HomeMy WebLinkAbout613 S MELDRUM ST CARRIAGE HOUSE - FDP200028 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSCommunity Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College AvenuePO Box 580Fort Collins, CO 80522970.221.6689970.224.6134 faxfcgov.com/developmentreviewApril 16, 2021Jeff Palomo
613 S Meldrum St.Fort Collins, CO RE: 613 S Meldrum St Carriage House, FDP200028, Round Number 2Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of 613 S Meldrum St Carriage House. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through
your Development Review Coordinator, Tenae Beane via phone at 9702246119 or via email at tbeane@fcgov.com. Comment Summary:Department: Development Review CoordinatorContact: Tenae
Beane, 9702246119, tbeane@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: INFORMATION:I will be your primary point of contact throughout
the development review and permitting process. If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the project reviewers, or need assistance throughout the process, please let me
know and I can assist you and your team. Please include me in all email correspondence with other reviewers and keep me informed of any phone conversations. Thank you!Response:Noted.
Thank you!Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: INFORMATION:As part of your resubmittal you will respond to the comments provided in this letter. This
letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a different font color. When replying to the
comment letter please be detailed in your responses, as all comments should be thoroughly addressed. Provide reference to specific project plans or explanations of why comments have
not been addressed, when applicable, avoiding responses like noted or acknowledged.Response:Noted. Thank you!Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: Please
follow the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming Standards found at https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic submittal requirements and file naming standards_v1_8
1 19.pdf?1566857888. File names should begin with the file type, followed by the project information, and round number. Example: UTILITY PLANS_PROJECT NAME_PDP_Rd2.pdfResponse:File
names have been updated to reflect submittal requirements.Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: INFORMATION:Resubmittals are accepted any day of the
week, with Wednesday at noon being the cutoff for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit your plans, please notify me advanced notice as possible.Response:We provided
email notice of our submittal at our earliest convenience last week (April 28).Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: INFORMATION:Temporary Service Changes
City of Fort Collins Development ReviewIn order to continue providing thorough reviews and giving every project the attention it deserves, the City of Fort Collins is implementing temporary
changes in how we serve our development customers. As you may be aware, we are experiencing staff shortages in a number of key departments, which has begun to impact the quality and
timeliness of our reviews. We recognize that development and construction play a critical role in our community’s vibrancy and economic recovery, and we have been exploring options for
mitigating impacts to our customers. As a result, we will be making some temporary service changes.Beginning Monday April 12 May 10th one additional week of review time will be added
to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks).Response:Noted.Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: The proposed development
project is subject to a Type 1 Review. The decision maker for your project will be an Administrative Hearing Officer at a public hearing. For the hearing, we will formally notify surrounding
property owners within 800 feet (excluding public rightofway and publicly owned open space). As your Development Review Coordinator, I will assist with preparing the mailing and coordinating
the hearing date with your team.Response:Noted. Thank you!Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR HEARING:All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed
and resolved prior to moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff would need to be in agreement the project is ready for Hearing approximately 3 5 weeks prior to the hearing.All
"For Final Approval / For Approval" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to moving forward with the final documents and recording of this project. I will provide a recording
checklist and process information when we are closer to this step.Response:Noted. Thank you!Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR HEARING:I am letting
you know that your quasi judicial item will be heard remotely and that there is the option to hold off until an in person hearing can be conducted.Any person or applicant seeking a quasi
judicial decision from City Council, a City board or commission or an administrative hearing officer under the City Code or the City's Land Use Code, shall be notified in writing or
by email of the intention to conduct a Quasi Judicial Hearing using Remote Technology. Such person or applicant shall be entitled to request that the Quasi Judicial Hearing be delayed
until such time as the Hearing can be conducted in person.Response:Noted. Thank you!Department: Planning ServicesContact: Clark Mapes, 9702216225, cmapes@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment
Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: It is the site plan that is typically designed by a landscape architect or architect with a whole approach and flow in
mind, to show walkways, retaining walls, paving, the front garden fence, an address marker facing the street sidewalk, and so on, in a clear illustration with clear labeling. At the
meeting, time permitting, let's look at the walkway routes as shown on the grading plan to clarify the flow, and then I will be asking if a designer can complete the site plan in this
regard.Response:Site plan updates have been shared with the architect and incorporated into the landscape plan.Department: Historic PreservationContact: Maren Bzdek, 9702216206,
mbzdek@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/22/202012/22/2020: Because the use of this property remains single family, and due to recent policy
clarifications regarding design review for single family use, no further historic review of this project is required.Response:Noted. Thank you!Department: Engineering Development ReviewContact:
Morgan Stroud, 9704164344, mstroud@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/22/202004/13/2021: For Approval:The plans reflect that the property
line appears to be about 4.5 feet behind the existing sidewalk and the fence is required to be on private property, which would require the fence to be either removed or relocated a
minimum of 4.5 feet from behind the sidewalk. The response indicated an existing mature tree is preventing the compliance of this requirement and references a 6 inch setback. Please
note that a six inch setback isn't considered an option, it is either the removal of the fence or placement on private property a minimum of 4.5 feet back from the current condition.
