Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2012-01-10I —Lo Prepared:December 29,2011 f”(Revised: AGENDA ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Tuesday,January 10,2012 9:00 a.m.—Board Room Town Hall 1.PUBLIC COMMENT 2.CONSENT Approval of minutes dated November 1,2011 3.321 &325 KIOWA TRAIL,THE MEADOW CONDOMINIUMS Owner:Marys Meadow Development/James Tawney Applicant:CMS Planning &Development/Frank Theis Request:Variance from EVDC Section 4.4,Table 4-5,which limits structure height to 30 feet above original natural grade after slope adjustment in the A-Accommodations zone district.Request to allow a post-construction height variance of approximately one foot. Staff Contact:Alison Chilcott 4.REPORTS 5.ELECTION OF OFFICERS Board will nominate members to serve as follows: Chair —County Representative Vice-Chair —Town Representative Recording Secretary —Administrative Assistant to the Community Development Department 6.ADJOURNMENT A meeting packet is available for review in the community Development Department and the Estes Valley Library two business days prior to the meeting. The Estes Valley Board of Adjustment reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. 7) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment November 1,2011,9:00 a.m. Board Room,Estes Park Town Hall Board:Chair Wayne Newsom,Members Bob McCreery,John Lynch,Chuck Levine,and Pete Smith;Alternate Member Jeff Moreau Attending:Chair Newsom,Members McCreery,Smith,Lynch,Levine Also Attending:Planner Shirk,Recording Secretary Thompson Absent:None Chair Newsom called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. 1.PUBLIC COMMENT None. 2.CONSENT Approval of minutes of the October 4,2011 meeting. It was moved and seconded (Levine/Smith)to approve the Consent Agenda as presented and the motion passed unanimously. 3.LOT 17,FOX RIDGE ESTATES,2115 RIDGE ROAD Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report.The applicant requests a variance from EVDC Section 4.3,Table 4-2,which requires a 50-foot setback from property lines in the RE-I — Rural Estate zone district.The purpose of the request is to allow a fronl yard setback of 42-feet in lieu of the 50-foot required setback for construction of a proposed attached garage/shop.The proposed building would measure 16 x 25 feet,attached to the existing garage.The existing dwelling was built in 1976 and is located in the southeast portion of the lot.It would be impractical to attach the garage to a different portion of the dwelling. Staff found that practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with Code standards. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered,and the variance would not adversely affect the delivery of public services.Staff found the variance represents the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. All applicable reviewing agencies were notified,and none had significant issues or concerns.There were no negative comments received from adjacent property owners or the homeowner’s association. This lot is undersized for the zone district.However,the setback requirement for the next lower zone district also requires 50-foot setbacks. Staff is authorized to approve variances up to 10%of the setback.This request is just over that allowance.The applicant has plans to construct a deck above the proposed garage/shop. Staff recommended approval with conditions listed below. Staff Discussion None. Public Comment Matthew Heiser/applicant’s representative stated the variance request was due to the location of the existing dwelling,and the desire of the property owner to improve the property. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2 November 1,2011 Conditions I.Compliance with the site plan and building design,as approved by the Board of Adjustment. 2.Setback Certificate.Prior to final inspection,a registered land surveyor shall provide to the Community Development Department a signed and stamped certificate that specifically verifies that the structure complies with the approved variance,and shall include a specific reference to the distance to property lines. Staff recommends a surveyor set survey stakes for foundation forms to ensure compliance with the approved variance. It was moved and seconded (Levine/Lynch)to approve the variance request with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously. There being no further business,Chair Newsom adjourned the meeting at 9:10 a.m. Wayne Newsom,Chair Karen Thompson,Recording Secretary 321 and 325 Kiowa Trail Height Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department,Planning Division Room 230,Town Hall,170 MacGregor Avenue P0 Box 1200,Estes Park,Co 80517 Phone:970-577-3721 Fax:970-586-0249 www.estes.org ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEEETING DATE:January 10,2012 REQUEST:This request is for a variance from Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.4,Table 4-5,which limits structure height to 30 feet above original natural grade after slope adjustment in the A-Accommodations zone district.This would allow a post-construction height variance of approximately one foot for a duplex addressed 321 and 325 Kiowa Trail. LOCATION:321 and 325 Kiowa Trail,Units 5 and 5,Mary’s Meadow Condominiums APPLICANTIOWNER:Mary’s Meadow Development —James Tawney STAFF CONTACT:Alison Chilcott REVIEW CRITERIA:In accordance with Section 3.6 C.Standards for Review”of the Estes Valley Development Code,all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein.The Board of Adjustment is the decision-making body for this application. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES:This request has been routed to reviewing agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment.A legal notice was published in the Trail Gazette. At the time of this report,no issues were expressed by reviewing staff. Neighbors concerns.On multiple occasions staff has met with two adjacent property owners;Mr.Tom Greslin of 2824 Kiowa Trail and Mr.Dave Schultz of 2800 Kiowa Trail. Both expressed concerns over numerous aspects of the Mary’s Meadow development. Concerns include,but are not limited to,processing of staff-level minor modifications to the Mary’s Meadow development plan,the height of the Unit 5/6 duplex,and height of future buidings. Planning Commission.Two Planning Commissioners,Betty Hull and Rex Poggenpohl, submitted comments (attached)concerning this variance request.This is the first time staff is aware of Planning Commissioners providing written comments to the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment.This was prompted by discussions at Planning Commission about the Mary’s Meadow development in November and December. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds: 1.Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g.,exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness,shallowness or the shape of the property)that are not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code’s standards,provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards,this Code or the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: Energy Heel.Building Permit #9074 for Units 5 and 6 contains architectural elevations that demonstrate compliance with maximum allowable height.Plans did not account for a 12-inch tall energy heel contained in the truss plans.The addition of the energy heel resulted in a height violation. •The engineer that prepared the construction plans did not prepare the truss system and may not have been aware of the energy heel. The twelve-inch energy heel was not a Town code requirement. •The duplex will be LEED Built Green certified,which may require the energy heel.This allows for full depth insulation all the way to the outer wall.It significantly reduces energy loss in what would otherwise be a cold spot. Height Elevation Certificate.On this project staff required a height elevation certificate at both the footing and foundation (F&F)and roof framing stages. Standard practice had been to require a certificate at the F&F only. The height elevation certificate submitted at the F&F (attached)stated that the building would comply with maximum allowable building height if built to plans.The assumed structure height was incorrect. The December height elevation certificate (attached)states that the building as constructed is over the maximum allowable height. 2.In determining ‘practical difficulty,’the BOA shall consider the following factors: a.Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance; Staff Comment The certificate of occupancies for this duplex will not be issued until the height violation is resolved,either through Board of Adjustment approval of the variance request or lowering the roof. b.Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Comment:The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance is substantial. c.Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance; Staff Comment Staff does not find that the variance would substantially impact the character of the neighborhood;reducing the height will not significantly change the look of the building or off-site views.Adjacent property owners may hold a different opinion. d.Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Comment The height regulation was in place at the time the design of the home was commenced. e.Whether the Applicant’s predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Comment The applicant can demolish and reconstruct the roof to reduce the height.Staff is not aware of the full extent of demolition required;i.e.whether some or all of the roof system needs to be replaced. Staff made the applicant aware that demolition was a possibility a number of months ago,when staff first became aware that there may be a height violation. 3.If authorized,a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Comment The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance is substantial. 4.In granting such variances,the BOA may require such conditions as will,in its independent judgment,secure substantially the objectives of the standard so varied or modified. Staff Comment.Two Planning Commissioners have recommended additional requirements be placed on future buildings.For new structures over 25 feet tall,staff will require ridgeline elevation certificates and ridgeline height elevations certificates with the roof framing inspection. SUGGESTED MOTIONS I move to APPROVE the requested variance to allow the building to remain as constructed ...(state reason/findings). I move to DENY the requested variance with the condition that revised plans be submitted for review and approval within 30 days and full compliance within 90 days... (state reason/findings). Note:If not completed within this time frame staff will pursue additional code enforcement action (which may include court) C ECEBVE DEC 272011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Setback and Height Survey Verification Form I,Lonnie A.Sheldon,a duly registered land surveyor in the State of Colorado,certi&that a survey of Unit 5 and 6 of the Meadow,a Minor Modification of Mary’s Meadow Development Plan on Lot 4A of Mary’s Meadow Repiat,Town of Estes Park,County of Larimer,State of Colorado,was performed under my responsible charge on March 16tl, 2009 and November 17th,2011.The result of the survey on March 2009 showed that the footing and foundation walls conform to the prescribed setbacks and easements for this lot.In addition,on November 17th,2011 the height of the constructed unit was measured as 31.8’at its highest point above finish basement grade at the North point of the highest ridgeline of Unit 5.Using the EVDC slope allowance,the building can be 31 .1’above existing grade at this highest point.The pie-construction grade elevation at this point of the house is 8099.7’making the highest elevation allowable 8130.8’.The existing finish