The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWILLOW AND PINE MULTI-FAMILY - PDP - PDP180006 - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSCity of Fort Collins 111�� May 11, 2018 Eduardo Illanes OZ Architecture 3003 Larimer St. Denver, CO 80205 RE: Willow & Pine Multi -family, PDP180006, Round Number 1 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/deve/opmentreview 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, Jason Holland, at 970-224-6126 orjholland@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Morgan Uhlman, 970-416-4344, muhlman@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: There is work being proposed on two different Schrader properties. This will require a temporary construction easement between the property owners. A letter of intent will be needed before the hearing. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Is the new sanitary sewer that is going through the two Schrader properties in an easement? Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: In what sequence will the vacation of the existing utility easements that still have infrastructure in them occur? Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Was this fence put up by the property owner or the railroad? A letter of intent should be received from the railroad acknowledging that the fence is being removed if they built and paid for the fence to be put up Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The cast in concrete benches along Willow need to be a minimum of 2' setback from the sidewalk as well as any other structure near the sidewalk. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The sanitary sewer manhole at the eastern driveway appears to be in the wheel path of vehicles turning left onto Willow. Manholes are not allowed in the wheel path of vehicles. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please provide more slope and spot elevations for the curb ramps along Willow to show that they will meet ADA requirements. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: How does the water drain out of the concrete structures in the curb returns? Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please provide the site distance triangles for the driveways on the site plan. The concrete structures on the corners may be in the line of site. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please provide LCUASS details in the utility plan set. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: 1 do not see the cast in place concrete structures on the elevations. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please see redlines for additional/minor comments. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, rverette@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: LANDSCAPE PLAN: Land Use Code section 4.17(D)(4)(a) specifies that: "The natural qualities of the River landscape shall be maintained and enhanced, using plants and landscape materials native to the River corridor in the design of site and landscape improvements. This standard is not met, as it does not appear that any locally native plant species have been selected. In order to meet this standard, a substantial portion of plant material on the site should be selected from the City of Fort Collins Native Plant List, with an emphasis on species native to the Poudre River corridor: https://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativepIants2013.pdf Please contact me if you need assistance selecting appropriate shrub, grass and perennial species for this site. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/09/2018 05/09/2018: ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PLAN: Please clarify whether the vapor barrier and sub -slab ventilation is planned for both buildings, not just Build A. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/09/2018 05/09/2018: ENVRIONMENTAL COMPLAINCE PLAN: For item "g" under Excavation, please elaborate on how this requirement will be met. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/09/2018 2 05/09/2018: ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PLAN: For item "f" under Monitoring, please provide a response for how this requirement will be met. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/09/2018 05/09/2018: ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PLAN: Additional comments pending from 3rd party reviewer (TRC). Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 5/7/2018: Explore the feasibility of transplanting trees #4, 6, 7, and 8 on or off -site. If this is possible, please indicate these trees as transplants, show their transplanted location on the plans, and add the following note: Transplanting trees #4, 6, 7, and 8 COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE, shall follow the recommendations of a qualified tree transplanting contractor in terms of size, staking, mulching, and irrigation. Additionally, please display this transplant with a bolded, capital `T" on the landscape plans and in the Tree Inventory table. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 5/7/2018: Please explore upsizing 5 street trees as the mitigation trees. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please include a plant list/legend for reference on sheet L-101. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: City Forestry is not familiar with Gladiator Crabapple. Is this species readily available at local nurseries? Please provide more information about this species for approval. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please clarify where the General Landscape Notes on sheets L-001 and L-101 originate from? These are not the standard City of Fort Collins General Landscape Notes. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: On sheet L-002, please provide species quantity in the legend. On the same sheet, provide Maximum Species Diversity percentages based on total on -site tree quantity. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The Honeylocust located just west of the bike racks are spaced 15 feet apart. At minimum, please provide at least 25 feet spacing between these trees, or incorporate a fastigiate deciduous species as an alternative (Crimson Spire Oak, Regal Prince Oak, Prairie Sentinel Hackberry are good choices). Fastigiate species will need to be spaced, at minimum, 20 feet apart. 3 The applicant stated that they preferred this close spacing to create a better canopy. Positioning the trees this close will cause significant additional maintenance. Spacing the trees at 25 feet will allow the site to achieve the same desired canopy effect, but allow the trees to grow healthier. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated 05/08/2018: The Crabapples at the north end of the property are spaced 5 feet apart. At minimum, please provide at minimum 20 feet spacing between these trees. The applicant stated that they preferred this close spacing to create a corridor/entrance affect. The maximum width of these trees is 9 feet. The 5 feet spacing will not work in terms of the trees' canopies growing sufficiently. If this corridor/entrance affect is a priority, consider planting a more fastigiate ornamental variety that is intended to grow close together. Comment Number: 11 05/08/2018: 05/08/2018 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 Please consider incorporating coniferous trees on this site. Since several decent evergreens are planned to be removed from the site, it would be nice to incorporate some year-round greenery around the perimeter. If larger conifer species are not realistic or the existing Spruce trees are unable to be transplanted, consider incorporating fastigiate evergreens such as Taylor Juniper, Woodward Juniper, Iseli Fastigiate Norway Spruce, or others. Comment Number: 12 05/08/2018: Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 Lindens typically do not survive or thrive well in parking lot islands and peninsulas. Please evaluate changing Lindens in these locations for better adapted shade trees, such as Kentucky Coffeetree or Bur Oak. Comment Number: 13 