HomeMy WebLinkAboutSALUD FAMILY HEALTH CENTER LOT 4 - FDP200011 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 5 - Responses
Page 1 of 21
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
December 15, 2023
RE: Salud Family Health Center Lot 4, FDP200011, Round Number 4
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Salud Family Health Center Lot 4. If you have questions
about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions
through your Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com.
Ripley Responses in Green
EPS Group Responses in Blue
TW Beck Responses in Red
JA Environmental Consulting Responses in Orange
Salud Responses in Purple
ICON Responses in Dark Orange
Salud Family Health Center_FDP_RD4
Session ID: 406-165-582
Session URL: https://studio.bluebeam.com/hyperlink.html?link=studio.bluebeam.com/sessions/406-165-582
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Todd Sullivan tsullivan@fcgov.com 970-221-6695
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
07/17/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
I will be your primary point of contact throughout the development review and
permitting process. If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the
project reviewers, or need assistance throughout the process, please let me
know and I can assist you and your team. Please include me in all email correspondence
with other reviewers and keep me informed of any phone conversations. Thank you!
Comment Number: 2
Page 2 of 21
07/17/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
As part of your resubmittal you will respond to the comments provided in this
letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this
document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a
different font color. When replying to the comment letter please be detailed in
your responses, as all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide reference to specific project
plans or explanations of why comments have not been addressed, when applicable.
Comment Number: 3
07/17/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
When you are ready to resubmit, please make an appointment with me at least
24 hours in advance. Submittals are accepted any day of the week, with
Wednesday at noon being the cut off for routing the same week.
Comment Number: 5
FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
All "For Final Approval / For Approval" comments need to be addressed and
resolved prior to moving forward with the final documents and recording of this
project. I will provide a recording checklist and process information when we are closer to this step.
Response: Understood
Comment Number: 6
INFORMATION:
LUC 2.211 Lapse, Term of Vested Right: Within a maximum of three (3) years
following the approval of a final plan or other site-specific development plan, the
applicant must undertake, install and complete all engineering improvements
(water, sewer, streets, curb, gutter, streetlights, fire hydrants and storm
drainage) in accordance with city codes, rules and regulations. The period of
time shall constitute the "term of the vested property right." Failure to undertake
and complete such engineering improvements within the term of the vested
property right shall cause a forfeiture of the vested property right and shall
require resubmission of all materials and reapproval of the same to be
processed as required by this Code. All dedications as contained on the final
plat shall remain valid unless vacated in accordance with law.
The project status can be reviewed at any time and, at the City's discretion, the
expiration date can be extended as additional "diligent pursuit" efforts are
made on this project.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Katelyn Puga kpuga@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 13
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Planning recognizes the executed Environmental Use Restrictions imposed by
the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) that
outlines the requirement that the site needs to be approved by CDPHE prior to
the recordation of the FDP. Please continue to work with Environmental
Planning and Environmental Regulatory Affairs.
Page 3 of 21
Response: The Site does not require prior approval from CDPHE to record the FDP, only that the Site development comply with
the Environmental Use Restrictions (EURs)(Record No. 20210035465, 4/7/2021, Larimer County). Salud has worked closely with
the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment (CDPHE) to address the historical environmental conditions and to
place the EURs on the Property as part of a completed Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) cleanup that was implemented from
about 2015 through 2020. (The VCP Completion Report for the former Forney Site, 1830 Laporte Ave. has been previously
provided to the City with our original submittals) CDPHE approved the completion of the cleanup and the closure of the
environmental conditions in 2021 with the issuance of a No Action Determination (NAD letter). The NAD stipulates that the CDPHE
approves the land for commercial use and the planned development fits this land use. There are currently no known environmental
conditions on the property that require investigation or remediation. The EURs were placed on the property to: 1) address any
residual environmental contamination; 2) provide environmental oversite of intrusive activities in the event that an unknown
environmental condition is encountered; and 3) to assure full protection of human health and the environment during the
redevelopment process and future use of the Property.
On January 23, 2024, Salud and the City held a meeting to discuss the City’s environmental comments and questions. Mr. Fonda
Apostolopoulos, P.E., Environmental Engineer at the State of Colorado Division of Hazardous Materials, CDPHE joined the meeting
by phone and confirmed that the development of the Property could proceed as a long as the EURS were followed. Mr.
Apostolopoulos leads the Colorado VCP program at CDPHE. He is knowledgeable of the conditions and issues at this Site as he
was involved with the former Forney Industries VCP Site completion. He provided the EC and EURs for the Site and is responsible
for hundreds of VCP projects statewide. The meeting with Mr. Apostolopoulos and the City environmental staff was arranged to
address concerns outlined in the City comments and was followed up by an additional meeting in March 13,2024 (Zoom meeting).
Comment Number: 14
12/12/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
To acknowledge the Environmental Use Restrictions that applies to the property
add the following notes to the site plan cover sheet:
1) No structures intended for human occupancy (including residences, offices,
or other workplaces, etc.) may be built on the Property without a properly
designed and constructed vapor mitigation system approved by the City of Fort
Collins and by CDPHE as required in the Environmental Use Restrictions.
2) All land use approvals and associated permits are subject to the approval of
CDPHE, prior to recordation of the final plans.
Response: Bullet 1: The EURs placed by Salud Family Health Centers(Salud), the property owner, and CDPHE on the property
as part of the completion of the VCP cleanup activities requires vapor mitigation systems (VMS) in all new construction. The VMS
will be included in the design plans and drawings as an element of the building construction. The VMS system design will be
provided to CDPHE for approval as part of the design process to assure that the VMS meets CDPHE requirements for this site.
The VMS will also meet the City of Fort Collins requirements for radon resistant construction.
