Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE MARK - FDP240013 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - Responses 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 August 30, 2024 Tenae Beane Ripley Design, Inc. 419 Canyon Ave, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: The Mark, FDP240013, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of The Mark. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through your Development Review Coordinator, Marissa Pomerleau via phone at (970) 416-8082 or via email at mpomerleau@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Development Review Coordinator Contact: Marissa Pomerleau mpomerleau@fcgov.com (970) 416-8082 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/19/2024: 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! Ripley Design Response: Thank you, Marissa! Comment Number: 2 08/19/2024: SUBMITTAL: As part of any resubmittal, a response to the comments provided in this letter and a response to plan markups is required. The final letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this letter to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a different font color. Please use the markups 2 to insert responses to each comment on plans. Please do not flatten markup responses. Provide a detailed response for any comment asking a question or requiring an action. Any comment requesting a response or requiring action by you with a response of noted, acknowledged etc. will be considered not addressed. You will need to provide references to specific project plans, pages, reports, or explanations of why comments have not been addressed [when applicable]. Ripley Design Response: Our team has responded to all comments in this letter. Comment Number: 3 08/19/2024: SUBMITTAL: Correct file naming is required as part of a complete resubmittal. Please follow the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming Standards found here: https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic-submittal-requiremen ts-and-file-naming-standards_v1_8-1-19.pdf?1703783275 File names should have the corresponding number, followed by the file type prefix, project information, and round number. For example: 1_SITE PLAN_Project Name_FDP_Rd1. A list of numbers and prefixes for each file can be found at the link above. Ripley Design Response: File names comply with the naming requirements. Comment Number: 4 08/19/2024: SUBMITTAL: 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" (version 2016.1) or “PDFSHX (version 2017 and newer) in the command line and enter "0". Read this article at Autodesk.com for more 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 Mode3 Response: Acknowledged EPS Response: Acknowledged, CAD settings are set to match those outlined by this comment. RVI Planning Response: Acknowledged. We have updated our settings and printed flattened pdfs for the submission. Comment Number: 5 08/19/2024: SUBMITTAL: Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being the cut-off for routing the same week. When you are preparing to resubmit your plans, please notify me with an expected submittal date with as much advanced notice as possible. Ripley Design Response: Noted. Thank you! 3 Comment Number: 6 08/19/2024: INFORMATION: Please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the expiration of your project. Ripley Design Response: Noted. Thank you! Comment Number: 7 08/19/2024: INFORMATION: ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an additional fee of $3,000.00. Landmark Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 8 08/19/2024: NOTICE: A Development Review sign will be posted on the property. This sign will be posted through the final decision and appeal process. A request for the removal of signs will be made by your Development Review Coordinator at the appropriate time. Ripley Design Response: Understood, thank you! Comment Number: 9 08/19/2024: FOR HEARING: All "For Hearing" comments need to be addressed and resolved prior to moving forward with scheduling the Hearing. Staff will need to agree the project is ready for Hearing approximately 4 to 8 weeks prior to the hearing. Ripley Design Response: Understood. Thank you! Comment Number: 10 08/19/2024: FOR HEARING: 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 right-of-way 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. Ripley Design Response: Noted. Thanks. Comment Number: 11 08/19/2024: INFORMATION: According to LUC 2.211, the Term of Vested Right allows a maximum of three (3) years following the approval of a final plan or other site specific- development plan. During this period, the applicant is required to undertake, install, and complete all engineering improvements, including water, sewer, streets, curb, gutter, streetlights, fire hydrants, and storm drainage, in accordance with city codes, rules, and regulations. This timeframe constitutes the 'term of the vested property right.' Failure to complete the required engineering improvements within this term will result in 4 the forfeiture of the vested property right. In such cases, resubmission of all materials and reapproval will be necessary, following the requirements outlined in the Land Use Code. Ripley Design Response: Understood. Comment Number: 12 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: We received the Certification of Mineral Estate Owner Notification form today. Thank you for getting that submitted. Ripley Design Response: Appreciate the confirmation. Department: Planning Services Contact: Arlo Schumann aschumann@fcgov.com 970-221-6599 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Thank you for submitting the