The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutKING SOOPERS #146, MIDTOWN GARDENS MARKETPLACE (FORMERLY KMART REDEVELOPMENT ) - PDP - PDP160043 - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTS (2)�it�/ �� Fort Collins January 21, 2017 Mr. Joel Starbuck King Soopers Division Real Estate Manager 65 Tejon Denver, CO 80223 Mr. Carl Schmidlein Principal, Galloway 6162 S. Willow Drive, Suite 320 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 Planning, Development and Transportation Services Current Planning 281 N. College Ave. PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov. com/currentplanning RE: Cover Letter to Round One Comments — King Soopers Redevelopment Dear Joel and Carl: As you know, we discussed at length on Wednesday, January 18, 2017, the proposed development project Midtown Gardens Marketplace (King Soopers supermarket) P.D.P. #160043, Round Number One. At this meeting, comments and issues from various City departments and agencies were identified and explained and summarized in a draft comment letter. Since that meeting, however, Staff has taken a step back and revisited the fundamental issue of how this development, as currently proposed, fulfills the City's vision for future growth as documented in Citv Plan Fort Collins (2011). New development at this at this strategic location presents an opportunity to fulfill the vision of compact urban growth along the community's spine. This re-evaluation leads us to conclude that the proposed development needs to be enhanced with a multi-family housing component that is possibly combined with parking structure. As we mentioned at Preliminary Design Review (May 9, 201), promoting mixed-use development along the MAX B.R.T., is a critical component of City Plan and the 1 proposed development does not meet the policy expectations as documented in the City of Fort Collins Midtown Plan adopted by City Council on October 1, 2013. Staff realizes that this represents a shift in our position on this issue but we remind the applicant that we are still in the early stages of the review process. We also contend that it is better now to emphasize this issue than at the time of public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board (or City Council in the event of an appeal). We acknowledge that the applicant and design team are aware of the principles and polices of both City Plan and the Midtown Plan. In order to ensure that we are all on the same page with the City's vision, the following adopted comprehensive planning objectives are offered: "City Plan Principle LIV 5: The City will promote redevelopment and infill in areas identified on the Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas Map. The purpose of these areas is to: • Promote the revitalization of existing, underutilized commercial and industrial areas. • Concentrate higher density housing and mixed-use development in locations that are currently or will be served by high frequency transit in the future and that can support higher levels of activity. • Channel development where it will be beneficial and can best improve access to jobs, housing and services with fewer and shorter auto trips. • Promote reinvestment in areas where infrastructure already exists. • Increase economic activity in the area to benefit existing residents and businesses and, where necessary, provide the stimulus to redevelop. Areas identified on the Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas Map are parts of the city where general agreement exists that redevelopment and infill would be beneficial. These areas are generally considered a priority for efforts to reduce barriers and concentrate public investment in infrastructure. However, of the areas identified, the "community spine" shall be the highest priority location for such efforts." "City Plan Policy LIV 5.2 Target Public Investment along the Community Spine: Together, many of the Targeted Redevelopment Areas and Activity Centers form the "community spine" of the city along College Avenue and the Mason Corridor. The "community spine" shall be considered the highest priority area for the public investment in streetscape and urban design improvements and other infrastructure upgrades to support infill and redevelopment and to promote the corridor's transition to a series of transit-supportive, mixed-use activity centers over time." City of Fort Collins Midtown Plan adopted by City Council on October 1, 2013. For example, on page 1-5, the Plan states: "Midtown should include a rich mix of uses, and at higher densities than exist today. Commercial businesses will continue to be an important part of the formula, and more housing should be introduced, as well as civic and institutional uses. Housing, in the form of apartments and townhouses, should be developed to take advantage of the MAX transit system and help create more ridership for the MAX service, and to make more efficient use of land that is close to the city center. Some of this housing would be developed as upper levels of mixed use buildings that face onto College Avenue, while others would orient to cross streets, Mason Street, and to the MAX line. Housing should address a diversity of markets, including students, young professionals, families and seniors." City of Fort Collins Land Use Code — Section 1.2.2(A): "The purpose of the Land Use Code is to improve and protect the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring that all growth and development which occurs is consistent with this code, City Plan and its adopted components, including but not limited to, the Structure Plan, Principles and Policies and associated sub-area plans." (In this case, the applicable sub-area plan is the City of Fort Collins Midtown Plan.l We understand that the applicant and design team have expended considerable effort thus far and that time is of the essence based on entitlement and construction schedules. Staff commits to an expedient discussion of the issues raised including, possibly, finding creative solutions to funding a parking structure. We hope that by discussing these issues with the applicant, design team and perhaps with additional development partners, the City can foster an outcome that is mutually beneficial to all parties. Sincerely: � Ted Shepard Chief Planner xc: Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Tom Leeson, C.D.N.D. Director Fort Collins � -� Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North Coilege Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Coilins, CO 8d522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov. com.idevelopmentreview January 21, 2017 Carl Schmidtlein KING SOOPERS C/0 GALLOWAY 6162 S WILLOW DR STE 320 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 RE: King Soopers #146- Midtown Gardens Marketplace (formerly Kmart Redevelopment), PDP160043, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343 or tshepard @fcgov.com. Comment Summarv: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Ragasa, 970.221.6603, mraqasa@fcgov.com Topic: Easements Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/12/2017 01/12/2017: Offsite access easements will be needed on the property to the north (Extension of K-Mart Plaza). Currently the proposed access easement on the proposed site doesn't line up with the existing traffic easement located on Lot 2 of the Extension of K-Mart Plaza. This Development is also proposing several parking stalls and the exits to the pharmacy and the click and save stations off of this Lot. This access easement or a letter of intent will be needed prior to hearing. