HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupporting Documentation - Response to Comments - 01/31/2025
Page 1 of 37
January 31, 2025
Cathy Mathis
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Strauss Lakes PUD, ODP240003, Round Number 1
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Strauss Lakes PUD. If you have questions about any
comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your
Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com.
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!
Comment Number: 2
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:
Page 2 of 37
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
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.
Page 3 of 37
Comment Number: 9
FOR RECORDING – PUD SET:
Could you please update the City signature blocks on the PUD Set? Instead of
using "the _______ day of ______, 2024," 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: The signature block has been changed.
Comment Number: 10
FOR HEARING:
All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to
moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff will need to agree the project
is ready for Hearing approximately 4 to 8 weeks prior to the hearing.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 11
FOR HEARING:
This proposed project is processing as a Type 2 Development Plan. The
decision maker for Type 2 is the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission. For
the hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 1,000 feet
(excluding public right-of-way and publicly owned open space). Staff will need
to agree the project is ready for Hearing approximately 4-8 weeks prior to the
hearing. I have attached the P&Z schedule, which has key dates leading up to the
hearing.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Kim Meyer kimeyer@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/28/2025:
FOR HEARING: This PUD cannot be heard and a final decision rendered until
such time as the property has been annexed and zoned, per pending concurrent
application.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2
01/28/2025:
FOR HEARING: The PUD checklist included in the application packet includes
a list of required items, concepts, and information such as: urban design
features (character defining, themes, streetscape), landscaping, amenities
(site, program, social), building design standards (materials, patterns), fencing,
notes that clarify design intent, project features, requirements or restrictions.
Page 4 of 37
Please ensure that the overall PUD document provides clear and objective
details that provide adequate guidance to future reviewers and builders on what
is required for this PUD. Without some defining elements that create the
needed character, this plan feels like an Overall Development Plan (ODP) that
provides basic densities and information for a multi-phase development.
RESPONSE: The applicant has converted this plan to an ODP and is
requesting approval of the same as an ODP.
Comment Number: 3
01/28/2025:
FOR HEARING: The PUD plan sheets and Narrative have been redlined with
multiple comments and requests for clarification. Please ensure each is
appropriately and thoroughly addressed prior to resubmittal.
On PUD Sheet 8, the LUC modifications to Articles 2 & 3 proposed provide a
very general “new urbanism” justification (elsewhere noted as “next level”)
without providing needed rationale or detail that staff and the PZC seek to
better understand the “better than” standard, beyond just smaller and/or
narrower lots. In general the housing types proposed are permitted within the
underlying zones, so provide additional design details or standards that clarify
the additional diversity proposed – and how these code deviations would yield
a neighborhood or housing type that would not otherwise be permitted by the
underlying zoning. The proposed deviations seem to only permit smaller lots,
smaller setbacks, etc., without detailing and requiring the commensurate higher
standard of design that would apply for future development phases in this PUD.
Code requires a level of detail that more specifically defines the community
vision and character that the City would seek as each phase comes forward for
development, such as higher level of: architecture (roof forms, min fenestration,
min % glazing, materials palette, larger than- porches, streetscape and
framework of public space (do smaller lots = more access to usable pocket
parks?), enhanced landscaping, perhaps higher % additional trees. The current
plan sheets point to creating a streetscape with certain building types that does
not meet LUC standards and appears to result in garage dominated- streets (ex:
the cottage court product) with small lots and minimal setbacks leaving little space
for any tree canopy.
As noted in the prior PDR, the general purpose of a PUD Overlay is to “provide
an avenue for property owners with larger and more complex development
projects to achieve flexibility in site design in return for significant public benefits
not available through traditional development procedures.” At the December 21,
2023, Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) hearing, Vice Chair Stackhouse
requested that the modifications sought for the project through the PUD process
be justified through clearly identifying what design and/or public benefits such
modifications achieve, and in what areas/circumstances those modifications
would apply. Staff requests further definition and evaluation of public benefits
Page 5 of 37
that the neighborhood can provide for unique placemaking and social health.
RESPONSE: In connection with the conversion of this application to an ODP,
these comments have been addressed in the plan sheets and narrative.
Comment Number: 4
01/28/2025:
FOR HEARING: The Planning & Zoning Commission noted at a pre-application
hearing that there is a desire to see more purposeful design and configuration
of parks and open spaces, beyond identifying the leftover spaces from lots as
open space; with attention to creating usable, functional spaces within blocks of
homes. The current PUD Conceptual Plan does not provide much detail in
terms of amenities or size of spaces and parks – the discussions provided in
the narrative and comment responses is not obviously reflected in the plan.
RESPONSE: In connection with the conversion of this application to an ODP,
these comments have been addressed in the plan sheets and narrative.
Comment Number: 5
01/28/2025:
FOR HEARING: Please provide the agreements from the ditch companies that
indicate the right to provide any needed access to or across their ditch easements
for the required bridges and pedestrian / bike trails. This is noted in the Narrative
as a “public amenity” and we need to ensure feasibility with the PUD plans.
Additionally provide a copy of any agreements related to allowance or a secondary
emergency access across the adjacent city property.
RESPONSE: This application has been converted to an ODP. The applicant
intends to address any detailed issues related to access across ditch
easements for bridges and pedestrian/bike trails at the PDP stage, when
specific site design and engineering details are available.
Since the north part of the site has been removed from the application,
secondary emergency access from the north part of the property across the
adjacent city property is no longer requested as part of this application.
Comment Number: 6
01/28/2025:
INFORMATION: The PUD plans and the PBA for the Metro District will need to
converge during the review process to ensure that the obligations within the
PBA are expressly reflected in the PUD and can be tracked through future
development plans to ensure compliance. Appropriate development triggers will
need to be determined as part of the PBA and the PUD – specifically in regards
to satisfying the PBA obligations, timing of development of the commercial
district, trails and parks, and the affordable housing.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 7
01/28/2025:
Page 6 of 37
INFORMATION: The drive that is serving the northern portion of the site appears
(conceptually) as a very small, private(?) drive that connects to CR 9 as it
crosses the ditch – which seems insufficient to handle the traffic of those units.
For all future preliminary and final development plans, please be aware that
those detailed engineering and design plans will be reviewed to ensure
compliance at that time.
RESPONSE: The north part of the site has been removed from the
application.
Comment Number: 8
01/28/2025:
INFORMATION: The PUD sets the stage for future development, and any
significant change from the approved PUD Comprehensive Plan – i.e., future
engineering work illustrates some element is not feasible - will require an
amendment (major or minor) to the PUD; and any such element that is also a
part of the Public Benefits Agreement (PBA) for the Metro District may require
an amendment to the agreement with City Council. Please ensure that elements
proposed have some level of due diligence that proves feasibility.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. The various meetings with Staff to discuss
specific elements (parks, alley widths etc) have taken place to resolve major
items and modify the application accordingly.
Comment Number: 9
01/28/2025:
INFORMATION: Changes, additions, and revisions that occur to this plan set
may elicit additional comments and redlines.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 10
01/28/2025:
INFORMATION: It feels important that City Staff and the Applicant develop
common language around the design concepts related to “new urbanism” such
that we can document some basic design principles to ensure that accommodation
in future development plans. We might use portions of these resources as a
starting point to further determine what would be worthwhile to document in the
PUD:
a.http://www.newurbanism.org/newurbanism/principles.html
b. https://www.dpz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Lexicon2014.pdf – 3.4-
Neighborhood Structure Checklist; 4.2 Block Types; 9 Building Types;
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Historic Preservation
Contact: Jim Bertolini jbertolini@fcgov.com 970-416-4250
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Page 7 of 37
INFORMATION – HISTORIC SURVEY - WAIVED:
At conceptual review, the applicant is responsible for working with City staff to
determine if any structures on the development site and, when relevant, within
200 feet of the development site, are designated historic resources or are
eligible for historic designation [LUC 3.4.7(B)(2) - new LUC 5.8.1(C)(2)].
