Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVERNS CUSTOM COUNTERTOPS 690 CAIRNES DRIVE - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2008-06-11Page 1 of 3 Sheri Langenberger - Re: Vern's Custom Countertop Site Plan From: Sheri Langenberger To: Matthew Johnson Date: Monday, June 25, 2007 1:02:52 PM Subject: Re: Vern's Custom Countertop Site Plan Matt Thanks for the info I am not as concerned about how the landscape traffic will be split if the other two lots need to be residential. So I agree it would be good just to have them provide some sort of documentation to show the difference and what they are expecting. I will let you all figure out if there are 2 or 3 lots. I just noticed that the plans showed three and the county assessor documents only show two. More than likely the drainage reports went to stormwater. I can get a copy from them if I need it. If they don't have one we will let you know and get a copy from you. Thanks Sheri >>> "Matthew Johnson" <mjohnson@larimer.org> 06/25/07 12:46 PM >>> Sheri - On the # of lots, if in fact there are 3 lots which conflicts with the county's parcel map, only the northern most lot can be commercial based on zoning. Matt Lafferty recalls seeing documentation showing 3 lots. But in any event, the north lot is where the countertop business will be. The other 2 could have residential (1 home each) or annex into the city and develop accordingly. Supposedly, the countertop site will generate less trips than the old landscaping business and with only one house possible on the middle property (if the property lines are adjusted without creating a new lot), my thought is that they are not unfairly using up the existing traffic numbers to get out of improvements. But I haven't seen any traffic info myself yet on this either. Matt Lafferty had 1 extra drainage report and plan if you would like to review it. He thought 7 copies were sent to the city, but maybe stormwater got them??? Feel free to let me know though. I haven't been out to this site yet, but I am planning on verifying the existing drainage patterns. Their current plan is to decrease total site runoff, so the county typically has a difficult time requiring drainage improvements in cases like this. If the city requires curb/gutter/sidewalk along Cairnes, then I agree that runoff should not flow over the access approach and into the street. I will make sure the final plans have city signature blocks and will check on the sight distance when I visit the site Thanks, Matt >>> "Sheri Langenberger" <slangenberger@fcgov.com> 06/25/2007 11:09 AM >>> Matt It does look like both streets are within the City limits. All I received was a site plan, so my comments will be based on what I see on that plan and the county aerial photo. file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\swamhoff\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 9/10/2007 Sheri Langenberger- Verns Page 1 From: Sheri Langenberger To: jim@loonanengineering com Date: Thursday, December 20. 2007 2,35:31 PM Subject: Verns Jim Here are my comments - I was waiting on any comments that Basil might have before forwarding these on, but I do not know where he is in his review and I wanted to get these out to you. The northern driveway If you are going to install a swale to carry the water so it does not occur against the pavement that is great, but a concrete pan, curb or something needs to be extended south of this northern driveway so that there is protection from undermining the driveway cut and the corner doesn't become a muddy mess as vehicles drive over it. The typical street section on sheets 8 and 9 please add in connector - it is considered a Residential Connector Local Street. Section 13+44.76 This section does not show the swale that you are planning to carry the drainage flows. Please make sure this section reflects what is intended to be built regarding the grading and swale to the east of the pavement edge. Please let me know if you have any questions I will be in the office tomorrow and Monday, but then will be out the office from Dec 25 until Jan 2. Sheri CC: Basil Harridan, Matthew Johnson From: "Matthew Johnson" <mjohnson@larimer.org> To: "Sheri Langenberger" <slan enber er fc ov.com>, < 9 g @ 9 jim@loonanengineering.com> Date: Monday, January 14, 20084:05:46 PM Subject: Re: Verns Jim and Sheri, I've attached my review comments below for your use. Please let me know if there are any questions. Thanks, mattj 498-5724 >>> "Sheri Langenberger" <slangenberger@fcgov.com> 01/11/2008 3:54 PM >>> Jim I wanted to forward comments that I have received from Basil His comments are Sheet 3A * Grass lined swale A how far south does section A extend to? * Table labeled Predeveloped should be labeled Pre -Redevelopment since it is not really reflective of the situation before the last land use. * Add City signature block to this sheet and all others that stormwater will be signing. * Please provide a cross section for the swale along the east side of the new building (that has the concrete pan in it). * Add