Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sm.Smith 1150 River Dr.23A-86 �f]JYLWCIL JV11MIal1 .711L/1 City of Aspen • k DATE RECEIVED: c7 -20 8 Ho CASE NO. __ _ DATE RECEIVE. COMPLETE: it TAFF: Sf PROJECT NAME 1 a t " 11 1 ' //-/ Y )69 f / IRO ' • APPLICANT: 1.' 0 tfli- 1 , Applicant Addr� Phone: 4 ��l�( /., /O, : ('f REPRESENTATIVE: U i ' Aire An,. ata / _ , Representative Address /Phone: GAMMEi l r/,';Ji �rMfl' Type of Application: I. GMP /Subdivision /PUD 1. Conceptual Submission 20 $2,730.00 2. Preliminary Plat 12 1,640.00 3. Final Plat 6 820.00 II. Subdivision /PUD 1. Conceptual Submission 14 $1,900.00 2. Preliminary Plat 9 1,220.00 3. Final Plat 6 820.00 III. All 'Two Step" Applications 11 $1,490.00 IV. All "One Step" Applications/ 5 $ 680.00 V. Referral Fees - Environmental Health, Housing Office • 1. Minor Applications 2 $ 50.00 2. Major Applications 5 $ 125.00 Referral Fees - Engineering / Minor Applications / 80.00 Major Applications 200.00 P &Z CC MEETING DATE: 5 : 0 0 PUBLIC H NG. YES NO ..k,:;_____TT DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: REFFERRALS: J City Atty Aspen Consol. S.D. School District City Engineer Mtn. Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas Housing Dir. Parks Dept. StateHwy Dept (Glenwd) Aspen Water Holy Cross Electric StateHiwy Dept (Gr.Jtn) City Electric Fire Marshall Bldg: Zoning /Inspectn Envir. Hlth. Fire Chief _ Other: Roaring Fork Transit Roaring Fork Energy Center • FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: ',- INITIAL: City Atty City Engineer 1/ Building Dept. Other : Other : i FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: V1,I1i •CASE DISPOSITION: % J`fleArt, NU/WI R(BNtt1 Reviewed by: Aspen P &Z City Council D !h Atct )4, Pd? t Ate l 4.4. M� �4�» a , c , L e l , � , , � � 1 ti CD R te , DA. t_ J. At e, L 4 a l 4 AGti[.ivEvz t J L p M 44 QJP� v R iltv441,pt. P W44 e 4 ad rtitU g A 141.114 Pu* (AA : ' g Afirt :eat. dn, till-a546 J? iu 6 141 (Ad uti pala 40-124-nub 1, Reviewer By: Aspen P &Z City Council MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office RE: Smith Stream Margin Review Parcel ID # 2735 - 013 -07 -004 DATE: August 13, 1986 LOCATION: 1150 River Drive, Lot 15, Black Birch Estates, City of Aspen. ZONING: R - LOT SIZE: 23,654 s.f. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Applicant, Kathleen D. Smith, requests stream margin review approval for the construction of an enclosed swimming pool elevated two feet above the Base Flood Elevation and the existing grade. PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTION: On November 20, 1984, P &Z granted Stream Margin Review approval for the construction of a second story addition. At that time, the house was also renovated without adding any footprint within the Roaring Fork River Floodplain. APPLICABLE SECTION OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE: Section 24 - 6.3 of the Municipal Code, as amended by Ordinance 62, Series of 1985, requires P &Z approval for any development within 100 feet from the high water line or within a flood hazard area. Section 24- 6.3(e) attached hereto states the criteria by which P &Z shall review such development proposals. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: A. Referral Comments: 1. Engineering Department - In an August 12, 1986, memorandum from Jim Gibbard comments were made regard- ing the adequacy of the application. It is requested that the Army Corps. of Engineers be contacted and asked to determine whether a permit is needed. 2. Environmental Health Department - In a memorandum from Tom Dunlop dated July 8, 1986, it is noted that: (1) During construction care should be taken to prevent soil and debris from entering the Roaring MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Burstein, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ID DATE: August 12, 1986 RE: Smith Stream Margin Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the above application and has the following comments to make: 1. The submitted elevation certificate does satisfactorily demonstrate that there will be no increase in base flood eleva- tion.as a result of the development. 2. The plans submitted show that the location of the proposed removal of vegetation and the proposed grade change will not produce erosion of the stream bank. 3. Plans submitted also indicate that the location of the development will not increase pollution significantly nor will it interfere with natural changes of the river. 