HomeMy WebLinkAboutBUCKING HORSE PARK - BDR210011 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 4 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
1
Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview
April 01, 2022
Jennifer Torrey
City of FC Park Planning
215 N Mason St
Fort Collins, CO 80522
RE: Bucking Horse Park, BDR210011, Round Number 3
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing
agencies for your submittal of Bucking Horse Park. 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 970-224-6119 or via email
at tbeane@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Development Review Coordinator
Contact: Tenae Beane, 970-224-6119, tbeane@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: 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: Thank you.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: 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
2
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: Responses will be descriptive to the extent feasible.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
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.pdf
File type acronyms maybe appropriate to avoid extremely long file names.
Example: TIS for Traffic Impact Study, ECS for Ecological Characterization
Study.
*Please disregard any references to paper copies, flash drives, or CDs.
RESPONSE: File name will follow the example provided.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
All plans should be saved as optimized/flattened PDFs to reduce file size and
remove layers.
Per the Electronic Submittal Requirements AutoCAD SHX attributes need to be
removed from the PDF’s.
AutoCAD turns drawing text into comments that appear in the PDF plan set,
and these must be removed prior to submittal as they can cause issues with the
PDF file. The default setting is "1" ("on") in AutoCAD. To change the setting
and remove this feature, type "EPDFSHX" in the command line and enter "0".
Read this article at Autodesk.com for more tips on this topic:
https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarti
cles/sfdcarticles/Drawing-text-appears-as-Comments-in-a-PDF-created-by-Aut
oCAD.html
RESPONSE: Files will be saved in accordance with the standard stated above.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being
the cut-off for routing the same week. When you are ready to resubmit your
plans, please notify me with as much advanced notice as possible.
RESPONSE: The resubmittal will be made by end of day on Tuesday, April 5.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
Temporary Service Changes City- of Fort Collins Development Review
In order to continue providing thorough reviews and giving every project the
attention it deserves, the City of Fort Collins is implementing temporary
3
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 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 May 10, 2021, one additional week of review time will be
added to all 1st and 2nd round submittals (increase from 3 weeks to 4 weeks).
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the
expiration of your project.
LUC 2.211 Lapse, Rounds of Review: Applicants, within one hundred eighty
(180) days of receipt of written comments and notice to respond from the City
on any submittal (or subsequent revision to a submittal) of an application for
approval of a development plan, shall file such additional or revised submittal
documents as are necessary to address such comments from the City. If the
additional submittal information or revised submittal is not filed within said
period of time, the development application shall automatically lapse and
become null and void.
RESPONSE: Resubmittal will be made within the required time frame.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: LUC 2.17 CITY- PROJECTS
Development projects for which the City is the applicant shall be processed in
the manner described in this Land Use Code, as applicable, but shall be
subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission in all instances,
despite the fact that certain uses would otherwise have been subject to
administrative review.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: FOR FINAL APPROVAL:
All "For Final Approval / For Approval" comments need to be addressed and
resolved prior to moving forward with scheduling the hearing. Final documents
and recording can occur once all comments are resolved, the hearing has
occurred and there is an approval. I will provide a recording checklist and
process information when we are closer to this step.
RESPONSE: We will continue to work with staff to resolve “For Approval” comments so that the project can proceed to
the April 21 P&Z Hearing.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Sophie Buckingham, sbuckingham@fcgov.com
Topic: General
4
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 02/17/2022
03/29/2022: INFORMATION ONLY:
Thank you for showing the railroad right-of-way. When tying into existing grades
at the edge of railroad ROW, please take care not to extend any grading,
stockpiling, or equipment staging into the railroad ROW unless you have
received permission from the railroad.
02/17/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Please label the edge of the railroad right-of-way on the utility plans to show that
grading will not extend onto railroad property. - RESPONSE: Silt Fence is called out to be installed on the outside of the railroad ROW. Therefore, no construction
activities should be taking place within the railroad property. RR ROW is also called out on the Utility plans.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/29/2022
03/29/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
The drainage alignments will need to be finalized for project approval. This does
not need to be completed prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission
hearing, but please share the legal descriptions and exhibits as soon as they
are available. They will also need to be included in the submittal package for
each round moving forward.
