HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUN COMMUNITIES - THE FOOTHILLS - FDP220005 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
June 22, 2022
Ms. Brandy Bethurem Harras
Development Review Coordinator
City of Fort Collins Planning & Development Services
281 N. College Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: Sun Communities ‑ The Foothills, FDP220005, Round Number 1
Brandy,
Thank you for your review of The Foothills FDP plans and documents. Below are the comments received from the City on April 22, 2022. Comment responses are included in red for each
comment, and plan comments have been addressed and are provided in a separate link along with the updated plans and documents.
Several changes have been made to the plan since the first FDP submittal. Previously, housing units were to be set on their supports on graded pads. The units are now proposed to be
“pit-set” type units, where a hole is dug and the unit is set on the supports built in the pit underneath the home. Blocking is added around the supports and the ground is filled in
around the unit. This makes the unit look more like a conventional home without the metal or wooden skirting you see on ground-set homes. The pit-set units have required the need for
regrading of the site to balance earthwork. The storm system has had some adjustments as well as the sanitary sewer system. These are the only major changes of note.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Brandy Bethurem Harras, 970‑416‑2744, bbethuremharras@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/04/2022: 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!
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 2
04/04/2022: INFORMATION:
As part of your resubmittal, you will respond to the comments provided in this
letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this
document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a
different font color. When replying to the comment letter please be detailed in
your responses, as all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide
reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments have not
been addressed, when applicable, avoiding responses like noted or acknowledged.
Response: Responses have been added as requested.
Comment Number: 3
04/04/2022: INFORMATION:
Please follow the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming
Standards found at https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic
submittal requirements and file naming standards_v1_8 1 19.pdf?1566857888.
File names should begin with the file type, followed by the project information, and round number.
Example: UTILITY PLANS_PROJECT NAME_PDP_Rd2.pdf
File type acronyms maybe appropriate to avoid extremely long file names.
Example: TIS for Traffic Impact Study, ECS for Ecological Characterization Study.
*Please disregard any references to paper copies, flash drives, or CDs.
Response: Noted
Comment Number: 4
04/04/2022: INFORMATION:
All plans should be saved as optimized/flattened PDFs to reduce file size and remove layers.
Per the Electronic Submittal Requirements AutoCAD SHX attributes need to be removed from the PDF’s.
AutoCAD turns drawing text into comments that appear in the PDF plan set,
and these must be removed prior to submittal as they can cause issues with the
PDF file. The default setting is "1" ("on") in AutoCAD. To change the setting
and remove this feature, type "EPDFSHX" in the command line and enter "0".
Read this article at Autodesk.com for more tips on this topic:
https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarti
cles/sfdcarticles/Drawing‑text‑appears‑as‑Comments‑in‑a‑PDF‑created‑by‑Aut oCAD.html
Response: PDFs have been created and saved as requested.
Comment Number: 5
04/04/2022: INFORMATION:
Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being
the cut‑off for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit your
plans, please notify me with as much advanced notice as possible.
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 6
04/04/2022: INFORMATION:
Temporary Service Changes ‑ City of Fort Collins Development Review
In order to continue providing thorough reviews and giving every project the
attention it deserves, the City of Fort Collins is implementing temporary
changes in how we serve our development customers. As you may be aware,
we are experiencing staff shortages in a number of key departments, which has
begun to impact the timeliness of our reviews. We recognize that development
and construction play a critical role in our community’s vibrancy and economic
recovery, and we have been exploring options for mitigating impacts to our
customers. As a result, we will be making some temporary service changes.
Beginning Monday May 10, 2021, one additional week of review time will be
added to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks).
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 7
04/04/2022: INFORMATION:
Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the
expiration of your project. (LUC 2.211 Lapse, Rounds of Review).
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 8
04/04/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
All "For Final Approval / For Approval" comments need to be addressed and
resolved prior to moving forward with the final documents and recording of this project.
I will provide a recording checklist and process information when we are closer to this step.
Response: Noted.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Clark Mapes, 970‑221‑6225, cmapes@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/20/2022, UPDATED FOR MEETING: QUESTION FOR THE MEETING ‑
Street D connection off‑site to the west: let's look at detailing of that ‑ less
uni‑directional, and with color in the concrete to make look more like a hybrid
cut‑through made for walking as well as vehicle access. A nice touch would be
an extra small tree in the abutting yard, and a stretch of picket fence along the
two abutting home sites for spatial definition and comfort for everyone.
Response: The access road has been updated as requested with guidance from the “Street D Connection” markup. The fencing and tree will be addressed in the landscape plans. The concrete
has been called out to be standard gray.
