HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceDave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 5:19 PM
To: 'Pam Sudmeier'
Cc: 'walter@inclineaspenhomes.com'
Subject: Cerise Ranch, Lot 16 - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Attachments: 2-Family Fire Reqts..pdf; Bldg Ht Calculation.pdf
Pam:
I am currently reviewing plans for a new residence to be located at Cerise Ranch, Lot 16. However, there are a couple of
issues that must first be addressed before we can finalize our review and issue a permit for this project ... see below for
more information.
A. Fire -Rated Construction Assemblies between Primary Residence and ADU — In order to place two separate
dwellings within the same structure, the Building Code requires that these dwellings be separated by fire
resistive construction in accordance with provisions of the I.R.C., Section R302.3 "Two Family Dwellings". Please
refer to the PDF attachment (7 pages) which clarifies specific requirements. Garfield County Building Dept.
requires that a Colorado licensed Architect provide wet -sealed drawings (plans, details, sections, etc.) in
compliance with these requirements and this can perhaps be addressed in "Addendum" form by using
supplemental drawings (11 x 17 size, for example). In this particular situation, the demising walls and
ceiling/floor assemblies between the two dwellings must meet fire ratings requirements and any penetrations
through those building elements (fireplace flues, mechanical/plumbing, etc.) must be protected as described in
the building code. In addition, where floor assemblies are required to be fire -resistance rated the supporting
construction of such assemblies must also have an equal or greater fire -resistance rating.
B. BuildingHeieht —There isn't enough information provided on plans for us to ascertain whether or not the
proposed residence meets our 25-foot height limitation. Please refer to the attached PDF for definition and
calculation methods for establishing the building height above "Average Natural Grade" as described in our Land
Use & Development Code. If you can please provide us with an overlay of the building footprint on the pre -
construction topography with building corners clearly identified for use in determining the "Average Natural
Grade" plane for this building we'd greatly appreciate it. Please note that if the maximum building height as
calculated on plans is within 12" of the 25-foot height limitation, we will require that the Contractor provide the
Building Dept. with an as -built building height survey prepared and verified by a Colorado licensed Professional
Land Surveyor prior to final frame inspection.
If you can provide us with follow-up on these items at your earliest opportunity by providing us with the requested
information, we can then proceed with finalizing our plan review of this project. In the meantime, we will place these
plans in our "pending" file.
Thank you for your assistance with this matter.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
le.(►al_fit'ld C'ou,,tr•
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. 1610
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
1
Garfield County
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
108 Eighth Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: (970) 945-8212
Fire Separation Requirements at Two -Family Dwellings
Including ADUs located within the same structure as Primary Dwelling
August zolg
A Secondary or Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) located within the same structure as a primary dwelling
unit invokes certain Building Code provisions that require proper detailing of construction assemblies
on the part of the designer, as well as proper execution at the job site by the builder.
Building Code requirements for "two-family dwellings" include fire -rated construction assemblies at
walls, floors and/or roofs, as well as penetrations occurring in these fire-resistant building elements.
Fire separation requirements of two family dwellings are described in detail in Sections R302.3—R302.4
of the 2015 International Residential Code. For more detailed information, refer to the attached
requirements as excerpted from I.R.C. Code & Commentary — Volume 1.
Garfield County residential projects with two or more dwelling units in the same structure require a
Colorado licensed Architect to wet -seal drawings submitted for building permit. The Architect shall
specifically address key fire resistance provisions of the Building Code (as referenced above), and the
Architect must wet seal/stamp the drawings submitted along with the building permit application.
Drawings prepared by the Architect and submitted to the Building Department for permit shall include
the following:
1. For All Projects — Clearly identify location and extent of all fire -rated assemblies between adjacent
dwelling units — as shown on floor plans, building sections, details — and including the following
requirements:
a. Construction assemblies of both vertical and/or horizontal separations are required to meet
a one -hour fire -resistance rating (*Note: Fire sprinklers reduce fire -rating to 30 minutes).
b. Floor/ceiling and wall assemblies shall extend to and be tight against exterior walls. Wall
assemblies shall extend from foundation up to underside of roof sheathing.
c. Where floor assemblies are required to be fire -resistance rated, supporting construction
(walls, beams, posts) shall have an equal or greater fire -resistance rating.
d. Penetrations (including electrical, recessed lights & mechanical ductwork) located within
fire -rated assemblies shall comply with specific requirements.
2. For New Construction Projects — Show detailed drawings or otherwise describe wall, floor, ceiling,
and roof fire -rated assemblies. Reference numbers of approved construction assemblies from
nationally recognized agencies (for example, Underwriters' Laboratories, U.S. Gypsum Association,
etc.) may be submitted, but descriptive specifications and/or illustrations must also be included.
3. For Retrofit/Remodel Projects — In lieu of specific documentation for the original structure, the
Building Department may accept installation of (2) layers of 5/8" Type X drywall at one side of wall,
floor/ceiling, or roof assemblies to provide the required one -hour fire rating between adjacent
dwelling units. The Architect may otherwise provide alternative fire resistance rating for assembly
components as per Chapter 7 of the 2015 I.B.C.
Attachments:
• "Two -Family Dwellings — Fire Separation Requirements" as excerpted from 2015 I.R.C. Code/Commentary
Two -Family Dwellings: Fire Separation Requirements
BUILDING PLANNING
f • � 3 FT
�: ti
ROOF SLOPE
MORE THAN 2:12
ROOF SLOPE OF
2:12 OR LESS
For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 304.8 mm.
UST EXTEND TO NOT LESS THAN
I TAHEE HERAPET HT OFAN PORT ON OF THE ROOF
WITHIN A DISTANCE OF 3 FT
30 IN. MIN
(ADJACENT ROOF NOT
SHOWN FOR Ca -Mil I Y)
Figure R302.2.3
PARPET REQUIREMENTS
R302.2.4 Structural independence. Each individual town-
house shall be structurally independent.
Exceptions:
1. Foundations supporting exterior walls or common
walls.
2. Structural roof and wall sheathing from each unit
fastened to the common wall framing.
3. Nonstructural wall and roof coverings.
4. Flashing at termination of roof covering over com-
mon wall.
5. Townhouses separated by a common wall as pro-
vided in Section R302.2, Item 1 or 2.
0 Each townhouse must be structurally independent and
capable of being removed without affecting the adja-
cent dwelling unit. This provision is applicable only to
townhouses, not two-family dwellings. This indepen-
dence is useful not only in the event of a fire in one unit,
but also during any remodeling or alteration. The
objective of this structural independence is that a com-
plete burnout could occur on one side of the wall with-
out causing the collapse of the adjacent townhouse.
This condition occurs rarely. The provision also helps if
there is ever a fire or other problem by creating a clear
separation between the units. With separate owner-
ship and each owner having a different insurance com-
pany, the ability to gain access or get repairs made can
be difficult and time consuming. By having clearly sep-
arated units, it is much easier to determine who is
responsible and to make any needed repairs.