a note stating that No grading shall occur on neighboring properties. * Provide a x-section for the shallow swale that you are now going to be providing along Cairnes Dr. As a recap these are what my comments were that I had sent you before Christmas: * The northern driveway. If you are going to install a swale to carry the water so it does not occur against the pavement that is great, but a concrete pan, curb or something needs to be extended south of this northern driveway so that there is protection from undermining the driveway cut and the corner doesn't become a muddy mess as vehicles drive over it. * The typical street section on sheets 8 and 9 please add in connector - it is considered a Residential Connector Local Street. * Section 13+44.76 This section does not show the Swale that you are planning to carry the drainage flows. Please make sure this section reflects what is intended to be built regarding the grading and swale to the east of the pavement edge. I also have Basil's redlined plans if you would like to pick those up. Sheri ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970)498-5700 FAX (970) 498-7986 MEMORANDUM TO: Matt Lafferty, Latimer County Planning Department FROM: Matt Johnson, Development Review Services DATE: January 15, 2008 SUBJECT: Vern's Custom Countertops Site Plan - P Review Project Description/Background- This is a site plan review for a new 4,900 square foot building and conversion of an existing residential building to a commercial/sales and assembly use for countertops. The property is located on the southeast corner of Cairnes Drive and Countryside Drive, approximately 500 feet south of the State Highway 14 and Timberline Road intersection. It should be noted that the portions of Caimes Drive and the majority of Countryside Drive that this proposal is adjacent to are within the City of Fort Collins. The project site lies within the City of Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA) and will therefore need to comply with the requirements contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Latimer County and the City of Fort Collins. Review Criteria: The materials submitted need to provide adequate information to accurately assess the drainage and transportation aspects for the site and how these aspects may impact the surrounding area. Latimer County Engineering Department development review staff members have reviewed the materials that were submitted to our office under these guidelines and per the criteria found in the Latimer County Land Use Code (LCLUC), Latimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS), Latimer County Stormwater Design Standards (LCSDS), and pertinent Intergovernmental Agreements. Remaining Comments: 1. Once these remaining items listed below have been addressed and the applicable plans have been signed by the City staff members, this office recommends that the applicant coordinates the final submittal with Matt Lafferty of the County Planning Department for approval and signatures. 2. A detail for the proposed 3 foot wide concrete pans in Cairnes Drive would be beneficial. 3. For informational purposes, this office's previous comments indicated that the civil drawings need to show, call out, and detail the gate that is proposed (on the site plan) along the emergency access in accordance with the Poudre Fire Authority's requirements. Although, the civil drawings still lack this information, Staff is willing to approve the site plan with a condition that states a certificate of occupancy will not be issued until a gate is installed and meets PFA's standards. 4. The Misc. Details Plan Sheet I 1 shows the Standard Temporary Dead End Barricade Drawing 1413, but the plans do not indicate the proposed location for a barricade. It seems a temporary barricade is C:\Documents and Settings\swamhoff\Local Settings\Temp\3rd Review Comments.doc no longer necessary and the standard detail can be removed from the plans, since the sidewalk ends at the new access drives. Fees & Permits: 1. Engineering Staff would like to notify the applicant that Transportation Capital Expansion Fees (TCEFs) will be required at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with duly enacted TCEF regulations then in effect (LCLUC Section 9.5 and 9.6). This office has prepared an estimated TCEF calculation for this site plan and used a 4,900 square foot general light industrial building plus 1,392 square feet for the existing modular that is to be used for countertop showroom sales and office space as an example. A landscaping business recently occupied this site and as a result, this office can likely apply a TCEF credit totaling $8,684 for that previous use. Based on these assumptions, the total estimated TCEF for this site equals $3,768. 2. The County has adopted a Development Construction Permit (DCP) and this application will be subject to the DCP fees and associated conditions (Section 12.5 of the LCLUC). According to current regulations, Staff estimates the DCP fee for this development to be $400 ($400 per 1 lot). 