HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLOCK 23 MORNINGSTAR - FDP200027 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSPage 1 of 11
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 28, 2020
Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Block 23-Morningstar, PDP200006, Round Number 3
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Block 23-Morningstar. If you have questions about any
comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your
Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via phone at 970-221-6695 or via email at
tsullivan@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Todd Sullivan, 970-221-6695, tsullivan@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
I will be the Development Review Coordinator working with you on this project
and be your primary point of contact throughout the development review and
permitting process.
If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the project reviewers,
or need assistance throughout the process, please let me know and I can assist
you and your team.
Please include me in all email correspondence with other reviewers and keep
me informed of any phone conversations. Thank you!
RESPONSE: Acknowledge, thank you
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
09/28/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
As part of your resubmittal you will respond to the comments provided in this
letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this
document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a
different font color.
Page 2 of 11
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. Please avoid using acknowledged, noted, or other non-descriptive
replies.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged, thank you
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 09/21/2020
09/21/2020:
FOR HEARING -- please contact engineering for next steps.
Rail easement along Mason:
Parking garage along Mason abuts the rail easement. I think this will be an
issue because we may need an LOI from the RR allowing construction access
in the easement. I’m not sure if this can be deferred to Final. I think the risk is
that the RR sues the City because the applicant relied on the City’s decision to
proceed forward with a design that can’t be constructed without using the
easement. You may want to move the garage back away from the easement.
RESPONSE: Applicant is working closely with Claire Havelda, Brad Buckman, Spencer Smith,
and Jason Holland on railroad issues. Applicant has previously provided the City-requested
‘LOI’ from BNSF. At the City’s request, Applicant is pursuing a formal agreement with BNSF.
The next step is in the City’s court. The City is scheduling an on-site meeting with BNSF and
the PUC. At this meeting, we’ll review all layout, easement, and encroachment issues.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 09/21/2020
FOR HEARING
09/21/2020: Garage Cherry doorway – add a canopy/sheltering element over
the street door. This is required or can be a condition of approval.
RESPONSE: Please see added detail D4 on A1 showing the entry canopy above the pedestrian
access to the garage off Cherry Street.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 09/21/2020
FOR HEARING
09/21/2020: For the garage parking – the four HC spaces are not shown in the
2nd level plan.
RESPONSE: This was a graphic error which has been corrected please see updated plan detail
A1 on sheet A2.
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 09/21/2020
FOR HEARING
09/21/2020: See redlines for the tabulations and bike parking locations.
Please indicate on the plans information for the LTC and IL units. Please
provide an alternative compliance letter if requested.
Page 3 of 11
RESPONSE: Bike parking data has been updated.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 09/21/2020
FOR HEARING
09/21/2020: Building Design Comments:
Garage panels
a) We’re not yet comfortable with the screen panel design for the parking
garage. This is a prominent design component of the elevations and it’s not
clear whether the design is supportable.
RESPONSE: Please see added details and detailed response to b and C.
b) We’re looking for more project specific details shown for the panels, and a
clearer commitment to the panel design detail shown. A clearer indication of the
panel design detail is needed, or if there are multiple panels we need details for
all of the proposed panels. We’d suggest removing the precedent images (C1
and C2) because these don’t provide enough information. Design images are
fine, but not precedent images.
RESPONSE: Please see added detail D1 on sheet A2 showing the panel design and detail. Please note
images C1 and C2 have been removed from sheet A12.
c) Detail view B4 is a concern. It doesn’t show enough context, and the design
proposed for the panel isn’t clear. A4 is fine, but we also suggest more
elevation perspective views of the panels. This can be from Maple or Cherry --
we need to see views that show more of the panels and the overall view of the
design in locations where the more of the panels will be seen.
RESPONSE: Detail B4 has been revised to show more context and a clearer indication of the panel
design. Please see added details C4 and D4 on A1 which give an overview of the garage from more
angles.
Balcony panels
d) Please decide which one of these you’re going with. B3 looks to be more
enhanced than the other images. The framing details and panel shown with all of
the detail examples is acceptable, with the exception of the A5 panel, which
seems to be the least desirable panel design because of the angled grid
pattern.
RESPONSE: Please note all balcony images have been removed from sheet A12 except for B3 which
represents the design intent.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 09/21/2020
FOR HEARING
09/21/2020: Trash/Recycling:
The plan information provided remains incomplete:
a) The building plans don’t indicate compliance information for the two rooms
on the ground level and the upper story rooms. Comment responses are helpful
but do not provide design information on the plans.
RESPONSE: Please see added details and more specific responses to b-g
b) No labeling is provided for the containers on the ground level. Development
Page 4 of 11
plans must include labeled drawings. Provide labeling for containers in each
room to demonstrate compliance.