elevation of 8022.,9Lmkes the highest point of the roof 8131.7’. ——- 2” LAND SURVEYS SUBDIVISIONS DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IMPROVEMENT PLATS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SANITARY ENGINEERING /MUNICIPAl.ENGINEERING 2 -‘ —a- VAN HORN ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING 0 0 0 W\2 I 32 k 32 c 3 LAND SURVEYS SUbDIVISIONS DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IMPROVEMENT PLATS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING/ff VAN HORN ENGINEERING A SANITARY ENGINEERING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING• Setback and Height Survey Verification Form ND SURVEYING I,Lonnie A.Sheldon,a duly registered land surveyor in the State of Colorado,certi’that a survey of the footing forms for the building of Unit 5and6 of the Meadow,a Minor Modification of Mary’s Meadow Development Plan on Lot 4A of Mary’s Meadow Replat,Town of Estes Park,County of Larimer,State of Colorado,was performed under my responsible charge on March 16,2009.The result of this survey showed that the footing and foundation walls conform to the prescribed setbacks and easements for this lot.In addition,based on the building plans,the height of the unit will be approximately IW3>Using the EVDC slope allowance the building can be 31.7’above existing grade at EWigfiest point on the northwesterly prow.The existing grade elevation at the highest pointOTThiiousej1making the highest elevation allowable 8129.9’.The proposed elevation of 8100.0’makes jhesbigh point of the roof 8128.3’,which meets the height requirement. —“ - 4S.“- LS #26974 0 0 GREGORY A.WHITE Attorney at Law North Park Place cw 1423 West 29th Street 970/667-5310 Loveland,Colorado 80538 Fax 970/667-2527 January 6,2012 Estes Valley Board of Adjustment P0 Box 1200 Estes Park,CO 80517 RE:Height Variance Request —321 and 325 Kiowa Trail Dear Board Members: The purpose of this letter is to address the scope of the Board of Adjustment’s review of the Height Variance Request for properties located at 321 and 325 Kiowa Trail,As noted in the Staff Report,issues have been raised by neighboring property owners concerning the Mary’s Meadow development including these two specific buildings.These issues have included,but not limited to,the Staff level approval of the minor modification to the Mary’s Meadow Development Plan, Development Plan No.06-01 for the Mary’s Meadow development was approved by the Planning Commission in 2006.In 2009,Community Development Staff approved the Second Amendment to the Development Plan No.06-O1B pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.7— Minor Modification of the Estes Valley Development Code.The neighboring property owners have raised issues with regard to the appropriateness of the Staff level approval of the Second Amended Development Plan.Please be advised that any discussion concerning the Staff level approval of the Second Amended Development Plan is not appropriate nor part of the Board of Adjustment’s review of this Height Variance Request.The owners of the Mary’s Meadow development received appropriate approval pursuant to the terms of the Estes Valley Development Code in 2009 for development of the property including the construction of the buildings at 321 and 325 Kiowa Trail. The only issue to be decided by the Board of Adjustment is the Height Variance Request. This Height Variance Request must be reviewed pursuant to the applicable standards set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code which are stated in Section 2 of the Staff Report. Further,letters have been submitted by two Estes Valley Planning Commission members suggesting certain conditions be part of the grant of the variance regarding future construction of buildings on the Mary’s Meadow property.Please be advised that it is my opinion that any requirements for construction for future buildings on the property is the responsibility of the Community Development Staff and not the Board of Adjustment. If the Board of Adjustment,following the determination on the Height Variance Request,wishes to advise the Community Development Staff as to possible future requirements to determine height of buildings,that is certainly within the purview of the Board of Adjustment. A.White GAW/ldr STATEMENT OF INTENT Prepared 12/19/11 MPY&MENT HEIGHT VARIANCE BULDING 2,UNITS 5 &6 AT THE MEADOW Lot 4a -Mary’s Meadow Replat The subject property is 5.062 acres located between Marys Lake Road and Kiowa Trail east of Marys Lake Lodge.This property has an approved Development Plan for 35 residential condominium units. Building 2 is a duplex including Units 5 &6.The finished floor elevations in this building comply with the approved Development Plan.However,at its highest point the building exceeds the Development Code’s maximum allowable height by 0.9 feet (Code sections 1 .9.E and 4.4). The excess building height was not identified until after construction was completed.It is the result of several of factors: 1)The foundation for this building was put in three years ago.At that time the Height Certificate,based on the slab elevation and building plans,indicated a maximum height 1.6 feet below the allowable height. 2)Due to the recession the building was not started for 2 1/2 years.When the final plans were drawn for building permit application,they included some roof plan changes (approved with the Development Plan Minor Modification in 2009)and a structural change from a panelized roof system to roof trusses.The permit drawings showed a maximum building height at,or below,the maximum allowed building height. 