HomeMy WebLinkAboutHOMESTEAD AT CLARENDON HILLS - PDP190007 - MONTAVA SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 4 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSF6rt Collins
Community Development and
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6689
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/deve/opmentre view
September 11, 2020
Kristin Turner
TB Group
444 Mountain Ave
Fort Collins, CO 80528
RE: Homestead at Clarendon Hills, PDP190007, Round Number 3
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Homestead at Clarendon Hills. If you have questions about
any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through
your Development Review Coordinator, Tenae Beane via phone at 970-224-6119 or via
email at tbeane@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Tenae Beane, 970-224.6119, tbeane(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: 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
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
As part of your resubmittal you will respond to the comments provided in this
letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format.
Please use this document to insert responses to each comment for your
submittal, using a different font color.
When replying to the comment letter please be detailed in your responses, as
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 09/04/2020
09/04/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN APPROVAL
A weed mitigation plan will have to be completed prior to FDP approval. Also,
an escrow will be required prior to issuance of the DCP that assures
establishment of plantings and seeded areas in the NHBZ.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. A weed mitigation plan will be provided at FDP.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR DISCUSSION
The steep and consistent slopes, and angular walls within the triangular NHBZ
does not meet the character of section 3.4.1. Is there opportunity to make the
design more natural?
RESPONSE: The engineered wall has been replaced with a dry stacked natural stone wall. We are
unable to vary the shape of the pond due to engineering constraints. Plant material of varying heights along with various sized
boulders are placed around the walls to soften the appearance of them as well.
noted on the plans.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 09/09/2020
09/09/2020: FOR DISCUSSION
Is there a way to create a boulder wall to naturalize the aesthetic of the triangular
NHBZ?
RESPONSE: The engineered wall has been replaced with a dry stacked natural stone wall.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 09/09/2020
09/09/2020: FOR HEARING
There will be mitigation trees for environmental required for the project.
Because you are already providing trees in the NHBZ, they will count however
they just have to be documented as such. EP will provide the mitigation value in
the next couple of weeks. EP and Forestry are scheduled to evaluate the trees
next week.
RESPONSE: Per an email from Kelly Smith, six (6) mitigation shrubs are required.
Comment Number: 7
These have been
Comment Originated: 09/09/2020
09/09/2020: FOR APPROVAL:
Please update utility plans to reflect the new NHBZ boundary
RESPONSE: The latest NHBZ boundary is included on the utility plans.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 09/09/2020
09/09/2020: FOR APPROVAL
Staff has concern over the proximity of trees to the retaining wall in the triangular
NHBZ. Please remove the small trees in the rain garden and ensure the shade
trees in the triangular NHBZ have room to grow and roots don't negatively
impact the walls.
RESPONSE: Per direction from staff, the deciduous trees have been moved 6' from the wall. The two
smaller trees have been removed.
Department: PFA
10
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, ilynxwilert@-Poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL - FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
> Fire lane to be identified by red curb and/or signage, and maintained
unobstructed at all times.
RESPONSE: The requested info will be provided at final.
> Fire lane sign locations or red curbing should be labeled and detailed on final
plans. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and
spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs. Please add
diagram #1418 to plan set.
RESPONSE: Detail #1418 is included on the utility plans, and additional requested information will be
provided at final.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland , cgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 31
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/0812020: FOR HEARING AND FOR FINAL:
The submittal plans do not meet PDF submittal requirements. These must be
saved using the optimization tool which flattens the drawings, removes layers,
paper space view ports, and other entities. Please see the electronic submittal
requirements —
https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreviewfiles/electronic-submittal-requiremen
is-and-file-naming-standards—vl—8-1-19.pdf?l 566857888
RESPONSE: Project team will work to ensure files are more manageable.
Comment Number: 32
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING —UNRESOLVED:
There are still some issues with building setbacks that are not clearly described
for all of the proposed lots. This needs to be addressed with the resubmittal.
