Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNORTHFIELD COMMONS - MJA210001 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Page 1 of 16 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview May 21, 2021 Cathy Mathis TB Group 444 Mountain Avenue Berthoud, CO 80513 RE: Northfield Commons, MJA210001, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of Northfield Commons. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via phone at 970-221-6695 or via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Kai Kleer, 970-416-4284, kkleer@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 1. Building Orientation Standards a. Generally, buildings 1, 2, 6 and 7 comply with the building orientation standard by providing a front entry oriented to a walkway (no greater than 200 feet) that directly connects into the Steely Drive. Buildings 3,4 and 5 require more work to meet orientation standards. The following comments highlight the issue but will require further exploration by the applicant team and staff. b. The walkway associated with Building 5 does not do enough to qualify as a Major Walkway Spine. Major Walkway Spines are really intended to be in-lieu of a street. Unpacking this concept, a building needs to orient onto a space that contains a 5-foot walkway, is highly landscaped and contained within a 35-foot corridor. Further, the front walkway of the building should be highly visible from the Suniga sidewalk system. Page 2 of 16 RESPONSE: The Building 5 walk now provides a major walkway spine and is clear, direct, and highly visible from Suniga. The addition of steps also helps provide an entrance to the project. For Buildings 3 and 4, we have provided crusher fines paths connecting directly to the sidewalk in Suniga. Comment Number: 2 c. Building 4 & 3 do not meet the building entrance standard. A possible approach can be achieved by providing the double sided architecture mentioned in comment 3d but instead of having sliding doors, the a similar entrance that is used on the back side of the building could be implemented. RESPONSE: Entrance roof canopies were added to front, Steely Drive side of all buildings at the sliding door of the two ground level units that face Steely Drive. Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 2. Architecture a. Please provide architectural details for the trash enclosures. Additional details are needed on the trash enclosure sheet to comply with design standards that can be found by visiting, https://www.fcgov.com/recycling/pdf/enclosureguidelines0804.pdf?152702721 RESPONSE: Trash enclosure elevations and details are now included with the 2nd submittal. b. Please provide a detail sheet that demonstrates the dimension changes in depth proposed with windows, material patterns and millwork, including dimensions of proposed pilasters, window and door trim surrounds, accent trim materials, molding and other similar elements. The goal is to ensure that building façades have depth and articulation. RESPONSE: Additional detail trim gas been added and noted on the building elevations in numerous locations including the freeze trim bands below roofs, window trim and other vertical elements. c. It's not clear from the site plan how much articulation in wall plane is provided. Please provide an overview of each building design that provides building measurements of projections, recesses. It appears that the side facing the street may need some additional articulation; however, it is hard to tell from the scale of the plan. RESPONSE: Enlarged building footprints have been added to show and dimension the building façade articulation, recesses and projections. d. Buildings facing Suniga should provide additional details to provide a human scale relationship to the street. Things like canopies above sliding doors, low fence for screening patio spaces and direct walkway connections into the street from each street facing patio would be a great start. e. Please provide a detail sheet of window placement within wall plane. RESPONSE: Entrance roof canopies were added to front, Steely Drive side of all buildings at the sliding door of the two ground level units that face Steely Drive. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 3. Lighting Plan a. Regarding Fixture S2, please reduce the glare rating to G1. b. It appears that only two lights are proposed on Building 5, is this the only building with wall mounted lighting in the entire development? If not, please include all other lighting in the photometric plan. c. Regarding the photometric plan, it is not clear where the property line is located and therefor it is not clear if the plan complies with horizontal luminance standards. Please update. Page 3 of 16 d. Please adjust the calculation points from 20 feet to 10 feet within the vicinity of the property line. e. Please exclude or make it clear on the photometric plan that the lighting approved under the Northfield project will not be changed from the previously approved plan. Might be a good idea cross hatch this area and add a note or something that provides a clear representation that this area is excluded f. Add a note stating, "Light poles for fixture S2H and S2 will be anodized or otherwise coated to minimize glare from the light source.". RESPONSE: Item a. Fixture type S2 to be revised to Fixture type S2H with house-side shield which has glare rating of G1 as requested. Item b. Added downlights Fixture type DD located at front entry porch for each building. Item c. Added property line to photometric plans. Item d. Revised calculation points to 10 feet by 10 feet, note that this required different scale and required photometric site to be broken into two site plan sheets. Item e. Previous site photometric plan to be included in resubmittal set. East property line added for Mercy site for clarification. Item f. Added requested noted regarding pole finish as requested. