Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKING SOOPERS #146 MIDTOWN GARDENS MARKETPLACE - PDP200012 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS (2)6162 S. Willow Drive, Suite 320 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 303.770.8884 • GallowayUS.com October 7, 2020 City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: King Soopers #146 – Midtown Gardens Marketplace – PDP200012 Please find below our comment responses addressing the first PDP submittal. This letter is to address comments we received from you on August 21, 2020. To facilitate your review, we have included the original conditions in italicized font and have provided our responses in bold blue. Planning Services – Kai Kleer Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.2.1 - Landscaping and Tree Protection, full tree stocking is required within all areas 50 feet or less from the building. The two areas of most concern are the front and rear of the building. The standard further requires full tree stocking in paved/walkway areas through the use of cutouts at least 16 square feet (4’x4’) in size. Staff will not support a modification of this standard, however an alternative mitigation plan can be considered. Response: We do not feel the rear of the building should be held to this standard as the code states it is for “high use” and “high visibility” areas. This area is for truck use, the additional parking was only added at the request of city staff. There is significant landscape and fencing provided as a buffer between the bus route to the West and the building that will screen this area from external uses. Adding landscape against the rear of the building would impede functionality of that area and irrigation is not recommended directly adjacent to the building according to the Geotech report. The intent of the promenade along the western edge of the property is intended to serve the purpose of addressing these elevations, with double row of trees and shrubs. For the front of the building it is once again not recommended to irrigate directly adjacent to the building per the Geotech report. There is limited space here to maintain functionality for pedestrians and due to the architectural requirements and the required 8’ walk. We have added raised seat wall planters with trees and annuals as well as bike racks where possible. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: MODIFICATION #1 Regarding 3.2.1(E)(5) – Interior Parking Lot Landscaping, staff generally does not support an approach where the end of areas of parking stalls are not spatially defined by a curbed landscape island and plantings. Staff may consider a Modification of Standard. However, at a minimum, an alternative plan must include a minimum of two trees in each end cap, an element to define the drive aisle/parking area and enhanced landscaping elsewhere on the site. The Modification Request should detail how the alternative planting scheme meets the intent of the standard in an equal to or better than way. Response: Per Section 3.2.2, the site landscaping meets the intent the code by providing a pedestrian refuge area to avoid conflict with vehicles with either raised curb and/or striping (front parking islands). The code states that a minimum of one canopy tree per each island (which is met on the plan) and a minimum of 10% of landscaping within parking is provided as well. Additional trees have been provided throughout the site to meet additional requirements. The Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 2 of 26 tree grates shown are approximately 8’ in diameter and are within raised concrete curbs. Based this information, we feel that a modification is not needed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.2.1 - Perimeter Parking Setbacks, both parking and vehicle use areas that abut Drake and College require a 15-foot average setback. Further, the landscaping within this area is required to provide screening in a way that blocks at least 75 percent of light from a vehicle’s headlights from entering into the right-of-way. Screening can also include a low wall, earthen berm and any plant material used to achieve this standard must achieve the required opacity in its winter seasonal condition within three years of construction. Response: Landscape buffers along College and Drake have both been increased in depth and an evergreen hedge has been supplied along both corridors to block a minimum of 75% of light from vehicle’s headlights. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Landscaping. Please provide greater detail of the first landscape island northwest of drake and the drive aisle for the site. This comment is noted in the redlines. Response: A label has been added. As it exists now this island is only concrete and there are no plans to change that. This island is not within our property bounds. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Landscaping. Please coordinate with forestry on the protection and preservation of two mature tree located in the south parking area – these should be preserved at all costs. Response: All trees protection and mitigation has been coordinated with Forestry. Any valuable trees that it is possible to save are noted as such. Please consult the Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter provided with this submittal in addressing individual trees that cannot be kept. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Lighting. The plan does not adequately define 20-foot boundary at which light levels cannot exceed (0.1) foot-candle. Please revise lighting plan to include this boundary. Response: Photometric plan has been updated to clearly show 20’ offset from property boundary with solid red line. See revised photometric plan. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Lighting. The calculation summary does not give and apples-to-apples comparison of minimum requirements table under 3.2.4(C). Please revise calculations so that staff can make the correct comparison. Response: Revised to better reflect table 3.2.4(C) for comparison. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Lighting. Please provide fixture cut sheets and temperature ratings for all fixtures. This detail seems to be lacking from the lighting plan. Response: Revised, please refer to Photometric Plans. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Access, circulation, and parking. Please provide more detailed description and demonstrate on the site plan how shopping carts will be stored and handled around the entryway of the building and other areas Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 3 of 26 of the site (e.g. around transit center). There is some expectation that folks will leave carts near the transit stop. Response: Circulation exhibit has been provided with this submittal. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Access, circulation, and parking. Please provide an auto-turn and route diagram and narrative regarding how delivery trucks will circulate on/off site. Response: Delivery and Fire Truck turn exhibits provided with this submittal. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding the “grand promenade”, please include a landscape island every 8 parking spaces to achieve the perception of a double row of trees that is otherwise lost due to parking. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.2.2(C)(4), Bicycle parking required for this project is 45 spaces with 20% enclosed and 80% fixed. Parking needs to be increased around the front entryways of the building and further detailed around the existing commercial building located on the southeast corner of the site. Please provide a cut sheet if enclosed parking will be located within a bike shed/shelter. Response: 11 (24%) Enclosed and 34 (76%) fixed bike spaces are provided. Locations have been adjusted so that there are bike racks closer to the entry of both the King Soopers and the Shops in the southeast corner of the site. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Extend the pedestrian promenade walkway to the northern property line. Please provide greater detail on how this connection will be terminated. Response: Revised to show sidewalk connection to northern property line. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Any use of bollards must be decorative and align with the design intent of the Gardens District Theme of the Midtown Plan. Response: Understood, we continue to work with vendors to provide a Garden Theme type bollard for the project; we fully intend to demonstrate compliance. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Pursuant to 3.5(E)(3) - Setbacks, all parking areas along an arterial street require a minimum average landscape setback area of 15 feet from S College and Drake. Further, the landscaping provided is required to provide screening and block at least 75 percent of headlight spill from the street. Screening can include a low wall, earthen berm and landscaping and must achieve the required opacity in its winter seasonal condition within three years of construction. Response: Landscape buffers along College and Drake have both been increased in depth and an evergreen hedge has been supplied along both corridors to block a minimum of 75% of light from vehicle’s headlights. See response for planning comment #3 Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 4 of 26 Please relocate the drive apron from the former Turkey Hill to align with the drive-aisle entry point to the west. Response: Proposed future access shown to align with drive-aisle entry to the west Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Please provide a circulation diagram of how this site connects into and utilizes the surrounding development both to the north and south. The circulation diagram should include both vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian routes. Response: Circulation exhibit has been provided with this submittal. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: A 5-foot landscape setback required along the parking area that abuts Lot 3. This area should also provide a walkway connection from the existing walkway feature between Jiffy Lube and Turkey Hill into the greater walkway system of the surrounding area. Response: 5’ landscape setback added to Lot 1; however, considering the existing pedestrian circulation patterns, walks are not provided due to site constraints. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: MODIFICATION #2 As previously discussed, the façade and exterior wall standard of 3.5.4(D)(1)(a)1, is not met. To meet this requirement the plan must incorporate wall plane projections or recesses having a depth of at least three (3) percent of the length of the facade and extending at least twenty (20) percent of the length of the facade. No uninterrupted length of any facade shall exceed one hundred (100) horizontal feet. The modification request should include justification of why the proposal meets the code in an “equal to or better than” way than a project complying with the standard would. Elements of this justification should include a comparison of the proposed building footprint and one that meets the code and must further provide a list of enhanced architectural elements that are provided that goes above and beyond what would otherwise be required. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(1)(c), the project must provide a repeating pattern that includes 3 elements described by this section and repeated at intervals of no more than 30 feet. The front entry façade fails to meet this standard and provides a façade feature that exceeds the 30-foot maximum length required for a change in color, texture, material, or wall plane offset. Please provide an exhibit that dimensions and labels the change in color, texture, material, and/or wall plane offset every 30 feet. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(1)(d), please provide an exhibit that details and demonstrates compliance with the parapet standards of this section. From the initial review of the elevation plans, it appears that the average height or maximum height may be exceeded (it’s unclear where the roof start). Additionally, it appears that the proposed parapet walls fail to provide a 3-dimensional cornice treatment. Please provide a detailed profile view of these building elements. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 5 of 26 The project still is required to provide one more additional roof element such as, “overhanging eaves, extending no less than three (3) feet past the supporting walls; sloping roofs that do not exceed the average height of the supporting walls, with an average slope greater than or equal to one (1) foot of vertical rise for every three (3) feet of horizontal run and less than or equal to one (1) foot of vertical rise for every one (1) foot of horizontal run; or (3) or more roof slope planes.” Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(1)(e), The building fails to demonstrate a predominant use of subtle, neutral or earth tone colors. Please change out the of Black Mountain cultured stone with a natural stone such as local sandstone or light colored brick. Note that other complimentary colors may need to change to better match the change in body color. This color pallet should be integrated into the fuel station. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(3), The building is required to feature entrances on at least two side of the building. The most appropriate location for the second entry would be on the southwest portion of the site where an entryway feature could be integrated into the bulb-out extension of the pedestrian/civic spaces located near the Max Line. Alternatively, the standard states, “If the large retail establishment does not include a second side entrance that is fully operational and open to the public, then this standard shall be met by attaching smaller retail store(s) ("liner stores") to the side of the large retail establishment which is expected to generate the most pedestrian activity or which faces a public street. Such liner store(s) shall, to the extent reasonably feasible, occupy no less than thirty-three (33) percent of the building elevation on which they are located and shall feature distinctive store fronts and entrances that are significantly differentiated from the large retail establishment in order to create strong identifiable entrance features. Entrances to the liner store(s) may, but need not, provide access into the large retail establishment and must be fully operational and open to customers at times that are generally equivalent to the store hours of the large retail establishment to which they are attached. All entrances, including those of the liner store(s), shall be architecturally prominent and clearly visible from the abutting public street.” Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(4)(c), the plan requires that a 6 feet area for landscaping area between the façade wall and the walkway. The plan particularly lacks compliance with this standard along the front of the building. Please provide adjoining landscaped areas that include trees, shrubs, benches, flower beds, ground covers or other such materials for no less than fifty (50) percent of the length of the walkways along the front of the building. Response: For the front of the building it is once again not recommended to irrigate directly adjacent to the building per the Geotech report. There is limited space here to maintain functionality for pedestrians and due to the architectural requirements and the required 8’ walk. We have added raised seat wall planters with trees and annuals as well as bike racks where possible. Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(4)(d), the areas both north and south of the primary entry vestibule are missing awnings or arcades that are required to extent thirty (30) feet beyond the entry door. Alternatives may be considered but the intent of this standard is to provide against weather. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 6 of 26 Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(4)(e), please provide a detailed drawing of how pedestrian walkways will be distinguished from driving surfaces. These areas should be constructed of low maintenance surface materials such as pavers, bricks, or scored and dyed concrete. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: MODIFICATION #3 Regarding 3.10.3(A), since the primary commercial building entrance does not front on a street, a Modification of Standard is required. It may be best to detail the north south drive aisle in a similar way that a street would be detailed in order to demonstrate an “equal to or better than” approach in meeting the intent of the standard. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: 3.10.5(B), provides an interrelated standard to those found in 3.5.4 and further requires that flat-roofed buildings feature three-dimensional cornice treatment on all walls facing streets or connecting walkways and that a single continuous horizontal roofline shall not be used on one-story buildings. The standard goes on to say, "accent roof elements or towers may be used to provide articulation of the building mass. To the maximum extent feasible, a minimum pitch of 6:12 shall be used for gable and hipped roofs. Where hipped roofs are used alone; the minimum pitch shall be 4:12." To demonstrate compliance with this standard please provide a profile view of the wall plane that includes the several cornice treatments used throughout the building. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.2.2(D)(1) and 3.2.2(E)(5), there are several elements of the driveway off of College Avenue that create significant safety concerns for peds, driver, and bicyclist. Please remove both north and south angled parking in this area and the cut-out for left turns coming from College. This area to the south of the drive aisle should be backfilled with the extension of the connecting walkway paired with adequate landscaping. As part of this standard, please extend the “central feature or gathering space” to include landscaping or architectural elements that fully screen the truck loading area when looking north from Drake Road. Response: Parking off of the College access shall remain as previously shown. The pedestrian connection has been moved further south to align with the main entrance of the store the provide better access from College. The area at the southwest corner of the building has been modified to the extent possible while allowing for delivery trucks to access the loading docks safely. Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.10.5(G), please provide a calculation on the site plan that demonstrates that glazing occupies 60 percent of all building sides (see staff redlines). False windows can be used to satisfy this requirement where it is not possible to daylight the interior of the building. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 7 of 26 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: As part of an interrelated requirement to provide greater pedestrian safety a second entryway, please extend the “central feature or gathering space” to include landscaping or architectural elements that fully screen the truck loading area when looking north from Drake Road. Response: See response for planning comment #31. Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: In areas where pergola is used in front of a storefront window system, please extend the windows vertically above pergola. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Please provide profile/detail drawing of a typical window system. The goal is to provide a design that emphasizes wall thickness through the placement of the window – the window should be located more toward the interior side of the building. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding the fuel station, please remove signage or add a note indicating that the signage is intended to provide a concept of the potential sign’s location and approval of the project does not infer any approvals of the signs shown. The fuel station must utilize the materials, colors, and architectural details of the building. Please apply material to base of canopy supports, modify the color scheme, and detail the service building with greater articulation in window depth and sill profile and provide a roof treatment that matches that of the primary building. The canopy should use a sloped roof that utilizes high profile asphalt shingles, natural clay tiles, slate, concrete tiles, ribbed metal, or wood shakes or shingles. Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding Jiffy Lube and Lot 3. Does a cross access agreement exist for this site? Please include the existing improvements of this site and that to the north within the context plan of the site. More detail needs to be demonstrated regarding how access will be preserved short and long term. If the site were to ever redevelop, the access points would need to be consolidated and routed to the primary entrance of King Soopers along Drake Ave. In the interim access should be preserved into the greater King Soopers site. Response: There is not an existing cross-access agreement per recent title work. However, with the development of Lot 3, cross-access may be established with the Jiffy Lube, which then the uses will be fully realized and access needs understood. Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 INFORMATION ONLY: Many of these comments are reflected in staff redlines, though not all articulate the same level of detail that is provided on the plan and vice versa. Response: Comment Noted. See responses to staff redlines provided separately. Comment Number: 39 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020 FOR HEARING: Regarding 3.5.4(D)(2), the entryway of the building fails to provide three of the following: Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 8 of 26 1. canopies or porticos; 2. overhangs; 3. recesses/projections; 4. arcades; 5. raised corniced parapets over the door; 6. peaked roof forms; 7. arches; 8. outdoor patios; 9. display windows; 10. architectural details such as tile work and moldings which are integrated into the building structure and design; 11. integral planters or wing walls that incorporate landscaped areas and/or places for sitting. At time of next submittal, a detailed entryway drawing is needed to call-out and detail how the entryway standard is being met with the aforementioned elements. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 40 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: Regarding the overall theme and vision board that was presented by the applicant, staff believes that this is an excellent representation of the style, architectural features, amenities, and landscaping that should be demonstrated in the plan. However, the plan fails to demonstrate these elements in a cohesive way. At time of next submittal please work to integrate elements shown in pictures such landscape buffered outdoor patio spaces, ample and sometimes informal seating opportunities through the use of boulders benches, and seat walls; an enhanced pallete of landscaping more aligned with the Garden District theme, architecture that includes human-scale elements and better defines space around the building. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Transportation Planning – Seth Lorson Easements Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR FINAL: Thank you for providing additional 44 shared parking spaces along the western pedestrian promenade. In order to ensure continued access for MAX BRT riders, please expand the shared parking easement as provided with the original 60 spaces on the south side of the building. Response: Understood, and with the addition of parking spaces along the western edge of the property to address staff’s concerns and accommodate additional MAX BRT riders; the ownership group is willing to explore shared parking agreements for the new parking field. Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: It would be great if we could provide ADA access from the south side plaza directly to the MAX BRT station. Let's discuss options. Response: Sidewalk revised to provide ADA connection from south side of plaza to MAX station as requested, see revised plan. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: With the bus pull-out reduced in size due to use of the bike lane, bike ramps up and down will need to be installed on both ends of the pull-out to accommodate bicyclists during the bus dwell time. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 9 of 26 Response: Bike ramps added to both sides of bus pullout area to accommodate bicyclists per example provided, and based on comments from the on-site meeting with city staff on 9/1/20. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: We'd like to confirm that the multi-use path along College Avenue is 10' - 12' wide. Can't find the measurements. Response: Dimensions for sidewalk width have been added on horizontal control plan to clarify. The sidewalk along College Ave. is proposed at 10’. Forestry – Molly Roche Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/18/2020: FOR HEARING - UNRESOLVED There are a handful of tree/utility conflicts that should be addressed prior to hearing. More information is shown on Forestry’s redlines. 4/28/2020: INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP Please include locations of utilities on the landscape plan including but not limited to water service/mains, sewer service/mains, gas, electric, streetlights, and stop signs. Please adjust tree locations to provide for proper tree/utility separation. 10’ between trees and public water, sanitary, and storm sewer main lines 6’ between trees and water or sewer service lines 4’ between trees and gas lines 10’ between trees and electric vaults 40’ between canopy shade trees and streetlights 15’ between ornamental trees and streetlights Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/18/2020: FOR HEARING – UNRESOLVED Document provided by applicant after Project Review Meeting. This has been forwarded to Molly for her review, and Todd will follow up with the applicant as quickly as possible. The applicant stated that they included an Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter with this submittal, however I had trouble locating it in the submittal folder. Please provide a copy of this letter for Forestry to review prior to hearing. Thank you! 4/28/2020: INFORMATION ONLY FOR PDP If there are trees that create a significant burden to the project, please provide an “Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter” for City Forestry staff to review. Proposals to remove significant existing trees must provide a justification letter detailing the specific reason for each tree removal. This is required for all development projects proposing significant tree removal regardless of the scale of the project. The purpose of this letter is to provide a document of record with the project’s approval and for the City to maintain a record of all proposed significant tree removals and justifications. Existing significant trees within the project’s Limits of Disturbance (LOD) and within natural area buffer zones shall be preserved to the extent reasonably feasible. Streets, buildings and lot layouts shall be designed to minimize the disturbance to significant existing trees. (Extent reasonably feasible shall mean that, under the circumstances, reasonable efforts have been undertaken to comply with the regulation, that the costs of compliance clearly outweigh the potential benefits to the public or would unreasonably burden the proposed project, and reasonable steps have been undertaken to minimize any potential harm or adverse impacts resulting from noncompliance with the regulation.) Where it is not feasible to protect and retain significant existing tree(s) or to transplant them to another on-site location, the applicant shall replace such tree(s) according to City mitigation requirements. Response: Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter has been provided. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 10 of 26 Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Continued: Please provide both horizontal and vertical details of the existing trees, new sidewalk, curb and gutter, parkway width, grading, and any cut or fill that is proposed around trees #21 and 24. Forestry staff would like to ensure that the critical root zones of these trees are kept intact throughout the new bus pull out and bike lane design and installation. The sidewalk should be ramped over roots to avoid any root cutting. If it is helpful, an on-site meeting should be scheduled with the applicant, Planning, Transportation Planning, Engineering, and Forestry to coordinate further on the protection of these trees around the new bus pullout, sidewalk, and bike lane. Response: Exhibit showing cross section and plan view with existing and proposed grades at each tree near the bus pullout area has been included with this submittal. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Please place an X over the symbols of all trees to be removed. X’s should be shown on the landscape and sheet 3 of the utility plans. It is especially hard to decipher the difference between trees to retain vs removed on the utility plan. The X’s will clearly identify trees to be protected vs to be removed. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Please review the updated tree inventory and mitigation table provided by Forestry staff which outlines several questions for the applicant regarding tree preservation tactics. Some significant design changes may need to be made to preserve a handful of high priority trees on-site. Specifically, trees # 1, 4, 11, 15, 25, 27, 41, 42, 44, 50, and 51 are considered to be high value trees and should be preserved and protected the extent reasonably feasible. These trees are highlighted on Forestry’s redlines for further clarification. · Tree #1: Looks to be off-site. Is the new sidewalk causing this tree to be removed? Work to shift sidewalk around tree so that it can be preserved. · Tree #4: Due to size and condition, this tree should be preserved to the maximum extent feasible. The applicant should rework the sidewalk plans to preserve this high value tree. Priority tree* · Tree #11: Can the sidewalk be shifted around this tree so that it can be preserved? · Tree #15: Can the sidewalk be shifted around this tree so that it can be preserved? · Tree #25: This tree appears to be able to be preserved based on the location of the existing island. Please preserve if possible. · Tree #27: Previous discussion with Planning, Transportation Planning, Forestry and the applicant was centered around keeping both trees #26 and #27. Thank you for showing tree #26 to remain. Staff would like the applicant to explore preserving tree #27 by keeping the larger island. It appears 2 or 3 parking spots will be removed. High priority* · Tree #41: Is it possible to keep this tree by increasing the square footage of the parking lot island? · Tree #42: Is it possible to keep this tree by increasing the square footage of the parking lot island? · Tree #44: Please keep a parking lot island in place to protect this high value tree. Shift handicap spaces around to accommodate the preservation of this tree. High priority* · Tree #50: High value tree. Applicant and Forestry discussed coming up with a creative solution to preserve the tree by redesigning the pharmacy drive thru. Perhaps the tree can be kept its Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 11 of 26 existing island and the driveway goes around the tree? This could be a unique design feature! High priority* · Tree #51: Please keep a parking lot island in place to protect this high value tree. Shift handicap spaces around to accommodate the preservation of this tree. High priority* Response: See the Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter for detailed responses on individual trees. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/18/20: FOR HEARING There are a handful of trees that are shown to be preserved but should probably be removed due to their condition or species type, specifically Ash that are now susceptible to dying from Emerald Ash Borer (EAB). #6, 7, and 53 are the trees that should be considered for removal and on-site mitigation. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/18/2020: FOR HEARING In the plant list, please include the species diversity percentage of each tree (percent of each new tree species). No one species should account for more than 15% of the total number of new trees on-site. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/18/2020: FOR HEARING The City of Fort Collins Forestry Division has determined that we are close to reaching the maximum percentage of Honeylocust and Bur Oak in Fort Collins’ urban forest. During the development review process, we see it as an opportune time to educate landscape architects to use fewer Honeylocust and Bur Oak trees on plan proposals. Please significantly decrease the number of Honeylocust and Bur Oak and incorporate additional Elm, Hackberry, and Linden. Please note that Lindens do not thrive well in parking lot islands and cutouts. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/18/2020: FOR HEARING Please note that the required size for mitigation trees are as followed: Required mitigation tree sizes: Canopy Shade Tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlapped Evergreen tree: 8.0’ height balled and burlapped Ornamental tree: 2.0” caliper balled and burlapped Currently the plan is showing several 3” diameter shade trees and 2.5” caliper ornamental trees. 3” diameter trees will be especially hard to come by in local nursery stock. Please show all mitigation trees at the proper diameter, label them as such in the plant list and on the plans with a bolded “M” next to the tree symbol. Response: Revised as requested. Note that the City of Fort Collins Development Application Submittal Requirements document dated 8-1-2019 specifies different sizes required for mitigation. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING I came across a handful of tree/utility conflicts that should be reviewed and amended prior to hearing. Additional details can be found on Forestry’s redlines. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 12 of 26 Please show the Critical Root Zones (CRZ) for all existing trees on-site. This is a fairly new code requirement, so please reach out to Forestry if you need clarification (LUC 3.2.1(G)(7)). The inner and outer CRZ should be shaded and shown on the landscape plan sheets that show proposed conditions. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Please describe how trees that are currently shown in grates along College will be protected during the conversion to turf. Please provide direct drip irrigation to existing and proposed trees in the parkway along College and Drake. The trees should be on a separate irrigation zone (apart from turf). Response: Notes have been added to the plans to address this. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING In addition to the unique symbols provided for different tree species, please provide direct species labels (using abbreviations) on the plans. Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Please describe how existing parking lot island trees will be protected throughout grading activities and provide a detail of how the islands will be reconstructed. In addition, please add a note to the landscape plan and utility plans (demo notes) which states: THE ON-SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE AN ON-SITE MEETING WITH CITY FORESTRY PRIOR TO GRADING WORK AND DEMOLITION OF THE PARKING LOT ISLANDS. FORESTRY WOULD LIKE TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH TREE PROTECTION. PLEASE CONTACT FORESTRY@FCGOV.COM. Response: Note has been added to plans. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Please include the City of Fort Collins Tree Protection notes to the Utility Plans. In addition, on sheet 3 of the Utility Plans please edit demolition note number 9 to read: REMOVE ALL ASPHALT, POSTS, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS UNLESS THE ITEM IS SPECIFIED TO REMAIN. Add a separate tree protection/removal note that states: ALL TREES SHALL BE PRESERVED AND PROTECTED WHILE ADHERING TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TREE PROTECTION NOTES, UNLESS THEY ARE OTHERWISE SHOWN TO BE REMOVED ON THIS SHEET OR ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS. TREES TO BE REMOVED ARE IDENTIFIED BY AN X OVER THE TREE SYMBOL. PLEASE CONTACT CITY FORESTRY IF FURTHER CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED – FORESTRY@FCGOV.COM. Response: Noted on plans. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: DCP Please note that tree protection must be installed around all trees prior to any level of site work occurring including but not limited to grading, asphalt/concrete removal, and demolition. Response: Noted on plans. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Please place all street trees a minimum of 30 ft apart. Currently along College Ave, some trees are shown less than 30 ft apart. The Land Use Code requires street trees to be placed every 30 to 40 feet. Response: Revised as requested. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 13 of 26 Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING In landscape islands and planting beds, please provide wood mulch in lieu of rock mulch. This will help decrease the impacts of heat island effect and will give plants a better chance at survival. If this is not feasible, please provide mulch rings around all trees and shrubs. Rocks should not be piled up against trees. Response: Our planting details and notes indicate that wood mulch rings are to be installed at all trees and shrubs. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING In addition to new parking lot trees, landscape islands with existing trees should have direct irrigation to them (drip rings) and mulch is preferred over rock mulch to decrease the heat island effect. Response: A note has been added to the irrigation concept note section. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 8/21/2020: FOR HEARING Prior to the next round of review, please schedule a follow up site visit with City Forestry to collect the remaining tree inventory and mitigation information for the trees labeled as “TBD”. Response: On-site review with the City Forester occurred on Sept. 1st 2020 and these trees are now included in the inventory and mitigation information. Engineering Development Review – Spencer Smith Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING Per Section 3.3.1© of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, this project is responsible for dedicating any easements and/or Rights of Way (ROW) that are necessary or required by the City for this project. Based upon the street sections identified in the Midtown Plan, it looks like there would be a minimum ROW dedication associated with this project of approximately 10 feet along the property frontage for both College Ave. and Drake Rd. There may be more ROW required, depending on roadway improvements such as the bus pullout, turn lanes, etc. The standard 15-foot utility easement will need to be dedicated along the frontage of both College Ave. and Drake Rd. as well. Other potential easements to be dedicated could include emergency access (to be determined by PFA), various utility easements (per Stormwater, Utilities, Light and Power), access easement for promenade area, etc. Also, if a shared access easement on the north side of the property will be required by the City, a letter of intent from the adjacent property owner(s) will be required prior to being scheduled for a PDP hearing. Response: See response to Planning Comment #3. Will need the modification to standard. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING The access to the future Lot 3 pad site should be shifted north to meet LCUASS access spacing requirements. I have not measured it, but if you align it with the existing parking lot access on the west side of the access drive, it would probably meet LCUASS spacing requirements. This would be the preferred location of the future access. From a site circulation standpoint, it may also make sense to keep an access to the northeast corner of that lot as well. This provides some vehicular circulation into the site from the current Jiffy Lube lot as well. Are there any existing cross or shared access easements or agreements in place between the Kmart property owner and Jiffy Lube that need to be considered and preserved? Response: Proposed future access for Lot 3 has been identified and shown to align with the access aisle for parking directly west of Lot 3. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR FINAL Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 14 of 26 The bus pullout area may need to be tweaked a bit. I have concerns with the very narrow bike lane without any buffer, no ramp for bikes to transition from on-street bike lane to the sidewalk, proximity of sidewalk to existing trees, etc. Also, it's a little hard to tell, but the cross section at the bus pullout and the plan view do not look like they exactly match (see redlines). Response: Bus pullout revised per coordination with staff and onsite meeting on 9/1/20. Ramps on either side of bus pullout have been provided on either side of the bus pullout to allow bicyclists to pass while bus is utilizing the area. Cross section of bus pullout area has been updated to match revised plan layout. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING A portion of the bus stop pad appears to be outside of the public ROW. This needs to be in ROW or an easement acceptable to FC Moves. Response: ROW dedication area revised to encompass full bus pullout. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR FINAL Is there any way to shift the east and west bound turn lanes in front of the main site access to Drake Rd.? I can't tell about the westbound movement, but the eastbound movement into this site does not line up well with the receiving lane. Response: Median in Drake Road has been revised to shift the left turn lane further east to better align with the receiving lane onsite per the redline comments provided. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING The PDP utility plans should include all proposed offsite improvements to Drake and College. Please provide a preliminary level design for any signing/striping, medians, etc. Response: Revised per comment. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING I think that the drive access to College Ave. needs to be revised a bit. I think we would be supportive of something that was similar to other College accesses to commercial properties to the north. Closing the southern drive aisle (the one with the enhanced pedestrian crossing) and removing the proposed parking would make a much safer thoroughfare into and out of the site at this location. Response: We have further evaluated the existing and proposed access drives and updated the TIS accordingly. Please refer to the revised plans and TIS. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR FINAL Please revise the utility contact list on the utility plan and site plan cover sheets (see redlines). Response: Revised per redline comments. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR FINAL The area that is allowed to sheet flow across a walk is limited to 700 sf, per City standards. Please ensure that you do not exceed this on your site, particularly at the access points to Drake Rd. and College Ave. Response: Sheet flow area has been reduced as noted. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: The proposed walk along the Lot 3 Drake frontage should be detached if possible. If the existing trees in that location are being removed, I think the walk should be detached per standards. If Forestry is requiring that those trees be preserved, then we can consider allowing the attached walk. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 15 of 26 Response: The proposed turn lane adjacent to Lot 3 is too close to 2 of the existing trees to save. By attaching the sidewalk along the turn lane, the sidewalk better aligns with the sidewalk to the west (near the bus pullout) we are able to save the existing tree at the southeast corner of Lot 3. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR FINAL A Development Agreement (DA) will be required for this project. The DA is an agreement between the property owner and the City of Fort Collins that defines the various standards, infrastructure requirements, maintenance responsibilities, etc. of the owner. A draft of the DA will be prepared by the City during the review and approval process. Prior to preparing this agreement, the applicant will need to provide a completed “Information for Development Agreements” form. This can be submitted with the initial project submittal. A copy of the document can be found at the Engineering web page link below: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: INFORMATION ONLY Larimer County Road Impact Fees and Transportation Expansion Fees are due at the time of building permit. Please contact Kyle Lambrecht at (970) 221 6566 if you have any questions Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: INFORMATION ONLY Any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of this project, shall be replaced or restored to City of Fort Collins standards at the Developer's expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: FOR DCP A Development Construction Permit (DCP) will need to be obtained prior to starting any work on the site. Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: INFORMATION ONLY Any public improvements must be designed and built in accordance with the LCUASS. They are available online at: http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/UrbanSt.htm Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/20/2020: INFORMATION ONLY All public sidewalk, driveways and ramps, existing or proposed, adjacent or within the site, need to meet ADA standards. Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: INFORMATION ONLY The City's Transportation Development Review Fee (TDRF) is due at the time of submittal. For additional information on these fees, please see: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/dev review.php Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: INFORMATION ONLY Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 16 of 26 With regards to construction of this site, the public right of way shall not be used for staging or storage of materials or equipment associated with the Development, nor shall it be used for parking by any contractors, subcontractors, or other personnel working for or hired by the Developer to construct the Development. The Developer will need to find a location(s) on private property to accommodate any necessary staging and/or parking needs associated with the completion of the Development. Information on the location(s) of these areas will be required to be provided to the City as a part of the Development Construction Permit application. Response: Noted, thank you. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: I have provided a pdf of a site that had a similar bike ramp from the street to sidewalk that you can use as a reference for the design of your ramp. Response: Ramp in this area revised per example provided to allow bicyclists to access sidewalk while bus pullout is in use. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: Please see redlines for additional comments. Response: Comment Noted. Comment responses for the redlines have been provided as part of the resubmittal as a separate document. Traffic Operation – Steve Gilchrist Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: Regarding the Transit stop along Drake, please ensure that buses do not dwell in the vehicular through lanes. If the bike lane width is used for dwelling, then please ensure that there is an easy alternate route, or slip ramp for bikes onto and off of the sidewalk. Response: Ramp in this area revised per example provided to allow bicyclists to access sidewalk while bus pullout is in use. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: The access to Lot 3 does not meet set back standards and will need to be realigned to the north. At a minimum it should align with the parking aisle on the west side. Response: See planning comment response #17. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: We would like to work with you and look at options for improving the pedestrian access extending from the grocery store, west to the Max station. The current width of this crossing mixed with the loading dock raises concerns. Response: See transportation comment response #3. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: US287 (College Avenue) is under the jurisdiction of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). They will need to be involved with the review of the project, and will need to approve change in use or new access permits. Response: Noted, thank you. Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: The TIS has been received and reviewed. Thank for the comprehensive work on the TIS. Please provide approach and movement LOS information. This will help identify whether any variance requests are needed to the LOS requirements in LCUASS chapter 4. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 17 of 26 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: The proposed access from the King Soopers onto College is recommended to be limited to a ¾ movement. The EB left turn out as a “high T” is not supported by City staff and likely not supported by CDOT. We believe allowing unsignalized left turns across four lanes of traffic on high speed arterials is problematic, especially given the backups from the downstream signal which greatly limit the visibility. This raises significant safety concerns. CDOT may have comments about this as well. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: The overall short term pm peak hour intersection LOS at College and Drake shows an overall LOS E. This does not meet Adequate Public Facilities requirements in the Land Use Code. What this means is that improvements need to be made to meet LOS E in the short-term total that are feasible / proportional to impact, or an Alternative Mitigation Strategy can be negotiated. Please provide a memo on the expected improvement for right turn overlap (already shown in the TIS), and the addition of a new right turn lane on the EB approach that allows all lanes to move over (and better align) to accommodates EB double lefts (and maybe WB double lefts). If that project would result in measurable improvements, then it may be that a fee in lieu towards that project can be the AMS. If needed, we can schedule a meeting and discuss this further. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: At College and Columbia, lengthening the EB left turn lane is a good idea, and we recommend doing that through striping instead of median reconstruction that results in loss of trees. Signal timing adjustments can also be made by the City if needed to support exiting vehicles. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: Along Drake Road, we would like to see some adjustment to the center ribbon median that will lengthen the EB left turn lane at the King Soopers entrance and shorten the WB left turn lanes onto McClelland. Response: The EB left turn lane off Drake have been lengthened 15’ and has been shifted east to better align with the receiving lane into the site. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: Along College Avenue for the NB approach to Drake, we do not believe the project should reconfigure the ribbon median between Thunderbird and Drake. That can stay as is. Response: Comment noted. Stormwater Engineering Erosion & Sediment Control– Basil Hamdan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/13/2020 08/13/2020: Preliminary Erosion Control Plan is acceptable. At Final, please make sure that all LID facilities are protected throughout the build-out of the site and that the design protects neighboring properties and streets from sediment and debris by including inlet protection for downstream inlets and adding all City of Fort Collins Erosion and Sediment Control notes to the plans. FOR FINAL: Please an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Report that meet all City criteria. Please provide a security deposit estimate. The Site disturbance exceeds 1 acre in size and will be subject to the State Stormwater Discharge permit requirements. Response: Comment Noted. An erosion and sediment control plan and report will be provided at final. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 18 of 26 Stormwater Engineering Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: The City would like to work with this development to add additional stormwater detention to this site. While not required by the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, it is needed in this area to alleviate roadway flooding problems downstream. The City would like to partner with you to add detention storage to on this site. We will be requesting a meeting with your development team to discuss possibilities and the developer repay process. Response: We have provided 100-year detention for the site based on coordination with City staff. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING – All offsite storm drain utility work may require drainage easements and temporary construction easements. For hearing, a legal exhibit and letter of intent from property owner(s) is required. Response: No connections are being made to the existing storm sewer system to the north, therefore, no easements are required. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: **UPDATED COMMENT** The existing storm pipe, parallel to the north property line, will need to be evaluated and most likely replaced to provide an adequate outfall for this project. The pipe should be reviewed for structural integrity and hydraulic capacity. Do you have a TV inspection video of this pipe section? Please contact me to discuss. Response: No connections are being made to the existing storm sewer system to the north. The proposed storm system will alleviate the existing flows to this storm pipe. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Drainage easements are required for onsite stormwater quality facilities and the outlet pipe, from the WQ facility to the City storm main. These will need to be shown on the plat. Response: Drainage easements have been provided on the plat and plans to encompass the underground water quality and detention structure and outfall pipe. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Please provide a delineation and tabulation of “new or modified impervious areas” with the drainage report. This is your required water quality treatment area. Response: Impervious areas have been tabulated and delineated in the drainage report. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Please tabulate the areas tributary to each LID or water quality facility. Compare this area to the required treatment area and discuss in the drainage report. Response: the LID/water quality design has been revised to include 1 system, which will treat all of the on-site runoff collected, which is also identified and discussed in the report. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Please provide storage volume calculations for each stormtech facility and compare to the required storage amount. Response: A stage storage tabulation of the stormtech system is included in the report. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Please show the site overflow paths on the drainage plan. For each major basin (A, B, C, etc.) would like to see how surface flows would leave the site. Response: Overflow paths have been shown on the drainage plan. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 19 of 26 Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Please see the redlined Landscape Plan for some minor utility separation issues. Response: See comment responses to redline comments provided as a separate document. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING: **New Comment** The drainage report states that the proposed storm drainpipe system will be sized for the 2-year flow. Further analysis and design will be needed to support this. The development will need to provide 100-year flow storm conveyance to the public storm system in College Avenue, as well as flow calculations to support. Eventually there will be a City capital project to improve the College Avenue storm system. Response: based on coordination with the City, the proposed storm system now includes 100- year pipe capacity, detention, and attenuation for the site. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING: **New Comment** Invert elevation and slope/ grade information will be required for the existing/ proposed storm drain systems. It would be most advantageous to have these systems profiled before hearing. At minimum invert, finished grade, cover, and slope information will need to be shown to confirm these pipe runs will work as proposed. Response: Storm drainage labels have been added to the drainage plan to show structure and pipe data as listed above. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: FOR HEARING: **New Comment** Storage volume calculations and preliminary designs for the proposed stormtech systems will need to be provided. You will need to show that the systems shown on the plans can provide the required storage volumes. Response: A stage storage tabulation of the detention system is included in the report. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: FOR INFORMATION: I encourage you to contact me directly with any questions or items you would like to discuss. I can be contacted at masimpson@fcgov.com. Response: We appreciate your readiness to collaborate with us on these comments! Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 08/21/2020: FOR HEARING: **New Comment** Provide an existing conditions drainage basin map along with rational peak flow calculations. Response: an existing condition drainage plan has been included in the drainage report. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 08/21/2020: FOR HEARING: **New Comment** The state SDI reporting data sheet will need to be provide for the underground water quality facilities. (release rates meet drain time criteria) Response: Comment noted. an SDI sheet for the proposed detention system will be included in the report at Final. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 20 of 26 Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 08/21/2020: FOR HEARING: **New Comment** Please see the redlined Utility Plans and Drainage Report for additional comments. Response: See comment responses to redline comments provided as a separate document. Water-Wastewater Engineering – Matt Simpson Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: A utility coordination meeting is needed to discuss the onsite/ offsite water mains and the water and sewer servicing of the site. Please contact the Development Review Coordinator to set up ASAP. Response: Utility coordination meeting was held on 9/22/20 with City staff. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: The submitted Utility Plan was drawn at 50-scale, which combined with the amount of existing and proposed utilities on this site, is very difficult to review. With the next submittal please prepare an Overall Utility Plan and Detailed Utility Plan sheets. 20 or 30 scale should be sufficient. Because of the difficulty reviewing this Utility Plan, additional comments may arise in future rounds. Response: A blowup of the proposed utilities behind the proposed store has been provided within the utility plan set to provide clarity for review. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: The existing 8-inch water main west of the building may not be abandoned as shown on the plans. This action would abandon a section of the dead-end main north from this site that currently has a fire service and a fire hydrant. The reconfiguration of this water main needs to be addressed with the PDP plans. Utilities likes the idea of abandoning and removing the main on the west side of the building and would like to discuss options with you. We have provided several ideas on the included “water options PDF.” Please review this and we will discuss at the utility coordination meeting. Feel free to reach out to me directly as well. Response: Per coordination with Matt Simpson, an 8” water main has been added to the north side of the store to provide water service for the building to the north of the site. This allows the existing 8” main to be abandoned at the rear of the store. Water service for the proposed building will be brought in from the existing water main at the front (east side) of the proposed store. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: See redlined utility plans for additional comments and clarification of the written comments. Response: See comment responses to redline comments provided as a separate document. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: The proposed sanitary sewer main will require a 30-foot utility easement to be dedicated, centered on the pipe. Response: A 30’ utility easement has been provided and is shown on the plat and utility/site plans. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 21 of 26 The plans show the existing 8-inch water main (east of the proposed building) is not currently in the utility easement. A 20-foot utility easement, centered on the water main, will need to be dedicated. The remainder of the existing easement may be vacated as appropriate. Response: The existing utility easement for the existing 8” water main is proposed to be vacated on the plat and a new 20’ easement which follows the correct alignment is proposed on the plan and PDP. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: The proposed 3-inch water service will require a water meter vault. Please add to the plans. The water meter vault needs to be located near the tap location and not where shown on the plans. Water services should be routed perpendicular to the main as much as possible. Response: The proposed water meter vault is shown on the utility plans. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: A water meter and service sizing memo with calculations will need to be submitted. This should be based on the AWWA M22 procedure. Response: The applicant will work with the architect and MEP to provide this calculation prior to hearing. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/20/2020 08/20/2020: FOR INFORMATION: *New Comment* Sewer discharge: Please note that all City of Fort Collins Utility Customers are subject to City Code requirements for wastewater. These requirements include Section 26-306 Wastewater Discharge Permit Requirements and Section 26-332 Prohibitive Discharge Standards. A permit may be required depending on activities on the site; however, discharge standards apply to. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 08/21/2020: FOR FINAL: *NEW COMMENT* The proposed sanitary sewer main will need to be profiled. Please pothole locate the tele-comm crossing (if this is encased, please obtain top and bottom depths). Response: Noted. The proposed sanitary will be profiled. The applicant will obtain necessary information regarding the tele-comm crossing prior to FDP approval. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020 08/21/2020: FOR HEARING: *NEW COMMENT* Please confirm the invert elevations and slope for the proposed sanitary sewers service on the gas station building. This service is proposed to connect to the existing service line and the sanitary manhole north of the site. Please confirm there is a utility easement on the adjacent parcel. Response: The applicant’s team is working to verify the elevation of the existing sanitary service for the site, any existing easements and any potential required easements offsite. The plan for the sanitary sewer service is to connect to the existing stub onsite to avoid having to disturb the site to the north. Light & Power – Cody Snowdon Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 22 of 26 The existing building was powered by a 750 kVA transformer located directly behind the building. The proposed connection point to our system will need to be extended from that location to the new transformer. Please see redlines. Response: Comment noted. Proposed electric service will extend from the location of the existing transformer. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: The existing electrical facilities along the western side of the building cannot be relocated or removed since this is a major duct feeding the city to the north and greater detail will need to be shown to ensure this will work with all proposed utilities. Please show an enlarged detail view to better show separations of all utilities. We advise a Utility Coordination meeting be scheduled early in the process to ensure this area can function as shown. Response: Comment noted. A utility coordination meeting with City staff was held on 9/22/20. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: There is an existing vault that is not currently shown on the plans. Please have this located and shown on the plans. Response: The vault has been located and shown on the plans. The existing vault will be relocated into a landscape island to avoid conflicts with the proposed fuel center. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: The existing underground electrical running along the northern property line to the existing vault, the existing vault, and the electrical routed to the north from the existing vault, needs to remain and will need to be located within a dedicated easement. Please see the redlined Plat and Utility Plan. These facilities will need to be accurately located to ensure the facilities are completely encompassed by a proposed or an existing easement. Response: Noted. A proposed utility easement has been provided for the portion of the electric line which runs parallel to the northern property that is not currently within an easement. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR HEARING: The proposed transformer location cannot be within an enclosure due to future access and maintenance. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface that can be accessed with a boom truck. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. When located close to a building, please provide required separation from building openings as defined in Figures ESS4 - ESS7 within the Electric Service Standards. Response: The wall around the proposed transformer has been removed. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR INFORMATION: The services to the buildings will be consider a commercial service; therefore, the service line from the transformers to the meter are required to be installed, owned and maintained by the property owner. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR FINAL: This project will need to comply with our electric metering standards need to be shown on the plans at time of Final. Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Reference Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric metering standards. A link has been provided below. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 23 of 26 https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_FINAL_18Novemb er2016_Amendment.pdf Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR FINAL: A commercial service information form (C-1 form) and a one-line diagram for all commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power Engineering for review prior to Final Plan. A link to the C-1 form is below: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR DCP: Please document the size of the electrical service that feeds the existing buildings prior to demolition of the building to receive capacity fee credits. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR DCP: Light & Power will require AutoCAD files of the Site Plan, Utility Plans, and Landscape Plans prior to the Entitlement Process approval. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR INFORMATION: If any existing electric infrastructure needs to be relocated or underground as part of this project, it will be at the expense of the developer and will need to be relocated within Public Right-of-Way or a dedicated easement. Please coordinate relocations with Light and Power Engineering. Response: Comment noted. Applicant will work with Light and Power on any areas of relocation. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR INFORMATION: For additional information on our renewal energy programs please visit the website below or contact John Phelan (jphelan@fcgov.com). Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR INFORMATION: The City of Fort Collins now offers gig-speed fiber internet, video and phone service. Contact Julianna Potts with Fort Collins Connexion at 970-207-7890 or jpotts@fcgov.com for commercial grade account support, RFPs and bulk agreements. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR 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 or visit the following website for an estimate of charges and fees related to this project: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-development-fees Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/18/2020 08/18/2020: FOR INFORMATION: Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 24 of 26 Please reference our policies, construction practices, development charge processes, electric services standards, and fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. Response: Comment noted. Environmental Planning – Scott Benton Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Please provide additional detail on the sod to be used, particularly the species (with scientific name) to be used. The City suggests Texas hybrid turf grasses commercially available that reduce water demand and can still withstand moderate use. From CSU: Some of the most drought resistant bluegrass cultivars include: America, Apollo, Baroness, Brilliant, Impact, Mallard, Midnight, Midnight II, Moonlight, Rugby II, Showcase, Total Eclipse, and Unique. Bluegrass cultivars differ little in actual water use rate. It appears that enhanced drought resistance comes from the ability to form somewhat deeper roots than the other bluegrasses. Limited research (along with many anecdotal field observations) suggests that the Texas bluegrass x Kentucky bluegrass hybrids (Reveille, Longhorn, Thermal Blue, Solar Green, Dura Blue, Bandera) have better than average drought resistance and excellent heat tolerance. These Texas hybrids form extensive root systems and produce large, aggressive rhizomes, making them well-suited for athletic field use. https://planttalk.colostate.edu/topics/lawns/1544-modern-bluegrass-varieties-betterheat-tolerance-drou ght-resistance/ Response: Revised as requested. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: Thank you for submitting a photometric plan. The plan shows that lighting levels under the fueling canopy are over 30 foot-candles; maximum allowed (maintained) are 20 foot-candles as per LUC 3.2.4(C). Please revise as necessary. Response: Lighting levels under the fuel canopy have been revised to a maximum level of 20- foot candles. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: The photometric plan indicates that lighting levels measured 20 feet from the property boundary are in excess of the allowable 0.1 foot-candles; see LUC 3.2.4(D)(7). Please revise as necessary. Response: Lighting levels have been minimized as much as possible 20 feet outside of the property line. 0.2-0.3. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING: LUC 3.2.4(D)(3) requires that all exterior light sources be concealed, fully shielded, or feature sharp cut-off capabilities to minimize up-light, spill-light, glare, etc. LUC 3.2.4(D)(11) requires that all lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of not greater than 3000K. Please provide cutsheets of the luminaires to ensure that the code requirements are met. Response: Color temperature of 3000K is used for all fixtures. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: Has a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) been considered since the existing fueling station is being closed and relocated? Phase I ESAs are commonly utilized for due diligence when fueling stations, storage, and auto repair facilities are concerned. See LUC LUC 1.2.2(I), LUC 3.4.2 and LUC 3.4.9. Response: Yes, one has been completed. PFA – Jim Lynxwiler Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 25 of 26 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR HEARING FIRE ACCESS - Fire access is required to within 150 feet of all exterior portions of any building, or facility ground floor as measured by an approved route around the perimeter. This comment was provided previously and noted by the applicant team, however, no indication of fire lane dedication is noted anywhere on the plans or plat. > Fire lanes shall be designed so as to provide access to all existing and proposed buildings as well as to the fueling facility. This will involve a network of easements on the west, south and east sides of the marketplace from property line to property line. A loop drive is needed to cover the existing building on the SE corner of the site. A fire lane from the main entry to the property line on the north will be required to serve the fueling station. Limits of the fire lane shall be noted on the plans. > Fire lanes established on private property shall be dedicated by plat as an Emergency Access Easement. > Fire lane shall be designed and constructed to minimum specifications (provided previously). > Fire lanes to be identified by red curb and/or signage. > 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. Response: Fire lane markings have been incorporated with the plans. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: NOT FOR HEARING ADDRESS POSTING - Please add the address to the monument sign at the College Ave entrance, posted with a minimum of eight-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Response: Comment Noted Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: NOT FOR HEARING INFORMATION - MOTOR FUEL DISPENSING FACILITIES Motor fueling stations shall be shown to comply with IFC Chapter 23 as well as applicable sections of Chapter 57. Response: Comment noted. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: NOT FOR HEARING INFORMATION - AST & UST STORAGE TANKS The installation or removal of an Above Ground (AST) or Underground Storage Tank (UST) requires a separate plan review and permit from Poudre Fire Authority. Tanks shall be protected from damage and have secondary containment. All tanks shall be UL listed. Please contact Assistant Fire Marshal Sarah Carter at 970-416-2864 with any questions. Response: Comment noted. Internal Services – Russell Hovland Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/10/2020 08/10/2020: This large retail store must be located at least 60 feet from all property lines and fire sprinkled in order to exceed 60,000 sq.ft. The building appears to be closer than 60ft on the north side. A pre-submittal meeting should be scheduled with Russ Hovland at 970-416-2341. Response: Please refer to supplemental Comment Response Memo from consultant team. Midtown Gardens Marketplace PDP200012 10/07/2020 Galloway & Company, Inc. Page 26 of 26 Technical Services – Jeff County Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: INFORMATION ONLY: Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP. Response: Comment noted. Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 08/17/2020 08/17/2020: FOR FINAL 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: See comment responses to redline comments provided as a separate document. Sincerely, GALLOWAY (303) 770-8884 Aaron McLean Site Development Project Manager AaronMcLean@GallowayUS.com Phil Dalrymple, PE Civil Engineer Project Manager PhilDalrymple@GallowayUS.com Sarah Adamson, RLA Landscape Architect SarahAdamson@GallowayUS.com Attachments: - 520329_KS146CommentReponses_2020-1007 (CR Architects) - King Soopers #146 Fort Collins Traffic Study Comment Response (Kimley-Horn)