HomeMy WebLinkAboutMONTAVA - PHASE D CORE AND IRRIGATION POND - BDR240006 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 4 - Responses (8)
Page 1 of 18
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
Montava - Phase D and Irrigation Pond, BDR240006, Round Number 4
Responses to Staff Comments for Round Number 3
November 6, 2024
October 11, 2024
Montava Development & Construction LLC
430 N. College Ave #410
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: Montava - Phase D Core and Irrigation Pond, BDR240006, Round Number 3
No response is necessary for Staff comments in Grey.
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Todd Sullivan tsullivan@fcgov.com 970-221-6695
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
INFORMATION:
I will be your primary point of contact throughout the development review and
permitting process. If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the
project reviewers, or need assistance throughout the process, please let me
know and I can assist you and your team. Please include me in all email
correspondence with other reviewers and keep me informed of any phone
conversations. Thank you!
Comment Number: 2
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
why comments have not been addressed [when applicable].
Page 2 of 18
Comment Number: 3
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?1703783275
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.
Comment Number: 4
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-AutoCAD.html
Comment Number: 5
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.
Comment Number: 6
INFORMATION:
Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the
expiration of your project.
Comment Number: 7
INFORMATION:
ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an
additional fee of $3,000.00.
Response: We will pay this fee in person on 11/7/24.
Comment Number: 8
FOR RECORDING - PLANNING SET:
Could you please update the City signature blocks on the Plat and Planning
Set? Instead of using "this _______ day of ______A.D., 20____," could you opt
for "on this day, _____________" for the date? This alternative format
facilitates smoother date input with digital signatures.
Additionally, kindly ensure there is sufficient space between the signature line
and the title line to accommodate the digital signature.
Response: City signature blocks on all plans are revised per this request.
Comment Number: 9
FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
All "For Final Approval / For Approval" comments need to be addressed and
Page 3 of 18
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.
There were at least a dozen new comments added in this round of review, and around sixteen
Unresolved comments remaining, based on this draft letter. Please let me
know if you would like any focus meetings to work through resolving any
comments.
Response: Thank you to Staff for meeting offline to discuss resolution of the Round 3 comments.
Comment Number: 10
FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The Director shall issue a written decision to approve, approve with conditions,
or deny the development application based on compliance with the standards
referenced in Step 8 of the Common Development Review Procedures (Section 2.2.8).
The written decision shall be mailed to the applicant, to any person who
provided comments during the comment period and to the abutting property
owners and shall also be posted on the City's website at www.fcgov.com.
Comment Number: 11
FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
If the project is approved by the Director, there is a two-week appeal period
from the date of the decision. The project is not able to be recorded until it is
confirmed there are no appeals.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Jill Baty jbaty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 16
10/05/2024: PREVIOUS COMMENTS RESOLVED:
Thank you for your work on the Civic Space types. We have no further concerns
with the Civic Spaces in this Phase.
08/05/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: CIVIC SPACE TYPES:
There are still several open spaces in the proposal that do not have a Civic
Space type associated with them. They are highlighted on the Site Plan.
Comment Number: 24
10/05/2024: LIGHTING PLANS:
- Thank you for clarifying the information about the timers and dimmers. This all looks fine.
- Using the proposed lights won't stop these plans from being approved, but I
truly believe that they are not in line with Montava's light pollution intentions.
Please see the lighting plan set for further thoughts & detail. Again, I encourage
your team to reconsider the choice.
08/05/2024: FOR NEXT ROUND: LIGHTING PLANS:
The information provided here does not speak to several of the MUDDS
standards that we need for the review. Please provide information showing
compliance with MUDDS Section 5.12, Exterior Lighting, including:
o Timers and dimming, per 5.12.1(c) and (d)
o 5.12.4, Residential Lighting Limits, including Table 5.12-3: Please note as
Page 4 of 18
well that “Fully Shielded Luminaire” is defined in the Land Use Code as one that
is “shielded or constructed so that no light rays are emitted by the installed
outdoor light fixtures at angles above the horizontal plane, as certified by a
photometric test report.” If the proposed fixtures emit light at angles above the
horizontal plane (i.e., a non-zero uplight rating), they do not meet the definition of
fully-shielded. Please either choose a fixture that does not reflect or project light
upwards or lower the lumens on these luminaires to meet Table 5.12-3 of MUDDS.