Comment Number: 2
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Generous angled or radiused corners
where sidewalks deviate around head‑in parking, to make the sidewalks more
useable despite the deviations. Response: Radii have been added as requested.
Comment Number: 3
04/19/2022: QUESTION FOR THE MEETING ‑ Parkway strips Upland Seed
Mix? Blue grama, buffalograss, sideoats, junegrass, purple threeawn. Do you
have a vision for this? Mowed, or naturalistic unmowed plains look? Which
would be a first here.
Response: We have changed the upland seed mix to 10% blue grama and 90% buffalograss.
Comment Number: 4
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There must be a Convenience retail
store in the Neighborhood Center.
Response: There is an area inside the Clubhouse designated for Retail, see Clubhouse Architectural plan set, sheet A.101.
Comment Number: 5
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Just Drafting ‑‑ The Modification for the
park space acreage needs to be listed on the Site Plan. I can assist with
editing the text that's on there to be shorter and make room for this.
Response: Note has added to cover sheet.
Comment Number: 6
04/19/2022: QUESTION: Lawn mowing? Just wondering, now that lawns were
required as an option.
Response: Need further clarification on this question.
Comment Number: 7
04/19/2022: QUESTION about the file format. If there's time.
Response: We have been doing everything we can to keep the PDF sizes down as much as possible and to help make them run better on your systems.
Department: Historic Preservation
Contact: Jim Bertolini, 970‑416‑4250, jbertolini@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/18/2022: NO HISTORIC REVIEW REQUIRED:
This proposal does not require historic review because there are no designated
historic resources, or resources that are at least 50 years old and would require
evaluation, on the development site or within 200 feet of the development site.
Response: Noted
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: John Gerwel, , jgerwel@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please include a ditch company approval block in the signatures.
Response: Approval block has been added to the cover for the ditch company.
Comment Number: 2
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The existing and proposed easements are not clear on the utility plans or the
plat. Please clarify. See redlines.
Response: Easements have been labeled and redlines addressed.
Comment Number: 3
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please call out the hatching used in sheets 15‑19 in the legend.
Response: Hatching is called out as “seed and mulch”. The hatch pattern has been revised for clarity.
Comment Number: 4
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are several overlapping elevations on the Grading Plan. Please clear up
overlapping text on plans. See redlines.
Response: Text masking has been added per redlines.
Comment Number: 5
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The areas shown in the Grading Plan are not called out in the key map. See redlines.
Response: Shading for areas shown in the grading plan have been added to the key map of each sheet.
Comment Number: 6
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Proposed water line plan and profiles are missing from the Utility Plan. Response: Water plan and profiles have been added to the plans.
Comment Number: 7
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The utility lines have linetypes and line shadings that do not match the legend.
See redlines.
Response: The legend has been updated per the redline.
Comment Number: 8
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please show a minimum of 150' beyond the project limits on the utility sheets.
Response: Sheets show between 100’-150’ outside of project limits to the extent of survey.
Comment Number: 9
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The sidewalks appear to be made of asphalt. Is this correct? Please note that
sidewalks in the must ROW must comply with LCUASS standards.
Response: The sidewalk hatching has been revised. Sidewalks will be concrete.
Comment Number: 10
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are several instances of stationing being concealed and text overlapping
with linework in the Utility Plans. See redlines. Please fix what the redlines are
denoting throughout the entire plan set.
Response: The overlapping text and redlines have been addressed.
Comment Number: 11
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
I'm a little confused with what is happening on the ditch on sheet 65. How is the
water getting up to the manhole? Could you provide a detail on the siphon structure?
Response: The ditch currently gravity flows under College Ave and bubbles up to a siphon structure. The proposed improvements do not change the ditch flow pattern. It continues to bubble
up to the manhole and to a siphon structure. Additional details have been provided.
Comment Number: 12
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Station is backwards on some, but not all storm plan and profiles. Please
provide consistent stationing with all plan and profile drawings.
The stationing has been updated on the storm plan and profiles.
Comment Number: 13
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please include all utilities in all street plan and profile sheets. Existing or
proposed utilities are not called out (or inconsistently called out) in the street plan and profile sheets.
Response: Utilities are shown in plan per legend and crossing utilities are shown in corresponding utility plan and profile sheets.
Comment Number: 14
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Utility easements and ROWs are missing from plan and profile drawings.
Response: The on-site roadways not within ROWs. They are in a “23’ public access, emergency access, utility & drainage easement. There are additional “19.5’ utility easements on each
side of the previously stated easement. All of which have now been labeled.
Comment Number: 15
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
What is the angle of intersection at Porter Drive and Trilby Road? Please
design intersections with public roads in accordance to LCUASS standards.
