HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA - PDP210017 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
1
Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview RESPONSES
November 05, 2021
Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Ave.
Berthoud, CO 80513
RE: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia, PDP210017, Round Number 1
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Fort Collins Nissan-Kia. If you have questions about any
comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your
Development Review Coordinator, Tenae Beane via phone at 970-224-6119 or via email
at tbeane@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Tenae Beane, 970-224-6119, tbeane@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
I will be your primary point of contact throughout the development review and
permitting process. If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the
project reviewers, or need assistance throughout the process, please let me
know and I can assist you and your team. Please include me in all email
correspondence with other reviewers and keep me informed of any phone
conversations. Thank you!
2
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
As part of your resubmittal you will respond to the comments provided in this
letter. This letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this
document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a
different font color. When replying to the comment letter please be detailed in
your responses, as all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide
reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments have not
been addressed, when applicable, avoiding responses like noted or
acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Please follow the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming
Standards found at https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic
submittal requirements and file naming standards_v1_8 1 19.pdf?1566857888.
File names should begin with the file type, followed by the project information,
and round number. Example: UTILITY PLANS_PROJECT
NAME_PDP_Rd2.pdf
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being
the cut-off for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit your
plans, please notify me advanced notice as possible.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Temporary Service Changes - City of Fort Collins Development Review
In order to continue providing thorough reviews and giving every project the
attention it deserves, the City of Fort Collins is implementing temporary
changes in how we serve our development customers. As you may be aware,
we are experiencing staff shortages in a number of key departments, which has
begun to impact the timeliness of our reviews. We recognize that development
and construction play a critical role in our community’s vibrancy and economic
recovery, and we have been exploring options for mitigating impacts to our
customers. As a result, we will be making some temporary service changes.
Beginning Monday May 10th one additional week of review time will be added
to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks).
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Development Review and Building Permit fees are proposed to change
January 1st, 2022. The fees are not finalized at this time, but your Development
Review Coordinator will keep you updated on the final amounts.
3
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
LUC 2.211 Lapse, Rounds of Review: Applicants, within one hundred eighty
(180) days of receipt of written comments and notice to respond from the City
on any submittal (or subsequent revision to a submittal) of an application for
approval of a development plan, shall file such additional or revised submittal
documents as are necessary to address such comments from the City. If the
additional submittal information or revised submittal is not filed within said
period of time, the development application shall automatically lapse and
become null and void.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
LUC 2.211(D) Project Development Plan and Plat. Following the approval of a
project development plan and upon the expiration of any right of appeal, or upon
the final decision of the City Council following appeal, if applicable, the
applicant must submit a final plan for all or part of the project development plan
within three (3) years... If such approval is not timely obtained, the project
development plan (or any portion thereof which has not received final approval)
shall automatically lapse and become null and void.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
This proposed project is processing as a Type 2 Development Plan. The
decision maker for Type 2 is the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board. For the
hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 800 feet
(excluding public right-of-way and publicly owned open space). Staff would
need to be in agreement the project is ready for Hearing approximately 3-5
weeks prior to the hearing. I have attached the P&Z schedule, which has key
dates leading up to the hearing.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to
moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff would need to be in
agreement the project is ready for Hearing approximately 3 5 weeks prior to the
hearing.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/03/2021
11/03/2021: INFORMATION
The Addition of Permitted Use part of the project requires a second
neighborhood to be held after the first round of review. It might be beneficial to
schedule the neighborhood meeting after this next round of review.
Response: Yes, we should get that set up. Thanks.
4
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/01/2021
Original Comment: The building design must demonstrate compliance with the standards in code sections
3.5.1 and 3.5.3. This provides standards for variation in massing and façade treatment.
Building design shall contribute to the uniqueness of the Fort Collins community with
predominant materials, elements, features, color range and activity areas tailored
specifically to the site and its context. Please depict building design elements such as
material selections that are unique to the community and demonstrate that the
“standardized prototype design” is modified as necessary to be unique.
For comment 1 in the Conceptual review letter, the applicant’s response says to
see attached elevations and doesn’t provide any information on how the
standard dealership prototypes are intended to be designed in the elevations to
meet the requirement, which says that “Building design shall contribute to the
uniqueness of a zone district, and/or the Fort Collins community with
predominant materials, elements, features, color range and activity areas
tailored specifically to the site and its context.” Please provide a more detailed
response indicating how you proposed to meet this requirement. Staff is open
to your suggestions on how to meet this requirement, but was not able to
complete a review with the information provided.
Response: 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility
(C) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale.
The adjacent properties feature 1 and 2-story commercial buildings. For the proposed Nissan and Kia
sites, we will incorporate a combination of 1 and 2-story massing to be proportional to the scale of the
neighborhood.
(E) Building Materials.
1. The existing neighborhood features commercial buildings with aluminum storefront, stucco, metal panel,
stone and brick / cmu masonry in a variety of colors. The proposed Nissan and Kia buildings will also
incorporate a combination of aluminum storefront / curtain wall, composite metal panel, stucco and cmu in a
consistent family of tones to unify the development.
2. The aluminum storefront will utilize anodized aluminum and clear glass to reduce glare / reflectivity and
provide display windows along the College Avenue frontage.
(F) Building Color.
The existing neighborhood features a variety of black, gray, white, earth tone, red, orange, and green
materials. Additionally, the current site has an existing Nissan car dealership building which will be
demolished for the new Nissan and Kia dealership buildings. The proposed Nissan and Kia buildings will
feature similar light / dark gray metals and masonry as the existing building with revised massing to meet
corporate dealership design standards.
(I) Outdoor Storage Areas/Mechanical Equipment.
Loading docks, truck parking, outdoor storage (including storage containers), utility meters, HVAC and other
mechanical equipment, trash collection, trash compaction and other service functions shall be incorporated
into the overall design theme of the building and the landscape accordingly. All rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be screened from public view by integrating it into building and roof design to the maximum
5
extent feasible.
1.5.3 Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings
(C)Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Walkways and Parking.
The main entrances for the proposed Nissan and Kia buildings shall face towards College Avenue with
connecting walkways to street sidewalks.
(D)Variation in Massing.
To help break up the building massing, each elevation of the proposed Nissan and Kia buildings will utilize a
combination of 1 and 2-story massing to be proportional to the scale of the neighborhood as noted in the
exterior elevations. Horizontal masses shall not exceed a height:width ratio of 1:3 without substantial
variation in massing that includes a change in height and a projecting or recessed elements. Also changes
in mass shall be related to entrances, the integral structure and/or the organization of interior spaces and
activities and not merely for cosmetic effect.
(E)Character and Image.
(1)Site Specific Design.
The standardized prototype design for Nissan and Kia have been modified to incorporate additional roof
massing and stucco / masonry materials to contribute to the predominant materials of the adjacent
neighborhood. These elements have been tailored specifically to the site and its context accordingly.
(2)Facade Treatment.
(a)Minimum Wall Articulation.
Building structural bays shall be a maximum of thirty (30) feet in width. Bays shall be visually established by
architectural features such as columns, ribs or pilasters, piers and fenestration pattern accordingly to add
architectural interest. No wall that faces a street or connecting walkway shall have a blank, uninterrupted
length exceeding thirty (30) feet without including at least two (2) of the following: change in plane, change in
texture or masonry pattern, windows, or an equivalent element that subdivides the wall into human scale
proportions. All sides of the building shall include materials and design characteristics consistent with those
on the front and will not include the use of inferior or lesser quality materials for side or rear facades.
(3) Facades.
The proposed Nissan and Kia facades that face streets or connecting pedestrian frontage shall be
subdivided and proportioned using features such as windows, entrances, overhangs and awnings along no
less than fifty (50) percent of the facade.
(4) Entrances.
The proposed primary entrances for the Nissan and Kia buildings are clearly defined accordingly with
framed entry overhangs and architectural elements in order to provide shelter from the summer sun and
winter weather.
