HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE PARK TOWNHOMES AT FOSSIL RIDGE (FORMERLY ZIEGLER TOWNHOMES) - PDP/FDP - FDP160043 - CORRESPONDENCE -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 03, 2017
Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Ave
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Ziegler Townhomes, FDP160043, Round Number 2
Comment Summary:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: General
02/01/2017: Carried over as unresolved.
11/16/2016: The street design has three different tangents (a tangent between the
existing curve on County Fair Lane and the proposed curve, a tangent between the
two proposed curves, and the tangent from the intersection) that are short of the
required 100 feet specified in Table 7-3 of LCUASS (the three tangents are 56.81,
75, and 50.95 respectively). A variance request is needed for the minimum tangent
lengths not being met. It is acknowledged that a similar variance request was
needed from the previous proposal on the property and was granted.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
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, Clay Frickey, at
970-224-6045 or cfrickey@fcgov.com.
Page 1 of 10
02/01/2017: Please add the following sight distance easement criteria on the plat:
"Sight Distance Easement – The sight distance easement is an easement required
by the City at some street intersections where it is necessary to protect the line of
sight for a motorist needing to see approaching traffic and to react safely for
merging their vehicle into the traffic flow. The following are requirements for certain
objects that may occupy a sight distance easement for level grade:
(1) Structures and landscaping within the easement shall not exceed 24 inches in
height with the following exceptions:
(a) Fences up to 42 inches in height may be allowed as long as they do not obstruct
the line of sight for motorists.
(b) Deciduous trees may be allowed as long as all branches of the trees are
trimmed so that no portion thereof or leaves thereon hang lower than six (6) feet
above the ground, and the trees are spaced such that they do not obstruct line of
sight for motorists. Deciduous trees with trunks large enough to obstruct line of
sight for motorists shall be removed by the owner.
For non-level areas these requirements shall be modified to provide the same
degree of visibility."
11/16/2016: Figure 7-16 in LCUASS would appear to demonstrate the need for a
sight distance easement at the northern drive approach onto County Fair Lane
heading west.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
02/01/2017: We'll need confirmation on the outcome of Xcel's overhead lines. Either
the plans should depict that they are undergrounded abutting the property, or conduit
is installed by the development to accommodate future undergrounding.
11/16/2016: Please verify the status of the existing overhead line along Ziegler Road
abutting the property. It would appear that this is no longer needed with the
development and would then be undergrounded (or removed) with this project and
should be indicated as such on the plans.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
02/01/2017: Please provide the spot elevations shown on the grading plan sheets
that depict these also on the intersection detail sheet to provide a more centralized
location for the intersection and ramp information used by Engineering Inspection.
11/16/2016: Please provide additional spot elevations and cross slopes along the
access ramps/sidewalk at County Fair Lane and Ziegler Road to verify that street
standards/ADA compliance is being met. There is the implication that at least the
cross slope for the access ramp at the north leg exceeds 2% cross slope.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
02/01/2017: I'm comfortable with the representation that no offsite work/easement
is needed. Please revise the property boundary on the civil set to depict the eastern
property line boundary as the new right-of-way line of Ziegler Road. Depicting this to
be within Ziegler Road itself is confusing.
11/16/2016: Please confirm the ability to construct the work fully within the project's
development boundary. The grading plan is a little difficult to follow in some regards,
and I'm aware that the previous submittal was doing offsite work on the Harvest
Park property.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
Page 2 of 10
02/01/2017: The right turn lane added for Ziegler Road doesn't reflect any further
adjusting of right-of-way dedication and/or access easement dedication for portions
of sidewalk that fall outside of right-of-way. We'll want to have the plat and plans
reflect the agreed to right-of-way/easement configuration that addresses the right
turn lane addition. [Further follow-up on this comment from Wednesday is such that
Engineering is OK with just providing access and utility easement for encompassing
up the back of sidewalk for the portions that are outside of right-of-way.]
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
02/01/2017: The right turn lane design needs to have a variance request submitted
for the length not meeting LCUASS requirements.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
02/01/2017: The right turn lane needs to provide additional offsite design to the north
to reflect how future extension/continuation of the turn lane north of the property can
be built without needing to rebuild portions of the turn lane fronting this property
(evidence that it is being built in the ultimate condition fronting this property.)
