HomeMy WebLinkAboutFAIRWAY APARTMENTS - PDP210005 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSDepartment: Planning ServicesContact: Kai Kleer, 9704164284, kkleer@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/05/202107/12/2021 FOR HEARING:Thank
you for revising the architectural elevations. For hearing, please develop a table that identifies the features that make each building distinctly different. Staff will provide a table
for a reference of what it should look like. RESPONSE: Table has been added to plans, sheet A0.11 - Building Types & Locations. We have varied different aspects and colors of the buildings
and have six uniquely different apartment buildings (of eight total).Regarding the Exterior Material Table in the elevation plan set should include more detailed descriptions of construction
materials that include manufacturer and specs.
RESPONSE: The table has been updated with additional information. These tables can be found on the building elevation sheets. 04/05/2021: FOR HEARINGRegarding design standards for multifamily
buildings, the project is required to provide three distinctly different building designs. This means that the project will be required to provide two additional building designs that
vary significantly in footprint size and shape and must be further distinguished by including unique architectural elevations and unique entrance features within a coordinated overall
theme of roof forms, massing proportions and other characteristics. Drastic changes to architectural elevations will be needed prior to hearing.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated:
04/05/202107/12/2021 FOR HEARING: A Modification of Standard is still required for Building 2 and 3 for 3.5.2(D). Staff generally supports the approach that is demonstrated. Please
provide a street section view of this area to demonstrate the details of what is being proposed (sidewalk width, street width, parking, ped zone, etc.)RESPONSE: Modification request
is provided. In addition, site renderings have been provided on sheet A0.12. Specifically, views 1 and 2 show views looking down this street.04/05/2021: FOR HEARINGBuilding 2 and Building
3 will need to be oriented to a Major Walkway Spine. The Major Walkway Spine is required to be a minimum of 35 feet wide in its smallest dimension, be clearly visible from a public street
(Fossil Boulevard) be tree lined with a combination of coniferous and deciduous trees (ornamental, canopy shade, etc…), contain a minimum of a 5foot sidewalk, and be planted with a varied
palette of landscaping on both sides of the walkway.Because Building 3 falls outside the maximum Major Walkway Spine distance of 350 feet this building will require a MODIFICATION OF
STANDARD to 3.5.2(D) – Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking. Staff would support a strategy that demonstrates and extension of the Major Walkway Spine corridor further north
from Building 2 and paring the walkway extension with enhanced landscaping and pedestrian connectivity from and around the building.Enhanced connectivity would include walkways connecting
into the major walkway spine from Building 3, sidewalk system around the perimeter of the site and that connects into the transit center and S College Sidewalk system at the northeast
and northwest corners of the site and additional connections from the parking lot into the Major Walkway Spine.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/05/202107/12/2021 FOR
HEARING:There is some concern that streets and buildings have been laid out in a way to minimize the disturbance to significant existing trees specifically for the stand of trees on
the south side of the site and other trees that forestry has commented on being saved. Continue to work with forestry and planning staff to ensure the maximum amount of trees can be
saved.
RESPONSE: TBG will continue to work with Forestry on preserving existing trees. The revised landscape plans are now showing additional trees to be retained.How are trees being mitigated
on site? I appears that mitigation trees are not property identified on the landscape plan and that there are still opportunities to plant trees more trees throughout the site.
RESPONSE: Mitigation trees have been identified.04/05/2021: FOR HEARINGThere are significant natural resources on the site that will require detailed consideration on how they are preserved.
