HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA - PDP210017 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
1
Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview
February 25, 2022
Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Ave.
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia, PDP210017, Round Number 2
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Fort Collins Nissan-Kia. If you have questions about any
comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your
Development Review Coordinator, Tenae Beane via phone at 970-224-6119 or via email
at tbeane@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Tenae Beane, 970-224-6119, tbeane@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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
2
been addressed, when applicable, avoiding responses like noted or
acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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 advanced notice as possible.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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 10th 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: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Development Review and Building Permit fees are proposed to change
January 1st, 2022. The fees are not finalized at this time, but your Development
Review Coordinator will keep you updated on the final amounts.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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.
3
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
LUC 2.211(D) Project Development Plan and Plat. Following the approval of a
project development plan and upon the expiration of any right of appeal, or upon
the final decision of the City Council following appeal, if applicable, the
applicant must submit a final plan for all or part of the project development plan
within three (3) years... If such approval is not timely obtained, the project
development plan (or any portion thereof which has not received final approval)
shall automatically lapse and become null and void.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: * FOR HEARING:
This proposed project is processing as a Type 2 Development Plan. The
decision maker for Type 2 is the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board. For the
hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 800 feet
(excluding public right-of-way and publicly owned open space). Staff would
need to be in agreement the project is ready for Hearing approximately 3-5
weeks prior to the hearing. I have attached the P&Z schedule, which has key
dates leading up to the hearing.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to
moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff would need to be in
agreement the project is ready for Hearing approximately 3-5 weeks prior to the
hearing.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/03/2021
11/03/2021: INFORMATION
The Addition of Permitted Use part of the project requires a second
neighborhood to be held after the first round of review. It might be beneficial to
schedule the neighborhood meeting after this next round of review.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Clark Mapes, 970-221-6225, cmapes@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/25/2022: MODIFICATION: A modification of a standard is needed for the
building placement with a drive between the building and the street - 3.5.3(C)(1)
in conjunction with the definition of 'Connecting walkway' in Article 5. This is a
slightly confusing standard in conjunction with the build-to-line standard below it
in the code. Give me a call on this if helpful - 970.221.6225.
Response: A Modification of Standard is provided.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/25/2022: APU AT HEARING: I have some thoughts about the APU request,
and expect to coordinate with you on the staff report in this regard.
Considerations may include the history and reason behind the MMN zoning,
and the APU criteria for this type of APU.
Response: Yes, we can provide more detail on the request.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
4
02/25/2022: LIGHTING: Specific lighting requirements, including parameters
and formatting of the lighting information, are found in Section 3.2.4. They
involve a total lumen budget and BUG ratings for the fixtures used. The full cutoff
and spillover information in the conceptual lighting plan are consistent with the
purposes of the lighting standards. (I don't see a lighting plan yet - right?)
Response: Lighting plans for both dealerships are provided.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: Q: what is the material in the Kia front vehicle display area?
Please add a label on the site plan if it's not already called out somewhere.
Response: The material is concrete and is now labeled.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: Q: Does the Kia site have a convenient trash enclosure?
Response: There is a large, shared trash enclosure that the owner’s prefer.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/25/2022
02/25/2022: SIGNS: I think it’s “cleaner” to have no signs shown on
development plans because then there’s no question about something being
approved or not. The other option is to put a note on the elevations saying
something like “signs are not reviewed or approved during development review;
requires separate sign permit”. As far as the red clip goes, the sign
measurement would be taken using that entire red face.
Response: All signage has been removed from the building elevations and a dashed line is added
indicating where the desired signage is to be located. We also included a note stating that Signage is to
be approved by separate Permit.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/25/2022
02/25/2022: TREE METRICS: I will work with you on a blanket 'alternative
compliance' request for any numerical tree standards, and a foundation planting
standard if needed to cover any questions about that.
Response: Let’s discuss. We think we are a lot closer on the full tree stocking requirements.
Comment Number: Comment Originated: 02/25/2022
02/25/2022: BUILDING MASSING VARIATION: Similar to 22 above, a minor
modification may be warranted to cover any questions about a standard limiting
horizontal building masses to a 3:1 width to height ratio. (3.5.3(D)).
Response: Understood, we are working with Clark on an “Alternate Compliance” design for this
modification.
Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
Carried forward on 2.25.2022: New parking for the school, SW of the Nissan sit
off of Venus: it looks like a walkway is needed along the s. edge of the parking
to get to the sidewalk on Venus.
UCDG Response: A sidewalk has been added.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: TRAIL OFF-SITE: Please continue to work with Parks Planning
regarding a potential connection to the nearby regional trail.
Response: We discussed the trail with Kyle from Parks and the feasibility of the trail is being evaluated by his staff.
5
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Dave Betley, 970-221-6573, dbetley@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
2/21/2022: For Hearing: The applicant will need to show the adjusted property
line of the vacated right of way for Crestridge Street reverting back to the
adjacent property owner. Since the plat effects this property owner and the land
will actually revert back to the adjacent property owner, then won't this property
owner need a signature block on the plat? Also, the plat is dedicating an
access easement of the property reverting back to the property owner. The
recipient and giver of the easement cannot be the same person. The owner will
not need a access dedicated to themselves. Is this access easement going to
be for emergency access. The line work on the plat shows the property reverting
back to Fort Collins Kia when the property will revert back to the owners of the
property for the Christian Academy. Is the property owner purchasing this
property? This is the way it is being presented and designed in the plans and
on the plat.