RESPONSE: The legal descriptions and exhibits will be shared as soon as they are available.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/29/2022
03/29/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
After the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, we will finalize Temporary
Construction Easements based on property ownership.
RESPONSE: We will work with staff to finalize the TCE for off-site construction work.
Department: Floodplain
Contact: Claudia Quezada, (970)416-2494, cquezada@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/03/2021
12/03/2021: Information only:
A portion of this property is currently located in the FEMA-Regulated, 500-year
Poudre River floodplain and must comply with the safety regulations of Chapter
10 of City Municipal Code.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 12/03/2021
12/03/2021: Information only:
FEMA is remapping the Poudre River, the project is called RiskMAP, and we
are expecting new regulatory mapping in the next 1-2 years. Any future
development will be subject to the floodplain map and regulations effective at
that time. Property owners near the river need to be aware that the floodplain
may be remapped and may change on their property. Preliminary maps show
this parcel out of the floodplain.
RESPONSE: Thank you for this information.
Department: Erosion Control
5
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 03/28/2022
03/28/2022: For Final:
The plan provided on this project was reviewed against the City Criteria
(FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3). No sequence sheets were provided. Please
ensure that the Erosion Control Plans provided include a individual sequence
sheets in accordance with (FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.3.2).. Please review the
provided comments and redlines and address them accordingly. Thank you for
providing responses it was tremendously helpful in making a quick review of the
changes. Only comment that was not addressed on the plans was the
Sequence Chart vs. Sequence Sheets. This project will need to provide two
additional sequence sheet per FCDCM 6.1.3.2 that were not provided this round.
RESPONSE: Initial, Interim, and Final Erosion Control sheets have been created and added to the plan set following the
FCSCM guidelines.
For Final:
The report provided on this project was reviewed against the City Criteria
(FCDCM Ch 2 Section 6.1.4). Resolved: Upon review the erosion control
report, it was found meeting the City Criteria.
RESPONSE: Thank you.
Information:
Based upon the updated materials and information provided since the last
review comments, we have recalculated an Erosion Control Inspection fee
of $1301.44 and a Stormwater LID/WQ Inspections fee of $315. A copy of the
calculation spreadsheet will be provided. The fee will need to be provided at the
time of erosion control escrow.
RESPONSE: Thank you for providing this information.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
04/01/2022: UPDATE - The approach to remove the existing culvert and berm
would address this issue. I will need to re-review the drainage report to resolve
the comment.
RESPONSE: Matt, you’re correct that it did remove this drainage channel issue. I have added several paragraphs
throughout the updated narrative talking about this. Please just see the updated report.
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED:
g. Channel Freeboard – The hydraulic calculations for the proposed channel
modifications show 0.05-ft of freeboard. The design should be modified to
provide 1-foot of freeboard per FCSCM requirements. I have seen your
response, stating that you think this is impossible, however this is standard
drainage criteria. It may be helpful to understand what the previous channel
design provided for flow depth and freeboard.
RESPONSE: No longer an issue with removal of berm and 36” culvert.
6
02/21/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Regarding the modifications to the offsite drainage channel, northeast of the
site, I have the following concerns:
a. This will require property owner permission to make these changes
b. The water surface impact of the channel encroachment and bridge
encroachment will need to be documented. The drainage report will need to
confirm that there will be no impacts to adjacent properties. ** This will most
likely require a backwater model. Please discuss further with me.**
c. Based on the documentation provided in the drainage report, this channel
conveys 341-cfs (Q100). Swales larger than 100-cfs do not need to follow the
133% freeboard requirement, rather they must provide 1-ft of freeboard.
d. How will the proposed bridge be hydraulically designed? Will the bridge low
chord be above the 100-yr WSEL?
e. What scour protection will be needed to protect the bridge abutments?
f. The drainage report will need a section discussing the modifications to this
drainage channel, the impacts, and any necessary mitigation.
