HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAGNOLIA DWELLINGS - PDP200018 - - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSCommunity Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College AvenuePO Box 580Fort Collins, CO 80522970.221.6689970.224.6134 faxfcgov.com/developmentreviewDecember 04, 2020Shelley
La Mastra Russell + Mills Studios506 S College Ave, Unit AFort Collins, CO 80524RE: Magnolia Dwellings, PDP200018, Round Number 1Please see the following summary of comments from City
staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of Magnolia Dwellings. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions
through your Development Review Coordinator, Todd Sullivan via phone at 9702216695 or via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com. Comment Summary:Department: Historic PreservationContact: Maren
Bzdek, 9702216206, mbzdek@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: Regarding the building's massing and dimensions, please see
the relevant questions and comments from Planning asking for more information to document compliance with land use code requirements for building dimensions and lot coverage related
to neighborhood compatibility. These are the same details that are also needed by our division and ultimately the Landmark Preservation Commission in order to provide comments regarding
compliance with Section 3.4.7 of the land use code.ALM2s Response: We have added information to this 2nd PDP submittal requested by Planning and the project is in compliance with those
referenced LUC sections.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: Because this project is infill in the Laurel School National Register District, we will
be scheduling a review of the application by the Landmark Preservation Commission prior to your hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board. The LPC will provide a recommendation to the
decision maker, specifically regarding compliance with Section 3.4.7, (E) Table 1 design compatibility requirements. While generally compatibility with the historic district properties
within 200 feet is the goal, satisfaction of the compatibility requirements relative to the abutting property to the east is of primary importance.ALM2s Response: This project received
a recommendation (to the decision maker/P&Z board) from the LPC on February 17, 2021.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: Regarding materials: the use
of horizontal siding on the streetfacing building mass is a good choice, while the vertical board and batten siding is not typical for the existing material palette in the district so
is best used in massing sections less visible from the street. Please be prepared to provide specific siding product information to the LPC.ALM2s Response:This project received a recommendation
(to the decision maker/P&Z board) from the LPC on February 17, 2021 and included approval of the proposed siding materials.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020:
Note the requirements for similar fenestration pattern in Table 1 of Section 3.4.7. Generally speaking, the vertically oriented windows and solidtovoid ratio are in the acceptable range
of compatibility, but as a note of minor concern I would point out that the small, horizontal sliders on the façade seem a bit too small for scale. If you feel this proportion is supported
by the historic context, it would be helpful to show some relevant examples from the neighborhood. Generally speaking, oneoverone double hung windows would be preferable to the windows
you are showing as sliders.ALM2s Response: The windows that are referenced were updated to provide for a more square window proportion and has since been approved by the LPC on on February
17, 2021.Department: Planning ServicesContact: Kai Kleer, 9704164284, kkleer@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR HEARING:The
subdivision plat shows that the lot is 9,500 SF (50’x190’) in size. Please update land use table to reflect this calculation and update any other FAR calculations required (unless the
property is being replatted). If the property is being replatted a new calculated lot size may be used.RMS Response: The land use table has been updated, property is not being replatted.Comment
Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR HEARING: Please add Floor Area Ratio information to the Land Use Table. Calculations should include basement (only if
basement wall is exposed three feet above grade), first floor, and second floor (anything greater than 7’6” in ceiling height). A simple diagram will be needed to show how each floor
was calculated to ensure consistency with the Land Use Code 4.8(D)(2)(b).RMS Response: The FAR is shown on the land use table on the right second column about halfway down.ALM2s Response:
Footprint diagrams of the main and upper-level floor have been added to the building elevation sheets that indicate the proposed FAR is less than the maximum allowed FAR as defined by
the LUC. Basement are not included in the FAR since the basements have exposed wall less than 3’ above grade.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR
HEARING: Please include the rearlot floor area ratio calculation in the title sheet land use table. The allowable floor area on the rear half of the lot cannot exceed 33% of the rear