10/26/2021: For Approval: The applicant is looking to vacate the Crestridge
Street. coordination may have already been performed with the property owner
to the west? The owner at this time has access to College Avenue. Vacation
will transfer access to Venus Drive. Is the applicant agreeable to this
configuration? The site layout does not afford this parcel access from College.
This will have to be coordinated and a letter of intent gathered from the property
owner. The adjacent property owner would need to be involved in the vacation
process. The current vacation is shown as a Tract on the plat. Part of this
property will go back to the adjacent property owner. The plat should reflect the
correct property lines after the vacation.
UCDG Response: This has been resolved through further communication with Dave Betley.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
2/22/2022: For Hearing: There seems to be a problem with the scale on the
plat. The right of way shown on the plans cannot be verified because of this
issue. Staff has tried to verify the scale in both Bluebeam and Adobe. Neither
produced the scale that or measurement needed to verify the right of way. It
was requested in the previous round of comments that the right of way distance
at least from the centerline be included for verification. Unfortunately the plat will
need to go through another round of review to verify the right of way dedicated.
UCDG Response: The scale is shown correctly on the plat at 1”=40’. Added some more dimensions to
Venus Avenue for clarification. Coordinated this via email with Dave Betley.
10/26/2021: For Approval: The applicant will need to dedicate the additional
right of way for College Avenue. The right of way is based on the half street
cross section. The right of way dedication would be half of the 144' as 72'. The
right of way for College Avenue appears to be adequate. Can the applicant
please provide a couple of half street measurements from the Centerline to
verify that no right of way needs to be dedicated.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
2/22/2022: For Final: The applicants cross section appears to be in alignment
with the South College Corridor Plan. The plan calls for an eight foot sidewalk
6
with bike lanes included on College Avenue. This configuration will need
approval from CDOT also as they maintain the highway and the submittal will
need an access control plan.
10/26/2021: For Approval: It appears that the project has actually placed the
sidewalk in the ultimate location for the College Avenue Improvements. Can the
applicant please discuss the design. Is the sidewalk placement in the actual
location of the ultimate College Avenue Cross Section and develop a cross
section showing the location of the right of way based on the half street cross
section. Profiles for College avenue will need to be submitted with the plan set.
Please include discussion and design of the Parkway.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Approval: The soils report does not show any groundwater
within the portion of the roadway. It appears that now boring were taken along
Venus Avenue. If any groundwater is encountered during construction the soils
report will have to be updated to include an underdrain.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Approval: The plans do not call out the handicapped ramps or
the grades required at the top and the bottom of the ramps. Can you please call
out the handicapped ramps on the plans and show the truncated domes where
required. This will need to be completed for FDP.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/28/2021
10/28/2021: For Approval: Please provide spot elevations for the cross pans
and the handicapped ramps.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Approval: Please callout the radii for the curb return on the
driveways and at the intersection of Venus Street and College Avenue.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Information: The dimensions of the island for the right in right
out will need to be included in the final FDP plans.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 11/03/2021
11/03/2021: For Information: There will need to be further discussion on the
improvement that are available for TCEF reimbursement. This will require
further investigation from the City's review.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: For Hearing: The applicant is dedicating a fifteen foot utility
easement over the North Louden Ditch Easement. The applicant will need to
provide a letter of intent from the N. Louden Ditch Company to be sure that they
are agreeable to this issue.
UCDG Response: The Loudon Ditch has been shifted to the west avoiding the 15-foot utility easement.
An Agreement to Negotiate provided and signed by the ditch company has been submitted.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Approval: There is six foot valley pan on Venus Drive. On the
aerial photos this pan has quite a skew to it that shows a different alignment
then what is on the plans. Is this pan being reconstructed? It appears on the
plans that the pan is existing.
UCDG Response: The pan is planned to be reconstructed to provide it perpendicular to traffic and slightly
adjust the location of the drainage collection on the west side of the roadway.
7
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Approval: The site calls out a light for the intersection of
Venus Drive and College Avenue. Reimbursement for signal Design is
contingent on a Collector classification on the connecting street. When will the
applicant complete the design for this signal and when does it need to be
constructed. The applicant will need to supply signal design plans and the
construction schedule will need to be completed for the Development
Agreement.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Approval: The facility for the North Louden Ditch will need to
be shown on the final plans and how this facility will impact utilities in the area.
Will set backs between dry and wet utilities be met in the design?
UCDG Response: The Loudon Ditch has been shifted to the west avoiding the 15-foot utility easement.
Additional design (plan and profiles) will be provided with final plans.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Hearing: There Tract on the northwest corner of Venus and
College is called out as Tract E on the plat and Tract D on the Utility plans.
Please correct to the proper reference so the utility and plat match.
UCDG Response: The plat has been updated.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Information: The cross section used for College Avenue does
coordinate with what is approved through the South College Corridor Plan. The
plan recommends an eight foot detached multiuse path with bicycle lanes in
College Drive.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Information: The applicant has opted to address the design
comments during the Final Development Plan Review. A more detailed
technical review will be required at this time. It is advised that these comments
be addressed earlier. Design changes to the technical plans can impact the
site plan and at times can cause changes to the approved entitlements.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: For Hearing: The applicant supplied a document to the storm
water group that titled the roadway easement as Temporary. The plat clearly
calls out the easement by separate document as just a slope easement. Can
the applicant elaborate on this discrepancy please.
