HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAVERIK AT I 25 AND HIGHWAY 392 - PDP200001 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 4 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS1
Community Development and
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6689
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/developmentreview
September 08, 2020
Cassie Younger
Maverik
185 State Street
Salt Lake City, UT 8411
RE: Maverik, PDP200001, Round Number 3
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Maverik. If you have questions about any comments, you may
contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your Development
Review Coordinator, Brandy Bethurem Harras via phone at 970-416-2744 or via email at
bbethuremharras@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Brandy Bethurem Harras, 970-416-2744, bbethuremharras@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
I am 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! DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 2
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
As part of your submittal 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 all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide
reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments have not
been addressed, when applicable. DCI Response: Noted
2
Comment Number: 3
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
All resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon
being the cut-off for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit please let me know.
DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 5
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING:
"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
hearing. There are key material due dates in order to be scheduled on the
Planning and Zoning Board Agenda. DCI Response: Noted
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwray@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
04/06/2020: FOR HEARING - UPDATED:
Site Plan Cover page - Continued from R1 Comments not addressed.
- Please use standard CDNS signature block template. DCI Response: Emailed Pete the signature
block being used and he verified it is the correct CDNS signature block.
Comment Number: 6
04/06/2020: FOR HEARING - UPDATED
Development Standards for I-25 Corridor
-UNRESOLVED: Section 3.9.3 - Building setback form I-25 Centerline. Please
show setback distance from the new I-25 centerline to building location. DCI Response: The sertback
distance from the I-25 centerline to the building location is called out in “Site Plan”, sheet 2 of 2.
- RESOLVED: Section 3.9.4 (B) Landscape Buffer. Please provide a Request
for Modification of Standards to the requirement for an 80-foot landscape buffer
between building or parking lot edge and I-25 ROW. See Article Two - 2.8 for
criteria and requirements for Modifications.
-RESOLVED: Please consider what additional landscaping on site can be
used to make up for lack of 80' buffer on east boundary, as equal to or better
than a plan in compliance.
Contact: Will Lindsey, , wlindsey@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/04/2020: FOR HEARING:
3.5.3(C)(2) – Orientation to Build to Lines for Street front Buildings
Based on past discussions regarding the build-to requirement staff has
considered that the site is eligible for the following exceptions to the standard.
Exception 1 can be granted if you further enhance the proposed seating area to
the west of the building with permeable pavers over the sand filter, as well as a
3
pedestrian connection down to the detention area further west. Enhancing that
detention with additional landscaping and/or customer amenities (such as a
dog area) would strengthen the application. If no enhancements can be made
than a modification to the standard should be discussed.
1. In order to form an outdoor space such as a plaza, courtyard, patio or
garden between a building and the sidewalk. Such a larger front yard area shall
have landscaping, low walls, fencing or railings, a tree canopy and/or other
similar site improvements along the sidewalk designed for pedestrian interest, comfort and visual continuity.
Exception 2 can be granted due to the high traffic volume on Carpenter Rd, the
existing landform, and the lack of an established pattern.
2. If the building abuts a four-lane or six-lane arterial street, and the Director
has determined that an alternative to the street sidewalk better serves the
purpose of connecting commercial destinations due to one (1) or more of the following constraints:
a. high volume and/or speed of traffic on the abutting street(s),
b. landform,
c. an established pattern of existing buildings that makes a pedestrian-oriented street front infeasible.
Exception 4 can also be granted due to the larger front yard area required off of
the Frontage Rd which includes the 10 ft utility easement.