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/12/2017 01/12/2017: Please work with Traffic Operations regarding traffic/access requirements with this Project. Any offsite work (widening lanes, sidewalks, etc) will require easements or letters of intent prior to hearing. A combined access easement can be granted for the right turn lane widening on College, the drive aisle and the detached sidewalk connection to the north. Topic: General Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: Please refer to Redlines for various Utility Plan cleanup items. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: All driveways will need to be reconstructed to meet current standards. Please refer to LCUASS drawing 707.1. The driveways need to include concrete to the back of the walk at a thickness of 8" as well as directional ADA ramps. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: Since the gas station is a part of Lot 1, improvements along the frontage will be required. This includes detached sidewalks. If you are proposing to not include work in this area, a defined lot will be needed. ROW and easements will still be required to be shown on the Plat. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: An inlet is being shown within the sidewalk on College Avenue. On site improvements need to be independent of the sidewalk. Maybe an area inlet completely onsite, separate from the public infrastructure can be installed. (Schedule 54) Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: Site lighting can't be within the public ROW. Please remove the proposed site light along College Avenue (Schedule 39) Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: Please verify the setback requirements from the public ROW from planning. If no setbacks will be required behind the sidewalk, wheel stops will be needed along these stalls along both College Avenue (South of the access) and Drake Road (Along the detached walk near bus pullout�. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: A site plan should not be included in the Utility Plans. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/09J2017 01/09/2017: Public sidewalks should be a minimum of 6" thick. Please revise Section A-A on Sheet 6. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: There are critical public improvements that are needed along Drake Road. A full bus pullout is needed for the existing number of trips and expected volume of growth. This would mean the pullout would need to be designed in a way that wouldn't block bike traffic, so the travel, bike and bus pullout can't be combined. In order to get this pullout, maintain a continuous 10' detached sidewalk and to prevent the loss of parking, the existing trees will most likely have to be removed. Based on the plans provided, moving the flowline of the pullout would conflict with the existing trees. If you think the pullout can be designed and the existing trees can be salvaged, please provide an exhibit of exact tree locations to determine if the existing trees can be saved. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01/09/2017: Road profiles will be needed for portions that the flow line changes. The portion of the proposed bus pullout will be needed. Also, you may want to look at this design closely. With the existing trees and grades, I'm not sure if the 2% minimum cross slopes in the sidewalks (and bus landing) will be maintained. 2 Topic: Plat Comment Number: 2 01/09/2017: Please update the Plat language to include the City's standard language for the Certificate of Dedication and the Maintenance Guarantee. Please add the Repair Guarantee Statement. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017: Dates will need to be changed to 2017 during final mylar Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017: Add the following note to the Plat: "There shall be no private conditions, covenants or restrictions that prohibit or limit the installation of resource conserving equipment or landscaping that are allowed by sections 12-120 —12-122 of the City Code." Comment Number: 5 01/09/2017: Please refer to all "Traffic Easements" as Access Easements on the propose Plat. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017: Will there be any emergency access easements needed with this project? Currentty none are being shown on the Plat. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017: The right of way dedication along College Avenue will need to be extended to both the north and south property lines so that when detached sidewalks are continued to either the north or south of the site, there would be continuity. More conversation will be needed regarding the sidewalk connection to the north. Please refer to redlines for these locations. The ROW lines should not follow the transition back to an attached sidewalk. Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 01 /09/2017 01 /09/2017 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/09/2017: Right of way and easements along Drake Road will need to match the improvements required for this project along the entire property frontage, including the existing gas station site. Detached walks will be needed to the west of the bus station as well as to the east of the driveway (Gas Station site). Please provide the necessary ROW and the required 15' easement behind the ROW. More ROW may be required for the right turn lane that Traffic Operations is requesting. Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General 01 /09/2017 01 /09/2017 01 /09/2017 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/21/2016 12/21/16: The project owes an additional $47.25 for PDP TDRfees. Based on the area being platted as being 11.189 acres. 