Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMONTAVA - PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE - BDR240010 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - Responses (5) Page 1 of 13 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 Infrastructure, BDR240010, Round Number 2 Responses to Staff Comments for Round 1 dated August 30, 2024 November 6, 2024 August 30, 2024 Forrest Hancock Montava Development & Construction LLC 430 N College Avenue, #410 Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Montava - Phase D Infrastructure, BDR240010, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of Montava - Phase D Infrastructure. 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 phone at 970-221-6695 or via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com. No response is necessary for Staff comments in Grey. Comment Summary: 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! Response: Thank you. Comment Number: 2 Page 2 of 13 SUBMITTAL: As part of your submittal, a response to the comments provided in this letter and a response to plan markups is required. The final letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this letter to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a different font color. Please use the markups to insert responses to each comment on plans. Please do not flatten markup responses. Provide a detailed response for any comment asking a question or requiring an action. Any comment requesting a response or requiring action by you with a response of noted, acknowledged etc. will be considered not addressed. You will need to provide references to specific project plans, pages, reports, or explanations of why comments have not been addressed [when applicable]. 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-Aut oCAD.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. Comment Number: 8 NOTICE: A Development Review sign will be posted on the property. This sign will be Page 3 of 13 posted through the final decision and appeal process. A request for the removal of signs will be made by your Development Review Coordinator at the appropriate time. Comment Number: 9 FOR RECORDING - PLAT AND PLANNING SET: Could you please update the City signature blocks on the plat? 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: Signature blocks gave been updated to reflect the new date format and additional space has been provided to accommodate digital signatures. 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. Department: Planning Services Contact: Jill Baty jbaty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/29/2024: Please address salt tolerances of the landscaping in the same manner as in the Phase D Core plan set. In essence, we are looking to record our current thinking around plant selection, etc. for anyone who might need to refer to these plans in the future. Response: We have added the same note from the Core set plant list to the Infrastructure plant list. Plant species have been selected with moderate to higher salt tolerance based on anticipated soil and water conditions. Comment Number: 2 08/29/2024: Please consider how "non-functional turf grass" will be used in this phase and how that relates to future phases. As you are aware, turf grass in parkway strips will not be allowed in the future, per new state legislation. These new restrictions will go into effect on January 1, 2026. Response: We are continuing to indicate the lower-water using 90/10 grass in the tree lawns as they may be constructed prior to January 1, 2026 and the revised FC landscape codes and LCUASS standards are not yet finalized. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson eolson@fcgov.com 970-221-6704 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/28/2024: Water Conservation is aware the irrigation system is non-potable. We still require an irrigation plan as per the Water Adequacy Determinations. Section 3.13.6 (A) (2) (b) Description of the water supply system and physical Page 4 of 13 source of water supply that will be used to serve the proposed development. Direct questions to irrigationdr@fcgov.com. Response: Preliminary Irrigation Plans have been included with the submittal. A separate set of irrigation (and planting) plans for the ‘fiddle’ intersection is included in the Utility Plan set as requested by Parks since they will be responsible for maintenance of this area. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Tim Dinger tdinger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/21/2024: FOR APPROVAL: Please address all redlines on the plans. Response: Redline comments on Bluebeam markup have been addressed. Please see provided Bluebeam responses. Comment Number: 2 08/21/2024: FOR APPROVAL: Both roundabouts (the fiddle roundabout and the Dutch roundabout) should be constructed with concrete, not asphalt. Please clarify this with labeling and hatching on the plans. Response: Noted; plans are revised to show construction with concrete in this submittal. Comment Number: 3 08/28/2024: FOR APPROVAL: Additional details about how much of the fiddle will be constructed are required. Some of the median islands that separate the lanes coming into and out of the fiddle are shown outside of the limits of construction. An interim condition will be