Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHOICE CENTER - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2011-11-10■ LILEY, ROGERS & MARTE LL, LLC ■ ATTORNEYS AT LAW October 24, 2011 VIA HAND DELIVERY Mr. Marc Virata City of Fort Collins Development Review 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Capstone Development Dear Marc: Pursuant to your request, enclosed are copies of the following recorded documents regarding the captioned matter: 1. Termination of Agreement and Vacation of Roadway Easement dated October 4, 2011 and recorded October 14, 2011 at Reception No. 20110062800 of the Larimer County, Colorado records; 2. First Amendment to Cross Easement Agreement dated September 30, 2011 and recorded October 14, 2011 at Reception No. 20110062799 of the Larimer County, Colorado records; 3. First Amendment to Grant of Easement with Covenants and Restrictions Affecting Land dated October 10, 2011 and recorded October 14, 2011 at Reception No. 20110062798 of the Larimer County, Colorado records; 4. Temporary Construction Easement and Agreement dated October 10, 2011 and recorded October 14, 2011 at Reception No. 20110062797 of the Larimer County, Colorado records; 5. Temporary Construction Easement and Agreement dated October 3, 2011 and recorded October 14, 2011 at Reception No. 20110062796 of the Larimer County, Colorado records; and 6. Temporary Construction Easement and Agreement dated October 10, 2011 and recorded October 14, 2011 at Reception No. 20110062795 of the Larimer County, Colorado records. LUCIA A. LILEY ■ JAMES A. MARTELL ■ TODD W. ROGERS ■ JOSHUA C. LILEY THE PETER ANDERSON HOUSE ■ 300 SOUTH HOWES STREET ■ FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 TELEPHONE: (970) 221-4455 ■ FAX: (970) 221-4242 to be wider such that vehicles leaving the parking lot are not directed into oncoming traffic on Stuart. Please see the redlines for clarification. Standard high volume drive approaches are now shown and the profile with right and left flowline profiles is also shown Number: 116 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/081 Please call out the drive approach being constructed on College across from Parker with the LCUASS standard (707) and identify the width of this driveway. Provide LCUASS DWG 707 on the detail sheets. he drive approach proposed on College across from Parker has been designed with detail 707 and is provided in the street details sheet Number: 117 Created: 9/23/2008 9/23/08 See redlines for all other minor comments related to drafting & labeling. Redlines have been addressed. Number: 118 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/081 1 will be meeting with CDOT on September 26 to review these latest plans and discuss waivers for the median and left turn bay work proposed on College. I will do my best to include any comments resulting from that meeting in the final comment letter. Although variance request letters have been submitted to the City, CDOT will need to issue formal waivers for any work being done in the College ROW that does not meet CDOT standards for street construction. Topic: Technical Services Number: 119 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/081 Plat - The boundary closes but the legal does not. Some line over text conflicts need to be fixed. Please see redlines for clarification. cknowledged Department: Light & Power Topic: Electric Utility Issue Contact: Doug Martine Number: 2 [9/15/08] Created: 7/7/2008 [7/7/08] It appears that several existing electric facilities will need to be relocated. Relocation of existing electric will be at the developer's expense, in addition to normal electric development charges. cknowledged Number: 92 Created: 9/15/2008 [9/15/08] The electric service (and I believe some other utilities) that serve the existing tire center are located where building #2 is planned. The new location for this electric service as shown on the utility plan may be problematic. The developer will need to install a new service from the existing transformers at the N.W. corner of proposed buliding #3 to the tire shop meters. The lateral separation between this electric service and the water & sewer services must be at least equal to the depth of the deepest of these utility services. Page 6 Installation of this electric service will need to be coordinated with Light & Power Engineering (221-6700). is acknowledged that the new location of the electric service to the tire store will be at the expense of the developer. The separation may still need to be reviewed. Number: 93 Created: 9/15/2008 [9/15/081 The developer will need to coordinate the power requirements for all 4 buildings with Light & Power Engineering. Acknowledged Number: 94 Created: 9/15/2008 [9/15/08] Light & Power will need to install an electric system from the building #1 transformer to the building #2 transformer, then to the existing transformer at the N.W. corner of building #3. This line will need to be installed along the front of building #1 (under the sidewalk is okay) as long as there is a minimum lateral separation of 10 feet between the power line and the 8" sewer main. In order to install this power line, the northerly water meter pit will need to be relocated farther to the west. - Acknowledged and the final location of the electric line will be shown on future submittals. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carie Dann Topic: Fire Number: 120 Created: 9/24/2008 [9/24/08] PFA has no additional comments or concerns at this time. Thank you Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford Topic: Traffic Number: 89 Created: 8/3/2008 [9/22/08] The 3/4 turn median configuration is good, but just upon visual review it looks like the opening for the southbound left needs to be moved a little more south. This makes for a tighter turn radius and reduced turning speeds. Please check and provide the turning template analysis. [8/3/08] Please provide truck turning template analysis of the revised College median north bound opening. Wanting to verify median bull nose shape and opening width are adequate for trucks. he % turn median has been analyzed and adjusted accordingly. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Floodplain Number: 121 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/081 1. The Choice Center project is located in a FEMA regulatory floodway and floodplain on Spring Creek. The development application must comply with all applicable sections of Chapter 10 of the City Municipal Code. 2. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) is required to document and quantify all proposed modifications to the floodway and floodplain per City Code 10-45(2)(a). The Page 7 CLOMR application shall be prepared for review and approval by City staff and FEMA, and shall be supported by floodplain modeling and technical analysis consistent with floodplain modeling guidelines, per City Code Sec. 10-45. 3. The CLOMR application shall be submitted to FEMA immediately following City approval. FEMA's acceptance of the CLOMR as proposed shall be a condition of approval for the 50% submittal. 4. No site work may commence prior to approval of the CLOMR by FEMA per City Code 10- 45(2)(a). Floodplain Administration will only agree to the early release of a grading permit if the Floodplain Use Permit and No -Rise Certification are approved, if all other departments are in agreement, and if the applicant understands that all overlot grading shall commence at their risk. Revisions to the site plan may be necessary based on FEMA's comments on the CLOMR application. A Floodplain Use Permit shall be required for each building and site element (parking lots, drainage channels, landscape features, detention features, etc.). A $325 permit fee and hydraulic review fee is required for the Floodplain Use Permit for the channel construction. All other Floodplain Use Permits have a $25 permit fee. 5. Per the e-mail dated September 8, 2008, construction of parking lots within floodways shall be prohibited, per FEMA and FEMA's contractor at Baker Corp. Please revise the development plan with all parking areas removed from the proposed CLOMR floodway. 6. A FEMA Elevation Certificate shall be prepared and submitted to the City for approval for Building #2. Please allow 2 weeks for review and approval. 7. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for any structures at the Choice Center until the LOMR is approved by FEMA, and until an Elevation Certificate is approved for any buildings in the floodplain, specifically Building #2. 8. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) is required immediately after completion of development activities at the Choice Center site, per City Code 10-45(2)(b). The LOMR application shall be prepared for review and approval by City staff and FEMA. 9. As noted in July 25, 2008 comments, the Applicant's engineer shall provide quantitative evidence, supported by engineering calculations, to prove the flood control channel on the west side of the residential structure is erosionally stable as designed. The channel is so close to the railroad embankment and the proposed residential building that any failure caused by erosion may threaten the life safety and property of the railroad and the student housing complex. Please refer to specific comments in the July 17, 2008 Floodplain Comments delivered to NOLTE -PLAT Associates, Inc., specifically Item #10, #10-a, #10-b, #15-b, and #15-c. 10. Please refer to the 50% floodplain review checklist for additional information required on the construction plans and drainage report. 11. Please make sure that all information (plans, designs, calculations, descriptions, etc.) in the CLOMR and LOMR submittals match the Development Plans. 12. Proposed floodplain and floodway limits shat not be shown on the plat or on the drainage, grading, and site plans, etc. Please show floodplain and floodway boundaries from current effective modeling only. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Stormwater Number: 13 Created: 7/23/2008 [9/26/08] The report states at final compliance another look at the percent impervious will take place. If the percent impervious were to increase with site plan changes above 75%, on -site detention would be required. The weighted percent impervious is less than 75%: therefore, on -site detention is not required. Page 8 [7/23/08] Please provide actual % impervious calculations for the proposed development to determine if the site is under the assumed master plan % impervious of 75%. The standard commercial % impervious numbers used in the calculations are lower than what is being proposed. Instead of 60% impervious for some of the assumed basins, the number is robabl closer to 80%. The weighted percent impervious is 64%. Refer to the Runoff Coefficient Calculations. Number: 14 Created: 7/23/2008 [9/26/08] Some form of water quality mitigation should be proposed for the sub -basins that drain into the storm sewer along Choice Center Drive. The City suggests proposing a hydraulic separator near the downstream end of the storm sewer. At final compliance, a determination can be made on the details of the water quality device. With this submittal we proposed a Contech CDS2020 precast Water Quality System. The unit will be positioned off-line between SDMH2-B6 and SDMH3- B6. A weir box will divert low flows to the unit while allowing higher flows to bypass the unit. The City finds the water quality mitigation techniques for the other sub -basins acceptable. [7/23/08] Water quality mitigation needs to be designed and accounted for in the preliminary submittal before a public hearing. The addition of water quality mitigation could have an im act on the site plan. _ Comment acknowledged. Number: 59 Created: 7/25/2008 [9/26/08] Repeat Comment. Drainage easements are still needed for the storm sewer, and for all areas that are being used for water quality mitigation. [7/25/08] Drainage easements dedicated to the City of Fort Collins are required for all of the storm sewers and the flood control swale. Comment acknowledged. Number: 122 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/08] Verification needs to take place on the condition of the existing storm sewer that is being used as the outfall for the proposed storm sewer. The City can coordinate this and even perform the inspection. The City has TV equipment to verify that the existing pipe is still in work' n condition. Coordinating the verification process with Wes Lamarque and Jay Barber. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: M WELKER Buffington Topic: Plat Number: 106 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Provide utility easement 15 feet on each side of sanitary sewer. he easement has been adjusted and is shown on the plat. Page 9 Topic: Water/Wastewater Number: 4 Created: 7/22/2008 [9/23/08] Clarification needed on information submitted, and counts needed for Bldg 2. [7/22/08] Two 4" water services and meters for each of Bldgs 1 and 2 seem excessive. Provide fixture counts and water service sizing calculations for these buildings. Only one 4" service line is now shown for building 1 Number: 5 Created: 7/22/2008 [9/23/08] Only 1 water service is shown to Bldg 2. [7/22/08] For mixed -use buildings, provide separate water and sewer services for the commercial and residential portions of the building. cknowledged Number: 9 Created: 7/22/2008 [9/23/08] In progress. [7/22/081 The City will do some computer modeling of the proposed water lines to determine if both water lines crossing College are needed. manhole is now proposed at the point of abandonment. Number: 102 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Install a sanitary MH in Stuart at the point where the sewer to north is being abandoned. cknowledged Number: 103 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Water/sewer mains must be minimum of 5 feet from gutter flowline. Water main in Choice Center Drive appears to be closer than 5 feet from west flowline. he water main is closer to the flow line than the 5 ft min. Can we receive approval to move the main closer to the sanitary sewer line to achieve the 5 ft separation from the curb line? Number: 104 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Correct the labeling of the proposed sanitary sewer. It appears to be labeled as both 8" and 12". Corrected Number: 105 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] See redlined utility plans for other comments. cknowledged Page 10 Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: Zoning Number: 51 Created: 7/24/2008 [9/12/081 Your request letter asks to increase the number of unrelated persons "to a maximum of 3 individuals for 3 bedroom units and 4 individuals for 4 bedroom units". The request to allow 3 individuals is not necessary and should be deleted. Section 3.8.16(A)(2) allows "2 adults and their dependents, if any, and not more than 1 additional person". This means that you are allowed 2 adults plus 1 other person, for a total of 3 persons, all of whom can be unrelated to each other. Therefore, your request should only be to allow 4 unrelated persons in the 4 bedroom units. [7/24/08] Clarification is needed regarding the request to allow the number of unrelated persons to be "increased to one individual per bedroom for each unit". If this means that they are planning on having only 1 person per bedroom, then the request should simply be to allow 4 unrelated persons in each 4 bedroom unit. The current wording - "increased to one individual per bedroom" when taken literally would imply that if the variance isn't granted, a 1 bedroom unit won't be allowed to be occupied by anyone. -Acknowledged Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit for final plan review. If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6206. Sincerely, Anne H. Aspen Senior City Planner Page 11 Page 1 of 3 Marc Virata From: Hice-Idler, Gloria [Gloria.Nice-Idler@DOT. STATE. CO. US] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:50 AM To: Marc Virata; Ward Stanford Cc: Ted Shepard; Lindsay Ex; Tim Buchanan; Ralph Zentz Subject: RE: Choice Center Our dissenter is okay with your tree choice. Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor COOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 From: Marc Virata [mailto:MVIRATA@fcgov.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 2:26 PM To: Hice-Idler, Gloria; Ward Stanford Cc: Ted Shepard; Lindsay Ex; Tim Buchanan; Ralph Zentz Subject: RE: Choice Center Hi Gloria, Thanks for information and your help on this, especially with CDOT being willing to allow the placement of street trees here. An inquiry was made with the City Forrestor (Tim Buchanan) and he had the following input: "From a City Forestry perspective we would really like to use Skyline Honeylocust. This is based on this species ability to survive the harsh environment in a South College median that includes a lot of road salt and pollution. The mature form is a high headed tree that can mature with the canopy developing above areas that will result in conflicts with traffic. Use of Honeylocust would be consistent with what has been planted along the several miles of College Aveune in medians and as street trees, where I would estimate that we have well over 100 of this species. Honeylocust is a xeric tree that will require less irrigation to survive and grow. Irrigation systems long term may not function as intended, which by using honeylocust we would have less problems with drought stress. Hawthorns are mostly low branched with horizontal growth. The road salt splash off College would damage them. " Can we get your guidance with regards to how we might influence CDOT to reconsider Honeylocusts over Hawthorns? I agree with Tim that in considering just the sight visibility perspective, honeylocusts would provide a better line of sight with its higher canopy than the hawthorn. Thanks! 5/11/2011 Page 2 of 3 Marc P. Virata, P.E. Development Review Engineering City of Fort Collins 970 221-6567 mvirata@fcgov.com From: Hice-Idler, Gloria [mailto: Gloria. H ice -Id ler@DOT. STATE. CO. US] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 9:56 AM To: Ward Stanford; Marc Virata Subject: RE: Choice Center I'm not entirely sure. That was the comment made by the traffic engineer. I think it has to do with the shading or lack of off when the leaves are off. I'm betting that we would consider the locusts, but might need a little convincing. Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor MOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 From: Ward Stanford [mailto:WSTANFORD@fcgov.