05/08/2018: Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 A Willow Street Improvements project coordination meeting between City Engineering and City Forestry is scheduled to occur the week of May 7th, 2018. At this meeting, Forestry will discuss preferred street trees in this area. If the street trees in front of this development were to match the Willow Street design, it would provide a cohesive corridor. Please stay tuned as future modification to street tree species on this project might occur. Comment Number: 14 05/08/2018: Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 Show location of any stop signs and street lights. Identify these fixtures with a distinct symbol. Space trees if needed as follows. Stop Signs: 20 feet from sign Street Light: 40 feet for canopy shade trees and 15 feet for ornamental trees Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please provide a tree grate detail on the landscape plans. City Forestry prefers larger tree grates such as 5'x8' if possible. A Willow Street Improvements project coordination meeting between City Engineering and City Forestry is scheduled to occur the week of May 7th, 2018. At this meeting, Forestry will discuss preferred street tree grates sizes and styles. Please stay tuned as 4 future modification to street tree grates on this project might occur. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated 05/08/2018: Please consider incorporating additional trees in the parking lot. There appears to be additional planting space throughout the site. Fastigiate varieties should be considered in these tight areas. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221-6206, mbzdek@fcqov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated 05/08/2018: 3.4.7 (F) (1) provides a standard for creating similar height, setback, and width of new structures to the historic buildings in the area of adjacency, which include Ginger & Baker, Bas Bleu Theatre, and 200 Jefferson Street. Comments provided on these standards related to height, setback, and width in the Current Planning section will improve the ability for this project to harmonize more successfully with the three adjacent historic buildings. The Landmark Preservation Commission would like to see a design that shows a more significant stepback as well as modulation of the width of the buildings along Willow to better relate to the Bas Bleu building across the street. The historic building at 200 Jefferson Street is at the rear of this property but is a highly sensitive resource --this project will provide an unimpeded backdrop for that building that will have a direct visual relationship despite the fact that the properties are separated by the rail corridor. Massing and height considerations should therefore be equally applied to the rear/south portion of the project in addition to the Willow side. Comment Number: 2 05/08/2018 05/08/2018 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Section 3.4.7 (F)(2) calls for a design that is in character with existing historic structures through visual ties such as alignment of horizontal elements and windows and repetition of window patterns. As noted in the Current Planning comments, improvement of the fenestration design and detailing will contribute towards satisfying this section of the code. The LPC mentioned adjusting window proportions to increase their verticality, as a reference to the historic window pattern. They also want to see the relationship of the windows to the rainscreen system to understand how they will be expressed and detailed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Section 3.4.7 (F)(3) states that the dominant building material (in this case, brick) of the adjacent historic structures shall be the primary material for new construction and that variety of materials is appropriate if it maintains the existing distribution of materials. The Landmark Preservation Commission discussed this aspect of the code at the conceptual review of this project and noted that the project falls short of using brick as the predominant material. The LPC also noted that the use of brick over the recessed ground level creates "an uncomfortable floating mass" that disrupts the historic pattern of going to grade with the brick. They also noted that materiality of the south elevation, due to its proximity to 200 Jefferson, needs attention and should reference the depot. Scaling of materials, e.g. the cement board, can be addressed in order to reference the scale of a traditional masonry unit. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The creation of a visual and pedestrian connection from Willow to the Union Pacific building along the Pine Street corridor demonstrates a successful solution to meet section 3.4.7 (F)(4), which calls for preserving or enhancing such connections. Department: Internal Services Contact: Jonathon Nagel, "naqel@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 04/24/2018: Comment Originated: 04/24/2018 Prior to hearing, the following information must be provided with the project plans for review and approval: a. Trash and recycling enclosure details are required and must be incorporated into the project plan set. Trash enclosure details must show each trash and recycling enclosures proposed, in plan view and elevation view. Enclosure elevations must be provided for all exterior sides of enclosures. b. Trash enclosure plan and elevation details must be drawn separately from the site plan, at a scale that is sufficient to provide clear and complete information that is easily understandable as a reference document for the public hearing. Typically a separate plan detail and elevation detail at an enlarged architectural scale is necessary to provide sufficient information and to emphasize the design intent and requirements prominently in the plans. It is recommended that these details be grouped together in the planning set along with other site details. c. Plan details shall include direct labeling, dimensions and notations that illustrate sufficient access, circulation and function of the enclosures for both residents/employees and service providers. Plan details shall label and dimension the overall enclosure area, widths of service gates, size of interior circulation areas to be provided for interior access, required pedestrian entrance, overall size of all proposed trash and recycling containers and their capacity. d. Elevations and plan details shall graphically show materials and textures, and directly label all design components and shall clarify all materials, patterns, colors, textures and general specifications as well as all functional components such as drains, bollards, curbs and ramps. Elevations shall also describe wall and door construction including recessed and projected material patterns, base and top treatments and other design features. Include labeling, detail enlargements and cross sections if needed to adequately describe the depth of materials and construction intent. 2. Prior to final plan approval, additional plan, elevation and capacity information may be required with Final Plan review to clarify the adequate function, construction and final design intent of the trash and recycling areas. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/24/2018 04/24/2018: The Community Recycling Ordinance (No. 109 2016) requires that all new business and multifamily complexes subscribe to recycling service that is at minimum 1/3 of their overall service capacity(total bin capacity x number of weekly pickups, include both trash and recycling when calculating overall service capacity). In general recycling containers must be at least 50% the size of proposed trash containers to meet this requirement. Please make sure proposed containers meet this requirement and that adequate space is provided in all enclosures. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/24/2018 04/24/2018: The service gates on the more northern trash and recycling enclosure need to provide unobstructed access and cannot be blocked by parking spaces. