Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2908 S TIMBERLINE RD MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS - PDP210011 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com August 18, 2021 City of Fort Collins Mr. Jason Holland 281 N College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: 2908 S. Timberline Rd Multi-Family Dwellings Dear Jason, Thank you for providing comments on the 2908 Timberline Rd Multi-Family Dwellings which was received on June 22, 2021. Our team’s comment responses are detailed on the following pages. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions by phone, 970-409-3414 or by email, rmcbreen@norris-design.com. Sincerely, Norris Design Ryan F. McBreen Principal 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Comment Summary: Development Review Coordinator Contact: Todd Sullivan, 970 221 6695, tsullivan@fcgov.com 1. I will be your primary point of contact throughout the development review and permitting process. If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the project reviewers, or need assistance throughout the process, please let me know and I can assist you and your team. Please include me in all email correspondence with other reviewers and keep me informed of any phone conversations. Thank you! Response: Comment noted, thank you. 2. As part of your resubmittal, you will respond to the comments provided in this letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a different font color. When replying to the comment letter please be detailed in your responses, as all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments have not been addressed, when applicable, avoid responses like noted or acknowledged. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 3. Please follow the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming Standards found at https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic submittal requirements and file naming standards_v1_8 1 19.pdf?1566857888. File names should begin with the file type, followed by the project information, and round number. Example: UTILITY PLANS_PROJECT NAME_PDP_Rd1.pdf Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 4. Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being the cut off for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit your plans, please notify me advanced notice as possible. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 5. LUC 2.211 Lapse, Rounds of Review: Applicants, within one hundred eighty (180) days of receipt of written comments and notice to respond from the City on any submittal (or subsequent revision to a submittal) of an application for approval of a development plan, shall file such additional or revised submittal documents as are necessary to address such comments from the City. If the additional submittal information or revised submittal is not filed within said period of time, the development application shall automatically lapse and become null and void. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 6. Temporary Service Changes City of Fort Collins Development Review In order to continue providing thorough reviews and giving every project the attention it deserves, the City of Fort Collins is implementing temporary changes in how we serve our development customers. As you may be aware, we are experiencing staff shortages in a number of key departments, which has begun to impact the timeliness of our reviews. We recognize that 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com development and construction play a critical role in our community’s vibrancy and economic recovery, and we have been exploring options for mitigating impacts to our customers. As a result, we will be making some temporary service level adjustments. Currently, one additional week of review time will be added to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks). Lengths of subsequent rounds of review will be considered after each round of review. Also, Completeness Checks will be performed on all initial and Round 2 submittals during this time. Please reach out with any questions or concerns. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 7. Staff has determined that an initial round of review of the Overall Development Plan needs to occur before a second submittal is made for this Project Development Plan. Once that initial round is completed, the two projects can be submitted and reviewed concurrently. Response: The first round of the ODP has been completed. A resubmittal is provided concurrently with this PDP resubmittal. Development: Planning Services Contact: Jason Holland, 97-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com General 1. FOR HEARING: We need the ODP and PDP to further explore the staff comments discussed for connectivity, and planning staff share the concerns noted in the comments that a more direct, safe and convenient system of bicycle and pedestrian connectivity is needed through the site, both from the city trail and to surrounding streets. More discussion is needed on whether the private drive design meets all necessary requirements in LUC 3.6.2, whether a modification to these standards is an acceptable approach and what modified alternative design is acceptable. "A private drive shall not be permitted if it prevents or diminishes compliance with any other provisions of this Code." Response: The site design has been updated to reflect a shared private drive and a dedicated trail along the east property line. 2. FOR HEARING: Planning staff is not yet comfortable with the street design section and how this safely and effectively accommodates multi modal traffic and serves the area as a safe, convenient and direct alternative to a public street. The ODP is also needed to evaluate this further. The head in parking is a concern due to the likely volumes of traffic on a private street. The width and proposed design section is unclear. Is this 27-feet wide? If this is the space to work with, the best option might be two travel lanes and two striped bike lanes with no parallel parking? The next step please send us design character sketch alternatives so we can discuss it along with the ODP submittal. Response: The private drive has been re-designed per the attached cross-section and updated site design. 