HomeMy WebLinkAboutFRCC HEALTH CARE CAREERS CENTER SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - SPA180002 - 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
January 2, 2019 – FRCC and HCM responses indicated in red text.
December 21, 2018
Derek Brown
Front Range Community College
4616 S Shields Street
Fort Collins, CO 80526
RE: FRCC Health Care Careers Center, SPA180002, 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 Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan, at 970-221-6695 or tsullivan@fcgov.com .
Comment Summary:
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
There are bike racks indicated on the Landscape Plan near the main entrance,
but the graphic is accompanied by a note that says TBD. Staff needs
clarification as to what needs to be determined? Clarification is needed. Bike
racks near the entrances to school buildings is considered an essential
component of campus site planning. If the quantity of bike capacity at the racks
is in question, then the applicant is encouraged to consult with Aaron Fodge,
Alternative Transportation Manager, Colorado State University, Parking and
Transportation Services, (970)491-2017, aaron.fodge@colostate.edu . Mr.
Fodge can provide well-informed guidance as to the number of racks needed
and their best location to accommodate the expected number of students,
faculty and staff.
HCM response: The quantity of bike racks are still to be determined as it will be based on a LEED
calculation that takes into account numbers of FTE occupants and number of estimated student occupants.
The final number will be calculated in the design development phase in the next few months as the floor
plan is finalized. There will ultimately be more than one location for bike racks, likely.
2
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: Also, please indicate these bike racks on the Site Plan as well.
HCM response: This will be added in the final revised documents prior to the P&Z meeting,
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: Please label the rooftop mechanical equipment screen walls on
the architectural elevations. Please state the proposed color of these screen
walls and that these walls be of sufficient height to totally screen the equipment
that is to be enclosed.
HCM response: Once the final design for the RTU's is determined we will then know the final size of the
units and will then design the screens to completely screen all roof top units. Color will coordinate with the
brick colors.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: There are graphics that indicate wall signage but the architectural
perspectives depict a grouping of blue, polygon forms that do not appear to be
signage. Staff is concerned that these forms are placed in front of windows
whereas typical building signage is placed on blank walls. By so placing, it
appears that the function and aesthetics of the windows are impeded. Please
clarify.
HCM response: The blue mountain logo graphic is intended to be a self-adhered vinyl graphic that is
translucent and will be able to see through the graphic, similar to graphics installed on city buses over
windows.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: There is no photometric illuminance plan. Staff needs to see the
location (and quantity) of the new pole lights on both the Site and Landscape
Plan. Also, please indicate the location (and quantity) of the wall sconces on the
architectural elevations. A Lighting Schedule is recommended.
HCM response: As mentioned in our response to the first round of comments, there will not be any new
parking lot pole lights as we are not revising parking numbers, All exterior lights on the north & west
elevations will be building mounted sconces, and there will be a few plaza pole lights at the southeast
corner of the building.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: In the documents provided, the pole light is indicated to be KIM
Pedestrian Path Pole Light but none of the specifications are provided. In a
Lighting Schedule, please indicate the selections as to lumens, Kelvin
temperature (CCT), Distribution and Pole Height. In general, staff is looking for
pole lighting that matches the campus. Also, a Kelvin temperature of 3,000
degrees or less will help reduce the glare associated with LED lighting.
HCM response: As indicated in the response to the 1st round of comments, all exterior lighting will be
specified to be 3,000 kelvins or less, and will be full cut off fixtures. As was discussed at the working
session meeting, we will add a note to the site plan in the final revisions prior to the P&Z meeting that
indicates that all exterior lighting will be 3,000 Kelvins or less and will be full cut off fixtures.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: The same comment applies to the KIM Exterior Wall-Mounted Wall
Sconces. While the down-directional fixture is selected, and this fixture only
3
comes with 48 lumens, there is no other information selected. In a Lighting
Schedule, please also specify the wattage, Kelvin temperature, distribution and
BUG rating. As with the pole lights, please indicate if these fixtures match the
existing fixtures on campus.
HCM response: please refer to response in comment 6 above
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: For both light fixtures, please indicate whether or not there will be
lighting controls that allow for dimming after certain hours.