4. The Army Corps of Engineers should be contacted and asked to determine whether ox not a 404 or a Nationwide permit is needed for this development and if so, a copy of that permit should be submitted. jg /strmmar cc: Jay Hammond Fork River from the building site; (2) Prompt revegetation should take place; and (3) Provisions should be made to prevent direct discharge of swimming pool water into the river when the pool is emptied. B. Staff Comments: The swimming pool proposal entails no effect on the existing water course and minimal effect on existing vegetation. Two trees, a seven (7) inch diameter birch and a four (4) inch diameter aspen would be removed. It should be noted that a thirteen (13) inch diameter spruce and a nine (9) inch diameter aspen adjacent to the existing house will not be disturbed by the swimming pool addition. No grass coverage is effected by the addition, therefore, revegetation is not an issue. Given the relatively great number of trees that would not be disturbed, the loss of two trees is not unduly detrimental to the landscape. No trail is designated within the development site. The closest linkage on the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks /Recreation /Open Space /Trails Element is a pedestrian corridor along Black Birch Drive. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of the requested swimming pool addition subject to the following condition: The Applicant shall contact the Army Corps. of Engineers to determine whether a permit is needed for this development and provide a copy of such permit prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. SB.1 Section 24- 6.3(e) as amended by Ordinance 62, Series of 1985 (e) Review criteria. In reviewing the plan for proposed development, the planning and zoning commission shall consider the following guidelines and standards, and impose the following conditions for permit approval: (1) No development shall occur within a special flood hazard area unless it can be demonstrated that there will be no increase in base flood elevation as a result of the development, as shown by an elevation certificate prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado. (2) In the event there is a trail designated by an approved trail plan within the development site, such trail shall be dedicated for public use. (3) All attempts should be made to implement the recom- mendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan pre- pared by the Roaring Fork Greenway Committee. (4) Vegetation shall not be removed nor any slope grade changes made that may.produce erosion'of the stream bank. (5) All efforts shall be made to reduce pollution and interference with the natural changes of the river, stream or other water course, and to enhance the value thereof as an important natural feature. (6) Written notice shall be given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relo- cation of the water course, and a copy of said notice shall be submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. (7) In the event a water course shall be altered or relocated, the applicant and applicant's heirs, successors and assigns shall provide maintenance to assure that the flood carrying capacity is not diminished. (8) Copies shall he submitted of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the one hundred year floodplain. ASPEN*PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM If JUL - 81986 To: Steve Burstein Planning Office From: Thomas S. Dunlop, Director - 75D Environmental Health Dept. Date: July 8, 1986 Re: Smith Stream Margin Review Parcel ID# 2735- 013 -07 -004 The only comments this office has regarding this submittal pertain to the ability of the applicant to mitigate any negative stream impacts which may occur during construction. In order for the addition to be completed the applicant must invade the floodplain to install piers on which to support the house addition and indoor swimming pool. During construction care shall be exercised to prevent soil and debris from entering the Roaring Fork River from the building site. Also, prompt revegetation shall take place over disturbed soil areas to control future soil erosion into receiving waters. Provisions shall be made to prevent a direct discharge of swimming pool water into the Roaring Fork River when the pool is emptied. • 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/925-2020 MEMORANDUM TO: Karen McLaughlin, City Attorney Jay Hammond, City Engineer Tom Dunlop, Environmental Health FROM: Janet Raczak, Planning Office RE: Smith Stream Margin Review Parcel ID 42735- 013 -07 -004 DATE: June 27, 1986 Attached for your review is an