HomeMy WebLinkAboutTIMBERLINE - INTERNATIONAL - FDP210020 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS  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
November 17, 2021
Steve Steinbicker
Architecture West LLC
5833 Big Canyon Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80528
RE: Timberline ‑ International, FDP210020, Round Number 2
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Timberline ‑ International. If you have questions about any
comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your
Development Review Coordinator, Brandy Bethurem Harras via phone at 970‑416‑2744 or
via email at bbethuremharras@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Brandy Bethurem Harras, 970‑416‑2744, bbethuremharras@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/02/2021: 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
09/02/2021: 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
been addressed, when applicable, avoiding responses like noted or acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3
09/02/2021: 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_PROJECT NAME_PDP_Rd2.pdf
File type acronyms maybe appropriate to avoid extremely long file names.
Example: TIS for Traffic Impact Study, ECS for Ecological Characterization Study.
Comment Number: 4
09/02/2021: INFORMATION:
All plans should be saved as optimized/flattened PDFs to reduce file size and
remove layers.
Per the Electronic Submittal Requirements AutoCAD SHX attributes need to be
removed from the PDF’s.
AutoCAD turns drawing text into comments that appear in the PDF plan set,
and these must be removed prior to submittal as they can cause issues with the
PDF file. The default setting is "1" ("on") in AutoCAD. To change the setting
and remove this feature, type "EPDFSHX" in the command line and enter "0".
Read this article at Autodesk.com for more tips on this topic:
https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarti
cles/sfdcarticles/Drawing‑text‑appears‑as‑Comments‑in‑a‑PDF‑created‑by‑Aut oCAD.html
Comment Number: 5
09/02/2021: 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 resubmit your
plans, please notify me with as much advanced notice as possible.
Comment Number: 6
09/02/2021: 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 10, 2021 one additional week of review time will be
added to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks).
Comment Number: 7
09/02/2021: INFORMATION:
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.
Comment Number: 8
09/02/2021: 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: 9
09/02/2021: INFORMATION:
LUC 2.211 Lapse, Term of Vested Right: Within a maximum of three (3) years
following the approval of a final plan or other site specific development plan, the
applicant must undertake, install and complete all engineering improvements
(water, sewer, streets, curb, gutter, street lights, fire hydrants and storm
drainage) in accordance with city codes, rules and regulations. The period of
time shall constitute the "term of the vested property right." Failure to undertake
and complete such engineering improvements within the term of the vested
property right shall cause a forfeiture of the vested property right and shall
require resubmission of all materials and reapproval of the same to be
processed as required by this Code. All dedications as contained on the final
plat shall remain valid unless vacated in accordance with law.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Will Lindsey, , wlindsey@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/13/2021: INFORMATION:
Thank you for your submittal. Planning's comment is related to the P&Z
Commission's discussion about the treatment of the patio area to the west of
the drive‑thru. Although it was not a condition of approval, staff is curious
whether any further thought has been given to the provision of tables for seating,
additional tree‑grates, or a shade structure since it was a significant topic of
discussion at the hearing.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970‑221‑6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED:
The revised cross sections would indicate that there would still need to be
pavement removal to get Timberline Road into its ultimate condition as the
drawings show a 3% interim that would be changed to a 2% in the ultimate. I'm
suggesting to meet further on this, perhaps explore the concept to demonstrate
that the 3% is the ultimate and show that the height of the median is higher along this section?
The cross-sections from Sta. 4+41.87 to Sta. 6+75.56 have been revised as discussed with Marc.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The cross sections provided for Timberline Road appear to be indicating the
ultimate condition only. Please have the cross sections depict the interim
condition as well (it should reflect what the existing cross slopes will be with the
project and the existing condition without the raised median and how the curb
and gutter and pavement that is being set with its cross slope that's being
established is the same as the ultimate condition.) The cross sections may
likely need to have a greater vertical exaggeration to more clearly demonstrate this.
Comment Number: 3
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED:
This comment still appears unaddressed, in general the spot elevations at the
flowlines aren't matching between the profile information and cross sections.
They appear to match on the centerline but not flowlines. See 2+04.15 and 1+61.04 for example.
All flowline elevations in the road profile now match the flowline elevations in the cross-sections.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The elevations shown on the cross sections don't seem to match the elevations
shown on the plan and profile sheets. The cross sections seem to be indicating
an edge of pavement elevation instead of a flowline elevation, but accounting for
the 2 inch difference doesn't seem to reconcile this. Also please have the
centerline and east flowline elevations shown on the stationing at 50 foot
intervals as was done on the west flowline to double check.
Comment Number: 4
11/16/2021:FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED:
There is some generalized indication that slope varies along the flowline and
some spot elevations along the flowline and wingwall but not along the sidewalk itself.
