HomeMy WebLinkAboutEAST OAK TOWNHOMES - FDP240009 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - Responses
1
Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview
January 19, 2024
RE: East Oak Townhomes, PDP230018, Round Number 1
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of East Oak Townhomes. If you have questions about any
comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your
Development Review Coordinator, Brandy Bethurem Harras via phone at 970-416-2744 or
via email at bbethuremharras@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Brandy Bethurem Harras bbethuremharras@fcgov.com 970-416-2744
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: 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!
RMS Response: Thank you
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: SUBMITTAL:
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. Comments requiring action
should NOT have a response such as noted or acknowledged. You will need to
provide references to specific project plans, pages, reports, or explanations of
2
why comments have not been addressed [when applicable].
RMS Response: Thank you, responses below.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: SUBMITTAL:
Correct file naming is required as part of a complete submittal. Please follow
the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming Standards found here:
https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic-submittal-requiremen
ts-and-file-naming-standards_v1_8-1-19.pdf?1680306305.
File names should have the corresponding number, followed by the file type
prefix, project information, and round number. For example: 1_SITE
PLAN_Project Name_FDP_Rd1. A list of numbers and prefixes for each file
can be found at the link above.
RMS Response: Thank you, files submitted with naming above.
Comment Number: 4
*AutoCad SHX Text on Geotech Report
01/16/2024: SUBMITTAL:
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" (version 2016.1) or “PDFSHX (version 2017 and
newer) in the command line and enter "0".
Read this article at Autodesk.com for more 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
EEC Response: PDF flattened.
Comment Number: 5
01/16/2024: SUBMITTAL:
Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being
the cut-off for routing the same week. When you are preparing to resubmit your
plans, please notify me with an expected submittal date with as much advanced
notice as possible.
RMS Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 6
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the
expiration of your project.
RMS Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 7
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an
additional fee of $3,000.00.
3
RMS Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 8
01/16/2024: NOTICE:
A Development Review sign will be posted on the property. This sign will be
posted through the final decision and appeal process. A request for the removal
of signs will be made by your Development Review Coordinator at the
appropriate time.
RMS Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 9
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to
moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff will need to agree the project
is ready for Hearing approximately 4 to 8 weeks prior to the hearing.
RMS Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 10
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
This proposed project is processing as a Type 2 Development Plan. The
decision maker for Type 2 is the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission. For
the hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 800 feet
(excluding public right-of-way and publicly owned open space).
RMS Response: Noted.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Arlo Schumann aschumann@fcgov.com 970-221-6599
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Have you had discussions with a trash service provider regarding bin pickup? Is
the intention that the hauler will remove and replace the bins in the enclosure
area? A summary of your conversations with the local haulers as part of the
narrative document would be helpful.
RMS Response: Email was sent to COFC Planning on May 15, 2024 confirming that Republic Service has
reviewed what is proposed and is comfortable with the approach.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Tandem parking spots are not counted towards the minimum parking counts. I
don't believe these are needed if you are following the TOD parking standards.
Since single-family attached is not considered a multi-family type of use, a
modification will need to be requested to evaluate the parking under the TOD
parking standards. This may be part of modification #6.
RMS Response: Modification 6 now includes the following code sections: 3.2.2(K)(1)(a)(1) and
3.2.2(K)(1)(a)(1)(a) for unit count requirements and demand mitigation strategy. Modification was approved
at P&Z hearing.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Stairs Encroaching into ROW. With the expected major encroachment request
4
for the stairs along Matthews, we'd like to have some discussion on alternative
unit entrances if for some reason the encroachment was revoked. It appears a
few of the rear doors enter garages. I believe the building code would not
accept that as a primary exit.
We would like to include a note on the planning coversheet as well as language
in the DA that modifications to the units will be made as needed to comply with
code standards if the encroachment is revoked.
RMS Response: Noted has been added to cover page of development set.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The lighting plan needs to include additional information. The allowable lumen
budget for the common area needs to be listed along with the proposed total
lumens proposed. The color temp of the fixtures should be included in the table
data. Any lighting not in the common areas only needs to meet building code
requirements and doesn't need to be included in the lighting budget.