application submitted by Michael Gassman, architect for Kathleen D. Smith, requesting stream margin review approval for the construction of an addition, within the stream margin, to a single family residence on property located at Lot 15, Black Birch Estates (1150 River Drive), in Aspen, Colorado. FACTS /HISTORY: The applicant, Kathleen D. Smith, submitted an Ownership and Encumbrance Report which certifies that The Kathleen D. Smith Revocable Trust Number 2 is the record owner of Lot 15, Block Birch Estates Subdivision. The report indicates that the property is subject to a Deed of Trust in the amount of $300,000 to Ute City Mortgage which has since been assigned to Taylorbanc Savings Association of Taylor, Texas. The property is currently zoned R -15 and contains 23,654 s.f. of lot area. According to Mr. Gassman's calculations, the maximum allowable FAR is 7,343. My calculations do not concur. On a 23,654 s.f. lot, the maximum allowable FAR is 5,019.18 s.f. This does not appear to be of concern because the applicant's existing house square footage (3,547 s.f.) plus the proposed addition square footage (1,100 s.f.) do not exceed the total allowable FAR. Area of Existing House 3,547 s.f. Proposed Addition 1,100 s.f. Total Area House & Addition 4,647 s.f. Allowable FAR 5,019.18 s.f. CODE SITES AND ISSUES: 24 -6.3 Stream Margin Review (a) Intention. To guide development and encourage appropri- ate use of land in proximity to designated natural water courses, to promote safety from flooding, to prevent impediment of natural Michael Gassman Architect Box 740 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303 925 2695 June 18, 1986 Planning and Zoning Commission City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Application for Flood Hazard Review Site: Lot 15 Black Birch Estates 1150 River Drive Aspen, Colorado Applicant, Architect & Michael Gassman Owner's Agent: Architect Box 740 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303 925 2695 Owner: Kathleen D. Smith Box 7968 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303 925 4347 Structural Engineer: Integrated Engineering Consultants, Ltd. 411 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303 925 5913 Proposal: To construct an enclosed swimming pool within Flood Zone A3. The pool building will be elevated 2 feet above the Base Flood Elevation as shown on the enclosed drawings. The pool building will be an addition to an existing single family house. Smith ,.rood Hazard Review Page 2 Existing Zoning: R -15 Lot Area: 23,654 Square Feet Allowable F.A.R.: 7,343 Square Feet Area of Existing House: 3,547 Square Feet Area of Proposed Addition: 1,100 Square Feet Total Area House and Addition: 4,647 Square Feet Enclosures: Site plan showing existing house and proposed addition, flood boundary, topography, trees, etc. Building floor plan Building sections and elevations Building structural drawings Elevation certificate Ownership certificate Letter designating an owner's agent 760 Bucks water flea, and to insure provisions for adequate protection and preservation of the designated natural water courses as important natural features. All lands and air space within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, shall meet the following requirements prior to the issuance of a building permit or any grading, filling or excavation of said lands. (b) Plan Specifications. A development plan shall be submitted to the building inspector which supplies the following i of ormat i on : (1) Boundary of the property for which building is request- ed; (2) Two (2) contours; five -foot intervals for grades over ten (10) percent; (3) Existing and proposed improvements; (4) Construction procedure to be used; and (5) Existing trees and shrubs. (c) Review Criteria. In reviewing the development plan the zoning commission shall consider the following guidelines and standards, and impose the following conditions for permit approval: NiiY n (1) No building shall be located so as to be within a X special flood hazard. The applicant proposes to elevate the pool building 2 feet above the floodplain. ISSUE: The entire residence, garage with gallery and approximately 80 percent of the addition is totally within the 100 Year Floodplain for the Roaring Fork River. The applicant proposes to build the addition on stilts within the floodplain. The above states "No building shall be located so as to be within a flood hazard area . . . " By placing the addition above the floodplain, does this address the issue? (2) In the event there is a trail designated by an approved