HCM response: We are not anticipating specifying dimming capability for exterior fixtures.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: The information on the Site Plan (SP-1) appears to indicate that
the limits of development work to construct the proposal does not generally
extend into City right-of-way and is within the FRCC property. This is somewhat
needing verification as the property line isn't clearly defined and labelled on the
sheet and may not be accurate (the sheet seems to imply that the north property
line extends into Harmony Road.) Please provide the verification on whether
utility cuts would extend into City right-of-way (necessitating an excavation
permit) and whether there are any additional impacts into right-of-way (grading,
etc.)
HCM response: We will clarify the location of the property lines in the final document revisions prior to the
P&Z meeting. It is anticipated that the water line tie-in is the only utility connection that would impact the
City right-of-way
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: The Site Plan Note #1 on SP-1 indicates referring to a final utility
plan for exact locations and construction information. It should be verified
whether a "utility plan" set with utility and grading information will be provided.
HCM response: The utility plan is included in the Site Plan SP-1, however, we will add a final grading and
drainage plan with the final drainage report to Wes Lemarque at the City when we get to that phase of the
design.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: I was understanding that it was being considered to temporarily
have an access point onto Shields Street from the transit stop location. If this is
being pursued it should be discussed with Engineering Inspection in conjunction
with any additional utility/grading work in right-of-way as referenced in the
previous comments.
HCM response: Yes, we are still anticipating using the existing abandoned bus stop on Shields to provide
right turn in, right turn out for construction traffic throughout construction. The contractor will coordinate with
the city for all final approvals for this temporary access.
4
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: The Traffic Impact Study information has been received, reviewed,
and the conclusions accepted. No further traffic related review is needed.
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: Regarding the temporary construction access and the
commitment to making it temporary and right-in, right-out only should be
documented on the plans, in a development agreement, or as a part of a
development construction permit.
HCM response: The contractor will coordinate with the city for all final approvals and permits for this
temporary access.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: The added pedestrian connections to the major roadway system
are very well done. Thank you!.
HCM response: Noted
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/15/2018
12/15/2018: Please clarify in luminaire schedule that 3000K or less lights will
be selected, ordered and installed. Currently there are options showing full
range of Kelvin temperatures available. What will be installed?
HCM response: Please refer to response to questions 5 and 6 under Planning Services comments.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/15/2018
12/15/2018: Finalize and formalize plant list. City staff assumes plantings will
mirror campus landscaping which meets Fort Collins Land Use Code
landscaping requirements.
HCM response: The final plant selections will be from the provided plant list on the landscape plan which
was selected from the City's approved plant list, and also continue the planting standards currently found
on campus.
5
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/15/2018
12/15/2018: Include water budget chart on landscape plans. Advance
apologies if I missed it. Note LUC 3.2.1(E)(3)(b)(1): Landscape plans shall
include: A water budget chart that shows the total annual water use, which shall
not exceed an average of fifteen (15) gallons/square foot for the landscape.
HCM response: a final water budget calculation will be created with the final construction documents. We
are designing the landscape to meet LEED gold requirements and low water use landscaping is a primary
strategy to meet the LEED certification requirements.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, 224-616-1992, mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/18: PROVIDE FUTHER CLARIFICATION PRIOR TO NEXT ROUND
SPA180002
Continued:
City Forestry counted 38 trees to be removed on the provided landscape plan.
Is this accurate? I don’t recall there being that many trees on-site. In some areas
of tree removal, new trees and plant material are incorporated into the design. It
is unclear why existing trees are removed in these areas, which are highlighted
on the redlines provided to the applicant. Forestry would like to better
understand the reasons for tree removal on-site especially considering the high
quality and condition of many existing trees. For the next submittal, please
provide a document that outlines the project’s reason for tree removal. As a
part of our standard development review checklist, other developments are
required to submit an Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter.
Proposals to remove significant existing trees must provide a justification letter
detailing the reason for tree removal. This is required for all development
projects proposing significant tree removal regardless of the scale of the
project. The purpose of this letter is to provide a document of record with the
project’s approval and for the City to maintain a record of all proposed
significant tree removals and justifications. Existing significant trees within the
project’s Limits of Disturbance (LOD) and within natural area buffer zones shall
be preserved to the extent reasonably feasible. Streets, buildings and lot layouts
shall be designed to minimize the disturbance to significant existing trees.