3 Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Overall planting plan looks like a good start. Increase species diversity through additions of at least one more species each to be included in the following categories: ornamental trees, shrubs, ornamental grasses and perennials. Suggestions/species to consider: Saskatoon Serviceberry (A. alnifolia), American Plum (P. americana), Flowering dogwood (C. florida), Four-wing Saltbush (A. canescens), Mountain ninebark (P. virginiana), Rocky Mountain juniper (S. scopulorum), Dwarf pussytoes (A. parvifolia), Yellow coneflower (E. paradoxa), Sideoats grama (B. curtipendula), Indian grass (S. avenaceum), Prairie dropseed (S. heterolepsis). Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Thank you for the details on the vines and greenscreen to support them. It appears www.greenscreen.com products and information is to be utilized. Include specific notes on plans illustrating how to properly install the screen and explicit directions on proper planting of vines to ensure successful establishment. Provide this information in construction documents as well. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 01 /20/2017: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Please total the mitigation trees and provide upsized mitigation sizes according to that number. • Shade trees: 3" caliper • Ornamental trees: 2.5" caliper • Evergreen trees: 8' height Comment Number: 2 01 /20/2017: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Trees 35 and 44 are prominent, large trees. Forestry requests that the applicant explore if it is reasonably feasible to retain them and what modifications might need to be made. Comment Number: 3 01 /20/2017: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Please switch the species of trees 6 and 7 on the Landscape Plans and in the Tree Analysis. Tree 6 should be a 21" Honeylocust and tree 7 should be a 16" Nonnray Maple. Forestry would be okay with the removal of tree #7 which is in poor condition, so as to provide additional sidewalk separation for tree #6. 4 Comment Number: 4 01 /20/2017: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Several existing trees to retain appear to be quite close to the proposed sidewalk (trees 2, 5, 7, 21, 22, 23, and 24). Please provide 3 feet of separation between the walk and trees measured from the outer bark of the trees. Also please explore with the City Engineering Department if there are any other options to provide these trees more space. The Forestry staff reviewed tress 21, 22, 23, and 24 on January 17, 2017. Comment Number: 5 01 /20/2017: Street Tree Selection: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Northern Red Oak is not on the City of Fort Collins Street Tree list. Please replace with species on that list such as Shumard Red Oak, Kentucky Coffeetree, or Bur Oak. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01 /20/2017: Private Property Tree Selection Please change the following tree species: Norway Maple, and Northern Red Oak. Norway Maple: not readily adapted to harsh urban environments Northern Red Oak: not adapted to soils in Fort Collins Reduce quantities and review plans for appropriate use of Net Leaf Hackberry and Shiny Leaf Hawthorn. These two native shrub-like trees are best used in large planting beds and not as specimen tree locations or in parking lot islands. Evaluate changing the ornamental species used in sidewalk cutouts and planters across the front of buildings as shown on sheets L3.1, L3.3, and L3.4. These currently show the use of Amur Maple and Shadblow Serviceberry. Consider using alternative species that are more upright such as Bigtooth Maple, Chanticleer Pear, Red Barron Crabapple, or Japanese Tree Lilac. Suggested Alternatives Shade trees: o Kentucky Coffeetree o Western Hackberry o Catalpa o Bur Oak o Chinkapin Oak o Shumard Oak Ornamentals (upright form): o Chanticleer Pear o Red Barron Crabapple o Japanese Tree Lilac Evergreen trees: o Southwest White Pine o Colorado Blue Spruce o Austrian Pine �Arnold Sentinel� Comment Number: 7 01 /20/2017: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Check the Tree Diversity Standard found in LUC 3.2.1 D3 and adjust quantities of minimum species if needed. Please list the percentage of each tree species used to confirm this standard is being met. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01 /20/2017: Please contact Ted Shepard, City of Fort Collins Chief Planner, to determine if any landscaping would be needed in the parking lot islands (currently shown in cross hatch and generally shown across the building). Comment Number: 9 01 /20/2017: Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 Please include the Standard Landscape Notes, Street Tree Notes, and bolded Permit Box Note on the Landscape Plan, with the Permit Box note placed on all sheets. These notes are available through the City Forester. Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 01 /09/2017: rhovland@fcqov.com Comment Originated: 01/09/2017 Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting: Pre-Submittal meetings are required to assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new commercial or multi-family projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The proposed project should be in the early to mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective and is typically scheduled after the Current Planning conceptual review meeting. Applicants of new commercial or multi-family projects are advised to call 416-2341 to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to present site plans, floor plans, and elevations and be able to discuss code issues of occupancy, square footage and type of construction being proposed. Construction shall comply with the following adopted codes as amended: 2012 International Building Code (IBC) 2012 International Residential Code (IRC) 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC) 2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) 2012 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2014 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Fort Collins has amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the fcgov.com web page to view them. � Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009. Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF. Frost Depth: 30 inches. Wind Load: 100- MPH 3 Second Gust Exposure B. Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code Use 1. Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2012 IRC Chapter 11 or 2012 IECC. 2. Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2012 IECC residential chapter. 3. Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2012 IECC commercial chapter. King Soopers — project specific concerns: 1. 60 feet of perimeter open space around this building and a fire sprinkler system is required to build larger than 60k sq.ft.. 2. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling. 3. Low-flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are required. 