alternative compliance request for the lighting in the buffer area. Planning and Environmental Planning staff are in support of the alternative compliance. Is there any addition building lighting being proposed on the upper levels such at the courtyard or balconies? Any other building lighting will need to be taken into account. You may use balcony and courtyard spaces as additional hardscape area for calculating your lumen budget. Mode3 Response: There is (1) fixture on the balcony at the SE corner stack of apartments. There are (4) of these total, (1) per balcony. This is a wall sconce fixture that has been approved for "dark sky compliance" and only illuminates the immediate area on the private balcony and does not illuminate outside of the balcony SF area. Lamp source is not visible from grade. The fixture is KICHLER 11077BKT. This has a total of 400 lumens which is very low. Lighting would be dark sky compliant and not spill into the natural area. RVI Planning Response: . Lighting intent for the courtyard and amenity spaces will utilize low-voltage pathway lighting and swimming pool lighting that satisfies minimum code requirements. All fixtures shall be full -cutoff rated and dark sky compliant. Fixtures will be set back from the edge of the building to prevent light spilling over the edge of the building. Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: I'd like to discuss the trash collection plan in general. We may need to add some additional notes regarding the trash collection system. Additionally, since the previous plan was approved we now require that recycling be provided at a ratio of at least 50% of the trash capacity. This should be shown on the plans. Mode3 Response: In discussion with Arlo on 9/18, there are notes indicated on sheet A1.0 of the submittal to address this comment. Thank you Arlo! Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Thanks for providing the modification request for the building height. Staff is supportive of the modification request. 5 Ripley Design Response: Great, thanks Arlo! Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Tim Dinger tdinger@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/07/2024: FOR HEARING: Please address all redlines on the plans and variance requests. EPS Response: All redlines on plans and variance requests have been addressed. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Jim Bertolini jbertolini@fcgov.com 970-416-4250 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/13/2024: No Preservation Concerns - design remains compatible as determined during previous applicant's submission. LUC 5.8.1 requirements met. Ripley Design Response: Thanks, Jim! Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/25/2024: FOR NEXT ROUND OF REVIEW: In coordination with the developer and their traffic engineer, the Transportation Impact Study is expected to be submitted no later than the next round of review. Once accepted by the City, the final signed and stamped copy of the TIS will be required when submitting final recording documentation. Traffic Response: Acknowledged. The TIS is included with documents submitted for this round of review. Comment Number: 2 08/25/2024: FOR HEARING: We will continue coordination regarding the bike and pedestrian level of service and the possibility of a connection across the Sherwood Lateral. Subsequent meetings may be needed but an agreement will need to be finalized for Final Approval. Landmark Response: Per 9/11/24 meeting with City Staff, the developer will contribute $250k toward a bike and pedestrian cros sing across the Sherwood Lateral to be constructed by the City in the future. This will be detailed in the Development Agreement. Comment Number: 3 08/25/2024: FOR HEARING: It looks as thought the Grading Plan sheet (C3.0) has the most detailed signing for the site. I've added a couple redlines for calling out signs and question marks on a couple others. Please verify whether or not all the parking in the cul 6 de sac will need removed or not. Additional No Parking Fire Lane signs may be needed. EPS Response: We have verified the presence of any existing signs and removed them if they were no longer on site. A vehicle tracking analysis was run along Johnson Drive and it was determined parking cannot be allowed in the cul -de-sac if the firetrucks are to complete their turnaround without obstructions. Department: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion Control Contact: Andrew Crecca acrecca@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 08/19/2024: INFORMATION: This project is located within the City's MS4 boundaries and is subject to the erosion control requirements located in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Chapter 2, Section 6.0. A copy of those requirements can be found at www.fcgov.com/erosion . This project was evaluated based upon the submittal requirements of FCSCM. Based upon the provided materials we were able to determine a total disturbed area. Based upon the area of disturbance or this project is part of a larger common development, State permits for stormwater will be required should be pulled before Construction Activities begin. EPS Response: Acknowledged, thank you. State stormwater permits will be pulled prior to construction activities starting. Comment Number: 2 08/19/2024: FOR HEARING: Since last submittal under FDP190021 - Requirements for Erosion Control Submittals have been updated. Please insert a copy of the current "Standard Erosion Control Notes" with the Utility Plan as well as in the Erosion Control Plan in the SWMP. Besides updating the Erosion Control Notes all other Erosion Control Submittals are acceptable. The