RESPONSE:
a. Permission has been granted but we are still working through final agreement documentation.;
b. Backwater model not provided with Park plans but will be reanalyzed with the trail project. A memo along with
associated calculations will be supplied with the trail project highlighting the impacts of the pedestrian crossings. I will
continue to work offline with you regarding these changes. – Blaine Mathisen;
c. 1’ of freeboard is provided now because the existing 36” culvert and berm have been removed;
d. I don’t know yet. Will be analyzed with trail project;
e. Scour protection will be specified with trail project;
f. Report has been updated to discuss all the above concerns.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED:
Please address the following comments on the Drainage Report
d. Add Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs) documents to the appendix.
These are maintenance requirements for the storm drain system. I have
provided these with the redlines.
e. Update LID variance justification and LID Map (per comment 18 below)
f. Future bridge crossing (follow up from comment 11 d) – any future
modifications to this drainage channel will require Stormwater department
approval, per standard development requirements in the Sidehill DA. Please
note this in the drainage report.
RESPONSE:
d. SOPs have been added to Appendix F;
e. Variance letter has been revamped;
f. We are not doing the bridge with this project and a new paragraph in the drainage report talks about this as well as the
removal of the existing berm and 36” culvert. See section I.B.5 of the updated drainage report.
02/21/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Please address the following comments on the Drainage Report:
a. In the drainage report body, please clearly present the onsite impervious
area and compare against the assumed imperviousness from the subdivision
7
drainage design (see redlines for more details).
b. Please have a section in the drainage report discussing the offsite channel
work and bridge.
c. Add a section discussing the design of the vegetated buffers for LID credit.
This should explain how these buffers are meeting the FCSCM requirements for
this BMP – and explain if you are intending to apply for a variance to any
specific criteria.
RESPONSE:
a. Report has been revamped. I also compiled summaries of all the old SWMM inputs for Sidehill, Bucking Horse 1
and 2 in the SWMM Appendix. This can be found in the SWMM Appendix;
b. Narrative includes some discussion on this topic;
c. See updated LID section. It discusses LID variance as well as what is being proposed.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 02/22/2022
04/01/2022: UPDATED - The LOI from the HOA is acceptable. Please note
the requirements for final approval.
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED:
*Regarding the property owner permissions – For Planning and Zoning
Hearing, the provided ‘Letter of Intent’ from the HOA is acceptable, however for
Final Approval you will need to provide an executed agreement (such as a
Temporary Construction Easement) - or the property transfer will need to have
occurred first.
*Regarding the proposed HOA property transfer – please clarify and confirm
which portions of the HOA parcel(s) are intended to be transferred to the City.
Based on the HOA letter of intent, they are proposing the entire detention pond
and channel parcel. There will need to be discussion and agreement about
which City departments are going to “own” and maintain these parcels.
RESPONSE: HOA plans on transferring the drainage channel and park parcel. The pond will remain a part of Bucking
Horse.
02/22/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
The offsite grading and trail work, in the stormwater channel north of the site, will
require at minimum a temporary construction easement from the property
owner. A permanent access easement may be needed for the trail (please
coordinate this with Engineering, Trails Planning, and Parks Review).
Typically a "Letter of Intent" is provided before PnZ Hearing and the executed
easements and agreements with the Final Approval of the development plan.
RESPONSE: A temporary construction easement exhibit has been prepared for offsite grading and trail work and is
included in the re-submittal.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Please see redlines of UT Plans, LS Plans and Drainage Report. These were
provided on 3/18 over email.
RESPONSE: UT plans have been updated. There are only two redlines that I did not address but provided reasoning in
redline responses. They pertain to having specs in our detail sheets and adding the existing cross section of the drainage
channel. Please see redline responses for additional clarification.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
04/01/2022: UPDATE - I agree with the LID variance approach in the revised
variance memo. Please include with the next submittal.
8
RESPONSE: Variance included with submittal
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Informal Grassed Buffer and LID Variance (follow up on Comment 6):
- The Drainage Report and LID Variance Letter will need to be revised to show
that the site is meeting the 50% LID requirement. The submitted variance is
proposing to provide 27% LID. The variance approach that we discussed was
to meet the 50% requirement through an alternative approach that is equal to or
better than meeting the standard FCSCM LID requirements – not to lower the
required amount.
We discussed that this approach would include a) a rain garden per criteria to
treat a denser area of the site, and b) informal grassed buffers to meet the
remainder of the 50% treatment requirement.