3. The City of Fort Collins will need to issue the permits and inspect for any work (utility cuts, driveway installation, roadway improvements, etc) within the Cairnes Drive or Countryside Drive right-of-way. Staff Recommendation: Once the remaining items listed above have been addressed and the applicable plans have been signed by the City staff members, this office recommends that the applicant coordinates the final submittal with Matt Lafferty of the County Planning Department for County approval and signatures. Please feel free to contact me at (970) 498-5724 or e-mail me at mjohnson@Dlarimer ore if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: Kirk and Kenda Weigand, 1024 West Prospect, Fort Collins, CO 80526 Freeman Architects, Attn: John Freeman, 2026 Blue Mesa Court, Loveland, CO 80538 Loonan and Associates, Attn: Jim Loonan, 1435 North Cleveland Avenue, Loveland, CO 80538 reading file file C:\Documents and Settings\swamhoff\Local Settings\Temp\3rd Review Comments.doc Selected Issues Report (:itv pt Tart C:nllitte 5/22/2008 Date: Vern's Custom Countertops Site Plan Review SELECTION CRITERIA: Status = All ISSUES: Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Sheri Langenberger Topic: General Number:1 Created:6/25/2007 Resolved [6/25/07] Is this being platting this into 3 lots? Seem to be showing 3 lots where the county records indicate that there are just two right now. Number:2 Created:6/25/2007 Resolved [6/25/07] Please provide traffic information regarding the proposal on the north lot and the other two lots as well if they are a part of this submittal. Number:3 Created:6/25/2007 Pending -As indicated by Matt Johnson, curb and gutter should be placed along the full length of Carnies due to the increase in drainage being added to the roadway and the possible impacts it could have. [6/25/07] The development should be improving the roadways along the frontage of the property(ies) with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Number:4 Created:6/25/2007 Resolved [6/25/071 Does this property still have the solid fence up around the corner? With the fence this is a pretty blind corner. Does the proposed driveway meet the sight distance requirements the county would require? Number:5 Created:6/25/2007 Resolved [6125/071 Any drainage out to the roadways needs to be thru a curb chase and not out the driveway per Larimer County Urban Area Design Standards. Number:6 Created:6/25/2007 Resolved [6/25/07] If drainage does go out to the street ( I only have a site plan for review which doesn't provide me with grades) how does the drainage flow down the street without impacting the roadway and the properties and then transition back into the curb and gutter section (most applicable if the installation of curb and gutter is not required with this project. Number:7 Created:6/25/2007 Pending [6/25/07] Please add the City's signature block to the utility plans. The City will need to sign the plans as we will need to permit and inspect any work within the street right-of-way (utility cuts, driveway installation, and curb, gutter and sidewalk). Number:8 Created:6/25/2007 Pending [6/25/07] Are there easements in place for the drainage? Page 1 Number:9 Created:6/25/2007 Resolved [6/25/071 We may also need to sign the grading and drainage plans. Refer to City stormwater comments on this. Number:15 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Needto show the pavement patches for the driveways (both), new curb and gutter section, and the utility connection. Number:16 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Need to include the standard note regarding limits of street patching - Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to be in accordance with City street repair standards. Number:17 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11112/07] -Remove any indication as to the asphalt design for the street. That will be determined with the final soils report and pavement design when the project is ready to pave. If you feel like something needs to be on the plans — can indicate the minimum design that the City allows for that type of street, but it clearly needs to be indicated that design is only preliminary and that a final pavement design report shall be submitted prior to construction and final pavement design approved by the City prior to construction. Number:18 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Saw cuts for patching will need to be on a lane line or the center of a travel lane. Thus the narrowest patch will be a cut on the bike lane line, which would be 8 feet from the flowline. Number:19 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -When you are adding the new curb and gutter— the x-slope of the patch cannot be less than the existing x-slope. See Section 7.4.2.C. Number:20 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Should be providing sidewalk along the full frontage of the site that is adjacent to the city limits. It can transition to attached as it goes around the corner to try and avoid impacting