The plans would not be allowed to be approved reflect the fence to remaining, note #5 on the City fences/walls requirement linked here: https://www.fcgov.com/zoning/fences.Response:The
existing iron fence and gates are noted as to be removed on plans.12/22/2020: For Hearing:On the plans submitted, I did not see the existing fencing in the front shown on the plans.
Please show that the existing fence and gate for the driveway are 2 feet behind the sidewalk, or are proposed to be relocated to meet this requirement.Department: Traffic OperationContact:
Steve Gilchrist, 9702246175, sgilchrist@fcgov.comTopic: Traffic Impact StudyComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/07/202012/07/2020: A Traffic Impact Study was waived
previously with this project. No further traffic evaluation is required.Response:Noted. Thank you!Department: Stormwater EngineeringContact: Matt Simpson, (970)4162754, masimpson@fcgov.comTopic:
GeneralComment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/22/202004/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Items 'a' and 'f' have not been addressed in the drainage report.12/22/2020: FOR FINAL
APPROVAL:Drainage Report Comments:a.Please add a section or paragraph clearly explaining the site requirements for detention and water quality. Then explain how the site is meeting
these requirements.Response:The requested detention and water quality clarification has been added to the report.b.Provided a subbasin map for both pre and postproject conditions. c.You
need to perform drainage runoff calculations (“rational” method calcs). Please refer to chapter 5, section 3.0 of the Fort Collins Drainage Criteria Manual for more information.https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/buildersanddevelopers/developmentformsguidelinesregulations/stormwatercriteriad.Document
how much impervious area and flow are directed to the alley for pre and postproject conditions. If there would be more flow to the alley, then an alley drainage analysis will need to
be completed.e.Please show and calculate how the stormwater flows will be conveyed around the existing house to S. Meldrum Street. This should include a cross section for the existing
or proposed swale(s) and swale capacity (normal depth) calculation for each swale.f.Add the master plan subbasin imperviousness for this site. (I will provide.)Response:The requested
master plan subbasin imperviousness has been added to the report.g.Please see the redlined drainage report for more information.Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/22/202004/13/2021:
FOR INFORMATION ONLY:12/22/2020: FOR INFORMATION ONLY:A post project Lot Grading Certification, by a professional engineer, will need to be submitted and accepted before the Certificate
of Occupancy can be released. Utilities requires 2weeks to review and return any comments on the certification.Response:Noted. Thank you!Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated:
04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Drainage Report Comments:a.The drainage report is showing that there is currently no runoff from this site entering the alley west of the site.
This is surprising. Please confirm this is correct.Response:This is correct. The alley is higher than the existing lot. This appears to be due to the underground concrete drainage channel
crossing the alley west of the lot.b.The calculations show you are proposing to add 630sf of impervious area draining to the alley. It appears you are calculating pavers as 100% impervious.
For your information permeable pavers may count at 40% impervious – IF an infiltration cross section is provided below the pavers. Please confirm if you are intending to use pavers
to reduce imperviousness. (Please feel free to discuss with me if you have questions.)Response:There is 520 sf of proposed pavers in developed drainage basin A. This was adjusted to
208 sf (40%) for the overall site imperviousness.Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:If pavers are to be used for impervious area
reduction, a construction detail showing the infiltration cross section (base storage) needs to be provided.Response:Infiltration pavers, like the ones shown here, are proposed for this
site. Construction note has been updated to indicate “concrete infiltration pavers – Turf Block or approved equal.” Product data sheet has been included in the drainage memo.Comment
Number: 10 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Please show the location of the roof drains for the new building on the Utility Plan and the Site Plan.