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
02/01/2017: Per the email to Andy that (also references the previous previous
comments), we'll want to have language in the development agreement for this
project that in the event that the developer/owner of this project (or its successors in
interest) acquires title to the Ruff property and develops that property with access
out to County Fair Lane, that the Developer acknowledges the requirement for
constructing of the extension of the turn lane to City standards at the time of that
future development.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
02/01/2017: With the addition of the right turn lane, I'm thinking that there could be
some concern with the evergreen tree being preserved at the northeast boundary of
the site with its location and sight distance for folks approaching Ziegler Road on
eastbound County Fair Lane that wasn't perhaps as much of a potential concern
before the turn lane. Ideally trees in right-of-way are deciduous and limbed up such
that branches are not less than 6 feet from ground level (per the sight distance
easement note on the plat). We should have a discussion with Traffic Operations
and Forestry on the tree's potential impact to sight distance and/or what might be
the potential of removing the tree. As it is, might the taper for the turn lane be
considered a concern with its proximity to the root zone for the tree, and cause
impact to the tree with the turn lane's construction?
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
02/02/2017:Please remove the right-of-way row shown on the Land Use Table in the
Plat. I'm concerned that the indication of maintenance by the City could be in conflict
with City Code provisions that would indicate certain aspects of right-of-way
maintenance are the responsibility of the abutting property owner.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/02/2017
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Page 3 of 10
01/17/2017: Three additional trees were identified for removal, so an additional 8
mitigation trees still need to be shown on the plans. Please add (or upsize) the
additional mitigation trees.
11/16/2016: It appears that many of the street trees are being used to account for
mitigation, but they do not appear to have been upsized (3" caliber for canopy shade
trees, 2.5"caliper for ornamental trees, 8' height B&B for evergreen trees), per LUC
Section 3.2.1(F).
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
01/17/2017: Please add a label to the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone on sheet G3 of the
grading plan.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/17/2017
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
02/01/2017:
Due to changes on the Landscape Plans and the removal of additional tress, the
required number of mitigation trees is now 43 trees. 43 mitigation trees are shown
with trees on the Landscape Sheets, however the Plant List does not reflect this.
Please adjust the Plant List to account for all required upsized mitigation trees.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
2/1/17:
Continued:
It appears that this good tree, #43 Hackberry, could be retained. Please look into
providing 3 to 4 foot separation between outer bark of the tree and sidewalk to allow
for additional protection.
* Comments marked with an asterisk have been resolved.
11/17/16:
Tree Inventory/Mitigation Plan
* It appears that there are an adequate number of new trees on the site to account
for 35 mitigation trees. Off-site mitigation is not necessary. Please review placing 35
upsized mitigation trees on site.
* Tree #58 is listed as to be protected, but should be removed based on its size and
condition. Proper mitigation will need to be discussed.
* Please set up a site visit to discuss construction impact of trees #59 (Cottonwood)
and #47 (Green Ash – multi-stemmed). These existing trees seem appear to be
pretty close to proposed foundations.
In regards to tree #43 (Hackberry), please explore placing the proposed sidewalk at
a further distance away to reduce the impact to the roots.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
Page 4 of 10
2/1/17:
Continued:
If there are street lights, please show their locations and proper tree separation: forty
(40) feet between shade trees and streetlights; fifteen (15) feet between ornamental
trees and streetlights.
There may have been some confusion, please review the first tree North of Country
Fair Lane along Ziegler Road. It appears that this tree impacts sight line visibility.
Please evaluate eliminating this street tree for improved visibility.
* Comments marked with an asterisk have been resolved.
11/17/16:
Street Trees
If there are street lights, please show their locations and proper tree separation: forty
(40) feet between shade trees and streetlights; fifteen (15) feet between ornamental
trees and streetlights.
* Please show locations of stop signs and proper tree separation: twenty (20) feet
between shade and/or ornamental trees and traffic control signs and devices.
The first tree north of County Fair Ln on Ziegler appears to impact sight line visibility.
Please evaluate eliminating this street tree for improved visibility.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
2/1/2017:
Continued:
Is it possible to add more coniferous trees in this area? Forestry suggests that
Colorado Blue Spruce may be a good choice.