The code lists five exceptions that waive the struc-
tural independence requirement. A quick review of the
exceptions shows that they generally deal with items
that will not structurally affect townhouses should a
problem develop in the adjacent dwelling unit. Excep-
tion 1 is based on the norm within the industry for foun-
dation construction. In the code, Section R402 lists
only wood and concrete within the foundation materi-
als section, although Section R404 accepts masonry
foundation walls. In general, concrete and masonry
are the most common types of foundations; wood foun-
dations are viewed as unique. Given the performance
of both masonry and concrete, and the fact that these
foundation systems must sustain loads from both the
structure and the adjacent soils, it is reasonable to
assume that the foundation will not be the item that
fails in most situations. Permitting a common founda-
tion also helps solve other problems that would arise if
the structural independence Issue were taken as an
absolute. An example where requiring separate foun-
dations would probably create more problems or diffi-
culty is in the dampproofing or waterproofing of below -
grade foundation walls.
If a wood foundation is used between adjacent units,
what is the level of fire protection that may be needed?
Because concrete and masonry foundations are the
norm, It would be easy to forget or overlook protecting
the foundation when it is constructed of wood. In these
cases, it would seem appropriate to deal with the foun-
dation as any other wall, and protect it on any exposed
side. The level of fire resistance should be equal to that
of the wall or walls that the foundation supports.
11302.3 Two-family dwellings. Dwelling units in two-family
dwellings shall be separated from each other by wall and
floor assemblies having not less than a 1-hour fire -resistance
rating where tested in accordance with ASTM E119 or UL
263. Fire -resistance -rated floor/ceiling and wall assemblies
2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE® COMMENTARY 3-47
BUILDING PLANNING
shall extend to and be tight against the exterior wall, and wall
assemblies shall extend from the foundation to the underside
of the roof sheathing.
Exceptions:
1. A fir -resistance rating of 1/2 hour shall be permitted in
buildings equipped throughout with an automatic
sprinkler system installed in accordance with NFPA
13,
2. Wall assemblies need not extend through arctic spaces
where the ceiling is protected by not less than 54 inch
(15.9 nun) Type X gypsum board, an auk draft stop
constructed as specified in Section R302.12.1 is pro-
vided above and along the wail assembly separating
the dwellings and the structural framing supporting
the ceiling is protected by not less than '1:-inch (12.7
inm) gypsum board or equivalent.
4 Most of the nation's fires occur in residentiaT6uildings,
particularly one- and two-family dwellings. These fires
account for more than 80 percent of all deaths from fire
in residential uses (including hotels, apartments. dor-
mitories, etc.) and about two-thirds of all fire fatalities in
any type of building. One- and two-family dwellings
also account for more than 80 percent of residential
properly losses and more than one-half of all property
fosses from fire. Despite this poor fire record, there is
widespread resistance to mandating much in the way
of fire protection systems or methods because of our
society's belief that people's homes are their castles.
This viewpoint has limited the types of protection that
are imposed on these private homes to the installation
of smoke alarms and the more recent requirement of
dwelling unit separation. Section R302.3 provides a
separation for protection of the occupants of one dwell-
ing unit in a two-family dwelling from the actions of their
1 •HR FIRE-RESISTANT WALL TO EXTEND
TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING -
neighbor In the adjacent dwelling unit. To accomplish
this protection, the code addresses separation
between the units, structural support and any openings
or penetrations of the separation.
Depending on the layout of the various dwelling
units, Section R302.3 requires that the walls andlar
floor assemblies that divide one dwelling unit from the
adjacent unit be at least 1-hour fire -resistance rated.
See Commentary Figure R302.3 for examples of the
separation. The separation rating is to be determined
by either ASTM E119 or UL 263, which is the normal
test used for determining fire resistance. Many tested
assemblies are available for use in these locations.
The provisions of the section also address the con-
tinuity of the separation, so that one dwelling unit Is
completely divided from the other. The horizontal
aspect of the separation, which requires that the
assemblies extend to and be tight against the exterior
wall, is not difficult to comply with. It is most likely the
vertical aspect (continuing a wall assembly to the
underside of the roof sheathing) that will require some
detailed planning, careful construction and careful
inspection for the units to be separated.
Exception 1 grants a reduction In the required sepa-
ration for those cases in which the building is equipped
with an automatic sprinkler system. In these cases, a
rating o€'!2 hour is permitted versus a 1-hourfire-resis-
tance rating. The sprinkler system roust be "installed in
accordance with NFPA 13," and is to be installed
"throughout" the building. The type of sprinkler system
used must meet NFPA 13 and may not be installed to
either NFPA 13D or 13R, even though those two stan-
dards do address certain types of residential uses. The
word "throughout" requires that the sprinkler system be
installed in all portions of both dwelling units and any
DWELLING
UNIT B
DWELLING
UNIT B
DWELLING
UNITA
DWELLING
UNIT B
1-HR FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY
TO EXTEND TO EXTERIOR WALL
(SUPPORT PER SECTION R302.3,1
fS REQUIRED)
Figure R302.3
DWELLING UNIT SEPARATIONS IN TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS
3-40 2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE® COMMENTARY
common spaces. The provisions of NFPA 13 that per-
mit omitting sprinklers in certain areas, such as small
concealed spaces, are applicable. Therefore, the pro-
vision requires a complying sprinkler system "through-
out" the building (that is, in all areas of the building that
must be protected according to the standard), and it
does not accept any partial system, such as one
Installed In only one dwelling unit or only in the base-
ment level of both units.
Exception 2 addresses separation in the area of the
attic of two-family dwellings or duplexes. As long as an
attic draft stop Is present that meets the requirements
in Section R302.12.1, the 1-hour fire separation is per-
mitted to stop at a ceiling constructed of 6/0-inch (1d.Y
mm) Type X gypsum board. This may be beneficial as,
in many cases, the type of truss or attic rafter and rafter
tie/collar tie configuration will prohibit continuing con-
struction of the 1-hour separation wall all the way up to
the roof sheathing.
R302.3.1 Supporting construction. Where floor assemblies
are required to be fire -resistance rated by Section R302.3, the
supporting construction of such assemblies shall have an
equal or greater fire -resistance rating.
4 This provision applies only to walls that support the
fire -resistance -rated floor assemblies that form tho
separation between dwelling units in a two-family
dwelling where the dwelling units are stacked verti-
cally. When either all or portions of a dwelling unit sep-
aration are provided by a floor assembly, the code
requires that the structural supports for the separation
have a rating equal to or higher than the floor. This is
conceptually similar to the garage separation of Sec-
tion R302.6. Without the supporting construction being
protected, a fire on the lower level could lead to an
early failure of the dwelling unit separation (see Com-
mentary Figure R302.3.1).
— DWELLING UNIT
SEPARATION
SUPPORTING CONSTRUCTION'
REQUIRES EQUAL OR GREATER
FIRE -RESISTANCE RATING
Figure R302.3.1
SUPPORT OF DWELLING UNIT SEPARATION
R302.4 Dwelling unit rated penetrations. Penetrations of
wall or floor -ceiling assemblies required to be fire -resistance
rated in accordance with Section R302.2 or R3(12,3 shall be
protected in accordance with this section.
+ This section addresses the specific requirements for
maintaining the integrity of fire -resistance -rated
2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE® COMMENTARY
BUILDING PLANNING
assemblies at penetrations. If the penetration of a
rated assembly is not properly constructed, the assem-
bly itself is jeopardized and may not perform as
intended. The provisions of this section apply to pene-
trations of fire -resistance -rated walls and floor/ceiling
assemblies that are a part of the dwelling unit separa-
tion in either two-family dwellings or townhouses. Pen-
etrations of the rated assemblies range from
combustible pipe and tubing to noncombustible wiring
with combustible covering to noncombustible items,
such as pipe, tube, conduit and ductwork.