Please see redlines.
A copy of our lighting compliance worksheet and an example of a lumen budget
table will be included in the final comment package as a resource.
RJM Response: Acknowledged, drawings updated.
Comment Number: 5
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The Land Use tables need to show the proposed and allowed lot floor areas
(including the max rear) for each SFA lot. These need to be shown for each
townhome lot. Since the buildings nearly cover the entirety of the townhome lots
this standard will need to be part of the modification package.
Allowable Floor Area per 4.9(D)(1) This seems to just be a definition
Allowable Floor Area on Rear Half of Lots per 4.9(D)(5) Included
Dimensional Standards per 4.9(D)(6) - This includes for front, side, and rear
setbacks since these are measured from the SFA lots. Included
RMS Response: All of these code section have been wrapped into one Modification as discussed.
Modification was approved at P&Z Hearing
Comment Number: 6
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
A modification request will be required to address the 'Building Design'
standards in 4.9(E)(1)(a)
-(4) The second floor shall not overhang the front or side exterior walls
-(7)The minimum roof pitch shall be 2:12
These modifications may be grouped under a modification of 4.9(E)(1)(a) Building Design
Au Workshop Response: Please see the separate modification request document.
Comment Number: 7
01/18/2024: FOR HEARING:
Regarding modification #3, it would be helpful to show the relationship between
the proposed building and the setback plane for walls higher than 18'.
FOR INFORMATION: Staff supports the set of modifications as currently
presented in this first submittal round. there appear to be additional
modifications that need to be added. It would be staff's recommendation to
5
combine modification requests by general topic rather than a separate
modification for each line of code. For example all items under 4.9(D)(6)
Dimension Standards could be combined into a single modification rather than
(a), (b), (d) etc. individually.
I'm happy to work with the team on how to group the requests.
RMS Response: Thank you Arlo, we will package per topic instead of individual code section as noted.
Comment Number: 8
01/18/2024: FOR HEARING:
We will need a shadow analysis and summary of conclusions as required in 3.5.1(G)
Au Workshop Response: Shadow analysis and summary of conclusions is now included in the
documentation. Please see sheets A10 and A11.
Comment Number: 9
01/18/2024: FOR HEARING:
There is concern that the corner turn in the drive aisle is very tight and vehicles
may tend to clip the corner planting area. See redline on site plan.
Wilson Response: A turn template exhibit has been provided with this submittal.
Comment Number: 10
01/19/2024: INFORMATION:
Please keep in mind per LUC 3.5.1 (I) (2) All mechanical equipment shall be
incorporated into the overall design theme of the building and the landscape so
that the architectural design is continuous and uninterrupted by ladders, towers,
fences and equipment and no attention is attracted to the functions by use of
screening materials that are different from or inferior to the principal materials of
the building and landscape. These areas shall be located and screened so that
the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of
view from adjacent properties and public streets.
Au Workshop Response: Thank you. At this point, the mechanical system is planned as geothermal and
there will be no exterior mechanical equipment to screen. If this changes in the future, code-compliant
mechanical screening will be provided as required.
Department: Historic Preservation
Contact: Jim Bertolini jbertolini@fcgov.com 970-416-4250
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
HISTORIC SURVEY: Some information below is repeated from conceptual
development review comments. The properties at 216 & 220 E. Oak Street
have up-to-date historic survey findings issued on December 9, 2021 (valid
through December 9, 2026, and/or during an actively filed development plan).
Both properties were determined Not Eligible and can be demolished as part of
the project. Further historic survey is not necessary.
Au Workshop Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
DESIGN COMPATIBILITY - REFERENCE: For the purposes of applying
historic design compatibility requirements in LDC 5.8.1 (formerly LUC 3.4.7),
the McIntyre Property at 137 Mathews is the primary historic property for
6
reference (considered Landmark-eligible), since it us abutting the development
site. Secondary references for design compatibility within 200 feet include the
Poudre Garage (148 Remington, Landmark), the McHugh-Andrews House (202
Remington, Landmark), 210 E. Oak St., and the Edwin Morrison Residence
(206 Remington, Eligible).