3)When the roof trusses were fabricated,they did not match the permit drawings.The highest point of the building was moved 8-10 feet north.The fabricators also added a 12”heel to the trusses to allow for insulation.This 12”heel was not required in the original panelized roof system,thus resulting in an unexpected increase in building height. The applicant is requesting a post-construction height variance to allow for the 0.9 foot excess building height.This error in the building height was unforeseen and certainly unintentional. The applicant was unaware of the building height change until after construction was completed,and to cut 0.9 feet off of the building’s high point at this time is virtually impossible without major expense.Also,given the orientation of the building,the impact on neighboring property owners is negligible. / Town ot Estes Park e PD.Box 1200 a 110 MacGregor Avenue -Estes Park,CC 80517 Community Development Department Phone:(970)577-3721 .Fax:910)586-0249 .www.estes.org/ComDev Revised9... )“f ( iFi!CE IIV!J ‘SbttI Data i2-i 9 —I I ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION 192011 :OMMLJNjTYDEVELOPMENT ii II enh.t4KIIrnrnmgl[.], RecordOwner(s):MØR}C ‘S hCAP0LA)flavaLcPt4aMT ,HsC. Street Address of Lot:3 LI —•2—4 K.Ck3A 9’rr.4 Legal Description:Lot:Lc’i—4’\Stock:Tract:I Subdivision:!1P.RX S tE.-.NE’c3cU REf L&T Parcel D#: rnflViTIiinnsi. Lot Size 5.C2 2-A RE-S Zoning Existing Land Use flJ3(-,øa C-o’c H flFvatorr-wJrr Proposed Land Use Existing Water Service X’Town r Well F Other (Specify) Proposed Water Service R’Town F Well F Other (Specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD R UTSD F Septic Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD UTSD F Septic Existing Gas Service 3<Xcel r Other F None Site Access (if not on public street)jJfl Are there wetlands on the site?F Yes No IllllI*” Valiance Desired (Development Code Section #):-S ExJfiCNj +4 -tX,SL.’iL...91it, /-4 NY II 1t i’tTI fl Name of Primary Contact Person Fg.AMK TI4EJS Compete Mailing Address Primary Contact Person is F Owner Applicant Consultant/Engineer ><Application fee (see attached fee schedule) )îç Statement of intent (must comply with standards set forth in Section 3.6.C of the Estes Valley Development Code) X 1 copy (folded)of site plan (drawn at a scale of 1”=20) X 1 reduced copy of the site plan (lix 17) *The site plan shall include information in Estes Val’ey Development Code Appendix B.Vll.5 (attached). The applicant wili be required to provide additional copies of the site plan after staff review (see the attached Board of Adustmer•t variance application schedule).Copies must be folded. PC?LLp<4-i6 IY,cc Ics;1 7 LaS0a,Ea, S Cl ,wwLi .z0I0-J00 ‘9EC0I.a,tS0VC‘Ua,t‘9C0c0a,0)CCC‘U0.>‘ a) ‘a ‘I , a, ‘9wa,CL0C0‘UC,0.a‘Ua,0CCU1.Ca>1-0U. Coa,CC0a) :3 •0a) -c00,a,a) -ca,0a)x0Co0-C0‘UC- )aaCU :30Ca) -o:30Ca)S0a) -C00,a)a,a) -Ca)a) C) , 0Ca,S-oa) -c0CDa,a, LIC0CU0CCCCCCCuaC’ , ‘I ) a) Li . od(I ) a)S-oa) -c0U,>a)0E00C0‘9a) ‘I ,I C APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing the application am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property. In submitting the application materials and signing this application agreement,I acknowledge and agree that the application is subject to the applicable processing and public hearing requirements set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). I I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC,and that,prior to filing this application,I have had the opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application. The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at: http://www.estes.org/ComDev/DevCode I understand that acceptance of this application by the Town of Estes Park for filing and receipt of the application fee by the Town does not necessarily mean that the application is complete under the applicable requirements of the EVDC. I understand that this variance request may be delayed in processing by a month or more it the information provided is incomplete,inaccurate,or submitted after the deadline date. I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete. The Community Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is determined to be complete. I I grant permission for Town of Eates Park Employees and Members of the Board of Adjustment with proper identification access to my property during the review of this application. I acknowledge that I have received the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Variance Application Schedule and that failure to meet the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application becoming null and void.I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. I understand that I am required to obtain a “Variance Notice”sign from the Community Development Department and that this sign must be posted on my property where it is clearly visible from the road.I understand that the corners of my property and the proposed building/structure corners must be field staked.I understand that the sign must be posted and the staking completed no later than ten (10)business days prior to the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment hearing. I understand that if the Board of Adjustment approves my request,“Failure of an applicant to apply for a building permit and commence construction or action with regard to the variance approval within one (1)year of receiving approval of the variance may automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void.”