Please provide a more detailed overlay of existing trees and building placement to ensure that the best possible preservation balance is being met. This topic will require significant
exploration and conversation with planning and forestry staff. These comments can result in significant site plan changes and need to be addressed prior to hearing.Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 04/05/202107/13/2021: FOR HEARING There is still some concerns with the design of the detention pond and the extent of the side slope undulation and retaining
wall design. Further coordination between the applicant team, planning, and stormwater staff is needed. Main goals are to naturalize the side slopes, if retaining walls are needed that
the wall design be a naturalistic bouldertype design. RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - The detention pond side slopes have been revised to provide for more undulation. We have provided
some pond exhibits that show the varying side slopes while still maintaining the required storage volume. Also provided is an exhibit showing landscaping elements within the detention
areas.04/05/2021: FOR HEARING The detention area at the southeast corner of the site is highly visible area and should be naturalized with undulating side slopes, landscaping, trees,
boulders, etc. Please review the City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Standards and Guidelines by visiting https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/stormwater_standards_and_guidelines.pdfIn
all cases the following standards apply:No concrete trickle channels shall be used where free draining soils are present (Soil Group A, B). Limit their use to areas with clayey soils
(Soil Group C, D) if necessary.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - This site is Soil Group C. We will continue to work with City staff to refine the trickle channel type and limit and/or omit
the trickle channel as necessary. Side slopes should vary and range from 4:1 to 20:1No vegetated slope should exceed 3:1Landscaped areas should slope to drain (2% minimum) or be planted
appropriately so regular mowing is not required (see PLANTING DESIGN section).Basin area cannot be 100% bound by walls. All walls proposed for the pond perimeter are required to have
a high quality visual character (such as natural stone or integral color concrete with form liner). Walls should not exceed 30” in height. Fences may be required for safety.Provide a
minimum of one entry point for regular access by maintenance vehicles and mowers, and for occasional access by heavy equipment if necessary. Provide adequate egress to allow users to
safely evacuate the area in the event of high water.Please work closely with planning and utilities staff to further refine this area.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - We have provided a
few detention pond exhibits with the intent to accommodate the referenced criteria above related to items such as side slopes, landscape wall, landscaping and access. We will continue
to work with the relevant City departments to refine the detention pond area a final design progresses.Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/05/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARING
Thank you for adding landscaping around the ground mounted air conditioner units. The is a need for the landscaping to be paired with a low screen fence/wall to provide full screening.
Please see redlines.
RESPONSE: Screening is shown on the plans and details have been provided. The fence detail is Detail 20 on sheet A0.16. The building elevations have also been updated. 04/05/2021: FOR
HEARING Regarding A/C condensers, please provide a detail of how these units will be screened. A low fence and landscaping are expected.Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated:
04/05/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARINGRegarding overall site circulation, there is some significant cleanup that needs to happen with walkway alignments around the north side of the site.
There are several instances when the sidewalk crosses the drive aisle there is not a corresponding connection or there is a significant jog in alignment in both east/west and north/south
walkways. Another area of concern is the point where the sidewalk deadends into a garage unit with no clear line of site into the corresponding sidewalk across the drive aisle. Please
scale back the garage to a expand the landscape island to help provide better pedestrian continuity in this areaKeeping in mind an August hearing date, staff will be looking to condition
the approval of the plan to address some of these design issues.
RESPONSE: Walks have been adjusted with crosswalks; no garage space will be eliminated. Sidewalk by northwest garage has been adjusted to 4’.04/05/2021: FOR HEARINGPlease review all
sidewalk connections and alignments across drive aisles and street to ensure consistent alignment and connections are being made across all points. An enhanced, raised connection is
also required per LUC 3.2.2(C)(5)(b). There are several instances in the site plan where sidewalk connections to trash enclosures are missing and need to be made.RESPONSE: For typical
raised crosswalk details see sheet C8.4 of the public improvement plans.Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 04/05/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARINGThank you for providing additional
detail of bike parking, however, there are several instances where the undereave bike parking blocks walkways and does not provide easy access to people living south of the pedestrian
spine. What can be done to relocate these bike parking areas into units, or under stairways? RESPONSE: We have added bike racks to apartment buildings 1 and 8. See sheet A0.14 for specific
locations and quantities. Please provide manufacturer specification and model numbers for all bike racks. RESPONSE: Specifications and images have been provided on sheet A0.14. Please
show the dimensioning for a typical garage space with the bike parking located inside.