trail plan within the development site, such trail shall be dedicated for public use. ISSUE: There are no trails planned within the development site. (3) All attempts should be made to implement the recommend- ations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan prepared by the Roaring Fork Greenway Committee. ISSUE: According to the Roaring Fork Greenway & Trails Plan Map, no greenway areas, parks, parking, water, proposed bridges, proposed cross country ski trails or trail corri- dors are located anywhere on the subject property. (4) Vegetation shall not be removed nor any slope grade changes made that may produce erosion of the stream bank. ISSUE: There will be removal of some vegetation. It should be investigated and determined the impacts of the removal of said vegetation. The plans indicate a slope grade change. It should be determined if the finished grade will produce erosion of the river bank. Will the removal of vegetation for the addition produce erosion of the stream bank? (5) There shall be permitted no changes to the stream channel or its capacity, and no activity shall be allowed which will increase stream sedimentation and suspension loads. ISSUE: The Engineering Department should address stream sedimentation and suspension loads with respect to the new construction and removal of any vegetation which may affect the river. Will the removal of some vegetation and con- struction improvements within the floodplain cause an increase in stream sedimentation and suspension loads? How will the applicant avoid such impacts? (6) All efforts must be made to reduce stream pollution and interference with the natural changes of the stream, and to enhance the value of the stream as an important natural feature. ISSUE: Will construction within the floodplain and removal of vegetation produce river pollution (e.g., rain causing runoff with construction debris around)? Will the addition be seen from the Rio Grande Trail? Will the addition impact the value of the stream as an important natural feature? Please review the attached materials and return your referral comments as soon as possible, and in any event no later than July 22, 1986, to the Steve Burstein, Planning Office in order to give him adequate time to review this application prior to P &Z review. JR.1 CITY OF ASPEN 130 south galena street aspen, colorado 81611 303-925-2020 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM DATE SUBMITTED June FEES $760.00 NAME GERALDINE T. HOBGOOD and DR. KENNETH P. BURRES c/o Law Offices of Gideon I. Kaufman 2005 Franklin St, Bldg. 2, Suite 540 ADDRESS 315 E. Hyman, Suite 305, Aspen, CO 81611 Denver, CO 80205 PHONE (303) 925 -8166 (303) 830 -2313 NAME OF PROJECT HOBGOOD- BURRES SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION PRESENT ZONING R -6 LOT SIZE Hobgood property = 4,556 sq. ft. Burres property = 9,069 sq. ft. Hobgood property: 300 E. Park St. Burres property: 925 S. Midland LOCATION Aspen, CO Aspen, CO (indicate street address, lot and block number. May require legal description. A vicinity map is very useful.)See legal descriptions attached hereto as Exhibits "1" and "2 ". CURRENT BUILD -OUT (Hobgood) 1,827 It sq. ft. 2 units (Burres) 1,278 ± sq. ft. 1 units PROPOSED BUILD -OUT no change sq. ft. no change units DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING USES See Addendum attached hereto DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE PROPOSAL See Addendum attached hereto TYPE OF APPLICATION Subdivision Exception for Lot Line Adjustment APPLICABLE CODE SECTION (S) Subsection 20 -19 Aspen Municipal Code PLAT AMENDMENT REQUIRED YES X ___NO DATE PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE COMPLETED My 2, 1986 ATTACHMENTS: 1. All applicants must supply Proof of Ownership in the form of a title insurance commitment or statement from an attorney indicating that he /she has researched the title and verifies that the applicant is the owner of the property (free of liens and eucumbrances.) (See attached title commitments) 2. If the process requires a public hearing, a Property Owner's List • must be supplied which gives all owners within 300 feet in all directions in some cases and adjacent owners in some cases. (No public hearing required) 3. Number of copies required (by code and /or in pre - application conference.) 