Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE QUARRY BY WATERMARK - FDP210016 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Page 1 of 16 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview October 01, 2021 Jessica Tuttle Watermark Apartments 111 Monument Circle, Suite 1500 Indianapolis, IN 46204 RE: The Quarry by Watermark, FDP210016, Round Number 2 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of The Quarry by Watermark. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions thro ugh your Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via phone at 970 -221-6695 or via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Development Review Coordinator Contact: Todd Sullivan, 970-221-6695, tsullivan@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/13/2021 I will be your primary point of contact throughout the development review and permitting processes. 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. To best serve you, 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: 08/10/2021 Temporary Service Changes - City of Fort Collins Development Review To best provide thorough reviews and give 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 Page 2 of 16 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. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/13/2021 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, avoiding responses like noted or acknowledged. 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. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 FOR FINAL APPROVAL: All "FOR FINAL APPROVAL / FOR APPROVAL" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to moving forward with the final documents and recording of this project. I will provide a recording checklist and process information when we are closer to this step. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 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. Files are to be named PLAN NAME_PROJECT NAME_REVIEW TYPE_ROUND NO. Example: UTILITY PLANS_MY PROJECT_PDP_RD1.pdf Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 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 appl ication shall automatically lapse and become null and void. Page 3 of 16 Department: Planning Services Contact: Kai Kleer, 970-416-4284, kkleer@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 09/24/2021 09/24/2021 FOR APPROVAL: Regarding the groundmounted a/c units please add returns to the screen walls.- Two points of conversation: There are some a/c condensers that are extremely close to walkways, can these be rotated so that they are closer to the building? Redlines highlight the units of concern. Regarding the approximately 72 groundmounted- condensers in-between multifamily buildings 4&5, staff is concerned with the amount of combined - noise these units will produce. Is there any way to use a unit that is integrated into the wall or on the roof rather than pad mount? Seems that this area between two buildings will bounce a lot of sound between the buildings and make the outdoor space unusable. What sound mitigation techniques or alternatives have been explored? Watermark: The following notes have been added on sheet L02 5. Where possible, AC condensers shall be placed so the long side is parallel with the building to allow more separation from walks. 6. AC units between buildings 4 and 5 will utilize a sound suppression blanket . Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 09/24/2021 09/24/2021 FOR APPROVAL: It appears that the street fixture nearest the cul -desac- is creating a lot of off-site light spill beyond the .1 maximum measured at 20'. Please relocate pole or lower fixture height and update lighting plan to show the property boundary and 20' distance from the edge of the property the - main area of concern being the point around the cul-desac-. Ripley Design Response: The light location has been moved. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/28/2021 09/28/2021 FOR APPROVAL: Please connect the internal walkway south of Building 6 to the Shields sidewalk System. Ripley Design Response: Internal sidewalk south of Building 6 is connected to Shields sidewalk system. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 09/30/2021 09/30/2021 INFORMATION ONLY: Regarding "Building Code Review Only", planning staff is comfortable signing off on this request. This process requires 100% CDs at the time of submittal and will only include review for compliance with building code. Other departments are not activated in this workflow and will not be activated until the project is fully recorded. Page 4 of 16 If the project is at 50% CDs, our building services team offers a "Presubmi ttal- Meeting" for the architect team to help catch any significant compliance issues earlyon-. Please work with the Development Review Coordinator to schedule or apply for the aforementioned processes. Watermark: Noted, thank you for signing off on the request. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: FOR APPROVAL: The plat depicts the extension of Stuart Street as a private drive, I believe the indication of "W. Stuart St." might be taken literally on the plat and would suggest it be specifically indicated as "Stuart Street". 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: The status of the naming of the private drives within the project was originally sought to be addressed with the PDP was requested to be deferred until Final Plan The plat and plans should be updated to address the private street naming and be coordinated also with GIS and PFA. The plat typically involves establishing tracts to define the limits of the particular street name with "(Private)" listed after the street name(s). NE Response: Plat has been updated to call this out as “Stuart Street” Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: FOR APPROVAL (unresolved): The plans were not updated with the details provided. I've included them again in the redlines folder. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Please ensure that for any named private drives that the private street sign detail provided in the redlines is reflected in the details in the civil set. NE Response: Details added to plan set (flow fill on C806, private street signs on C809) Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Verify if coordinated with utilities, not shown on civil plans? 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: There are existing City sanitary sewer lines that are being indicated as being encapsulated in either a 48' utility easement (site plan), 48' sanitary sewer easement (civil plan), or 48' maintenance, construction access & utility easement (plat). The labelling of this area needs to be consistent across all the documents and more importantly, the official determination of the legal right to this area has to be understood by all the utility providers, with particular attention to City Utilities with the existing facility in place. It may be that there are concerns with legal ability for other utility providers to be within the same easement. NE Response: Easement called out as sanitary sewer easement on plat to match plans Page 5 of 16 Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: INFORMATION: First reading on the ordinance is now scheduled for October 5th. 08/10/2021: INFORMATION: The drafting of the ordinance for the vacation of rights -of-way internal to the site has been provided to the City Attorney's Office for initial review. Coordination on timing to go to City Council can be better affirmed upon completion of that initial review. NE Response: Acknowledged, thank you Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: FOR APPROVAL: With the existing City interests that exist within the platted boundary, the City is requesting that a title commitment on the property be provided. This would aid the City in finalizing how to monument these interests moving forward through their re-establishment on the plat and referenced in the development agreement. Watermark: A title commitment has been provided with this resubmittal Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970-224-6175, sgilchrist@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL: Striping relines have been provided for the Stuart and Shields intersection. NE Response: Striping redlines have been addressed Department: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion and Sediment Control Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-222-1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/24/2021 9/24/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL [UPDATED]: Thank you for addressing most of my comments from the previous round . Please see redlined plans for remaining issues. 08/05/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5-2 was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections. As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such inspections. The Erosion Control fees are based on the number of lots, the total site disturbance, the estimated number of years the project will be active and the Stormwater Inspection Fees are based on the number of LID/WQ Features that are designed for on this project. Based on the proposed site construction associated with th is project we are assuming 25 lots, 22.57 acres of disturbance, 2 years from demo through build out of construction and an additional 4 years till full vegetative stabilization due to seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Fee estimate of $3,38 3.11. Page 6 of 16 Based on 1 bioretention/rain garden, 2 extended detention basins, and 2 underground treatments facilities the estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee to be $1,645. Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the above-mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for you to review. These fees will need to be paid prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit for this site FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There needs to be protection and construction control measures along the banks of Spring Creek and the Canal Importation Channel for construction activities that are occurring in close proximity to these natural features. Since the site is going to construct a storm outlet pipe into the Canal Importation Channel and a storm sewer adjacent to Spring Creek, the report and the plans need to address this issue and provide the appropriate measures and protection. Revegetation of the areas disturbed by such construction activities should also be addressed. The plans and the report fail to show any measures and ignore the issue of revegetation. The revegetation should be done in close coordination with the City’s Natural Resources planner. Please indicate whether the development is intended to be built in one phase. If the project is to be phased, then please provide phasing plans, and calculate escrow based on these plans. Please address all redlines and comments provided on the Erosion Control Plan and the SWMP report. NE Response: Thank you for the information, additional comments have been addressed. Department: Stormwater Engineering – Floodplain Contact: Claudia Quezada, (970)416-2494, cquezada@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/28/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED: Please address remaining redlines. 