Contact: Kim Meyer kimeyer@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
08/06/2024: INFORMATION (UPDATED):
05/28/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: A Water Adequacy Determination is
pending an ongoing review of the submitted documents by Staff. Per LUC 5.17
(previously, Sec. 3.13), this Determination is required prior to final approval and
recording of any project that increases the demand for water. It appears there is
sufficient information provided for this review and Staff will reach out with any
questions or concerns that arise. The transitory nature of the current proposal
and water sources may result in a unique Determination, which may require
amendments in the future as final water sources and usage are further settled
among the various entities involved.
Response: A request to defer the determination has been submitted to Kim Meyer; we are awaiting
a response.
Comment Number: 2
05/28/2024: INFORMATION:
Please see redlines and comments from Planning in the various plan sets
(shown in purple) and reach out with any questions on intent.
Comment Number: 8
10/05/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL/BUILDING PERMIT:
Thank you for providing the Preliminary Irrigation Plans.
08/05/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL/ BUILDING PERMIT:
We look forward to seeing the Irrigation Plans.
05/28/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Irrigation plans are required, per LUC 5.10.1(E)(3)(b)(1);
as well as a Hydrozone Table, per LUC 5.10.1(E)(3)(a)(1) [previously LUC
3.2.1(E)(3)(a)(1)]. Please identify which private lots may be irrigated with the non-pot Metro District water.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Tim Dinger tdinger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 10
09/24/2024: FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - UPDATED:
Development Agreement draft in progress.
Response: City comments on Montava’s first draft were received 10/23/24. We are working on our
responses and will provide our redlines directly to Tim Dinger as soon as they are ready.
Page 5 of 18
07/25/2024: FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - UPDATED:
We received the first draft of the DA with the round 2 BDR submittal. We will
begin reviewing and provide a second draft once all departments are ready.
05/28/2024: FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
For Montava Phase G, the developer's team were the ones to draft the
development agreement. We will allow the Montava team to start drafting the
Phase D Development agreement as well. Please collaborate with all of the
various departments on necessary language to be included as soon as
possible. I will send a base DA form to begin the draft from by Friday, 5/31/24.
Comment Number: 14
10/08/2024: FOR APPROVAL:
All easements for this project that are to be dedicated by separate document
must be recorded prior to recording the plat. Reception numbers for all
easements by separate doc could be added to the plat.
Response: All easements will be recorded prior to the plat and the recording information for
each will be added to plat prior to its recording. Status of the easements:
CITY (15’ UE, east side of Giddings): The Easement Dedication application, together with drafts of
the Deed of Dedication with legal descriptions/depictions and the Closure Reports are being
submitted concurrently for City review. The application fee will be paid in person 11/7/24. The
execution, attorney certification, acceptance and recording of the Deed of Dedication will be
accomplished after Montava’s acquisition of the Anheuser-Busch Foundation property.
ELCO (waterlines): Our legal counsel and ELCO working on easement dedication document; legals
are in process. This should not impact approval of the Phase D Core plans.
BOXELDER (sewer facilities): Our legal counsel and Boxelder working on easement dedication
document; legals are in process. This should not impact approval of the Phase D Core plans.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
05/27/2024: FOR APPROVAL:
The Transportation Impact Study has been received and is being reviewed.
See subsequent comments.
Comment Number: 3
10/07/2024: FOR APPROVAL UPDATED:
Thank you for adding the right turn lane. See redline mark ups for minor striping
changes. Add right turn arrow stencils, and skip bike lane 100 feet in advance of intersection.
Response: All markups have been addressed. Turn arrows and skip line and callouts have been
added to the plans.
08/05/2024: FOR APPROVAL UPDATED: The traffic volumes for the
southbound right turn on Giddings at Mountain Vista would require the
installation of a separated right turn lane. Would like to discuss further.
