Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL A-WING REPLACEMENT - FDP - FDP150013 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Please revise water line connection in Lemay Avenue per redlines. The new water line needs to connect to the 12-inch main which is located on the west side of Lemay. Response: Waterline connection has been revised to connect with the 12-inch main. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The City would prefer the existing water service that is being used for irrigation be abandoned at the main and the irrigation tap be fed from the new water line in Doctors Lane. Response: A new 2" irrigation tap has been added in Doctors Ln. The old tap will be abandoned at the main. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Will an irrigation tap be needed for the north parking lot? Response: No. The new 2" irrigation tap south of Doctor's Lane will also supply the irrigation for the north lot so that all irrigation is controlled from a single system. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Please see other minor redlines on the Utility Plan. Response: Redlines addressed. 0 Comment Number: 6 04/22/2015: No comments. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 7 04/22/2015: No plans were provided for review. Response: Lighting Plans are now submitted. Topic: Plat Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Is the Poudre Valley Hospital District and Health Services District Of Northern Larimer County the same entity? If not, a signature block will be needed for the vacation of the 24' Ingress & Egress Easement, to be signed by the Poudre Valley Hospital District. Response: The signatories on the plat are that required and confirmed by the Owners attorney. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/23/2015 04/23/2015: Please remove "and a parcel" from the sub -title. This is confusing, and reads like the parcel is being replatted. Response: The sub -title has been revised to wording agreed by City surveyor. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Please add a legal description to sheet S1. See redlines. Response. Plans have been updated. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: any final redlines for the signing and striping will be provided by Friday. Response: Redlines have been addressed and submitted via email for review before this submittal. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com Response: Acknowledged. Irrigation plans will be submitted with building permit application. Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970416-2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General 7 All stairwells shau therefore be protected and if not required now, will require roof access when the building goes up in elevation. Stairs going to the roof shall have stair treads rather than ships ladders along with exterior doors at ground level. Standpipes are required with rooftop hose connections. Please contact me with any questions. Response to this comment may be delayed until building permitting if so chosen. It does not affect the acceptance of the site design at this time. Response: Acknowledged. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Please see minor comments on the redlined plans. Response: Redlines have been corrected. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: There are text over text issues. See redlines. Response: Redlines for Civil sheets C-012 and C-014 provided have been addressed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: The lighter text & linework marked is not acceptable. It will not scan or reproduce. Please darken it up. See redlines. Response: Redlines for Civil sheets C-012 and C-014 provided have been addressed. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: All reception numbers for documents recorded by separate document must be added prior to mylars. Response: Per direction from Marc Virata on previous project, the reception number callouts have been removed from the civil plans; however, reception numbers will be added to the plat mylar sheets. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: Please tie the coordinate values shown for utilities to the project boundary. We would prefer that this be done by adding property corner values to each sheet, or showing the property corner values on the horizontal control plans and adding a note to each sheet with coordinate values. Response: A note has been added to storm plan and profile sheet referring to the horizontal control sheet for coordinate values. Coordinates are also shown on the overall utility plan sheet. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: Redlines for Civil sheets C-012 and C-014 provided have been addressed. Topic: Landscape Plans require a 2 week review response time from the utility providers once the legal description and fee is paid. It is suggested that this process get started sooner rather than later if there are timing concerns. Response: The easement vacation documents have been emailed to Marc Virata and Jeff County. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-2401, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 1 04/15/2015: Landscape plans look good - thank you. Response: Thank you. Department: Light And Power Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/15/2015 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: Proposed transformer location is not big enough for the transformer and clearance around the transformer. Transformer pad is appox.. 9' x 7.5' and the transformer must have a minimum clearance of 3' on the back and sides, with 8' of clearance in front of the doors for switching operations. Response: The transformer has been drawn to scale on the plans and provides the stated clearances. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: Electric capacity fee and building site charges will apply. System modification charges will apply where applicable. Response: Noted. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/21/2015 04/21/2015: Contact Rob Irish with Light & Power Engineering @ 970-224-6167 with questions or concerns. Response: Noted. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, iynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: STAIRWELLS The current site plan has met all fire department concerns for the proposed two-story hospital addition. General perimeter access requirements have been met and there are currently, no aerial fire apparatus access requirements at this time. However, as plans will allow the building to increase to four stories at some point in the future, the fire marshal is asking the project team to be reminded that there will be no aerial truck site accessibility when the building becomes four stories. As discussed at a planning meeting several months ago, stairwells for the two-story addition should be designed in preparation for eventually serving four stories. s Response: Please refer to the legals and exhibits, by separate document for depictions of these areas. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The median shown in Doctors Lane needs to be built to a modified detail for median curbs (the "back-to-back" curb look) with the underdrain system. Copies of two options for this detail will be provided. The proposed landscaping of the median should be verified in terms of having sufficient width for the back-to-back curb look. The 10 feet of planting area dimensioned on the civil horizontal control plan will be reduced to about 7 feet with the additional curb. The underdrain itself shown on the grading plan is depicted not in the center of the median but offset to the north, which would not be per the detail options. Response: A modified raised median detail 705a has been add to the detail sheet and noted in the plans. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The northeast corner of Lemay Avenue and the private drive entrance/Robertson Street needs to have directional access ramps installed to City/ADA standards. It's awkward to have this one area abutting the property along Lemay Avenue not have ADA/City compliant access ramps. Response: New directional ramps have been added on the northeast corner and to match existing crosswalk striping. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The right-of-way dedication for the right turn lane seems like it could be reduced in the drive approach to follow a straight line from the back of the detached sidewalk on the south side of the driveway. This would reduced the amount of the driveway that would need to be built in concrete per our standards and the note that was provided indicating concrete to the property line. Response: New directional ramps have been added on the northeast corner and to match existing crosswalk striping. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: From my perspective (though I'll defer to Martina), I don't see the need for the striping of crosswalks, with the exception of the mid -block crossing on Doctors Lane. Response: Redlines from Martina were addressed and crosswalk striping was not removed. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The horizontal control plan shows a sign at Lemay and Doctors that abuts the new sidewalk on Lemay. Signs need to be offset a minimum of 2 feet from any public street sidewalk. Response: The sign south of the intersection has been moved east to provide 2 feet clear of sidewalk. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Please show where existing right-of-way line/property boundary is south and east of the right-of-way dedications by separate document for Lemay Avenue and Doctors Lane to understand how the dedications will result in property boundary lines tying into existing. This should also be reflected in the overall exhibit in Comment #4. Response: Noted. Proposed and Existing right-of-way has been shown and called out on the construction plans. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The presumed vacation of easements by separate document will 4 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: A response to a previous comment related to this noted to "refer to the plat and legal description for the property". I believe that the plat is correct in that Poudre Valley Hospital Third Filing is "being a replat of lots 1-5, Humphrey Medical Center and a parcel located located..." However the overall project Poudre Valley Hospital, A -Wing Replacement is not just the boundary of the plat titled Poudre Valley Hospital Third Filing but comprises of the summation of both the boundary of this plat for Poudre Valley Hospital Third Filing and the boundary of the plat for Poudre Valley Hospital (I had this incorrectly identified as Lot 2 of the Poudre Valley Memorial Hospital Addition". I believe the civil plan information under the title should be revised accordingly to reflect it's not just the land now being plated, and also the site and landscape plans should be describing the legally described properties within which the Poudre Valley Hospital, A Wing Replacement comprises of. The final plan boundary the development plan and corresponding development agreement legal description would be Poudre Valley Hospital Third Filing and Poudre Valley Hospital. Response: Legal Description has been corrected, as agreed to with Jeff County and Marc Virata. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Continuing on a similar theme from the previous comment, the plans need to show the existing easements, building envelopes, and other legal definition from the plat for Poudre Valley Hospital to ascertain whether existing legal delineations are impacted by the proposal. It's apparent to me that portions of the expansion go into existing easements that would be to vacated, though the utility providers might need additional utility/drainage easements dedicated. Response: Lot 2 of the PVH Campus contains a building envelope with the rest of the site being blanket easement(s). The plat and civil plans depict the existing building envelope and any associated existing right-of-way for and within Lot 2. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: In addition to easement dedications/vacations potentially needed on the Poudre Valley Hospital what is a "Proposed Metes and Bounds Line For Building By Separate Document", and is this intended to be done via a City process? There's a City process to vacate easements by separate document, but there is no City process to modify a building envelope, short of a replat. I'm concerned with what the intentions on this might be and whether this process can actually be done. Response: The text has been revised to be 'Existing Access, Utility and Drainage Easement to be vacated by separate document. Reference to modify the building envelope has been removed. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: An overall exhibit showing the Poudre Valley Hospital property with proposed right-of-way and easement dedications and assumed easement vacations by separate document should be provided to get a better idea of how the proposed development will work with the separate document dedications/vacations. (In looking further into this however, I question why this wasn't done via a replat, especially since a plat was needed for the parking lot on the north side of Doctors Lane, which could have been approved concurrently at hearing.) K7 Comment Number: 2. Comment Originated: 04/10/2015 04/10/2015: The Lighting Plan now specifies that the S-6 fixture under the canopies will be flush mount and flat lens in compliance with Section 3.2.4. But, overall, the Lighting Plan does not provide any information about watts and lumens per fixture. Since L.E.D. lighting is relatively new for outdoor applications, and since the color tone of L.E.D. is much brighter with a higher color temperature than metal halide or high pressure sodium, Staff needs more information to ensure that the site is not excessively illuminated. The Lighting Plan should provide additional information as to the wattage and lumen output of each fixture at the specified "L.E.D. Count" instead of listing a table with multiple L.E.D. Counts. Finally, the Lighting Plan graphics for the Type S5 fixture does not show how the light source is shielded. Response: Acknowledged, refer to cut sheets provided per comments number 3 and 4. Comment Number: 3. Comment Originated: 04/10/2015 04/10/2015: Staff is not familiar with an "Exterior Surface Mounted Decorative Luminous Cube" nor how it applies to a canopy. Please provide a cut sheet for this fixture and how it is applied to a canopy. Response: Acknowledged, see attached cut sheets. Comment Number: 4. Comment Originated: 04/10/2015 04/10/2015: The graphics depicted on P3 of P3 are confusing. Please describe the views that are illustrated. Again, cut sheets would be helpful. Response: Acknowledged, see attached cut sheets. Comment Number: Comment Originated: 04/10/2015 04/10/2015: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-65679 mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: The projected flowline for the rebuilt curb return around the southeast corner of Lemay Avenue and the private drive entrance/Robertson Street shows that the access ramps would have a cross slope of 3.33% which would exceed the 2% maximum. Please adjust to have the flowline at no more than 2% in the area where the access ramps intersect. Response: Slopes at access ramps are revised to hold 2% or less across ramp. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: It also appears that the 2% maximum for the access ramps isn't being met for at least the access ramps intersecting out to the new northern driveway. Additional instances may be occurring but cannot be verified with the spot elevations provided. Response: All ramps are checked and spots added as needed to comply with 2%. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/22/2015 04/22/2015: Please ensure that LCUASS details are updated per the link: http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/GMARdStds.htm Response: LCUASS details are updated with the most current revision. Topic: General kA Fort Collins Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax tcgov. com/developmentreview April 27, 2015 Responses May 6, 2015 Angela Milewski BHA Design, Inc 1603 Oakridge Dr Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Poudre Valley Hospital A -Wing Replacement, FDP150013, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Ted Shepard, at 970-221-6343ortshepard@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: From Tim Buchanan by email: The Red Baron crabapple shown at the corner of Doctors Land and Lemay needs to be repositions 6 feet away from the water line. Response: Plans have been updated Existing trees 66, 67, 68 and 69 are listed to be removed in the Tree Mitigation Summary but on the landscape plan shown to retain. I couldn't remember if we had discussed some special classification for these but it appears they should be marked to retain. Response: These existing trees 66, 67, 68, 69 are to remain and be protected. Plans have been updated to reflect this. Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1. Comment Originated: 04/10/2015 04/10/2015: The Final Landscape Plan is now sufficiently detailed and includes effective screening of the ambulance bay from Lemay Avenue. For clarification, please specify the height of the two Bosnian Pine along Lemay. Are these six or eight feet high? Response: The two Bosinan Pines are 6' high.