HomeMy WebLinkAboutSOLARIUM - PDP190016 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - CORRESPONDENCE-CONCEPTUAL REVIEWAppendix D – A comment response letter from the project’s Conceptual Review
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
from
CONCEPTUAL REVIEW LETTER DATED
February 15, 2019
For
Solarium PDP with APU Requests
Original Comments in Black
Responses in Red
Comment Summary:
Planning Services
Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com
1. The property has been used for several years as a Lodging Establishment with 12 rooms
and 22 beds for 35 guests within the rooms. The property also contains the yoga use
which appears to be operating in the basement. Neither of these uses received a land
use approval by the city are operating illegally.
Response: We have been working with the City on our interim use of the building, and it is our
understanding that so long as we keep the ball rolling on preparing our request to remedy the
situation, we will be allowed to continue to operate for the time being .
2. Please also be aware that hostels and inns are marketing terms and not City land use
terms that would be approved through a land use hearing. Site plans and other review
documents submitted must include the use designation that is provided by the Land Use
Code. If the B&B use with 6 or fewer beds is re-established, this would be the use
designation approved. If an APU is proposed to increase the beds, the Lodging
Establishment use is the most appropriate designation. The yoga use is considered
Limited Indoor Recreation Establishment. The process for requesting to establish these
uses to the property is by Addition of Permitted Use (APU) for this property. This process
is explained in the Land Use Code under Section 1.3.4. The Lodging use is also not
permitted in the LMN zone district and would also require an APU. Lastly, the application
mentions a massage studio. This would be classified as a Personal Business and
Service Shop and would also require an APU.
Response: We have decided only to persue “Lodging Establishment” and “Small Scale Reception
Center” with this application, and we understand that both of these uses would require going
through the APU process. We no longer wish to persue the yoga or massage studio uses.
3. The past Conceptual Review meeting that was held with this owner discussed the
Small-Scale Reception Center use that was proposed, which would also be an APU
1
process. It was explained at that time that an APU process is required, however staff's
understanding is that events have been held without this land use approval. These
reception centers are only permitted in areas where the use is permitted by the zoning
and where the reception center can meet the Performance Standards for small scale
reception center in the U-E, urban estate district, as outlined in LUC Section 3.8.27. The
applicant has the option to submit the Complete Application for a Project Development
Plan (PDP) that includes this use (in tandem with the three APU’s discussed above) for a
recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval or denial by City
Council. Staff is not supportive of this APU. Should the project proceed forward without a
staff recommendation of approval, operational conditions would need to be discussed
that would limit the nature and extent of the events. Staff would also recommend that the
property require oversight and reporting by the owner to the city to ensure that the
operations on the site meet all conditions. Lastly, contractual, off-site parking agreements
would need to be provided, reviewed and approved by the City in perpetuity to provide
parking for the small-scale events. These items would be requirements with the
development submittal. The owner should also be prepared that the reception center APU
will likely take several Planning and Zoning Board hearings and Council hearings, in order
to refine the operating requirements and restrictions.
Response: Acknowledged. Please see the PDP-APU submittal, in particular the project narriative,
where we have addressed the concerns in detail that you have listed in this comment.
4. The first step in the APU review process is a neighborhood meeting.
Response: The first neighborhood meeting was conducted June 26, 2019. Please see the PDP-APU
submittal, in particular the project narriative, where we have addressed the concerns in detail that
were expressed at the neighborhood meeting.
5. The memo provided states that the parcel has been “identified by the City” as being
adjacent to a “defacto neighborhood center”. The City has not identified this area as a
neighborhood center. The uses in the area are not integrated into a center. While there is
a school use in the neighborhood located to the north, it is too far away and there is no
cohesive arrangement of uses that were planned to be a neighborhood center.
Additionally, while the Spring Creek Trail and the Mallard’s Nest Natural Area provide
open space and a trail corridor in the area, these are not intended to provide the outdoor
space that would be required with a Neighborhood Center.
Response: Acknowledged.
6. The memo also identifies the property as a Place of Worship or Assembly. Staff does not
agree with this classification as this use is for churches or Synagogues or the like but shall
not include buildings used for commercial endeavors.
Response: Acknowledged. We are no longer suggesting this use.
