Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout716 MAPLE ST. DUPLEX EXPANSION - PDP - 2-11 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)Number: 3 Created: 1 /24/2011 [1/24/11] The site plan needs to show the building footprint, with the side setbacks shown at the various walls in order to determine if any other walls on the east or west side may need modifications. The site plan submitted just shows rectangular boxes, which are really the building envelope. The plan labels them as the building footprint, which is not correct. Likewise, the data on the "land use breakdown" table needs to state what the existing and propose building square footage is. It just states the footprint information, which is ok to be listed, but it's not complete. Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit. If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750. Sincerely, mma McArdle City Planner Page 6 [1/31/11] Please darken the linework for the vicinity map on the Elevation Plan Number: 11 Created: 1 /31 /2011 [1/31/11] Please add a legal description to the Site/Utility/Grading Plan. Number: 12 Created: 1 /31 /2011 [1/31/11] Please move "716 Maple Street" ahead of "Proposed Expansion of Existing Duplex". Number: 13 Created: 1 /31 /2011 [1/31/11] Does "Proposed" need to be in the title? Number: 14 Created: 1 /31 /2011 [1/31/111 Typically the Site Plan is the first sheet in a plan set, and the Utility & Grading Plans are a separate set of plans. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque` Topic: Stormwater Number: 5 Created: 1 /28/2011 [1/28/11] Please include a drainage summary letter documenting the new impervious area for the site, explaining that the new impervious area is less than the 5,000 sf allowed in the Old Town Basin for not requiring on -site quantity detention. Also, please include a statement explaining how water quality mitigation is being achieved for the site. A suggestion is to discuss how all roof drainage will flow across the landscaped yard before flowing into the right-of-way, which will provide some water quality. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: WaterMastewater Number: 26 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/11] Revise the configuration of the water services and meter pits as shown on the redlined drawings. Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: zoning Number: 1 Created: 1 /24/2011 [1/24/11] The property is in the NCM zone. The applicant's submittal refers to the proposed use as "attached single family". Such a use is not allowed in the NCM zone. I believe the proposed project is really an interior remodel of an existing duplex and an addition. The duplex use is allowed in the zone, and since an addition is proposed, a Type 2 review is required. All reference to use in the narrative and on the plans must be changed from "attached single family" to "duplex". Number: 2 Created: 1 /24/2011 [1/24111] The elevation drawings show the north, south and west elevations. We also need the east building elevation. If any portion of the side walls exceed 18' in height above grade, then a setback of greater than 5' is required per Sec. 4.8(E)(4) of the LUC. Since there's no east elevation drawing, I can only go by the north and south elevations. They seem to show that the east wall of the rear unit is taller than 18', which means that a minimum 6' side yard setback is needed along the east lot line. The applicant has included 2 modification requests, but neither of them deal with the setback issue. Page 5 Number: 30 Created: 2/2/2011 [2/2/11] The title of the plan set should perhaps be revised so that its a little more "searchable". 716 Maple Street could work. Number: 31 Created: 2/2/2011 [2/2/11] In general there's numerous incorrect spelling of words on the plan set that should be corrected: "remodled", "attaced", "sanirery", "sanitrery', "cocnrete", "side walk", "foot print", "in to". Number. 32 Created: 2/2/2011 [2/2/11] Inspection fees will need to be assessed for the proposed splitting of the water service. This will likely be done under an excavation permit instead of a development construction permit. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine Topic., Electric Utility Number: 4 Created: 1 /25/2011 [1/25/11] Please coordinate power requirements with Light & Power Engineering (221- 6700). Electric charges to modify the electric system may apply, depending on the power requirements to the building. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carie Dann Topic: Fire Number: 20 Created: 2/1/2011 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: • Residential within Urban Growth Area, 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further 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. 2006 International Fire Code 508.1 and Appendix B Number: 22 Created: 2/1/2011 ADDRESS NUMERALS Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum six-inch high numerals on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). If the numerals are mounted on a side of the building other than the side off of which it is addressed, the street name is required to be posted along with the numerals. PLEASE NOTE: The address of the rear unit shall be visible from the street, whether by signage or the actual address mounted on the building. 2006 International Fire Code 505.1 Department: Technical Services Issue Contact: Jeff County Topic: General Number: 9 Created: 1 /31 /2011 [1/31/11] Please remove the address from the legal description on the Elevation Plan. Number: 10 Created: 1/31/2011 Page 4 J211 mber: 25 Created: 2/1/2011 111] The foot prints don't appear to be accurate. No porch shown on front and back but y are shown on the elevations Nbe Numb28 Created: 2/1/2011 1211/11r: ] Please change all Foot Print references to floor area. i Number: 33 Created: 2/4/2011 2/4/11] 1 recommend changing name to 716 Maple Duplex Expansion, make sure its consistent on all plans. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: Engineering Number: 6 Created: 1/28/2011 [1/28/11] Please add a note indicating that: "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 to City of Fort Collins standards at the Developer's expense prior to the acceptance of completed improvements and/or prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy." Number: 7 Created: 1/28/2011 [1/28/11] As was noted from the Conceptual Review: "Section 3.6.2(J)(2) of the Land Use Code requires the paving of the alley with the submitted proposal." However, with the understanding that the property would change from a duplex to two attached single family dwellings, it appears there is no overall increase in the number of units and would make for a potential justification to vary from the requirement on paving the alley as. this provision of code allows for an exemption to the alley improvement requirement for carriage houses and habitable accessory buildings (presuming alley paving is not required by another department/entity, such as PFA), and an "equal to or better" argument could perhaps be made that the impact of this proposal is no different than a carriage house. If the applicant wishes to pursue not constructing the abutting alley a modification request to this section of code (as outlined in Section 2.8 of the Land Use Code) should be pursued." Should a modification be submitted and the decision maker decides that it cannot be supported, a design for the construction of the alley would be required from the consultant engineer. Number: 8 Created: 1/28/2011 [1/28/111 Typically construction (engineering) drawings are separate from the site plan (planning) drawings. Based upon the current information, I'm not needing to have the drawings separated (provided other commenters concur with this). Please note however that an advantage exists in separating the drawings into a planning and engineering set — should a change to the utility plan portion be needed, this can be done through a simple no -cost revision process when it's separate from the planning set. Otherwise a change to the utilities that's part of the site plan would need a minor amendment with fees paid as part of the minor amendment process. Should the final outcome result in separating the engineering from the site plans, the engineering plans should have that standard construction plan approval block and be signed and stamped by the engineer as well as additional information typically required with a construction plan set as required by the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. Page 3 Number: 39 Created: 2/4/2011 [2/4/11] Something to think about, you are required 2 parking spaces per unit, which you are meeting currently. Consider showing what that would mean if you meet the FAR and lot area requirements, pads one spot each per unit, which would require you to move the building elements around. I'm not sure this is the best option, but is an idea to look into. Also, look at other duplex conditions in the area, how does this compare, is it complementary with the neighborhood, how? For rear half, consider adding information about how you are beyond the setback in the front because the structure is beginning where the current structure does, would you meet the rear FAR if you could move the structure up? The big one for this standard is addressing its intent, to avoid shading rear yards for neighbors and keeping privacy, may want to consider window placement on that side of the unit for this purpose. Topic: Planning Objectives Number: 24 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/11] Fix Planning Objectives to stay consistent with the expansion of existing duplex, not convert to single family attached. That would mean replatting the lot into two, not what you are proposing. You are not building a "new" home, this is an addition to an existing duplex. Please correct this. (t U-��Nq ..a-7 Topic: Site mber: 15 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/11] The vicinity map is not legible, the line weights are too light. I would recommend having the coversheet have the vicinity map, signature blocks and site and landscape plan; a second sheet be utility information (grading and utility); and then the elevations on the last s t. Number: 17 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/11] Please tell me dimensions of sidewalk, parkway and adjacent ROW for Maple. umber: 18 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/11] Please label the adjacent lots, for example Lot 22 Block 14 of West Side Addition, or whatever the legal is. Number: 19 Created: 2/1/2011 2/1/11] Tell me the material of the alley. Are you proposing paving? If not a modification is needed to section 3.6.2(J)(2) of the LUC. The modification must meet the criteria of 2.8.2 of the LUC. umber: 21 Created: 2/1/2011 (2/1/11] Where is the entry to these homes? Need a direct sidewalk connection to the primary entry. Number: 23 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/11] The labeling needs to change on the units, this is not a "new" single family attached home. This is an existing duplex expansion. Please show existing footprint and the proposed. v` V �rage 2" — art Collins STAFF PROJECT REVIEW CARSON DESIGN STUDIO - AUBREY CAR Date: 2/7/2011 413 CORMORANT CT FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 Staff has reviewed your submittal for 716 Maple St - Duplex Expansion - PDP Type ll, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Emma McArdle Topic: Elevations Number: 34 Created: 2/4/2011 [2/4/11 ] Please provide the east elevation. Number: 35 Created: 2/4/2011 [2/4/11] The elevations of the north and south side seem like they are mixed up. The south �-- elevation that faces Maple looks more like a rear elevation. I would prefer the side facing the street to have more detail. The windows are all so small; please a�d some details to the south elevation. Ted suggested a throne wi 0;.s Number: 36 Created: 2/4/2011 [2/4/11] Elevations need to 1ca�ll out material and color. I think the Board would like to see a color rend possible, J Topic: Landscape Number: 16 Created: 2/1 /2011 [2/1/11] Please make the landscape table right side up. I need the street trees shown. Are they in front of this lot or neighboring lots? Street trees are required at 30' - 40' intervals. Sho�me this is d orw�e� II n street add�ed�� ` _ _a �_ _ , umber: 377 ZS`, Created: t'2//4i/220011 �-� [2/4/11] Please tell me what is existing vs. what is proposed landscaping. `dumber: 38 Created: 2/4/2011 V [2/4/11] Are there any planting bed planned for the front? Code requires 5' beds along at least 50% of the building. Topic: Modifcation of Standard Requests umber: 27 Created: 2/1/2011 [2/1/111 The requests do not say what code section they are to or meet the criteria adequately. Please revise requests using supporting data to meet the criteria of the code. See the redlined modifications with recommendations for structure. ,Dumber: 29 Created: 2/2/2011 [2/2/111 Additional modification needed for paving of alley, or applicant needs to pave the alley. Page 1