the trees. When attached it should be 5 feet if possible. Number:21 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Where ever the sidewalk ends a type III barricade needs to be installed. Number:22 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/071 -Is this project dedicating row along the property to reach the full width of the roadway? Or are you planning on dedicating an easement to accommodate the sidewalk? Need to provide something. Number:23 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Need to provide a copy of the standard roadway section (local connector) on the plans. The x-section page would be a good place. To show what the standard section for this roadway should be and what type of roadway it is considered. Number:24 Created:11/12/2007 Pending [11/12/07] -Need to provide the following details on the plans — 701 — vertical curb Page 2 1602 — shows detached sidewalk grades 709 — sidewalk chase detail 1413 — type III barricade for end of walk 1601 — sidewalk and driveway thickness Page 3 Page 2 of 3 Are they platting this into 3 lots? They seem to be showing 3 lots where the county records indicate that there are just two right now. If they are making this into 3 lots do they need to address the traffic changes and generation that will be for all three of these parcels? It maybe that the north lot traffic generation will be less than the landscape business, but what about the middle lot - it was part of the landscape business as well. When it wants to develop will it then be considered all new traffic trips? It doesn't seem fair that the north lot gets to use all the existing trip numbers to justify no change and as such get out of improvements. What are your thoughts on this and how do you work this? Overall - yes we would like to see them improve the frontage along this lot. Primarily would like to see them install the sidewalk along the frontage of the property (along Countryside and then south on Cairnes Drive to the Driveway). When the other two lots change use or develop they should improve their frontage then. Does this property still have the solid fence up around the corner? With the fence this is a pretty blind corner and although they have moved the driveway as far south on their lot and partially onto the next lot it may still have pretty poor visibility. Does it meet the sight distance requirements the county would require? I don't have a grading plan, but you indicated that they are planning on taking the drainage out to the roadway and into an inlet. First comment on this - they can not take the drainage out the driveway to the street. They should be installing a curb chase to get it out to the street. Second comment How is the drainage flowing down the street without impacting the roadway and the properties out there without curb and gutter on the street. How does the flow transition from swale into the curb and gutter (I am assuming that any inlet is in the curb and gutter section of the roadways). The City will need to sign the plans as we will need to permit and inspect any work within the street right-of-way (utility cuts, driveway installation, and hopefully curb, gutter and sidewalk). Because of this we probably do have a bit of leverage regarding the improvements. We may also need to sign the grading and drainage plans since the drainage will be Flowing thru the City Natural Area. I believe that the drainage easements across the natural area were just granted to the small housing development to the south of this project that was developed in the City, so there maybe an issue with this developments water flowing across easements that are owned by the other development. I have copied Glen on this as he may have some info on that and can provide better comments on the drainage issues. Hope this helps. I have also provided an electronic copy of the comments I have written up that will go in the letter Let me know your thoughts. Sheri Sheri Langenberger Development Review Manager City of Fort Collins, Engineering Dept 970-221-6605 >>> "Matthew Inhnsnn" <minhncnn nn inrimor nrn� nf177/n7 v•ci DM --- Hi Sheri, I am reviewing this site plan which is adjacent to Cairnes Drive and Countryside Drive (southeast of the Mulberry/Timberline intersection). It looks like Cairnes Drive and Countryside are both within city limits as well. This site used to be a landscaping business, but now the owner is removing the greenhouses and building a 4900 SF building to manufacture countertops. The office will be in the existing residential building. Traffic info for the new countertop business was not included in the submittal. After talking with Jim Loonan, it sounds like the trips would be less than the previous landscape business though. He said customers rarely visit and do not file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\swamhoff\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW)00002.HTM 9/10/2007 Page 3 of 3 come to "kick tires". Apparently, orders are generally received from builders/contractors, manufactured onsite, and then