2
7. Current Use and Maximum Occupancy:
The property was previously approved in 2001 as a B&B which allows 6 or fewer beds,
however the property offers accommodations in excess of this allowance and has not
been operating in compliance with this use for several years. The permitted B&B use
would allow up to 12 guests, in up to 6 rooms, with not more than 6 beds. All other prior
approved uses from 1994 – including the student boarding house (for long term rentals)
have been abandoned. Should the owner elect to re-establish the B&B use with not more
than 12 guests, in up to 6 rooms, with not more than 6 beds, a minor amendment must be
submitted. The minor amendment must provide a new site plan drawing at 1:20 or 1:10
scale. Land Use Code considerations that must be addressed on the plans include: trash
and recycling enclosure, bicycle rack, street and sidewalk improvements, paving, lighting,
standard city notes, owner signature block, buffers, setbacks, land use and operations,
and other restrictions and plan details as identified during review. The maximum
occupancy for each building would include any employees or other visitors and should be
noted on the minor amendment site plan. After the minor amendment is approved, a
building permit submittal and review process is required. Should this option be pursued, a
minor amendment must be submitted and expedient progress made towards the
completion of approved plans. We would need to discuss a submittal timetable to ensure
that the property meets all land use code and building code approvals. If progress is not
made, enforcement action will be taken. A separate submittal checklist can be provided
for the minor amendment option.
Other uses discussed including the yoga studio, massage, small scale event center, and
Lodging Establishment with more than 6 beds would be processed as a Project
Development Plan and Final Plan (PDP/FDP), with Additions of Permitted Use (APU)
incorporated. In lieu of the PDP planning fee, the application would qualify as a small
project fee and APU fee. Finalized fee calculations are available for this option upon
request. A notable difference with this route is that the set of drawings may require a bit
more detail and additional notes, and land use code Modifications would need to be
considered for aspects of the plan that do not comply with the code standards. We would
also need to discuss a timetable and action items for this process, to see progress
towards compliance and avoid enforcement action. We can provide a PDP checklist for
this option and fee calculations.
Response: We have decided only to persue “Lodging Establishment” and “Small Scale Reception
Center” with this application, and we understand that both of these uses would require going
through the APU process.
8. Uses:
All proposed uses must be listed on the new site plan, and the nature/extent of the uses
adequately described on the new site plan sheet or on the cover sheet. To accompany the
uses proposed, and to confirm the parking tabulations, plan sheets must be incorporated
into the planning set that show and label the floor plans of level of each building. The
3
floor
plans must accurately depict existing walls and room functions vs. any proposed
walls/renovations and proposed improvements.
Response: The nature and extent of the proposed uses are described on the cover sheet of the
PDP-APU submittal, including parking tabulations. We have also included floor plans of each
building including room functions and proposed renovations.
9. Parking:
The minimum parking for the proposed uses is outlined in Section 3.2.2 of the Land Use
Code. This information must be provided in a new land use table with the new site plan,
with subtotals for each use and total parking included. Minimum parking outlined in 3.2.2
includes:
Limited Indoor Recreation (yoga): 3/1000 sf. min.
Personal Business and service shops (massage studio): 2/1000 sf. min.
Lodging Establishment (B&B or lodging): 0.5 spaces minimum per unit. This minimum
allowance can be supported, provided that not more than two guests are permitted within
each separate unit (bedroom would be a similar term to unit).
Employee spaces: The plans/land use table should depict how employee parking will be
accommodated for the proposed uses and the number of employees anticipated. At least
one employee parking space must be provided.
The general retail sales that are part of the current operations – this will need to be
clarified on the site plan, that this use is accessory to the lodging, if this is the case. This
would be appropriate if most of the items for sale are for the Solarium guests and to
support other uses proposed. If a retail business is proposed that would generate vehicle
trips solely for the retail, then additional parking spaces may be required to support the
retail use.
Off-site parking: Please note that with this option, staff would need to see and review
off-site parking agreements with the off-site property owners. This would be a letter of
intent prior to hearing and executed agreements prior to final approval. These
agreements must be in place in perpetuity with the established use and are subject to
enforcement.
Response: The intent is that the parking needs of the “lodging establishment” will be accommodated
on-site. We proposed to have 16 sleeping rooms, which would require 8 parking spaces at the ratio
of 0.5 parking spaces per sleeping room. We are providing a total of 11 parking spaces, which gives
us 3 flex parking spaces for employees and overflow guest parking. We propose that during small
scale reception center related events, that the entire building, including the lodging rooms, be
required to be rented for the event. In other words, event customers will not be competing with
lodging customers for parking. The intent is that weddings will be the typical type of event, and
when that happens, all lodging rooms will be part of what is being rented to the wedding party.