UCDG Response: The slope easement was labeled as temporary on the stormwater exhibit to indicate to
the property owner that it could be vacated with the development of the property. When we dedicate those
easements, we will label them as slope easements. On the plat, we have added a note for the slope
easements that says “The slope easement next to Venus Avenue is for the temporary construction and
support of Venus Avenue. The easement can be vacated in the future when the adjacent property to the
north is developed or a new plan is in place for the support of Venus Avenue.” We’re happy to revise this
language as necessary with the final plat if necessary and we’ll work on securing the easements from the
adjacent property owner after the PDP Hearing.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 02/23/2022
02/23/2022: For Information: The site has a lot of different easements
8
intertwined in the site. It would be very beneficial to compile a list of easements
that need to be recorded by separate document and the recordation timing to
reference as we move forward to FDP review.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Spencer Smith, 970-221-6820, smsmith@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/25/2022: FOR HEARING
I still think that more information on the Venus/College intersection as a
stop-controlled intersection could be helpful to the City. If we will have to make
the determination of whether to signalize it now, with just one warrant being met,
it may be good to have the details of how the intersection would
operate/function without the signal in place.
Delich Response: Additional information added to the TIS.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
Please provide a clear recommendation on the installation of a traffic signal at
Venus/College. It appears that you've analyzed the site with a signal in place at
that location, but the written report and findings/recommendations don't state
that you are recommending a signal in that location. Was the intersection
analyzed without a signal? I'm curious how the intersection would operate
without the signal in place. We also will need to have confirmation that CDOT is
in approval of the signal being shifted from the prior planned location at
Crestridge to the newly proposed Venus intersection.
Delich Response: Additional information added to the TIS.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/23/2022: INFORMATION ONLY
Because Venus is local roadway, the Venus/College intersection is not eligible
for TCEF reimbursement.
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
Please note that full design of College Ave., including the proposed traffic
signal, signing and striping, etc. will be the responsibility of the developer and
subject to review and approval by CDOT. The traffic signal is not eligible for
City funding and will be the full responsibility of the development.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
The commercial local street section has bike buffer between the bike lane and
travel lanes, rather than the bike lane and parking. Although the City is allowing
the previous ROW width associated with the Commercial Local street section,
we want the roadway to meet the current section standards as closely as
possible. We will want the bike lane buffer to be shown to the current standard
for this project.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: INFORMATION ONLY
As discussed previously, if the applicant team can have some possible options
to offer up if the P&Z commission questions this, it would be helpful.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
Dealership traffic traveling through the neighborhood to the south has been a
9
concern for the residents. Anything that can be implemented operationally (such
as a policy of test drives not using Venus at all, south of existing Crestridge) by
the dealerships to help alleviate this would be important. Perhaps some sort of
traffic calming where Venus transitions from the neighborhood to the
commercial area could be helpful too. I would anticipate that this topic will come
up at the P&Z hearing.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/23/2022
02/23/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN
The City would like to see turn lanes into the site from Venus Drive. The final
design plans will need to look at where on-street parking will need to be
restricted and show the appropriate signing/striping.
Department: Erosion Control
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-222-1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/17/2022
02/17/2022: FOR FINAL:
The previously provided comments can be addressed at Final. No additional
comments for the PDP level submittal.
10/26/2021: 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 an 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)
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)
Please submit an Erosion Control Report to meet City Criteria. (FCDCM Ch 2
Section 6.1.4)
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: FOR FINAL:
Please see/address redlined civil plans for additional comments.
Department: Floodplain
Contact: Claudia Quezada, (970)416-2494, cquezada@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Development review checklists and permit application forms for floodplain
requirements can be obtained at
10
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-document
s. Please utilize checklist (see redlines) when preparing plans for resubmittal.
May not need this if we aren’t doing any work in the floodplain.
UCDG Response: The project limits, specifically the Lang Gulch outfall, have been modified where
floodplains are no longer being impacted.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/25/2022: FOR HEARING: There are concerns with the location of the Pond
A1 Outfall; ideally, the outfall should not be in the meander. Please provide a
stability study for work in the erosion buffer. The stability study should look into
construction methodology, access, maintenance, etc. Please meet with
floodplain staff to discuss stability study before submitting for PDP round 3.
Not doing work in Erosion Buffer, but we are sending water towards it. Need to determine what would be
required to do this.
11/02/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:
Please be advised that a stability study may be required for work within the
erosion buffer.
Detention ponds or water quality ponds are not allowed. Placement of fill in an
erosion buffer zone is prohibited. Temporary or permanent storage of materials
is not allowed. Please see Section 10-202 of City Municipal Code for additional
erosion buffer considerations.
UCDG Response: The Lang Gulch outfall has been modified where neither the floodplain nor erosion
buffer will be impacted. Per the meeting with City staff on 4/7/22, the stability of the bank may be provided
during final.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR FINAL: See redlines. Floodplain linework needs to be
updated due to the Fossil Creek LOMR. City Staff to provide updated linework.
11/02/2021: Please see redlines for clarification and minor comments to address.
UCDG Response: The floodplain linework has been revised.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 02/25/2022
02/22/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Approval of an erosion buffer waiver is required prior to FPD approval. Please
review Sections 10-201 to 10-203 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. Then
complete the Erosion Buffer Waiver form and supply documentation on
methods to minimize disturbance within the Buffer.
The form is available on this webpage:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents
Waiver form, Section B, Section of Code being requested – Should have the
very specific item listed e.g. 10-202(2) f, h
UCDG Response: The Lang Gulch outfall has been modified where neither the floodplain nor erosion
buffer will be impacted. Per the meeting with City staff on 4/7/22, the erosion buffer waiver no longer
applies.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 02/25/2022
02/25/2022: FOR FINAL:
A Floodplain Use permit with a No-Rise Certification (pre and post
construction) is required for work in the floodplain/floodway. There may be a
need for hydraulic modeling depending on the extents of the work in the
floodway. Survey of the disturbance area could be an option as well.
