HomeMy WebLinkAboutHICKORY COMMONS - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - (3)Response to Comments
Hickory Commons PDP
8/1/2012
Department:Current Planning
Contact:Courtney Levingston,970-416-2283,clevingston@fcgov.com
Topic:General
Comment Number:11 Comment Originated:04/25/2012
04/25/2012:On the 1st page.the list of potential uses are listed.While these are all permitted uses in the Service Commercial Zone,
they need to be re-examined due to incompatibility with site layout.LUC 3.2.2(F)talks about parking vis a vis user needs.With the
proposed uses,this is not accommodated.
Response:At your request,we analyzed the previously proposed list of commercial uses for incompatibility of site layout and also regarding
parking user needs and have removed enclosed ministorage and limited indoor recreation. For all the remaining uses,user parking needs can
vary greatly,so we feel there are many scenarios of all the remaining uses that would be compatible with the site layout and would adequately
accommodate user parking needs. Because the ultimate users have not yet be determined,a full understanding of compatibility is somewhat
speculative. Please let us know if there are any specific uses you are uncomfortable with regarding the extent to which you perceive
incompatibility.
Topic:Landscape Plans
Comment Number:12 Comment Originated:04/25/2012
04/25/2012:LUC 3.2.1 speaks to full tree stocking and there is question as to if this proposal satisfies this code section.
Response: As you pointea out,section 3.2.1(D)(1)(c)"full tree stocking"of the LUC applies to this project. This standard requires that landscape areas shall be
provided in adequate numbers,locations and dimensions to allow full tree stocking to occur along all high use or high visibility sides of any building or structure.
The buildings are designed in such a way as they have both a commercial and a residential entrance facing and opening onto the interior drive aisle facing the
parking. Additionally,the buildings have a second residential entry facing the opposite direction. This second residential entry faces a connecting walkway,but
is likely to be used infrequently as compaired to the side of the building that faces the interior drive aisle. The question on the table is which of the sides of the
building are high use or high visibility areas,which can be summarized as follows:
The east side of the easterly buildings is a low use(not high use)side of the buildings,however it is high visibility because of the adjacent regional
bicycle trail,full tree stocking is therefore required in this location;
The sides of the buildings facing the parking and drive aisle are high use sides of the buildings,therefore full tree stocking is required in this location
as well:
The west side of the westerly buildings is a low use(not high use)side of the buildings,and is also,because of the screening wall/fencing along the
west property line,a low visibility side of the building. This side of the buildings is not high use,nor high visibility,therefore full tree stocking does not
apply to the west side of the westerly buildings.
Please see the revised plans where you can see that we are satisfying this standard in all applicable locations.
Topic:Lighting Plan
Comment Number:9 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Per LUC 3.2.4(D)(8),please show lighting levels 20 feet beyond property boundaries.This appears to only be an issue
on the east and west side of the property.
Response:Revised.
Comment Number:10 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Per LUC 3.2.4(C),there are some locations where the lighting level is inadequate for the sidewalk along Hickory Street
and the parking areas.The parking areas should equal a minimum of one footcandle.
Response: 1 o solve this,i ve upgraded the waiipacnc lighting fixture to a brighter fixture and a.so added some wadpacks to trio north end of the
buildings facing Hickory Street. Please also note,the photometric plan just shows our private lighting levels,and the public street lights are not
shown,per code. If you account for this public street lights,the Hickory sidewalk will also get some of that light spillage too,so the actual light
levels at the location where the street sidewalk crosses the drive aisle should actually meet that 0.5 foot candle minimum.
Contact:Emma McArd!e,970-221-6197,emcardle@fcgov.com
Topic:General
Comment Number:5 Comment Originated:04/13/2011
04/13/2011:In addition to the paper routings,please provide electronic versions of the resubmittal.
r
Response: A DVD of pdfs of the submittal drawings has been provided with this resubmittal.
Department:Engineering Development Review
Contact:Andrew Gingerich,970-221-6603,agingerich@fcgov.com
Topic:General
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
4/17/2012:Still Applicable;Contours along the southwesterly property line do not appear to tie to existing and offsite contours are
not shown.