(6)Base and Top Treatments.
All elevations have been provided with recognizable base and top materials. Base materials include
storefront / curtain wall glass, stucco and cmu materials. Top materials include contrasting / stepped metal
panel and stucco materials. See exterior elevations for reference.
(9)Illumination prohibition.
The proposed Nissan and Kia buildings shall not include exterior-mounted exposed neon/fiber optic/ rope
L.E.D. lighting, illuminated translucent materials (except signs), illuminated striping or banding, and
6
illuminated product displays on appurtenant structures (e.g., fuel dispensers).
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/01/2021
Original Comment: The property is in the South College Corridor Plan area (SCCP). This plan encourages
high quality architecture and materials, and also enhancing the “public realm” with public
plazas, multi-layered landscaping, rock and wall features and other details to enhance the
corridor.
For comment 2 in the Conceptual review letter, the applicant’s response says
that this detail will be provided with the PDP. More response information would
be helpful on the features proposed in the application within the dealership site
plan and how these design elements are intended to address and meet the
intent of the SCCP. Please provide a response in writing with the resubmittal.
Response: The project complies with many of the Vision elements of the South College Corridor Plan as
follows:
• Connectivity. By realigning Venus Avenue and closing Crestridge Street, the project provides a
street network and rear access opportunity as defined in the Plan. In addition, on-street bike lanes
and sidewalks provide connections.
• Gateway Elements. We have created distinct entries at both dealerships by adding walkways and
plazas with benches and stone columns.
• Improve Traffic Safety Along the Highway for All Users. By realigning Venus Avenue and closing
Crestridge Street in its current unsafe location, the project creates a much safer situation. In
addition, the construction of the traffic signal at Venus and 287 will also improve safety and access
for the surrounding neighborhood and area.
• Reduce the Impact of Parking. The project provides have distinct entries at both dealerships by
adding walkways and plazas with benches and stone columns. Walkways to the building entries
will be enhanced with colored, stamped paving.
• New Signalized Intersections. The new signal at Smokey/Venus and 287 will provide safer turning
movements.
• Gateway Design. Monument signs, multi-layered landscaping and distinct entry elements create a
sense of arrival.
• Natural resources within and adjacent to the South College Corridor will be protected and
enhanced to the maximum extent feasible. Natural features within the site will be protected with
the proper buffers and native landscape treatments. Natural drainages will be preserved and
enhanced.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/01/2021
For comment 4 in the Conceptual review letter, a Modification request was not
provided with the PDP, although the response says that a request is provided at
PDP submittal. With the resubmittal, please provide the request so that a formal
review of the modification can begin.
Response: A Modification is not required based on the arterial street frontage and the lack of pedestrian-
scale along the state highway.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/01/2021
For comments 8 and 10 in the Conceptual review letter, the vehicle display lot
for the Kia does not appear to address the standard mentioned for perimeter
parking lot screening. The comment response does not address this. The
landscape perimeter design in this area is incomplete – only sod is provided
7
along the perimeter where the vehicle display area is located, which does not
meet the parking lot perimeter landscape standards. Related to comment 10,
the landscape interior compliance information is not provided. If these
standards can’t be met, please provide an alternative compliance request.
Please provide information with the resubmittal so that the review of comments
8 and 10 from the conceptual letter can be completed.
Response: The Kia site now has landscape like Nissan – they are mirrored on either side of the vehicle
entry. A table for both lots indicating parking lot interior landscape has been added.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/01/2021
Drawing scale: Sheet 3 of the site plan does not appear to be scaled correctly.
Response: The bar scale has been corrected to read 1” = 60’.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/01/2021
No lighting plan and lightings details that can be reviewed were provided, and
this will be an important part of the PDP to review prior to the next neighborhood
meeting, which is required after the first round of PDP review.
Response: A lighting plan will be provided with the next round of review.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: Tree Stocking: The north side of the Nissan building complies,
however there are gaps to the east, southwest and west where the tree spacing
is not met and there are no trees within 50' along the building walls. Please add
more trees to the east and west. To the southwest, please propose options that
add more trees.
Response: Some columnar evergreens were added on the east side of Nissan building. Large shade trees
have also been added on the south side of the building. Trees have also been placed along the inner
driveway located southwest of the Nissan building.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
For the parking aisle in the southwest corner of the Nissan site, this area would
need to show existing and proposed landscaping. Is this dealership parking or
for the school?
Response: The parking lot is for the school and additional landscape has been added.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
The Kia dealership building does not meet the tree stocking requirement for
trees spaced around the building perimeter within 50 feet of the building along
the east. Please add trees along this side.
Response: Due to site restrictions, we are unable to place trees on east side of Kia building.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
To the west of the parking drive aisle along the Kia building, this would need to
meet the parking lot perimeter tree spacing and landscaping requirements. The
landscape plan appears to be incomplete in this area.
Response: Taylor junipers and large shrubs have been added on the west side of Kia building.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
Along the south parking perimeter for Kia, this also does not meet the parking
lot perimeter tree spacing requirements.
Response: Trees have been added to the south side of the Kia parking lot.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
Please confirm that all proposed outdoor storage areas are indicated and
screened, and all mechanical equipment is indicated, and screening details included if needed.
8
Response: The only outdoor storage area is the trash enclosure.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
Is there any proposed building foundation landscaping around the Kia building?
The PDP would not meet this requirement as shown.
Response: Due to site restrictions, we are unable to place foundation plantings around Kia building.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
Please indicate in a diagram or on the landscape plan the overall parking lot
areas in square feet and the amount of interior landscape space depicted in
square feet.
Response: Table has been added to show parking lot interior landscaping calculations. Please refer to
sheet LS00.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: Please work with Parks Planning to provide a public access
easement if needed for the trail along the west with the language and location
that they will need.
Response: We plan on touching base with Parks Planning after this round of review.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Dave Betley, 970-221-6573, dbetley@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: For Approval: The applicant is looking to vacate the Crestridge
Street. coordination may have already been performed with the property owner
to the west? The owner at this time has access to College Avenue. Vacation
will transfer access to Venus Drive. Is the applicant agreeable to this
configuration? The site layout does not afford this parcel access from College.
This will have to be coordinated and a letter of intent gathered from the property
owner. The adjacent property owner would need to be involved in the vacation
process. The current vacation is shown as a Tract on the plat. Part of this
property will go back to the adjacent property owner. The plat should reflect the
correct property lines after the vacation.
Response: Crestridge was entirely dedicated by the northern property owner therefore it all goes back to
the northern property owner. This has been discussed the adjacent property owner. We have removed
the Tract designation from this property and have included it as Lot 1 Block 1. The property owner to the
south will be allowed to access through this property and easements are dedicated for this on the plat.
They will also be allowed to park vehicles on this property via a lease with WWW Properties LLC. A letter
of intent is provided by this property owner with the submittal.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: For Approval: The applicant will need to dedicate the additional
right of way for College Avenue. The right of way is based on the half street
cross section. The right of way dedication would be half of the 144' as 72'. The
right of way for College Avenue appears to be adequate. Can the applicant
please provide a couple of half street measurements from the Centerline to
verify that no right of way needs to be dedicated.
Response: The subdivision plat and plans show additional ROW to be dedicated where applicable at the
south end of the property otherwise all other ROW is adequate. The half street measurements have been
added to the horizontal control plans.
9
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: For Approval: It appears that the project has actually placed the
sidewalk in the ultimate location for the College Avenue Improvements. Can the
applicant please discuss the design. Is the sidewalk placement in the actual
location of the ultimate College Avenue Cross Section and develop a cross
section showing the location of the right of way based on the half street cross
section. Profiles for College avenue will need to be submitted with the plan set.
Please include discussion and design of the Parkway.
