Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0 BOA Staff Report 07.26.2010Exhibits — Variance — Kirk and Melissa Leintz., VARA 6322 BOA Public Hearing (07/26/2010) A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 P Q R S Proof of Publication, Posting, and Mailings Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, as amended Application Staff Memorandum Staff Powerpoint Improvement Location Certificate submitted with Building Permit No. 6901 Garfield County Stop Work Order, dated 1/19/09 Notice of Anticipated Enforcement Cease and Desist, dated 2/13/09 Garfield County Pre -Application Summary, dated 7/2/09 Garfield County Notice of Violation, dated 12/2/09 Garfield County Pre -Application Summary, dated 2/11/10 Protective Covenants for Amended Riverbend Subdivision Filing No. 2, Reception No. 299710, dated November 26, 1979 Letter from Garfield County Road and Bridge, dated June 14, 2010 Email from Dan Roussin, Colorado Department of Transportation, dated June 5, 2010 Letter from Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. (consulting engineer), dated June 15, 2010 Amended Riverbend Subdivision Filing No. 2, dated 11/23/79 Resolution No. 77?2 Foundation Location Survey, dated 6/4/10 REQUEST: BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL A setback variance for a garage's eave and decorative column that extends into the 25' front setback by 10" and 8", respectively. APPLICANT / OWNER: Kirk and Melissa Leintz LOCATION: Lot 2, Block 3, Amended Riverbend Subdivision, Filing No. 2 , 263 Riverbend Drive, New Castle, CO SITE DATA: .52 acres with an existing Single Family Residence Riverbend Drive Planned Unit Development (PUD) ACCESS: ZONING: I BACKGROUND The subject property is owned by Kirk and Melissa Leintz (Applicant) and zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD). The property is situated east of the Town of New Castle within the Amended Riverbend Subdivision, Filing No. 2. 1 BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL The Applicant purchased the residence in 1996. On September 16, 1998 the Applicant obtained a building permit (Permit No. 6901) for a garage addition from Garfield County. However, as the result of financial difficulties, the Applicant never finished the garage addition including the installation of the garage doors, electrical, sheetrock, and siding. As a result of not completing the structure, a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) was never issued by the County. Since a CO wasn't issued this structure could not be used and if used this would be considered a violation by the County. As part of the approved Building Permit No. 6901, the Applicant represented to the County Building & Planning Department that the existing garage was 54 feet from the property line (Exhibit G). This building permit expired on June 13, 2002. On January 19, 2009 a "Stop Work Order" was issued to the Applicant by a County Building Inspector for unpermitted exterior decks, a concrete room addition, and a garage addition (Exhibit H). Upon further investigation by the County, it became apparent that the Building Department had not issued a CO for the garage addition and the Applicants were using this structure illegally. The County spoke with the Applicant on January 19 and 22, 2009 and told the Applicant he needed to apply for another building permit to address these issues. On February 13, 2009 a Notice of Anticipated Enforcement (NOAE) was issued to the Applicant (Exhibit I) stating that the Code Enforcement Officer had witnessed new construction and that the County had not issued a building permit for this construction. On February 20, 2009, the Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) received an email from the Applicant addressing the NOAE and that he had every intention to resubmit an application for a building permit. The CEO responded by encouraging the Applicant to submit an application for a building permit as soon as possible. In April 2009, the Applicant submitted several building permit applications to remedy the setback issue, but they were not processed by the Building Department because the Applicant was in violation of the Garfield County zoning regulations. On July 2, 2009 the Applicant had a pre -application meeting with County Planning staff to discuss the Variance Land Use Change Permit process and submittal materials required (Exhibit J). Pre -application summaries are only valid for six (6) months for the date of the summary. No application was submitted within this six (6) month time period making this pre -application summary void. December 2, 2009 a Notice of Violation was issued to the Applicant for new construction without a valid building permit (Exhibit K). The County filed a Complaint in County Court seeking civil penalties on January 5, 2010. The trial date has been continued at the Applicant's request, due to health problems, and trial is now set for August 13, 2010. 