(Estes Valley Development Code Section 3.6.D) Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT:J All E_4z 7so i’ia>( Applicant PLEASE PR!NT FPAJSIC.1i4a S Signatures Record Own&t/?ct-7 c Date _______________________________________- Date I )/i,/Ij ia—iT—Il 0 Revised 11/20/09 ‘-F, Zoning Districts S §4.4 Nonresidential Zoning Districts 4.Table 4-5:Density and Dimensiona’Standards for the Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Table 4-5 Density and Dimensional Standards Nonresidential Zoning Districts F Minimum Lot Size [7] Zoning District A -Minimum Land Area per Accommodation or Residential Unit (sq.ft.per unit) Accommodation Unit =1800 [I]; Residential Units: SF =9,000; 2-Family =6750; MF =5,400 Minimum Building! Structure Setbacks 14][8] Area (sq ft) 40,000 [2] Width (ft.) 100(3] Front (ft) Arterial =25 [5]; All other streets = 15 Side (ft.) 15 [8] Z1 Bldg Height (ft)[9] 30 Rear (ft) 10(6] A-I Max. Lot Cover age 50 10,890 Max. FAR N/A 15,000 [2]50 [3] Arterial =25 [5]; All other streets = 15 4- 15 10 30 .20 30 CD Accommodation Units Only = 1,800; SF &2-Family (stand-alone)= 9,000; Dwelling Units (1st FLoor)I unit per 2250 square feet of gross land area Dwelling Units (2nd Floor)No minimum gross land area per unit (Ord.15-03#3) Accommo dation uses =20,000 All other uses =n/a SF & 2-Family (stand alone)=25; MF (stand alone)= 100; All other uses n/a Mini mum = a Maxi mum 16 If lot abuts a residential property = 10; All other cases =0 If lot abuts a residential property = 10; All âther cases =0 30 2.0 n/a Lots fronting I arterials = 40,000 [2]; Outdoor Fronting Arterial Commercial arterials ==25 [5]; CO n/a Recreation/200; All other 15 [6]15 [6]30 .25 65 I Entertain-,oJl other streets I mentt lotst50 =1540,000[2]I I I Allotherlots I I I I Supp.5 4-21 a, Zoi thig Distdcts C,C) 5.Number of Principal Uses Permitted Per Lot or Development Parcel. a.Maximum Number shall be permitted district,only one of Principal Uses Permitted,One (1)or more principal uses per lot or development parcel,except that in the A zoning (1)principal residential use shall be permitted per lot ordevelopmentparcel. b.Permitted Mix of Uses.Where more than one (1)principal use is permitted per lot or development parcel,mixed-use development is encouraged,subject to the following standards: (1)More than one (1)principal commercial/retail or industrial use permitted by right or by special review in the zoning district may be developed orestablishedtogetheronasinglelotorsite,or within a single structure, provided that all applicable requirements set forth in this Section and Codeandallotherapplicableordinancesaremet.0 §4.4 Non,esidential Zoning Districts Minimum Lot Size [7] Miigmuni Building!Structure Setbacks [4][8] Minimum Land Area per Accommo dation or Residential Unit (sq.ft.per unit) Residential units (2nd Floor) 1 unit 2,250 sq. ft.GFA ofncipalus Zoning District U CII Area (sq if) 15,000 [21 Width (ft.) Fronting Arterials = 200; All other lots 50 Front (ft.) Arterial =25 [5]; All other streets =15 Side (ft.) 15 [6] Rear (ft.) 15 [6] Max. Building Height (II.)[9] 30 Max.Lot Coverage 50 Max. FAR .25 6,000 [2]50 15 0 [6]0 [6]30 .50 80 I Fronting ,Arterial 15 000 Arterials =‘=25 [5]; I-I n/a 200;,All other 10 [6]10 [6]30 .30 80 All other streets 11ots501 =is (Ord.2-02#6;Ord.11-02 §1;Ord.15-03#3) flNOTES TO TABLE 4-5:. [1]For guest units in a resort lodge/cabin use that have full kitchen facilities,the minimum land area requirementperguestunitshallbe5,400 square feet.See also5.1 .P below. [2]If private wells or septic systems are used,the minimum lot area shall be 2 acres.See also the regulations setforthin§7.12,“Adequate Public Facilities.” [31 For lots greater than 2 acres,minimum lot width shall be 200 feet. [41 See Chapter 7,§7.6 for required setbacks from stream)miver corridors and wetlands.(Ord.2-02 #5;Ord.11-02 ‘§1) [5]All front building setbacks from a public street or hghway shall be landscaped according to the standards setforthin§7.5 of this Code. [6]Setback shall be increased to 25 feet if the lot line abuts a residential zoning district boundary. [7]See Chapter 7,§7.1,which requires an increase in minimum lot size (area)for development on steep slopes.(Ord.2-02 #6) [8]All structures shall be set back from public or private roads that serve more than four dwellings or lots.Thesetbackshallbemeasuredfromtheedgeofpublicorprivateroads,or the edge of the dedicated right-of-way orrecordedeasement,whichever produces a greater setback.The setback shall be the same as the applicableminimumbuilding/structure setback.This setback is applicable only in the “A-I”district.(Ord.11-02 §1) [9]See Chapter 1,§1 .9.E,which allows an increase in the maximum height of buildings on slopes.(Orcl.18-02 #3) 0 Supp.5 4-22 To:Estes Valley Board of Adlustment From:Rex Poggenpohi Gentlemen: Please consider the following in your deliberations on the upcoming variance request for the above and include as public comment for the record: As an Estes Valley Planning Commissioner,I know my colleagues are as disappointed as myself,in that portions of the above project were constructed above the height restrictions of the Development Code and do not conform to the Development Plan that was approved by the Commission,consequently upsetting some of the surrounding residents.I understand that the height of some of the trusses increased during the final truss design and I suspect that the owners were not aware of this violation at the time or that the former Director of Community Development incorrectly considered this a minor modification. I also suspect that the Board of Adjustment will find it practical to approve the variance request and appropriately “slap the hands”of the Owner or Developer and hopefully inform the Owner that further construction of the development will not be treated as favorably.However,I think more is needed to help prevent similar violations in the future as this violation is symptomatic of changes in the design professions and the construction industry that abdicate detailed design to fabricators. As a former licensed Architect and licensed Professional Engineer,I know the State requires one of these to be the Professional of Record to insure the project is designed and constructed to protect the public and meet the appropriate Building Codes and public Ordinances.Over the last 50 years, these professions have increasingly passed on some engineering and detailing to project contractors and fabricators to save themselves effort in order to keep from raising fees.This has become such an industry standard for items such as truss design that the Professional is confident that a truss is engineered to correct safety standards,and rarely checks the fabricators