Please see redlines.
RESPONSE: The redlines have been addressed.
Comment Number: 33
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING:
Please directly label the proposed lots (1 through 8) on the proposed site plan,
on each lot. See redlines.
RESPONSE: Labels added.
Comment Number: 34
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING:
Dashed lines shown on the site plan set on each lot must be removed. These
are likely conceptual footprints from the drainage report. See redlines.
RESPONSE: These have been removed.
Comment Number: 35
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
11
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING:
Please see redlines for clarifications needed with the fencing notations.
RESPONSE: Revised.
Comment Number: 36
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING:
Text is cut off with several of the viewports in the siteflandscape plan set. See
redlines.
RESPONSE: Revised.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020. FOR HEARING:
On the civil plans, the callout for the ditch says see note 10, but this appears to
be the wrong note.
RESPONSE. The call out to the wrong note is fixed per the City's comment.
Department: Environmental Services
Contact: Linda Hardin, Ihardin@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 02/24/2020
02/24/2020: INFORMATIONAL:
A Construction Waste Management Plan will be required with application for
building permit. See: hUps://www.fcgov.com/recycling/constructiondebris .
Contact Linda Hardin, Ihardin@fcgov.com, or 970-416-2701 with questions.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, lcounty(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/29/2019
09/03/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at
FDP.
03/06/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at
FDP.
04/29/2019: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at
FDP.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/29/2019
09/03/2020: FOR APPROVAL -UPDATED:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter.
12
RESPONSE: Plat was updated per the City redlines.
03/06/2020. FOR APPROVAL -UPDATED:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter.
RESPONSE: Plat was updated per the City redlines
04/29/2019. FOR APPROVAL:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter.
RESPONSE: Plat was updated per the City redlines.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 02/19/2020
02/19/2020: Regarding the parkway strips along Langdale Dr.: Irrigation plans
are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans
must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use
Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at
221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Chris Pletcher, Fort Collins- Loveland Water District, 970-226-3104,
chrisp@fclwfd.com,
Topic: General
Comment Number:
Comment Originated: 04/22/2019
04/22/2019: The following PDP comments are provided on the water and
sewer drawings shown on your plans.
1. Please make sure you add the District's title block for signature.
RESPONSE: The District's signature block is on Sheets CS1 (Cover Sheet) and U1 (Utility Plan).
2. Please confirm a minimum of 10 feet separation between the water and
sewer lines in Lots 1 and 2.
RESPONSE: On Lot 1, it is 31' from the water service to the sanitary sewer service. On Lot 2, it is 25'
from the water service to the sanitary sewer service.
Contact: Don Kapperman, Comcast, don_kapperman@comcast.com, 970.567-0245,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/25/2020
02/25/2020: Comcast will need a 6 foot rear lot utility easement or the open
13
space will need to spelled out as a utility easement. Comcast can go joint trench
in the front lot with Light & power if here is no rear lot easement
RESPONSE: Applicant would prefer to see cable joint trenched with Light and Power.
Contact: Nate Ensley, Fort Collins- Loveland Water District, 970-226-3104,
nensley@fclwfd.com,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/03/2020
03/03/2020: See comments and redlines on attached document.
RESPONSE: We have not received any redlines from FCLWD.
Contact: Smith Lateral Ditch Users
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: See attached ditch user comments.
14
all comments should be thoroughly addressed.
Provide reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments
have not been addressed, when applicable.
Please avoid using acknowledged, noted, or other non descriptive replies.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
When you are ready to resubmit, please let me know at least 24 hours in
advance. Submittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at
noon being the cut off for routing the same week.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: "FOR HEARING' comments will need to be addressed and
resolved prior to moving forward with scheduling the hearing.