Proposed language for the site plan cover sheet taken directly from the NAD:
“As per the Notice of Environmental Use Restrictions placed on the property, any new building will have to have an approved vapor
mitigation system installed and certified. As part of the certification process, the owners will have to apply to the Voluntary Cleanup
Program and have the state approve a No Action Determination for the installed system. “
Bullet No. 2: No land use approvals and associated permits are subject to the approval of CDPHE at this time. All CDPHE
approvals regarding the environmental conditions at the Property have been completed with the NAD and the EURs as long as the
land use is for Commercial purposes. If residential was being proposed, CDPHE would need to approve that change in land use.
Page 4 of 21
The EURs do require future CDPHE approval of the VMS as discussed above. In addition, if any CDPHE stormwater or other
permitting is needed, that permitting will be part of the construction requirements of the project and will be addressed with CDPHE
when conditions require such permits.
Appropriate comments have been added to the Site Plan cover sheet to address this comment.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: John Gerwel jgerwel@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
11/20/2023: INFORMATION:
Our Capital Improvements department has confirmed payment of Laporte
frontage improvements. Per applicant response, work within recently
constructed ROW improvements are subject to increased pavement impact
fees. More information on that can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/excavation
(Previous comments from Marc Virata)
08/11/2022: for approval:
In the time since the development project was last reviewed, the City's capital
project to improve Laporte Avenue adjacent to the site has progressed such
that it is approaching a 90% design this month and construction anticipated
later this year. The current design along the frontage does not take into account
Salud Drive and addresses only existing accesses in the current condition
before the proposed development. There may be options that would have the
capital project accommodate as part of the design and build the opening for the
future Salud Drive, but that window is diminishing as the capital project design
is furthered along towards approval. Additionally, with the Laporte project, there
could be the option to extend the water service off of Laporte into the site to
avoid future street cuts into Laporte Avenue that could be subject to triple impact penalty fees.
Also, in looking at the phasing plan that was included that didn't take into
account the capital project now moving forward, it is suggested that a check in
occur with the applicant on vision towards the timing of their development to
understand how to approach finalizing the capital project design. Note that to
the extent that the City is building the local portion frontage of Laporte Avenue
abutting the property, there would be a repay from the development to the City
for the local street improvements specified in the development agreement.
Additionally, as part of the development agreement we would document that the
landscaping and irrigation along Laporte Avenue as part of the capital project
would be required to be maintained by the developer.
04/27/2021: for approval:
The plans have been forwarded to Dan for his input and verification. The
preliminary design plans for Laporte don't appear to coincide with what is shown
on the plans as an elevated bike lane along Laporte behind the curb and gutter is shown. After Dan's
review, we may want to have a meeting to discuss design and timing considerations.
07/14/2020: for approval:
Page 5 of 21
The City has an improvement project for Laporte Avenue that involves this
development's Laporte Avenue frontage. Discussion with Dan Woodward in
Engineering Capital Projects should occur to explore how the plans should
reflect the frontage along Laporte and also whether the construction of this
frontage might be better served to be done by the City (with a payment provided
in-lieu of construction). The timing of the development's anticipated construction
start in comparison to the City is part of the consideration for this.
Comment Number: 7
11/21/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UNRESOLVED:
The culvert design has been routed to our structural engineer. Comments from
them will be coordinated. The railing shown in the plans does not have the
minimum 54 inches of protection. Please revise.
Response: The railing was revised to provide 54” of protection.
(Previous comments from Marc Virata)
08/11/2022: for approval:
The response indicated that new box culvert designs have been included.
These have been route to Jin for his review.
04/27/2021: for approval:
The revised design with the more standard box culvert is appreciated. The
review of the box culvert design is with Jin Wang and updated comments will be
coordinated and provided. One concern I do see is that there doesn't appear to
be a railing over the bridge. A bicycle railing is required with the roadway having
an adjacent bikelane and would need to be a minimum of 54 inches (11.3.4 of LCUASS).
07/14/2020: for approval:
The design of the ditch crossing under the new roadway was provided for initial
review to Jin Wang, City Engineering's staff structural engineer and the overall
design is problematic and would need to be redesigned. AAASHTO Load and
Resistance Factor Design should be the design specifications and the use of
an aluminum box culvert would not be allowed as only reinforced concrete and
steel are acceptable per 11.2.3 of LCUASS. A complete design with presumed
structural rebar with a concrete box and wingwalls is needed. Attached
sidewalks are required to be 8 feet. The design engineer should perhaps reach
out to Jin Wang for further details and discussion.
Comment Number: 16
11/20/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UNRESOLVED:
The sheet referenced in the response to this comment does not address the
concerns laid out below. Please address these concerns.
Response: We added sheet E-2 to the title sheet, which previously was missing.
(Previous comments from Marc Virata)
08/11/2022: for approval:
Carried over as unresolved. The response indicates E2 has been added to the
sheet index, but I'm not seeing this, or understand if it intended to address the comment.
04/27/2021: for approval:
The environmental status and previous contamination of the property was not
something I was aware of having inherited the project, and I'm looking for more
Page 6 of 21
information on from the perspective that the City would become the owner of
land (right-of-way) for public street purposes. Additional information is needed
for review with the information provided in the November 2020 report that City
staff was recently made are of and still processing and should be identified in
the most recent Site Characterization Report :
1) Identify with the proposed development what are the areas of City owned
right-of-way and also City maintained infrastructure (utilities, trees, public street)
that coincide with areas of contamination identified in the environmental
compliance completion reports (such as an overlay of the proposed site
development with areas identified in Page 28 of the November 2020
completion report). We don't believe we have all the known information at this
time to make this determination.
2) How will the proposed development potentially impact any ongoing
compliance efforts (such as Page 28 of the 11/2020 report delineates a
"photoremediation" zone, which appears to potentially be in proximity to the new
City right-of-way/street. Is this a "phytoremediation zone", and if so, what is it still
ongoing and what is the implication on the loss of vegetation with the development?)