taken to the buyers home or wherever - if that makes sense. If that's the case then I told him he will need to submit a description of new site traffic compared to old landscaping and how it meets LCUASS 4.2.3.D TIS waiver criteria. The Drainage Report also proposes to decrease imperviousness and runoff reporting directly south to the Riverbend Condos. However, the west site basin will increase runoff slightly to Cairnes Drive. Apparently there is a sidewalk chase further south in Cairnes Drive that can handle the increase. As a result, they do not propose detention. I thought that all sounded reasonable. Having said all that, do have any comments regarding ROW dedications, adjacent half street improvements (there are none along Cairnes at least), access permits, city signature blocks on plans, etc? I suppose it is difficult to determine if they trip the warrants for 1/2 street improvements without traffic info. but maybe we say something to the effect that this requirement is pending on the requested traffic info.??? Also, the waiver criteria in LCUASS 1.9.2.0 for adjacent 1/2 street improvements can only be applied in GMAs. In this case, the road is in the city though and they will likely need a City access permit. So, is this a case where the city would have "leverage" to get the improvements? Thanks, Matt Johnson 498-5724 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\swamhoff\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW)00002.HTM 9/10/2007 Verns Custom Countertops June 25, 2007 Is this being platting this into 3 lots? Seem to be showing 3 lots where the county records indicate that there are just two right now. Please provide traffic information regarding the proposal on the north lot and the other two lots as well if they are a part of this submittal. The development should be improving the roadways along the frontage of the property(ies) with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Does this property still have the solid fence up around the corner? With the fence this is a pretty blind corner. Does the proposed driveway meet the sight distance requirements the county would require? Any drainage out to the roadways needs to be thru a curb chase and not out the driveway per Larimer County Urban Area Design Standards. If drainage does go out to the street ( I only have a site plan for review which doesn't provide me with grades) how does the drainage flow down the street without impacting the roadway and the properties and then transition back into the curb and gutter section (most applicable if the installation of curb and gutter is not required with this project. Please add the City's signature block to the utility plans. The City will need to sign the plans as we will need to permit and inspect any work within the street right-of-way (utility cuts, driveway installation, and curb, gutter and sidewalk). Are there easements in place for the drainage? We may also need to sign the grading and drainage plans. Refer to City stormwater comments on this. c SMn Lannenberger - Site Plan Review Comments doc — — — Page-1 I, LARIMER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COUNTY Post Office Box 1190 _ Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 i 0 00 COMMITTED i0 EXCELLENCE FAX (970) . 98-7986 MEMORANDUM TO: Matt Lafferty, Larimer County Planning Department FROM: Matt Johnson, Development Review Services DATE: June 28, 2007 SUBJECT: Vern's Custom Countertops - Site Plan Review Project Description/Back round This is a site plan review for a new 4,900 square foot building and conversion of an existing residential building to a commercial/sales and assembly use for countertops. The property is located on the southeast comer of Cairnes Drive and Countryside Drive, approximately 500 feet south of the State Highway 14 and Timberline Road intersection. It should be noted that the portions of Caimes Drive and the majority of Countryside Drive that this proposal is adjacent to are within the City of Fort Collins. The project site lies within the City of Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA) and will therefore need to comply with the requirements contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Latimer County and the City of Fort Collins. Review Criteria: The materials submitted need to provide adequate information to accurately assess the drainage and transportation aspects for the site and how these aspects may impact the surrounding area. Latimer County Engineering Department development review staff members have reviewed the materials that were submitted to our office under these guidelines and per the criteria found in the Larimer County Land Use Code (LCLUC), Latimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS), Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards (LCSDS), and pertinent Intergovernmental Agreements. Site Improvement Comments: 1. The plans indicate a new location for the south property line - "new property line after lot lines adjust". The applicant should be aware that they will need to coordinate the lot line adjustment with the County Planning office. The process and application to adjust the lot line will be separate from this current site plan application. 