Au Workshop Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
DESIGN COMPATIBILITY – GENERAL: Staff will provide redlines for specific
elements of LUC 3.4.7, E, Table 1. Overall, while some elements of design
compatibility appear met, there are several elements that appear unmet, and
other elements that are unclear and may just require additional visuals to
document compliance. Key items that appear unmet relate to use of
predominant materials on the abutting historic resource to select dominant
materials on the new construction (Table 1, Item 4) and the use of horizontal or
vertical reference lines to connect old and new construction (Table 1, Item 6).
Au Workshop Response: Thank you for providing the redlines. Per email correspondence and our Zoom
meeting on February 13, 2024, we feel these items have been met and are prepared to discuss them with
the Historic Preservation Commission.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS: Staff may be able to support a Modification
of Standards for elements of 3.4.7, E, Table 1. Staff is likely to support a
Modification of Standards request for the stepback requirement in light of the
additional setback provided along the north property line and the treatment at
the southwest property corner as “as good or better than” solution to the
stepback requirements in LUC 3.4.7. A modification for other items currently not
clearly met such as primary materials and vertical/horizontal reference lines may
be supported if other compatibility requirements are exceeded, demonstrating
an “as good or better than” approach to the project’s overall design.
Au Workshop Response: Thank you. Per our email correspondence and subsequent meeting, we believe
this comment has been addressed.
Comment Number: 5
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR WHEN HISTORIC RESOURCES ARE NEAR DEVELOPMENT SITE:
If no structures or other features on the development site are historic resources
(based on the information provided by the surveyor), Historic Preservation
review of your proposed development would be limited to section 3.4.7(E),
which provides various standards regarding architectural compatibility with
abutting and nearby historic properties within 200 feet. The purpose of the
design compatibility standards is not to force derivative architecture, but rather
to establish a few points of commonality and create a fundamental harmony
between the old and the new. Those requirements are designed to create an
appropriate design relationship between new construction and nearby historic
resources. They cover building massing and design features and, for larger
developments, are applied only to the new construction that is closest to the
identified historic structures, i.e. the “historic influence area.” This is illustrated in 3.4.7(B)(2).
If an abutting property is a historic resource or there are historic resources on
the development site, the design compatibility requirements are typically met
7
relative to that property, even if there are other historic resources within the 200-foot boundary.
Au Workshop Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 6
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: The applicant is required to seek
a recommendation to the decision maker for development sites that contain
historic resources or have historic resources within 200 feet. In this case, staff would
refer this application to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for that recommendation.
The recommendation addresses compliance of the development with Section
3.4.7 of the land use code. A conceptual review with the HPC was already held
at the October 2023 regular meeting – that feedback should be incorporated
into documentation of 3.4.7 compliance. The HPC hearing for a formal
recommendation can be scheduled at any time prior to the hearing with the
decision-maker (P&Z Commission) – staff can advise on the best timing.
Au Workshop Response: As discussed, we intend to present the project to the Historic Preservation
Commission at the March 2024 hearing.
Comment Number: 7
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
SALVAGE/DECONSTRUCTION: This is not a requirement of the Historic
Preservation Land Use Code but as a suggestion, deconstruction & material
salvage may be a good option for portions of the building, especially the
masonry. There are non-profits such as the National Center for Craftsmanship
that support that kind of approach. Salvage and reuse in the proposed new
construction is a possibility as well. Staff can assist with examples/networking if needed.
Au Workshop Response: Noted, thank you. We will remain in contact with Historic Preservation about this
item.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: John Gerwel jgerwel@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The steps to the front porches on the east and south encroach into the ROW.
This will require an encroachment permit. The implications of this permit means
that the City has the right to revoke the permit, should the ROW space need to
be utilized. These units should have another means of ingress/egress, and
probably a backup front entrance configuration. This will also mean that if any
utility line running under the steps needs to be worked on, then those steps will
be removed and replaced at the owner's expense.