3) A soils report wasn't found in the electronic documents, it should be provided
for review to understand the recommendations for the construction of the public
street system and whether the report considered the environmental condition.
Response: The property has been the subject of extensive environmental investigations and remediation activities under a CDPHE-
approved VCP, including soil and groundwater assessment and cleanup. There are currently no known environmental conditions
on the property that require further investigation or remediation. The Property is cleared and approved by CDPHE for commercial
redevelopment as long as the EURs are implemented as part of the redevelopment program. The closure was done with the
placement of EURs due to low concentrations of residual chlorinated solvents in groundwater. CDPHE determined that the
concentrations of chlorinated solvent remaining at the Site were not migrating and do not represent a risk to human health and the
environment as long as any redevelopment of the Property follows the EURs.
Salud met with the City of Fort Collins staff on January 23, 2024 to review the historical soil and groundwater investigation and
remediation information and to provide assurance that the EURs will be followed during redevelopment. Mr. Fonda Apostolopoulos
of the CDPHE VCP Program participated in that meeting confirming: 1) the site conditions are acceptable to the State of Colorado;
2) that migration of the residual contaminants is not an issue of concern to the CDPHE based on the remediation and monitoring
previously performed; 3) there was no need or requirement for additional investigation or remediation activities; and ) 4 the
proposed development plans are consistent with the EC as long as the project follows the EURS.
In addition, Salud held a subsequent follow-up meeting with the City to further discuss the environmental conditions and to provide
additional information requested during the January meeting. A Power Point presentation referenced during the March 13, 2024
follow up meeting outlines the meeting topics and is attached as Attachment 1 (March 13, 2024 Meeting Outline).
As part of that meeting, Northern Engineering prepared a figure that overlays key environmental sampling locations and data with
the planned street and utilities and shows the depth to groundwater with respect to utilities in the work areas. This figure should
help with understanding the Site conditions and shows a compilation of post remediation monitoring data and some data from the
initial 2014 and 2015 groundwater investigations at the Site. The figure shows that only limited sections of the planned street are in
areas of possible environmental concern. However, consistent with the MMP, environmental oversight is needed during installation
of utilities and road construction for the entire street in accordance with the MMP. The new figure is included as Attachment 2 (New
Figure).
Page 7 of 21
Comment Number: 17
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The soils report that is referenced in the utility plans has not been found in any
previous submittals. Given the amount of time that has elapsed in these project
submittals, we need a new soils report, unless the one referenced explicitly has
a warranty/expiration date that has not been exceeded. Either way, we need a
soils report and that report should be accurately referenced on the title sheet of the utility plans.
Response: Please see attached signed and stamped letter from EEC, the GEOR indicating the GEO-Report 2016 is valid for the
current plan concept.
Comment Number: 18
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Has a ditch crossing agreement been established with the ditch company? We
will want to see that that has been executed prior to approving these plans.
Response: We are establishing crossing agreements with the ditch company for the box culvert, electric/fiber, water, sewer, and
gas. The ditch company has requested a 3-way agreement for the street/box culvert between the developer and city. We will
continue to coordinate with the ditch company and city as needed.
Comment Number: 19
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide more complete labeling for existing contours in the grading sheets.
Response: Updated contour labels and checked all grading plans to ensure labeling.
Comment Number: 20
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please include the statement found in LCUASS App E, section E-4.II.E in the
notes on the grading sheets.
Response: Included FFE statement on grading sheets.
Comment Number: 21
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Will there be any speed limit sign postings? I'm not seeing any.
Response: A 25mph speed limit sign has been added northbound along Maple Street
Comment Number: 22
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The signing and striping of the bike lane and buffer appear to be backwards
from current LCUASS standards. The buffer should be between the travel lane
and the bike lane, not between parking and the bike lane.
Response: Updated striping of bike buffer lanes to correct orientation and location.
Comment Number: 23
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The water main linework does not match what is indicated in the legend of the
utility plans. Please correct the plan linework to match the legend.
Response: Updated the water linework in the legend to make plan sheets.
Comment Number: 24
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Adding on to Water/Wastewater's- comment 7, we will need an offsite utility
easement and an offsite temporary construction easement for that water line.
Both need to be recorded with the County Clerk and need to be depicted on the
plans and plat with reception numbers in the plat.
Response: We are showing an offsite utility easement for the water crossing on Maple Street. We do not believe a temporary
Page 8 of 21
construction easement is necessary. The Offsite Utility Easement and General Deed language has been submitted to the city for
review.
Comment Number: 25
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
LCUASS standard detail drawings 1401 and 1411 are not current. Please use
the updated drawings. Additionally, the LCUASS trenching detail (Drawing
2201) is missing from the plans. Please include that as well.
Response: Updated details to most recent version and checked remaining details. Added detail 2201 on sheet D1.
Comment Number: 26
11/29/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
This project will require a development agreement. Please fill out the DA form
found in the following link. Please include this in the next submittal.
https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev
Response: DA For has been included with this submittal
Comment Number: 27
11/30/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please coordinate with our Parks department to determine who will be
responsible for maintenance of the parkway along Laporte.
Response: Noted project team has reached out to the parks department to better understand maintenance obligations and will
continue to coordinate with City staff.
Comment Number: 28
12/11/2023: INFORMATION:
Third party inspectors should be in communication with City inspectors. Having
all inspectors on the same page could help out quite a bit with the approval
process. Our ROW inspector is Ken Zetye (kzeye@fcgov.com) and our chief
building inspector is Marcus Coldiron (mcoldiron@fcgov.com)
Comment Number: 29
12/12/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The City does not wish to assume responsibility for land that is subject to an
environmental use restriction. Maple Street should be private. If the EUR is
successfully removed, then the City would consider accepting the street as
public ROW. The street would also need to be designed to LCUASS standards
if the City is to accept the ROW in the future. This can be further solidified in the development agreement.