During events the only lodging customers will be part of the wedding party. Furthermore, the intent
4
is that guest parking during events will be accommodated off-site. Please see the project narrative
as part of the PDP-APU application for more detail on our off-site parking approach.
10. Parking and drive aisle configuration:
See LUC 3.2.2 for parking drive aisle and parking space dimensions required for short
term parking. If these metrics cannot be met, (drive aisle depth for two-way aisles, parking
dimensions, etc. then a Modification of Standard request must be provided, with a
justification provided per the criteria in Division 2.8 of the Land Use Code. Modifications
to the minimums seem supportable provided that the layout is useable for short term
parking, safe, and not detrimental to the public good. The new site plan drawing must
provide dimensions and callouts as necessary to describe all elements and metrics of the
plan. See the Submittal Requirements document for information on the Planning Set
standards, details and general drawing requirements.
Street access points and any metrics that deviate from the city engineering standards
(entrance widths, etc. would need be discussed through Engineering staff.
At least on Van accessible HC space must be provided per the criteria in LUC 3.2.2.
All vehicle use areas that are unpaved must be paved with a hard surface such as
concrete pavers, concrete or asphalt, per LUC 3.3.2-D-3-c.
Response: Actually, it looks like if we make our driveway be one-way there’s enough space to meet
the parking stall dimensions standards, and thus we propose to make our drive aisle be a one-way
drive aisle. The drive aisle is 20.5 feet wide along the eastern 5 parking spaces (all 5 are 90 degrees to
the drive aisle). The drive aisle is 15 feet wide along the western 6 parking spaces (all 6 spaces are
diagonal to the drive aisle ranging from 30 degrees to 45 degrees). Section 3.2.2(L) of the Land Use
Code requires 20 feet of aisle width for 90 degree spaces along a one-way drive aisle, and requires 15
feet of aisle width for 30 to 45 degree diagonal parking spaces along a one-way drive aisle. We are
now providing these minimums, and thus it is our understanding that no modification of standard is
required in this case. See the civil plans for street access point refinements. A Variance Request,
as per the LCUASS, is included in the submittal package, as it relates to the parking lot facilities. We
are now providing one van accessible HC space, and we are proposing to pave the portions of the
parking lot that were previously not paved.
11. Teepees:
The two teepees on the site are considered structures. These need more discussion with
building services staff. I would suggest scheduling a presubmittal meeting with them to
discuss this and what the building code occupancy limits are for each building based on
the Land Use Code uses that may be proposed, and what building upgrades may be
required. Your Development Review Coordinator can schedule this meeting.
Response: We suggest this meeting will be most effective after we received the first round of
PDP-APU comments from the city. We are currently proposing the removal of the small teepee if
5
necessary.
12. Other options:
Other options for the buildings could work other than, or in addition to Lodging APU or the
6 bed B&B, if all of the lodging currently offered isn’t marketable. For example, dwelling
units (apartments) could be created and incorporated into the site plan proposal, if this is
feasible. Each dwelling unit must have a separate bathroom and kitchen. Off-street
parking must be provided, so the options to add units may be limited based on the total
amount of parking available.
Response: In the event that we are denied our request for lodging establishment use, we will most
likely pursue this use, however we would like to hold-off condidering this unless and until it becomes
necessary because of a denial.
13. The comments included here provide general details on the process and requirements
and may need refinement when plans are submitted for a full review.
Response: Acknowledged.
14. The proposed addition of permitted use is subject to Section 1.3.4 Addition of Permitted
Uses, of the LUC. The proposed use is subject to a Type 2 (Planning and Zoning Board)
review and public hearing. The applicant for this development request will be required to
hold a neighborhood information meeting prior to formal submittal of the project. Type 2
development proposals are subject to the neighborhood meeting requirement, per
Section 2.2.2 of the LUC. Please contact me at 221-6750, to assist you in setting a
date, time, and location for a meeting. A planner and possibly other City staff, would be
present to facilitate the meeting.
Response: The first neighborhood meeting was conducted June 26, 2019. Please see the PDP-APU
submittal, in particular the project narriative, where we have addressed the concerns in detail that
were expressed at the neighborhood meeting.
15. Please see the Development Review Guide at www.fcgov.com/drg. This online
guide features a color coded flowchart with comprehensive, easy to read information on each
step in the process. This guide includes links to just about every resource you need
during development review.
Response: Acknowledged.