Y . _ , of 50 feet offsite.
Response: Topographic information for this area is shown on the plans. This area is very flat so there are not many contours to show.
Comment Number:2 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
4/17/2012:Still Applicable;Label Right of Way on Site Plan and Hemlock Street P&P.
Ind din omlock streets.
Response: Acknowledged
Comment Number:3 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
4/17/2012;Still Applicable;Sidewalks in this location should be detached,please reference'Type 1"in detail callout on Sheet C4
and show sidewalk detached along frontage.
Response: As per our recent conversations,the sidewalk along Hickory has not been changed. 1 P y,r i v hlJ
Comment Number:5 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
V
4/17/2012:Still Applicable; Hemlock has been preliminarily designed as a part of this submittal,
1 however a local street portion estimate will still need to be prepared by the City for the future
frontage improvements and that amount will need to be provided in a Bond,LOC,or Cash.
As mer,:,. or rmprovina r
frontages of both Hickory and Hemlock. Currently. there are no plans to improve Hemlock
Street and due to its existing condition;the City will not require any frontage improvements at
this time. However, this project will still be required to preliminarily design Hemlock Street
along its frontage as well as 500 feet offsite in either direction.Also.a local street portion
estimate will he prepared by the City for the future frontage improvements. and that amount will
need to be provided in a Bond, LOC, or Cash.
Response: Acknowledged,
Comment Number:10 Comment Originated:04/15/2011
4/17/2012:Still Applicable;it is unclear where this statement is shown on C4,it is recommended that it be added to note 16 of the
17 Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan.
rent on the Grading sheet. "The top of foundation elevations shown are the minimum
elevations required for protection from the 100-year storm."
Response: Acknowledged. This has been added as note 10.
Comment Number:11 Comment Originated:04/15/2011
4/17/2012:Still Applicable;Include street cut note to utility sheet and provide reference to street cut note on both utility and grading
sheets.
ir 311:Please show the approximate limits of any proposed street cuts.Also.please add the following note to the Utility Sheet.
Limits of street cut are approximate. Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector.All repairs to be
in accordance with City street repair standards."
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:13 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Typical for all sheets;please address textmask and line over text conflicts.
Response: Acknowledges.
Comment Number:14 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Show utility easement along Hemlock right of way on utility sheet.The retaining wall appears to be located within
proposed utility easement. Utility companies may need to be re-routed plans for any comments associated with retaining wall and fill
within utility easement.
L4,/: I.its jr.- T,o .l
do Qy.
Response: Because the existing ROW is wider than required,we propose to locate dry utilities within the"excess" 11.5'feet of ROW and not
provide additional easement.
Comment Number:15 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Revise note 4 of Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan to reference correct sheet.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:16 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:It is unclear at this level of detail but it should be noted that proposed handicap parking must maintain 2%in all
V
directions.
Response: Acknowledged. if additional detail is needed it will be provide during final engineering.
Comment Number:17 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:On the Grading, Hickory Street P&P and Cross section sheets include an interim design to show how proposed street
improvements will tie to existing 337 Hickory Street Frontage in case there improvements are not completed prior to construction of
this project.You may want to add a note that dictates the timing of these projects related to the applicable improvements.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:18 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012: Easement and Proposed linework/X-Reference appear to have been turned off for the Hickory Commons site on Sheet
V C5.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:19 Comment Originated: 04/17/2012
04/17/2012:On sheet C6 Signing and Striping Plan it is unclear what the intent is for removing and replacing the Type 3 barricade.
Response: The labeling has been revised to clarify.
Comment Number:20 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012.Note 1 of Sheet C7 may need to be revised to address the current state of 337 Hickory improvements.This note
speaks to both projects being under construction at the same time.It may be better served to note that contractor shall review 337
plans to ensure improvements are constructed in conjunction with each other.
a 0-1 fri rg-Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:24 Comment Originated:04/18/2012
04/18/2012:The grading contours tie into existing on the adjacent trail parcel to the east, Please discuss with Parks department in
regards to grading on their parcel and/or obtaining an easement or agreement and specific language may need to be added to the
development agreement.