Wilson Response: The architecture team understands the permit requirements and will configure the
porches so they can be modified if the permit is revoked.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
We would want the setback of the first step on those porches to 2 feet behind
back of sidewalk. This creates a safer walkway, better separates the steps
when sidewalk maintenance is needed, and could potentially help the steps stay
in the event that the street configuration has to widen.
8
Au Workshop Response: Noted, thank you. The steps will be set back 2’ from the sidewalk.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The electric transformer will need a dedicated easement around it. Reach out to
Cody Snowden from Light and Power to see how much clearance he needs.
Wilson Response: The entire Tract A is Utility Easement.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
This might be more of a planning comment, but I'm a little concerned with alley
and interior access. The gate and driveway for Lots 9-15 seems to only be able
to accommodate one-way traffic.
Wilson Response: A turn template exhibit has been provided with this submittal. Very few trips are
anticipated. This area is intended to function similar to a narrow alley.
Comment Number: 5
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The alley entrance needs to be reconstructed as well.
Wilson Response: Alley is now shown as being reconstructed.
Comment Number: 6
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Could we clear up some of the utility linework? I know it's all service lines, but
there are a lot of service lines. Built in linework labeling would really clarify things. See redlines.
Wilson Response: The utility linework line type has been updated for clarity.
Comment Number: 7
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The site delineation on the plat looks like it might be incorrect. Please confirm. See redlines.
Wilson Response: The plat has been updated.
Comment Number: 8
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The variance request needs one small edit - the first justification notes that
LCUASS local streets have 19.5 feet of space from the curb to the back of
easement. This is untrue. The dimension is 22.5 feet.
Wilson Response: The dimension has been updated to 22.5 feet. The approved variance request has been
received. Thank you.
Comment Number: 9
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The mailroom falls under utility and drainage easement. Structures are not
permitted on easements. Tract A should be revised to exclude that area.
Wilson Response: Our understanding is that this is not a structural component.
Comment Number: 10
01/16/2024: FOR FINAL PLAN:
It appears that the pedestrian ramp on the east side is intended to be
demolished, but was not identified in the demo plans. Could you clarify that?
See redlines.
Wilson Response: The ramp demo has now been identified on the demo plans.
Comment Number: 11
01/16/2024: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Given the amount of public improvements and utility tie-ins, we'll probably want
9
to pursue a Development Construction Permit (DCP) for work done in the
right-of-way. DCP info can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev
Wilson Response: Comment noted for Final Plan.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/15/2024: FOR HEARING:
The Transportation Impact Study details the unit types as 220-Multi-Family (Low
Rise,) when it really should be considered 215- Single Family Attached housing
units since each individual unit has a private external entrance versus entrances
off a shared internal corridor. I would also like this reviewed under the General
Urban/Suburban Setting/Location category in comparing the differences in the
daily/peak hour trips from the former use to the new use. Once this is
resubmitted we will review for the possibility of waiving the TIS.
Delich Response: Update Made
Comment Number: 2
01/17/2024: INFORMATION:
The removal of the ADA parking spot will need to be reconsidered. With the
new Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines being adopted, 1 ADA
accessible spot will be required per block face, or every 25 parking spots. If the
developer wishes to move the spot, that is something we can consider but it will
need to be fully ADA compliant. We don't want to simply just remove the
parking spot if we will be required to come back later and install one.
Wilson Response: The ADA parking spot has been added back into the plans, but shifted to the south end
of the row of on street parking.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter. If you have any specific questions about the markups, please contact
John Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com
RMS Response: Noted, redlines addressed.
Department: Erosion Control
Contact: Andrew Crecca acrecca@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
12/27/2023: INFORMATION:
This project is located within the City's MS4 boundaries and is subject to the
10
erosion control requirements located in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria
Manual (FCSCM), Chapter 2, Section 6.0. A copy of those requirements can be
found at www.fcgov.com/erosion .
This project was evaluated based upon the submittal requirements of FCSCM.
Based upon the provided materials we were able to determine a total disturbed area.
