Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceDave Arqo From: Sênt: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Andy Schwaller Weclrresday, December 19, 2018 1:11 PM yurtstead @gmail.com; richard.ruse@claytonhomes.com Dave Argo; Claire DalbY Mountain Shadow Place Building Permits 0890-001.pdf Gentlemen, We have received three grading permits and three building permits for this subdivision. ln reviewing the building permit files, the geotechnical report, engineered foundation, fire sprinkler design and radon control design are missing. There does not ãpp"r¡. to be any information on the snow load for the units or details on the framing for the basement levels to support the units above. Typically, manufactured units have the sprinkler system installed at the factory. lt would be very difficult to retro fit this in the field. Also not sure what the design is for the fire rated assembly between the duplex units. tsthisbuiltatthefactoryoraddedinthefield. Anythingaddedinthefieldwouldneedtobepartoftheoriginal manufactured home approvals by the Colorado Division of Housing for the specific unit and built into the unit at the factory not to void the certification attached to the manufactured unit. The Subdivision Approval Agreement (SlA) also appears to need to be addressed further. Claire Dalby a planner with the county will be contacting you shortly about this. We are hesitant to issue the grading permits for the 3 units until the above items are adequately addressed. Thanks, Andy Schwaller Building Official Garfield County 1 Dave Arqo Sent: To: Cc: From:Dave Argo Monday, January 14,2019 4:08 PM Greg Bak (greg.bak@cogs.us) Andy Schwaller (aschwaller@garfield-county.com) Mountain Shadows Subdivision - West Glenwood Greg I wanted to check in with you regarding a new project in West Glenwood on Mountain Shadows Drive. lt's (3) duplexes located on a relatively steeply sloped lot with and the duplexes are compactly (tightly) situated on the sloping terrain. lf you are familiar with this project, you may know that one of the requirements of the Subdivision & subsequent Amended Final Plat of this parcel is instdllation ol øutomatic fire sprínklers ín øll dwelling units.l believe that this is a condition Ron Biggers suggested during the referral process, and it was subsequently formally adopted during subdivision approvals and final plat. Have you been provided with a copy of the proposed plans from CMH Homes, David Rasmussen or Kate Schweryn? One of the challenges of these unique duplex designs - caused by placement of a Manufactured House on a site built foundation - is that the fire sprinkler system for the Mfd. Housing portion is installed at the factory, whereas fire sprinklers at the crawlspace & basement levels of the building must be site built. Although a fire sprinkler layout plan is included for the modular building (see final page of plans submittal) there isn't any provision on the plans we have to provide fire sprinklers at the basement and crawl space areas of these duplexes. Also, the fire sprinkler layout plans provided with the Mfd. Housing design plans specifically calls out crawl space sprinklers as "not required". Do you agree with this assessment, or should fire sprinklers also be installed at crawl spaces? *Note: The crawl spaces areas are located below the (3) upper duplexes, and the (3) lower duplexes all have finished basements which definitely need to have the fire sprinklers installed. lf you can let me know whether or not you have received a copy of these plans and where you are with your review and assessment of the fire sprinkle r (and/or any other) requirements, l'd greatly appreciate it. lf helpful, maybe we can get together to discuss in a little more detail. Thanks, Dave Argo Plans Examiner Gurftelü Ctuuty Community Development Department 708 8th Street, Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: 970-945-8272 Ext. 7670 Email : do rg o @ g a rfield-cou nty, com Web : go rfield-cou nty.com Subject: 1 Dave Argo From: Sent: lo: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Dave Argo Tuesday, January 15,2019 4:32 PM 'David Rasmussen'; Kate Schwerin Andy Schwaller (aschwaller@garfield-county.com); Claire Dalby; Lindsay Krol RE: Mountain Shadow Mtn Shadows Subdivision.pdf David Thanks for your email, and I have been in the process of composing a comprehensive assessment of what all must be completed for us to proceed with review/approval of your permits. A formal extension of the SIA by the BOCC must happen before we