HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOLORADO IRON & METAL EXPANSION (REPLAT) - PDP/FDP - FDP120002 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/25/2012
06/25/2012: On the phasing plan phase 3 is indicated to be planted with a dryland seed mix.
Details of the seed mix needs to be identified on the plans and approved by the city
environmental planner.
RESPONSE: Please see the Dryland Seed Mix table now included on the lower right corner of the
landscape plan, and landscape note 21 on the landscape plan, which clarifies which seed mix will
be used in this instance.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/25/2012
06/25/2012: Is building 2 to be constructed under phase 2?
What is phase 1 improvements tied to?
There needs to be a note that all interim conditions will be completed during phase 1.
A note needs to be added that if the phases are not completed within five years of approval of
the Final Development Plan that those not completed will need to be reviewed by minor
amendment to bring the site into compliance with the current code of the future time.
Notes on the landscaping plan about the timing of improvements of the detention plan
contradict the phasing plan. Remove these notes from the landscaping plan and incorporate
them into the phasing plan.
RESPONSE: Phase 1 improvements include quite a bit of fencing, and a pole light in the phase 1
portion of the new parking lot, both of which will require a building permit. Can the phase 1
improvements be tied to either the the fence permit, or the electrical permit to install the light?
14
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970-221-6820, wstanford(a)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Project isn't increasing in scope or scale, just repositioning some already
approved buildings on a larger land area. No traffic related issues.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffington(cDfcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Add note to core drill opening in existing MH for the new sewer service.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. The new hydrant near the northwest corner of the site has also
been added as per the recent discussions with yourself and Ron Gonzales.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: There has been a change in the approach to the fire hydrant that needs to be
moved. This is an old hydrant that needs to be replaced. Please add the appropriate notes to
require that the hydrant be replaced and that the new valve on the hyrant run be installed and
restrained to the tee on the 12" main. The other references to coordinating with Water Utilities
on the shutdown would be the same.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
Department: Zoning
Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals(a�fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 06/25/2012
06/25/2012: Sheet 2 and 3 Have a note that an area around building three will be (interim gravel
base future asphalt surface). This note does not match the phasing plan of sheet 5.
Remove this note (interim gravel base future asphalt surface) from site and landscape plan and
incorporate the gravel base to asphalt change into the phasing plan.
RESPONSE: The notes on sheets 2 and 3 have been removed. All phasing is now described on
the phasing plan.
13
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: There are several descrepancies between the legal description and what is shown
on the drawing. See redlines.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please show the linework for Lot 23 of North Lemay Subdivision Second Filing.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06122/2012: Please show the full width of right of way for Buckingham Street.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawing
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please show how the right of way of Buckingham Street was dedicated.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06122/2012: Please check the symbols for the boundary monuments. Some of them are
showing as being set, when they were set on the Colorado Iron and Metal plat previously.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please change the project title on all sheets to "Colorado Iron & Metal Second
Filing".
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012. Please change the legal description to match the Subdivision Plat being filed.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please increase the text sizes on sheet 2.
12
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Are any of the easements shown as "dedicated by rec. no." dedicated to an entity
other than the City of Fort Collins? If so, please note this with appropriate easement.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Are there any lienholders? If so, please add the signature block.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please add title policy information in the Title Commitment Note.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please label all adjoining properties, platted or unplatted.
RESPONSE. Please see the revised drawings
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please show the southwest corner & south line of Parcel #1 per rec.
#20070090962.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please add a full decription of both monuments on the basis of bearings, and
provide monument records for these comers.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawing
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please provide the reception number for the 25' Drainage Easement at the south
end of the property.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/2212012: Please provide the reception number for the 38' Temporary Construction
Easement along the west side of the property.
11
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please increase the text sizes on the sheet 6 Fencing Plan.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please change the project title on all sheets to "Colorado Iron & Metal Second
Filing".
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please increase the text sizes on sheet 3.
RESPONSE: Piease see the revised drawings.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please change the project title on all sheets to "Colorado Iron & Metal Second
Filing".
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/2212012: The outer boundary closes.
RESPONSE. Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: Please add reference to Lot 23 of North Lemay Subdivision Second Filing in the
sub -title. See redlines.
RFcpnNSF Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/22/2012
06/22/2012: There seems to be a typo in the legal description.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
10
Comment Number: kv „omment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please change the legal description to match the Subdivision Plat being filed.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: The sheet description for C11 in the cover sheet index doesn't match the
description shown on sheet C11.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please be consistant with the benchmark descriptions on sheet C2.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please correct the benchmark system name on sheet C2.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: There are line over text issues on sheets C7. C8 & C9.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please change the project title on the Phasing Plan sheet to "Colorado Iron &
Metal Second Filing".