16. This development proposal will be subject to all applicable standards of the Fort Collins
Land Use Code (LUC), including Article 3 General Development Standards. The entire
LUC is available for your review on the web at
http://www.colocode.com/ftcollins/landuse/begin.htm.
6
Response: Acknowledged.
17. If this proposal is unable to satisfy any of the requirements set forth in the LUC, a
Modification of Standard Request will need to be submitted with your formal development
proposal. Please see Section 2.8.2 of the LUC for more information on criteria to apply
for a Modification of Standard.
Response: Our only modification request is to allow off-site parking to accommodate attendees for
events as part of the APU requested for small scale reception center.
18. Please see the Submittal Requirements and Checklist at:
http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php.
Response: We have based our submittal on these.
19. The request will be subject to the Development Review Fee Schedule that is available in
the Community Development and Neighborhood Services office. The fees are due at the
time of submittal of the required documents for the appropriate development review
process by City staff and affected outside reviewing agencies. Also, the required
Transportation Development Review Fee must be paid at time of submittal.
Response: Acknowledged.
20. When you are ready to submit your formal plans, please make an appointment with
your Development Review Coordinator, Tenae Beane, at 970-224-6119 or
tbeane@fcgov.com
Response: We have scheduled our submittal appointment through Tenae.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com
1. As part of this development project, in accordance with Section 24-95 of the City Code,
the public sidewalk adjacent to the site must be brought up to meet minimum federal
ADA standards. Minimum allowable sidewalk width for conformance with ADA is 4 feet
in all sections of the sidewalk with a passing space at least five feet by five feet every
two hundred feet. There appear to be several areas adjacent to the site that do not meet
minimum width requirements. The maximum allowable cross slope in the pedestrian
path is 2%. The driveways into the site appear to greatly exceed this maximum. The
crosswalk sign will also need to be relocated and water meter will need to be made flush
with the walk, in order to minimize the path obstruction. Please keep these requirements
in mind as you consider project cost/design and consult your civil engineer for a
thorough analysis of the existing conditions and necessary changes.
7
Response: The Utility plans identify the removal/replacement of all non-conforming sidewalk. The
east driveway will be modified to meet the design standard and the west driveway will have a bypass
walk to accommodate pedestrian and AQDA access, as per City requirements. The curb stop will be
lowered in the vicinity of a new mid block access ramp at the existing cross walk.
2. Larimer County Road Impact Fees and Transportation Expansion Fees are due at the
time of building permit. Please contact Kyle Lambrecht at 221-6566 if you have any
questions. The City's Transportation Development Review Fee (TDRF) is due at the
time of submittal. For additional information on these fees, please see:
http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/dev-review.php
Response: Acknowledged.
3. Any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as streets,
sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of
this project, shall be replaced or restored to City of Fort Collins standards at the
Developer's expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior
to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.
Response: Understood. The plans make the contractor aware that some curb/gutter that exists may
need to be replaced and that any damage as a result of the construction process would likewise need
to be repaired.
4. Any public improvements must be designed and built in accordance with the Larimer
County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). They are available online at:
https://www.larimer.org/engineering/streets
Response: Understood, these standards were used to guide site design. Known variances are
presented for approval in a variance request.
5. This project is responsible for dedicating any right-of-way and easements that are
necessary or required by the City for this project (i.e. drainage, utility, emergency
access). This shall include the standard utility easements that are to be provided behind
the right-of-way (15 foot along an arterial, 8 foot along an alley, and 9 foot along all other
street classifications). Information on the dedication process can be found at:
http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php
Response: An additional 15 feet of street right-of-way was dedicated for Stuart Street in 2016. That
makes 45’ of right-of-way on our side from the centerline of Stuart Street. Stuart is designated as a
two lane collector on the master street plan. It has a unique cross section in that there is parking on
the north side, and no parking on the south side. Both sides have bike lanes. The LCUASS
standards for a collector with parking (and bike lanes) is 76’ total ROW width (which is a 38’half
8
width), or it calls out a collector without parking is 66’ total ROW width (which is a 33’ half width). The
parking is on our side of the street, and thus we assume that we can consider 38’ to be the necessary
half width that is needed. So for some reason, in 2016, the property owner was asked to dedicate 7
more feet of ROW than is actually needed. We suggest that rather than a 9 foot utility easement be
dedicated behind the existing ROW, that we only be required to dedicate an additional 2 feet of utility
easement in this location, because the right of way is 7 feet wider than necessary in this location. We
propose to dedicate this additional easement through separate instrument, but want to wait until we
get comments back on this issue, so we know exactly how much easement to dedicate in this case.