move forward with issuance of permits on the Building Dept. side of things, but completion of the entirety of the SIA will not hold up these permits. Please refer to the attached PDF document which itemizes the issues which must be addressed in order for us to move forward with Grading & Building Permits for your project. I have consulted with both Claire & Andy Schwaller in compiling this list of items/issues. After you have reviewed this "Request for Supplemental lnformation" please contact me if you require any additional cla rification. Thanks, Dave Argo Plans Examiner Garfield County Community Development Department L08 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 87601 Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. L6L0 Emo il : dq rgo @ ga rfield-cou nty. com Web : go rfie ld-cou nty.com From: David Rasmussen Imailto:david@davidrasmussendesign.com] Sent: Tuesday, January L5, zOLg 3:02 PM To: Dave Argo Cc: Kate Schwerin Subject: Mountain Shadow Hi Dave, How are you? I spoke with Claire yesterday and wanted to follow up with you regarding the SIA and building permits. She said you might be getting in touch with us. I wanted to apprise you of some of the conversations \rye had with Dave Pesnichak while we were going through the sub-division approval process. Dave P had told us that we would be able to put in the improvements required by the SIA concurrently with building out the lots. He had 1 stated that the CO's for each home would not be issued until the SIA was satisfied. We have planned out entire construction schedule and hence budget based on these conversations. Claire had mentioned there might be some thinking in the building department contrary to this. Can you let me know if this is the case and what if any options we may have to acquire building permits before the SIA items are fully satisfied? Thank you, Dave David Rasmussen VR Cabinetmakers I PRINCIPAL 826 C Hwy 133 Carbondale CO 81623 david@vrcabinet.com I cell 802.236.2677 Follow us on Instragram! http : //instagram. com/davidrasmusscndcsi gn/ fo Itrtl 2 Mountoin Shadows Subdivision Building & Plonning Perm¡ts *rt Request for Supplemental lnformation: We have begun the plan review of the proposed (3) duplexes to be built on Mountain Shadows Subdivision in West Glenwood. As a follow-up to your recent phone conversation with Claire Dalby, we thought it may be helpful to provide you with a summary of where we are with Planning and Building Department approvals for your project. (1.) Subdivision lmprovements Asreement - As you know, the original SIA expires on February 1.2. As we understand it, Claire is assisting you to obtain an extension to this agreement and this will probably occur in early February. From a Building Department policy standpoint, we cannot issue any permits (grading or building) until this SIA extension has been formally granted by the BOCC. Once the BOCC has accepted your request for extension, we can then issue permits - but only if we have received all required information. Presently, your applications for grading and building permits are incomplete, and you will need to provide us with additional information as described in greater detail below. (2) Gradine Permit - Given the difficulty and complexity of your proposed site improvements, as well as the nature of this project being a subdivision with its own specific requirements - the grading permit requirements for your project are different from those of a single-family residence. For us to process the Grading Permit we require submission of the following items: a. Access Road lmprovements, Parking and Utilities Plans - Provide a copy of the engineered plans as prepared by Sopris Engineering which were included in the Subdivision approval documents (Sheets C1{6). Also please note that one of the conditions of the SIA is Engineer verification that actual construction of the roadway and other infrastructure is installed per these engineered plans. b. Ensineered Site Grading & Drainase Plan - Given the tightly spaced buildings, steeply sloped site grades, placement of retaining walls shown right along property boundary lines, site drainage not fully contained on this property, and steep slopes located between proposed buildings and driveway/parking lot located above, we require an Engineered Site Grading & Drainage Plan. This engineered site plan must be submitted prior to our office prior to grading or building permit approvals. * Pleose Note: This site pløn shall match up with the Engineered Foundation