RESPONSE: Please see added enlarged plan details A1 and A2 on sheet A3 showing all containers
labels.
c) The rooms also don’t show how compostable and waste cooking oil needs
of the proposed use and future uses will be provided.
RESPONSE: Please see added enlarged plan details A1 and A2 on sheet A3 for the location of waste
cooking oil storage and compost containers.
d) Provide dimensions inside the rooms, along with showing the containers, so
that it’s clear whether there is sufficient room inside each room for residents
and service providers to maneuver. You will likely need to provide enlarged plan
details of each room to show this. Each container must be able to be removed
from the room independently. Residents must be able to access each container.
RESPONSE: Please see added enlarged plan details A1, A2, and A3 on sheet A3 showing detailed
dimensions and clearances for all containers, door openings, and maneuvering clearances.
e) The upper stories must show the containers, as well as the labelling that
indicates how many are provided for recycling vs. trash. The containers must be
shown, so that it’s clear that all of the containers can be accessed, and not just
some of the containers.
RESPONSE: Please see added enlarged plan detail A3 on sheet A3 showing detailed dimensions and
clearances for all containers, door openings, and maneuvering clearances.
f) All rooms must be labelled trash/recycling, and not just trash. Proposed
recycling capacity must be at least fifty (50) percent of the proposed trash
capacity and not the minimum 30% volume mentioned in the comments and
plans. This needs to be clearly indicated for each room.
RESPONSE: Please see added enlarged plan details A1, A2, and A3 on sheet A3 showing all room labels
revised and percentage of recycling to trash at all rooms.
g) The new ground level room to the south does not appear to have exterior
doors that are large enough. Also, there is no interior access to the room. The
room will likely need to be larger to accommodate this.
RESPONSE: Please see added enlarged plan detail A3 showing clear dimensions for the exterior doors
showing adequate clearance for the containers in the room. With the future retail tenants and interior
subdivision of the retail space unknown at this time an interior access door is not desired, because it could
conflict with the future uses. All retail tenants and waste collection services will access this room by the
double swing doors on the alley.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/11/2020
06/11/2020: FOR HEARING
Is there a vehicular pullout on College? It is not clear whether that is the case, or
if so, what it is for. We'll need to coordinate review and approval with Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) if there's a pullout proposed.
RESPONSE: This project is proposing a vehicular pullout for emergency vehicles only. CDOT has reviewed
and will not require permits as long as the city identifies it for emergency use. The pullout will be properly
Page 5 of 11
marked as no parking/fire lane
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
06/16/2020: FOR INFORMATION
Note that high-rise construction in the downtown area is challenging. We'll need
to work with you early in the process to consider construction impacts, and how
to minimize adjacent street / sidewalk closures.
RESPONSE: Understood. We will need to set up a meeting to discuss any issues that need to consider
with construction.
Contact: Steve Gilchrist, 970-224-6175, sgilchrist@fcgov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/24/2020
08/24/2020: The sign for the northbound traffic exiting the alley needs to be
changed from the W1-6 Arrow sign to a R3-2 No Left Turn sign.
RESPONSE: Sign has been revised to No left Turn sign
Department: Outside Agencies
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/29/2020
08/31/2020: CDOT - Gloria Hice-Idler idler@rocksol.com
If the City identifies the pull out as an emergency use, then CDOT will not require
it be permitted. We wouldn’t want it to be used for any long-term parking.
RESPONSE: Thanks. No long-term parking will be proposed. Pull out will be emergency use only and
properly marked as No parking/Fire lane
Department: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion and Sediment Control
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-222-1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/11/2020
09/16/2020:
08/19/2020:
06/11/2020: No Erosion and Sediment Control materials needed at PDP. Will
expect to review the materials at time of first FDP submittal.
RESPONSE: Erosion Control material included in submittal
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/24/2020
08/24/2020: FOR FINAL:
Please submit all details for the LID features, including the StormTech system,
sand filter/detention vault, and rain gardens.
RESPONSE: More detail has been included in drainage report concerning the drainage features being
proposed with this project
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 09/23/2020
Page 6 of 11
09/23/2020: Stormwater is ready for a hearing.
RESPONSE: Thanks
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 08/25/2020
09/23/2020: FOR HEARING:
Where is the Fiber Optic line? Is there a Fiber Line near here?
08/25/2020: FOR HEARING:
The 3-inch water meter vault is being proposed in close proximity to a gas and
fiber optic line. The city requires 6 feet minimum separation between the vault
and other utilities. The vault and/or the utility lines may need to be relocated.