Please clarify.
6. Utility plans will be required, and a Development Agreement may need to be recorded
once the project is finalized.
Response: Acknowledged.
7. A Development Construction Permit (DCP), or a sidewalk permit, depending on the
scope of work, will need to be obtained prior to starting any work on the site.
Response: Acknowledged.
8. LCUASS parking setbacks (Figure 19-6) apply and will need to be followed depending
on parking design.
Response: Understood, however, the existing parking lot is not in compliance with the parking lot
setback standards. This is detailed in the Variance Request.
9. All fences, barriers, posts or other encroachments within the public right-of-way are only
permitted upon approval of an encroachment permit. Applications for encroachment
permits shall be made to the Engineering Department for review and approval prior to
installation. Encroachment items shall not be shown on the site plan as they may not be
approved, need to be modified or moved, or if the permit is revoked then the site/
landscape plan is in non-compliance.
Response: We will refrain from showing any encroachment items on the site plan, but rather we will
request approval of such items through the separate encroachment permit process. Based on site
visit with staff, we understand that the existing business sign needs to be removed and that the
mailbox may remain. Please refer to the landscape plan and utility plan for landscape improvements
proposed within the ROW. Please identify any proposed improvements that may require an
encroachment permit.
Department: Traffic Operations
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com
9
1. The change in use to a special event center with dozens of events up to 200 people will
meet the threshold of requiring a traffic study. Please have your traffic engineer contact
me to scope the study. The study will be somewhat unique due to the non-typical nature
of the use. It will need to address circulation (pick up drop off), parking, walking/biking
routes etc.
Response: Please see the submitted Traffic Impact Study.
2. Work with engineering on required sidewalk improvements.
Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Fire Authority
Contact: Andrew Rosen, 970-416-2599, arosen@poudre-fire.org
1. 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.
Response: Acknowledged.
2. FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM
The requirement for a fire sprinkler system for this building will be driven by the final use
and classification of the building. The following information is provided for future
planning and reference:
2018 IFC 903.2.1.2 A banquet hall, which is considered an A2 occupancy with 200
occupants will require an appropriate fire sprinkler system.
2018 IFC 903.2.8 A Boarding House with more than 10 occupants will be designed with
an approved fire sprinkler system. Should this facility be designated as Short Term
Rentals, then further requirements have to be met.
2018 IFC 607.2 A Type I hood shall be installed at or above all commercial cooking
appliances and domestic cooking appliances used for commercial purposes that
produce grease vapors.
Please contact Assistant Fire Marshal, Jerry Howell with any fire sprinkler related
questions at 970-416-2868.
Response: If and when we successful obtain approval for Lodging Establishment through the APU
process, we intend to then change the occupancy of the building, and at that time we would proceed
with a request to change the building in a manner where these comments would then apply. Based
on the assumption that a fire sprinkler system will be required, the Utility Plans identify a proposed
fire sprinkler service connection to the water main in Stuart Street. The size of the service is still to
be determined prior to final submittal.
10
3. ACCESS
>Access is required to within 150ft of all portions of the exterior perimeter of the
building. This can be measured from Stuart St which is a collector however the building
is 65ft out of compliance with this requirement.
>This out of compliance condition can be mitigated by establishing a fire lane on the
property which is then shown on the Plat or dedicated by separate legal document.
Response: Would it resolve this issue to make our one-way loop drive aisle also be an emergency
access easement? Based on existing conditions, we may need a variance on exact turning radii to
accomplish. We understand that this requirement is mitigated by the requirement of a sprinkler
system. Please advise if this is not correct.
4. HYDRANT
A hydrant producing 1500gpm at 20psi residual pressure is required within 300ft of this
building. The hydrant located at Stover and Stuart St is approximately 140ft distant and
therefore satisfies this requirement. However it is the applicant's responsibility to verify
the output. Please contact the water department for assistance.
Response: We had a Hydrant Flow Test conducted on 10-1-19 by the Water Engineering & Field
Services office at the city, and the following results were listed in their summary report:
Flow Test Hydrant: w12599 Mfg. WATEROUS
Flowed Nozzle Size: 4.5
Flowed at 34: PSI
Hose Monster Conversion Chart: 1930 GPM
Side Gauge Reading During Flow Test: 45 PSI
Static and Residual Hydrant: w12284 Mfg. MUELLER
Static Reading: 100 PSI
Residual Reading During Flow Test: 95 PSI
5. ADDRESSING
To assist with prompt emergency response the address shall be clearly visible from the
street in no less than 8" tall numerals on a contrasting background.