50% of the lot.RMS Response: Information for rear lot FAR is now shown below the overall FAR. The line for front and rear lot is also shown and labeled on the site plans.Comment Number:
4 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR HEARING: Please depict building setbacks on site plan. FYI 15 feet front, 5-foot side and 5-foot rear.RMS Response: Setbacks
were shown, dimension labels added and linetype added to legend for clarification.Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR HEARING: For the diagram showing
the minimum side yard and maximum wall height please add labeling and additional callouts to show where the eave line is being measured from and where natural grade is (looks like 4,982
or 4983, please label). The diagram should be a section view of both the east and west walls. Staff is measuring that the wall height is approximately 22 feet on the west and 27’ on
the east (or more depending on where natural grade is measured). The additional 4 feet in height would require a 7-foot setback.ALM2s Response: Lines to indicate the natural grading
have been added to the 2nd round PDP elevations along with dimension to illustrate the compliance with wall height.Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020
FOR HEARING: Please callout roof pitch.ALM2s Response: Roof pitch callouts have been added.Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR HEARING: Please
show an overall building height dimension. The standard is 2 stories or 25’ 4” as measured from the average of the finished ground level at the center of all walls to the highest point
of the roof.ALM2s Response: This interpretation of this LUC standard has been since clarified with Staff and the 25’-4” would only apply to the height of walls per story (12’8” per story
per LUC 3.8.17;A; (c)) and does not apply to the height of the roof structure.Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020 FOR HEARING:Greater attention to screening
along the eastside lot line. The plan should incorporate vertical elements such as trellising or arbors with vines or other plant material that promote year-round screening higher than
what the existing 6foot fence can provide. Please show the footprints of the surrounding buildings to show the relationship of this project to the existing context. It may be wise to
show a section view of the relationship between the eastside singlefamily residence to the newly proposed building. The section view should also take into consideration the sites finished
grade.RMS Response: Footprints for adjacent property buildings have been added. Email correspondence with adjacent property owner to the east has been included in the submittal. Ultimately
after 3D modeling was completed showing the view from the balconies of the building there were no further concerns from the adjacent property owner.Comment Number: 9 Comment
Originated: 12/04/202012/04/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:Regarding the modification requests, both the compact stall and landscaping set back use the appropriate criterion for justification.
Staff may have one or two tweaks when writing the Staff Report, but the overall approach is supportable.RMS Response: Noted, thank you.Department: Engineering Development ReviewContact:
Spencer Smith, 9702216603, smsmith@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR HEARING:Stormwater detention should be located
outside of the 9' utility easement.Highland Response:The stormwater LID infiltration gallery has moved outside of the easement.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020:
FOR HEARING:The overhead utility undergrounding needs to be shown and/or called out on the plans. The undergrounding of the lines will be the responsibility of the developer/propertyowner
and should be coordinated (design, etc.) with the appropriate utility entity.Highland Response:Undergrounding of utilities noted on plans and has been coordinated with Comcast and Century
Link.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:A Development Agreement (DA) will be required for this project. Please submit a completed
DA information form with your first FDP submittal. The information form may be downloaded from the City's Engineering Development Review website: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.phpRMS
Response: Noted, will be submitted with FDP submittal.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:This project will require a Development
Construction Permit prior to construction. Toward the end of FDP process, a DCP application and fee will need to be provided. An engineer's cost estimate will need to be submitted
during the FDP process as well, for review and approval. This will help us determine how much surety will be required for the public improvements. More information can be found about
the DCP process and requirements at the City's Engineering Development Review website: https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.phpHighland Response: Noted.Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:The easement legal descriptions and exhibits should be submitted early in the FDP process, to avoid delays in approval.