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 4. Trash Enclosure a. The Community Recycling Ordinance (No. 109 2016) requires that all new business and multifamily complexes subscribe to recycling service that is at minimum 1/3 of their overall service capacity (total bin capacity x number of weekly pickups, include both trash and recycling when calculating overall service capacity). In general recycling containers must be at least 50% the size of proposed trash containers to meet this requirement. Please make sure proposed containers meet this requirement and that adequate space is provided in all enclosures. RESPONSE An additional, third, trash enclosure location has been added to provide more capacity in order to meet the community recycling ordinance. b. All trash and recycling enclosures are required to provide methods of protecting the interior walls from damage by dumpsters. Depending on the type of dumpster used certain methods are more effective than others. For rolling dumpsters (4 yard or smaller) curbing or angle iron spaced from the wall so that the dumpsters hit it before they impact the walls (sides and rear) is most effective. For large, stationary dumpsters (6 cubic yard or larger) bollards evenly spaced are more effective. Please add protection for the side walls and consider using curbing or angle iron in the rear for the curtain proposal. RESPONSE: A steel angle for wall protection has been added to the trash enclosure details submitted. c. With the large service gates on the trash and recycling enclosures it is recommended to use hinges with grease fittings and provide support wheels for the gates. RESPONSE: Comment noted. d. It is required for the service gates on the trash and recycling enclosure to be able to be secured in the fully open position. Using a cane-bolt as proposed this would simply require drilling additional holes for them to drop into in the open position. Please add a note on the gate details stating that this will be provided. RESPONSE: A canebolt is included with the trash enclosure detail submitted. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 Page 4 of 16 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 5. Walkways and Parking a. Because the walkway in front of vehicle parking is also being used to meet the Orientation to a Connecting Walkway standard, please expand the sidewalk to 7 feet to allow for 5 feet of clear for pedestrian movement. RESPONSE: The walk is 7 feet wide where there is a vehicle overhang. b. Please provide a n/s walkway along the eastern property boundary for the attached units. RESPONSE: North-south walk added. c. Regarding the walkway spurs that extend from the southernmost east-west walkway. Please ensure that when they cross the drive and align with a curb ramp. In between, understanding that there may be stormwater challenges on the site, the crossing can be flush with the street, however, it should be stamped and patterned or detailed in a way to ensure priority and emphasis is given to the pedestrian. RESPONSE: The north-south walkway connections now line up with a curb ramp on the other side. d. The dead-end drive adjacent to Building 5 seems a bit challenging and will require people to back up into the hammerhead turn-around if they cannot find a spot. What other alternatives have been explored for this area? RESPONSE: We turned one parking stall into a striped no parking area for people to back up. e. The plan does not demonstrate enough parking for the site and does not apply 3.2.2(K)(1)(a)1.a. correctly. This site is not located within the TOD overlay district so it cannot be applied used. The project will require a modification of standard to 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) and provide some alternative mitigation to help make up for deficiency in parking. Possible ideas are to provide enhanced bike parking infrastructure, such as more racks, bike service locations near the regional trail and on each side of the project (pumps, tools, etc.). Also an enhanced pedestrian connectivity from the first floor sliding doors into Suniga Street, Steely, regional trail, or Connecting Walkways. RESPONSE: The project is providing 140 parking stalls, 6 spaces short of the requirement. The Modification will use community-wide need and nominal and inconsequential as justification for the reduction. The Modification will also demonstrate enhanced pedestrian connectivity throughout the entire site as well as amenity areas. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 6. Vehicle and Bicycle Parking a. There are several instances where bike parking is located on the side of the building that are not necessarily convenient or accessible (sometimes being blocked by landscaping by users. Please revise these bike parking locations to more practical locations that on the site. RESPONSE: The bike racks on the sides of some buildings have been moved to the corner of the buildings. They will be located on crusher fines with a direct path to each one. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: 7. Landscaping Page 5 of 16 a. Regarding the Landscaping along Suniga, please provide tighter street tree spacing and additional landscaping along the south side of the sidewalk consistent with the previously approved plan. Please explore more opportunities to incorporate canopy shade trees in between the south property line and walkway. RESPONSE: Street trees along Suniga have been tightened to 35’ spacing. More shade trees have also been provided between Suniga and the buildings. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: Please add Public Benefit Summary to Sheet 1 of the plan set. A Word document is provided with the final comment letter. RESPONSE Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 FOR HEARING: An amendment to the Public Benefit Agreement may be required as part of this project. This amendment would need to be approved through an action of City Council. More clarity will be provided after an internal staff meeting that is scheduled for May 24th. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Spencer Smith, 970-221-6603, smsmith@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) A DA will be required for this project. A DA exists for this site, since it was included as a phase of the Northfield project, but the City would like to enter into a separate one that is for this site specifically. Please complete the DA information form (provided with the redlines/comments) and submit to Engineering as soon as possible. I will not be able to complete the draft agreement until I have that information. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FINAL APPROVAL An additional access to Suniga was not approved as part of the overall Northfield plan and was not included in the conceptual review site plan that was reviewed. Seeing that it does not meet City standards for intersection spacing and does not really appear to be a significant benefit to traffic flow for the site, Engineering would ask that the connection remain an emergency access only connection. Please revise the plans accordingly. UPDATE: based on discussion at the staff review meeting, we will be presenting a variance request to the City's Transportation Coordination group for approval. I will try and get this item on the 5/24/21 meeting agenda. Please provide any supporting memo/information to me by noon on 5/24. RESPONSE: This item was discussed during a previous TC meeting and there is now support for this RI/RO access. It is unclear if an actual variance is needed since the intersections are on the opposite sides of a divided road. Page 6 of 16 Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FINAL APPROVAL I believe that internal crosswalks were to be enhanced, per the overall Northfield development approval. I'm not sure if that is what is proposed or not. Please work with Planning on that requirement and update plans as needed. RESPONSE: The enhance crosswalk at the east side of the site is now shown. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FINAL APPROVAL Redlines have been provided for the plat and utility plan. Please address all redlines with your next submittal. RESPONSE: Redlines have been addressed Department: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion and Sediment Control Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-222-1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR FINAL: At Final, please provide a revised Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and report and escrow calculations per City stormwater criteria based on the revised plans for this development. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. INFORMATION ONLY: The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5-2 was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections. As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such inspections. The Erosion Control fees are based on; the number of lots, the total site disturbance, the estimated number of years the project will be active and the Stormwater Inspection Fees are based on the number of LID/WQ Features that are designed for on this project. Based on the proposed site construction associated with this project we are assuming 1 lots 6.32 acres of disturbance, 1 year from demo through build out of construction and an additional 3 years till full vegetative stabilization due to seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Fee estimate of $1,301.44 Based on one bioretention/rain garden and one extended detention basins, the estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee is $ 565.00 Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the above-mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for you to review. Page 7 of 16 These fees will need to be paid prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit for this site. Department: Stormwater Engineering - Floodplain Contact: Claudia Quezada, (970)416-2494, cquezada@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR FINAL: Please add the following note to the site plan and Utility set: 1. "This property is located in the FEMA-regulated, 500-Year Poudre River Floodplain. Any development within the floodplain must comply with the safety regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code." 2. “Essential services critical facilities and at-risk population critical facilities are prohibited in the 500-year floodplain.” RESPONSE: Notes have been added to the Utility Plan and Grading & Drainage Plan and the Site Plan. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR FINAL: Due to the known flood risk, it is highly recommended that buildings and any air conditioning units and/or any ground mounted equipment be elevated as much as possible. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Dan Mogen, 970-305-5989, dmogen@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FOR HEARING: There are several areas the proposed landscaping does not meet separation requirements from the proposed storm system. Please review proposed landscape separations throughout the site and update as needed. RESPONSE: All tree/utility separations have been reviewed and should be good to go. Please note: storm line along the south side of the site has been moved as far north as possible. These trees were requested during our previous rounds of submittal with Northfield, in order to give some blockage for the existing neighborhood. They have been moved as far south as possible, giving about 7' - 8' of separation. Perhaps a discussion between forestry, wastewater, and our team is required if this is still not adequate? Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FOR FINAL: There are no significant concerns at this time with the overall stormwater design. Please see redlines for update/clarification requests. I encourage you to reach out with any questions or to review potential revisions, and I’d be happy to set up a meeting or conference call to do so. RESPONSE: Drainage report comments have been addressed Page 8 of 16 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Dan Mogen, 970-305-5989, dmogen@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FOR HEARING: It is important to ensure proper access for maintenance and operations, and there are concerns with two notable locations on this site. For water, the proposed connection to the main at the west end of the site parallels Suniga and creates issues with access as well as landscaping separations. Is it possible to realign the proposed emergency access easement and water main to eliminate this parallel stretch and eliminate this conflicts? For sewer, access is needed to the proposed manhole at the southeast corner of the property. It appears site and landscaping design will need to be coordinated to enable needed access. Please see redlines for additional information. I encourage you to reach out with any questions or to review potential revisions, and I’d be happy to set up a meeting to discuss. RESPONSE: The waterline alignment crossing Suniga has been updated to not require any pipe bends before entering the site. Access is provided either by sidewalk or the emergency access. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FOR HEARING: It does not appear adequate landscape separations are proposed in all locations on site. Please review to ensure adequate separation and clear space is provided around hydrants, water meters, and other water appurtenances as well as sewer mains and manholes. It does not appear sewer services are shown currently. Please ensure to preserve space for these services as well. Note: No trees shall be planted within 10’ of water and sewer mains or within 6’ of service lines. No shrubs shall be planted within 4’ of water and sewer mains or service lines. RESPONSE: All tree/utility separations have been reviewed and should now be adequate. Please note: storm line along the south side of the site has been moved as far north as possible. These trees were requested during our previous rounds of submittal with Northfield, in order to give some blockage for the existing neighborhood. They have been moved as far south as possible, giving about 7' - 8' of separation. Perhaps a discussion between forestry, wastewater, and our team is required if this is still not adequate? Department: Light And Power Contact: Luke Unruh, 9704162724, lunruh@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL / MUST BE SHOWN 1ST ROUND FDP: Transformer locations need to be shown on the utility plan. Transformer Page 9 of 16 locations will need to be coordinated with me. Transformers must be shown on the plans on the first round of FDP. Transformers must be placed within 10ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. RESPONSE: Transformer and meters are now shown Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 INFORMATION ONLY: 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 development charges and fees: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide a C-1 form and a one-line diagram for each building so I can determine the transformers needed for the development. You can find the C-1 form at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utilsprocedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C1Form.pdf RESPONSE: We believe that the transformer locations and number of have been coordinated. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: Since the electric infrastructure will be installed in a few weeks along Suniga, I recommend early coordination of power requirements. This could save the development from system modification charges. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss. RESPONSE: Power requirements has been coordinated. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/20/2021 FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Regarding the electrical schematic design narrative provided, “(2) meter stacks will be provided and located in basement area of building if approved by local utility company.” This seems like a long shot. I know this will require an exterior entrance directly into the electric meter room among other requirements the Meter shop may have. Please reach out to Chad Stanley CSTANLEY@fcgov.com for other requirements. Early planning needs to be considered for meter location, because this will effect transformer placement. If the electric meters are on the exterior of the building, physical wall space is always an issue when PV equipment needs space also. Meter location must be shown on the utility plans before hearing RESPONSE: Meters are shown Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416-4290, sbenton@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Please keep me abreast of what commitments are worked out between this project and the Northfield project regarding the Page 10 of 16 NHBZ and the regional trail. Environmental Planning's comments and requirements will vary greatly depending on whether or not this project is responsible for establishing the NHBZ and trail. If this project is responsible for the NHBZ then requirements will include a restoration and weed management plan, natural resources language in the development agreement, a security deposit, etc. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Please clearly label the NHBZ on all plan sets and clean up the hatching, colors, etc. It is difficult to fully understand what is what as the plans currently are. Additionally, there is a table with color coding depicting 'existing NHBZ area that is permanently disturbed', but that color is not represented on the drawings. RESPONSE: We have added the NHBZ hatch on the plans and have labeled it. The legend and colored hatching will match. The NHBZ disturbance area is most likely due to the construction of the box culvert Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR APPROVAL: It is hard to know for sure without labeled lines, but it appears that the NHBZ is drawn from the centerline of the ditch. NHBZ and applicable calculations should be drawn from the top of bank of the ditch. RESPONSE: NHBZ and top of ditch are now labeled clearly – please let me know if this seems incorrect. NHBZ is also measured from top of ditch, as requested. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR APPROVAL: As per LUC 3.2.4, no light spillage is allowed in NHBZs. Please adjust accordingly. RESPONSE Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR APPROVAL: At least one species presented in the landscape plan to be planted in the NHBZ is inappropriate to be used in the NHBZ - southwestern white pine (Pinus strobiformis). All species planted in NHBZs must be native; a more complete review can be completed when line work is more clearly labeled. RESPONSE: Southwestern White Pine has been removed from NHBZ. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: FOR APPROVAL: 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." RESPONSE: There are no existing trees on site; therefore, no removal is necessary. Page 11 of 16 Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, 224-616-1992, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Continued: If there are existing trees within this project scope, please schedule an on-site meeting with City Forestry. This should happen prior to the next round of review. RESPONSE: Upon a site walk held on June 3rd with Forestry, there are no existing trees on the site. 1/20/2021: PRE-SUBMITTAL: Forestry Tree Inventory Please schedule an on-site meeting with City Forestry (mroche@fcgov.com) to obtain tree inventory and mitigation information. Please note that existing significant trees should be retained to the extent reasonably feasible. This meeting should occur prior to first round of formal submittal. Forestry recommends scheduling the on-site tree inventory as early in the design process as possible. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Continued: Submit an existing tree removal feasibility letter if there are existing trees on-site that need to be removed. 1/20/2021: INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP If applicable, please provide an “Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter” for City Forestry staff to review. 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. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Continued: Please remove the Warranty and Inspection notes on sheet LS5. Include General Landscape Notes and Site Plan notes to the landscape plan. All ornamental trees must be sized at 2” caliper B&B. Please update the plant list. Page 12 of 16 RESPONSE: Warranty and inspection notes have been removed; general notes are on sheet LS2 and site notes are on LS5; ornamental tree sizes now showing at 2” cal. BB. 1/20/2021: INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP Please provide a landscape plan that meets the Land Use Code 3.2.1 requirements. This should include the existing tree inventory, any proposed tree removals with their locations clearly noted and any proposed tree plantings (including species, size, quantity, and method of transplant). The plans should also include the following City of Fort Collins notes: General Landscape Notes Tree Protection Notes Street Tree Permit Note, when applicable. These notes are available from the City Planner or by following the link below and clicking on Standard Plan Set Notes: https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php Required tree sizes and method of transplant: Canopy Shade Tree: 1.0” caliper container or equivalent Evergreen tree: 4.0’ height container or equivalent Ornamental tree: 1.0 caliper container or equivalent Canopy Shade Tree as a street tree on a Local or Collector street only: 1.25" caliper container or equivalent Required mitigation tree sizes: Canopy Shade Tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlapped Evergreen tree: 8.0’ height balled and burlapped Ornamental tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlapped Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Continued: Please include species diversity percentages in the plant list for review. RESPONSE: Now provided. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Please provide species labels directly to all proposed trees. RESPONSE: Trees are now labeled. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Please include streetlight and stop sign locations to the landscape plan and space trees accordingly. Streetlight/Tree Separation: Canopy shade tree: 40 feet Ornamental tree: 15 feet Stop Sign/Tree Separation: Based on feedback from Traffic Operations, it is preferred that trees be planted Page 13 of 16 at least 50 feet from the nearest stop sign in order to minimize conflicts with regulatory traffic signs. While the 50 feet of separation is not officially codified yet, Traffic Operations has indicated that the current standard of 20 feet does not provide adequate stop sign clearance. RESPONSE Streetlight/tree separations are now being met. There is one street tree on the east side of the site which is 40’ from a stop sign instead of the requested 50’, due to utility conflicts. Please let me know if you would like this tree removed. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 5/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Please review Forestry redlines – several tree/utility conflicts are noted. Please revise for next round. Utility/Tree Separation: 10’ between trees and electric utilities, transformers, public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines 4’ between trees and gas lines RESPONSE: All tree/utility separations have been reviewed and should be good to go. Please note: storm line along the south side of the site has been moved as far north as possible. These trees were requested during our previous rounds of submittal with Northfield, in order to give some blockage for the existing neighborhood. They have been moved as far south as possible, giving about 7' - 8' of separation. Perhaps a discussion between forestry, wastewater, and our team is required if this is still not adequate? Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/14/2021 05/14/2021: TURNING RADIUS The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. The proposed radius for the hammerhead between building 3 and 4 is showing 15 feet on the plat. Please correct to minimum radius or provide Autoturn exhibit. RESPONSE: A vehicle turning exhibit is included with this submittal confirming the PFA vehicle movements work with the proposed layout. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/14/2021 05/14/2021: FIRE LANE SIGNS The limits of the fire lane shall be fully defined. Fire lane sign locations should be indicated on future plan sets. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of fire inspection. Code language provided below. - IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. RESPONSE: Fire Lane/No parking signs are shown Page 14 of 16 Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: ADDRESS POSTING - M-F - LOCAL AMENDMENT - IFC 505.1.7: Address shall be clearly visible on approach from any street, drive or fire lane that accesses the site. Buildings, either individually or part of a multi-building complex, that have fire lanes on sides other than the addressed street side, shall have address numbers on the side of the building fronting the roadway from which it is addressed. Buildings that are addressed on one street, but are accessible from other drives or roads, shall have the address numbers AND STREET NAME on each side that is accessible from another drive or road. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Addressing & Way Finding will be coordinated during final. Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/17/2021 05/17/2021: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: 2018 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments 2018 International Residential Code (IRC) with local amendments 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments 2018 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments 2018 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments 2018 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments 2018 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Copies of current City of Fort Collins code amendments can be found at fcgov.com/building. Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017. Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF. Frost Depth: 30 inches. Wind Loads: Risk Category II (most structures): · 140mph (Ultimate) exposure B or Front Range Gust Map published by SEAC. Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code: · Single family: IRC chapter 11. · Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2018 IECC residential chapter. · Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2018 IECC commercial chapter. RESPONSE Thank you. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: · 10% of all parking spaces must be EV ready (conduit in place) Page 15 of 16 · Multi-family Residential located within 1000ft of rail tracks, 500 of highway, or 250ft of a 4-lane road must provide ext wall composite sound transmission of 39 STC min. · R-2 occupancies apartment/condo must provide 10ft setback from property line and 20 feet between other buildings or provide fire rated walls and openings per chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC. · City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2018 IBC require a full NFPA-13 sprinkler system in multifamily units with an exception to allow NFPA 13R systems in buildings with no more than 6 dwelling units (or no more than 12 dwelling units where the building is divided by a 2-hour fire barrier with no more than 6 dwelling units on each side). · Prescriptive energy compliance with increased insulation values is required for buildings using electric heat. · A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new multi-family structure. · Attached single-family provide 3ft setback to property line or provide fire rated walls & openings per chap 3 of the IRC. · Bedroom egress windows (emergency escape openings) required in all bedrooms. · Attached single-family townhomes and duplexes are required to be fire sprinkled per local amendment and must provide a P2904 system min and provide fire rated wall per R302. Determine what water line size will be provided to dwellings so the fire-sprinkler system can be designed. · New homes must provide EV/PV ready conduit, see local amendment. · Provide site-wide accessibility plan in accordance with CRS 9-5. This requires accessible units per that state standard. This requirement includes single family attached homes and accessible path must be provided into the dwelling entrance (no step). Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting: Please schedule a pre-submittal meeting for any new commercial or multi-family building with Building Services for this project. Pre-Submittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: Unless required during MJA, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/18/2021 05/18/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: 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. Page 16 of 16 RESPONSE: Comments are addressed.