needed. Response: Additional details for the fiddle including, flowline profiles, grading plans, and interim transitions have been added to the plan set. Limits of construction have been updated. As discussed we will transition back to the existing Giddings condition north of the Fiddle as the intent is to have this constructed in lieu of the north entrance shown with Phase D Core. Comment Number: 4 08/28/2024: FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: Please submit the DA for this phase with the round 2 submittal. Response: Montava’s first draft of the Development Agreement is attached for your review. Comment Number: 5 08/28/2024: FOR APPROVAL: Per discussions with Forrest and Derek, the Ultimate design of Giddings Road will be provided with with the infrastructure package in round 2. Response: The ultimate conditions of Giddings Road from Goodheart Drive (south entrance of Core Set) to the north side of the fiddle will be constructed to the ultimate conditions. We are also showing ultimate design, 1000’ feet beyond the end of our improvements per LCUASS standards as discussed. Comment Number: 6 08/28/2024: FOR ROW VACATION: Please submit the necessary documents to begin the ROW vacation for Giddings Road. The documents and a process summary can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev Response: The ROW vacation is being submitted directly to Engineering Development Review. Department: Traffic Operation Page 5 of 13 Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: INFORMATION: The Transportation Impact Study for the Infrastructure Project was completed in conjunction with the Core Project. Coordination between the two projects will need to occur so that all requirements outlined in the TIS are met with both projects. Response: The traffic study for Montava Phase D conservatively evaluated all uses associated with Phase D as part of the Core Project. This demonstrated that full development of Phase D Core could be supported with the two initial points of access along Giddings Road associated with the Core Plan. The Infrastructure Plan (fiddle roundabout and ultimate access plan to Giddings) was evaluated with the 20-year horizon and full buildout of all Montava. The access plan for the Infrastructure Project is reported to support the 20-year traffic projections and all Montava development. Comment Number: 2 08/26/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Signing and marking redlines are provided within the Utility Plans. Would be happy to coordinate outside the review process to make sure everything is addressed. We will also need to see the signing and marking for the rest of the roadways included in the Infrastructure Project, right now we just have the two main intersections. Response: All Bluebeam redline mark ups have been addressed. Please see provided Bluebeam comment responses. Comment Number: 3 08/26/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: This comment was provided in the Core Project as well. The raised crossing on Timberline should be incorporated into the raised crossing at the roundabout. These two raised crossings are too close together. Response: Yes, this crosswalk will be combined. The crossing shown on the Core Set is only temporary and will be removed and combined into the Dutch Roundabout Crossing. Comment Number: 4 08/26/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The multi-use path as it enters the Dutch roundabout does not currently tie in. Better detail will be needed. We would also like to have a better detail of the raised crossings in the roundabout. Are these at grade with the sidewalk? How will drainage work? Response: The layout / connection for the paths have been updated to provide better connectivity. Additional details for the raised walks have been added to the detail sheets. Yes, these will be at grade with the sidewalk. These are custom raised crossings, but we have followed the intent / detail for the raised walks that the City would like to use as it relates to heights and slopes. Area inlets have been added prior to these raised crossing where necessary. Please refer to updated drainage and grading plans for those details. Comment Number: 5 08/26/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The signing and marking of the "Fiddle" intersection may need further coordination. I have redlined a few items but would like further detail on the crossings and may need to discuss the internal arrow markings. We would also like to see the internal edge line versus the yield line used and would like that to align with the roadway better. Response: Bluebeam redline comments have been addressed. Once you have reviewed this submittal, we would like to schedule a call to coordinate further. Comment Number: 6 Page 6 of 13 08/26/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The Landscape Plans detail the medians internal to the Dutch roundabout and the "Fiddle" as having plantings. We want to make sure whatever is planted in these will not cause an sight distance issue for vehicles entering these intersections. All plantings should be low lying and should not grow to a point that it would restrict visibility. Response: Sight distance triangles have been indicated on the Landscape Plans and lower plants indicated in these areas. Department: Erosion Control