Standard Erosion Control Notes can be found in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual Chapter 6.1.3.4. EPS Response: Updated notes have been added to utility plans and SWMP report. Topic: Fees Comment Number: 3 08/19/2024: INFORMATION - FEES: The City Manager’s development review fee schedule under City Code 7.5 -2 was updated to include fees for Erosion Control and Stormwater Inspections. As of January 1st, 2021, these fees will be collected on all projects for such inspections. The Erosion Control fees are based on; the number of lots, the total site disturbance, the estimated number of years the project will be active. Based on the proposed site construction associated with this project we are assuming 1 lots, 2.56 acres of disturbance, 1.5 years from demo through build out of construction and an additional 2.00 years till full vegetative stabilization due to seeding. Which results in an Erosion Control Fee estimate of $1,508.40 . 7 Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the above-mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for you to review. Please respond to this comment with any changes to these assumed estimates and why, so that we may have a final fee estimate ready for this project. The fee will need to be provided at the time of erosion control escrow. The Stormwater Inspection Fees are based on the number of LID/WQ Features that are designed for on this project. Based on the plans we identified 0 number of porous pavers, 1 number of bioretention/level spreaders, 1 number of extended detention basins, and 0 number of underground treatments, results in an estimate of the Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee to be $ $565.00. Please note that as the plans and any subsequent review modifications of the above-mentioned values change the fees may need to be modified. I have provided a copy of the spreadsheet used to arrive at these estimates for you to review. Please respond to this comment with any changes to these assumed estimates and why, so that we may have a final fee estimate ready for this project. The fee will need to be provided at the time of erosion control escrow. Landmark Response: Acknowledged. No comments on the spreadsheet that was provided for the fees noted above. The Erosion Control Fee and Stormwater LID/WQ Inspection fee will be provided at the time of erosion control escrow. Department: Stormwater Engineering – Floodplain Contact: Kevin Meyer kmeyer@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: Please update all floodplain linework and references to the currently effective floodplain data. The currently effective data is from the "Spring Creek at Riverside and Edora Park LOMR" which became effective on July 24, 2024. Please include the new effective linework and cross-sections on the site plan, utility plan, floodplain exhibit, and drainage report. EPS Response: Updated floodplain linework was taken from FEMA website. Linework and cross sections were updated in the base files. Comment Number: 2 08/26/2024: FOR BUILDING PERMIT: An approved floodplain use permit and pre-construction elevation certificate and floodproofing certificate shall be approved prior to building permit approval and start of construction. An approved floodproofing design will be required as well. No code changes affecting floodproofing have occured since the project was previously approved, so the old design is likely to still compy. The design will need to show backflow prevention into stormwater vault, sealed waterproof joints and waterproofing on either exterior or interior. up to RFPE, and calculations demonstrating the structure is capable a withstanding hydrodynamic and hydrostatic forces from ground and surface water at 100-year flood stage. 8 EPS Response: Floodplain use permit and preconstruction elevation certificate are in the process of being completed and will be submitted once complete. Mode 3 Architecture Response: The stormwater exhibit indicates backflow prevention device, sealed waterproof joints, and appl ied waterproofing to the outside face of the perimeter vault walls. Retaining wall calculations are added to the submittal to de monstrate the walls are designed to resist hydrodynamic forces from the ground and surface water. Refer to stormwater exhibit added into Arch drawings sheet A1.0A and construction pictures/drawing on A1.0B Department: Stormwater Engineering – Water Utilities Contact: Wes Lamarque wlamarque@fcgov.com 970-416-2418 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: The City would like to have additional discussions with Floodplain and Environmental Planning on exactly how the storm sewer will transition into Spring Creek. These discussions will happen within the next week. EPS Response: Updated comment received from Wes 9/5 (below). Riprap calculations will be added to the drainage report to veri fy riprap is adequately sized to prevent erosion in the creek and along its banks. Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Please add a detention and LID summary table on the Drainage Exhibit sheet. EPS Response: Detention and LID summaries added to drainage exhibit Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Regarding the sand filter, it appears flow will enter the forebays with larger flows overtopping the forebay while entering the sand filter. Small riprap or river-rock is needed where this water spills over to ensure no erosion will occur. Please revise. EPS Response: Riprap has been added at the base of the forebay weirs. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque wlamarque@fcgov.com 970-416-2418 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Is the proposed 1-inch wet tap service for irrigation? If so, please label as an irrigation service. EPS Response: Yes, updated label to callout irrigation Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Please show the existing domestic water service line to the 3-inch vault on the utility plan. 9 EPS Response: Water service line added to plans Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Please add 10 feet of separation from the proposed 1-inch water service to the nearest tree. EPS Response: Updated location of water service. Department: Light And Power Contact: Rob Irish rirish@fcgov.com 970-224-6167 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/13/2024: FOR HEARING: Light & Power understands the applicant is working on gathering electric load information and what the electric needs are going to be. Until such information is available, Light & Power doesn't have any new comments for this round that were not previously provided at the PDR. Light & Power may have comments for future rounds, that may affect the site plan, once more information is available. Please continue to coordinate all electric changes with me. Mode3 Response: Acknowledged. Updated Utility forms completed and sent. Comment Number: 2 08/13/2024: INFORMATION: The existing pad mount transformer along Spring Court will need to be relocated to provide clearance for the new detached sidewalk. This will most likely involve replacing the existing electric primary cable if there is not enough slack. EPS Response: Acknowledged, the callout has been updated to replace cable if necessary. Comment Number: 3 08/15/2024: INFORMATION: Electric Capacity Fee, Building Site charges, and any system modification charges necessary will apply to this development. Please contact Light & Power Engineering at ElectricProjectEngineering@fcgov.com. Please reference our Electric Service Standards, development charges and fee estimator at the following link: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investmen t-development-fees Landmark Response: Acknowledged. We will reach out on this item. Comment Number: 4 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: We have sent a Work Request through Klara Rossouw for the outstanding Building Site Charges that are due on the property. Ripley Design Response: The work request form was completed and sent to Rob Irish via email on 8.28.24 10 Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Scott Benton sbenton@fcgov.com (970)416-4290 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: If the stormwater detention pond south of the Sherwood Lateral is not under The Mark’s control, please remove it as a NHBZ on all the plan sets, from the Buffer Zone Diagram (Sheet LP102), and the Proposed Buffer Zone Calculations table. Doing so would mean the proposed plan would not meet the quantitative performance standard, but qualitative measures could be used to satisfy the performance standards outlined in 5.6.1(E). Qualitative measures could be features like a pollinator resource. RVI Planning Response: We have removed the detention pond from all plan sheets as well as the calculations. To meet the Qualitative Performance Standard, we have introduced pollinator species to the southeast corner of the site. Specific additio nal plant species and quantity include; (12) rabbitbrush, (16) leadplant, (3) additional boulder raspberry, (22) blue mist penstemon - (6) echinacea- (34) solidago, (9) Rudbeckia, Comment Number: 2 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: Now that the first submittal is in, please confirm if a nationwide permit is needed or not or the Spring Creek outfall. EPS Response: Per Cedar Creek’s report, this is necessary and we are in the process of getting this submitted to the Army Cor ps. Comment Number: 3 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: The amount of the security will need to be updated; a new security will need to be received prior to releasing the old one. Landmark Response: An updated escrow calculation will be submitted. We look forward to coordinating this process moving forward. Please let us know what is needed prior to hearing and what is needed prior to DCP/permitting. Comment Number: 4 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: Updates to restoration plan to bring up to current best practices. Please provide a restoration plan that addresses soil handling, weed management, and monitoring utilizing an adaptive management approach. An abbreviated version of the plan will be required on the landscape plan. Landmark/Cedar Creek Response: Acknowledged. Plans have been updated as outlined by RVI below. RVI Planning Response: Notes have been added to LP101, LP102 and LP103 to address this comment. Comment Number: 5 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: Other possible updates to landscape plan include: possibly pollinator resources (especially the northwest corner), seed mix alterations, updated native seed mix notes, etc. The area south of the new buildings and north of the Sherwood Lateral will 11 require special attention to ensure vegetation will establish due to fill being placing to bring to the proposed grade. Soil amendments and possibly decompaction will be needed in the rooting zone to facilitate good growing conditions. Forage radishes may be a good choice for the this area as a cover crop, nutrient cycling kick-starter, and decompaction agent. Please clarify where decompaction agents are included because it is not mentioned in the Native Seed Mix Notes as the conceptual review comment responses indicate. RVI Planning Response: We have added a pollinator garden to the southeast corner of the project and have updated