HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEARTSIDE HILL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - PDP210020 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSCommunity Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College AvenuePO Box 580Fort Collins, CO 80522970.221.6689970.224.6134 faxfcgov.com/developmentreviewJanuary 28, 2022Cathy
Mathis TB Group444 Mountain AvenueBerthoud, CO 80513RE: Heartside Hill Residential Development, PDP210020, Round Number 1Please see the following summary of comments from City staff
and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of Heartside Hill Residential Development. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct
your questions through your Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via phone at 9702216695 or via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com. Comment Summary:Department: Development Review
CoordinatorContact: Todd Sullivan, 9702216695, tsullivan@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/28/2022I 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: 01/28/2022As 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.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.pdfResubmittals
are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being the cutoff for routing the same week. When you are working to resubmit your plans, please notify me as much in advance
as possible of the expected submittal date.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/28/2022Temporary Service Changes City of Fort Collins Development ReviewTo 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 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 2 weeks to 3 weeks for Affordable projects).
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: 4 Comment Originated: 01/28/2022All "FOR HEARING" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to moving
forward with scheduling the hearing for this project.Department: Planning ServicesContact: Will Lindsey, , wlindsey@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Please provide a table on the site plan cover sheet that shows compliance with the LMN density requirements. This should include the density calculations
(net and gross) for both the overall development and the individual uses (multifamily and singlefamily). Per 4.5.(D)(1) all residential developments in the LMN shall have an overall
minimum average density of 4 dwelling units per net acre of residential land, except those residential developments (whether overall development plans or project development plans) containing
20 acres or less shall have an overall minimum average density of 3 dwelling units per net acre of residential land. The maximum density of any development plan taken as a whole shall
be 9 dwelling units per gross acre of residential land, except that affordable housing projects (whether approved pursuant to overall development plans or project development plans)
containing ten (10) acres or less may attain a maximum density, taken as a whole, of 12 dwelling units per gross acre of residential land. The maximum density of any phase in a multiplephase
development plan shall be 12 dwelling units per gross acre of residential land, and the maximum density of any portion of a phase containing a grouping of 2 or more multifamily structures
shall be 12 dwelling units per gross acre of residential land.RESPONSE: Density information has been added to the Cover Sheet.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022:
FOR HEARING: The Site Plan sheets 2 and 3 list the Heart of the Rockies zoning as RL. Please correct this to reflect the current LMN zoning.RESPONSE: This has been corrected.Comment
Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Please label the multifamily buildings as Buildings 18. You should still include the building model (ex. Building
1A).RESPONSE: Building labels and types added.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Street Trees – Staff has concerns over the lack of street
trees planted along E Trilby Rd in the parkway strip provided. If overhead utilities along Trilby are to be grounded as part of the project as required by the code than street trees
should be planned for planting after that occurs. Pending the outcome of this requirement more trees will be needed along the Trilby frontage of the development. Additionally, staff
would like to see more trees provided adjacent to the northern and eastern parking areas to help meet the minimum treestocking requirements for the site. Potential locations for additional
trees could be the Residential Garden and the Rain Garden areas.RESPONSE: Trees were added along East Trilby and around the raingardens, and in the open space area east of Building 1A.Comment
Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Minimum Species Diversity – Please provide a calculation on the Landscape Plan sheet LSO4 that demonstrates
no tree species accounts for more than 15% of the trees provided on site.RESPONSE: Table added.Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: For
the purpose of reviewing the PDP staff only finds that the central drive that runs north/south through the development qualifies as a private drive per the standards found in 3.6.2.
