Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout609 S COLLEGE AVE MIXED USE - BDR200004 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTSPage 1 of 15 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 03, 2020 Sam Coutts Ripley Design Inc. 419 Canyon Ave., Ste. 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: 609 S. College Ave. Mixed Use, BDR200004, Round Number 1 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of 609 S. College Ave. Mixed Use. 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 970-221-6695 or via email at tsullivan@fcgov.com. Comments in red – Tree Line Builders (Owner Representative), Forest Glaser Comments in yellow – Dengler Architecture, Kim Morton Comments in green – Ripley Design Inc., Sam Coutts Comments in blue – Northern Engineering, Ben Ruch Comments in purple – APS Inc., Randy Bremmer Comment Summary: Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221-6206, mbzdek@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard 1 of the Secretary of Interior's (SOI) Standards for Rehabilitation of a Historic Property requires that a property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. This single-family residential property will undergo a change of use as a result of the proposed work. In the conceptual review process, we explored opportunities to create a rehabilitation treatment approach to repair the existing residential structure without any replacement of historic materials or removal of character-defining features. The revisions completed to date have reduced the scale of the rear addition, the impact of its intersection with the original Page 2 of 15 residence, and its visibility from College Avenue, by narrowing the addition’s width and altering the connecting foyer and stair element to maintain more of the rear elevation’s original roof form and wall. The new construction would remove or obscure some existing historic material on the rear elevation in order to connect the old to the new, but the biggest change to the existing historic materials would be removal of the existing enclosed rear porch, which was constructed about 1906 and enclosed sometime before 1968. More information is needed about the rear elevation condition and design now obscured inside the enclosed porch. Dengler Response: Information and additional details were provided for LPC approval which was granted on May 20, 2020. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: SOI Standard #2 states that the historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. As noted above, the proposed plans call for alterations to the rear elevation of the historic residence. Please provide more detailed information and photos about the existing conditions of that rear elevation and how the new construction will intersect with the original building in order to support how the project meets this standard. Dengler Response: See response to comment number 2 above. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: SOI Standard #3 states that each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties will not be undertaken. The proposed new construction and site alterations are clearly of their own time and include no new elements that would create a false sense of history. Building “hyphenation” that maintains understanding of the original building form and strong material and building form differentiation further provides a clear record of change over time. The original, front portion of the building along College continues to serve as a clear representation of the 20th century residential use of the site, although that record is heavily altered on the property’s rear portion. Dengler Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: SOI Standard # 4 states that changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. The removal of the enclosed rear porch, which constitutes a historic alteration, would not be in keeping with this standard. Generally speaking, the removal of similar historic rear porch features has been considered an appropriate tradeoff to retain the structure’s most important character-defining features, elevations, Page 3 of 15 and building form, while accommodating new changes for a new use in a less visible location. Dengler Response: A modification of the new entry/ foyer will allow the existing doorway to the house to remain as well as two existing windows. This plan was submitted For LPC approval which was granted on May 20, 2020. The revised floorplan will be submitted with all future submittals Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: SOI Standard #5 states that distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. Based on our conceptual review, it is staff’s understanding that the rehabilitation plan for the existing residence will retain all historic materials and Character -fining features, with the exception of the alterations to the rear elevation. The applicant will need to provide a more detailed list of proposed treatments to front of the building (i.e. porch rehab, masonry work, window rehabilitation, etc.) as well as more detail on the rear elevation to finalize the review process for this standard. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: SOI Standard #6 states that deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. As with the above comment, we will need a more detailed list of proposed rehabilitation alterations to finalize evaluation of this standard. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard #7 states that chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. Information regarding how the proposed work will meet this standard should be included in the project's plan of protection. I can provide a template plan of protection for your use. Dengler Response: The plan of protection was submitted for LPC approval which was granted on May 20, 2020 Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard # 9 states that new additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. This standard will require the greatest amount of consideration and input from Page 4 of 15 Historic Preservation staff and the Commission. As always, the balance between differentiation and compatibility for an addition is the primary overall goal related to this standard, which can be met with a variety of design options. The applicant has responded to staff’s initial comments to reduce the scale of the rear addition and concerns about the impact of the connecting point between old and new. The result is a more graceful transition of scale and preservation of the original cottage building form. The addition is approximately 800 square feet, while the original is 1,275 square feet. The hyphenation of the foyer and stairs creates a smaller scale element to transition between the old and new. The new construction materials and building design shown in this proposal attempts to speak to both the historic residence on the site and an abutting historic resource, by providing referential nods to the raised stone foundation of the original residence as well as the stucco exterior of the landmark Beebe Clinic to the north. The historic resources on the site as well as on abutting sites are relevant points of comparison—because the properties are bordered to the west by an improved alley with public views of their rear elevations, the question of how the properties will cohere in their design from the rear is worthy of consideration. The Commission’s input and support for the solution currently proposed will be important information for the decision maker to consider. The exterior alterations do remove the rear porch (constructed in 1906 and enclosed before 1968) and will require penetration of the building envelope at the roof and the newly exposed rear elevation to connect the old and the new. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard #10 states that new additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Further exploration and information is needed on the condition of the rear elevation, as well as more detail on how the connection will be made. In general, it seems possible that the proposed design could be carried out in such a way that the form of the roof and wall on the rear elevation could be restored to their original, essential form (with the loss of historic materials understood) if the new construction were removed. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Section 3.4.7 (Table 1) of the land use code provides additional, but similar requirements for creating design compatibility with historic resources. The first standard states that new construction shall be similar in width or, if larger, be articulated into massing reflective of the mass and scale of historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. The new construction as proposed is smaller in width than the original Page 5 of 15 residence. The applicant should provide dimensions on drawings to provide more detail and confirmation. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard 3 in Table 1 of 3.4.7 is also relevant. It states that the lower story facades until any stepback (required or otherwise) must be constructed of authentic, durable, high quality materials (brick, stone, glass, terra cotta, stucco (non EIFS), precast concrete, wood, cast iron, architectural metal) installed to industry standards. The applicant should provide specific product information re: the proposed materials. Stucco should be real hard coat stucco and the stone product should directly reference the rusticated stone on the original in both authenticity and material scale. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Table 1's Standard 4 states that new construction shall reference one or more of the predominate material(s) on historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley, by using at least two of the following to select the primary material(s) for any one to three story building on the lower story facades until any stepbacks (required or otherwise): 1) type; 2) scale; 3) color; 4) three-dimensionality; 5) pattern. The most important historic resource that should serve as the reference is the historic residence at 609 S College, as those building materials must be compatible with the new materials that will join to them. The proposal as shown also appears to seek compatibility with the Beebe Clinic due to the close proximity of those two structures, as an opportunity to create an overt, cohesive relationship between the two properties. Dengler Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard 5 in Table 1 requires that the new design use at least one of the following: 1) similar window pattern; 2) similar window proportion of height to width; 3) similar solid-to-void pattern as found on historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. The solid-to-void pattern is similar and the verticality of the windows also contribute to achievement of this standard. Dengler Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard 6 in Table 1 calls for use of select horizontal or vertical reference lines or elements (such as rooflines, cornices, and bell courses) to Page 6 of 15 relate the new construction to historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. Application of this standard will have the most impact on the south and north elevations, in which the old and new building forms will be seen together as a whole. Horizontal alignment with the historic eave-height is achieved through the height of the first-floor connecting foyer element. Dengler Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Table 1 of 3.4.7 also has a requirement that new construction shall not cover or obscure character-defining architectural elements, such as windows or primary design features of historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. There are no currently identified character-defining or primary design features on the rear elevation. The placement of the new construction on this site is sensitive to the historic resources on and abutting the site. The new construction’s intersection with the central portion of the historic rear elevation with obscure that original portion while preserving an understanding and view of its original form. Dengler Response: Acknowledged. Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: The area of adjacency (historic resources within 200 feet of proposed development) for this property are: 609 S College (Rist-Reitzer Residence, Classic Cottage, constructed 1901) – red brick Classic Cottage with rough stone trim and raised foundation; hipped roof; 613 S College (Frank Corbin House/Canino’s, designated 1995) – blond brick Foursquare (Mission influences); rough stone trim and foundation; hipped roof; 605 S College (Beebe Clinic, designated 2005) – Art Moderne; flat roof with parapet, stucco walls, glass block and steel casement windows. In order to facilitate our evaluation of compatibility with these resources, please provide views of the proposed design in its fuller context (including abutting landmarks). Those views should be from College Avenue as well as the improved alley, showing the relationship of the infill to its existing context on both sides. Dengler Response: See response to comments number 2 above. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: Standard #8 states that archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. Page 7 of 15 The plan of protection as mentioned in the above comment will cover fulfillment of this standard and supply the applicant’s proposed course of action in the event of discovery of subsurface resources at the time of construction. Dengler Response: The plan of protection was submitted for LPC approval which was granted on May 20, 2020 Department: Planning Services Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwray@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 FOR APPROVAL: Trash & Recycling. - The size of the trash and recycling containers are based on commercial square footage and number of bedrooms. Please show in summary table. Ripley Response: Noted. Size of the studio space (updated use) and lodging space with number of bed rooms is located on the cover sheet of the submittal. - Any path that will be used to roll dumpsters between their storage location and the truck access point needs to be concrete cement and may not exceed 5 percent slope in the direction of travel and 2 percent cross slope. Please label this path, surface material and slopes on the site plan. Location of enclosure should be oriented towards alley so doors open on west side for access to truck. The current enclosure access may be obstructed by a vehicle parked in the HC space. Ripley Response: Concrete hatch has been placed underneath the trash enclosure. Slope is not to exceed 5% and 2% cross slope has been labeled on plan. Slope is approximately 1.2% towards the alley. Enclosure has been oriented towards alley. HC space has been flipped to not block enclosure access. - Please provide an enlarged detail of enclosure to meet all standards, including materials, height, color, gate details, metal angle protection bar etc. Enclosure service gates and associated latches and hinges are required to be constructed of metal or other durable material. Please label this on the plan enlargement for the trash and recycling enclosure. Ripley Response: Enclosure detail is located on site plan. Enclosure materials, height, color, and gate details are located on architectural sheets. Dengler Response: The elevations of the trash enclosure have been updated and materials called out. - Trash enclosure base and access pad needs to be concrete. Ripley Response: Concrete base has been added to plans. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 FOR APPROVAL. Site Plan. - Summary table, include artisan studio with office use. Ripley Response: Artisan studio has been included with office use. See land use tables on cover for updated plans. - Please show how truck loading will get access into rear yard. With the proposed parking wheel stops, it is not clear for access from alley. Ripley Response: An exhibit showing van and or bus movement into the rear parking flex space has been added to the submittal. Page 8 of 15 - Remove existing driveway labels since this is being demolished. Ripley Response: Labels have been removed. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 FOR APPROVAL. Lighting Plan. - Please provide updates to proposed fixtures for compliance with 2019 standards. APS Response: Noted, all new fixtures to comply with standards. All new fixtures to be cut-off type with 3K LED lamping. - This pertains to existing fixtures on site/building. APS Response: Yes, the existing fixtures within the property lines to be replaced with new as types noted above. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 FOR APPROVAL. Landscape Plan. - Please include information on turf blend. Ripley Response: Turf blend has been added to landscape notes (Vortex Bluegrass Sod by Korby Sod LLC.). Additional cut sheet on sod has been added to this submittal. - Include planting material selection for planting beds and update summary table accordingly. Ripley Response: Plant material selection has been added to planting beds. Labels have been added and summary table reflects planting design. - With demolished front driveway, include planting restoration of parkway area. Ripley Response: Turf has been added to area impacted by utilities and removal of the front drive. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 FOR APPROVAL. Building Elevations. - Please include 2nd level floor plan of existing house. Dengler Response: Acknowledged and provided in the current submittal. Also note that main level floor plan, elevations and 3d rendering have all been updated in response to comments provided by Historic Preservation. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Morgan Stroud, 970-416-4344, mstroud@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: FOR APPROVAL: With the driveway in front of the house not being used with this proposal. The driveway will need to be removed an replaced with landscaping and a vertical curb on College Avenue. Northern Response: Driveway now shown as to be removed. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/31/2020 03/31/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please submit a costs and quantities estimate of the proposed work being done in the right-of-way so we can determine what kind of permit will be required to start construction. Northern Response: Public improvement quantities submitted. Page 9 of 15 Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/02/2020 04/02/2020: FOR APPROVAL: The applicant will need to work with CDOT on the correct permit for closing the access on College Avenue. Please reach out to Tim Bilobran (timothy.bilobran@state.co.us, 970-350-2163) for this permit. Treeline Response: Acknowledged. Also looking into the possibility of boring the new line. Department: Stormwater Engineering - Floodplain Contact: Claudia Quezada, (970)416-2494, cquezada@fcgov.com Topic: Floodplain Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: INFORMATION ONLY: A portion of this property is currently located in the City regulated, 100-year Old Town floodplain and must comply with the safety regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code. Northern Response: Acknowledged. Thought the floodplain currently goes through the existing building, Northern is submitting a LOMA to remove all but a small portion of the lot from the floodplain. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please include the following notes on the site plan and drainage/grading plan: 1. “The Developer shall obtain a Floodplain Use Permit from the City of Fort Collins and pay all applicable floodplain use permit fees prior to commencing any construction activity (building of structures, remodeling of existing structures, grading, fill, detention ponds, bike paths, parking lots, utilities, landscaped areas, flood control channels, etc.) within the 100-year Old Town floodplain limits¬¬. All activities within the floodplain are subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code.” Northern Response: Note added. 2. “An approved FEMA Elevation Certificate completed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer showing that the building is constructed to the required elevation is required post-construction prior to a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) being issued.” Please note: If any part of the building is within the floodplain boundary then the entire structure is considered in the floodplain and the entire building envelope must meet the requirements of elevating/floodproofing to the RFPE. Northern Response: Note added. 3. “Critical facilities, which include at-risk populations, essential services, etc. are prohibited in the 100-year floodplain.” Northern Response: Note added. 4. "The applicant acknowledges that the building design does not comply with the current regulatory floodplain. The applicant will apply for a Letter of Map Amendment showing that the addition area is elevated above the Base Flood Page 10 of 15 Elevation, however the City cannot guarantee approval of the LOMA without a submittal. The applicant understands that building permits cannot be issued prior to the approval of the LOMA. " Northern Response: Note added. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: INFORMATION ONLY: Additions are allowed in the Old Town 100-year floodplain, as long as the lowest finished floor of the building, and all duct work, heating, ventilation, electrical systems, etc. are elevated to a minimum of 12-inches above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). This elevation is known as the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE). RFPE = BFE + 12-inches. BFE = 4995.5ft, therefore RFPE= 4996.5 ft. An approved FEMA Elevation Certificate, completed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer and showing that the addition is constructed to the required elevation, is required prior to a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) being issued. Northern Response: Understood. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please utilize the Floodplain Review Checklist for Development Review Submittals when preparing your plans, see redlines. Northern Response: Checklist used and plans updated. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Cross-section and BFE lines should also be shown on drainage/grading plans (pg. 4 of Utility Set) or on a separate Floodplain Sheet if it’s too cluttered. Contact Beck Anderson of Stormwater Master Planning at banderson@fcgov.com for floodplain CAD line work. Northern Response: Separate sheet added. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: The City requires that any new or modified impervious area be treated by water quality and/or LID techniques. It appears that the two new rain gardens are treating an area less than the additional impervious area of around 2,000 sf. A meeting is requested to discuss this requirement. Northern Response: Meeting was held and updated drainage areas are now being treated. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please include all details and design information for the proposed rain gardens Page 11 of 15 in the Utility Plan set. Northern Response: Details provided. Department: Stormwater Engineering – Erosion and Sediment Control Contact: Basil Hamdan, 970-222-1801, bhamdan@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/25/2020 03/25/2020: INFORMATION ONLY: No Comment from Erosion Control. Based upon the submitted Planning materials it has been determined that this project; will disturb less than 10,000 sq. ft., is not proposed to be in a sensitive area, has no steep slopes (greater than 3H:1V) within or adjacent to the project, and is not part of a larger common development that will or is under construction. Therefore, no Erosion Control materials submittal is needed. If this project substantially changes in size or design where the above criteria now apply, erosion control materials should be submitted. Though the project at this time requires no erosion control materials submittal, the project still must be swept and maintained to prevent dirt, saw cuttings, concrete wash, trash debris, landscape materials and other pollutants from the potential of leaving the site and entering the storm sewer at all times during the project in accordance with City Code 26-498. If complaint driven or site observation of the project seem not to prevent the pollutant discharge the City may require the project to install erosion and sediment control measures. Nearby inlets that may be impacted by the pollutants, in particular dirt, should be protected as good preventive practice and individual lots should be protected from material escaping onto the sidewalk. If at building permit issuance any issues arise please email erosion@fcgov.com to help facilitate getting these permits signed off. Northern Response: Thank you. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Coordination with the City of Fort Collins Utilities will be required for the fire service tap with at least a 2-week notice. Northern Response: Acknowledged. Applicant will also be replacing the water service while the opportunity exists. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: No additional comments. Northern Response: Page 12 of 15 Department: Light And Power Contact: Cody Snowdon, 970-416-2306, csnowdon@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/26/2020 03/26/2020: FOR INFORMATION: From the response to previous comments, it is understood that electrical upgrades are unknow at this time. If electrical upgrades are required for the project, further investigation on site modifications and capacity fees will need to be assessed and addressed. Please continue to coordinate with City Light and Power to ensure adequate power is supplied and fees/site modification charges are known and at the forefront. Treeline Response: We have been in communication with Northern Engineering, APS Electrical Engineers, and Cody Snowdon about power needs and upgrades. If a new transformer is needed, we have made provisions to place it east of the bike racks on the North side of the property near the alley. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Kelly Smith, , ksmith@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please clarify specific turf species on the Landscape Plan and the blend percentages to ensure the project water budget chart gets adequately calculated. Ripley Response: Turf blend has been added to landscape notes (Vortex Bluegrass Sod by Korby Sod LLC.) Additional cut sheet on sod has been added to this submittal. Department: Forestry Contact: Nils Saha, , nsaha@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL There are no shade trees proposed on the plan set. Per 3.2.1 (D.2.A), canopy shade trees should constitute at least 50 percent of all tree plantings. Please incorporate shade trees species in the plant schedule. Ripley Response: We have added a shade tree to the plan but due to the large percentage of mitigation trees and constraints of the site we are not able to meet the 50% shade tree requirement. We have talked with Forestry and are submitting an alternative compliance with this submittal (see alternative compliance). Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL Will the trees that are to be planted in the cobble west of the bur oak have drip irrigation? Ripley Response: Yes, all trees and shrub plantings on the plan will be irrigated. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 Page 13 of 15 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL Please include the tree inventory table on sheet C100. Ripley Response: Tree inventory was provided to civil to add to sheet C100. Northern Response: Table added. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL Thank you for shifting the concrete patio area outside of the hyper critical root zone of tree #7 (38” bur oak). However, the patio is still proposed within the critical root zone (~38’ from the trunk) and any excavation in this area has the potential to damage roots, which can result in impacting the structure and health of this tree. Please note the following from the Tree Protection Standards: “Within the dripline of any protected existing tree, there shall be no cut of fill over a four-inch depth unless a qualified arborist or forested has evaluated and approved the disturbance.” In addition to the typical detail that’s provided, please add a note to the plans indicating that no more than 4” of cut or fill is anticipated under the drip line. Ripley Response: Understood. After a conversation with Forestry we have added an additional note to the tree protection note on the tree mitigation sheet. The note reads, “Within the dripline of any protected existing tree, there shall be no cut or fill over a four- inch depth (with exception to the proposed building foundation) unless a qualified arborist or forester has evaluated and approved the disturbance. In the event the proposed cut/fill is not approved, techniques and products shall be recommended by the arborist or forester to mitigate the impact of the cut/fill while enabling construction to continue.” Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/16/2020 03/16/2020: INFORMATION ONLY Fire Department Connections 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 FDC shall be approved by the fire department and the location labeled on Utility Plans. Northern Response: Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/16/2020 03/16/2020: INFORMATION ONLY SMOKE ALARMS & CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS - Required to be installed per code for R-3 residential occupancies. Dengler Response: Acknowledged. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/16/2020 Page 14 of 15 03/16/2020: INFORMATION ONLY 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. The box shall be positioned 3 to 7 feet above finished floor and within 10 feet of the front door, or closest door to the fire alarm panel. Ripley Response: Understood. A key box (Knox Box) has been added to the site plan to the vehicle entry gate. Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: There are several code implications as outlined during conceptual and the pre-submittal meeting. If the building changes to commercial with residential then fire sprinklers, occupancy separations, and accessibility to name a few are required code changes. I suggest keeping the structure a dwelling and not introducing commercial use into the space. A dwelling will allow some intended use of the space to take place such as practice of music with no audience. Dengler Response: : The building will be mixed-use with the music room being the only commercial space, with a B occupancy. The new entry and existing, renovated structure will remain residential with a R3 occupancy. A one-hour separation is planned between the music room and the new entry/ foyer. A one-hour wall will be called out and detailed for the northern wall of the music room as it is closer than 10; from the property line. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Dengler Response: Acknowledged, and revised Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please revise the Benchmark Statement as marked. See redlines. Northern Response: Statement updated. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Northern Response: Relines have been addressed. Topic: Site Plan Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 03/30/2020 Page 15 of 15 03/30/2020: FOR APPROVAL: Please add a legal description for the property where this project is located. Ripley Response: The legal description has been added to the cover page.