Response: The sidewalk is shown in it’s ultimate location at 8’ wide. Since there is additional right of way,
it is pushed 2.5’ further to the west which allows for a larger landscape strip of 11.5’. Molly Roche
requested a 10’ landscape strip if possible (9’ minimum). Even if the sidewalk is expanded to include joint
pedestrian and bicycle use a 9.5’ landscape strip would remain. We are providing the cross section with
an on-street bike lane as shown in the South College Avenue Plan and US 287 Environmental Study. We
think that it might be important for the City to decide whether they want on street bike lanes in this location,
a separate raised bike lane behind the curb or a wider shared bike lane / sidewalk. The City has a 2014
Bicycle Master Plan and updated arterial street sections in LCUASS that show a separate bike lane above
the curb & gutter. We believe the solution we are providing now works and should be adequate for PDP
approval, but we think it would be good for the City to decide what they ultimately want along this corridor.
Profiles along the College Avenue flowline will be provided with the final plans.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: For Approval: It is acknowledged that the Venus drive was
designed with a 72 foot based on the old Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards Commercial Local Street Standard. It is also acknowledged that the
this cross section was negotiated with the adjacent property owners before the
adoption of the new standards. The applicant has submitted a variant.
Engineering will review the request.
Response: A Variance request for this standard is included along with the variance request for the
minimum tangent length as mentioned in Comment #6.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: For Information: The applicant will need to submit a completed
plan set to CDOT and obtain approval as a condition of approval of the FDP
plans.
Response: Noted. The second PDP submittal has been forwarded to CDOT.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Approval: Please submit a variance for the minimum tangent
length not being met for the vertical curve prior to the intersection of Venus
Avenue and College Drive.
Response: Variance request was submitted for the minimum tangent length not being met for the
horizontal curve prior to the intersection of Venus. We are not aware of any standards related to the
“vertical curve”.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Approval: It appears that the right of way dedication does not
propagate through the entire frontage of the plat. The very southern edge of the
site has the property line to the east on the plat but shows the property line
going straight through on the utility plans. Can you please correct this on the
plat to match the representation on the utility plans. Maybe it is a matter that this
area need to be called out as dedicated right of way?
Response: The area has been labeled as right of way dedication on the plat.
10
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Approval: Please revise the title sheet of the Utility Plan set to
match the title Fort Collins Nissan-Kia. Please add the proper signature blocks
from the agencies needed. For example, relocation of the Louden ditch will
require a signature block.
Response: The cover sheet has been revised.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Information: The soils report does not show any groundwater
within the portion of the roadway. It appears that now boring were taken along
Venus Avenue. If any groundwater is encountered during construction the soils
report will have to be updated to include an underdrain.
Response: Additional borings are being completed so we will have an updated soils report included with
our final design during FDP.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Information: The utility plan set appears to be incomplete.
There are no details sheets or sheet C7.0. The plans will need to include
completed plan and profiles for all streets. The additional sheets will need to be
submitted. Since they are not included in the package the review could not be
completed. The information will need to be included for FDP review. Please
review the requirements for the LUCASS Standards and supply the necessary
sheets.
Response: Noted, these items will be added during Final.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Information: The plans do not call out the handicapped ramps
or the grades required at the top and the bottom of the ramps. Can you please
call out the handicapped ramps on the plans and show the truncated domes
where required. This will need to be completed for FDP.
Response: Noted, these items will be added during Final.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/27/2021
10/27/2021: For Information: Per the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards the maximum cross slope for streets is 3%. There are different
locations where this cross slope is greater than three percent. The engineer will
need to discuss this issue and adjust the slopes accordingly. It is acknowledge
that the cross slopes at the edge of the project which are tying into the existing
lanes may exceed this slope. There does appear to be some slopes greater
than three percent between station 16+00 and 17+00. Please bring the slopes
into design criteria or contact Engineering to discuss. This will need to be
completed for FDP.
Response: Cross slopes have been revised. Please note that Section LCUASS Section 7.4.2.B-C allows
for a maximum cross slope of 4 percent for reconstruction and/or widening. This will be further evaluated
with FDP and when flowline profiles of College Avenue are provided.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/28/2021
10/28/2021: For approval: Please provide spot elevations for the cross pans
and the handicapped ramps.
Response: Noted, these items will be added during Final.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Approval: Parcel C on the plat does not seem to have any
11
information concerning access or Emergency Access. Please clarify on the
what easements will be needed to be dedicated with the vacation.
Response: Tract C has been removed. Access and Emergency access easements have been added.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: Please callout the radii for the curb return on the driveways and at
the intersection of Venus Street and College Avenue.
Response: Radii have been added to the Horizontal Control and Street Plans. Full line and curve
information and tables will be provided during Final.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Information: The dimensions of the island for the right in right
out will need to be included in the final FDP plans.
Response: Noted, these items will be added during Final.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Information: Please call out if the storm drains are to be
private or public.
Response: Noted, this will be added to Storm Plan and Profiles during Final.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Information: The City usually requires a two year and a five
year warranty stated on the plat. The surveyor may want to take a closer look at
the language. Is this the correct language for the City of Fort Collins.
Response: The plat is updated to match City of Fort Collins requirements
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 10/31/2021
10/31/2021: For Approval: The applicant will need to submit letters of intent
from the adjacent property owners for the the dedication of the right of way and
easements from the adjacent properties.
Response: Noted, a letter of intent from the adjacent property owner is included with this submittal.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 11/03/2021
11/03/2021: For Information: There will need to be further discussion on the
improvement that are available for TCEF reimbursement. This will require
further investigation from the City's review.
Response: Noted, thank you. The applicant will follow up with the City on this topic.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Spencer Smith, 970-221-6603, smsmith@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
Please provide a clear recommendation on the installation of a traffic signal at
Venus/College. It appears that you've analyzed the site with a signal in place at
that location, but the written report and findings/recommendations don't state
that you are recommending a signal in that location. Was the intersection
analyzed without a signal? I'm curious how the intersection would operate
without the signal in place. We also will need to have confirmation that CDOT is
in approval of the signal being shifted from the prior planned location at
Crestridge to the newly proposed Venus intersection.
Response: In the Signal Warrants section of the TIS, it is stated that the College/Venus-Bueno intersection
meets peak hour signal warrants. When the TIS was prepared/completed, we were not sure whether
12
CDOT or the City would allow/approve a signal based upon peak hour warrants. Therefore, we provided
the necessary information to both entities for their consideration. Since then, we learned that use of the
peak hour signal warrants for installation of a traffic signal is acceptable to both entities. In the Operations
Analysis section of the TIS, it is stated that the College/Venus-Bueno intersection meets the Fort Collins
LOS criteria with a signal and the geometry (Figure 11). In our judgment, it is not necessary to analyze
that intersection with stop sign control, since clearly the minor street delays would be at LOS E and F. If
the signal is moved to the College/Venus-Bueno intersection location, an amendment to the South College
Access Control Plan would be required. That would be initiated by the City.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
Have there been discussions with the existing school site adjacent to
Crestridge about the vacation of the Crestridge ROW and the changes to their
access? The vacation of ROW and changes to Crestridge are a pretty key
piece to the proposed access and we want to make sure all details have been
worked out. The vacated ROW is being shown to all be part of this property.
Depending on how the ROW was originally dedicated, this may or may not be
the case. I also have questions about the parking that is shown on Tract C
(who/what is this for?).
Response: Crestridge was entirely dedicated by the northern property owner therefore it all goes back to
the northern property owner. This has been discussed the adjacent property owner. We have removed
the Tract designation from this property and have included it as Lot 1 Block 1. The property owner to the
south will be allowed to access through this property and easements are dedicated for this on the plat.
They will also be allowed to park vehicles on this property via a lease with WWW Properties LLC. A letter
of intent is provided by this property owner with the submittal.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
Was a vertical sight distance analysis done for the site accesses to College
Ave.? I would like to confirm that those standards are being met.
Response: Yes, vertical sight distance was completed along College Avenue and there is adequate sight
distance. The Crestridge RIRO doesn’t need sight distance because of the right turn acceleration lane.