05/27/2024: FOR APPROVAL:
Within the TIS, the conclusions for Mountain Vista and Giddings intersection
detail that this intersection may approach capacity and excessive delays for the
southbound movement. How does the previous comment that adds trips to this
Page 6 of 18
intersection affect the level of service if Timberline isn't utilized. The conclusion
also recommends a single lane roundabout in the short term, but will eventually
be a multi-lane roundabout in the long term. This will need further discussion.
Comment Number: 6
10/07/2024: FOR APPROVAL UPDATED: Still have not seen any response from CDOT.
Response: Following discussions with CDOT and Steve Gilcrest, Montava agreed to design,
permit and construct improvements to northbound offramp at Mountain Vista if such improvements
are triggered by the Phase D trips. See, however, the November, 2024 update to the Phase G TIS
submitted herewith, where the analysis indicates that the Phase D trips only trigger the
improvements if the Phase G and E trips are included as background traffic. Since Phases G and E
will not be approved and constructed until after Phase D, the conclusion is that the northbound
offramp improvements are not needed at this time. A meeting to discuss is scheduled for 11/7/24.
05/27/2024: FOR APPROVAL:
Within the TIS, the recommendation for the northbound left turn lane at the I-25
Northbound Ramp and Mountain Vista will need to be coordinated with the
Colorado Department of Transportation. I would recommend contacting Tim
Bilobran, Region 4 Permits Manager at timothy.bilobran@state.co.us. Office
970-350-2163 to initiate this discussion.
Comment Number: 20
10/07/2024: INFORMATION UPDATE:
On Timberline as it approached the roundabout at Maple Hill there is a sidewalk
that extends across Timberline, I would like to understand if this is a temporary
sidewalk that will be removed with the Infrastructure project. See page 186 in Utility Plans.
Response: This sidewalk is temporary and has been removed
and combined into the Dutch Roundabout with the Infrastructure set.
08/06/2024: FOR APPROVAL: The sidewalk that runs along Maple Hill on the
boundary of this phase identifies 3 raised crossings in close proximity to the
intersections. Is there any way to incorporate these crossing into the
intersections. In particular the Timberline and Maple Hill roundabout is showing
a raised crossing within 20-30 feet of the raised crossing. We will need to look
closer at these crossings. Will these raised crossings be installed with this
phase since they are directly on the boundary?
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Andrew Crecca acrecca@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
05/27/2024: INFORMATION ONLY:
This project is located within the City's MS4 boundaries and is subject to the
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.
Based upon the area of disturbance or this project is part of a larger common
development, State permits for stormwater will be required should be pulled
before Construction Activities begin.
Page 7 of 18
Comment Number: 23
10/04/2024: ACCEPTED:
Thank you for providing the requested erosion control plans, report and escrow
calculation. All submitted erosion materials are accepted. You will be notified
via email with instructions to submit fees and escrow along with the required
forms. This email will also have instructions for requesting an initial erosion
control inspection when you are ready you start your project.
If the nature, scope, size or design of this projects deviates from the submitted
materials updated Erosion Control Plans, Report and Escrow calculation may
be requested as well as a recalculation of Erosion Control and Stormwater inspection fees.
Topic: Fees
Comment Number: 24
10/04/2024: Fees:
The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5-2
was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections.
As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such
inspections. The Erosion Control fees are based on; the number
of lots, the total site disturbance, the estimated number of years the project will be active. Based
on the proposed site construction associated with this project we are assuming 329 lots,
39.48 acres of disturbance, 3 years from demo through build out of construction and an additional 3.00
years till full vegetative stabilization due to seeding. Which results in an Erosion
Control Fee estimate of $12,234.10 . Please note that as the plans and any
subsequent review modifications of the above-mentioned values change the
fees may need to be modified. I have provided a copy of the spreadsheet used
to arrive at these estimates for you to review. Please respond to this comment
with any changes to these assumed estimates and why, so that we may have a
final fee estimate ready for this project. The fee will need to be provided at the
time of erosion control escrow.
The Stormwater Inspection Fees are based on the number of LID/WQ Features
that are designed for on this project. Based on the plans we identified 0 number
of porous pavers, 1 number of bioretention/level spreaders, 1 number of
extended detention basins, and 4 number of underground treatments, results in
an estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee to be $ $2,225.00 .
Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the
above-mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have
provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for you to
review. Please respond to this comment with any changes to
these assumed estimates and why, so that we may have a final fee estimate
ready for this project. The fee will need to be provided at the time of erosion control escrow.
Contact: Wes Lamarque wlamarque@fcgov.com 970-416-2418
Topic: General
Combined response to Comment Numbers: 6, 7 and 15
Following the Montava/Ditch Co. mediation session on 10/2/24 regarding resolution of the Phase D
drainage issues and further discussions and meetings with Heidi Hansen, Montava provides the
following items for the City’s evaluation and confirmation that the design of the proposed
Page 8 of 18
stormwater outfall is feasible to meet City standards:
Offsite stormwater design plans including:
○ the interim conveyance swale across the farm field to the future siphon location (see Utility
Plans);
○ the inverted siphon to cross under the Larimer & Weld Canal to the lower Cooper Slough,
including profiles (as provided by Martin/Martin through Max Moss to Heidi Hansen);
○ the conveyance swale from the siphon outlet structure to the lower Cooper Slough, including
profiles across property owned by Front Range Water LLC (as provided by Martin/Martin through
Max Moss to Heidi Hansen);
○ details of flow restrictions to release no more than 11 cfs after a 100-year storm event into the
lower Cooper Slough (as provided by Martin/Martin through Max Moss to Heidi Hansen).
Communications indicating the intent to permit or approve/authorize the proposed stormwater
outfall design from the project partners will be provided as soon as available.
Comment Number: 6
10/08/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
Ongoing - See City letter dated October 1st, 2024.
Response: See Combined Response above.
08/19/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
This item is still unresolved. Developed drainage also increases the volume of
flows that leave the site. Although the flow rate is reduced due to quantity
detention, the volume of storm water always increases with development due to
the addition of impervious area. This increased volume mandates that a legal
drainage outfall is obtained to the nearest natural drainage way, existing
engineered drainage outfall, or irrigation ditch when allowed.
05/29/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Per the drainage report, the drainage outfall is proposed to drain into the farm
field at the southeast corner of mountain vista Drive and Giddings Road. For
developed storm water flows, the City requires a defined and engineer
designed drainage outfall. This would include a channel, swale, or pipe to the
Larimer & Weld Ditch which meets City Criteria.
Comment Number: 7
10/08/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
Ongoing - See City letter dated October 1st, 2024.
Response: See Combined Response above.
08/19/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
This section of the proposed drainage outfall mentioned below needs to be
planned for and engineered for Phase D, unless another outfall is proposed.
The existing infrastructure underneath the railroad does not meet City Criteria
and will require improvements along with permission/easements from the
Railroad to do these improvements.
05/29/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The drainage outfall section from west of the BNSF railroad and into the
Larimer & Weld Canal needs to be investigated further to determine what is
needed to be an acceptable outfall. The drainage design needs to show the
outfall is structurally sound, stable, non-erosive, and sized appropriately and be
included in the drainage report.
Comment Number: 11
10/08/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
Page 9 of 18
SWWM is being reviewed through several iterations.
Response: The SWMM Model has been updated per Wes’ e-mail comments on 09/23/24.
08/19/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
The SWMM model will be reviewed in late August.
05/29/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The City does not use MHFD criteria to design detention basins. Please use a
method that is consistent with City Criteria. SWMM should be used for all
detention basins due to the size of the development and the storm water basins.
Comment Number: 15
10/08/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
Ongoing - See City letter dated October 1st, 2024.
Response: See Combined Response above.
08/19/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UPDATED:
This comment still applies.
06/07/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Pertaining to the 1986 AB-L&W Agreement, utilizing this outfall requires that all
parties interest are protected and the drainage design meets current City
Criteria, the Larimer & Weld Irrigation Company's design parameters of
drainage flows entering the ditch, and all necessary permits from the BNSF
railroad are obtained to perform improvements on the existing culvert under the
railroad and for any future maintenance.