2 BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL Since the first pre -application was no longer valid, a second pre -application meeting was held with the Applicant and County staff on February 11, 2010 to discuss the Variance Land Use Change Permit and process (Exhibit L). On February 23, 2010 the Applicant submitted to the County a Variance Land Use Change permit application. II REQUEST The Applicant is requesting a setback variance for an eave and decorative column for a garage addition that extends into the 25' front setback by 10" and 8", respectively. This front setback requirement is set forth in the Protective Covenants for Amended Riverbend Subdivision Filing No. 2, Reception No. 299710 dated November 26, 1979 (Exhibit M). Looking East — Garage Addition (on the right) III REFERRAL AGENCIES a. Garfield County Road & Bridge (Exhibit N): This department does not have any objections to this application but has the following comments. These comments include: • Approval of this application has no negative impact to the County road system -3- BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL for present maintenance or future road improvements. • This department supports approval of this application. b. Colorado Department of Transportation (Exhibit 0): This agency has no comments on this application. c. Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. (Exhibit P): This consultant has no comments on this application. d. Town of new Castle: No comments received. e. Burning Mountain Fire District: No comments received. IV STAFF COMMENTS From research conducted by the County and review of this application the following facts are noted: 1. The approved plat for the Amended Riverbend Subdivision Filing No. 2 indicates setbacks for the subdivision as a "30 foot set back lines." (Exhibit Q); 2. The Resolution for Amended Riverbend Subdivision Filing No. 2 (Resolution No. 77-2) has three (3) conditions, none of which addresses front yard setbacks (Exhibit R); and, 3. The Protective Covenants for Amended Riverbend Subdivision Filing No. 2, (Reception No. 299710) recorded with the County Clerk and Recorder is not identified on either the recorded subdivision plat or part of Resolution 77-2. With consideration of the above three (3) facts, the only setback that the County can recognize and enforce is the 30 foot setback. Since the subdivision's covenants were not a part of the approved plat or stated within the resolution, the County can't enforce these private covenants. The Applicant provided another survey by Survco, Inc. dated June 4, 2010 (Exhibit S) identifying the setbacks of the garage addition's foundation, eave, and decorative column. The Applicant believes this survey is more accurate than the original survey provided with the variance application. The distance to the property line from these structures are as follows: • Eave: 22.66 feet • Decorative column: 24.24 feet • Foundation: 24.96 feet Since this information is almost identical to the original survey provided with the application the County doesn't have an objection in using it to review the submittal. With the distances provided above and using the 30 foot setback requirement as identified on the approved plat the following variances would need to be requested by 4 BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL the Applicant. These variances are: The eave is 5.84 feet within the 30 foot setback. This number is derived from subtracting the distance of the eave to the property line from the 30 foot setback and then subtracting the allowable 18 inch encroachment into a setback by eaves. The decorative column is 5.76 feet within the 30 foot setback. This number is calculated by subtracting the distance of the column to the property line from the 30 foot setback. The foundation is 5.04 feet within the 30 foot setback. This number is derived from subtracting the distance of the foundation to the property line from the 30 foot setback. If the Applicant uses the setbacks set forth in the recorded covenants then the following variances would need to be requested. The eave is .84 feet within the 25 foot setback. This number is derived by subtracting 22.66 feet from 25 feet. An addition 18 inches can be subtracted for the allowance of an eave encroaching upon a setback. The decorative column is .76 feet within the 25 foot setback. This number is calculated by subtracting 24.24 feet from 25 feet. The garage addition foundation is .04 feet within the 25 foot setback. This number is derived by subtracting 24.96 feet from 25 feet. Applying