As this project is under an acre and not part of a larger common development
an Erosion Control Report is not necessary in order to meet City Criteria.
Wilson Response: Acknowledged that an Erosion Control Report is not necessary to meet City Criteria.
Comment Number: 2
12/27/2023: FOR FINAL PLAN:
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.
Please provide an erosion control plan for 'Final Plan or Approval Submittal'.
This project disturbs under 3 acres so only a sequence chart needs to be
provided on the erosion control plans. Please ensure that the Erosion Control
Plans provided include a sequence chart in accordance with (FCSCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2)
Based upon the supplied materials, an Erosion Control Escrow Calculation will
need to be provided. Please submit an Erosion Control Escrow / Security
Calculation based upon the accepted Erosion Control Plans to meet City
Criteria (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.5) at time of Final Plan or Approval Submittal.
Wilson Response: An Erosion Control Plan and Escrow Calculation will be provided for Final Plan.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Emma Pett epett@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/09/2024: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Preliminary irrigation plans are due at FDP should include a landscape plan, a
water budget and hydrozone map. Your water budget must be under 15
gallons/square foot for the property annually. Final irrigation plans are due at
building permit application, but we encourage you to submit them earlier in case
changes need to be made. Detailed irrigation submittal requirements can be found here:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities//img/site_specific/uploads/irrigation-plan-submittal-reqs.pdf?1649260267
RMS Response: Noted, plans will be provided at that time. We will not be using more than 30,000 gallons
New tap shown on plans.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Stephen Agenbroad sagenbroad@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Fort Collins requires that 75% of the impervious area on site is treated with LID
methods, the site is currently proposing treatment of only 64%. For only 50% of
11
the site to be treated with LID methods, it would require the use of permeable
pavers. Since there are no pervious pavers proposed on this site it is required
that 75% of the site is treated with LID methods. The Udal Subbasin treats the
remaining 25% (or less) of impervious area with standard water quality
methods. Please adjust the sizing and drainage plan to accommodate for these requirements.
Wilson Response: The sizing and drainage plan have been adjusted to accommodate these requirements.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The city would prefer that the vehicular use areas are treated rather than the
roofed areas. Vehicular use areas often have more contaminants than roofed
areas, therefore the city would like for these areas to be treated first.
Wilson Response: The area treated has been adjusted to also treat as much of the vehicular area as
possible and still meets the above requirements.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: QUESTION:
Could the curb inlet at the north end of the site have an overflow weir that directs
flow to the stormtech system rather than directing all roof drains to the stormtech system?
For larger storms, flows would overtop the weir and flow out the 15-inch storm line to Mathews st.
Wilson Response: The system has been adjusted to add the weir that will backflow runoff into the
Stormtech system.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Please provide more information on how all roof drains will be routed to the
stormtech system. Due to the limited space on site, it will be difficult to route all
roof drains to the stormtech system and maintain required separations. Do you
intend to tie the roof drains to the basin at the north end of the system? Or tie
directly into the chambers.
Wilson Response: The roof drains have been adjusted to tie to two storm systems that will then backflow
into the Stormtech system.
Comment Number: 5
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING
Is the mail room a roofed/conditioned structure? The city does not allow
permanent structures over a stormwater system and not within a utility/drainage
easement. In addition, the city does not allow stormwater lines to run under
permanent structures. This structure will restrict access to the facility if
maintenance is ever required. This structure may need to be relocated or removed.
Wilson Response: The storm system has been moved to drain to the north and is no longer in conflict with
the mail room.
Comment Number: 6
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING
When sizing the stormtech isolator rows please provide more information on the
volume of the chamber with aggregate.
Wilson Response: The entire system is the isolator rows and the only volume is in the chambers. That
calculation does not use any of the aggregate void volume.
Comment Number: 7
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING
Please provide an LID exhibit, similar to the Impervious Area exhibit, that shows
the impervious areas being treated with LID methods.
12
Wilson Response: A Permanent BMP Exhibit has been added to the report.
Comment Number: 8
01/17/2024: FOR HEARING
The current alignment of the of the stormwater outlet is roughly 1-2 ft off of the structure.