The other access drives with parking areas are functionally parking lots, and will be reviewed as such therefore compliance with the standards in the following comments will need to
be demonstrated.RESPONSE: Acknowledged. See below responses.Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Parking lot interior landscaping – please
provide separate calculations for each parking lot. Per LUC 3.2.1 6 percent of the interior space of all parking lots with less than one hundred (100) spaces, and ten (10) percent of
the interior space of all parking lots with one hundred (100) spaces or more shall be landscape areas. Please also confirm that the interior area of each parking lot includes the following
trees:“Maximized Area of Shading. Landscaped islands shall be evenly distributed to the maximum extent feasible. At a minimum, trees shall be planted at a ratio of at least 1 canopy
shade tree per 150 square feet of internal landscaped area with a landscaped surface of turf, ground cover perennials or mulched shrub plantings.”RESPONSE: Additional trees have been
added around the detention pond, in open space areas, around the raingardens and southeast of the church building.Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022:
FOR HEARING: Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping – Parking lots with 6 or more spaces are required to be screened from abutting uses and from the street. Since none of the parking areas
are directly adjacent to abutting residential uses only screening from the street will apply. Specifically, the eastern most parking area will need to be screened sufficiently from S
Lemay Ave. This can consist of a wall, fence, planter, earthen berm, plant material or a combination of such elements that will have a minimum height of 30 inches and extend a minimum
of 70% percent of the length of the street frontage of the parking lot and 70 % of the length of any boundary of the parking lot. Please provide a graphic depiction of the parking lot
screening as seen from the street.RESPONSE: Plantings have been added around the pond and raingarden to screen the easternmost parking area. Note that this area has been shifted to
the west since you saw this in round 1, so the parking is much farther away.Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Per 3.2.2(C) pedestrian
walkways within the site must be a raised or enhanced with a paved surface not less than 6 feet in width. The site plan currently shows some of the walkways as 5 feet wide. Due to the
pedestrianoriented nature of the project with its numerous walkways for accessing the primary streets, it is important that they meet this minimum width. Furthermore, a minimum sidewalk
width of 8 feet is required for walkways where bicyclists and pedestrians may share the walkways. Please increase the width of the currently proposed 7foot and 5foot sidewalks to meet
these standards.RESPONSE: As discussed, the sidewalks will remain at 7’ wide.Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: The offstreet parking
calculations includes an error in calculating for the 4bedroom units. The requirement is 3.0 spaces per dwelling unit (not 4.0) so the overall minimum required for the multifamily is
140 (not 146). I’m confused by the numbers for the total provided though. I counted 144 spaces onsite, but the site plan cover sheet lists 147 (it also shows a breakdown of standard
spaces: 192, compact: 25, and accessible: 11). Please correct/update these calculations for Round 2.RESPONSE: These have been updated and corrected.Comment Number: 11 Comment
Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: What are the lot widths for the singlefamily detached dwellings? If less than 40 feet 2 parking spaces are required per dwelling. If
greater than 40 feet only 1 space is required (22 spaces vs. 11 spaces). For lots that require two vehicle parking spaces both spaces must have unobstructed access to the drive (i.e.,
no parking the cars one behind the other). This could be addressed by widening the driveway to facilitate access for both cars to and from the drive.RESPONSE:The driveways for the Habitat
lots have been widened to accommodate 2 cars.Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: The required number of enclosed bicycle parking spaces
is 108, and the site plan cover sheet references 94 enclosed spaces being provided in garages. This doesn’t meet the minimum requirement, and I don’t believe garage spaces are being
provided for the multifamily unless I’m missing something? Are there enclosed bicycle parking areas in the buildings themselves? Please clarify and increase the number of enclosed spaces
to meet the requirement. Can the outdoor covered bicycle parking spaces incorporate some screen fencing on either side of the cover to provide more of an enclosure? This would help those
parking areas better align with the definition of enclosed bicycle parking.RESPONSE: The number of bike spaces has been updated, corrected, and revised to meet the new numbers of bedrooms.Comment
Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: There appear to be several issues with the plans demonstrating compliance with the new lighting code (Section
3.2.4). Please provide details on the next lighting plan that demonstrate the existing and proposed lighting is compliant with the maximum BUG (BacklightUplightGlare) ratings allowed
in the Lighting Context area (LC1 for this project). Information on these maximums can be found in Tables 3.2.42, 3.2.43, and 3.2.44.RESPONSE: Plans have been updated meet BUG ratings.
Not doing anything with the recently replaced LED parking lot lights in the church parking lot our new lighting stops short of this existing parking lot area.Comment Number: 14
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Please provide a site lumen calculation using the Hardscape Area Method (Table 3.2.47). The total installed initial luminaire
lumens are calculated as the sum of the initial luminaire lumens for all luminaires. Base Allowance: LC1: 1.25 lumens per SF of hardscape.RESPONSE: Exterior Lighting Summary Table has
been added indicating Hardscape Area Method.Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: There appears to be several light trespass issues along
the abutting property lines. Please adjust the lighting fixtures and/or orientation to demonstrate compliance with the following Light Trespass Limitation: LC1 context area; 0.1 max
horizontal illuminance; calculation points no further than 10’ apart; “For property boundaries that abut public rightsofway, private streets, private drives, public alleys, and public
and private parking lots, the backlight rating, glare rating and illuminance values provided in Tables 3.2.42, 3.2.43 and 3.2.44 respectively, shall be measured 10 feet from the property
boundary. For all other property boundaries, values shall be measured at the property boundary.”RESPONSE: Exterior lighting has been updated accordingly.Comment Number: 16 Comment
Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: What other lighting fixtures are proposed for the multifamily dwellings? Are there any onbuilding light fixtures? If so those fixtures
will need to be included in the lumen allowance, light trespass, and BUG rating calculations.RESPONSE: Exterior wall mounted entry lights for each building have been added to photometrics.Comment
Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: The twomultifamily dwellings internal to the site as well as the two buildings in the southeast corner do
not appear to meet the requirement in 3.5.2(D)(1) for orientation to a connecting walkway. Per 3.5.2(D)(1), “Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face
the adjacent street to the extent reasonably feasible. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face a connecting walkway with no primary entrance more than
200 feet from a street sidewalk and the address shall be posted to be visible from the intersection of the connecting walkway and public right of way. Additional walkway extensions that
run inbetween the buildings out to Trilby and Lemay can help meet this standard for some of the buildings, but a modification will need to be requested for the two internal buildings.