either setback of 30 feet or 25 feet, the Applicant doesn't meet the setback requirement and would need a variance to lawfully maintain these structures. Article IV, Division 3 of the ULUR discusses the process and requirements for issuance of variances: Section 4-301 Review Process for Request for Variance. Variances are deviations from the terms of this Code that would not be contrary to the public interest when, owing to special circumstances or conditions like exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of a specific piece of property, the literal enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to or exceptional and undue hardship upon the owner of the property. C. Standards for Approval of Variance Requests. The following standards shall be satisfied for approval of a request for variance from specific regulatory provisions of this Code. 1. Special Circumstances or Conditions Exist. One or more of the -5 BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL following circumstances or conditions exists with respect to the specific property: a. Exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of the property at the time of the enactment of the regulation in question. b. Exceptional topographic conditions of the property. c. Other extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition of the property. 2. Not a Result of the Actions of Applicant. The special circumstances and conditions have not resulted from any act of the applicant. 3. Strict Application Consequence. Because of the special circumstances and conditions found pursuant to Section 4-301 (C) (1) above, the strict application of the regulation would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship on, the owner of the property. 4. Variance is Necessary for Relief The granting of the variance from the strict application of the provisions set forth in this Code is necessary to relieve the owner of the peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship. 5. Not Detrimental to the Public Good. Granting the variance will not cause substantial detriment to the public good. 6. Variance Will Not Impair the County's Zoning Plans. Granting the variance will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code. The following facts are associated with the parcel: a. The topographic conditions and shape of the property doesn't result in any peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties or hardships upon the property owner. b. It is the result of the Applicant's own intentional actions of not adhering to setbacks identified when building the garage addition. The Applicant didn't adhere to either setbacks indicated in the recorded covenants or approved plat. Implementation of specified setbacks is the responsibility of the Applicant. The original building permit was issued based on incorrect information provided by the Applicant. c. A variance to the public good would not be detrimental. d. Granting a variance sets a precedence of not abiding by setbacks identified in approved documents. IV. SUGESTED FINDINGS a. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the -6- BOA July 26, 2010 Leintz Variance MOL Board of Adjustment; b. That the hearing before the Board of Adjustment was extensive and complete and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting; c. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed variance is not in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County; d. That the application is not in conformance with the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment DENY the request for a variance. -7 • posi•ito ax Noe 7071 . . - tAlrOtet Mgr IJ, 7.5* MEE • 1 sPur LEHEL MAC NOME :1 A. sir mcrie amtecr MN' L ad. 161.561 g END if PAC IMO DRIVE LEVAL DES-MP77'ON LOT 2. . ;BLOCK 2 • NdEME0 RIPEIVEND SUBDIViteO'N, ig7LINO NO. 2 • ACCONWNO MI me Pori RECORDED AS REC. NO. 29.97W COUNkY c GARFIELD srArti OF CCALORA,DO SCAM 1 INIM ok SO PT Cx GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING, SANTTATION and PLANNING DEPARTMENT 109 8th, SU-eet, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601(974) 945-8212 Job Address Nature of Worlc Use of Buildin Owner Contractor No, 6901 (J9AiO ea& i acing pmt tL 00 g , A Amount of Permit$ recP Date e_b tabbies - m STOP WORK ORDER - INSPECTOR'S PORTION ©Z 3 le/PAC 13./143 G.sI/P. '49,P, o,S/ fix/ �,L'cKs, Ca4,740' - i'�/sr 4i�prTia, r 9O DATE PERMIT NO. 2-13-2009 Kirk Leintz 263 River Bend Dr. New Castle, CO 81647 BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF ANTICIPATED ENFORCEMENT CEASE and DESIST The Garfield County Building and Zoning Code Enforcement Officer has reason to believe a possible Zoning violation may exist on your property located at 263 River Bend Dr. New Castle, CO 