Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFAIRWAY APARTMENTS - FDP210023 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS 1 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 July 16, 2021 Cathy Mathis TB Group 444 Mountain Ave Berthoud, CO 80513 RE: Fairway Apartments, PDP210005, Round Number 2 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of Fairway Apartments. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your Development Review Coordinator, Tenae Beane via phone at 970-224-6119 or via email at tbeane@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Development Review Coordinator Contact: Tenae Beane, 970-224-6119, tbeane@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: INFORMATION: 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! Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: INFORMATION: 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 2 been addressed, when applicable. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: INFORMATION: 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 submit your formal plans, please notify me with as much advanced notice as possible Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: INFORMATION: 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_Fairway Apts_PDP_Rd2.pdf Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: FOR HEARING: All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff would need to be in agreement the project is ready for Hearing approximately 3 5 weeks prior to the hearing. I have attached the 2021 P&Z schedule, which has key dates. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: FOR HEARING: I am letting you know that your quasi judicial item will be heard remotely or in a hybrid format and that there is the option to hold off until an in person hearing can be conducted. Any person or applicant seeking a quasi judicial decision from City Council, a City board or commission or an administrative hearing officer under the City Code or the City's Land Use Code, shall be notified in writing or by email of the intention to conduct a Quasi Judicial Hearing using Remote Technology. Such person or applicant shall be entitled to request that the Quasi Judicial Hearing be delayed until such time as the Hearing can be conducted in person. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 04/06/2021: INFORMATION: 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 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 changes. Beginning Monday May 10th one additional week of review time will be added to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks). 3 Department: Planning Services Contact: Kai Kleer, 970-416-4284, kkleer@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021 07/12/2021 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 HEARING Regarding design standards for multi-family 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: 04/05/2021 07/12/2021 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 HEARING Building 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 5-foot 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. 4 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: 04/05/2021 07/12/2021 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 through-out the site. RESPONSE: Mitigation trees have been identified. 04/05/2021: FOR HEARING There 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: 04/05/2021 07/13/2021: 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 boulder-type 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_gui delines.pdf In all cases the following standards apply: 5 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 20:1 No vegetated slope should exceed 3:1 Landscaped 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: 04/05/2021 07/12/2021: 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: 04/05/2021 07/12/2021: FOR HEARING Regarding overall site circulation, there is some significant clean-up 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 dead-ends into a 6 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 area Keeping 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 HEARING Please 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: 04/05/2021 07/12/2021: FOR HEARING Thank you for providing additional detail of bike parking, however, there are several instances where the under-eave 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 HEARING It'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: 04/05/2021 04/05/2021: FOR HEARING Please 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: 07/12/2021 07/12/2021: FOR HEARING 7 The 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: 07/12/2021 07/12/2021: FOR HEARING For 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, tot-lot 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. 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: 07/12/2021 07/12/2021: FOR HEARING A lighting plan is required. Please submit prior to hearing. RESPONSE: A lighting plan is provided. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 07/12/2021 07/12/2021: FOR HEARING Regarding 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 Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 07/13/2021: 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 8 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 added Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/13/2021 07/13/2021: 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: 07/13/2021 07/13/2021: 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 limited on how far we can shift them due to the existing District sanitary sewer line. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/13/2021 07/13/2021: 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 Operation Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970-224-6175, sgilchrist@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 07/12/2021: 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. 9 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 Engineering Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 07/13/2021 07/13/2021: FOR HEARING: The detention pond grading does not appear to meet the articulation and varying side-slopes 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. Non-varying 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, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 07/09/2021: REMINDER COMMENT FOR HEARING: 04/06/2021: FOR HEARING: Off-site 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: 04/06/2021 07/09/2021: 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: 04/06/2021 07/09/2021: REPEAT COMMENT: 04/06/2021: FOR HEARING: Please edit the text of the Drainage Report to include the LID porous paver design in the sub-basin descriptions and in any other section where applicable. 10 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: 04/06/2021 07/09/2021: 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. RESPONSE: The pond now has landscape added per the Standards. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 07/09/2021 07/09/2021: FOR HEARING: Please provide a detention pond stage-storage table to document that the 2.47 ac-ft 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: 07/09/2021 07/09/2021: 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: 07/09/2021 07/09/2021: 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 Power Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish@fcgov.com 11 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. RESPONSE: Buildings don’t encroach into the Utility easement. Correspondence with Light and Power has begun to coordinate best routing. 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. RESPONSE: Transformer locations have been revised and the proposed locations show up on the site photometric plan (‘XR’). Locations to be coordinated with Light and Power. 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. RESPONSE: Apartments will be all electric. Proposed transformer locations are shown on the site photometric plan (‘XR’). Locations to be coordinated with Light and Power. 04/05/2021:For Hearing: Are the transformer locations being shown for 3-phase transformers or are you 12 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. RESPONSE: Preliminary electric line routing is shown in the Utility Plans. We will continue to work with you to finalize this routing as we progress toward final design 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. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Electric gear and meters are shown on our building elevations and are shown on the site plan. 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. 13 RESPONSE: We will coordinate with SFCSD on spacing from their utilities and work to finalize street light locations along College Ave. 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. RESPONSE: A blanket dry utility easement will be included in the plat in the next FDP submittal. 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. Department: Forestry Contact: Nils Saha, nsaha@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 07/13/21: FOR HEARING CONTINUED Though 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: 04/06/2021 14 07/13/21: FOR HEARING Continued: 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 burlapped Evergreen tree: 6.0’ height balled and burlapped Ornamental tree: 1.5” caliper balled and burlapped 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 RESPONSE: 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 payment-in-lieu to the City of Fort Collins Forestry division to be used to plant replacement trees as close to the site as possible. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416-4290, sbenton@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021 04/05/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: 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: Acknowledged. Trees will be removed before the nesting season next February. 15 Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/02/2021 04/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN: Pavers- Fire lanes shall be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather 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: 07/09/2021 07/09/2021: 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 Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/02/2021 04/02/2021: BUILDING PERMIT: 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 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. 16 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. 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. 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. Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting: Please schedule a pre-submittal meeting 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 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 email their coordinator to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. RESPONSE: A meeting was held July 28. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021 07/13/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. 17 RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledged 04/05/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/05/2021 07/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED: 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 – Revisions have been made to the plat per your redlines. 04/05/2021: 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. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Don Kapperman, don_kapperman@comcast.com, Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 07/08/2021 07/08/2021: Comcast would like to go joint trench with City of Fort Collins Light & Power. Contact: Megan Harrity, Larimer County Assessor, (970) 498-7065, mharrity@larimer.org, Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2021 03/30/2021: FOR FINAL: 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 18 office. Here is Lisa's contact information. Lisa Ford Assessment Support Mgr fordla@co.larimer.co.us 970-498-7068 RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart is working with the FCLWD. See the attached email thread between John Tufte and Sam Lowe with the FCLWD regarding the inclusion of the lot. Additionally, the District provided a “Will Serve” letter noting the lots were included. The attachments are included with this response. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/06/2021 03/30/2021: FOR FINAL: The plat is titled as FAIRWAY LANE SUBDIVISION. The dedication of the plat is dedicating it as "FAIRVIEW LANE SUBDIVISION" RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart – previously addressed Contact: Sam Lowe, FCLWD, 970-226-3104, slowe@fclwd.com, Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/31/2021 07/13/2021: UPDATED FOR FINAL PLAN Please see attached redline comments. RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart – These redlines have been addressed and responses provided. 03/31/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN Please see the attached comments. RESPONSE: Sanderson Stewart - acknowledged