HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN NORTH, 3RD FILING - FDP - FDP170003 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSPage 1 of 12
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 17, 2017
Sam Coutts
RIPLEY DESIGN, INC
419 Canyon Ave
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: Old Town North 3rd Filing, FDP170003, 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,
Pete Wray, at 970-221-6754 or pwray@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Comment Responses: Shear Engineering, Ripley Design, Intermill Land Surveying
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573,
slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 1. The site has shallow water – Please know that
sump pumps can only be tied into an approved drainage facility and cannot be
drained out across sidewalks or into the curb and gutter or into the streets/ alleys.
A paragraph will be added into the development agreement giving builders and
property owners notice of this. This needs to accounted for in your design and
plans.
Response: The geotechnical investigation report indicates groundwater depths of six
feet (6') to seven feet (7'). Bore logs were provided in April, 2016.
Residence structures along Osiander Street and on the south side of the alley have
been designed with garage slabs and basement finished floors above alley levels.
Residence structures on the north side of the alley have been designed with garage
slabs and main level finished floors above alley levels.
Groundwater levels have been drawn down over time with development
construction items including the 60" City of Greeley water line, the NECCO storm
sewer, the interim NECCO regional detention pond (high water elevation = 4959.68.
There is a drainage channel to the north which conveys runoff to the east directed
to the NECCO outfall and ultimately to the NECCO regional detention pond. The
defined Lot 41 finished floor slab elevation = 4966.12. The invert of the channel
north of Lot 41 is 4962.97, 3.15' below the Lot 41 FF elevation. The current NECCO
Page 2 of 12
regional pond water surface elevation is 4959.68. The Ultimate 100-year water
surface elevation for the NECCO regional pond will be 4957.17 (8.95' below the Lot
41 finished floor elevation).
When the NECCO regional detention pond the is complete, the storm sewer outfall
will be at elevation 4747.00 (substantially below all Suniga Road utilities).
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated:
02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 2. Site Plan/ Plat – You will need to show an area on
the plat void of the blanket easement to accommodate the shade structure shown
on the plans.
Response: Tract J has been created for the pocket park void of any blanket
easements.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated:
02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 3. Site Plan – Sheet 3 – single family setback
note: Add – No fencing may extend into the 8 foot rear yard setback.
Response: Noted added
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated:
02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 4. Plat – Need to identify who the parking easement
is being dedicated to. This is not an easement that would typically be dedicated
to the City. The City does not want to be the party that determines what a parking
easement is and allows for and when it can be vacated.
Response: Parking easement removed, parking areas to remain in private
ownership
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated:
02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 5. Plat – sheet 2 – You have two C1 curves identified
and labeled on this sheet with differing curve data information.
Response: The two curves relate to property boundary and individual lots,
see separate curve tables.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated:
02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 6. Plat - The alley needs to be identified as
being dedicated as ROW.
Response: Alley identified as dedicated ROW
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 7. Plat - sheet 3 – you have curve data for two different curves
labeled as C3 on this page.
Response: The two curves relate to property boundary and individual lots,
see separate curve tables.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 8. Plat – Sheet 4 – you have curve date for two different curves
labeled as C2 on this page.
Response: The two curves relate to property boundary and individual lots,
see separate curve tables.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 9. Utility Plans – Note # 13 on the cover sheet is incorrect. The city
does not use bricks in the ADA ramps.
Page 3 of 12
Response: Note #13 has been revised.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 10. Utility Plans – A copy of the plat does not need to be included in the
utility plan set. That was important when we didn’t have electronic copies. But is
something that is outdated and not needed.
Response: We have removed the plat from the index of sheets.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 11. Utility Plans – Sheets 1 and 2 – if these are to be a part of this set
they need to be numbered as a part of this set. I guess I understand why you want to
include these – but they are confusing because they reference incorrect legals - That is
not the legal description for this project.
Response: Our preference is to keep the plat with the utility plan set for bidders,
stakers, contractors, etc. but we can incorporate those when we need to.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 12. Utility Plans – Sheet 2 – note 47. Need to indicate an answer to
this note and identify what it applies to. If there are no private streets than NONE
needs to be noted.