RESPONSE: There is a possible conflict with the fiber line and the proposed building and water meter. We
are still trying to get information from CenturyLink on relocating that line. It has been added back into the
plan set and portions shown as relocated until we can get confirmation from CenturyLink.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/15/2020
06/15/2020: INFORMATION:
Light and Power has electric facilities existing in the alley from Maple St to
Cherry St. There is an existing 3phase primary switch cabinet approx. 150 north
of Maple St on the east side of the alley that appears to be in conflict with the
development plans. Relocation or modification may be needed at the
developers’ expense.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/15/2020
08/24/2020: INFORMATION:
There may be overtime labor charges to relocate our existing switch cabinet in
the alley. The multifamily building to the west is currently fed from this switch
cabinet and will need to be on an outage to relocate the switch cabinet.
06/15/2020: INFORMATION:
Any existing electric infrastructure that needs to be relocated and/or removed as
part of this project will be at the expense of the developer.
RESPONSE: Understood
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/15/2020
06/15/2020: INFORMATION:
Electric fees, development fees, building site charges and any system
modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development.
Please contact me to discuss a preliminary estimate 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-investmen
t-development-fees
RESPONSE: Understood
Page 7 of 11
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 06/15/2020
06/15/2020: INFORMATION:
Please contact Tyler Siegmund with Light & Power Engineering if you have any
questions at 970.416.2772. Please reference our policies, construction
practices, development charge processes, electric service standards, and use
our fee estimator at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
RESPONSE: Thanks
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Scott Benton, , sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/24/2020
08/24/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Two of the species are not on the City's
approved plant list (http://www.fcgov.com/forestry/plant_list.pdf): Buxus
microphylla japonica and koreana (Japenese and Korean boxwood) and
Miscanthus sinensis. Please replace with approved plants.
RESPONSE: These plants have been removed from the plans.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 08/24/2020
08/24/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: On the Native Seed Mix notes, please
specify that certified weed-free straw will be used for mulch.
RESPONSE: Weed free straw will be used for native seed areas.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 08/24/2020
08/24/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please ensure on the luminaire
cutsheets that down directional and/or sharp-cutoff models are used in
accordance with LUC 3.2.4(D)(3).
RESPONSE: Fixtures with sharp cutt off models are used per this comment.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 08/24/2020
08/24/2020: GENERAL UPDATE: What is the plan to address the items
mentioned in the Phase I Assessment?
RESPONSE: A Phase 1 has been submitted with this submittal.
Department: Parks
Contact: Aaron Wagner, , aawagner@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
06/16/2020: FOR INFORMATION
There is a city owned tap with irrigation to the street trees along College.
Proposed improvements will replace existing irrigation. Please coordinate with
Parks to sever existing irrigation and take over maintenance of the
streetscaping. Please contact Jill Wuertz, (jwuertz@fcgov.com) 970-416-2062,
or Aaron Wagner (aawagner@fcgov.com), 413 S. Bryan Ave, Fort Collins, CO
80521 regarding the Parks’ Department’s interest.
RESPONSE: Understood
Department: Forestry
Contact: Nils Saha, , nsaha@fcgov.com
Page 8 of 11
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
9/25/2020: FOR FINAL
Please see additional comments pertaining to trees #9 and #11.
8/25/2020: FOR HEARING - UPDATED
Tree cutouts should aim to protect the critical root zone of existing trees and
provide adequate space for long term growth. Please see additional comments.
06/16/2020: FOR HEARING
Please see below for the minimum parkway width standards on the three
streets (LUCASS).
College Ave (four lane arterial): 10’ minimum
Cherry St (two lane collector): 7’ minimum
Maple St: since Maple St has an existing parkway with street trees, Forestry
would like to retain the current width to ensure the existing tree roots are
protected.
RESPONSE: The existing widths are maintained or expanded in some areas to that existing roots
are protected.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 08/25/2020
9/20/2020: FOR FINAL
Please provide a construction plan and work with city forestry to determine
strategies to adequately protect trees throughout the construction process.
Scheduling a meeting with forestry is recommended.
08/25/2020: FOR HEARING
It appears that the building face is approximately 10-12’ from the trunks of
existing trees on Cherry St, ~15’ on Maple St and ~20’ on College.
Please provide a construction access plan and detail how the applicant intends
to protect the large mature street trees during building construction. Forestry
wants to ensure that these trees are protected throughout the construction
process, including when the foundation is set, during any crane work and for any
scaffolding that may be installed.
RESPONSE: The landscape architect and contractor will work with the City Forestry to ensure that
Tree protection takes place.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 08/25/2020
9/24/2020: FOR FINAL
Thank you for providing the details for the tree cutouts. Will there be cutouts for
trees #9 and #11?