Added spot elevations at flowline and at back of walk along the west side of Timberline.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide additional spot elevations and cross slope measurements on
the grading plan, focusing at and around the access ramps along Timberline
and at International to help further demonstrate that City and ADA compliance is being met.
Comment Number: 5
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED:
Thanks for updating the patching to encompass the full bike lane width. The
patching is now extended into the travel lane at an angle north of the driveway
and I'm questioning if this is needed and can be just reduced to the bike lane?
Otherwise, the patching extended to the travel lane should be extended to the full
width of the travel lane to start at the northern limits. (See redlines).
Extended the asphalt patch to the full width of the thru lane.
Additionally, there is an angled patch that would need to be squared up at the
International intersection, also shown in the redlines.
Squared up asphalt patch at the south end of the pavement removal on Timberline.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please expand the patching depicted to include all of the bike lane north of the
driveway as we do not allow a seam to occur within a bike lane.
Comment Number: 7
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The structural plans were reviewed by Jin Wang, Engineering's structural
engineer. We're suggesting a meeting with the applicant's engineer and
structural engineer to discuss aspects of the design.
There are a couple of aspects of the design that ahead of the structural design itself is of concern:
There needs to be a bridge railing/parapet wall implemented that isn't indicated
on the plans, in accordance with Figure 1108 in LCUASS (page 8 of the following link:
https://www.larimer.org/sites/default/files/uploads/2021/1101‑1422_1.pdf)
The structure itself is abutting the back of sidewalk around the radius at the
intersection. The parapet and railing would be up against the sidewalk and is of
concern. There needs to be 2 feet of separation from the back of walk to the
parapet wall and railing per Figure 16‑1 of LCUASS. Perhaps this can be
achieved in altering the sidewalk design around the curve as shown within the redlines.
Specified Bridge Railing/Parapet Wall detail. Revised sidewalk radii to provide 2’ of
clearance from the back of walk to the proposed parapet wall. Gary Weeks had provided a structural detail for the parapet wall.
Comment Number: 8
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The City's adopted on its civil/utility plan set an updated approval block that
would only be used on the cover sheet and the depicted utility plan approval
block can then be removed on all the sheets. This detail to use on the cover
sheet is linked below. https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/files/utilitysigblock.pdf?1611856399
Revised approval block has been added to the Cover Sheet. Approval blocks on all other
Sheets have been removed.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Melissa Buick, Lake Canal, (970) 686‑7126, melissahbuick@gmail.com, ,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
11/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The Company is required to accept storm discharges that are historically
tributary to the canal up to the historic 100‑year flow rate, subject to further
limitation by City/County regulations. Applicant has provided a copy of the
drainage report and an agreement for the discharge into Lake Canal has
already been completed and is currently in place. The applicant should be
aware that the Company is not liable for flooding on adjacent properties
attributed to the lack of capacity of existing facilities to convey the 100‑year
historic flows. The capacity of the canal is limited to the irrigation flow plus
freeboard that can accommodate some amount of off‑site flow for the protection of the canal.
Comments have been noted.
Comment Number: 4
11/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Sheet 9 of the Final Utility plans shows a 12” RCP culvert discharging into the
canal from the proposed Detention Pond 1. The proposed outlet protection is a
small 9” D50 riprap pad. The pad should be extended to the toe of the slope
(bottom of canal) to serve as a rundown for the discharge. It should also be
noted that the riprap installation should be flush with grade or slightly recessed
so that it does not impede canal flow.
The riprap pad has been extended to the bottom of the Lake Canal and will be revegetated.
Comment Number: 5
11/17/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Considering both the culvert extension and the storm sewer under the culvert
extension, permanent easements or agreements must stipulate that storm water
facilities under, over or in line with irrigation facilities, and not the responsibility
of the Company, will be repaired in a timely manner upon notification of a
problem. If the Company must repair these facilities to ensure irrigation
conveyance, the party responsible for the stormwater facilities will be charged for the repair.
There will be no storm pipe crossing, only the box culvert extension. This has been communicated
To Lake Canal Company.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970‑224‑6175, sgilchrist@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
We are currently working with the City Attorneys office with regard to language
that we will want added to the Site Plan and the Development Agreement to
indicate that it will be the responsibility of the property owner to mitigate any
safety or operational issues that arise with the possible stacking of vehicles onto a City
street from the proposed drive thru. Once we have this coordinated we will provide that for you.
Comment Number: 2
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Some minor signing and striping redlines will be provided to address a few
items that just need to be changed out.
Department: Erosion Control
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970‑222‑1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
11/10/2021: INFORMATION ONLY [UPDATED]:
Based on the area of disturbance or this project is part of a larger common development,
State permits for stormwater construction discharge will be required and should be obtained from
the State prior to commencement of Construction Activities on this site.
WCE will begin the process of preparing the General Permit with the CDPHE.
The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5‑2
was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections.
As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such inspections.