Each type of penetration requires a specific method
of protection, which is based on the type of fire -resis-
tance -rated assembly penetrated and the size and
type of the penetrating item. The first step in determin-
ing the type of penetration protection required Is to
identify whether a wall or floor/telling assembly is
being penetrated. The next step is to determine the
type of penetrating item and whether it is a membrane
or through penetration. Once these factors are known,
then the applicable section must be applied and the
applicable method of protection must be decided upon.
R302.4.1 Through penetrations. Through penetrations of
fire -resistance -rated wall or floor assemblies shall comply
with Section R302.4.1.1 or R302.4.1.2.
Exception: Where the penetrating items are steel, ferrous
or copper pipes, tubes or conduits, the annular space shall
be protected as follows:
1. In concrete or masonry wall or floor assemblies,
concrete, grout or mortar shall be permitted where
installed to the full thickness of the wall or floor
assembly or the thickness required to maintain the
fire -resistance rating, provided that both of the fol-
lowing are complied with:
1.1. The nominal diameter of the penetrating
item is not more than 6 inches (152 mm).
1.2. The area of the opening through the wall does
not exceed 144 square inches (92 900 mm2).
2. The material used to fill the annular space shall pre-
vent the passage of flame and hot gases sufficient to
ignite cotton waste where subjected to ASTM E119
or UL 263 time temperature fire conditions under a
positive pressure differential of not less than 0.01
inch of water (3 Pa) at the location of the penetration
for the time period equivalent to the fire -resistance
rating of the construction penetrated.
. This section contains the general requirements for
through penetrations, which are penetrations that pass
through an entire assembly. A through penetration is in
contrast to a membrane penetration, which creates a
penetration through only one side of an assembly.
Meinbrane penetrations are addressed later in Section
R302.4.2. See Commentary Figure R302.4.1 for an
Illustration of these two types of penetrations.
Through penetrations must be protected to maintain
the fire resistance of the penetrated assembly. The
code states two methods, found in Sections
R302.4.1.1 and R302.4.1.2, which can be used to
3-49
BUILDING PLANNING
assure the adequacy of the penetration protection. The
difference between these two is the test methodology
used, but they both provide essentially the same
results. The commentary for those sections is addi-
tional discussion of the differences.
Based on the history of these provisions and on the
wealth of fire test data that exists concerning items
such as conduit, water piping and other similar pene-
trations, the code provides two exceptions that permit
protection by methods other than those generally
required. The first permits the use of concrete, grout or
mortar to protect certain penetrations of concrete and
masonry wall or floor assemblies. The concrete, grout
or mortar must he applied for the full thickness of the
assembly unless evidence can be produced demon-
strating that the required fire -resistance rating can be
achieved with a lesser depth. Concrete, grout and mor-
tar have traditionally been used as protection for the
annular space in penetrations of concrete and
masonry assemblies. Experience has shown this form
of protection to be viable.However, caution must be
used any time something, such as a water pipe or con-
duit, is placed in concrete or masonry. Sections
P2603.3 and P2603.5 contain examples of protection
of plumbing systems.
Exception 2 addresses the space between the pen-
etrating item and the original assembly construction.
This gap Is called the annular space, and this excep-
tion provides a method to simply evaluate the perfor-
mance of the material used to fill that space. It is often
mistakenly believed that this exception permits a vari-
ety of untested items, but as can be seen from the pro-
vision itself, the materials need to meet a specific
performance level. This exception requires that the
ability of the material to prevent the passage of flame
and hot gases sufficient to ignite cotton when sub-
jected to the time -temperature criteria of the ASTM
E 119 test standard be prequalified. This requirement is
similar to provisions found in both ASTM E 119 and
ASTM E814, the standards used to evaluate fire-resis-
THROUGH
PENETRATION
SEC. R302A.1
MEMBRANE
PENETRATIONS
SEC. H302.4.2
Figure R302.4.1
TYPES OF PENETRATIONS
3-50
taut assemblies and penetration protection. Because it
Is very likely that the penetration In the actual fire will be
exposed to a positive pressure, this section specifies
that the test -fire exposure include a positive pressure
of 0.01 inch (0.25 mm) of water column as a further
means to verify the performance of this protection
method. Thus•the protection will not be blown out or
moved from its place during a fire.
R302.4.1.1 Fire -resistance -rated assembly. Penetrations
shall be installed as tested in the approved fire -resistance -
rated assembly.
+ This section addresses situations in which the penetra-
tion is tested as a part of the regular full-scale test for
the wall or floor/ceiling assembly. The penetration and
proposed type of protection are evaluated as a part of
the regular ASTM E119 test, which evaluates the wall
or floor/ceiling rating. This section and the option it pro-
vides are not used frequently because of the cost of
conducting such full-scale tests and the limitations
placed on the application of the tested assembly.
Because of these issues, penetrations are most often
protected in accordance with one of the exceptions in
Section R302.4.1 or the provisions of Section
R302.4.1.2.
R302.4.1.2 Penetration firestop system. Penetrations shall
be protected by an approved penetration firestop system
installed as tested in accordance with ASTM E814 or UL
1479, with a positive pressure differential of not less than
0.0I inch of water (3 Pa) and shell have an F rating of not less
Man the required fire -resistance rating of the wall or floor -
ceiling assembly penetrated.
�+ Through -penetration flrestop systems consist of spe-
cific materials or an assembly of materials that are
designed to restrict the passage of fire and hot gases
for a prescribed period of time through openings made
in fire -resistance -rated assemblies. To determine the
effectiveness of a through -penetration firestop system
in restricting the passage of fire, and to determine that
the penetration has not jeopardized the original fire-
resistant assembly, firestop systems must be subjected
to fire testing using the ASTM E814 or UL 1479 test
standard. This is a small-scale test method developed
specifically for the evaluation of a firestop system's abil-
ity to resist the passage of flame and hot gases, with-
stand thermal stresses and restrict the transfer of heat
through the penetrated assembly. There are hundreds
if not thousands of tested through -penetration firestop
systems available today. The actual type of system
used will depend on the type and construction of t€le
assembly being penetrated, the material makeup and
size of the penetrating item, and the size of the annular
space that exists between the penetrating item and the
assembly being penetrated. Because there are a multi-
tude of products available, and there is no 'one size fts
Er system available, it is helpful if the methods of pro-
tection are included on the construction documents as
covered by Section R106.1.1.
The actual rating of the; through -penetration firestop
system Is generated from the results of the testing and
2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE° COMMENTARY
is reported as an "F" (flame) rating and a "T" (tempera-
ture) rating. The code requires only an F rating. The F
rating indicates the period of time, In hours, that the
through -penetration firestop system remained in place
without allowing the passage of fire during the fire expo-
sure test, or the passage of water during the hose
stream portion of the test_ The required F rating must be
equal to the fire -resistance rating of the wall or floor/oeil-
ing assembly that is being penetrated. This means
either a 1- or 2-hour rating, depending on the dwelling
unit separation.
Two of the most common materials used in through -
penetration fireston systems are intumescent and
endothermic materials. Intumescent materials expand
approximately 8 to 10 times their original volume when
exposed to temperatures exceeding 250°F (121°C).