RESPONSE: Parking dimensions have been added to the garage floor plans.04/05/2021: FOR HEARINGIt's not entirely clear how enclosed bike parking will be handled located in each garage
and under building eaves. Please provide a 'typical detail' for how and the location of the spaces that will be distributed across the site. Detail sheet should include dimensions and
fixture details.Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 04/05/202104/05/2021: FOR HEARINGPlease provide a rendering that better conveys the relationship of the Pedestrian Spine
to building ends.RESPONSE: Updated renderings have been provided on sheet A0.12.Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 07/12/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARINGThe emergency access
to the north should not be obstructed by a vertical curb and should be an extension of the private street south. This should include a parkway and street trees on the west side of the
drive.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart will adjust emergency access and will show gate. Parkway and detached walks were added with a gate and rollover curb and gutter.Comment Number: 17
Comment Originated: 07/12/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARINGFor all site retaining walls, please provide an elevation view of what is proposed along with material specification.RESPONSE:
Sanderson Stewart We have provided a landscape wall profile at the bottom of the colored pond side slope exhibit. The maximum height of the wall would be 2.5 feet. This will be a non-engineered
decorative segment block wall. An example of material to be used is also provided.It appears there will be steps in several areas of the site. Please provide a detail of steps that includes
railing design.RESPONSE: A typical site stair section has been provided on sheet A0.16.Provide specifications for all site furniture, landscape pots, trash containers, totlot equipment,
or any similar site feature. Photographic images can be used to demonstrate these materials but please include manufacturer and model.
RESPONSE: Specifications have been provided on sheet A0.14.Provide paving details for all crossings and special pavement features within the site.RESPONSE: Reference plan for striping
and crossing locations. Striping and details, along with ADA coordination will be provided at Final. An example is provided with this submittal.Additionally, see sheet C8.4 of public
improvement plans for typical raised crosswalk detail.Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 07/12/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARINGA lighting plan is required. Please submit prior
to hearing.RESPONSE: A lighting plan is provided.Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/12/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARINGRegarding the trash enclosures between garages, the
total door opening to roll out dumpsters is required to be a minimum of 10 feet.RESPONSE: Trash enclosure doors are now 10’.Department: Engineering Development ReviewContact: Marc
Virata, 9702216567, mvirata@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/13/2021: for hearing:The sidewalk along College Avenue needs more
detail as it deviates from the fully detached section and ties into the existing intersections at the northern and southern boundaries of the site. The widths appear potentially too
narrow and the sidewalks appear to abut utility pedestals without a minimum 1 foot separation requirement. The additional detail of these areas will likely result in the pedestals being
need to be relocated to provide separation and wider sidewalk widths.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart – Exhibits have been provided to show a revised sidewalk layout that clarifies some of
the grading and, layout, and relocations as necessary. The same exhibit has been provided for the north crossing at the Spradley Barr access. (See supplemental engineering exhibits
– attached)04/06/2021: for hearing:Please provide labeling of the sidewalk and parkway widths along the public street frontages (College Avenue, Fairway Lane, and Fossil Blvd) for verification
of the cross section meeting requirements behind the curb for the roadway classification.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart – Previous comment - dimensions have been addedComment Number:
10 Comment Originated: 07/13/202107/13/2021: for hearing:The pedestrian paths to the City South Transit Center require work on City property and modification to remove curb
and provide access ramps. What sort of conversations have taken place with the City as land owner on securing at least a letter of intent prior to hearing, and presumably easements for
approval at time of final plan approval. Also, please provide a letter of intent from the property owner to the north for the emergency access.RESPONSE: See attached email for correspondence.
