Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL A-WING REPLACEMENT - FDP - FDP150013 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - REVISIONS1 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 February 10, 2015 Responses March 25, 2015 Angela Milewski BHA Design, Inc 1603 Oakridge Dr Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Poudre Valley Hospital A-Wing Replacement, PDP140019, Round Number 2 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 970-221-6343 or tshepard@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Ted Shepard, 970-221-6343, tshepard@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 6. Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 12/10/2014: Will the light fixtures under the canopy, S6, be recessed into the decking? Or, do the fixtures protrude? Section 3.2.4(D) requires under-canopy fixtures to be flush-mount using a flat lens. Second Round Comment: On sheet P2 of P3, for the S6 fixture, please add the specification that these fixtures are to be "Flush-Mount and Flat Lens." Response: Fixture schedule on sheets P1 & P2, and detail 03 on sheet P3 have been revised. Fixture type S6 has been revised to comply with flush-mounted with flat lens canopy lighting requirements. Comment Number: 9. Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: All revisions are in order. Prior to hearing, it would be helpful to call out on sheet L1 of L4, the individual species within the landscape buffer between the detached sidewalk and the four-foot knee wall along Lemay Avenue that screens the ambulance area of the E.D. Please consider an enlarged view of this screening for the benefit of the Planning and Zoning 2 Board. Response: Final plans now indicate plant species for all areas, including the buffer areas illustrated for the March 12, 2015 Planning and Zoning Board hearing. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: Please ensure that the widening of the sidewalk is depicted on C-015. 12/10/2014: The metal sidewalk culvert detail reflects the widening of the sidewalk approaches on either side of the culvert, this should be reflected on the plans as well for clarity and reduce the likelihood that the contractor does not initially install the sidewalks to reflect this widening. Response: Widening of walk is now shown. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: Response on confirmation of the encroachment permit is noted. We'll again identify this during the DCP process. 12/10/2014: It appears the plans indicate an irrigation line that ties the two properties and crosses Doctors Lane. If this is not already identified and permitted through an encroachment permit, it would likely need to be through the Development Construction Permit process. Response: Acknowledged Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: In looking at the submitted plat the disjointed right-of-way is awkward in that it does not necessarily correspond with the street section. Along Doctors Lane, can we instead either 1) reduce the amount dedicated to correspond with the west half of Lot 1 and have the additional wider right-of-way currently shown on the east half of the lot be within an access easement, or 2) increase the amount dedicated on the west half of Lot 1 to correspond with the same line on the east side. Along Hospital Lane, please maintain the same amount of dedication up to the north property boundary instead of reducing from about 7 feet to 1.77 feet. This will allow a potential opportunity to modify to a detached sidewalk in the future should a full redevelopment of the property to the north occur. 12/10/2014: The development portion on the north side of Doctors Lane would need to be platted in conjunction with the development plan approval. New detached sidewalks along Hospital Lane, Doctors Lane, and Luke Street should have right-of-way dedication to match the back of walk locations. Response: ROW has been redrawn to follow the back of sidewalk for the majority of length along the north side of Doctor’s Lane, with the exception of where the walk is attached to the curb. Engineering requested we hold the ROW line parallel to road section, and this has been provided for. 3 Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The response and designs provided is acceptable with the expectation that the dedication of right-of-way along Lemay Avenue and Doctors Lane is provided before final plan approval. Additionally, the City's approach for the coverage of the development agreement would be that it would apply to both the "Poudre Valley Hospital Third Filing" property and Lot 2 of the "Poudre Valley Memorial Hospital Addition". 12/10/2014: The development plan needs to establish what the development plan boundary is (both shown and described). On the north side of Doctors Lane this will be evident as the name of the plat for this portion of the development. On the south side of Doctors Lane, the development plan boundary should be shown and described as Lot 2 of the Poudre Valley Hospital. It would then be envisioned that the corresponding development agreement property boundary is also the platted boundary on the north side of Doctors Lane and the current Lot 2 of the Poudre Valley Hospital plat. Response: Please refer to the plat and legal description for the property. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The site and landscape plan documents need to show the property line boundary reflecting the dedication of right-of-way (whether by plat or separate document) for Doctors Lane, Hospital Lane, and Lemay Avenue. 