11/18/2016:
Please look at placing additional trees along the west of edge of the project north of
County Fair Rd to increase the buffer for adjacent homes.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Coy Althoff, 970-224-6150, CAlthoff@fcgov.com
Topic: General
11/18/2016: Light & Power will need to extend electric facilities to this area by
installing primary conduit and cable along the west side of Ziegler Rd. and also along
the north side of County Fair Ln. (as it will become a through road to Ziegler Rd.)
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges
and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: Streetlights will be placed along public streets. A 40 feet separation on
both sides of the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. A 15 feet
separation on both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and
streetlights.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
Page 5 of 10
11/18/2016: Multi family buildings are treated as commercial services; therefore a(C
1) form must be filled out and submitted to Light & Power Engineering. All
secondary electric service work is the responsibility of the developer and their
electrical consultant or contractor.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: Transformer locations shall be within 10' of a paved surface and must
have a minimum of an 8' clearance from the front side and a 3' clearance around
the sides and rear.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: Contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the transformer
and electric meter locations, please show the locations on the utility plans.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: Please provide a one line diagram and a C-1 form to Light and Power
Engineering. The C-1 form can be found at:
http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: You may contact FCU Light & Power, project engineering if you have
questions. (970) 221-6700. You may reference Light & Power’s Electric Service
Standards at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_F
INAL_17June2016.pdf
You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee
estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
01/31/2017: No changes on behalf of Light & Power since the November 2016
review meeting.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com
Topic: Plat
11/07/2016: Comment from the County Assessor: There is an additional 'call' that
has been added. Immediately following the verbiage, 'POINT OF BEGINNING;' the
following call is not needed;
'thence continuing along said East line, South 01 45' 51" East, 701.48 ft;'
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/07/2016
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
01/29/2017: FIRE LANE LIMITS
The limits of the fire lane shall be labeled on the plans. Currently there are some
challenges in reading the EAE limits due to overlapping dashed and solid lines.
Please adjust accordingly. In addition:
> An EAE is not currently labeled on the Utility Plan.
> The NW boundary of the EAE is not well defined on the Site Plan (with both
arrows pointing to the east).
> The EAE turnarounds are not well differentiated on the Site Plan.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/29/2017
Page 6 of 10
01/29/2017: FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
Place an additional "No Parking - Fire Lane" sign to the west side of drive lane
between Buildings E & F (at mail kiosk). Refer to LUCASS detail 1418 for sign type
to be included in plan details. Directional arrows required on all signs in all locations.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/29/2017
01/29/2017: ADDRESS SIGNAGE & WAYFINDING
Addresses shall be posted on each structure and where otherwise needed to aid in
wayfinding. Access to all units will be my a means other than the road on which
they are addressed and as such, additional posting and wayfinding signage will be
required before FDP approval.
All building fronts shall be posted with unit address. All back of buildings will be
posted with unit number and entire street name. South ends of Buildings A & D will
require posting of street name (if it is to be a Ziegler address). North end of Buildings
C & F will require posting of street name (if it is to be a Ziegler address). PFA is
requesting that applicant to submit a plan for review. It seems important to bring city
GIS into this discussion at this time. Code language provided below.
> IFC 505.1: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers,
building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly
legible, visible from the street or road fronting the property, and posted with a
minimum of six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Where access is by
means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a
monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure.
> IFC 505.1.7: Buildings, either individually or part of a multi-building complex, that
have fire lanes on sides other than the addressed street side, shall have the
address numbers and street name on each side that fronts the fire lane.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/29/2017
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Clay Frickey, 970-224-6045, cfrickey@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
01/31/2017: Please re-check the dimensions of the building footprints shown on the
elevations. Some of the dimensions seems to be inaccurate at the scale provided.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
Topic: General
01/31/2017: Thank you for the revised modification requests to 3.5.2(D)(1) and
3.5.2(E)(2). Staff generally supports the modification requests.
11/03/2016: Thank you for your modification requests for Land Use Code sections
3.5.2(E)(2) and 3.5.2(D)(1)(b). Staff did not receive a modification request for Land
Use Code section 4.5(D)(1)(b). Staff will look for this modification request for the
second round of review.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/03/2016
01/31/2017: While the project meets the parking requirement, staff is concerned
about the lack of guest parking. Are there opportunities to provide more guest
parking on-site? With the lack of on-street parking on County Fair Lane at present,
staff would feel more comfortable with the plan if you could accommodate more
guest parking spaces. This is especially true since one of the units has a one car
garage and two of the surface spaces are handicap spaces.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
Topic: Landscape Plans
Page 7 of 10
02/01/2017: One of the notes about the landscaping within the fenced areas is
covering up a portion of the landscaping on the southern most unit of Building C.