Easements need to be recorded prior to final approval or permit issuance, etc.Highland Response: Noted.Department: Traffic OperationContact: Steve Gilchrist, 9702246175, sgilchrist@fcgov.comTopic:
GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/23/202011/23/2020: FOR INFORMATION:The Traffic Impact Study was waived during the Conceptual Review of this project. No further
traffic evaluation is needed for this project unless significant changes to these plans would result in an increase in the anticipated number of trips generated by this site.RMS Response:
Noted, thank you.Department: Stormwater EngineeringContact: Basil Hamdan, 9702221801, bhamdan@fcgov.comTopic: Erosion ControlComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/18/202011/18/2020:
FOR FINAL:Please provide a calculation for the total disturbed area.Highland Response: Will be provided.Please provide some erosion protection along the alley.Highland Response: Will
be provided.The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft. and/or meets the criteria fora need for Erosion and Sediment Control Materials to be submitted.The erosion control requirements
are located in the StormwaterDesign Criteria in Chapter 2 Section 6.0 a copy of the requirements canbe found at www.fcgov.com/erosionPlease submit an Erosion Control Escrow / Security
Calculation basedupon the accepted Erosion Control Plans to meet City Criteria.Highland Response: Will be submitted.Department: Stormwater EngineeringContact: Dan Mogen, 9703055989,
dmogen@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: FOR HEARING:Stormwater, including Low Impact Development (LID), facilities are
not allowed within the utility easement. Please either relocate LID facility outside of the utility easement, or verify that utilities do not need this easement and abandon the utility
easement.Beyond the easement concern, please clarify the separation from the facility to the building foundation.Highland Response:The stormwater LID infiltration galleries have moved
outside of the easement.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: FOR HEARING:Please review landscape separation requirements listed on sheet LP100 and update
plan where necessary (it appears separations are not being met at the northwest and southeast areas of the site).Highland Response:The drain pan has been re-routed to the west of the
tree to meet separation.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: FOR HEARING:Please see redlined drainage report and utility plans. I encourage you to
reach out with any questions or to review potential revisions, and I would be happy to set up a meeting or conference call to do so.Highland Response:Acknowledged. Comments have been
addressed on the drainage report.Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: INFORMATION:Please note that additional comments may be forthcoming upon future
submittals as additional details are discovered.Highland Response: Noted.Department: WaterWastewater EngineeringContact: Dan Mogen, 9703055989, dmogen@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment
Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: FOR HEARING:Fort Collins Utilities will be replacing the water main in Magnolia; therefore, the proposed water main in
the alley is not necessary. Please update plans to show water connections to the improved main in Magnolia.Highland Response:Acknowledged. Plans updated to show waterline connections
in Magnolia.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: FOR FINAL:The water service and meter for this project site will need to be sized based on the AWWA
M22 manual design procedure. A sizing justification letter that includes demand calculations for maximum flows and estimated continuous flows will need to be provided as a part of the
final submittal package for this project.Highland Response: Noted.Department: Light And PowerContact: Tyler Siegmund, 9704162772, tsiegmund@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number:
1 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: INFORMATION:The site currently has a singlephase service with a capacity of 150 amps.RMS Response: Noted, thank you.Comment Number:
2 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: INFORMATION:Light & Power has electric facilities running within the alley to the south. Existing lines can be intercepted to
provide single phase power to the site.RMS Response: Noted, thank you.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: INFORMATION:If any existing electric infrastructure
needs to be relocated as part of this project, it will be at the expense of the developer and will need to be relocated within Public Right of Way or a dedicated easement. Please coordinate
relocation's with Light and Power Engineering.RMS Response: Noted, thank you.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: SITE SPECIFIC:Transformer locations
will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have
a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. When located close to a building, please provide required separation from building openings as defined in Figures
ESS4 ESS7 within the Electric Service Standards. Please show the proposed transformer location on the Utility Plans.Highland Response: Coordination of the power source has been coordinated.
No transformer will be required qonsite.Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: INFORMATION: The new electric service to the building will be considered
a customer owned service: therefore, the service line from the transformer to the meter is required to be installed, owned, and maintained by the property owner.RMS Response: Noted,
thank you.Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: INFORMATION:This project will need to comply with our electric metering standards. Electric meter locations
will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Each residential unit will need to be individually metered. Please gang the electric meters on one side of the building,
opposite of the gas meters. Reference Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric metering standards. A link has been provided below.https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_FINAL_18November2016_Amendment.pdfALM2s
Response: Thank you for this information. Once we more forward with the building design, we will indicate the location of the electrical meters with the understanding that these will
need to be located ganged together on one side of the building.Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: INFORMATION:Electric capacity fees, development
fees, building site charges and any system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development. Please contact me or visit the following website for an estimate
of charges and fees related to this project:http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders and developers/plant investment development feesRMS Response: Noted, thank youComment Number:
8 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: SITE SPECIFIC:Please show the proposed transformer location for the project on the utility plan. A utility easement will need to
be dedicated for the primary lines and transformer that extend onto this property.There is a single-phase transformer located on the property to the west that may be used to feed this
project if an agreement/easement is obtained from that property owner. Depending on your proposed electric load, this existing transformer may need to be upsized.Highland Response: Coordination
of the power source has been coordinated. No transformer will be required onsite.Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/02/202012/02/2020: SITE SPECIFIC:There are 2 neighboring
properties electric services located in the existing 6ft east side lot utility easement. Your proposal is placing a storm drain within this easement. Light and Power has a 3ft minimum
separation requirement from storm drain lines.