Response: Angle of intersection at Portner Drive and Trilby Road is 90 degrees.
Comment Number: 16
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The sidewalk east of Portner running south of Trilby appears to be close to or
exceeding the ADA slope limits. Please ensure that all public sidewalks are within ADA limits.
Response: All proposed public sidewalks are within ADA limits.
Comment Number: 17
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The K‑values for Debra and Kevin Drive are too low. This is a residential
connector road, so per LCUASS requirements, the crest K‑values should be at
a minimum of 19 and the sag K‑values should be a minimum of 37. If these
cannot be met, a variance request must be submitted.
Response: The K-values have been updated.
Comment Number: 18
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Debra Drive meets Street A as a T‑intersection. Because Debra Drive is a
public road, a minimum of one mid‑block access ramp is required at all
T‑intersections. The question is, where do you plan to have an ADA crossing at
for this intersection? See LCUASS Figure 16.2.
Response: A mid-block curb ramp has been added at the intersections. A fire hydrant and parking location have been moved as a result.
Comment Number: 19
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There is no profile for the widening of Trilby Road.
Please create a profile view similar to the one created for College Ave.
Response: A profile for Trilby Road widening has been included.
Comment Number: 20
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Stationing from street plan and profiles are often obscured.
Please clear up any text overlapping with stations.
Response: Added masking to stationing text.
Comment Number: 21
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
What are the proposed speed limits for the streets?
Response: Roadways have been designed for a local road speed limit of 25 mph.
Comment Number: 22
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
For all private streets and sidewalks, it is recommend that LCUASS and ADA
standards be followed, especially when it concerns pedestrian safety.
Response: Comment noted. Some curb ramps have been relocated for ease-of-use.
Comment Number: 23
04/18/2022: INFORMATION:
Lot 128 has a storm inlet overlapping the driveway.
Response: The storm inlet has been relocated.
Comment Number: 24
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The standard details, Drawings 1401, 1404, are not current. Please refer to
LCUASS Appendix A for the most recent versions.
Response: Details have been updated
Comment Number: 25
04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
What were standard details, Drawing 1604 and 1606a modified for in the
plans? If these modifications were made for public roads or public connections,
a variance request should be submitted.
Response: Modified 1606a is being used on private sidewalks. 1604 has been replaced by 1606 for the sidewalk on Trilby.
Comment Number: 26
04/22/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On March 31st, 2021, it was determined that the water and sanitary utilities, with
exception to service lines, were to be made public. As a result, easements must
be dedicated and the utilities must be appropriately placed within those
easements. The current plans do not reflect this. Please follow LCUASS
standards, Chapter 12 in particular, for utility placement in public ROW. We will
defer to FCLWD/SFCSD for utility placement criteria within private property. It
is highly recommended that the utilities avoid areas where trees have been
planted. We caught this on Friday, so we will not have time to fully mark up the
Utility Plans and Plat. There are several instances where these utilities leave
their easement boundaries or there is no easement dedicated for them.
RESPONSE: Per conversation with Sam Lowe at the Fort Collins Loveland Water district on June 9, 2022, it was decided that the sanitary sewer line could remain private.
Comment Number: 27
04/22/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There is updated private road signage that will need to be used for the private
roads. The applicant will be emailed a copy of the detail that is needed. Response: The detail has been added.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Spencer Smith, 970‑221‑6820, smsmith@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Thank you for submitting signing and striping plans. They are being reviewed
with Traffic Ops signing and striping staff and additional final comments will be
provided when available.
06/08/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Please provide detailed signing and striping sheets at FDP with labeled street
crossings. Some striping is visible on the site plan. Marked crosswalks are
desirable at some high pedestrian locations. The plan shows marked cross
walks through out the site. On City Streets crosswalks are marked at
intersections where there is substantial conflict between vehicle and pedestrian
movements, where significant pedestrian concentrations occur, where
pedestrians could not recognize the proper place to cross, and where traffic
movements are controlled.
Response: Signing and striping plans have been updated.
Comment Number: 2
04/19/2022: FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED:
It doesn't appear that any of the recommended crosswalk changes were made.
The comment response memo indicated that the comment had been
addressed. Please provide some clarification on why the comment was not
addressed or if it was an oversight.
07/02/2021: INFORMATION:
At several locations the crosswalks and ramps are set back away from the
intersections which doesn't represent natural walking patterns. Should consider
moving crossings more in line with the intersections. (i.e. Street C at Street F,
Rick Drive at Street B and Street G. The crosswalk on Crown Ridge east of
Portner would be better served on the west side of the intersection, and the
parking moved east a little, out of the intersection.
