Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUN COMMUNITIES - THE FOOTHILLS - FDP220005 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS October 19, 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 2 Brandy, Thank you for your review of The Foothills FDP plans and documents. Below are the comments received from the City on August 1, 2022. Comment responses are included in red for each new comment, and plan comments have been addressed and are provided in a separate link along with the updated plans and documents. 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! Comment Number: 2 04/04/2022: RESUBMITTAL: As part of your resubmittal, you will respond to the comments provided in this letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a different font color. When replying to the comment letter please be detailed in your responses, as all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments have not been addressed, when applicable, avoiding responses like noted or acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 04/04/2022: RESUBMITTAL: 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. Comment Number: 4 04/04/2022: RESUBMITTAL: All plans should be saved as optimized/flattened PDFs to reduce file size and remove layers. Per the Electronic Submittal Requirements AutoCAD SHX attributes need to be removed from the PDF’s. AutoCAD turns drawing text into comments that appear in the PDF plan set, and these must be removed prior to submittal as they can cause issues with the PDF file. The default setting is "1" ("on") in AutoCAD. To change the setting and remove this feature, type "EPDFSHX" in the command line and enter "0". Read this article at Autodesk.com for more tips on this topic: https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarti cles/sfdcarticles/Drawing‑text‑appears‑as‑Comments‑in‑a‑PDF‑created‑by‑Aut oCAD.html Comment Number: 5 04/04/2022: RESUBMITTAL: Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being the cut‑off for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit your plans, please notify me with as much advanced notice as possible. Comment Number: 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). 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. Comment Number: 9 07/29/2022: INFORMATION: ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an additional fee of $3,000.00. Response: Comment noted. We feel these plans have addressed the Cities comments and concerns and are ready to move to the next step in the Fort Collins development process. Department: Planning Services Contact: Clark Mapes, 970‑221‑6225, cmapes@fcgov.com Topic: General 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: To be generous and really serve people out walking, please confirm that those are least 5‑foot radii. And, consider even more, say 6 feet. Response: The sidewalk radii in these location have been revised to have 6’ radii and have been dimensioned on the Detailed Parking Lot Grading plans. Comment Number: 4 04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There must be a Convenience retail store in the Neighborhood Center. 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 been verified to adequately address this comment per email from Clark Mapes dated 9/14/2022. Comment Number: 6 04/19/2022: QUESTION: Lawn mowing? Just wondering, now that lawns were required as an option. Comment Number: 8 07/29/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Photometric Plan, p. 8, at Kevin Drive: Is light spilling onto the lot across Kevin Drive to the west? The photometrics are not clear on the plan, unless I'm missing something. Call if helpful, thank you. We should avoid creating any nuisance there. There is an area inside the Clubhouse designated for Retail, see Clubhouse Architectural plan set, sheet A.101. Comment Number: 9 07/29/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: I need to confirm that the Site Plan has the notes we have discussed about the Affordable units: they include both lot rent and unit rent; and they shall be included proportionally in all phases of construction. (I don't see it on the Site Plan ‑ is it in the plan set anywhere?). Response: note has been verified to adequately address this comment per email from Clark Mapes dated 9/14/2022. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: John Gerwel, , jgerwel@fcgov.com Topic: General 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: All overlapping elevations were cleared up Comment Number: 6 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: Thank you for providing the waterline sheets. The station labeling appears to be having some issues. See redlines. Response: The water plan and profiles use the roadway stationing. Stationing for intersecting roadways have been removed for clarity. 04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Proposed water line plan and profiles are missing from the Utility Plan. Comment Number: 7 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: The changes made reduced the clarity of the plans. Please change the electric lines back to "‑E‑". I was just looking for a way to differentiate the electric and gas service lines. Ideally, service lines have some sort of lettering like your water and sanitary service lines. But at a minimum, keep the lettering on the main utility branches and make the service lines distinguishable from one another. See redlines. Response: The electric lines have been revised to show “-E-“ for both the main electric lines and service lines. 04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL The utility lines have linetypes and line shadings that do not match the legend. See redlines. 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: All redlines relating to text overlapping with linework has been addressed Comment Number: 13 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED: This was not addressed. Public utility crossings in public streets are required to be shown in street profile views. It is recommended to include public utility crossings on private streets as well, as it would assist Utilities in the future. I am also expanding this comment to include all plan and profile drawings, as there are missing utility crossings from those as well. See redlines. Response: Street Plan and Profile sheets have utilities shown in plan view. In a call with John on 8/30/22, it was indicated that utility profiles in the street profiles would not be required. Separate utility profiles have been provided in the construction drawings. 