11
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING – NOT ADDRESSED:
The detention ponds are not releasing at the master plan flow rate of 0.2
cfs/acres. The drainage report discussed a variance to this criterion, however
this will not be accepted.
The detention calcs will need to be updated and the ponds resized before the
next submittal. I know we discussed this after PDP1, but the proposed release
rates in the drainage report are not meeting City Stormwater standards. We do
allow for “area swapping” for detention, however this will require extra area
(equal to the free release impervious area) added to the detention calculations
for pond A1 in exchange for free releasing subbasins C1 and C2. Please see
redlines for more information and then lets discuss any questions you have.
**This needs to be addressed before the next PDP submittal. Please send me
updated detention calculations and drainage plan before submitting the next
PDP review.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Please review and revise the detention pond release rates and pond sizing.
The detention release rates must meet the master plan specified 0.2 cfs/ac
requirement. Offsite stormwater flows and area should not be included in this
calculation. Basically, offsite flows are routed “over the top” of the pond, instead
of “through the pond.” Any free releases of onsite flows (from impervious areas)
need to be subtracted from the release rate.
UCDG Response: The release rates from the pond and area swapping have been revised per discussions
and meetings. The revised calculations were provided on 4/1/22 and included in the revised drainage
report.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING – UPDATED:
The isolation chamber (underground filtration) approach that was sent over as
Alternative 6 seems like a viable option. Please see redlines for our comments.
Please note that this will be a permanent water quality facility and will be
privately maintained by the development owner.
**Please send me an updated Utility Plan sheet for this option before submitting
for the next round of review.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
The Venus Ave detention and water quality/ LID need to be accounted for with
this design. Specifically:
a. Basin C1 (North ½ of Venus Ave) – The Northern Property is responsible for
detention and WQ/ LID for C1 when that site develops. However, a temporary
detention and standard water quality pond need to be provided now to detain
and treat runoff from the current improvements. (This would be a private owned
pond.)
b. Basin C2 (South ½ of Venus Ave) - This development is responsible for
detention and WQ/LID for C2. Basin C2 should count towards the overall
impervious area in the required LID calculations. If you want to use the northern
12
property for stormwater treatment from basin C2, an agreement with that
property owner would be necessary to shift this burden onto their property.
c. Please do not use snouts in these inlets.
d. During the interim time, the City would want the current development (Fort
Collins Nissan Kia) to perform the maintenance for this pond.
UCDG Response: The redlines have been addressed and the revised Utility Plan was provided on 4/1/22
and included in the revised plan set.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING – UPDATED:
Thank you for your responses to these items and the updates to the plans
(consider items a-f addressed). There are a few more items that need more
detail before Hearing:
g. Please add more detail to the ‘limits of disturbance’ for construction,
particularly: access road to outlet, bore pit locations.
h. Please discuss with your contractor or construction consultant how the
boring will be performed – specifically which direction the storm pipe be bored
from.
i. Please show on the plans the ‘worst case scenario’ for scour protection
between the outlet and the low-flow channel.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
The feasibility and constructability of the Lang Gulch Outfall needs to be
investigated and demonstrated for Hearing. Specifically:
a. Will the outfall pipe be able to be constructed considering the bedrock in the
area? Provide a description of how this outfall will be constructed.
b. The stability of channel and erosiveness of the outlet will need to be
considered.
c. Provide a profile drawing showing bedrock (if possible) and sewer
crossings. See redlines for more information
d. For final design, outlet scour protection will need to be designed.
e. Other departments requirements will also need to be met, such as floodplain
(no rise), erosion buffer (stream stability), wetlands, and environmental.
f. More detail on the plans will need to be provided at the outlet area.
UCDG Response: The Lang Gulch outfall has been modified where construction is no longer necessary at
the bottom of Lang Gulch. Per the meeting with City staff on 4/7/22, a letter detailing out the stability of
Lang Gulch may be provided during final.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING:
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Provide documentation that detention ponds can provide 2-feet minimum
separation from groundwater. For Final Approval – this documentation needs
to be provided for groundwater levels during the high grounds water months
(July – September).
UCDG Response: A supplemental geotechnical report with locations of piezometers placed onsite to
document groundwater has been submitted. Additional readings will be provided during final, but initial
groundwater levels are approximately 4’ below proposed Pond A1.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING:
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
The realignment and undergrounding of the North Louden Ditch will require the
13
ditch company to sign the plans. A Letter of Intent is required before Hearing.
For final approval – the agreement with North Louden Ditch Company will need
to document Ownership and Maintenance responsibilities for relocated ditch section.
UCDG Response: An “Agreement to Negotiate” provided by the Ditch Company has been submitted.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING – UPDATED:
Thank you for the Landscape Plan adjustments. I am currently seeing several
trees in the parking lot island above the underground stormtech facility (NE
corner of site). There should be no trees or shrubs above the stormtech.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
On the Landscape Plan, check that trees provide 10-ft (min) separation from all
stormwater pipes and inlets. See redlines.
UCDG Response: The underground detention area has been revised.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Provide documentation that the detention ponds meet the State drain time
criteria.
UCDG Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Detention Ponds A1 and B1 are in series – ponds in series configuration will
require an EPA SWMM analysis for final design.
UCDG Response: The ponds have been revised and are no longer in series but hydraulically connected.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING:
Follow up on comment 13 – a drainage easement will be needed through the
Natural Areas property for formalization of this drainage flow path. A ‘letter of
intent’ for this will be required before Hearing. The Natural Areas staff has
indicated that a recommendation from the Natural Areas Board will be needed
before this LOI can be written. The final easement approval is through City
Council however.