Please provide that request with the Round 2 submittal for staff to review.RESPONSE: A Modification request is included.Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022:
FOR HEARING: Special height review is required for buildings that are taller than 40 feet per the criteria in LUC 3.5.1(G). Please provide a narrative and graphic as necessary to address
the criteria and discusses how the building designs are compatible with the area in terms of massing, bulk, scale, articulation, human scaled proportions, materials, and colors.RESPONSE:
A shadow analysis has been provided with this resubmittal based on the height of Building C. Based on the shadow analysis provided, the shadows produced by the 3-story, Building C have
minimal impacts to the adjacent 2-story apartments and property. Building C incorporates numerous exterior wall and roof articulations along with a well defined 1-story main building
entrance. Building materials and colors have also been utilized and placed to create human scaled proportions.Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022:
FOR HEARING: Based on a recent drive of the surrounding residential areas there is a greater range of building colors and materials than what is reflected in the proposed elevations.
Per the standards found in 3.5.1 (F) building colors and materials should draw from the range of shades and materials that already exist on the block or in the adjacent neighborhood.
This relates to additional comments below about meeting the standards for variation among building and colors found in 3.8.30(F)(2) and 3.8.30(F)(3).RESPONSE:A greater range of building
colors have been updated and included to be building specific and have also incorporated some warm tones that reflect the surrounding adjacent neighborhood.Comment Number: 20
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Staff does not find that the architectural variation between the buildings meet the standards found in 3.8.30 or 4.5.(E)(4).
Suggested changes to better meet the standards include (but are not limited to): alternative material treatment for the building base (such as brick); changes to the roof line/pitch;
alternative materials between building types (change stucco or board and batten siding on one or more of the building models); greater color variation to better distinguish building
models, etc. Further distinguishing the building models, through color and materials, is very important due to the minimal variations in building footprint currently proposed.RESPONSE:
The revised buildings do include unique color schemes per building to create more variation. Furthermore, one building has been removed with this submittal that leaves a total of 7
apartment building and only require 2 distinctly different building types. The current design includes a total of four unique building types including building type A, A with attached
clubhouse, type B and Type C, which is a 3-story version. The 2-story buildings type A and B also have significantly different footprint sizes and massing.Comment Number: 21
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Entrances – There is a duplicative standard in 3.8.30 and 4.5(E)(4)(e) that requires entrances to be made clearly visible from
the streets and public areas through the use of architectural elements and landscaping. It does not appear that the buildings are meeting this standard. A possible approach can be achieved
by providing a doublesided architecture where a similar entrance that is used on the back side of the building could be provided.RESPONSE: Since six of the seven apartment building
front a busy arterial street and we are required to location parking behind the buildings, it is not feasible or desirable to have building entrances on the street facing side of these
buildings. Instead of providing entrances on the street facing side, double-sided architectural elements haven been added to the revised elevations that include roof coverings over
all of the balconies that face either the street or parking lot side of the building which provide for additional articular and reduced sense of scale.Comment Number: 22 Comment
Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Please add a detail sheet that provides standard details and specifications for benches, bike racks, totlot equipment, stairs and railings
around the site, entry feature for the private drive, signage, picnic structure, tables, street crossing pavement details, and grills.RESPONSE: A detail sheet has been added for benches,
raised beds, tot lot, bike racks and shelters, dry stream beds and picnic tables.Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Per 3.8.30(C)(2)
the private park space must be a minimum of 5,000 square feet. Please verify that the central park space meets this minimum size. Additionally, are there going to be any seating areas,
grills, tables, benches, etc? If so, please show these on the plan. Also, please incorporate some additional smaller amenity areas throughout the development, particularly next to the
buildings that are along Trilby.RESPONSE: Yes, the park is 8,087 sq. ft. Benches, grills and tables have been added.Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022:
FOR HEARING: The PDP narrative acknowledges the singlefamily detached homes for Habitat for Humanity but does not provide much detail on the architectural profile for the dwellings.