Response: Salud recognizes the City’s concerns regarding the City’s acceptance of the street as a public ROW based on potential
environmental considerations. The meetings that were held on January 23, 2024 and March 13, 2024 resulted in significant
progress in addressing the City’s issues to accept the street as a public ROW. To be clear, Salud is in the business of providing
medical care to underprivileged and underserved people. Salud is not however structured to maintain and manage roadways, and
certainly not capable of maintaining a through street with significant public use like the planned Maple extension.
The City is concerned with possible environmental liability stemming from accepting the roadway. The conversations on this
subject include the facts that: 1) based on the new figure that was provided at the March meeting (Attachment 2), the portion of the
street that is in an area where there was environmental contamination is very small. While the entire planned street is in the area
that is subject to environmental covenant, the area where there is the potential for an environmental discovery is minimal; 2)
Salud is required by the MMP to provide environmental oversite and possible testing during the installation of all utilities for the
entire street (not just the area of potential environmental concern). All excavation activities associated with the construction of the
roadway are subject to the MMP. If any potential environmental concerns are encountered, Salud is responsible under the MMP and
Page 9 of 21
covenant to address the concerns, collect confirmation samples indicating that the concern has been addressed, and documenting
the activity in a completion report that will be provided to CDPHE; 3) The concentrations of residual chlorinated solvent in the
groundwater are extremely low, are well below the planned excavation depth, and do not represent an issue for future maintenance
workers (see response to Comment 10); and 4) Mr. Fonda Apostolopoulos of the CDPHE indicated in the January meeting that
once oversight of the utility installation and the roadway installation has been completed that there is no reason for additional
oversight associated with utility or street maintenance; CDPHE has since agreed to provide a letter indicating to the City that once
the City accepts the street as a public ROW (following Salud’s oversight of environmental conditions and reporting the oversight
efforts to the CDPHE), that implementation of the MMP as part of the environmental use restrictions no longer applies to the ROW.
Salud is working with CDPHE to provide written assurance of this MMP modification for the ROW to the City.
Comment Number: 30
12/12/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
We will want some approval by CDPHE documented in the final submittal
documents. That may be through a memo documented in the development
agreement. This will depend on what CDPHE is willing to provide. Updates will
come when we hear from CDPHE. Ultimately, we feel that having something like
that documented in association with this project will be beneficial for all parties.
Response: Since this comment was provided, Salud has facilitated a meeting between the City and the CDPHE on January 23,
2024 and we have communicated with CDPHE based on discussions that were held during our March 13, 2024 meeting (see
Response to Comment 29).
Department: Environmental Regulatory Compliance
Contact: Jesse Schlam jschlam@fcgov.com 970-218-2932
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 29
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: All underground utilities (water,
wastewater, stormwater, electric, etc.), foundations, sump pits, and their
bedding material should be located outside of the groundwater plume.
(estimated at 7 feet down). This project will need to prevent contaminates from
infiltrating utility pipes (causing groundwater pollutants to be directed off site into
the drainage system or sanitary treatment system) or use the bedding to
redirect flow and "shortcut" the groundwater off site.
Response: Planned underground utilities will be mostly located outside areas of known and suspected groundwater
contamination based on the VCP sampling and investigations. Groundwater at the site was remediated and monitored for about
five years during the groundwater cleanup portion of the VCP at the Site. The groundwater level at the site is generally at or around
12 feet below ground surface (bgs) near the irrigation ditch and runs about 20 feet bgs in the area where most of the utilities will be
installed. See the Figure presented in Attachment 2 for depths to groundwater. The groundwater plume was remediated using a
reductive dehalogenation technology approach and only limited areas of low levels of chlorinated solvent remained on the Site when
the NAD was issued. It is unlikely that any residual solvent will be encountered or caused to move off-site due to construction
activities. Where there is the potential for installation of utilities in areas of potential environmental impacts, environmental
oversight performed in accordance with the CDPHE approved MMP for the Site will provide for protection of human health and the
environment. The above discussion of the groundwater conditions was confirmed by Mr. Fonda Apostolopoulos of CDPHE during
our January 2, 2024 meeting on environmental conditions. Additional information on the environmental conditions is presented in
Attachment 1 (outline from Salud’s March 13, 2024 meeting with the City).
Page 10 of 21
Comment Number: 30
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: All LID treatment should either be
relocated outside of the plume footprint or prevent the addition of water into the
groundwater, promoting higher groundwater levels and furthering the spread of contaminants.
Response: This comment suggests a misunderstanding of current Site conditions including the contaminant levels and aerial extent.
The groundwater plume has been remediated at the Property. Most of the former plume was reduced to concentrations that are
below the Colorado Basic Groundwater Standards. There were residual concentration of chlorinated solvents in some areas of the
former groundwater plume that remained when the NAD was issued, but these contaminants were at low concentrations, the areas
do not have enough contaminant mass to cause significant migration, and the residual concentrations were acceptable to CDPHE
with the placement of the EURs for the Site. It is highly unlikely that any LID treatment will cause migration of the residuals, in fact it
is likely that any input to groundwater will serve to dilute concentrations of any residuals that may be present.
Comment Number: 31
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Per the Materials Management
Plan/Notice of Environmental Use Restrictions and the Fort Collins Drainage
Criteria Manual, any Erosion Control Report needs to be updated to provide
description of the known contaminants on this project and develop a list of
Control Measure or Best Management Practices to address encountering
contamination in soil and how those materials will be handled during demo, site
grading, and construction. Any soil disturbance will require trained oversight and monitoring.