This is not constructable, please provide some additional separation
from the building and the pipe so that it is accessible for maintenance. Please
refer to my redlines for a possible alignment. Please also coordinate with other
utilities to satisfy their separation requirements. Ideally, the city would like at
least 6ft of separation from trees to the storm line.
Wilson Response: The stormwater outlet has been relocated to the north.
RMS Response: Dimensions added to landscape plan for trees and storm lines.
AND
Since the line is running parallel to the ROW, please coordinate with
Engineering to obtain an encroachment permit.
Wilson Response: The stormwater outlet has been relocated to the north.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Stephen Agenbroad sagenbroad@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
To have 8 single-family attached homes served of a single combo service,
please submit a variance request to both Heidi Hansen (hhansen@fcgov.com)
and me (sagenbroad@fcgov.com) for review. The variance request will need to
justify why the chosen alternative is the best option for the site and must address
why other alternatives are not feasible. Please feel free to reach out to discuss.
Wilson Response: The variance for the shared sewer service has been submitted.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING
The city prefers water meters to be external to the buildings and patios. This is
to make them accessible to our crews at all times. To keep the water meters
external to the buildings and patios, a minimum of 10-ft from the building to the
shared combo service is needed. In addition, the water meters are required to
be at least 4-ft from any structure. Therefore, please ensure that the individual
services have at least 4-ft of separation from the patios.
Wilson Response: The water meters have been moved to keep a minimum of 4-ft from any structure.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Please coordinate with PFA to determine the amount of flow is needed to
satisfy the flow requirements of the fire sprinkler systems. Typically we see
1-inch services are required in order to satisfy the flow requirements of the fire
sprinkler systems. On occasion we have accepted 3/4-inch services, but to
meet the flow requirements a water tank is needed within the property.
Wilson Response: Comment noted and will be addressed at Final.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING
Please maintain at least 6-ft of separation between service lines and tree plantings.
RMS Response: Dimensions added to landscape plan for trees and storm lines.
13
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund tsiegmund@fcgov.com 970-416-2772
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Please show the electrical routing on the utility plans from the existing
transformer location to the new transformer location.
McNutt Response: Please refer to sheet E100 for meter locations and secondary routing.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
Please show the proposed meter locations on the buildings and private electric
service from the transformer to the meters.
Au Workshop Response: Please see sheet E100. The meter stacks will be on the north walls of the west
and east buildings.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
The proposed transformer is placed on existing utility lines. Please shift the
proposed transformer east to not conflict with the existing utilities in the alley.
Wilson Response: The transformer has been shifted, but we think these lines will be moved as they are
from the existing transformer.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
Building site charges and system modification charges, in addition to capacity
fees, will apply to this project for the transformer relocation. Please contact me if
you have any questions regarding electrical fees for the project.
Owner Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 5
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and any system
modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development.
Please contact me 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-investment-development-fees
Owner Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 6
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
All single-family attached buildings or services above 200 amps are considered
customer owned service; therefore, the applicant is responsible for installing the
secondary service from the transformer to the meters and will be owned and
maintained by the individual unit owner.
McNutt Response: Acknowledged
Comment Number: 7
01/16/2024: 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.
McNutt Response: Acknowledged
14
Comment Number: 8
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
This project will need to comply with our electric metering standards. Electric
meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering.
Residential units will need to be individually metered. Please gang the electric
meters on one side of the building, opposite of the gas meters. Reference
Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric metering standards. A
link has been provided below.
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStanda
rds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
McNutt Response: Acknowledged refer to sheet E100 for meter location.
Comment Number: 9
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
Light and Power is experiencing material shortages and long lead times on
certain materials and unfortunately this is an industry wide issue.
Light and Power typically has stock of our materials, including transformers, and
we work on a first come, first service basis with our inventory stock. We will
assess what we have available when this project gains City approval and
progresses to construction. Light and Power is working hard to secure
materials, transformers, and orders have been placed with our manufactures to replenish inventory.