08/10/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please address redlines. NE Response: Redlines have been addressed Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/28/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED: See redlines for grading plans with unlabeled BFEs/cross-sections. 08/10/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Page 7 of 16 Since BFEs and cross-sections are shown and labeled on Historic Drainage Exhibit (C700), they can be removed from the grading plan(s). Otherwise, please label them on the grading plan(s). NE Response: BFEs and cross-sections removed from grading plans Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED The rain garden detail and BSM sand media mix are missing from the Utility Plan set. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Rain Garden - Please add the City’s LID details for the bioretention and the BSM sand media mix. Please make sure a rain garden seed mix (of your choice) is shown on the landscape plans. Ripley Design Response: Raingarden seed mix is shown on landscape sheets. NE Response: Rain garden detail added to plan set Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UNRESOLVED: Please review the grading plans and add HP and LP to each High Point or Low Point spot elevation. I do not see many o f these labeled on the plans. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Grading - Please add HP and LP to each High Point or Low Point spot elevation on the detailed grading plans. NE Response: Per conversation with City staff, this comment primarily pertains to the crown transition occurring at the Shields entrance and has been addressed with additional labeling Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UNRESOLVED: I am not finding the inflow rates to the detention ponds clearly documented in the drainage report. See redlines for more information 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Detention Pond 2 - In the drainage report, please document the total inflow rate to the detention pond 2. The overflow channel should be sized for the full (non-attenuated inflow rate). Please confirm which calculation corresponds to this location. NE Response: Updated drainage report to specify pond inflow rates and resized the overflow channel per SWMM inflow values. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED: Thank you for the weir and channel calculations. I am not finding the inflow rates to the detention ponds clearly documented in the drainage report. See redlines for more information. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: The Detention Pond 1 overflow weir needs calculations showing the width and depth of flow. This needs to be sized for the full inflow rate to the pond. Please also provide normal depth calculation along the flow path following the access road to Spring Creek. Page 8 of 16 NE Response: Updated drainage report to specify inflow rates to the pond. Resized the ermergency spillway for the SWMM inflow values. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED: Provide more information about outlets to Canal Importation Channel. It appears the design will be removing a grouted boulder toe to install pipe outlets. More detail is needed for the construction of these. This will likely require discussion with Stormwater Master Planning and Field Services Manager. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Outlet scour protection needs to be provided at the main outlet to Canal Importation Channel. Please design adequate protection and show on plans. If there is already protection, then you will need to provide documentation of what currently exists and confirm this is sufficient protection for the project. NE Response: Detail has been added to display how the pipes will be installed with headwalls formed into the existing boulders at the outfall locations. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UNRESOLVED: I did not find an exhibit (map) showing this in the report. Please provide with the next submittal. **Updated - I have redlined the map that was sent over on Wednesday. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Surface flows - I am struggling to understand how surface flows and pipe flows interact across the site. Especially for the 2yr capacity storm systems. Please provide an exhibit(s) showing the pipe system flows, surface overflows, and surface flow paths. For the pipe hydraulic profiles, please create and exhibit showing where each system is located. NE Response: Provided responses to redlines on exhibit and sent back to Matt offline. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/29/2021: FOR INFORMATION ONLY - UPDATED: The City is interested in receiving Tracts A and B in the future. It was agreed that this should be part of a separate land transfer process after development has been completed. The Stormwater department will require that all trees deemed to be hazards by the Forestry department have been mitigated before ownership transfer. 08/10/2021: FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Is the developer still interested in conveying Tracts A and B to the City? We are continuing discussions on our end and will likely end up needed focused meetings with the development team to discuss how this may play out. Please let me know and stay tune for more updates from us. NE Response: Acknowledged, thank you. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/29/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Provide dimensions and specs for the scour protection on the plans. NE Response: Scour stop dimensions added to utility sheets Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/29/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Page 9 of 16 See Utility Plans redlines for more comments including: - Add detention pond depth gauge detail - Provide access to rain garden for maintenance. - Resolve conflict between outlet pipe and boulders in detention pond 1 - Add ADS storm tech details. - Add forebay detail - Sheet C 806 is missing. - Detail for stormtech flow splitter weir and manhole. NE Response: Added detention pond depth gauge, Stormtech plans/details provided with next submittal, forebay detail added, Sheet C806 is included, stormtech manhole detail added. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 09/29/2021 09/29/2021: FOR APPROVAL: See Drainage Report redlines for more comments including: - Pipe analyses need to consider the stormtech weir elevations as a hydraulic control. - Concerns about drainage design at DP D3 – see redlines for more Information. - Pond 2 extended detention needs to be calculated for 120% of the WQCV. - Discrepancies in the rain garden WQCV calculation and report documentation. - Revisions to Stormtech sizing calcs. NE Response: Per discussion with City staff, grading at DP D3 will be updated with grade break. Pond 2 extended detention basin WQCV updated to 120%. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED: Water service sizing calculations must be provided prior to approval of FDP. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Water service and meter sizing calculations need to be provided for all services (except for the duplex units). This must be provided for FDP round 2. NE Response: See worksheets provided with the submittal Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED: Please include a “flow fill crossing detail” on the plans, this should be similar to the example detail I provide you with the redlines. This only needs to be applied to crossings with large storm over the 30 -inch watermain. PVC sewer crossings are not required to follow this detail. 08/10/2021: FOR APPROVAL: For all crossings over the 30-inch water main, we will require flowfill along the water main from springline to springline, 10-feet each side of the crossing. This will also require wrapping of the water main. We have an example detail of this I have included in the redlines. NE Response: Flow fill crossing detail added to plans Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/13/2021 09/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL – UNRESOLVED 08/13/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Page 10 of 16 For the irrigation service(s) please determine the tap and meter sizing and confirm the estimated peak flow and estimate of annual water usage. Ripley: Below is the data requested • Tap and meter size: 1.5-inch • Flow: 50 gpm max • Pressure: 75 PSI (minimum required) • Annual water requirement – 975,500 gal Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/13/2021 09/29/2021: FOR INFORMATION ONLY UPDATED-: If approved by City Council, the City’s domestic water fees for commercial services will change from being based on tap size to actual usage based on business type. The City will also require a separate irrigation tap for all multi-family and non-residential developments. These changes are anticipated to be implemented 1/1/2022; specific information can be found at www.fcgov.com/wsr-update. 09/28/2021: FOR INFORMATION ONLY: FYI the water supply fee structure and irrigation fee structure will be changing in 2022. Please follow up with us later this fall to request a fee estimate and to discuss other changes to the requirements. Watermark: Noted, we have the new 2022 fees in our budget Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/13/2021 09/28/2021: FOR INFORMATION: For the Development Agreement (supplied at FDP round 2) we had discussed several additional items during PDP related to the 30inch water main - easement. Here is a draft of this item, please review and let us know if you have any concerns with. “Within the Water Transmission Main Easement, if the City needs to remove any trees, landscaping, concrete curbing, or concrete paving for the purposes of maintenance, repair, or replacement of the watermain, these items would be replaced at the developer/owner's cost and not at the City’s.” Watermark: We accept this language Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 09/28/2021 09/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL: Please include the following note, regarding the water main easement, on the Plat, the Utility Plan, and the Landscape Plan: "Improvements within the 33foot Waterline Easement will be maintained by the - Developer and subsequent owners. If for the purposes of maintenance, repair, or replacement of the watermain, the City needs to remove any trees, landscaping, concrete curbing, concrete paving, or other surface improvements within the watermain easement, these items wou ld be replaced at the Developer/Owner's expense and the City would not have any financial obligation." Watermark: We accept this language Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/28/2021 09/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL: *REVISED COMMENT* On the Plat, please remove the utility easement cutouts from the exclusive water and sewer easements. Instead, add the following notes to the plat: Page 11 of 16 -“Public or private utilities may cross the exclusive water easement in a perpendicular manner but shall not be installed parallel to the water main inside of the easement.” -“Public or private utilities may cross the exclusive sanitary sewer easement in a perpendicular manner but shall not be installed parallel to sewer main inside of the easement.” NE Response: Cut outs have been removed and notes have been added Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/28/2021 09/28/2021: FOR INFORMATION: Will this site benefit from temporary irrigation to establish nonirrigated - native areas? Ripley: Native areas will be irrigated with rotors Department: Light