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please increase the text sizes on the sheet 5 Phasing Plan.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please change the project title on the Fencing Plan sheet to "Colorado Iron &
Metal Second Filing".
M
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: The detention pond needs to be designed to the Detention Pond Landscape
Standards. Additional landscaping is needed.
RESPONSE: The pond design meets the requirements as far as we can tell.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: The outfall storm sewer is not entirely located within the off -site drainage
easement. The storm sewer needs to be located in the center of a 20 foot easement.
RESPONSE: There is an existing drainage easement in this area dedicated as part of the
Odell Brewing Company First Replat. We've added this to the plans, along with additional information
for the existing drainage system.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: The connection of the outfall storm sewer and the existing pipe needs to be
discussed. The pipe can not connect into a metal culvert.
RESPONSE. This connection is being made to the 15" Class III RCP outfall pipe from the
existing detention pond. This new manhole is downstream of the existing outfall structure
for the pond. As -built information was obtained from the record drawings for the Odell Brewing
Company First Replat.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, icounty(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 22
Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please change the project title on all sheets to "Colorado Iron & Metal Second
Filing".
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 06/23/2012
06/23/2012: Please change the project title on all sheets to "Colorado Iron & Metal Second
Filing".
RESPONSE: Please see the revised drawings.
0
All trees and shrubs to be irrigated with an automatic drip or spray imgation system.
Transplanted trees shall be transplanted during the dormant season based on industry
standards.
Transplanted trees to be moved with a tree spade of adequate size for the diameter of existing
trees. A qualified transplant contractor shall determine the size of tree spade to be used.
Also please add:
Provide a detail of transplanted trees with a water basin and schedule for individual tree
irrigation.
Pr-SPONSE See notes 3 and 20 regarding irrigation. See note 19 regarding transplanting of trees.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Rob Irish, 970-224-6167, rirish()fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Square footage and front footage charges will apply to the newly acquired adjacent
parcel.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Owner is responsible for unpaid development charges on the existing
development.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Will the existing electric transformer need to be relocated? If so, contact Light &
Power Engineering (221-6700) to discuss system modification and relocation charges.
RESPONSE: Nn relcc=}ior necessary.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargueofc-gov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Please see the Erosion Control Checklist for requirements needed on the Utility
Plans and in the Drainage Report.
7
06/26/2012: Please provide the specifications for the non -turf steed mix.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised landscape plan.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Please remove smooth brome from the turf seed mix - this species is not
encouraged to be planted in the City.
RESPONSE: Removed as requested.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221.6361, tbuchanan(ailfcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
06/27/2012:
Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
Some of the trees at the NW portion of the site west of the entrance are quite close together.
This occurs with the street trees and the trees behind the walk. Positioning trees in back of the
walk between the street trees and using all ornamental trees in this area could improve the
spacing. Since the trees behind the walk in this area are quite close to the sidewalk using all
Chanticleer Pear in this area will help in maintaining growth over the sidewalk at 8 feet.
Also across the front of the site between curb cuts placing the new street trees between the
existing row of trees in back of the walk would improve spacing. Adding a flowering crab in the
open area behind the walk would be consistent with the existing row of crabs in this area.
Across the front of the building where shade trees are placed these are a couple of trees with
narrower crown spreads to consider. (Catalpa and Linden)
Placing shrubs in planting beds improves irrigation and maintenance efficiency. Consider
putting a shrub bed on the north side of the fence in front of the building where shrubs are
shown in the lawn area.
RESPONSE: We have revised the landscape plan in the NW portion of the site to spread the trees
out a bit and we have specified the Chanticleer Pear where next to the sidewalk. The comment
pertaining to the parkway strip in front of the existing building is acknowledged, however the Land
Use Code requires that we provide canopy street trees in the parkway strip at 30 to 40 foot
spacing. Shrub beds have been added where recommended.
Comment Number: 2
06/27/2012:
Please add these notes:
6
Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Buckingham was resurfaced in 2011. Any cuts in the pavement may be subject to
triple impact fees.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Topic: Plat
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Verify with Poudre Fire that the emergency access easement isn't required to be
extended to the west for buildings 2 & 3.
RESPONSE: We have extended the emergency access easement per conversations with PFA.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: The temporary construction and slope easements are not processed through the
City of Fort Collins. However, they will need to be recorded and copies provided to
Engineering prior to signing mylars.
RESPONSE: Arknow�edoe^
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: The 45' Drainage and access easement on the east side of the project is not
shown on the replat. Shouldn't this access still remain for the adjacent lot?
RESPONSE: Please see revised plat.
Comment Number: 12
Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: The drainage easement dedicated on the original plat is no longer being shown
and it is assumed that it is being vacated by this plat. Is it possible to show a legend of what is
being vacated and dedicated by this plat similar to what was done on the original? Similarly,
the offsite temporary construction easement on the original plat could be shown with a hatch to
clearly show what portions are being vacated by this plat.