Contact: Andrew Crecca acrecca@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 08/23/2024: "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. We understand projects are subject to revisions during the first round of Basic Development Reviews and it is not practical to submit Erosion Control Submittals untill the final design is established. Comment Number: 2 08/23/2024: For Approval or Final Plan: Please see Erosion Control Plan Redlines within the Utility Plan Set and the provided SWMP. Comments reflect only a portion of the missing requirements. Please refer to the Erosion Control Submittal Checklist and Chapter 2 of the Stormwater Criteria Manual for required submittal items for subsequent rounds of review. These resources can be found at https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-f orms-guidelines-regulations/erosion/ Erosion Control Reports are required for all projects over an acre. The SWMP satisfies this requirement but will be reviewed according to the criteria set forth in the “City if Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual” (FCSCM) Chapter 2 Section 6, which varies from the State requirements for a CO400000 Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit. The applicant may choose not to add the requested items to the SWMP but will be required to submit an Erosion Control Report as a "Stand Alone" Document. Otherwise, all required items need to be included per FCSCM Chapter 2 Section 6. A copy of the Erosion Control Submittal Checklist can be found at https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-f orms-guidelines-regulations/erosion/ Response: The SWMP has been replaced with an Erosion Control Report. All necessary items per the criteria stated above have been added. Page 7 of 13 Comment Number: 3 08/23/2024: For Approval or Final Plan: Based upon the supplied materials, an Erosion Control Escrow Calculation will need to be provided. Please submit an Erosion Control Escrow / Security Calculation based upon the accepted Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.5) at time of Final Plan or Approval Submittal. Response: These will be provided with next submittal. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque wlamarque@fcgov.com 970-416-2418 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: The infrastructure for the local drainage is in conformance with the drainage design for Montava Phase D Core & Irrigation Pond. Response: Thank you. Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: The City agrees with delaying the LID requirement for this public road infrastructure project until further phases so the LID mitigation can be on private property and incorporated into that future phase's site plan. Extended-detention standard water quality should be included into the temporary detention ponds in the interim. Response: Thank you. Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: FOR APPROVAL: Please submit storm sewer plan & profiles at next round of review. Response: Storm Plan & Profiles have been added to the plan set. Department: Light And Power Contact: Austin Kreager akreager@fcgov.com 970-224-6152 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: PRIOR TO NEXT SUBMITTAL: Please send us your cad files so we can place electric facilities in the project area for the next submittal. Response: Now that we are much further along with the design of this plan set, we thought it would be much more efficient to provide CAD files with this submittal so that you have more information available to do a more thorough layout. CAD files will be provided via e-mail directly to your team. Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: Light and Power's running lines and vaults cannot be located under sidewalks and still maintain ADA compliance. Please keep our facilities out of the sidewalk wherever possible. Response: Where possible your facilities have been located within the provided utility easements and outside of the sidewalks. We should coordinate running your lines though the Fiddle and Dutch Roundabout areas. We look forward to seeing your layout once you have had a chance to review the CAD files. Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: Page 8 of 13 During utility infrastructure design, please provide adequate space of all service and main lines internal to the site to ensure proper utility installation and to meet minimum utility spacing requirements. A minimum of 10 ft separation is required between water, sewer and storm water facilities, and a minimum of 3 ft separation is required between Natural Gas. Please show all electrical routing on the Utility Plans. Response: Where possible we have made sure to meet these minimum separation requirements. Contact: Tyler Siegmund tsiegmund@fcgov.com 970-416-2772 Topic: General Comment Number: 4 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: Due to existing water mains in the parkway location along the west side of Giddings Rd, streetlights for Giddings will only be installed along the east side of the road. Response: This works for us. Please add streetlights to your layout and we will make sure to get these incorporated. Comment Number: 5 08/27/2024: FOR APPROVAL: Please show the location of the undergrounded Xcel electric lines on the utility plans. If gas is proposed to