Also see attached LOI from the property owners to the north. The connection of the spine walk to the Transit Center is located at the Transit Center’s access to this project.Comment
Number: 11 Comment Originated: 07/13/202107/13/2021: for hearing:The trees along College Avenue appear to be centered in the parkway, but should be shifted further west to
account for widening of College Avenue as referenced previously.RESPONSE: The trees have been shifted further west, however, we are limitedon how far we can shift them due to the existing
District sanitary sewer line.Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/13/202107/13/2021: information only:There appears to be aspects of the buildings along College that
encroach into the 15' utility easement (door swing and concrete landing, along with stairs?) It should be verified that this does not constitute an issue through the building permit
process, and also not a concern with the utility providers.Department: Traffic OperationContact: Steve Gilchrist, 9702246175, sgilchrist@fcgov.comTopic: Landscape PlansComment
Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/12/2021: FOR HEARING UPDATE: The first tree east of Fossil Blvd. does not appear to be 50 feet from the stop sign for westbound
traffic and needs moved or removed from the plans. RESPONSE: Tree has been removed.04/06/2021: FOR HEARING:Adequate sight distance will need to be maintained at intersections and access
points in regards to placement of trees within the sight distance triangle. Trees should also not be planted within 50 feet in advance to stop signs.Department: Stormwater EngineeringContact:
Matt Simpson, (970)4162754, masimpson@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/13/202107/13/2021: FOR HEARING:The detention pond grading does
not appear to meet the articulation and varying sideslopes standards in the Grading Chapter of the FCSCM. Please consider what adjustments you can make to the grading and site plans
to accomplish this, then meet with FC Stormwater and Planning to discuss.See Ch 8. Section 3.1:"Embankments and side slopes are to vary and undulate, with maximum side slopes of four
feet horizontal to one foot vertical (4:1) and stabilized. Nonvarying slopes and slopes exceeding 4:1 in detention basin areas will not be accepted."RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - The
detention pond side slopes have been revised to provide for more undulation. We have provided some pond exhibits that show the varying side slopes while still maintaining the required
storage volume.Contact: Wes Lamarque, 9704162418, wlamarque@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/09/2021: REMINDER COMMENT FOR HEARING:04/06/2021:
FOR HEARING:Offsite drainage easements are required for this development to use the existing offsite drainage outfall. At minimum, a letter of intent from the offsite property owner
is required to allow for a public hearing to be scheduled.RESPONSE: An MOU has been included.Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/09/2021: FOR FINAL:Please change
the line type for the storm sewers on the Landscape Plan. It appears all the separation distances are being met, but difficult to tell in certain spots.04/06/2021: FOR HEARING:Please
add all storm water infrastructure to the Landscape Plan to document required separation distances from trees, etc.Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/09/2021:
REPEAT COMMENT:04/06/2021: FOR HEARING:Please edit the text of the Drainage Report to include the LID porous paver design in the subbasin descriptions and in any other section where
applicable.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - Based on a cost assessment of permeable pavers versus Stormtech to provide LID treatment, Stormtech was clearly a more economical option and
one that the developer would like to proceed with. We have omitted the proposed paver systems from the site and added two (2) Stormtech systems, S1 and S2, to the site. The drainage
report has been updated with details of these Stormtech systems in the Section VI.C of the report and included in Appendix D.(See attached supplemental engineering exhibits)Comment Number:
10 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/09/2021: FOR HEARING UPDATED:Please document the height of the retaining wall. Any retaining wall over 6 feet should be converted to
a stepped retaining wall system to comply with the Detention Pond Landscape standards. Also, additional mitigation is required to buffer the retaining wall. This needs to include additional
landscaping with trees near the wall. The retaining wall needs to be a material other than just concrete. Typically, these have been proposed as a decorated engineered stone.RESPONSE:
Sanderson Stewart / TBG - We have provided a landscape wall profile at the bottom of the colored pond side slope exhibit. The maximum height of the wall would be 2.5 feet. This will
be a non-engineered decorative segment block wall.04/06/2021: FOR HEARING:The detention pond needs to meet the City's Detention Pond Landscape Standards.Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 07/09/202107/09/2021: FOR HEARING:Please provide a detention pond stagestorage table to document that the 2.47 acft of storage is achieved with the proposed detention
pond grading.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - The latest required storage is 102,815 sf or 2.36 ac-ft. We are currently providing 104,376 sf or 2.40 ac-ft. A stage-storage table has been
provided on the Pond Sizing Exhibit provided with this submittal.Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 07/09/202107/09/2021: FOR HEARING:A discussion is needed to see if
the southern porous pavement system can be relocated or eliminated to avoid the conflicts with the water and sewer mains and what this would do to the total LID treatment calculations.RESPONSE:
Sanderson Stewart - Please refer to the response to Stormwater Comment No. 9 above.Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 07/09/202107/09/2021: FOR FINAL:Some of the water
and sewer services are located passing through the porous pavement sections. Revisions to avoid these conflicts, where possible, can be addressed during Final Plan Review.RESPONSE:
Sanderson Stewart - Please refer to the response to Stormwater Comment No. 9 above.Department: Light And PowerContact: Rob Irish, 9702246167, rirish@fcgov.com**Comments in this
letter are from the previous round of review, these will be updated for the final comment letter on Friday**Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: Light & Power will need to extend electric infrastructure
from the northside of the site to the southside of Fairway Ln. The ROW along
College Ave. could be problematic with the exiting SS. Light & Power could
possibly go in the proposed Utility easement. It appears some parts of the
building are encroaching into the Utility easement? Recommend coordinating
offline to determine the best routing once we have all of the necessary
information.