UCDG Response: It is understood that a drainage easement will be needed from Natural Areas. We
have been working towards this easement agreement and the requirements for replacing or adding another
pipe to convey the 10-year storm event. Our current design reduces the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year
storm events to this existing drainage location. We understand that it is Natural Areas policy to not provide
a letter of intent until they have approval from the Natural Areas Board. If this letter is the only thing
holding up our ability to go to a PDP Hearing, the developer would like to discuss the possibility of going to
the PDP Hearing at risk without the letter of intent. It is understood that Natural Areas Board approval and
City Council approval would be a condition of final approval.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING:
A sediment forebay will be needed on the stormwater pipe outlet from Venus
Ave to Pond A1. For Final Design - this forebay should be sized based on the
contributing area and should be easy to maintain. Please contact me with any questions.
UCDG Response: A forebay is now shown on the PDP plans and sizing will be provided during final.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN:
14
Please show topographic contours to the extent of subbasin OS1 and also at
least 50-feet beyond the southern edge of the site. This needs to be far enough
to clearly show the existing drainage patterns south of the site.
UCDG Response: Contours have been added.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING:
At the north end of Venus Ave the storm pipe that outlets Stormtech Pond C1
would be a private storm pipe until the manhole that connects to the Venus Ave
inlets. The City does not want private storm pipes running parallel inside of the
ROW. You will need to look into another option for connecting this outlet that
does not require running parallel in the City ROW. Please see redlines for more
information. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
UCDG Response: The pipe location has been revised.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING:
Let’s discuss the needed width of the drainage easement on the Silverthorne
property. Twenty feet is the minimum, however the depth of pipe and need for
maintenance access to the swale may require a wider drainage easement.
UCDG Response: Per meeting with the Stormwater department on 3/2/22, the 20’ easement is sufficient
for this temporary condition.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Light and Power has existing electric facilities along the College Ave frontage of
the property that will need to be extended north to feed the site. Light and Power
also has electric facilities along the east side of existing Venus Ave that will
need to extend down the parkway of realigned Venus.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Streetlights will be placed along public streets. 40ft of separation on both sides
of the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. 15ft separation on
both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and streetlights.
A link to the City of Fort Collins street lighting requirements can be found at:
http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/Ch15_04_01_2007.pdf
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
During utility infrastructure design, please provide adequate space along the
public roads and private drives to ensure proper utility installation and to meet
minimum utility spacing requirements. 10ft minimum separation is needed
between all water, sewer, storm water, and irrigation main lines. Light and
Power has a 3ft minimum separation requirement from all utility lines/infrastructure.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
15
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Any existing electric infrastructure that needs to be relocated as part of this
project will be at the expense of the developer. Please coordinate relocations
with Light and Power Engineering.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Any existing and/or proposed Light and Power electric facilities that are within
the limits of the project must be located within a utility easement.
All utility easements and required permits (crossing agreements, flood plain,
etc.) needed for the development will need to be obtained and paid for by the
developer.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
A commercial service information form (C-1 form) and a one line diagram for all
commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power
Engineering for review. A link to the C-1 form is below:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-
forms-guidelines-regulations
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: 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
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/15/2022
02/15/2022: INFORMATION:
Due to the College Ave road widening, it appears that our existing primary vault
will need to be relocated to the parkway. Please show this on the utility plans. All
electric system relocations/modifications will be at the expense of the
developer.
UCDG Response: The relocated vault is noted on sheets C1.02 and C3.02.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/15/2022
02/15/2022: FOR FINAL:
16
See redlines LP. Please show the electric routing on the plan set for the next
round of review.
UCDG Response: The electric routing has been included in the plans.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416-4290, sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: (REPEAT) FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Additional language will be
required in the even that ‘unusual’ fossils are unearthed during the construction
process. This is a rarity for the City so there will likely be some iteration as to
the specific language, location (a plan vs the development agreement), etc.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: (REPEAT) FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND DEVELOPMENT
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ISSUANCE: Language regarding the protection and
enhancement of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone will be included in the
Development Agreement for this project. A security will need to be provided
prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit that accounts for
the installation and establishment of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone. Prior to the
FDP approval please provide an estimate of the landscaping costs for the
Natural Habitat Buffer Zone, including materials, labor, monitoring for a
minimum of three years, weed mitigation and irrigation. We will then use the
approved estimate to collect a security (bond or escrow) at 125% of the total
amount prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: INFORMATION ONLY: No FACWet analysis is required for this project.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR HEARING: Coordination with the Natural Areas Department
is still needed regarding an easement for the Fossil Creek outfall, trail
discussions, and potential land swap.
UCDG Response: Coordination for the easement is in the works with Natural Areas.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR HEARING: Some coordination with Stormwater related to the
Lang Gulch outfall is needed.
-Civil plans indicate a 3-ft drop from the outfall to the bottom of Lang Gulch. I’m
curious why the outfall is not at the very bottom of Lang Gulch? Given the grade
of the bored pipe, the potential force seems substantial;
-Please provide a sediment forebay prior to stormwater entering Pond A1;
-Please provide the applications and supporting materials provided to the
Corps of Engineers (JD/PCN/Nationwide permit application, etc.). COE
response will be needed prior to Final Approval.
UCDG Response: The Lang Gulch outfall has been modified where construction is no longer necessary at
the bottom of Lang Gulch. Per the meeting with City staff on 4/7/22, a letter detailing out the stability of
Lang Gulch may be provided during final.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code,
17
Section 3.2.4(C)(3), requires projects to "demonstrate no light trespass onto
Natural Areas, Natural Habitat Buffer Zones or River Landscape Buffers as
defined in Section 4.16(E)(5)(b)(1)(a)." Please include all necessary
information, including photometric plans, B-U-G ratings, etc. to demonstrate
compliance.