Response: Crossings at Rick Drive & Street B and Street C at F have been revised to have the curb ramps closer to the intersections. Intersection of Portner and Crown Ridge has been
revised. Crossing of Rick Drive at Street G has remained to due grading and layout constraints.
Comment Number: 3
04/19/2022: INFORMATION:
Please continue to coordinate with Tracy Dyer regarding the scope of the City's
College/Trilby intersection project and how it will tie into and/or impact Sun
Communities' access and frontage improvements.
Response: Atwell will continue coordinating with the City.
Comment Number: 4
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please replace "local entity engineer" with "City of Fort Collins Traffic Engineer"
in Traffic Signing and Pavement Marking Construction Notes on utility plan
notes sheet (Sheet 3).
Response: This has been addressed as requested.
Comment Number: 5
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
It isn't clear to me if the left turn lanes on Trilby are designed to the
recommendations of the TIS. The right turn lane at Portner appears to be
correct, but let's discuss the left turns in more detail.
Response: The proposed Trilby striping was designed to match the existing striping on both ends of Trilby along the property frontage. The geometry at Portner and Trilby was designed
to meet the “Short Range Geometry” as described in the TIS report and these plans provides the turns as described in the report. A minimum length of 160’ for the tapers was used, per
Figure 8-2 of the LCUASS.
Comment Number: 6
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The signing and striping sheet legend only includes notes 1‑7. The plans have
callouts numbered 8 and 9 that are not included. The signing and striping
sheets for Trilby don't provide any details/information on striping, symbols, etc.
There is just a reference to a standard detail, but this isn't sufficient. Please
provide more information on dimensions, placement, type/color, etc. Also, the
symbols and striping that you show on your plan don't look they match the
standard detail anyway, so that isn't a relevant reference for the contractor to
install the symbols and markings. I have included an example of approved
signing and striping plans with the redlines for this review. Please contact me
with any questions.
Response: The notes legend has been updated to include all notes. Trilby striping has been updated.
Comment Number: 7
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The City will want to convert the Debra/Trilby intersection to right‑in right‑out
once the connection to Debra to the south is completed and the City capital
project improvements to Trilby are constructed. We will need to continue to
discuss details and timing as this project moves forward with FDP approval.
Response: Comment has been noted. Atwell will continue to work with the city.
Department: PFA
Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970‑416‑2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre‑fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/15/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please add a note to the Utility Plans that all private roads dedicated as
Emergency Access Easements will be designed to support 40 tons.
Response: Note has been added to Street Improvement Notes on sheet 3.
Department: Erosion Control
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970‑222‑1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
04/13/2022: INFORMATION:
Based upon the area of disturbance or this project is part of a larger common development,
State permits for stormwater will be required since the site is over an acre and should be pulled
before Construction Activities begin. An Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit may be needed
depending on the size of the wetlands disturbance with the project.
Response: Wetlands have been determined to be non-jurisdictional by the Army Corps of Engineers in a letter dated January 28th, 2020.
This project is located within the City's MS4 boundaries and is subject to the
erosion control requirements located in the Stormwater Design Criteria,
Chapter 2, Section 6.0. A copy of those requirements can be found at www.fcgov.com/erosion
Based upon the supplied materials, site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft. and/or
meets one of the other triggering criteria (sensitive area, steep slopes, or larger
common development) that would require Erosion and Sediment Control Materials to be submitted.
The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5‑2
was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections.
As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such inspections.
The Erosion Control fees are based on; the number of lots, the total site disturbance,
the estimated number of years the project will be active and the Stormwater Inspection Fees
are based on the number of LID/WQ Features that are designed for on this project.
Based on the proposed site construction associated with this project we are
assuming 204 lots, 52.65 acres of disturbance, 3 years from demo through
build out of construction and an additional 5 years ‘til full vegetative stabilization
due to seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Inspection Fee estimate of $10142.94.
Based on 0 number of porous pavers, 2 bioretention/level spreaders and 3
extended detention basins, the estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee is $1380.
Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the
above‑mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have
provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for you to review.
The fee will need to be provided at the time of erosion control escrow deposit.
Response: Thank you for your comment and pointing us in the direction of the standards on your website. It is noted that the fee will need to be submitted at the time of erosion control
escrow deposit.
Comment Number: 2
04/13/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plans provided include an individual
sequence sheets in accordance with (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2)
Response: The erosion control plan sheets provide sequencing in the order of initial land disturbance measures, interim land disturbance measures and final land disturbance measures.
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)
Response: The erosion control plans, Escrow, and reports include phasing in the order of initial, interim, and final.