04/05/2021: For Hearing:
Light & Power has existing electric facilities running along the Southside of
Fairway Ln. and into the South Transit Center. Electric infrastructure will need to
be extended from Fairway Ln. along the S. College frontage of the this property
to the Spradley Barr property. This extension will provide for streetlighting along
College Ave. and could possibly serve as a loop feed through the site.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: A couple of the transformer locations proposed appear
to not meet required separation from wet utilities. We can coordinate with you
offline to determine the best location for electric facilities once we have all of the
necessary information.
04/05/2021:For Hearing:
You have shown transformer locations on the plan set. Some of the proposed
locations are considered out of access and/or don't look to meet the separation
requirements from other Utilities.
Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power.
Transformers must be placed within 10 feet of a drivable surface for installation
and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of
10 feet and side/rear clearance of 4 feet minimum. When located close to a
building, please provide required separation from building openings as defined
in Figures ESS4 ‑ ESS7 within the Electric Service Standards. Please show all
proposed transformer locations on the Utility Plans.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: According to the response letter the apartments will be
single‑phase. Will the apartments be all electric or is gas being installed? This
will make a difference on how many transformers will need to be installed. I
understand you may not know what the clubhouse loads are, at this time, but
keep in mind that bringing in 3‑phase to the site could mean some additional
vaults that may alter your Site plan.
04/05/2021:For Hearing:
Are the transformer locations being shown for 3‑phase transformers or are you
planning on the buildings being single‑phase? Will the units be gas heat or all
electric units? Will the Clubhouse need three‑phase power? I understand it's
early in the process and some of these questions may not be vetted yet. It just
really helps with laying out all of the Utilities the sooner this information is
available.
A Customer Service Information form (C‑1 form) and a one‑line diagram for all
commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power
Engineering for review prior to Final Plan. A link to the C‑1 form is below:
http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils‑procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C‑1Form.pdf
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: Once we have coordinated how many transformers,
transformer locations, and the routing for the primary, we will want to have that
shown on the plan set for other departments to weigh in on.
04/05/2021: For Hearing:
Please show a proposed electric running line throughout the site. It looks like
electric will mainly be running through the parking and under the permeable
pavers. Is this okay with Stormwater? At the North end of the property there
doesn't appear to be a way for electric to go East/West between the garages
and meet minimum separation requirements. Please show how this will work.
Please provide adequate space along the private drives to ensure proper utility
installation and to meet minimum utility spacing requirements. A minimum of 10
feet separation is required between water, sewer and storm water facilities, and
a minimum of 3 feet separation is required between Natural Gas. Please show
all electrical routing on the Utility Plans.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: Thank you for showing the meter locations. Meter
locations are shown on both ends of the long buildings, are you intending to split
up the electric metering into two services on each end from two separate
transformers? This can work and may end up being required depending on the
loading for each building.
04/05/2021:For Hearing:
All dwelling units will need to be separately metered and comply with our electric
metering standards. This project will need to comply with our electric metering
standards. Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and
Power Engineering. Reference Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for
electric metering standards. A link has been provided below:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStanda
rds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: Streetlight placement along College Ave. appears to be
right on top of sanitary sewer and not meeting separation requirements. This
area looks to be challenging for separation with the existing SS and other
Utilities. Please check with South Fort Collins Sanitation on what kind of
separation they will require.
04/05/2021:For Hearing:
Streetlighting will be placed along Fairway Ln. and along College Ave. adjacent
to this site. A 40 feet separation on both sides of the light is required between
canopy trees and streetlights. A 15 feet separation on both sides of the light is
required between ornamental trees and streetlights.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021
07/13/2021: Updated: The existing Utility easements shown on the Plat do not
appear to be wide enough to include the electric primary running line and also
the transformer locations will need to be included. We can coordinate offline to
determine the best locations for electric facilities.