Structures subject to this requirement must be at least 50 years old. This
process involves ordering historic property surveys if no such documentation
has been produced for the property in the last five years.
This requirement has been waived based on staff review of easily available
historical information such as aerial imagery of the site, showing a high degree of
disturbance. It has also been waived based on consultation with other City staff.
Both the Box Elder Ditch and the nearby section of the GSL&P Railroad have
already been documented and determined Eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2
RECOMMENDED – TRIBAL MONITORING - HISTORIC SURVEY:
Please note that this comment is a recommendation only, and the City’s Land
Use Code does not require tribal monitoring. There are no known cultural
resources on the development site, and much of the north and east portions of
the site have been heavily disturbed by gravel mining on this location since
1975. However, the development site is in proximity to known, significant
archaeological and indigenous cultural sites. Monitoring during site
preparation/excavation, although not Code required- in this instance, is
recommended, especially for the comparatively less disturbed southwest
portion of the site. Preservation staff are available to assist with securing any
tribal monitoring professionals, and can coordinate any necessary paperwork
with the local repository of record (the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery).
Please contact Preservation staff if electing to pursue this recommendation – a
collections agreement would need to be on file with the Museum prior to initiating
any monitoring.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3
INFORMATION – STATE LAW RELATED TO INADVERTENT
ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES ON PRIVATE LAND:
While the expected likelihood of discoveries is lower due to site disturbance,
the site is in close proximity to areas of cultural importance to this region’s
indigenous people. City staff would note that in the event of the Inadvertent
exposure or disturbance of human remains, objects of cultural significance or
patrimony, sacred objects, or associated or unassociated funerary objects, the
City shall comply with the requirements of the Native American Graves
Page 8 of 37
Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C.A. § 3001 or the State Unmarked
Burial Process C.R.S. §§ 24-80-1301, whichever jurisdictional authority applies.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Tim Dinger tdinger@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/08/2025: FOR APPROVAL:
Percheron Drive and William Neal Drive are not classified as collector roads per
the City of Fort Collins Master Street plan. They should be built to local street
standards, and will not be eligible for any TCEF reimbursements. Please adjust
these labels in the plans.
RESPONSE: Labels will be adjusted. Portions of Percheron may be
constructed to a wider cross section to accommodate a sanitary sewer force
main in addition to other standard utilities.
Comment Number: 2
01/08/2025: INFORMATION:
Per the response to comments letter, no LCUASS engineering variances are
anticipated by the developer team. None have been applied for, nor discussed
to be included in this PUD. Any engineering variances must be applied for and
approved during the technical submittal of the plans (PDP/FDP or BDR).
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3
01/28/2025: INFORMATION:
More information is needed about the access to the north from environmental
drive. Is there any encroachment into the railroad ROW? Will the road be public
or private? This access will need to meet all PFA standards.
RESPONSE: The north part of the site has been removed from the
application.
Comment Number: 4
01/28/2025: FOR APPROVAL:
You are proposing trails within the easement of the Boxelder ditch. A letter of
intent (LOI) will be required from the ditch company stating that they will allow
this connection in the future when the details are worked out in the PDP/FDP
processes.
RESPONSE: Box Elder ditch is part of a network of irrigation ditches and
canals that carry water from the Cache la Poudre River to users in and
around Fort Collins.[1] The Box Elder Ditch is owned and operated by the
Box Elder Ditch Company, an irrigation company in the South Platte River
Page 9 of 37
Basin. Melissa Buick manages it. The Box Elder Ditch Company's contact
information is:
207 Windflower Way
Severance, CO 80550
Email: Melissahbuick@gmail.com
Phone: (970) 686-7126 Office
Cell Phone: (970) 420-7019
While CLF has no ownership or control over the operation or management of
the Box Elder Ditch, CLF is willing to work with the Box Elder Ditch
Company and Ms. Buick to establish the pedestrian connection on the
southern end of the park across the ditch and to enter any required crossing
agreement with the ditch company necessary to permit the construction of
the crossing at CLF’s expense. Ms. Buick has confirmed to CLF that it is not
the practice of the Box Elder Ditch Company to enter into a Letter of Intent
like that mentioned in the comment until it has reviewed any related
(approved) development plans and it fully understands what a crossing
agreement may need to entail. Ms. Buick indicated her willingness to speak
directly with Park Planning staff to explain the ditch company’s reasoning
for this.
Comment Number: 5
01/28/2025: FOR APPROVAL:
Signalizing the intersection of Ziegler and Percheron will not meet LCUASS
spacing standards for signalized intersections. The intersection at William Neal
can likely be signalized, but not Percheron.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. This signal has been removed from the
application.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING: The Transportation Impact Study has been
received and is being reviewed. We will need to work with your traffic engineer
to on aspects of the study that will need to be updated. This should include
elements from the email received with considerable concerns regarding the
current study. It will be beneficial to address these concerns prior to the hearing
rather than at the hearing.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Page 10 of 37
Comment Number: 2
01/28/2025: We would like to have a separate meeting with the applicants
traffic engineer to update the scope of the study to more directly align with the
requirements in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for a Master
TIS, to get a better understanding of the phasing of this project, and to address
the neighbor concerns.
RESPONSE: The traffic study has been updated per further direction from
the CIty.
Comment Number: 3
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: With this project seeking vesting of a
Planned Unit Development (PUD), the TIS will need to included all the detailed
information required in a Full TIS which should include such aspects the LOS
for each movement and the associated queuing analysis for intersections. This
should also include any recommended geometry (turn lane) requirements. See
section 4.3.4.A of the LCUASS
RESPONSE: Detailed LOS and Queuing results are included for every
movement at each intersection, in each analyzed scenario. Included in the
Appendix of analysis results. Mitigations for failing intersections provide
what geometry would be necessary for sufficient LOS.
Comment Number: 4
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: Analysis Horizons. Within a Master TIS we
will need to look at 3 study horizons. The existing, the short range (build out),
and the long range 20 year. The TIS takes into account the existing, existing
with project traffic, and the build out at 2040. We will need this to follow LCUASS
more directly taking into account the background growth and the long range 2045.
There should also be some considerations made to the phasing of this
development and what improvements will be required based on the build out of
each phase.
RESPONSE: As part of the Master TIS the following 4 time lines are
analyzed: 2025 (existing), 2027 (background & build), 2032 (background &
build), 2045 (background & build)
Comment Number: 5
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: Trip Distribution. We added the Harmony and
Strauss Cabin intersections to the TIS to get an understanding of the impacts on
Horsetooth, Strauss Cabin, and Harmony as is pertains to traffic that will exit
your development and head directly east. No traffic was assigned to that
direction and we will need to update this. In addition, the findings of the TIS
conclude that these roads will need to be built out to accommodate the LOS at
the Harmony and Ziegler intersection. This will need further discussion and
coordination with Larimer County. We would also like to understand if there will be
any vehicular connectivity through the city park as this could alter the distribution
Page 11 of 37
of traffic for the workforce housing.
RESPONSE: Harmony & Strauss Cabin intersection is included in the
analysis. As directed, 10% of project traffic is distributed along Strauss
Cabin Road. Workforce housing parcel removed, no vehicular connectivity
provided through the park.
Comment Number: 6
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: Trip generation. We will need to include the
anticipated park traffic within the study and the impacts that will be created with
them accessing the park from William Neal and from Environmental. We will
also need to include the Union Park development trips now that that project has
been finalized as well that Liberty Common Middle School trips from that
project. I will coordinate that data with your traffic engineer. In addition the total
trips represented the findings and recommendations does not match the trip
generation table within the study. We will need to reconcile this, as internal
capture was not applied within the study.
RESPONSE: Union Park and Liberty Commons Middle School TIS trips
added to background analysis. Park land use assumed 58 acres of general
park with 3 soccer fields to generate ITE based trip generation.