And Power Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 08/10/2021: INFORMATION: Light and Power has existing electric facilities along the north side of Hobbit St and the east side of Shields St that will need to be extended into the property to provide power to the site. There is an existing high voltage duct bank running north and south along the east side of Shields St adjacent to the project. NE Response: Acknowledged, thank you Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/28/2021: INFORMATION: Thank you for submitting preliminary C-1 forms. Please note that all residential units larger than a duplex and/or 200 amps total for the building is considered a customer owned service, therefore the owner is responsible to provide and maintain the electrical service from the transformer to the meter(s). There are proposed changes to code to consider all buildings other than single family detached homes to be customer owned electric services to the meter. The electric services to the duplex products will be considered customer owned and maintained. 08/10/2021: INFORMATION (For Approval): A customer service information form (C 1 form) and a one -line diagram for each building 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/developmentforms guidelines regulations NE Response: C1 diagram was provided with last submittal Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 08/10/2021: INFORMATION: Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development. Please contact me to discuss a preliminary estimate of fe es or visit the following website for information on our charges and fees related to Page 12 of 16 development projects: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders and developers/plant investment development fees NE Response: Acknowledged, thank you. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 08/10/2021: INFORMATION: For additional information on our renewal energy programs please visit the website below or contact John Phelan (jphelan@fcgov .com). https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/go renewable NE Response: Thank you Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 08/10/2021: INFORMATION: The City of Fort Collins now offers gig-speed fiber internet, video and phone service. Contact Brad Ward with Fort Collins Connexion at 970 -224-6003 or bward@fcgov.com for commercial grade account support, RFPs and bulk Agreements. NE Response: Thank you. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 08/10/2021: INFORMATION: Please contact Tyler Siegmund with Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 970.416.2772. Please reference our policies, construction practices, development charge processes, electric service standards, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders and developers NE Response: Thank you Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/28/2021 09/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL: By adding the utility easement exclusion areas on the plat for the existing waterline and sewer lines, it is not clear how dry utilities can feed the site as proposed. Please add a note to the plat that dry utilities may cro ss the Waterline and Sanitary Sewer Easements. NE Response: Updated on plat Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Kelly Smith, , ksmith@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 08/10/2021: SAME COMMENT: FOR FINAL Language for the Natural Resources section of the Development Agreement will been provided to Engineering. The following items must be submitted prior to FDP approval: 1. A cost estimate for landscaping in the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone (including plant material, labor and irrigation) 2. A cost estimate for three years of monitoring and annual reporting of landscape establishment in the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone Page 13 of 16 3. A weed management plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/29/2021 09/29/2021: FOR FINAL It appears there will be impacted wetlands along the stormwater channel from the installation of a stormwater outlet. As mentioned early in the process, impacted wetlands shall be mapped and a jurisdictional determination from the Corps is required. Prior to Final Plan Approval I will need the following: 1. Wetlands mapped 2.Jurisdictional letter from the Corps 3.Letter from the Corps that the project complies with federal regulations 4.Wetland restoration plan for disturbed areas 5.Finer details on the disturbance in the area (grading and limits of disturbance) Refer to LUC 3.4.1(O)(1) Proof of Compliance: If a proposed development will disturb an existing wetland, the developer shall provide to the city a written statement from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that the development plan fully complies with all applicable federal wetland regulations established in the federal Clean Water Act. Watermark: We will be submitting for a nation wide permit. The disturba nce is less than a tenth of an acre and will not require mitigation. Department: Parks Contact: Aaron Wagner, , aawagner@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/11/2021 UPDATE: 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL To continue the discussion from (4/13/21) of the Wallenberg bridge improvements, Parks would like to discuss a 50/50 cost sharing option for replacing the bridge across the Canal Importation Channel (CIP). This would include cost sharing on design and construction, and it would be Parks preference to see the bridge constructed by the developer due to efficiencies of construction and to align timelines. Parks believes improvements to this access point would greatly enhance The Quarry development . Please reach out to Todd to schedule a time that we can begin to have these conversations and come to an agreement. 