Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFISCHER PROPERTIES - PDP220007 - 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 September 23, 2022 Joel Weikert Ripley Design Inc 419 Canyon Ave Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Fischer Properties, PDP220007, Round Number 2 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of Fischer Properties. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your Development Review Coordinator, Brandy Bethurem Harras via phone at 970 -416-2744 or via email at bbethuremharras@fcgov.com. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: VFLA RESPONSE: DELICH ASSOCIATES RESPONSE: Comment Summary: Department: Development Review Coordinator Contact: Tenae Beane, 970-224-6119, tbeane@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 05/24/2022: INFORMATION - UPDATED: I will be filling in for Tenae while she is on leave. Please utilize me, and have your team utilize me as the main point of contact for your project. Reach out with any questions or issues. Thanks, Brandy - bbethuremharras@fcgov.com 05/24/2022: 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 2 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! RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Thank you for filling in during this time, Brandy. We will resubmit the application to you when the time comes. Comment Number: 2 05/24/2022: 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. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Our team will provide detailed responses to the best of our abilities. Comment Number: 3 05/24/2022: 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. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The resubmittal will follow naming conventions prescribed. Comment Number: 4 05/24/2022: 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-AutoCAD.html RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: PDFs will be optimized and flattened on the resubmittal. Comment Number: 5 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday a t 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. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Resubmittal deadlines for routing are understood. A heads up email was sent a week in advance of our resubmittal. Comment Number: 7 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: 3 Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the expiration of your project. (LUC 2.211 Lapse, Rounds of Review). RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The resubmittal will occur within the time period allowed. Comment Number: 8 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an additional Fee of $3,000.00 RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: This is understood. Comment Number: 8 09/21/2022: FOR HEARING - UPDATED: With the updates made for round 2, the project, as proposed, would be subject to a Type 1 Review. The decision maker for your project will be an Administrative Hearing Officer at a public hearing. For the hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 800 feet (excluding public right-of-way and publicly owned open space). As your Development Review Coordinator, I will assist with preparing the mailing and coordinating the hearing date with your team. 05/24/2022: 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) Commission. For the hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 800 feet (excluding public right-of-way and publicly owned open space). 05/24/2022: FOR HEARING: All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff will need to agree the project is ready for Hearing approximately 4 to 8 weeks prior to the hearing. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Thank you for confirming our assumption on the hearing type. We will plan for a Type 1 Review. Comment Number: 10 09/23/2022: FOR HEARING: I am letting you know that your quasi-judicial item could be heard remotely and that there is the option to hold off until an in-person hearing can be conducted. Any person or applicant seeking a quasi-judicial decision from City Council, a City board or commission or an administrative hearing officer under the City Code or the City's Land Use Code, shall be notified in writing or by email of the intention to conduct a Quasi-Judicial Hearing using Remote Technology. Such person or applicant shall be entitled to request that the Quasi-Judicial Hearing be delayed until such time as the Hearing can be conducted in person. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: At this time, our preference would be for the hearing to be heard remotely. Let’s revisit this item when a hearing is scheduled and confirm the method of hearing as a team. Department: Planning Services Contact: Clark Mapes, 970-221-6225, cmapes@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 11 4 9/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Overall – staff sees some common issues in apartment complex plans. The plan is a good attempt to maximizing every foot and inch for more units, but it creates some awkward relationships and minimal walkways for this level of intensity of development. 70+ dwelling units next to CSU should have generous and inviting walkway circulation. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The resubmittal includes a robust circulation network that circumnavigates the multifamily building and provides multiple shared walk connections to both Westward Drive and Shields Street (3 connections to each), as shown below. Additionally, the network includes common points of ingress/ egress to the proposed multifamily building as well as walk out conditions for all first-floor residential units. While the proposal is efficient in space utilized, great care has been taken to make a robust and useful circulation system. Comment Number: 12 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Building Program Where the building abuts south walkways with car bumpers and headlights, storefront style, are those bedroom windows? That’s an awkward relationship—it’s appropriate for urban retail walkways along display windows but not residential bedrooms. We have seen an example where the building owner actually went to the trouble and expense of going back in and cutting out a 2-foot foundation planting strip to create at least a minimal layer of space and sense of separation. In that case, it’s a 15 -foot walkway, not 8’. Therefore, the car bumpers and headlights are a little further back. It looks like the maximization of the plan should be eased to provide a foundation planting area along that south side. Would awnings also help to add a sense of layering space without much added expense or problems? RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Bedroom windows are not provided on the southside of the multifamily wings, thus removing the awkward relationship described. These areas where the building abuts the multifamily wings are used for electric meters, enclosed bike storage, and stairwells. With the design proposed, car headlights will not shine into residential units. Comment Number: 13 09/20/2022: ...ALSO, with more space there, that walkway could be wider, say 8-10 feet not counting the curb as walkway, with tree grates and a couple feet of bumper overhang. 