Response: The Material Management Plan (MMP) that was approved by CDPHE will be followed, including oversight of intrusive
activities by a trained Environmental Professional (EP). The MMP describes site conditions. All known contaminated soils at the
project Site have been remediated as part of the VCP cleanup, however, any impacted soils that are discovered will be handled in a
manner that is compliant with State and local requirements. The MMP provides procedures that should be followed for addressing
contamination in the soil and groundwater during demolition, site grading, and construction. The MMP will be referenced in the
erosion control report.
Comment Number: 32
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Per the Materials Management
Plan/Notice of Environmental Use Restrictions and the Fort Collins Drainage
Criteria Manual the erosion control report must include Construction Dewatering
and the anticipated controls to hand pollutants in the groundwater.
Response: Salud does not anticipate that dewatering activities will be associated with the planned slab-on-grade building or the
utilities that will be installed. Since the groundwater table is generally 12 to 20 feet deep, the only area where we may encounter
groundwater is potentially during installation of the foundation of the bridge over the irrigation ditch. This construction activity will
take place in an area that is not near the footprint of the historic groundwater plume. Any water that is removed during construction
will be assessed by the EP for the site and will be managed appropriately in accordance with the CDPHE approved MMP and
applicable regulations.
Comment Number: 33
Page 11 of 21
12/11/2023: INFORMATION ONLY: The groundwater on this site would not
meet the State's low risk discharge and could not be land applied on site. That
said, a construction dewatering permit will likely result in a remediation permit
which will require collecting samples getting tests and possible institute
treatment before any discharges off site. This site may require any groundwater
to be collected and properly disposed of rather than dewatering. Any of these
dewatering options will result in higher than typical costs related to construction.
Any sump pumps or foundations would also likely result in a long-term
remediation permit which would require ongoing permitting with CDPHE.
Response: Remediation of groundwater at the site resulted in most of the monitoring wells being at or below the Colorado Basic
Groundwater Standards. A few of the wells had levels of chlorinated solvents that were slightly above the Standards but were at
concentrations that CDPHE determined were protective of human health and the environment with the placement of EURs.
Attachment 2 provides a new map of the locations where concentrations of solvents were above the standards when the NAD was
issued is being prepared. Construction dewatering, sump pumps, or foundation dewatering is not anticipated for the slab-on-grade
building that is planned, but any dewatering that is necessary in these areas will be done in a manner that is compliant with state
and local requirements as dictated in the CDPHE approved MMP. The EP for the site will be responsible for identifying and
properly handling of any environmental conditions including extracted groundwater.
Comment Number: 34
12/11/2023: INFORMATION ONLY: Based upon the complication to this unique
site and the amount of permits and environmental remediation the City
recommends that a dedicated and knowledgable environmental compliance
staff be employed for this sites' design, development, and construction.
Response: Historically, there were environmental conditions of concern on this Property; however, the VCP cleanup has addressed
all known environmental conditions as discussed in other comment responses. Salud will follow the EURs for the Site including the
implementation of the CDPHE approved MMP. Salud is prepared to work with the City to address any concerns regarding past or
existing environmental conditions. During our January 23, 2024 and March 13, 2024 meetings, JAEC contrasted the conditions at
the former Forney Industries Site with the environmental contamination that is present in the downtown Fort Collins area of the
Willow Street and the Northside Aztlan Community Center to set perspective on the magnitude of environmental conditions at the
two properties. In the Willow Street area, the City is a party to an environmental covenant that is the result of historical landfilling
and the presence of a historical manufactured gas plant (MGP) in the area. The residuals present as a result of the MGP
operations and landfilling are relatively high, with the presence of highly contaminated groundwater and free product residuals that
required a remediation barrier to prevent discharge of the free product coal tar into the Poudre River. The extremely low
concentrations of residual chlorinated solvents at the former Forney site are significantly lower than the concentration of compounds
such as benzene and naphthalene that are beneath the highly developed Willow Street area.
The City also operates a VMS in the Azlan Center to control vapor intrusion from the contamination into the building. The vapors
include benzene, naphthalene, and other compounds. Despite the presence of the serious contamination in the area, the
environmental conditions and the environmental covenant did not prevent redevelopment in this area; for example, the construction
of a major apartment project was done under a Colorado VCP without major issues due to environmental concerns. Mr. Joseph
Aiken of JAEC managed the environmental oversight during construction, and the installation of the VMS system for this project.
The removal of impacted soils and a sump associated with the former MGP operations, the extraction and proper disposal of
groundwater countered during the installation of caissons, and the installation and testing (with CDPHE approval) of a VMS in the
buildings all occurred in accordance with the CDPHE approved MMP for that site. In addition, the installation of major new utilities in
Willow Street required environmental oversight and Mr. Aiken managed that oversight for the City during the project. No
contaminated groundwater or soils were encountered during that utility installation project and conditions that may have caused a
Page 12 of 21
health and safety concern were not found during the project. While the very low concentrations of residual chlorinated solvents at
the former Forney Industries Property represent a much lower risk than a construction project in the Willow Street area, the planned
project at the Site has the same restrictions as the Willow Street projects and will have the same level of oversight as the work that
was done in the Willow Street area. Salud plans to provide the necessary oversight by an EP as required by the MMP and we are
committed to working with the City and CDPHE on addressing any environmental conditions that are encountered.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kirk Longstein klongstein@fcgov.com 970-416-4325
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
12/11/2023: INFORMATION ONLY
A development agreement will be required prior to issuance of a DCP. The DA
will likely include language regarding the environmental contamination issues,
which will be determined when all the requested information is available.
Response: The EC and EUR language address environmental concerns associated with the site and property development. The
EURs generally prohibit the use of groundwater, dictates the implementation of a CDPHE-approved VMS in all new construction,
and requires the use of the CDPHE-approved MMP for all construction activities. Since the time this comment was provided Salud
has met with the City Staff to review the EC’s and the MMP providing additional background and supporting information. Salud
appreciates the opportunity to participate in additional discussions if Staff has further questions.