The Venus right out doesn’t need sight distance for the right out because of the right turn acceleration. If a
traffic signal is not installed initially, there is still good sight distance for a left turn from Venus to College.
This distance is shown on the Cross Sections plan and can be added to the College Avenue flowline profile
with the Final Plans.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
Please note that full design of College Ave., including the proposed traffic
signal, signing and striping, etc. will be the responsibility of the developer and
subject to review and approval by CDOT. The traffic signal is not eligible for
City funding and will be the full responsibility of the development.
Response: Acknowledged. Noted, thank you. From subsequent coordination with City personnel, we do
understand that the City is discussing internally the possibility of a reimbursement for the signal.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/03/2021: FOR HEARING - UPDATED
13
Thank you for submitting the complete TIS dated July 2021. I will review and
coordinate directly with the applicant team if there are any additional/new
comments that arise from my review.
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
All of the technical appendices, attachments, etc. need to be included in the TIS.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
TIS comments:
The bicycle section could contain more detail and specifics on the width of the
College shoulders that serve as bike lanes currently, where you are proposing
bike lanes on and adjacent to this site, etc. Same with the pedestrian section.
More specifics on where you will have proposed walks, what they will connect
to, etc.
Can Table 6 be moved so that it follows Table 5 in the report?
Provide some more specifics on the future apartment development (where
located) that is mentioned in the first paragraph on pg. 12. Also on page 12,
there is a typo in the Signal Warrants section (4th sentence).
Response: As noted in the Bicycle Facilities section of the TIS (Page 8), bicycles operate on the shoulders
along College Avenue. Sidewalks will be installed along the site frontages on public streets (per the site
plan). The reference to Table 6 is made on page 24 of the TIS. Report format convention would indicate
that Table 6 should follow the page where it is referenced. Inclusion of the future apartment development
was discussed with Jason Holland (City Planner at the time). The apartment development is located
northwest of the Fort Collins Nissan-Kia site. It was agreed that inclusion of this development was
appropriate in the long range future.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
The commercial local street section has bike buffer between the bike lane and
travel lanes, rather than the bike lane and parking. Although the City is allowing
the previous ROW width associated with the Commercial Local street section,
we want the roadway to meet the current section standards as closely as
possible. We will want the bike lane buffer to be shown to the current standard for this project.
Response: Acknowledged. Striping has been revised to match up to the current Commercial Local Street
section.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
Dealership traffic traveling through the neighborhood to the south has been a
concern for the residents. Anything that can be implemented operationally (such
as a policy of test drives not using Venus at all, south of existing Crestridge) by
the dealerships to help alleviate this would be important. Perhaps some sort of
traffic calming where Venus transitions from the neighborhood to the
commercial area could be helpful too. I would anticipate that this topic will come
up at the P&Z hearing.
Response: Per communication with City personnel, this will potentially be addressed during Final.
14
Department: Erosion Control
Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-222-1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:
This project is located within the City's MS4 boundaries and is subject to the
erosion control requirements located in the Stormwater Design Criteria,
Chapter 2, Section 6.0. A copy of those requirements can be found at
www.fcgov.com/erosion
Based upon the supplied materials, site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft. and/or
meets one of the other triggering criteria (sensitive area, steep slopes, or larger
common development) that would require Erosion and Sediment Control
Materials to be submitted.
Based upon the area of disturbance or this project is part of a larger common
development, State permits for stormwater will be required since the site the
disturbed area is over an acre in size and a permit should be should be
obtained from the state prior to commencement of Construction Activities on the
site.
The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5-2
was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections.
As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such
inspections.
The Erosion Control fees are based on; the number of lots, the total site
disturbance, the estimated number of years the project will be active and the
Stormwater Inspection Fees are based on the number of LID/WQ Features that
are designed for on this project.
Please provide documentation for the total disturbed area associated with
construction activities that will take place on-site and off-site in order to provide
you with an estimate of the stormwater inspection fees that would be due on this
project.
Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the
above-mentioned inspection fees may change as plans are updated.. I will
provide an estimate for those fees are plans are further developed and the total
disturbed area calculation is provided.
Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: FOR FINAL;
Please submit an Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria (FCDCM Ch 2
Section 6.1.3)
Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plans provided include an individual
15
sequence sheets in accordance with (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2)
Please ensure that the Erosion Control Plans, Escrows, and Reports include
phasing requirements (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3, 6.1.4, & 6.1.5)
Please submit an Erosion Control Escrow / Security Calculation based upon the
accepted Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria. (FCDCM Ch 2 Section
6.1.5)
Please submit an Erosion Control Report to meet City Criteria. (FCDCM Ch 2
Section 6.1.4)
Response: Noted, the plans will be updated for the FDP.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/26/2021
10/26/2021: FOR FINAL:
Please see/address redlined civil plans for additional comments.
Response: Noted, the plans have been revised as requested.
Department: Floodplain
Contact: Claudia Quezada, (970)416-2494, cquezada@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:
Portions of this property are in the City-designated, 100-year Fossil Creek
floodway/floodplain and erosion buffer and must comply with the safety
regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code.
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Please include the following notes on the site plan and drainage/grading plan:
1. “The Developer shall obtain a Floodplain Use Permit from the City of Fort
Collins and pay all applicable floodplain use permit fees prior to commencing
any construction activity (building of structures, grading, fill, detention ponds,
bike paths, parking lots, utilities, landscaped areas, flood control channels, etc.)
within the Fossil Creek floodplain/floodway and erosion buffer limits. All
activities within the floodplain and erosion buffer are subject to the requirements
of Chapter 10 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code.”
2. “Construction of new structures, hard surface paths, walkways, driveways,
walls, and parking areas is prohibited in the floodway unless no-rise conditions
are met, per section 10-45 of City Code. Any construction activities in the
regulatory floodway must also include a no-rise certification prepared by a
Professional Engineer licensed in Colorado.”
3. "Storage of equipment and materials (temporary or permanent) is not
allowed in the floodway."
5. “Any items in the floodway that can float such as bike racks, picnic tables,
etc. must be anchored.”
16
6. "A stability study may be required for work within the erosion buffer."
Response: Notes have been added to the Site Plan, Grading Plans and Drainage Plans.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Development review checklists and permit application forms for floodplain
requirements can be obtained at
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/flooding/forms-document
s. Please utilize checklist (see redlines) when preparing plans for resubmittal.
Response: Plans and reports have been updated per the checklist where applicable.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:
Please be advised that a stability study may be required for work within the
erosion buffer.
Detention ponds or water quality ponds are not allowed. Placement of fill in an
erosion buffer zone is prohibited. Temporary or permanent storage of materials
is not allowed. Please see Section 10-202 of City Municipal Code for additional
erosion buffer considerations.
Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: Please see redlines for clarification and minor comments to
address.
Response: Redlines and comments have been addressed.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Please review and revise the detention pond release rates and pond sizing.
The detention release rates must meet the master plan specified 0.2 cfs/ac
requirement. Offsite stormwater flows and area should not be included in this
calculation. Basically, offsite flows are routed “over the top” of the pond, instead
of “through the pond.” Any free releases of onsite flows (from impervious areas)
need to be subtracted from the release rate.
Response: Per coordination w/ Stormwater Engineering, “swapping” of 100-year on-site and off-site
release flows is permitted given that the total release to Fossil Creek is less than the required 0.2 cfs/acre
plus existing off-site flows. This is discussed further in the drainage report.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
The rational runoff calculations need to follow the formulas and procedures in
the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) and not from UDFCD/
MHFD. See redlines for more information.
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-f
orms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria
Response: Revisions have been made to the rational calculations to conform to FCSCM.