Response: Understood, we have submitted an “Equal or Better Modification Request” to the City in a
previous work session. In this work session, we agreed with staff on a solution for the Land Use Code
requirements
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide a thorough depiction of
the temporary impacts related to construction of the Lang Gulch outfall: how
heavy equipment and concrete will access the outfall on Lang Gulch, temporary
construction area of the Lang Gulch outfall, and bore launch pits above Lang
Gulch.
UCDG Response: The Lang Gulch outfall has been modified where construction is no longer necessary at
the bottom of Lang Gulch.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Restoration Plan – the restoration plans
were greatly improved this round. A handful of comments:
-In an effort to increase the visibility of the restoration and weed management
plans on projects with NHBZs, an abbreviated version of the restoration and
weed management plans will be needed on the Landscape Plan. The
abbreviated versions are site-specific just like the full versions, but I can provide
an example.
-The last needed improvements relate to the firming up the monitoring
requirements and the subsequent reporting and communication of monitoring
results.
-Please provide a map in the full version of the restoration plan indicating what
restoration method is applied where.
-To clarify, restoration efforts will almost certainly extend beyond the typical
3-year timeframe.
Response: Abbreviated plans for upland and wetland restoration as well as weed management have been
provided. Restoration efforts are outlined through year 6.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please replace the non-native Texas
red oak (Quercus texana) located within the NHBZ with a native tree species,
maybe hackberry or bur oak?
Response: The species have been changed to Hackberrys.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Let’s have a discussion on some of the
seed mixes. For instance, Thermopsis rhomibifolia is more common in the
foothills/plains are instead of mountain goldenbanner, let’s make sure that there
is sufficient diversity and quantity of salt-tolerant species in the Pond A1 that
receives Venus Ave runoff, etc.
Response: Species lists were updated.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
18
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The last known nesting activity in Redtail
Grove NA was 3/2019. Therefore, please include a note on the appropriate plan
(Landscape and/or grading) that an additional raptor survey will be conducted
prior to construction initiation if withing the nesting season (Feb 1 – July 31).
Response: Raptor surveys are currently being conducted every two weeks. A note has been added on
Sheet LS00 that an additional raptor survey will be conducted if construction begins after February 15,
2023. The 2022 nesting season will be covered by current efforts.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
02/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The City’s standard Native Seed Mix
notes have evolved. Please replace all but the last, site-specific note with the
following:
NATIVE SEED MIX NOTES
1. THE TIME OF YEAR SEEDING IS TO OCCUR SHOULD BE OCTOBER
THROUGH EARLY MAY.
2. PREPARE SOIL AS NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE FOR NATIVE
SEED MIX SPECIES THROUGH LOOSENING AND ADDITION OF
AMENDMENTS THAT PROMOTE WATER ABSORPTION AND RELEASE,
THEN SEED IN TWO DIRECTIONS TO DISTRIBUTE SEED EVENLY OVER
ENTIRE AREA. DRILL SEED ALL INDICATED AREAS AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE AFTER COMPLETION OF GRADING OPERATIONS.
3. IF CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE TO SEED MIX BASED ON SITE
CONDITIONS THEN APPROVAL MUST BE PROVIDED BY CITY
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER.
4. APPROPRIATE NATIVE SEEDING EQUIPMENT WILL BE USED
(STANDARD TURF SEEDING EQUIPMENT OR AGRICULTURE EQUIPMENT
SHALL NOT BE USED).
5. DRILL SEED APPLICATION RECOMMENDED PER SPECIFIED
APPLICATION RATE TO NO MORE THAN ½ INCH DEPTH. FOR
BROADCAST SEEDING INSTEAD OF DRILL SEEDING METHOD DOUBLE
SPECIFIED APPLICATION RATE. REFER TO NATIVE SEED MIX TABLE
FOR SPECIES, PERCENTAGES AND APPLICATION RATES.
6. PREPARE A WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ENSURE THAT WEEDS
ARE PROPERLY MANAGED BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER SEEDING
ACTIVITIES.
7. AFTER SEEDING THE AREA SHALL BE COVERED WITH CRIMPED
STRAW, JUTE MESH, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE METHODS.
PLASTIC-BASED EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS (I.E.,
PLASTIC-WELDED BLANKETS) SHALL NOT BE USED WITHOUT
EXPRESS PERMISSION FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER AS
THESE MATERIALS HAVE PROVEN TO CAUSE WILDLIFE ENTRAPMENT
ISSUES.
8. WHERE NEEDED, TEMPORARY IRRIGATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED
UNTIL SEED IS GERMINATED THEN WEEN THE SEED FROM IRRIGATION.
IF IRRIGATION IS USED, THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM FOR SEEDED AREAS
SHALL BE FULLY OPERATIONAL AT THE TIME OF SEEDING AND SHALL
ENSURE 100% HEAD-TO-HEAD COVERAGE OVER ALL SEEDED AREAS.
ALL METHODS AND REQUIREMENTS IN THE APPROVED IRRIGATION
PLAN SHALL BE FOLLOWED.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR SEEDED AREA FOR PROPER
19
IRRIGATION, EROSION CONTROL, GERMINATION AND RESEEDING AS
NEEDED TO ESTABLISH COVER.