2. With the next submittal, a description comparing the new site traffic to the traffic generated by the previous landscaping business is needed. This should include daily trip generation volumes, 4 of employees, customers, deliveries, etc. The traffic information needs to also describe if this site's use meets the LCUASS Section 4.2.3.1) - TIS waiver criteria. 3. The City of Fort Collins has commented on this proposal as the adjacent streets are within City limits. As a result, the City will require this development to improve the road along the property H:\DEVREV\PLANCHK\Projects\Site Plans\Vern's Custom Countertops SP1Site Plan Review Comments.doc Sheri Lawgenberger - Site Plan Review Comments.doc -- -- - Page 2 frontage with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The new gutter flowline should align with the existing Cairnes Drive flowlines beyond this project's limits. 4. There does not appear to be adequate space for emergency vehicles to maneuver and/or turn around in the parking area. Therefore, with the next submittal, written documentation is needed from the Poudre Fire Authority which confirms that the building and internal parking lot layout is adequate for their purposes. 5. LCUASS Figure 7-16 requires 210 feet of available sight distance for accesses onto public roads. Based on a site visit conducted by this office, it appears that the fence, trees, and home obstruct the required sight distance to the north for the proposed access location. Also, County records show that there is one owner for each of the properties between the Riverbend Condos and this site. In effort to consolidate access points as well as maximizing sight distance, this office recommends that a shared access and easement be created for these properties. Otherwise, sight distance should be maximized for this project by shifting the new access as far south as possible within this property's boundaries. 6. The LCLUC Section 8.6.3 provides the following parking space guidelines for wholesale commercial uses as I space per every 200 square feet of building office area and 1 space per every 350 square feet of gross floor area or 1 space for every 2 employees of manufacturing activities. These are guidelines and not requirements, but this office requests documentation describing why the proposed 8 spaces will be adequate for this site since the LCLUC parking guidelines recommend nearly 21 spaces. 7. Based on a site visit, it does not appear that drainage from the east site basin can actually flow to the existing inlet in the Riverbend Condos cul-de-sac. It appears small ponding occurs throughout the site and a fence along the Riverbend Condos boundary blocks flows to the existing inlet as well. Although this project proposes to decrease imperviousness and peak runoff, site plans are still required to demonstrate that legally and physically adequate paths of flow exist for downstream conveyances (LCLUC Section 8.1.3). If drainage from the new building will eventually flow to the existing inlet in the Condos cul-de-sac, then the Drainage Report should demonstrate that the inlet and system was sized for these offsite flows and that there is an easement in place to accept this runoff across the properties and into the inlet. Another option that would require City approval would be to redirect all site flows into Cairnes Drive and into the existing chase to the south. 8. Horizontal control information such as line and curve information and northings/eastings should be provided on the plans for construction staking purposes. The control information is needed for all new site improvements including, but not limited to curbs, edges of pavement, concrete pans, PCRs, utility structures, etc. 9. The site plan drawing contains information that will be useful during construction of the improvements (dimensions and handicap sign/ramp details) and should therefore be included in the plan set. However, it should be confirmed that the site plan is consistent with the civil drawings. The design engineer will ultimately certify that the site was built to plan, so this office recommends the engineer confirms that the site plan information corresponds with the rest of the civil plans. 10, The construction plans should provide a recommended pavement section for the new paved parking area. The LCLUC Section 8.6.3.0 requires parking areas within GMAs to be paved with asphalt or concrete. Also, the site plan appears to show a curb around the parking lot, but the civil drawings seem to only show edge of pavement. The plans should be consistent and standard details will be needed for any curb and gutter. 