Additionally, the elevations provided seem like they’re from another project (Harmony Cottages). Please note that the comment from the PDR last year related to the Housing model variety
still applies. No singlefamily dwelling can adjoin a lot with the same housing model on the same block face. This will significantly impact anyone attempting to pull a future building
permit for any of the singlefamily dwellings.RESPONSE: Acknowledged. This was discussed.Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Any development
containing fewer than 100 singlefamily units shall have at least 3 different types of housing models. Each housing model should have at least 3 characteristics which clearly and obviously
distinguish it from the other housing models, which characteristics may include, without limitation, differences in floor plans, exterior materials, roof lines, garage placement, placement
of the footprint on the lot and/or building face. These requirements do not apply to developments containing 10 or fewer dwelling units.RESPONSE: Based on our meeting on 2/17/21, options
to provide multiple building types were discussed for both the Habitat for Humanity and L’Arche homes. We discussed using a mirrored plan for the 1-story Habitat for Humanity homes
to create two different elevation types and the (2) L’Arche homes will be 2-story and larger in overall size than the Habitat Home to create the third different housing model type.Comment
Number: Comment Originated: 01/27/202201/27/2022: FOR HEARING: Let's discuss the designation for the Friends of L'Arche homes proposed. Staff would like some clarity on the
use of the homes to ensure they don't fall under the group home definition.RESPONSE: As discussed, the L’Arche home, will be single family and not group homes.Department: Engineering
Development ReviewContact: Dave Betley, 9702216573, dbetley@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR INFORMATION: The
project will have to address bringing the handicapped ramps up to current standards when the FDP is submitted. The plans should reflect this.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedComment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL: The applicant will need to address future right of way that may be needed at the intersection of Trilby and Lemay.
The analysis should address any right hand turn lanes needed. The traffic study addresses the need for some right hand turn lanes. Please coordinate with traffic and engineering on
the requirements needed for the intersections. Any additional right of way will need to be dedicated with the plat. Projects beyond the project frontage may qualify for TCEF funding.
Additional conversations will need to take place to discuss this issue.RESPONSE: Please see that included ultimate conditions for Lemay & TrilbyComment Number: 3 Comment Originated:
01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL: The sidewalk location along Brittany Way will need to be coordinated with forestry and the existing trees to be sure the root system is not impacted
for the existing trees.RESPONSE: 8’ parkway is provided with walk extending into an access easementComment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
The existing right of way for Brittany seventy feet. The roadway section is 50 feet. The current section has a bike lane on the southern portion and parking. The applicant should
address the striping and the parking on the street. There should be a discussion of bike lanes and parking and striping patterns that best fit the development for Brittany Drive. There
may need to be a separate meeting with Traffic, FCMoves, and Engineering to discuss options.RESPONSE: Bike lane striping exists along the frontage of this site along BrittanyComment
Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL: Please include a note on the plan that states that all above ground utility lines will be relocated underground
as required by City Code. The plans will need to reflect a design that relocates the power lines underground.RESPONSE: The overhead electric is noted to be undergroundedComment Number:
7 Comment Originated: 01/24/20221/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL: The applicant will have to submit variances for the driveway locations that don't meet LUCASS Standards.RESPONSE:
Currently not variances are being requestedComment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL: There is a median island located in the right of way
at the driveway entrance on Trilby. The applicant will need to discuss the issue further. The applicant will need to coordinate the island with the traffic analysis. There may need
to an island built to perform right in and right out movements for the driveway located on Trilby. Any privately maintained portions of the median island will need to be removed from
the right of way or an encroachment permit will be needed for any private improvements.RESPONSE:Please see that included ultimate conditions for Lemay & TrilbyComment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR APPROVAL: The driveway width on Trilby is fiftythree feet wide. Per the LUCASS Standards, driveway widths are to be between twentyfour
and thirtysix feet wide. Please adjust the design accordingly.RESPONSE: The driveway width has been adjusted to provide 14’ wide NB/SB lanesComment Number: 10 Comment Originated:
01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR INFORMATION: How will access be provided for the thirty foot utility easement located to the west of the intersection of Brittany and Lemay? The utility
company will want access to this area and it appears that it will be blocked by landscaping in the driveway of lot 7.RESPONSE: access provided via drivewayComment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR INFORMATION: Lot 3 and lot 6 do not appear to have a plan layout for the lots. Will they be left bare? I think there may be a layer
shut off on one of the sheets in the utility plans. (C10, Horizontal Control)RESPONSE: Please see updated layout.Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022:
FOR APPROVAL: The project will need to enter into a Development Agreement for the project during the FDP review process.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedComment Number: 13 Comment Originated:
01/25/202201/25/2022: FOR APPROVAL: The sire will need to be designed with any fencing set back two feet beyond the sidewalk.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated:
01/25/202201/25/2022: FOR APPROVAL: The onsite drive for lots 1 through 4 is more that 150 feet long. This length will need to be coordinated with Poudre Fire Department.RESPONSE:
The drive does not exceed 150 ftComment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: FOR APPROVAL: It appears that the plat does not have an emergency access easement
across Tract A. Will Poudre Fire need to utilize this access?RESPONSE: No emergency access easement required through Tract ADepartment: Traffic OperationContact: Nicole Hahn, 9702216820,
nhahn@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: An access between Britney and Lemay on Trilby was added with this submittal.