be installed along Giddings, please show the gas routing. Response: No gas is planned to be installed at this time. The overhead electric will be undergrounded as part of the Core Set. We are currently coordinating with Xcel to determine the final location / routing of their system. We will update the plans to reflect this routing once we have that information. Comment Number: 6 08/27/2024: FOR APPROVAL: See markups on page 6 of the plat for utility easement dedication. Response: Pocket utility easement at the NE corner of Mountain Vista Drive and Giddings Road has been added to the plat. Comment Number: 7 08/28/2024: INFORMATION: Any existing electric infrastructure that needs to be relocated as part of this project will be at the expense of the developer. Please coordinate relocations with Light and Power Engineering. Response: Understood. Please let us know any necessary relocations required and will make sure these items are coordinated. Comment Number: 8 08/28/2024: INFORMATION: Any existing and proposed Light and Power electric facilities that are within the limits of the project must be located within a utility easement or public right-of-way. Response: Lines have been checked to make sure they are in an easement and or ROW. Easements have been added as needed. Comment Number: 9 08/28/2024: 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 Response: Understood. Investments fees will be provided when necessary, but I believe these Page 9 of 13 should be provided with the Core Set correct? Let’s discuss this further once you have had a chance to determine routing of facilities and all necessary upgrades. Comment Number: 10 08/28/2024: 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: Scott Benton sbenton@fcgov.com (970)416-4290 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/05/2024: 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 has been indicated as an NHBZ in the plans. These plantings and the NHBZ have been indicated on the Phase D Infrastructure Plans so it can be constructed with the completion of the roads in this area to avoid disruption of the plantings. In the 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 later 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. We have added a table to the Phase D Infrastructure plans indicating: -the total area of the wetlands impacted with Phase D plus a 50’ buffer, and -the total area of the riparian/wet meadow area identified in the channel in Phase D (NHBZ), which is greater than the wetland + 50’ buffer. We have also indicated this area as the NHBZ on the plans. In addition, the table indicates the minimum, average and maximum widths of this NHBZ. Comment Number: 2 08/05/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Change the seeding rate of 'Native Seed - Type 1' to at least 1/5 of the specified rate. The current rate of 5 lbs/1000 square feet is a heavy turf rate and won't be sustainable without irrigation over that of the specified hydrozone rate, and will reduce cost for as much as this particular seed mix is prescribed over Montava's area generally. This will likely need to happen on all Montava phases. Page 10 of 13 Response: (Same response as Core set, resolved) After discussing further with Pawnee Buttes Seed, they recommend this higher rate for this seed given the planned locations within park and greenbelt area use. Since these are bunch grasses, they recommend a higher application rate to help result in greater seed coverage with establishment. Once established, the water need for these seed varieties are still low. Comment Number: 3 08/05/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: 'Native Seed - Type 1' has low to moderately-low salt tolerance. This lends weight to the importance of monitoring salt levels in both the soils and irrigation water over time to understand what the baseline conditions are and what the trend is over time. Several salt-related plant/landscaping issues can be addressed before they become big problems with monitoring, but not without monitoring. Please contact me to discuss further offline. Response: (Same response as Core set, resolved) As for the planned ‘Native Seed – Type 1’, based on input from Pawnee Buttes Seed, they consider the Low Grow Mix and Native Low Grow Mix are considered moderately salt tolerant and they recommend either of these for our conditions and planned use. As is standard practice, we will monitor the progress of all landscape elements and will be responsible for replacement if not successful. Monitoring: Montava has water quality testing, modeling and monitoring planned to ensure the success of our landscape plantings. Max has provided a Long Term Irrigation System Management Strategy to Kirk which includes careful plant selection, deep tilling and soil amendments to improve soil drainage, shortening the irrigation season, and soil and water testing. The development must comply with the current LUC regulations including those that require us to replace any landscape element that dies. Department: Forestry Contact: Freddie Haberecht fhaberecht@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: FOR INFORMATION Please refer to redlines regarding utility separation and tree species selection salt tolerance. Response: Tree/utility separations and tree species changes have been corrected. Department: Park Planning Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: Both Park Planning & Development and Parks Department comments will be provided by Missy Nelson | mnelson@fcgov.com, 970.416.8077. Please note, we are available to discuss and set up separate meetings to go over any of the comments in greater detail. Response: Thank you. Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: For the fiddle roundabout and medians that the Parks Department will maintain, please have separate sheets in the Utility Plan set containing the landscape plan (plant legend only for the roundabout and median that Parks will maintain Page 11 of 13 please), irrigation plan (*PER PARKS' IRRIGATION STANDARDS*), and ground cover plan. Response: We have included the landscape and irrigation plans for the fiddle roundabout in the Utility Plans meeting Parks standards. Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There are a few plant selection and design changes we’d like to work through. Can we please set up a meeting with BHA to discuss? Items such as: native grass and mulch areas, plant selections. Response: Thank you for the additional comments. We have removed the plantings from the fiddle’s ‘splitter island’ medians, relocated the maintenance staging areas and made them concrete, and have added steel edger between mulch bed and seed areas. Comment Number: 4 08/27/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please include and call out Sight Distance Triangles on plans with fiddle and medians. Site, landscape and utilities. Response: Sight triangles are now indicated in plans. Comment Number: 5 08/27/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: On L3, the two west median wings only show part of them will be maintained by Parks, is that correct, or a drawing mistake? Response: We have removed landscape from all of the ‘splitter island’ medians around the fiddle intersection, so the only area now indicated for Parks maintenance is the interior of the fiddle itself. The landscaping on Montava Avenue past the crosswalk will be maintained by the Developer (Met District). Comment Number: 6 08/27/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Maple Hill and Timberline are Collector Streets so the roundabout and associated medians will be maintained by the Metro District. Response: Plans have been corrected. Comment Number: 7 08/27/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The NE and SW fiddle median wings look like they're not going to be fully constructed with this phase; is that correct? Response: Plans have been revised to show full design of these medians matching the infrastructure utility plans. Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org 970-416-2869 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: TURNING EXHIBIT The submitted turning exhibit does not provide the turning movements for our largest apparatus. Please revise the exhibit with Tower 1 dimensions. Response: Truck movements have been updated to reflect the 47’ Tower 1 truck. Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: WATER SUPPLY Table C102.1 Footnote C. Where new water mains are extended along street where hydrants Page 12 of 13 are not needed for protection of structures or similar fire problems, hydrants shall be provided at spacing not to exceed 1,000 feet to provide for transportation hazards. Footnote B. Where streets are provided with median dividers that cannot be crossed by fire fighters pulling hose lines, or are arterial streets, hydrant spacing shall average 500 feet on each side of the street and be arranged on an alternating basis. New hydrants will be required along N Giddings and Maple Hill Dr. Response: Additional hydrants have been added and called out where marked up on both Giddings and Maple Hill. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588 Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 08/23/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please provide the following information for the Benchmark Statement in the EXACT format shown below. PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) = NAVD88 DATUM - X.XX’. Response: Benchmark has been updated exactly as shown above. Comment Number: 3 08/23/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: All Benchmark Statements must match on all sheets. Response: Benchmark has been double check and updated in all locations. Comment Number: 4 08/23/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please make sure all matchline references are added & correct. Response: Matchlines have been updated / added as needed. Comment Number: 5 08/23/2024: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See markups. Response: Text masks have been added. Page 13 of 13 Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 08/23/2024: INFORMATION ONLY: The Subdivision Plat will not be reviewed at this time. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Jim Bertolini jbertolini@fcgov.com 970-416-4250 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/13/2024: NO HISTORIC REVIEW REQUIRED: This proposal does not require historic review because there are no designated historic resources on the site and the nature of the project does not impact any historic resources that may lie on the development site or within 200 feet of the site.