4. If a larger or otherwise noncompliant front yard area is required by the City to continue an
established drainage channel or access drive, or other easement. DCI Response: As discussed in
the Intake Meeting on September 8th, amenitizing the detention pond poses significant issues to
the potential water quality coming off of the site. We have proposed a seating area adjacent to
the building to encourage customers to gather in a safe and inviting atmosphere. Furthermore,
exception 4 allows for an exception due to a non-standard requirement at the front of the
property. In this particular case, the presence of the CDOT drainage swale between the site
and the Frontage Road require additional space between the structure and the traffic which
prevents the connection that this standard tries to employ.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Spencer Smith, 970-221-6603, smsmith@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING - UNRESOLVED:
04/03/2020: BY HEARING - UPDATED:
Thank you for adding the typical streets section. Per the LCUASS E-4
checklist, please move the section to the cover page. Also, there is quite a bit
of incorrect information on the cover sheet. There are references to Larimer
County, which is not the correct jurisdiction. I don't think you have City of Fort
Collins benchmarks referenced and no City signature block, etc. (see redlines). DCI Response: The
Larimer County references have been removed. and verified the benchmark is a City of Fort
Collins benchmark per CITY OF FORT COLLINS MEMORANDUM DATED: NOVEMBER 2013,
from JOHN VON NIEDA PLS, CITY SURVEYOR. Spencer verified by email the City signature
block used in the plans as the correct signature block.
01/17/2020: BY HEARING:
Per LCUASS Appendix E-4, please include all applicable signature blocks as
well as typical street section on the utility plan cover sheet. DCI Response: Spencer verified by
email the City signature block used in the plans as the correct signature block.
Comment Number: 4
4
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING - UPDATED
There are some remaining issues with the proposed frontage road section. 3:1
slopes are not allowed within public ROW. DCI Response: The existing 3:1 slope to the east of
the new walk along the Frontage Rd will be preserved and will have minimal disturbance with
the addition of a thickened edge to the back of walk.
04/03/2020: BY HEARING - UPDATED:
The frontage road improvements still need some work. What is proposed does
not meet City standards for a Major Collector roadway and there is not much
information on the existing roadway in the plans (existing width, edge of asphalt,
lane striping, etc.). This information will be needed to help lay out the proposed
improvements. Their needs to be some discussion between City staff and the
applicant team regarding this issue prior to any resubmittal. Please coordinate
with the Development Review Coordinator (Brandy) to get a meeting scheduled.
If a variance from the City standard street section is going to be proposed, a
formal variance request will need to be submitted to the City. Please refer to
section 1.9.4 of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) for
variance request standards/guidelines, which can be found at the following
location: https://www.larimer.org/sites/default/files/ch01_2016.pdf DCI Response: The standard
Major Collector street section has been modified to show a 7’ attached walk. Additional
roadway information has been added such as striping for existing turning and decel lanes,
edge of asphalt on west side of Frontage Rd., existing inlet on SH 392, existing signs, etc.
This has been verified by Spencer through emails and phone calls.
01/17/2020: BY HEARING:
Per conceptual review engineering comment #2, the adjacent frontage road will
need to be improved to City collector road standards. The plans need to
include the proposed design of these roadway improvements. I believe that the
road will be a Major Collector, but please coordinate with me to confirm that
prior to adding that to your plans. DCI Response: The street plan and profile has been viewed
and verified to now include the proposed design of these roadway improvements. We also
discussed the roadway as a Major Collector, and have coordinated with Spencer to confirm that.
Comment Number: 7
01/17/2020: BUILDING PERMIT:
There will be a repayment assessed for I-25 and SH 392 interchange improvements. The amount
appears to be approximately $19,000 and will be due at time of building permit. The exact amount
will be determined at that time by City finance staff. DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 9
04/03/2020: BY HEARING:
Please show all of your proposed contours tying into existing contours. We
want to make sure that the proposed grading works before moving on to FDP.
With the steep grades along the frontage road and the required roadway
improvements, this is going to be very important. I'm not sure how the site will
work without some retaining walls, so I think we need to make sure we work out
the proposed improvements with Engineering, Forestry, Planning, etc. prior to
going to hearing, as there could be significant impacts to the site. Please see
grading plan for additional grading comments. DCI Response: The grading for the site has been
5
revised, the proposed contours tie in to the existing. A wall has been graded in along the west
side of the site between the back of walk and the drainage facilities. Spencer has viewed and
confirmed these revisions as being acceptable to his comments.