Comment Number: 25
10/09/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
For all StormTech systems, the underdrain needs to exit downstream of the WQ weir. Please revise.
Response: Underdrain moved to downstream of WQ weir.
Comment Number: 26
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On Sheet 80, storm sewer ST-2C is labeled as public. Both of these laterals
need to be private. Please revise.
Response: Labels have been updated.
Comment Number: 27
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On Sheet 87, storm sewer ST-3C needs some changes on private vs. public. If
you reverse what is public and private then it is correct.
Response: Labels have been updated.
Comment Number: 28
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Some of the storm sewers that enter the temporary swale are private and some
are public. These should be all be public if they are coming from a road ROW.
Response: Labels have been updated.
Comment Number: 29
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On Sheet 97, storm sewer ST-04 is labeled as public at the most upstream
section. This section from the inlet in the alley to the first manhole needs to be private.
Response: Labels have been updated.
Comment Number: 30
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Page 10 of 18
On Sheet 100, storm sewer ST-4F is missing a label for public.. Please revise
Response: Missing label added.
Comment Number: 31
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
On Sheet 102, storm sewers ST-08 & ST-09 needs to be labeled a private.
Response: Labels added.
Comment Number: 32
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Storm sewer ST-08 is an inverted siphon, which does not meet City Criteria.
Discussions need to take place whether any other options exist to have this be
a gravity outfall.
Response: Per phone conversation with Wes on 10/16/2024, siphon condition has been accepted
since it is temporary and will be removed with ultimate stormwater improvements.
Comment Number: 33
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
In regard to the StormTech system that does not have an underdrain, this may
cause the system to fail long term due to the lack of infiltrating soils in the area.
Please revise back to having an underdrain, even though this will drain into Pond D.
Response: StormTech systems have an underdrain. All details and base files updated.
Comment Number: 34
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
The Pond D Outlet detail shows a WQ water surface elevation, but no water
quality is being proposed in the irrigation pond. Please revise.
Response: WQ water surface elevation line removed from detail.
Comment Number: 35
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
For the Stormtech systems, a WQ weir is needed, but not any orifice holes or
100-yr restrictor plate. Coordination is needed to resolve.
Response: WQ weir updated, and orifice holes and 100-yr restrictor plate removed from detail.
Comment Number: 36
10/11/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Rain garden details are needed including the standard City Rain Garden detail,
outlet works, and area of soil media documented.
Response: Rain Garden details added.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund tsiegmund@fcgov.com 970-416-2772
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
05/28/2024: INFORMATION:
Light and Power infrastructure is to be placed in the parkway location along
public streets(between back of cub and sidewalk). If this area is to be
pavement, it is a Light and Power standard to flowfiill our trench under paved
surfaces. All flowfill needed for the electric install is tracked during construction
and billed back to the project after installation.
Comment Number: 3
Page 11 of 18
10/07/2024: INFORMATION:
Please send power requirements for multifamily and single family attached
buildings as early as possible. If additional transformers are needed, there is a
possibility that additional utility easements will need to be dedicated prior to
permit approval. Other phases of Montava may be required to submit C-1 forms
and one-line diagrams prior to project approval.
Response: Noted; we will provide as soon as possible after architectural and electrical plans are
available.
05/28/2024: FOR APPROVAL:
Multi family buildings and single family attached buildings are treated as
customer owned electric services; therefore a C-1 form and one line diagram
must be filled out and submitted to Light & Power Engineering for each building.
All secondary electric service work is the responsibility of the developer and
their electrical consultant or contractor. A C-1 form can be found here:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations
Comment Number: 4
10/07/2024: FOR APPROVAL - UNRESOLVED:
Please clarify meter locations on the utility plan set.
Response: Additional labels have been added to the Utility Plans calling out meter locations.
05/28/2024: FOR APPROVAL:
Please show the proposed meter locations for all single family attached buildings.
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. For all attached units,
please gang the electric meters on one side of the building, opposite of the gas
meters. Reference Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric
metering standards. A link has been provided here:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStanda
rds_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
Comment Number: 5
05/28/2024: INFORMATION:
Light and Power has existing facilities along the west side of Giddings. When
Giddings is improved/widened Light and Power will work with you on any
relocations necessary. All relocations of exisitng electric infrastructure will be a
cost to the project.