Comment Number: 7
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: Bike and Pedestrian LOS. The TIS did not
provide any information regarding the feasibility of the potential underpasses
identified in the Trails Master Plan as recommended in the conceptual
comments. This will require further coordination with Engineering and Park
Planning. We also asked to look into the feasibility of a bike and pedestrian
bridge across the ditch from the isolated property on the southwest corner of the
development. A more detailed bike and pedestrian plan internal to the site would
be beneficial.
RESPONSE: A grade-separated crossing analysis memorandum was
provided to the City. Comments from PPD Staff confirmed that an overpass
is not feasible but stated that staff considers an underpass to be a feasible
option and requests the applicant dedicate an easement large enough to
accommodate a future underpass. The applicant is committed to working
with the City to address the specific location, scope and terms of any such
required easements at the PDP stage.
Comment Number: 8
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: Improvements. The TIS concluded that
certain improvements will be made to accommodate the LOS, but does not
provide any recommendations or the required timing of improvements to
accommodate this project. This includes the expansion of the roundabout at
Zielger and Horsetooth, the traffic signal at Ziegler and William Neal, the build
Page 12 of 37
out of Horsetooth to the east. Some of these are projects currently being
considered and designed by the City but not fully funded at this time. We
would also like to have the roundabout at Ziegler and Horsetooth analyzed as a
potential traditional intersection with a traffic signal and have a safety analysis
conducted.
RESPONSE: Intersection of Ziegler and Horsetooth analyzed as a
roundabout and as a signal in the 2045 build scenario with the highest levels
of traffic. As part of the Master TIS improvements are listed under the year in
which they become necessary due to background traffic or project
generated traffic.
Comment Number: 9
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: The recommendation to potentially signalize
Ziegler and Percheron is not likely as this does not meet spacing requirements
found in the LCUASS of every 2640 feet for an arterial roadway. We would like
to have this analyzed along with the Des Moines intersection to determine if these
intersection.
RESPONSE: Signal warrant analysis completed for these intersections.
Result in a recommendation of a three-quarters access at Percheron for the
site and no signal at Des Moines.
Comment Number: 10
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING TIS: Please correct and double check any street
names and correct. Rigden Parkway.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 11
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING: The TIS and the development plans detail
William Neal and Percheron east of Ziegler as Collector roadways. This is not
consistent with the Master Street Plan and may require an update to the Master
Street Plan of that is to remain, and will need to go through City Council. If
desired, the development can build these to a collector standard but have
remain a local street. The plans should be corrected to reflect that.
RESPONSE: William Neal Parkway will be constructed to LCUASS figure 7-
5f, which includes both on street parking and bicycle lanes.
Comment Number: 12
01/28/2025: INFORMATION: The overall PUD plan calls for narrowed and
raised crossing within the development. The locations don't need to be directly
identified at this time but they will need to be approved by the City Traffic
Engineer. More detail would be beneficial to demonstrate the internal bike and
pedestrian connectivity.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Page 13 of 37
Comment Number: 13
01/28/2025: INFORMATION: This project will need to be routed to Larimer
County as this development will impact the adjacent roadway which will remain
under their jurisdiction. A coordinated meeting may be needed to discuss the
unpaved section of Horsetooth Road.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 14
01/28/2025: INFORMATION: The findings in the TIS indicate that there are
intersections that will fail overall intersection level of service with the existing
traffic plus the project traffic. Mitigation for these intersections will be required,
or Alternative Mitigation Strategies may be considered according to the
procedures outline in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards
section4.6.8.
RESPONSE: Mitigations provided for intersections in failing conditions. LOS
analysis of intersections with mitigations provided in the appendix.
Comment Number: 15
01/28/2025: FOR HEARING: TIS. It has come into question the collection of
data for certain intersections when school was not in session. We would like to
coordinate further and possibly have the Miles House and Drake intersection
recounted to determine the difference between when school is in session and
not. We will be able to apply that "factor" to other counts collected when school
was not in session. We can discuss.
RESPONSE: Traffic counts from the summer have a factor applied to them to
account for school period traffic volumes. AM and PM peak hour factors
calculated by comparing intersection traffic volumes from school year to
summer period. That factor is applied to counts from the summer period to
reflect school period traffic volumes.
Comment Number: 16
01/28/2025: INFORMATION: We will need to coordinate further with
Engineering on the proposed access from the multi-family housing on the north
end that leads to Environmental. With the anticipated trips that will be
generated at that location, improvements to the bridge and roadway may be
required.
RESPONSE: The northern portion of the property and associated multifamily
use has been eliminated from the project.
Department: Erosion Control
Contact: Basil Hamdan bhamdan@fcgov.com 970-222-1801
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 11
01/21/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Page 14 of 37
No Erosion and Sediment Control materials are needed at ODP/PUD submittal
level. Materials will need to be provided at PDP/FDP submittal.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Floodplain
Contact: Kevin Meyer kmeyer@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 1
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
A portion of this property is currently located in the FEMA regulated-, 100-year
Poudre River flood fringe and must comply with the safety regulations of
Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code. A FEMA Flood Risk map is attached.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Any construction activities in the Poudre River 100-yr flood fringe (e.g. grading,
structures, sidewalk or curb & gutter installation/replacement, roads, utility work,
landscaping, etc.) must be preceded by an approved floodplain use permit, the
appropriate permit application fees, and approved plans.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
The Poudre River floodplain is currently being remapped. This effort is known
as RiskMAP. Floodplain/floodway boundaries on the subject property have the
possibility of changing. It is currently anticipated that the 100-year floodplain will
be removed from the property when RiskMAP becomes effective. Any
development is subject to floodplain requirements based on effective floodplain
mapping at the time of building permit issuance.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Hazardous materials are not permitted in the 100-year floodplain. This includes
flammable, explosive, toxic and/or water reactive- materials, liquids, gases or
solids.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 5
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Construction of residential and mixed use- structures is prohibited in the Poudre
River 100-year flood fringe. Per chapter 10 of City Municipal Code: “Residential
structure shall mean any structure that is used for, or designed as and capable
of being used for, the temporary or permanent domicile of persons, including
without limitation a dwelling, a boarding house, a hotel, a motel and similarly
used structure and a manufactured home.” “Mixed use- structure shall mean any
Page 15 of 37
structure that is used or intended for use for a mixture of nonresidential and
residential uses in the same structure.”
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 6
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Construction of a non-residential structure is allowed in the FEMA Regulated
Poudre River 100-year flood fringe, as long as the lowest finished floor of the
building, and all duct work, heating, ventilation, electrical systems, etc. are
elevated 24-inches above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). This elevation is
known as the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE). RFPE = BFE +
24-inches. An approved FEMA Elevation Certificate, completed by a licensed
surveyor or civil engineer and showing that the structure is constructed to the
required elevation, is required post-construction prior to a Certificate of
Occupancy (CO) being issued.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 7
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
In lieu of elevating structures, it may be possible to floodproof the structures.
When more detail regarding this project is available, we can determine if
floodproofing is a feasible option. If that option is available, all the requirements
of Section 10-38 of City Code must be met. Floodproofing Guidelines as well
as a FEMA Floodproofing Certificate (which will be required
before construction begins, and again after construction is complete and prior
to issuing a Certificate of Occupancy) can be obtained at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-documents
. FEMA Technical Bulletin 3, “Non-Residential Floodproofing – Requirements
and Certification” can be found at
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/nfip_t3_04011993_0.pdf.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 8
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Floatable materials including trash dumpsters, vehicles, trailers, equipment,
supplies, outdoor furniture (i.e. benches, tables), etc. related to non-residential
uses are prohibited in the 100-year floodplain. All floatable materials, must be
stored inside a building, be anchored per an approved engineered design (i.e.
the dumpster) or be located outside of the 100-year floodplain. This restriction
does not apply to employee and customer vehicles parked on the site during
business hours with an owner onsite to move the vehicle. No overnight parking of
vehicles is allowed.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 9
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Critical Facilities for AtRisk- Populations (schools, nursing homes, daycares, etc.)
and Essential Services (police, fire, hospitals, etc.) are not allowed within the
Page 16 of 37
Poudre River 500-year floodplain.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 10
01/17/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
If any construction activities will take place in the floodplain, please utilize the
development review checklist for floodplain requirements when preparing your
plans for submittal.