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. Comment Number: 19 06/30/2022 FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: The plan view of the street plan and profile view for Trilby (sheet 89) should look more like sheet 87 for College in terms of what is shown and called out. Same thing for the road sections. Please show consistent street plan and profiles for all streets and use the checklist in LCUASS Appendix E for guidance on what needs to be included. One thing to note is that the curb radii for the intersection of Portner and Trilby is not called out. Response: Trilby Plan and Profile has been updated. Sections have been updated. Curb radii have been added. 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. Comment Number: 20 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED: Thank you for adding masks. Stationing is still obscured in several places. See the redlines on Debra Drive for a good example (sheet 93). Response: Stationing has been fixed on all redlines so they are no longer obscured 04/18/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL Stationing from street plan and profiles are often obscured. Please clear up any text overlapping with stations. Comment Number: 24 07/14/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED: Thank you for adding the most current standards. Something happened with the resolution, and the text is unreadable. Please update. Response: Standard details have been updated. 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. Comment Number: 27 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: Thank you for adding that. Could you add a note in detail 1401 that points someone to the private sign detail? I wouldn't have found it if I wasn't looking for it. Response: Note has been added to reference private sign detail. 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. Comment Number: 28 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please use the updated General Notes, Construction Notes, Traffic Signing Notes and Storm Drainage Notes, found in LCUASS Appendix E. Response: Notes have been updated per LCUASS Appendix E Comment Number: 29 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please show drainage arrows in the grading plan illustrating a positive drainage to streets or drainage facilities. Response: Drainage arrows have been added to the overlot grading plan Comment Number: 30 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The stationing is very difficult to see in many of the plan and profile drawings. There is also stationing from streets or other utilities that are irrelevant to the current sheet. Please make the relevant stationing more visible, making sure it doesn't also obstruct anything worth showing, and please remove unnecessary stationing. See redlines. Response: Unnecessary stationing has been removed per redlines and made more visible Comment Number: 31 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The utility plan and profiles should be showing utility crossings to ensure separation requirements are met. See redlines. Response: Utility crossings have been shown in the plans. Comment Number: 33 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Centerline and both flowline profile views are required for all public streets. Debra would need both flowline profile views, Kevin would need the proposed flowline profile view, Trilby will need the centerline profile view, and College will need the flowline profile view. The goal is to establish context with what is proposed and what is existing so we can see if the proposed parts of the road are compatible with the existing. Response: Debra Drive flowline profiles have been added. Kevin Drive proposed flowline profile has been added. The existing centerline for Trilby has been added. The profile provided with College is the flowline profile. Comment Number: 34 07/13/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The profile view of the proposed road on Trilby seems to have several grade changes that are not called out. See redlines. Response: Trilby Plan and Profile has been updated. It should be noted that the centerline profile for Trilby represents an existing condition. Comment Number: 35 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Per LCUASS 12.2.2, all utilities must have a minimum depth of 2 feet below subgrade. The RCP storm pipes going under Debra Drive do not seem to meet these requirements. Elliptical pipes could be explored as an option. It was discussed that extra fortification would be used. If separation cannot be met, a variance request will have to be submitted. There, the applicant detail how what they are proposing would be an acceptable alternative. Response: The grading of North Louden Ditch underneath Debra Drive has been revised to provide 2’ of cover of the RCP storm pipes. Comment Number: 36 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The sag k‑values and a crest k‑value for Kevin Drive is too low. See LCUASS table 7.3. If these standards cannot be met, a variance request will have to be submitted. See redlines. This one is tricky because you want to make the proposed half compatible with the existing half. Establishing context of the roads existing conditions (see comment 33) will be useful if deciding if a variance request would be required. Response: The center line profile for Kevin Drive represents an existing condition. It was indicated in a call with John that it would be acceptable to warp Kevin Drive to provide an acceptable flowline slope. Slope arrows have been added to show the pavement cross slopes. Comment Number: 37 07/13/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The vertical curve lengths for Kevin