Response: None is now noted on note 47.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 13. Utility Plans – Sheet 2 – Note 48 references an exhibit A. You
either need to change the note so it makes sense without that reference or provide
Exhibit A here. And that approval as written doesn’t make sense and is not correct
since you changed the design and have additional and different pipes that doesn’t
meet coverage requirements than when it was first submitted. So that verbiage can’t
be used. The street will need to be concrete to the western most edge of the western
most inlet.
Response: We changed the Arch RCP to elliptical because arch pipe is not
available in Colorado and shipping from Texas is cost prohibitive. We have
updated Note 48 to read:
“A variance request from Chapter 12 of the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards (12.2.2 Minimum Depth) for minimum depth of cover over all utilities,
in this case storm sewer, was approved on September 19, 2016 with conditions.”
Osiander Street limits of concrete paving has been updated to extend to the
westernmost edge of the westernmost inlet. Plan construction notes have been
revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 14. Utility Plans – Sheet 2 – Traffic signage notes. Traffic Engineer
needs to replace City of Fort Collins Engineer as noted on the plans.
Response: Traffic signage notes have been revised as noted on the plan
redlines to indicate Traffic Engineer.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 15. Utility Plans – Is the fire hydrant located next to the emergency
access existing or new? It is show in dark solid lines as if it is new, but there are no
notes to indicate that is a new fire hydrant to be installed.
Response: The fire hydrant is existing. The fire hydrant was identified as existing
on construction note 5 on the Master Improvements Plan. We have updated all
affected sheets to graphically represent the fire hydrant as existing.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 16. Utility Plans – Sheet 6 – do not label the street slopes on this sheet.
They do not match any that are shown on the actual plan and profile designs. Shwo the
profile alignment, but don’t provide the specific slopes. By doing so it just means if there
Page 4 of 12
is a revision to them in the future that you will also need to revise this sheet.
Response: Street slopes have been removed
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 17. Utility Plans – Sheet 7 - The minimum cover over the pipes within the
street are not labeled on the plans as required by the conditions of the variance
request.
Response: The cover over the pipe in Osiander Street are now labeled.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 18. Utility Plans – Based on the variance that was approved Osiander
shall be concrete from Redwood to the western edge of the inlets. Additional inlets have
been added since the original variance was requested and the pipe connecting these
inlets is not meeting minimum cover requirements. The concrete section needs to
extend to the western edge of the inlets.
Response: Osiander Street limits of concrete paving has been updated to extend
to the westernmost edge of the westernmost inlet. Plan construction notes have
been revised accordingly.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 19. Utility Plans – The plans are now showing a rain garden along Suniga
that extends into the 15 foot utility easement along Suniga, including a retaining wall in
this easement that appears to be located only a few feet away from the Water Main. I
have concerns regarding this design. If this is allowed to stay – The developer will be
responsible for any repairs/ replacement of the rain garden or wall when disturbed by
utility work. It will not be the utilities responsibility to repair and reinstate this rain garden
– and we will need to look at the depth of everything as it may not be allowed because of
the depth and how this private improvement will interfere with the use of the easement. I
did not see any place in the plans where information on this wall is provided to
understand the height and the proposed design. A structural wall requiring a building
permit cannot be done in an easement.
Response: The rain garden has been modified to eliminate the retaining wall. There
is some grading in the existing easement, but the water line cover has been
maintained.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 20. Utility Plans – Master Improvement Plans – if you are going to spell
out everything that is to be built you need to identify that the sidewalk along the North
side of Osiander from Blondel to Redwood is to be constructed.
Response: The new sidewalk to be constructed on the north side of Osiander
Street from Blondel to Redwood has been identified on the Master Improvements
plans
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 21. Utility Plans – the Emergency access will not be a driveway cut as
indicated on the plans. It can be roll curb, but would not be a driveway cut. It also
looks like on the plans that you are showing ADA ramps on each side of the
emergency access drive in the sidewalk. We don’t want those either. This is not a
driveway and yes emergency services will use this occasionally, but not with enough
frequency that we need to have peds view it as a high frequency driveway.