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/fp-checklist100-2018-
update.pdf?1522697905
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Derek Lutz dlutz@fcgov.com 970-221-6339
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
***UPDATED***
01/28/2025: FOR APPROVAL:
Per the approved Fox Meadows Master Plan, this site has been identified as a
location for a regional water quality feature that would provide water quality
treatment for upstream developments that were constructed prior to the City
requiring water quality treatment. The location of this feature is flexible and can
be worked into the development site plan. The cost for land and construction of
this feature would be reimbursable to the developer. ***The regional water quality
pond calls for a volume of 7.3 acft-.***
RESPONSE: Based on discussions with City staff in July, 2025, we
understand that the regional water quality pond will not be placed on the
Site.
Comment Number: 2
***UPDATED***
01/28/2025: FOR APPROVAL:
Preliminary investigation by city staff of 100-YR flows in the FCRID show that the
restrictor plate on the bridge at William Neal Parkway causes overtopping of the
east bank of the FCRID near the intersection of County Road 9 and
Environmental Drive. Design of an emergency spillway and conveyance to an
adequate outfall is required if the restrictor plate is to remain in place. A
drainage easement also needs to be dedicated to capture these flows from the
spillway to an adequate outfall.
***Please provide analysis regarding the restrictor plate and subsequent
spillway.***
RESPONSE: The application has been revised to remove the northern
portion of the site. The spill north of the railroad was studied but never
Page 17 of 37
formalized. There is a formal agreement and easement in place between the
landowner, FCRID and the City of Ft. Collins to allow spill out of the FCRID
north of William Neal Parkway. The project no longer relies on a spill north
of the railroad.
Comment Number: 3
01/30/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Further coordination is required regarding the detention/water quality pond
shown on the Topminnow Natural Area property for treatment of Horsetooth
Road runoff. Kelly Smith, ksmith@fcgov.com, is the point of contact with City of
Fort Collins Natural Areas. As this will become a city owned and maintained
stormwater facility that is only treating public right-of-way, we will not require a
letter of intent at this time. But Natural Areas will need to approve the final
configuration of this stormwater facility.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Derek Lutz dlutz@fcgov.com 970-221-6339
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/28/2025: FOR APPROVAL:
The Water Exhibit and Sanitary Sewer Exhibits both show infrastructure for this
development on adjacent City of Fort Collins - Parks Department property.
Please provide a letter of intent from City of Fort Collins - Parks Department
that they are in support of this infrastructure being located on their property.
RESPONSE: The revised application shows the lift station to be located on
the subject property, not the park property. Due to eliminating the north
portion of the site from the application, the entire sanitary system can be
relatively shallow (to minimize infiltration), so situating the lift station on the
project site, rather than in the park, is technically feasible.
Comment Number: 2
01/28/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
The City will need to evaluate the downstream wastewater capacity to confirm if
the existing system can support this development. Off-site wastewater
improvements are a possibility.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. The application has included a sanitary sewer
demand estimate for the City’s evaluation.
Comment Number: 3
01/30/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Minimum easement widths are as follows: Water main = 20-FT centered on the
Page 18 of 37
main, Wastewater main = 30FT centered on the main, -Combined
Water/Wastewater main = 35-FT centered on the main. In certain limited
situations, the wastewater easement width may be reducedif the wastewater main
is less than 10FT deep. -Theoretically, this could be applied to the combined
easement width also. We will not approve a "typical lot layout" witheasement
widths less than our minimums.
RESPONSE: The product types have been adjusted. Most, if not all
residential lots will have street frontage to minimize or eliminate the need for
water or sewer mains in the alleys. Note that this change will reduce the
number of smaller residential units, and the variety of residential unit types.
Comment Number: 4
01/30/2025: FOR INFORMATION:
Minimum separation of wet utility mains to buildings and structures is 15-FT. In
certain limited situations, this separation may be reduced. We will not approve a
"typical lot layout" with wet utility mains with less than 15-FT separations to
buildings and structures.
RESPONSE: The product types have been adjusted. Most, if not all
residential lots will have street frontage to minimize or eliminate the need for
water or sewer mains in the alleys. Note that this change will reduce the
number of smaller residential units, and the variety of residential unit types.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Austin Kreager akreager@fcgov.com 970-224-6152
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/28/2025: INFORMATION:
Light and Power has three phase primary in the area that can be used to serve
this project.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2
01/28/2025: INFORMATION:
Light and Power must have truck access to all of our facilities. This makes it
difficult to install our lines in the green space as proposed in the "fronting
landscape tract".
RESPONSE: The product types have been adjusted. Most, if not all
residential lots will have street frontage to minimize or eliminate the need for
water or sewer mains in the alleys. Note that this change will reduce the
number of smaller residential units, and the variety of residential unit types.
This will be detailed in future land use applications.
Comment Number: 3
01/28/2025: INFORMATION:
Light and Power must have 5' of separation from our running lines to buildings. It
Page 19 of 37
does not appear that your alley widths will meet this requirement.
RESPONSE: The product types have been adjusted. Most, if not all
residential lots will have street frontage to minimize or eliminate the need for
water or sewer mains in the alleys. Note that this change will reduce the
number of smaller residential units, and the variety of residential unit types.
This will be detailed in future land use applications.
Comment Number: 4
01/28/2025: INFORMATION:
Light and Power would like to remind you that all of our facilities must have a ten
foot clearance away from all water, wastewater, and storm sewer facilities. We
also require a three foot clearance away from all other utilities with the exception
of communication lines.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. This will be detailed in future land use
applications.
Comment Number: 5
01/28/2025: 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-anddevelopers/-plant-investmen
t-development-fees
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 6
01/28/2025: INFORMATION:
You may contact Austin Kreager with project engineering if you have questions.
(970) 224-6152. You may reference Light & Power’s Electric Service Standards
at:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/electricservicestandar
ds.pdf?1645038437
You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our
fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kirk Longstein klongstein@fcgov.com 970-416-4325
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/24/2025: PRIOR TO HEARING
The overall development plan must show the general location and approximate
Page 20 of 37
size of all natural areas, habitats and features within its boundaries and shall
indicate the applicant's proposed rough estimate of the natural area buffer zones
as required pursuant to Section 5.6.1(E).
Please provide a separate cut sheet within the PUD plans that does not show
development and one that clearly indicates the location of existing natural
habitats and features as identified by the approved Ecological Characterization
study. This page should include a tabulation of all the features and their respective
buffers.
RESPONSE: Figure 5 of the Revised ECS shows all natural areas, habitats
and features, including buffer zones, within the project boundaries and
adjacent properties
Comment Number: 2
01/24/2025: PRIOR TO NEXT SUBMITTAL
Provide an updated Ecological Characterization consistent with the Fort Collins
Land Use Code section 5.6.1 (D)(1).