This access does not meet our spacing requirements. We do understand the purpose for the access point based on feedback we heard from the neighborhood at the preliminary neighborhood
meetings, and support a right in right out access point at this location. Please work with engineering on design for a splitter island.RESPONSE:Please see that included ultimate conditions
for Lemay & TrilbyTopic: Traffic Impact StudyComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/25/2022The Traffic Study has been received and reviewed. A SB right turn lane on Lemay
at Britney and a SB right turn lane on Lemay at Trilby were identified as being warranted in the traffic study. We would like to work with you to determine what improvements will be
required with this development.RESPONSE:Please see that included ultimate conditions for Lemay & TrilbyDepartment: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion and Sediment ControlContact: Jesse
Schlam, 9702182932, jschlam@fcgov.comTopic: Erosion ControlComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/19/202201/19/2022: FOR FINAL:Please submit an Erosion Control Plans
to meet City Criteria (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3)Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plans provided include a individual sequence sheets in accordance with (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2)Please
ensure that the Erosion Control Plans, Escrows, and Reports include phasing requirements (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3, 6.1.4, & 6.1.5)FOR FINAL:Please submit an Erosion Control Escrow /
Security Calculation based upon the accepted Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria. (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.5) FOR FINAL:Please submit an Erosion Control Report to meet City Criteria.
(FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.4) No erosion control provided assume the acknowledged response is for providing an erosion control report, plan and escrow at time of FDP.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedComment
Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/19/202201/19/2022: FOR FINAL: The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.52 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 85 lots, 8.84 acres of disturbance, 3 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 $4892.2.Based on 0 number of porous pavers, 1 number
of bioretention/level spreaders, 1 number of extended detention basins, and 0 number of underground treatments, results in an estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee to be $565.Please
note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the abovementioned 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.Please respond to this comment with any changes to these assumed estimates and why, so that we may have a final fee estimate ready for this
project. The fee will need to be provided at the time of erosion control escrow.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedDepartment: Stormwater EngineeringContact: Matt Simpson, (970)4162754, masimpson@fcgov.comTopic:
GeneralComment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR HEARING:Please revise the detention pond grading to address the following items:a.Can the bottom slope
of the detention pond be increased to 2%? If so, a trickle pan would not be required, which would be more desirable to the City.RESPONSE: The pond bottom is unable to be at 2% and still
achieve required detention volumesb.The eastern slope of the detention pond will need to include some articulation or variation of the slope.RESPONSE: Articulation provided.c.Adjacent
to the Lemay Ave sidewalk please confirm there is 2ft of “shoulder” before the grading breaks to the detention pond slope.RESPONSE: Shoulder providedComment Number: 4 Comment
Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR HEARING:In the drainage report please address the following itemsAdd a detention pond summary table to body of report.RESPONSE: Please see Pond
Calc sheetCheck that the WQCV for the rain garden provides 120% of the WQCV.RESPONSE: 20% is added for sedimentationComment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022:
FOR HEARING:On the Landscape Plan please check the separation between trees and stormwater infrastructure, 10ft minimum separation is required. There are 2 trees at the south drive
entrance that need to be adjusted. (See redlines)RESPONSE: Trees moved.Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN:See redlines of Utility
Plans and Drainage Report.RESPONSE: Comments should be addressedComment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:A maintenance agreement and/or
amended development agreement will be required to establish maintenance responsibilities for the joint stormwater facilities (rain garden and detention pond). This will include an agreement
between the church property owner and this development for these stormwater facilities.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedComment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR
FINAL PLAN: Please address the following items regarding drainage easements:a.I would prefer the rain garden and detention pond to have a specific easement around each of them instead
of a blanket drainage easement in Tract A. RESPONSE: Acknowledged and can be provided with final platb.The offsite flow from Heart of the Rockies lots will need to be contained within
an easement on this site. The Tract A blanket drainage easement does cover this technically; however, I would prefer to have specific drainage easements around these flow paths instead.RESPONSE:
AcknowledgedDepartment: WaterWastewater EngineeringContact: Matt Simpson, (970)4162754, masimpson@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022:
FOR INFORMATION:This project site is located within the Fort Collins Loveland Water District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation District for water and sewer service. Please contact
them at (970) 2263104 for development requirements.RESPONSE: CorrectDepartment: Light And PowerContact: Rob Irish, 9702246167, rirish@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: For the detached singlefamily lots along Brittany, Light & Power will need to install infrastructure adjacent to these
lots along Brittany. With the existing street trees in the parkway, it may be necessary for L&P to install primary and vaults behind the proposed detached walk. Another option would
be to install the primary and transformers behind the singlefamily detached homes with access from the private drive behind. Please coordinate the best location for primary and equipment
with L&P and show on the plan set. Will these homes have gas or will they be all electric?RESPONSE:Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING:
Any 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 rightofway. Please
coordinate with Light & Power Engineering. Primary routing and transformers will need to be in easements or public rightofway.RESPONSE:Easements will be provided along elec line alignmentComment
Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Transformer and meter locations must be coordinated with Light & Power Engineering and shown on the plan set.