Comment Number: 3
04/13/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
In general the Erosion and Sediment Control Plans are at a too small of a scale
and it was hard to decipher all that is being proposed, more comments may
arise once we can see all proposed activities.
Response: Erosion control plans have been revised to be more legible including updated hatch patterns. Scale remains the same.
Off‑site grading will need to get approval from neighboring property owners.
Response: We are currently working with the City for the grading on their property.
All points of entry into LID facilities will require a forebay.
Response: Forebays are already proposed for the LID features and now include details.
It is suggested additional protection be provided in proximity to existing
wetlands, along all major channel conveyance areas, pond inlet points and outlet
points and the channel along Trilby Road.
Response: Additional erosion protected has been added to all drainage ways per the included redlines.
Please address all comments provided on the Utility plans as well as all
comments provided on the Stormwater Management Plan.
Response: All redline comments on the Utility and Stormwater Management plans have been addressed.
In particular please note that all existing wetlands need to be protected during construction.
Response: The existing condition of the wetlands is severely degraded and full of noxious weeds; we are proposing to replace the existing wetlands with a constructed wetland. We are
continuing to work with a wetland consultant and the City’s environmental department to obtain an approved plan.
Please add notes specific to the site construction activities on the Erosion control plans.
Response: There are notes on the erosion control plans that mention the wetlands are to be replaced and mitigated.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970‑416‑2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The larger off‑site rain garden used to meet the City's LID requirements is sized
with the volume required, however does not function as a "pond" as required
per City Criteria. This rain garden needs to have the required volume which will
then infiltrate through the required soil media area with an overflow path to the detention pond.
Response: The larger off-site rain garden has been re-graded to function as a pond.
Comment Number: 5
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The City is reviewing the revised SWMM to ensure the release rate and the
volume provided meets City criteria. Results of this review will be at the end of this week.
Response: SWMM comments were not received.
Comment Number: 6
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The rain garden detail is not per City Criteria. The City requires 18‑inches of
soil sand media. The City has an updated Bioretention detail that I will email to
you. Also, please cross out the "walled cross‑section" portion of the detail.
Response: The rain garden now shows 18-inches of soil media.
Comment Number: 7
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Bio‑retention #2 sizing calculations are not included. Bio‑retention #1
calculations were presented twice. Please revise.
Response: The interior bio-retention swale is no longer being proposed. All calculations for the off-site bio-retention swale are included in the report.
Comment Number: 8
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The slope down to the off‑site rain garden needs to be a maximum of 4:1 slope.
Please document this slope is no steeper than this and label on the plans 4:1 maximum slope.
Response: The side slopes of the rain garden are no steeper than 4:1 and are now noted on the plans.
Comment Number: 9
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please label on all the Storm Sewer Plan and Profile sheets that "All Storm
Sewer is Privately Owned and Maintained".
Response: The note has been added.
Comment Number: 10
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The City requires a detention pond depth gage for ponds deeper than 4 feet.
Please show and label location of depth gages on the grading plans. These
should be located next to the outlet structures.
Response: The depth gage is now shown and labeled on the storm sewer sheet.
Comment Number: 11
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On sheet 70, the number of rows is stated as 1 for the water quality outlet
structure. With 12 inches of water quality depth, this should be 3 rows. Please revise.
Response: The water quality structure detail has been revised.
Comment Number: 12
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
For both ponds on sheet 67 and 68, the outlet structures need to be positioned
at the invert of the ponds. Please relocate outlet structures or revise contours to
where the outlet structures are located at bottom of ponds.
Response: The contours have been revised.
Comment Number: 13
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Is outlet protection needed at the entrances into both detention ponds? This is
most likely needed for the pipe outlets and for the southern bioretention pond
into the large detention pond. The City prefers TRM for these type of locations
with a life span of at least 30 years. Scour stop or an approved equal has been proposed in the past.
Response: The pond plans now call for TRM with scour stop.
Comment Number: 14
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide details of the forebays proposed at the entrances into the bioretention ponds.
Response: There are now details shown on the plans for the forebays.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Cody Snowdon, 970‑416‑2306, csnowdon@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
I have created an electrical design for this project based on the CAD files I was
provided. Please include this design within the Utility Plans and coordinate with
Light and Power any areas that have changed from the CAD files that were provided.
Response: The electric design sent to us has been incorporated into the Utility Plans. The layout has been shown generically and a note added for the contractor to coordinate with lighting
and power. Service locations to individual units have been adjusted to electric connection location on units.
Comment Number: 2
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Streetlights will need to be installed along Trilby Road. These streetlight
locations have been included within the provided design. 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. A link to the City of Fort Collins street lighting
requirements can be found below: https://www.larimer.org/sites/default/files/ch15_2007.pdf
Response: Street lights are shown as indicated along Trilby.