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/24/2018 04/24/2018: All trash and recycling enclosures are required to have a pedestrian entrance that is separate from the main service gates. Please provide a pedestrian entrance for the more southern enclosure. Consider moving the pedestrian entrances closer to the stairwell entrances to provide more efficient access. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/24/2018 04/24/2018: The location of the more southern trash and recycling enclosure is not conducive to efficient servicing and will require the hauler to back in to service it. Additionally -25ft of overhead clearance is required to service most dumpster types which will mean in its proposed location that the hauler will need to roll the dumpster out from under the building in order to service. Consider moving the enclosure to the north or west of the adjacent stairwell so that it could be serviced from the same location as the other enclosure. Department: Light And Power Contact: Clint Reetz, 970-221-6326, creetz@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Any changes to the existing electric capacity and or electric infrastructure will initiate electric development and system modification charges. Please coordinate power requirements with Light and Power Engineering. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please issue load requirements to Light and Power Engineering ElectricProjectEngineering@fcgov.com using a C-1 form and a one -line diagram. The C-1 form can be found at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1 Form.pdf Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 221-6700. Please reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, llynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: FIRE LANE SIGNAGE Approved signs, red curbing, and/or other approved notices that include the words NO PARKING - FIRE LANE shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the obstruction thereof. Fire lane sign locations are to be added to the plans along with sign details. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. Comment Number: 2 05/08/2018: REQUIRED FIRE ACCESS PERIMETER ACCESS: Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 > Building A is fully compliant with regard to perimeter fire access requirements. > Building B does not fully comply with perimeter fire access requirements. The updated Site Plan indicates Bldg. B is out of access by approximately 125 feet. Dependent upon final resolution of aerial apparatus access requirements, this out of access distance may be considered acceptable. AERIAL APPARATUS ACCESS: > Neither Buildings A nor B meet minimum requirements for aerial fire apparatus access as defined by IFC Appendix D105. In order to approve the Site Plan as currently proposed, the applicant will need to provide a written plan to the fire marshal which details the project's intent to meet the intent of the 2015 International Fire Code via alternative means and methods. Based upon similar, past projects in the area, such a plan is likely to include building requirements consistent with high rise construction. Further offline discussion will be needed. Comment Number: 3 05/08/2018: FDC LOCATION Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 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 proposed FDC located on the east side of Bldg. A is 130' from the hydrant on Willow when a maximum allowable distance of 100' is specified by code. The deficiency can be resolved by moving the FDC to the Willow Street side, at the east end of Bldg. A. Alternatively, the proposed FDC location may be approved in conjunction with the plan for meeting code intent via alternative means and methods. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: MULTIPLE BUILDINGS SERVED BY ONE FIRE PUMP Should a single fire line/fire pump be proposed to serve multiple buildings, the configuration will need to be shown on the Utility Plans. The plan shall be approved by Water Utilities Engineering and a covenant agreement will be required. The applicant shall coordinate fire line locations with Water Utilities. Please contact Water Utilities Engineering for further details at (970)221-6700 or WaterUtilitiesEng@fcgov.com. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: FIRE ALARM & DETECTION SYSTEMS Group R-2 occupancies shall comply with IFC Section 907.2.9 and Sections 907.3-Fire Safety Functions, 907.4-Initiating Devices, 907.5-Occupant Notification and/or other areas of this code resulting from alternative means of code compliance. Comment Number: 6 05/08/2018: TIVOLI LIGHTING Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 > The code requirement to provide for aerial apparatus access has not yet been resolved. Tivoli lighting across the fire lane will be approved in conjunction with a plan for meeting minimum fire code requirements via alternative means and methods. > If approved, the installation of Tivoli lights shall account for droop. All portions across the fire lane shall exceed 14' in height at all times. Comment Number: 7 05/08/2018: MISCELLANEOUS Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 > All areas of the fire lane shall be engineered to support 40 tons. This will also include the area served by the underground storm chambers. This will also include the area engineered with pavers. > Please detail what fire apparatus dimensions were used in the Autoturn study. Autoturn should be using 52' ladder truck template. > The EAE should be updated to reflect required inside turning radii for fire apparatus at the apex of the 90 degree leg internal to the site. > The fire lane shall be identified on the Plat as an "Emergency Access Easement" (and other plan sets as an EAE) and not a "Fire Access Easement" as currently indicated. > In order to serve the 3rd floor roof amenity, standpipe fire hose connections will be required interior to the courtyard access doors. > Correction to prior fire department comment: Fire pits and grills fueled by natural gas shall have a 10' separation to combustible construction and/or vegetation (NOT SAS PREVIOUSLY INDICATED). Department: Planning Services Contact: Jason Holland, 970-224-6126, jholland@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated All comments provided here must be satisfied prior to scheduling the Land Use 05/07/2018 9 Hearing. Division 4.17 - River Downtown Redevelopment District (R-D-R) (A) Purpose. The River Downtown Redevelopment District is intended to reestablish the linkage between Old Town and the River through redevelopment in the Cache la Poudre River (the River) corridor. This District offers opportunities for more intensive redevelopment of housing, businesses and workplaces to complement Downtown. Improvements should highlight the historic origin of Fort Collins and the unique relationship of the waterway and railways to the urban environment as well as expand cultural opportunities in the Downtown area. Any significant redevelopment should be designed as part of a master plan for the applicable group of contiguous properties. Redevelopment will extend the positive characteristics of Downtown such as the pattern of blocks, pedestrian -oriented streetfronts and lively outdoor spaces. Staff comments: Project design not consistent with purpose statement. Issues: extending positive characteristics of Downtown; block patterns; pedestrian oriented streetfronts and outdoor spaces. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D) Development Standards. (2) Street and Walkways. (a) Streets. Redevelopment shall maintain the existing block grid system of streets and alleys. To the extent reasonably feasible, the system shall be augmented with additional connections, such as new streets, alleys, walkway spines, mid -block passages, courtyards and plazas, in order to promote a fine-grained pedestrian circulation network that supplements public sidewalks. Staff comments: Standard not met. In order to meet this requirement, staff is recommending to P&Z that the project incorporate an east/west connection into the proposed parking area from the alley. Include raised crossings with special paving, planters, planting islands and sidewalk widths to accommodate bike and ped. flow. Please also reference LUC 3.2.2.