The following comments were provided to ERO August 13, 2024. please
resubmit the ECS with the following updates:
• The ECS is missing an exhibit that shows the natural habitat features and
the associated buffers called out within the Buffer zone table in LUC 5.6.1 (E)
• Natural Areas and Habitat: Figure 5 of the Revised ECS shows all natural areas,
habitats and features, including buffer zones, within the project boundaries and
adjacent properties
• LUC 5.6.1(D)(2) Wetland boundary delineations is required for both a
nonjurisdictional- wetland and "jurisdictional wetland" within project area. The
submitted ECS is missing wetland delineation sheets for wetlands along the
unnamed ditch along the southern boundary and wetlands along the southern
boundary
• Wetlands along southern boundary – The unnamed ditch is labeled as FCO in the
Figure 2, Appendix C of the ECS contains datasheets for Data Point 8 (DP8)
which is within the FCO wetland along the southern boundary of the project area
• Additional information is needed to determine hydrology sources for wetlands 3&4
if the applicant plans to preserve these features as a part of the final
development plan
• Hydrology sources – Wetlands 3 and 4 appear to be supported by groundwater or
a spring on the hillslope. No culvert or other hydrological source was identified
during the site visits. As described in the ECS, the hydrology indicators for
Wetland 3 and Wetland 4 included surface water, a successful FAC-Neutral test,
saturation on the aerial imagery, and geomorphic position.
Page 21 of 37
• The Ft Collins land use code applies a 2,640feet- buffer to Bald eagle nest
sites which is greater than the CPW recommended buffers of a ¼ mile No-
Surface Occupancy. Fort Collins and CPW’s buffer is more extensive than the
National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007) due to the
generally open habitat used by Fort Collins’ nesting bald eagles.
• Eagle buffer - Figures 3 and 5 of the ECS shows the 2,640 feet buffer to Bald
eagle nest. As described in the ECS, the northern portion of the project area as
described in the original application is within the 2,640 feet buffer, but the
application has since been revised to remove the northern portion of the site. The
remaining project area is not located within the 2,640 feet buffer.
Regarding Riparian Forest/tree protection – I’d like to further discuss the
assessment during a Forestry tree inventory/site visit and explain that the city
seeks to protect the trees through buffering but does not intend to apply a full 50’
buffer around the trees. As you know, Chapter 3 of the CO SWAP states, “
Plains riparian areas are often subjected to heavy grazing and/or agriculture
and can be heavily degraded. Tamarisk and less desirable grasses and forbs
have invaded degraded examples throughout eastern Colorado. Groundwater
depletion and lack of fire have created additional species changes.” Riparian
forest tends to include large communities of cottonwood trees (Populus spp.).
White poplar included occurs in riparian, and forest steppe- communities alike.
Gravel soils and hardwood floodplain woodlands are common white poplar
habitats. If the ERO team recommends removal of these trees, we’ll want to
appraise the value through a third party.
• Riparian Forest/tree protection – A City approved arborist is schedule to meet with
Forestry on March 12, 2025
o Regarding Migratory Bird concentration areas:
The City of Fort Collins NAD provides guidance in its Wildlife Conservation Guidelines
(NAD 2017) that can assist in defining a concentration area’s habitat characteristics.
These guidelines define concentration areas or key production areas as gravel ponds,
the Poudre River and the wetlands adjacent to the river. These areas are of particular
importance during the spring migrations as ducks and shorebirds frequently use these
seasonally flooded wetlands that are rich in food resources. This provides
carbohydrates for migration and invertebrates for the formation of protein necessary for
egg production for breeding species.
o CPW provides publicly available data on species activity mapping (SAM) for the entire
state of Colorado. In this dataset, individual species known overall range, nest
locations, concentration areas, and migration corridors among several other species
specific characteristics are compiled. Each term used to delineate species occupancy is
defined by CPW (CPW 2014). CPW does not delineate concentration areas for all
species of waterfowl but does provide a precedent for defining what seasonal
Page 22 of 37
concentration densities entail:
Concentration areas for wildlife are generally defined as having a significantly
higher density of use than within the species overall range, and/or areas in which
densities are at least 200% greater than in the surrounding overall range during a
specific season (CPW 2014).
• Migratory Bird Concentrations – No migratory bird concentration areas are identified
on the referenced data sources. Additionally, bird surveys conducted in summer 2024
and winter 2025 have identified some waterfowl use of canals, ditches and open water
on the property, but the number of individuals and the diversity of species observed
does not indicate that the property is a waterfowl or migratory bird concentration area.
More discussion will be provided in the revised ECS.
RESPONSE: The responses below are broken down by the order of the bullets
listed above
• Natural Areas and Habitat: Figure 5 of the Revised ECS shows all natural areas,
habitats and features, including buffer zones, within the project boundaries and
adjacent properties. This figure includes all natural areas mapped by the city
and available at https://data-fcgov.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/natural-
habitat/explore?location=40.541478%2C-105.017391%2C15.76 and all wetlands
identified on the property by ERO.
• Wetlands along southern boundary – The unnamed ditch is labeled as FCO (Fort
Collins Outfall) in the Figure 2, Appendix C of the ECS contains datasheets for
Data Point 8 (DP8) which is within the FCO wetland along the southern boundary
of the project area. No disturbance or drainage work is anticipated in the FCO,
other than providing road access to Horsetooth Road.
• Hydrology sources – Wetlands 3 and 4 appear to be supported by groundwater
or a spring on the hillslope. No culvert or other hydrological source was
identified during the site visits. As described in the ECS, the hydrology
indicators for Wetland 3 and Wetland 4 included surface water, a successful
FAC-Neutral test, saturation on the aerial imagery, and geomorphic position.
• Eagle buffer - Figures 3 and 5 of the ECS shows the 2,640 feet buffer to Bald
eagle nest. Note that the northern portion of the property that was proposed for
Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood has been removed from consideration
of rezoning at this time. Thus, the proposed re-zoning would not impact the
CPW recommended ¼ - mile “no surface occupancy” buffer of any eagle nest.
Although, 16 years of extensive observations of eagle activity in proximity to
industrial and recreational activity detailed below indicates that the CPW criteria
for a 660-foot buffer as a “Highly Developed Area” is likely more appropriate
(Exhibit B). The first eagle pair was observed nesting on Cottonwood Land and
Farms property directly east of the Strauss Lakes property in 2009 (ERO 2009).
Because construction aggregate mining and restoration activities were ongoing
on the East Rigden property, ERO developed Avian Management Plans in
consultation with CPW Conservation Biologist Mike Sherman and the local
Page 23 of 37
District Wildlife Manager Nancy Butler beginning in 2009 (ERO 2009). The eagles
nesting on the East Rigden property have been routinely monitored and the
management plans have been periodically updated to reflect changes in the
location and number of active eagle nests in the area (Beane 2010, Hart
Environmental 2012,ERO 2020, ERO 2023). In 2024, ERO on behalf of CLF
developed an Eagle Protection Plan for Debris Management in Consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) (ERO 2024). These Avian
Management Plans and related reports have documented significant human
disturbance on the property for at least the last 40 years.
Likewise, The northern irrigation pond and a small portion of the proposed
development does fall within the CPW recommended buffer for no permitted,
authorized, or human encroachment activities within ½ mile (2640 feet, 800
meters) radius of active nest sites from December 1 through July 31 (CPW 2021).
Sand and gravel mining was first permitted by the Colorado Mined Land
Reclamation Board on the property in 1979, which actively continued until 2021.
Other disturbances in the area include, but are not limited to, the Great Western
Railroad operated by OmniTRAX (which bisects the property), Colorado State
University Environmental Learning Center with occupied dwellings and multiple
trails, the Poudre River Regional Trail (completed in 2025 by the City of Fort
Collins, which is open to pedestrians and bicycle use – discussed further
immediately below), ready mix aggregate processing plant, Fort Collins water
treatment plant, City Parks Department offices and maintenance building, and
three active canals requiring routine checks and maintenance. All of these
disturbances are located within 0.3 mile of the closest eagle nest to Strauss
Lakes. Of particular note is the year-round Poudre River Regional Trail that is
located approximately 660 feet from the eagle nest closest to the Strauss Lakes
Development. Numerous scientific and agency publications substantiate and
conclude that bald eagles exhibit higher sensitivity to pedestrians (both alone
and with dogs) compared to individuals in vehicles, and that bicyclists cause
moderate to high disturbance (Service 2007). Further evaluating human
disturbance out to the 1/2-mile recommended buffer, the northernmost bald
eagle nest is clearly located in an existing area of high-density residential
development (more than 100 single-family homes and 20 multifamily units),
commercial/industrial use, and year-round recreational use (Exhibit B).