Response: Understood. The representation of a driveway cut has been
eliminated. Modified City of Longmont mountable curb is specified as previously
discussed. ADA ramps in the sidewalk have been eliminated. Construction notes
have been updated.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 22. Utility Plans – Master improvement Plans – need to indicate that
Osiander is to have concrete pavement and the limits. The south alley driveway needs
Page 5 of 12
to be built to the property line.
Response: Concrete pavement and limits of concrete pavement has been
identified. The Osiander Street typical street section has also been updated with
the limits of standard pavement section and the concrete pavement section.
The south alley driveway (Alley L) concrete is now shown to the right-of-way line.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 23. Utility Plans – Osiander Plan and Profile – The vertical curves
shown are too short. As per 7-17 the minimum crest curve vertical curve for a local
street is 70 feet.
Response: The vertical curves have been revised.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 24. Utility Plans – Osiander Plan and Profile – Need to identify the
station where the horizontal curve ends. This is needed so I can understand where the
centerline stationing is true and what part of the design needs to have the true slope
and distances labeled.
Response: The plan and profile are revised.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 25. Utility Plans – Osiander Plan and Profile – Slopes only go to the start/
end of a vertical curve. They do not extend into the vertical curve and the slope used to
determine the A.D. is the slopes going into and out of the vertical curve. There is no
magical change of slope within a vertical curve that can be used.
Response: The plan and profile are revised.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 26. Utility Plans – Osiander Plan and Profile – You have the alleys
identified on the plans, but do these stations align with the centerline of the alley or
one side?
Response: The plan and profile are revised.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 27. Utility Plans – Osiander Plan and Profile - Have a great break on the
right flowline that exceeds grade break standards.
Response: The plan and profile are revised.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 28. Utility Plans – Sheet 12 – need to indicate on the sheet the limits of
the concrete paving. STA?
Response: The limits of the concrete pavement is now shown including start and
end stations.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 29. Utility Plans – alley profile – The stationing is not shown on the plan
view. The General Notes indicate that CL station is used unless otherwise noted. So is
this center line stationed or flowline stationing. I don’t know how to review this and if
centerline stationing was used and then true slopes and grades need to be provided or
what you are showing is the true flowline slopes. I can check it once this is known.
Response: We changed the stationing to the north flowline. Stationing was and is
shown in the plan view and the profile is labeled “flowline stationing”.
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 30. Utility Plans – alley profile – The A.D. numbers for your crest vertical
curves are wrong – at least based on the slopes you are showing going into and out of
the curves. Those are the numbers used as that is the grade entering and exiting the
VC..
Page 6 of 12
Response: The plan and profile are revised.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 31. Utility Plans – alley profile – No vertical curve shall be used at the
low point. As per comment #29 and #43 on the plans before final submittal: 29.
Reminder minimum flowline grade is .5% and that is what is required going into a low
point in the street or alley. 43. Alley Design – at the flowline the low point in any street
is required to have .5% going in and out of the low point. Since the alley slopes to one
side – I would use the VC along the south edge to reduce the dip effect, but the flowline
needs to meet the minimums. Need s sidewalk culvert or inlet at the low point in order
to get the flows into the parking lot.
Response: The vertical curve at the low point has been eliminated. Sidewalk
culverts did not have adequate capacities so inlets and storm sewer is provided
to convey alley runoff north. We will profile the south side of Emmaus at the low
point with a vertical curve to reduce the dip effect.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 32. Utility Plans – alley profile – To the east of the low point you will need
grade breaks meeting standards to take you from the .5% going into the low point to
the 1.75% you show.
Response: Please reference revised profile.
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 33. Utility Plans – Transition lengths need to be labeled on the
intersection details. Why is the transition at Redwood and Osiander so long?
Response: Redwood and Osiander intersection is complete and approved.