McNutt Response: Acknowledged
Comment Number: 10
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
Light & Power will require AutoCAD files of the Site Plan, Utility Plans, and
Landscape Plans prior to the Entitlement Process approval.
RMS Response: Noted, files will be provided.
Comment Number: 11
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
The City of Fort Collins now offers gig-speed fiber internet, video, and phone
service. Contact John Stark with Fort Collins Connexion at (970) 207-7890 or
jstark@fcgov.com for commercial grade account support, RFPs, and bulk agreements.
RMS Response: Noted
Comment Number: 12
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
For additional information on our renewal energy programs please visit the
website below or contact John Phelan (jphelan@fcgov.com).
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/go-renewable
Owner Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 13
01/16/2024: INFORMATION:
Please contact Tyler Siegmund with electric project engineering if you have any
questions at (970) 416-2772. You may reference Light & Power’s Electric
Service Standards at:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/electricservicestandar
ds.pdf?1645038437
Reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee
15
estimator at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
Owner Response: Noted.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kristie Raymond kraymond@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/02/2024: INFORMATION:
Please note that 2-4" cobble mulch will cover ground but will not function as a
mulch to deter weeds and retain moisture. If a rock mulch is desired, then 3/4"
of 1/2" screen or smaller would be necessary.
Additionally, please note there are disadvantages to using a weed barrier.
While it helps prevent weed growth, there are some potential negatives to consider:
Limited Water Infiltration: Weed barriers can restrict water penetration into the
soil, potentially leading to water runoff and poor moisture distribution. This may
affect the health of plants by limiting their access to water.
Soil Compaction: Over time, the use of a weed barrier can lead to soil
compaction. Compacted soil hinders root growth and reduces the overall health
of plants by limiting their access to nutrients and water.
Weed Barrier Degradation: Weed barriers can break down over time due to
exposure to sunlight, weather, and other environmental factors. This
degradation can create openings for weeds to grow through, defeating the purpose of the barrier.
Nutrient Limitations: Weed barriers can impede the natural decomposition of
organic matter, limiting the availability of nutrients in the soil. This can impact the
overall fertility of the soil and affect plant growth.
RMS Response: Cobble mulch shown only in some small arcs of tree lawn area to break up the space. All
planted areas will be mulched with organic mulch and no weed barrier.
Comment Number: 2
01/02/2024: FOR HEARING:
Please provide approximate plant quantities and locations in the landscape plan.
RMS Response: Shrubs, ornamental grasses and perennials have been added to the plans.
Comment Number: 3
01/02/2024: INFORMATION:
This area would be great to incorporate some green infrastructure that has
many benefits. Green roofs can help regulate a building’s internal temperature,
reduce stormwater runoff, and mitigate the urban heat island effect. Green roofs
offer significant economic benefits, including a longer roof life and heating and
cooling energy savings. Green roofs also provide an opportunity for urban food
production, and increasing urban biodiversity. If well-designed and cared for,
green roofs can offer people the psychological benefits of nature.
RMS Response: Noted, project is utilizing many other green methods such as solar panels, shared
vehicles, heat pumps, etc.
Department: Forestry
16
Contact: Freddie Haberecht fhaberecht@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/08/2024: INFORMATION
The courtyard plan looks very nice and the form of the birch would be great but it
may be worth considering some different species. Heritage birch in particular
has had soil tolerance issues. Western river birch can be a great tree but tend
to be variable and to die out in the middle and re-sprout. For a similar effect
Japanese lilac, pekin lilac, bigtooth maple, Turkish filbert, 'Harvest Gold' linden,
Yellowwood, and even redbud with the protected site could work.
RMS Response: Ownership would like to keep the proposed trees. The HOA will have an arbor visit
annually to assess disease and any fertilization needs of the trees.
Comment Number: 2
01/12/2024: QUESTION:
What method of excavation will be used to install the utilities within the critical
root zone of the existing city owned trees? Trenching in the areas proposed will
cause significant damage to the existing trees.