Response: We are currently coordinating with Parks on th.:,
Topic:Site Plan
Comment Number:22 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Site Plan-Please include the top of wall elevation and height of wall callouts along the retaining wall on the site plan.
The building department may require a building permit and need to review the design of the wall depending on the proposed height
of the wall.
Response:We are no longer proposing a retaining wall around the detention pond.
Comment Number:23 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Site Plan-The handicap parking spaces shown on the site plan are labeled as standard parking spaces instead of
V handicap parking spaces.
Response:Revised.
Topic:Variance Request
Comment Number:21 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
V 04/17/2012:The variance request for the 50'parking setback from Hickory Street has been reviewed and accepted.Engineering
finds that the distance as proposed from Hickory Street to the first driveway is acceptable.Please include reference to this variance
request in note 48 of the general notes on your next submittal.
Response: Acknowlec'r,,,,
Department:Environmental Planning
Contact:Lindsay Ex,970-224-6143,lex@fcgov.com
Topic:General
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated:04/07/2011
04/11/2012:Please provide a copy of the letter of intent from Natural Areas.
As pet eting with Daylan Figgs needs to be held to determine
how the stormwater will or will not flow across the Salyer Natural Area.
Response:We are no longer proposing to cross the natural area with our outfall.
Department:Forestry
Contact:Tim Buchanan,970-221-6361,tbuchanan@fcgov.com
Topic:General
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated: 04/15/2011
04/15/2011: Landscape note number 11 should clarify that the native seed would receive temporary irrigation but the trees and other
plants that are in the native seed area will permanent automatic irrigation such as drip or bubler.
Response:Revised.
Topic:Landscape Plans
Comment Number:2 Comment Originated:04/18/2012
04/18/2012:Autumn Blaze maple is not adapted to Fort Collins Soils.The City Forester recommends that another more suited
shade tree species be selected.
Response:Revised.
Comment Number:3 Comment Originated:04/18/2012
04/18/2012:Please add these landscape notes."A permit must be obtained from the City forester before any trees or shrubs as
noted on this plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way.This includes zones between the sidewalk and curb,
medians and other city property.This permit shall approve the location and species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may
result in replacing or relocating trees and a hold on certificate of occupancy."
Response:Revised.
Department:Light And Power
Contact:Doug Martine,970-224-6152, riro fcgov.com
Topic:Genera!
Comment Number:2 Comment Originated:03/29/2011
03/29/2011: It is difficult to locate the electric(and gas)meters on the buildings,especially Bldg.#2. It is also unknown how
Live/Work Unit"impacts the electric service needs. In order to design the electric utility system,a utility coordination meeting is
necessary. Depending on the power requirements to each building,other facilities such as water meter locations may need to be
adjusted.
Response: A utility coordination meeting will be scheduled in the near future.
Comment Number:3 Comment Originated: 04/10/2012
04/10/2012:Water service stop boxes need to be 2'away from the back of the easement line.Also,the water meters need to be on
the property side of the easement line in order to provide space for electric facilities.
Response: Acknowledgec,
Department:PFA
Contact:Carle Dann,970-219-5337,CDANN@poudre-fire.org
Topic:Site Plan
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated:04/11/2011
04/11/2011:Please get together with me to discuss FIRE LANE-NO PARKING sign template and placement along the Emergency
Access Easement.Thanks for addressing all previous concerns.
Response:Meeting conducted Si_vr template included.
Contact:Ron Gonzales,970-221-6635,rgonzales@poudre-fire.org
Topic:General
Comment Number:3 Comment Originated: 04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the building.
Response:Acknowledged
Comment Number:2 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:A fire hydrant shall be within 300 feet of all buildings.
Response: Two new fire hydrants are proposed within the site,which will provide the required coverage.
Comment Number:4 Comment Originated: 04/18/2012
04/18/2012:The hammerhead turnaround is subject to being flooded.This must be elevated so that a depth not to exceed 6 inches
is underwater at any one time. also,t must be paved a hard deck.compacted road base is not acceptable.
Response: We are no longer proposing a hammer head,and the maximum depth in the emergency access easement is less than 6 inches
during the 100-year event.