The Erosion Control fees are based on; the number of lots, the total site
disturbance, the estimated number of years the project will be active and the
Stormwater Inspection Fees are based on the number of LID/WQ Features that
are designed for on this project.
Based on the proposed site construction associated with this project we are
assuming 1 lots, 1.39 acres of disturbance, 1 years from demo through build out
of construction and an additional 3 years till full vegetative stabilization due to
seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Fee estimate of $1301.44.
Based on 1 bioretention/rain garden and 1 extended detention basin, the
estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee is $565.
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 your review.
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 this project.
Based on the proposed site construction associated with this project we are
assuming 1 lots, 1.39 acres of disturbance, 1 year from demo through build out
of construction and an additional 3 years till full vegetative stabilization due to
seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Fee estimate of $1301.44.
Based on 1 bioretention and one extended detention basin the estimate of the
Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee is $565.
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 your review.
Comment Number: 2
11/10/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL [UPDATED]:
Please use the updated City Standard Construction Control notes available in
Appendix F of the City’s Stormwater Criteria Manual as the general Standard
erosion Control Notes currently shown are outdated.
The revised EC Notes have been added to the General Notes Sheet.
Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plan provided includes a sequence
chart in accordance with (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2)
A Construction Sequence table has been added to the Erosion Control Plan.
Please address all redlines provided on the Utility Plans
All comments contained on the redlined plans have been addressed.
09/09/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please correct the escrow calculation per redlines.
Please address all redlines provided on the Utility Plans.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970‑416‑2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4
11/15/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL REVISED:
Please label the ECB type and spec. on the Erosion Control Plan.
An erosion control blanket has been specified on the Erosion Control Plan.
09/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Temporary erosion protection is needed on the east slope of the rain garden to
protect this slope since flows will sheet flow into the rain garden. Permanent
TRM may also be a good option with the difficulty of native grass establishment.
Comment Number: 9
11/15/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL REVISED:
The LID table does not match the calculations in the Drainage Report. Please revise
The LID table on the Drainage Plan has been revised to match the drainage report.
09/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please add a LID summary table to the Drainage Plan. This should include a
WQ storage volume and area of soil media required and provided.
Comment Number: 10
11/15/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL REVISED:
Please label the transition from perforated to solid pipe is 2 feet from the edge of aggregate.
A note has been added regarding the location of the pipe transition.
09/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The perforated underdrain needs to be located only within the aggregate layer.
The underdrain needs to be a solid pipe from 2 feet inside the aggregate area
to any section outside of the rain garden aggregate area.
Comment Number: 11
11/15/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The required soil media surface area for the rain garden was calculated to be
433 square feet in the Drainage Report. The Utility Plans show a surface area
of 3,215 square feet of soil media. This is way more than what is required and
the City suggests reducing the soil media surface area.
The area of the rain garden has been reduced to a maximum of 433 sf.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Austin Kreager, 970‑224‑6152, akreager@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
09/14/2021: PRIOR TO DCP:
Please submit one‑line diagrams and C‑1 forms for each service being
proposed. The C‑1 form can be found here:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/c‑1_form.pdf?159767 7310
Comment Number: 3
09/14/2021: INFORMATION:
You may contact Austin Kreager, project engineering if you have questions.
(970) 224‑6152. You may reference Light & Power’s Electric Service Standards at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandar
ds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders‑and‑developers.
Comment Number: 4
11/16/2021: FOR APPROVAL:
Our transformer must be a minimum of 2' from the edge of the sidewalk. Please
show this change prior to your next submittal. Thank you.
The transformer has been moved 2-feet to the north to provide separation from the sidewalk.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416‑4290, sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
11/15/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Thank you for providing a cost estimate for NHBZ installation. An estimate for
three years of NHBZ monitoring and specific management (i.e., weed
management) is still needed. The total security amount will be 125% of the sum
of the NHBZ installation, maintenance, and monitoring costs.
One word of caution ‑ one of the most common culprits for NHBZs not meeting
success criteria is inappropriate maintenance. Typically, maintenance
contractors mow it the same as conventional landscaping areas, thereby
handicapping the native plants and allowing weeds to flourish. Communicating
appropriate management of the NHBZ can't start too early.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970‑221‑6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
10/25/2021: BUIDING PERMIT:
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
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970‑221‑6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 9
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UPDATED:
Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the
noted sheets. See redlines.
All comments on the redlined drawings have been addressed.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the
noted sheets. See redlines.
Comment Number: 10
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UPDATED:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Line over text issues have been corrected.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 4
11/15/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Sheet L‑3 is still missing from the index on sheet PL1.0.
09/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please make sure all sheet titles match the title on the Site Plan cover sheet,
Timberline ‑International.
Comment Number: 13
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please revise the legal description to match the legal description on the Site Plan.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
11/15/2021: 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 HYPERLINK "mailto:jvonnieda@fcgov.com" jvonnieda@fcgov.com
09/14/2021: 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