Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPATEROS CREEK - FDP - FDP130034 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 -  Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 ‑ fax fcgov.com/developmentreview September 26, 2013 Craig Russell Russell Mills Studios 141 S. College Ave Ste 104 Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Pateros Creek, FDP130034, 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, Lindsay Ex, at 970‑224‑6143 or lex@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Current Planning Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970‑224‑6143, lex@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: The Land Use Code standards for ornamental trees are 1.5" caliper and not 4‑5' in height. Please update to reflect these standards. Size has been adjusted back to the 1.5” caliper. Request had been made to specify height since the trees are listed as multi-stem trees. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: The arc length on Lot 21 is still less than 50' (see Curve 16, which indicates the length is 47.34'. Please update. Arc for Lot 21 is 50.15’ as shown on site plans. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Andrew Gingerich, 970‑221‑6603, agingerich@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: CS1 ‑ the wood street cross section should not include the 7 foot parkways. Please dimension as 30 foot travel or two 15 foot travel lanes. Response: The labels for the parking have been removed. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 Update 09/27/2013: Please revise the Variance request to speak clearer that the design speed of 20 mph is requested due to the street configuration, call to discuss if needed. 09/25/2013: CS2 ‑ The variance request is being reviewed. Engineering will consult with Traffic to determine if a reduction in the design speed is acceptable. LCUASS does require that the sight distance triangle be drawn to the centerline of the roadway for local streets and needs to be reflected on the plans whether its 210 or 260. Include the variance if accepted on note 48 on this sheet. Response: The variance has been updated as requested. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: OU1 ‑ There is an existing street light at the southwest corner of the north fleet services driveway intersection with Wood Street. Please identify this location on the plans. Response: The street light has been added and labeled throughout the plans as requested. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: SS2 ‑ The notes on the sanitary sheets mention a subdrain. Is this a general note or is there a subdrain proposed with the Sanitary sewer? If a subdrain is propsoed please ensure the appropriate details are included in the detail sheets. Response: The note in question was from another project. No subdrain is proposed with this project. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: OG1 ‑ Show the proposed grading extents for tieing in grades along Wood Street and the adjacent property owners. It appears that at the north side of Wood Street there will be some cut and it is important to see how this will tie into existing grades and driveways. R esponse: Subsequent discussions with city staff along with an exhibit showing the extent of grading have resolved this issue. Grading tie-ins fall between the existing fence to the northwest and the proposed sidewalk, and work well with existing driveways and grades. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 Update 09/27/2013: The midblock crossing at the intersection of Wood and Harts Garden should be moved to the west a little more to allow better sight distance for for vehicles approaching NB to EB. For example approx, placing in the curb return of the corner.09/25/2013: G1 ‑ Please remove the midblock crossing at curve from Wood Street to Harts Garden Lane. You may keep the ramp at the trail but do not include the ramp on the south side of the road. The City does not want to promote pedestrians crossing at an uncontrolled intersection. Response: The ramp has been moved. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: G1 ‑ Provide concrete along the back of Right of way were the Harts Garden Sidewalk ties to the trail. The curve can remain in addition to this extra concrete. If this intersection were to become a "T" or 4‑way in the future we would like to have the sidewalk along the Right of Way. Response: Extensive discussions with city staff regarding the advantages of having the sidewalk along the ultimate right of way vs. the impacts to grading have occurred. The sidewalk is now shown per city staffs final determination. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: R1 ‑ Please detail out or provide additional comments as to how the proposed Curb and gutter on the east side of Wood will terminate? Rip rap? Asphalt wraps around end of gutter and curb head, etc. Response: Additional detail for this termination has been added to the intersection details. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: R1 ‑ Label Radius of flowlines along Wood Street. Response: The radii are now labeled. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: R1 ‑ There is some cut to existing grade on the west side of wood street as it heads north to Harts Garden Lane. Please verify with Forestry that this cut will not be detrimental to the Tree roots or if there is any additional tree protection notes required. Response: A site meeting was held on 10/4 to discuss the cuts and confirmed that the current design will work. Some additional coordination will be required between Forestry and the concrete contractor to ensure that impacts to the trees and roots are minimized. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: R2 and R3 ‑ Label the radius of curves along the flowlines and specifically where the flowline bumps out for the drainage pass throughs. There are some grade breaks that are larger than the allowable .4%. Let's discuss further how some breaks are due to the curb bump outs and which ones aren't. Response: The requested radii have been labeled. All radii associated with the bump outs are 5’. Additionally, discussions with city staff have clarified that grade breaks larger than 0.4% will be allowed at points where the roadway cross slope would be adversely affected if typical criteria were used. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: R4 ‑ Add some additional flow arrows the intersection details as shown on the redlines as well as some flow arrows and slopes within the cobble swales. Provide a typical cross section of the cobble swale including the sidewalk, swale, curb and asphalt. Response: The requested flow arrows have been added. Also, the requested typical section has been provided on the detail sheets. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 Update 09/27/2013: Please contact engineering to discuss more specifically about the detail design of these chases, who will maintain? Can the cobble be grouted? Cut off wall depth, etc.? 09/25/2013: D3 ‑ is it intended for the cobble swale "pass‑throughs" to be a water quality feature (infiltrate a measurable amount) or to simply pass water behind the curb? Some additional discussions will need to be had with Staff depending on the intent of the swale to determine the best detail its purpose. For example providing a cutoff wall along the back of curb adjacent to the street or using a concrete pan instead of cobble, etc. Response: Discussions with city staff have clarified that the pass throughs will be grouted cobble or a solid concrete pan, and that they are not intended to allow for infiltration. As such, cutoff walls are not proposed at this time. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: The City would like to have a preliminary engineers opinion of cost of the improvements associated with Wood Street construction, specifically the portions the applicant would like to file for reimbursement. Line items, unit, and prices would be preferred. This will help assist in the finalizing of Development Agreement. Bellisimo to provide information. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please review and verify that all plants and shrubs that are proposed within the public right of way/parkway will not grow to a mature height greater than 2 feet. It appears that there may be a few species that will exceed 2 feet and specifically in the areas where the sight distance is a concern. Plants have been adjusted to meet at 2’ max. height in public street R.O.W. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please provide legal description and exhibits for Right of Way that is required along wood street and adjacent property owners. The TDRF fee for these dedications is $250 each. These are being submitted. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970‑224‑6143, lex@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: On the native seed mix, please provide PLS/acre or per sq. ft on the plans. PLS /acre has been added to landscape plans. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: A mitigation and monitoring plan for the wetland areas will need to be submitted and will be recorded with the Development Agreement. Mitigation and monitoring plan will be following shortly. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Was there going to be a note on the nature of the wetland and the buffer area and how it is to be maintained in the future, e.g., it is not to be turned into a bluegrass area? A note has been added to LP102 stating that area will be mowed once/season and not to be planted with blue grass. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: The Poudre River buffer needs to be clearly labeled on the site, landscape and utility plans along with a note that says "See Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within the Poudre River Buffer Zone" Response: The requested information and note has been provided. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: The cobble inlet structure appears quite large ‑ is it necessary to have this much cobble or can this be planted with landscape materials? Also, the cobble material did not appear on the landscape plan. Should an installation detail be added to the Utlility Plans? Response: The cobble forebay volume has been reduced to 3% of the total water quality capture volume, which is the minimum requirement per Urban Drainage. The previous design provided 5%. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970‑221‑6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Revise landscape note #20 to the following or equivalent. All tree pruning and removal work that will be done on site must be by a company holding a current City of Fort Collins Arborist License where required by code. Revision has been made to note. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Add the following as Tree Mitigation and Protection note #9. A private certified arborist will supervise and evaluate during construction tree protection requirements and the construction impact to existing trees that will be retained. The project certified arborist will mark all trees to be retained in the development zone prior to construction. The certified arborist will recommend tree protection methods to the developer to insure retained trees are protected. If the certified arborist determines any tree should not be retained due to unforeseen construction impact or for tree health reasons then a report will be provided to the City documenting the tree evaluation and reasons for removal. Removal of any tree shown to be retained shall require the approval of the City with mitigation based on the existing tree inventory. Note has been added as note #7. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Label the off‑ site trees shown on sheet LP101 on the west side of Wood Street and west of the trail to be preserved and protected. A label and outline has been added to trees on west side. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Please add these street tree planting notes: Street trees shall be installed by residential lots by the developer/builder at time of CO, unless time of year limits tree planting, in which case residential street trees shall be planted within 6 months of CO. The Developer/ builder shall replace dead or dying street trees after planting until final inspection and acceptance by the City of Fort Collins Forestry Division. All street trees must be established, of an approved species and of acceptable condition prior to acceptance. Street tree locations and numbers may be adjusted to accommodate driveway locations, utility separations between trees, street signs and street lights. Street trees to be centered in the middle of the lot to the extent feasible. Quantities shown on plan must be installed unless a reduction occurs to meet separation standards. All of the above notes have been added to sheet LP102. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Plant Selection and placement at entry to project off of Wood Street: The native Serviceberry used at the project entry off Wood Street is a large shrub and wouldn’t work well at the corner of Wood Street or in a narrower parkway by lot 1. Planting any tree or large shrub at the corner landscape area at Wood and Harts Garden Lane NW of Lot 23 appears to conflict with maintaining site visibility. Evaluate if Crimsonspire Oak could meet the design objectives by lot 1 and possibly on the north side of lot #23. Review plant selection and placement at the entry intersections for site distance requirements. All shrubs have been adjusted to meet a 2’ max requirement for the public R.O.W. Serviceberry has been replaced with Amorpha nana. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Civil Engineer should set up an on‑site meeting with the City Forester to review construction of sidewalk on the west side of Wood Street for tree protection for the row of ash trees and construction methods. Response: An on-site meeting was held on 10/4 to identify potential issues and solutions to implement during construction. Department: Internal Services Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970‑224‑6143, lex@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/18/2013 09/18/2013: Addresses will be assigned by the GIS Department after the plans have met final approval through Development Review and are recorded with the City. Please contact Todd Reidenbach with any quetions at 416.2483 or treidenbach@fcgov.com. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Transfort and Parks Planning have no comments on the revised plans. Department: Light And Power Contact: Doug Martine, 970‑224‑6152, dmartine@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/17/2013 09/17/2013: Normal electric development charges, plus the costs to remove the existing electric utility facilities will apply. The square footage charge portion will not apply for the area that was previously a trailer park, but it will apply for the area that is outside the previous trailer park site (Tract D). Please contact Doug Martine at 224‑6152 with any questions. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/17/2013 09/17/2013: After the plans are final, please send an AutoCad (version 2008) drawing of the site plan to Terry Cox at TCOX@FCGOV.COM. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/17/2013 09/17/2013: The locations of the electric utility services to each building will need to be coordinated. The electric meter on each unit will need to be on the same side of the house as the electric service 'stub'. Gas meters are encouraged to be on the opposite end of each house from the electric meter. If gas and electric meters must be on the same side of the house, the meters must be a minimum of 3 feet apart and the services must maintain a minimum of 3 feet lateral separation and not cross each other. The approximate locations of the gas services and the electric services have been added to the utility plans (U1 & U2) as requested. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970‑224‑6143, lex@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Don Kapperman with Comcast has no comments but if additional rounds are required, he would like a copy of the plat, site and landscape plans. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970‑416‑2869, jlynxwiler@poudre‑fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/26/2013 09/26/2013: EAE The EAE connection at Wood St. may be designed as a rollover curb but not a vertical curb as currently specified. It is my understanding that the eastern connection of the EAE at Peregoy Farms Way is already designed as a rollover curb. Response: The curb has been changed to rollover in that location. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/26/2013 09/26/2013: EAE The EAE is labeled in several places on the plans (pg. LS102 & LS401 for example) as PUBLIC ACCESS. The reference to the EAE as a public access should be removed from all pages of the plan. All references to public access have been removed. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970‑218‑2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/17/2013 09/17/2013: Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted does not meet requirements. Please correct redlines on the Erosion Control Plan. Please add to Erosion Control Report to address the Existing Percent Vegetative Density on the site, Describe the proceedures that will be taken to manage any encountered soil contamination, and call out a Seed mix as well as Soil Amendment Requirements in City Code 12‑130 Through 12‑132. Please Provide an Erosion Control Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need clarification concerning these issues, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970‑218‑2932 or email @ HYPERLINK "mailto:jschlam@fcgov.com" jschlam@fcgov.com Response: The report has been modified as requested, and the redline comments have been addressed. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970‑416‑2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Due to the flood and the associated time dealing with flood recovery, Floodplain Management staff have been unable to do a detailed review of the proposed submittal. Furthermore, since the flood directly impacted this property, we feel it is prudent to have a meeting to again discuss the accuracy of the floodplain mapping and thus the design assumptions that are being used. Please contact Marsha Hilmes‑Robinson at 970‑224‑6036 to set up a meeting. Response: A meeting with staff was completed and it was determined that current modeling was very accurate in the recent flooding and will be appropriate to use moving forward. Topic: General Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Please provide weep holes in the forebay so low flows can infiltrate the forebay. Please discuss options with City staff. Response: Weep holes have been provided. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970‑221‑6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/23/2013 09/23/2013: No comments. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/23/2013 09/23/2013: Please correct the spelling of "Roadway" on sheet CS1. See redlines. Response: Spelling has been corrected. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please mask all text within hatched areas. See redlines. The hatch in question (along with all gray scales) did not print properly on the last submittal. As such, we have corrected the printing to allow the text to be more legible, rather than creating little white boxes everywhere. If this printing solution is still unacceptable, we will add the requested masks. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: There are text over text issues on sheet R4. See redlines. Response: This has been corrected. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: The sheet number & bottom of the sheet is cut off on sheet LP001. See redlines. The sheet viewport has been adjusted. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: There are line over text issues on sheet LP101 & LP103. See redlines. All line over text circled have been adjusted. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Is there a newer title commitment? Not at this time. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please add a note (#8) stating that there are no lienholders for this property. See redlines. Note added. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please show the locations of the deeds & reception numbers listed in the Statement Of Ownership And Subdivision. See redlines. These are now shown. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please add a space where shown in the Statement Of Ownership And Subdivision. See redlines. Space has been added. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please furnish current acceptable monument records for all aliquot corners shown on this Plat. These are being submitted. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please add "Name & Title" to the Owner signature block. See redlines. This will be added at mylar this may vary depending the signor. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: What is the line shown at the northwest corner of the property? See redlines. This is described on the plat. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please correct the description of the Point Of Beginning. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please rotate all marked text 180 degrees. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: A majority of Lot 1 is within the West Vine Floodway. See redlines. This is by design. See note on site plan about development of lots 1 and 2. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: There are line over text issues on sheet 2. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please make sure that all lines & curves are labeled. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please correct the spelling of "separate". See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please label the marked lines at the southwest corner of the property. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please change the street names to Harts Gardens Lane & Peregoy Farms Way. These are the new street names, per the May 30, 2013 comment response letter from Craig Russell w/ Russell Mills Studios. All other plans have been changed to these names. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please show the dividing line between Harts Gardens Lane & Peregoy Farms Way. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Please show the existing fence line and it's relationship to the boundary. See redlines. This has been addressed. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: Wally Muscott had done a survey for the north boundary line showing found pins at Rupel's positions. The City survey crews verified their positions (they are still in place) and the City will recognize these pins as their boundary. John will send an ASCII and a drawing showing this information, and will ask you to either revise the boundary, or at a minimum show and mathematically relate Rupel's monuments to your boundary. If you choose to keep your boundary, we also strongly recommend you add a note discussing you have rejected Rupel's pins. This has been addressed. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 09/25/2013 09/25/2013: There are line over text issues on sheets LS102, LS401 & LS403. See redlines. All line over text circled have been adjusted. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Ward Stanford, 970‑221‑6820, wstanford@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Please add an R1‑1 with street name sign at the Harts Garden & Peregoy Farms intersection facing to the south (Peregoy). Response: The sign has been added. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/26/2013 09/26/2013: Please adjust the north sidewalk ramp in the corner of Wood St and Harts Garden Way closer to the field access driveway to maximize pedestrian visibility from either street. Just in case it's being considered, don't add a striped crosswalk between the two ramps. Response: The ramp has been adjusted. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Applicants reply is to seek a variance using a design speed less than the posted speed to base the sight distance (SD) on. Traffic Op's does not see the need for the SD at a speed less than 25 mph (posted). The resulting SD is only marginally outside of a few location that are not already within the normal utility easement. Traffic Op's is probably not opposed to the SD being based upon a lower design speed of 20 mph as the characteristics of the location support the inability to probably drive at the speed limit(approaching a sharp turn, tight street, on‑street parking). Please provide why the lower design speed SD is desired. Response: A revised variance request has been submitted providing additional detail on the need for the variance, while minimizing the degree of variance from standard criteria. 05/28/2013: Looks like a sight distance easement may be needed for the intersection of Peregoy and Hart Farms. Please review for intersection sight distance. If required please coordinate between plan sets. Site easement has been adjusted and shown for approved speeds. Department: Water‑Wastewater Engineering Contact: Roger Buffington, 970‑221‑6854, rbuffington@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Schedule a meeting to further discuss the sanitary sewer easement issue. From the response to the last review comments, it sounds as though there is resistance to meeting the normal 15 feet each side of sewer easement requirement. Response: A meeting was held on 9/30 to discuss the easement, and it was decided that the easement can remain in its current location, but that it will be recorded via a separate document from the plat to ensure that it shows up on title insurance for individual lots. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Please provide information on the design of the all‑weather surfacing in Tracts C and D. The sewer cleaning equipment weighs approximately 40 tons. There is concern that concrete will not hold up if not adequately designed. Response: The access’ are specified as concrete. A paving detail has been added to the detail sheets showing a 5.5” thick concrete section over compacted subgrade, per the geotechnical report. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: What are the "high deflection" couplings noted on the water main near the intersection of Harts Garden and Peregoy Farms (and other locations). Why not use fittings or pipe deflection? Response: These are couplings that allow for greater deflection than the typical 1.5 degrees allowed in a typical fitting. They have been used in locations that do not need a full 11.25 degree bend, but that exceed the limits of pipe deflection. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Water/wastewater did not receive utility plans; therefore, redline comments are on the stormwater redlines. Response: We did receive both WW and stormwater redlines. Thanks. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: Lets review/discuss the water and sewer service locations to attempt to keep water services from ending up under driveways. Response: Service locations have been updated to avoid having water services under driveways as much as possible. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 09/24/2013 09/24/2013: See redlined utility plans for other comments. Response: Redline comments have been addressed. Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970‑416‑2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 09/04/2013 09/04/2013: Applicant stated that the requirement for a note about farm animals has been addressed, however such note did not appear on the site plan, please clarify. A note has been added to sheet LS102 stating farm animals are not allowed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 09/04/2013 09/04/2013: Please indicate with a note on the site plan any approved modifications that were received. Previously approved modification for density is listed on sheet LS102.