Transformers must be located within 10 feet of an allweather surface accessible by a line truck. Please show all proposed transformer locations on the Utility Plan. Please adhere to
all clearance requirements in the Electric Service Standards at the following link. http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/buildersanddevelopers/developmentformsguidelinesregulationsRESPONSE:
Transformers shownComment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Will the multifamily buildings need 3phase power or singlephase power? Will the
buildings be all electric or will gas be brought into the site to feed the buildings?RESPONSE:Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: 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.RESPONSE: Easements
will be provided along elec line alignmentComment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: 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/ElectricServiceStandards_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdfRESPONSE: AcknowledgedComment Number:
7 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Secondary service for any buildings other than singlefamily detached, will be installed, owned, and maintained by
the owner.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedComment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Streetlights will be placed along public streets. 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.RESPONSE:
One street light added where existing tree is to be removedComment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARING: The proposed utility easement behind the
single family homes may need to align with the curb line to allow for electric facilities to go in the easement to feed the single family from the rear.RESPONSE:Easements will be provided
along elec line alignmentComment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: INFORMATION ONLY: 8.1.10. The builder is required to install the electric meter socket(s)
on the same side as the electric service ‘stub’.8.1.11. Builders are also encouraged to install the natural gas meter(s) on the opposite side of the house from the electric service.8.1.12.
The electric service trench must be a minimum of 3 feet from the natural gas service trench, and the electric and gas services shall not cross each other.RESPONSE: AcknowledgedDepartment:
Environmental PlanningContact: Scott Benton, (970)4164290, sbenton@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: FOR HEARING: My
apologies for missing this at the PDR phase, but aerial imagery indicates that the residential development site supports a prairie dog colony. Therefore, an Ecological Characterization
Study (ECS) is required by City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.4.1 as the site is within 500 feet of LUC defined natural habitats and features (prairie dog colonies >1
acre). A memobased ECS can be submitted that specifically addresses the size and number of active burrows of the colony. Online LUC link: https://library.municode.com/co/fort_collins/codes/land_useSince
this project is already in the PDP phase, a conceptual prairie dog removal plan will be needed prior to Hearing as well. The plan should address how the preferred mitigation options
will be implemented. Feel free to contact me to discuss the specifics of the process, requirements, etc.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: FOR FINAL
APPROVAL: In Fort Collins, prairie dog colonies one (1) acre or greater in size are considered special habitat features (see LUC 5.1 Definitions). In addition, the Land Use Code requires
that any prairie dogs inhabiting a site must be relocated or humanely eradicated prior to development activities [LUC 3.4.1(N)(6)]. Mitigation options are based from onsite assessment
and include but are not limited to trap and donate; active relocation; passive relocation; paymentinlieu. Regarding black tailed prairie dogs and the proposed project site:a. City Land
Use Code requires that for any prairie dogs inhabiting a project site, prior to any site construction work, the animals must be removed either through relocation or humane eradication.
b. Should this project achieve approval and proceed to construction, a burrowing owl survey, in accordance with Colorado Parks and Wildlife standards shall be provided prior to any prairie
dog removal and prior to issuance of Development Construction Permit (DCP). The survey must be completed by a qualified wildlife biologist. c. Should this project achieve approval and
proceed to construction, documentation needs to be provided prior to issuance of DCP (at least one week prior to DCP meeting is ideal) regarding the burrowing owl survey and the relocation
of black tailed prairie dogs. Documentation should be in the form of a signed letter or memo from the wildlife biologist for the survey, and from the contractor(s) for the relocation
(date, time, methods).Department: Parks Contact: Aaron Wagner, , aawagner@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR INFORMATIONParks
Department Planning staff can help with any questions you may have regarding these comments. Please contact Jill Wuertz (jwuertz@fcgov.com), 9704162062, or Parks Planning Technician,
Aaron Wagner (aawagner@fcgov.com) 9706820344, 413 S. Bryan Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 regarding the Parks’ Department’s interest.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated:
01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARINGFOR HEARING: Parks would like to confirm that the arterial tree lawns will be maintained by the HOA in perpetuity.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 01/24/202201/24/2022: FOR HEARINGFOR HEARING: Please label the proposed park as ‘Private Park to be privately maintained/Publicly Accessible’RESPONSE: Note
added.Department: ForestryContact: Molly Roche, 2246161992, mroche@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGContinued:
Please include species diversity percentages to the plant list for Forestry’s review. Thank you!4/6/2021: INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP LUC standard for Tree Species Diversity states that
in order to prevent insect or disease susceptibility and eventual uniform senescence on a development site or in the adjacent area or the district, species diversity is required and
