HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.10 Completeness Review ResponseSeptember 14, 2017
Patrick Waller
Garfield County Community Development Department
108 Eighth Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 80601
RE: Completeness Review - Sorensen Variance (VARA-08-17-8573)
Dear Mr. Waller,
I am writing you to address the items you are requiring prior to determination of technical completeness
of our setback variance application. Please find below responses to the requested items:
1. The Payment Agreement Form has been completed, signed, and is attached.
2. The following existing improvements are located within building setbacks, all but one meeting
applicable standards detailed in noted Code Sections.
a. The existing retaining wall for the parking area meets Section 7-1201 (B) for the side yard
setback because it retains 4’-9” (6’ or less). Where it enters the existing 25’ front yard
setback, it retains 4’ and tapers to 0’ within 11’ horizontally toward the road, where 3’ or
less is required. This is an existing structure which we believe was built in conjunction with
the home in 1988, but do not have any documentation demonstrating this. It was in place
when we purchased the property in October, 2015. None of this wall will be in the new front
yard setback if our variance is granted. Also, since the wall is located at or below the road
elevation, Clear Vision Area standards in Section 7-303(I) are not impacted.
b. The existing rock wall within the front yard setback meets Section 7-1201(B) as it is 3’ or less
in height and is not located within the Clear Vision Area outlined in Section 7-303(I).
c. The existing fences on the property are located within side and rear yard setbacks only, the
tallest of which are 6’. Therefore, these meet the requirements of Section 7-1201(B) and
are not located within the Clear Vision Area outlined in Section 7-303(I).
d. The existing stairs (at-grade) and 18” tall deck section (less than 30” in height) located in the
front yard setback meet the requirements outlined in Section 3-202(F) since Table 3-202:
Projections lists “No Restriction” for allowed encroachment into setbacks for at-grade steps
and decks less than 30” in height.
3. The retaining wall east of the shed expansion is proposed to be located within the 10’ utility
easement. We contacted our subdivision HOA via email regarding a holder of the easement and
they did not respond. We also scheduled a utility locate through 811 and no utility
infrastructure was identified within the proposed area of the wall.
I hope the above information sufficiently addresses all of the additional items required for
determination of our application’s technical completeness. Photos of existing improvements within
setbacks and located utility infrastructure have been attached for your review. Please feel free to
contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Shane Sorensen
EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS:
Parking area as seen from street
North side of parking area retaining wall within 25’ front yard setback (4’ tapering to 0’)
West side of parking area retaining wall within side yard setback (4’-9”)
At-grade steps in front yard setback
Deck within front yard setback (18” tall)
Rock wall within front yard setback (3’ or less in height)
Front fence within north side yard setback
Fence within south side yard setback
South side property perimeter fence
West side property perimeter fence
North side property perimeter fence
Gas Locate
Comcast/CenturyLink Locate