17
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
The Venus Ave detention and water quality/ LID need to be accounted for with
this design. Specifically:
a. Basin C1 (North ½ of Venus Ave) – The Northern Property is responsible for
detention and WQ/ LID for C1 when that site develops. However, a temporary
detention and standard water quality pond need to be provided now to detain
and treat runoff from the current improvements. (This would be a private owned
pond.)
b. Basin C2 (South ½ of Venus Ave) - This development is responsible for
detention and WQ/LID for C2. Basin C2 should count towards the overall
impervious area in the required LID calculations. If you want to use the northern
property for stormwater treatment from basin C2, an agreement with that
property owner would be necessary to shift this burden onto their property.
c. Please do not use snouts in these inlets.
d. During the interim time, the City would want the current development (Fort
Collins Nissan Kia) to perform the maintenance for this pond.
Response: Per coordination w/ the Stormwater Engineering and with Natural Areas, the design team and
owner are pursuing to locate a water quality pond on a parcel north of the site and just south of the existing
trail. This may be either through an easement or by a land swap with Natural Areas. This information has
been included in the plans and drainage report as Option 1 to address the above comments. Further
information regarding the status of the easement and/or land swap will be added as design efforts continue.
Additionally, the plans (specifically the drainage plans) and drainage report include Option 2 as discussed
in a meeting with Stormwater Engineering which consists of a series of temporary plunge pools from the
end of the storm sewer to the edge of the Natural Areas property
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
The feasibility and constructability of the Lang Gulch Outfall needs to be
investigated and demonstrated for Hearing. Specifically:
a. Will the outfall pipe be able to be constructed considering the bedrock in the
area? Provide a description of how this outfall will be constructed.
UCDG Response: The outfall pipe will be bored through the bedrock. A profile of this section of storm
sewer has been added to the plans.
b. The stability of channel and erosiveness of the outlet will need to be considered.
UCDG Response: The concentrated flows at the Lang Gulch will be significantly reduced relative
to existing conditions due to swapping of 100-year detention as noted previously. However, a stilling basin
will be provided at the end of the pipe. Refer to the aforementioned profile section.
c. Provide a profile drawing showing bedrock (if possible) and sewer
crossings. See redlines for more information
UCDG Response: A profile of the Storm A outfall is now provided, though bedrock depths are unknown at
this location (additional geotechnical services have been ordered). It is expected, however, that bedrock
will be encountered with the bore of the storm outfall. Per information provided by the contractor, boring
through the bedrock that exists in the area is not a concern.
d.For final design, outlet scour protection will need to be designed.
UCDG Response: Noted.
e. Other departments requirements will also need to be met, such as floodplain
(no rise), erosion buffer (stream stability), wetlands, and environmental.
UCDG Response: Noted.
f. More detail on the plans will need to be provided at the outlet area.
18
UCDG Response: Noted. A stilling basin and riprap have been included in the design and plans
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING
More information will be needed for the Fossil Creek Outfall including:
a. Letters of intent from adjacent property owner and City Natural Areas.
Executed easements and temporary construction easements will be needed for,
or as part of, final approvals.
UCDG Response: The LOI from the adjacent property owner has been provided with this resubmittal.
The design team is currently working with Natural Areas regarding the LOI required on City property.
b. Provide channel sizing and concept grading. Channel stabilization may be
necessary.
UCDG Response: Capacity calculations of the channel have been added to the drainage report for the
Option 1 condition regarding WQCV of Venus Avenue. In addition, regarding stabilization, TRM is
included within the channel.
c. For Final - The outlet to Fossil Creek will need to be evaluated for erosion
and scour.
UCDG Response: Noted.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Provide a Water Quality Treatment exhibit showing treatment areas broken out
by LID and BMP facilities. Please see the redlines for comments. 120% of
WQCV needs to be provided for the LIDs also.
Response: The LID/BMP Treatment Map has been added. The 120% WQCV is provided in the
calculations.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Wetlands comments:
a. Please clarify which wetlands are mitigation and which are for stormwater
treatment credit. Just to be clear, mitigation wetlands cannot be used to meet
stormwater quality requirements.
UCDG Response: There now is only one wetland area for mitigation purposes. These wetlands are
designed to be a relocation of the existing wetlands and are not for stormwater treatment credit.
b. Please review wetland guidance in the Fort Collins LID Implementation
Manual and MHFD manuals.
UCDG Response: Noted.
c. Please evaluate and present to us a quantitative method to size the
treatment wetland and document that it meets stormwater treatment
requirements (similar to a WQCV or other method). To do this, please review
available guidance documents. We are not sure how to evaluate the wetland
sizing for meeting “meet treatment requirements.” If nothing is available, please
discuss with us.
UCDG Response: As noted above, there are no longer wetlands proposed for treatment credit.
d. Mitigation wetlands, if located in a stormwater facility, will need
documentation of water rights compliance.
UCDG Response: Per communication with City personnel, for the mitigated wetlands, this is not a known
requirement as the wetlands are replacing a historic condition.
e. Stormwater treatment wetlands (to meet Stormwater requirements) will need
19
to meet any/ all State water rights requirements. This documentation will need
to be provided.
UCDG Response: As noted above, there are no longer wetlands proposed for treatment credit.
f. Provide clarification if the wetland ponds will or will not need to meet the
State 72-hr and 120-hr drain time requirements.
UCDG Response: Pond A1 will be designed to drain per State requirements. Documentation will be
provided at Final.
g. Provide information that there will be enough base flow and/or groundwater
for sustaining a wetland.
*For Hearing, the wetlands items here will need to be discussed and a clear
path forward determined.
UCDG Response: The base flows for the mitigation wetlands will exceed existing base flow conditions
that established the existing wetlands as more tributary area is being added to the system, minor flows from
the adjacent bioretention are being piped upstream of the mitigation wetlands, and extended detention
(water quality and 100-year) are now being provided causing more frequent inundation of the wetland area.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Provide documentation that detention ponds can provide 2-feet minimum
separation from groundwater. For Final Approval – this documentation needs
to be provided for groundwater levels during the high grounds water months
(July – September).
Response: Additional geotechnical bores and monitoring wells have been ordered and additional
information will be provided prior to hearing.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
The realignment and undergrounding of the North Louden Ditch will require the
ditch company to sign the plans. A Letter of Intent is required before Hearing.
For final approval – the agreement with North Louden Ditch Company will need
to document Ownership and Maintenance responsibilities for relocated ditch
section.
Response: The letter of intent is in process with the Ditch Company and this letter will be submitted prior to
hearing. During final the agreement with the Ditch Company will be pursued further.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
On the Landscape Plan, check that trees provide 10-ft (min) separation from all
stormwater pipes and inlets. See redlines.
Response: Noted. Trees have been shifted and/or removed to meet 10 ft. separation.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Provide documentation that the detention ponds meet the State drain time
criteria.
Response: The State drain time spreadsheets will be provided for each pond during Final.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN:
Detention Ponds A1 and B1 are in series – ponds in series configuration will
20
require an EPA SWMM analysis for final design.
Response: A SWMM model for ponds A1 and B1 will be provided during Final.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR INFORMATION ONLY:
This project site is located within the Fort Collins Loveland Water District and
the South Fort Collins Sanitation District for water and sewer service. Please
contact them at (970) 226-3104 for development requirements.
Response: Comments from FCLWD and SFCSD have been received and the plans have been revised
accordingly.
Department: PFA
Contact: Marcus Glasgow, 970-416-2869, marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR HEARING
FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS
Fire access is required to within 150 feet of all exterior portions of any building,
or facility ground floor as measured by an approved route around the perimeter.
The definition of facility includes uses in a fixed location including exterior
storage areas. This would include all inventory storage areas (parking lots). For
the purposes of this section, fire access cannot be measured from an arterial
road (College Ave). Any private alley, private road, or private drive serving as a
fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) and be
designed to standard fire lane specifications. Please update plans with access
provided in parking areas of block 1, block 2 and south of the Kia building.
Response: The site and EAE throughout the site have been revised to include storage areas as noted.