10. THE APPROVED NATIVE SEED MIX AREA IS INTENDED TO BE
MAINTAINED IN A NATURAL LIKE LANDSCAPE AESTHETIC. DO NOT
MOW DURING HOT, DRY PERIODS. DO NOT MOW LOWER THAN 6 TO 8
INCHES IN HEIGHT TO AVOID INHIBITING NATIVE PLANT GROWTH.
11. NATIVE SEED AREA WILL BE CONSIDERED ESTABLISHED WHEN
SEVENTY PERCENT VEGETATIVE COVER IS REACHED WITH LESS
THAN TEN PERCENT OF COVER CONSISTING OF NOXIOUS WEEDS, NO
BARE SPOTS LARGER THAN ONE FOOT SQUARE, AND/OR UNTIL
DEEMED ESTABLISHED BY CITY PLANNING SERVICES AND EROSION
CONTROL.
12. THE DEVELOPER AND/OR LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ADEQUATE SEEDLING COVERAGE AND GROWTH
AT THE TIME OF FINAL STABILIZATION, AS DEFINED BY STATE AND
LOCAL AGENCIES. IF FINAL STABILIZATION IS NOT ACHIEVED TO THE
SATISFACTION OF THE AGENCY, THE DEVELOPER AND/OR
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDITIONAL
CORRECTIVE MEASURES TO SATISFY FINAL VEGETATIVE
REQUIREMENTS FOR CLOSEOUT.
Response: Notes added.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, 224-616-1992, mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
2/22/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Final review of species counts and labeling will be reviewed at final. Thank you!
Response: Thank you.
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
In addition to unique symbols for each species, please directly label species
with their associated abbreviation. If space allows, please include a condensed
version of the plant list on each sheet.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
2/22/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Forestry will review final tree-utility conflicts during final plan review.
Response: Thank you.
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please review Forestry redlines – several tree-utility conflicts are highlighted.
Adjust trees and/or utilities as needed to meet separation requirements.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
2/22/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Forestry will review final tree-street light and tree-stop sign separations during
final plan review. Please provide their locations with clear symbols on the plans
and in a legend.
Response: Thank you.
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please include street light and stop light locations on the site/landscape plan.
20
Street trees shall be placed 50-ft from stop signs. Canopy shade trees shall be
40-ft from street lights and ornamental trees shall be 15-ft from street lights.
Provide unique symbols for stop signs and street lights and include in a legend.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Please propose canopy shade trees in parking lot islands. While fastigiate
trees are great for small spaces, they do not provide as much canopy cover
which is so need in parking lots to decrease the heat island effect. Thank you!
Response: Acknowledged. Thank you.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Please center trees in the ROW lawn.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Coralburst Crabapple does not thrive long term in Fort Collins. Please propose
another ornamental species in their place.
Response: Trees replaced with other species.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Please review Forestry redlines and adjust trees/utilities as needed.
Response: Acknowledged for Final.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
On the existing tree inventory/tree removal sheet, please darken the X over
trees to be removed. Unless you zoom way in, it is difficult to tell what trees are
to be removed vs preserved.
Response: X’s have been darkened.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Please label mitigation trees in the plant list.
Response: We have added the mitigation trees in a separate list.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/24/2022
2/24/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Sheets C1.01 and C1.02 shows incorrect tree preservation and removal
information. Please reference sheet LS08 on the landscape plan for correct
locations of tree removal. On these sheets in the utility set, please include the
City of Fort Collins Tree Protection Notes and the tree mitigation table provided
on LS08. Thank you!
Response: We will discuss at Final.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Kyle Lambrecht, 970-221-6566, klambrecht@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The Park Planning & Development Department is
available to discuss these comments in more detail. Please contact Kyle
Lambrecht, PE at 970 416 4340, klambrecht@fcgov.com.
21
Response: We discussed the feasibility of the trail and easement and are awaiting further discussion.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code Section
3.4.8 “Parks and Trails” addresses compliance with the 2021 Parks and
Recreation Master Plan (“Master Plan”). The Master Plan indicates the general
location of all parks and regional recreational trails. Parcels adjacent to or
including facilities indicated in the Master Plan may be required to provide area
for development of these facilities.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The 2013 Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan
(“Trail Master Plan”) was adopted by City Council and provides conceptual
locations and general trail design guidelines for future regional recreational
trails. The Trail Master Plan is available at
https://www.fcgov.com/parkplanning/plans and policies.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards
(“LCUASS”), Chapter 16 Pedestrian Facilities and Chapter 17 Bicycle
Facilities provide additional design guidelines for multi use regional
recreational trails.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Grade separated crossings of arterial roadways
and major collectors are required (LUCASS Chapter 17.3) and provide safe
trail connectivity. Additional easement area for underpass/overpass
approaches may be required in locations of potential grade separated
crossings for the trail.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Local street at grade intersections with a
recreational trail are to be avoided. When necessary, the location of a future
recreational trail at grade crossing must be coordinated with Traffic Operations.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
2/22/2022: FOR HEARING: Please plan to include a preliminary level design
for the section of the Skyridge Trail as identified in the South College Corridor
Plan (SCCP) adopted March 3, 2009 by the City of Fort Collins. This trail is
located on the western portion of the property, extending from the north to south
boundary of the parcel. This trail will ultimately connect to the north to the Fossil
Creek Trail in the Redtail Grove Natural Area and provide connectivity for
southwest Fort Collins to the City’s existing trail system.
UCDG Response: Per meeting with Kyle Lambrecht on 3/14/2022 it was understood that a trail in this area
is not feasible with the floodway, erosion buffer, and grading issues. It was understood that the City would
look at other options for a trail connection and this comment would be removed.