Comment Number:5 Comment Originated:04/18/2012
04/18/2012:This facility is out of access and is required to be fire sprinklered with a full)NFPA 13 sprinkler system,not a 13R.
Response:Acknowledged
Comment Number:6 Comment Originated:04/18/2012
04/18/2012:There shall be no grilling,with either wood or gas without the balconies being sprinklered.
Response:Acknowledges
Department:Stormwater Engineering
Contact:Wes Lamarque,970-416-2418,wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic:General
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated: 04/12/2011
04/17/2012: Need to see easement.
r the Natural Area was for just the property's drainage to the east. This development will need to
obtain Their own permission and easement. Please contact Day!an Figgs at 416-2814 for more information.
Response: A new storm drain outfall is proposed down Hemlock towards the west. This alignment is contained in the existing ROW and does
not cross Natural Areas property. No LOt is required.
Comment Number:4 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
04/20/2012:This can be finalized during the final compliance stage.
show r as well as a basin and pond summary table.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:6 Comment Originated: 04/13/2011
04/20/2012:Off-site water from the west needs to pass through the site.The sidewalk right on the property line does not allow for
this. Conveyance needs to be provided along this property line directly these flows to the south.The off-site flows need to be
quantified as well.
04/13/2011: Please include more detailed grading of the lots to the west of the site in order to make sure the fill for this site will not
block existing off-site drainage and describe how these lots drain in the text of the drainage report.
Response: A storm pipe has been stubbed to this property for future connection.
Comment Number:7 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012: Detention in parking lots or driving lanes are allowed up to one foot of depth.This detention pond is proposing depths
much greater.The detention area as proposed does not meet this important criteria
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:8 Comment Originated: 04/17/2012
04/17/2012:The detention pond does not meet our Detention Pond Landscape Standards with the large retaining wall surrounding 3
sides of the pond.This needs to be revised as well.
Response: The pond has been revised substantially,and now meets the landscape standards for detention ponds.
Comment Number:9 Comment Originated: 04/20/2012
04/20/2012:The detention calculations show more detention than is required. I calculate.543 ac-ft of quantity detention plus the
water quality volume for a total of.601 ac-ft of volume required.
Response: Acknowlengc
Comment Number:10 Comment Originated: 04/20/2012
04/20/2012: If a lower outfall was provided for this site,the detention and grading difficulties would be greatly improved.
Coordinating an outfall with the Natural Resources department is suggested.
Response: A new storm drain outfall is proposed down Hemlock towards the west. This alignment is contained in the existing ROW and does
not cross Natural Areas property. No LOI is required.
Comment Number:11 Comment Originated:04/20/2012
04/20/2012:Grading along the eastern side of the property shows that flows will be directed to the property to the east and not into
the detention pond.These flows need to be directed to the detention pond.
Response: This area now Dimes along the west side of the trail to the s,reer.
Department:Technical Services
Contact:Jeff County,970-221-6588,jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic:Building Elevations
Comment Number:10 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012: No comments.
Response:Acknowledged.
Topic:Construction Drawings
Comment Number:12 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:There is a typo in the basis of bearings statement on sheet C2. Please remove the"a".
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:13 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Please change the right of way width of Hickory Street to"varies"on all sheets.
Response: Acknosdedi-ed.
Comment Number:14 Comment Originated: 04/17/2012
04/17/2012:There are line over text issues on sheets C4&C6.
Response: Acknowledges
Comment Number:15 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:The detail on sheet C8 is a little small.The small text will not scan or reproduce well.
Response: This detail has been enlarged.
Topic:Landscape Plans
Comment Number:4 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
04/17/2012: No comments.
Response:Acknowledged.
Topic:Lighting Plan
Comment Number:11 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012: No comments.
Response:Acknowledgec
Topic:Plat
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated: 04/12/2011
04/17/2012:The boundary and legal close.
04/12/2011:The boundary and legal close.
Response:Acknowledged
Comment Number:6 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:There is a typo in Surveyor's Note#1. Please remove the"a".
Response:Revised.
Topic:Site Plan
Comment Number:7 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Please correct the sheet number on sheet 1 &2.
