Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceDave Argo From: Dave Argo Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 8:42 AM To: Carla Ostberg (carla.ostberg@gmail.com) Cc: Ikrol@garfield-county.com; Andy Schwaller (aschwaller@garfield-county.com) Subject: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht. Problem Attachments: Bldg Ht Calculation.pdf; Ostberg Bldg Ht Redlines.pdf Carla: We have recently reviewed plans submitted for a new S.F. residence located at Pinyon Peaks, Lot 10 as well as another permit for an ADU/Pole Barn for this property. The building permit for the ADU/Barn are approved and you will be receiving a call from Lindsay later today regarding final balances due and pick-up instructions for that project. However, before we can issue a building permit for the primary residence, there is an outstanding issue regarding overall building height which must first be addressed. More specifically, as currently designed the building height exceeds the 25 -foot maximum allowable height above pre -construction grades. Perhaps your designer did not fully understand how Garfield County defines and calculates "building height" according to our Land Use & Development Code, and to assist you in making necessary adjustments to come into compliance I have attached a 2 -page description of how the Building Dept. confirms compliance with our requirements (see attached PDF). In addition, I have also included my redlines of the elevation + building sections of your new residence to further clarify the discrepancy between your design and the problem it currently has in meeting this maximum building height (see 11 x 17 scanned images attached). Please work together with your designer to come up with alternative design that complies with our requirements and submit a new compliant design so that we can finalize our plan review and issue a permit once this issue has been resolved. If you or your designer should desire to discuss this issue further, please feel free to call or email directly. However, I should note that I will be out of the office the remainder of today, but available first thing on Monday morning. 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: Barfield-county.com 1 Garfield County fii► COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 108 Eighth Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: (970) 945-8212, Fax: (970) 384-3470 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). 4-1435,4, 1` tqz POLaINI, f ooTrrz4O - tX1V1pJ6 E-600srRucrtoN col.) rota 9 (?d girt 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: ow 66 I 0 ni�ly rif 4 oxo L Ave✓Age, uod►,rtiektri isom 9"A de- ,91'yi•4.•r/we � 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. itISilk 4 AN_ 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. Stucco Per Manu. Specs & IRC - 0" 4"-- 4 1/2" Ate► )19 roof hf. Axce41-9 � 7 I'�'1r . hf• 3' l04 CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THAT STRUCTURE WILL COMPLY WITH BUILDING HEIGHT ZONING REGULATIONS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION � Foundation ti 111111111111 f 11111 ---3' — 10" - FINISHED GRADE -------ppm F5j -Garage -7' - 4 1/2" 1est 1/8" = 1-0" • 9-6 1314 54e4iint yheilikz6 Asphalt or Fiberglass Shingles per IRC Fr war, - 1111 AFiralu MVPVIPla ETA zoparviy r -r ani _ ErtiM Corrugated Metal Siding - Rusted Stone per Manu. Specs & IRC (F MID- IT trl NOTE: Chords T.O.W. - 2nd 11�, 19'-0" Floor Joist Sections and Truss not shown ir Building Section J� 99 ryl N i 1 Level 2 4 10'-0" l! Level 1 o' - o" 6968' - 6" 6964' - 1 1/2" -4' - 4 1/2" istravitcol4vG0-04) - ) 0 0 CO cod O U a) t U SHEET A105 CONDITION OF PERMIT: AN ELEVATION SURVEY, SEALED BY A COLORADO PROFESSIONAL LICENSED SURVEYOR, IS REQUIRED AT FRAME INSPECTION TO VERIFY THAT AS -BUILT ROOFS COMPLY WITH GARFIELD COUNTY'S 25 -FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT AS DEFINED IN THE LAND USE DEVELOPMENT CODE. A106 NOTE: Floor Joist Sections and Truss Chords not shown in Building Section _ Foundation 3'- 10"— pck FDN - Garage -7' - 4 1/2" Section 2 3/16" = 1'-0" Dave Argo Frain: Carla Ostberg <carla.ostberg@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 4 2020 10:32 AM To: Dave Argo; Steve