11. The plans should provide recommendations for subgrade preparation underneath the new pavement in the parking/drive areas. For example, a note could state the depth of scarification, any moisture control, and any recompaction specifications, etc. 12. The proposed alignment for the ductile iron storm pipe runs through a bush or tree. Therefore, verification is needed that the actual location of the bush will not interfere with the new pipe. 13. Plan Sheet 2A calls out the existing gravel areas to be removed. As a result, the plans should identify what type of material and/or seeding/vegetation/landscaping is to replace the gravel areas. H:\DEVREV\PLANCHK\Projects\Site Plans\Vern's Custom Countertops SP\Site Plan Review Comments.doc ShLri-Langenberger - Site Plan Review Comments doc —_ Page 3 14. All General Notes and Construction Notes for Latimer County that are applicable to this project need to be provided on the civil plans. These notes can be found in Appendix E of the LCUASS and should replace the notes currently shown on Sheets 1 and 2 of the plans. Also, General Note 18 on Sheet I refers to a variance that does not seem applicable to this project. 15. City signature blocks are needed on any plans which show impacts to City right-of-way. 16. Any applicable LCUASS Appendix A Standard Drawings should be provided in the plans. For example, a drive approach detail will be needed in accordance with the City's recommendations as the access will be taken from their right-of-way. Fees & Permits: I. After a written description of this site's anticipated traffic generation is received, Engineering Staff would like to notify the applicant that Transportation Capital Expansion Fees (TCEFs) may be required at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with duly enacted TCEF regulations then in effect (LCLUC Section 9.5 and 9.6). If the applicant would like to have an estimate computed, please contact Paula Gamble with this office at 970-498-5726. 2. The County has adopted a Development Construction Permit (DCP) and this application will be subject to the DCP fees and associated conditions (Section 12.5 of the LCLUC). According to current regulations, Staff estimates the DCP fee for this development to be $400 ($400 per 1 lot). 3. The City of Fort Collins will need to issue the permits and inspect for any work (utility cuts, driveway installation, etc.) within the Cannes Drive or Countryside Drive right-of-way. Staff Recommendation: I. The Larimer County Engineering Department can not recommend approval of this proposal until the comments stated above have been addressed and our department has reviewed and approved the additional information. 2. In addition, the applicant shall provide written responses to the above comments on the next submittal. 3. The applicant should be aware that our department has based the comments on the submitted information and once the additional information has been submitted, we may have additional comments. Please feel free to contact me at (970) 498-5724 or e-mail me at miohnson!ailarimer org if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: Kirk Weigand, 1024 West Prospect, Fort Collins, CO 80526 Freeman Architects, Attn: John Freeman, 2026 Blue Mesa Court, Loveland, CO 80538 Loonan and Associates, Attn: Jim Loonan, 1435 North Cleveland Avenue, Loveland, CO 80538 reading file file H:\DEVREV\PLANCHK\Projects\Site Plans\Vern's Custom Countertops SP\Site Plan Review Comments.doc R ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-5700 FAX (970)498-7986 MEMORANDUM TO: Matt Lafferty, Larimer County Planning Department FROM: Matt Johnson, Development Review Services DATE: October 19, 2007 SUBJECT: Vern's Custom Countertops Site Plan - 2id Review Project Description/Background- This is a site plan review for a new 4,900 square foot building and conversion of an existing residential building to a commercial/sales and assembly use for countertops. The property is located on the southeast corner of Cairnes Drive and Countryside Drive, approximately 500 feet south of the State Highway 14 and Timberline Road intersection. It should be noted that the portions of Cairnes Drive and the majority of Countryside Drive that this proposal is adjacent to are within the City of Fort Collins. The project site lies within the City of Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA) and will therefore need to comply with the requirements contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. Review Criteria: The materials submitted need to provide adequate information to accurately assess the drainage and transportation aspects for the site and how these aspects may impact the surrounding area. Larimer County Engineering Department development review staff members have reviewed the materials that were submitted to our office under these guidelines and per the criteria found in the Larimer County Land Use Code (LCLUC), Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS), Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards (LCSDS), and pertinent Intergovernmental Agreements. Site Improvement Comments: I. The traffic information included in this submittal appears to meet the LCUASS Section 4.2.3.D — Traffic Impact Study waiver criteria. As a result, a TIS will not be required for this site plan. 2. The proposed Cairnes Drive access is located on another property to the south. As a result, the south property line must be adjusted by the time the site plan application is approved so that the access drive is entirely within this site or an access easement will be required with the next submittal. 