12/10/2014: With the two previous comments in mind, the dedication of right-of-way for the right turn lane at Robertson can be done via separate document. Given that additional right-of-way (or access easement) for the new detached sidewalks along Doctors Lane and Lemay Avenue is needed, there may be some value in replatting Lot 2 concurrently with the plat for the portion of the development on the north side of Doctors Lane. Response: This has been done. Please see civil plans and plat. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The response indicated that the variance request(s) will be provided at time of final. Since the viability of the development as designed would require a variance for review (and potential approval), the variance will need to be submitted, reviewed and evaluated prior to hearing. 12/10/2014: The emergency access entrance and exit access on Lemay Avenue require variance requests to LCUASS access spacing requirements along Lemay Avenue (from both Robertson and Doctors Lane). Response: Variances have been completed, submitted, and reviewed prior to the March 12 public hearing. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The response indicated that the variance request(s) will be provided at time of final. Since the viability of the development as designed would require a variance for review (and potential approval), the variance will need to be submitted, reviewed and evaluated prior to hearing. 12/10/2014: The entrance off of Lemay Avenue has four parking spaces which back out onto the main drive aisle that accesses Lemay Avenue. Based on the 4 Traffic Study indicating 167 visits (ADT's) utilizing this access, Figure 1906 of LCUASS would require a parking setback distance of 75 feet off of Lemay Avenue, which would require the removal of the four parking spaces. Similar to the previous comment, a variance request would be required for evaluation. Perhaps the emergency nature of the access and the particular use of those four parking spaces (unknown) would provide such justification to allow all or a portion of these parking spaces to remain? Response: Variances have been completed, submitted, and reviewed prior to the March 12 public hearing. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The Lemay Avenue emergency entrance (and exit) are both unclear to me between the civil set C-006 and Elevation Sheet A2 as to how these two driveways will be indicated as limited to emergency access only. 12/10/2014: In general, signage for how the access points onto both Lemay Avenue and Doctors Lane are restricted (either to emergency, and/or one-way) should be indicated on the plans for clarity of how accesses will be limited and function. I'll also be curious to see what sort of signage will be visible to vehicles on the west side of the Lemay Avenue/Garfield Street intersection. Existing No Parking signage along Luke Street should be shown as to remain, with additional signs added as well? Response: Please see civil plans for signing and striping. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The plans just need to depict the existing sidewalk to the north to show that this all ties-in to an existing improvement to the north. 12/10/2014: The sidewalk along Hospital Lane as it heads north to the property boundary should probably be shown to attach to the existing attached sidewalk at the boundary rather than remain detached, as the sidewalk as shown appear to tie directly into a utility pedestal. If there's an opportunity to move the pedestal to maintain the sidewalk detachment, that could certainly be explored. Please show more of the existing features to the north for verification. Response: We have indicated the existing buildings and walks along the north property line. The detached sidewalk ties in to the existing attached sidewalk along Hospital Lane at the property boundary. 5 Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The plans just need to depict the existing sidewalk to the north to show that this all ties-in to an existing improvement to the north. 12/10/2014: The sidewalk along Luke Street as it ties in to the existing attached "sidewalk" might be tying into more towards the east-west narrower "sidewalk" with the raised curb head on the north side than the north-south sidewalk along Luke Street. Please show more of the existing features to the north for verification. A comment was made in the civil portion of comments regarding the appearance of the existing gutter pan (for the former driveway) at the northeast corner not being removed and replaced with vertical curb and gutter and how the new sidewalk ties into the attached walk/access ramp as well. Response: We have indicated the existing buildings and walks along the north property line, including the existing attached walk that we tie into at the property boundary. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 12/10/2014 02/03/2015: The civil plans will need to add an underdrain detail in addition to the underneath call out for the landscaping of the median. 12/10/2014: I'm understanding that features to promote/identify the striped crosswalk crossing Doctors Lane such as a raised median island in the center turn lane is being contemplated. We'll want to review what proposed design solutions are implemented for Engineering considerations. Response: Completed. Please see utility plan. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: The plans show a lot of striped crosswalks, especially across driveways. We'll want confirmation from Traffic Operations on the usage of striped crosswalks in right-of-way throughout the development. I suspect they'll want the majority of these removed due to maintenance obligation concerns. Response: Aspen emailed Traffic Ops, and the response did not indicate that crosswalk striping should be removed. Striping will remain, as shown, unless City requests it be removed. 