Comment Number: 6
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The current plans do not show the contaminated groundwater plume as it
related to the designed structure. Please add a sheet to the plans delineating
the extent of the plume and the proposed improvements.
Response: A map showing the groundwater contamination and proposed project is included as Attachment 2. The groundwater at
the Site was historically contaminated with chlorinated solvents but has been remediated to concentrations that are considered by
CDPHE to be protective of human health and the environment as long as the EURs are adhered to. The groundwater plume was
remediated and closed with a VCP NAD in 2020. The closure allowed for some residual solvent at concentrations that were low
enough to not be migrating and are contained in limited areas of the Property. A new map was prepared and discussed at the
March meeting. The groundwater map shows the site areas where residual solvents exceeded the Colorado Basic Groundwater
Standards as known when the NAD was issued.
Comment Number: 7
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Written approval from CDPHE that the Notice of Environmental Use
Restrictions and the accompanying Material Maintenance Plan for this property
have been reviewed and meet the State's Criteria for all work in and around the
contaminated groundwater plume along with the vapor mitigation system.
Page 13 of 21
Response: CDPHE has approved the notice of EURs and the MMP. The approved documents are posted on the CDPHE website
under the “Sites with Environmental Covenants and Use Restriction” section. During our January 23, 2024 meeting on the
environmental concerns presented in the City’s comments, Mr. Fonda Apostolopoulos of CDPHE confirmed that no additional
approvals are required to proceed with the development as long as the EURs are followed and the MMP is implemented. The MMP
does require Salud to obtain CDPHE approval of our VMS design when that design is available. CDPHE will approve confirmation
sampling that shows that the VMS is working properly.
Comment Number: 8
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please provide a Remediation and monitoring Plan including specific actions to
treat groundwater contaminates: TCE, cis-DCE, and Vinyl Chloride to meet
Colorado groundwater standards.
Planning staff would like the most recent data from the remediation monitoring
wells to see how the site has been progressing over the last 3 years. In addition,
we would like an environmental remediation professional to provide a written
estimate of how long following natural attenuation verses active remediation
would take for all the contaminates to meet the groundwater standards.
Response: There are no known environmental conditions that require investigation or remediation at the Site. CDPHE has issued
a NAD and EURs for the Site. The site was assessed, remediated, and closed through the Colorado VCP. The latest data was
collected as part of the VCP closure in 2020 and is included in the Completion Report for the VCP project. As stated in the above
comments, Salud and JAEC met with the City regarding the environmental conditions on January 23, 2024 and March 13, 2024.
The Salud project team is available to meet with City staff again if requested to discuss the closure documentation including
discussion of the Colorado’s Conditional Closure Policy and Guidance for Low Threat Sites. This guidance document was used to
address and close the groundwater issue providing assurance to the CDPHE that the source materials were removed and that the
residual chlorinated solvents do not represent a threat to human health and the environment.
Comment Number: 9
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Provide progressive monitoring reports that show groundwater contamination of
TCE, cis-DCE, and Vinyl Chloride levels meet CDPHE groundwater standards
for four (4) consecutive quarters.
Response: All monitoring data is presented in the VCP Completion report for the Property. The site was closed with an EC and
EURs to address any chlorinated solvents that were above the Standards at the time of closure. See response to Comment 8.
Comment Number: 10
12/11/2023: INFORMATION ONLY:
The City recommends that the property owner work with the State to lift the
Environmental Use Restrictions once groundwater contamination of TCE,
cis-DCE, and Vinyl Chloride levels meet CDPHE groundwater standards for
four (4) consecutive quarters.
Response: In compliance with the NAD there are no plans to sample groundwater at this time. The NAD indicates that the
groundwater was remediated to the satisfaction of CDPHE, and no additional monitoring or remediation is necessary. Based on
our conversations with CDPHE, once the street has been installed and any observed environmental conditions are addressed, the
CDPHE will issue a written statement that future implementation of the MMP is not required in areas of the roadway right-of-way
Page 14 of 21
where utilities have been installed as deemed cleared by the Environmental Professional (EP (See response to Comment 29)
Groundwater use restrictions and the requirement for vapor mitigation in on-site structures will remain. These restrictions will not
apply to the roadway.
JAEC has also communicated with CDPHE regarding the potential for worker exposure in utility trenches in the roadway. This
concern was raised during Salud’s conversations with the City. While the part of the street that may be in an area of residual
groundwater impact is very small, JAEC modelled hypothetical worker exposure to contaminated air in excavated area with the US
EPA Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (VISL). The calculation was based on groundwater concentrations found at the site and
assumed that the worker was in a basement or closed vault with an annual exposure of 8-hours per day. We believe this approach
is a conservative representation of the potential exposure. The VISL results indicated a very low risk of exposure (1 x 10 -9 range of
risk). US EPA considers the 1 x 10 -6 range to be protective of human health and the environment so our calculation indicated a risk
that was three orders of magnitude below the protective range. Keep in mind that the actual exposure scenario where a worker is
in an open trench is more protective than the indoor air exposure that we calculated because the trench is open to the atmosphere
and not a confined space such as a basement. The result of this analysis is that virtually no exposure risk to a worker in a trench at
the Site exist. CDPHE stated in our January 2024 meeting that there was a very low probability of a worker issue based on the site
data and was satisfied with this assessment.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque wlamarque@fcgov.com 970-416-2418
Topic: General
Comment Number: 27
12/07/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please replace Bioretention Detail with updated version.
Response: Updated bioretention detail to most recent version.
Comment Number: 28
12/07/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Rain Garden 2 elevations are not correct. It looks like the bottom of the pond is
at 41.00, not 41.7. Please revise. Also, please label grate elevation for the rain garden spill.