Comment Number: 6
05/28/2024: 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 to discuss development fees 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
Comment Number: 7
05/28/2024: INFORMATION:
Light and Power is experiencing material shortages and long lead times on
Page 12 of 18
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.
Comment Number: 8
05/28/2024: 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/electricservicestandards.pdf?1645038437
Reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee
estimator at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kirk Longstein klongstein@fcgov.com 970-416-4325
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
09/24/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Environmental Planning is satisfied with
the proposed wetland mitigation approach, even if the mitigation is
riparian/mesic habitat instead of wetland. However, a dedicated NHBZ is still
required on the plan sets. Why not display the NHBZ on both the Phase D Core
and Infrastructure plans?
Include the following table as well, same as with Phase G:
- amount of buffer area that would be required by a 50' buffer from the feature its current condition
- amount of buffer area provided on these plans
- minimum buffer distance
- maximum buffer distance
- average buffer distance
Response: This area and plantings have been indicated as an NHBZ in the Infrastructure Plans so it
can be constructed with the completion of the roads in this area to avoid disruption of the
plantings. In this Phase D Core set, the temporary drainage channel is shown to be seeded to
prevent erosion control and to allow the permanent plantings to be installed with the final channel
grading and completion of the adjacent roads. Based on the meeting with Kirk Longstein, the
standard NHBZ performance standards will apply in this area.
Comment Number:
09/24/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
Concerns related to salty soils and the impact on future landscapes is pursuant
to LUC 5.6.1 (I) Landscape Materials, Maintenance and Replacement. To
address environmental planning concerns related to salty soils and landscaped
areas, please provides a management plan to address the potential of
attenuating salt levels originating from non-potable water sources and how
future residents should plan to manage potential conditions in the future. The
long-term management plan should consider future successors in interest
(including HOA/Metro District) and their responsible for the regular maintenance
Page 13 of 18
of all landscaping elements in good condition.
Response: Montava has provided the City with its Long Term Irrigation System Management
Strategy for the City’s files which includes careful plant selection, deep tilling and soil amendments
to improve soil drainage, shortening the irrigation season, and soil and water testing.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 6
10/08/2024: INFORMATION: The Montava team has requested to push off the
Water Share Agreement to a later date. While there are concerns with the plan
to delay this agreement, Parks/PPD Leadership Team agree to withdraw the
requirement for the execution of the agreement for Phase D Core and Irrigation
Pond. Please note, this agreement will need to be executed during Phase G (or
whichever phase includes the future Park property).
08/09/2024: FOR APPROVAL: The separate Water Agreement needs to be
executed which holds all details of the proposed shared use irrigation pond.
Department: PFA
Contact: Marcus Glasgow marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org 970-416-2869
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
10/3/2024:FOR APPROVAL - UPDATED
The updated turning exhibit shows only Tower 1 body dimensions. It will also
need to include the bucket dimensions (approx 47 ft length).
Response: The turning movements for Tower 1 have been updated to include the bucket.
Per email from Marcus the total length of truck including the bucket is 47’.
7/31/2024: UPDATED
Thank you for providing the turning exhibit. The corners still seem a bit tight. If
you resubmit the turning exhibit to show actual Tower 1 specs that have been
provided via email, this may help.
05/28/2024: 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.
The submitted turning exhibit shows many corners with body overhang or areas
that are too tight to be considered. Please correct the areas provided in the redlines.
Comment Number: 4
10/07/2024: FOR APPROVAL - UPDATED
The signs have been updated on the site plans but the details still need to be added.
Response: Sign details have been added.
7/31/2024: UPDATED
Thank you for providing fire lane signage. The Assistant Fire Marshal has
authorized to increase the spacing between fire lane signs in the alleys to 150
feet. Please revise plans to show revised distance. 05/30/2024: FIRE LANE SIGNS
The limits of the fire lane shall be fully defined and fire lane sign locations should
be indicated on future plan sets. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for
sign type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on
Page 14 of 18
all signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of
fire inspection. Code language provided below.