(Extent reasonably feasible shall mean that, under the circumstances,
reasonable efforts have been undertaken to comply with the regulation, that the
costs of compliance clearly outweigh the potential benefits to the public or would
unreasonably burden the proposed project, and reasonable steps have been
undertaken to minimize any potential harm or adverse impacts resulting from
noncompliance with the regulation.) Where it is not feasible to protect and retain
significant existing tree(s) or to transplant them to another on-site location, the
applicant shall replace such tree(s) according to City mitigation requirements.
City Forestry will provide examples of other Existing Tree Removal Feasibility
Letters for reference. Please schedule a second on-site meeting with City
Forestry to obtain existing tree inventory information (species, size, condition,
6
and recommended mitigation value, if applicable). This inventory should be
included on the landscape plan to document existing tree conditions and
proposed plan for retention and/or removal.
HCM response: There are 38 existing plantings called to be removed on the landscape plan either
because they are located on or near the building footprint location, or because the site will require
significant regrading between the existing streets and the new building making it impossible to protect the
existing plantings. The majority of the plantings to be removed are very small shrubs or trees that are
'volunteers'. All of the trees/shrubs indicated to be removed will be replaced, and a significant number
more added, in new locations with city approved plantings. Please let us know if this explanation meets
your expectations or if a justification letter is still required.
9/11/2018:
The appear to be existing trees on-site. Prior to the next submittal, please
schedule an on-site meeting with City Forestry to obtain tree inventory and
mitigation information. Existing significant trees should be retained to the extent
reasonably feasible
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/18: PROVIDE FUTHER CLARIFICATION PRIOR TO NEXT ROUND
SPA180002
Continued:
In the Planting Schedule, please provide approximate quantities of potential
species. In addition, please provide species labels to the tree and plant
symbols on the landscape plans. Please note that some species, including but
not limited to, Sugar Maple, River Birch, Red Birch, Hazelnut, Tanyosho Pine,
and Eastern Redbud, perform marginally in Fort Collins’ soils and might not be
the best choice for this site. City Forestry will provide a more detailed list of
marginal species that we recommend to be removed from the plan as well as a
list of species that generally perform well in Fort Collins.
In addition, Note #4 states that this list includes POTENTIAL TREES TO BE
UTILIZED FOR PLANTING. ALL SPECIES WILL NOT BE UTILIZED. FINAL
DEISGN WILL OCCUR WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. Please clarify
if a final planting plan and list will be provided to City Staff for review as a part of
this Site Plan Advisory Review?
HCM response: The project is currently only in early design development, and there are still details for
site infrastructure to be finalized which will impact final quantities and locations. The overall site layout as
indicated will not vary significantly, though. We can provide a final construction document set to the City
for landscaping once they are finalized.
9/11/2018:
Please provide a landscape plan for City Forestry to review and comment on. If
applicable, include 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.
Required tree sizes and method of transplant:
Canopy Shade Tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlapped
7
Evergreen tree: 6.0’ height balled and burlapped
Ornamental tree: 1.5” caliper balled and burlapped
If any mitigation is required, trees must be upsized to the following dimensions:
Canopy Shade Trees: 3.0" caliper balled and burlap or equivalent.
Evergreen Trees: 8' height balled and burlap or equivalent.
Ornamental Trees: 2.5" caliper balled and burlap or equivalent.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: FOR INFORMATION ONLY:
Redlines are provided to Development Review Coordinator for applicant to
review.
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018:
City Forestry will provide examples of other Existing Tree Removal Feasibility
Letters for reference. In addition, due to the number of trees proposed to be
removed, City Forestry would like to schedule a second on-site meeting with the
applicant to obtain existing tree inventory information (species, size, condition,
and recommended mitigation value, if applicable). This inventory should be
included on the landscape plan to document existing tree conditions and
proposed plan for retention, transplant, or removal. Upsized mitigation trees
may be required to be planted to offset the site impacts from tree removal.
Please note that tree transplanting might be feasible if the applicant is willing to
move the trees onto City Property (Roselawn Cemetery for example).
HCM response: FRCC will schedule a 2nd site meeting with the city to identify any proposed trees/shrubs
to be removed that the city feels could be relocated.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: No comments.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/11/2018
12/11/2018: Information Only:
Haselden's Response is confusing the City will not be the reviewing or
inspecting party for erosion control, all erosion control materials need to be
reviewed through FRCC's MS4: Construction group, not the City. Please consult
with FRCC's Permit Compliance folks to discuss meeting the FRCC's MS4
Permit requirements. 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
HCM response: Noted
8
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: The LID proposed with the submittal does not meet the City's LID
requirements and code ordinance.