6 Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: With Hospital Lane and Doctors Lane being a T-intersection, LCUASS requires at least one sending and receiving access ramp pair crossing Doctors Lane Please add an additional access ramp to direct north-south on both sides of the east-leg of the intersection. Response: Ramp was added. Please see civil plans. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-2401, sblochowiak@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/20/2014 11/20/2014: With respect to landscaping and design, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, in Article 3.2.1 (E)(2)(3), requires that you use native plants and grasses in your landscaping or re landscaping and reduce bluegrass lawns as much as possible. Response: Acknowledged. A full planting plan with species and quantities has been submitted for review. Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Review and incorporate the following comments for the final landscape and tree protection plan. Response: Acknowledged. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Existing tree number 5 is a 17 inch diameter hackberry. Its actual location is different than what is shown on the plan. The actual location is about 12 feet further east which appears to preclude its retention. Please review this situation and update tree inventory and mitigation information. Response: Agreed and verified in field. Plans have been updated to indicate removal and mitigation of this tree. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Please include tree protection note number 7 from LUC 3.2.1 G with the associated table on sheet L4. Response: Note has been added. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Add percentages of tree species used and check for minimum species diversity LUC 3.2.1 D. 3. Response: Plans have been updated 7 Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: On final plan identify all trees as upsized to meet this component of tree mitigation for the project. Canopy shade trees 3.0 inch caliper Ornamental trees 2.5 inch caliper Evergreen trees 8 feet height Response: Plans have been updated Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Please include the following notes 1-5 under a separate heading labeled street tree notes and eliminated duplication in other note lists. 1. A permit must be obtained from the City Forester before any trees or shrubs as noted on this plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way. This includes zones between the sidewalk and curb, medians and other City property. This permit shall approve the location and species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may result in replacing or relocating trees and a hold on certificate of occupancy. 2. Contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at the completion of each phase of the development. All trees need to have been installed as shown on the landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final approval of each phase. 3. Street tree shall be supplied and planted by the developer using a qualified landscape contractor. 4. The developer shall replace all dead and dying street trees after planting until final maintenance inspection and acceptance by the City of Fort Collins Forestry Division. All street trees in the project must be established of an approved species and of acceptable le condition prior to acceptance. 5. Street tree locations and numbers may be adjusted to accommodate driveway locations, utility standards, separation between trees, street signs and street lights. Street trees shall be centered in the middle of the parkway. Quantities shown on plan must be installed unless a reduction occurs to meet separation standards. Response: Notes have been added to plan Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Please place the following note in large print with a bold border on the landscape plan. A free permit must be obtained from the City Forester before any street trees are planted in parkways between the sidewalk and Curb. Street tree locations and numbers may change to meet actual utility/tree separation standards. Landscape contractor must obtain approval of street tree location after utility locates. Street trees must be inspected and approved before planting. Failure to obtain this permit is a violation of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Response: Note with border has been added. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: Evaluate the proposed ornamental tree at the corner of Lemay and Doctors lane 8 on Lemay for site distance impact and separation from the water line to see if it is feasible to plant at this location. Response: Plan has been revised. Please let us know if there are still concerns with this tree location. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/10/2015 02/10/2015: In locations where ornamental trees are shown as City street trees evaluate use of upright species such as Chanticleer Pear or Red Barron Crabapple should be considered. Response: Plans have been updated Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/02/2014 02/03/2015: Erosion Control Plans: Please add Response notes from the redlines about silt fence installation to FDP plans to help contractor understand as well. Other than that plans ok. Erosion Control Escrow and Report will be reviewed at FDP. 12/02/2014: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft and in a sensitive area, therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted does not meet requirements. Please submit; Corrected Erosion Control Plan from the redlines (SW Packet), Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need clarification concerning this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com Response: Note has been updated on erosion control plan. SWMP will be provided directly to Jesse for review/approval. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 02/03/2015: Inspection needs to take place at Final Compliance with a determination on the condition of the pipe. 12/09/2014: The irrigation lateral may be used for the outfall. The storm sewer needs to be inspected to make sure it is in good working condition. The City can assist in using a television camera to inspect the line. If the line is not adequate, the storm sewer would need to be repaired or replaced up to City standards. Response: PVH/UCH is currently investigating the pipe and we’ll provide confirmation to stormwater on condition of pipe once TV is reviewed. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 02/03/2015: Can take place during Final Compliance. 12/09/2014: Please provide PLD (porous landscape detention) sizing calculations. Response: This has been completed. Please see drainage report. 9 Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 02/03/2015: No plans were provided for review, so we cannot verify this was addressed. 12/09/2014: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Response: Plans have been revised. Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 02/03/2015: There is still text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines. 12/09/2014: There is text that needs to be rotated 180 degrees. See redlines. Response: Plans have been revised. Please let us know if any additional corrections are needed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 02/03/2015: There is one line over text issue on sheet C-004. See redlines. 12/09/2014: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Response: This has been addressed. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: The City has moved to the NAVD88 vertical datum. Please provide the following information in the EXACT format shown below. If your project is started on NAVD88 datum: 1) PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK #1 w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK #2 w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: OR, if project has already been surveyed in NAVD29 Unadjusted datum: 2) PROJECT DATUM: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (OLD CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) BENCHMARK #1 w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK #2 w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: If using NGVD29 UNADJUSTED the following equation statement will be needed. 10 NOTE: IF NAVD 88 DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NAVD88 = NGVD29 UNADJUSTED + X.XX’ Response: This has been updated. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: Please move the statement "The existing site control provided ..." in Note #40 on sheet C-002 from the Benchmark Statement, and correct the spelling of "Surveying". See redlines. Response: Completed Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: Please reference (in Note #40 on sheet C-002) the datum that the PVHS Campus Control is based on. Response: Completed Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: All reception numbers for documents recorded by separate document must be added prior to mylars. Response: Acknowledged Topic: Plat Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: Please provide current acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown. These should be emailed directly to Jeff at jcounty@fcgov.com Response: Completed Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: We found a reference on a map that Book 1209 Page 360 was the document dedicating Hospital Lane. Please verify. Response: ELS to verify Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 12/09/2014: We'll need some signage/way-finding plans in the future. This includes directing people to the main entrance (Robertson), and directing public to the ED entrance (Doctors), and do not enter signs at the ambulance entrance across from Garfield. Response: Civil plans reflect directional signage. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: We'll work with you to finalize the signing, and striping plans and plan for the signal changes as we move into FDP. 11 Response: Acknowledged. Civil plans reflect current proposed striping. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/28/2014 11/28/2014: Perovskia Atriplicifolia (Russian Sage) has been removed from the City of Fort Collins Plant List. Please replace with a plant variety from the current list. If you have questions contact Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com or 970-221-6704. Response: Plans have been updated Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/09/2014 02/03/2015: Will complete review during Final Compliance. 12/09/2014: For the new water service, a backflow preventer will be required if the service line connects with any existing water service lines within the building. Response: Acknowledged Department: Zoning Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970-416-2743, avandeutekom@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/03/2015 02/03/2015: The new signage will require a separate permit and review and is not approved as part of this PDP. Response: Acknowledged. Monument sign locations are indicated on plans for reference only.