Turning exhibits have also been revised and resubmitted.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
ACCESS ROAD LOADING
Fire apparatus access shall be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving
surface capable of supporting 40 tons. A note shall be added to the civil plans
indicating load capabilities of the EAE.
Response: A note has been added to the Horizontal Control Plans and pavement details will be provided
during final.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
FIRE LANE SIGNS
The limits of the fire lane shall be fully defined. Fire lane sign locations should be
indicated on future plan sets. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign
type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all
signs. Posting of additional fire lane signage may be determined at time of fire
21
inspection.
Response: Noted, all signage and details will be provided during Final.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
FIRE DEPARTMENT HOSE CONNECTION
- IFC 912.2: Fire Department Connections shall be installed in accordance with
NFPA standards. Fire department connections shall be located on the street
side of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point
of fire department vehicle access. The location of fire service lines and FDC(s)
shall be approved by the fire department and the location labeled on Utility Plans.
Response: FDCs have been added to the Utility Plans.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR FINAL PLAN
PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: ADDRESS POSTING & WAYFINDING
Where possible, the naming of private drives is usually recommended to aid in
wayfinding. Addresses shall be posted on each structure and where otherwise
needed to aid in wayfinding. 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 eight-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 and best route.
- IFC 505.1.8: Address shall be clearly visible on approach from any street,
drive or fire lane that accesses the site. Buildings that are addressed on one
street, but are accessible from other streets, shall have address numbers on the
side of the building fronting the roadway from which it is addressed. Buildings
that are addressed on one street, but are accessible from other drives or roads,
shall have the address numbers AND STREET NAME on each side that is
accessible from another drive or road.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR HEARING
LANDSCAPE PLAN/TURNING RADII
The proposed Landscape Plan indicates that tree canopy diameters may
encroach on the fire lane over time specifically in areas that fire apparatus
overhangs landscape area in turns. PFA would like to ensure the integrity of the
EAE remains intact as trees mature and a canopy develops. The EAE shall be
maintained unobstructed to 14' in height. This comment is aimed at preserving
both trees and fire apparatus. Please be mindful when selecting tree species
and or provide larger turning radius of curbs.
Response: Tree species have been changed to Turkish Filbert and Fastigiate Oaks in these areas.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: FOR PERMIT
KEY BOXES REQUIRED
- IFC 506.1 and Poudre Fire Authority Bureau Policy P-13-8.11: Poudre Fire
Authority requires at least one key box ("Knox Box") to be mounted in an
22
approved, exterior location (or locations) on every new or existing building
equipped with a required fire sprinkler or fire alarm system. The box shall be
positioned 3 to 7 feet above finished floor and within 10 feet of the front door, or
closest door to the fire alarm panel. Exception can be made by the PFA if it is
more logical to have the box located somewhere else on the structure. Knox
Box size, number, and location(s) to be determined at building permit and/or by
time of final CO.
All new or existing Knox Boxes must contain the following keys as they apply to
the building:
- Exterior Master
- Riser room
- Fire panel
- Elevator key if equipped with an elevator
The number of floors determines the number of sets of keys needed. Each set
will be placed on their own key ring.
- Single story buildings must have 1 of each key
- 2-3 story buildings must have 2 of each key
- 4+ story buildings must have 3 of each key
For further details or to determine the size of Knox Box required, contact the
Poudre Fire Authority Division of Community Safety Services.
Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Light and Power has existing electric facilities along the College Ave frontage of
the property that will need to be extended north to feed the site. Light and Power
also has electric facilities along the east side of existing Venus Ave that will
need to extend down the parkway of realigned Venus.
Response: Noted, thank you
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: FOR HEARING:
Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power.
Transformers must be placed within 10ft of a drivable surface. The transformer
must also have a front clearance of 10ft and side/rear clearance of 3ft minimum.
When located close to a building, please provide required separation from
building openings as defined in Figures ESS4 - ESS7 within the Electric
Service Standards. Please show all proposed transformer locations on the
Utility Plans.
Response: Transformers have been located on the Utility Plans
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Streetlights will be placed along public streets. 40ft of separation on both sides
of
the light is required between canopy trees and streetlights. 15ft separation on
both sides of the light is required between ornamental trees and streetlights.
23
A link to the City of Fort Collins street lighting requirements can be found at:
http://www.larimer.org/engineering/GMARdStds/Ch15_04_01_2007.pdf
Response: Noted, streetlights will be added during final plans.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
During utility infrastructure design, please provide adequate space along the
public roads and private drives to ensure proper utility installation and to meet
minimum utility spacing requirements. 10ft minimum separation is needed
between all water, sewer, storm water, and irrigation main lines. Light and
Power has a 3ft minimum separation requirement from all utility
lines/infrastructure.
Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Any existing electric infrastructure that needs to be relocated as part of this
project will be at the expense of the developer. Please coordinate relocations
with Light and Power Engineering.
Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Any existing and/or proposed Light and Power electric facilities that are within
the limits of the project must be located within a utility easement.
All utility easements and required permits (crossing agreements, flood plain,
etc.) needed for the development will need to be obtained and paid for by the developer.
Response: Noted, easements will be provided for all existing and proposed Light and Power electric
facilities. Easements have been provided along Venus for dry utility installation. Additional easements,
as required, will be added during final with the design of proposed electric facilities is determined.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
A commercial service information form (C-1 form) and a one line diagram for all
commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power
Engineering for review. A link to the C-1 form is below:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-
forms-guidelines-regulations
Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
For additional information on our renewal energy programs please visit the
website below or contact John Phelan (jphelan@fcgov.com).
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/go renewable
Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
The City of Fort Collins now offers gig-speed fiber internet, video and phone
service. Contact Brad Ward with Fort Collins Connexion at 970-224-6003 or
24
bward@fcgov.com for commercial grade account support, RFPs and bulk
agreements
Response: Noted, thank you.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: INFORMATION:
Please contact Tyler Siegmund with Light & Power Engineering if you have any
questions at 970.416.2772 Please reference our policies, construction
practices, development charge processes, electric service standards, and use
our fee estimator at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
Response: Noted, thank you.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416-4290, sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: INFORMATION ONLY: Thank you for submitting all the pertinent
documents: ECS, restoration plan, Pre-Construction Notice, etc.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Regarding Corps of Engineers (COE) permitting
and proof of compliance:
-A jurisdictional determination is still required. This should address whether or
not the wetlands and water bodies (Fossil Creek and Lang Gulch) are
jurisdictional wetlands or Waters of the US. This is required by LUC 3.4.1(O),
Proof of Compliance.
Response: The wetland delineation report originally submitted to the Army Corps of Engineers in
September of 2021 will be updated to reflect current outfall locations and acres of disturbance. The
updated delineation report will be resubmitted to the Corps for a Jurisdictional Determination.
-Plans indicate that stormwater outfalls will permanently impact portions of Lang
Gulch and associated wetlands (Wetland 1, 0.002 acres) and Fossil Creek and
associated wetlands (Wetland 3, 0.005 acres). Nationwide permits are likely
necessary as those are likely jurisdictional Waters of the US (final jurisdictional
status will be determined by COE).
Response: Current plans do not anticipate impacting Fossil Creek wetlands. The Lang Gulch storm
outfall will impact the Lang Gulch wetlands. Refer to sheet C3.30 for impact areas (temporary and
permanent).
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Further coordination is needed with the applicant,
City’s Natural Areas Department (NAD), and Environmental Planning.
Coordination will be required for the following items:
-The stormwater outfall to Fossil Creek on Redtail Grove NA (applicant will be
required to proceed through NAD’s Easement Policy);
Response: Additional coordination has been completed. An application regarding the storm outfall
impacting Fossil Creek is forthcoming as discussed in the 12/16/21 meeting.
-The status and species utilizing the raptor nest on Redtail Grove NA;
Response: The status of the raptor nest formerly in Redtail Grove was investigated. See the Redtail
Grove Natural Area Raptor Nest Survey memo dated November 29, 2021.