Response:Revised.
Comment Number:S Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012: Please correct the sheet index on sheet 1.
Response:Revised.
Comment Number:9 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:The easements on sheet 2 are incorrectly labelled.
Response:Revised.
Department:Transportation Planning
Contact:Matt Wempe,970-416-2040,mwempe@fcgov.com
Topic:Site Plan
Comment Number:1 Comment Originated: 04/05/2011
04/05/2011:The individual unit sidewalk connections to the Hickory Trail spur will not be
allowed. However,the two group connections(in between Buildings 3 and 4 and on the south
side of Building 4)are ideal.
Response:Revised with previous round of review. Does Matt Wempe still work for the City? We discussed our revision on this issue with Craig
Forman,and he is satisfied with our solution.
Comment Number:2 Comment Originated: 04/05/2011
04/05/2011:Where will bicycle parking be located,and how much will be provided?The idea
location is a hard surface,well-lit, near business entrances,secure,and protected from the
elements.
Response:See bicycle parking on the east side of the drive aisle near Hickory Street. There are 6 bicycle parking spaces as described on sheet 1
of 1 parking language.
Comment Number:3 Comment Originated:04/05/2011
04/05/2011:Hickory Street is classified as a collector on the Master Street Plan. Right-of-way
and design must follow the collector standards in the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards.
Resnonse: Acknowledged.
Department:Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact:Roger Buffington,970-221-6854,rbuffington@fcgov.com
Topic:Construction Drawings
Comment Number:3 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
04/17/2012:On plat and construction drawings, adjust utility easement to extend 10'west of water main and 15'east of sanitary
sewer.
04712/2o I .1deority easemei:rS d/7d add oh 77ci; :Ocr>. easemcoi 61iuihs arc 2U Icei TO(cu[e(eirU,i0 tec lo: so;uW1y
sewer. (I did not receive a copy of the plat.)
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:4 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
04/17/2012:
At final,provide profile of sanitary sewer.
Response Acknowledged.
Comment Number:6 Comment Originated:04/12/2011
04/17/2012:
U4,i2iLU 1 1. 517014'ail oiatei vCIVCC.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:9 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Move south storm intake to the center of the drive to maintain the same alignment in the center of the drive.
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:10 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Move the south section of sanitary sewer west to maintain the same alignment as the north end(5'off face of curb of
the landscape areas).
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:11 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Correct the easement dimensions on the utility plans(after the adjustments noted in Comment 3 above).
Response: Acknowledged.
Comment Number:12 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:Move 8"gate valve as noted on the redlined utility plans.
Response: Redlined plans were not provided.
Comment Number:13 Comment Originated:04/17/2012
04/17/2012:See redlined utility plans for other comments.
Response: Redlined plans were not provided.
Comment Number:14 Comment Originated: 04/18/2012
04/18/2012:A utility coordination meeting is STRONGLY encouraged.There doesn't appear to be enough space for the dry utilities.
Response A utility coordination meeting will be scheduled in the near future
Department:Zoning
Contact:Peter Barnes,970-416-2355,pbarnes@fcgov.com
Topic:Site Plan
Comment Number:2 Comment Originated: 03/31/2011
04/06/2012: Building footprint/elevation dimensions are show only for Building 2.Add a note to general notes stating that a raised,
compact car parking only"sign will be posted at the head of each compact space. Didn't answer the question about trash
enclosures.Are there any?and if so,show location and provide a detail. label lot line on site plan.
n to the footprints, with the
a;;veicpu ri;;7;e; .,,0,7 :,rw ti compact only"sign at the head of
each space.A handicap parking space is required.Are there going to be trash enclosures?If so.please show location and provide
a detail of materials and size. Label lot lines and show lot line dimensions. Label street on site plan. Show the depth of the compact
parking stalls on the site plan.
Response: The elevations for building 2 are representative of the character of all the proposed buildings. It is our understanding that only
character elevations are required. We have added building footprint dimensions for all other buildings.Requested note added regarding
compact parking.See new note number 18 regarding each unit having individual curb side trash service. The fact that all the units will have
curb side trash service,we didn't provide a common dumpster.