3. FOR HEARING: Typical designs should also show a detail for the bicycle parking layouts. Also, on the main site plan pages please show the building roof overhangs as dashed lines. Response: A typical bike parking layout has been provided on sheet LP401 with the building enlargement showing typical planting layouts at building foundations. 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com 4. FOR HEARING: The trail spur connection design to the private street sidewalk which runs along the face of the building does not meet the intent of a trail connection design. This isn’t a good solution because the trail spur needs to be designed so that it has fewer conflicts with vehicle parking, overhanging bumpers, parking ingress/egress and typical activity traffic associated with the 24 plex buildings. We need more coordination on the design of this connection and the associated land use code language. Response: A new trail connection has been added on the east side of the site to connect with the Rendezvous Trail in order to provide a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with no vehicular conflict. 5. FOR HEARING: If there’s a tradeoff to be had between deeper sidewalks and required landscaped depth along the buildings, I’d suggest exploring making the sidewalk depths deeper. Typical landscape plan detail(s) should be provided that show the proposed character, design attributes and typical extent of the landscaping, and this could also explore the design relationships along the space between the building and parking. Response: Sidewalks provided along the buildings are 6’ deep to allow for car overhang. A typical landscape plan enlargement for a group of buildings have been provided on sheet LP401. This shows the typical size and layout of plant materials, mulch and other elements included in the design. This will also show the bike parking layout in the space in between buildings. 6. FOR HEARING: Special height review is required for buildings that are taller than 40 feet per the criteria in LUC 3.5.1(G). Please provide a narrative and graphic as necessary to address the criteria and discusses how the building designs are compatible with the area in terms of massing, bulk, scale, articulation, human-scaled proportions, materials, and colors. The biggest concern is that a more muted color palette and with less contract between buildings may be a better compatibility approach and would better meet Section 3.5.1(F) and 3.8.30(F)(3). Response: After further study of the surrounding neighborhoods, the color palette employed on the buildings has been revised to blend more cohesively with existing structures in the area. 7. FOR HEARING: Tree stocking requirements around the buildings do appear to be met because there are gaps along the parking areas where there is no tree spacing that would meet the tree stocking criteria. Response: Trees have been provided in islands and along the street light private drive to the extent possible, while also maintaining light and utility offsets. 8. FOR HEARING: Ground level patio screening – please consider ways to provide some layer of privacy for these dwellings. Response: The typical planting shown on sheet LP401 shows landscape layout and screening for ground level patios, which will include layers of shrubs perennials and ornamental grasses. 9. FOR HEARING: Interior parking lot landscaping: Please provide calculations showing that the parking lot interior percentages are met for each parking lot. This would be the interior landscape areas from the back of the main sidewalk and include interior and end island areas. 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Response: The interior planting areas are indicated on the plans with the “Shrub Bed Area” hatch pattern and calculations are provided in a table on the Cover Sheet G001. As noted in a comment below, hatches have been provided at preliminary to avoid redesign as the site shifts to accommodate requirements. Interior parking areas will be landscaped per code requirements. 10. FOR HEARING: Headlight screening would appear to be a compatibility issue. I’d recommend an intermittent low wood screen fence, and this could have offsets/staggered placement to add design intersect with a simple fence design and selective ground level plantings to anchor the fence. Response: This commented is noted, thank you. At this time, large planting beds are shown adjacent to parking areas which will contain a combination of dense hedges, evergreen shrubs and evergreen trees that should provide adequate screening from headlights. In addition, landscape beds and trees are proposed on the east edge of the property which will also help buffer this from adjacent properties. 11. FOR HEARING: The trash enclosures – there could be compliance issues with these. No site plan layout detail was provided for review, and the depiction on the overall 60 scale plan does not match what is shown on sheet A8. Response: A site plan detail of the trash enclosure has been included on sheet A-10. 