81647. I have witnessed new construction at the above address and our office does not have a building permit on file for this construction. I am also aware you have been notified by our building inspector Jim Wilson that your original building permit has expired by at least two (2) years. You are hereby given notice that you may file a written application for a Takings Determination before the Board of County Commissioners within three (3) days of your receipt of this notice. If you choose not to apply for a Takings Determination, you will receive a written Notice of Violation to correct or to cease and desist from continuing the violation. Pursuant to Garfield County's Land Use Resolution of 2008, Article XII, the county may pursue any of the available enforcement procedures and penalties in connection with this violation. Garfield County Building and Zoning regulations, Enforcement Protocol and permit application forms are available at www.garfield-county.com in the "Building and Planning "directory. If you have any questions regarding what actions are required to achieve compliance, or you wish to report compliance action taken, please contact this office in writing at the address below or by E mail cchappelle(ciigarfield-county.coin Sincerely_,,- --, Christopher Chappelle Building / Planning Code Enforcement Officer 108 Eighth Street, Suite 401 • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945--8212 • (970) 285-7972 • Fax: (970) 384-3470 'Cir; 1 GARFIELD COUNTY = Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.oarfield-countv.com EXHIBIT 1.. PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2123-344-05-002 APPLICANTS PLANNER: Torn Veljic PROJECT: Leintz Setback Variance OWNER: Kirk Leintz; 970/309-320o alpineconstructioninc@yahoo.com REPRESENTATIVE: NA PRACTICAL LOCATION: 0263 Riverbend Drive, New Castle, CO 81647 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance request for garage within 25 ft. setback DATE: July 2, 2009 I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property owner began construction of garage addition 1111998 and the permit lapsed with the garage not completed. Owner wished to restart permit for garage recently and building inspector discovered discrepancy in old permit. The addition appears to be 24 feet 4 inches (approximately) and 8 inches within the setback area. The property is located within the Riverbend development, 2nd Addition which is a PUD. There are specific building setbacks assigned to the PUD development. Discussion with the owner included site specific constraints that may have affected placement of the garage addition. II. PROCESS In summary, the process will be the following: 1. Preapplication Meeting (held 7/2/09) 2. Submittal of complete Variance Application 3. Review by staff for Technically Complete (TC) Status 4. Notice of TC to applicant with schedule; Applicant submits copies for referral to reviewing agencies 5. Applicant prepares public notice for posting, mailing, and posting of site 6. Hearing scheduled for Board of Adjustment and referral copies sent to referring agencies and departments 7. Staff report preparation 8. Public hearing before Board of Adjustment and decision by the Board III. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS: e Garfield County Comprehensive Plan a Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution o Article III, Zoning o Article 1V Application and Review Procedures Section 4-3O1 Review Process for Request for Variance Section 4-501 I Variance IV. APPLICATIQ IBEVIEW a. Review by: Staff for completeness recommendation and referral agencies for additional technical review Referral Agencies: b. Public Hearing: Town of New Castle Garfield County Road and Bridges Fire Department Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners X Board of Adjustment V. REPLICATION REV ELNI E Planning Review Fees: $ 250.0o Referral Agency Fees: Total Deposit: $ (additional hours are billed at hourly rate of $40.5o ) Generaf ApplicationPrpcessing Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to referral agencies for comments. Case planner contacts applicant and sets up a site visit. Staff reviews application to determine if it meets standards of review. Case planner makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the appropriate hearing body. Piselamnt The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Pre:appiicatjczn SummaryP.reparedby: `r 744„ r Thomas Veljfc, /MCP Senior Planner Attachments: Variance Application tfrk_5' Date I2-2-09 Kirk Leintz 263 River Bend Dr. New Castle, CO 81647 EXHIBIT k Garfield County BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF VIOLATION Re: New construction without a valid building permit. You received a Notice of Anticipated