8’ is barely MINIMAL for having trees in cutouts. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The applicant team believes the 8’ walk in this location is appropriate given the anticipated use and nuance of the building and site. Additionally, the trees in tree grates were added as an urban design touch to this area – should the tree width and walk be in question, the applicant team and City can coordinate at Final Plan if the tree grates should remain. Comment Number: 14 09/20/2022: QUESTIONS: Walkways Why the break in the east walkway? Root zone of the spruce? The people walking out that door will probably want to go north almost every time. Maybe the trees force them to go south to go north? RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The break in the walkways is indeed due to the adjacent existing spruce that the applicant wants to preserve during and post construction. The sp ruce’s lower branches extend outward and would impede pedestrians on the walk if extended. Additionally, only one unit would be serviced going north should the walks be connected. To head north from this lone unit, a future resident would head south to the nearby walk that connects to the Shields Street sidewalk and then head North. 5 Comment Number: 15 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Walkways Where the walkway from the west crosses parking lot islands, ramps should be added to the plan so that people aren’t stepping off and onto curbs with ADA access thwarted. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Ramps have been added to the site plan at these locations. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Ramps have been added to the site plan at these locations. Comment Number: 16 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Walkways Where the walkway widths are labeled, it looks like those dimensions include the curb-correct? The south walk labeled as 8’ on the site plan is labeled 6’ on the utility plans. I assume the tree grates are 5x5? Actually you might as well make them 5x7 to benefit those trees. ALSO, since cars will park against the curb, you might as well just move the curb back to form 17’ stalls. ALSO, at the inside Lshaped- corner, ease that corner with at least a 5’ radius. Minor detail. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The southern walk is 8’ in width and will be coordinated on both plans at resubmittal. The tree grate size has been increased to 5’x8’. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Attached walk widths are measured from the flowline. Comment Number: 17 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Walkways Rare comment from staff—western walkways along parking: In this rare instance, the space for those walkways looks like it would be better used to screen parking with a fence, and to make room for landscaping. A fence would screen the parking year-round. A few trees and shrubs would soften the vinyl fence. The walkways really don’t go anywhere that people would walk, and the shrub bed as shown does not look wide enough to allow for shrubs anyway. And finally the site plan and landscape plan do n’t match there–the site plan indicates no space for shrub bed. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Site plan revised; sidewalks removed where described (Western walkways adjacent to rain gardens and SFD lots). Comment Number: 18 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Architecture In the neighborhood meetings and other communications, there have been stated commitments to fitting in with the neighborhood character in terms of forms and materials. The stucco does not really fit that—it lends a more modern urban character than the suburban residential character of the houses which comprise the neighborhood. Staff suggests using siding instead of stucco. Or, If you want to add another material, how about shingle siding in the gables or wherever you think would be appropriate? Relatedly, the stone pattern as shown has a concrete block look – again, more modern, more urban. Perhaps that’s just the computer pattern? Or if it’s actually accurate, even though it could be great in the right setting, in this case it should be a more traditional residential neighborhood scale stone pattern, or e lse brick, which is common in the context. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. Elevations revised. Within these revisions, the 6 elevations indicate increased siding on multiple elevations. The building intends to utilize like kinds of materials from the neighborhood while providing scalable components and a design aesthetic compatible to the neighborhood character. For clarification, the stone pattern is a currently designed as a limestone veneer and not intended as CMU. Two of the main south entrances are very nondescript and utilitarian. Can any embellishment be added? Trim, or a little roof feature, or…? VFLA RESPONSE: Elevations revised. Comment Number: 19 09/20/2022: QUESTION: Fence If you’re going to use vinyl, can you please use a tan and not shiny white. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Fence materiality will be revised as the project progresses. Reflective colors/ materials will be avoided as commented on. Comment Number: 20 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: AC Condensers: are there 77 of these appliances? If so, where are they on the plan. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. AC condensers have been concentrated in roof mechanical wells located on all roofs. Condensers are not planned to be ground mounted or visually seen. Comment Number: 21 09/20/2022: Trash and recycling location QUESTION for the meeting: is a LONG way to the trash and recycling –looks like it would be frustrating–down hallways, around the parking lot…are we seeing this right? This is one more thing that could be improved with slightly less Program. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The proposed trash location is located on a walkable path from any of the southern shared points of ingress/ egress to the multifamily building. Please see the image below for shared unit entrances (identified in red circles) and highlighted path to trash enclosure. Comment Number: 22 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: Parking The 18’ spaces spaces technically require a minor modification of the 19’ standard. Staff has no problem supporting that based on the spaces being internal and affecting only residents who will be familiar, without detriment to the public good. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: It is the understanding of the applicant that a modification is not required as the 18’ spaces (that are 8’-6” wide) are qualified as Long-Term Parking spaces as identified in LUC section 3.2.2L(3). Comment Number: 23 09/20/2022: Landscape Plan: does M stand for mature? Just wondering. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: The M designates a proposed tree that carries the mitigation tag for upsizing as identified in the LUC. The M is added to the legend on the landscape plans. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Jim Bertolini, 970-416-4250, jbertolini@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 05/18/2022: INFORMATION: Compatibility with the 1301 S. Shields property is encouraged but for the purposes of this project, if Planning considers LUC 3.5.1 compatibility 7 requirements met, Historic Preservation will consider design compatibility requirements of 3.4.7 also met. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. As stated in the previous R1 response: “Generally, the architectural aesthetic of the overall building design is to blend into the scale of the surrounding neighborhoods. The approach includes an overall scale that has been reduced and physically broken down using a variety of step-down conditions at the ends of the buildings to begin and end with smaller scales and lower masses that are directly adjacent to the residences of the neighborhoods. Similar to 1301 S. Shields, which utilizes a similar scale breakdown of a lower building component at the edges of the taller, main body of the residence on the north, east, and south sides. Additionally, the overall building mass is broken into smaller components in which it physically steps down at the roof and reduces the stories from 3 to 2 stories and in some locations, 3 to 1 story steps at others. Larger overall building mass is reduced with large recesses along the facades onthe Shields and Westward Drive creating smaller scaled, main building masses. Similarly, to the 1st floor of the 1301 Shields project, the architecture includes a series of smaller scaled and unique design components at the entries and corners that provide a higher level of pedestrian scaled elements. Finally, the window compositions and types in the overall design reflect compositions that are similar to the area. The windows are “single hung” styles that provide a residential feel. They are designed to provide a variety of visual scales where windows are ganged together, separated, and at times, smaller scaled to the program needs. Residential accent trim is utilized at and around the windows, doors and corners of the building to blend with the residential context within the area and specifically, 1301 S. Shields.” Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Tim Dinger, , tdinger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 09/07/2022: FOR HEARING - UPDATED: Additional redlines have been made on the revised round 2 plans. Please address prior to next submittal. 05/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Please see redlines for additional plan comments. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Redline comments have been addressed and responses have been added to the PDF’s with this submittal. Comment Number: 2 09/07/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: The ROW vacation forms for Lakewood Drive must be submitted during final design plan review. The ROW vacation must be approved prior to the issuance of the Development Construction Permit (DCP). For more information on the ROW vacation process, please visit the City of Fort Collins Engineering Development Review webpage (https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev). 05/24/2022: FOR HEARING: For more information regarding the vacation of right -ofway- (ROW) for the existing 60’ ROW for Lakewood Drive, please visit the City of Fort Collins Engineering Development Review webpage (https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev) NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: This information will be provided at final design. Comment Number: 5 8 09/19/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Coordinate the timing of the street patching with Construction Inspection Manager, Ken Zetye (kzetye@fcgov.com). Colorado State University typically prefers the street patching to be done in summer, when there is less CSU student traffic. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: A note has been added to the civil site plan for coordination of the street patching. Ken’s information has been added to the cover civil cover sheet. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970-224-6175, sgilchrist@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 5 09/19/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: All signing and striping will be reviewed during final. Please show any stop signs on Landscape plans. No trees should be considered within 50 feet approaching a stop sign. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Noted. This information will be shown at final. Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 6 09/21/2022: FOR HEARING: We would like to have your Traffic Engineer provide a brief letter or memo we can attach to the Traffic Impact Study describing the change to the number of units that has occurred between rounds of review. The purpose of this letter/narrative is to document the reduction in the number of units that will be built, and the overall reduction in trips that will occur. DELICH ASSOCIATES RESPONSE: A memorandum will be provided addressing this comment. Department: Erosion Control Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 09/14/2022: INFORMATION: Saw note will look for Erosion control materials at FDP. 05/19/2022: FOR INFORMAION: 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 11 lots, 5.34 acres of disturbance, 3 years from demo through build out of construction and an additional 3 years till full vegetative stabilization due to seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Inspection Fee estimate of $2,914. Based on 1 bioretention/rain garden, 2 extended detention basins and 1 underground treatment system, the estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee is $1,230. Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the 9 above-mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for your review. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: fess have been noted. Comment Number: 2 09/14/2022: INFORMATION: Saw note will look for Erosion control materials at FDP. 05/19/2022: FOR INFORMATION: 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. 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. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Noted, this information will be submitted at final. Comment Number: 3 09/14/2022: INFORMATION: Saw note will look for Erosion control materials at FDP. 05/19/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: -Please submit an Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3) -Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plans provided include a individual sequence sheets in accordance with (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2) -Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plans, Escrows, and Reports include phasing requirements (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3, 6.1.4, & 6.1.5) -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) NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Noted, this information will be provided at final. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Matt Simpson, (970) 416-2754, Civil Engineer III Topic: General Comment Number: 7 05/24/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Please provide evidence that the detention basin is in compliance with drain times per Colorado Revised Statute 37-92-602(8). More information on this statute is available at http://tinyurl.com/RevisedStatuteMemo, and a spreadsheet to show compliance is available for download at http://tinyurl.com/ComplianceSpreadsheet. Please contact Matt Simpson at masimpson@fcgov.com with any questions about this requirement or for assistance with the spreadsheet. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Noted, this information will be provided at final. Comment Number: 8 05/24/2022: INFORMAITON: Please think through and explain how the HOAs will work for this development and which entities will be maintaining the single -family- and multi-family detention and water quality facilities. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: This we be discussed with the project team. Comment Number: 9 10 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: The 100-year runoff coefficients (C100) were not calculated correctly. The adjustment factor needs to be applied to the composite runoff coefficient. See FCSCM Ch5, section 3.2.2. This is a follow up comment from the round 1 redlines. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Runoff calculations have been revised. Comment Number: 10 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: The detention calculations used low C100 values and are incorrect. The detention ponds will need to be resized. Detention c alculations were not provided with the round 1 submittal. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: detention volume calculations have been revised. Comment Number: 11 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Provide stagestorage- tables for each detention facility and LID facility. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: This information will be provided with this submittal. Comment Number: 12 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Show the detention pond 100yr WSEL on the grading plans . Confirm that Detention Pond 3 does not back up into the parking lot. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The detention pond 100-yr WSEL has been added to the grading plans and labeled. Pond 3’s overflow spill path goes through the parking area, but the 100-yr ponding volume does not. Comment Number: 13 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Show the pond and site overflow locations on the grading plans. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: overflow locations have been labeled on the grading plans. Comment Number: 14 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Provide a drainage easement for the Pond 3 overflow path across multifamily site. The overflow path must be in a drainage easement until connection with public ROW. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The multi -family Tract B is being dedicated with a blanket drainage easement which should cover surface drainage transportation from one basin to the other. Comment Number: 15 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Combine storm outlet pipes so that there is only one connection to the Shields Street storm main, preferable at the existing manhole. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The Pond 3 outfall location was relocated per direction from staff. It was relocated to an existing inlet on Shields. This way we will maintain that there is only one street cut required for storm drain connection in Shields. Comment Number: 16 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Groundwater levels need to be measured and reported BEFORE Hearing. There must be 2-feet minimum separation between annual high groundwater (July – Sept) and the bottom of detention facilities and of LID cross sections. This is a follow up comment from the round 1 redlines that was not addressed. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: groundwater depths were measured in April of this year. Groundwater depths of between 10 and 17’ were recorded at that time. Town staff indicated that 11 the current report and design separations are okay to go to hearing. Comment Number: 17 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: No large trees may be in the rain garden. Small trees may be 10 -feet or greater from the underdrain. This is a follow up to round 1 redline comments. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: All large trees are removed from the rain garden. Any small tree will meet 10’ min. separation requirement. Comment Number: 18 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: See redlines of Utility Plan and Landscape Plan for further comments. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Redlines on the Utility Plans have been addressed. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Redlines on Landscape plans addressed. Comment Number: 19 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: See redline comments on utility plan and drainage report. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Redlines on the Utility plan and drainage report have been addressed. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Matt Simpson, (970) 416-2754, Civil Engineer III Topic: General Comment Number: 1 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: There will be credits for the existing water and sewer services on this site. We have started an estimate sheet. Please contact UtilityFees@fcgov.com for more information. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Noted. Thank you. Comment Number: 2 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: There will need to be significant water and sewer coordination with Water Utilities. The infrastructure in this area is old and may not be able to support a development of this nature, described as follows. 1) For information The- water mains in Lakewood Dr, Del Mar St, and Westward Dr will be replaced in 2022 by City crews. The location of these water mains will likely be moved from the current location (behind walk) to the street. 1) For Hearing The -northsouth- sewer main that bisects this site is old and in need replacement due to excessive root intrusion. See comment 3 for continuation of this subject. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: City staff has indicated that there will not be a formal plan by the City for replacement of the water mains, but they will be field fit. We have depicted logical locations for the water main relocation on the utility plans and noted that those improvements shall be done by others. See comment 3 for continued response. Comment Number: 3 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING - UNRESOLVED: Upon further review and discussion, Utilities will not accept re -construction of the existing sewer main in place. FC Utilities wants the sewer main rebuilt in a different location that meets current criteria and provides for better maintainability in the future. Please see our preferred alignment on the redline 12 comments. You will need to provide a plan and profile of this option before Hearing. **After you have a preliminary profile along this alignment, please contact us for a meeting to discuss.** 05/24/2022: FOR HEARING: ** [This developer will, at minimum, need to replace the sewer main from Westward Drive to Springfield Drive.] <- this portion of the comment is retracted and replaced with 9/15/22 comment above** However, the Utility would rather have this sewer main relocated to Westward Drive. The Utility is willing to cost share in this effort. The developer would be responsible for the cost to replace the existing main in place and the City would be willing to provide the incremental cost difference to relocate. *Please see redlines for more information and follow up with us to discuss further.* **For Hearing – the proposed Westward Drive sewer main will need to be profiled to confirm this is a workable option – both for slope and for conflict avoidance with the existing Shields St storm main. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: A plan and profile of the preferred sanitary sewer alignment has been added to the utility plans. Comment Number: 7 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING - UNRESOLVED: Irrigation services and meters must be shown on the plans before Hearing. 05/24/2022: FOR HEARING: - A separate irrigation meter and service will be needed for the single -family detention and rain garden areas. - A separate irrigation meter and service will be needed for the multifamily site. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Locations for irrigations meters are now shown on the plans for both the single-family and multi -family tracts. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Irrigation meters and service lines are shown on site plan/ landscape plan with resubmittal. Complete irrigation plans will be provided at FDP. Comment Number: 9 05/24/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: The initial FDP submittal will need to include separate irrigation service(s) for the site. Separate irrigation service is required due to recent changes to Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply Requirements (WSR) and Plant Investment Fees (PIF). Please ensure the project submittal includes: - Preliminary Irrigation Plan (PIP) – plan requirements can be found at: www.fcgov.com/WCS. Please contact Irrigation Development Review (irrigation@fcgov.com) with questions regarding the required PIP. - Water budget (annual usage) and peak flow (gallons per minute) for each irrigation service. Note: this information should be included on the PIP. - Landscape Plan including hydrozone table updated with 2022 values – 3, 8, 14, and 18 gallons/square foot/year for very low, low, medium, and high zones, respectively. - Water Need Form – form is available at: www.fcgov.com/WFF Please contact Utility Fee and Rate Specialists (UtilityFees@fcgov.com or 970-416-4252) with questions regarding the Water Need Form. - Irrigation service(s), including curb stop and meter location, shown on the Utility and Site Plans. Irrigation service location (s) must match information on the PIP. On Oct. 5, 2021 Council adopted changes to Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply Requirements and Plant Investment Fees. In general developments that use more water may pay more and developments that use less wate r may pay less. These changes were implemented 1/1/2022; more information can be found at: www.fcgov.com/wsr -update 13 RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Irrigation plans will be supplied during the FDP process that are compliant with LUC Section 3.2.1(J). A hydrozone table is provided with PDP submittal (on L5). Comment Number: 10 05/24/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Show all existing water and sewer services. Label "To be removed and abandoned at the main". NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Water and sewer services to be removed and abandoned at the main will be shown and labeled on the final plan. Comment Number: 11 05/24/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: A water service and meter sizing memo, with calculations, must be provided with the FDP round 1 submittal. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: This will be provided at final. Comment Number: 13 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: Parking spots may not be located above sewer main manholes. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Proposed sanitary sewer manholes have been relocated to be outside of the parking spaces. Comment Number: 14 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: The rain garden may not be located above the proposed sewer main. 10-feet of separation must be provided. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The rain garden has been redesigned to give 10’ separation from the proposed sanitary sewer main. Comment Number: 15 09/15/2022: FOR HEARING: See redlines for further comments. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Redlines have been addressed. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 05/05/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Preliminary irrigation plans (PIP) are required for review at Final Development Plan (FDP), prior to issuance of building permit. The requirements for the PIP must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to irrigationdr@fcgov.com or Eric Olson eolson@fcgov.com RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Irrigation plans will be supplied during the FDP process that are compliant with LUC Section 3.2.1(J). Comment Number: 2 05/05/2022: BUILDING PERMIT: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Irrigation plans will be supplied during the FDP process that are 14 compliant with LUC Section 3.2.1(J). Department: Light And Power Contact: Austin Kreager, 970-224-6152, akreager@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: Light and Power would like to remind you that all of our facilities must have a ten foot clearance away from all water, wastewater, and storm sewer facilities. We also require a three foot clearance away from all other utilities with the exception of communication lines. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: 10’ separation from landscape dra in lines along the north and east side of the building was not feasible. Due to the relocated sanitary sewer (with 30’ easement) requested by wastewater engineering and other site constraints 10’ separation from the landscape drains was not feasible. 3’ separation from the landscape drains if achievable, would this be acceptable since these are minor storm drain facilities? Comment Number: 3 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: Any existing electric infrastructure that needs to be relocated as part of t his project will be at the expense of the developer. Please coordinate relocations with Light and Power Engineering. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: noted. Comment Number: 4 05/24/2022: 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 contact me to discuss development fees or visit the following website for an estimate of charges and fees related to t his project: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen T-development-fees NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: noted. Comment Number: 5 05/24/2022: 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 or public right -ofway-. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The Multifamily Tract has a blanket utility easement. We can discuss if it would be appropriate to have dedicated electric easements for this site and have them depicted and dedicated at final. Comment Number: 6 05/24/2022: 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. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Contractor shall note service size pri or to demolition. Comment Number: 7 05/24/2022: FOR HEARING: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. When located close to a building, please provide required separation from building openings as defined in 15 Figures ESS4 - ESS7 within the Electric Service Standards. Please show all proposed transformer locations on the Utility Plans. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: The northwestern transformer from the previous submittal has been relocated to a more central location for service to the multifamily development. Setbacks have been accounted for in the placement of the transformers. Comment Number: 8 05/24/2022: PRIOR TO FINAL PLAN: Streetlights will be placed along public streets. 40 ft separation on both sides of the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. 15 ft separation on both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and streetlights. Please coordinate the light placement with Light & Power. Please reach out to me before the first round of the Final Development Plan so I can provide a streetlight layout. The City of Fort Collins Street lighting requirements can be found at: http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/Ch15_04_01_2007.pdf NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: We will reach out prior to the final development plan. Comment Number: 9 05/24/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Multi family buildings and duplexes are treated as customer owned services; therefore a C-1 form and one line diagram must be filled out and submitted to Light & Power Engineering for each building. All secondary electric service work is the responsibility of the developer and their electrical consultant or contractor. A C-1 form can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders -and-developers/development-f Orms-guidelines-regulations NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: noted, this will be provided at final. Comment Number: 10 05/24/2022: INFORMATION: This project will need to comply with our electric metering standards. Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Residential units will need to be individually metered. Please gang the electric meters on one side of the building, opposite of the gas meters. Reference Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric metering standards. A link has been provided here: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStanda rds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. Wall space has been provided at the south ends of the west and east wings. Service Standards will be followed. Comment Number: 11 09/20/2022: FOR HEARING: I have concerns about space in the areas where you are proposing gas and electric meters. Electric Meters should not be in the same walled in space as the gas meters. Please propose and show separate locations. Thank you VFLA RESPONSE: Gas service has been reduced to one meter serving the entire bu ilding. The electrical meters will be at the locations shown, but the single gas meter will be moved to a new location. Department: Forestry Contact: Christine Holtz, , choltz@fcgov.com 16 Topic: General Comment Number: 3 09/20/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN - UPDATED Though stated previously that final separation requirements will be reviewed at final, please see forestry redlines to start considering shifting planting locations. Particularly on L2 there are multiple trees proposed approximately 4 ft from storm utilizes. Please shift these trees to decrease the likelihood that they will not have to be removed or damaged in the future due to utility maintenance. 05/25/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Ultimate separation requirements will be reviewed at final plan. Trees proposed at the northeastern end of the development are not meeting the tree-water utility separation requirements. See Forestry redlines Street Light/Tree Separation: Canopy shade tree: 40 feet Ornamental tree: 15 feet Stop Sign/Tree Separation: Based on feedback from Traffic Operations, it is preferred that trees be plant ed at least 50 feet from the nearest stop sign in order to minimize conflicts with regulatory traffic signs. Driveway/Tree Separation: At least 8 feet from edges of driveways and alleys. Utility/Tree Separation: 10’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines 6’ between trees and water or sewer service lines 4’ between trees and gas lines 10’ between trees and electric vaults RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Utility separations are attempted to be met at the current PDP submittal although some tree separations are not met adjacent to multifamily building underdrains/ trees in tree grates. It is understood that these separations will be refined and met at Final. Comment Number: 4 09/23/2022: FOR HEARING - UPDATED Thank you for changing the proposed landscape plan from removing all existing trees to preserving 4. Out of the 43 inventoried trees, there are still many existing significant trees worth preserving for the benefit of the site. Trees number 42, 43, and 27 for example. Please strongly consider what else can be done to preserve moretrees. 05/25/2022: FOR HEARING: There are multiple large mature trees on this property in fair or better condition including, 27, 40, 41, 42, 43. These are mostly located along Shields. Please consider preserving some of this mature canopy instead of removing all the trees inventoried. Having mature trees. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Per subsequent meetings conversations and follow up emails, tree #42 will be spade and transplanted elsewhere along Shields. Trees 43 and 27 are in poor condition 17 or sited in the proposed building location. Comment Number: 6 09/20/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Please consider using larger cutouts for the tree grates such as 4x6 or 6x6 to support tree health. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Tree grate size has been increased to 5’x8’. Comment Number: 7 09/20/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: Please replace the heritage birch with a species more suited to this climate such as Canada red chokecherry, hot wings maple, or Rocky Mountain bigtooth maple. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Heritage birch replaced with Canada red chokecherry. Comment Number: 8 09/21/2022: FOR HEARING On page L3 just east of the cul-de-sac, per stormwater requirements to remove the oaks from the rain garden, please do not remove them from the landscape plan entirely, but rather, for example, swi tch their locations with the osage orange proposed around the cul-de-sac to ensure trees are not removed from the plan, especially large shade trees. See Forestry redlines. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: Large trees removed from rain garden. Oaks relocated to sloped native seed area and tree lawn where prescribed in forestry redlines. Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 09/20/2022:FOR HEARING- UPDATED: Access provided from Westward will be adequate for the western side of the building. Elevations have changed and there is a separation between roofs on the 3 story wings. The East wing end of the parking lot does not provide adequate access for this section. I would recommend going back to the original elevation or an alternative method of compliance will be required for approval. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. A stair has been provided to the roof of the east wing as a means of alternative compliance. 05/20/2022: FOR HEARING: AERIAL ACCESS - The comment response indicates access is provided to the western side of the West Wing. The West Wing is only 2 story and showing max eave height of 24 ft-7 in so no aerial access is required for this wing. The response also indicates aerial access on each end of the wings. Aerial access will not work on the gable ends of the wings. Westward Dr could be used as aerial access if the building is moved to within 30 feet of the curb. No parking fire lane would be required in this area. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. The building has been shifted to be within 30 feet of the curb. Comment Number: 4 05/20/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: FIRE LANE LOADING - Fire lanes shall be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather 18 driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. The utility plan indicates Heavy Duty but will need to indicate this will support 40 tons. A note shall be added to the civil plans. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: a note has been added to the civil site plan. Comment Number: 5 05/20/2022: FOR FINAL PLAN: FIRE LANE SIGNS - The limits of the fire lane shall be fully defined. Fire lane sign locations should be indicated on future plan sets. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of fire inspection. Code language provided below. - IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: This information will be provided at final design. Comment Number: 6 05/20/2022: PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: ADDRESS POSTING & WAYFINDING - Where possible, the naming of private drives is usually recommended to aid in wayfinding. New and existing buildings shall be provided with approved address identification. The address identification shall be legible and placed in a position that is visible from the street or road fronting the property. Address identification characters shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall not be spelled out. The address numerals for any commercial or industrial buildings shall b e placed at a height to be clearly visible from the street. They shall be a minimum of 8 inches in height unless distance from the street or other factors dictate larger numbers. Refer to Table 505.1.3 of the 2018 IFC as amended. The address numbers for one- and two-family dwellings shall be a minimum of 4” in height with a minimum ½” stroke and shall be posted on a contrasting background. If bronze or brass numerals are used, they shall only be posted on a black background for visibility. Monument signs may be used in lieu of address numerals on the building as approved by the fire code official. Buildings, either individually or part of a multi- building complex, that have emergency access lanes on sides other than on the addressed street side, shall have the address numbers and street name on each side that fronts the fire lane. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. A monument sign and address numerals will be provided per 505.1.3 of the 2018 IFC. Department: Building Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 05/23/2022: 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 19 · 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 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 nonfire- 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. VFLA RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. Comment Number: 2 05/23/2022: BUILDING PERMIT: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: 2021 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments 2021 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments 2021 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments 2021 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments 2021 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments Colorado Plumbing Code (currently on the 2018 IPC) 2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Copies of current City of Fort Collins cod e amendments can be found at fcgov.com/building. Important: Fort Collins will be adopting the new 2021 Building Codes in April of 2022. Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017. Snow 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: • Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2021 IECC residential chapter. • Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2021 IECC commercial chapter. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 20 · Electric vehicle charging parking spaces are required, see local amendment. · This building is located within 250ft of a 4 lane road or 1000 ft of an active railway, must provide exterior composite sound transmission of 39 STC min. · R-2 occupancies must provide 10ft setback from property line and 20 feet between other buildings or provide fire rated walls and openings per chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC. · All multi-famliy buildings must be fire sprinkled. City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2021 International Fire Code limit what areas can avoid fire sprinklers with a NFPA 13R, see local IFC 903 amendment. · Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of fire-sprinkler. All egress windows above the 1st fl oor require minimum sill height of 24”. · If using electric systems to heat or cool the building, ground source heat pump or cold climate heat pump technology is required. · A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new multi-family structure. Stock Plans: When the exact same residential building will be built more then once with limited variations, a stock plan design or master plan can be submitted for a single review and then built multiple times with site specific permits. More information can be found in our Stock Plan Guide at fcgov.com/building/res-requirements.php. Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting: Please schedule a pre-submittal meeting with Building Services for this project. Pre-Submittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed above. The proposed project should be in the mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects should email their Development Review Coordinator to schedule a presubmittal - meeting. VFLA RESPONSE: Comments acknowledged. The 2021 IBC and 2021 Residential IECC and local amendments will be followed. The electric vehicle charging spaces and acoustic ratings will follow the local amendments. The project will be sprinklered per local amendments. The project will provide bedroom egress windows. Cold climate heat pump technology will be utilized if electric heat systems are used. A presubmittal meeting will be scheduled with the Development Review Coordinator. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 05/20/2022: INFORMATION ONLY: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. RIPLEY DESIGN RESPONSE: This is acknowledged and understood by the applicant team. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 05/20/2022: 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 21 Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: Comments have been addressed. Comment Number: 2 09/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: PLEASE NOTE. This is a submittal requirement and will need to be submitted for the 1st round of FDP, or the project will be marked "Incomplete". Please provide current acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown. 05/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide current acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: monument records will be recorded. Comment Number: 4 09/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: PLEASE NOTE. This will need to be submitted for the 1st round of FDP, or the project will be marked "Incomplete". Please provide a closure report for the out er boundary of this Subdivision Plat. NORTHERN ENGINEERING RESPONSE: This information will be provided at final.