HCM response: The design team will research the viability of routing all internal roof drains from the new
building to the site storm swale system in lieu of routing directly to storm sewers as discussed at the city
work session.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: Please provide a grading plan. This can be included in the
drainage report.
HCM response: The grading plan will be submitted with the revised site plan and landscape plan prior to
the P&Z meeting.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Austin Kreager, 970-224-6152, akreager@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: INFORMATION:
Thank you for meeting with me on site to discuss the path that our primary line
will take from the switch cabinet on the side of the sunlight peak building to the
new building. I look forward to continuing to coordinate with you going forward
for the transformer location.
HCM response: Noted.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: INFORMATION:
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.)
HCM response: We will continue to design the site for the new transformer and incorporate adequate
clearances and site access to within 10’ of the transformer.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: INFORMATION:
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
HCM response: Once we have finalized the power requirements/sizing in the construction document
phase we will finalize a one-line diagram and the C-1 form and submit to the city
9
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: INFORMATION:
Contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the transformer and electric
meter locations, please show the locations on the utility plans. Please keep in
mind that this project will be responsible for 100% of construction costs as well
as the full capacity fee associated with the new service.
HCM response: The final location for the transformer and meter locations is still being finalized and we
will continue to coordinate with Light and Power Engineering for final service.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/18/2018
12/18/2018: INFORMATION:
You may contact FCU Light & Power, project engineering if you have questions.
(970) 221-6700. You may reference Light & Power’s Electric Service
Standards at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandar
ds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use the
fee estimator at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
HCM response: Noted
Department: PFA
Contact: Andrew Rosen, 970-416-2599, arosen@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/14/2018: 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.
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/14/2018: FOR HEARING
>The provided Elevations in the Plan set indicate that the building will be greater
than 30ft in height which triggers the requirement for aerial access Fire Lanes.
These are 26ft wide which is shown on the west side in an appropriate location.
However, the Fire Lane located at the east side of the building is notated at 20ft
wide.
HCM response: We will revise the walk widths at the south main entry to be 26 feet in lieu of 20 feet as
noted.
10
>Further discussion is required regarding the width and how the proposed Fire
Lanes will connect through the parking lot to the south and to the existing
network through the Campus
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/19/2018: UPDATE
The Fire Line will connect at the Southeast corner of the building
Should the Fire Alarm panel be located elsewhere in the building, a fully
functional remote annunciator will be required in the front lobby area.
HCM response: We will likely locate the Fire Alarm Panel in the entry vestibule or just inside the building
adjacent to the vestibule.
12/14/2018: FOR INFORMATION
FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM
The project team states that the building will be fully sprinklered however there
appears to be no fire water line shown on the plan. Please contact Assistant
Fire Marshal, Jerry Howell with any fire sprinkler related questions at
970-416-2868.
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/14/2018:
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (FDC)
The FDC should be located on the building elevation (not remote) close to the
hydrant and fire lane on the southeast of the building.
HCM response: The final location is being finalized, however, it is currently assumed to be located either
near to the main southeast entry, or on the west elevation near the west fire lane.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/14/2018: FOR INFORMATION
HYDRANT
The new hydrant shown on the plan is located correctly unless it has to move to
accommodate a change in the Fire Lane location. It shall supply a minimum of
1500gpm at 20psi residual pressure
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/14/2018:
EMERGENCY RESPONDER RADIO COMMUNICATION - AMPLIFICATION
SYSTEM TEST
> IFC 510 & 1103.2: New & existing buildings require a fire department,
emergency communication system evaluation after the core/shell but prior to
final build out. For the purposes of this section, fire walls shall not be used to
define separate buildings. Where adequate radio coverage cannot be
established within a building, public-safety radio amplification systems shall be
designed and installed in accordance with criteria established by the Poudre
Fire Authority. The installation of required ERRC systems shall be reviewed and
11
approved under a separate permit process through PFA.
HCM response: Noted
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/14/2018
12/14/2018: FOR INFORMATION
ADDRESSING/WAYFINDING
The proposed addressing plan is appropriate
HCM response: Noted
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
HCM response: Noted. These will be edited for the final submittal prior to the P&Z meeting
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/17/2018
12/17/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
HCM response: Noted. These will be edited for the final submittal prior to the P&Z meeting