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 9:45 AM To: Hice-Idler, Gloria; Marc Virata Subject: RE: Choice Center Morning Gloria, Just for knowledge what is it about Hawthorns that CDOT likes (I do not know good or bad about Hawthornes so just looking to learn something new today)? Thanks, Ward Stanford Traffic Systems Engineer City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations off: 970-221-6820 fax: 970-221-6282 From: Hice-Idler, Gloria [mailto: Gloria. H ice -Idler@ DOT.STATE. CO. US] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 9:27 AM To: Marc Virata; Ward Stanford Subject: Choice Center 5/11/2011 Page 3 of 3 Marc and Ward, We (CDOT) met yesterday on the landscaping issue on Choice Center. CDOT will allow two trees to be placed in the concrete island, provided the following: 1. The trees be Hawthornes. 2. An underdrain is installed in the island. 3. The island be constructed with a "splash block". 4. That the City assume maintenance responsibility for the trees. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor COOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 5/11/2011 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second Final Compliance Submittal - March 30, 2011 Date: 3/30/2011 Ted Shepard City Planner Current Planning 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Ted, What follows is our response to the items that were listed in the staff comments for CHOICE CENTER MIXED -USE REDEVELOPMENT PDP - TYPE I and Final Plans, dated 2/18/2011: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Topic: General Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING ENGINEERING GRAPHIC DESIGN Number: 78 Created: 7/29/2008 [2/16/11] After speaking with our attorney, please change the Buffer Land Use Code reference (on the SITE PLAN and plat) to only reference Land Use Code Section 3.4.1 (instead of the subsections). Thank you. [9/23/08] Do not see on SITE PLAN. Unable to comment for Plat until I review drawing. [7/29/08] The following note shall be added to the SITE PLAN and Plat at final review: For allowable uses within a buffer zone, refer to Section 3.4.1(E)(2) of the Land Use code. Response: This has been updated. Topic: Grading Plan Number: 81 Created: 7/29/2008 [2/16/111 As per Dana Leavitt's original comment, thank you for providing the profile of the storm headwall. However, as Spring Creek is not depicted in this profile, one cannot assess the connection between the storm outfall and the creek. Please revise this profile to illustrate Spring Creek and provide a detail, similar to those on Sheet 14, that is a cross-section of this outfall area. Response: Currently, we plan to core into the existing headwall. For this submittal, we did not provide a cross-section detail because the outfall for the proposed on -site storm drain has not been finalized. [9/23/08] have not seen utility plans, as soon as I do, I'll provide comment. [7/29/08] Provide plan and profile of storm drain line adjacent to Spring Creek, between SDMH-OS1 and SDMH- OS2. The creek and the retaining wall are very close together, which may have impacts to the creek. Department: Engineering Topic: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland Number: 39 Created: 7/23/2008 [2/16/11 ] The typical cross-section for Stuart does not show what the separation distance from the back of sidewalk to the retaining wall is proposed to be (and should be at least 2' per the original comment). Response: JVA - The typical cross-section shows a 3.5' separation from the back of walk to the wall. Verifying with the plans, the wall is a minimum of 4.0' from the back of walk. [7/23/08] Grading Plan - Please dimension sidewalk and parkway ROW improvements on College and Stuart. Show one cross section for Stuart showing the relationship to the proposed retaining wall which should have 2 feet minimum clearance from the sidewalk. Response: JVA - Dimensions are now shown. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P 970.484.192.1 F 970.484.2443 INFOfa11MSELLDESIGN.COM 1IMSELLDESIGN.COM Mr. Marc Virata October 24, 2011 Page 2 Please call if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Barbara K. Reed Legal Assistant /bkr Enclosures cc: Capstone Development Corp. (w/enclosures) Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: General Number: 147 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Sheet SP3 of the SITE PLAN shows all of lots 3 and 4 as being built in a future phase(s). This does not seem to coincide with the construction plans that show no phasing of the infrastructure. Is the indication of the future phases only with regards to redevelopment of the buildings, or does it pertain to the infrastructure within those phases? Of concern if phasing is being looked at with lots 3 and 4, is that the frontage improvements along College Avenue (sidewalk, street trees, etc.) are built with Phase 1 (the plan does not indicate what phase the frontage improvements are intended to be built). Of additional concern is how the infrastructure within lots 3 and 4 would be able to tie into the frontage improvements along College Avenue to be built in Phase 1. Bringing in sidewalk detached would have an impact on the existing parking. The construction drawings and SITE PLAN would need to show how the interim would tie into the frontage improvements without being problematic for both the parking lot and frontage improvements. Response: The project is now to be constructed in one phase. Number: 148 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] The right-of-way vacation proposed on the southeast portion of the site no longer seems relevant with the further detachment of the sidewalk along College at this area (the plat should then remove from the legal description "that portion of vacated College Avenue...". Ideally additional right-of-way should be dedicated to match the back of sidewalk along this further detached area instead of providing access easement and/or vacating existing right-of-way along this location. Response: JSD-NOLTE We have removed the record legal descriptions from the Plat cover sheet which contained this reference, as the record legal descriptions were from old title commitments that are no longer relevant to the project. Number: 149 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/111 What is the manner in which the landscaping being removed will be mitigated with the median reduction taking place in College Avenue that removes several trees and landscaping? I'm understanding that Community Development and Neighborhood Services has a general concern about the landscaping and trees that along the median in College Avenue that would be removed with the construction of the larger left turn lane onto the site. Will the installation of the new median directly north result in the installation of low lying plantings as mitigation for the lost landscaping. Will the narrowed down median that creates the longer left turn lane have landscaping installed? Response: The existing trees in the median have been evaluated by the City Forester and the Tree Mitigation sheet (11 of 11) has been updated. The new median adjacent to the turn lane is not large enough for new landscape, but we have planted the median that is across from the main entrance, see sheet 10 of 11. Number: 154 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] It doesn't appear that "Choice Center Drive" street signs are indicated to be installed on the signing and striping plan. If desired (or required) however, wherever street signs are posted indicating the private "Choice Center Drive", please provide separate informational signage (black lettering on white background ) below (at about 5' off the ground) indicating "Choice Center Drive privately owned and maintained". Please provide a detail of this on the details sheet. This is in the same manner as to how Council Tree Avenue (a private drive) in Front Range Village was addressed. Response: JVA — A sign is now proposed to be placed at the intersection with Stuart and Choice Center Drive designating Choice Center Drive as a private drive. Number: 155 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Please ensure the title on all the drawings is coordinated (the plat has "Subdivision" at the end of the title which does not match the site and construction plans). Response: NOLTE The word "Subdivision" has been removed from the Plat as requested. Number: 156 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] There is a location along College Avenue and a location along Stuart Street where the public sidewalk is apparently shown to ramp down along the direction of travel. Why is the ramp down being proposed? Response: The College Avenue ramps have been adjusted. The Stuart Street ramp has been laid out to best accommodate the grading and pedestrian direction of travel. Due to the orientation of the north -south sidewalk location and proximity to the corner a corner ramp would cause a cross -ramping situation on the north -south walk. This option would force pedestrians to ramp up and immediately back down to cross the parking entrance to the north. Our proposed solution establishes a pedestrian refuge by providing curbs adjacent to the walk where it is at the same elevation as the road surfaces. Number: 158 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Has formal discussion taken place with City Real Estate (Helen Matson) for the offsite work that is shown on City property in order to formalize the appropriate easements? Is it understood how the City's process and timeframe in potentially granting these coincides with anticipated final plan approval by the applicant? Response: That is now in the process to go to City Council. Number: 164 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Thought/suggestion: The access ramp east of Building 4 on the north side might be better served for the pedestrian if it faced directly south and not angle southeast as the eastbound pedestrian crossing the drive aisle is angled by the current design to not as easily see oncoming southbound traffic from the property to the north. As this in on private property and does not impact public right-of-way, this is more of a thought/concern rather than requirement. Response: This ramp has been adjusted to run perpendicular to the direction of travel. Number: 169 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Is there a reference document already compiled that lists the various dedications and vacations of easements that are required both onsite and offsite? It is suggested that this document be provided for review and will then be used as a "check -off" for verification and agreement with all that all the required approvals are obtained prior to final plan approval. Response: Nolte will prepare a graphic showing these items as requested and will submit to the City for review when it is complete. Number: 189 Created: 2/18/2011 [2/18/11] CDOT and the City would like to see an updated traffic memo/letter with the consultant's traffic engineer indicating what changes (if any) to the proposed land use and resulting trip generation may have taken place between the PDP (pre -hearing) submittal and with the present final plan submittal, and the impacts (if any) that may result. Response: JSD - Copies of the updated memo was included in our first Final submittal. If additional copies are needed please let us know. Topic: Plat Number: 161 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] The plat indicates the use of "access easement", "public access easement", and "sidewalk easement". When dedicated to the City, these should all just use the "access easement" designation. Response: Nolte - Public Access Easement designations have been changed to "Access Easement" on the Plat. The "Sidewalk Easement" designation has been removed. Number: 186 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] There would be no objection from the City if on the plat all the various separate document dedications/vacations of easements were to just be noted as to be dedicated (or vacated as appropriate) by separate document, instead of the various blank lines for reception numbers that would need to be filled in before the plat is filed. Response: Nolte - The changes has been made as requested. 133 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P 970A84.1921 F 970AS4.2443 INFO@JIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMSELLDESIGN.COM Topic: Utility Plan Number: 150 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] CDOT M&S Standards should be provided in the construction details pertaining to the improvements in College Avenue and referenced in the plans. The City is meeting with CDOT at our monthly coordination meeting this Friday and may have additional comments/concerns following the Wednesday morning meeting. The following three comments are thoughts I had specific to the new construction/reconstruction along the median in College Avenue and may be further refined pending input from CDOT. Response: JVA — The applicable CDOT M&S Standards are included. Number: 151 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11 ] The new concrete median for the left turns onto the site and Parker Street should have additional design information on sheet 15. Please provide spot elevations along the gutter along with cross sections of College Avenue in at least a couple of locations along this median. Is the hatching around this median intended to indicate concrete pavement? If so, please provide a concrete jointing plan detail for this area (from the CDOT M&S Standards). Response: JVA — Spot elevations have been included and the concrete pavement has been replaced with asphalt, similar to existing. Number: 152 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] The apparent new concrete "ribbon" median extending the left turn stack into the site should have additional information on sheet 15. Please indicate a flowline to flowline width of this median. If it's intended that the existing median along the west side of College is to remain, how will the new median transition to the existing median? It seems that the existing median no longer has the gutter at existing finished grade due to successive overlays and the new median gutter would need to then be set below finished grade in order to tie into existing. Please provide spot elevations along the gutter (or final pavement grade if gutter is set below) along with cross - sections at several locations in order to understand how drainage along the extended turn lane is intended to function. Response: JVA — Due to the possibility that the existing gutter pan may have been paved over in past overlays on College Ave, we have proposed to use asphalt rather that concrete. A full depth median gutter is proposed, and the asphalt will overlap the gutter to match the existing curb height on the west side of the median. This allows future mill and overlays on College to be adjusted back down to the original cross slope. Number: 153 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] In consultation with the City's Traffic Engineer, please provide SU-30 turning template information for the left turn movements off of College onto the site and onto Parker Street in order to demonstrate that the median nose design will accommodate these vehicle types. Response: JVA — Turning templates are included in the resubmittal. Number: 157 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Please provide detail on the northeast portion of the site as to how the tie-in to the existing sidewalk along College Avenue will occur. Label the width of existing attached sidewalk the proposed is tying into. Show the existing LANDSCAPE bed behind the attached sidewalk and how this will be terminated (Sheet 10 of the LANDSCAPE plan seems to imply the continuation of the curb that defines the northern boundary but there is no indication if rock, turf, plantings, etc. will be provided.) Response: JVA - Existing spot elevations and dimensions are provided. Number: 159 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Please provide a note on the storm drainage sheets that the manhole locations along storm drain B-1 shall be adjusted to be at the center or middle of the travel lanes along Stuart Street. It appears that the manholes B6 and 66b should be shifted slightly south to the center (crown) of Stuart Street with B7 appearing to be fine with the taper for the turn lane. Response: Comment acknowledged. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P 970.484.1921 F 970.484.2443 INFO@JIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMSELLDESIGN.COM Number: 160 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/111 Sheet 13 of the construction plans shows a CDS2020 water quality device that doesn't seem to be indicated elsewhere on the set and a detail is not provided. Will an access manhole be needed and where will this be situated in relationship to the lane lines? Will this be traffic rated? [Stormwater indicated that is a private improvement. Private improvements should not be placed in public right-of-way and is considered problematic as a result.] Response: JVA — The Contech CDS2025 will have an access manhole, is traffic rated, and is now placed within Choice Center Drive (Private Drive). Number: 162 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] On sheet 3 of the construction plan please change "County" to "City" on Note 5. Response: JVA - Corrected Number: 163 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] In the construction plan set, existing features (such as contours and utilities) are too difficult to analyze with the line weight used. It appears in some instances that proposed contours don't tie into proposed contours. Response: JVA — Line types and colors have been adjusted for clarity Number: 165 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Please remove the incorrect labeling of the private drive as Stuart Street on sheet 12 of the construction drawings. Response: Comment acknowledged. Number: 166 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] The plan and profile sheet for Stuart Street seems a little unclear as one profile line is indicated that it's finished grade for both existing and proposed left and right flowline while a different indication of the same line indicates to see additional curb return profiles on the same sheet. Will the flowline profiles on both sides of the street be the same? Having the flowline and centerline profiles individually separate might be preferred for clarity in this regard. Response: JVA — The proposed right flow line is provided in the resubmittal. The left flow line is to remain existing and existing spot elevations are provided. Number: 167 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] Please label on the Stuart Street plan and profile sheet where on the centerline (in plan view) the transition starts to remove the crown from the street intersecting onto College Avenue. Response: JVA — The transition is labeled. Number: 168 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11] On the Stuart Street signing and striping plan the location of the "STOP" pavement painting directly west of the public right-of-way ending for Stuart Street seems in an odd location as it appears to define the stop location where opposing westbound traffic would cross into. Shouldn't this be shifted south to the south half of this driveway opening? Response: JVA — The pavement painting has been adjusted to align with the right lane. The "STOP" painting has been removed, though the stop bar is still proposed, as requested in other comments. Number: 170 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11 ] A detail of the concrete headwall for the storm outfall didn't seem to be included in the plan set. Response: JVA — The storm outfall is tying into an existing headwall. The existing headwall will need to be cored to accommodate the proposed outfall. Number: 187 Created: 2/18/2011 [2/18/11] There is apparently an existing irrigation line/tap for the existing LANDSCAPEd median on College. If that irrigation line isn't utilized with the reworked College Avenue improvements, the line will likely need to be abandoned. Response: JSD - JVA The water line will be extended to the new median. A note has been add to relocate the existing irrigation box to the proposed center median. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P 97U.484.1921 F 970.484.2443 INFO@JIMSELLOESIGN.COM JIMSELLUESIGN.COM Number: 188 Created: 2/18/2011 [2/18/11] CDOT met with the City on 2/18 and indicated that they needed to have additional discussion internal to CDOT as to how the median improvements should be constructed given the successive overlays to College (referring back to #151 and #152). They anticipate having comments completed by next Friday (the 25th). JVA — We have not received additional comments from CDOT. Please include in our next set of comments. Department: Light & Power Topic: Electric Utility Issue Contact: Doug Martine Number: 2 Created: 7/7/2008 (1/25/11] [9/15/08] [7/7/08] It appears that several existing electric facilities will need to be relocated. Relocation of existing electric will be at the developer's expense, in addition to normal electric development charges. Response: JVA-CAPSTONE-CRS - Acknowledged Topic: Utility Plan Number: 130 Created: 1 /25/2011 [1/25/11] The electric service to the existing Discount Tire store is 120/240 Volt open delta 3 phase. If this service is relocated as shown on the utility plan, it will be 120/208 Volt wye three phase. The developer will need to coordinate with Discount Tire to change the voltage, which may involve replacing equipment in the building. The developer will be responsible for installation of the new electric service from the transformer to the meter on the building. Response: This issue is being coordinated, we don't foresee any issues at this time. Number: 131 Created: 1 /25/2011 [1/25/11) It appears that there is only 24 Ft. between buildings 2 & 3. The plan shows 2 sewer services, a water service, a fire water line, and an electric service in this area. Installation as well as maintenance of these is such close proximity may be challenging or impossible. A utility coordination meeting is encouraged before plans are finalized. Response: JVA — A utility coordination meeting has been held. The fire service to proposed Building 2 has been relocated to enter the building along the west, off of Choice Center Drive, relieving some of the utility congestion. Number: 132 Created: 1 /25/2011 [1/25/11] The water main in Choice Center Dr. will need to be moved a minimum of 7 Ft. to the east of the location shown to provide space for installation of the high voltage electric system. This may result in the necessity to relocate the sewer main. A utility coordination meeting is encouraged before plans are finalized. Response: JVA — The water line has been adjusted as discussed in the utility coordination meeting. Department: Natural Resources Topic: Utility Plan Issue Contact: Lindsay Ex Number: 134 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] Add the Limits to Development line to the legend on the Utility and Grading Plans. Response: The LOD line has been added to the legend. Department: PFA Topic: Fire Issue Contact: Carie Dann Number: 136 Created: 2/15/2011 PUBLIC -SAFETY RADIO AMPLIFICATION SYSTEM Where adequate radio coverage cannot be established within a building, public -safety radio amplification systems shall be installed in the following locations: 1. New buildings greater than 50,000 SF in size or addition(s) to an existing building that cause the building to be greater than 50,000 SF. For the purpose of this section, fire walls shall not be used to define separate buildings. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO80524 P970.484.1921 F970.484.2443 INFOC-)JIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMSELLDESIGN,COM 2. All new basements greater than 10,000 SF where the designed occupant load is greater than 50, regardless of the occupancy classification. 3. Existing buildings meeting the criteria of Items 1 and 2 of this section undergoing alterations exceeding 50 percent of the aggregate area of the building. Public -safety radio amplification systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with criteria established by Poudre Fire Authority. PFA Fire Prevention Bureau Administrative Policy 07-01 Response: Acknowledge Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Floodplain Number: 171 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11 ] General Comments: 1. The drainage report and associated plans are incomplete and contain errors, and cannot be fully reviewed at this time. These comments are not final since identifiable revisions from this review period will change the submittal package during the next round of review. Response: Comment acknowledged. 2. BFE = 4986.24 ft-NGVD 29, 4989.24 ft-NAVD 88, include in plans and drainage report as redlined. Response: Comment acknowledged. See sheet 13, Floodplain Exhibit, and refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 3. RFPE = 4987.74 ft-NGVD 29, 4990.74 ft NAVD 88, include in plans and drainage report as redlined. Response: Comment acknowledged. See sheet 13, Floodplain Exhibit, and refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 4. Please address and resolve all comments on the 100% Development Review checklist. Response: Comment acknowledged. Please see the attached 100% Development Review checklist with my comments. 5. Please include a typical drawing detail for each foundation type proposed, see 100% development review checklist, pg 4. Response: Comment acknowledged. See sheet 13, Floodplain Exhibit for the typical foundation detail for Building 1 and Table 2 for the elevation information. 6. All plan sheets that are marked as redlines, please revise per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Plat: 7. Please modify per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. 8. Add the following notes: 1) All activities in the current effective floodplain and floodway are subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code. 2) No storage of materials or equipment in the floodway before, during and after construction. 3) All activities in the floodplain and floodway must be pre -approved through floodplain use permit and no -rise certifications. No certificate of occupancy will be issued without no -rise re - certifications and FEMA Elevation Certificates. 4) Landscape changes in the floodplain and floodway must be pre - approved through floodplain use permit and no -rise certifications. Response: Comment acknowledged. Site Plan: 9. Please modify per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P970A84.1921 F-970.484.2443 INFO@'JIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMSELLDESIGN.COM 10. Label proposed conditions FEMA floodway and floodplain per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. 11. Show current effective floodplain and floodway boundaries and label per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. 12. Add notes: 1) All proposed conditions determined by CLOMR Case # 09-08-0735R effective January 29, 2010. 2) Proposed uses will be subject to Chapter 10 requirements consistent with approved CLOMR conditions. Response: Comment acknowledged. Drainage and/or Grading Plan: 13. Remove all corrected effective floodway and floodplain line work per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the revised Drainage and Grading Plans. 14. Remove pre 1997 floodplain line work per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the revised Grading Plans. 15. Show current effective floodplain and floodway boundaries and label per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Line work removed from Drainage and Grading Plans. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the current effective floodplain and floodway boundaries. 16. Label proposed conditions floodway per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Line work removed from Drainage and Grading Plans. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the proposed conditions floodway. 17. Show cross section lines on plans. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the cross-section lines. 18. Show BFE lines on plans in both NGVD 29 and NAVD 88. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the BFE lines in both NGVD29 and NAVD88. 19. Show lowest floor elevation in both NGVD 29 and NAVD 88. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the lowest floor in both NGVD29 and NAVD88. 20. Add the following notes: 1) All activities in the current effective floodplain and floodway are subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code. 2) No storage of materials or equipment in the floodway before, during and after construction. 3) All activities in the floodplain and floodway must be pre -approved through floodplain use permit and no -rise certifications. No certificate of occupancy will be issued without no -rise re - certifications and FEMA Elevation Certificates. 4) Landscape changes in the floodplain and floodway must be pre - approved through floodplain use permit and no -rise certifications. 5) All proposed conditions determined by CLOMR Case number 09-08-0735R effective January 29, 2010. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the notes. 21. Remove note 9 on sheet 6 of 28. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the notes. 22. Sheet 7 of 28 remove note 8. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Exhibit for the notes. 23. Sheet 11 and 12 of 28, Correct orientation of North Arrow. Response: Comment acknowledged. North arrow orientation corrected — refer to sheet 11. Drainage Report: 24. Please see redlines for changes and comments. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, C,OLORADO 80524 P 970,484.1921 F 970.484.2443 INFO@g JIMSELI.,DFSIGN.COM JIM5ELLDESIGN.COM 2. All new basements greater than 10,000 SF where the designed occupant load is greater than 50, regardless of the occupancy classification. 3. Existing buildings meeting the criteria of Items 1 and 2 of this section undergoing alterations exceeding 50 percent of the aggregate area of the building. Public -safety radio amplification systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with criteria established by Poudre Fire Authority. PFA Fire Prevention Bureau Administrative Policy 07-01 Response: Acknowledge Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Floodplain Number: 171 Created: 2/16/2011 [2/16/11 ] General Comments: 1. The drainage report and associated plans are incomplete and contain errors, and cannot be fully reviewed at this time. These comments are not final since identifiable revisions from this review period will change the submittal package during the next round of review. Response: Comment acknowledged. 2. BFE = 4986.24 ft-NGVD 29, 4989.24 ft-NAVD 88, include in plans and drainage report as redlined. Response: Comment acknowledged. See sheet 13, Floodplain Exhibit, and refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 3. RFPE = 4987.74 ft-NGVD 29, 4990.74 ft NAVD 88, include in plans and drainage report as redlined. Response: Comment acknowledged. See sheet 13, Floodplain Exhibit, and refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 4. Please address and resolve all comments on the 100% Development Review checklist. Response: Comment acknowledged. Please see the attached 100% Development Review checklist with my comments. 5. Please include a typical drawing detail for each foundation type proposed, see 100% development review checklist, pg 4. Response: Comment acknowledged. See sheet 13, Floodplain Exhibit for the typical foundation detail for Building 1 and Table 2 for the elevation information. 6. All plan sheets that are marked as redlines, please revise per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Plat: 7. Please modify per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. 8. Add the following notes: 1) All activities in the current effective floodplain and floodway are subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code. 2) No storage of materials or equipment in the floodway before, during and after construction. 3) All activities in the floodplain and floodway must be pre -approved through floodplain use permit and no -rise certifications. No certificate of occupancy will be issued without no -rise re - certifications and FEMA Elevation Certificates. 4) Landscape changes in the floodplain and floodway must be pre - approved through floodplain use permit and no -rise certifications. Response: Comment acknowledged. Site Plan: 9. Please modify per redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Response: Comment acknowledged 25. Clearly specify in report that if floodplain use permit will be submitted at the time of building permit application or another time. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 26. Change all references to "Nolte", Nolte's", and "Nolte Associates CLOMR" to the "Choice Center CLOMR" Add CLOMR report to the references section. Response: Comment acknowledged. 27. Page 15 of the drainage report — if conclusive evidence of SWMM and CLOMR integration is not available this report is incomplete and cannot be considered a final document for review and approval. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Developed Storm Water Conditions section of the drainage report. Flood Plain Use Permit: 28. Please clarify in drainage report when floodplain use permit will be applied for. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. September 29, 2008 Comments: 29. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for structures in the current effective floodplain until the LOMR is approved by FEMA, and until an Elevation Certificate is approved for any buildings in the floodplain, especially at Building #1. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 30. A Letter Of Map Revision (LOMR) is required immediately after completion of non-structural development activities at the Choice Center site, per City Code 10-45(2)(b). The LOMR application shall be approved by City staff and FEMA before a building permit can be issued. A floodplain use permit shall be approved for Building #1 before the building permit can be approved. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the Floodplain Information section of the drainage report. 31. Please refer to the 100% floodplain review checklist for additional information required on the construction plans and drainage report. Response: Comment acknowledged. Refer to the construction plans and drainage report for revisions. 32. Please make sure that all information (plans, designs, calculations, descriptions, etc.) in the CLOMR and LOMR submittals match the Development Plans. Response: Comment acknowledged. Additional Comment - Drainage Report: 33. All cross section WSELs must be reported in dual units of ft-NGVD 29 and ft-NAVD 88 at all locations within the drainage report text. Response: Comment acknowledged. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: LANDSCAPE Plan Number: 173 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11 ] Revise Plant Note 6 to include 10' separation between trees and water or sewer mains. Adjust tree placements accordingly. Response: The note has been revised to include the main line separation. Topic: Plat Number: 142 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] Provide utility easements as follows: Water mains - 10 feet each side of main (20 feet total); Sanitary sewer - 15 feet each side of sewer (30 feet total). This applies to existing and proposed lines. Response: NOLTE easements have been provided as requested. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Stormwater Number: 59 Created: 7/25/2008 [2/17/11] Reminder Comment. [9/26/08] Repeat Comment. Drainage easements are still needed for the storm sewer, and for all areas that are being used for water quality mitigation. [7/25/08] Drainage easements dedicated to the City of Fort Collins are required for all of the storm sewers and the flood control swale. Response: Comment acknowledged. Number: 122 Created: 9/26/2008 (2/17/11] In progress. (9/26/08] Verification needs to take place on the condition of the existing storm sewer that is being used as the outfall for the proposed storm sewer. The City can coordinate this and even perform the inspection. The City has TV equipment to verify that the existing pipe is still in working condition. Response: The inspection is complete and the existing 48" RCP and CMP outfall pipes do need to be rehabilitated. We are researching and pricing different alternatives. Number: 174 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11 ] The report states that sub -basins C1 b and C1 c are being treated for water quality in the grass swale used as the floodway channel. This channel could be used for water quality mitigation if the 3-foot pan was removed. If the pan can not be removed, other mitigation would be required. Response: Mike Welker (Nolte Associates) is reviewing our request to remove the concrete pan. We need to determine if removing the concrete pan: 1) will not change the modeled water surface elevations and 2) make it more difficult to construct and certify the flood control channel. Number: 175 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] The Contech hydro separator needs to be sized and construction details provided in the plan set. The sizing needs to be based on a 80% efficiency removal at a particle size of 50 microns. Response: We upgraded the Contech hydrodynamic separator unit from the CDS2020 to the CDS2025. This unit meets the City of Fort Collins treatment guidelines: 80% removal efficiency at a particle size of 50 microns. Number: 176 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] The proposed Contech water quality device is proposed to be located in the public ROW. Private infrastructure is not allowed in the public ROW. There is a process to allow a public utility in the ROW, but it could be long and undesirable. A location on private property (on -site or off -site) would be the best solution. Response: We moved the Contech CDS2025 from the public ROW into the private ROW (Choice Center Drive). Number: 177 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] Please make sure the sizing calculations for the PLDs include the entire areas draining to them. Response: The Porous Landscape Detention (PLD) sizing calculations do include the entire tributary are draining to them. Number: 178 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11) Please include construction details for the PLDs per the Urban Drainage Manual. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P970.484.1921 F970.484,2443 INFOrJIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMISELLDESIGN.COM BE Y O N D E N G I N E E R ING January 19, 2011 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP-Type I Preliminary Plat Comments Responses to "Staff Review Review" dated 09/29/2008 Department: Current Planning Topic: General Comment # 78 Comment: "The following note shall be added to the Site Plan and Plat at final review: For allowable uses within the buffer zone, refer to Section 3.4.1(E)(2) of the Land Use code". Response: The note has been added to the Plat as requested. Department: Engineering Topic: Engineering Comment # 107 Comment: "The City has a new standard plat note that is required on all plats. I have attached the new note to the redlines. Please add this note anywhere on the Plat cover sheet". Response: We were unable to find the copy of the note affixed to the cover sheet of the plat copy with redline comments from 2008. Please add as a review comment to the next review, or please furnish the text for the note and we will add to the Plat. Comment #108 Comment: "Please add a line next to the label for all vacations or dedications by separate document where the reception numbers for the recorded documents can be hand written before the Plat gets filed. All dedication and vacation applications must be submitted with review fees prior to scheduling a hearing. If a signed deed of dedication is not yet available, a letter of intent from the owner (Tire Store) must be provided prior to hearing. New dedications are $250 per document and vacations are $400". Response: We have added the lines for the recording information for the future vacations and dedications as needed on the Plat. Matt- Please add text to this regarding the addition of these lines to the Site Plan and the Developer's understanding of the vacations and dedications that need to occur for the project. Comment # 109 Comment: "The requested public access easement connection to the north has been provided to facilitate a future connection however, the location does not line up well or connect logically with the existing private drive isle. There also appears to be a large existing tree that may block this location. Further discussion with Transportation Planning and Current Planning is needed to resolve this cross lot issue". NOLTE ASSOCIATES, INC. 8000 SOUTH CHESTER STREET, SUITE 200 CENTENNIAL, CO 80112 303.220.6400 TEL 303.220.9001 FAX WWW.NOLTE.COM Response: Comment acknowledged. Number: 179 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11 ] Please provide easement documentation for the storm sewer located on City Park's property. Response: We are working with Helen Matson and Glen Schlueter on negotiating the storm drainage easements in Creekside. Number: 180 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] Water draining from the south parking lot has increased the flows onto City Park's property and written permission is required to increase these flows. City Stormwater staff can assist in acquiring this. Response: We are negotiating with the City of Fort Collins Parks Department to allow developed runoff from Choice Centers south parking lot to drain through a GB and into Creekside Park. Number: 181 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11 ] Please provide a detail (cross-section) for the grass buffer being proposed to provide water quality mitigation for the southern parking lot. Response: Refer to Appendix C of the drainage report for the Grass Buffer (GB) sizing calculations (per UDFCD) and Sheet 3 of the Choice Center Landscape Plan for planting details. Number: 182 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] Please provide a drainage easement with a minimum width of 20 feet for the storm sewer in Choice Center Drive. The pipe should be centered within the easement. Response: Comment acknowledged. Number: 183 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] Please provide 100-yr HGLs for all storm sewer profiles. Response: Comment acknowledged. Number: 184 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11] There is a few areas that need more detail regarding grading to help clarify drainage patterns and to ensure the site gets built per the plans. Please see redlines. Response: Comment acknowledged. Number: 185 Created: 2/17/2011 [2/17/11 ] Please provide an erosion escrow amount in the drainage report. Response: Comment acknowledged. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Water/Wastewater Number: 103 Created: 9/23/2008 [2/15/11 ] [9/23/08] Water/sewer mains must be a minimum of 5 feet from gutter flowline. Water main in Choice Center Drive appears to be closer than 5 feet from west flowline. Response: JVA — The water main has been adjusted as discussed to be a minimum of 5 ft from the gutter flowline. Number: 137 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11 ] Provide water service sizing calculations for the buildings with residential units. Response: JVA- Sizing calculations are included in this submittal. Number: 138 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] The area between Proposed Bldg 2, Discount Tire and Existing Bldg 3 is very congested with utilities. Re -locate the fire line for Proposed Bldg 2 to the west side of the building. Response: JVA - A utility coordination meeting has been held. The fire service to proposed Building 2 has been relocated to enter the building along the west, off of Choice Center Drive, relieving some of the utility congestion. Number: 139 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] A utility coordination meeting is strongly encouraged. It's been a long time since this project has been in for review and a refresher is needed on the conflicts and pinch points for utilities. Response: This meeting has been completed. Number: 140 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] The existing water main to the west of Existing Bldg 4 appears to have several conflicts with landscaping and new curb and gutter. Please schedule a meeting to review re-routing this main. Response: JVA-JSD The landscaping and water main have been adjusted. Number: 141 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11) Sht 4 doesn't reflect the water quality device in Stuart Street that is shown on Sht 11. Please clarify. This may be in conflict with the new sanitary sewer manhole. Response: The water quality device, a Contech CDS2025, was moved to Choice Center Drive. Number: 143 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] Show easements on utility plans consistent with comment 142 and plat. Response: NOLTE-JSD Easements have been added to reflect comment 142. Number: 144 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] Show/label all curb stops and meter pits on 3/4-inch through 2-inch inch water services and meter vaults and shut-off valves on services larger than 2-inch. Response: JVA — The meter pits, curb stops and shut-off valves are shown and labeled Number: 145 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11] Label elevation of the existing sewer invert at San MH-1. Response: JVA — All existing manhole and tie-in elevations are labeled. Number: 146 Created: 2/15/2011 [2/15/11 ] See redlined utility plans for other comments. Response: JVA — Redlines have been addressed. Department: Zoning Topic: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Number: 51 Created: 7/24/2008 [1/26/11] The applicant's response comment letter states that this comments is "acknowledged", but there wasn't any documentation in the materials I received stating that they were requesting that the 4 bedroom units be occupied by 4 people. The best way to do this is to add a note on the SITE PLAN (sheet 2 of 3) in the "Residential Dwelling Unit Table" for Building 1 and Building 2. The note can be something like "4 bedroom/4 bath units (to be occupied by 4 unrelated people)". This can be a typical note for all of the 4 bedroom types in the two buildings. [9/12/08] Your request letter asks to increase the number of unrelated persons "to a maximum of 3 individuals for 3 bedroom units and 4 individuals for 4 bedroom units". The request to allow 3 individuals is not necessary and should be deleted. Section 3.8.16(A)(2) allows "2 adults and their dependents, if any, and not more than 1 additional person". This means that you are allowed 2 adults plus 1 other person, for a total of 3 persons, all of whom can be unrelated to each other. Therefore, your request should only be to allow 4 unrelated persons in the 4 bedroom units. [7/24/08] Clarification is needed regarding the request to allow the number of unrelated persons to be "increased to one individual per bedroom for each unit". If this means that they are planning on having only 1 person per bedroom, then the request should simply be to allow 4 unrelated persons in each 4 bedroom unit. The current wording - "increased to one individual per bedroom" when taken literally would imply that if the variance isn't granted, a 1 bedroom unit won't be allowed to be occupied by anyone. Response: A note has been added to the Site Plan. Comments from Ward Stanford —Traffic Operations Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford Topic: Traffic Number: 89 Created: 8/3/2008 [2/23/11] Please provide a drawing(s) of the turning paths. Drawing can be a separate 8.5 x 11 or as a detail on the S&S Detail sheet. We need to see the level of turning perfection in the design (basically make sure there is excess turning space so the public doesn't have to turn perfectly, since that does not happen.). [9/22/08] The 3/4 turn median configuration is good, but just upon visual review it looks like the opening for the southbound left needs to be moved a little more south. This makes for a tighter turn radius and reduced turning speeds. Please check and provide the turning template analysis. [8/3/08] Please provide truck turning template analysis of the revised College median north bound opening. Wanting to verify median bull nose shape and opening width are adequate for trucks. Response: JVA — Turning path exhibits are included in the resubmittal Number: 197 Created: 2/23/2011 [2/23/11] Utility Plans - S&S Plan, sheet 18, Stuart St S&S detail: move the Stop Bar to the right hand side of the access from the parking lot. Delete the word "STOP" also. It's an on -going maintenance issue and not necessary since there is an R1-1 sign. Response: JVA — The stop bar has been adjusted to align with the right travel lane and the word "STOP" has been removed. Number: 198 Created: 2/23/2011 [2/23/11 ] Utility Plans - S&S Plan, sheet 18: Remove the word "STOP" at all locations that also have an R1-1 sign. On -going maintenance issue and unnecessary. Response: JVA — The word "STOP" has been removed. Number: 199 Created: 2/23/2011 [2/23/11 ] Utility Plans - S&S Plan, sheet 18: Remove the R3-5R sign at the exit of Choice Center Drive onto College. The median and the R3-1 sign give adequate info to motorists that there only option is to the right. Response: JVA — The R3-5R sign has been removed. Number: 200 Created: 2/23/2011 [2/23/11] Utility Plans - S&S Plan, sheet 18: Remove the thru/right roadway stencil on Stuart at College. Response: JVA — The thru/right roadway stencil has been removed. Number: 201 Created: 2/23/2011 [2/23/11 ] Please provide a copy of the most current TIS with the next submittal. Response: JSD - Copies of the updated memo was included in our first Final submittal. If additional copies are needed please let us know. Thank you, Jim Sell 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADOB0524 P970A84.1921 F970A84.2443 INFO@JIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMSELLDESIGN.COM Project: Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment Project Description: This is a request to redevelop the approximately 10.49 acre site at 1609-1797 S. College, near the southwest corner of College and Prospect, into a mixed -use student housing project and 58,252 square feet of retail space. The existing strip retail buildings along South College are proposed to be remodeled and updated. Two new four-story buildings are proposed, one on the west side of the site and one at the northwest corner of Stuart and College that would contain a total of 219 student housing units. The property is zoned CLCommercial District. Engineering Development Revie%Vs Unresolved Issues: Made By: Marc Virata Initial Date: 02/16/2011 Issue ID: 149 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: With the proposed landscaping now shown on the drawings some input from CDOT in this regard: 1) CDOT indicates that they will not support the placement of street trees in the median. The City is currently doing further analysis on this and may wish to pursue appealing CDOT's decision (a sight distance analysis of the street tree placement is forthcoming from Ward Stanford). 2) CDOT requires the installation of an underdrain system as a result of the landscaping of this median. [2/16/11] What is the manner in which the landscaping being removed will be mitigated with the median reduction taking place in College Avenue that removes several trees and landscaping? I'm understanding that Community Development and Neighborhood Services has a general concern about the landscaping and trees that along the median in College Avenue that would be removed with the construction of the larger left turn lane onto the site. Will the installation of the new median directly north result in the installation of low lying plantings as mitigation for the lost landscaping. Will the narrowed down median that creates the longer left turn lane have landscaping installed? Initial Date: 02/16/2011 Issue ID: 150 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: Additional comments from CDOT are found elsewhere in my comments. Note though that CDOT standard M-609-1 (both sheets) should be provided as a detail. Comments further herein outline CDOT wanting to use barrier curb, this should pertain to Curb Type 2 (6" Barrier) with a variable depth as further prescribed and dowelling to existing similar to Curb Type 4 (6" Barrier). [2/16/11 ] CDOT M&S Standards should be provided in the construction details pertaining to the improvements in College Avenue and referenced in the plans. The City is meeting with CDOT at our monthly coordination meeting this Friday and may have additional comments/concerns following the Wednesday morning meeting. The following three comments are thoughts I had specific to the new construction/reconstruction along the median in College Avenue and may be further refined pending input from CDOT. CITY OF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING REVIEWED BY : ybolt Page 1 of 16 oPic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active 04/20/2011: Feedback from CDOT indicates that they will require barrier curb (without a gutter) to instead be installed for the new concrete ribbon median as well as the new curb for the median porkchop. The depth of the barrier curb for the median ribbons will need to match the depth of the surrounding existing curb and gutter and dowelled per CDOT criteria. The depth of the barrier curb for the new median porkchop will need to be at a minimum the projected curb and gutter depth of the barrier curb medians on either side. [2/16/11] The apparent new concrete "ribbon" median extending the left turn stack into the site should have additional information on sheet 15. Please indicate a flowline to flowline width of this median. If it's intended that the existing median along the west side of College is to remain, how will the new median transition to the existing median? It seems that the existing median no longer has the gutter at existing finished grade due to successive overlays and the new median gutter would need to then be set below finished grade in order to tie into existing. Please provide spot elevations along the gutter (or final pavement grade if gutter is set below) along with cross -sections at several locations in order to understand how drainage along the extended turn lane is intended to function. Initial Date: 02/16/2011 Issue: This is a request to redevelop the approximately 10.49 acre site at 1609-1797 S. College, near the southwest corner of College and Prospect, into a mixed -use student housing project and 58,252 square feet of retail space. The existing strip retail buildings along South College are proposed to be remodeled and updated. Two new four-story buildings are proposed, one on the west side of the site and one at the northwest corner of Stuart and College that would contain a total of 219 student housing units. The property is zoned C�Commercial District. Engineering Development Reviews Unresolved Issues: Made By: Marc Virata Initial Date: 02/16/2011 Issue [Do 152 T Issue: Project: Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment Project Description: Issue ID: 154 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active doesn't appear to be provided off the access from College. Can an additional sign be placed provide 04/20/2011: The signing and striping plan show this being provided off the access from Stuart but this indication off College Avenue? [2/16/11 ] It doesn't appear that "Choice Center Drive" street signs are indicated to be installed on the signing and striping plan. If desired (or required) however, wherever street signs are posted indicating the private "Choice Center Drive", please provide separate informational signage (black lettering on white background ) below (at about 5' off the ground) indicating "Choice Center Drive privately owned and maintained". Please provide a detail of this on the details sheet. This is in the same manner as to how Council Tree Avenue (a private drive) in Front Range Village was addressed. Initial Date: 02116/201, Issue ID: 169 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: Carried over for reference. It is suggested that the plat be used to create a map type exhibit of the various easement dedications/vacations (turning off other layers other than property boundaries) along with an accompanying table indicating each easement along with the identified Grantor and Grantee for each for dedications and the party consenting for vacations. [2/16/11] Is there a reference document already compiled that lists the various dedications and vacations of easements that are required both onsite and offsite? It is suggested that this document be provided for review and will then be used as a "check -off' for verification and agreement with all that all the required approvals are obtained prior to final plan approval. Page 2 of 16 Project: Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment Project Description: This is a request to redevelop the approximately 10.49 acre site at 1609-1797 S. College, near the southwest corner of College and Prospect, into a mixed -use student housing project and 58,252 square feet of retail space. The existing strip retail buildings along South College are proposed to be remodeled and updated. Two new four-story buildings are proposed, one on the west side of the site and one at the northwest corner of Stuart and College that would contain a total of 219 student housing units. The property is zoned C6Commercial District. Engineering Development Reviews Unresolved Issues: Made By: Marc Virata Initial Date: 02/18/2011 Issue ID: 188 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 1 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: We did receive feedback from CDOT earlier this week. In addition to previous comments regarding concern on the trees in the landscape island, providing a subdrain, and the use of barrier curb, the following comments were provided from CDOT: 1) Remove CDOT as a signature on the construction plans. 