The drainage report and variance request will need to be revised to explain how
the site is meeting the 50% requirement by alternative methods and how the
alternative LID approach is equal to or better than meeting the LID requirements
by critieria standards.
- Please fill out and submit the included Stormwater Variance form.
- The informal grassed buffer areas need to be delineated on the LID exhibit,
shown on the Utility Plans, and tabulated to show 50% (minimum) LID treatment.
- Please see the attached experts from the Trailhead Park Drainage Report as
an example. See redlines for more information.
RESPONSE: Variance Form included; The grass buffers are shown on the drainage sheet in the utility plans but the
information and calculations are a part of the LID exhibit; LID Exhibit revamped. Followed Trailhead Park (aka Traverse
Park) Drainage Report example.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Rain Garden Comments (follow up on Comment 6):
- Please see redlines of Utility Plans and Landscape Plans for design
comments on the rain gardens.
- The Rain Garden will require an easement called a “drainage alignment” for
City owned properties. This will need to be dedicated and recorded with the
approval of this project.
RESPONSE: Redlines have been addressed; Redlines have been addressed and drainage alignment has been included
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Please see redlines of the Landscape plan for comments including:
a) Minimum separation from storm drain pipes to trees and shrubs needs to be
provided. It appears some trees and shrubs will need to be adjusted to provide
10-ft min. clearance (trees) or 4-ft min clearance (shrubs) to storm lines.
b) Please confirm the vegetation to be planted in the rain garden.
RESPONSE:
a. My notes from our meeting on March 29 indicate that offsets from private utilities is not required. However, trees
and shrubs marked up in the redline plans have been adjusted accordingly for both the existing public storm
pipe from Miles House Avenue to the drainage channel as well as for the private storm line to the rain garden and
the private storm line connection from the park into the drainage channel. Written responses have been added to
9
the redline landscape plans and included in the re-submittal.
b. There are 2 native turf seed mixes proposed within the rain garden area: the short grass prairie mix (native turf
type 1) and the wet meadow mix (native turf type 2). See sheet LP001 for the proposed seed mixes. The proposed
seed mixes have been approved by Parks, Park Planning & Development, Natural Areas and Environmental
Planning. See sheet LP101 for the tree, turf and sod planting plan. Hatch patterns for turf types are paired with
labeling that clearly identifies which seed mix is to be applied to each area. Written responses have been added
to the redline landscape plans and included in the re-submittal.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
On the site plan show and label the existing storm drain on the east side of the
site. Show and label the rain garden.
RESPONSE: The storm lines are shown on the site and landscape plans. We don’t typically add labels outside of the
civil plans for underground storm lines. The standard line type used is commonly recognized as a storm line. However,
the existing storm line type is different and we have added a label on the site plan to more clearly identify this line. The
rain garden is shown and is labeled on the submitted plans.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Please submit the updated SWMM model for Bucking Horse/ Side Hill.
RESPONSE: SWMM model has been updated. SWMM section in the report is a complete revamp and should help shed
light on the previous designs.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Drainage easements ("alignments") will need to be dedicated for:
- Expansion of the offsite drainage channel onto the northeast side of the park
site. All areas within the 100-yr water surface will need to be in a drainage
easement/ alignment.
- The rain garden.
- The existing 36-inch public storm drain, on the northwest side of the site will
need a 30-ft drainage easement (15-feet each side of pipe on your property).
*Note - the City calls these “alignments” instead of easements for City owned
property. Contact City Engineering and Survey to discuss how these are
dedicated.
RESPONSE: Drainage alignments added except for the 100-yr WSEL in the drainage channel because it is no longer an
issue because no more backwater conditions exist.
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Matt Simpson, (970)416-2754, masimpson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 02/21/2022
03/18/2022: FOR APPROVAL – UPDATED:
The submitted water service sizing calculation reports a peak demand of 64
gpm, however the memo requests a ¾-inch water meter which can only handle
up to 30 gpm. We internally discussed the buffer tank approach and decided
that this will not be accepted. The water meter and service need to be sized
10
based on the calculated peak demand flow. As a suggestion, you could
consider revising the fixture pressure down (from 80 psi to maybe 50psi) by
using a PRV to lower the peak demand. If this rate can be reduced to 50 gpm a
1-inch meter would be an option.