Highland Response:The existing electrical service to the northeast residence will need to be adjusted to accommodate the proposed storm line and is show on the plans as so.Can a chase
drain be installed instead of a buried pipe?
Highland Response:Unfortunately there is not real estate available to accommodate a chase drain along the east side of the units.Department: ForestryContact: Nils Saha, , nsaha@fcgov.comTopic:
GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR HEARINGA concrete drain pan is proposed within the critical root zone of a 9” bur oak in the public
rightofway. I did not see a detail for the drain pan in the utility set. Can the drain be shifted outside of the CRZ to protect the root system? Please note that per the Tree Protection
Notes, no excavation deeper than 4” in permitted within the critical root zone of a tree (in this case, 9’ radius).RMS Response: Lines have been added to site plan, landscape plan and
tree protection plan showing root system and critical root zone. The drain plan has been relocated outside of the 9’ radius.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020:
FOR HEARINGThere are 14.5 mitigation trees required, given the number of trees proposed for removal. Per LUC 3.2.1 (F) “Tree Preservation and Mitigation,” mitigation trees should meet
Tree Planting Standards set forth in the Land Use Code. One of these standards requires that canopy shade trees constitute at least fifty (50) percent of all tree plantings (LUC 3.2.1
(D.1)). Currently, only two of the proposed trees are shade trees. One of the main goals of mitigation trees is to replace loss of canopy due to development, both on the development
site as well as in the greater urban forest. Given their relative height and canopy spread, ornamental trees and conifers do not maximize canopy cover or mitigate canopy loss to its
full extent. Similarly, they also provide far fewer benefits compared to canopy shade trees. When it is not possible to meet mitigation requirements on site, LUC 3.2.1 (F) provides the
following options: 1.To the extent feasible, replacement trees should be planted on the development site. RMS Response: The maximum number of trees that can be on site has been placed
on site. Due to the narrow lot and existing and proposed utilities the site presents a hardship for accommodating all of the required mitigation trees.2.When it is not reasonably feasible
to plant mitigation trees on the development site, replacement trees should be planted within one half mile of the development site. RMS Response: Emails correspondence with the property
owner on the eastis submitted. Ultimately the owner chose not to have any trees on her property as she was concerned about being able to maintain them long term. Owner explored other
properties of theirs, but they were all over ½ mile away.3.If no locations can be identified within half mile of the development site, the applicant can choose to submit a paymentinlieu
to the City of Fort Collins Forestry division to be used to plant replacement trees as close to the site as possible. Please coordinate with forestry for options 2 &3.RMS Response: LA
will coordinate with Forestry on option 3. A note has been indicated on TR101 that the trees will be covered with this option at $450/tree.Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated:
12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR HEARINGThe planting space along the west side of the property out back is fairly narrow (<5’). Please consider switching the locations of the Kentucky coffeetree
with the pear that’s on the east side of the property.RMS Response: Due to the proximity to the building it is not desired to have a large shade trees directly adjacent to the building.
Tree is also a canopy tree that is required for parking and to increase overall tree canopy needs.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR HEARINGChanticleer
pears are overplanted in the City of Fort Collins. Generally, the soil quality in old town is better and a wider range of species tends to do well in this area. Please consider substituting
the pears with another ornamental species of similar size (i.e. Japanese tree lilacs, Canada chokecherry tree etc.)RMS Response: Canada chokecherry has been substituted.Department:
PFAContact: Jim Lynxwiler, 9704162869, jlynxwiler@poudrefire.orgTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: INFORMATION OCCUPANCY GROUP
CLASSIFICATIONThe following comments relate to Group R2 occupancies as acknowledged by the applicant. Other requirements may apply should the project be otherwise classified (eg. R3).ALM2s
Response: Yes, the project will be considered a R-2 multi-family apartment building per code.Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFire Department Connections (FDC) shall be installed in accordance with NFPA standards. Fire department connections shall be located on the street side of
buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department vehicle access. > The location of the fire riser room is not an issue; however, the FDC
is required to be located on the north side/Magnolia side of the building.ALM2s Response: The fire riser room has been relocated to the north side of the building along with the FDC.Comment
Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR HEARING FIRE HYDRANT PLACEMENTHydrant placement shall be along an approved path of vehicle travel and PFA does not
typically plan for emergency access from a residential alley. The proposed fire hydrant location in the alley on the south side of the property would not be approved by the fire marshal.