Ostberg Cc: Lindsay Krok Andy Schwaller Subject: Re: [External] Permit#BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht Problem Thanks Dave! We'II get to work on the revisions to comply with the height. We were already discussing lowering by 2', so it shouldn't be too difficult to make the adjustment. Also, digging is easier than anticipated! I am always impressed with Garfield County's Building Department and how efficient, responsive, and helpful everyone is!!!!! It's a pleasure working with all the staff!!! Thanks again and we'll let you know if we h ave any questions as we work through this. Carla Ostberg CBO Septic Consulting 970.309.5259 Office 981Crn enDii , B-7 Caitondale, CO 81623 Mailing 33 Fo urWheel Drise Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Dave Argo From: Bruce Stolbach <cadcode@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 2:36 PM To: Dave Argo Cc: Steve Ostberg; Carla Ostberg Subject: [External] RE: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht. Problem Attachments: OstbergHouse-2018-RevBldgHt-12-13-20.1.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Hi Dave, Carla, Steve and I have been working together on the plans and at the site, and, have made revisions to the main house plan to resolve the height issue. Please look them over and confirm that the house as now proposed is in compliance. We will then bring in the revised hard copies the county needs. Thanks Bruce Bruce Stolbach Cadfidh LLC 970-618-0230 cell cadcode@hotmail.com email Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Carla Ostberg Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 10:25 AM To: Bruce; Steve Ostberg Subject: Fwd: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht. Problem Hi Bruce, Here are the comments from Garfield county. Looks like we need to figure out how to lose 3' 6" off the height. Tim Hagist, our excavator, can meet us on site pretty much any time next week. He comes up once a day to check on his guys anyhow. We discussed already lowering the building by 2' which puts us right at grade on the south side of the house, so we need to figure how how to adjust by another 1' 6" We starting grading already and are digging footers for the ADU now. Building corners are all staked by a surveyor, so it's pretty easy to see where things go. Let us know when you might be able to meet on site to discuss. Thanks! Carla Ostberg CBO Septic Consulting 970.309.5259 Office 981 Cowen Drive, B-7 Carbondale, CO 81623 1 NOTE: Rau Joist Sections and miss Chords not shown in Building Section -—Ret Room Level MBR1 Deck 6966' - 10' 0 ,24, Nat, Grade Level 1 — — 6964.- 6' r -626s--$ ! 59fit' ?-1 6958'-S1/22' Section 2 3115' =1' Ostberg Residence Lot 10 Pinyon Peaks Subdivision - 1st Amended County of Garfield, State of Colorado r�_T ❑ F. Res Rc n t 8 - 11- Aiee T.O.W. _214 $9'-6' -Y NOTE: Floor Joist Sections and i nxss Chords not shown in Building Section r1 Levee MDR; Deck 6.966'- 10. � Avg NaL Grade • Levet E 6964. - 6- r'� mu'6861 -22" Section 1 -— Level MBR 1 Dec* t , 6966' - 19" V tev_et_ls [0'-4'y 696.5--o- 6961'-1-11 6958 - 1 112' Ost be rg Residence Lot 10 Pinyon Peaks Subdivision -1st Amended County of Garfield, State of Colorado A. NaL Grade 6954 - 6' cr- CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THAT STRUCTURE WILL COMPLY WRH BOLDING HEIGHT ZONING I REGULATIONS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION -•; 1:� cnf�. ••F:••,1' :m Y: ��� •` +.. Grader' - L -F .-•: F"ti'`�—.j:: ----'--.. X;�IP�u�u!r�III�IISII t� 1_ ___`_- Ai If:: [.i 'I .[",1!•�c-:i. n'-!r'•i��. ==i_}Y=a, , .i-=;�,::' i111" ����r 1 IIE1.I�lZ —I 111 --1 ,- Level 1 Deck 1II1i I :I�amIEI1II lhII[-IIIII II 111111I'^:,+.3��^R.:,,r��-.�.w.�•1' •: uv .-,•=` ACB_ — ? 11• 1.1I11IAI ' 4 -4A -r? ijiivtLNat6965to _1'+•+•`• 6964'-6• Fal5cPa 'HIL11111411 illsilllIiii11 l l I ! ll1 11i.Mill.11L 1H �Foundation 41.-/6961'-2- — — — — — — i.4 W1 r1� East 8981' -1 ir� FDN - Garage 41-. 6958'- 1 12P1451"EDGRADE tucco Per Manu. Specs & IRC T.fl.F. Rec Room r- pllik Level 1 6985 b—(O' - FINISHED GAGE 4' 6961' -.1 V2 FDN - Garage L? -i tis -,•'r= E; Ostberg Residence Lot 10 Pinyon Peaks Subdivision - 1st Amended County of Garfield, State of Colorado CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THAT STRUCTURE WILL COMPLY W RH BUILDING HEIGHT ZONING REGULATIONS PRIOR TO BEGJNNIN G CONSTRUCTEON -,.