on the north and south ends of the building, each with direct exterior access at grade. As discussed with the City, standpipes are no longer required because of additional access provided. Department: Planning Services Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/21/2018: Thank you for adding a cornice on the west and north elevations. Can you please provide a detail showing a section view of the proposed cornices and metal parapet cap? 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: Please see the ‘Parapet w/ Cornice’ detail on ‘ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS.’ This three-dimensional cornice detail is proposed for the north and west facades of the corner of the building facing Mason and Creger, with a simpler parapet with metal coping on the remainder of the building. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/04/2018 05/21/2018: Thank you for providing a detail of the bike racks to be used. Will you also be using these racks inside the building for bike parking? Given the narrowness of the bike room, I assume you will be using wall mounted bike racks. Please add a detail of the bike racks you propose using inside the building as well. 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: Please see the proposed bike room plan and elevation on ‘ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS’. Because many of the residents are unable to lift bikes onto a wall rack, we have revised the bike room plan to provide floor racks instead. There are now 23 bike storage spaces in the bike room, and 40 spaces under the front entry canopy to provide 63 total spaces (62 required). Note that the bike loom is somewhat larger than in the earlier submittal. . Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/21/2018: Will await erosion control materials to be submitted at Final. 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: Comment noted. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/22/2018: The modified impervious area has been documented, but the treatment does not meet City LID criteria. An underground filtration device is an acceptable solution. What was proposed is not a filtration device. A rain garden is another option as well. 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: Comment noted. Underground StormTech Chambers are proposed for LID and WQ treatment. See Drainage Report and Civil Plans provided at FDP. Department: Street Oversizing Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/21/2018 05/21/2018: TCEF and LCRR will be due for the redevelopment at the time of building permit. Response: Noted Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Revised as requested. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: Please revise the sub-title as marked. See redlines. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: Some of the right of way & easements shown do not match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Comment noted. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: Some of the right of way & easements shown do not match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Comment noted. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Noted Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: 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. 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: Comment noted. There is no known lienholder. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: Please revise the legal description as marked. See redlines. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/21/2018: This will be verified at FDP. 05/08/2018: Some of the right of way & easements shown do not match the Subdivision Plat. Response: Comment noted. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, , TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/22/2018 05/22/2018: Thank you for updating the Traffic Memo. Traffic Operations reviewed the crosswalk warrant analysis and a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon would be the appropriate crosswalk treatment for pedestrians to cross Mason. It is the City's policy not to install crosswalk treatments until the warrants are met so we are asking for a fee in lieu of installing the RRFB with the project. We will work with you on the fee amount which will include the RRFP, curb ramp, and thermoplastic pavement markings. Response: A traffic memo is submitted with this package. 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: Notes have been removed. 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: Comment noted, discussions have been initiated. 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: Landscape water budget has been adjusted and is now below the 15 gallon per square foot maximum. 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: Comment Noted. Comment Number: Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/22/2018: Pleaes add a "with thrust block" to the fire hydrant line connection to the main. 05/08/2018: Please include all fittings on the Utility Plan. See redlines. Response: Comment 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: The lighting design was revised to bring light levels down to 0.1 fc within 20’ of the east property line. Please see the revised SITE PHOTOMETRIC sheet.