12. FOR HEARING: The trash enclosures – the layout in the site plan seems problematic in two ways: they are placed where the islands don’t adjoin the end walls, extending the islands would be better aesthetically and would protect the enclosures: places where the wall juts out and may narrow the drive aisles too much (unclear what the drive aisle dimensions are at pinch points; places where the walls are so close to end intersections that vehicle visibility may be too obscured at intersections. Causing a safety issue. Also unclear why the walls are 10 feet in height, this seems to add to the potential vehicle/vehicle and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts. Response: The location and design of the trash enclosures have been revised to reduce the conflicts described above. 13. FOR HEARING: The clubhouse – the location appears to obscure visibility at the surrounding intersections. As an example, at intersections landscape requirements in section 3.2.1 say that “Visibility. To avoid landscape material blocking driver sight distance at driveway street intersections, no plant material greater than twenty four (24) inches in height shall be located within fifteen (15) feet of a curb cut.”\ Response: This comment is noted, thank you. For clarification, this is a leasing office, and this has been updated on the architectural sheets. 14. FOR HEARING: Building setback per 3.8.30(E)(3) along the private drive is nine feet from the back of the sidewalk. It looks like there are places where this is not met. "A private drive shall not be permitted if it prevents or diminishes compliance with any other provisions of this Code." Response: The private drive cross-section has been re-designed in order to allow for a greater setback between the building and the sidewalk. 15. FOR HEARING: Not enough information was provided with the landscape plans to form a 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com compliance recommendation. There is also a photographic image provided but there is no information for how this image relates to the plans. There appear to be compliance issues around to 24 plex buildings where the use of paving and rock depicted appears excessive and does not meet Section 3.2.1 which discusses “Landscape arrangement. Provide a cohesive arrangement of turf, plants, mulch, boulders, and other landscape elements that support the criteria in Section 3.2.1(H). Landscape elements shall be arranged to provide appropriate plant spacing and grouping and to avoid a disproportionate and excessive use of mulch areas.” Response: Trees and hatches for planting areas have been provided in lieu of a full planting plan due to the changes anticipated for the site layout. The different hatches are meant to indicate the different mulch types (for variation on the parking lot sides) as well as a planting. As discussed in our review meeting, an enlargement of one of the building groups has been provided to show a typical landscape layout to demonstrate how we will achieve compliance once plans move into final and we have provided a landscape design intent statement on sheet LP001 to further describe the character and intent of the design. Detail callouts have been added design elements for clarity. 16. FOR HEARING: If a soils report is the basis for no landscaping around buildings, you would need to provide more complete evidence that demonstrates that this is an issue, such as case studies showing that that drip irrigation of xeric plantings has damaged a foundation system, evidence that the cost of removing bad soils or providing drainage measures is infeasible, etc. Response: As noted above, landscape will be provided around buildings and is shown in the enlargement. Hatches are being provided at the preliminary level to avoid redesign as the site shifts to accommodate requirements. These are noted in the legend as 2”-4” cobble landscape bed, 3”-8” cobble landscape bed and crusher fines landscape bed. See also the response above. 17. FOR HEARING: Per section 3.2.1 – “each landscaped island shall include one (1) or more canopy shade trees, be of length greater than eight (8) feet in its smallest dimension.” There are areas where the islands do not meet this requirement. Response: Trees have been placed in all parking islands to the extent possible while also maintaining utility and light conflicts. This was discussed with the Civil and Lighting and these areas of conflict were coordinated and minimized as much as possible. 18. FOR HEARING: Please provide information confirming that the “Maximized Area of Shading” is met: “Landscaped islands shall be evenly distributed to the maximum extent feasible. At a minimum, trees shall be planted at a ratio of at least one (1) canopy shade tree per one hundred fifty (150) square feet of internal landscaped area with a landscaped surface of turf, ground cover perennials or mulched shrub plantings.” Response: Understood, thank you. As noted in our response to comment 15, a planting bed hatch is being provided at this time to indicate planting areas, including the interior parking areas. These areas will be landscaped per code requirements. 19. FOR HEARING: Bicycle parking: Please provide more information in the land use table, and graphically, to describe where all of the fixed and enclosed bicycle parking spaces are located and how these areas work. It is unclear whether the design meets our requirements. The parking must be conveniently distributed and located and on the ground level near building entrances. For 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com example, they cannot be located within the dwellings. There are callouts on the building elevations, but a plan design isn’t shown and it is unclear whether the bicycles can be sufficiently covered in this area or how many spaces are proposed at each location. Please also refer to the definition for bicycle parking in Article 5 of the code for details. Response: Additional detail has been added to the layouts in the site plan, landscape plan and in the table on the cover sheet. 