Response: Fixed spot elevation locations to display correct top and bottom elevations.
Department: Stormwater Engineering - Floodplain
Contact: Kevin Meyer kmeyer@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 24
12/08/2021: FOR APPROVAL:
Please see floodplain CLOMR comment letter from ICON Engineering that was
sent to Aaron Cvar. Please address the listed comments and resubmit for review.
Update:12/6/2023:
CLOMR resubmittal is currently under review. No construction may take place
prior to approved CLOMR. Please coordinate with Ted Bender at
tbender@fcgov.com for any questions regarding CLOMR review or timelines.
Response: Noted, the project team will continue to work with and coordinate with City staff once CLOMR review is completed.
Comment Number: 25
Page 15 of 21
12/08/2021: FOR APPROVAL:
There is concern regarding removal of the existing bridge and placement of the
new bridge across the irrigation canal and the impact of those changes may
have on the spills from the canal (location and discharge). This will need to be
analyzed to show that the spills are not changing. If there is a change, the
modeling must be revised to reflect the proposed condition.
Update:12/6/2023:
CLOMR resubmittal is currently under review. No construction may take place
prior to approved CLOMR. Please coordinate with Ted Bender at
tbender@fcgov.com for any questions regarding CLOMR review or timelines.
Response: Noted, the project team will continue to work with and coordinate with City staff once CLOMR review is completed.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque wlamarque@fcgov.com 970-416-2418
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7
12/07/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UNRESOLVED:
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
04/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL:
Please submit utility easement documents once completed and these will be
required before the signing of recording documents.
07/10/2020: Have locates and survey been completed for the water main to the
east? The connection point shown does not appear to line up with the existing
water main and it does not appear the existing water main has been stubbed to
the property line. An easement may be needed to connect across the adjacent
parcel in order to make the connection to the existing water main.
Response: The Offsite Utility Easement and General Deed language has been submitted to the city for review.
Comment Number: 17
12/07/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED:
Please provide specs for maintenance road. Road needs to be able to support
HS20 loading. Also, we need to revisit the offsite access to the manhole on the
City property to the north. It has been a while and I am not sure the City's stance on this.
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED:
The comment response indicated a maintenance road is being provided.
Please provide documentation within the Utility Plan Set.
04/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL:
City Utilities will get back with the Applicant regarding if any maintenance
access will be required for the new offsite public sanitary main.
Response: A maintenance road detail has been added to the detail sheets (D8). Per the email on 7/25 we will extend the
maintenance road to manhole A2
Page 16 of 21
Comment Number: 20
12/07/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED:
The fire service to the new building needs additional separation from a couple trees.
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - UPDATED:
There is a tree too close to the water service right before the service enters the building.
04/28/2021: FOR APPROVAL:
Please show the water and sewer services all the way to the building on the
Utility Plan and the Landscape Plan to ensure separation requirements from
other utilities and trees/landscaping.
Response: Water and Sewer Service lines have been updated to show connecting all the way to the building. Landscaping has
been updated to provide required 6’min separation from trees and utility lines.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Cody Snowdon csnowdon@fcgov.com 970-416-2306
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4
12/12/2023: FOR APPROVAL:
On the C-1 Form, please add the meter/service required for the stormwater
outfall pump. The pump will need to be a metered service until the time that the
regional outfall is constructed. Please also provide a one-line diagram showing
this service for review.
Response: C1 form has been updated to include the meter/service required for the pump
07/13/2020: FOR APPROVAL:
A commercial service information form (C-1 form) and a one-line diagram for all
commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power
Engineering for review prior to Final Plan. A link to the C-1 form is below:
http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf
Comment Number: 6
12/12/2023: FOR APPROVAL:
Please dedicate an easement around the existing facilities running along the
western edge of the property. These facilities will be required to provide
redundant power through the project.
Response: We have added utility easement around electric line along west property line. Responses have been added to redlines.
07/13/2020: FOR APPROVAL:
All existing electrical facilities located onsite need to be located and shown on
the plans. All existing electrical facilities need to be within public Right-of-Way
or an Utility Easement will need to be dedicated on the Plat.
:
Comment Number: 9
07/13/2020: FOR 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:
Page 17 of 21
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-anddevelopers/-plant-investment-development-fees
Comment Number: 13
12/12/2023: FOR APPROVAL:
Please add an electrical vault on the north side of the private drive to provide
redundant power to the property. Please see markups.
Response: Added electric vault along private drive. Responses have been added to redlines.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Freddie Haberecht fhaberecht@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 21
08/09/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL- UPDATED
Redlines from last round have not been resolved. See comment below.
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL – UPDATED
Continued:
Thank you for adjusting tree and utilities. Forestry identified a few more conflicts
which are highlighted on an updated redlined set.
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL UPDATED
Please review Forestry’s redlines. There are a handful of tree-utility conflicts that
need to be resolved either by shifting utilities or slightly shifting tree locations.
Response: Landscape has been updated to avoid tree/utility conflicts mentioned in Forestry Redlines.
Comment Number: 25
12/11/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
This project does not currently meet City of Fort Collins streetscape standards
in that it only provides a 5.5' parkway strip as opposed to the current standard of
8'. This width of parkway leads to conflicts with the trees in the future.
Response: The site plan was entitled at Planning and Zoning Board and the parkway width shown was entitled with it. The new
parkway width is a standard that was enacted after the projects entitlement.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
12/12/2023: INFORMATION: Both Park Planning & Development and Parks
department comments will be provided by Missy Nelson | mnelson@fcgov.com | 970.416.8077
Comment Number: 2
12/12/2023: Please add the following note to the General Note section of the Landscape Plans:
The Developer, or its successor(s) in interest, shall be responsible for the
ongoing irrigation and maintenance of the landscaping located within the public
right-of-way along the portion- of Laporte Avenue that abuts the Property.