Enforcement concerning violations on your property located at 263 River Bend Dr. New Castle, CO 81647. Dated (243 -09) - You are hereby given notice, pursuant to Article XII of the Garfield County Land Use Resolution of 2008, that you must completely correct the violations or cease and desist from continuing the violations within ten (10) days of the date you receive this notice. Under Article XII of the Garfield County Land Use Resolution of 2008, your failure to correct or cease the violations on your property may result in one or more of the following enforcement actions being taken against you: 1. Revocation of any building permits issued for improvements of the subject property; 2. Denial of additional land use approvals or building or other development applications pertaining to the subject property; 3. Suspension of any land use approvals for the subject property; 4. Withdrawal of any development permits that are being violated; 5. Forfeiture of any vested property rights; 6. Criminal enforcement; 7. County court civil penalties; and 8. Civil lawsuit. You have the right to appeal this Notice of Violation, pursuant to the provisions of the Garfield County Land Use Resolution of 2008. Garfield County Building and Zc available at www.garfteld-county.c If you have any questions regardi compliance action taken, please co E-mail cella eller • arfiel -coun SENDER: COMPLETE :THIS SE'CTION ..: Sincere Christopher Chappell Building / Planning Code Enforcement Officer • Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. ■ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ■ Attach this card to the back of the maifplece, or on the front If space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: Kirk Leintz 263 River Bend Or New Castle, Cu 81647 COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY ❑ Agent ❑ Addrea C. Date; of Delis" D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No 3. Sandra Type ❑ Certified Mail ❑ Registered ❑ insured Mail 0 Express Mali 0 Return Receipt for Marchand 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (&tra Fee) ❑ Yes 108 Eight) 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label} (970) 94. PS Form 3811, February 2004 7008 3230 0002 5965 7124 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -G2 -M-1 ry GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.garfield-county.com EXHIBIT PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2123-344-05-002 APPLICANTS PLANNER: Tom Velljic PROJECT: Leintz Setback Variance OWNER: Kirk Leintz - 970/309-3200 - alpineconstructioninc@yahoo.com REPRESENTATIVE: NA PRACTICAL LOCATION: 0263 Riverbend Drive, New Castle, CO 81647 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance request for garage within 25 ft. setback DATE: February 11, 2010 L GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The property owner began construction of a garage addition in 1998 and the permit lapsed with the garage not completed. The owner attempted to restart the building permit for the garage recently and the building inspector discovered discrepancy in the old permit. The addition appears to be 24 feet 4 inches (approximately) and 8 inches within the setback area, Also, the roof overhang exceeds the zoning code permitted 18 inch encroachment into the setback by extending 24 inches into the front yard setback. The property is located within the Riverbend development, 2nd Addition which is a PUD. There are specific building setbacks assigned to the PUD development. Discussion with the owner included site specific constraints that may have affected placement of the garage addition. R. PROCESS In summary, the process will be the following: 1. Pre -application Meeting (held 2/11/2010) 2. Submittal of complete Variance Application 3. Review by staff for Technically Complete (TC) Status 4. Notice of TC to applicant with schedule; Applicant submits copies for referral to reviewing agencies 5. Applicant prepares public notice for posting, mailing, and posting of site 6. Hearing scheduled for Board of Adjustment and referral copies sent to referring agencies and departments 7. Staff report preparation 8. Public hearing before Board of Adjustment and decision by the Board III. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS: • Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, as amended • Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended o Article III, Zoning • PUD o Article IV, Application and Review Procedures • Section 4-103, Common Review Procedures • 4-103 (F), Notice of Public Hearing Section 4-301, Review Process for Request for Variances • Section 4-501(1), Variances (Application Materials) ▪ Section 4-502, Description of Submittal Requirements o Article VII, Standards • Divisions 7-1; General Approval Standards • Division 7-2, General Resource Protection Standards o Article XVI, Definitions IV. APPLICATION REVIEW a. Review by: . Staff for completeness recommendation and referral agencies for additional technical review Referral Agencies: b. Public Hearing: Town of New Castle Garfield County Road and Bridge Fire Department _ Planning Commission _ Board of County Commissioners X Board of Adjustment V. APPLICATION REVIEW FEES Planning Review Fees: $ 250,00 Referral Agency Fees: $ Total Deposit: $ (additional hours are billed at an hourly rate ) General Application Processing Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to referral agencies for comments. Case planner contacts applicant and sets up a site visit. Staff reviews application to determine if it meets standards of review. Case planner makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the appropriate hearing body. Disclaimer The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Pre -application Summary Prepared by: eOW ll be(D /Thomas Veljic, AICD Senior Planner Attachments: No attachments Date A digital version of the Variance Application is available online at; http://www.ciarfield- county, comil nd ex. as px? page=1113 Please refer to the sections of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 noted above which is located at; http://www,garfzeld-county.coin/Index.aspx?page-578 sou 539 p 9255 NOV?(; ri79 it(t OilrtHNj 2c:,...4-a,-•,0 � _.. �'' c• i t. '� i 1'; .... t} {at-tr llc+r.rpl.ir,n th,. _... -s Mildred l. , 1[000rclot• PROTECTIVE C'(iVI:I!Alrt•5 • il' !tf''JaPuba7 1(1 VEl(J:1YJ1} :;I.1Jl1JIVliloti _ ... i'11.IIJ tU 2 f:l,b C(lLORAEIr} (IEEIn}`i i.ii (2' ;Lt•iit'l inn (r J1(+vr.lopmetlt Co., the Declarant heroin and owner of liivc'ncend :;ubdi.visioii, Garfield County, Colorado, as the same•CCrtJtltvar:; upon that plat filed for rocord on �1t�nUc}_n�if�: S'�! / ztr. ituC.').ion 110. c>697/0 in the office of the Clerk and Recorder: of Garfield County, Colorado, does hereby covenant and agree that the use thereof shall be restricted icLctl by 1.1tr Lernls and conditions as herein- after set forth. It further covenants and wjr.ee, that said restrictions shall be covenants running with the land ani shall be binding upon itself, its successors and assigns, and shall be mutually binding and enforceable by all purchasers of lot:; or property within said Subdivision. The protective cove i.ttll-:: to ruin with L1le land are as follows: 1. Nu 1o[r shall be used for other; than single--1,-.roily residence purposes. '11 Llti_r: end, no hui ltfing shall Le ciee:ted, altered, placers or permitted LO remain on any lot, other than ono :single-family dwelling. Appurtenant struc- tures such as detached garage, carport; storage structut'c, guest house or workshop, must approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee. 2. t. to building or any part thereof shall be erect:ccl on any lot closer Lig the respective lot lines than as follow:;: (a) Front .lot line 25 Coot (1,) ]tear lot line 2.. feet (c) Side lot .lin: 10 Cert or oris -half (l/2) the height of the plineipiil building, whichever is; greater. Eaves, :steps and open porches Shall ntit be considered part of t building in computing net -hacks: r GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form EXHIBIT Date Sent: June 1, 2010 Comments Due: June 14, 2010 Name of application: Leintz Variance Sent to: Garfield County Road & Bridge Department Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the Planning Department in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Garfield County Building & Planning Staff Contact: Molly Orkild-Larson 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-3470 Phone: 970-945-8212 General Comments: Garfield County Road & Bridge Department has no objections to this application with the following comments. Approval of this application has no negative impact to the County road system for present maintenance or future road improvements. Garfield County Road & Bridge Department supports approval of this application. Name of review agency: Garfield County Road and Bridge Department By: Jake B. Mall Date June 8, 2010 Revised 3/30/00 Moll Orkild-Larson From: Roussin, Daniel[Daniel.Roussin©DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 10:17 AM To: Molly Orkild-Larson Subject: 263 Riverbend Drive, New Castle I have no comments. thanks Dan Roussin Region 3 Permit Unit Manager 222 South 6th Street, Room 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 970-683-6284 Office 970-683-6291 Fax 1 EXHIBIT �o June 15, 2010 Ms. Molly Orkild-Larson Garfield County Building & Planning 0375 County Road 352, Building 2060 Rifle, CO 81650 RE: Variance Review: Kirk and Melissa Leintz Dear Molly: MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING AND DESIGN EXHIBIT This office has performed a review of the documents provided for the Leintz Variance application. The submittal was found to be thorough and well organized. The review generated no comments. Feel free to call for any reason. Sincerely, Mounta Cross Enginq€ring Inc. is Hale, PE 826 1/2 Grand Avenue • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 PH: 970.945.5544 • FAX: 970.945.5558 • www.mountaincross-eng.com r• rt. _aid•r i, r• l/ j� J• fi • Amended Riverbend .. . t. . _ .. PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 34 T 5 S , R9OW OF THE 6TH PM, 41,14x. _ • - .4441.1fur r!1• a Ir••• •r .:4.431 pl.., fr..1.44. ,. Ilr.. 1.3 1.