The expansion of the material fills the voids or openings
within the penetration to resist the passage of flame,
while the outer layer of the expanded intumescent
material forms an insulating charred layer that assists in
limiting the transfer of heat. The expansion properties of
intumescent materials allow them to seal openings left
by combustible penetrating items that burn away during
a fire, but they do not retard heat as well as endothermic
materials. Intumescent materials are typically used with
combustible penetrating items or where a higher T rat-
ing is not required.
Endothermic materials provide protection through
chemically bound water released in the form of steam
when exposed to temperatures exceeding 600°F
(316°C). This released water cools the penetration and
retards heat transfer through the penetration. Endother-
mic materials tend to be superior in heat -transfer resis-
tance and have higher T ratings, but they do not expand
to fill voids left by combustible penetrating items that
burn away during a fire. Therefore, endothermic mate-
rials are typically used with noncombustible penetrating
items and where a higher T rating Is required.
R302.4.2 Membrane penetrations. Membrane penetrations
shall comply with Section R302.4.1. Where walls are required
to have a fire -resistance rating, recessed fixtures shall be
installed so that the required fire -resistance rating will not be
reduced.
Exceptions:
1. Membrane penetrations of not more than 2-hour fire -
resistance -rated walls and partitions by steel electri-
cal boxes that do not exceed 16 square inches (0.0103
m2) in area provided that the aggregate area of the
openings through the membrane does not exceed 100
square inches (0.0645 m2) in any 100 square feet
(9.29 rrn') of wall area. The annular space between the
wall membrane and the box si II not excccd'4 inch
(3.1 mm). Such boxes on opposite sides of the wall
shall be separated by one of the following:
1.1. By a horizontal distance of nut less (Lau 24
inches (610 mm) where the wall or partition
is constructed with individual noncommuni-
cating stud cavities.
BUILDING PLANNING
1.2. By a horizontal distance of not less than the
depth of the wall cavity where the wall cav-
ity is filled with cellulose loose -fill, rock -
wool or slag mineral wool insulation.
1.3. By solid fireblocking in accordance with
Section R302.11.
1.4. By protecting both boxes with listed putty
pads.
1.5. By other listed materials and methods.
2. Membrane penetrations by listed electrical boxes of
any materials provided that the boxes have been
tested for use in fire -resistance -ruled assemblies and
are installed in accordance with the instructions
included in the listing. The annular space between the
wall membrane and the box shall not exceed 1/8 inch
(3.1 mm) unless listed otherwise. Such boxes on
opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by one of
the following:
2.1. By the horizontal distance specified in the
listing of the electrical boxes.
2.2. By solid fireblocicing in accordance with
Section R302.11.
2.3. By protecting bush boxes with listed putty
pads.
2.4. By other listed materials and methods.
3. The annular space created by the penetration of a
fire sprinkler provided that it is covered by a metal
escutcheon plate.
This section deals with instances where only a single
side of the fire -resistance -rated assembly is pene-
trated. This would be the situation for Items such as
electrical outlet boxes or plumbing fixtures located on
one side of the wall only. Commentary Figure R302.4.1
shows this type of penetration. For the most part, a
membrane penetration is to be protected by one of the
previously described methods established for through
penetrations. However, there are some penetrations
that are allowed without a specific flrestopping material
in the annular space around them. These are
addressed by the exceptions. This section also deals
with the installation of recessed luminaires in fire -resis-
tance -rated assemblies and states that their installation
may not reduce the assembly's protection. Although
these fixtures are common, they do represent a pene-
tration of the assembly's protection and must be
installed so that the assembly is not compromised.
Exception 1 allows penetrations of steel electrical
outlet boxes under certain conditions. The criteria of
this section limit the size of the box to 16 square inches
(0.0103 m') or less in area and to an aggregate area not
to exceed 100 square inches (64 500 rnm2) in each 100
square foot (9.3 m2) area. Commentary Figure
R302.4.2(1 ) shows some of the requirements of this
section. The area limitations are consistent with the cri-
teria from fire tests, which have shown that within these
limitations, these penetrations will not adversely affect
the fire -resistance rating of the assembly. However, the
2016 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE* COMMENTARY 3.61
BUILDING PLANNING
boxes are assumed to be installed as they were during
the fire tests. In general, the test requirements match
the limitations shown by the code regarding their size
and the need to be offset. An additional requirement,
one that does not appear in the code, regulates the size
of the annular space created around the outlet boxes.
Both the Underwriters Laboratory's (UL) Fire -Resis-
tance Directory arid the Gypsum Association's Fire -
resistance Design Manual specify a maximum over -cut
of 'I Inch (3 mm) for the annular space around the out-
let boxes. Additionally, Article 314 of the National Elec-
trical Code (NEC) (also known as NFPA 70) includes
the size limitation of the over -cut. Therefore, the excep-
tion applies only when the boxes are installed as they
were during the original fire tests, including the limited
annular space. Because outlet boxes on both sides of a
wall create penetrations of both layers of a wail assem-
bly's protection, the code provides five methods to
address this problem. This gives code users several
options and does not limit them to the usual 24-inch
(610 mm) offset.
Exception 2 permits using outlet boxes of nonmetallic
materials if they have been specifically tested. Because
many different types of nonmetallic boxes are available,
It Is important to determine that the boxes being used in
the rated dwelling unit separation have been tested.
Although the exception applies to nonmetallic electrical
outlet boxes, the same concept would apply to steel
boxes that exceed the sizes specified in Exception 1.
Exception 3 provides an alternative to the annular
space protection provisions for a fire sprinkler that pen-
etrates a single membrane. This exception is available
if the annular space around the sprinkler is completely
covered by an escutcheon plate of noncombustible
material. The nature of the hazard posed by single -
membrane penetrations of the sprinkler is limited by the
size of the opening, the potential number of openings
present and the presence of a sprinkler system. The
installation of a noncombustible escutcheon provides
protection against the free passage of fire through the
annular space and allows for the movement of the
sprinkler piping without breaking during a seismic event
[see Commentary Figure R302.4.2(2)).
COMPLYING STEEL
ELECTRICAL BOX-
r^ FIRE -RESISTANCE -
RATED WALL
MIN 24 IN. `I
SEPARATION
BOX SIZE: 516 SQ IN.
WITH MAX OF 100 SO IN.
PER 100 SQ FT OF WALL
PLAN SECTION OF WAIL
STEEL ELECTRICAL OUTLET BOX PENETRATION
For SI: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 square Inch = 845 mm2, 1 square foot = 0.0929 m2.
Figure R302.4.2(1)
MEMBRANE PENETRATION BY OUTLET BOX
ANNULAR SPACE AT SPRINKLER PENETRATION
NOT REQUIRED TO BE PROTECTED WHERE
COVERED BY METAL ESCUTCHEON PLATE -
ESCUTCHEON PLATE
PENDENT SPRINKLER
ir CEILING MEMBRANC
Figure R302.4.2(2)
EXCEPTION TO ANNULAR SPACE PROTECTION
9-52
2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE COMMENTARY
RC
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
108 Eighth Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: (970) 945-8212, Fax: (970) 384-3470
Garfield County
Building Height Definition and Calculation Procedure
As defined in Garfield County Land Use & Development Code (Article 15, Definitions):
Height, Building — The distance, measured vertically, from the average undisturbed or
natural ground grade horizontal plane of a structure footprint to the top of a flat roof or
mansard roof or to the mid -point between the eave line and the peak of a gable, hip,
shed, or similar pitched roof.