Staff would need to be in agreement the project is ready for hearing
approximately 3-5 weeks prior to the administrative hearing.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 17
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
09/07/2020. FOR HEARING —
The submitted Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) needs to be updated to
120% of the calculated WQCV, per the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual
(FCSCM -see section 5.4 of Chapter 7). Please reference the FCSCM
equations not the MHFD eqns. This will require an update to the plans for the
larger WQCV.
hftps://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-f
orms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria
RESPONSE: The water quality volume calculation has been updated.
03/09/2020: FOR HEARING:
Please provide rain garden sizing calcs and confirmation that rain garden
footprint is sufficient.
RESPONSEThe rain garden stage -storage calculations are included.
Comment Number: 21
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
09/07/2020. FOR FINAL:
Pond Aesthetics:
"UPDATED COMMENT"
As the Landscape Plan is finalized, please continue to consider how to break
up the visual appearance of the linear detention embankment. Thank you!
RESPONSE: A mix of plant material is designed around the wall which will range in height and texture. In
addition, landscape boulders in varying sizes are proposed throughout the planting area. The engineered wall is also being
replaced with a dry stacked natural stone wall.
03/09/2020: FOR HEARING: (RESOLVED)
Detention pond landscaping and grading - As shown, the detention pond
grading plan does not meet the Detention Pond Landscape Guidelines — these
require the pond grading and shape to vary and articulate. However, it is
recognized that providing articulating grading and shape for small detention
facilities may be very difficult. In light of that, robust landscaping will be needed
around the detention pond to mitigate the slopes and lack of naturalistic shaping
2
of these areas. Please feel free to let us know if you would like to discuss this
further.
Comment Number: 23
09/07/2020: FOR HEARING:
See updated drainage report redlines
RESPONSE: Drainage report updated per City redlines.
Comment Number: 24
09/07/2020: FOR HEARING:
See updated Utility Plan redlines.
RESPONSE: Utility plan updated per City redlines.
Comment Number: 26
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR HEARING —
"UPDATED COMMENT"
Letters of Intent from Smith Lateral irrigation owners:
Stormwater needs confirmation that the ownership of the Smith Lateral irrigation
ditch is willing to formally accept runoff from this development into their irrigation
ditch. You have responded to previous comments that this agreement will be
provided for "Final Plat" — however Stormwater's requirements are that Letters
of Intent, from all owner's or representatives, are required to proceed to hearing.
(This is the continuation of comment #1 from previous rounds).
RESPONSE: Our attorney, Allan Massey, of Vahrenwald, McMahill Massey and Mitchell, is
in touch with the attorney for the ditch owners, Tim Dow. Tim has indicated over the last week that they are willing to sign such
document if we widen the access easement on the east side of the property to 12 feet. We have agreed. At this time, Mr. Massey
is awaiting information as to whether the ditch owners will be signing individually, or as an HOA. City legal staff should be in
agreement with respect to the Fort Collins ditch shares. The community college is willing to sign such letter, but will need formal
ratification of such consent at the next board meeting, in November.
FOR FINAL -
The Smith Lateral ditch owners will be required to sign the Utility Plans and the
Plat as their approval. This needs to be done before the City will sign the final
plans. Any agreements between the development and the ditch owners should
be worked out privately beforehand.
RESPONSE: As above, we are actively working on finalizing the agreement that will guarantee that ditch
owners will sign the Utility Plans and the Plat.
Comment Number: 27
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR HEARING —
Stormwater Quality Treatment:
The required stormwater water quality treatment does not appear to be
provided on the current plans. Lots 1 and 8 are free releasing and do not have
water quality treatment for flows to the south.
The FCSCM requires that require water quality treatment for all new impervious
areas, with 50% minimum being LID (for this project). The existing Clarendon
Hills drainage ponds do not appear to have any formal water quality. This site is
providing more LID than is required, however is not providing enough total water
3
quality treatment. Please contact us to discuss further.
(This comment is follow up on Rnd 1 comment 9 and 10, and Rnd 2 drainage
report redlines)
RESPONSE: Detention pond and LID calculations updated per City comment.