4. Low VOC interior finishes. Department: Light And Power Contact: Coy Althoff, , CAlthoff@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/12/2017 01/12/2017: Light & Power serves the existing facility. 3-phase power is available on the west side of the building and also along the north side of Drake Rd. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/12/2017 01/12/2017: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/12/2017 01/12/2017: As your project begins to move forward please contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the streetlight, transformer and electric meter locations, please show the locations on the utility plans. Minimum clearances for pad-mount transformers are to be 10' from paved surface, 8' clearance at the front and 3' clearances around the back and sides. Comment Number: 4 01/12/2017: Please provide a one line diagram and a C-1 form to Light and Power Engineering. The C-1 form can be found at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1 Form.pdf Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated 01/12/2017: You may contact FCU Light & Power, project engineering if you have questions. (970) 221-6700. You may reference Light & Power's Electric Comment Originated: 01/12/2017 Service Standards at 01 /12/2017 ` http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandar ds_FI NAL_17J une2016.pdf You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. Department: PFA Contact: Cal Sheesley, 970-416-2599, csheeslevCpoudre-fire.orq Topic: General Comment Number: 1 01/17/2017: 2015 IFC CODE ADOPTION Comment Originated: 01/10/2017 The Poudre Fire Authority and City of Fort Collins are in the process of adopting the 2015 International Fire Code. Building plan reviews shall be subject to the adopted version of the fire code in place at the time of plan review submittal and permit application. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/10/2017 01/10/2017: PUBLIC-SAFETY RADIO AMPLIFICATION SYSTEM TEST > IFC 510: New buildings require a fire department, emergency communication system evaluation after the core/shell but prior to final build out. For the purposes of this section, fire walls shall not be used to define separate buildings. Where adequate radio coverage cannot be established within a building, public-safety radio amplification systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with criteria established by the Poudre Fire Authority. Comment Number: 3 01/10/2017: WATER SUPPLY Comment Originated: 01/10/2017 Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. A hydrant is required within 300' of any Commercial Building and on 600' centers, as measured along an approved path of vehicle travel (i.e. fire lane or public road). The preliminary plan indicates appropriate hydrant placement within the development site; however, hydrants will be required along W Drake and S College to correct hydrant separation deficiencies in the area. Any alteration to the existing hydrant plan within the development will trigger a re-evaluation of hydrant placement. It's the responsibility of the applicant to verify hydrant volume and pressure. A hydrant flow test may be scheduled on line at www.poudre-fire.org. Code language for commercial requirements are listed below. > IFC 507.5 and PFA Policy: COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS: Hydrants to provide 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter. > IFC 507.5.5: A 3-foot clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants except as otherwise required or approved. > IFC 507.5.6: Where fire hydrants are subject to impact by a motor vehicle, guard post or other approved means shall comply with section 312. � Comment Number: 4 01/10/2017: FIRE LANES Comment Originated: 01/10/2017 Fire access is required to within 150' of all exterior portions of any building, or facility as measured by an approved route around the perimeter. This shall apply to both the new and existing structures within the property line. For the purposes of this section, fire access cannot be measured from an arterial road (College Ave or Drake Rd) and any private drive serving as a fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) and be designed to standard fire lane specifications. Therefore, if fire lanes have not been previously provided on this site, EAE dedication will be required at this time. So as to meet perimeter access needs for this site plan, the drive lanes to the East, South, and West of the King Sooper's Bldg. shall be dedicated as EAE's. Fire access in the form of a dedicated EAE will also be required to serve the existing buildings on south and east areas of the property. Also be advised that the drive lane on the west side of the building will create a long, dead-end fire lane and therefore will require a dedicated turnaround, unless the drive lane on the north side is also incorporated into the EAE with an off-site easement, as city engineering is requesting. Dedicating this off-site drive lane as an EAE should alleviate the need for a turnaround on the building's west side. An AutoTurn exhibit showing truck turning movements throughout the site is requested. In addition to perimeter access requirements, aerial apparatus access requirements are triggered for buildings in excess of 30' in height. Based on preliminary information, the height of the building remains uncertain. Please identify parapet height in future submittals. Code language and specifications provided below. > IFC 503.1.1: Approved fire Lanes shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Comment Number: 5 01/11/2017: FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements: > Shall be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE). > Maintain the required 20 foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance. > Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. > Dead-end fire access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. > The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. Turning radii shall be detailed on submitted plans. 0 > Be visible by painting and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. Sign locations or red curbing should be labeled and detailed on final plans. > Additional access requirements exist for buildings greater than 30' in height. Refer to Appendix D of the 2012 IFC or contact PFA for details. International Fire Code 503.2.3, 503.2.4, 503.2.5, 503.3, 503.4 and Appendix D; FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006 and Local Amendments. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/10/2017: AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS GREATER THAN 30 FEET IN HEIGHT > IFC D105.1: WHERE REQUIRED - Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. > IFC D105.2; FCLUC 3.6.2(B)2006; and Local Amendments: WIDTH - Aerial fi�e apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 30 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. > IFC D105.3: PROXIMITY TO BUILDING - At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM This building will require a NFPA13 sprinkler system under a separate permit. Please contact Assistant Fire Marshall Joe Jaramillo with any fire sprinkler related questions at 970.416.2868. Comment Number: 8 01/18/2017: PREMISE IDENTIFICATION & WAYFINDING Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 Addresses shall be posted on each structure and where otherwise needed to aid in wayfinding. Code language provided below. > IFC 505.1: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible, visible from the street or road fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 10 01/18/2017: FIRE DEPARTMENT TRAINING OPPORTUNITY Poudre Fire Authority is currently looking to acquire a commercial property to use for a major emphasis drill (lost or injured firefighter), during the month of March. The training is intended to be non-destructive in nature: no walls or ceilings breached, no water flow, etc. Please contact me if your site may be willing to pursue a discussion along this line and I will put you in touch with our training division chief. Thank you. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/21/2017: This comment has been revised since the project review meeting on Wednesday, January 18, 2017 which generated a draft summary of the comments from the Planning Department. Instead, please see Staff's cover letter to these comments dated January 21, 2017. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/21/2017:This comment has been revised since the project review meeting on Wednesday, January 18, 2017 which generated a draft summary of the comments from the Planning Department. Instead, please see Staff's cover letter to these comments dated January 21, 2017. If, after consideration of the issues raised in the cover letter, there remains a large parking field along College Avenue, then such parking lot must be mitigated with a wide variety of mitigation measures. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: In the Planning Objectives, the applicant states: "Along the west side of the site, accommodations have been made to incorporate the area required for the Grand Promenade, which displays the applicant's focus on connectivity and multi-modality." Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: But other than a label on the Site Plan, there are no improvements indicated that would actually implement the Grand Promenade. Similarly, the Landscape Plan simply labels this area as having a utility line. The Promenade needs to be implemented with this project. The vision in the Midtown Plan states that the Grand Promenade is to be a key circulation concept. Features must include, at minimum, a concrete path for bikes and pedestrians as well as other features such as decorative lighting, benches, seat walls, and the like to promote an attractive urban corridor that facilitates north-south travel. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Site Plan, south of the southern truck ramp, there is a large undefined area that is not labeled and appears to be all asphalt. Please describe what is planned for this area. Is this maneuvering room for the truck ramp? Is there any way this amount of asphalt can be reduced or mitigated? Please provide flow arrows or a diagram that explains the circulation patterns in this area. 11 Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Site Plan, on the north side, access to the click-list parking is via what appears to be an access drive on the adjoining property. Please label this access drive and indicate that King Soopers has the right to use (or will soon obtain the right to use) this off-site private drive. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Based on observations of supermarkets and drugstores, there does not appear to be a need for two pharmacy drive-through lanes. The North College Market Place store features only one. Staff recommends that the amount of structure and hard surface required for the second lane be removed as being excessive. This would provide additional area for landscaping and contribute to the midtown gardens objective. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Site Plan, on the west side, please label all screen walls. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Site Plan, it appears the cart corrals are counted as parking spaces. Please adjust accordingly. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Landscape Plan, please note that every effort should be made to preserve the existing trees that are within the parking lot by adjusting the location of the parking lot landscape islands. For example if the handicap parking shifted over one parking bay to the north, healthy existing trees could be preserved. Large mature trees will contribute to shading and promote the midtown gardens theme. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: There needs to be more Evergreen Trees and Shrubs and more variety of each. One area that would benefit from additional evergreens is along both sides of the entrance along College Avenue. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: For example, the Landscape Plans indicate that there are only two types of Evergreen Trees. For a project of this size, this limited variety is insufficient in order to provide year-round visual interest. Please add Bacheri, Hoopsi, Iseli Fastigiate, Vanderwolf, in any combination, for greater variety and year-round effectiveness. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: The same comment applies to the lack of variety of Evergreen Shrubs. Please add other species such as Mugo Pine or any variety of Upright Junipers or other species, in any combination. Relying on just Sea Green Junipers is monotonous. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Landscape Plan, along the click-list parking, there needs to be a shrub bed that helps shield the parking. 12 Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Landscape Plan, there is an area about 15-feet side by 65 feet long that is not landscaped. Please note that shrubs can be placed within four feet of a water line. This is an excessively large area to be void of landscaping especially if the midtown gardens theme is being promoted. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: There are five parking lot end caps in front of the store. Staff recalls the conversation that the middle one in front of the main entrance needs to be at-grade and flush with the store entry with no raised island based on safety and practicality. Staff supports this concept. Of the remaining four, the two on the north are landscaped but the two on the south are not. Let's further discuss this concept including why the two on the south do not feature shade trees. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Landscape Plan, the Planting Legend / Schedule must indicate for each tree its percentage of the total number of trees. The maximum percentage of any one species is 15%. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Staff supports the meandering sidewalk along College Avenue in a manner that preserves as many existing trees as possible. Thank you for providing a creative solution that meets multiple objectives. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: It appears that additional design work is needed to fully resolve the extent of the bus pull-out lane and the resulting location of the sidewalk in relationship to the existing street trees. A detail of this area will be needed that shows both horizontal and vertical relationships at a larger scale. When this design is resolved, we will need to find parking lot screening solutions along Drake Road that are feasible. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Please show the electrical transformer on both the Site and Landscape Plans so we can see how it's either screened by an enclosure or landscaping. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the architectural elevations, staff is concerned the building as proposed does not comply with Section 3.5.3(E). For example, there is no distinctive base as required. With the exception of the east elevation, and portions of the south, there are significant wall areas where the same material is featured from grade to top. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: There is an excessive reliance on smooth face c.m.u. Further, when combined with the other primary material, ground-face c.m.u. means that most of the building is clad in a similar material with only slight differentiation. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Also, per Section 3.5.3(E), the building is required to feature a distinctive top. For flat roofed buildings, this means cornices, stepped parapets, or sloping accent features, or overhangs with brackets. A cornice 13 need not be masonry as we have seen synthetic stucco and metal forms used with effectiveness as long as there are meaningful dimensions that are clearly visible. (Metal coping systems are not acceptable.) Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Also, per Section 3.5.3(E), walls are required to be articulated with relief provided at least every 30 feet. (No scale is provided.) The east elevation clearly complies. The south elevation is difficult to assess due to the lack of a scale. The west and north elevations need additional treatments in order to comply. Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the west elevation, it appears the only architectural relief is accomplished by roof scuppers and downspouts. Since this elevation faces the Grand Promenade and the MAX B.R.T., more attention needs to be paid to finding compliance with Section 3.5.3(E). Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: In addition, the screen walls along the west elevation will need to be designed in such a way as to match the primary building exterior material and provide horizontal relief. Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Similarly, on the north elevation, the only relief is provided by the pharmacy drive-through canopy and one window. Additional relief is required. Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: The Midtown Plan states: "New development will be of high quality, sustainable urban form that supports a pedestrian environment and fronts onto MAX through four-sided block development." (Page 20.) "Buildings should use materials that are durable and well detailed. Masonry, in the form of stone, brick and high quality architectural metals, should be encouraged and detailed to provide a human scale and convey a sense of permanence." (Page 20.) In summary, Staff recommends that we continue to meet with the architectural design team to explore how best to achieve compliance. Staff suggests that the design team begin to think seriously about a new and distinctive base material, wall plane recesses and projections, projecting wall pilasters, the use of accents such as overhangs in any combination in order to provide the necessary horizontal and vertical relief. Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: A material sample board will be needed for the worksession and public hearing. Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: The rooftop mechanical screen wall material needs to be specified. 14 Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Based on a recent site inspection of the North College Market Place, staff remains concerned about properly screening the outside storage of materials at the rear of store. For example, staff would like to discuss various options for screening the composing containers. Also, the outside storage of various appurtenances such as pallets, racks, miscellaneous containers, and the like must be screened. On the Lighting Plan, please provide a specification that the Backlight, Uplight and Glare (B.U.G.) ratings are 1— 0-1 respectively. Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On the Lighting Plan, in the Luminaire Schedule, please add a column that specifies that all fixtures must not exceed a maximum of 3,000 degrees Kelvin. Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Is the applicant interested in fixtures with automatic dimming capability? This would save on kilowatts during times of little or no customer activity. If so, please indicate. Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: On sheet one of the Plat, please provide a total site area contained within the boundaries of the plat. We need this for agenda descriptions and the staff report. Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: For further information on solid waste management, recycling and composting, please contact Caroline Mitchell, 221-6288. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: Drainage Report Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Drainage Plan: Please label or callout all "outfall" locations. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017: LID Exhibit: This plan indicates that there are at least 12 different rain garden basins. There are some shaded landscape islands indicating rain gardens that aren't called out and some shaded areas that don't look to line up with landscape islands. Please clean up these items. Please note that each rain garden will be required to have its own calculation with the correct tributary area for each. It seems like a different approach to LID is warranted based on the significant number of rain gardens, coupled with landscape requirements for each island and the regraded parking lot. Let's discuss. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017: Page 6 discusses existing offsite detention. Please note that there is no offsite detention tributary and downstream of this site. Comment Number: 9 01/11/2017 01h 1/2017 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Page 9 includes a table for redeveloped impervious area. Please help me understand what this means. 15 Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: The storm drains have been analyzed for the 2-year storm. If the onsite and downstream offsite pipes can only handle the minor storm, you will need to then show where the 100-yr storm flows will be routed and what the ponding depth at each outfall or inlet is going to be on the site. Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Regarding the private storm lines in this parcel — previous field investigation indicated that the pipes are in poor condition and don't function properly. My previous comment during Conceptual Review stated that these pipes needed replacement, but the response to this comment and the plans indicate that you plan to utilize these existing pipes. This is not an adequate response and we need to discuss this further. Adequate capacity and functionality of these pipes is required and must be shown. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: There are several underdrain pipes that cross the existing storm pipes in the parking lot. Please verify that there are not crossing conflicts here. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: The grading plans indicate significant grade changes in some areas of the parking lot (approx. 2' of fill along the front of the building). Please note that this is not a"mill and overlay" and cannot be exempt from the LID requirements. Re-grading of the parking lot is considered "redevelopment" and is subject to the LID requirements. Please update your LID calculations accordingly. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: For the 18-inch storm line tie-in north of the property, our records indicate that this junction is an inlet box so tie-in may require the installation of a new structure here. Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, �schlam@fcqov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/27/2016 12/27/2016: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft., therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted do not meet requirements. Please submit; an Erosion Control Plan (based on redlines), an Erosion Control Report (did not meet City Criteria please see erosion control criteria returned in the packet) , and an Escrow / Security Calculation (Not supplied but needed). If you need clarification concerning the erosion control section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations 16 Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please add the title that is on the other plan sets. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please revise the sub-title as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please change the Basis Of Bearings to match the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: 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 FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = NAVD88 - X.XX'. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: The legal description is not necessary. The sub-title is a legal description for the property. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: There are spelling issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets. Comment Number: 23 01/20/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 24 01/20/2017: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please tie the coordinate values shown for utilities to the project boundary. We would prefer that this be done by adding property corner values to each sheet, or showing the property corner values on the horizontal control plans and adding a note to each sheet with coordinate values. 17 Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please revise the sub-title as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 11 01/20/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles on the noted sheets. See redlines. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: There is text that needs to be rotated 180°. See redlines. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please add the title that is on the other plan sets. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: 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. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please revise the sub-title as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017: Please change the Basis Of Bearings to match the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017: Benchmark Statements are not required. If it is to remain, it needs to match the required format. 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 01 /20/2017 01 /20/2017 18 UNADJUSTED FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = NAVD88 - X.XX'. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: The legal description is not necessary. The sub-title is a legal description for the property. Comment Number: 6 01/20/2017: There are spelling issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 7 01/20/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 8 01/20/2017: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/20/2017 01/20/2017: Please remove notes & labels as marked. See redlines. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01/17/2017: The EB Left turn bay into the access off of Drake has no storage. We will need to work with you on roadway improvements that allow for additional storage in this turn bay. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01/17/2017: We would like to work with you on access operations at both the Drake Road and College Avenue accesses. Left turns out of both access locations can be difficult and raise safety concerns. We will need to work with the property owner to the South to determine if a limited movement access could work. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017: The traffic study is showing 143 right turns in at the Drake access. Based on figure 8-4 in LCUASS this turning volume exceeds the warrant for a right turn lane at this location. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017: The existing College Avenue access right turn lane needs to be brought up to standard. 01/17/2017 01/17/2017 Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01/17/2017: The EB Left and NB Left turning movements at Drake and College are LOS F and variance letters need to be provided to account for not meeting the standard. 