2) Please add lane width dimensions along College Avenue and explain any deficiencies to CDOT's requirements. 3) Contact Gloria Hice-Idler to start coordinating CDOT approvals as access permits, a utility permit, and a landscape permit will be required. Because there's changes to existing accesses, creation of new accesses, and closures of existing, several access permits will be required but these can all be applied for using a single set of plans. [2118/11] CDOT met with the City on 2/18 and indicated that they needed to have additional discussion internal to CDOT as to how the median improvements should be constructed given the successive overlays to College (referring back to #151 and #152). They anticipate having comments completed by next Friday (the 25th). Initial Date: 02/18/2011 Issue ID: 189 Topic: General Round: 1 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: 1 didn't come across this info, perhaps an electronic version can be provided that we can provide a copy to CDOT? [2/18/11 ] CDOT and the City would like to see an updated traffic memo/letter with the consultant's traffic engineer indicating what changes (if any) to the proposed land use and resulting trip generation may have taken place between the PDP (pre -hearing) submittal and with the present final plan submittal, and the impacts (if any) that may result. Initial Date: 04/20/2011 Issue ID: 190 Topic: Plat Round: 2 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: Porous Landscape Detention being defined on the plat seems unusual. Is this intended to be a drainage easement? Initial Date: 04/20/2011 Issue ID: 191 Topic: Construction Drawings Round: 2 Status: Active Issue: 04/20/2011: The CLOMR sheets indicated for reference only, if needing to be included in the construction plan set will require that the sheet numbering be revised to show a total sheet number more than 29 (and the plat should be included in the total sheet number as well). Initial Date: 04/22/2011 Issue ID: 192 Topic: General Round: 2 Status: Active Issue: 04122/2011: ust as a heads -up, I've received feedback from City Engineering, Capital Projects -Street Oversizing that the City provides reimbursement for the oversized portions of street components only to the extent that what was there previously is either substandard or non-existent. With the construction of new detached sidewalk, reimbursement from the local to oversized condition is only to the extent that there is either no sidewalk or non -compliant (less than ADA width) sidewalk previously in place. Thus the portions of existing attached sidewalk that are being removed and installed as detached will not have reimbursement rights extended to the applicant. Page 3 of 16 i� i f ClI e r t U, C, AI t/ylArcc Vi�t�r� C pry ©F F,�T `mt ��tis 'Cn�vs .rsvi�a�►�tr�s�/ �iwr ' VV7-tk rr&4N ''Herman Feissner jC�c,rl � t Magma L1�'I-GINS �X�j cv -coo Feisshe r Consu It n9 LPL lifeissner @ feissnerconsu cow, ` CQJVK � J son ClacYs 3Y�1, t,� c , pot,,, e fir• j v, $u�ud�o� i'Z► c�'I'JLfTIES r ��c���v'�®�� �or►� Z;,-,i K A le- E?-.nN 1 �Eo sNE Pro 1 Wes La Le UAAcir—. /OcG - as r - C ,3'i.3 CA Fe (A; L4es 4i6 -WI a FT- c . G t f rrti-&SWFA AZ �{ 22�-Fs�`7 0414-14% Ifto -2zl 17- W02-IoZO 22'� • 9 0' 9 27T- 9 g 21- 68a!� VLMOWN•rf"ee -6 9ov,Cow PIMO 'TYNa Q Fcqlo V. Co A9 Randy Ma¢land RE Choice Center medians on College Variances & Waivers Page 1 From: "Nice -Idler, Gloria" <Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT. STATE. CO.US> To: RMaizland@fcgov.com Date: 10/16/2008 2:44:53 PM Subject: RE: Choice Center medians on College - Variances & Waivers That's a lot better! Too bad they didn't start here. Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor CDOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 -----Original Message ----- From: Randy Maizland [mailto:rmaizland@fcgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 1:50 PM To: Hice-Idler, Gloria Subject: Choice Center medians on College - Variances & Waivers Hi Gloria, Eric Bracke and the engineer working on Choice Center have re-evaluated the north bound left turn lane on College into the site and they can in fact lengthen the turn lane by doing additional modifications on the south end. It will wipe out a few scrub trees and require a street light relocation but the City thinks the benefit outweighs the loss. Take a look at the drawing attached. We would essentially have a 4 foot wide continuous median throughout. It shows the taper and storage lengths as well. Let me know if you see any concerns or have any questions since they will need a variance and waiver approval for this. Thanks, Randy August 26, 2008 �0 Mr. Randy Maizland J„Av" Engineering Department 281 N. College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Project: Choice Center Variance Request: College Ave Median Radius JSD Project No. 2566 Dear Randy: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING ENGINEERING GRAPHIC DESIGN This letter is hereby requesting a variance to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) median design criteria for a proposed median on College Ave at the Parker Street intersection. LCUASS currently dictates a minimum radius of 3' on medians. The proposed median has a 1.5' radius. The purpose of this median is to block left -out turning movements from Parker and the Choice Center private access, while allowing left turns off College onto these roads. With a 3' radius used on this median nose, it appears that left -out movements, from Parker and the private access, will not be fully blocked. Even though this movement will clearly be signed as illegal, creating a physical barrier for vehicles, with the 1.5' radius, will be more effective in deterring motorists. The variance requested for this proposed median on College Ave.: • will not have a negative impact on capital or maintenance cost requirements for the City or property owners; • is not anticipated to reduce the life of the proposed roadways; and • will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare and will not result in decreased sight distance or unsafe turning movements (from the existing condition). Thank you for your consideration in the approval of this variance request. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, JIM SELL DESIGN Jonathan Sweet, P.E. cc. file r, � �! P f ' I 101? S E: IPRO✓ECT FLLBSUMi2566 Capstone Developmentl&bmittalslPDP Submittal #ZEngineering Variances12566 variance_request_College Ave Median radius.doc 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 P970.484.1921 F970.484.2443 INFO@JIMSELLDESIGN.COM JIMSELLDESIGN.COM fi.` August 26, 2008 Mr. Randy Maizland Engineering Department 281 N. College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Project: Choice Center Variance Request: Stuart Street Vertical alignment JSD Project No. 2566 Dear Randy: La,0,,aly, k'bl4rhnr L,ugiii<,°rin/ Lemirr�nnirnlnl C G�n+nauul y Pl urvriaq This letter is hereby requesting a variance to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) vertical alignment criteria for the reconstruction of Stuart Street that is being completed"with the Choice Center Project. This variance is being requested to allow for a public street access to the Choice Center property without effecting adjacent existing properties. Stuart Street is classified as a local residential street in the City of Fort Collins and therefore is subject to LCUASS Table 7-3, Figure 7-17, Figure 7-18 and Figure 8-17 for vertical design. Choice Center is an infill project and has tight site constraints on the south side of the road. `An existing Maytag store is located directly behind an attached sidewalk, south of Stuart. Therefore, we are unable to vary the reconstructed centerline of Stuart St to any great degree, from the existing non-standard vertical alignment, without disrupting existing buildings, infrastructure, access points to the Maytag store and drainage patterns. Our design shows a sump condition on Stuart (approx sta: 12+00). This area falls within the existing and proposed 100-yr floodplain. Our site design is incorporating an emergency access connection from Choice Center Drive (private) to the south parking lot (see attached) with 18", or less, depth of water during a 100-yr storm. From, the sump elevation in Stuart we need to raise the elevation of the street quickly to accommodate this emergency access. In addition, the existing, and therefore proposed, approach to College Avenue is quite steep and is another portion of the street that requires a non-standard design. Summary of non-standard vertical alignment design for Stuart Street: 1. LCUASS Table 7-3 states a minimum K value of "30" for sag curves on local residential streets. The design is currently showing a K value of 13.49 for the sump condition (see attached profile). This will be necessary to tie into existing access points for the Maytag store and achieve an emergency access connection -with 18", or less of water depth during the 100-yr storm. 2. The algebraic difference (A.D.) on this sump curve is 7.42. Figure 7-17 suggests a curvy length of roughly 210' for a similar A.D.. We are currently showing a curve length of 100'. A shortened length will be required in order to meet the same goals as described in item number 1. 3. Figure 8-17 asks that for a local -arterial intersection, the maximum slope be 4% for the first 125'. The proposed connection to the College Ave intersection is at 4%, but in order to match the existing street grades we need to have a maximum grade of 4.82% within this first 125'. �i, JIM SELL DESIGN, INC. 153 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 970 484.1921 FAX: 970 484.2443 JIMSELLDESIGN.COM Client Name Date Page 2 Response: The Developer is aware of this issue and is currently working toward resolution with the adjoining property owner and will be contacting the City for further discussions on this issue. Matt- this seems to be a JVA issue, even though it was flagged in the comments as being it Nolte Plat issue. I have added response text for the issue as I understand it to he as of this date. Topic: Technical Services Comment #119 Comment: "The boundary closes but the legal does not. Some line over text conflicts need to be fixed. Please see redlines for clarification". Response: The error in the legal description has been fixed and the legal description now matches the boundary courses and distances on the plat and both form a mathematically closed figure. The Plat has been revised to eliminate line work over text as requested. Department: Storm water -Water -Wastewater Topic: Plat Comment # 106 Comment: "Provide utility easement 15 feet on each side of sanitary sewer". Response: Nolte is working with the Engineer to define the easement and the easement will be provided on the Plat for the next submittal. Matt- JVA will need to address this but I have added response text for the issue as I understand it to be as of this date. For and on behalf of Nolte Associates, Inc. Charles Beresford, PLS NOLTE ASSOCIATES, INC. 4. The vertical curve at the approach to College (approx. sta: 10+65) has a sufficient K value of 46.62, but has, a designed curve length of 38'. Figure 7-17 calls out a minimum vertical curve length of approximately 70' for the design speed of 25 mph. Again, this non-standard length will be necessary in order to match the existing conditions. The variance requested for these proposed vertical alignment modifications on Stuart St: will not have a negative impact on capital or maintenance cost requirements for the City or property owners; is not anticipated to reduce the life of the proposed roadways; and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare and will not result in decreased sight distance or unsafe turning movements (from the existing condition). This portion of Stuart Street has several challenges due to the fact that it is the reconstruction of an existing non-standard street, in an infill area, with floodplain constraints on the proposed and existing surrounding properties. We are anticipating low speeds in this area due to fairly high traffic volumes and the horizontal geometry of the road as it transitions from public to private at a 90 degree bend. These lower speeds will help to offset sight distance and drivability concerns which are the basis of the standards we are modifying. Thank you for your consideration in the approval of this variance request. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, JIM SELL DESIGN O O� tj O 34 Jonathan Sweet, P.E. f ..,. cc. file O! �` APPROX. EMERGENCY ACCESS PATH WITH 18" MAX WATER DEPTH DURING 100-YR STORM (LOWEST ELEVATION =4983.80) SOUTH PARKING I I 4990 4985 Landscape Architecture, Engineering, & Planning 153 West Mountain Ave Fort Collins, CO 80524 970 484 1921 fax: 970 484 2443 1) 20 0 40 80 HORIZONTAL SCALE 1" = 40' MA STA 13+50 VERTICAL PA ELEV = 4985.31 SCALE 1" = 4' A.D. —0.95 K = f73.61 CHOICE CENTER JSD PN : 2566 STUART VARIANCE 8/26/08 SHEET 1 oF 1 ELB En�ineerin�, LLC Transporta Hon Engineering Solutions August 22, 2008 Ms Helen Migchelbrink, PE City Engineer City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Variance Request, Choice Center/College Avenue Design Dear Ms. Migchelbrink; e, r.. The owners of the Choice Center development located at the intersection of College Avenue (US287) and Parker Street respectfully request a variance to the intersection design of College Avenue and Parker Street. The intersection currently allows for full vehicular movement. The project, as proposed, will modify the intersection to a 3/4 movement: allowing for right-in/right-outs as well as north and southbound left turning movements. Under the requirements of the State Highway Access Code and the Larimer County Urban Area Standards, the median design for an NR-B should have 435 feet of deceleration and 100 feet. Under an urban condition, this standard is difficult to achieve. The current design is to allow for 125 feet of taper and 120 feet of storage for the northbound left turn. This design is similar to the geometrics currently operating in place on the roadway. The designed, as proposed intersection represents a better/safer condition for the public than the current condition. The elimination of the east and westbound through and left turns reduce the amount of conflicts at the intersection. The variance, if granted, does not pose a health or safety risk to the public. Please let me know if additional information is required. Thank you for your consideration regarding this matter. Respectfully Submi d Eric L. Bracke, PE, PTOE �p0, gFrts NAL xc: Gloria Hice-Idler, CDOT Region IV Access Manager ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane �r �.�►c.�c'OC3 .: G� t' /iIV Y�11r r ��j F- Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 1 FAX: 970-225-8942 F,LBEngineering@lpbroadband.net /Vlp✓ 1r.' _� ?.Eli..✓ra17:4 ""-41..' "'Tl.'�._. �c.,c'i .i"',�Naa;C. c (.i4rGri.f.,j��,,,,, April 8, 2008 Ms. Anne Aspen City Planner Current Planning 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Anne, What follows is our response to the items that were listed in the Staff Project Review dated 3/12/2008 for the Choice Center Mixed Use Redevelopment PDR: Staff has reviewed your submittal for Choice Center Mixed Use Redevelopment PDR, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen Topic: Specific Questions Posed for PDR Specific questions/topics you posed in PDR application: ■ Schedule feasibility Anne has been working with Dave P. to make sure the schedule is accurate and will continue to be available to refine the schedule as needed. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED ■ What is the best way to work with City Stormwater, the City's consultant and FEMA to allow construction of the floodplain mitigation site work prior to commencing site work for the project development? We had hoped to change our Land Use Code this spring to allow this city-wide. Unfortunately, when we began to look at how we would accomplish this, we realized that it would not work here the way it works in other communities. So unfortunately, we will not be able to offer that at this time. Dave Pietenpol, Sheri Langenberger and I have been coordinating about how this can be effectively accomplished in another way. I also have an email into our City Attorney about this issue and will continue to work to figure out if and how we can accomplish the tight construction schedule that you require. I do not have a specific answer for you right now, but we are working on it. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED ■ Please address details of the College right-of-way and the site plan Page I See specific questions and answers on the College design in the next section. ACKNOWLEDGED ■ Please address the disposition of existing trees on the west side of the property. Which trees are significant? What mitigation will be required if trees must be removed? If you have not already, please schedule a site visit with our City Forester, Tim Buchanan at 221-6361 or at tuchanan@fcgov.com. Tim will assess the health, safety and significance of the existing trees on site and will make recommendations about any needed mitigation. ACKNOWLEDGED. MATT BLAKELY JIM SELL DESIGN MET WITH TIM BUCHANAN ON MARCH 18, 2008. RESULTS OF THE MEETING HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. Site/Project specific questions/topics we added from our meeting one week before PDR: ■ CLOMR/LOMR process Your design team members and our stormwater team and planning members have met and discussed the 2 FEMA processes and how they will dovetail with the development review schedules. Glen Schleuter's comments below recap the details of the process. Aside from the second question above, I think these processes are clear. Please let me know if you have further questions about this. I am scheduling a meeting with all parties involved to discuss the Mason retaining wall's impact on flood issues in the area for March 19`h. Confirmation will be sent soon. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED. ■ Can we have wetlands (existing and constructed) in the drainage easement? The wet area that is on the site does not meet the criteria to be considered an existing wetland so no buffer will be required around this area. The City is very supportive of creative integration of constructed wetlands, bioswales, etc in the drainage easement area. Dana Leavitt, Environmental Planner and Basil Hamdan in Stormwater can be resources to you as you develop ideas. ACKNOWLEDGED ■ What are the requirements for onsite detention and/or water quality? The Spring Creek drainage master plan assumes this site to develop at a 70 to 75 % percent impervious area. Any development that results in flows exceeding those that would be generated by such an impervious area would require detention. Alternatively, an analysis could be done to show no increase in peak rates and no adverse impact downstream. The no -adverse impact analysis should consider the impact from a rate and a volume perspective. Vft Page 2 You will need to provide water quality treatments on the site. It is recommended that more than one technology be used to provide such a treatment, such as disconnected impervious areas and Low Impact Development strategies. ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN. ■ What street section is needed for College? According to the City's' Master Street Plan, College Avenue is a major arterial roadway (6 lane) and will require additional right-of-way along College Avenue to meet the major arterial standards (70.5 feet total from the current street centerline is needed). The development is responsible for improving the street frontages adjacent to the project to current standards. For the College Avenue frontage, an 8-foot sidewalk will need to be constructed with the back of the sidewalk abutting the back of the right-of-way being dedicated, since along this property there is either no formal sidewalk or substandard sidewalk. THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN MODIFIED BY LATER INFORMATION. THE RIGHT-OF- WAY HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF CDOT AND CITY STAFF. ■ Will changes to the medians be required? Yes, the intersection with Parker will need to be controlled so that it functions as a 3/ access intersection. This may entail a relatively simple revision of the existing medians to prevent northbound left turns from this site and southbound left turns from Parker to College. Please contact Ward Stanford for more detailed information. THE SUBMITTED DESIGN IS CONSISTANT WITH FURTHER COMMENTS FROM CDOT AND CITY STAFF. ■ What alternatives are acceptable to explore? We will consider any reasonable alternative and will strive to be creative and collaborative problem -solvers with you as you develop your plans. THANK YOU ■ How many access points are required and at which locations? What are the best cross -access points for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles? Access points will be needed to serve the site for vehicles, bikes and pedestrians. It seems that access from Stuart and across from Parker will be sufficient to serve the site for vehicles. If the new north -south road is dedicated as an emergency access easement and pedestrian access easement and sufficient connectivity is made to the north (to Prospect) and to the south (to the Spring Creek Trail), then Poudre Fire Authority and bikes and pedestrians should have adequate access to the site. We will have further comment once we have a chance to review the TIS. THE SUBMITTED DESIGN IS CONSISTANT WITH FURTHER COMMENTS FROM CDOT AND CITY STAFF. PLEASE SEE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. �J JIM St LL UESIGN Page 3 ■ Can Stuart be vacated and turned into a private drive? As we discussed at the meeting, it is important to the City to maintain control of Stuart and the signalized intersection with College in order to maintain the road, control parking and striping etc. However, the main concern about needing to provide a cul-de-sac seems to be resolved by dedicating the street as public to a point just before the private drive connection. Please see Engineering comments for more detail. STUART HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO BE A PUBLIC STREET AND INCORPORATES COMMENTS FROM PFA AND CITY STAFF. ■ Are there other design options that are acceptable to explore such as hammerheads, a roundabout, an offset culdesac, revised radii? Yes, if needed. At the meeting this was resolved without the need for a cul-de-sac type terminus. THANK YOU. STUART HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO BE A PUBLIC STREET AND INCORPORATES COMMENTS FROM PFA AND CITY STAFF. ■ What are the triggers that will require site improvements with additions to the existing retail? Site improvements will be required in association with Phase 2 if the buildings which contain the commercial uses are expanded by more than 25% and/or the use of the buildings change. It would appear that the planned expansion to the retail buildings will add more than 25% of floor area, meaning the site will need to be brought into compliance to the extent reasonably feasible (build -to -line standards will not apply, but project would be required to provide a detached walk to standards and meet internal parking lot landscaping requirements.) ACKNOWLEDGED ■ Will staff support a build -to line modification if buildings are expanded? If the existing buildings are retained in the expansion, then a build -to line modification will not be needed. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED ■ Is masonry required on upper levels of the buildings? No. The standards that apply to architecture in the TOD Overlay are contained in Section 3.10.5 (C)(2). ACKNOWLEDGED ■ Where are there existing easements on the site? Page 4 ■ Where might additional easements be needed? What utilities are currently on site? Where are lines located? What kind of pressures do we have? Most of these questions will be answered by the developer's consultants pursuant to the survey and utility locates. For City utilities, information is contained in the comments for Light and Power, Water/Wastewater and Stormwater below. ACKNOWLEDGED ■ What do we need to provide for fire access? How many points? How wide? At the meeting, we discussed the need for an emergency access easement along the new north -south private drive which would grant PFA adequate access. We also discussed the potential need for access on the west side of the buildings. You met with Carie after the meeting and her comments are below. We are happy to work together as you develop your designs to accommodate the storm drainage, green space, and appropriate level of fire access to the site. WE HAVE MET WITH CARIE DUNN AND BELIEVE THAT THE SUBMITTED DESIGN MEETS THE CRITERIA THAT HAVE BEEN SET BY PFA. ■ What is the most current funding and phasing information for the Mason Corridor? Denise Weston previously sent the most current funding and phasing information for the Mason Corridor to Capstone. She sent it to other members of the design team right after the PDR so all would have the same information. THANK YOU Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: Zoning Number: 1 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] The uses described in the project description are all subject to a Type 1, administrative public hearing process. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 2 Created: 3/3/2008 [313/08] Parking rows can't contain more than 15 parking spaces in a row without an intervening landscape island (Sec. 3.2.1(E)(5)(e) of the Land Use Code). The preliminary site plan shows numerous rows that contain more than 15 parking spaces in a row without an island. THE SUBMITTED DESIGN COMPLIES Number: 3 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] To the maximum extent feasible, a landscape island needs to be installed at the end of each parking aisle (Section 3.2.2(E)(4)). Page 5 THE SUBMITTED DEISGN ATTEMPTS TO DO SO Number: 4 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] Need handicap parking spaces in a quantity as set forth in Section 3.2.2(K)(5). INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN Number: 5 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] Need bike racks for bikes equal in number to 10% of the total number of parking spaces provided. INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN Number: 6 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] Show trash enclosure locations on site plan. SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS Number: 7 [3/3/08] Show parking stall, drive aisle, dimensions on site plan. SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS Created: 3/3/2008 building footprint and building setback Number: 8 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] All parking lots with less than 100 parking spaces must have 6% interior parking lot landscaping. Lots with 100 or more spaces must have 10% interior landscaping. SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS Number: 9 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] Site improvements will be required in association with Phase 2 if the buildings which contain the commercial uses are expanded by more than 25% and/or the use of the buildings change. It would appear that the planned expansion to the retail buildings will add more than 25% of floor area, meaning the site will need to be brought into compliance to the extent reasonably feasible (i.e. I don't believe the build -to -line standards will apply, but some parking and landscape standards would apply). SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS Page 6 Number: 10 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] It's not clear which phase Retail Bldg. A is in. The narrative states that it's in Phase 2, but the site plan shows it as Phase 1. RETAIL BUILDING A IS IN PHASE 2 Number: 11 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] In addition to compliance with the normal standards in the LUC, the development will also need to comply with the TOD standards contained in Section 3.10 of the LUC. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 12 Created: 3/3/2008 [3/3/08] If it's the intent to allow units to be occupied by more than 3 unrelated people, then the application needs to clearly state how many they want to be allowed for in a unit per Section 3.8.16(E)(2) of the LUC (i.e. do they want to have up to 4 persons in the 4 bedroom units?). PLEASE SEE FORMAL REQUEST IN PDP STATEMENT OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen Topic; Standard Comments Number: 63 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] The entire Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC) is available for your review on the web at http://www.colocode.com/ftcollins/landuse/begin.htm THANK YOU Number: 64 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] This development proposal will be subject to all applicable standards of the Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), including Article 3 General Development Standards, and Division 4.21 C--Commercial District. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 65 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] When developing your plans for submittal, pay particular attention to the following sections of the Land Use Code: ■ 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection (you will need to protect existing significant trees, mitigate for significant trees that cannot be saved, provide street trees and planting beds, etc. to current standards) ■ 3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking (parking dimensions, HC accessible parking requirements, parking lot interior landscaping, etc.) ■ 3.2.4 Site Lighting ■ 3.2.5 Trash and Recycling enclosures ■ 3.5.1 Building Standards JIM SELL DESIGN Page 7 (0�031 City of Fort Collins Jim Sell Jim Sell Design 153 W. Mountain Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW Date: 9/29/2008 Staff has reviewed your submittal for Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP- TYPE I, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen Topic: General Number: 77 Created: 7/28/2008 [9/26/081 [7/28/081 For the Choice Center Drive elevations to be pedestrian friendly as was intended, additional design features need to be incorporated like additional entries, porticos, perhaps metal awnings or trellises. This is not a requirement per code but a suggestion. -NOTED Number: 95 Created: 9/16/2008 [9/16/081 The following departments or agencies have no further concerns with the proposed project: Comcast, PFA, Water Conservation. HANK YOU Number: 96 Created: 9/16/2008 [9/16/08] 1 have made minor edits to the request to increase occupancy. Please see redlines. -NOTED Number: 97 Created: 9/16/2008 [9/16/081 1 know you are interested in scheduling the hearing as soon as possible. We will do our best to accommodate your request. Please be aware that I need one full week to write the staff report and the hearing officer needs one full week to review the staff report. If we overlap staff review, I'll need to be sure to have all items for the hearing no later than 2 weeks prior to the hearing (including the special height review items, north and east color rendered elevations for Building 2) so that I will have time to review the project and write the staff report concurrently. I have sent a letter via email to Walker and JSD spelling out what staff members have indicated must be done prior to hearing. I have also sent a letter dated 9/17/08 to Walker and JSD reiterating that Capstone assumes all risk taking this project to hearing prior to FEMA approval. If FEMA requires changes that affect the site plan, at best, you'll need to request a minor amendment or at worst, you'll need to go back through staff review and public hearing again. -UNDERSTOOD Page 1 ■ 3.5.2 Residential Building Standards ■ 3.5.3 Mixed -Use, Institutional and Commercial Building Standards (for Phase II mostly) ■ 3.8.16 Supplemental Standards - Occupancy Limits; Increasing the Number of Persons Allowed ■ 3.10 Transit ■ 4.21 Commercial District Standards ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 68 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] A neighborhood meeting is not required for Type I projects such as these. Since there are no residential areas very near this project and the railroad embankment is between this property and the open areas beyond to the west, a neighborhood meeting is not requested either. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 67 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] An exhaustive list of submittal requirements for this type of project is available at http://fcgov.com/currentplanning/pdf/project-dev-plan.pdf. There is a submittal checklist at http://fcgov.com/currentplanning/pdf/pdp.pdf. Please let me know if you have any questions about the requirements for your submittal. THANK YOU Number: 69 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] You will need to set up an appointment to submit your application with the Development Review Center front counter at 221-6750. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 70 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Please note that postage rates have been raised as of January 2006. The fee for the APO labels will now be $.75 per label per mailing. APO labels must be generated for an area 800 feet out from each property line. PLEASE SEE ACCOMPANYING APO LIST. FUNDS SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION Number: 66 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] 1 will have more detailed comments once I have more detailed plans to review. ACKNOWLEDGED 11d; f JIM SELL DESIGN Page 8 Topic: Site Specific Comments Number: 72 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Student housing projects such as these are not subject to the "Three Unrelated Ordinance". They are in fact, appropriate antidotes to the problems we face in our single-family neighborhoods which prompted Council to adopt the ordinance in the first place. Section 3.8.16(E)(2) was specifically crafted to address student housing projects. In your submittal to the City, perhaps as part of your Planning Objectives, you will need to formally request an increase of the occupancy limit and address the criteria listed in the standard. This is likely to be about one paragraph, and assuming that the criteria have been addressed in your site plan, staff will support and the Hearing Officer will approve the request. PLEASE SEE FORMAL REQUEST IN PDP STATEMENT OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES Number: 73 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] In the Fall of 2006, City Council adopted a Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay zone which includes these parcels. The Overlay includes areas within a quarter -mile of future planned transit stations along the Mason Corridor and downtown and campus areas. Also Council adopted a standard which removes minimum required parking for multi -family projects. The emphasis of the new standards is to encourage TODs by enhancing multi -modal transportation opportunities, pedestrian -friendly design, and a diverse mix of uses. Section 3.10 of the Land Use Code contains design standards for the TOD Overlay south of Prospect, which will apply to this project. ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO PROJECT DESIGN Number: 74 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Maximum building height in the C--Commercial Zone District is four stories. A performance incentive is available in the TOD Overlay that increases allowed height up to 3 additional stepped -back stories with the provision of structured parking, mixed -uses, affordable housing or a combination of these. See Section 3.10 for more detail. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 75 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Bike parking must be provided on site. Bike parking in the TOD Overlay must be provided for the number of bikes that equals 10% of the total number of car parking spaces provided. ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO PROJECT DESIGN Number: 77 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Please show context around your development on the site plan or an overall site plan so that we can understand how pedestrian connections are made, etc. Consider showing the site north to Prospect and south to Spring Creek. V Page 9 ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO PROJECT DESIGN Number: 78 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] As I think you are aware, there is a grand -scale initiative underway between the University and the City called UniverCity Connections. One task force of this effort is focused on student housing. I think it might benefit you both to know about one another's efforts —they may help you understand this specific market and you may help them achieve their goals as well. Contact Joe Rowan from Funding Partners at (970)494-2021 for more information. THE APPLICANT HAS MET WITH CSU AND HAS THEIR SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT Number:79 Created: 3/12/2008 - [3/12/08] While this is probably unlikely for a student housing project, if the project is certified as an affordable project (10% or more of the units are priced at or below what would be affordable to someone making 80% of the median income for the area), it will be eligible for reduced fees and accelerated development review procedures. Contact Ken Waido at 221-6753 or kwaido@fcgov.com for more information. THE PROJECT DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING STATUS Number: 80 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/081 This project is subject to Neighborhood and Community Parkland Fees. Contact Craig Foreman in the Parks Department for more information. He can be reached at 221-6618 or cforeman@fcgov.com. ACKNOWLEDGED Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Sheri Langenberger Topic: General Number: 93 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] Larimer County Road Impact Fees and Street Oversizing Fees for this project will apply and be due at the time of building permit. Please contact Matt Baker (970- 224-6108) if you have questions about the Street Oversizing Fees. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 94 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] Transportation Development Review Fees (TDRF) will apply to this project and are due at the time of submittal. For more information, see http://fcgov.com/engineering/dev-review.php ACKNOWLEDGED Page 10 Number: 95 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] A Transportation Impact Study will need to be submitted with this project. Please contact Ward Standford at (970) 221-6820 with Traffic Operations and Denise Weston at (970) 416-2643 in Transportation Planning to schedule a scoping meeting. A TIS IS INCLUDED WITH THE PDP SUBMITTAL Number: 96 Created: 3/13/2008 (3/13/08] This project will need to dedicate any easements that maybe necessary to accommodate the needs of the project or the existing utilities that maybe on the site. This can be done by separate document, or if they are within the boundaries of a proposed plat with that plat. We will work with you to process any easement dedications or easement vacations that need to be processed. There are processing fees and filing fees that will be applicable, the processing fees are identified on the TDRF application and the filing fees are subject to the current fees charged by Larimer County for the filing of the documents. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 97 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/081 This project will need to prepare and submit utility plans. UTILITY PLANS INCLUDED WITH PDP SUBMITTAL PACKAGE Number: 98 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] The City will enter into a development agreement with the developer for this project. *** THE DEVELOPER REQUESTS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE STARTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER APPROVAL BY THE HEARING OFFICER. SINCE THIS IS A STUDENT HOUSING PROJECT, TIMING IS CRITICAL. Number: 99 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] Prior to the start of any utility or grading work on the site a Development Construction Permit (DCP) will need to be issued. This permit is issued by Engineering. *** THE DEVELOPER REQUESTS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT BE COORDINATED SO THAT CONSTRUCTION CAN BE INITIATED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER THE EXECUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. SINCE THIS IS A STUDENT HOUSING PROJECT, TIMING IS CRITICAL. Number: 100 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] College Avenue adjacent to the site is SH 287 which is a state highway. Engineering can help to coordinate any meetings with the CDOT and will work with them on reviewing any plans that identify work within or impact the state highway. You will Page 11 most likely need to obtain access permits from the State for Stuart Street intersection and any access points being removed or remaining on the site. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED Number: 101 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] There are a lot of utilities in the area, please contact us if you would like us to set up a utility coordination meeting for you. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED Number: 102 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] The project shall be designed in accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (as applicable). ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 103 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] Any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk existing prior to construction, as well as streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, destroyed, damaged or removed due to construction of this project, shall be replaced or restored in like kind at the Developer's expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. The limits of the repairs will be identified in the field by the City Engineering Inspector prior to and over the course of the project and will not be shown on the plans. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 104 Created: 3/13/2008 (3/13/08] Please keep ADA requirements in mind when designing the buildings, especially if you are designing the building to be set against the row line and/ or planning an urban sidewalk condition. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 105 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] The developer would be eligible to file a repayment from the adjacent property for any portion of Stuart Street (public row portion) that is rebuilt to street standards adjacent to another property. At such time as the adjacent property redevelops the repay would be collected in accordance with Section 3.3.2(F)(2) of the Land Use Code. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED Number: 108 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] For portions of the street sidewalk along College Ave that are rebuilt to the street standards the developer is eligible for reimbursement for 3.5 feet of the 8 foot sidewalk width if built in the ultimate location. Per Section 24-112 of the City Code. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 12 ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED Number: 109 Created: 3/13/2008 [3/13/08] Stuart Street adjacent to this property needs to be a public street and public row to a point just before the private drive connection. If PFA is okay with not having a cul-de-sac at the end of the roadway — which per discussion at the PDR they were — then Engineering is okay with no cul-de-sac being built at the end of the road, provided that a public access easement is provided thru the site to enable the public to loop thru the site. THE PDP HAS BEEN DESIGNED AFTER CONSULTATION WITH PFA Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford Topic: Traffic Number: 83 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Project will need to provide median revisions on College at Parker. ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN Number: 84 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Traffic Operations has Level of Service concerns at Stuart and College. TIS will assist in determination. ACKNOWLEDGED. TIS IS INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL. Number: 85 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Traffic Operations has concerns with the adequacy of the northbound left turn lane storage length at Stuart and College. TIS will assist in determination. ACKNOWLEDGED. TIS IS INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL. Number:86 Created: 3/12/2008 ' [3/12/08] Project may require a southbound left turn lane at Stuart and College. TIS will assist determination. ACKNOWLEDGED. TIS IS INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL. Number: 87 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Traffic Operations will need to review the adequacy of the northbound left turn lane storage at College and Parker. ACKNOWLEDGED. TIS IS INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Rob Irish Topic: General Number: 48 Created: 3/10/2008 .IIM SELL DESIGN Page 13 [3/10/08] Please show all existing electric facilities on the plans & proposed transformer locations. There is a significant electrical duct bank existing along the west edge of this site. Relocation of this would be a significant issue & extremely expensive. Please locate and show on plans. FACILITIES ARE SHOWN ON PLANS Number: 49 Created: 3/10/2008 (3/10/08] Any relocation or modification to existing electric facilities will be at the owners expense. THE DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT ANY RELOCATION OR MODIFICATION TO ANY EXISTING ON -SITE ELECTRIC FACILITIES ARE AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE. Number:50 Created: 3/10/2008 - [3/10/08] There is available 3-phase power existing along the North end of the property & along the Southside of W. Stuart St. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 51 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] Owner will be responsible for Electric Capacity Fee and Building Site charges. Contact Light & Power Engineering with electrical load requirements & to coordinate transformer locations within 10' of a all weather drive over surface. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 52 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] Please submit Commercial Service form and One -Line diagram. ACKNOWLEDGED. THIS DIAGRAM IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS SUBMITTAL PACKAGE. IT WILL BE FORWARDED TO ANNE ASPEN AND/OR ROB IRISH AS SOON AS IT IS COMPLETED. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carle Dann Topic: Fire Number: 25 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] REQUIRED ACCESS: A fire lane is required. This fire lane shall be visible by painting and signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements: ■ Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface (asphalt or concrete) capable of supporting fire apparatus weights. Compacted road base shall be used only for temporary fire lanes or at construction sites. Page 14 ■ Have appropriate maintenance agreements that are legally binding and enforceable. ■ Be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement. ■ Maintain the required minimum width of 30 feet throughout the length of the fire lane. If a fire lane cannot be provided, the building shall be fire sprinklered. 97UFC 901.2.2.1; 901.3; 901.4.2; 902.2.1 THE BUILDING IS BEING SPRINKLERED. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THE SITE IS DESIGNED TO INCORPORATE PFA ACCESS DESIRES. Number: 26 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] TURNING RADII: Minimum turning radii for emergency -response apparatus on any fire apparatus roadway is 25 feet inside, 50 feet outside. UFC 902.2.2.3 ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN Number: 27 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] STREET NAMES: Street names (private drive) shall be reviewed and verified prior to being put in service. 97UFC 901.4.5 ACKNOWLEDGED. POSSIBLE NAMES FOR THE PRIVATE DRIVE HAVE BEEN INCLUDED WITH THE PDP STATEMENT OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES. Number: 28 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] ADDRESS NUMERALS: Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6 inch numerals on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). 97UFC901.4.4 ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 29 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] WATER SUPPLY: Fire hydrants, where required, must be the type approved by the water district having jurisdiction and the Fire Department. Hydrant spacing and water flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. Minimum flow and spacing requirements include: Commercial, 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter; residential within Urban Growth Area, 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter; residential outside Urban Growth Area, 500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter. These requirements may be modified if buildings are equipped with automatic fire sprinkler systems. 97UFC 901.2.2.2 ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN Number: 30 Created: 3/5/2008 Page 15 [3/5/08] SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS: The proposed buildings shall be equipped with approved, automatic fire -sprinkler systems. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 31 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] BALCONY FIRE PROTECTION AND OPEN -FLAME COOKING DEVICES: Balconies on all multi -family dwellings of Type V construction are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. Charcoal burners and other open -flame cooking devices shall not be operated on combustible balconies or within 10 feet of combustible construction, unless the buildings, balconies and decks are protected by an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. LP -gas -fueled cooking devices having an LP -gas container with a water capacity greater than 2.5 pounds shall not be located on combustible balconies or within 10 feet of combustible construction (regardless of automatic sprinklers). IFC 308.3.1 and 308.3.1.1 ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 32 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] STANDPIPES AND FIRE PUMP: Buildings four or more stories in height are required to be equipped with firefighting standpipes in every stairwell. The standpipe system must be capable of supplying a minimum 100 psi to the top floor; an approved fire pump may be required to obtain this minimum pressure. IFC 905.3.1 ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 33 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] STAIRWELL SIGNAGE: Approved stairwell identification signs shall be posted at each floor level in all enclosed stairways in buildings four or more stories in height. 97UFC1210.4 and Appendix I-C ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 34 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: Fire department connections shall be installed remote from the buildings, and located on the street or fire lane side of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department vehicle access or as otherwise approved by the fire code official. If possible, a fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of the FDC. PFA Bureau Policy ACKNOWLEDGED AND INCORPORATED INTO DESIGN Number: 35 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] FIRE LINE REQUIREMENT: Buildings that are required to be fire sprinklered shall have a minimum 6-inch fire line unless hydraulic calculations can support a smaller fire line. ACKNOWLEDGED Page 16 Number: 36 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] KNOX BOX REQUIRED: Poudre Fire Authority requires a "Knox Box" to be mounted on the front of every new building equipped with a required fire sprinkler system or fire alarm system. 97UFC 902.4; PFA BUREAU POLICY 88-20 ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 37 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] COMMERCIAL COOKING FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM: An approved fire -protection system shall be installed in hood -and -duct locations where grease -laden vapors are produced from cooking operations. A permit and plan review is required by the Poudre Fire Authority for the installation of required hood -and -duct fire extinguishing systems. Two sets of plans, along with an application, are required to be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau at 102 Remington St. 97UFC 1006.1; 1006.2.1 ACKNOWLEDGED ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: Environmental Planning Number: 88 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Show all natural features within 500' of the site and the associated buffers per Section 3.4.1 (E) of the LUC. Spring Creek has a 100' buffer as measured from the top of embankment. The existing wetlands on the west side of the railroad tracks need to be shown on the plans. If under 1/3rd of an acre, there is a 50' buffer. Greater than 1/3rd acre, there is a 100' buffer. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 89 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Any storm water improvements connecting to Spring Creek should stay out of the stream channel and any wetlands. If impacts to either shall occur, the Army Corps of Engineers will need to be contacted to determine if any permits are required. THE DEVELOPER IS PURSUING A CLOMR/LOMR PROCESS WITH FEMA CONCURRENTLY WITH THE CITY APPROVAL PROCESS. THIS PROJECT WILL NOT DISTURB SPRING CREEK. THE CLOMR/LOMR PROCESS MAY DISTURB THE STREAM CHANNEL AND/OR WETLANDS. THE DEVELOPER IS AWARE THAT A PERMIT MAY BE REQUIRED FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. Number: 91 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] Any drainage improvements on site should be designed to be sustainable through the use of bio-swales, constructed wetlands and/or other best management practices. ACKNOWLEDGED JIM SELL DESIGN Page 17 Number: 123 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/08] Once the prehearing issues have been addressed, you can contact me to schedule your administrative hearing. I'll need 2 sets of the full site, arch, landscape and lighting planset plus 2 plats. Remember to include 2 sets of the color rendered elevations and special height review materials. Number: 124 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/08] As of the staff review, the pre -hearing issues are as follows: +Engineering needs the LOI +Engineering needs the application and TDRF fees +Planning and Transportation Planning need the ped LOS situation addressed (which we saw a draft of at staff review). +Planning needs special height review materials. +All the Stormwater pages need to reflect the site as currently mapped. +Adjust design of the south parking lot nose to eliminate traffic conflict. +Adjust design of Choice Center Drive to reflect a drive approach and/or submit a variance to go over 750sf of drainage. -UNDERSTOOD Topic: Site Plan Number: 21 Created: 7/23/2008 [9/26/08] [7/23/08] I'm still not seeing any context to the north towards Prospect. We need to see the buildings and the proposed pedestrian connection from your site to Prospect. Please add this to your site plan or as a separate exhibit. letter of intent and diagram are included in the submittal packet. Number: 73 Created: 7/28/2008 [9/26/081 [7/28/08] 1 am concerned about the plaza design. The walkways are narrow given how many students will be coming and going on them and there aren't areas to eat or bbq or sit and read. Clark Mapes suggested looking at the University Village courtyards on campus for ideas. e have modified the plaza design accordingly. Number: 100 Created: 9/16/2008 [9/16/081 Since your last submittal, Building 2 parking lot no longer meets dimensional standards. The drive aisle must be 24 feet wide and overhang can only happen where there is sufficient clear walkway beyond. On the north side, you will be left with just 4 feet of walkway, and yet your main (and only) entrance to Building 1 spills everyone out onto this sidewalk. This does not make sense. e have added wheel stops in the parking lot and reserved these 4 spaces for compact cars only. The main entrance to building #1 is actually further to the north. Page 2 Number: 92 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] The City has started a green building program. At this time, any green building practices are entirely voluntary. It is recommended that green building technologies be used to reduce impacts to the site, reduce energy consumption and increase water conservation. THE DEVELOPER AGREES AND DESIRES TO IMPLEMENT AS MANY GREEN - BUILD PRACTICES AS ARE ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE. Number: 90 Created: 3/12/2008 [3/12/08] The existing trees on the site will need to be evaluated by Tim Buchanan, City Forester to determine if any meet the land use code standard for existing significant trees. MATT BLAKELY (JIM SELL DESIGN) MET WITH TIM BUCHANAN AND DANA LEAVITT ON MARCH 18, 2008. RESULTS OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Denise Weston Topic: Transportation Planning Number: 38 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] At a minimum, there should be connectivity between a sidewalk on site with the existing sidewalk servicing the retail establishments to the north with final connectivity to Prospect Rd. To the south, we would like to see connectivity to the Spring Creek Trail. This could include an off -site trail connection to the existing path just north of the existing bridge. Please consider bicycle and pedestrian circulation throughout the site including pedestrian crossings on the New Road as well as bicycle parking. Overall pedestrian and bicycle activity and potential requirements may be discussed further following the completion of the traffic study. THE SITE HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO CONNECT WITH THE SPRING CREEK TRAIL AND WILL PROVIDE A WALKWAY ACCESS TO THE BUSINESSES TO THE NORTH. Number: 39 Created: 3/5/2008 [3/5/08] The Mason Corridor/ MAX BRT Project is scheduled for final design/engineering/ROW acquisition during mid-2008 thru mid-2009. Construction is scheduled for mid-2009 thru end-2010 with operations scheduled to begin early 2011. ACKNOWLEDGED Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Glen Schlueter Topic: Stormwater Number: 53 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] A portion of this site is in the FEMA 100-year floodplain and floodway for Spring Creek. This property was highly impacted by the 1997 Spring Creek flood that resulted in the loss of life of five people. ACKNOWLEDGED JIM SELL DESIGN Page 18 Number: 54 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] The City's Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) projects, located upstream from this site, are expected to reduce the overtopping of the railroad. However, the overtopping may not be completely eliminated, and there is also the risk of larger floods that could overtop the railroad. The revised mapping based on the PDM projects is not expected to be approved by FEMA for at least 2 years. ACKNOWLEDGED. CONCURRENTLY WITH THE DESIGN OF THE SITE, THE DEVELOPER IS PURSUING CLOMR/LOMR APPROVALS FROM FEMA. Number: 55 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] Therefore, in order for the applicant to put structures in the floodway, a channelization project must be completed based on the effective FEMA mapping. ACKNOWLEDGED. CONCURRENTLY WITH THE DESIGN OF THE SITE, THE DEVELOPER IS PURSUING CLOMR/LOMR APPROVALS FROM FEMA. Number: 56 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] This will involve receiving approval of a CLOMR and LOMR from FEMA which will change the floodplain mapping. The City's floodplain modeling guidelines should be used in preparing the CLOMR and LOMR applications. ACKNOWLEDGED. CONCURRENTLY WITH THE DESIGN OF THE SITE, THE DEVELOPER IS PURSUING CLOMR/LOMR APPROVALS FROM FEMA. Number: 57 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] Building permits in the floodway cannot be issued until the LOMR is approved by FEMA. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 58 Created: 3/10/2008 (3/10/08] Work could be started in the floodway prior to the CLOMR being approved if a floodplain use permit and no -rise certification are submitted and approved. However, this will be at the applicant's risk, because FEMA may have comments that would affect the project design. ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPRECIATED Number: 59 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] Because work is being done in the floodway, the project must be able to show that there will be no rise on any insurable structure. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 60 Created: 3/10/2008 4 Page 19 [3/10/08] After the LOMR is approved and the proposed structures are shown to be outside of the floodplain and floodway, there will no longer be subject to the City's floodplain regulations. However, it is strongly recommended, given the flood history of this site and the remaining potential for overtopping of the railroad in floods greater than the 100-year, that the structures be further protected from flood damage by elevation. Parking on the ground floor with living areas above, would be the recommended design in order to minimize the potential for loss of life. Additional mitigation measures to keep cars from floating down to the College Avenue Bridge and creating a blockage are also highly encouraged. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 61 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/08] The City has detailed high water mark documentation from the 1997 flood and video of the actual flood that may be helpful in designing additional flood protections for this site. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 62 Created: 3/10/2008 [3/10/081 All forms and guidelines are available on the City's website at: http://www.fcqov.com/stormwater/fo-forms.i)hp THANK YOU Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Basil Harridan Topic: Stormwater Number: 13 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] The Floodplain Admin contact for this project is Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, phone 970- 224-6036. THANK YOU Number: 43 Created: 3/7/2008 [3/7/08] There is one existing 42-inch storm sewer, that turns into a 48-inch line that crosses the site that will need to be relocated or removed. Flows from that sewer will need to be accommodated by another sewer or by the proposed channel along the railroad tracks. Please see the attached map for the line location. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 44 Created: 3/7/2008 [3/7/08] Outfall to Creekside Park should be coordinated with the Parks Department such that impact to the Park is minimized and mitigated. ACKNOWLEDGED. WE HAVE MET WITH CRAIG FOREMAN. Page 20 Number: 45 Created: 3/7/2008 [3/7/08] At submittal, standard drainage and erosion control reports are required and must be prepared by a professional engineer registered in Colorado. REPORTS ARE INCLUDED WITH THE PDP SUBMITTAL PACKAGE Number: 46 Created: 3/7/2008 [3/7/08] The design of this site must conform to the drainage basin design of the Spring Creek Drainage Master Drainage Plan as well the City's Design Criteria and Construction standards. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 47 Created: 3/7/2008 [3/7/08] The city wide development fee is $4,420/acre ($0.1015/sq.ft.) for new impervious area over 350 sq.ft. No fee is charged for existing impervious area. This fee is to be paid at the time each building permit is issued. ACKNOWLEDGED Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: WaterMastewater Number: 15 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] Existing mains: 6-inch water in easement through the site in north/south alignment west of the existing commercial buildings, 12-inch water main in College R.O.W., 21-inch sewer in east side of railroad R.O.W. in N % of site, 8-inch sewer in easement to west of commercial buildings in south 1/3 of site and 21-inch sewer in easement along the south side of site (or N edge of park). ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 16 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] Average day water pressure in the area is in the 75 to 80 psi range. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 17 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] The existing water/sewer services to the site must be used or abandoned at the main. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 18 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] Separate water/sewer services are required for each building. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 19 Created: 3/4/2008 Page 21 [3/4/08] Domestic water services and fire lines must connect separately to public water mains. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 20 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] Water meters must be located in meter pits outside the buildings. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 21 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] The capacity of the 6-inch water main is limited. For the intensity of the development being proposed, an additional looping connection must be made to the 12- inch Vrater main on the east side of College Avenue. - ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 22 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] A utility coordination meeting is strongly encouraged early in the site layout/design. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 23 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] The water conservation standards for landscape and irrigation will apply. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 24 Created: 3/4/2008 [3/4/08] Development fees and water rights will be due at time of building permit. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 40 Created: 3/6/2008 [3/6/08] Easement width requirements for new water/sewer mains are: Water mains - 20 feet (10 feet each side); Sewer - 30 feet (15 feet each side). ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 41 Created: 3/6/2008 [3/6/08] Backflow prevention devices will be required on the domestic and fire line water services and must be located/installed in accordance with the City's Cross Connection Control regulations which include specific requirements for drains having capacity for device discharges. Page 22 ACKNOWLEDGED Page 23 Number: 125 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/08] Wherever there are ramps, dip the sidewalk if the ramp would pinch the through walk. II ramps are ADA compliant. Number: 126 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/08] There needs to be landscaping (10' setback from Stuart, 15' setback from College). -On Stuart Street we request a variance based on "equal or greater than" criteria. Instead of providing 10 feet of setback we are utilizing an ornamental wall and landscaping. College Avenue meets the criteria. Also, in order to preserve the existing trees along the north section of the parking lot, we are jogging the new walk to the west outside of the R.O.W.; an easement will be granted. Topic Elevations Number: 127 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/081 Need elevation details of trash enclosures. Need color rendered north and south elevations of Building 1 and east and north elevations of Building 2. -Included in the submittal Number: 128 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/081 Consider revising your design for the north side of Building 3 to be a wider walk with trees in grates separating peds from vehicles. he cross grade on the north side of building # 3 is too steep to accommodate the requested design. Topic: Lighting Plan Number: 129 Created: 9/26/2008 [9/26/08] How will the main entrance to Building 1 be lit? The lighting plan doesn't show any building mounted light fixtures. Please add. e have added a building mounted light at the main entrance. See photometric diagram. Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: General Number: 78 Created: 7/29/2008 [9/23/08] Do not see on Site Plan. Unable to comment for Plat until I review drawing. [7/29/08] The following note shall be added to the Site Plan and Plat at final review: For allowable uses within a buffer zone, refer to Section 3.4.1(E)(2) of the Land Use code -Acknowledged Page 3 Number: 79 Created: 7/29/2008 [9/23/081 Require meeting to finalize. [7/29/08] During the final review process, a "Limits of Development" line will be determined and shown on the following plans: Site, Landscape, Existing conditions and Demolition, Utilities, Grading and Erosion Control. he "Limits of Development" are shown on the plans and encompass all improvements Topic: Grading Plan Number: 80 Created: 7/29/2008 [9/23/081 Clarify why straight trickle pan is needed by CLOMR/LOMR design. If in fact it is not required, address 7-29 comment. [7/29/08] Tricle pan in swale adjacent to the railroad R.O.W. should reflect the grading of the side slope and walkway, creating a more curvilinear alignment. he trickle plan was reviewed and is part of the approved CLOMR. The bottom of the swale is at 1.0% slope and to ensure proper drainage, a trickle pan was provided Number: 81 Created: 7/29/2008 [9/23/08] have not seen utility plans, as soon as I do, I'll provide comment. [7/29/08] Provide plan and profile of storm draim line adjacent to Spring Creek, between SDMH-OS1and SDMH-OS2. The creek and the retaining wall are very close together, which ma have impacts to the creek. he storm plan and profile is provided. Number: 82 Created: 7/29/2008 [9/23/08] Show edge of creek and wetlands on appropriate plans for evaluation. Did not review utility plans, will comment once plans are reviewed. [7/29/08] The plan does not show any kind of riprap at the south end of the tricle pan where it ties into the creek. Provide details of design to allow for evaluation on impacts to the creek and associated wetlands. he edge of creek and wetlands are provided on the appropriate sheets. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland Topic: Engineering Number: 107 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] The City has a new standard Plat note that is required on all plats. I have attached the new note to the redlines. Please add this note anywhere on the Plat cover sheet knowledged Number: 108 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Plat - Please add a line next to the label for all vacations or dedications by separate document where the reception numbers for the recorded documents can be hand written in before the Plat gets filed. All dedication and vacation applications must be submitted with review fees paid prior to scheduling a hearing. If a signed deed of dedication is not yet available, a letter of intent from the owner (Tire Store) must be provided prior to hearing. New dedications are $250 per document and vacations are $400. Page 4 -Acknowledged Number: 109 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/081 Plat - The requested public access easement connection to the north has been provided to facilitate a future connection however, the location does not line up well or connect logically with the existing private drive isle. There also appears to be a large existing tree that may block this location. Further discussion with transportation Planning and Current Planning is needed to resolve this cross lot access issue. packet. -Please refer to the north access exhibit that is included in the submittal Number: 110 Created: 9/23/2008 (9/23/081 General Notes - Please remove the reference to the Modification listed under Note 48. Only variances to the LCUASS standards should be listed under this section. The modification will be subject to approval by the hearing officer where variances are approved administratively by Engineering. Only variances to LCUASS are listed. Number: 111 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/081 Please add a Note 7 on Sheet 5, Grading, indicating that any retaining walls over 40 inches in height measured from the bottom of footing to top of wall are under separate ermit b the Building Department. his note is provided on the grading sheet. Number: 112 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] No plan or profile design has been provided for the storm drain system under Stuart Street. I will defer to Storm Water but I believe this design needs to be provided and all maintenance responsibility should be clearly identified public versus private. - The storm drain profile within Stuart is provided. Number: 113 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Please call out all pedestrian access ramps within the public ROW with the a ro riate LCUASS 2007 standard with truncated domes. Pedestrian ramps with truncated domes are shown. Number: 114 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] 1 believe that the cross walk striping across Stuart will need to be modified or skewed to line up with the ramps. I will confirm this with Transportation Planning and Traffic. The cross walks have been adjusted to align with the skewed ramps. Number: 115 Created: 9/23/2008 [9/23/08] Stuart Street should terminate at the far west end as a standard street section with private access drive approaches into the parking lot and onto Choice Center Drive. Please revise the street design to show standard high volume drive approaches at both access points and call them out with the LCUASS standard 707. Please only provide a profile design for that portion of Stuart that will be public. The access to the parking lot area needs Page 5