Plons os described in ltem (b) below. (3) Buildins Permits - Similar to the Grading Permit, these permit applications are currently incomplete and we must receive additional information as described below prior to issuance of permits: a. Soils Report - Please provide us with a digital copy of the geotechnical report as per requirements stipulated in the Subdivision approvals, b. Engineered Foundation Designs - Provide engineered site specific foundation plans for each of the (3) duplex buildings. Engineered foundation plans are required to illustrate actual or proposed final grades and shall include sizes, details and/or specifications for foundations, footings and posts required to structurally support the modular units. *þ!g The "generic" foundotion plons included in the Monufoctured House plans do not satisfy this requirement. c. Engineered Site Gradins & Drainage Plan - As noted above under "Grading Permit". d. Radon Svstem -All residences are required to be constructed using Radon Resistant New Construction (RRNC) standards. Provide information, details and/or specifications. e. Floor Plans - All interior rooms must be labeled or named on each respective set of plans. f. Partv Wall Construction - Construction of site built party walls at basement/crawl spaces must comply with requirements of Gypsum Association specifications WP-3605 as shown on Manufactured House plans. Provide copy of detailed specifications. C. Fire Sprinkler Svstem - As per conditions of Land Use Change Permit (GAPA-O2-L8-85617) all residences shall contain fire sprinkler system. Have plans been submitted to Greg Bak at Glenwood Springs Fire Protection District? Do these plans address the connection of site installed fire sprinklers at basement and crawl spaces to the pre-fab fire sprinklers at the upper level manufactured housing units? Please provide a copy of approval/sign-off from GSFPD to the Building Dept. for our records, Please provide follow-up on all of these outstanding items/issues so that we may finalize our plan review of your permit applications. Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Cc: Subiect: Dave Argo Wednesday, January 16,2019 8:36 AM 'David Rasmussen'; Kate Schwerin Andy Schwaller (aschwaller@garfield-county.com); Claire Dalby; Lindsay Krol RE: Mountain Shadow David & Kate See my responses to your questions in red text below Also, to address Kate's subsequent email, I will serve as primary contact on building dept. items (grading/building permits) and Claire will serve as point regarding SIA extension and any other planning related items. Dove Argo Plans Examiner GrrJield County Community Development Department 708 gth Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 87601 Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. L6L0 Emo il : d o rg o@ go rfi eld-cou nty. com Web : go rfield -cou nty.com From: David Rasm ussen Imailto:david @davidrasmussendesign.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 75,2OL9 5:09 PM To: Dave Argo Cc: Kate Schwerin Subject: Re: Mountain Shadow Hi Dave, I'11make sure we have address everything in this PDF. Thank you for your time putting this together. The only item on here that is not in progress is an additional engineered grading and drainage plan. Do I need to have an engineer stamp that or will an architects stamp suffice? The engineered site grading &, drainage plan needs to be prepared and wet-sealed by a Colorado licensed Professional Engineer, and it needs to address all of the items described in my previous email that are not sufficiently addressed in the Architect's site plan prepared by Steve Novy. My suggestion is for you to have Sopris Engineering simply extend the existing grading plan (which they prepared for roadway access/parking at the upper portion of the site) all the way down to include the entire property including all features surrounding the building footprints. Do you want2 hard copies of all the items requested for each lot except the soils report or are the other items in this list that you would like just electronically? Yes, 2 copies of all revised, amended or supplemental drawings are required for the Building Permits. Once you have everything together and bring it into our office, we will have you insert or attach into the (3) separate packages of drawings. That way you don't have to reprint everything again. As for the Grading Permit, only one set of drawings for each of the two items described in the PDF will suffice. I Dave Arqo Sent: From:Dave Argo Wednesday, January 16,2019 