Comment Number: 28
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020, FOR HEARING —
"UPDATED COMMENT"
>Time of Concentration Calculations:
The time of concentration calculations need to follow the Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) methods. Please update the time of
concentration calculations to follow the "manning velocity approach" for
channelized flow and not the NRCS calculation from the MHFD manual. (See
FCSCM Ch 5, section 3.3.3, Eqn 5-4).
Note, this may change the free -release flow rates, which may change the
required detention storage. Please see the drainage report redlines.
>C Factor and Impervious Calculations:
The analysis approach for this project has been to use a generic landuse (C
factor and impervious value) for the residential lots — as the exact footprint of the
house and adjacent hardscaping are unknown. I agreed with this approach
previously but now it does not seem to be working out with the basin divide at
roughly 3/< of the lot depth.
To proceed, I think the imperviousness values and C-factors need a direct
calculation for this site. You will have to make some assumptions for the
building envelope area.
With this updated, I think the site's water quality needs will make more sense
and we can also discuss if any water quality treatment is actually needed for the
drainage to the north (note all impervious areas do require WQ treatment — or
compensatory treatment elsewhere). I recognize this comment is lengthy, I
encourage you to contact me to discuss any questions.
RESPONSE: Drainage calculations updated per City comment.
Comment Number: 29
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR HEARING —
"UPDATED COMMENT"
The vegetative buffer and ditch access easement significantly overlap. We
have decided that a veg buffer, for LID credit, cannot overlap with an access
easement. These are two competing surface uses that. To proceed with the
vegetated buffer (for LID or WQ credit), the formal portions of the buffer will
need to be located outside of the ditch assess easement.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions about this.
RESPONSE: The vegetative buffer has been removed since it was not treating any developed flows.
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR HEARING -
"UPDATED COMMENT'
Site grading, drainage, and roof drains notes (Lots 1 and 8):
4
The Utility Plans note that all roof down spouts should drain south towards
Clarendon Hills Dr or Langdale Dr (note 8 on sheet G1 as well as other
locations). However, the proposed grading shows that a portion of the building
envelopes, on Lots 1 and 8, will drain north towards the Smith Lateral.
This situation — where roof drains are supposed to route water across a
drainage divide — is not practical or enforceable. We do not want this note on
the plans on in the design.
To proceed, I recommend two options:
A. Adjust the lot grading so that Lots 1 and 8 can truly function as 'A' lots -
draining south to the street. Or,
B. On Lots 1 and 8, adjust the drainage boundaries to follow an estimated
rooftop dividing line in the middle of the building envelope. These appear to be
'B' lots in this case.
Feel free to contact me to discuss.
RESPONSE: We have updated the drainage basin boundary so that it includes the full building footprint
and ensured that the lot line high point is north of the back of the home in all cases in order to force the
roof drainage south.
Comment Number: 31
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR FINAL — Provide the State engineer detention drain time
compliance documentation.
RESPONSE: This info will be provided at final as requested.
Comment Number: 32
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR FINAL — The rain gardens will need rundowns (scour
protection) and forebays (energy dissipation and sediment capture).
RESPONSE: This info will be provided at final as requested.
Comment Number: 33
Comment Originated: 09/07/2020
09/07/2020: FOR FINAL — For final plan please provide rain garden design
details, detention embankment cross sections, spillway scour protection
calculations, and any other necessary drainage design details.
RESPONSE: This info will be provided at final as requested.
Comment Number: 34
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING:
The scour protection for detention pond overflow (riprap or other scour
protection) may not overlap the public utility easement. Plan adjustments will be
needed to move the portions of the spillway that require scour protection out of
the public utility easement. Feel free to contact me to discuss any questions.
RESPONSE: The pond has been modified so that the emergency spillway utilizes the common driveway
rather than going across the landscaping area.
Comment Number: 35
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020. FOR FINAL:
Streets would like the primary outlet from the detention to discharge to
Clarendon Hills Drive instead of Langdale Drive. This is for winter maintenance
5
purposes. Feel free to contact us to discuss.