Response: We will ensure this is the case.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
1. An Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) is required by City of Fort Collins Land Use
Code (LUC) Section 3.4.1 as the site is within 500 feet of LUC defined natural habitats
and features (Spring Creek, wetlands, Mallards Nest Natural Area). The buffer standard
is 100ft for Spring Creek from top of bank or edge of wetlands. The ECS should
11
address all items (a)-(l) of LUC 3.4.1(D)(1) available for view online. In addition, ensure
that the study identifies feature(s) size, the "top of bank" of any stream or ditch, the
edge(s) of wetlands, and whether jurisdictional wetlands may be impacted by the
proposed project. Please contact me to discuss the scope and requirements of the
ECS further and/or to schedule an onsite meeting. Online LUC link:
https://library.municode.com/co/fort_collins/codes/land_use
The ECS is due a minimum of 10 days prior to PDP submittal
Response: The ECS was submitted to Stephanie on 10/7/2019.
2. Information from the ECS informs design of a "natural habitat buffer zone" or "NHBZ".
Response: See submitted ECS.
3. With respect to lighting, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, Section 3.2.4(D)(6),
requires that "natural areas and natural features shall be protected from light spillage
from off-site sources." Thus, lighting from parking areas or other site amenities shall not
spill over into any natural features or natural habitat buffer areas.
Response: All proposed new lighting is down-directional cut-off fixtures.
4. LUC Section 3.4.1(I)(1) of the Land Use Code applies: Projects in the vicinity of large
natural habitats and/or natural habitat corridors, including, but not limited to, the Poudre
River Corridor and the Spring Creek Corridor, shall be designed to complement the
visual context of the natural habitat. Techniques such as architectural design, site
design, the use of native landscaping and choice of colors and building materials shall
be utilized in such manner that scenic views across or through the site are protected,
and manmade facilities are screened from off-site observers and blend with the natural
visual character of the area. These requirements shall apply to all elements of a project,
including any aboveground utility installations.
Response: Acknowledged.
5. As the site is adjacent to the Mallards Nest Natural Area, Section3.4.1(L) Compatibility
with Public Natural Areas or Conserved Land applies. If the project contains or abuts a
publicly owned natural area or conserved land, the development plan shall be designed
so that it will be compatible with the management of such natural area or conserved
land. In order to achieve this, the development plan shall include measures such as
barriers or landscaping measures to minimize wildlife conflicts, setbacks or open space
tracts to provide a transition between the development and the publicly owned natural
area or conserved land, and educational signage or printed information regarding the
natural values, management needs and potential conflicts associated with living in close
proximity to such natural area or conserved land.
12
Response: Acknowledged.
6. City of Fort Collins Land Use Code [Section 3.2.1 (E)(3)], requires that to the extent
reasonably feasible, all plans be designed to incorporate water conservation materials
and techniques. This includes use of low-water-use plants and grasses in landscaping
or re-landscaping and reducing bluegrass lawns as much as possible. Native plants and
wildlife-friendly (ex: pollinators, butterflies, songbirds) landscaping and maintenance are
also encouraged. Please refer to the Fort Collins Native Plants document available
online and published by the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department for guidance
on native plants is: http://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativeplants2013.pdf. Also
see the City of Fort Collins Plant List : https://www.fcgov.com/forestry/plant_list.pdf.
Response: Acknowledged.
7. If trees may be impacted then a review of trees shall be conducted with Ralph Zentz,
Senior Urban Forester or Molly Roche, Forestry Specialist (970-221-6302,
rzentz@fcgov.com, mroche@fcgov.com) to determine the status of existing trees and
any mitigation requirements that could result from the proposed development. LUC
Section 3.2.1(C) requires developments to submit a landscape and tree protection plan,
and if receiving water service from the City, an irrigation plan, that: "...(4) protects
significant trees, natural systems, and habitat, and (5) enhances the pedestrian
environment. " Note that a significant tree is defined as one having DBH (Diameter at
Breast Height) of six inches or more. Please contact assigned Development Review
Coordinator directly or email DRCoord@fcgov.com to schedule a tree inventory site
visit.