We are maintaining grades and breaks and tying into the existing cross
sloped concrete.
Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 34. Utility Plans – Detail 701 needs to be added to the plans. This is
needed for the vertical curb installation for Osiander.
Response: Detail 701 has been added.
Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 35. Utility Plans – Details 706.1, 1605 need to be removed from the
plans. There are no driveways that are being taken off of Osiander, only alleys and
emergency access roll curb and 1605 was not approved for use.
Response: Details 706.1 and 1605 have been removed.
Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 36. Utility Plans – The emergency access will need to be a roll curb - not
a driveway. Our standard roll curb can be used or the modified lower curb that is to be
used at the pull-out can be used if there are delineators behind the sidewalk to clarify it
is not an access. A detail is needed for the drive-over curb if that is what is to be used
at the emergency access that shows the drive-over curb with a 2 foot pan.
Response: Drive-over curb has been provided at the emergency access. Master
Improvements plan construction notes have been updated.
A drive-over curb with 2 foot pan detail has been provided.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 37. Utility Plans – A variance needs to be written to allow for the 3 foot
pavement section behind the drop curb. The minimum sidewalk width or width of
concrete to be placed within the ROW is 4 feet. This is because we have had problems
with lesser widths not being of enough bulk and mass to stay in place.
Identify the proposed depth of these panels in the request.
Response: We will coordinate variance request requirements with you.
Page 7 of 12
Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 38. Utility Plans – the concrete behind the drop curbs. We need to
look at this design. The small concrete points are normally not allowed because they
will break almost immediately. Since these are intended to be driven on I think we
need to look at how to square these ends off. I will talk with our inspector and draw a
preferred pattern on the plans.
Response: We will coordinate the final preferred detail with you.
Comment Number: 39 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: See additional comments on plans.
Response: Redline comments have been accommodated.
Comment Number: 40 Comment Originated: 02/15/2017
02/15/2017: 39. If a gate is not installed to control general access across the
emergency access easement then flexible bollards shall be shown to be installed
and maintained along the alley and Osiander behind the sidewalk.
Response: Flexible bollards have been added.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Stephanie Blochowiak, 970-416-4290, sblochowiak@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Regarding black-tailed prairie dogs and the proposed project site:
a. The Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) documented black-tailed prairie
dogs living within the boundaries of this proposed project area.
b. Provide the acreage of the black-tailed prairie dog colony located on the proposed
project site.
c. City Code and Land Use Code require that for any prairie dogs inhabiting a project
site, prior to any site construction work, the animals must be removed either through
relocation or humane eradication.
d. Provide a prairie dog removal plan as soon as possible and by next round of FDP
review.
e. Should this project achieve approval and proceed to construction, a burrowing owl
survey, in accordance with Colorado Parks and Wildlife standards shall be provided
prior to any prairie dog removal and prior to issuance of Development Construction
Permit (DCP). The survey must be completed by a qualified wildlife biologist.
f. Should this project achieve approval and proceed to construction, documentation
needs to be provided prior to issuance of DCP (at least one week prior to DCP
meeting is ideal) regarding the burrowing owl survey and the relocation of
black-tailed prairie dogs. Documentation should be in the form of a signed letter or
memo from the wildlife biologist for the survey, and from the contractor(s) for the
relocation (date, time, methods).
It is important to provide this documentation as soon as possible.
Response: Per conversation with Environmental Planner, environment consultant will
conduct burrowing owl survey and provide acreage of colony and removal plan prior
to DCP meeting.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Page 8 of 12
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Report seeding rate in pounds per acre in addition to pounds per square
foot. Both the Water Quality and the Dryland Native Seed Mix pounds/acre drill seed
application rate should be at least 15 lbs/acre. If broadcast seed method is to be used
double the drill seed rate. Currently the drill seed rate in the seed mixes looks good. In
both the Water Quality and the Dryland Native Seed Mix tables include a column calling
out the broadcast seed application rate as well.