Recognizing these ongoing human disturbances during the development of the
Avian Management Plans (ERO 2009), CPW concurred in 2009 that a modified
disturbance buffer ending at the railroad tracks was appropriate.
• Riparian Forest/tree protection – ERO walked the entire property with the City of
Fort Collins Forestry Department on March 12, 2025, and received the City’s tree
inventory and evaluation of mitigation value should any trees be removed
(Attached to this submittal). Project design will avoid removing trees to the
maximum extent possible, particularly the grove of non-native white popular in
the south west corner of the property.
Page 24 of 37
• Migratory Bird Concentrations – No migratory bird concentration areas are
identified on the referenced data sources. Additionally, bird surveys conducted
in summer 2024 and winter 2025 have identified some waterfowl use of canals,
ditches and open water on the property, but the number of individuals and the
diversity of species observed does not indicate that the property is a waterfowl
or migratory bird concentration area. More discussion will be provided in the
revised ECS.
Comment Number: 3
01/24/2025: PRIOR TO HEARING
Please include the following language on the PUD notes:
A Natural Habitat Buffer Zone escrow must be submitted with each subsequent
development plan. The city approved- guarantee will serve as a warranty for all
habitat enhancement activities, which include, but are not limited to, the
installation of plant materials, seed establishment, weed management,
temporary irrigation, monitoring, and reporting for the Natural Habitat Buffer
Zone. A deposit of 125% of the cost estimates will be required before the
issuance of a Development Construction Permit.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 4
01/28/2025: PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
as a condition of approval:
Planning Staff is aware of reclamation work that is ongoing at the site. If this
work will continue after PUD, a note should be added to the PUD indicating the
nature of the permit and the work that will be done on the site.
Reclamation associated with the active mining permit open with the Colorado
Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety must be complete and closed prior
to a Development Construction Permit and prior to issuing any building permits.
RESPONSE: CLF is unaware of any ongoing mined land reclamation work
other than certain discrete areas of mine-related land disturbance caused by
the City of Fort Collins, as identified to the City in communications to the
Fort Collins City Attorney’s Office (T. Hewitt) dated October 3, 2024 and
February 24, 2025. The City presently holds Permit M-1979-097 issued by the
Mined Land Reclamation Board. Upon completion of the reclamation of the
areas identified by CLF to the City, CLF and the City will work to transition
Permit M-1979-097 from the City to CLF, at which time CLF will develop its
plan to mine land areas covered by the permit located north of the GSL&P
Railroad tracks on Larimer County Parcel No. 8728000009 in Larimer
County. Reclamation in the project area associated with the CLF’s active
mining permits will be complete and closed prior to issuance of building
Page 25 of 37
permits.
Comment Number: 5
01/28/2025: FOR NEXT SUBMITTAL
Projects in the vicinity of large natural habitats must comply with Section 5.6.1(I)
(1) of the Land Use Code.
To meet this standard, the following should be addressed in the site, landscape,
utility plans and project objectives:
Manmade facilities and building façade must blend with the visual character of
the area. Significant attention needs to be paid to the building materials, colors,
etc. Staff recommend reviewing the AIA guidelines for designing for ecosystems
services.
to meet this requirement, staff will also be looking at landscape plans. for
example: for the purpose of promoting bird habitat, we would like to see a
landscape plan that provides areas for Food, Shelter, and Nesting. From the
literature, this generally includes a planting pallet that focuses on various vertical
plant structures and heterogeneous habitat (e.g., grasses, forbs, trees). The
following online references has a few images showing site design ideas -
https://dirt.asla.org/
RESPONSE: This will be addressed with each PDP for the site.
Comment Number: 6
01/28/2025: FOR NEXT SUBMITTAL
Projects in the vicinity of large natural habitats, natural areas, and Parks must
comply with Section 5.6.1(L) & (M) of the Land Use Code. Staff recommend
including the district locations for educational signage and access points to public
natural areas and conserved lands. Additionally, adaptive management plans
must be managed pursuant to natural areas department best practices and shall
not conflict with ongoing restoration activities of adjacent conserved lands.
management of natural habitat buffer zones is a requirement of the
development agreement. Coordination with the City’s Natural Areas and Parks
Planning Department is required to meet this standard.
RESPONSE: This will be addressed with each PDP for the site.
Comment Number: 7
01/28/2025: FOR NEXT SUBMITTAL
LUC 5.6.1 (E) (2) (c) Pedestrian and recreational features are allowable uses
within a NHBZ buffer zone, provided they are compatible with the ecological
character of the site. The common areas should be quiet, contemplative, and
designed to encourage a connection with nature. These should not be used as
Page 26 of 37
patios for specific commercial tenants and should instead be accessible to all
residents and users.
RESPONSE: This is a PDP-level comment as there are no proposed patios
within a NHBZ.
Comment Number: 8
01/28/2025: FOR NEXT SUBMITTAL
The current proposal does NOT go beyond the minimum requirements set forth
in the land Use Code. Staff encourage the applicant team to explore public
benefits related to natural habitat beyond the requirements set in LUC 5.6.1.
The plans currently show a pollinator park that would not be considered an
“enhanced habitat” for the purposes of the Metro District Policy; however,
environmental planning looks forward to the opportunity to explore elements of a
Pollinator master plan for enhanced habitat consideration, including the following:
• The Plan must identify locations for linear pollinator corridors and site -specific
design nodes for pollinators of varied species and flight distances.
• Plant species that provide both year round- and seasonal habitat for pollinator
species.
• Integrate wetland features and stormwater pond edges to create additional
opportunities for riparian pollinator species within the interior of the
community.
The Bloom Pollinator Plan is an example of a plan that meets the city’s policy
intent.
Additionally, the plan may consider multi-use stormwater basins that meet the
water quality, stormwater detention, and innovation in Natural Environment
Protection as an enhanced public benefit. These stormwater and NHBZ design
elements must include:
•The primary design should intend to attenuate flows and mimic the former riparian
complex of riparian corridor, and wetlands, within the NHBZ zones.
•Increase the pervious surface area across the basin’s bottom.
•Slow water flow and dissipate flow concentration.
•Emphasize sinuous edges and an undulating bottom in order to maximize
heterogeneity of edge habitats and provide more resistance to flow through
small islands, oxbow channel mimics, and mini floodplains.
•Minimize Edge Slope: The terrestrial- facultative plant boundary should have
a very gradual slope. Facultative plants mean plants that are equally likely to
occur in wetlands and non-wetlands
•Persistent Emergent Vegetation: Persistent emergent vegetation has
stems which persist even after the growing season. This provides yearround-
resistance to water flow.
•Create a heterogeneous moisture regime with hydric, mesic, and upland
Page 27 of 37
communities.
Sharing the following resources for design ideas supporting Nature in the City
program efforts.
a.Making Urban Nature / Stads Natuur Maken , J. Vink, P. Vollaard, N. de Swarte
b.Planting in a PostWild World, T. Rainer- and C. West
c.Habitat Network, Bat Houses, TNC/Cornell
d.Toward an Urban Ecology, SCAPE, 2018
e.Attracting Native Pollinators, The Xerces Society, 2011
f.Restorative Commons: Creating Health and Well-being through Urban
Landscapes, USDA, USFS, Northern Research Station, Meristem, 2009
RESPONSE: Comments acknowledged. Thank you for the references. These
elements will be addressed in future land use applications.