• 4 •Ia:n••dd wl;.A. all •lae kel 03.44 • 4••4•.•• 1'.I• rl at. 14.,11 In.'s r.t 4444 11..4. 1.141 >r t.ry• .! .ua.11P1..4 . 4 7'..S.% 0404:. 114.1 arrre4• 1n 4.0d. • 3,11 .rr•ad a. r, l.... N 1[a• 04'S9'E 512 68' 49 1 - ;SU110NISIOM CO01.75OL 41O8U11ENT '• - 5' 841G53 CM' IW PEACE ' 001117 Or PE61N01114O gof-B"'_ 4511+97 N r 1448 ;a 4141, see•oa'S9'w V.?) = .-t 499.51' J19.8a' 6f[4! 4.1) 19' ru511C 1[41[4 1Kl4i0 144L4r01 R15...44'51'14 - Pas 32' 1'-16'51'1!'Pas.32' 'IIM'WA R[ ' • : Proceedings of the Board of Coun mmissioners, Garfield County, Colo., JANU , 19 77 (4) Inclusion of provision in the Plan that engineering standards to be used in the construction of all public improvements under the Plan shall be commensurate with those standards used by the City of Rifle when such standards are at least as restrictive as those presently in force under the regulations of Garfield County, Colorado. and that no development of the subject property under said plan or implementation of said plan shall be done until all of the foregoing conditions have been complied with to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado. And that upon such compliance, the Zone District Map of Garfield County be accordingly amended to reflect this amendment. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ATTEST_ GARFIELD COUNTY Ella Steph is, Clerk Eleven J. Ceris ,1 Chairman Pete J. Mattivi Lynh Hill EXHIBIT Letter of application for change in classification for Air Quality Standards was discussed. Mr. Mattivi moved that the application be approved to reclassify that portion of Garfield County as outlined in the application. Seconded by Mr. Hill. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion of Panoramic Mesa Subdivision and acceptance of roads into County system was held. Mr. Hartert reviewed the recommendation of Mr. Scarrow and stated that no deed was necessary. Mr. Hill moved that the road be accepted for maintenance in the County road system. Seconded by Mr, Mattivi. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Witkowski presented Resolution No. 77-2 on PUD zoning for Riverbend Subdivision. Mr. Mattivi moved that Resolution 77-2 be adopted. Seconded by Mr. Hill. Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 77-2 WHEREAS, Hamilton Duncan has made application to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, for a Planned Unit Development amendment to the Zoning Resolution of Garfield County, Colorado, said proposed PIanned Unit Development being known as Riverbend all as more particularly described in said application; and WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Planning Commission of Garfield County, Colorado, as provided in Section 8.04 of said Zoning Resolution and further that said Planning Commission has certified to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, its recommendation that the said application be approved subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, has duly and regularly held a public hearing on said application in conformity with the laws of the State of Colorado and the provisions of said Zoning Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, is now fully advised in the premises in regard to said application, and finds that such Planned Unit Development amendment is in conformity with the General Plan for Garfield County and the Zoning Resolution of Garfield County, Colorado. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, that the application for a Planned Unit Development amendment to the Zoning Resolution of Garfield County, Colorado, for the Riverbend project, be and the same is hereby adopted, subject to the following conditions:, (1) That said Plan provide for settlement ponds and filtration devices to be included in the design of the storm drainage system if the Board of County Commissioners finds that increased run-off from the project poses a pollution hazard. (2) That the Plan provide that the commercial convenience store shown in the Planned Unit Development be included in the phased development when the need for said convenience store is demonstrated to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado. (3) That the Plan provide that the fire protection system be designed to provide a minimum of sixty (60) pounds per square inch static line pressure and five hundred (500) gallons per minute volume of flow to all lots as subdivided on the project. and that no development of the subject property under said plan or implementation of said plan shall be done until all of the foregoing conditions have been complied with to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado. And that upon such compliance, the Zone District Map of Garfield County be accordingly amended to reflect this amendment. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: GAREIELD COUNTY tr C;d-G-, �A1--/.( , Elia ephens, t Maven J. Cerise( 9hairman Pete J. Mattivi Lynn Hill 7. Foundation Location Survey Lot 2, Block 3 Riverbend Subdivision Filing 2 as Amended SITUATED IN THE SEI/4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 90 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO Found Reber N/Alum. Cap, Pus Nn. 16397 r>' o / h $ / of 2, Block 3 Outline o. Eaves' 191ng2e Family Redden,, -e 1 Wood Flame Cons[. 163 Riverbend Drive 23.7' NIRCUA'S919 2.69' Conc, eon. 48.1' Found Rebar W/A11m, Cap, PLS NO. 15397 2_ LeVat '59'W Found Rebel 14/A1om, Cap, PLS Nu. 9009 m --.7.50" .e 44 51 29' ---'� 19.3' DUL1lne o� oerderion 44.1' Found Rebar W illegible Mum Cap approx. 1' below o existing grade. Sheet 1 of 1 sl . R-590.90 51.59 c, V o 43 15' ----1----- Dain Corer "�� 19als. Column) PI IP. . my 5961104'59V 67.00' 0.42' Found Rahn, W/AlIm . Cap, PLO lb. 16301 See04'S9'W OAR' Lot 3, Block GRAPHIC SCALE w m n ( D4 SSW ) 1 lmnh - 20 It. All linear dlmenslnns shc1n 1erenn are In US survey feet. Client: 0791 and Metasa Gland Drown 8y. 5. Phelps Dote: 04/.Iona/20111 .dwg Rle: 10-014-001 Job No.: 09-028 ay ATE Remise OESCAPTOR F0111d Rebar W/12Oegi1Le c Alum. Cap ptotrvdinu u approx. e" cut of ground. 14142' Lot 1, Block 3 585.04'S9W 160.01 111110ng Location 0002162nd Drive Riverbend Drive Right — of — Way 588'04'19 199.51 ; ,R 107°29'00" W WGG84 107°2U'O0"-W 0 ' it. 107'2'00" W WGS8410-570008ASE100fFRS W TM tY1ii U [000 FEET U 580 Printed fromTOPOI l54 Wlldlbw4F PWdg411Dre(tYWw.topo.Co11) SURVEYORS' CERTIFICATION: I, THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF COLORADO DO NERE0Y CERTIFY THAT TWA I'OUNUATION LOCATION SURVEY WAS PREPARED FOR 0009 AND 1111.11100 311001 BY 01107C01 1141. 01400 744 DIRECT 0117351115140 AND CHECKING AND THAT IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY m-IOWI.EDGE AND PE1.1EF. RY: SAMUEL D. PHELPS 4010000'0 LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR N0. 27513 FOR AND ON RENALF OF S7HVOO, IEC, DATE OF CERTIFICATION: 04/JUNE/2719 SURVEYOR'S NOTES: 1) THIS SURVEY 4453 BEEN PREPARED PURSUANT TO CLIENT RAWEST TO SHOW THE LOCATION OF THE E1ISTING FDONDATIOU A5 LOCAS22 ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. 2) BEA0TNGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BAUD UPON THE RECOR0 PLAT FOR R122RBEND BUBDIV1SION FT_1ING NO. 2 45 AMENDED AND ARE RELATIVE TO A SEARING OF 5.64'00'58"W. FOR THE LINE BETWEEN THE POUND 010AR AND ALUMINUM CAP, PLS NO. 16397 AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, 1314[1 3 AND A NO. 5 441090 FOUND AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 10; 1, BLOC: 2. 31 THIS EURVLY TS BARED OMA 'BEST FIT' 5TAT1101CA4 0NALYRIS OF FOUND PROPERTY CORNERS 7HR000H001 RIVEBBENO SUBDIVISION FILING NO. 2 AS AMENDED IN COMPARISON TO THE 010000LONS 1NDICATED ON THE. FINAL 5000IV131ON PLAT. THERE EXISTS 01MEN51ONAL ERRORS 3N THIS 320014ISION OF VARYING DEGREE WITHIN ANY 0440 FOUND PROPERTY CORNER, AND AT SONE LOCATIONS THERE E21211 DUPLICATE MBN-D13NI'AT100 INTENDED TO REPRESENT THE SAME PROPERTY CORNER. EXHIBIT 4107045 (PURSUANT TO C.B.S. 13-80-1051 ACCORDIN0 TO COLORAU2 LAW YOU MST COe1IEACE Ah_ LEGAL ACTIOL BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN TH15 SURV'E'Y 617)40N TB11EE YEARS AFTER YOU DISCOVER SUM DEFECT. IN NO EVENT, MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY BE COMIENC+'D WORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF 112RTIFIC2TION SHORN HEREON. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 2, 20001 3 RIVERELND SIIBDIVISION EILING NO, 2 AS AMENDED AC600011C TO THE SVEDIVISION PLAT THEREO/ A3 FILED FOR RECORD 1IOV. 26, 1979 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 299710 COUNTY OF 0004101.0 51'A.W 01' [OLDHAM COHTA:NLNG 0.52 210£1 AS PLATTED SurvCo, Inc. RTK GPS and Conventional Land Surveying Services 826-1/2 Grand Avenue Post Office Box 2782 Glenwood Springs, CO. 81602-2782 Phone:(970) 945-5945 Fax:(970) 945-5946 Ernoil: survcoa7gmcil.cam