8:51 AM 'David Rasmussen'; Kate Schwerin Andy Schwaller (aschwaller@garfield-county.com); Greg Bak (greg.bak@cogs.us); Claire Dalby FW: Mountain Shadows Subdivision - Fire SprinklersSubject: David & Kate Aftersending my recent emailto you earlierthis morning I received the attached email(see below)from Greg Bakover at Glenwood Springs Fire District. You will need to provide a set of drawings for Greg's review before we can issue the Building Permit. The Fire District enforces the Fire Code (including fire sprinkler system design & installation), but the Building Dept. will also require that you provide us with sign-off approval report from Greg at the conclusion of rough framing and again prior to final building inspection & Certificate of Occupancy. Approval of the fire sprinkler system by the local Fire District is also a specific requirement of your Subdivision lmprovements Agreement. It's therefore in your best interests to update Greg with a set of the current drawings and to discuss with him how the factory installed fire sprinklers at the modular units will be tied into the site built portion of the fire sprinkler system which will be installed at the finished basements. Dave Argo Plans Examiner Gurfield Counp, Community Development Department 708 gth Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel : 970-945-82 L2 Ext. 1 6 10 Ema i I : dø rgo @ ga rfield-cou nty.com Web : ga rfiel d-cou nty. com From: Greg Bak [mailto:greg.bak@cogs.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 16,2OL9 8:314M To: Dave Argo Cc: Andy Schwaller Subject: Re: Mountain Shadows Subdivision - West Glenwood Since this is my first exposure to modular or off-site-constructed buildings with sprinklers, I'm exploring new territory as we go. My interpretation of a L3D spr¡nkler system is that all LIVING (occupiable) spaces need to be sprinklered. Therefore, if they are indeed crawlspaces (dirt floors with insufficient head space, not finished, not condit¡oned)then they should not need sprinklers. To: Cc: 1 I met with Kate a couple weeks ago: she had questions regarding system rough-in inspections. I told her that if the manufacturer can provide documentation of the system completed that meets the requirements of NFPA 13D, inspected and attested to by the local fire code official (at their factory), that will suffice as a substitute for us to perform a rough-in inspection here. When the project is assembled here, I can review plans forthe basement areas, perform a rough-in of those added basement areas, and a final inspection of the entire structure(s) before the certificate of occupancy is awarded. On the day we met, Kate did not leave me with a set of plans. Nor have I received plans from CMH or David Rasmussen. What I have so far is the site plan that Ron reviewed a/ß/17. lf this site plan has been revised since then I would like to review it as well. lbelievethistobearealisticplan. lfthereisanythingaboutitlhavemissed,pleaseletmeknow. Thanks, Greg Bak Fire Protection Analyst Glenwood Springs Fire Department From: Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-countv.com> Sent: Monday, January 1.4,2019 4:07:51 PM To: Greg Bak Cc: Andy Schwaller Subject: Mountain Shadows Subdivision - West Glenwood Greg: lwanted to check in with you regarding a new project in West Glenwood on Mountain Shadows Drive. lt's (3) duplexes located on a relatively steeply sloped lot with and the duplexes are compactly (tightly) situated on the sloping terrain. lf you are familiar with this project, you may know that one of the requirements of the Subdivision & subsequent Amended Final Plat of this parcel is instolløtÍon of automøtic fÍre sprinklers in all dwelling uníts.l believe that this is a condition Ron Biggers suggested during the referral process, and it was subsequently formally adopted during subdivision approvals and final plat. Have you been provided with a copy of the proposed plans from CMH Homes, David Rasmussen or Kate Schwerin? One of the challenges of these unique duplex designs - caused by placement of a Manufactured House on a site built foundation - is that the fire sprinkler system for the Mfd. Housing portion is installed at the factory, whereas fire sprinklers at the crawl space & basement levels of the building must be site built. Although a fire sprinkler layout plan is included for the modular building (see final page of plans submittal) there isn't any provision on the plans we have to provide fire sprinklers at the basement and crawl space areas of these duplexes. Also, the fire sprinkler layout plans provided with the Mfd. Housing design plans specifically calls out crawl space sprinklers as "not required". Do you agree with this assessment, or should fire sprinklers also be installed at crawl spaces? *Note: The crawl spaces areas are located below the (3) upper duplexes, and the (3) lower duplexes all have finished basements which definitely need to have the fire sprinklers installed. 