Since the drainage plan shows the full building draining east, the drainage certification will need to confirm and document that these are draining perplan asconstructed.Response:Roof
drain locations have been added to the Utility and Site plans.Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The paved areas and permeable
paver areas on the Planning Site Plan and Utility Plan are different on the west and north sides of the new house. These need to match.Response:Planning Site Plan has been updated to
match Utility Plans.Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Comments on proposed retaining walls:a.Can the proposed retaining walls
be constructed without affecting the existing trees along the north property line?Response:Retaining walls have been moved further from the northern property line and the flowline is
offset from the wall.b.Can the retaining walls be constructed near the property lines without encroaching onto, or using the adjacent property for construction?Response:Retaining walls
have been moved further from the southern property line. The existing fence line does not follow the property line.Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021:
FOR FINAL APPROVAL:See redlines of drainage report, utility plans, and site/ landscape plans.Response:Redlines have been addressed within drainage report and utility plans. Composite
runoff coefficient calculations have not been adjusted as requested in the redlines. It is my understanding the runoff coefficients already consider the surface type when solving for
the composite runoff coefficient; therefore, areas do not require to be reduced further. Overall change in site impervious calculations utilize the percent impervious numbers shown in
Table 4.1-3.Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 04/14/202104/14/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:**You will need to confirm the direction flows in the alley drain from this site.
The inlet on the alley, south of the site, discharges in the Arthur Ditch. Any increase of flows into this ditch (via the inlet), will need an agreement with the ditch company. Otherwise
simply confirm in the drainage report that this site is not adding any runoff to the Arthur Ditch inletResponse:The alley is relatively flat at the high point adjacent to the site. In
an abundance of caution, a timber wall is proposed along the alley and proposed site grading will push stormwater flows to the north, ensuring no additional runoff towards the Arthur
Ditch inlet.Department: WaterWastewater EngineeringContact: Matt Simpson, (970)4162754, masimpson@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/22/202004/13/2021:
FOR FINAL APPROVAL UPDATED:The sewer service extension is very shallow, with about 2feet of min cover and may be susceptible to freezing. The standard is 4ft minimum bury depth.
To meet criteria, a new sewer service at a deeper depth may need to be constructed/ reconstructed from the sewer main. Please discuss with your engineer and propose a solution that
you would like to implement.Response:This is a private sewer service, outside of City right-of-way. Within the City’s Development Construction Standards (2017), I was unable to locate
a requirement for 4 ft minimum bury. The proposed sewer service shall be installed at the minimum 2% slope and buried at least two feet below grade. Based on previous conversations with
local builders, this depth has not resulted in freezing of sewer service lines. Also, the proposed sewer service will be underneath a non-traffic loading area.12/22/2020: FOR FINAL
APPROVAL: Show the invert elevations and pipe slope on the sewer service.Response:Noted and Done. Thank you!Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/22/202004/13/2021: FOR
FINAL APPROVAL: I was not able to find these notes on the Landscape Plans, if I have missed them, please show me; if not, please add to the Landscape Plans.Response:Noted and Done. Thank
you!12/22/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Include the following note on the Landscape Plans:THE FOLLOWING SEPARATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN TREES/SHRUBS AND UTILITIES:40 FEET BETWEEN
CANOPY TREES AND STREET LIGHTS15 FEET BETWEEN ORNAMENTAL TREES AND STREETLIGHTS10 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER MAIN LINES6 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC
WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES.4 FEET BETWEEN SHRUBS AND PUBLIC WATER AND SANITARY AND STORM SEWER LINES4 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND GAS LINESComment Number: 7 Comment
Originated: 12/22/202004/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL: See the attached redline comments on the utility plans for more information.Response:Redlines have been addressed as shown on
utility plans.Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/23/202004/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL UPDATED:The Covenant Agreement should be for both water and sewer services, unless
a new service is run from the water main.Response:A new water service is proposed to be run from the water main.12/23/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:To extend the water and sewer service
to the carriage house, Utilities requires that a covenant agreement is signed and recorded for the property such that the property cannot be subdivided in the future. I have included
a template agreement with the redlines.Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:The submitted water service configuration is not what
I expected based on previous conversations. I was expecting a new water service connecting directly to the City water main. To proceed with the development of the Utility Plan, here
are 3 options that could work under the Wastewater criteria: a.Configure as a standard "carriage house" with both buildings connected to one water meter and service line. Note, our
records show the water meter is inside your basement, the water component in the tree lawn is a curb stop (shut of valve). In this configuration the carriage house waterline connects
to water service on customer side of water meter. As an option the water meter could be relocated to the front yard. (1 water meter, 1 curb stop in this scenario.) This scenario will
require a water meter and service sizing memo to confirm that one ¾ inch water service and meter can support this many fixtures and appliances.b.Configure as 2 “single family” water
services connected in the “goal post” configuration with a “Tee” or “Wye” on the existing ¾inch water service. This would require a new ¾inch meter on the carriage house service and
a secondary curb stop on each water service (2 water meters, 3 curbstops total). See redlines and standard water detail 12A. This scenario appears to be what you are aiming for on
your plans. Please see my redlines for adjustments you will need to make under this scenario.c.Tap a new water service from the water main. This may be a ¾inch or 1inch service. With
corresponding meter and curb stop.Response:A new 1” water service with meter and curb stop is proposed for the carriage house domestic and fire flow demands.Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Add standard water details 11, 12A, and 15 to the plans. They may be found here:https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/buildersanddevelopers/developmentformsguidelinesregulations/
https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?scope=doctype&dn=Utilities&dt=DETAIL+DRAWINGS&vid=189&q=water+stormwater+wastewater&cmd=searchResponse:Water details 11 and 15 have been added to the plans
on a second sheet.Department: PFAContact: Jim Lynxwiler, 9704162869, jlynxwiler@poudrefire.orgTopic: GeneralComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/21/202012/21/2020:
FIRE APPARATUS ACCESSFire access is required to within 150 feet of all exterior portions of any building, or facility ground floor as measured by an approved route around the perimeter.