the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone Seed Mix. We have added Note #2 to the Native Seed Mix Notes that asks for the consideration of a soft so il de-compaction agent. Comment Number: 6 08/26/2024: FOR HEARING: Please replace Native Seed Mix Note #9 with the following: “NATIVE SEED AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE NHBZ WILL BE CONSIDERED ESTABLISHED WHEN SEVENTY PERCENT VEGETATIVE COVER IS REACHED WITH LESS THAN TEN PERCENT OF COVER CONSISTING OF NOXIOUS WEEDS, NO BARE SPOTS LARGER THAN ONE FOOT SQUARE, AND/OR UNTIL DEEMED ESTABLISHED BY EROSION CONTROL. NHBZ-SPECIFIC REVEGETATION SUCCESS CRITERIA TO BE CONSIDERED ESTABLISHED INCLUDE MEETING THE REFERENCE AREA COVER STANDARD, LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT NOXIOUS WEEDS, EIGHTY PERCENT SURVIVAL OF WOODY SPECIES, NO SIGNIFICANT BARE SPOTS, AND/OR DEEMED ACCEPTABLE BY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING.” RVI Planning Response: Note has been updated on the Landscape Plans as Note #10 under the Native Seed Mix Notes. Department: Forestry Contact: Freddie Haberecht fhaberecht@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: INFORMATION: Please include specifications about decompaction to a depth of 12" or greater in the ROW to help minimalize the impact of the substandard parkway width. RVI Planning Response: We have updated Note #4 Soil Amendments that specifies the decompaction depth. Comment Number: 2 08/26/2024: INFORMATION: To assure that trees are preserved on site please include tree protection notes and plan on demolition, utility, and grading plans. EPS Response: Adding tree protection notes to demolition, utility, and grading sheets. RVI Planning Response: Complete 12 Department: Park Planning Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: Both Park Planning & Development and Parks department comments will be provided by Missy Nelson | mnelson@fcgov.com | 970.416.8077 Comment Number: 2 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Thank you for submitting a memo for Creekside Park. A couple of follow-up questions on your "Not Complete" items, numbers 3, 4, & 5. A Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) will need to be approved for any work within the Park. Please provide an exhibit to myself directly so our Real Estate Department can begin working on it as it needs to be approved by City Council. Please make sure to also include the square footage of the TCE for review and approval. Council approval of this TCE is required prior to approval of this project. Thank you! EPS Response: Per coordination on 9/4 with Missy, this easement will no longer be necessary. Ripley Design Response: It is understood based on email correspondence with Missy that a parks permit will be required in lieu of the TCE. Comment Number: 3 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: We would like to discuss the modification of the bank, Riprap and Boulder Relocations in a separate meeting. Email from Missy 8/30/24: • Both Stormwater and Environmental Planning agree that the grouted riprap is the best choice. Since the area is within Park property, the final outcome and making sure it’s aesthetically pleasing is important. Riprap should be as naturalized as possible. Please provide examples of what the end product is envisioned to look like (above and beyond just standard details). EPS Response: Grouted riprap is proposed in this location, we will work with planners to determine the most aesthetically ple asing construction of this. Ripley Design Response: An on-site meeting was held 9/12 with RVI Planning, EPS, Cedar Creek, City Parks Staff, Environmental Planning Staff, and Erosion Control Staff, to discuss the details of the riprap – plans have been updated accordingly. Comment Number: 4 08/27/2024: FOR HEARING: Please provide a separate sheet in the utility plan set, for the Creekside Park Reseeding and Restoration plan. Thank you. EPS Response: Per conversation with Missy (9/11) is acceptable that this sheet be provided in the landscape set rather than t he utility plan set. RVI Planning Response: Refer to sheet LP103 for the Creekside Park Restoration Plan. 13 Comment Number: 5 08/27/2024: INFORMATION: Any work performed on Creekside Park property needs to be scheduled and coordinated with myself or the Crew Chief 1 week prior to start of work. Thank you. Landmark Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 6 08/28/2024: Please add the following note to the site, landscape and utility plan set general notes sections: “There shall be no encroachment or storage of materials within the Spring Creek Trail Easement or on the Creekside Park property unless a temporary construction easement has been granted. This includes any related construction activity, staging equipment, or storage of materials. EPS Response: Note added to General Notes on the cover sheet of our plan set. RVI Planning Response: Note has been added to sheet LP103. Department: PFA Contact: Marcus Glasgow marcus.glasgow@poudre-fire.org 970-416-2869 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS, MODIFICATIONS AND METHODS Where a project conflicts with fire code compliance, the intent of the fire code may be met via alternative materials, modifications, or methods, where approved by the fire code official. As per Sections 104.8, 104.9 and 104.10 of the 2021 International Fire Code (IFC), the fire code official has the authority to review alternatives proposed in accordance with these sections and consider them for approval. An alternative methods request letter and any supporting documentation must be submitted to the Fire Marshal for review and approval, prior to final development plan approval. The letter and supporting documentation must include language that supports the requirements of the previously mentioned sections. If alternatives are approved by the Fire Marshal, this approval must become a part of the permanent record of the final development plan and must be included in the code analysis of any design construction documents. The new alternative method of compliance updated to current code will need to be submitted for approval. Mode3 Response: Acknowledged. The new alternative method of compliance has been updated to 2021 codes. Submitted to you via email along with the completed informational form. The alternatives will be included in the code analysis and the construction documents. 