HomeMy WebLinkAboutPERMIT.PLANS 6838 1575 Fall River Rd, deck 2000-10-2000„„; 0,0050
BUILDINGApDRESS....
Legal Description
„04407° 2007
TOWN F ST PA
Building Department
PID
0
NAME
N
E
R
L
nne,3, "70' „1,70
MAILING ADDRESS
PHONE NUMBER
NAME
ADDRESS
E
R PHONE NUMBER
0
C.
NAME
ADDRESS
r)007 4-f Au .1 I-1 A„)
0;" 77" 000 00
• •••,- .
oonn,01"'00, dco
Total
K
1°41/11 7/4020 0,00,440„,,,4
n '
to400"01ct,
Valuation
Building Permit
& Plan Review
00000! eneen0t0 '",;1774"
Other
totit
Certificate of Occupancy
.0001re
nne nem 07 re
1,001 10 00 45000 100,0000 0
-^Ilw (0000 St
S IT /3 141 C7,:d „, C85 t
TOWN LICENSE NO.
Arch/Designer/Engineer
Name
TOWN LICENSE NO,
PC
L 0
UN
MT
B. R.
NAME
ADDRESS
TOWN UCENSE NO.
Type of Construction 1 FR, 11 FR, 11 1-Hr.,
II N. N, IV HT. V 1-Hr, VN
Occupancy Group A, B, E, F, H, 1, m, S, U
Di oh 1, 2, 2.1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
CLASS OF WORK
New
Demolish
Alteration
Rirpair
Addition
Use of Building /0,4„,,,
.' Remove
. .
f0,0,0„. iot 0„ CT' 000
Floor Area 037 4, Lament
1st
2nd
Garage
Size of Building
Height
Maximum Occupancy
Number of Families
Number of Baths
% Full
Size of Lots
Number of Floors
No. Bedrooms
Number of Buildings
Now on Lot er 000 of
Use of Buildings
Now on Lot
By
Address
Phone Number
ZONING INFORMATION
Zoning District
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS ITEM #
Front Yard Setback
Side Yard Setback
Rear Yard Setback 0 S
FLOOD PLAIN CHECK
Approved em Disapproved
Comments
Flood Zone:
By
Date "-
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that
the above is correct and agree to comply with all Town Ordinances and
State Laws, regulating building construction and zoning.
Permitteee
no0
ge,
244. 024,-attet 40010000002,202,„„4,
Building Inspector
Certificate ofOccupancy Number
ly
The Building Department will make every effort to prevent errors in
your application and pemtit, but cannot be responsible for your failure
to comply with all Building, Zoning and other applicable codes.
WHITENELLOW ninin nmpacrriAckiT
V,wan iumml uwWudYlvIIIXHNG(/q!!!!!tll/!Gn
i1 nmwono mgmosmma CO.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
September 5, 2000
Page 3
2. Prior to pouring the foundation, a setback certificate from a qualified
professional shall be required to determine location of footing.
6. LOT70 FALL RIVER ADDITION APPLICANT: JOHN MOYNIHAN-SETBACK
VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3 TABLE 4-2 OF THE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE ESTES
Senior Planner Joseph reviewed the Staff Report. The owners are requesting a
variance to do improvements to the exterior of the building and the addition of a
deck to access the main door of the residence. The lot is steep and rocky to the
rear and sides of the building. Staff finds there are unique physical constraints on
the property and recommends approval. Statement of Intent refers to vacation
rentals; however, the variance request is only regarding the setback. The Light &
Power Department advised the request would be acceptable in regard to the
power pole located next to the proposed deck. Neither the applicant nor a
representative was present.
Public Comment:
Robert Mussman of Sunnyside Knoll Resort requested a requirement to improve
on the appearance of the site. The Board requested the Chief Building Official
Birchfield to comment and he advised the project was under construction with
new siding. Appearance, however, is not considered under the UBC.
Based on the recommendations of staff, it was moved and seconded
(Newsom/Ball) to approve the variance request with the following
conditions, and it passed unanimously.
1. Full compliance with the Unified Building Code.
2. Submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a qualified individual third party.
3. Setback reductions in accordance with the submitted site plan.
4. No use variance is being considered or granted.
7. LOT 18 WINDCLIFF ESTATES 3RD FILING APPLICANT: RAY VERM —
SETBACK & HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUESTS FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4-
2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE
Senior Planner Joseph reviewed the Staff Report. The grade across the site is
steep (approximately 40%). There is an existing sewer main that crosses the
property and presents another constraint on the buildable area. The setback
variance is significant, however, due to circumstances appeared justified. The
height variance request is substantial and perhaps could be reduced,
Jim Vander Voorst of BVZ Architects represented the applicants. He reviewed
the items that have already been done to reduce the variance required. They
have tried to mitigate the effect of the height by located it as low on the site as
possible and the use of the surrounding trees. There is no problem with the
requested conditions of approval. He reviewed the other options that were
available but less functional or aesthetically appealing.
Board Member Sager complimented the firm for the site preparation and staking.
The memo from the Larimer County Building Department was reviewed and
responded to by the architects and Chief Building Official Birchfield.
\
m
‘1'
0
unneumeuuumlIMMIIMI, u.11e( memUsosuuUOmna
v