4. Plat by Registered Surveyor Yes X No (Improvement Surveys by Registered Surveys are enclosed) DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING USE AND LAND USE PROPOSAL GERALDINE T. HOBGOOD, owner of Lots 1 and 2, Riverside Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen (bearing a street address of 300 East Park Street) , and KENNETH P. BURRES, owner of the adjacent property known as Lot 7, Block 1, Promontory Subdivision (bearing a street address of 925 South Midland), join in this application for an exception to the subdivision provisions for purposes of adjusting a lot line. Approximately 27 sq. ft. of the residence owned by Ms. Hobgood encroaches upon the property owned by Dr. Burres. This application proposes the adjustment of the lot line between the two parcels in order to permit the transfer of a 278 sq. ft. parcel to Ms. Hobgood, and thus remove the encroachment. The Hobgood property presently comprises 4,556 sq. ft. and contains a duplex structure. The Burres property presently comprises 9,069 sq. ft. and contains a single family residence. The proposed lot line adjustment will reduce the Burres property by 278 sq. ft. and increase the Hobgood property by an equal amount. The lots are located in the R -6 zone. The proposal does not adversely impact setback requirements for the Burres property since the Burres property will continue to comply with setback requirements after the lot line adjustment. The parcel to be conveyed is bordered on the north - eastern side by an existing fence and the parties have treated the parcel as being part of the Hobgood property. The approval of this proposal will abate an existing encroachment and lessen an existing nonconformity. There are no planning issues raised by this application. Subsection 20 -19 of the Aspen Municipal Code permits the exception from the strict application of the subdivision regulations under certain conditions. This application meets the specified conditions for the following reasons: 1. Undue hardship will result from the strict application of the full subdivision procedure since the proposed exchange does not affect the buildout of the lots; and 2. The exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicants. The encroachment adversely impacts the ability of the owners of each lot to convey their respective parcels. - 1 - 3. Neither the public at large nor adjacent land owners are affected by the approval of this application. Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, P.C. A Pro d..on. ".rporation B i By Kaufman - 2 - EXHIBIT "1" (Hobgood Property) PARCEL A: LOTS 1 AND 2 BLOCK 7 RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, EXCEPTING THE SOUTHERLY FIFTEEN (15) FEET OF SAID ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY. PARCEL B: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING PART OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 4, BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. SAID PARCEL IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED - AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 WHENCE THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 BEARS SOUTH 00'14'00" WEST 15.51 FEET; THEENCE SOUTH 00'14'00" WEST 23.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 1 AND 4; THENCE SOUTH 85 ° 41'25" EAST 40.05 FEET; THENCE NORTH 21 °50'00" EAST 15.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE NORTH 75'06'00" WEST 47.00 FEET ON A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 15 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 1 AND 2 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL C: A TEN (10) FOOT STRIP ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 9, PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION, ASPEN, COLORADO, tXTEYDING FROM THE SOUTAEST CORNER OF SAID LOT AT PARK AVENUE EASTERLY APPROXIMATELY TWENTY -FIVE FEET (25') TO THE WEST SIDELINE OF A FIFTEEN FOOT (15') STRIP ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF ASID LOT PREVIOUSLY CONVEYED TO DR. ROBERT BARNARD. EXHIBIT "2" (Burres Property) Lot 7 Block 1 Promontory Subdivision, except that portion of Lot 7 more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence the Northwest corner of Lot 8, said Promontory Subdivision bears North 75 °06' West 3.61 feet; thence South 75 °06' East 46 feet to the Northeast Corner of said Lot 8; thence North 17 °45' East 40 feet; thence North 75 °06' West 16 feet; thence in a southerly and westerly course on a straight line to the point of beginning; and the East 15 feet of Lot 9, Block 1, Promontory Subdivision. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado i VERIFICATION OF APPLICATION I, GERALDINE T. HOBGOOD, as owner of Lot 2, Block 7, Riverside Addition, join in this Application for Subdivision Exception and verify the truth and accuracy of the representations set forth herein. t e ERALDINE T. HOBGOOD 1 1 - 3 - KATHLEEN D. SMITH P.O. Box 7968 ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 (303) 925 -4347 lay 23, 1986 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Michael Gassman is my agent and architect in the matter of an addition to my house and has authority to act for me in my behalf in all matters concerning the addition. Kathleen D. Smith KDS:ht OWNERSHIP AND ENCLMB: ' CE RL:f'ORT Made Foe STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. HEREBY CERTIFIES from a search of the books in this office that the owner of . : , : x: c e : , 2uLdi I ._ io:1 Situated in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. appears to be vested in the name of The Kat,nle P. Erni t }; Rev-,cau.e Tr Numb:. 2 and that the above described property appears to be subject to the following: Tkrzid u17 Trust (71a lied. A eu.`J 98'5 , executed by Mel P. Lhe . 7lf,� D . S . . ,_, _ llL i. =it1Cj nc3 t. 1, U Smith, to .�.- r..iD11C 7.CUS r? Ot P1 tkL ,.y, ',.o ;(2C it ; 11;:leb ediLc ss o. $3;0,000.00 in favor of t,. 1;. ), .. '.ic :ciri L 1J., f, „. . }r r 1 J and Ash t ii�Yit(d Auld � �(1, Lutik Page 12(' !?eo ti'1.ion :0. 27101 3 . inc n;'ntet es` urricr said ;:?ed of 3,u.:t, was i Nt ni Pe- ,r o :.y_ut L.tnc. :S;avir,gs Assoc: iatian of Taylor, Ci l: y' 'l.Jr Hay e C:; party re.:ot;ie.,t A°syusL 30, 1905 in C9 -1 w t, Patin , r.s P N.,. 2 7 1010. EXCEPT all easements, right -of -ways, restrictions and reservations of record. EXCEPT any and all unpaid taxes and assessments. This report does not reflect any of the following matters: I) Bankruptcies which, froin date of adjudication of the most recent bankruptcies, antedate the report by more than fourteen (14) years. 2) Suits and judgments which, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven (7) years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period. 3) Unpaid tax liens which, from dace of payment, antedate the report by more than seven (7) years. Although we believe the facts stated ate true. this Certificate is not to be construed as an abstract of title, for an opinion of title, nor a guaranty of title, and it is understood and agreed that Stewart Title of Aspen,- I nr,., neither assumes, nor will be chat with any financial obligation or liability whatever on any state- ment contained herein. Dated at Aspen, Colorado, this 1 9Lh day of •t,,y A.D. 19 t h t ,3 J O A. Ii, STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. BY g ,�e�G 1_ e Authorized Signature it h Forni OEZ 10/82 ° t wo M,,,,, OMB 3067 -0077 o- t, � s FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY Expires: June 1984 � l`� ' NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM ELEVATION CERTIFICATE • This form is to be used for: 1) New /Emergency Program construction in Special Flood Hazard Areas; 2) Pre -FIRM construction after September 30, 1982: 3) Post -FIRM construction; and, 4) Other buildings rated as Post -FIRM rules. BUILDING OWNER'S ADDRESS NAME KAfl- {LEEr'/ 0. SMITH FEN rnLni 4cO aiC12 PFlOPERTy LOCATION (Lot and Block numbers and address if available) ' /3 - gLcK �1Ccu s;AraS II duce IDI evE S(- C,LO 400 I certify that the information on this certificate represents best efforts to interpret the data available. I understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under 18 U.S. code, Section 1001. SECTION I ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION (Completed by Local Community Permit Official or a Registered Professional Engineer, Architect, or Surveyor) COMMUNITY NO. PANEL NO SUFFIX DATE OF FIRM FIRM ZONE DATE OF CONSTR. BASE FLOOD ELEV. BUILDING IS In AO Zone. use depth) ❑New /Emergency NOr 09/VSUEoGr6r ❑ P -FIRM Reg O I 000/ 23 )7 %bS A 3 rt - 1-7742 :vast-FIRM Reg. ¥Ey NO It is intended that the building described above will be constructed in compliance with the community's flood plain Ct✓ ❑ ordinance. The certifier may rely on community records. The - Noer-(including basement) will be at an elevation ojt77 ft, NGVD. Failure to construct the building at thi elevation may place the building in violation of the community's flood plain management ordinance. 