In order to measure distances and calculate building height according to the preceding definition, one
must first establish the average natural grade plane of the subject project site. Subsequent calculations
of building height all reference this benchmark, and this flat plane elevation is determined by averaging
out the existing site grades (typically illustrated as topographic contour lines) on the site plan. Using a
simplistic rectangular floor plan as an example, existing site grades at all four corners of the building
footprint are added together and divided by 4, thereby establishing the average natural grade plane
elevation (see illustration below).
72 _
&&Mink- FRE-cot,fSTRUcttON
60JTouR 9 �: slt
rborrtz1or
Calculating Average Natural Grade:
Corner A = 94.75
Corner B = 96.0
Corner C = 93.0
Corner D = 92.0
Total = 375.75
Average Natural Grade Elevation:
375.75 / 4 = 93.9375
"Average Natural Grade" is used in calculating Building Height
With more complex building footprint configurations, a greater number of building corners will be
employed, but the intent remains the same: to define the average natural grade elevation within the
confines of the building footprint. Flatter lots will see very little difference between existing site grades
at the building corners, whereas steeply sloping lots will have greater variation between building
corners. However, the result in both situations will be establishment of a flat horizontal plane which
represents average pre -construction grades at the project site prior to any proposed development.
Measuring Building Height above Average Natural Grade Plane
To the extent that the designer provides clear delineation of the existing natural grade plane and
measurements to roofs above, it will help facilitate speedy review and confirmation of building height
during the plan review of the project. Design drawings that illustrate building height most clearly will
typically include exterior elevations and building sections.
A couple of basic illustrations for measurement of building height are provided below:
i
i
iJ
Yiiziq ITT
L
�ozn
Acko✓•ye usrli sifr✓6e( // 4 lain 1
9✓n4"_. a 1- sk A c lure 1,ri s/
ELEVATION VIEW
*Note: Refer back to the definition of "Building Height" on page one to verify specific measuring points
for the various types of roofs including flat or mansard vs. shed, hip or gable pitched roofs.
'c�Fr
%AlSrlu(y GAAD'Ft .
3-D VIEW
It is recommended that all buildings be designed a minimum of several inches lower than absolute
maximum building height, as there are design and construction tolerances which must be accounted for
in any project. If design drawings indicate that roofs are within 12" of the maximum building height, the
Building Department will require a Building Height Survey (aka Improvement Location Certificate) at
framing inspection, sealed and stamped by a Colorado licensed professional Surveyor to insure that the
building has, in fact, been built in compliance with building height requirements.
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:31 AM
To: Pam Sudmeier; walter@inclineaspenhomes.com
Cc: Bill Gavette (gavette@carbondalefire.org)
Subject: Cerise Ranch, Lot 16 - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Pam:
One additional item that must also be addressed with this project concerns requirements for installation of an automatic
Fire Sprinkler system. Total "Fire Area" of this new residence (including residence, garage & covered decks/patios)
exceeds 6,400 S.F. allowable size and therefore invokes requirements for inclusion of a fire sprinkler system as stated on
the final plat and subsequently revised by Carbondale Fire District requirements.
Our calculations of overall project size are as follows:
Residence 4,325
Garage 835
Covered Decks 1,875
TOTAL FIRE AREA = 7,035 S.F.
I strongly encourage either you or the General Contractor to contact Bill Gavette at Carbondale Fire District directly to
provide him with a set of plans, review specific design/build requirements and inspections policies for the fire sprinkler
system. For your convenience and to facilitate open communications about this matter, I have also copied Bill on this
email, or you can contact him via phone at: (970) 963-2491.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
4E:. Garfield County fi
Community Development Department
108 80 Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. 1610
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
1
Dave Argo
From: Walter Hooker <inclineaspenhomes@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 8:12 AM
To: gavette@carbondalefire.org
Cc: Pam Sudmeier; Dave Argo
Subject: [External] Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Bill
Good morning.
I am following up an an email sent by Dave Argo in regards to the Covered deck areas at Lot 16 in Cerise Ranch.
I have spoken to the homeowners and they have agreed to remove the 2 south facing roofs that flank the large dormer
to reduce the covered deck area calculations and reduce the size of the deck from 11'6" to 10'.
Will you please let me know if this will allow us to proceed without having to install a fire suppression system?
Thank You
Walter Hooker
(970) 379-4463
Walter@Inclineasoenhomes.com
IN•LINE
CONSTRUCTION
1
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 9:24 AM
To: Walter Hooker; Bill Gavette
Cc: Pam Sudmeier
Subject: RE: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Walter:
As long as amended/updated plans submitted to our office actually calculate out to be under the maximum allowable
fire area, that will work.
As I told Pam previously, the Building Dept. performs our own S.F. calculations — not simply relying on numbers
submitted to us — so I suggest that any modifications (reductions) start by using the square footages I sent to you in a
previous email.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
(Garfield County
Community Development Department
108 8« Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. 1610
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
From: Walter Hooker <inclineaspenhomes@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:50 AM
To: Bill Gavette <gavette@carbondalefire.org>
Cc: Pam Sudmeier <pam@sudmeier.com>; Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Dave,
Are you Ok with this reduction?
Please let us know
Walter Hooker
(970) 379-4463
Wa l terCr I n cl i nea seen h o mes.co m
IN • LINE
CONSTRUCTION
On Dec 16, 2020, at 9:47 AM, Bill Gavette <gavette@carbondalefire.org> wrote:
1
Hi Walter,
I rely on the County's fire area calculations. As long as the County verifies the fire area reduction, I have
no issue with omitting the fire suppression system.
Thanks,
Bill Gavette
Deputy Chief
Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District
www.carbondalefire.org
970-963-2491
<image002.jpg>
From: Walter Hooker[ma ilto:inc lineaspenhomesCthgmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 8:12 AM
To: Bill Gavette
Cc: Pam Sudmeier; Dave Argo
Subject: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Bill
Good morning.
I am following up an an email sent by Dave Argo in regards to the Covered deck areas at Lot 16
in Cerise Ranch.
I have spoken to the homeowners and they have agreed to remove the 2 south facing roofs that
flank the large dormer to reduce the covered deck area calculations and reduce the size of the
deck from 11'6" to 10'.
Will you please let me know if this will allow us to proceed without having to install a fire
suppression system?
Thank You
Walter Hooker
(970) 379-4463
Waiters i n c l i n easoe n homes.com
<image003.jpg>
2
Dave Argo
From: Pam Sudmeier <Pam@sudmeier.com>
Sent: Monday, December 28, 2020 10:38 AM
To: Dave Argo
Cc: walter@inclineaspenhomes.com
Subject: [External] Cerise Ranch, Lot 16 - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590 reply to comments review
Attachments: 032 Cerise Ranch_Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590_12282020 .pdf; Andrew and Belinda Love-
firewall locations.pdf; Andrew and Belinda Love -Bldg Ht calculations.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
To Dave Argo
Subject: Cerise Ranch, Lot 16 - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
In reply to the 3 review comments below, please see the attached notes referencing the drawings.
As discussed, I will get 2 copies of the full size drawings as required and bring them to the office. The pdfs of
the 11x17 pages and the full size pages pdf are attached in this email.
Thank you Dave for your review and guidance.
Sincerely,
Pam
From: Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-countv.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 5:20 PM
To: Pam Sudmeier <Pam@sudmeier.com>
Cc: walter(inclineaspenhomes.com
Subject: Cerise Ranch, Lot 16 - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Pam:
I am currently reviewing plans for a new residence to be located at Cerise Ranch, Lot 16. However, there are a couple of
issues that must first be addressed before we can finalize our review and issue a permit for this project ... see below for
more information.