** I suggest that you contact Utility Fees ( UtilityFees@fcgov.com) to get an
estimate of water development fees for each situation. This may help with
decision making.
02/21/2022: FOR APPROVAL:
Please provide a water service sizing calculation for the domestic water
service. This should follow the AWWA M22 method.
RESPONSE: AWWA M22 method sizing has been provided with the Domestic Water Tank design, however after
eliminating the tank, the design is based on the International Plumbing Code. This document, titled “1 inch service size
explanation” has been provided with the submittal to the department of Park Planning and Development. The decision to
size by the code requirements eliminates consideration of pressure from the calculation, as the code requirements are
based solely on demand volume (GPM) of the fixtures and are unaffected by the high pressure in the area. The fixtures
themselves are pressure independent and are placed after a pressure reducing valve in order to ensure all are operating
within their manufacturer specified pressure range. Based on comments from the Department of Water and Wastewater
Engineering during the last submittal and the demand volume of the system, the 1” service is sufficient.
The project has committed to upsize the domestic water service from ¾" to 1”. A 1” water service explanation has been
provided with the re-submittal.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/18/2022
03/18/2022: FOR INFORMATION ONLY:
The static water pressure in this area should be near 120psi. The irrigation
plans are showing 75-psi. Please take this into account in your system design.
RESPONSE: Acknowledge.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-416-2772, tsiegmund@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
Light and Power has conduit stubbed to the south edge of the site that can be
extended to provide power to the park.
RESPONSE: Thank you for this information.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: 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 to discuss the preliminary estimate 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-investmen
t-development-fees
RESPONSE: Thank you for this information.
11
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
A commercial service information form (C 1 form) and a one line diagram for all
commercial meters will need to be completed and submitted to Light & Power
Engineering for review. A link to the C 1 form is below:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders and
developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations
RESPONSE: Thank you for this information.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 12/07/2021
12/07/2021: INFORMATION:
Please contact Tyler Siegmund with Light & Power Engineering if you have any
questions at 970.416.2772. Please reference our policies, construction
practices, development charge processes, electric service standards, and use
our fee estimator at:
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers
RESPONSE: Thank you for this information.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Scott Benton, (970)416-4290, sbenton@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/29/2022
03/29/2022: No further comments.
RESPONSE: Thank you.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Aaron Wagner, aawagner@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 02/02/2022
02/02/2022: FOR INFORMATION
The Parks Dept. is working offline with PP&D regarding Parks related issues.
RESPONSE: Thank you, we will continue to work collaboratively with Parks off-line.
Department: Building Services
Contact: Katy Hand, , khand@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Insp Plan Review
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 12/06/2021
12/06/2021: INFORMATIONAL:
Each detached structure requires a separate permit, this includes: play
structures, buildings, bike shelters, trellises, pergolas, shade structures,
fences/posts over 6ft tall.
RESPONSE: Understood.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 12/06/2021
12
12/06/2021: Each restroom requires an accessible stall. New Buildings need
to comply with 2017 ICC-A117.1 which means larger clear floor spaces and
turning radius to accommodate power assisted wheelchairs. Plan Restroom
building size accordingly.
RESPONSE: C&E … Thank you for this information, the permit submittal documents will comply with the code
specified.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 12/06/2021
12/06/2021: Please visit our website for current adopted codes, local
amendments, and submittal requirements. Note: 2021 Building Codes will be
adopted early 2022
https://www.fcgov.com/building/application.php
https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes.php
https://www.fcgov.com/building/energycode
RESPONSE: Thank you.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/29/2022
03/29/2022: INFORMATION ONLY:
We have no comments, but will need to see any future submittals.
RESPONSE: Thank you.
Department: Outside Agencies
Contact: Don Kapperman, Comcast, don_kapperman@comcast.com,
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 02/16/2022
02/16/2022: Comcast has no issues.
RESPONSE: Thank you.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/15/2021
11/15/2021: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building
permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section
3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation
requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com
RESPONSE: Irrigation plans are included in the re-submittal.