5 rn M of /F/g /5U,LOIN 1 Yi NO The building described above has been constructed in compliance with the community's flood plain management Q ❑ ordinance based on elevation data and visual inspection or other reasonable means. If NO is checked, attach copy of variance issued by the community. YES NO The mobile home located at the address described above has been tied down (anchored) in compliance with the ❑ ❑ community's flood plain management ordinance, or in compliance with the NFIP Specifications. MOBILE HOME MAKE MODEL YR. OF MANUFACTURE SERIAL NO. DIMENSIONS X (Community Permit Official or Registered Professional Engineer, Architect, or Surveyor)) NAME MiiC.I- -IAEL— GASSMAPJ ADDRESS Sox / ? L yo � TITLE A , i F .0 CITY ASpstJ STATE ( nt-0l ✓d ZIP `r3/6r2_ I • SIGNATURE I J Crej Ass DAT P • s 3 - 2c- 26. SECTION II ELE . TION CERTIFICA ION (Certified by a Local Community Permit Official or a Registered Professional Engineer, Architect, or Surveyor.) rx 17/E 3 ✓ FIRM ZONE A1-A30: I certify that the buildi galt thR property location described above has the leweeHloor (including basement) at an elevation of 77'V1 'n feet, NGVD (mean sea level) and the average grade at the building site is at an elevation oa—feet, NGVD. FIRM ZONES V, V1 -V30: I certify that the building at the property location described above has the bottom of the lowest floor beam at an elevation of feet, NGVD (mean sea level), and the average grade at the building site is at an elevation of feet, NGVD. FIRM ZONES A, A99, AH and EMERGENCY PROGRAM: I certify that the building at the property location described above has the lowest floor elevation of feet, NGVD. The elevation of the highest adjacent grade next to the building is feet, NGVD. FIRM ZONE AO: I certify that the building at the property location described above has the lowest floor elevation of feet, NGVD. The elevation of the highest adjacent grade next to the building is feet, NGV D. SECTION III FLOODPROOFING CERTIFICATION (Certification by a Registered Professional Engineer or Architect) I certify to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, that the building is designed so that the building is watertight, with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water and structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic Toads and effects of buoyancy that would be caused by the flood depths, pressures velocities, impact and uplift forces associated with the base flood. YES ❑ NO ❑ In the event of flooding, will this degree of floodproofing be achieved with human intervention? (Human intervention means that water will enter the building when floods up to the base flood level oc- cur unless measures are taken prior to the flood to prevent entry of water (e.g., bolting metal shields over doors and windows). YES ❑ NO ❑ Will the building be occupied as a residence? If the answer to both questions is YES, the floodproofing cannot be credited for rating purposes and the actual lowest floor must be completed and certified instead. Complete both the elevation and floodproofing certificates. FIRM ZONES A, A1-A30, V1 -V30, AO and AH: Certified Floodproofed Elevation is feet, (NGVD). THIS CERTIFICATION IS FOR ❑ SECTION II ❑ BOTH SECTIONS II AND III (Check One) CERTIFIER'S NAME COMPANY NAME LICENSE NO. (or Affix Seal) TITLE ADDRESS ZIP SIGNATURE DATE CITY STATE PHONE The Insurance agent should attach the original copy of the completed form to the flood insurance policy application, the second copy should be supplied to the policyholder and the third copy retained by the agent INSURANCE AGENTS MAY ORDER THIS FORM FEMA Form 81 SEP 83 REPLACES FEMA FORM 81 -31, APR 82, WHICH IS OBSOLETE. New /Emergency Program Construction: For the purposes of determining insurance rates, buildings for which the start of construction or substantial improvement commenced after September 30, 1982. are New /Emergency buildings. Pre -FIRM Construction: For the purposes of determining insurance rates, buildings for which the start of construction or substantial improvement was on or before December 31, 1974 or the effective date of the Initial Flood Insurance Rate Map (date printed on commu- nity FIRM), whichever is later. Special Note: If an approved building permit is dated prior to December 31, 1974, construction must have commenced not later than 180 days after the date of the approved building permit. "Existing Construction" and "Pre -FIRM Construction" have identical meanings for the purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program. Post -FIRM Construction: For insurance rating purposes buildings for which the start of construction or substantial improvement commenced after December 31, 1974 or the effective date of the initial Flood Insurance Rate Map (date printed on community FIRM), which- ever is later. "New Construction" and "Post -FIRM Construction" have identical meanings for the purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program. Substantial