Response: Understood. We have met with staff on site to conduct the tree inventory and this data is
presented in the Utility Plans (Existing Conditions Plan) and Site Plan (Landscape Plan, etc.) two
trees are being removed and the replacement plan is identified in the landscape plans.
8. If tree removal is necessary, please include the following note on the tree mitigation plan
and landscape plan, as appropriate:
"NO TREES SHALL BE REMOVED DURING THE SONGBIRD NESTING SEASON
(FEBRUARY 1 TO JULY 31) WITHOUT FIRST HAVING A PROFESSIONAL
ECOLOGIST OR WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST COMPLETE A NESTING SURVEY TO
IDENTIFY ANY ACTIVE NESTS EXISTING ON THE PROJECT SITE. THE SURVEY
SHALL BE SENT TO THE CITY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER. IF ACTIVE NESTS
ARE FOUND, THE CITY WILL COORDINATE WITH RELEVANT STATE AND
FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES TO DETERMINE WHETHER ADDITIONAL
RESTRICTIONS ON TREE REMOVAL AND CONSTRUCTION APPLY."
13
Response: There are two trees identified for removal, we will add this note to the plan.
9. Please submit a site photometric plan and luminaire schedule. In regard to outdoor
lighting, especially LED light fixtures, cooler color temperatures are harsher at night and
cause more disruption to circadian (biological) rhythms for both humans and wildlife.
Warmer color temperature (warm white, 3000K or less) for any LED light fixtures is
preferred. Please also consider fixtures with motion-sensing or dimming capabilities so
that light levels can be adjusted as needed. Site light sources shall be fully shielded and
down-directional to minimize up-light, light spillage and glare [see LUC 3.2.4(D)(3)].
Thank you in advance for supporting City of Fort Collins Night Sky Objectives. For further
information regarding health effects please see:
http://darksky.org/ama-report-affirms-human-health-impacts-from-leds/
Response: We have accommodated this comment into our lighting design. Please see the
submitted lighting plan.
10. Our city has an established identity as a forward-thinking community that cares about the
quality of life it offers its residents now and generations from now. Thus, the City of Fort
Collins has many sustainability programs and goals that may benefit this project. Of
particular interest may be:
1) ClimateWise Program: http://fcgov.com/climatewise, contact
climatewise@fcgov.com or Kelsey Doan at KDoan@fcgov.com, 970-416-2410
2) Zero Waste Plan and the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program
(WRAP): http://fcgov.com/recycling/wrap.php, contact Jonathon Nagel at 970-416-2701
or jnagel@fcgov.com
3) Utilities Building Energy Scoring:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/building-energy-scoring , contact Kirk Longstein
at 970-416-4325 or klongstein@fcgov.com
4) Solar Rebate Program: www.fcgov.com/solar, contact Rhonda Gatzke at
970-416-2312 or rgatzke@fcgov.com
5) Integrated Design Assistance Program: http://fcgov.com/idap, contact Gary
Schroeder at 970-224-6003 or gschroeder@fcgov.com
6) Nature in the City Program: http://fcgov.com/natureinthecity, contact Justin Scharton at
970-221-6213 or jscharton@fcgov.com
7) Bike Share Program: http://fcgov.com/bikeshare, contact Stacy Sebeczek at Bike
Fort Collins at stacy@bikefortcollins.org or 970-481-5577
Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Nils Saha, nsaha@fcgov.com
14
1. 2-4-2019: INFORMATION ONLY
There are existing trees on site. Please clarify whether the proposed changes in use will
have any impact on the existing trees on the property. If so, 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.
Response: Understood. Meeting with staff was conducted on site and the results are represented in
the accompanying plans.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
1. Information Only:
No Comment from Erosion Control. Based upon the submitted Planning
Materials it has been determined that this project; will disturb less than
10,000 sq. ft., is not proposed to be in a sensitive area, has no steep slopes
(greater than 3H:1V) within or adjacent to the project, and is not part of a
larger common development that will or is under construction. Therefore, no
Erosion Control Material submittal is needed. If this project substantially
changes in size or design where the above criteria now apply, erosion control
materials should be submitted. Though the project at this time requires no
erosion control material submittal, the project still must be swept and
maintained to prevent dirt, saw cuttings, concrete wash, trash & debris,
landscape materials and other pollutants from the potential of leaving the
site and entering the storm sewer at all times during the project in
accordance with City Code 26-498. If complaint driven or site observation of
the project seem not to prevent the pollutant discharge the City may require
the project to install erosion and sediment control measures. Nearby inlets
that may be impacted by the pollutants, in particular dirt, should be
protected as a good preventative practice and individual lots should be
protected from material escaping onto the sidewalk. If at building permit
issuance any issues arise please email erosion@fcgov.com to help facilitate
getting these permits signed off.