Comment Number: 3
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
If the private drives/alleys are proposed to be illuminated, the streetlights are
considered private and will need to be privately metered. Please show all
private streetlights and private meters on the plans.
Response: private street lights are shown on plan. Note has been added indicating that all private street lights are to be metered and that meter locations are to be coordinated with
Fort Collins Lighting and Power.
Comment Number: 4
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
For the commercial buildings, please coordinate meter locations with Light and
Power and show on the utility plans during Final Design. These locations will
need to comply with our electric metering standards. Electric meter locations
will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Reference
Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric metering standards. A
link has been provided below.
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStanda
rds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
Response: Comment noted.
Comment Number: 5
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
For the commercial buildings, a Customer Owned Service Information Form
(C‑1 Form) and a one‑line diagram for all commercial meters will need to be
completed and submitted to Light & Power Engineering for review prior to Final
Plan. A link to the C‑1 Form is below:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/c‑1_form.pdf?159767 7310
Response: See the attached completed form.
Comment Number: 6
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On the one‑line diagram provided for the commercial buildings, please show
the main disconnect size and meter sequencing. A copy of our meter
sequencing can be found in our electric policies practices and procedures below.
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders‑and‑developers/development‑fo rms‑guidelines‑regulations
Response: See the attached completed form.
Comment Number: 7
04/19/2022: INFORMATION:
Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and any system
modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development.
Please note that all on‑site electrical will be invoiced on a time and material
basis and is considered building site charges with the street being dedicated
as private drives. Please contact me or visit the following website for an
estimate of charges and fees related to this project:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders‑and‑developers/plant‑investmen t‑development‑fees
Response: Comment noted.
Comment Number: 8
04/19/2022: INFORMATION:
Please document the size of the electrical service(s) that feeds the existing
property prior to demolition of the building to receive capacity fee credits.
Response: Existing electric services will be documented prior to demolition.
Comment Number: 9
04/19/2022: INFORMATION:
If any existing electric infrastructure needs to be relocated or underground as
part of this project, it will be at the expense of the developer and will need to be
relocated within Public Right‑of‑Way or a dedicated easement. Please
coordinate relocations with Light and Power Engineering.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment Number: 10
04/19/2022: INFORMATION:
All utility easement and crossing permits (railroad, ditch, floodplain, etc.)
needed for the development will need to be obtained by the developer.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment Number: 11
04/19/2022: INFORMATION:
Please reference our policies, construction practices, development charge
processes, electric services standards, and fee estimator at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders‑and‑developers.
Response: Comment noted.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416‑4290, sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
I like the overall design of the wetland, especially the island and the creativity of
transitioning to a forested wetland habitat type. I would like to make sure that
feasibility of this plan is thought through to give the greatest chance of success long‑term.
‑ There have been concerns about water quantity for this wetland. How can we
anticipate the water usage via transpiration of that many trees? The common
cottonwood gallery habitat type are in riparian systems; how can we expect it to
fair long term wetland system? Would that many trees transpire such an amount
of water that it would be detrimental to the wetland?
‑Has a revegetation scheme based on hydroseres been considered? That
would entail using the ground water monitoring data and engineering
expectation to anticipate the surface and subsurface water levels and using
those expectations to guide the planting plan. Restoration niches are more
narrow than ecological niches, so a hydrosere approach would be helpful in
guiding what is planted where.
‑ I do like the density and diversity of shrub plantings. However, I’m unsure of the
proportion of hackberries. What was the thought process behind that?
‑A hydrosere approach would be applicable to seed mixes as well to fine tune
what is seeded where.
Please reach out to have an offline meeting to discuss these details.
Response: Plains cottonwood trees are normally found in riparian systems and are rated as a
facultative species for wetland areas in the great plains region, meaning it occurs in wetlands and non-wetlands.
Peachleaf willows are also rated as facultative wetland, meaning they usually occur in wetlands,
but occur in non-wetlands. These species were chosen so they could potentially increase the amount of
wetlands on site but also able to provide a diverse riparian system. We do not believe this amount of trees
are too dense to be detrimental to the wetland areas and would assist with potentially increasing the
amount of wetlands. The amount of trees are enough to provide shade, cover, and create the gallery type
system while also providing enough space between trees for mature growth.
This planting plan could be adapted to be based on hydroseres and has been designed been
designed on proposed zones for wetland, riparian, and upland settings. ERO will evaluate the groundwater
data and proposed grading plan to evaluate a hydrosere approach for the planting plan.