Improvement: Any repair, reconstruction. or improvement of a building. the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the building either (a) before the improvement or repair is started, or (b) if the building has been damaged, and is being restored the market value before the damage occurred. For Flood Insurance Program purposes substantial improve- ment is started when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor. or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. However, the term does not include either any project for health, sanitary. or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure sate living conditions; or any alteration of a building listed on the National Register of Historic Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places. Lowest Floor - The lowest floor is the lowest floor (including basement) of the enclosed area. I he following modi- fications of the lowest floor definition are permitted in order to meet community permit practices: (1) In Zones A, AO, AH, Al A30, B, C, D. and Emergency Program areas which are not oceanside building sites. (a) The flgpr of an unfinished enclosed area at ground level or above, which is a crawl space, or space within the foun- dation walls, usable as areas for building maintenance, access. parking vehicles, or storing of articles and maintenance equipment (not attached to the building) used in connection with the premises is not considered the building's lowest floor if the walls of the unfinished enclosed areas are constructed with openings (such as with parallel sheer walls, open lattice walls, discontinuous foundation walls, and combinations thereof) to facilitate the unimpeded movement of flood waters or the walls are breakaway walls. (b) The floor of an attached unfinished garage used for parking vehicles and storing articles and maintenance equip- ment used in connection with the premises and not attached to the building is not considered the building's lowest floor if the walls of the unfinished enclosed areas are constructed with openings (such as with parallel sheer walls, open lattice walls, discontinuous foundation walls, or combinations thereof) to facilitate the unimpeded movement of flood waters or the walls are breakaway walls. (2) In Zones V and V77V30; and Emergency Program areas which are Oceanside building lots, the following exceptions apply: (a) For flood plain management purposes. the floor of an unfinished enclosed area is not considered the building's lowest floor if the area's walls are constructed as breakaway walls. However. for insurance rating purposes. (i) The floor of an unfinished enclosed area less than 300 square feet is not considered the building's lowest floor if the walls are breakaway walls_ (ii) The floor of an unfinished enclosed area equal to or greater than 300 square feet is considered the building's lowest floor even if the walls are breakaway walls. (b) The floor of an unfinished enclosed area with walls made of insect screening or open wood constructed break- away lattice work (regardless of the size of the area enclosed) is not considered the building's lowest floor. Lowest Floor Elevation - The lowest floor elevation is the elevation of the bottom the floor beam of the lowest floor in Zones V, V1 -V30. In all other zones, the lowest floor elevation is the elevation of the top of the lowest floor. ON WITH ON ON SLAB BASEMENT PIERS SLAB A A ZONES V I'�� DOOR ZONES = A ZONES LOWEST FLOOR ZONES r V .WINDOW y I LOWEST FLOOR \' _-_--=._.-.-- ZONES 1 I ' ELEVATION OF w II I LOWEST FLOOR IF AVE RAGE GRADE LOWEST BASE BASEMENT IS FLOOR FLOOD BASE FLOODPROOFED 1 BASE ELEVATION FLOOD t...- l ( FLOOD ELEVATION AVERAGE y iii ELEVATION I GRADE ELEVATION OF LOWEST FLOOR i IF NOT FLOODPROOFED j i NOTE: A Zones - A, AO, AH, Al -A30, A99, Emergency Program other than Oceanside Building Sites V Zones - V, V1 -V30, Emergency Program Oceanside Building Sites (beach areas subject to wave action during severe storms) Base Flood Elevation - Flood plain management requirements including the Base Flood Elevation are shown on the 'IRM for Zones AH, A1-A30, V1 -V30. For FIRM Zone A. V, and Emergency Program Special Flood Hazard Areas the com- Inity permit official or the builder has estimated this elevation by the reasonable interpretation of available data. /\ r that estimated elevation in the space provided in Section I of the Elevation Certification for Base Flood Elevation. \ community permit official or the builder has not selected an estimated Base Flood Elevation, enter N.A.