Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupporting Documentation - Response to Comments - 03/26/2025 March 26, 2025 City of Fort Collins Planning & Development Services 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: SWC Drake College, ODP240002, Round Number 2 Dear Ms. Bethurem-Harras, Thank you for your coordinated review of the SWC Drake/College ODP submittal, the comments for which we received on March 21, 2025. The comments have been addressed in the resubmittal materials attached, please see our team’s written responses to staff and referral agency comments in the following pages. Sincerely, Norris Design Ryan McBreen Principal Department: Development Review Coordinator Contact: Brandy Bethurem Harras bbethuremharras@fcgov.com 970-416-2744 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 01/14/2025: 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 correspondencewith other reviewers and keep me informed of any phone conversations. Thank you! Response: Thank you Brandy. We have worked to include you on all correspondence with Staff. Comment Number: 2 01/14/2025: 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]. Response: Please find this letter along with PDF markups with thorough responses to Staffs’ comments. Comment Number: 3 01/14/2025: 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-requirements-and-file-naming-standa rds_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. Response: Thank you we believe these resubmittal items have been submitted following the required naming convention, as requested. Comment Number: 4 01/14/2025: 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 Response: We believe all submittal items have been optimized as requested. Comment Number: 5 01/14/2025: 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. Response: Understood. Thank you. Comment Number: 6 01/14/2025: INFORMATION: Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the expiration of your project. Response: Thank you. This submittal falls within this timeline. Comment Number: 7 01/14/2025: INFORMATION: ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an additional fee of $3,000.00. Response: Understood. It is our hopes this is a final review and we may proceed to hearings for this application. Comment Number: 8 01/14/2025: NOTICE: A Development Review sign will be posted on the property. This sign will be posted through the final decision and appeal process. A request for the removal of signs will be made by your Development Review Coordinator at the appropriate time. Response: Understood. Thank you. Comment Number: 9 03/14/2025: FOR RECORDING – ODP PLAN SET: 01/14/2025: FOR RECORDING – ODP PLAN SET: Could you please update the City signature block Plan Set? Instead of using "this _______ day of ______, 20____," could you opt for "on this day, ____________" for the date? This alternative format facilitates smoother date input with digital signatures. Response: This requested modification has been made to this signature block as well as the Planning Certification block. The title of the City signature box should be "Planning Certification" rather than Planning & Zoning Certification. Response: This has been updated as requested. Please update the Signature Line, from "Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Board" to CDNS Director or Designee OR Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services or Designee. Response: This has been updated as requested. Additionally, kindly ensure there is sufficient space between the signature line and the title line to accommodate the digital signature. Response: An extra carriage return has been added to provide more room, as requested. Department: Planning Services Contact: Jill Baty jbaty@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 03/18/2025: FOR HEARING: Please see markups on the plan sets. Response: Please see included PDF plan with responses to included comments Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Sophie Buckingham sbuckingham@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 03/24/2025: FOR HEARING: Please indicate a bike and pedestrian connection to the existing frontage road stub, with no vehicular connection. Response: An additional note has been added to the plan on sheet 2 of the ODP, as requested. See snip below of proposed solution. We understand that the reviewer is out at the time we are making this submittal, so please confirm we are accurately portraying this request. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 03/05/2025: FOR HEARING - UPDATED: Thank you for updating the TIS see subsequent comments. Response: TIS has been updated per staff comments. Please refer to updated report and comment responses below for additional information. 01/13/2025: FOR HEARING: The Transportation Impact Study has been received and is being reviewed. See subsequent comments. Comment Number: 2 03/05/2025: FOR HEARING - UPDATED: Based on the findings within the TIS the southbound and eastbound movements will not meet LOS standards for the 2028 total traffic volumes. Given that the proposed Capital Project is not moving forward with an expected completion date prior to build out, mitigation will be required. We would like to see a proportional share contributed to the future improvements for the eastbound left movement, but will defer mitigation for the southbound movement, as the City will look at signal retiming the entire College corridor versus trying to make timing changes to just a single intersection. We can coordinate on what the proportional share will be. Response: We have added a statement to the updated traffic study discussing that a cost-sharing contribution will be determined with the City for the EBL movement. 