Response: Native seed application rates now reflect drill and broadcast methods in
lbs/acre.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Add Native Seed Mix notes to landscape plans.
a. NATIVE SEED SHALL BE PROVIDED BY (INSERT SEED MIX NAME AND
COMPANY FROM WHICH IT WILL COME FROM and COMPANY CONTACT
INFORMATION) AND THE GROUND SHALL BE CULTIVATED LIGHTLY THEN
SEEDED IN TWO DIRECTIONS TO DISTRIBUTE SEED EVENTLY OVER ENTIRE
AREA.
b. IF CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE TO SEED MIX BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS
APPROVAL MUST BE PROVIDED BY CITY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER.
c. PRIOR TO SEEDING SOIL WILL BE AERATED AND SOIL AMENDMENTS ADDED
AS NECESSARY. APPROPRIATE NATIVE SEEDING EQUIPMENT WILL BE USED
(STANDARD TURF SEEDING OR AGRICULTURE SEEDING EQUIPMENT ARE
NOT BE USED).
d. DRILL SEED APPLICATION RECOMMENDED PER SPECIFIED APPLICATION
RATE TO NO MORE THAN 1 INCH DEPTH. FOR BROADCAST SEEDING INSTEAD
OF DRILL SEEDING METHOD - DOUBLE SPECIFICIED APPLICATION RATE.
REFER TO NATIVE SEED MIX TABLE FOR SPECIES, PERCENTAGES AND
APPLICATION RATES.
e. TREAT NATIVE SEED MIX AREA PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SEED WITH
APPROPRIATE HERBICIDE TO HELP CONTROL HERBACEOUS WEED SPECIES.
ONLY AFTER APPROPRIATE TIME PERIOD THEN APPLY NATIVE SEED AS
CALLED FOR ON APPROVED PLANS.
f. AFTER SEEDING THE AREA SHALL BE COVERED WITH CRIMPED STRAW OR
OTHER APPROPRIATE METHODS AND PROVIDED TEMPORARY IRRIGATION
UNTIL SEED IS ESTABLISHED. CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR SEEDED AREA
FOR PROPER IRRIGATION, EROSION CONTROL, GERMINATION AND
RESEEDING AS NEEDED TO ESTABLISH COVER.
g. THE APPROVED SEED MIX AREA IS INTENDED TO BE MAINTAINED IN A
NATURAL-LIKE LANDSCAPE AESTHETIC. IF AND WHEN MOWING OCCURS IN
NATIVE GRASS SEED MIX AREAS DO NOT MOW LOWER THAN 6-8 INCHES IN
HEIGHT TO AVOID INHIBITING NATIVE PLANT GROWTH.
h. NATIVE SEED AREA WILL BE CONSIDERED ESTABLISHED WHEN SEVENTY-
PERCENT TOTAL COVER IS REACHED WITH NO LARGER THAN ONE FOOT
SQUARE BARE SPOTS AND/OR UNTIL DEEMED ESTABLISHED BY CITY
PLANNING SERVICES.
Response: Notes added per conversations with Environmental Planner
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Overall landscape plans and plant selections look good. Thank you for
selecting many plants native to this area and appropriate for the Fort Collins ecotype and
Page 9 of 12
elevations.
Response: Thanks!
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Clarify that 3000K or less luminaires shall be called out clearly on
lighting plan and construction plans.
Cooler color temperatures are harsher at night and cause more disruption to
circadian (biological) rhythms for both humans and wildlife. Several departments
within the City of Fort Collins have been working together to address this issue; they
are referred to as the City¿s Night Sky team. Results of the team¿s work can
currently be viewed on the City¿s Public Records website in Resolution 2016-074, a
summary of City of Fort Collins City Council Intent and General Policy Regarding
Night Sky Objectives. For further information regarding health effects please see:
http://darksky.org/ama-report-affirms-human-health-impacts-from-leds/
Response: Boxes now highlight fixture specifications on cutsheets. Legend
also calls out specs.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
Continued:
2/17/2017:
06/20/2016:
The first street tree on Suniga east of Blondel is a flowering pear. Please change to
a canopy shade tree for better visibility under the canopy at this intersection.