04/05/2021:For Hearing:
Relocations or modifications to existing electric facilities will be at the expense
of the owner/developer. Any existing and/or proposed Light & Power electric
facilities that will remain within the limits of the project will need to be located
within a dedicated easement or the public right‑of‑way. Please coordinate
relocations with Light & Power Engineering. RESPONSE: Thank you. Comments are acknowledged and we will work through them during Final.Contact: Scott Benton, (970)4164290, sbenton@fcgov.comTopic:
GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/05/202104/05/2021: FOR HEARING:Due to the substantial number of mature trees on site, a songbird nesting survey (if trees
are removed during the nesting season, Feb 1 to July 31) is a substantial survey. Please keep Environmental Planning updated on tree inventory and removal plans.RESPONSE: We have provided
updated tree removal and inventory plans.Department: ForestryContact: Nils Saha, nsaha@fcgov.comTopic: Landscape PlansComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/13/21:
FOR HEARINGCONTINUEDThough this comment was answered as ‘acknowledged’ in the response letter, there are still 133 trees boing removed from this site, including the trees called out
in this request—#73 (32 inch western catalpa), #101 (20 inch spruce), #114 (23 inch existing in the proposed detention pond). Please work with Forestry to see what can be done to preserve
the significant trees on this site. RESPONSE: TBG will work with Forestry to explain why the above trees cannot be preserved.#73 is right in the middle of Building 7.#101 is in Building
8.#114 is in the middle of the pond, which will be graded.04/06/2021: FOR HERAING:Forestry requested that the following trees be retained on site to the extent reasonably feasible:
#74, #102, #115, in addition to some of the large ash, honeylocusts and pines on site. Please coordinate with Forestry to determine how these trees can be protected. Please incorporate
and show the critical root zone of trees to be protected on the plans. Given that this is a heavily canopied site, please consider how more trees can be retained and be incorporated
into the site design.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/06/202107/13/21: FOR HEARINGContinued:1. The planting schedule does not indicate which trees are mitigation trees.
The total mitigation for all of the proposed removals is 266 trees, not 262. You have 234 proposed trees—are these all mitigation trees? RESPONSE: Yes, all of the new trees are mitigation
trees. We have proposed 260 trees, which now exceeds the required mitigation number of 228 trees.2. Per LUC 3.2.1 (see below), please indicate which option you will be choosing to fulfill
the mitigation requirements. 04/06/2021: FOR HEARING:Since the plans do not indicate which trees are being removed, it is not clear whether the landscape plan includes adequate number
of mitigation trees. Please note the following size requirements for mitigation trees: Required tree sizes and method of transplant: Canopy Shade Tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlappedEvergreen
tree: 6.0’ height balled and burlappedOrnamental tree: 1.5” caliper balled and burlappedRequired mitigation tree sizes:Canopy Shade Tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlappedEvergreen tree:
8.0’ height balled and burlappedOrnamental tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlappedRESPONSE:Plant schedule and labels have been updated to reflect mitigation trees. Note that all evergreen
trees upsized to 8’ and ornamental trees upsized to 2”. All canopy shade trees are 2”.When it is not possible to meet mitigation requirements on site, LUC 3.2.1 (F) provides the following
options: 1.To the extent feasible, replacement trees should be planted on the development site. 2.When it is not reasonably feasible to plant mitigation trees on the development site,
replacement trees should be planted within one half mile of the development site. 3.If no locations can be identified within half mile of the development site, the applicant can choose
to submit a paymentinlieu to the City of Fort Collins Forestry division to be used to plant replacement trees as close to the site as possible.Department: PFAContact: Marcus Glasgow,
9704162869, marcus.glasgow@poudrefire.orgTopic: GeneralComment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/02/202104/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN: Pavers Fire lanes shall be designed
as a flat, hard, allweather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. Private drives incorporating pavers as surface for fire lanes shall provide geotech information confirming
the paver design can handle fire truck loading. A note shall be added to the civil plans.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - We are no longer proposing permeable pavers for this project. We
will instead be utilizing underground chambers located outside of the pavement sections. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 07/09/202107/09/2021: FOR INFORMATION:LANDSCAPE
PLAN The proposed Landscape Plan indicates that tree canopy diameters may encroach on the fire lane over time. PFA would like to ensure the integrity of the EAE remains intact as trees
mature and a canopy develops. The EAE shall be maintained unobstructed to 14' in height. This comment is aimed at preserving both trees and fire apparatus. Please be mindful when selecting