Comment Number: 9
01/28/2025: Please provide details for the intent of Boxelder Ditch. if the ditch
is undergrounded, the areas is subject to the mitigation requirements within LUC
5.6.1 (E))
Policy LU6 in the Nature in the City Strategic Plan specifies that the multiple
values of the City’s ditch system, including wildlife habitat and ecological
functions, should be supported and protected. This includes keeping ditches
daylighted when appropriate, removing barriers to wildlife movement along
ditches, enhancing habitat, and improving connectivity for people and wildlife
where appropriate. In some cases, re-alignment of ditches to achieve the goals
outlined in this policy and the specific site development goals can be
considered when the ecological value on the site can either be protected or
enhanced. As such, the City recommends leaving the ditch open, incorporating
it into the site design as an amenity, and enhancing it as part of a connected
corridor for people and wildlife. See the Nature in the City Executive Summary for
reference.
https://www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity/pdf/nature-in-the-city-executive-summary.
Pdf
RESPONSE: Box Elder ditch is part of a network of irrigation ditches and
canals that carry water from the Cache la Poudre River to users in and
around Fort Collins.[1] The Box Elder Ditch is owned and operated by the
Box Elder Ditch Company, an irrigation company in the South Platte River
Basin. Melissa Buick manages it. The Box Elder Ditch Company's contact
information is:
207 Windflower Way
Severance, CO 80550
Email: Melissahbuick@gmail.com
Page 28 of 37
Phone: (970) 686-7126 Office
Cell Phone: (970) 420-7019 Cell
CLF has no ownership or control over the operation or management of the
Box Elder Ditch. Therefore, it is CLF’s expectation that the ditch will remain
open and that it will not be “undergrounded” such that mitigation
requirements would need to be considered or required.
Comment Number: 10
01/28/2025: FOR THE NEXT SUBMITTAL - Nesting Raptors – Bald Eagle
Direct impacts to active bald eagle nest must be avoided by prohibiting work
within the Colorado Parks and Wildlife construction buffers from active nest
sites located on the adjacent Natural Area.
The developer shall provide to the city a written statement from Colorado Parks
and Wildlife and US Fish and Wildlife Service that the proposed buffers and
development plan conform and are consistent with CPW and USFWS standards.
In addition to a written letter from state and federal agencies - As a condition of
the development construction permit, and during land development and vertical
construction; active nests must be monitored by an on-site Qualified Wildlife
Biologist to ensure that measures are being employed to minimize disturbance
to nesting birds. Regular monitoring of active nests will also inform when and if a
buffer can be reduced, or if adaptive management measures, such as
increasing the buffer, need to be employed. The frequency of nest monitoring
will be determined by the sensitivity of the construction activity proposed but will
occur at a minimum of three times per week leading up to and during construction
activities.
RESPONSE: Appendix F of the ECS provides a copy of correspondence
from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on nesting raptors and
eagles. CLF continues to correspond with Colorado Parks and Wildlife and
the Service regarding impacts to nesting bald eagles near the project area.
An expanded discussion of direct impacts to raptors and eagles will be
provided in the revised ECS, including consultation with state and federal
wildlife agencies.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Malesa Plumley mplumley@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/27/2025: FOR INFORMATION
Please refer to previous comments for first round PDP submittal.
Page 29 of 37
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. A tree inventory site walk was done on March
12, 2025. A tree inventory sheet is provided with the ODP set.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/31/2025: INFORMATION: Both Park Planning & Development (PPD) and
Parks Maintenance (Parks) departments comments will be provided by Missy
Nelson | mnelson@fcgov.com | 970.416.8077. Please reach out to the
Development Review Coordinator if you would like to set up a separate
meeting(s) to discuss any of the following comments.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: It’s understood that this development will come
in for review in Phases. Parks and Trails are affected by the whole
development therefore please add a comment section on Sheet 1 dedicated to
Parks and Park Planning & Development “PPD/Parks Notes.”
RESPONSE: Notes have been added.
Comment Number: 3
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: Please provide a Memorandum detailing all
items affecting the future Park. Providing one all inclusive- memorandum of
Parks and Trails related items is acceptable. Please use the Natural Areas
Department Easement Policy as guidance:
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.fcgov.com/n
aturalareas/files/2024-easement-application.pdf
Please ensure all details, easements, impacts, etc. are included, including
alternative analyses, as well as detail any floodplain modifications that you will
be making that might impact the parks property and/or any trail easements.
RESPONSE: The project will provide a primary access to the Park site by
extending William Neal Parkway, and the associated pedestrian sidewalks,to
the west side of the Boxelder Ditch. No other direct impacts are anticipated.
No easements or floodplain modifications on Park property are necessary to
facilitate the development. Due to the lack of impacts, a memorandum has
not been provided.
Comment Number: 4
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: William Neal Parkway is serving as the main
access to the Park. If the plans will not be developed beyond conceptual as
currently shown, please add a note pertaining to parallel parking on both sides
of William Neal Parkway. Also, please add to “PPD/Parks Notes” section.
Page 30 of 37
Question: Will William Neal Pkwy include on street- bike lanes as well?
RESPONSE: William Neal Parkway will be constructed to LCUASS figure 7-
5f, which includes both on street parking and bicycle lanes.
Comment Number: 5
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: The second access through the northern
triangle parcel, if dedicated as public right-of-way- or as a private drive, needs to
accommodate parallel parking. The public access easement needs to include
the sidewalks on either side of the drive. Note, this access is in addition to the
easement for the ultimate alignment of the Poudre River Trail.
RESPONSE: The application has been revised to remove the northern
portion of the site. Therefore, this access is no longer a part of the
application.
Comment Number: 6
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: FOR APPROVAL: If PPD allows the
development to utilize part of the Park property to serve as the second point of
emergency access to the northern triangle parcel, this needs to be shown and
approved on the plans. Note: If that parcel will be developed at a later phase,
these details cannot wait. It needs to be determined during the PUD process
and agreed upon by PPD. The burden of the drive cannot be solely on Park
property. This item shall be included in the requested memorandum. Please
also confirm whether you’re requesting Emergency Access Easement or full
access easement. A full access drive will impact the safety of park users and
may further limit programmed elements within the park. Please note, PPD will
need to evaluate the request; approval is not guaranteed.
RESPONSE: The application has been revised to remove the northern
portion of the site. Therefore, this access is no longer a part of the
application.
Comment Number: 7
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: Please add to the Parks and PPD note section
on Sheet 1: The pedestrian connection on the southern end of the park across
the Boxelder will be designed, crossing agreement executed, permitted, and
constructed by the Developer at no cost to the City. For PUD approval, a Letter
of Intent (LOI) from the Boxelder Ditch Company shall be provided.
RESPONSE: Box Elder ditch is part of a network of irrigation ditches and
canals that carry water from the Cache la Poudre River to users in and
around Fort Collins.[1] The Box Elder Ditch is owned and operated by the
Box Elder Ditch Company, an irrigation company in the South Platte River
Basin. Melissa Buick manages it. The Box Elder Ditch Company's contact
information is:
207 Windflower Way
Page 31 of 37
Severance, CO 80550
Email: Melissahbuick@gmail.com
Phone: (970) 686-7126 Office
Cell Phone: (970) 420-7019
While CLF has no ownership or control over the operation or management of
the Box Elder Ditch, CLF is willing to work with the Box Elder Ditch
Company and Ms. Buick to establish the pedestrian connection on the
southern end of the park across the ditch and to enter any required crossing
agreement with the ditch company necessary to permit the construction of
the crossing at CLF’s expense. Ms. Buick has confirmed to CLF that it is not
the practice of the Box Elder Ditch Company to enter into a Letter of Intent
like that mentioned in the comment until it has reviewed any related
(approved) development plans and it fully understands what a crossing
agreement may need to entail. Ms. Buick indicated her willingness to speak
directly with Park Planning staff to explain the ditch company’s reasoning
for this.
Comment Number: 8
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: Please add at least a pedestrian connection
from the parcel on the SW corner of the property across the FCRID into the
development and leading them to the future Park. It’s not sufficient to require
pedestrians to have to use the arterial trails/sidewalks.