08/11/2021: FOR FINAL Thank you for proposing to replace the bridge to Wallenberg Dr., this improvement will be greatly appreciated. Parks and PP&D will need to review and approve the bridge design. Please coordinate with us as you move into the design of this connection. UPDATE 8.11.2021: Parks appreciates the easement that will be given to the city. We will continue to discuss this arrangement as this project progresses and look forward to the partnership. We approve of the development retaining the Wallenberg Spur as a separate component. a. Please clarify what your thoughts on the bridge replacement timing? Parks would prefer to construct a new bridge in tandem with construction of the project, to ease access into the CIP area. b. Who will be responsible for designing and constructing the project? Please coordinate with Parks so there is a firm und erstanding of how this piece might move forward. Page 14 of 16 Watermark: We met with Parks staff on October 18th. Watermark will develop language for the DA to be reviewed by the City Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL After internal discussion regarding the naming conventions of easements, we would like to include a special designation for the easements related to Stormwater, Parks and Forestry’s needs. The easement definition language shall be included on the Plat. The city is drafting this language and will be sending to the applicant team as soon as we are able. NE Response: Waiting on language from parks – may need to be addressed with the next submittal Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL With the existing City interests that exist within the platted boundary, the City is requesting that a title commitment on the property be provided. This would aid the City in finalizing how to monument these interests moving forward through their re-establishment on the plat and referenced in the development agreement. Watermark: A title commitment has been provided with this submittal Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: FOR INFORMATION Please convert the existing Parks tap into an ADA accessible Drinking Fountain in a suitable location. A drinking fountain would be an amenity for both The Quarry and the nearby Spring Creek Trail. Design and construction would need to be approved by Parks. Watermark: Watermark is willing to work with Parks on the placement of the drinking fountain during construction utilizing the new irrigation tap provided south of Stuart Street. We would like to separate it out form entitlement approvals to keep on sched ule. Department: Forestry Contact: Christine Holtz, , choltz@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: INFORMATION FOR APPROVAL Landscape sheet L12 there are two trees with missing labels in the north east corner along Wallenberg dr. Please add them. Ripley Design Response: Acknowledged, the trees described have been labeled. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: INFORMATION FOR APPROVAL Please add the size of the evergreen trees on the Plant List. Evergreens being used as mitigation trees need to be 8’. Non-mitigation evergreens need to be a minimum of 6’. Ripley Design Response: Sizes of evergreen trees have been added to the plant schedule on sheet L17. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: INFORMATION FOR APPROVAL If the dedication to the City of tracts A and B goes forward, Forestry will require the mitigation and removal of several trees located in tract B. Watermark: If the dedication does proceed, Watermark will work with Forestry on the removal of the trees Page 15 of 16 Department: Internal Services Contact: Lauren Wade, 970-302-5962, lwade@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/23/2021 09/23/2021: GIS has no comments at this time. Ripley Design Response: Acknowledged. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 08/10/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. NE Response: Redlines have been addressed Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are text over text issues. See redlines. 08/10/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are text over text issues. See redlines. NE Response: Redlines have been addressed. Topic: General Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 09/27/2021 09/27/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The titles need to match on all plan sets. Please change all plan titles so they all read The Quarry By Watermark. NE Response: Titles on plat and plans read “The Quarry by Watermark” Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/10/2021 09/27/2021: 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. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com 08/10/2021: 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. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com NE Response: Thank you. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Page 16 of 16 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 07/21/2021 07/21/2021: 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 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/28/2021 09/28/2021: A landscape plan shall contain accurate and identifiable hydrozones, please correct and re-calculate the landscape water budget chart for the entire site. The annual Irrigation Water Requirements (IWR) for Kentucky blue grass are 18 gallons per square foot (GPSH). Please refer to the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Cod e for details. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221 -6704 or eolson@fcgov.com Ripley Design Response: The landscape water budget chart has been updated for the entire site.