3. This office will require the City's signatures on all applicable plan sheets prior to approving the site plan. 4. City acceptance of the Drainage Plan is required since this proposal nearly doubles the contributing drainage basin area to Cairnes Drive compared to the area which currently reports to Cairnes Drive. If the City accepts the proposed Drainage Plan, then it seems that a conveyance element such as curb and gutter should be extended further south to allow this site's drainage to adequately flow to the C C:\Documents and Settings\swamhof l-oeal Settings\1'emp\2nd Review Comments.doc existing chase without undermining the existing pavement in Cairnes Drive. The applicant should coordinate this issue with the City and provide a response to this office with the next submittal. 5. The Larimer County signature block can be removed from the plan sheets as the Planning office will manually stamp the plans with a signature block for both departments' signatures. This comment applies only to construction plan sets for County Site Plan applications. Staff apologizes for any inconvenience this may have caused. 6. The Demolition Plan needs to show and call out the removal of any existing features, landscaping, or fencing necessary to obtain adequate sight distance to the north along Cairnes Drive. 7. The civil drawings need to show, call out, and detail the gate that is proposed along the emergency access in accordance with the Poudre Fire Authority's requirements. Also, the "Do not enter" sign should also include a "No parking — Fire Lane" sign per LCUASS Standard Drawing 1418. 8. Detail drawings are needed for the 2 foot curb cuts, 12 inch sidewalk chase, swale, wattle filter, and 18 inch concrete pan. The design engineer should confirm with the City to determine if they will require a temporary sidewalk barricade at the north end of the new Cairnes Drive sidewalk. Standard �V LCUASS details should be used for the sidewalk chase (Drawing 709) and sidewalk barricade (Drawing 1413). 9. LCUASS standard details are needed for the different types of curb and gutter that are proposed with this site. The plans should call out the type of curb and gutter that will be used in the different locations (spill vs. catch gutter, I foot vs. 2 foot gutter, etc.). 10. Spot elevations do not need to be shown on the Erosion Control Plan and can be removed for clarity. Fees & Permits: 1. Engineering Staff would like to notify the applicant that Transportation Capital Expansion Fees (TCEFs) will most likely be required at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with duly enacted TCEF regulations then in effect (LCLUC Section 9.5 and 9.6). This office has prepared an estimated TCEF calculation for this site plan and used a 4,900 square foot general light industrial building plus 1,392 square feet for the existing modular that is to be used for countertop showroom sales and office space as an example. Based on these assumptions, the total estimated TCEF for the site equals $12.452. This office is also aware that the site was previously used as a landscaping business. However, TCEF credits can only be given for previous uses that were considered legal uses and were still in operation within 1 year of the new site plan proposal. Therefore, more documentation will be needed for this office to consider applying TCEF credits. 2. The County has adopted a Development Construction Permit (DCP) and this application will be subject to the DCP fees and associated conditions (Section 12.5 of the LCLUC). According to current regulations, Staff estimates the DCP fee for this development to be $400 ($400 per I lot). 3. The City of Fort Collins will need to issue the permits and inspect for any work (utility cuts, driveway installation, roadway improvements, etc) within the Cairnes Drive or Countryside Drive right-of-way. Staff Recommendation: The Larimer County Engineering Department can not recommend approval of this proposal until the comments stated above have been addressed and our department has reviewed and approved the additional information. The applicant should be aware that our department has based the comments on the submitted information and once the additional information has been submitted, we may have additional comments. Please feel free to contact me at (970) 498-5724 or e-mail me at miohnsonnlarinier.org if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: Kirk Weigand, 1024 West Prospect, Fort Collins, CO 80526 Freeman Architects, Attn: John Freeman, 2026 Blue Mesa Court, Loveland, CO 80538 Loonan and Associates, Attn: Jim Loonan, 1435 North Cleveland Avenue, Loveland, CO 80538 reading file & file C:ADocuments and Settings\swamhofflLocal Settings\TempA2nd Review Comments.doc