Hackberries were proposed to increase the amount of diversity in the tree layer. In this
type of setting there are only a few native species that would be naturally present, with those mainly
consisting of plains cottonwood and peachleaf willow. Other native trees to Colorado are more often found
in the foothills or higher elevations. ERO was proposing hackberries to increase some diversity with a
species that can likely tolerate this elevation and site conditions. If there are any other suggestions for
native trees, please let us know.
ERO will evaluate and revise the seed mixes to be based on a hydrosere approach.
Comment Number: 2
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
All the NHBZ is noted as low hydrozone with only trees and shrubs receiving
irrigation. Will temporary irrigation be provided? Revegetation is possible with
or without temporary irrigation with both methods having pros and cons. A
conversation with the applicant team regarding this is merited to make sure
expectations align and that the restoration plan adequately addresses all
aspects of revegetation.
Response: Refer to Irrigation drawings.
Comment Number: 3
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
A comprehensive restoration plan will be needed that addresses 1) soil
handling, establishment, maintenance, and weed management of upland areas
within the NHBZ, and 2) mitigation wetland establishment, maintenance, and
weed management, and three years of monitoring. Additionally, an abbreviated
version of the restoration and weed management plans are required on the plan
set to ensure the plans are visible to contractors, future owner, property managers, etc.
I will provide some monitoring guidelines to facilitate the process.
Response: ERO will prepare a comprehensive restoration plan to address these requirements.
Comment Number: 4
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There is a ‘Note’ on the Wetland Mitigation Plan sheet that is ineligible. Please rectify.
Response: Note has been rectified.
Comment Number: 5
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please clarify on the landscape plans that straight species, versus cultivars, will
be used for tree and shrub plantings in the NHBZ. This is to improve pollinator
resources and decrease wind damage to taller trees. I’m thinking of the
chokecherry and plains cottonwood specifically.
Response: Unless otherwise noted, all plants on the schedule are straight species unless called out as cultivars.
Comment Number: 6
04/19/2022: PRIOR TO DEVLOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (DCP) 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, 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 DCP. A NHBZ Calculator has been provided
to the DRC to help this along.
Response: Sun Communities will provide the necessary security for issuance of the DCP.
Comment Number: 7
04/19/2022: PRIOR TO DCP ISSUANCE:
Thank you for providing the acreage of impacted prairie dog colony (24.015
acres). The payment‑in‑lieu fee without CO/PERC is $1,637/acre, or
$39,312.56. If CO/PERC is used, then the payment‑in‑lieu fee is $1,337/acre,
or $32,108.06. Whichever method is chosen, the payment‑in‑lieu is in addition
to relocation, trap and donate, or euthanization costs.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment Number: 8
04/19/2022: PRIOR TO DCP ISSUANCE:
Prior to prairie dog removal, please submit 1) the results of a burrowing owl
survey completed by a professional, qualified wildlife biologist, and in
accordance with CPW standards if removal is between March 15 and October
31, and 2) a letter explaining how and when prairie dog removal occurred at the
site and in accordance with the Division of Parks and Wildlife standards.
Response: Documents will be provided.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, 224‑616‑1992, mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 13
4/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please space trees 6‑ft from fire hydrants.
Response: All trees have been moved at least 6 feet from fire hydrants.
Comment Number: 14
4/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please do not proposed English Oak on the plans. They have not done
historically well after the early and late freezes that we experience. Please swap
this oak for Texas Red or Shumard Oak.
Response: English Oaks have been removed and replaced with Shumard Oaks.
Comment Number: 15
4/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
In order to avoid future visibility issues, please provide enough separation
between trees and “street” signs. There are a few locations where trees are
proposed right on top of signs.
Response: Trees have been separated from street signs.
Comment Number: 16
4/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are several tree/utility conflicts. Please review Forestry redlines and
provide redline/comment responses on the plans indicating that changes were made.
Response: Trees have been moved from utility conflicts.
Comment Number: 17
4/18/2022: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
Forestry will provide development agreement language to the City Engineer.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment Number: 18
4/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please include the tree inventory and mitigation plan, along with the City of Fort
Collins tree protection notes to the civil plan set.
Response: Tree mitigation plan is included in the site plan set.
Department: Building Services
Contact: Russell Hovland, 970‑416‑2341, rhovland@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1
04/18/2022: BUILDING PERMIT
A permit is required for this project and construction shall comply with adopted
codes as amended. Current adopted codes are:
· 2021 International Residential Code (IRC) with local amendments
· Colorado Plumbing Code (currently 2018 IPC) with local amendments
· 2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado
· Copies of current City of Fort Collins code amendments can be found at fcgov.com/building.
Please read the residential permit application submittal checklist for complete requirements.