Pleaser add the LCUASS sign details to the construction details sheets in the utility plans.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russell Hovland rhovland@fcgov.com 970-416-2341
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1
05/14/2024: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended.
Current adopted codes are:
2021 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments
2021 International Residential Code (IRC) with local amendments
2021 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments
2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments
2021 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments
2021 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments
2021 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments
Colorado Plumbing Code (Currently the 2021 International Plumbing Code
adopted by State of Colorado)
2020 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado
Projects shall comply with the current adopted building codes, local
amendments and structural design criteria can be found here:
https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes
New 2024 building codes will be adopted in 2025.
Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017.
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 SEAC.
Seismic Design: Category B.
Climate Zone: Zone 5
Energy Code: 2021 IECC and local amendments.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
• Electric vehicle charging parking spaces are required, see local amendment.
• This building is located within 250ft of a 4 lane road or 1000 ft of an active
railway, must provide exterior composite sound transmission of 39 STC min.
• Buildings must provide 10ft to 30ft of fire separation from property line and 20
feet between other buildings or provide fire rated walls and openings per
chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC.
• All multi-famliy buildings must be fire sprinkled. City of Fort Collins
amendments to the 2021 International Fire Code limit what areas can avoid fire
sprinklers with a NFPA 13R, see local IFC 903 amendment.
• If using electric systems to heat or cool the building, ground source heat pump
or cold climate heat pump technology is required.
• A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any
new multi-family structure.
• For projects located in Metro Districts, there are special additional code
Page 15 of 18
requirements for new buildings. Please contact the plan review team to obtain
the requirements for each district.
• City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2021 IFC require a full NFPA-13
sprinkler system in multifamily units with an exception to allow NFPA 13R
systems in buildings with no more than 6 dwelling units (or no more than 12
dwelling units where the building is divided by a 2 hour fire barrier with no more
than 6 dwelling units on each side).
• A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any
new multi-family structure.
• Attached single-family provide 3ft setback to property line or provide fire rated
walls & openings per chap 3 of the IRC.
• Attached single-family townhomes and duplexes are required to be fire
sprinkled per local amendment and must provide a P2904 system min and
provide fire rated wall per R302.
• New homes must provide EV/PV ready conduit, see local amendment.
• Electric vehicle charging parking spaces are required, see local amendment.
• Provide site-wide accessibility plan in accordance with CRS 9-5. This
requires accessible units per that state standard. This requirement includes
single family attached homes if more than 6 units.
• Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting:
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.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
10/08/2024: Please make changes as marked in the Technical Services (TS)
markup PDF. 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
Response: We appreciate the thorough review. Markups have been addressed.
In addition, the Boxelder easements have been removed from the plat as we have confirmed they
have been vacated.
08/06/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL-UNRESOLVED:
The Round 2 Subdivision Plat does not look like it has been revised. Please
see the 5/28/24 markups. 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
05/28/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
Page 16 of 18
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
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: BNSF Railway, Rafer Nichols, PE, rafer.nichols@bnsf.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5
10/09/2024:
Forrest forwarded the City his direct response to BNSF he sent October 9, 2024.
Response: We met with BNSF and the City on 10/16/24 to discuss the design and construction of
the ultimate crossing improvements. We have provided Heidi Hansen with copies of our contracts
with Martin/Martin and BNSF as well as the preliminary BNSF crossing alternatives plan that will be
submitted to BNSF as soon as structural plans are ready.
08/06/2024:
Comments provided in Word document and forwarded to Montava Team.
Contact: Boxelder Sanitation District, Daniel Richardson, PE,
drichardson@boxeldersanitation.org.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
10/10/2024: City Response:
1) Standalone easement will be required for all sewers that are not located in the public R.O.W. The
easements are necessary to address access and maintenance issues that are not included on the plat.
Standard easement width for Boxelder is 30-feet. Easements that meet this criterion will need an easement
agreement submitted to the District and recorded by Larimer County. District acknowledges submittal of
requested changes to easement agreement. This document is under review and has not been accepted at
this time.