2 lf you can let me know whether or not you have received a copy of these plans and where you are with your review and assessment of the fire sprinkler (and/or any other) requirements, l'd greatly appreciate it. lf helpful, maybe we can get together to discuss in a little more detail. Thanks, Dave Argo Plans Examiner Garticld Cøunty Community Development Department 708 gth Street, Suite 4Ol Glenwood Springs, CO 87607 Tel : 970-945-8272 Ext. 7670 Ema i I : d a rg o @ g o rf i e I d -co u n ty. com Web : g a rfi eld-county. com 3 Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Dave Argo Wednesday, January 23,2019 2:10 PM 'David Rasmussen'; Kate Schwerin Andy Schwaller (aschwaller@garfield-county.com); Lindsay Krol Mountain Shadows Place Building Permits Mtn Shadows Place.pdf David & Kate: As I discussed with David earlier today, please refer to the attached PDF summary of additional clarifications and/or additional info required by our office before we will be able to release a grading or building permit for your Mountain Shadow Place development. These additional items are the result of us taking a "deeper dive" into your initial application + design drawings, and we want you to be able to respond to these comments while you are also addressing the original list of items we sent to you last week. lf you have questions, please note that I won't be available until next Tuesday, as I am traveling out of state over the next few days. Thanks for your assistance - Dave Argo Plans Examiner GarJield Coanty Community Development Department 708 4th Streel Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: 970-945-8272 Ext, 1610 E ma i I : d o rg o @ g o rf i e I d -cou nty. co m We b : g a rfi e I d -co u nty. com M ou nta ¡ n Sha d ows Subd ivision Building & Plonning Permits West Glenwood Springs Jonuary 23,2019 David & Kate: We have taken a closer look at your recent Grading & Building Permit applications for the Mountain Shadow place subdivision, and wanted to follow-up with you about some items requiring further clarification and/or additional information needed to finalize our review of your project. This information is in addition to items addressed in the previous "Request for Supplemental lnformation" dated UL8/2OL9. A. Grading Plan - Given the extremely close-knit nature of these (3) duplexes on a relatively tight site, we believe it's probably more appropriate for you to simply submit one singular grading plan for all three lots. Redundancy of (3) separate Grading Permit applications which essentially include identical information is unnecessary. ln fact, it is more important for all (3) duplexes and the driveway/parking areas to be reviewed in their entirety. Lindsay will be able to help simplify your Grading Permit application once you have the Engineered Site Grading & Drainage Plan prepared. B. Design Drawings - There are several inconsistencies, corrections and/or clarifications required with the design drawings (not the manufactured house plans) and these items include: o Clarify retaining walls located between Building 2 and Building 3 - Site Plan shows as boulders, but Exterior Elevations indicates concrete retaining wall. Verify height of reta¡n¡ng wall exposure above finish grade per Engineered Site Grading Plan. o lllustrate lower level patios. o Verifv all site grading/drainage, walkways/stairs, retaining walls, curb stops at parking areas, and clarify retaining wall shown directly on eastern property line. o lllustrate all plumbing fixtures & label all rooms on the appropriate floor plan for each building permit (i.e., Lot t,Lot2 or Lot 3). ¡ Windows & patio doors at south elevation do not match up with floor plans. Please clarify and revise as appropriate. o Provide Engineered Foundation Plans for each building - per previous email. o Verify size of beam located at middle seam of modular housing units. Also provide additional info about structural posts + foundations required to support this beam. o Provide structural sizes, specifications & dimensions at decks including joists, posts and foundations. ¡ Provide design