25
-Planning for trail connection and alignment; and
Response: We have not had any discussions with Parks regarding trail connections; that will be something
we will be working on after this round of review.
-Please provide any updates on discussions with NAD regarding the property
west of Lang Gulch.
Response: Per the meeting with NAD on 12/16/21, the applicant is interested in discussing the Lang Gulch
property and the potential swap of land near Fossil Creek. An application regarding the storm outfall at
Fossil Creek is forthcoming as discussed in the meeting.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Regarding the raptor nest on Redtail Grove NA –
if NAD does not have the information, further surveys will be required to
determine the species utilizing the nest and the status of the nest (active or not).
Further coordination with CO Parks and Wildlife (CPW) may be necessary.
Once the species is known, the buffer distance must be displayed on all plan
sets as necessary (landscape, utilities, site, etc.). Temporal buffers may be
necessary in addition to the spatial buffer at the time of construction. Buffering
will be in accordance with LUC 3.4.1(N)(5) and CPW’s Recommended Raptor
Buffer Guidelines.
Response: See the Redtail Grove Natural Area Raptor Nest Survey memo dated November 29, 2021.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Further coordination is needed with the
applicant, City’s Stormwater Department, and Environmental Planning.
Coordination is needed on the following topics:
-The proposed storm outfall draining to the north to Fossil Creek;
Response: The storm outfall is currently planned south of CNA land upstream of Fossil Creek.
-The proposed storm drain draining to the west to Lang Gulch: Was the existing
pipe located that drains to the base of Lang Gulch? There is not sufficient detail
on the utilitly plans to determine the feasibility of the outfall given the steep
topography. More coordination is needed to determine that the outfall
structure/location is adequately protected in a manner appropriate for a NHBZ;
Response: Existing pipe was found to be inadequate for storm conveyance. Refer to sheet C3.30 for the
proposed storm outfall pipe.
-What is the long-term maintenance anticipated for the stormwater features
present in the NHBZ? Are there areas that require regular maintenance (i.e.,
sediment removal every few years)?;
Response: The only items within this area are an impact stilling and riprap. No routine maintenance is
anticipated for these items. Sediment from storm flows will be removed upstream of the impact basin
within the proposed water quality and detention pond system.
-What are the details of the expected stormwater flows and hydrology of the new
wetland areas, bioretention areas, and detention ponds? A basis is needed to
understand that the stormwater features will have adequate hydrology to sustain
wetland conditions. This could be in the form a solid expectation of percentage
of the year the area will have water, varying the bottom depth of Pond A to
ensure some areas are inundated for longer; etc.;
Response: The base flows for the mitigation wetlands will exceed existing base flow conditions that
26
established the existing wetlands as more tributary area is being added to the system, minor flows from the
adjacent bioretention are being piped upstream of the mitigation wetlands, and extended detention (water
quality and 100-year) are now being provided causing more frequent inundation of the wetland area.
-Are the seed mixes appropriate for the proposed stormwater features? For
example, does the bioretention area have a high proportion of sand?
Response: We believe seed mixes described in the Wetland Restoration Plan are appropriate for sandy
soils.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Further coordination is needed with the
applicant, City’s Forestry Department, and Environmental Planning. Several of
the trees indicated on the Landscape Plan to be planted in the NHBZ are
non-native. All species planted in the NHBZ must be native. I have no doubt
that an agreement can be reached that will satisfy both Forestry’s and
Environmental Planning’s mitigation/planting requirements through a
conversation.
Response: Tree species in the NHBZ have been changed to native species.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Please add an Environmental Planner signature
to all utility plans that show the buffer zone.
Response: Environmental signature is located on the cover sheet of the Civil Construction Plans. Per City
revised standards, the signature block is located only on the cover sheet.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Please add the following note on all sheets of the
site, landscape and utility plans that show the Habitat Buffer: "The Natural
Habitat Buffer Zone is intended to be maintained in a native landscape. Please
see Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code for allowable uses within the Natural
Habitat Buffer Zone." This will help preserve the intention behind the buffer
zones and the natural features into the future.
Response: The note has been added to the applicable plan sets.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: Please add a table to the site plan that includes
the following:
-Amount of buffer area that would be required by all the natural features on site,
as measured from the maximum extent (contact me if you have any questions to
avoid unnecessary back and forth)
-Amount of buffer area provided on these plans
-Minimum buffer distance
-Maximum buffer distance
-Average buffer distance
Response: Table has been added to the Site Plan Sheet 2.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: According to the ECS and proposed plans,
Wetland 2 (0.6 acres) will be permanently impacted. This is acceptable given
previous conversations with Environmental Planning, however, the area serving
as wetland mitigation needs to be labeled and indicated on the appropriate
plans (site, landscape, utility, etc.). Mitigation acreage must be a 1:1 ratio. A
27
FACWet analysis may be appropriate in this situation as well.
Response: Please let us know if the City is requiring a FACWet analysis.
Also, the circumstances that allow for Wetland 2 to be moved and mitigated
should also allow for more ideal design of stormwater features, and those
features will be judged by Environmental Planning with that criteria in mind.
Response: Mitigation acreage has been added to sheet C3.30.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR HEARING: The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, Section
3.2.4(C)(3), requires projects to "demonstrate no light trespass onto Natural
Areas, Natural Habitat Buffer Zones or River Landscape Buffers as defined in
Section 4.16(E)(5)(b)(1)(a)." Please include all necessary information, including
photometric plans, to demonstrate compliance.
Response: A lighting plan will be submitted with the next round that meets this requirement.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Regarding the Restoration Plan – this is
a good starting point but further work will be required. For example:
-Some basics, like appropriate soil handling and stockpiling, will need to be
addressed;
-Weed management needs to be addressed in Year 2 in Table 1;
-Specific mention should be made to seed the upland native seed mix in the
appropriate timeframe (late fall to early spring) in order to maximize expected
precipitation (e.g., plant in anticipation of snow and/or rain);
-Seeding/planting practices of non-upland habitats (stormwater features) should
be addressed (appropriate timeline, other planting methods such as plugs if
appropriate, allowable weed management in wet areas, etc.);
-Specify revegetation practices in graded and disturbed areas vs undisturbed
areas.
Response: An updated Upland Restoration Plan and Wetland Restoration Plan will be provided with this
submittal.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Additional language will be required in
the even that ‘unusual’ fossils are unearthed during the construction process.
This is a rarity for the City so there will likely be some iteration as to the specific
language, location (a plan vs the development agreement), etc.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/29/2021
10/29/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND DEVELOPMENT
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ISSUANCE: Language regarding the protection and
enhancement of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone will be included in the
Development Agreement for this project. A security will need to be provided
prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit that accounts for
the installation and establishment of the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone. Prior to the
FDP approval please provide an estimate of the landscaping costs for the
Natural Habitat Buffer Zone, including materials, labor, monitoring for a
minimum of three years, weed mitigation and irrigation. We will then use the
approved estimate to collect a security (bond or escrow) at 125% of the total
28
amount prior to the issuance of a Development Construction Permit.
Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, 224-616-1992, mroche@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please show a 10-ft parkway along College Avenue. At minimum, a 9-ft
parkway should be provided to meet the South College Plan.
Response: Parkway is now wider. A 9’ parkway was previously being show to match the College Avenue
plan. However, there is additional right of way in this area so the 8’ sidewalk has been shifted to the west
2.5’ resulting in an 11.5’ parkway. If there was ever a desire to include a 10’ sidewalk for shared
pedestrian and bicycle use a 9.5’ parkway would still exist.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please show critical root zones of existing trees to remain on the proposed
landscape/site plan. Forestry would like to review anticipated impacts to the
inner and outer CRZ.
Response: Inner and outer CRZ have been added to the plans.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please include species diversity percentages in the plant list.
Response: Biodiversity percentages have been added.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
In addition to unique symbols for each species, please directly label species
with their associated abbreviation. If space allows, please include a condensed
version of the plant list on each sheet.