Response: Understood. The proposed site plan and utility plans will disturb less than 10,000 SF.
However, silt fence, rock socks, and a concrete washout area are identified on the plan as a good
preventative practice. These BMPs are intended to mitigate transfer of pollutants onto neighboring
properties and sensitive areas.
2. Information Only:
A portion of this property is located in the City regulated, 100-year Spring Creek
floodplain and floodway. Any development within the floodplain must obtain a floodplain
use permit and comply with the safety regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code.
15
The materials submitted for conceptual review indicate that there will be no outdoor
improvements to the site so there should be no floodplain permitting requirements.
Please continue to show the floodplain boundaries on the site plan. If there will be any
improvements within the floodplain please contact Heidi Hansen with any questions
about development in the floodplain. hhansen@fcgov.com 970-221-6854.
Response: We have contacted Heidi Hansen and met her on site. We are proposing the potential
reconstruction of the pedestrian bridge that existed across Spring Creek for over 40 years until last
year. Heidi is OK with us showing a potential future bridge so long as we add a note that clarifies a
floodplain use permit would need to successfully be obtained in order to accomplish that.
3. No site improvements? (site specific comment):
No improvements or increases in impervious area are indicated in the application, so
there are no Stormwater requirements. Please contact the Water Utilities Engineering if
site improvements are anticipated.
Response: Understood. The project now intends to enhance the parking area and we have discussed
the proposed improvements with Water Utilities Engineering.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Shane Boyle, 970-221-6339, sboyle@fcgov.com
1. No service modifications? (site specific comment):
No changes to the water or sewer services are anticipated with this application. Please
contact the Water Utilities Engineering if site improvements are anticipated.
Response: Understood. Based on the proposed use and fire authority comments, we anticipate the
need for a fire sprinkler service., The proposed service is identified in the Utility Plans for your
review.
2. Water conservation (standard comment):
The water conservation standards for landscape and irrigation will apply. Information on
these requirements can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/standards
Response: Please see the submitted landscape plan.
Department: Electric Engineering
Contact: Luke Unruh, 9704162724, lunruh@fcgov.com
1. Information Only
The site is currently serviced by a privately owned single-phase commercial service
connected to a secondary box located along Stuart Street. If upgrades to your service
are required with the proposed project, please contact Light and Power
16
Response: We don’t anticipate any needed upgrades to the electrical service.
2. Information Only
If upgrades are required, electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges
and any system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this
development. Please contact me or visit the following website for an estimate of
charges and fees related to this project:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-develo
pment-fees
Response: We don’t anticipate any needed upgrades to the electrical service.
3. Information Only
Please contact Luke Unruh with Light and Power Engineering at (970) 416-2724 to
discuss the power requirments that will be needed for this project. Please reference our
policies, construction practices, development charge processes and electric services
standards at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
Response: We don’t anticipate any needed upgrades to the electrical service, however if we do, we
will contact Luke.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
1. As of January 1, 2015 all development plans are required to be on the NAVD88 vertical
datum. Please make your consultants aware of this, prior to any surveying and/or design
work. Please contact our office for up to date Benchmark Statement format and City
Vertical Control Network information.
Response: Understood. The site survey was conducted and is based on the NAVD88 vertical datum.
2. If submitting a replat for this property/project, addresses are not acceptable in the
Subdivision Plat title/name. Numbers in numeral form may not begin the title/name.
Please contact our office with any questions.
Response: We are not proposing to replat the property.
Pre-Submittal Meetings for Building Permits
17
Pre-Submittal meetings are offered to assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the
design, that new commercial or multi-family projects are on track to complying with all of the
adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The proposed project should be in the early
to mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective and is typically scheduled after the
Current Planning conceptual review meeting.
Applicants of new commercial or multi-family projects should call 970-416-2748 or email
scarter@fcgov.com to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to
present site plans, floor plans, and elevations and be able to discuss code issues of occupancy, square
footage, and type of construction being proposed.
Response: As described in the comment above, this meeting should be conducted in the early to
mid-design stage. We think this meeting will be most effective after we received the first round of
PDP-APU comments from the city.
18