20. FOR HEARING: Utility easements not clear whether the building wing walls are encroaching into required easements or are too close to utilities. Response: Buildings have been shifted. All portions of the buildings are outside the proposed utility or access easements. 21. FOR HEARING: With the private drive, please label the intended use of the road surface (parking, bike lanes, drive lanes) and provide section details. Response: Acknowledged 22. FOR HEARING: Pending the discussion of the private drive design and accommodation of multimodal traffic, we then be able to complete the review and address the modification requests. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 23. FOR HEARING: Comments are pending for the lighting plans, still under review for compliance with the new code. Response: Acknowledged Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Sophie Buckingham, sbuckingham@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. The proposed utility relocations will require a Development Construction Permit. The DCP will need to be obtained prior to starting any work on the site. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 2. The applicant will need to dedicate new utility easements and complete the proposed relocation of utilities before vacating the existing utility easements. The dedication of new utility easements can be done with the proposed plat, and the vacation of easements will need to be done at a later time. For drainage easements, vacation and rededication can be done simultaneously with the plat. Response: Generic Utility, Drainage, Access, and Emergency Access easement provided on plat. All others to be dedicated by separate instruments through Final. 3. Please indicate the boundaries of the easements to be dedicated. The applicant must ensure that all existing and new utility lines are within easements. Response: Easements added to plans. 4. The applicant must place the City of Fort Collins updated utility signature block on the cover sheet of the Civil Construction Plans. The signature block can be found at https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/files/utilitysigblock.pdf?1611856399 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Response: Block added to the cover sheets of the grading and utility plans. 5. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that the proposed private drive, including the sidewalk, meets ADA standards. Response: Comment has been noted, thank you. 6. The applicant must provide dimensions for the private drive, including flowline to flowline width, sidewalk width, parkway width, and bike lane width. The applicant is encouraged to submit a cross section for the private drive. Please clearly indicate the boundaries of the private drive and sidewalk on the grading and utility plans. Response: Cross-section and dimensions provided with this resubmittal. 7. INFORMATION ONLY: The applicant will need to consider naming and addressing for the private drive. When the FDP is submitted, it is likely that Poudre Fire Authority and City GIS will have comments on naming and addressing, as well as a potential monument at the Timberline access, since the private drive may not be visible from the Timberline access point. 8. INFORMATION ONLY: A Development Agreement (DA) will be recorded once the project is finalized. 9. INFORMATION ONLY: In regard to construction of this site, the public right of way shall not be used for staging or storage of materials or equipment associated with the Development, nor shall it be used for parking by any contractors, subcontractors, or other personnel working for or hired by the Developer to construct the Development. The Developer will need to find a location(s) on private property to accommodate any necessary staging and/or parking needs associated with the completion of the Development. Information on the location(s) of these areas will be required to be provided to the City as a part of the Development Construction Permit application. Response: Comments have been noted, thank you. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970 224 6175, sgilchrist@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. FOR HEARING: We would like more information in regard to the circulation and access from the project site to Timberline Road. The current parking lot configuration does not allow the project site traffic to exit onto Timberline at the south access without driving all the way around the site. This may need to change if this is considered for an emergency access. Response: The Poudre Fire Authority has confirmed that the south access that is shared with the church is adequate as a secondary access. 2. FOR HEARING: The layout and design of the private drive will need to be discussed further and how they plan to accommodate multi modal traffic. The bike and pedestrian connectivity to Timberline is also not clear as there are some gaps in sidewalk access through the parking lot. Response: Pedestrian and bike connectivity can be addressed with the current alignment and the future access easement illustrated on the ODP. 3. FOR HEARING: The trail alignment and connectivity over to Timberline is also something we would like considered with this project. This may be part of the Overall Development Plan but will required some connectivity through this site. 