Comment Number: 10
04/03/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Please work with Engineering to dedicate an emergency access easement on
the site. This will need to be dedicated by separate instrument during the FDP
review and approval. You can find more information regarding the process,
deed of dedication template, TDRF application form with fee information, etc.
at: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 11
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN
See utility plan sheet 12 of 13 for misc. redlines. DCI Response: Addressed redlines included in
plan sheets.
Comment Number: 12
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN
The proposed Emergency Access Easement (EAE) will need to be approved
and dedicated prior to approval of the FDP. The legal and exhibit will need to
be prepared by a licensed Colorado Land Surveyor and submitted to the City
for review. The easement should be indicated on your TDRF application and
the associated fee paid at time of submittal ($250). DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 13
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING
Please be sure that all existing infrastructure is shown on all plans. The existing
storm drain rundown along the west slope is not on every sheet, for example. DCI Response: Verified
all infrastructure is being shown on all applicable plans. The west slope storm drain rundown
near SH 392 – Frontage Road intersection is being shown in the Site Survey Sheet and the Demo
Sheet. All demo features are not represented in the proposed plan sheets.
Comment Number: 14
09/08/2020: BUILDING PERMIT
Due to the age of the frontage road pavement, there may be increased fees due
for the proposed street cuts, due at time of building permit. Please coordinate
with me further to determine if this well be the case. DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 15
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING
Contours aren't typically shown on utility plan sheets (7 of 13). If you want to
include them, you should be showing proposed grading. It looks like you are
just showing existing contours on the utility plan sheet currently. DCI Response: The contours have
been removed from the Utility Plan
Comment Number: 16
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING
See frontage road plan and profile sheet for comments. The slope labels
shown there, don't match what is called out on your cross sections. There are
also errant labels for contours that aren't shown on the plan, bearings that aren't labeling any linework, etc.
DCI Response: The Frontage Road plans have been revised. Added missing linework. Spencer
has verified the revised design by zoom meeting and corresponding emails..
6
Comment Number: 17
09/08/2020: FOR HEARING
Please revise the street section on the utility plan cover sheet to show the
approved variance on the east side of the frontage road. DCI Response: Street section on cover sheet
has been revised to match the proposed 7’ attached walk.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Dan Mogen, 970-305-5989, dmogen@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2
09/03/2020: FOR HEARING - UPDATED:
Many of the redlines and concerns from the previous round have been
addressed; however, there are critical items that have not been addressed
including sizing calculations for the sand filters and detention ponds. Please
review redlines and contact me to discuss. It would be helpful to discuss the
overall plan and intent for how runoff will be conveyed from the sand filters to the detention pond.
DCI Response: All calculations have been revised and view by Dan through emails and phone
calls to verify his consent to the updated methods.
04/03/2020: Clarification is still need about the overall design and updated
redlines are provided with additional guidance. The most important items to address are:
- overall design - how is runoff from all basins being treated for LID and also
conveyed to the detention pond? It appears portions of Basin E particularly are not treated/detained.
- sand filter sizing (currently required volumes are not being met)
- runoff/detention calculations
- detention outfall location
- proposed drainage easements for detention pond, sand filter, and outfall/spillway locations.
DCI Response: The redlines have been addressed and view by Dan through emails and phone
calls to verify his consent to the updated methods. Proposed drainage easement has been
added to each of the drainage facilities.
Please contact me to review redlines.
01/17/2020: Clarification is needed on the overall stormwater design including
LID facilities and detention basin including outfall locations.
Please see redlined drainage report and utility plans which provide additional
detail and specific items to be addressed. I encourage you to reach out with
any questions or to review potential revisions, and I’d be happy to set up a
meeting or conference call to do so. DCI Response: After contacting Dan through emails and
phone calls, the revisions to the LID and stormwater design have been made per his
recommendations.