RESPONSE: Please see the revised plat.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Lindsay Ex, 970.224.6143, lex fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
5
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Please provide a clearer "sharper" key map that is easier to read and can be
reproduced.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Sheet C1 - Revise the legal description on the cover sheet 1 to match the plat or
vice a versa.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Sheet C3 - Label adjacent lot ownership on similar to what was done on sheet C4.
RESPONSE: Acknowiedged.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Sheet C3 - Their was a proposed fire hydrant callout on the previous plans located
along Buckingham just west of the east access. This callout appears to be missing from these
plans. Has the fire protection been revisited?
RESPONSE: This fire hydrant is no longer needed since the baler building moved towards the west.
There is however a new hydrant proposed near the northwest corner of the site.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Please revisit the phasing shown on all sheets. Their are some discrepancies
between C3 and C4 for example. Ensure that all are consistent.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Sheet C7 & C8 - Consider removing overall Buckingham street plan station callout
title and instead list the stationing under the "preliminary" and "frontage" callouts.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 06/27/2012
06/27/2012: Sheet C9 - Ensure that stationing of Cross Sections match the profile stations.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
4
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Please provide better details of fencing and gates: color and material.
RESPONSE: The detail of the gates has been refined on the fencing plan. All wrought iron listed
on the fencing plan to be wrought iron is to be painted black. The sheet metal fencing is to match
the existing screen fencing at their current Mulberry site (forest green on facing the public), a photo
of which is shown below:
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: The 10' fence along the west property line must be reduced to 4' between gate #4
and the front property line, per Sec. 3.8.11(C)(2). You may want to consider using the 30"
decorative fencing for this portion of the fence.
RESPONSE: We've eliminated the fencing in this location.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Andrew Gingerich, 970.221.6603, agingerichpfcgov.com
3
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Please provide an irrigation plan with identified hydrozones as per Sec. 3.2.1(J)
and 3.2.1(E)(3)(b). V
RESPONSE: Hydrozones are now listed on the landscape plan. All plant material proposed,
except those that are "very low-water use plantings," are intended to be served by a permanent,
automatic irrigation system. In accordance with section 3.2.1(E)(3)(b), we have provided
information on hydrozones on the landscape plan, and the future irrigation plan will comply with this
hydrozone information. Providing an irrigation plan at this time, however is premature.- Detailed
irrigation design is similar in process timing to detailed building design, in that it is typically
something that could and should be done after the development approval, prior to the issuance of a
building permit. In accordance with 3.2.1(J)(2), we have provided a note on the landscape plan
note # 20 clarifying that the irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Utilities
Executive Director prior to the issuance of a building permit or commencement of construction. We
intend to hire a landscape contractor who also provides irrigation design/build to implement the
landscape plan, however until we have a finalized and approved landscape plan, it is not typical for
the irrigation design/build process to commence. The timing of when the irrigation plan must be
submitted for review is clearly spelled out in 3.2.1(J)(2), which reflects the timing of when this level
of design work would typically be done, namely, at time of building permit.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: The lighting plan shows a fixture "C" but does not provide a cut sheet. Please
provide details for fixture "C".
RESPONSE: We have removed reference to fixture C. We are no longer proposing a fixture C.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Fixture A does not meet the "sharp cut off capability so as to minimize up -light" as /
required in Sec. 3.2.4(D)(3).
RESPONSE: We have replaced the previous fixture A with an alternative fixture that now has the
sharp cut off capability.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Light bleeds beyond the north property line at a higher level of foot candle than
permitted, per Sec. 3.2.4(D)(8).
RESPONSE: After further review, as it turns out, the light shown within the ROW was a
result of us showing photometric information generated from the public street lights. We
have removed all information associated with the public street lights.
2
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
COLORADO IRON & METAL, SECOND FILING
(COMBINED PDP & FINAL)
2No SUBMITTAL
JULY 18, 2012
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, slorson((Dfcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Please provide color elevations to confirm compliance with Sec. 4.28(E)(2)(c).
RESPONSE: Please see the revised elevations in this submittal.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: The proposed recycling and light industrial uses are permitted in the industrial
zone district subject to an administrative hearing (Type 1).
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Digital copy of plans required.
RESPONSE: Included in this submittal.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 06/26/2012
06/26/2012: Please provide interior and exterior parking lot landscape calculations according
to Sec. 3.2.1(D)(1)(a), 3.2.2(M)(1), and Figure 1 at 3.2.1(E). Also, what is the hashed area that
the trees are planted in?
RESPONSE: Please see the diagram below clarifying that the parking lot has approximately 11 %
of its area devoted to landscaping.