A. Fire -Rated Construction Assemblies between Primary Residence and ADU — In order to place two separate
dwellings within the same structure, the Building Code requires that these dwellings be separated by fire
resistive construction in accordance with provisions of the I.R.C., Section R302.3 "Two Family Dwellings". Please
refer to the PDF attachment (7 pages) which clarifies specific requirements. Garfield County Building Dept.
requires that a Colorado licensed Architect provide wet -sealed drawings (plans, details, sections, etc.) in
compliance with these requirements and this can perhaps be addressed in "Addendum" form by using
supplemental drawings (11 x 17 size, for example). In this situation, the demising walls and ceiling/floor
assemblies between the two dwellings must meet fire ratings requirements and any penetrations through those
building elements (fireplace flues, mechanical/plumbing, etc.) must be protected as described in the building
code. In addition, where floor assemblies are required to be fire -resistance rated the supporting construction of
such assemblies must also have an equal or greater fire -resistance rating. SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT 11X17.
B. Building Height — There isn't enough information provided on plans for us to ascertain whether or not the
proposed residence meets our 25-foot height limitation. Please refer to the attached PDF for definition and
calculation methods for establishing the building height above "Average Natural Grade" as described in our Land
Use & Development Code. If you can please provide us with an overlay of the building footprint on the pre-
1
construction topography with building corners clearly identified for use in determining the "Average Natural
Grade" plane for this building we'd greatly appreciate it. Please note that if the maximum building height as
calculated on plans is within 12" of the 25-toot height limitation, we will require that the Contractor provide the
Building Dept. with an as -built building height survey prepared and verified by a Colorado licensed Professional
Land Surveyor prior to final frame inspection.
If you can provide us with follow-up on these items at your earliest opportunity by providing us with the requested
information, we can then proceed with finalizing our plan review of this project. In the meantime, we will place these
plans in our "pending" file. SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT 11X17. FULL SIZE PAGES: A3.1, A3.2 ELEVATIONS UPDATED.
Thank you for your assistance with this matter.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
One additional item that must also be addressed with this project concerns requirements for installation of an automatic
Fire Sprinkler system. Total "fire Area" of this new residence (including residence, garage & covered decks/patios)
exceeds 6,400 S.F. allowable size and therefore invokes requirements for inclusion of a fire sprinkler system as stated on
the final plat and subsequently revised by Carbondale Fire District requirements.
Our calculations of overall project size are as follows:
Residence 4,325
Garage 835
Covered Decks 1,e74
TOTAL FIRE AREA = 7,035 S.F.
I strongly encourage either you or the General Contractor to contact Bill Gavette at Carbondale Fire District directly to
provide him with a set of plans, review specific design/build requirements and inspections policies for the fire sprinkler
system. For your convenience and to facilitate open communications about this matter, I have also copied Bill on this
email, or you can contact him via phone at: (970) 963-2491.
SEE ATTACHED FULL SIZE PAGES: COVER, A2.1, A2.2 PLANS AND A5.2 ROOF PLAN UPDATED.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
-�. Garfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. 1610
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
2
1
f �
f /
L_i L-,
NCLINECONSTRUCTWk
..r@IncfneespenM,res cerr
970-3744463
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
622 LARKSPUR DRIVE
CEW V E RAYC6 Pf22SE 2 LOT 16
CARBONDALE, CO
656 I
1 I 1'\\'
\'`)L "
l 1, r4 1
\\.\\\ 4urc\\/!-,
1111I 1 1
/
YA 1 --\. 1:1 \ \\ ti\
I 1"--Lijaao\
l
DITCH / ` z
///
___L_
67.4
CALCULATING AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE:
CORNER A=66.2
CORNER 6 = 67.4
CORNER C = 70.1
CORNER D = 68.8
CORNER E = 67 4
CORNER F = 67.4
CORNER G = 65.6
TOTAL = 472-9
AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE ELEVATION:
472.9 / 7 = 67.557
ISSUE DATE:
12-14-2020
0
HALL
L
LINE OF FIREPLACE CHASE BELOW RATED FLOOR ASSEMBLY- SEE DETAIL 5.
ONE HOUR FIRE -RESISTANCE WALL ASSEMBLY SHALL EXTEND FROM THE
FOUNDATION/SLAB ON GRADE TO THE UNDESIDE OF THE ONE HOUR DWELLING
UNIT FLOOR CEILING ASSEMBLY ABOVE. IRC 2015 R302.3 AND SEE DETAILS 3
AND 4.
PANTRY
ADU
LAUNDRY'
CLOSE
I 009 11 JI
MECH
at1
caL
BATH
11:10
f
I DW
KITCHEN
4.
r
BEDROOM
008
INCLINE CONSTRUCTION
Wa er Hooker
walter@incli easpenhomes oom
970-379-4463
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
032 LARKSPUR DRIVE
CERISE RANCH PHASE 2 LOT 16
CARBONDALE, CO
aFIRE RATED LOCATION PLAN VIEW
SCALE• f14' = 1'-p•
NOTE:
FIRE BLOCKING AND DRAFT STOPS INSTALLED PER IRC 2015
PENETRATIONS WILL BE PROTECTED PER IRC 2015 R302 4.
PENETRATIONS INCLUDE:
1.) RECESSED CAN UGHTING.
2-) OUTLETS AND SWflCHES
3.) FORCED AIR DUCTS.
LISTED ELECTRICAL BOXES Vr1LL BE INSTALLED PER R302.4.2
EXCEPTION #2. RECESSED CANNED LIGHTING Vv1LL BE APPROVED
LISTED ASSEMBLY AND FORCED AIR DUCTS WILL BE METAL AND
PROTECTED PER R302 4.1. ASSEMBUES WILL BE REVIEWED BY
INSPECTOR PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
.\ PENETRATIONS
`LJ SCALE: NIS
TJI AT 16" 0 C SEE STRUCTURAL
DRAWINGS.
tA A. A A.II
If V IF V tri
it
liii
I
illp
2 LAYERS 5/8" TYPE X GYP BD.
FLOOR/CEIUNG•
PROTECT PER IBC 2015 TABLE 721.1(3), ITEM #26-1.1
(\ 1 HOUR FLOOR/CEILING
•\ bUALt: 1-1/Z = 1 -U
2X6 FRAMING PER STRUCTURAL
h. A. 11114A.Ii Ai! A. A 111
LAYER 5/8" TYPE X GYP. BD EACH SIDE
WALL:
FIRE PROTECT WALL PER IBC 2015 TABLE 721.1(2) ITEM #14-1.3.
2X6 @ 16" OC.
n1 HOUR WALLS
J SCALE: 1-1/2" = 1-0"
i1 HR RATED
FLOOR -CEILING
ASSEMBLY
MECHANICALLY FASTEN
STEEL J TRACK 24" O.C.
FLEXIBLE SEALANT
(OPTIONAL)
1R- TYPE S OR
S-12 PAN -HEAD
SCREWS
(TWO PER
STUD)
FDV451 DIRECT VENT
CHASE AND FLUE
CLEARANCES AND
INSTALLATION PER
FIREPLACE
SPECIFICATIONS
3-5/8" STEEL
STUDS 24" O.C.
MAX.
1/2" TYPE S OR S-12
PAN -HEAD SCREW
TRACK 24" O.C.