Response: Canopy tree can not be placed in this location due to separation
requirements from street lights. Pear is left, but out of sight distance triangle.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017:
Tree Species Selection
Please reduce the number of Catalpa by incorporating Hackberry or another
acceptable street tree species.
Please do not use Mountainash in the right of way. This species is not on the street
tree list, nor is it readily adaptable to harsh environments.
Response: Catalpas reduced, all species meet diversity requirements.
Mountain ash substituted with Accolade Elm.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017:
Please use the City of Fort Collins Tree Protection notes, which are available
through the project planner or the City Forester.
Response: There are no existing trees on site to protect.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Coy Althoff, 970-224-6150, CAlthoff@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Light & Power has existing electric facilities in the area that can be
extended to the proposed development.
Page 10 of 12
Response: Acknowledged: The two new street lights near the east end of
Osiander Street that you identified in your Monday, February 13, 2017 4:05 PM
e-mail have been added to the plans. Construction notes for both street lights
have been added to Sheet 11 of 27; Master Improvements Plan (East).
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Development charges, electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges
and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development.
Response: Acknowledged
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Contact Light and Power Engineering to coordinate the transformer
and electric meter locations, please show the locations on the utility plans.
Response: Please provide the preferred transformer and meter locations.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: 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.
Response: The two (2) street lights on Osiander Street and the intersection of
Osiander and Redwood have been added to the plans. Master Improvements
Plan construction notes have been added.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/15/2017
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_18November2016_Amendment.pdf
You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee
estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers.
02/15/2017:
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/08/2017
02/08/2017: FIRE LANE MARKING
The updated fire lane sign placement shows four signs. This plan is acknowledged
by PFA with the following minor adjustments:
> Fire lane signs at the cross over on Tract B, should be revised to be positioned
parallel with the Osiander and Emmaus, and not at a 45 degree angle as shown.
> The two signs on the north side (at Emmaus) should be moved approximately
6'-10' south so as to be off the edge of the public alley. The two signs on the south
side (at Osiander) are appropriately placed.
> These four signs are indicated on the Site Plan but not properly called out. Only
one is labeled as fire lane signage. The other three are not indicated with any
labeling. Arrows should be added to indicate all four.
> The fire lane sign detail currently indicated on sheet 24 should be update to
observe the current Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Drawing #1418.
Response: Above comments have been accommodated based on our best
interpretation.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/12/2017
02/12/2017: GATE
The emergency access crossover at Track B is shown with a gate. Gating is NOT
being required by PFA and this lane may be left open to be shared with pedestrians
Page 11 of 12
and bikes. PFA only requires this area to be maintained unobstructed at all times (to
include snow removal). Should city planning or local HOA require this access lane to
be gated, the gating plan shall be submitted to PFA for review and approval. Code
language provided below.
> IFC 503.6: The installation of security gates across a fire apparatus access road
shall be approved by the fire chief. Where security gates are installed, they shall
have an approved means of emergency operation. The security gates and the
emergency operation shall be maintained operational at all times.
> IFC D103.5: Gates securing fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all of
the following criteria:
1. The minimum gate width for vehicle access shall be 20 feet.
2. Gates shall be of the swinging or sliding type.
3. Construction of gates shall be of materials that allow manual operation by one
person.
4. Gate components shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times and
replaced or repaired when defective.
5. Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening the gate by fire
department personnel for emergency access. Emergency opening devices shall be
approved by the fire code official.
6. Manual opening gates shall not be locked with an unapproved Knox padlock, or
chain and Knox padlock, unless they are capable of being opened by means of
forcible entry tools or when a key box containing the key(s) to the lock is installed at
the gate location.
7. Gate design and locking device specifications shall be submitted for approval by
the fire code official prior to installation.
Response: Knock down bollards have been provided instead of a gate.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/12/2017
02/12/2017: WAYFINDING
PFA is questioning if all units accessible from the public alley can be addressed off
the public alley now that it is named? That may forego the need to provide
monument signs to enable wayfinding.