Response: Tree species have been labeled. Plant code legend also added to each sheet.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please review Forestry redlines – several tree-utility conflicts are highlighted.
Adjust trees and/or utilities as needed to meet separation requirements.
Response: Trees have been adjusted and/or removed due to utility conflicts.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please include street light and stop light locations on the site/landscape plan.
Street trees shall be placed 50-ft from stop signs. Canopy shade trees shall be
40-ft from street lights and ornamental trees shall be 15-ft from street lights.
Provide unique symbols for stop signs and street lights and include in a legend.
Response: Stop signs and street lights will be added at final.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
There appears to be several trees that were inventoried but not included on the
submitted plans. I highlighted these trees on the redlines for quick reference.
Please include their information in the tree inventory and mitigation table.
29
Response: Additional trees have been inventoried and included on the plans.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 11/04/2021
11/3/2021: FOR HEARING
Please include additional evergreen and ornamental trees to increase the
diversity of these species groups. There are a substantial number of Ponderosa
Pine – please include Colorado Blue Spruce and Southwestern White Pine.
Please include Japanese Tree Lilac and other crabapple varieties to diversify
the ornamental tree category.
Response: Colorado Spruce, SW White Pine, and Japanese Tree Lilac have been added to the plant
selection.
Department: Park Planning
Contact: Kyle Lambrecht, 970-221-6566, klambrecht@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The Park Planning & Development Department is
available to discuss these comments in more detail. Please contact Kyle
Lambrecht, PE at 970 416 4340, klambrecht@fcgov.com.
Response: Kyle, we plan on setting up a meeting with yourself and the applicant after this round is
submitted.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code Section
3.4.8 “Parks and Trails” addresses compliance with the 2021 Parks and
Recreation Master Plan (“Master Plan”). The Master Plan indicates the general
location of all parks and regional recreational trails. Parcels adjacent to or
including facilities indicated in the Master Plan may be required to provide area
for development of these facilities.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The 2013 Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan
(“Trail Master Plan”) was adopted by City Council and provides conceptual
locations and general trail design guidelines for future regional recreational
trails. The Trail Master Plan is available at
https://www.fcgov.com/parkplanning/plans and policies.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards
(“LCUASS”), Chapter 16 Pedestrian Facilities and Chapter 17 Bicycle
Facilities provide additional design guidelines for multi use regional
recreational trails.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Grade separated crossings of arterial roadways
and major collectors are required (LUCASS Chapter 17.3) and provide safe
trail connectivity. Additional easement area for underpass/overpass
approaches may be required in locations of potential grade separated
crossings for the trail.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Local street at grade intersections with a
30
recreational trail are to be avoided. When necessary, the location of a future
recreational trail at grade crossing must be coordinated with Traffic Operations.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: If the site is indicated for a future park or regional
recreational trail the plat must dedicate a tract as a “Future City Park Site”
and/or a recreational trail “Public Access and Trail Easement”.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Tracts dedicated as a “Future City Park Site”
shall be 7to10 acres and will be reserved for future purchase and development
by the City. Until the site is purchased by the City the landowner is responsible
for all maintenance of the tract.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The South College Corridor Plan (SCCP)
adopted March 3, 2009 by the City of Fort Collins indicates the conceptual
location of the Skyridge Trail on the western portion of the property, extending
from the north to south boundary of the parcel. This trail will ultimately connect to
the north to the Fossil Creek Trail in the Redtail Grove Natural Area and provide
connectivity for southwest Fort Collins to the City’s existing trail system.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The City encourages the developer to explore a
trail spur along Venus Avenue, along with coordinating with your neighbor to the
north to potentially provide a connection to the Fossil Creek Trail.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Park Planning and Development must approve
the trail alignment and design. The developer will be required to develop a
centerline profile and cross-sections for the trail as part of the site design.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The future trail alignment cannot be used to
provide internal pedestrian circulation and cannot provide direct access to
buildings. Internal access to the recreational trail from the internal
bike/pedestrian system should be provided at limited and defined access
points.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Recreational trails do not function as widened
sidewalks adjacent or within street rights of way.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The typical paved recreational regional trail cross
section is constructed as a 10’ wide concrete trail, widened to 12’ in areas of
high traffic area or other areas of potential user conflicts. A 4 6’ wide soft
(gravel) path is located parallel to the paved surface, separated by 3 5’ of
vegetated area; there shall be 3’ wide level shoulders on both sides of the trail,
providing 3’ of horizontal clearance from vertical obstructions such as trees,
transformers, fences and/or walls. Modifications of the typical cross section
must be approved by Park Planning & Development.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The Public Access and Trail easement width is
50’. The location of the easement must be approved by Park Planning &
31
Development.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The trail easement may co exist within a Natural
Habitat Buffer Zone if approval is obtained from Environmental Planning. The
easement shall be identified on the plat, utility, and site plans as a “Public
Access and Trail Easement”. The easement cannot encroach on the railroad
right-of-way.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: A trail easement may not be located within a ditch
easement unless the applicant provides written approval for the trail easement
within the ditch easement from the ditch company. The paved trail surface
cannot function as a ditch access road if heavy equipment will use or cross the
trail to maintain the ditch.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Grading within the designated recreational trail
easement is required to occur during overall site grading. Plans must indicate
that the final grade within the easement can provide a trail alignment that meets
the American Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for cross slopes between 1 and
2% and a maximum centerline profile grade of 5%. Construction documents
should include trail profiles and cross sections to demonstrate the ability to
meet ADA standards.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The SCCP calls for this segment of the Skyridge
Trail to be City constructed and maintained. There is no current schedule for
City construction of this portion of the trail. Construction is scheduled as funds
become available. Partnerships for cost-sharing between the site developer
and the City for trail construction along with site improvements may allow
construction to occur in a timely and cost-effective manner. Park Planning &
Development would be interested in developing such a partnership.
Construction responsibilities for other trail segments will need to be determined.
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: The SCCP call for the City to maintain this
segment of the Skyridge Trail. Other sections of trail internal to the site will
need to be determined. If these are publicly owned, the Parks Department will
maintain. If these are private, the developer will maintain. Maintenance consists
of snowplowing of the paved surface, occasional seasonal mowing 2 3’
adjacent to the trail surface and repairing/replacing surface damage of the trail.
The underlying property owner shall be responsible for all other landscaping,
irrigation, and maintenance within the easement.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 10/25/2021
10/25/2021: INFORMATION: Landscaping within the recreational trail
easement shall be provided in accordance with all applicable City codes and
will remain the responsibility of the underlying landowner. Landscaping must
provide acceptable clearances from the trail surfaces as specified in the Trail
Master Plan. Spray irrigation, if required, shall be designed and maintained to
avoid spray on the trail.
Department: Building Services
32
Contact: Katy Hand, khand@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR BUILDING PERMIT:
Please visit our website for current adopted codes, local amendments and
submittal requirements.
https://www.fcgov.com/building/application.php
https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes.php
https://www.fcgov.com/building/energycode
Response: Thank you.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: FOR BUILDING PERMIT:
Each structure requires a separate building permit.
Response: Acknowledged. Thank you.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/28/2021
10/28/2021: INFORMATION ONLY:
Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at
FDP.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/28/2021
10/28/2021: FOR HEARING:
Please make changes as marked. If changes are not made or you disagree
with comments, please provide written response of why corrections were not
made. Please provide any responses on redlined sheets and/or in response
letter. If you have any specific questions about the redlines, please contact John
Von Nieda at 970-221-6565 or jvonnieda@fcgov.com
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Sam Lowe, FCLWD, 970-226-3104, slowe@fclwd.com,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/02/2021
11/02/2021: Attached are the Districts’ comments for the Nissan-Kia proposal.
Response: Plans have been revised as requested.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/22/2021
10/22/2021: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building
permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section
33
3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation
requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com
Response: Acknowledged.