FASTENED 1 LAYER S'6' 1 LAYER 5/8"
TO STUDS 24" FIRE -SHIELD FIRE -SHIELD GYPSUM
0,C MAX. GYPSUM BOARD
1 HR RATED BOARD
WALL 3-5/8" STEEL STEEL TRACK
ASSEMBLY STUDS 16"
O.C. MAX.
CHASE DETAIL
�JJ SCALE: 1-1/2" = 1'-0
FIRE -RATED CONSTRUCTION ASSEMBLIES BETWEEN PRIMARY RESIDENCE AND AWL.
CERISE RANCH, LOT 16 - PERMIT #BLRE-11-20-6590 ISSUE DATE: 12.28.2020
PAGE 1 OF 1]
Olt
EXTERIOR IMAGERY MATERIALS AND COLOR PROPOSED SAMPLES
General Notes
A ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE
AND LOCAL WOES AND ORDINANCES ANDSHAL
LSE PERFORMED TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS
OF CRAFTMANSHIP BV JOURNEYMAN OF THE
APPROPRIATE TRADES.
B THE CONTRACTORSHALL BE RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE SAFETY AND CARE OF ADJACENT
PROPERTIES WRING CONSTRUCTKNJ FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE 0 S HA
REGULATIONS AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF
ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS DELIVERED TO THE OWNER
C. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME
RESPONSIBIUTY OF ITEMS REQUIRING
COORDINATION AND RESOLUTION WRING THE
BIDDING PROCESS AND CONSTRUCTION
D. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED
BY THE CONTRACTOR WHEN THERE IS NEED OF
INSPECTIONS A REQUIRED BY THE UFO AND ALL
LOC, CODE OR ORDINANCE
E ALL INTERIOR FINISHES, FIXTURES, PRODUCTS
SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH OWNER PRIOR TO
PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION
F. THE CONSTRUCTION INDICATED SHALL
COMPLYVWU4THITH IBC STANDARDS.
G. ALL DETAILS SHALL BE CONFIRMED WITH
WATER AND THERMAL CONSULTANT TO BE THE
BEST CONSTRUCTION PER REGULATIONS
H THE PROJECT SHALL COMPLY TO THE 20151BC.
IBAKO
@J6TICpl®i, SHALL BE
NATO tranw OMlR E1 PROVIDED BY A.
was wore.
Project Directory
CLASS OF WEAK
NEW RESIDENCE
OWNER
ANDREW AND BAINDA LOVE
..cwFSDw5.aQw21.1.4_ Dm
1A1.150605
GENERAL CONTRACTOR:
INCLINE CONSTRUCTION
WALTER HOOKER
1-81=79-00193
VALVE,.PEwD PDIdSxv
PAMELA SUOMEI.
(9701396-0385
PAMODSVOMEIERCOM
SIRUCIURAL ENGINEER:
ERNEST KOLNR ENGINEERS, INC
•+TREES. SUITE 203
CAR9NWLE DO P009379-7368 a
IEM 98=222
LL
ERMEwLLARMOMNLCOM
CIVIL ENGINEER
FirmAcLEOssIGN
HA. E BRUCKER PE
8. BUCK POINT ROAD
CARB NDALE CO 8161
9708m3110
KIEESP#MIND INC'A\
MO Homo..
I8711 BAsALT, co et S21.1
ISSUE DATE DECEMBER 28, 2020 GARFIELD COUNTY UPDATES CONSTRUCTION
SET
Sheet Index
( Q1ITECTURAL,
A-0 COVER
A-1 2 SITE PLAN
A. 13 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
AD I wrNL 4V161. 4
A2.1 MAIN LEVEL PLAN
A-3.1 ExTERKIR ELEVATIONS
PJ3 EXTERKN3 ELEVATIONS
5.1 SECTIONS
AS.2 ROOF PLAN AND WINDOW SCHEDULE
A-B.1 DETAILS
Ad.2 FIREPLACES
AL.3 AIR
A2.1 ADU KITCHEN AND BATH, LAUNDRY
A-72 ILBATHS AND BAT. BUNKS
A-7.3 KTICHEJ
A2.0 MASTER BATH AND POWDER
A2.5 MUDROOM, BATH1 AND BATH2
A-0.1 DESIGN INTENT IMAGERY
EG 1 LIGHTING PLANS
.Cps
Cl
STRUCT IRA,
Legal Description
ADDRESS
032 LARKSPUR DRIVE
CERISE RANCH PHASE 2
LOT 1E
LOWER LEVEL =1533 SF
MAIN LEVEL=2221 SF
GARAGE=1082 SF
MECH=B3 SF
TOTAL LIV.S£ • ME{SF
TOPOGRAPHY ELEVATION = 6375
ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION = 100 0"
St FOUNDATION PLAN
S2 MAN LEVEL FRAMING
NG
S3 ROOF FRAMING PLAN
SA STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES AND SPECIFICATIONS
S5 DETAILS
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
aa
0
0
N
ILI W
><
Q
oao
W
y z
KW2
O
re
oUC.)
ISSUE OATM
105 OORM.lq YF
t TAo Di a EmirYIg1N
COVER
AD
N
THO
EMI
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
sucuMoirdav
ISSUE DAIS:
QQ v CONACTycyrvWarre
waorwafMMrtrYII
t) TE
INTERIOR TRIM HEADS SHALL BE ~•mil
MOCKED UP MOOR TO rtwswRc. LOWER.LEVELPLAN
y.mniroe.w
A-2.1
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
0 O
J
W W
> to
000
1 z
N14o
Z
TWO
gam
oUU
ISSUE DATE:
,,,,==121.0 COMITY UPDATES
10233020 one REVIEW MOAT.
WIZ
1.)MEWORTRIM HEADS SHALL BE
zl venue Rs uHi�5g. nwsH MAIN.LEVEL.PLAN
3 I Apo SOUR RAHEIS RER cc.
Ma'
1-.•ct
.9..DETAIL-SEE wA5,,„ 1,
Pe'
' 1,wh AIM ,1.
flll rl Km RAI.�
i1t1An11 Iflll JII]I1II. "In ...y
/ a fl Ililele111111. AILLI.tIMITI N
f IIIIfilli f1IIIIlliiItI IUIP QuII IIIIIIIIsie in 1 IIlfiia.
AIlll1I ltrit i1I3II17f-r a II$ WLUIIIIIILllflhIllllII,LI
RAOZTER—
Am �r� Oi
■Liew-dcaser.Tse .Z.i.:.-R"
_ �wi�llier ya��>tr:_ —
z•alama Alt I,A^ :ax 18.•-�
el Om z- is saw- accrai
LINES OF CALCULATION FOIR
-AVERAGE NATURAL GRACE.
ARTICLE 15 GARFIELD COUNTY
LAND UBE AND DEVELOPMENT
»tn.l�en�lm•.,e.
uA iUIILPIfll '
• i3 1 ,,,---Film
II 101. ��NM= tit ■ um.iIni
— II• _ mil r Al n �1 =
1 •M uInr r:ir —Iw aw�wrllallC r:7u IIrw1
IEEE 1 .., =TA 1 I S:1 --r- "—IL.