design against the original design documents which indicate the desired height and slope of such trusses. The solution I suggest is: •The Board of Adjustment recommend to the Trustees and Administration that the Building Department require of every project a Certification Affidavit from the Professional of Record to accompany the submission of final as-built drawings.This Certification Affidavit must state that the constructed project conforms with all Building Code and Development Code requirements or list the variations if existing,and request review of the variations by the Community Development department for determination of either minor modification or Board of Adjustment action.When professionals slack on this requirement,their license should be formally questioned to the State.This will increase the scrutiny of project construction to the approved design; consequently improving project quality and decreasing the number of incidents requiring Board of Adjustment action. Respectful regards Rex Poggenpohl Commissioner,EVPC 0 0 TO:The Estes Valley Board of Adjustment-- Wayne Newsom,Bob McCreery,John Lynch,Pete Smii Chuck Levine,Jeff Moreau RE:Mary’s Meadow Development Plan #06-01 Gentlemen, The twice-modified development plan and building permit for this development states that the ALL units will comply with the maximum building height of 30 feet (see EVDC 1.9.E).The former Planning Director illegally granted a minor modification (see EVDC 3.7.l.c—”In NO circumstances, however,shall the Staff approve a modification that results in an increase in building height”). After neighbors registered a complaint,the Present Planning Director repeatedly requested that the Developer present an independent ‘as-built’field survey certificate relating to height,but to no avail.Director Chilcott fmally learned the duplex unit (5&6)as constructed does not comply with the maximum building height.According to the Developer,alleged field changes to the trusses must have resulted in this code violation. As the result,the property owner has the option of applying to you,the Board of Adjustment,for a height variance for this unit (5&6)or to rebuild it complying with the height requirement. I firmly believe our Estes Valley Development Code is the “bible”which we all must follow.It protects the rights of every one of our valuable citizens,and as a Planning Commissioner,I am committed to uphold it. I have long followed Mary’s Meadow Development with interest. Unfortunately,because Twill be out of the State when this variance request comes before you,I am unable to appear to speak.I thank you for listening to me now, and I ask that my remarks be entered in the record. Since it is simply not practical to deny this variance at this point,I implore you instead,to reluctantly grant the variance gpjy with the condition that the applicant make available for inspection an independent ‘as-built’field height survey certificate as each future unit is built with the understanding that no like variances will be granted for this development in the future. Thank you, Betty Hull Estes Valley Planning Conunissioner Th e Me a d o w Co n d o s He i g h t Va r i a n c e Ow n e r Ow n e r II Ad d r e s s Ci t y ST Zi p Jo h n Fi n c h e r So s y Ba r d a k j i a 14 4 3 Ma r i g o l d St Up l a n d CA 91 7 8 4 Tr a n s c o n t i n e n t a l In v e s t m e n t s , LL C 18 2 0 Fa I l Ri v e r Rd Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Ca r o l & Mi c h a e l Du g a n 26 2 5 Ma r y s La k e Rd #6 Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Wa y n e & Ei l e e n Sa l m o n 21 1 1 Be l m o n t Ln Re d o n d o Be a c h CA 90 2 7 8 Do n a l d De b e y 26 2 5 Ma r y s La k e Rd Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Ke n t & Je n n i p h e r Ba r b e r 50 6 31 s t St Fa i r b u r y NE 68 3 5 2 Da v i d La S a l l e & Al i x We n g e r t - L a S a l l e 11 6 2 3 De n s e St a r Sa n An t o n i o TX 78 2 4 5 Li n d a Wi l k e r s o n 10 4 0 1 Be l i n d e r Rd Le a w o o d KS 66 2 0 6 Ch r i s Lo r e n z e n Jr 35 1 8 Ge o r g e t o w n Ho u s t o n TX 77 0 0 5 Ra v i d Pr o p e r t i e s , LL C P0 Bo x 23 9 2 Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 An t h o n y & Cy n t h i a Sa n c h e z Ru b e n Ar c h i l l a 32 3 3 E Bi r c h Av e Pa r k e r CO 80 1 3 4 60 1 5 Bo w e n Pa r t n e r s HI P Ne t t i e Ta y l o r 64 0 0 Ra b b i t Mt n Rd Lo n g m o n t CO 80 5 0 3 Le o n a r d & Ba r b a r a Dr y e r 53 4 9 Gr a n d Fi r Wy Pa r k e r CO 80 1 3 4 Cr y s t a l & La w r e n c e Sc h m i t t 10 0 Wa i p u h i a P1 Ha i k u HI 96 7 0 8 Ki o w a Ri d g e Pr o p e r t y Ow n e r s As s n P0 Bo x 32 3 4 Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Ch r i s t o p h e r Ga l l u p Cr y s t a l Kr e i t z e r 38 7 2 Ri d g e l a k e Ct Ad d i s o n TX 75 0 0 1 Zo e Co n d o LL C 60 0 5 Ri v e r Ch a s e Ci r At l a n t a GA 30 3 2 8 Da n e & Lo r i Sp i l l e r s 51 As p e n Rd Pl e a s a n t Pl a i n s IL 62 6 7 7 Ke n n e t h & Ja n e Si b i l i a 14 1 5 Cr a w f o r d Rd Om a h a NE 68 1 4 4 Ge r a l d Be r g e r o n 77 Wa n d e r i n g El k Wy Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Ma r y s Me a d o w De v e l o p m e n t In c 18 2 0 Fa l l Ri v e r Rd Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Da v i d & An n a b e l l e Sc h u l t z 28 0 0 Ki o w a Tr I Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Le s l i e An n Pr a t t P0 Bo x 27 8 Wi n n e t k a IL 60 0 9 3 Da v i e & Vi r g i n i a St u a r t 58 4 5 Hi g h l a n d Hi l l s Ci r Ft Co l l i n s CO 80 5 2 8 Ri c h a r d Lo y 26 2 5 Ma r y s La k e Rd S- 8 Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Te r e s a & Ot i s Mo r r o w P0 Bo x 11 4 6 Ar k a n s a s Ci t y KS 67 0 0 5 Ro b e r t Ko e h l e r 22 5 Ro c k Ca s t l e Ln Ft Co l l i n s CO 80 5 2 8 Vi c k i Pa r r i s h 16 3 9 8 E Wy o m i n g Dr Au r o r a CO 80 0 1 7 Sp l o z a n g o LL C 81 0 0 E Un i o n Av e . Su