extensive monocultures are prohibited. The following minimum requirements shall apply to any development plan:Number of trees on siteMaximum percentage of any one species101950%203933%405925%60
or more15%The City of Fort Collins’ urban forest has reached the maximum percentage of the following species. Ash (Fraxinus), Honeylocust (Gleditsia triacanthose: ‘Shademaster’, ‘Skyline’,
etc), Bur Oak (Quercus macrocarpa), and Chanticleer Pear (Pyrus calleryana). Please note that additional species might join this list as we work through the review process.RESPONSE:
Tree percentages have been added and other species have replaced Honeylocust and Chanticleer Pear.Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGContinued:At
this stage, canopy shade trees (91 total) account for 43% of all new tree plantings (out of 214 new trees total). This does not meet LUC 3.2.1. (D) standard. Please increase canopy shade
tree plantings and incorporate other species such as Elm and Linden. Thank you!4/6/2021: INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDPPer LUC 3.2.1 (D) (c), canopy shade trees shall constitute at least fifty
(50) percent of all tree plantings.RESPONSE: Shade trees now account for 50% of plantings.Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGFor the next
round of review, would it be feasible to enlarge the tree inventory sheet? It would be helpful if the scale was smaller (more enlarged), particularly to review trees that are proposed
to be removed. It is difficult to read the tree #’s and the tree inventory is quite small as well. Thank you for your help in making this review a little less straining on the eyes!
Additionally, something is strange with the numbering of the trees in the inventory table. Looks like the text was jumbled with other numbers.RESPONSE:Existing tree plan has been enlarged
for better legibility. Tree inventory worksheet has been enlarged as well but placed on separate sheet due to restrictions of sheet size. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated:
01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGPlease include the tree inventory and mitigation information to the utility plans. The plans should show existing trees, proposed tree removals with
locations clearly noted (X over the symbol is an easy identifier), and the mitigation table provided by City Forestry. Please remove symbols for trees to be removed from the proposed
site/landscape plan and civil drawings. Only existing trees proposed to be preserved should be shown on the proposed drawings. In addition, please include the City of Fort Collins tree
protection notes to the demo plan and the sheet that contains the inventory information within the civil set. Thank you!RESPONSE:Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022:
FOR HEARINGIn order to preserve and protect the root systems of existing trees, please shift the proposed sidewalk along Brittany Street outside of their critical root zones. Critical
root zone spreads out from the trunk at a distance that equals one foot per diameter inch of the tree.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR
HEARINGPlease include/shade in critical root zones for all existing trees that are to be preserved and protected. Forestry needs to review potential impacts to the inner and outer critical
root zones onsite. Refer to LUC 3.2.1. diagram of the critical root zone.RESPONSE:Inner and outer critical root zones are now shown for all existing trees to remain. Comment Number:
14 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGThe overhead utility along Trilby shall be undergrounded to the extent feasible in order to accommodate a new row of
street trees in the right of way. The trees currently shown behind the walk will shift within the right of way. Additional trees may be required behind the walk if space and utility
separation allows.RESPONSE: Trees have been added to the tree lawn.Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGThere are some right of way/tree lawn
locations that have ornamental trees proposed. Please provide shade trees in the right of way (even along private drives) where feasible. If this is not feasible, please provide a reasoning
for swapping ornamentals in for shade trees.RESPONSE: Ornamental trees have been replaced by shade trees.Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGPlease
review Forestry redlines and adjust tree/utility locations to meet separation requirements.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022: FOR HEARINGPlease
remove Coralburst Crabapple from the species list. They do not thrive in Fort Collins climate/soil.RESPONSE: Tree removed.Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/25/20221/25/2022:
FOR HEARINGIs it feasible to change the cobble rock to turf in some locations to provide trees with additional moisture through irrigation? Locations in question noted on the redlines.RESPONSE:
Cobble has been switched to turf.Department: PFAContact: Marcus Glasgow, 9704162869, marcus.glasgow@poudrefire.orgTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
01/11/202201/11/2022: FOR HEARINGAERIAL ACCESS REQUIREMENTSBuilding C is measured over 30 feet in height when measured from grade to the eave. Aerial access will be required for this
building elevation. To meet the requirements, Aerial access should be available on at least one long side of the building, located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet
from the building or as otherwise approved by the fire marshal. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the
immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof.RESPONSE: The roof line and grading around Building C has been revised to be below the 30’ height when measured from grade to the
eave. A dimension and dashed line indicated the 30’ height has been included with the revised elevations.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/11/202201/11/2022: FOR PERMITAUTOMATIC
FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMSThe building that includes the attached clubhouse will require a full NFPA13 system. The multifamily building attached to the clubhouse is considered part of the
aggregate fire area and will exceed 5,000 square foot.RESPONSE: All apartments will use a 2-hr. rated area separation to separate the buildings to less than 6 units and utilize NFPA
13R sprinkler systems. The clubhouse will have a NFPA 13 system.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR FINALFIRE LANE SIGNS The limits of the fire