On the east side of both trees, the edge of the sidewalk is proposed less than 3
feet from the trunks. At the very least, the interior critical root zones of these two
trees should be protected. Please incorporate similar curved cutouts for these
two trees to provide additional space around the trunks.
08/25/2020: FOR HEARING
For the trees to be retained on College Ave and Cherry St: please provide a
detail(s) for the tree pits/planting areas that jut out, including the depth, width
and curb/wall height.
TBG RESPONSE: Site sections and the site plan illustrate specific site details.
Page 9 of 11
A detailed tree plan was also submitted previously with the PDP illustrating how trees
Were to be preserved.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 08/25/2020
9/25/2020: FOR FINAL
Please ensure these notes are placed on civil, utility and construction plans.
8/25/2020: FOR HEARING
With proposed reductions in parkway/planting space on Maple and Cherry
streets, we have some concerns about the impact to the root systems of
protected trees.
Please show the critical root zone of each tree on (LUC 3.2.1 (G.7)) on the site
plan. RESPONSE: A critical root zone has been added to the tree inventory plan.
Additionally, please add a note to the civil, utility and landscape plans that
states the following:
AN ON-SITE VISIT WITH CITY FORESTRY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE
REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING SIDEWALK.
Prior to DCP issuance, City Forestry must review and approve on-site tree
protection.
RESPONSE: Notes have been added to the utility plans
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 08/25/2020
9/25/2020: FOR FINAL
Forestry would like to review an irrigation plan and potentially schedule a site
visit prior to the installation of drip irrigation to ensure tree roots are protected.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
08/25/2020: FOR HEARING
Please ensure that drip irrigation is supplied to all existing and proposed trees
in the parkway. Trees should be on their own irrigation zone.
RESPONSE: All trees will be irrigated with drip irrigation.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 08/25/2020
9/25/2020: FOR FINAL
The canopy shade tree requirement has not been met yet. Please contact
forestry to discuss species selection.
08/25/2020: FOR HEARING
Canopy shade trees should constitute at least 50 percent of all tree plantings
(LUC 3.2.1 (D.1.c). The proposed plant list contains ~12 percent canopy shade
trees. Are there additional opportunities to incorporate shade trees at this site
and increase the total percentage?
Please see redlines for suggestions.
RESPONSE: Coniferous plantings have been reduced and deciduous trees have been added. Additional
deciduous trees are proposed for the courtyards that will raise the number of deciduous trees for the overall
site also.
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Page 10 of 11
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 08/21/2020
08/21/2020: NOT FOR HEARING
FOR FINAL APPROVAL - PARKING GARAGE
As previously stated, Fire Apparatus Access is required to within 150 feet of all
exterior portions of the ground floor perimeter. Additional access requirements
apply for buildings greater than 30 feet in height.
> Perimeter fire access can be measured from a public right-of-way (eg.
Cherry Street or alley); however, it may not be measured from an arterial road
(eg. Mason Street). Perimeter access also cannot be measured where
otherwise obstructed by inherent site constraints (eg. railroad).
> Based upon the site plan, perimeter access cannot be achieved at the
parking garage as currently proposed. In order to offset current code
deficiencies for access, a dry standpipe system shall be required in all
stairways.
> The parking garage will require a Fire Department Connection (FDC) to be
installed.
> The FDC shall be located within 100 feet of a fire hydrant.
> The parking garage is currently proposed at 3-stories and approximately 28
feet in height (excluding elevator lobby and rooftop mechanical). Should the
structure otherwise exceed 30 feet in height, the parking garage will be required
to be equipped with a fire sprinkler system.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Internal Services
Contact: Katy Hand, , khand@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
06/16/2020: INFORMATIONAL: Buildings located within 250ft of a 4-lane road,
or within 1000 ft of an active railway must provide exterior composite sound
transmission of 39 STC min.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
06/16/2020: 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
https://www.fcgov.com/building/energycode
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
06/16/2020: INFORMATIONAL: Each structure will require a separate building
permit (garage / Mixed use building)
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/16/2020
06/16/2020: If trash chutes are provided, recycle chutes must also be provided
RESPONSE: Recycle chutes are included. See Architectural set.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Page 11 of 11
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/09/2020
09/23/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at
FDP.
08/24/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at
FDP.
06/09/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.
RESPONSE: Understood. Thanks
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/09/2020
09/23/2020: FOR HEARING:
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.
08/24/2020: FOR HEARING:
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.
06/09/2020: FOR HEARING:
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: Responses have been provided on redlined pdf