detailing & specifications for concrete retaining wallfooting located between Lot 2 and Lot 3 buildings. Engineering required for retaining walls greater than four feet in height. ¡ Clarify construction assembly detailing & specifications at lower level party wall, including concrete vs. wood framing, proposed final grade inside crawl space, and fire-rated party wall assembly between duplex units. (See Building Section 2) e Verify finish grade elevation at lower level bedroom windows to allow proper operation of egress windows and site drainage away from foundation. (See West Elevation/Buildings 1 and 3) o Verify height of concrete retaining wall located between Lot 2 and Lot 3 buildings. lf the exposed vertical height of this retaining wall exceeds six feet, a variance will be required for placement of retaining wall within the required l"O-foot side yard setbacks. (Reference Lond IJse & Development Code, Table 7-7201-8 - Accessory Structuresl ¡ Verify vertical height of south side of decks above retaining wall between Lot 2 and Lot 3. lf distance from deck surface down to finish grade at bottom of retaining wall exceeds 30" in height, then a variance will be required for placement of decks inside the required lO-foot side yard setbacks. (Reference Lond tJse & DevelopmentCode, Toble 3-202: Proiectionsl Mou nta i n Sho dows Su bd ivi sion Building & Planning Permits West Glenwood Springs Jonuory 23, 2079 Design Drawings - continued o Clarify construction assembly detailing & specifications at lower level party wall, including concrete vs. wood framing, proposed final grade inside crawl space, height of concrete foundation wall, and fire-rated party wall assembly between duplex units. Coordinate detailing and concrete wall height with engineered foundation plans as described above. . Verify size of beam located at middle seam of modular housing units and structural posts + foundations required to support this beam. Thanks for your assistance in providing us with a complete application/submittal Dave Argo Plans Examiner Garfield County Community Development Department 708 8th street, Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: 970-945-8272 Ext. 7610 E ma il : d o rg o @ g a rfi e I d -cou ntY. com Web: ga rfiel d-cou nty.com Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: David Rasmussen <david@davidrasmussendesign.com> Wednesday, January 23,2019 4:04 PM Dave Argo Kate Schwerin Re: Mountain Shadows Place Building Permits Follow up Flagged Hi Dave, Thanks for sending this over. Everything looks pretty straightforward. The only question I have is regarding the variance you are stating would be required for the decks. My understanding of the code is that since the decks are within 30" of grade and do not cantilever beyond the retaining wall they meet the 30" code requirement. Are you saying that the retaining wall needs to be moved further to the south to increase the distance from the edge of the retaining wall to the edge of the deck to meet code? If that is the case can you point me to where I need to look in the code to understand this better? If we need a variance we would probably want to eliminate the retaining wall all together and just build the decks with taller columns since it would be more cost effective. If it would be better to discuss this on a call my cell is 802.236.2677. Thank you for your help in this matter, Dave On Wed, Jan23,2019 at2:10 PM Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-couff wrote: David & Kate: As I discussed with David earlier today, please refer to the attached PDF summary of additional clarifications and/or additional info required by our offrce before we will be able to release a grading or building permit for your Mountain Shadow Place development. These additional items are the result of us taking a "deeper dive" into your initial application + design drawings, and we want you to be able to respond to these comments while you are also addressing the original list of items we sent to you last week. If you have questions, please note that I won't be available until next Tuesday, as I am traveling out of state over the next few days. Thanks for your assistance - DøveArgo Plans Examiner 1 I L . -.1-ìì On V/ed, Jan 30, 2019 at2:31 PM Dave Argo <darqo@garfield-cou wrote David & Kate: Just wanted to respond to David's call from yesterday afternoon. After discussing the side yard setback issue in our weekly staff mtg. it was decided that a couple of our planners needed to dig a little deeper into the Land Use Change Permit for your Mountain Shadow Place project - simply because David Pesnichak is no longer on staff & we don't have his first-hand knowledge of working through that approval process with you. Claire Dalby & Glenn Hartmann are going to team up on this and you should be hearing back from us by end of this week. Thanks for your patience on this issue. Dave Argo Plans Examiner 2 lfvrn.