19 Department: Transportation Planning Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-416-4320, slorson@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01/17/2017: TRANSFORT In order for us fully analyze the compromised design at the Drake Street bus stop pull-out; we need a more detailed drawing of the stop. Please include, exact locations and caliper of tree trunks, actual travel lane widths, topography and sections of the proposed sidewalk, curb, gutter, pull-out, bus pad and trees. We need this information to determine if the proximity of the concrete improvements will damage the trees we are trying to preserve. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017 01/17/2017: TRANSFORT The bus stop pad needs to comply with Type III Wide Parkway amenity detail (Figure 19) from the Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines (http://www.ridetransfort.com/img/site_specific/uploads/Final_Design_Standard s.pdf). This may require a reduction in sidewalk width to accommodate the larger pad. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/10/2017 01/10/2017: 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 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Heather McDowell, 970-224-6065, hmcdowell@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017: All unused water or sewer services associated with this property will be required to be abandoned at the utility main, per City of Fort Collins standards and specifications. Contractor shall coordinate with City of Fort Collins Utilities Field Operations Department, (970) 221-6700, during abandonment procedures. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017: The demo plan indicates removal of trees that are right on top of the existing water main in the east parking lot. How do you propose to remove these trees? We want to make sure the plans address this adequately as we don't want the existing water main to be damaged in the process. Comment Number: 3 01/11/2017 01 /11 /2017 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: The demo plan shows some of the storm pipes on a layer that makes them look as though they are proposed. Please clarify linetypes on this plan. 20 Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Water infrastructure: You are proposing to abandon the two existing hydrant laterals in the east parking lot and replace these with new laterals. Please indicate the location of the existing and proposed laterals relative to each other on the plans in some way. The proposed water main connection shown on the north side of the building is not in the location that its needed. Per the comment provided at conceptual review, the water main connection needs to occur offsite to the north. This connection is a much shorter distance (�75') than the one you have shown. The existing water main along the west side of the building is located below a large electrical duct bank. For this reason, we would like to look at abandoning this section of water main and determining the best way to still provide hydrant coverage along this back side of the building and water/fire services to the building. This needs to be discussed further. There are no valves on the existing fire or commercial services to the building so construction sequencing will need to occur in such a way as to allow for full isolation of this waterline segment PRIOR to building demolition. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated 01/11/2017: It looks as though you are proposing a new sewer main along the west side of the building. However, the placement doesn't meet current separation standards. Sewer mains are required to have a 10' minimum separation from other utilities and a 15' minimum separation from buildings. It looks like you may be able to simply eliminate the main along the west side of the building if you're able to run the northerly sewer service connection through the building plumbing. This needs to be discussed further. 01/11/2017 Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: All existing and proposed utilities need to be shown on the overall landscape plan. Currently, the proposed utilities are included but the existing utilities are not. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Standard City of Fort Collins landscape notes include a note about required separations between utilities and trees and shrubs. Please make sure this note is included and that the separation requirements have been met. Currently, it looks as though there are several trees proposed in landscape islands in the parking lot that are located on or too close to existing utilities. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: Trees are not allowed to be planted within existing or proposed utility easements. Please include these easements on the landscape plans. 21 Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: There are several landscape islands at the site that are also proposed to include rain gardens within the island. Typically tree installations within rain gardens does not work because the root systems interfere with the media and functionality of the rain garden. We need to discuss how to approach the LID requirements or this site. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: The existing 15' utility easement along the existing waterline will need to be upsized to meet our current standards, which is 10' either side of the waterline, or 20' total. Also, the new hydrant laterals will also need to be in a 20' easement. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/11/2017 01/11/2017: The diagonal sanitary sewer main will need to be in an easement that is 15' either side of the sewer main, or 30' total. Department: Zoning Contact: Marcus Glasgow, Topic: General 970-416-2338, mqlasqow@fcqov.com Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Please include parking stall and drive aisle dimensions on site plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Please show location of bicycle parking on site plan. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: The landscape islands on west side of lot must be landscaped with a raised curb. LUC 3.2.1(E)(5)(c) Landscaped Islands. In addition to any pedestrian refuge areas, each landscaped island shall include one (1) or more canopy shade trees, be of length greater than eight (8) feet in its smallest dimension, include at least eighty (80) square feet of ground area per tree to allow for root aeration, and have raised concrete curbs. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/18/2017 01/18/2017: Photometric site plan shows excessive amount of light spillage on all sides of the property. LUC 3.2.4(D)(8) Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct result of the on-site lighting. 22