tree species.Department: Building ServicesContact: Russell Hovland, 9704162341, rhovland@fcgov.comTopic: Building Insp Plan ReviewComment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
04/02/202104/02/2021: BUILDING PERMIT:Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are:2018 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments2018
International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments2018 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with
local amendments2018 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments2018 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments2018 International Plumbing Code
(IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of ColoradoCopies of current City of Fort Collins code amendments can be found at
Fcgov.com/building.Accessibility: State Law CRS 95 & ICC/ANSI A117.12017.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 The Structural Engineer's Association of Seismic Design: Category B.Climate Zone: Zone 5Energy Code:
· Multifamily and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2018 IECC residential chapter.· Commercial and Multifamily 4 stories and taller: 2018 IECC commercial chapter. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: ·
10% of all parking spaces must be EV ready (conduit in place)· This building is located within 250ft of a 4 lane road or 1000 ft of an active railway, must provide exterior composite
sound transmission of 39 STC min.· R2 occupancies 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 NFPA13 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).· Bedroom
egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of firesprinkler. All egress windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24”.· 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 multifamily structure.Stock Plans:When
residential buildings will be built at least three times with limited variations, a stock plan design or master plan can be submitted for a single review and then built multiple times
with site specific permits. More informationcan be found in our Stock Plan Guide at fcgov.com/building/resrequirements.php.Building Permit PreSubmittal Meeting: Please schedule a presubmittal
meeting with Building Services for this project. PreSubmittal 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 listed above. The proposed project should be in the early to middesign stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects
should email their coordinator to schedule a presubmittal meeting.
RESPONSE: A meeting has been scheduled for July 28.Department: Technical ServicesContact: Jeff County, 9702216588, jcounty@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment
Originated: 04/05/202107/13/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledged04/05/2021:
INFORMATION ONLY:Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledgedTopic: PlatComment Number: 1 Comment
Originated: 04/05/202107/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVALUPDATED:Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree with comments, please provide written response of
why corrections were not made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response letter.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledged04/05/2021: 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.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledgedDepartment: Outside AgenciesContact: Don Kapperman, don_kapperman@comcast.com, Topic: GeneralComment
Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/08/202107/08/2021: Comcast would like to go joint trench with City of Fort Collins Light & Power.Contact: Megan Harrity, Larimer County Assessor,
(970) 4987065, mharrity@larimer.org, Topic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/202103/30/2021: FOR HEARING:RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart is working with
the FCLWD. See the attached email thread between John Tufte and Sam Lowe with the City of Fort Collins. That attachment is included in the attachments of this response.Of the four
parcels being combined, one is in a different taxing district than the other three.Parcel number 9602100012 R0230219 is in tax district 1106.Parcels 9602109002,9602100015,9602100006
are in tax district 1107.The difference is that Parcel No. 9602100012, in tax district 1106, is not included into the FORT COLLINS LOVELAND WATER DISTRICT.The four parcels will need
to be in the same taxing district before they can be combined into one lot.If you need contact information for the Fort Collins Loveland Water District, or if you have questions about
the taxing districts, please contact Lisa Ford in our office. Here is Lisa's contact information.Lisa FordAssessment Support Mgrfordla@co.larimer.co.us9704987068Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 04/06/202103/30/2021: FOR HEARING:The plat is titled as FAIRWAY LANE SUBDIVISION. The dedication of the plat is dedicating it as "FAIRVIEW LANE SUBDIVISION"RESPONSE:
Sanderson Stewart – previously addressedContact: Sam Lowe, FCLWD, 9702263104, slowe@fclwd.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/31/202107/13/2021: UPDATED
FOR FINAL PLANPlease see attached redline comments.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledged03/31/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN Please see the attached comments.RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart
- acknowledged