Response: This should not impact approval of the Phase D Core plans. Our legal counsel and
Boxelder are working on easement dedication document; legal descriptions are in process. The
easements will be executed after acquisition of the property from the Anheuser-Busch Foundation.
Upon recording, reception numbers for the Boxelder easements will be added to the Phase D Core
plat prior to its recording.
2) A Sewer System Agreement will be required for this project. Agreement will be submitted to applicant for
review.
Response: Form has been received and is under review; the agreement will be executed with
Boxelder prior to installation of sewer facilities.
3) Applicant will remit outstanding development review fees.
Response: Fees were submitted by Montava on 10/11/2024.
05/31/2024:
Responses required for comments below (actual letter included with package):
1) Standalone easement will be required for all sewers that are not located in
the public Right-of-Way and in alley tracts. The easements are necessary to
address access and maintenance issues that are not included on the plat.
Standard easement width for Boxelder is 30-feet. District Easement template is attached.
Page 17 of 18
2) Add curb distance for sanitary sewer lines.
3) Terminate service lines in sanitary sewer manhole where possible.
4) Drawings show parallel sewer lines entering from Maple Hill. Edit drawing to
reflect that the southern line is abandoned.
5) District codes and regulations require sanitary sewer manholes to be
installed every 400 feet. Ensure that sanitary sewer lines meet District
standards.
6) The planned sanitary sewer line crossing Giddings Rd. will need to be inside
a casing. Edit drawings to reflect this requirement.
7) Are there plans for an underdrain system for this phase? Space limitations
within the easement will need to be considered.
Contact: East Larimer County Water District, Randy Siddens,
randys@elcowater.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
10/10/2024: City Response:
Have not received a response from the review request yet. Once received, we
will forward this on to the Montava Team.
Response: ELCO’s redlined comments were received 11/01/24; these have been addressed in the
revised plans.
Regarding the dedication of easements to ELCO for waterline improvements within Phase D, our
legal counsel and ELCO are working on easement dedication document and legal descriptions are
in process. The easement dedications will be executed after acquisition of the property from the
Anheuser-Busch Foundation. Upon recording of the easement dedications, reception numbers for
the ELCO easements will be added to the Phase D Core plat prior to its recording.
05/31/2024:
Please see attachments for ELCO comments on the drawings submitted.
For all alleys or roads that are private (not public Right-of Ways), we will need to
have 30-foot wide easements dedicated to ELCO for all our water lines that are
in those non-public roads/alleys.
Contact: Lawrence Custer Grasmick Jones & Donovan, LLP, Ryan Donovan,
ryan@lcwaterlaw.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
10/09/2024:
You can expect comments on 10/21/2024. These comments will be provided on
separate documents and will be forwarded via email from the City.
Response: Comments from LWIC’s engineer and legal counsel were received on 10/21/24.
Technical comments from W.W. Wheeler & Associates, Inc. have been addressed with corrections
to the Utility Plans, Non-Potable Construction Plans and Erosion Control Report. See also the
Page 18 of 18
responses to the W.W. Wheeler comments that are provided with this submittal.
Montava acknowledges receipt of the 10/21/24 comment letter from LWIC’s legal counsel. The
subject matter of the comments is being addressed in the ongoing settlement discussions. We will
not be submitting a response because the issues will be addressed in the settlement between the
parties.
08/15/2024:
Comments and Attachments for Round 2 provided separately.
5/31/2024:
Please see attachments provided in Round 1 Comments Package.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Emma Pett epett@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
10/08/2024: FOR APPROVAL: The annual water usage on the irrigation plan
(6,671,347) differs from the annual water usage in the landscape plan
(3,885,840). Please confirm the square footage of the irrigated area and the
annual water usage. Thank you for submitting a thorough irrigation plan.
Response: We have resolved the discrepancy between the irrigation plan water usage and the
hydrozone plan in the Landscape drawings. Based on discussions with other departments, the
landscape and irrigation within the channel adjacent to Maple Hill Drive will be indicated in the
Phase D Infrastructure plan set instead of the Phase D Core set. Revisions to the landscape,
irrigation plans and the hydrozone calculations for both sets have been completed.