(C)(5) for detail. A north/south pedestrian alley or walkway is also recommended from Willow Street, between the proposed building and Mill House. Along this pedestrian alley/walkway and along Willow Street, provide traditional entrance doors, entry stoops, canopies and/or porches to reinforce the pedestrian scale. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3) Buildings. (b) Programming, Massing and Placement. 1. Height/Mass. Multiple story buildings of up to five (5) stories are permitted, provided that massing is terraced back from the River and from streets so that multiple story buildings are stepped down to one (1) story abutting the River landscape frontage and are stepped down to three (3) stories or less abutting 10 any street frontage. Such terraced massing shall be a significant and integral aspect of the building design. Where new buildings are placed next to existing shorter buildings that are expected to remain, the new buildings must be stepped down in such a manner as to minimize their impact on the shorter buildings. Staff comments: Standard not met. Significant massing step -backs are recommended. The current plan provides only a four -foot recess which is achieved by projecting the building forward. In addition, step -backs are needed along the south portion of the building to reference the depot building height. The terraced massing proposed is not integral or significant. Of the entire building footprint, staff recommends that the stepbacks be revised to represent a significant portion of the total building footprint. Staff recommends that stepbacks be significant. Current downtown code changes recommend a stepback of not less than 10 feet along the street frontages. Additionally, significant step -backs are recommended to reduce the apparent mass of the building when viewed from the south and west from College Avenue and Jefferson Street. Step -backs in the 10 to 20-foot range are typical in downtown areas where height transitions are provided to reflect historic resources. The building projection provided with the 2-story brick element has the opposite massing effect from what was intended with the RDR guidelines and standards. The brick element contributes to an uncomfortable street transition and provides a dominant, looming horizonal element that significantly adds to the overall apparent building mass, rather than contributing to a reduction in mass and appropriate reinforcement of human -scaled proportions. Instead of providing a projecting element that emphasizes the mass and horizontal length of the building, staff recommends a series of storefront modules be provided, with distinctive durable materials and details applied to the modules in a base, middle and top pattern. The Elizabeth Hotel is a recent example of this massing and material approach. Staff recommends that Major Facade Plane Changes be provided (defined as the portion of the building below any required upper -story step -backs). A Major Facade Plane Change should be provided not to exceed 50 foot intervals, and must be a minimum of 2 feet deep and shall be related to entrances, the integral structure and/or the organization of interior spaces and activities and not merely for cosmetic effect. Comment Number: Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(b) 5. Outdoor spaces and amenities. To the extent reasonably feasible, all development shall provide on -site outdoor space such as courtyard, plaza, patio or other pedestrian -oriented outdoor space. To the extent reasonably feasible, outdoor spaces shall be visible from the street and shall be visually or physically connected with any outdoor spaces on adjacent properties. Staff comments: Standard partially met. The project does carve out some plaza 11 space at the main entrance. Approx. 300 SF with two small seating areas. More attention is needed to provide greater building and site detail for outdoor pedestrian network and space within the site. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) Character and Image. New buildings shall be designed to demonstrate compatibility with the historical agricultural/industrial characteristics of the District in order to promote visual cohesiveness and emphasize positive historical attributes. Such characteristics include simple rectilinear building shapes, simple rooflines, juxtaposed building masses that directly express interior volumes/functions, visible structural components and joinery, details formed by brickwork, sandstone, sills, lintels, headers and foundations and details formed by joinery of structural materials. Staff comments: Standard not met. Staff recommends that the building be redesigned to provide massing and details including: sills, lintels, foundation material base, cornice details, and articulation of entrances, all in manner that is commensurate with the detail and articulation patterns seen in the downtown area. A taller first floor ceiling height may also be helpful in articulating the street level. An additional staff recommendation is to design the two buildings to be distinctively different. Overall, the building has a ubiquitous character with materials, colors and patterns that are commonly repeated in other municipalities and zone districts. Staff is concerned that the overall building design — including the massing variation, detailing, materials and color selection does not demonstrate the intended RDR character and image. The intent of the standards is to achieve buildings that are distinctive and unique to the Fort Collins RDR district. The use of juxtaposed building masses is not done in a way that provides a distinctive RDR character. The River District Block One is a recent example that satisfies this standard. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 1.Outdoor spaces. Buildings and extensions of buildings shall be designed to form architectural outdoor spaces such as balconies, arcades, terraces, decks or courtyards. Staff comments: Standard is not met. Outdoor space provided is too minimal. Balconies are not deep enough to be functional or to provide detail, massing and articulation that is a unique or distinctive contribution the RDR District. Pedestrian alleyway connections with direct residential entrances into each ground unit can also be used to satisfy this requirement and provide a Pedestrian Friendly Edge in accordance with the RDR guidelines. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 2. Windows. Windows shall be individually defined with detail elements such as frames, sills and lintels, and placed so as to visually establish and define the building stories and establish human scale and proportion. 12 Windows shall be placed in a symmetrical pattern relative to the wall and massing. Glass curtain walls and spandrel -glass strip windows shall not be used as the predominant style of fenestration for buildings in this District. This requirement shall not serve to restrict the use of atrium, lobby or greenhouse -type accent features used as embellishments to the principal building. Staff comments: Standard not met. Staff recommends that all windows be designed to provide depth and with details formed by joinery of structural materials. Vinyl windows typically do not reinforce the rich structural detail that should be found in a downtown area. Additionally, a grey color change is proposed with the surrounding materials to make the window openings seem larger. The combination proposed is busy and reduces the overall cohesiveness of the building design. The window design and placement does not provide a positive contribution to the RDR district. Specific window details have not been provided with the plans. No inset appears to be proposed with the upper stories. Windows appear to be 'tacked on" in a similar way that was provided at Old Town Flats. The window treatment does not meet a downtown standard and the window design contributes to the ubiquitous character of the building. The drawing implies that window HVAC units are proposed at some window bases, and the units are not labelled. These detract from the overall expected RDR quality and character of the building and are more commonly associated with suburban hotels. Staff recommends that the window units be removed or screened by architectural features integrated into the building design. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 3. Roof forms. Flat, shed and gable roof forms corresponding to massing and interior volumes/functions shall be the dominant roof forms. Flat -roofed masonry buildings shall feature three-dimensional cornice treatment integral with masonry on all walls facing streets, the River or connecting walkways. Additional decorative shaped cornices in wood (or other material indistinguishable from wood) shall be permitted in addition to the top masonry cornice treatment. Sloped metal roofs are allowed. Barrel roofs may be used as an accent feature but must be subordinate to the dominant roof. Specialized or unusual roof forms, including mansards and A -frames, are prohibited. A single continuous horizontal roofline shall not be used on one-story buildings except as part of a design style that emulates nearby landmarks (or structures eligible for landmark designation). Staff comments: Standard not met. While flat roofs are permitted, the forms and material treatments proposed don't work in tandem to ensure a distinctive RDR building. The roof form proposed reinforces the ubiquitous nature of the building. See River District Block One example. Staff recommends that a cornice detail be provided at major step -backs, such as those that can be provided by brick coursing, and an additional cornice detail be provided at the top of the building. 13 Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 4. Materials. Building materials shall contribute to visual continuity within the District. Textured materials with native and historic characteristics, such as brick, stone, wood, architectural cast stone and synthetic stone in historically compatible sandstone patterns only, architectural metals and materials with similar characteristics and proportions shall be used in a repeating pattern as integral parts of the exterior building fabric. Masonry units must wrap around the corners of walls so as to not appear as an applied surface treatment. Other exterior materials, if any, shall be used as integral parts of the overall building fabric, in repeating modules, proportioned both horizontally and vertically to relate to human scale, and with enough depth at joints between architectural elements to cast shadows, in order to better ensure that the character and image of new buildings are visually related to the Downtown and River context. Lapped aluminum siding, vinyl siding, smooth -face concrete masonry units, synthetic stucco coatings and imitation brick are prohibited. Staff comments: Standard not met. There are several issues with the material design. Portions of the building facades that are not street facing rely to heavily on the cement panel system, and not "textured materials with native characteristics". The cement panel pattern proposed is too expansive, monolithic, and not of an appropriate scale. This makes the building seem more massive and does not provide a rich, textural detail pattern. The ground -face texture masonry application at the ground level does not provide sufficient detail and visual interest. Generally, this material is too commonly used in building design and does not positively reinforce the RDR District. Overall the appearance is too utilitarian and it is also used for the penthouse elevator cores on the roof. The white and grey combination currently seems overused in multifamily urban design; in particular, the white material makes the building seem more influenced by national design trends and less of a response to reinforcing a unique character area such as RDR. Please consider other material combinations, patterns and textures. The use of raw concrete panels with textures might be a potential option, such as provided by TAKTL http://www.taktl-llc.com/Textures No significant character -defining materials, material combinations or embellishments are provided that provide unique visual interest or help break down the scale or the building. The downtown hotel is a good example where filigree and other material provisions were provided to reinforce the positive character of the building and provide unique visual interest. No material examples were provided. Example pictures were provided that don't relate well to what is proposed. 14 Round concrete columns are proposed without textural detail. Consider wider columns, or more integrated in into the faqade, or possibly another shape/material. Mill House — square. The brick coursing surrounding the windows shown is confusing. The horizontal material indentations between windows and surrounding the windows seem out of place and don't relate well to the patterns in the rest of the building levels. Where smaller windows are proposed within larger openings, typically more detail is provided. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 5. Primary entrance. The primary entrance must be clearly identified and must be oriented to a major street, pedestrian way, place, courtyard and/or other key public space. The primary entrance must feature a sheltering element such as a canopy or be defined by a recess or a simple surround. Staff comments: Standard not met. Side entrance design is not noticeable or distinctive. Staff recommends that the entrances be redesigned to face Willow Street or be chamfered to be at the corners of the two buildings. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 6. Accent features. Accent features, where used, must complement and not dominate the overall composition and design of the building and may include secondary entrances, loading docks, garage bays, balconies, canopies, cupolas, vertical elevator/stair shafts and other similar features. Staff comments: Standard not met. Downtown hotel is a good recent example that integrates accent features into the material design. Integration of complementary accent features may be helpful. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(3)(c) 7. Awnings and canopies. Awnings and canopies must complement the character of the building and must be subordinate to the facade. Colors must be solid or two (2) color stripes for simplicity. Staff comments: Standard not met. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(4)(b) Walls, Fences and Planters. Walls, fences and planters shall be designed to match or be consistent with the quality of materials, the style and colors of nearby buildings. Brick, stone or other masonry may be required for walls or fence columns. Staff comments: Standard may not be met. Only concrete seat walls are provided. Please consider this standard when addressing revisions. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(4)(c) Street Edge. A well-defined street edge must be established and shall be compatible with the streetscape in the public realm. Components may include any of the following: planted areas, decorative paving, public art, street 15 furnishing with ornamental lighting and iron and metal work that reflect on the agricultural/industrial heritage of the district. Staff comments: Standard may be met. Planting areas are provided along Willow Street, no planting plan provided. Benches and planters appear to be proposed. Unclear whether decorative features are proposed. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(4)(e) Parking. Where parking lots are highly visible from streets or pedestrian -oriented outdoor spaces, a visual buffer must be provided. Such buffering may consist of any of the following singularly or in combination: a low solid screen wall, a semi -opaque screen or a living green wall consisting of plant material sufficient to provide a minimum of seventy -five -percent opacity year-round or other screening device that is sensitive to pedestrian activity. Staff comments: Concrete bench walls are proposed which partially screen the parking. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(4)(e) Parking. Where parking lots are highly visible from streets or pedestrian -oriented outdoor spaces, a visual buffer must be provided. Such buffering may consist of any of the following singularly or in combination: a low solid screen wall, a semi -opaque screen or a living green wall consisting of plant material sufficient to provide a minimum of seventy -five -percent opacity year-round or other screening device that is sensitive to pedestrian activity. Staff comments: Concrete bench walls are proposed which partially screen the parking, however the walls and plaza area may be an area where more accent detail should be provided. TBD with resubmittal. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 4.17(D)(4)(E) Design Guidelines. See also the Fort Collins R-D-R, River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District Design Guidelines, which are intended to assist applicants in the preparation of development plans within the zone district. RDR - summary of guidelines and compliance notes: 1. Guidelines consider the neighborhood, site and building. Vision of the RDR zone district is intended to respect and be sensitive to the ag-industrial character. 2. Key Principals: Excellence in Design; promote creativity; design with authenticity; design with consistency; design for durability; design for sustainability; enhance public realm; enhance ped. experience; provide signature open spaces; keep parking subordinate. Staff comments: Guideline key principles not met. Staff recommends the following: -step-back and massing reductions around the perimeter of the building (see detailed comments). 16 -More appropriate predominant materials including full dimension brick and stone masonry. Faux or simulated materials, including composite wood grain materials, imitation wood siding or stone should not be used. Use materials that reinforce the continuity and integrity of the overall Downtown district. The design and materials should be durable, classic, and elegant. -Maintain the rhythm established by the repetition of the traditional facade by changing the materials, patterns, reveals. 3. Variation in bldg. setbacks along streets and river encouraged Guideline not met. 4.Open space amenities encouraged, not too large, appropriately sized, often street oriented Guideline is minimally met, see detailed comments. 5. Neighborhood - each project - promote a rich diversity, perceived as its own district, relate well to other properties. Important subjects: connectivity, establish and reinforce mid -block connections. Guideline not met, see detailed comments. 6. Site Design - pedestrian oriented entries, windows facing street, small public spaces linked to sidewalk, urban streetscape design, street furniture, public art. Enhance character of district. Open space amenities encouraged; could be part of a detention area. Guideline is minimally met. 7. Building, Design - Draw upon the building traditions of the RD at large as inspiration for new, creative designs. Character: draw upon agricultural industrial & commercial architecture of the past; do not imitate historic styles; contemporary interpretations of building forms, materials and details encouraged. 8. Simple geometric forms and shapes & juxta positioning of simple forms/materials encouraged. 9. Diversity of building forms encouraged. Guideline not met. 10.4th story always steps back. Guideline not met. 4th story step -back is not sufficient. Juxta-position of forms is not adequate. 11. Wall lengths should be in scale with those seen traditionally in the area. 17 Guideline not met. Horizontal articulation of wall forms not sufficiently provided. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 12. Primary building forms should appear similar to those seen traditionally. Guideline not met. Horizontal articulation of wall forms not sufficiently provided. 13. Fagade to appear predominantly as flat; decorative elements and projecting/recessed elements subordinate to the dominant form; Guideline not met. Dominant form is the projection band. 14. New building to reflect traditional range of building widths in the district; 15. When exceeding width, use changes in design features so that the building reads as separate modules that reflect the traditional widths and massing. Guideline not met. Horizontal articulation of wall forms not sufficiently provided. 16. Avoid use of highly complex forms; too much variation is inappropriate; attention to the design transition between modules is important. Guideline met but with issues. 17. Relate to human scale. Guideline not met. The projecting massing, materials and colors are issues as well as lack of a significant and varied step -back. 18. Solid to Void ratio: use similar ratio to existing. Guideline not met. Horizontal articulation of wall forms not sufficiently provided. 19. Roofs: 3d cornice treatment with flat roofs Guideline not met. No 3d cornice treatment provided. 20. Durable materials -- masonry and metals, windows. Design with authenticity. Guideline not met. Durability not apparent or consistent throughout design. 21.Building features -- exposed structural elements, simple detailing, clearly defined entrances. Guideline not met. 22. Well defined windows with frames, sills and lintels; Guideline not met. 18 23. Accent features -- Accent features should be used to complement overall composition and context; awning canopies, structural features. Guideline not met. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 Grading plan, Sheet C-4. What is the grading transition proposed along the east boundary? There is not enough labeling on the grading plan to determine this. Spot elevations shown, are these top or bottom of curb? This is not clear on the plans. East side of podium parking, a hatch pattern is shown but it's not clear what this represents, is this a trench drain? Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 Landscape plan -- there are a few discrepancies with planting vs/paving areas shown on the civil plans. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.1 - Building and Project Compatibility (A) Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to ensure that the physical and operational characteristics of proposed buildings and uses are compatible when considered within the context of the surrounding area. They should be read in conjunction with the more specific building standards contained in this Division 3.5 and the zone district standards contained in Article 4. All criteria and regulations contained in this Section that pertain to "developments," "the development plan," "buildings" and other similar terms shall be read to include the application of said criteria and regulations to any determination made by the Planning and Zoning Board under paragraphs 1.3.4(A)(5) and (6) for the purpose of evaluating the authorization of an additional use. (B) General Standard. New developments in or adjacent to existing developed areas shall be compatible with the established architectural character of such areas by using a design that is complementary. In areas where the existing architectural character is not definitively established or is not consistent with the purposes of this Code, the architecture of new development shall set an enhanced standard of quality for future projects or redevelopment in the area. Compatibility shall be achieved through techniques such as the repetition of roof lines, the use of similar proportions in building mass and outdoor spaces, similar relationships to the street, similar window and door patterns and/or the use of building materials that have color shades and textures similar to those existing in the immediate area of the proposed infill development. Brick and stone masonry shall be considered compatible with wood framing and other materials. Architectural compatibility (including, without limitation, building height) shall be derived from the neighboring context. Staff comments: Standard not met, similar compatibility is not achieved. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.1(C) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale. Buildings shall either be similar in size and height, or, if larger, be articulated and subdivided into massing that is proportional to the mass and scale of other structures, if any, on the same block face, abutting or adjacent to the subject property, opposing 19 block face or cater -corner block face at the nearest intersection. (See Figures 7a and 7b.) Staff comments: Standard not met. Buildings are too massive. New buildings in historic districts should reflect the historic character of the neighborhood through repetition of roof lines, patterns of door and window placement, and the use of characteristic entry features. Staff comments: Standard not met per LPC comments. Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.1(E) Building Materials. (1) General. Building materials shall either be similar to the materials already being used in the neighborhood or, if dissimilar materials are being proposed, other characteristics such as scale and proportions, form, architectural detailing, color and texture, shall be utilized to ensure that enough similarity exists for the building to be compatible, despite the differences in materials. Staff comments: Standard not met. Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.1(E)(2) Glare. Building materials shall not create excessive glare. If highly reflective building materials are proposed, such as aluminum, unpainted metal and reflective glass, the potential for glare from such materials will be evaluated to determine whether or not the glare would create a significant adverse impact on the adjacent property owners, neighborhood or community in terms of vehicular safety, outdoor activities and enjoyment of views. If so, such materials shall not be permitted. Staff comments: Standard not met. White color selection is too dominant and does not blend well with neighborhood. Comment Number: 25 3.5.1(E)(3) Windows. Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 (a) Mirror glass with a reflectivity or opacity of greater than sixty (60) percent is prohibited. (b) Clear glass shall be used for commercial storefront display windows and doors. Staff comments: Provide notation/specification with the plans indicating compliance. Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.1(E)(3)(c) Windows shall be individually defined with detail elements such as frames, sills and lintels, and placed to visually establish and define the building stories and establish human scale and proportion. Staff comments: Standard not met. Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 20 3.5.1(F) Building Color. Color shades shall be used to facilitate blending into the neighborhood and unifying the development. The color shades of building materials shall draw from the range of color shades that already exist on the block or in the adjacent neighborhood. Staff comments: Standard not met. White color selection is too dominant and does not blend well with neighborhood. Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.1(G) Building Height Review. (1) Special Height Review/Modifications. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish a special process to review buildings or structures that exceed forty (40) feet in height. Its intent is to encourage creativity and diversity of architecture and site design within a context of harmonious neighborhood planning and coherent environmental design, to protect access to sunlight, to preserve desirable views and to define and reinforce downtown and designated activity centers. All buildings or structures in excess of forty (40) feet in height shall be subject to special review pursuant to this subsection (G). (a) Review Standards. If any building or structure is proposed to be greater than forty (40) feet in height above grade, the building or structure must meet the following special review criteria: 1. Light and Shadow. Buildings or structures greater than forty (40) feet in height shall be designed so as not to have a substantial adverse impact on the distribution of natural and artificial light on adjacent public and private property. Adverse impacts include, but are not limited to, casting shadows on adjacent property sufficient to preclude the functional use of solar energy technology, creating glare such as reflecting sunlight or artificial lighting at night, contributing to the accumulation of snow and ice during the winter on adjacent property and shading of windows or gardens for more than three (3) months of the year. Techniques to reduce the shadow impacts of a building may include, but are not limited to, repositioning of a structure on the lot, increasing the setbacks, reducing building mass or redesigning a building shape. Staff comments: No significant shadowing issues observed. 2. Privacy. Development plans with buildings or structures greater than forty (40) feet in height shall be designed to address privacy impacts on adjacent property by providing landscaping, fencing, open space, window size, window height and window placement, orientation of balconies, and orientation of buildings away from adjacent residential development, or other effective techniques. Staff comments: No apparent privacy issues. 3. Neighborhood Scale. Buildings or structures greater than forty (40) feet in height shall be compatible with the scale of the neighborhoods in which they are situated in terms of relative height, height to mass, length to mass and building 21 or structure scale to human scale. Staff comments: Standard not met, see detailed comments. Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated 3.5.1(1)(2) 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 so that the architectural design is continuous and uninterrupted by ladders, towers, fences and equipment, and no attention is attracted to the functions by use of screening materials that are different from or inferior to the principal materials of the building and landscape. These areas shall be located and screened so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets. 05/07/2018 Staff comments: HVAC locations are an issue. Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 3.5.2 - Residential Building Standards (D) Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking. 3.5.2(D)(1) Orientation to a Connecting Walkway. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face the adjacent street to the extent reasonably feasible. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face a connecting walkway with no primary entrance more than two hundred (200) feet from a street sidewalk. The following exceptions to this standard are permitted: Staff comments: Standard only partially met, also see ground floor unit comments. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/01/2018 05/01/2018: Based upon the EEC, LLC report and Nation Inspection Services Information Request Response some specific pollutant sources will need to be addressed as part of the Erosion Control Report, specifically; 1) pumped ground water from each pier hole, 2) Benzine, Naphthalene, Chlorinated solvent, and PCE contaminated soil, and 3) suspected asbestos containing debris. Please identify in the Erosion Control Report, What will be done with these prior mentioned pollutant sources? How will these materials be managed as to prevent a commingling with stormwater and potential discharge of this material to the storm drainage while waiting for material to be characterized for disposal? Please specify control measures being implemented and eventual disposal method of the pollutant contained materials from the site if and when encountered. These are in addition to the PDR review comments. Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com 22 Topic: General Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The City is requesting that the detention and LID chambers include an impermeable liner to ensure no infiltration of storm water into the soils. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The City is advising no utility excavation be below the groundwater level. Additional permits and remediation would be required if excavation exposed any groundwater. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: There is a conflict with the southeast electrical transformer and the public storm sewer. Separation distance of 10 feet is required. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Additional separation is needed between the public storm sewer and the west storm water chambers. Moving the chambers two feet to the east will meet the separation requirements. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please label plug and grout manhole opening for the storm sewer manhole east of the property where the storm line is being abandoned. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: There are two locations where a conflict exists between the public storm sewer and trees. 10 feet of separation is the criteria. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Additional separation is needed between the public storm sewer and the electrical line. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icounty@fcqov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated 05/10/2018: Please remove the address from the title blocks of all sheets. With the project being replatted, the address could change. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated 05/10/2018: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. Topic: Construction Drawings 05/10/2018 05/10/2018 Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Please revise the Benchmark Statement as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: All benchmark statements must match on all sheets. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Sheet C-001 has an incorrect sheet name. 23 Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Some of the right of way descriptions shown are incorrect. If they are going to stay on the plan, they should match what is shown on the Subdivision Plat. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: 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. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: There is text that needs to be rotated 180°. See redlines. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Topic: General Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: PARKING PLAN: Please remove the address from the title block. With the project being replatted, the address could change. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: STREET PLAN: If these plans are going to be filed, please make changes as shown. See redlines. Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Please revise the title on all sheets as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Please remove the address from the title blocks of all sheets. With the project being replatted, the address could change. Topic: Lighting Plan Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Please remove the address from the title blocks of all sheets. With the project being replatted, the address could change. Topic: Plat Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: 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. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Please revise the legal description as marked. See redlines. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/10/2018 05/10/2018: Please remove the address from the title blocks of all sheets. With 24 the project being replatted, the address could change. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: Traffic Impact Study Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: The Trip Generation in Table 2 is based on 226 Bedrooms however the Site Plan shows 234 bedrooms. Please submit a memo that clarifies the number of bedrooms. The results of the study are not likely to change but please confirm in the memo. Department: Transportation Planning Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-416-4320, slorson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: PARKING. Your project is proposing 174 parking spaces for 193 units (234 bds), will this adequately accommodate the parking demand? Please keep in mind that the on -street public parking spaces may become 2-hour time limited spaces as the River District develops. Thus, there is no parking spaces in the area to absorb spillover from your project. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/07/2018 05/07/2018: 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 Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: The proposed sewer main along the eastern edge of the property does not meet separation requirements. The City will also require it to be a service which feeds the one customer. Please revise the utility plan to a sewer service in this location. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: A 30 foot utility easement is required on the property to the west for the new alignment of the sanitary sewer main. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Coordination is required with the Willow Street Capital Project to ensure all water, wastewater, storm water and site improvements have been accounted for. 25 Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Some conflicts exist between the pavers and sewer main and with the water meter vault. Coordination is needed to determine where and if the pavers are necessary. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: A conflict exists with the eastern water meter vault and the crab apple trees. Department: Zoning Contact: Missy Nelson, mnelson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: LUC 3.2.2(C)(5)(a) Pedestrian connectivity from Linden to building via alley -way is lacking. Directness and Continuity . Walkways within the site shall be located and aligned to directly and continuously connect areas or points of pedestrian origin and destination, and shall not be located and aligned solely based on the outline of a parking lot configuration that does not provide such direct pedestrian access. Walkways shall link street sidewalks with building entries through parking lots. Such walkways shall be raised or enhanced with a paved surface not less than six (6) feet in width. Drive aisles leading to main entrances shall have walkways on both sides of the drive aisle. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: LUC 3.2.2(M) At least 6% of interior space of parking lot should be landscaped & irrigated. - Shade trees provided in each landscape island in a parking lot Perimeters of parking lots should screen headlights and have trees planted at 40 foot intervals. (Review of modification request discussed). At least 6 more trees plus landscaping should line the parking lot on the railroad side. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: LUC 4.17(D)(3) & (4) Criteria of building design in the R-D-R district does not seem to be met. Please refer to Planning and Historic comments for more detail. Specifically referring to Character and Image — Roof Forms, Primary Entrances and Site design — River Landscape Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: LUC 3.2.4 Does the wall sconce direct the wash light upwards? A temperature of 3000K or less is preferable, one of the fixtures, D-Series wall luminaire does not specify. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: LUC 3.5.1(1)(6) All rooftop mechanical equipment & ground equipment shall be screened from public view from both above and below by integrating it into building and roof design to the maximum extent feasible. In addition, conduit, meters, vents and other equipment attached to the building or protruding from the roof shall be painted to match surrounding building surfaces. Please note locations of equipment on site plan and elevations. 26 Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: LUC 3.2.5 All development shall provide adequately sized conveniently located, accessible trash and recycling enclosures with both service and pedestrian access. Please provide details of trash enclosure on elevation plans. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 05/08/2018 05/08/2018: Please provide detail of bike racks. Please note on plans how many bikes each rack location will hold. 27