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Response: The alignment to Timberline will include pedestrian and bike connectivity. Topic: Traffic Impact Study 1. FOR HEARING: The Traffic Impact Study has been received and reviewed. Based on conversations with the project's Traffic Engineer this project will not be utilizing a new potential access off of Timberline, but will be sharing the existing access with the Timberline Church. The TIS will need to reflect those changes and evaluate the existing and anticipated traffic/trips for that intersection. It is also our understanding that there will be an Overall Development Plan for this entire church site, which is typically submitted prior to an internal project. The Traffic Impact Study for the ODP need to show how this site will be incorporated into that plan. Further review of the transportation impacts will be needed. Response: The Overall Development Plan illustrates the existing access from Timberline as secondary access and a future access easement, both reflected in the TIS. Primary access to the site will be from the north. Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970 416 2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre fire.org Topic: General 1. FOR HEARING TURNING RADII IFC 503.2.4 and Local Amendments: The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. Please show these dimensions on the site plan. Response: Fire Access lanes are shown on C900 2. FOR FINAL PAVERS It appears that the fire lane for Building 6 will have pavers located in the fire lane. Fire lanes shall be designed as a flat, hard, all weather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. When incorporating pavers as surface for fire lanes, you shall provide a note to the civil plans that states that pavers will support. Response: The grid shown are not pavers. They are underground water quality filtration systems. They have been relocated outside of the fire lanes. 3. FOR HEARING EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENTS Any private alley, private road, or private drive serving as a fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE). Please provide this information on the plat. Response: Plat updated to show easement within the private drive. See C900 for the individual easements in the parking drive areas. 4. FOR HEARING Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. A fire hydrant capable of providing 1500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure is required within 300 feet of any commercial or multifamily building as measured along an approved path of vehicle travel. Please show hydrants on the overall utility plans. Response: Waterline and hydrants are shown in detail on the C700 series sheets. 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Department: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion and Sediment Control Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970 222 1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control 1. INFORMATION ONLY: The site is over 1 acre in size and is subject to Erosion and Sediment Control requirements. At Final please submit a detailed Erosion and Sediment Control plan, a report and an Erosion control escrow calculation. At Final an estimate will be provided for erosion and water quality measures inspection fees. Response: Erosion Control plans will be included with the Final Development Plan. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970 416 2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. FOR HEARING: The rainfall data used is slightly different than the City of Fort Collins' data. Please revise rainfall intensities to City criteria. Response: Rainfall intensities have been adjusted. 2. FOR HEARING: All necessary drainage easements need to be granted for Lot 1 A that are required for all the existing and proposed storm water infrastructure including detention ponds, storm sewers, and LID features. Response: Utility/Drainage Easements have been added for all storm sewer facilities. 3. FOR HEARING: In general, the City's LID Criteria requires all mitigation techniques to be sized with the required water quality volume. Bio swales are generally not accepted as a standalone technique. In this case, it may be possible to utilize a bio swale and have the water quality volume included in the extended detention basin as proposed. The City will inform the Applicant if this alternative method to City Criteria will be sufficient for this proposal after an internal discussion. Response: Due to the site constraints, the bioswale presents the best option to provide water quality treatment for the northern most basin. Department: Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970 416 2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. FOR HEARING: The sewer configuration at the southern end of the development needs some discussion and revisions. A meeting is suggested to determine what the best layout will be for this area. Response: Sanitary Sewer has been redesigned in its entirety. 2. FOR HEARING: All necessary Utility easements need to be granted for Lot 1 A that are required for all the existing and proposed water and sewer infrastructure. 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Response: Acknowledged Department: Light And Power Contact: Luke Unruh, 9704162724, lunruh@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. FOR HEARING: Transformer locations will need to be placed on the utility plan and site plan. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft 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. 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. https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/electricservicestandards_12 august 2019.pdf?1570027325 Response: Thank you for the comment. The transformers are indicated on the electrical utility site plans E101 – E103 and the civil overall utility plan C500 along with required clearances and separation from other utilities. Transformers are also shown on the site and landscape plans. 