14 Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland rhovland@fcgov.com 970-416-2341 Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 08/21/2024: Multi-family Construction shall comply with adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: 2021 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments 2021 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments 2021 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments 2021 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments 2021 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments Colorado Plumbing Code (currently on the 2021 IPC) 2023 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Projects shall comply with the current adopted building codes, local amendments and structural design criteria can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes New 2024 building codes will be adopted in 2025. Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017. Snow Live Load: Ground Snow Load 35 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 Colorado Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code: • Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2021 IECC residential chapter. • Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2021 IECC commercial chapter. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: • Electric vehicle charging parking spaces are required per local IBC amendment 3604, which requires 70% of parking spaces provide 3 types of EV charging. • If the 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. • R-2 occupancies must provide 10ft to 30ft of fire separation distance (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. • All multi-famliy buildings must be fire sprinkled. City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2021 International Fire Code limit what areas can avoid fire sprinklers with a NFPA 13R, see local IFC 903 amendment. • Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of fire -sprinkler. All egress windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24”. • If using electric systems to heat or cool the building, ground source heat pump or cold climate heat pump technology is required. 15 • A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new multi-family structure. • Energy code requires short hot water supply lines by showing plumbing compactness. • For projects located in Metro Districts, there are special additional code requirements for new buildings. Please contact the plan review team to obtain the requirements for each district. Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting: For new buildings, please schedule a pre-submittal meeting with Building Services for this project. Pre-Submittal 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 mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects should email rhovland@fcgov.com to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. Mode3 Response: Acknowledged on all code and informational items. Thank you. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588 Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 1 08/23/2024: FOR HEARING: Please revise the sub-title as marked. See markups. EPS Response: Subtitle on cover sheet has been updated per comments Comment Number: 2 08/23/2024: FOR HEARING: The Storm Detention Plan sheet number in the sheet index does not match the noted sheets. See markups. EPS Response: Updated sheet number for storm detention sheet. Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Laura Culleton, Larimer County Planning Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/15/2024: INFORMATION: Larimer County Planning has no comments. 16 Department: Outside Agencies Contact: Melissa Buick, Sherwood Irrigation Topic: General Comment Number: 2 08/26/2024: INFORMATION: The ditch easement needs to remain unobstructed for access, maintenance, repair and replacement. The ditch will continue to be maintained by mowing, spraying or burning weeds and the use of heavy equipment is necessary. Any trail system needs to be outside of the ditch easement and any request to encroach upon or cross the ditch or ditch easement will require an agreement with the Company. Please use my contact information for any such request. Landmark Response: Acknowledged. EPS Response: Acknowledged, this will be taken into account in the case any trail easements are granted. RVI Planning Response: Acknowledged. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson eolson@fcgov.com 970-221-6704 Topic: General Comment Number: 1 08/26/2024: BUIDLING PERMIT: 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 irrigationdr@fcgov.com or Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com RVI Planning Response: Acknowledged. Irrigation Plans and Details have been included in this set for reference. Final Irrigat ion Plans including the Creekside Park temporary irrigation plan will be included in the Building Permit Set.