> The optimal code compliant location would be on the corner of Magnolia and Peterson so as to be immediately accessible to the FDC location for this project. > As an alternative,
a hydrant located on the corner of Peterson and the alley may be acceptable; however, the approved path exceeds 300 feet to the front of property and would require approval of the fire
marshal. > An alternative method may be to offset the lack of hydrant by upgrading the fire sprinkler system from a 13R to a full NFPA 13 system. Alternative methods would also require
fire marshal approval.Highland Response:The hydrant has been removed from the alleyway and will be included as part of the new waterline in Magnolia.Comment Number: 4 Comment
Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL FIRE ALARM AND DETECTION SYSTEMSFire alarm systems and smoke detection shall be installed in Group R2 occupancies as required
by IFC Section 907.2.9.1 and 907.2.9.3.ALM2s Response: Thank you for this comment and a fire alarm system will be installed per this code provision.Comment Number: 5 Comment
Originated: 12/01/202012/01/2020: INFORMATION KEY BOXES REQUIRED > For planning purposes, be aware that Poudre Fire Authority requires at least one key box ("Knox Box") to be mounted
in an approved, exterior location on every new or existing building equipped with a required fire sprinkler or fire alarm system. Location TBD at time of permit.ALM2s Response: A knock
box located will be determined prior to permit.Department: Environmental PlanningContact: Kelly Smith, , ksmith@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated:
11/21/202011/21/2020: no commentsRMS Response: Thank you.Department: Technical ServicesContact: Jeff County, 9702216588, jcounty@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 11/25/202011/25/2020: INFORMATION ONLY:Unless required during PDP, a complete review of all plans will be done at FDP.RMS Response: Thank you.Department:
Internal ServicesContact: Russell Hovland, 9704162341, rhovland@fcgov.comTopic: Building Insp Plan ReviewComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/30/202011/30/2020:
Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are:2018 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments2018 International Existing Building Code
(IEBC) with local amendments2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments2018 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments2018 International Fuel
Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments2018 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments2018 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado2020
National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of ColoradoCopies of current City of Fort Collins code amendments can be found at fcgov.com/building.Accessibility: State Law CRS
95 & ICC/ANSI A117.12017.Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF.Frost Depth: 30 inches.Wind Loads: Risk Category II (most structures):· 140mph (Ultimate) exposure B
or· Front Range Gust Map published by The Structural Engineer's Association of Seismic Design: Category B.Climate Zone: Zone 5Energy Code: · Multifamily and Condominiums 3 stories
max: 2018 IECC residential chapter.· Commercial and Multifamily 4 stories and taller: 2018 IECC commercial chapter. ALM2s Response: Thank you for provided this information. INFORMATIONAL
ITEMS: · 10% of all parking spaces must be EV ready (conduit in place)ALM2s Response: Thank you for provided this information. EV parking will be provided.· This building is located
within 250ft of a 4-lane road or 1000 ft of an active railway, must provide exterior composite sound transmission of 39 STC min.ALM2s Response: Thank you for provided this information
and an exterior composite sound transmission will be provided.· R2 occupancies must provide 10ft setback from property line and 20 feet between other buildings or provide fire rated
walls and openings per chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC.ALM2s Response: The project will provide a 1-hour rated exterior wall construction and have limited unprotected openings as allowed
per code on the west side of the project since it is less than 10’ but greater than 5’ from the west property line.· City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2018 IBC require a full NFPA13
sprinkler system in multifamily units with an exception to allow NFPA 13R systems in buildings with no more than 6 dwelling units (or no more than 12 dwelling units where the building
is divided by a 2-hour fire barrier with no more than 6 dwelling units on each side).ALM2s Response: Since this project has four total units, it will have a NFPA 13R sprinkler system.·
Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of firesprinkler. All egress windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24”.ALM2s Response: Upper-level window
sills are 24” or taller.· Prescriptive energy compliance with increased insulation values is required for buildings using electric heat.ALM2s Response: This building will not be using
electrical heat.· A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new multifamily structure.ALM2s Response: Comment Acknowledge.Building Permit PreSubmittal
Meeting: Please schedule a presubmittal meeting with Building Services for this project. PreSubmittal meetings assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the
new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed above. The proposed project should be in the early to middesign stage for this meeting
to be effective. Applicants of new projects should email rhovland@fcgov.com to schedule a presubmittal meeting.ALM2s Response: We will set up a pre-submittal meeting once we are at the
50% design development level.