2. FOR HEARING: Please show the electric lines on the utility plans and make sure separation requirements are met from other utilities. Response: Thank you for the comment. The electrical lines are indicated on the electrical utility site plans E101 – E103 and the civil overall utility plan C500 along with required clearances and separation from other utilities. Dan Wroblewski C&E. 3. FOR HEARING: Please show and label electric meter locations on the utility plans. Gas and electric meters should be placed on opposite sides of the buildings if possible. If not, separation requirements must be met. Response: Thank you for the comment. The electric meters for each building are located on the electrical utility plans. See Note 4 on sheets E101 – E103. Gas meter locations shall be coordinated to provided all required clearances and separation requirements with electrical meters. Dan Wroblewski C&E 4. INFORMATION ONLY: Electric system modifications will likely be needed to serve the proposed building. Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges, and system modification charges will apply at owners’ expense. Please see the Electric Estimating Calculator and Electric Service Standards at the following link: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders and developers Please feel free to call me for an estimate of the fees that will be associated. Response: Thank you for the additional information and resources. We have been in contact with Fort Collins Electric Utilities and will continue to coordinate with the City of Fort Collins as development of the project continues. Dan Wroblewski C&E 5. FOR APPROVAL: A commercial service information form (C 1 form) and a one line diagram will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power Engineering for review. A link to the C 1 form is below: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders and developers/development-forms- guidelines-regulations 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Response: Thank you for the additional information and resources. One-line diagrams and a completed C-1 form shall be completed for final construction documents and submitted to Light & Power Engineering for review and interconnection coordination. Dan Wroblewski C&E Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Kelly Smith, ksmith@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. FOR PDP: Please show the boundary for the natural habitat buffer zone on the landscape plan, site plan, utility plan and photometric plan. Without the buffer zone delineated, environmental planning staff are unable to evaluate conformance to City standards. Response: Noted. The natural habitat buffer is shown on the site, landscape, utility, and photometric plans. Callouts and dimensions have been added for clarity. 2. FOR PDP: It appears that the project will not conform to the quantitative setback standard for the irrigation ditch. Therefore, the project will have to conform to the performance standards in 3.4.1.E.1 of the Land Use Code. This project will be evaluated per the performance standards for PDP approval therefore please review and consider these standards for next round. Environmental Planning staff is available to meet and discuss design strategies to help the project conform to requirements. Response: As discussed in the review meeting with the City, the original setback is shown to depict where our site encroaches, but we have added additional setback area (indicated with a new line and a natural habitat buffer hatch) to indicate where we are adding natural habitat area to make up for the square footage being encroached on. 3. FOR PDP: Please add a table to the site plan that includes the following: - amount of buffer area that would be required by a 50' buffer from the ditch - amount of buffer area provided on these plans - minimum buffer distance - maximum buffer distance - average buffer distance Response: This has been added to the table on the site plan cover sheet. 4. FOR PDP: Please vary the grading of the detention areas to create a more naturalistic, undulating landform. Side slopes should vary and range from 4:1 to 20:1, per the Stormwater Standards and Guidelines. http://www.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/Detention_Pond_Landscaping_Standards.pdf Response: This has been done where possible and also still meet capacity needs/requirements. Planting beds and trees have been added and adjusted to create the naturalistic character. 5. FOR PDP: Within the natural habitat buffer zone, according to Article 3.4.1(E)(1)(g), the City has the ability to determine if the existing landscaping within the buffer zone is incompatible with the purposes of the buffer zone. The existing stormwater detention has bare spots and will require revegetation. Also, because the project must adhere to the buffer performance standards additional 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com plantings may be necessary. Response: The entire detention area is now shown as being seeded in order to provide revegetation and planting areas (indicated with hatches) have been added to meet the buffer performance standards. 