i t e 21 0 4 De n v e r CO 80 2 3 7 Ra m s Ho r n De v e l o p m e n t Co LL C 26 2 5 Ma r y s La k e Rd Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 la i n Mc W h i n n e y 32 Gr a n t Wy Pr i n c e t o n NJ 08 5 4 0 Gi l b e r t & Ca r o l Gr e s s l i n P0 Bo x 35 3 Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Tr e v o t & Ke m b e r l y Wa r d l a w 60 0 1 W Wa c o Dr . Un i t J Wa c o TX 76 7 1 4 Ch r i s & Ju d y Wa d h a m s 44 0 0 Pi o n e e r Gr e e n s Dr Li n c o l n NE 68 5 2 6 Al a n & Ki m b e r l y He n d e r s o n 38 2 Os a g e Ct Pe r r y s b u r g OH 43 5 5 1 Ma r k Ju r e n k a 41 0 0 In d e p e n d e n c e Dr Ch e y e n n e WY 82 0 0 1 Ke v i n & Ja d i l y n Pu g h 35 8 0 Ca p i t o l Pe a k Dr Lo v e l a n d CO 80 5 3 8 RM R M A LL C 50 5 Bi g Ho r n Dr Es t e s Pa r k CO 80 5 1 7 Ca t h y & Ma t t h e w Ro s i n g 34 0 0 Ch e r r y s t o n e Ct Ft Co l l i n s CO 80 5 2 5 Ge o r g e & Ka r l a Dr o l l 63 9 Gl e n w a y Av e Wy o m i n g OH 45 2 1 5 Al a n & Do r a Be n s 20 0 5 Br e n t ‘Y b * 1 e a d o w Co n i ei g t d l I & n n c e OH 43 5 2 8 Li . . EA S E M E N T IC ’ EG I A T E A FI E S A OH M I C CA O I O A J A R _ _ E _ _ _ _ — t - - - — - — E - - — - Mi D S T U S E t . 4 - GR E O L E ET H I S T H D I C 1 S M R PL A T A n c — Ci t MA R C O EO R I I 4 OR A L — ES L E I S R C , TE L S E R A O A I E MA D EA R L E ST E CI T E C ST R U C T T O H PL A N — D R R i - — — — - - E — — — OT T I * W A D EL S E . TI L E 45 4 0 CA S T E RO R C O ‘T E E WA I T E LR C (I N l E T S ) . RO W P I P E / P E R ) — 11 ’ NA R Y MO E ‘S u E R SH E (P V C ) - 5’ W R Y lA N A GA S LA N E (P a I T T N Y I G R & AR E C T RO D E O ) 3 lI A R S . AL L SE A N C E GA L S AL L RE 1) 5 . 4• PE R F O R A T E D F l I t MA D E R I R IE T S A C R S St I l T S HE Y K PY O P E A W LIA R HO A A D E E M I Q 0 EL Z C T I R E CA L L PE D E S L I S CL L E D C C M C tG L C P P T R I A W C IS L E V S A O A E PE E E S S A L WA l S H VA L V E OR E KO O W I O K — ST E E R 1 0 0 4 0 4 1 SM A S H E S 50 1 C R CL E A O I O L S T DO W E l SO R E R LO Q E A S E E (5 0 1 — 1 0 0 * 1 0 6 0 . SC — T Y P E _ C ) TR O T H PA D (T R u C E EN C L O S E S ) RI l E PA C T CO A 1 S R l u S t AS 11 0 5 W EC E a H E H I E AS RO O S T 0AD©e0n. V . 5 1 1 — 2 0 ’ ‘Y I N S W P O I D - : - - . . ‘ S t n c I I O TS A R S CA R S * 4 a’ O Y R OR R I LW W ’ V l l CO A P A C K E ) . 1 5 ) 0 1 . 1 ‘A P I l E ) . 4’ CO M P A C T E D CL A S S S 4V S R E E A T E RO A D RO S E \ % T T H ; R E L 50 ES L K A I L E I 1 T . k CO A P A C T G A EE L YE TO 02 0 0 0 HE T T T R \ _ _ CO A P A L 5 0 0 SO S RO S E NE A T E V I A L . FR E E El CI R C U I t LS A I E E I A . TY P I C A L DR i V E W A Y CR O S S — S E C T I O N AC E NA T I V E IL L RO A E A A AV A L L A E L E CO L I P A C T E S TO 0 5 5 . SU P P L Y DR E S S SI D E P1 0 0 1 . CL A S S A R0 0 0 R A S E 11 0 0 R E n T E R 1 11 ±2 ’ - “ A H E I - S 0 E TY P P K CO N C R E T E S- ) P E E W A L K TO S a T I A t E O0 * A R R L L S t E TO N SO SO M A L I P0 1 C C TE A l S AT 0’ •A EH E M GA G E R I DC I I ST E P5 5 CR O W D L E . c , SI IT S l E W AS 3’ Et C EA I I S R O äI A . N L A R Y P SI D E W A L K SC A E L S / 4 • .E R O J E C T NO T E S . TO O L US E AL M A IS RE P S E S C N T A S U A A L CO l T PA l E IS AO l TO RE CO N S T R U E S AS A iP S O AJ O G E Y P1 . 6 5 0 0: 4 AA P R O S E M E H T SU R V E Y PL A Y S. Ea R N S PO W LO T 4A IS AC C S R A I 4 E D A S O A A S (A ) . SE I S A C I E S AR E 51 4 0 0 0 1 AS 55 5 PO S E R SE A L LO T LI R E IS ’ ER L R A KI O W A T h A t AN D KI O W A TR I O S AN D 25 PR O M LI A R S ’ S 1, 1 5 ) . RO A D . S. AL L RE S L R R Y L AP R O A E I A E N T S SK G L L RE LS L W R L I S O OR WA S M I T E E D IA AC C C A V D P J A C C KI m LO O t SE C T O R 2. 1 5 MA O T a S K . 4. TIR E L’ R C R RR . L HE RE S t O R E D TO PA O A I S € PO P o V a l S A E C S S l Y Y II AC E C E O M I C C RA W ER I E EV O C KC C T I C R A 7. 1 1 . 5 . TH E N. S . A MA O TN ! LR . C M C AL L ‘C O W AI C N O M E H T S KY TH E I. R C S AL L WA L T R A I T n o W O E S SH R L I . HE WA R D N s I f l t . S R . TR A . A A DU L A P S E E S S SH A L L AS 0 5 ( 0 * 4 0 AS O Y A S T HE A , R S MA D MA D 01 0 C R MA L I A L S . 5. AT t I R e S M C SO R D I A T I C , SH E AC E S O L LO C A T I C 4 I S TE A L DC PI L E D PI T AT 15 0 ) . TI L l S 55 IN S E A L L A L O R I A. L I D S LW EI S I S I R R A J 4 C A SH A L T . HE EC L C I I A T E R CI TI C ET E L S PR O P TO CO I A C I I C K A R S N T C r ET I C A V A T O R I . 05 ± 0 0 1 5 0 0 CO N S T R S C T I T H A Ru b EC A I T T S A U T T O O RA S H E R P0 1 0 1 1 0 OR AL 4 5 OT N O R IR E 1 N O R AP P R O V E D CT VI AS F A. AL L ET I T O R I L E LIQ A T S A I G SH A L L HE SA E L E C D A l t SS M I C P S T SR u D N LO H A M A T S US E I I O T T O RI O SH O W E R TH A N 5’ . AS PE R U S E S FI L L E T DC N S L O P A A E I A T EE O C 10 , AL L f l t l l 4 t S SE A S SL A V E A 1C O S M A VS I I C A S T RI T A DC ST I l T ‘A M O C O G± S I L A L A I ’ C A A 05 1 TI C IR O N S ER TI C CE D R I C I AE R I A l l i t RP A I C W A T ’ ES EY I A S R I . A L A AS AS P U C . N I E E To t LO O T S AE C E E S O T’ C T V O A TI l E EZ I T R A L AR E A IS A , tA R E TI C LI A C T S PO S I T S LI TI C 0 0 9 1 ’ PR O R R TI l E PA M A S I C AS E A S . 15 € RE G R E S S L A S t ? S ‘I ’ S ’ i t HE D E T C I S . ST AL L G a l O R E RA T E IC R IR C E S S RO l E S AS ‘ O R b I t AL L SM O t E OR E ’ SE A S I C K LA C E UU L L At r EH E P E T PO W NE A T E R . 4 • PO E PO P 50 1 C R . r PI S PO P 5* 5 . 7) 5 ’ EC N O R A T P o t p. E C T R C . 