drive are too low. See LCUASS Figures 7‑17 and 7‑18. If these standards cannot be met, a variance request will have to be submitted. See redlines. See comment 36. Response: The center line profile for Kevin Drive represents an existing condition. Vertical curve information has been included for the flowline of Kevin Drive. Comment Number: 38 07/13/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There is a piece of Kevin Drive where the grade is less than the minimum 0.5% grade for streets. If this standard cannot be met, a variance request will have to be submitted. See redlines. Response: The center line profile for Kevin Drive represents an existing condition. It was indicated in a call with John that it would be acceptable to warp Kevin Drive to provide an acceptable flowline slope. Flowline slopes show a minimum slope of 0.5%. Comment Number: 39 07/14/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The western sawcut edge along College appears to be in the existing wheel path. Please expand the sawcut so that it is in the middle of the of the driving lane. Please see the figures referenced in LCUASS Chapter 25 here: https://www.larimer.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/2021/figures_25‑1_‑_25‑4_0. Pdf Response: Sawcut has been adjusted to be in the middle of the bike lane and milling has been extended to the existing stripe between the travel lane and the bike lane. This will keep the joint in the top coat of asphalt on the edge of the bike lane and travel lane. This also matches up well with the ultimate section striping. Comment Number: 40 07/14/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The proposed asphalt for College is not present in the section views. Please include the proposed road and add existing and proposed grade percentages. Response: Section views have been updated. Please note that the proposed cross slopes on the College Avenue extension represent an attachment to existing conditions. The primary driver for the design of the cross slopes on College Avenue is the slope of the flowline. Comment Number: 41 07/14/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There doesn't appear to be any proposed striping on College on sheet 126. Response: Striping has been updated for College. Comment Number: 42 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please address all other redlines that were not specifically mentioned in the comments. The aim is for consistency and clarity for someone who is looking at these plans for the first time. The clearer the plans, the less mistakes get made. Please apply the redline comments wherever else they are needed. Response: Every effort has been made to make these plans as clear as possible for constructability, while providing information required by the City and other entities involved, and to provide record of development. Comment Number: 43 06/30/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide the signed Letter of Intent and a signed private easement dedication for the North Louden ditch and the private access easement on the southern portion of the site. The latest LOI I have seen has not been signed by the applicant. We would be happy to record these private dedications once they are complete. Response: Private access easement has been removed from plat after conversations with the City. Sun now owns the property the private access was going to and does not want it. Access to the Bundy property is being provided to Stoney Brook. Access out to Debra from the Bundy property remains. The Ditch company has a prescriptive easement and so no easement dedication is needed. It is possible that a dedicated easement would need to be vacated with development on the Hamar property. Sun is continuing to work with the Ditch Company on their needs and requirements. An agreement to negotiate has been provided in the General Information folder. Comment Number: 44 07/14/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Any variance requests that get approved must be reflected in note 48 of the general notes. Response: Comment noted. No additional variances are requested. Comment Number: 45 06/30/2022: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: This project will require a development agreement. Please fill out the DA form located here: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev Once the form is submitted, with your materials for the next round, we will get started on drafting the DA and finalize it as the project starts to wrap up. Response: From has been included in submittal. Comment Number: 46 08/03/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The flowlines of College Ave need to show more context and detail. The purpose of this is to get a good idea of how water is going to flow within the existing area. The neighboring development to the south (Lakeview on the Rise) has a good example of the additional context. The profile view should be showing enough of the existing flowline at the beginning and end of construction in order to show how everything ties in. Response: Flowlines have been extended to show more context. Comment Number: 47 08/03/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The pavement transition on the north part of College is very sharp. It looks like the same angle the was used for Lakeview on the Rise was used for this spot. The applicant will need to provide specific signage/barricades to be used as a warning to drivers. Response: Signage and barricades have been identified in the signage and striping plan. Comment Number: 48 08/03/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Trilby to the west of the development has a ditch. How will the addition of the right turn lane impact that? Response: Historically, the ditch has drained onto the property and eventually into the box culvert underneath Trilby. The proposed condition will take these flows into the curb and gutter and convey it into a proposed inlet. There will be no obstruction to the ditch flow due to the improvements on Trilby. Comment Number: 49 08/03/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The addition of curb and gutter on Trilby is going to require some more materials. (1) The flowlines are going to need to extend beyond construction to show the context of flow. Again, the goal is to see if this layout is compatible with the surrounding area. (2) We want to make sure that the curb and gutter that is installed will be a long term solution. So need to see an ultimate buildout of this area of Trilby and the surrounding area to see that the LCUASS arterial buildout can be met. Response: Flowlines have been extended to show relationship to surrounding connections. Proposed conditions include a connection to the existing curb and gutter on the east end. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Spencer Smith, 970‑221‑6820, smsmith@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 08/02/2022: INFORMATION: The Debra Dr. access may need to be limited to right in right out after both the intersection improvements are made and the development has made connections to Debra. We will work with you and the capital project to determine the appropriate timeline for the median extension. Response: Comment noted. 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. Comment Number: 7 08/02/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED: Response: A connection for Debra has been provided through the site. We will continue to work with the City. 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. Department: Erosion Control Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970‑222‑1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 2 07/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑UPDATED: 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) It seems that the project is too large to be built in one phase, please provide a phasing plan and explain in the Erosion Control Report how phasing will be done on this project. Separate escrow calculations will also need to be calculated for each phase. Response: It is the developer’s intent to build the project site in one construction phase. Comment Number: 3 07/21/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please address all comments provided on the Utility plans. Response: Comments have been addressed and responded to on the Utility Plans redlines. Please add notes regarding final site stabilization to the Erosion and Sediment Control plans. Response: Notes have been added to the plans referencing the landscape plans for final stabilization and seed mixes. Topic: Fees Comment Number: 1 07/21/2022: INFORMATION ‑UPDATED: 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, 3 bioretention/level spreaders and 2 extended detention basins, the estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee is $1,445. 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: Erosion Control Escrow Deposit has been noted. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970‑416‑2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 6 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: The City will email the revised detail. Response: The revised detail has been added to the stormwater details. 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. Comment Number: 12 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: Pond 386A needs revised grading to match the outlet structure. Response: The grading has been revised. 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. Comment Number: 14 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: I could not find these details in the plan set. Response: The forebay details are shown on corresponding storm line sheets. Notes have been added. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide details of the forebays proposed at the entrances into the bioretention ponds. Response: An electronic copy will be provided with this submittal. Comment Number: 15 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: On page four(4) in the Drainage Report, please edit the Linear Bioretention paragraph to discuss these contain the 12‑hour WQ volume with ponding of 12 inches which will infiltrate through a soil media and be released into the detention pond via an underdrain. Response: The drainage report has been updated with the requested text. Comment Number: 16 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide an electronic copy of the updated Fossil Creek Master SWMM model to the City. Response: An electronic copy of the updated Fossil Creek Master SWMM model has been included with this submittal. Comment Number: 17 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The Linear Bioretention Exhibit states 88.91% of the site is being treated with Linear Bioretention #1. This does not match the exhibit map which shows a larger area in white not being treated. Please revise. It appears the offsite area was included in the calculation of 46.81 ac. The offsite acres should be used in sizing the facility, but not in the "Percentage of site being treated", which would lower it to 57.22%, which is still higher than the 50% requirement. Response: The exhibit has been revised. Comment Number: 18 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Flows that exit sub‑basin A11 at the end of the culd‑a‑sac has no defined path into Pond 386 and most likely will erode the side slope. Please provide permanent erosion control for this outfall and a notched area to contain the flows within the protected side slope. Response: Flows that exist sub-basin A11will flow through a curb cut and to a trickle channel. There is a sidewalk chase to pass the flows through the sidewalk. The plan now shows riprap to provide stability of the pond slope. Comment Number: 19 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: In sub‑basin A12, the swale invert is in the same location as the pedestrian path just northwest of the pond. These should be offset to provide a path that is not compromised with mud or ice. Please revise. Response: The swale will utilize sidewalk chases to pass the drainage under the sidewalk, therefore the sidewalk should not become compromised with mud and ice. Comment Number: 20 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Page 68 of the Drainage Report does not match what is required for detention volume and unsure why this page is included in the report. Please clarify. Response: The ponds were initially sized using the FAA method and The Fossil Creek SWMM study was updated, and the pond sizes confirmed. 