Comment Number: 3
09/03/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
04/03/2020: Please provide details on the spill containment system including
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to be including in the Development Agreement (DA).
01/17/2020: Spill containment for fueling areas must be provided. While called
out in the drainage report, it is not clear this is included in the utility plans. DCI Response: Noted,
details on the spill containment system including Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) will
be provided at Final Plan.
7
Comment Number: 5
09/03/2020: FOR HEARING - UPDATED:
The maximum allowable slope on detention pond side slopes and other on site
areas is 4:1. Please adjust the site to eliminate slopes greater than 4:1 and
provide maintenance access to all stormwater facilities.
Please minimize the extent of off-site grading on the slope west of the site. Is it
necessary to regrade the entire slope? DCI Response: All proposed 3:1 slopes on site have
been revised to be 4:1 or less.
04/03/2020: It is encouraged to follow these guidelines. Please note the
section on "Landform and Slopes." 01/17/2020: Please review Fort Collins Landscape
Design Standards and Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities for ideas to potentially
incorporate into the design - that document is available at:
https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/stormwater_standards_and_guidelines.pdf
DCI Response: The Fort Collins Landscape Design Standards and Guidelines for Stormwater
and Detention Facilities have been reviewed for ideas to potentially incorporate into the design
Comment Number: 7
09/03/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Please dedicate easements for sand filters, detention pond, and outfalls. DCI Response: Proposed
drainage easements has been added to each of the drainage facilities including sand filters
and detention pond.
Department: Fort Collins Loveland Water District
Contact: Nate Ensley, nensley@fclwd.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/04/2020: FOR HEARING:
Please see redlines DCI Response: All redlines have been reviewed and addressed.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Cody Snowdon, 970-416-2306, csnowdon@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/15/2020: FOR INFORMATION:
City of Fort Collins Light and Power currently does not serve the site nor has any
electric facilities close to the proposed project to serve it in the future. This site
is currently served by Poudre Valley REA. DCI Response: Noted
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Kelly Smith, , ksmith@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
01/20/2020: BY HEARING - UNRESOLVED:
In Fort Collins, prairie dog colonies one (1) acre or greater in size are
considered special habitat features (see LUC 5.1 Definitions). In addition, the
Land Use Code requires that any prairie dogs inhabiting a site must be
8
relocated or humanely eradicated prior to development activities [LUC 3.4.1(N)
(6)]. Mitigation options are based from onsite assessment and include trap and
donate; active relocation; passive relocation; or payment in lieu. Please indicate how you
intend to mitigate. Client Response: Please see attached letter by Animal & Pest Control
Specialist for site assessment and mitigation plans.
Comment Number: 3
01/20/2020: BY HEARING - UNRESOLVED:
If this project proceeds in the development review process, at least a concept
prairie dog removal plan will be needed prior to Hearing. Client Response: Noted, Please see
attached letter by Animal & Pest Control Specialist for site assessment and mitigation plans.
Contact: Scott Benton, , sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
04/06/2020: BY HEARING - UNRESOLVED:
A prairie dog removal plan is required to address a number of aspects to
satisfactorily meet LUC 3.4.1(N)(6) - which Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW)
-approved methods will be employed, time of year removal will occur, and
measures to prevent re-establishment of the site in addition to burrowing owl
surveys. Note that black-tailed prairie dog relocation requires CPW permits
(https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-Black-tailedPrairieDogPermits.aspx).
Client Response: Please see attached letter by Animal & Pest Control
Specialist for site assessment and mitigation plans.
Comment Number: 1
09/04/2020: FOR HEARING - UNRESOLVED:
To date no prairie dog removal plan or mitigation measures have been
submitted as required by previous comments; those comments have been
retained for you to refer back to. To reiterate, active prairie dog colonies >1
acre in size are considered a special habitat feature by the City of Fort Collins
and a removal plan and mitigation measures are required [LUC 3.4.1(N)(6)].