- Asphalt or Fiberglass Shingles per IRC 1 19'-a Leve.l2 — LD' Vertical Wood Sung Per Manu. Specs & IRC Level MBR1 Deck 6965T- 14" S7ork• per Manu. Specs & 1RC_ Avg. Nal, Grade 8964' - sCif - Fourdnion Fe {WADE 6961'.2- Dave Argo From: Bruce Stolbach <cadcode@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 3:04 PM To: Dave Argo Cc: Carla Ostberg; Steve Ostberg Subject: [External] FW: Ostberg Res. Revised Bldg Ht. Plan - Permit #BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht. Attachments: OstbergHouse-2018-RevBldgHt-12-15-20.pdf; OstbergRes- BldgHtPlanChangeMemol2-14-20.doc; OstbergRes-C1426 Sheet File Site Plan 12 14 20[51400].pdf Hi Dave, Attached is the memo describing the changes made on the plans per our discussion and the sheets changes were made on. Also attached is the Final Set of Revised plans for the Garco Building and Planning Departments with all the changes noted in the memo. The elevations and sections have the significant changes but there are minor changes made on most of the sheets so the Ostberg's will be dropping off 2 sets of the attached plans for the county. bruce Bruce Stolbach Cadfish LLC 970-618-0230 cell cadcodePhotmail.com email Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Bruce Stolbach Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 2:36 PM To: dargo@garfield-county.com Cc: Steve Ostberg; Carla Ostberg Subject: RE: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht. Problem Hi Dave, Carla, Steve and I have been working together on the plans and at the site, and, have made revisions to the main house plan to resolve the height issue. Please look them over and confirm that the house as now proposed is in compliance. We will then bring in the revised hard copies the county needs. Thanks Bruce Bruce Stolbach Cadfish LLC 970-618-0230 cell cadcode@hotmail.com email Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Carla Ostberg Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 10:25 AM To: Bruce; Steve Ostberg Subject: Fwd: Permit #BLRE-11-20-6571 - Building Ht. Problem Hi Bruce, Here are the comments from Garfield county. Looks like we need to figure out how to lose 3' 6" off the height. 1 TO: GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENTS RE: OSTBERG RESIDENCE — LOT 10 PINYON PEAKS SUBDIVISION FROM: CARLA & STEVE OSTBERG, OWNER 970.309.5259 cell carla.ostbere- onail.com email BRUCE STOLBACH, CADFISH LLC, DRAFTSMAN 970-618-0230 cell, cadcode(@,hotmail.com email SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO PLANS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT COMPLIANCE AND MINOR FLOOR PLAN AND WINDOW CHANGES REVISED PLAN SET DATED 12/15/20 12/15/20 The following changes were made to the building design and building elevations to comply with the Garfield County Building Height requirements for the project. In addition a few minor changes were made to the project by the owner as we worke don the modifying the design for builkding height compliance. 1. Garage is lowered 3'-0", garage floor to 6961 1 1/2" House is dropped 3'6", level 1 floor to 6965'-0. See al Sections and Elevations Sheets A103, A105, A106. 2. MBR1 on lower level, floor framing is dropped and hung with joist hangers so drainage away from building and down the site can be accomplished from MBR1 to and past garage. Sheets A102, S3. 3. Main house roof slope reduced to 6/12 from 7/12. See A103, A106. 4. The back wall of the Rec Room on Level 2 was dropped to 'T6" . See Sec. 2/A105. 5. MBR1 Roof dropped so ceiling height in MBR1 is not changed and provide additional head height space for MBR2 gable end windows and MBR1 windows which were modified. See floor plans, elevations, sections, and window schedule. A101, A102, A102, A104, A105, A106, S3 & S4 for header changes 6. Bathroom fixtures in MBR1 and MBR2 Bathrooms rearranged. No new fixtures added. Sheets A101, A102. 7. Upper level MBR2 exterior deck deleted. See A102, A103. 8. Mudroom mexterior door changed to 2-0 4-0 SH window. See A101, A104. 9. Revised site plan provided with average natural grade and T.O. Main Level 1 marked on site plan.