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The basin area draining into pond 386A is 6.01 acres. The detention volume calcs show 5.34 acres on sheet 72. Please revise. Also, it appears there is extra volume in pond 386A. If this is the case, the City would prefer reducing the release rate to maximize the storage volume for this pond and pond 386 as well with still leaving enough volume for the City property to the south. Response: The sub-basins draining to Pond 386A are A13 through A15, totaling 5.34 acres. Sub-basin A16 consists of the outfall drainage swale, which follows it’s historic flow pattern. Additionally, there is not any excess volume in the pond, we are providing 1.0’ of freeboard above the emergency water surface elevation. Comment Number: 22 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please discuss the off‑site basin to the south and how this development is providing detention storage for this City owned land within Pond 386 and how LID is being provided in Bioretention #1. This should include what assumed impervious area was used for the property to the south as well. Response: The off-site basins are now discussed in the Drainage Facility Design section of the Drainage Report. Comment Number: 23 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: For basin areas over 20 acres, detention volume sizing needs to be calculated using SWMM. The modified FAA method was used. Please check these numbers with SWMM and if the existing calculations show more volume than SWMM, than existing calculations can stay. If not, than use the SWMM calculations. Response: The ponds were initially sized using the FAA method and The Fossil Creek SWMM study was updated, and the pond sizes confirmed. Comment Number: 24 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Landscaping in Pond 386 needs to be discussed. There seems to be an abundance of cottonwoods that may effect the volume. 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. This 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. Comment Number: 25 07/27/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are storm sewer and tree conflicts throughout the site. The standard is 10 feet of separation from any tree to a storm sewer or inlet. Please revise. Also, please make sure the latest storm sewer and inlet design is shown on the Landscape Plans. Response: All tree and utility conflicts throughout the site have been addressed. The latest storm sewer and inlet design is shown. Department: Light And Power Contact: Cody Snowdon, 970‑416‑2306, csnowdon@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED: We will require meter pedestals to be installed an private services to each building. Please coordinate with Light and Power on those meter pedestal locations. Response: Pedestals have been coordinated with Light and Power. 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 layout has been updated and pedestals have been shown. Services to pedestal are not shown in the civil plans and will be coordinated with home setter. Comment Number: 2 08/02/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED: Please revise the Landscape Plan to accommodate for streetlighting along Trilby Road. Response: Landscape has been revised to accommodate for streetlighting along Trilby Road. 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 Comment Number: 3 08/02/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL – UPDATED: Please show meter pedestal locations for the site lighting. Response: Site lighting connections have been shown on lighting plans by BERGMAN. 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. Comment Number: 4 08/02/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL – UNRESOLVED: 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: Coordinated per Standards. Comment Number: 5 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED: For single phase power, the largest cable size allowed is 350 kcmil. Please revise the C‑1 Forms and design accordingly. Response: Revised Accordingly 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 Comment Number: 6 08/02/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL – UNRESOLVED: Response: revisions per applicable requirements. 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 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 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. 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. 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. 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. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416‑4290, sbenton@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 3 07/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: 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 am looking forward to seeing this plan as it will be critical to successful implementation of the NHBZ plan. I will provide some monitoring guidelines to facilitate the process. Response: ERO restoration plan has been included in submittal. Comment Number: 6 07/20/2022: PRIOR TO DEVLOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (DCP) ISSUANCE ‑ UNRESOLVED: 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: Estimate has been provided. Comment Number: 8 07/20/2022: PRIOR TO DCP ISSUANCE ‑ UNRESOLVED: 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: Comment noted. Once plans are approved, and a construction date set, coordination will take place to provide the survey, and provide a letter on prairie dog removal. Comment Number: 9 07/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Some good news for once: since trap and donate approach is being taken no payment in lieu is required. However, there is a unique opportunity for active relocation – the USFWS, CDOT, and others are establishing a large prairie dog colony in Pueblo County to support black‑footed ferret reintroduction efforts. The project holds the required CPW permits, is providing a transfer center, etc. All that is needed is for the prairie dogs to be live trapped and transported to the transfer center. This would be the City’s preferred removal option. Response: Comment noted. We will continue to work with the City on prairie dog relocation efforts. Department: Forestry Contact: Carrie Tomlinson, , ctomlinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 16 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑UNRESOLVED: There continue to be utility conflicts with trees proposed on your plan. Please review the following guidelines for utility separation and revisit all redlines from round 1. There has also been utility line movement on the landscape set in round 2 that is not represented on the round 2 Utility Plan set. Please ensure that these plan sets match for all plans. 