¡z.tT4IeYVl\";--çrT+\f.Ëìú)=',\o{=$È,ü<E-ss'Ê!ÞçÁÈ-Fru f,,¡mffi Ji; *:iS; d* -1]v:I Trr'-tl\ Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: David Rasmussen <david@davidrasmussendesign.com> Thursday, January 31, 2019 1 1:26 AM Dave Argo Kate Schwerin; Claire Dalby; Glenn Hartmann Re: Mtn. Shadow Place - Side Yard Setbacks Hi Dave, Thank you again for your time yesterday review the issues we are facing. Can you let me know if the design represented in the drawing below will satis$ code for the deck and retaining wall? After review the code again, I am unable to find where the ofßet from the retaining wall to the deck is called out in the code. This drawing is the East Elevation of Lot 2. Retaining wall is 6'tall from finished grade to top of wall. I was able to get a2'-6" offset from the deck to the retaining wall which will allow ample room for a person to walk between the deck and wall. There will be a3' ruilingon the deck and the retaining wall. If this looks like it will work for you, I'11have Sopris Engineering proceed with the new site plan based on these changes and revise the entire drawing set for re-submission. Thank you, Dave 1 Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Dave Argo Monday, February 11,2019 3:05 PM 'David Rasmussen' RE: Moving forwardSubject: David: I appreciate your recent email and forthríghtness in admitting that drawings prepared for the Mountain Shadow Place project were incomplete, not well coordinated and absent of required engineering plans. With all future projects please make certain that you submit to our office a complete and well-coordinated package for review, and this will unquestionably allow for the process to go much more smoothly' As you may have sensed in our recent communications, I have reached the point of frustration by virtue of having such minimal and confounding drawings submitted for our plan review. As I have told you before, it's not our role to design a project for you, nor are we here to help you to learn how to become a developer. That burden belongs with you, and it's important that you learn when to engage professionals to assist you with your development projects - and to facilitate more expedient plan review and approvals by our office. Our office is certainly willing and able to help you understand our building and land use development codes. Additionally, we can sometimes help you identify specific design professionals that you may need to include on your project team. But please engage us in conversations earlier in the process, rather than rushing into our office with an incomplete submittal package which will result in longer review times and, as a result, negatively affect your own expectations about how quickly approvals from our office will take. Dave Argo Plans Examiner Garlietd Çnuni¡' Community Development Department 708 gth Street, Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: 970-945-8272 Ext. 7610 Emo il : da rg o @ go rfiel d-cou nty' com Web : ga rfi eld-cou nty.com From: David Rasm ussen ImailtO :david @davidrasm ussendesign.com] Sent: Thursday, February7,2O19 1:50 PM To: Dave Argo Cc: Kate Schwerin; Steve NovY Subject: Moving forward Hi Dave, Thanks againfor all your insight and help in steering this project in the right direction. I want to apologize about submitting incomplete drawings. We had never intended on those drawings being reviewed. We handed in drawings to git in ünã for permit ánd were intending to replace them with coordinated drawings that included structural and foundation engìneering before you reviewed them. I had assumed I would have time to do so. That didn't happen and its taken longer than anticipated to pull together some of the coordination. It was obviously a big mistake to turn in drawing pre-maturely and for that I am sorry. I am leaming a lot through this process.,. I'm going to mcet up with Steve next week to gct things back on track. One good note, I didn't recall in the meeting what how we had dealt with the no tolerance width previously, but afterward I reviewed the current drawings and the building are in fact29'-6'wide, so we will have some