`'l °RVIA 1719N
onIcto
j
�1a
7
�•
Arnie
I
If
i m.`I I
rAr-
IanA,Eam
IIIFiI•
—
' in
A
x.*w
C)SOcU H EL EVA1'ION
mai
■at31.t �`ra —� t
BAIN
BATTEN
sT OP,• IOC,
°I_a d ■
11.. ., . -
rem
,ws
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
ISSUE DATE:
.&'.RPOB 82020 �'s"c"TABN Br. wen.
Es
10.2320e0 we RENE ..TER
ELEVATIONS
A-3.1
04,
trC
fI11Ir1111111111Er 1111
alllllrl11111. 1 11 1 t
AIr11HIr111111:
111.nr111nllli
lh
LEA•T•1111 1 .
1111n11.11111111111
31111111111111111111
11111111R11I1n11.11
II111n111rnImr
111111I111Irifrll
t11111fuFri11
i
. �F1?r111i[11
=e'41f111111
�dir{li[f11A. light1
�Illp�q��l.l, i
Ofi OM 'IS
�...n le111•,
oar
1.1611711141�!:;® :am!%;�era p-%ems•_+rreA. q1 1' 1 -
i1�61ilt1■l_la al=tea P.=laaV=l si lap=Sa aim --r4
-_ __� ■l=6ap_EI N=
Sail
1 1 I
.J;
11
jai- • / a9�� a�=� a�
�rH-arl�6rq��r .
1 :CIYc'.� • 1'd
L
yiry
1.001,111,
www
i
.1 1r.-
N I- 1 1
dl ®
1�1�. \
�./.Atli11
/MEMIIIEVEHMEMIElainill
1
MI a
etc
ai�I1
ar
Ai. Le/
. - `-
A3' i rllmlr �111/111111.1111i1�11111B pLD
°���'*� �1nitiIi iquilb Ali 11111 11r1111niR1111fIrng111111111
WWI 1111r—....••1111I` 1rI11.1r11aE111[rmmai 11111 11[11
Arin ism 1111 f eiti Ii11111111r1111arilialitlfIH1!7
ATimin mill
RE11 llrlir, tiR111ri111[rllllnlnl11rn1Sa311
11.�11ini
.-
ip
mfrpitsim1
inrg1
1
>
11 11111
AO
ARC -.
.co.
�NfT•
iElfI1R1L
R11ilrl1Vair1E1FRN-mulilytilll111;
rui/d inaii�m1urYgranzA.,,.i uratin1Mli
arw�8..,
4aFr*-"
lf�lC='r�
sa:. ae
+ en•- mc-
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
0
0
J
N
ww
><
CC I
0 0 U
CC Z w
aQ
Y St0
K w0
0
fn
m
CL CC
o IL U
SOME axe
•
.-na..ad.r..rRa
ELEVATIONS
A-3.2
f' 'I M
CJGiZ-? 24 72469C
G-AC2-3636* C-AC23436
n n
CL11NDOW SCHEDULE
FICAL`. NT6
LT
C-AC23672` CAC2-3072*
n 0 Q n
000R SCHEDULE
NOTES
1) ALL DOORS PER OWNER SELECTION
2) ALL DOORS - SEE PLAN FOR SIZE AND SWING.
WINDOW SCHEDULE ENERDYCALCULATION6AND GLAZINGVALUES REF WINDOW
SPECIFICATIONS. R3D3. R310
NZ VL
_
-
67
rcexwKu
ELEVATION
II
Pr "I
srTAV.SIf
ceE MOMS!),
C
1e
3*
CWWW, KUM
MEtt.E,A1q.
;['
Sr
04fNDR
KACYrA.[}.
37
CAREPIr F'PC
ra %ttYrrN
D
1C
at
Ca Eiv41tw
.r
az
PlaID
Kt Eu+'ATON
16'
Y
E
p6.E IL41A•.DN
.
C4445•
YF a3M7G1
k
r
wawa
!!£f A4'AfYh
rP
4
K.
CW1.YA••
usnAVA!c..
n
F
C47 SI?C
SEEBy4ATf7Y
t` 4•
n
be_truW 1 a.
ata.n.... Kn.,
w
r
-
cat® war
IIME1._`••A1T'a.
ox,
CC
•••
7?
c4.10- D x
&V.LkL163
or. tom.
e.). a),Fltoa7
4t0.A,1+2R
rrn.yam
J
DG
•.•.-
Q
xcwas
MThly TCO
rm. a I
tNOTES
j PROVIDE -SIERRA PACIFIC', OR APP OVER EQUAL WINDOWS WITH U7035 OR LESS`
3) THE WINDOW IMAGCONFIRM ALL ERY REPRESENTS SIZE W SIZES PER AND TYPE ONLY
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
) SEE THE ELEVATIONS FOR OPERATION
5) (ELD VENFY ALL ROUGH OPENING
6) ODER DOORS SPECIFIC PER CLIENT SELECT.
TOCONCUR PER MANUFACTURER INSTALLATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS
DOOR AND WINDOW PLACEMENT .
6 SAFETY LA G ALL HAZARDOUS LOCATION PER SEC. R306
S.) ETAL CLADWINDOWS
E.:/ SJ
rIEDULF
irk NTS
CAC2-3054. CAC2-2454*
CAIS-1696
CAID-3696-1
(7) _07) ( - FA)
()WINDOW TRIM DETAIL
SCALE: NTD
FAA-21E]
CPS-7296-2 )X0)
n _(F)_
® RSCALEOOF:t PLAN
=1'-0'
GUTTERS
COATED OR PAINTED No
MAT. THE FASGA
E COW RUC
BELINDA AND ANDREW LOVE
ISA? DIKE
SCHEDULES
AC.OF.7.nti
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 8:50 AM
To: Pam Sudmeier
Cc: Ikrol@garfield-county.com
Subject: Cerise Ranch, Lot 16 - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Pam:
Received your amended plans last week but didn't get the chance to review before the end the shortened holiday week.
But I have looked everything over this morning and it appears that all fits within the parameters for necessary
corrections I had previously issued. I'll be finished transferring my original redlines over to these plans by the end of the
day & your Contractor should expect to receive a call from Lindsay tomorrow morning with regard to final balances due
and permit pick-up instructions.
Thanks for your assistance & Happy New Year!
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
C•: . Gatfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. 1610
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
1
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 1:37 PM
To: Bill Gavette (gavette@carbondalefire.org)
Cc: Pam Sudmeier; Walter Hooker
Subject: 32 Larkspur Drive - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6590
Bill:
Just wanted to update you on the status of Cerise Ranch — Lot 16. Based on amended plans submitted to our office the
overall size of the "Fire Area" has been reduced to 6,325 S.F. (or below the threshold of 6,400 S.F.) and therefore fire
sprinklers will not be required. Thought it would be prudent to send you this follow-up correspondence for your records.
Thanks for your assistance & Happy New Year!
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
_ Gul: f,dd County 1
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212 Ext. 1610
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
1
1?mifi} $I.1*-1 I-ZU- & 40
auiu +Vk 4' - LDi' IL
Arr.0." u,,fion CAl c (4fi (g •
t 44 ON Av # 1-whs (I2/$ i 7)
ik. 1WbIGY1
!Vont treIrGin Roe iti•lueidii I'20
Roots f t v4 440*
TOtiti K446tA' in `Filet At -` <110
Ovi4fwil 4firL fir. eA(05 ?103�
t ptiee- Raw,tiotei5 <710)
N 'eita, Art"' 1bP^( &)'0�5
siwimiclum h tt r+:64-
As Ft- Ar < (1100 g t