RESPONSE: In our discussions with FCRID, FCRID has stated that they will
not permit a pedestrian bridge over the ditch. CLF is willing to cooperate
with the City if the City wishes to acquire the property rights needed for a
pedestrian bridge.
Comment Number: 9
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: The lift station is shown on Park property.
Please provide a memorandum that provides more specifics to fully understand
the proposed concept. This memo should provide a detailed analysis of why
this concept is the best solution, a narrative describing the opportunities and
challenges associated with the alternatives, as well as needed easement widths
and respective constraints. Please also include more information on the
structure that houses the lift station and any potential impacts to the floodplain
mapping in the area if located on Park property. The future park site is very
challenging to design due to size, orientation, floodplain constraints, and other
factors. Please describe how locating the lift station on Park property will be
mutually beneficial from a design, use, and space perspective. At this time,
without being able to properly review the request, PPD does not support the lift
station to be located on Park property.
Page 32 of 37
See PPD Exhibit A (email to Bill McDowell).
RESPONSE: The design has been updated, and the lift station is no longer
proposed to be on Park property.
Comment Number: 10
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: The water line is shown crossing through Park
property. This is another item that needs to be included in the memorandum
and include details, impacts, easement, encumbrances, alternative analyses,
and why this alignment best serves both the development and the park.
RESPONSE: The northern portion of the project has been removed from the
application, and as such there is no need to extend a water line through Park
property.
Comment Number: 11
01/31/2025: FOR COMPLETENESS CHECK: Note: If any item affecting Park
Property is not addressed via requested memorandum(s), PPD is required to
mark the submittal incomplete.
RESPONSE: Comment acknowledged. As the items directly affecting the
Park have been removed from the proposal, a separate technical
memorandum has not been provided.
Comment Number: 12
01/31/2025:
FOR APPROVAL: Please revise the trail exhibit (mark-ups on Sheet 9):
- Trails need to clearly show which will be owned and maintained by the City
of Fort Collins and which will be owned and maintained by the Metro District.
- Include Trails outside the development to show how the development is
providing connections to trail system.
- Clearly show the current interim alignment of the Poudre Trail (Railroad
Right--of--way) and the ultimate final alignment of the Poudre Trail on the northern
triangle parcel.
RESPONSE: Trails are shown on the ODP.
The northern triangle portion has been removed from the project. CLF is
willing to grant an easement for the Poudre Trail and has provided a map
showing the preferred alignment. Such easement will be granted by separate
instrument within 30 days after all final non-appealable annexation, zoning,
ODP, and metro district approvals have been obtained.
Comment Number: 13
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: The development’s trail system provides
important connectivity and circulation for your residents, including access to the
future park. Currently, trails are shown within the ditch easements. For PUD
approval, provide an LOI from associated ditch companies for all trails within those
Page 33 of 37
easements.
RESPONSE: This application has been converted to an ODP. The applicant
intends to address any detailed issues related to access across ditch
easements for bridges and pedestrian/bike trails at the PDP stage, when
specific site design and engineering details are available.
Comment Number: 14
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: In the “Parks/PPD Notes”: comment section
on Sheet 1, add: “All trails and pedestrian bridges, will be designed and
constructed by the Developer at no cost to the City. Public Access Trail
Easements shall be dedicated without fee to accommodate the multi-use trail
system. Please work together with PPD to determine the alignment of required
easements. City owned and maintained- trails shall be built to PPD’s standard
trail specifications (or as otherwise directed and approved by PPD). -Trail
specifications for design and construction will be provided at the time when
individual phases are submitted for development review. Standard tr-ail easement
of 50’ is not required for trails constructed by the development. Easement width
may vary depending on detail but needs to provide enough width to include the 10’
trail, a detached 4’ gravel side path and 2-3’ on each side to allow for maintenance
(mowing and snow removal)."
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. CLF will show all trails as meeting City
standards in subsequent stages of development.
Comment Number: 15
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: A feasibility study of a grade separated crossing
(overpass and underpass) of Ziegler Road shall be provided. Please refer to
Traffic and Engineering’s comments on the subject for more details, including
hydrology study.
RESPONSE: A grade-separated crossing analysis memorandum was
provided to the City. Comments from PPD Staff confirmed that an overpass
is not feasible but stated that staff considers an underpass to be a feasible
option and requests the applicant dedicate an easement large enough to
accommodate a future underpass. The applicant is committed to working
with the City to address the specific location, scope and terms of any such
required easements at the PDP stage.
Comment Number: 16
01/31/2025: INFORMATION: (FOR FUTURE PHASE SUBMITTALS): All
private parks and trails shall be noted on plan sets as private but shall be
located within public access easements.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 17
01/31/2025: FOR APPROVAL: Please add the following note to the
PPD/Parks Notes section:
Page 34 of 37
“The Developer, or its successor(s) in interest, shall be responsible for the
ongoing irrigation and maintenance of the landscaping located within the public
rights-ofway along the -portion- of Ziegler Road and East Horsetooth Road that
abuts the Property as shown on the Final Development Plan Documents. This
obligation may be assigned to a homeowner’s association or metro district duly
Constituted pursuant to Colorado state law, however, should such homeowner’s
association or metro district be dissolved, the obligation shall become that of the
Developer or its successor(s) in interest.”
RESPONSE: Pursuant to the pending changes to the Code, the metropolitan
district shall be responsible for irrigation and maintenance during the three-
year warranty period. Upon expiration of that period, it is anticipated that the
City will assume responsibility.
Department: PFA
Contact: Marcus Glasgow marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org 970-416-2869
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/24/2025: ADDITIONAL POINTS OF ACCESS – IFC D105.1 Amendment
Additional points of access shall be required where a required access roadway
exceeds 660 feet in length.
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS ADDITIONAL ACCESS
POINTS - IFC D106.2
Amendment
Multiple-family residential projects having more than 200 dwelling units shall be
provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads
regardless of whether they are equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler
system.
REMOTENESS IFC D106.3
Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a
distance apart equal to not less than onehalf- of the length of the maximum overall
diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight
line between accesses.
The multifamily area on the northside of the site only appears to provide 1 point
of access. The proposed access road dead ends at the future city park site. The
second point of access shall connect to a public road or private road dedicated as
EAE in order to comply.
RESPONSE: With respect to the north area of the site, the northern part of
the project, and the associated multifamily use, has been removed from the
application.
Page 35 of 37
Comment Number: 2
01/27/2025: DEAD-END FIRE LANES
- IFC 503.2.5, Appendix D Figure D103.1 Dead-end fire access roads in
excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning
around fire apparatus.
William Neal Parkway will need to provide an approved turnaround at the dead
end.
RESPONSE: A temporary hammerhead or cul de sac will be provided on
William Neal Parkway prior to crossing the Boxelder Ditch. Once the park
project is completed, the temporary turnaround will no longer be necessary
and will be removed.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Russell Hovland rhovland@fcgov.com 970-416-2341
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1
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.
Page 36 of 37
Climate Zone: Zone 5
Energy Code: 2021 IECC and local amendments.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
• Electric vehicle charging parking spaces are required, see local amendment IBC
3604.
• 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
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.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588
Topic: General
Page 37 of 37
Comment Number: 1
01/28/2025: INFORMATION ONLY:
We have no comments, but will need to see any future submittals.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Donna George, Xcel Energy, 303-571-3306,
Donna.L.George@xcelenergy.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/31/2025:
Xcel Energy: - See Letter included with Markups
RESPONSE: Xcel comments acknowledged. Service applications for new
facilities or for relocation of existing facilities will be submitted concurrent
with future land use applications.
Contact: Marcus Petty, Comcast, Marcus_Petty@cable.comcast.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
01/31/2025:
Comcast will be able to service this project.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.