Response: We prefer to address off the alley and forego the monuments
signs.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/12/2017
02/12/2017: PUBLIC ALLEY
PFA is questioning if the public alley shouldn't be labeled as a public ROW on the
plat?
Response:
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/12/2017
02/12/2017: LANDSCAPE PLANS
Scale labeled as 1"=30' but plans are printed at 1"=20'.
Response: Scale corrected
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwray@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017: Based on the number of comments, another round of review is
needed. Coordinate with me for routing.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Page 12 of 12
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
02/10/2017 02/09/2017:
The Erosion Control Report (Stormwater Management Control) submitted is
incomplete and not current neither for City Erosion Control Requirements nor for
State SWMP requirements please review requirements located on the City's
website: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/Accomp_Doc.pdf
The current erosion control measures as shown on the submitted plans are still
lacking some protection along inlets to culverts as well as pond outlets, additionally
there is no protection shown for the grading being performed north of Suniga Drive.
Please refer to redlines for further detail. The erosion control escrow calculations
will need to be revised based on modifications made to the plans with any future
submittals.
Response: Acknowledged. Refer to revised report, plans and escrow
calculations.
Contact: Mark Taylor, 970-416-2494, mtaylor@fcgov.com
Topic: Drainage Report
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/10/2017
02/10/2017: Please highlight the development location on the FEMA Map Panel
included toward the rear of the drainage report.
Response: Done.
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/10/2017
02/10/2017: Thank you for adding the note concerning the need for floodplain use
permits for work in the floodplain. Please add another note to all the pages which
include the floodplain note. "A No-Rise Certification is required prior to beginning any
work within the floodway."
Response: The requested note has been added to all sheets with the floodplain
use permit note.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017: Please make changes to the Benchmark Statement as marked. See
redlines.
Response: Done.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated:
02/17/2017 02/17/2017: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets.
Response: Done.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated:
02/17/2017: 02/17/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Accommodated.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated:
02/16/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 02/16/2017
Response: Plans updated.
Page 13 of 12
Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
Comment Number: 11
02/16/2017: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: There are cut off text issues. See redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please arrange the statements on sheet 1 as marked. See redlines.
Response: Plans updated.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please add title commitment information as available.
Response: No updated title commitment is available
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please revise the square feet in Note #6 as marked. See redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please add notes to the Tracts as marked. See redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please make changes to the symbols & legend as marked. See
redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please change the Lot & Tract areas to the nearest square foot.
Response: Plans updated
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please remove the "20' Alley" note from Osiander Street on sheet 3.
See redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Please replace the Tract designations as marked on sheet 4. See
redlines.
Response: Plans updated
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: Some of the easement descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are
going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat.
Sheet 2 also shows Tract B as "Emergency, Pedestrian And Bicycle Access Only".
The Plat shows no restriction. See redlines.
Response: Easement descriptions now match the plat.
Page 14 of 12
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Nicole Hahn, 970-221-6820, nhahn@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/15/2017
02/15/2017: We need final signing and striping plans.
Response: No signaling and striping plans are required with is project. Redwood
Street was installed with Aspen Heights. Osiander Street is a residential local and
Emmaus Lane is a public alley. Refer to Master Improvements Plans for street
sign locations.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/16/2017
02/16/2017: 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:
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017: Please add verbiage a thrust block is required for Note 2 on sheet 4.
Response: Accommodated.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017: For the water line deflection on sheet 4, please add a note stating the
radius of the curve and the deflection proposed per joint. The note needs to also
state the deflection shall be less than City and manufacturer maximum deflections.
Response: Accommodated.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 02/17/2017
02/17/2017: Please remove text of 11 1/2 degree bend in note 6 on sheet 5.
Response: Accommodated.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2338, mglasgow@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Bicycle parking at clubhouse should have 4 spaces. Site plan only
shows 3 spaces.
Response: 4 bicycle parking spaces are now shown.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 02/14/2017
02/14/2017: Add front setback on two family attached typical.
Response: Per conversation with Zoning, notes have been added.