RMS Response:
Comment Number: 3
01/12/2024: QUESTION:
The one city tree proposed for removal was under my understanding being
removed for the placement of utilities. I'm not seeing any utility conflicts with this
tree or replacing this tree? If a tree is replaced in the location of the removed
tree the mitigation payment can be reduced by 500 dollars which is the city cost of planting a tree.
RMS Response: Tree will be replaced with a new tree and payment is shown as $500 on mitigation plan.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: INFORMATION: Both Park Planning & Development and Parks
department comments will be provided
by Missy Nelson | mnelson@fcgov.com
RMS Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: No comments from Parks or Park Planning and Development. Thank you.
RMS Response: Thank you.
Department: PFA
Contact: Marcus Glasgow marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org 970-416-2869
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS – IFC Appendix D105
Amendment
Buildings over 30' in height trigger additional fire lane requirements in order to
17
accommodate the logistical needs of aerial apparatus (ladder trucks). The
intent of the code is to provide for rescue operations and roof access via ladder
trucks when ground ladders cannot reach upper floors. Aerial access should
therefore be available on at least one entire long side of the building, located
within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building. Aerial
fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26
feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion
thereof. Dead end access roads shall have a minimum width of 30 ft. Parapet
heights greater than 4' in height do not support ladder truck operations.
The current proposal does not meet aerial requirements. If compliance cannot
be met, a written alternative method request would be required to be submitted
to the Fire Marshal for approval.
Au Workshop Response: We have engaged with a fire + life safety consultant to evaluate the project and
prepare a request for alternate materials and methods. Our target is to submit the request to PFA within a
week or two of this submittal. UPDATE: The building will now include a NFPA 13 system. No tree or
parking will be removed.
Comment Number: 2
01/16/2024: FOR FINAL PLAN:
PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: ADDRESS POSTING & WAYFINDING – IFC
section 505.1.1 amendment
Where possible, the naming of private drives is usually recommended to aid in
wayfinding. New and existing buildings shall be provided with approved
address identification. The address identification shall be legible and placed in
a position that is visible from the street or road fronting the property. Address
identification characters shall contrast with their background. Address numbers
shall be arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall not be spelled
out. The address numerals for any commercial or industrial buildings shall be
placed at a height to be clearly visible from the street. They shall be a minimum
of 8 inches in height unless distance from the street or other factors dictate
larger numbers. Refer to Table 505.1.3 of the 2021 IFC as amended. The
address numbers for one- and two-family dwellings shall be a minimum of 4” in
height with a minimum ½” stroke and shall be posted on a contrasting
background. If bronze or brass numerals are used, they shall only be posted on
a black background for visibility. Monument signs may be used in lieu of
address numerals on the building as approved by the fire code official.
Buildings, either individually or part of a multi- building complex, that have
emergency access lanes on sides other than on the addressed street side, shall
have the address numbers and street name on each side that fronts the fire lane.
Addressing for the interior courtyard facing townhomes will require additional
wayfinding signage and address locations. Please add generic address to
elevations and update note 17.
Au Workshop Response: Note 18 has been updated on sheet G001 per email correspondence. We will
continue to work with PFA on wayfinding and addressing throughout the building permit and construction
process.
Comment Number: 3
01/16/2024: FOR FINAL PLAN:
FIRE LANE LOADING - IFC Appendix D102.1 amendment
Fire lanes shall be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable
18
of supporting 80,000 pounds. Private drives used for fire lanes shall provide
information confirming the design can handle fire truck loading. A note shall be
added to the civil plans indicating all areas dedicated as EAE are capable of
supporting 80,000 pounds.
If the alley is to be used as a fire lane, it shall meet the minimum loading requirements.
Au Workshop Response: Thank you. The fire + life safety consultant will determine if the alley will be
needed for fire access.
Comment Number: 4
01/16/2024: FOR HEARING:
TURNING RADII
- IFC 503.2.4 and Local Amendments: The required turning radii of a fire
apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside.
If the alley is to be used as a fire lane, it shall meet the minimum turning radius requirements.
Au Workshop Response: Thank you. The fire + life safety consultant will determine if the alley
will be needed for fire access.