6. FOR PDP: Please provide a conceptual plant list for the natural habitat buffer zone. Response: A conceptual plant list has been provided for the natural habitat buffer. Department: Parks Contact: Aaron Wagner, aawagner@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. GENERAL: Parks Department Planning staff can help with any questions you may have regarding these comments. Please contact Jill Wuertz (jwuertz@fcgov.com), 970 416 2062, or Parks Planning Technician, Aaron Wagner (aawagner@fcgov.com) 970 682 0344, 413 S. Bryan Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 regarding the Parks’ Department’s interest. The Park Planning & Development Department is available to discuss comments related to trails in more detail. Please contact Suzanne Bassinger at 970 416 4340, sbassinger@fcgov.com . Response: This comment is noted, thank you. 2. FOR HEARING: Thank you for showing the trail connection to the Rendezvous Trail, Parks and PP&D will need to review and approve any trail connections to the trail system. Please clarify the intent of the proposed Trail system and whether this will be public trail and open to the public or private and privately maintained. Please label the trails accordingly. Parks Department Planning staff and Parks Planning and Development can help with any questions you may have. Response: The plans have been updated to show the trail connection on the east side of the site as a publicly dedicated trail. 3. FOR HEARING: This project site includes a section of a Fort Collins Parks maintained trail. Clearly label any impacts to the trail on demo, site, and landscape plans if necessary. Add the following notes to the plans stating: There shall be no equipment, materials, or items stored on a Fort Collins Parks trail or within the trail easement. If there is a need to close a section of the trail for any reason, a traffic control plan is required to be submitted and approved through Traffic Control. The Parks Department will need sign off on it once submitted. Please keep the closures to the shortest amount of time depending on work scheduling and flow. Parks Department Planning staff can help with any questions you may have regarding these standards. There shall be no encroachments into the trail easement during the construction process. If it is determined that an encroachment is required, for any reason, please contact one of the above Parks representatives. Response: These comments have been added to the plans. 4. FOR HEARING: Parks prefers to have the trail connection to be doweled into the Rendezvous trail to reduce the potential differential settling. However, any damage to the trail will need to be corrected by the contractor, at the time of the damage, at no cost to the city. Please include this as 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com a note on the Site plan set for reference. Response: This note has been included. Please provide a design detail of the existing trail as doweling can be problematic in concrete sections less than 5” thick. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, 224 616 1992, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. FOR HEARING Continued: Forestry to review this information once provided on the plans. Response: This is noted. 2. INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP: LUC standard for Tree Species Diversity states that in order to prevent insect or disease susceptibility and eventual uniform senescence on a development site or in the adjacent area or the district, species diversity is required and extensive monocultures are prohibited. The following minimum requirements shall apply to any development plan: Number of trees on site Maximum percentage of any one species 10 19 50% 20 39 33% 40 59 25% 60 or more 15% The City of Fort Collins’ urban forest has reached the maximum percentage of the following species. Ash (Fraxinus), Honeylocust (Gleditsia triacanthose:‘Shademaster’, ‘Skyline’, etc), Bur Oak (Quercus macrocarpa), and Chanticleer Pear (Pyrus calleryana). Please note that additional species might join this list as we work through the review process. Response: This comment is noted, thank you for the information. 3. FOR HEARING Continued: Please review several tree utility conflicts on Forestry’s redlines. Please include streetlight locations and include a symbol in the legend. Response: Street lights are shown and utility conflicts have been resolved. 4. INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP: Please provide a typical right of way detail per transects that includes locations of utilities (gas, water, electric, communication, cable, fiber option, sewer etc.), streetlights, driveways (if applicable) and street trees. Standard tree utility separation distances currently used per Land Use Code standards are preferred and are as followed: Streetlight/Tree Separation: Canopy shade tree: 40 feet Ornamental tree: 15 feet 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com Stop Sign/Tree Separation: Based on feedback from Traffic Operations, it is preferred that trees be planted 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. Driveway/Tree Separation: At least 8’ from edges of driveways and alleys Utility/Tree Separation: 10’ between trees and electric utilities, public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines 4’ between trees and gas lines Response: Utilities and trees are shown and separations have been met along the street like private drive. A spacing of 25’ between street trees and lights have been provided along the street like private drive per email discussion with Forestry. 5. FOR HEARING Continued: Please review redlines to include additional trees on the plans. Response: Redlines have been reviewed and trees have been added where possible. 6. INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP: Tree Planting Standards. All developments shall establish groves and belts of trees along all city streets, in and around parking lots, and in all landscape areas that are located within fifty (50) feet of any building or structure in order to establish at least a partial urban tree canopy. Full tree stocking shall mean formal or informal groupings of trees planted according to the following spacing dimensions: Tree Type Minimum/Maximum Spacing Canopy shade Trees 30' 40' Coniferous evergreens 20' 30' Ornamental trees 20' 30' Exact locations and spacings may be adjusted at the option of the applicant to support patterns of use, views and circulation as long as the minimum tree planting requirement is met. Response: This comment is noted, thank you for the information. 7. FOR HEARING Continued: Forestry to review this information once provided on the plans. Response: This information has been provided. 8. INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP: Per LUC 3.2.1 (D) (c), canopy shade trees shall constitute at least fifty (50) percent of all tree plantings. Response: This comment is noted, thank you. 9. FOR HEARING: The plant list should include species, size, quantity, and method of transplant 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com (B&B), and species diversity percentages. Mitigation trees should be noted in a separate column and labeled on the plans with a bolded M or a callout that states “mitigation tree”. Please include unique symbols for all trees species and label trees with an abbreviate of the genus and species (ex: Honeylocust – Gleditsia triacanthos – GL TR). Please note that it is extremely helpful to provide these details early in the design review process. Response: Overall quantities of tree types have been provided, but a detailed plant schedule with individual species quantities and mitigation sizing/symbols will not be provided until final. It is understood that a higher level of detail is preferred at PDP, but due to the shifting of the site, this level of detail is premature. The final landscape plan will comply with City requirements and mitigation trees will be provided as noted on the tree mitigation plan. A landscape design intent statement has also been provided on sheet LP001. 10. FOR HEARING: Please review Forestry redlines and make the following additions or adjustments: areas clouded in green could use additional trees; redlines show tree utility conflicts. Response: Utility conflicts have been coordinated with the civil and adjusted. Forestry redlines have been reviewed and addressed. 11. FOR HEARING: Please include the tree inventory and mitigation information to the landscape and civil plans. The plans should show existing trees, proposed tree removals with locations clearly noted (X over the symbol is an easy identifier), and the mitigation table provided by City Forestry. Please remove symbols for trees to be removed from the proposed site/landscape plan and civil drawings. Only existing trees proposed to be preserved should be shown on the proposed drawings. Response: The tree inventory and mitigation information has been provided as part of the landscape set. 12. FOR HEARING: Please include the City of Fort Collins Street Tree Permit note on all landscape sheets. Response: This note has been included on all landscape sheets. 13. FOR HEARING: Please do not include the following species on the plans: Sensation Boxelder and American Plum. Response: These species have been removed from the plans. Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970 416 2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review 1. Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: - 2018 International Building Code (IBC) 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 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com - 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 The Structural Engineer's Association of Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code: - 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. The project intends to comply with required codes and compliance will be addressed at the appropriate time. 2. 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. - R 2 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 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). - Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of fire sprinkler. 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 multi family structure. Response: Comments noted. Thank you for this information. 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 information can be found in our Stock Plan Guide at fcgov.com/building/res requirements.php. Response: Comments noted. Thank you for this information. Building Permit Pre Submittal Meeting: Please schedule a pre submittal meeting with Building Services for this project. Pre Submittal meetings 244 North College Ave, #130 I Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.norris-design.com 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 mid design stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects should contact their Development Review Coordinatory to schedule a pre submittal meeting. Response: Comments noted. Thank you for this information. This meeting will be schedule at the appropriate time. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970 221 6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. INFORMATION ONLY: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. Response: Comment noted. Thank you. Topic: Plat 2. FOR 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. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John Von Nieda at 970 221 6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com Response: Preliminary Plat updated Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970 221 6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General 1. Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221 6704 or eolson@fcgov.com Response: Comment noted. Irrigation plans will be provided in the future as required.