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The South College Corridor Plan (SCCP)
adopted March 3, 2009 by the City of Fort Collins indicates the conceptual
location of the Skyridge Trail on the western portion of the property, extending
from the north to south boundary of the parcel. This trail will ultimately connect to
the north to the Fossil Creek Trail in the Redtail Grove Natural Area and provide
connectivity for southwest Fort Collins to the City’s existing trail system.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
22
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The City encourages the developer to explore a
trail spur along Venus Avenue, along with coordinating with your neighbor to the
north to potentially provide a connection to the Fossil Creek Trail.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
2/22/2022: FOR HEARING: Park Planning and Development must approve the
trail alignment and design. The developer will be required to develop a
preliminary layout for hearing. A centerline profile and cross-sections for the
trail will be required as part of final design.
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Park Planning and Development must approve
the trail alignment and design. The developer will be required to develop a
centerline profile and cross-sections for the trail as part of the site design.
UCDG Response: Per meeting with Kyle Lambrecht on 3/14/2022 it was understood that a trail in this area
is not feasible with the floodway, erosion buffer, and grading issues. It was understood that the City would
look at other options for a trail connection and this comment would be removed.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The future trail alignment cannot be used to
provide internal pedestrian circulation and cannot provide direct access to
buildings. Internal access to the recreational trail from the internal
bike/pedestrian system should be provided at limited and defined access
points.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Recreational trails do not function as widened
sidewalks adjacent or within street rights of way.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The typical paved recreational regional trail cross
section is constructed as a 10’ wide concrete trail, widened to 12’ in areas of
high traffic area or other areas of potential user conflicts. A 4 6’ wide soft
(gravel) path is located parallel to the paved surface, separated by 3 5’ of
vegetated area; there shall be 3’ wide level shoulders on both sides of the trail,
providing 3’ of horizontal clearance from vertical obstructions such as trees,
transformers, fences and/or walls. Modifications of the typical cross section
must be approved by Park Planning & Development.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The Public Access and Trail easement width is
50’. The location of the easement must be approved by Park Planning & Development.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The trail easement may co exist within a Natural
Habitat Buffer Zone if approval is obtained from Environmental Planning. The
easement shall be identified on the plat, utility, and site plans as a “Public
Access and Trail Easement”. The easement cannot encroach on the railroad right-of-way.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: A trail easement may not be located within a ditch
easement unless the applicant provides written approval for the trail easement
within the ditch easement from the ditch company. The paved trail surface
cannot function as a ditch access road if heavy equipment will use or cross the
trail to maintain the ditch.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
23
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Grading within the designated recreational trail
easement is required to occur during overall site grading. Plans must indicate
that the final grade within the easement can provide a trail alignment that meets
the American Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for cross slopes between 1 and
2% and a maximum centerline profile grade of 5%. Construction documents
should include trail profiles and cross sections to demonstrate the ability to
meet ADA standards.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The SCCP calls for this segment of the Skyridge
Trail to be City constructed and maintained. There is no current schedule for
City construction of this portion of the trail. Construction is scheduled as funds
become available. Partnerships for cost-sharing between the site developer
and the City for trail construction along with site improvements may allow
construction to occur in a timely and cost-effective manner. Park Planning &
Development would be interested in developing such a partnership.
Construction responsibilities for other trail segments will need to be determined.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The SCCP call for the City to maintain this
segment of the Skyridge Trail. Other sections of trail internal to the site will
need to be determined. If these are publicly owned, the Parks Department will
maintain. If these are private, the developer will maintain. Maintenance consists
of snowplowing of the paved surface, occasional seasonal mowing 2 3’
adjacent to the trail surface and repairing/replacing surface damage of the trail.
The underlying property owner shall be responsible for all other landscaping,
irrigation, and maintenance within the easement.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Landscaping within the recreational trail
easement shall be provided in accordance with all applicable City codes and
will remain the responsibility of the underlying landowner. Landscaping must
provide acceptable clearances from the trail surfaces as specified in the Trail
Master Plan. Spray irrigation, if required, shall be designed and maintained to
avoid spray on the trail.
Department: PFA
Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/18/2022
02/18/2022: FOR HEARING
TURNING RADII
The Northwest and Southwest corner of the Kia Building are on the edge of the
EAE. The provided turning radius body overhang is touching the edge of the
building on the Northwest corner and in the landscape areas on the Southwest
corner. These areas will not provide enough access for the apparatus. Please
revise plan.
UCDG Response: The site plan and turning exhibits have been revised and resubmitted.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/18/2022
02/18/2022: FOR FINAL
24
WATER SUPPLY
They hydrant located on the North of the side will need to be moved to the
intersection at College Ave to accommodate infill.
Department: Building Services
Contact: Katy Hand, khand@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR BUILDING PERMIT:
Please visit our website for current adopted codes, local amendments and
submittal requirements.
https://www.fcgov.com/building/application.php
https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes.php
https://www.fcgov.com/building/energycode
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR BUILDING PERMIT:
Each structure requires a separate building permit.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/28/2021
02/22/2022: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.
10/28/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/28/2021
02/22/2022: FOR HEARING-UPDATED:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John
Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com
UCDG Response: Revised plans as requested.
10/28/2021: 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 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com.
UCDG Response: Revised plans as requested.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Don Kapperman, Comcast, don_kapperman@comcast.com,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/17/2022
25
02/17/2022: Comcast has no issues at this time.
Contact: Sam Lowe, FCLWD, 970-226-3104, slowe@fclwd.com,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
02/17/2022: See attached for updated comments from FCLWD.
11/02/2021: Attached are the Districts’ comments for the Nissan-Kia proposal.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: 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