Page 18 of 21
Response: The above note has been added to the General Notes section of the landscape plans.
Comment Number: 3
12/12/2023: Thank you for providing a spur trail heading north. Please provide
an exhibit of the trail connections in the area.
Response: An exhibit of the trail connections in the area has been provided with this submittal
Comment Number: 4
12/12/2023: Please see redlines on site plan and plat. Add public access
easement to cover all portions of the trail.
Response: Redlines have been addressed on the site plan
Response: Responses have been added to redlines
Comment Number: 5
12/12/2023: Please see redlines on site plan and add note on site plan that the
trail is privately owned and maintained within a public access easement.
Response: The above note has been added to the site plan.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Lauren Wade lwade@fcgov.com 970-302-5962
Topic: GIS
Comment Number: 3
11/16/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Maple St will continue to W Laporte Ave per the Master Street Plans. Salud Dr will be Maple St.
Contact: Todd Reidenbach treidenbach@fcgov.com 970-416-2483
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
07/24/2020: This street is Maple St, per the Master Street Plan's future Maple St extension.
Contact: Russell Hovland rhovland@fcgov.com 970-416-2341
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1
07/13/2020: A change of occupancy for these existing buildings will require a
building permit and full review by Building Services.
Comment Number: 4
12/11/2023: Commercial Construction shall comply with adopted codes as
amended. Current adopted codes are:
2021 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments
2021 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments
2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments
2021 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments
2021 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments
2021 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments
Colorado Plumbing Code & state amendments (currently 2021 IPC)
2023 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado
Projects shall comply with the current adopted building codes, local
Page 19 of 21
amendments and structural design criteria can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017.
Snow Live Load: Ground Snow Load 35 PSF.
Frost Depth: 30 inches.
Wind Loads: Risk Category II (most structures):
140mph (Ultimate) exposure B or Front Range Gust Map published by The
Structural Engineer's Association of Colorado
Seismic Design: Category B.
Climate Zone: Zone 5
Energy Code: 2021 IECC commercial chapter.
Response: We understand we will need to comply with all current codes at the time of the building permit submittal.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
Commercial occupancies must provide 10ft to 30ft of fire separation (setback)
from property lines and 20 feet between other buildings or provide fire rated
walls and openings per chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC.
City of Fort Collins adopted International Fire Code (IFC) and amendments to
the 2018/2021 IFC require a full NFPA-13 sprinkler system per IBC chapter 9 or
when building exceeds 5000 sq.ft. (or meet fire containment requirements).
Buildings using electric heat, must use heat pump equipment.
A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new commercial structure.Plans
must be signed and stamped by a Colorado licensed architect or
engineer and must be included in the permit application.Electric vehicle parking spaces are now required
per local amendment to the IBC. See section 3604. For projects located in Metro Districts, there are special
additional code requirements for new buildings.
Please contact the plan review team to obtain the requirements for each district.
Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting:
For new buildings, please schedule a pre-submittal meeting for any new
commercial or multi-family building with Building Services for this project.
Pre-Submittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the
design, that the new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and
Standards. Please work with your Development Review Coordinator to schedulethis meeting.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 18
12/06/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please change the titles to "Salud Family Health Center - Lot 4" in the sheet title
blocks. See markups.
Response: Utility Plans have been updated to include “Lot 4”. However, the Plat was not updated because we are platting more
than Lot 4.
Response: The title of this project has been updated to include “Lot 4.”
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 11
12/06/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
There are line over text issues. See markups
Page 20 of 21
08/09/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
04/29/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
07/10/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Responses have been added to redlines.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 15
12/06/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines.
08/05/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines.
Response: A text mask has been added to the text in the landscape sheets to avoid line over text issues and provide more clarity.
Comment Number: 17
12/06/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
There are line over text issues. See markups.
Response: Redlines provided have been responded to and the applicable texts have been adjusted to avoid L.O.T. legibility.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
12/12/2023: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John
Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com
Response: Responses have been added to redlines
08/05/2022: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter. If you have any specific questions about the markups, please contact
John Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com
04/29/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response letter.
07/10/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response letter.
Page 21 of 21
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Todd Sullivan tsullivan@fcgov.com 970-221-6695
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
07/17/2020: LARIMER COUNTY CANAL NO. 2 - Melissa Buick
melissahbuick@gmail.com 970.686.7126
FOR APPROVAL:
Larimer County Canal No. 2 Irrigating Company requests the plans show the
ditch easement as being 25 feet from the top of the bank on both sides of the
ditch for the continued ongoing cleaning, maintenance, and repair and/or
replacement of the ditch. Additional comments are that the developer will need
to have crossing agreements in place for the construction/installation of the
vehicular bridge, utility or other crossings of the ditch an/or any historical
discharge into the ditch. The Company requests additional plans showing the
detail for each of the proposed ditch crossings for review and approval.
Response: The ditch easement is shown 25-feet from the top of bank. We are coordinating crossing agreements with ditch company
and city.
Comment Number: 2
11/19/2021: LARIMER COUNTY CANAL NO. 2 - Melissa Buick
melissahbuick@gmail.com 970.686.7126
FOR APPROVAL:
Larimer County Canal No. 2 Irrigating Company will require agreements to be
completed for any crossing of, or discharge into the ditch prior to work
beginning and requests the developer provide a list of items impacting the ditch
and ditch easement, including plans for each individual crossing. The ditch
easement should be shown on the plat and access to the ditch and ditch
easement throughout the property may not be obstructed.
Response: We are coordinating crossing agreements with ditch company and city.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson eolson@fcgov.com 970-221-6704
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
07/01/2020: BUILDING PERMIT:
Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The
irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of
the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric
Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com