01/13/2025: FOR HEARING: The TIS details the existing southbound through movement on College at Drake fails the required level of service standards with an F, but is mitigated in the 2028 Totals through signal timing optimization in order to meet the level of service standards. We will need further discussion on the proposed timing changes and the potential impacts. Comment Number: 6 03/05/2025: FOR HEARING - UPDATED: Please include any correspondence that you have had with CDOT regard updated access permit requirements. If changes are required within the TIS to meet their standards we would like to have this addressed prior to approval. Response: We will include correspondence with CDOT and any updates we receive from them. At the time of this resubmittal, we have not yet received comments. The study was submitted to Tim and Ally on 3/7/2025. 01/14/2025: FOR HEARING: This project will need to be routed to the Colorado Department of Transportation CDOT for review and necessary access permits. We would also like confirmation that they will not require dedicated right turn lanes at the College/Site Access, and at College and Thunderbird. Please contact Tim Bilobran and Allison Young, Region 4 Access Management. Comment Number: 7 03/05/2025: FOR HEARING: The bike and pedestrian LOS was not completed according to the guidelines outlined in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Appendix H, Part II. I have provided a copy of the appendix and will need to see the level of service provided to destinations such as transit/Max stations/King Soopers to the north, residential/retail to the east, and retail to the south. Please reach out if you have questions. Response: The updated TIS includes bike and pedestrian LOS analysis to the aforementioned destinations as requested. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Kristie Raymond kraymond@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 02/27/2025: FOR HEARING: Contaminants (chloroform and ethylbenzene) have been identified on site from a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for this site . The Phase II report should be completed for hearing for this project, and a remediation plan approved by the state with a development plan. Language will be included in the Development Agreement noting the requirement for remediation on site for the contaminants. Response: Thank you for this information. A Phase II report has been included as part of the resubmittal materials. The Applicant would also like to further discuss this item with you and intends to reach out to set up a discussion in the near term. Comment Number: 2 02/27/2025: FOR HEARING: Please include the following statement on the plan, "There is known contamination that must be remediated prior to any future development. Refer to the remediation plan approved by the state generated from the Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)." Response: The requested note has been added to the cover sheet of the ODP. Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org 970-416-2869 Topic: General Comment Number: 2 03/17/2025: Fire lane signage shall be shown on streets dedicated as EAE. Response: Per e-mail from Brandy Betherum Harras dated 3/25/25, this comment is applicable to the accompanying BDR application and is not required to be addressed as part of this ODP application. This comment will be addressed as part of that BDR application. 01/14/2025: OBSTRUCTION OF FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS - IFC503.4 Fire apparatus access roads shall not be obstructed in any manner, including the parking of vehicles. The minimum widths and clearances established in Section 503.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. The local access roads proposed are wide enough for fire lane requirements but parking on either side of the street would obstruct the fire lane. No parking fire lane signage would be required on both sides of the these streets. Comment Number: 3 03/17/2025: Fire lane signage shall be shown on streets dedicated as EAE. Response: Per e-mail from Brandy Betherum Harras dated 3/25/25, this comment is applicable to the accompanying BDR application and is not required to be addressed as part of this ODP application. This comment will be addressed as part of that BDR application. 01/14/2025: 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 all signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of fire inspection. Code language provided below. - IFC D103.6: Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or D103.6.2. - IFC D103.6.1; ROADS 20 TO 26 FEET IN WIDTH: Fire lane signs as specified in Section D103.6 shall be posted on both sides of fire apparatus access roads that are 20 to 26 feet wide. - IFC D103.6.1; ROADS MORE THAN 26 FEET IN WIDTH: Fire lane signs as specified in Section D103.6 shall be posted on one side of fire apparatus access roads more than 26 feet wide and less than 32 feet wide. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 03/18/2025: INFORMATION ONLY: We have no comments, but would like to see any future submittals. Response: Thank you. Staff should forward as part of review process.