wiggle room in siting them coneotly within the set backs and will not need to go through a lot line adjusünent. I wanted to let you know so you don't have to waste any time thinking about how that was going to be dealt with. We will be extra diligent during concrete work to maintain correct placement... Have a good day and we'll be in touch soon Dave David Rasmr¡ssen VR Gabinetmakers I PR!NCIPAL 826 C Hwy 133 Carbandale CO 81623 david(@vrcabinet. com I cell 802.236.267 7 2 Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Subject: Dave Argo Tuesday, March 19,2019 2:05 PM 'David Rasmussen' RE: Mountain Shadow Wet Stamp Site and Grading Plan David: Given the quantity and extent of revised information presumably being changed, am I correct in assuming that it may be most advantageous for you to submit new sets of drawings for all 3 duplexes?...(with the exception that the modular plans don't need to be resubmitted) lf that's the case, please include copies of the new site plan for all buildings (2 revised sets for each building). Thanks, Dave Argo Plans Examiner Garfuld County Community Development Department 708 gth Street, Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 8L601. Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. L610 Emo il : da rgo @ g o rfield-cou nty.com Web : go rfield-cou nty. com From: David Rasmussen Imailto:david@davidrasm ussendesign.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 19,20791"L:55 AM To: Dave Argo Subject: Mountain Shadow Wet Stamp Site and Grading Plan Hi Dave, How many copies of the site plan would you like? Do you need 6 or would like like just 2 sets. Thanks Dave David Rasmussen VR Cabinetmakers I PRINCIPAL 826 C Hvuy'133 Carbondaìe CO 81623 david@vrcabinet.com I cell 802.236.2677 1 67 GA-6OO-2009 FIRE RESISTANCE DESIGN MANUAL GYPSUIII WALLBOARD, WOOD STUDS one layer s/a" type X plain or predecorated gypsum wallboard applied parallel to each side o1 íx ¿woód studs 2a" o.c. with 6d coated nails, 1zia" long, 0.0915" shank, r/4" heads, 7" o.c. at joints and top and bottom plates and ¡/¡" beads of adhes¡ve at intermediate studs. Joints staggered 24" on oppos¡te sides. (LOAD'BEARING) Thickness: 471¿" Approx. Weight: 7 Psf Fire Test: FM \ /P 90,8-21-67 Sound Test: G&H NG-246FI 7-2-65 WALLS AND INTERIOR PARTITION S, WOOD FRAMED GENERICGA FILE NO. WP 3514 35 to 39 STC SOUND 1 HOUR FIRE GYPSUII WALLBOARD, WOOD STUDS one layer 5/s', type X gypsum wallboard or gypsum veneer base applied parallel or at right- ;"gba to eãón sidä;f 2 x 4 wood stuAJlO" o.c. w¡h 1rÀ' Type W drywall screws 12" o.c. Joints staggered 16" on opposite sides. (LOAD'BEARING) Thickness: 41¿" Approx. \Â/eight 7 psf Fire Test S\ /Rl 01-4511-619[rl, 3-94 Sound Test: See WP 3520 (G&H NG-246FT,7-2-65) GENERICGA FILE NO. WP 3520 35 to 39 STC SOUND 1 HOUR FIRE GENERICGA FILE NO, WP 3605 30 to 34 STC SOUND 1 HOUR FIRE GYPSUM WALLBOARD, WOOD STUDS onelayers/g'tyPeXplainorpredecoratedgypsumwallboard,water.resistantgypsum backing boarct, or gypsur u"ne"r nase apptièc parallel or at right angles to e,ach side of 2 x 4 r,iood studs ió;' o.c. with 6d coated nails, 17ls" long, 0.0915" shank, V¿" heads, 7" o.c. Joints of square edge, bevel edge or predecorated wallboard may be lefi exposed' Joints staggered 16" on opposite sides. (LOAD'BEARING) Thickness: 471s" Approx. Weight: 7 Psf Fire Test: UL R13194, -6, Ù17-52: uL R2717-39, 1-20-66; uL R3501-52, 3-15-66, UL Design U305; ULC Design V11301 Sound Test: OR 64-8, 24'64 Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dave Argo Wednesday, January 30,2019 2:31 PM 'David Rasmussen'; Kate Schwerin Claire Dalby; Glenn Hartmann Mtn. Shadow Place - Side Yard Setbacks David & Kate Just wanted to respond to David's call from yesterday afternoon. After discussing the side yard setback issue in our weekly staff mtg. it was decided that a couple of our planners needed to dig a little deeper into the Land Use Change Permit for your Mountain Shadow Place project - simply because David Pesnichak is no longer on staff & we don't have his first-hand knowledge of working through that approval process with you. Claire Dalby & Glenn Hartmann are going to team up on this and you should be hearing back from us by end of this week. Thanks for your patience on this issue Dave Argo Plans Examiner Gorfield County Community Development Department 708 gth Street, Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 81607 Tel: 970-945-8272 Ext. 7670 Em o i I : d a rg o @ g o rfi e I d -co u nty. com We b : g o rfi el d -co u n ty. co m 1