RESPONSE: The pond outlet was revised per the City comment.
Comment Number: 36
Comment Originated: 09/11/2020
09/11/2020: 14. FOR HEARING:
"NEW COMMENT"
The two trees on the west side of the detention pond are too close to the
retaining wall. Can the placement of these trees be adjusted to get 10-feet of
separation from the wall? Please feel free to present alternate locations to
Stormwater (myself) and Forestry.
RESPONSE: Per direction from staff, the trees have been shifted to maintain 6' from the wall.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson(a7fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
03/09/2020: FOR INFORMATION
The project site is located in the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and the
South Fort Collins Sanitation District. Please contact them for requirements on
this proposed development plan.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. We have not received any redlines from FCLWD at time of the submittal.
Department: Parks
Contact: Aaron Wagner,
Topic: General
aawagner fcgov.com
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL
Thank you for adding the easement and label to the ditch. The city requires an
access easement along the east property line in order to maintain the inlet and
infrastructure at this location. Currently, the development is proposing an
access easement near the western portion of the property and along the ditch —
and we thank you for providing that. As discussed with the applicant's legal
counsel, we are respectfully requesting a 12 ft. wide access easement, instead
of 15 ft. as previously requested, along the east property line. This is in addition
to the western access and ditch easement. We understand that the
development has two goals: safety and preserving vegetation along the ditch.
The city can achieve those goals by providing a point to access the inlet which
requires regular maintenance and will preserve the vegetation along ditch by
reducing the number of times that we drive over it. This will satisfy the safety
concern by providing a loop drive in the event that pedestrian traffic is present
allowing trucks and equipment to exit via the western access.
RESPONSE: A 12' easement is now provided along the eastern boundary and the hammerhead has
been removed.
Comment Number: 17
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
R
For information: Parks has a draft Letter of Intent being vetted by our legal team
and we hope to have that finalized for you soon.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Rob Irish, 970.224-6167, rirish@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: For Hearing: How will dry Utilities dig through the Spillway with
Scour Protection? Will this area have to be directional bored underneath? If
utilities dig through this I do not see it getting replaced correctly. Spillway makes
this area of the Utility easement not useable.
RESPONSE: The spillway has been relocated.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Morgan Stroud, 970-416-4344, mstroud()fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
09/09/2020: For Hearing - Unresolved - Update:
I spoke to construction inspection on this matter, and we want to see the
existing roll over curb removed and replaced with vertical curb and gutter. I
added more detail about this in my redlines.
RESPONSE: The plans have been updated as requested.
03/09/2020: For Hearing - Unresolved:
The existing roll over curb and gutter along Langdale drive will need to be
replaced with the detachment of the sidewalk because the stones were poured
monolithically. With this construction, there is not a good way to preserve the
existing curb while only detaching the sidewalk without significant damage to
the curb section.
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 03/09/2020
03/09/2020: For Hearing:
Please address my minor comments in my redlines with your next submittal.
RESPONSE: Utility plans were updated per City redlines.
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: For Hearing:
With lot 2 taking access off of Clarendon Hills Drive, access spacing
requirements on a major collector are not being met. Please adjust where the
driveways are to meet our access spacing requirements on Clarendon Hills
Drive.
RESPONSE: The driveways have been updated so that Lot 2 takes access from the common drive.
Comment Number: 11
09/09/2020: For Final Plan:
Comment Originated: 09/09/2020
7
To piggy -back off of Traffic comments regarding the sight distance triangle.
Please include this on the site and landscape plan so we can confirm if any
plantings are within the triangle, that they will not obstruct views.
RESPONSE: A sight distance easement exhibit has been provided to staff.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970-224.6175, sgilchrist(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 03/03/2020
09/04/2020: FOR FINAL
Will need to have No Parking signs along the access driveway on the plans
prior to final approval.
RESPONSE: The requested signs/curb markings will be provided at final.