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 40’ between canopy shade trees and streetlights 15’ between ornamental trees and streetlights Response: All tree and utility conflicts throughout the site have been addressed. 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: All tree and utility conflicts throughout the site have been addressed. Comment Number: 17 07/26/2022: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: Forestry will provide development agreement language to the City Engineer. Comment Number: 18 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED: Please mark your mitigation trees on your landscape plan and not your tree inventory. Response: Mitigation trees have been marked on the landscape plan. 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. 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. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970‑221‑6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 13 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Masks have been applied to all elevation sheets as requested. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching. Comment Number: 14 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Masks have been applied to all elevation sheets as requested. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 15 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Masks have been applied to all elevation sheets as requested. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 16 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UPDATED: Please change the "underscore" in the equation to a "dash" or "minus sign". 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: Text has been revised accordingly. Comment Number: 17 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Plans have been updated for clarification. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 18 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Plans have been updated for clarification. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching. Topic: Easements Comment Number: 20 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: Please have the Land Surveyor preparing the offsite Easements provide us with closure reports for each. Response: There is only one offsite easement, on city property, proposed. The closure report has been provided for this drainage easement. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide closure reports for all Easements & Alignments. Topic: General Comment Number: 21 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please make sure that all plans showing the subdivision boundary dimensions match the Subdivision Plat. Response: The subdivision boundary is the same boundary as used in the plat. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 10 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Titles and numbers in index match noted sheets in specific plan sets. 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. Comment Number: 11 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Text has been masked. 04/20/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 07/22/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UPDATED: Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response letter. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John Von Nieda at 970‑221‑6565 or HYPERLINK "mailto:jvonnieda@fcgov.com" jvonnieda@fcgov.com Response: Corrections have been made as indicated. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 3 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Architectural sheet ranges have been added. 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. Comment Number: 4 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UPDATED: Please change the "underscore" in the equation to a "dash" or "minus sign". 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’. Comment Number: 5 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Plans have been updated with text masking. 04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please mask all text in line work, contours & hatching. Comment Number: 9 07/26/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL‑UNRESOLVED: The response letter noted that this was addressed, but I am not seeing that corrections were made to the plans submitted for this round. Please clarify and/or update plans. Response: Redlines regarding matchlines have been updated. 04/19/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Megan Harrity, Larimer County Office of the Assessor, (970) 498‑7065, mharrity@larimer.org, , Topic: General Comment Number: 1 07/12/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UNRESOLVED: This as a reminder about the two different tax districts that will affect the new Lot 1, Blk1. The original tax district comment was sent back in January 2021 and I don't want the owner to forget. Response: Comment noted. 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. 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 07/25/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL ‑ UPDATED: Please see redlines / comments. Response: Redlines and comments have been addressed on the Utility Plan redlines. 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.