2 ’ CG R S I A R T EG O S JE S E P 1 0 0 R E 5 0 T• CS E O R $ T PE P CA R E . NO T E TO O T AL l , SL I E T I C RIR O A IS l E S RE A L RA W A r EC O A D S I R I ED T I AS I A ’ S IN A O E I O T O I I T TH E EE ’ I T L O R ’ S C R A T IU I P T R C . I E SA I d * 1 RA R E 3• PA I D EA R L E lI A R lI L T . SA V E 2’ CO A C N J I T TR S O M Q T D J T AS O€ L S , IS . P 4 C LO T S i A G MA D RR A A I E R C I & DE S I S H A E O O * 1 RE 00 1 € RI A= U C A J A C S IR i S H TI C IL U . T . C S E . SO N S 94 1 0 1 HE PL A C E 01 0 iN C 01 5 C R TO E ) . Cr 15 € W A L R Pu W l TI C AM O C A C SP A C E S T i AL L CO S t A R , AE C R E S S E T RO L L U D( L M R S D 10 DC CL U S T S R RO Y LO C A T E D AL O N G KI O W A NA V E AZ O T I C A C C L Ra i S E AL L HE f f i TO SE R W O W IK I S OE S E L I W I O O . • MA S E S E I M A C K a L . I D T R Dt S 1 . A E E F R a n C s 0 D C R E S t R d . R f S OR OA T C G I a a w AT S O O A S f l I OW 10 € PR O W E R 1 T OW ’ € R 5. 15 € HE C W A L I E TS R u O S O N TH E CL N T R N . AR E A S TO SE R I F IO E S E U L A M AC C E S S PE R EA A E R S E H E T SV R O , E S . IS TE A t CO E D Ri T E SI C SH A L L RE EI A O C R R T D SD AE E C O A I I X A T E A PS T E I R D O C TI SH E NE R V E S Sl A T S MI D S* A T E E tR A I T S RA T LE A P T LO C A I T E R I S OW RA R E ES S E A HE D 0 0 5 E A S OA S I S DR A R I A C 54 0 EO I 4 S I E O C T T O H PI T A ’ S . TH E DA S H E S LI N E L AS , J A E E N T 10 75 0 tR O T S AR E EL A A A P L E G HE PO S S I K I S EN P A A A $ O A . 15 € AN T I S NE L L RE M I L l AS RE T I N A L OC O , R S n o CO H E R E TE A R E D ‘C A D ES P A I Y S A S A . AO H S O R A L ES A I P S S L Y J I C A R N L PA S T R Y MU , HE OS A R S T H E I C I E D TR I R R A C TI E PE A R L P5 0 * 5 LW CC R A S T R O C T I E H I I’ TO R E SW I S S , LI T I L I T I E S , Al t O LA ) 1 0 0 C A P T N O NA TI C PR O P O S E D PH A S E Pl E A T lO L L OS CC A C O L E T T S PR I O R 1 0 CE A A S I R S I C S S R A D OT H E R PH A S E S AS RE S T IE E E TO CO N I R S E ‘S T E TA S T O K A M A C E PA I D P5 * 5 1 4 DL V C L O P E T AR E A S SR . TH E AS P E N GR O V E TO TH E R O T H Cf RS R L T R A A O 4 04 LO T 4 5 51 5 1 4 0 HE ST O R E D tS P RI T A CW S T N L I C T T O A PE A C E *1 4 0 RE MT S O A A EM I T S OP AS S S I R R T J . C E T h e M e a d o w M i n o r M o d i f i c a t 2 o n # 2 a P h a s e I P a r k i n g Lc v y o u t C h a n g e o f L o t 4A , o f M a r y ’ s M e a d o w R e p l a t P o r t i o n o f S e c t i o n 2, T o w n s h i p 4 N o r t h , R a n g e 7 3 We s t o f t h e 6 t h P. M . T o w n o f E s t e s P a r k , C o u n t y o f L a r i m e r , S t a t e o f C o l o r a d o A CE R T I F I C A T I O N AN D AP P R O V A L : S C LD C L R S C A A E D . K I l O Ti C OR I O L E S E0 SE V E R S AG I L E TH A T TI ’ S TS A R , PS O A L R T S 1 5 LL S C R A D L D RI II I ! A f l U C A S C H PO T EC L E I E P N E R T AL A N SC R E W IE E E CR 1 0 0 1 0 LA I D AS 51 0 1 1 1 , EN IN S AT E PL A N OA A L L HE SL O , C C T TO TA R E P 5 5 5 1 5 0 5 1 5 W TI T L E IT 05 ’ TA l C AV I O O Y A L CC C L SE TI C ‘O C T ’ 1 1 CF ES T E S PP . 7 1 K . LL T . O R . A S O AN D Ml ’ : OT H E R L. O Y I M A C E T OR lI V E ‘0 0 1 1 SE ES I E S PA R E , CG E L S N A O O PS R T I A I R A E TO . d a l . . s 4 1 t 0 . 9 ) t < 1 :1 1 1 4 5 ) . , HE S 0 0 0 HE S R L W A R X T P P V * 1 1 5 * 10 1 1 1 1 : 5 . PR L S E O E I I A SC A L E ’ r — AR 40 TO PL A N N I N G CO M M I S S I O N CE R T I F I C A T E : AP P R O V E D MI S A f l C R _ R S D A R O S P A . li p LC V E L O P I A E L T 22 0 0 DO G E C T O N . DI I TA N IT O 1 NO T I C E OF AP P R O V A L . AP P R O ± A L SE Ti l l S AL M A CR E A T E S A, IA E O T F T PE O P R A T T Y RT E A R T PR A I S S N A T TO 45 1 1 C R RI S I II T L E 24 . C R 3 . AS A W A I t S . ST A T I S T I C A L 1N F O R M A T I O N : 1. GR O S S PR O J E C T AR E A — 12 0 SO C ES OR 5 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 5 HE Y PR O J E C T A L A — 1 5 5 5 ( 5 5 ‘S OR 5. 0 6 2 AC R E S 7. 05 0 1 1 5 0 7 1 OR LIA A T T S PT R T P 0 5 0 1 1 . 35 AV E R T S ) . SL O P E . PR O P O S E D PI M I C O R A L lA S S IS RE W O A R I A L SO A C L E 5 5 1 1 3 OS l O AR E A AC E Al I t - 9, 5 0 0 - S PR O P O S E D TE A P L E E tA R t AR E A PE R SO T _ A, 7 5 0 — TO PS O T O S E S II L R . S — F A A I A , Y LA S t AR I A PE A SA C K — 5 . 4 5 — 50 PR C K ’ 2 S T S lo l A 1 . LA S t AR E A US E D I. E O 0 5 ) A K . T O C A T L S + S . A 0 5 0 J O J — 55 0 . 1 0 5 5 4 0 06 5 5 5 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 P DR V E L O P E L PU L L I ST I R AT L A S PA A S , Y L’ S E I l l , f l 5 5 AL L T A T T S F DS I C L O P E J RO S A U AL C U O I T S AS ) . 3. PR O J E C T TIE ’ S LS ’ 4 S A T Y — 5 7 1 . 7 0 0 / 2 5 - 6 . 2 0 0 ‘S f 1 5 0 6 7 A. P5 1 0 : 1 1 1 SP A C E S TE O L T O C S - OA S E S ON RE S I S E T A I A L LI s t ‘A ) . PE R UN I T 5 0 2 5 PS R AX L E S . 7 . 1 S 3 S . ID TO R t E LI U S T RE *C C E S S A J L L W Y A T S G I A A C C T S L A S L E S. P4 0 0 0 ( 0 SP A C E S PR O V I D E D . 74 20 SP A C E S TA TO E EA . R A C E L MA D 54 SP A C E S It ES S E S N A T S I OA R AC C E S S A R L E OO T S R E , S CA S E AC E E S S A S L E SA J S S D E C. P4 7 1 1 5 1 1 1 0 IS AR AC C E S S O R Y US E MA D AO L PA I A E Y A O LI L I E S TA R E PL A C E IN PR O V T D T D PA I K R A O AR E A S . P. AG I * 1 1 4 0 J L I C IT I L O N A C hE i G H T - 10 ’ 4 (L 4 C A P OV E R DI E LE N G T H OF TI l E RE L O A R O ) — NO T TO Gi L L E D 40 ’ I . LO T CO A C R A C E — LI S T S IA I S I S OL D ) . PO O T P 0 0 0 T S — 20 , 0 4 5 AS P H A L T IR I S ! & P . 5 6 1 0 5 — I 0, 2 2 2 CO N C R E T E PA T H S & P A I 5 0 5 — 10 , 7 2 0 EV E S AL L O W E D ) A. D l i OL V T E D P I A E O T 0 WR . J C C T TO TO E EC C E S S O R ’ A LO E S / S T R G I C T I I R E RE S A I A L T I C O I S FO R TH E MA l ’ L5 L I I - ’ P A J A I S RE O O E N S A L L ZO N T A P CO l O N I S T . •O L I T T O A O L AC C E S S S F ’ RU I L D O I C S WIL L HE LA A I T E O TO A TA P S I R E I A RE A A H E R OP RD 1 0 5 0 0 1 0 5 Al A S A WA S I O U A PO D T P R I T T S Pl E A OP 2 , 5 0 0 SO R J A A R T PE E l W O R E IE T A D A C PL M A * E i G I I l M C A AP P R O V A L . V i c i n i t y M a y ALPINE ENGINEERING,US 7414 TENBY COURT CASRE ROCK,Co 80108 pbstructuraftgmaiI.com 303.882.4242 CL . ELEVATIONS