Staff cannot confirm the final counts on a couple of the plants as a result. Please
move this note.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
02/01/2017: Two of the plants have discrepancies between the landscape plan and
plant list. Please resolve these discrepancies:
Leadplant - Plan shows 30, plant list shows 31
Crabapple, Prairiefire - Plan shows 10, plant list shows 9
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-224-6035, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
01/30/2017: No Erosion Control Escrow calculations were included in report.
11/14/2016: Please note that no erosion control report or calculations were
submitted with this first submittal. Since this is a combined PDP and FDP a report
is required. Please provide one for review with next round.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/14/2016
01/30/2017: There is no sediment protection called out for the construction of the
storm lines adjacent to the existing detention pond to the south of this project.
Please address. Please add note indicating that contractor shall limit all construction
activities to areas delineated by construction or silt fence with no intrusion into the
existing pond to the south.
11/14/2016: Please provide erosion control protection for the inlet along Ziegler
Road and please address any other redlined comments on the plans.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/14/2016
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
02/03/2017: Please revise storm sewer system to provide a by-pass system for the
100-year flows.
11/16/2016: It is unclear how the chamber system will operate with the major flows
entering the chambers and no bypass system.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
02/03/2017: There are still some conflicts with trees and storm sewers north of
County Fair Lane.
11/16/2016: There are some locations where trees are not 10 feet away from storm
sewers. Please revise.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/16/2016
02/03/2017: The existing 24-inch outfall storm sewer needs to have capacity for all
site drainage as well as all off-site flows directed to the Zeigler Road inlet.
Please provide calculations supporting this. If there is not enough capacity in the
existing storm sewer, additional conveyance for the 100-year site flows will need to
be provided.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/03/2017
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Page 8 of 10
Topic: Construction Drawings
02/03/2017: The statement on the Subdivision Plat is still in question. Please be
sure that any changes on the Plat are reflected.
11/17/2016: Please change the Basis Of Bearings statement to match the revised
Subdivision Plat Basis Of Bearings statement.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
02/03/2017: There are sheet title & numbering issues. See redlines.
11/17/2016: There are sheet title & numbering issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
02/03/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
11/17/2016: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
Topic: Landscape Plans
01/31/2017: This has not been corrected.
11/17/2016: There are match line issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
Topic: Lighting Plan
02/01/2017: Please change the titles to match the other plan sets.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 02/01/2017
Topic: Plat
02/01/2017: This has not been corrected.
11/17/2016: Please make changes to the Basis Of Bearings statements as
marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
02/01/2017: This has not been corrected.
11/17/2016: Please make changes to the Owners & Lienholders signature blocks
as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
01/31/2017: Please add a Sight Distance Easement statement.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
01/31/2017: Please add dedication information for all street rights of way. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
01/31/2017: Please correct the right of way label for County Fair Lane as marked.
See redlines.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
01/31/2017: Please review the need for the easements as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
01/31/2017: Please correct the distance noted along Block 2. See redlines.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
01/31/2017: Please revise the easement notes as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
Topic: Site Plan
Page 9 of 10
01/31/2017: The subdivision plat name has changed. Please revise the legal
description as marked. See redlines.
11/17/2016: Please revise the legal description as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/17/2016
01/31/2017: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles
on the noted sheets. See redlines.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 01/31/2017
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com
Topic: General
11/18/2016: The traffic study was received and reviewed. The study does not
define the methodology used to redistribute traffic through the new connection of
County Fair. In the absence of this methodology, we calculated several scenarios
trying to recreate the numbers used in the study. In the least conservative (most
favorable to the development) scenario the south bound right turn lane warrant was
met.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
11/18/2016: Due to the proximity of the access locations to the intersection of
Ziegler and County Fair, the center left turn lane needs to be extended to allow for
left turns into the development. We are happy to work with you on lane widths, and
striping.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/18/2016
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
11/15/2016: 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
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/15/2016
Page 10 of 10