A removal plan is required to detail when the removal is expected to occur,
results of a burrowing owl survey if removal occurs during the active season (I
understand you plan to euthanize outside of the active season), proof that
appropriate CPW permits are obtained if necessary, the planned method of
removal (Fumitoxin in this case), and what measures will be taken to prevent
prairie dogs from re-inhabiting the site. Proof of efficacy of euthanization will also be required.
Client Response: Please see attached letter by Animal & Pest Control Specialist for site
assessment and mitigation plans.
Comment Number: 2
09/04/2020: FOR DCP AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
Mitigation is also required for removal of a prairie dog colony >1 acre. Since
euthanization is the desired method of removal then a payment in lieu fee is the
required mitigation. The DRC will provide you with a flowchart detailing prairie
dog management in Fort Collins during the development review process.
The payment in lieu is calculated in coordination with the City's Natural Areas
Department (see table below). The payment in lieu is due prior to issuance of
the DCP, and the fee and payment mechanism is required to be recorded in the
Development Agreement. Note that mitigation requirements may be reduced if
9
more humane forms of fumigation are used (e.g., carbon monoxide or
CO/PERC). Currently, the product planned to be used (Fumitoxin) does not
meet the 'more humane' specification since it is aluminum phosphide-based.
Cost/acre Acres Total Fee
No CO/PERC $1,637.00 2.84 $4,649.08
Using CO/PERC $1,337.00 $3,797.08
DCI Response: Please see attached letter by Animal & Pest Control
Specialist for site assessment and mitigation plans.
Comment Number: 3
09/04/2020: FOR HEARING:
Please indicate that luminaire type T-15 is fully shielded.
RE: Confirmed luminaire type T-15 is fully shielded.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Nils Saha, , nsaha@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 13
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Thank you for adding the street trees along the frontage road. On the south side
of the site, the trees are spaced <60’ apart. Is it possible to tighten the spacing
closer to 40’ along this stretch?
Canopy shade trees should be planted at 30-40’ spacing in the center of the
parkway (LUC 3.2.1 (D2)).
This would require a couple of additional trees/grates. RMS Response: Additional tree grates have
been added at 40’ o.c.
Comment Number: 14
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Of the two details provided for tree planting in grate, detail A is preferable.
Wires, stakes etc. should be removable and be removed one-two years after
tree planting. Please adjust the detail for the tree grate in front of the building. RMS Response: Detail B
has been updated to match Detail A.
Comment Number: 15
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Sensation boxelders require extensive structural pruning especially early on.
These may not be the most suitable species for tree grates along the frontage
road. Please substitute with another species. RMS Response: Tree species has been updated to
catalpas.
Comment Number: 16
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Please see redlines for additional comments about tree placement and
tree/utility separation. RMS Response: Dimensions have been added to the plans. Tree grate in
plaza will remain at 4’ square for pathway. Trees have been adjusted to provide as much as room
from existing trees as possible due to the utility easement constraint.
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
10
Topic: General
Comment Number: 11
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
FIRE HYDRANT - Site prep, grading, and foundation work may proceed at any
time; however, a functioning fire hydrant is required before vertical construction
can proceed. I've made this comment previously but the plans remain vague by
indicating, "Proposed fire hydrant by others as part of Frontage Road utility
work". Be aware that vertical construction will not be permitted until a hydrant is installed.
DCI Response: Noted, proposed fire hydrant will be installed prior to vertical construction.
Comment Number: 12
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
FIRE LANE SIGNAGE - Please add LCUASS detail #1418 to plan set. DCI Response: Noted, detail
#1418 will be added on Final Plan
Comment Number: 13
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
The fire apparatus template noted on the Fire Access Plan is out of date.
Please refer to the updated template provided with the Redlines. DCI Response: revised template.
Comment Number: 14
09/08/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION - Please indicate the FDC location on the Utility Plan.