lane shall be fully defined. Fire lane sign locations should be indicated on future plan sets. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing and add detail
to Utility Plans. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of fire inspection.RESPONSE:Comment Number:
4 Comment Originated: 01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR HEARINGTURNING RADII IFC 503.2.4 and Local Amendments: The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be
a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside.The proposed corners of the private drives and roundabout do not meet this standard.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated:
01/21/202201/21/2022: FOR HEARINGFIRE LANE WIDTHFire lanes established by dedicated EAE shall maintain 20 foot unobstructed width. The roundabout lanes are 13 feet to 16 feet in width
and do not meet the code requirement.RESPONSE:Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/26/202201/26/2022: FOR HEARINGFIRE LANEThe private drive through the center of Tract
A is noted as Fire Lane on site plan but not dedicated EAE on Plat.RESPONSE:Department: Internal ServicesContact: Russell Hovland, 9704162341, rhovland@fcgov.comTopic: Building
Insp Plan ReviewComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/16/202201/16/2022: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are:2018 International
Building Code (IBC) with local amendments2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments2018
International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments2018 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments2018 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local
amendments2018 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of ColoradoCopies of current City of Fort
Collins code amendments can be found at fcgov.com/building.Important: Fort Collins will be adopting the new 2021 Building Codes in March 2022.Accessibility: State Law CRS 95 & ICC/ANSI
A117.12017.Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF.Frost Depth: 30 inches.Wind Loads: Risk Category II (most structures):· 140mph (Ultimate) exposure B or· Front Range
Gust Map published by The Structural Engineer's Association of Seismic Design: Category B.Climate Zone: Zone 5Energy Code: · Multifamily and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2018 IECC residential
chapter.· Commercial and Multifamily 4 stories and taller: 2018 IECC commercial chapter. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: · 10% of all parking spaces must be EV ready (conduit in place)· This building
is located within 250ft of a 4 lane road or 1000 ft of an active railway, must provide exterior composite sound transmission of 39 STC min.· R2 occupancies must provide 10ft setback
from property line and 20 feet between other buildings or provide fire rated walls and openings per chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC.· City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2018 IBC require
a full NFPA13 sprinkler system in multifamily units with an exception to allow NFPA 13R systems in buildings with no more than 6 dwelling units (or no more than 12 dwelling units where
the building is divided by a 2 hour fire barrier with no more than 6 dwelling units on each side).· Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of firesprinkler. All egress
windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24”.· Prescriptive energy compliance with increased insulation values is required for buildings using electric heat.· A City
licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new multifamily structure.Stock Plans:When residential buildings will be built at least three times with limited variations,
a stock plan design, or master plan can be submitted for a single review and then built multiple times with site specific permits. More information can be found in our Stock Plan Guide
at fcgov.com/building/resrequirements.php.Building Permit PreSubmittal Meeting: Please schedule a presubmittal meeting with Building Services for this project. PreSubmittal meetings
assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed above. The proposed
project should be in the early to middesign stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects should email rhovland@fcgov.com to schedule a presubmittal meeting.RESPONSE:
A pre-submittal meeting will be scheduled at the completion of the Design Development phase.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/16/202201/16/2022: A permit is required
for this project and construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are:2018 International Residential Code (IRC) with local amendments2018 International
Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of ColoradoCopies of current City of Fort Collins code amendments can
be found at fcgov.com/building.Important: Fort Collins will be adopting the new 2021 Building Codes in mid March of 2022.Please read the residential permit application submittal checklist
for complete requirements.Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF.Frost Depth: 30 inches.Wind Loads: Risk Category II (most structures):· 140mph (Ultimate) exposure B
or· Front Range Gust Map published by The Structural Engineer's Association of Seismic Design: Category B.Climate Zone: Zone 5Energy Code: 2018 IRC chapter 11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
· 5ft setback required from property line or provide fire rated walls & openings for nonfire sprinkled houses per chap 3 of the IRC. 3ft setback is required for fire sprinkled houses.·
Bedroom egress windows (emergency escape openings) required in all bedrooms.· Prescriptive energy compliance with increased insulation values is required for buildings using electric
heat.· A passing building air tightness (blower door) test is required for certificate of occupancy.RESPONSE: Comments Acknowledged.Department: Technical ServicesContact: Jeff County,
9702216588, jcounty@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: INFORMATION ONLY:Unless required during PDP, a complete review
of all plans will be done at FDP.Topic: PlatComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/25/202201/25/2022: FOR HEARING: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 9702216565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com