> Fire access to the proposed structure, as measured from Meldrum Street exceeds the 150 foot allowable perimeter measurement. > Fire access is not typically measured from a residential
alley unless the alley meets minimum fire lane specifications and is named. > In order to meet minimum requirements either, (1) a fire lane shall be constructed on the property, (2)
the alley is named and brought up to minimum standards throughout, or (3) the carriage house is equipped with a residential fire sprinkler system.Response:PFA has recommended solution
of additional sprinkler heads in the garage, 1hr fire wall with 5/8” type X gypsumand monitoring for early alert. I accept solution and I will comply. Thank you!Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/21/202012/21/2020: FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS 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: > Fire lanes established on private property shall be dedicated
by plat or separate document as an Emergency Access Easement. > Maintain the required 20-foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance. > Be designed as a flat,
hard, allweather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. > The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside.
> Fire lane to be identified by red curb and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. > Fire lane sign locations or red curbing should be labeled and detailed on final
plans. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs.Response:N/A. Thank you!Contact: Marcus Glasgow,
9704162869, marcus.glasgow@poudrefire.orgTopic: GeneralComment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: FIRE APPARATUS ACCESSThe addition of an automatic sprinkler
system allows us to extend perimeter access to 200 feet. The carriage house is approximately 60 feet beyond the extended perimeter access. The building would either need to be closer
to Meldrum to be within 200 foot perimeter access or the alley must be improved and named to be used as access.Response:Solution to add additional sprinkler heads in the garage, 1hr
5/8” type X gypsum on garage wall and monitoring for early alert. Fire Marshall has approved site design as shown.Department: Light And PowerContact: Rob Irish, 9702246167, rirish@fcgov.comTopic:
GeneralComment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/17/202003/23/2021: UPDATED: Please refer to diagram ESS1 Underground Service Meter Installation. The proposed location for
the two meters shown does not meet the 2 foot minimum working clearance from the proposed window. Please make adjustments or relocate the meters farther back on the building. 12/17/2020:
Final Approval: This project will need to comply with our electric metering standards. Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. 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.pdfResponse:One
proposed meter has been removed from carriage house.Department: Environmental PlanningContact: Scott Benton, (970)4164290, sbenton@fcgov.comTopic: GeneralComment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/13/202104/13/2021: No further comments.Response:Noted. Thank you!Department: Building ServicesContact: Russell Hovland, 9704162341, rhovland@fcgov.comTopic:
Building Insp Plan ReviewComment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/18/202012/18/2020: This project appears to be creating a duplex with 2 dwellings, please clarify the intent
here.If 2 dwellings the units must be separated by a 1hour wall and a p2904 fire sprinkler system is required.If 1 dwelling and 1 accessory, the 1hour separation wall is required. The
accessory space cannot be used as a 2nd dwelling.Response:Units will be separated with a 1-hour wall (5/8” type X gypsum) and sprinkler system will be installed. Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 12/18/202012/18/2020: Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are:2018 International Residential Code (IRC) 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.Please read the residential permit application submittal checklist for complete requirements.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: 2018 IRC chapter 11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: · 5ft setback required from property line or provide fire rated
walls & openings for nonfire sprinkled houses per chap 3 of the IRC. 3ft setback is required for fire sprinkled houses.· Bedroom egress windows (emergency escape openings) required in
all bedrooms.· Prescriptive energy compliance with increased insulation values is required for buildings using electric heat.Response:Noted. Thank you!Department: Technical ServicesContact:
Jeff County, 9702216588, jcounty@fcgov.comTopic: Site PlanComment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/21/202004/13/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Please revise the legal description
as marked. See redlines.Response:Legal description within Declaration of Covenants and Agreement has been revised as marked on the redlines.12/21/2020: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:Please add
a legal description for the project property to sheet CVR.Response:Noted and Done. Thank you!