· Snow Load Live Load: Ground Snow Load 35 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 Colorado
· Seismic Design: Category B.
· Climate Zone: Zone 5
· Energy Code: 2021 IECC residential chapter
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
· 5ft setback required from property line or provide fire rated walls & openings
for non‑fire sprinkled houses per chap 3 of the IRC. 3ft setback is required for
fire sprinkled houses.
· Fire separation of 10ft between dwellings is required.
· Bedroom egress windows (emergency escape openings) required in all bedrooms.
· For buildings using electric heat, heat pump equipment is required.
· A passing building air tightness (blower door) test is required for certificate of occupancy.
STOCK PLANS:
When the same residential buildings will be built at least three times, a stock
plan design or master plan can be submitted for a single review and then built
multiple times with site specific permits. More information can be found in our
Stock Plan Guide at fcgov.com/building/res‑requirements.php.
Response: Comment noted.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970‑221‑6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 12
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Some of the sheets in the sheet index do not match the noted sheets in the
specific plan sets. See redlines.
Response: The sheets will be re-ordered.
Comment Number: 13
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching.
Response: A mask has been added behind all text.
Comment Number: 14
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: A mask has been added behind all text.
Comment Number: 15
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are text over text issues. See redlines.
Response: A mask has been added behind all text.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 16
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide the following information for the Benchmark Statement in the
EXACT format shown below.
PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL
DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29
UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) FOR
THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS.
IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DATUM) IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION
SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF
FORT COLLINS DATUM) = NAVD88 DATUM ‑ X.XX’.
Response: Benchmark note has been updated.
Comment Number: 17
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Lines over text have been addressed per redlines.
Comment Number: 18
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching.
Response: Masking has been added.
Comment Number: 19
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The reference to the offsite Drainage Easement on the City property needs to
be changed to an "Alignment". See redlines. Response: Redlines have been addressed.
Topic: Easements
Comment Number: 20
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide closure reports for all Easements & Alignments.
Response: Please refer to the plat for easement dimensions. Refer to the street plan and profiles for alignment dimension information.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 10
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Some of the sheet titles & sheet numbers in the sheet index do not match the
noted sheets in the specific plan sets. See redlines.
Response: Sheet numbers and titles have been adjusted.
Comment Number: 11
04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching.
Response: All text has been masked.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John
Von Nieda at 970‑221‑6565 or HYPERLINK "mailto:jvonnieda@fcgov.com" jvonnieda@fcgov.com
Response: Responses have been provided on redline documents.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 2
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please revise the legal description as marked. See redlines.
Response: Legal description has been revised per redlines.
Comment Number: 3
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Some of the sheet titles & sheet numbers in the sheet index do not match the
noted sheets in the specific plan sets. See redlines.
Response: Sheet titles and numbers have been revised per redlines.
Comment Number: 4
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide the following information for the Benchmark Statement in the
EXACT format shown below.
PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION:
PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL
DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29
UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) FOR
THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS.
IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DATUM) IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION
SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF
FORT COLLINS DATUM) = NAVD88 DATUM ‑ X.XX’.
Response: Benchmark note has been updated.
Comment Number: 5
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching.
Response: Masking has been added.
Comment Number: 6
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are matchline issues. See redlines.
Response: Matchlines have been updated.
Comment Number: 7
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The reference to the Easements that are being dedicated by separate
document do not match the legal descriptions & sketches. The offsite Drainage
Easement on the City property needs to be changed to an "Alignment". See
redlines.
Response: This easement has been revised and has yet to be recorded.
Comment Number: 8
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are cut off text issues. See redlines.
Response: Text cut off issues have been addressed per redlines.
Comment Number: 9
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Line over text issues have been addressed per redlines.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Megan Harrity, Larimer County Office of the Assessor, (970) 498‑7065,
mharrity@larimer.org, ,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/12/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Is the project still waiting for the South Fort Collins Sanitation District to
complete the process of getting that parcel into the district?
This should be done before the final plat is recorded.
Response: Comment noted. Please note that the Sanitary sewer is mostly private, with a public line running through the site.
Contact: Sam Lowe, Fort Collins Loveland Water District / South Fort Collins
Sanitation District, (970) 226‑3104 Ext 113, SLowe@FCLWD.com, ,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
We have some pretty major comments for this development. Primarily that we
are asking that all private sewer be made public and that they provide
easement for all water and sewer lines.
RESPONSE: Per conversation with Sam Lowe at the Fort Collins Loveland Water district on June 9, 2022, it was decided that the sanitary sewer line could remain private.
Comment Number: 2
04/19/2022: REDLINES:
Due to the size, the redlines have been split into three files.
Response: Noted.