DCI Response: added FDC location to Utility Plan
Comment Number: 15
09/09/2020: FOR FINAL PLAN:
EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT - Please show the limits of the fire lane
(EAE) on sheets 6-9 and 11 of the Utility Plans and on the overall Site Plan.
DCI Response: for Final Plan, the limits of the fire lane will be shown.
Department: Building Services
Contact: Katy Hand, , khand@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1
01/21/2020: INFORMATIONAL:
Please visit our website for a list of current adopted building codes and local
amendments for building permit submittal:
https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes.php DCI Response: Noted
Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 2
01/21/2020: BUILDING PERMIT:
A passing building air tightness test is required to be submitted prior to occupancy.
DCI Response: Noted
Department: Environmental Services
11
Contact: Linda Hardin, , lhardin@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3
03/31/2020: INFORMATIONAL:
A Construction Waste Management Plan (CWMP) will be required with the
application for building permit. A Final CWMP will be required to be submitted
and approved when the project is completed. Refer to:
https://www.fcgov.com/recycling/constructiondebris . Contact Linda Hardin,
lhardin@fcgov.com, or 970-416-2701 with questions. DCI Response: Noted
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/03/2020: FOR INFORMATION:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.
DCI Response: Noted
Department: Larimer County
Contact: Jenn Cram, cramjl@larimer.co.us
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/01/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
Traffic will mostly be generated by I-25 and localized to the station. All on CDOT
or City roads, no impacts to County Roads anticipated. DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 2
09/01/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
The spillway inundation area from Fossil Lake should be considered. If it
impacts this parcel, may want to consider when putting in a critical facility like a gas station.
DCI Response: Noted
Department: Colorado Department of Transportation
Contact: Tim Bilobran, timothy.bilobran@state.co.us
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
Access permits for the frontage road with auxiliary lanes will be required. DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 2
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
You may need to look at modifying the drainage swale in the area as well. DCI Response: Noted
Comment Number: 3
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
Coordinating the development with the I-25 team as well. DCI Response: Noted
12
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
02/12/2020: BUILDING PERMIT:
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 DCI Response: Noted
Department: Town of Windsor Planning
Contact: Sandra Mezzetti, 970-674-2430, smezzetti@winsorgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
09/08/2020: INFORMATION:
Windsor is not opposed to reduced I-25 buffer given site context/topography and increased
Planting density. DCI Response: Noted
September 25, 2020
Maverik
185 S. State Street
Suite 800
Salt Lake City, CO 84111
Cell: 330.554.0967
Cassie.Younger@maverik.com
Re: Prairie Dog Proposal in 392 & I25 Frontage Road, Fort Collins
Thank you for your interest in our services. Animal and Pest Control Specialist provides a service of
removing nuisance wildlife from commercial and residential properties. We are licensed by the Colorado
Division of Wildlife and the Colorado Department of Agriculture. We have over 20 years of experience
diagnosing and presenting long-term solutions for your wildlife and general pest problems. Our staff is
professional and courteous to your needs.
APCS visited the site. I estimated up to 100 holes.
We are going to use the PERC machine, which is pressurized carbon monoxide (CO), as the method for
removal. An engine creates the CO, pumps into a tank, and then is delivered into a burrow through a
hose. The hose is buried with dirt to seal and make sure CO fills the burrow.
• We plan to do the treatments after November 1
st
, 2020 and complete before March 15
th
, 2021.
• We maintain records of quantity of burrows treated.
• Retreat records will show the effectiveness of the treatment.
• Silt fence installation will prevent migration of other colonies moving into treated area
Other Considerations:
• Treatment scheduled for fall or winter, temperature is a consideration for day of work (must be
45 degrees for the PERC to work properly)
If you have any questions, please call.
Don Scadden
Operations Manager
Animal & Pest Control Specialist, Inc.
3800 E. 64
th
Ave, Commerce City, CO 80022 - Phone 303-987-0842 Fax 303-431-4968