03/03/2020: FOR HEARING
No parking can be allowed in the private access road (too narrow). It should be
signed as 'no parking'.
RESPONSE: The requested signs/curb markings will be provided at final.
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 09/08/2020
09/08/2020: FOR INFORMATION:
Please show the sight distance for the Langdale and Clarendon intersection in
regard to the Landscaping plans for that corner. Please maintain 50 feet of
clearance approaching the stop sign to the nearest tree.
RESPONSE: A sight distance exhibit has been provided to staff.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Nils Saha, nsaha anfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/10/2020
09/14/2020: 03/10/2020: FOR FINAL
Please consult to traffic operations to determine whether the serviceberries
proposed at the corner of Langdale Dr. and Clarendon Hills Dr. will obstruct the
site distance triangle.
RESPONSE: Site distance triangle is provided and there is no overlap with serviceberries.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 09/14/2020
09/14/2020: 9/8/2020: FOR FINAL
Thank you for providing the Tree Risk Assessment report. Please note that the
arborist's recommendation is to remove tree #16 based on its condition.
Please evaluate the fall zone of this tree and any targets within the fall zone (lots,
fences, trails etc.) and determine pruning/removal needs accordingly.
Any tree that is considered a safety risk does not require mitigation from
Forestry (LUC 3.2.1 F(2)).
RESPONSE: The hope is to keep the tree and have an arborist heavily prune it. We believe it will still
provide habitat to birds and other wildlife. We are requesting that any necessary notes pertaining to this tree can be added at
FDP.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 09/14/2020
9/8/2020: FOR HEARING
The Land Use Code provides specific language regarding placement of street
trees. LUC standards require (LUC 3.2.1 D (2)) that whenever the sidewalk is
i3
detached, canopy shade trees should be planted at 30-40' spacing in the
parkway. If the sidewalk is attached, canopy shade trees should be established
between 3-7 behind the sidewalk. Neither of these are fully being accomplished
along Clarendon Hills Dr.
Given that this is an existing frontage, Forestry is willing to approve the current
proposal to plant three trees on lots 1-3 (please see redlines for
comments/questions). We would like to see some additional notes on the site
plan and in the development agreement to ensure that these trees are permitted
along with the rest of the street trees and maintained.
RESPONSE: The requested notes have been added to the plans. Please reference General Landscape
Notes #'s 17 and 18.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/14/2020
9/8/2020: FOR HEARING
The typical lot setback detail only seems to apply to two out of the eight lots at
this site. Please clarify the following pertaining to tree placement on lots 1-3:
Are these lots proposed to be developed to the maximum allowable floor area?
The trees are shown within the allowable floor area. Could a more accurate
building envelope be shown for these three lots?
RESPONSE: The rectangle has been removed (per comments from other reviewers). It does
not necessarily depict the buildable area (homes can be built farther back for example but not
Notes have been added to the plans with requirements for the trees and placement.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/14/2020
9/8/2020: FOR HEARING
Please see redlines and address questions/comments about tree placement on
the lots and along drainage easement.
RESPONSE: Revised per redlines.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 09/14/2020
9/8/2020: FOR HEARING
As a follow up to discussions regarding the drainage pond, please coordinate
any changes to proposed trees south of the pond with Forestry. There is a 4:1
slope shown just south of the proposed trees (please see redlines). Proposed
trees should be kept out of that slope.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
closer).
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kelly Smith, ksmith(Mcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/04/2020
09/04/2020: FOR APPROVAL.
Please ensure the plant species in the NHBZ near the ditch are native. The only
area permitted to have some non-native plantings is in the triangular area.
RESPONSE: Plants within the NHBZ (with the exception of the triangular area) are native plants.
Comment Number: 2
09/04/2020. FOR APPROVAL
Can you confirm what is happening with the ditch? Thank you
RESPONSE: The ditch will remain open and "as -is".
Comment Originated: 09/04/2020