The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVARIANCE 458 Chiquita Ln Garage Setback 2022-07-12 Community Development Memo To: Estes Park Board of Adjustment Through: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director From: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director Date: July 12, 2022 Application: Variance Request, Setbacks for Garage and Two Accessory Structures 458 Chiquita Lane, Estes Park Dennis & Robin Schall, Owners/Applicants Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the variance request, subject to the findings described in the report. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective The applicant requests approval of a variance to allow a reduced front and rear setback of 20 feet from the requirement of 25 feet for a new two-car detached garage, and a variance to allow a reduced front and rear setback of 17 feet from the requirement of 25 feet for two existing accessory structures beyond the current allowance in the E-1 Zone District. Location Addressed as 458 Chiquita Lane, the .35-acre subject site is legally described as POR LOT 138 AMD PLAT AL FRESCO PLACE BEG SW COR SD LOT 138, TH S 89 20' E 67.7 FT ALG SRLY LN SD LOT, TH N 20 30' E 135.9 FT, N 46 35' W 109.5 FT TO PT ON NRLY LN SD LOT, TH S 87 35' W 33.2 FT TO NW COR SD LOT, TH SRLY A, Town of Estes Park. Background The subject property contains a single-family home and two existing accessory structures in the E-1 (Estate) Zone District. The applicants would like to construct a new, detached garage on the site and have an existing workshop and covered platform that was built several years ago but did not meet the required setbacks. The applicants argue that the sites size and configuration do not meet the requirements of the Development Code and present a hardship for them to use the property as intended without variances. Project Description Overview This is a request to allow front and rear setback variances for a new, detached garage and for two existing accessory structures. The E-1 Zoning District was established to preserve the predominantly lower density residential uses that have been established in the Estes Valley. This zone implements the "Estate (E-1)" future land use designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The district regulations permit single-family residential uses at densities of one (1) dwelling unit per acre. Location and Context Vicinity Map 2 | Page Zoning Map Land Use Summary Table 1: Zoning and Land Use Summary Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses Subject Estate: 1 Acre Minimum E-1 (Estate) Residential Site North Estate: 1 Acre Minimum E-1 (Estate) Residential South Estate: 1 Acre Minimum E-1 (Estate) Residential East Estate: 1 Acre Minimum E-1 (Estate) Residential West Estate: 1 Acre Minimum E-1 (Estate) Residential Review Criteria The Board of Adjustment (BOA) is the decision-making body for variance requests. In accordance with EPDC Section 3.6.C., Variances, Standards for Review, applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. The Standards with staff findings for each are as follows: 3 | Page 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 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 Finding: The criteria is applicable to the request. The site is .35 acres, which is significantly less than the development standard of 1 acre. The single- family home on the site was built prior to the current zoning and also does not meet the setbacks. The narrowness and overall shape of the parcel constrains practical development, and also due to the topography, there are limited areas on the site for new construction. 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 Finding: There is beneficial use of the property without the variance. The property owners purchased the site in 2015 and have been using the existing attached one-car garage to house their vehicle and storage items. However, the applicants would like to build a larger garage and renovate the small home to better fit their needs as they seek to age in place. b. Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Finding: The variance is not substantial, and represents a minor modification of the front and rear setbacks (five to eight feet) in order to accommodate the applicants requests. The home was built in the early to mid- 50s, and is more characteristic of parcels found in the R Zoning District (minimum ¼-acre lot size). 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 Finding: Staff does not find the character of the neighborhood would be altered, and there would be no detrimental impacts to adjoining properties as a result of the variance to allow a new garage on site, or to allow the continued use of two accessory structures built over five years ago. The majority of properties adjacent to the parcel dont meet the required minimum lot size for a RE-1 District, and they typically have accessory structures on site as well. The 4 | Page applicants state they will construct the detached garage to match the residential look and feel of the adjoining properties. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: Public services such as water and sewer will not be adversely affected by the variance, and since there is an existing shared water line that would be underneath the proposed garage, the applicants will relocate the water line at their expense. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Finding: The applicants were not aware of the setbacks when they purchased the parcel in 2015, and discovered the issue when they came to the Town to apply for a building permit. Despite their initial desire to maintain the property and home in its current state, the applicants state their needs changes over time and they would like to remain here. f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: The applicants indicate in their Statement of Intent that the only feasible location to site the new detached garage is in the proposed location, due to the grade of the site and in order to provide adequate separation for the single- family home. 3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding: The proposed variances would be the least deviations from the Development Code, and as proposed, would range from five to eight feet overall from the front and rear setbacks. The other potential options for the applicants would be to re-zone their property to R, but this process wouldnt be cost or time- effective, and as mentioned above, there are many lots in this area that dont meet the general development standards in the Code and they would likely need to be rezoned to maintain consistency. 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 Finding: Staff does not recommend conditions. 5 | Page compliance with the above Standards and Criteria, describing how they have determined their variance request demonstrates compliance with each. and recognizes that many lots in Town do not meet regulations within the Development Code, and the applicants provided a letter of support from their adjacent neighbor, included in the attached exhibits. Review Agency Comments The variance application was referred to all applicable review agencies for comment. Public Works noted that if approved, the driveway length should be expanded to 23 feet instead of 20 feet to allow for longer vehicles without encroaching into the Right of Way for Chiquita Lane, unless there are other spaces on the site to accommodate a longer vehicle. There were no other comments received from the Estes Valley Fire Protection District, Estes Park Sanitation District, Estes Park Utilities, and Estes Park Building Division. Public Notice Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with Town and State public noticing requirements. As of the time of writing this report, no written comments have been received for the variance request. Written notice mailed to adjacent property owners on June 24, 2022. Legal notice published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on June 24, 2022. June, 2022. Advantages The applicant would be able to construct a new, detached two-car garage, and have two, legally permissible accessory structures on their property. Disadvantages Approval of the variance may set a precedent where future applicants may cite hardships if their properties dont meet the development standards of the Code. Action Recommended Staff recommends approval of the proposed variance described in this staff report under Finance/Resource Impact N/A Level of Public Interest Low. 6 | Page Sample Motions I move to approve the requested variances, one to allow 20-foot front and rear setbacks for a new, detached garage and another for 17-foot front and rear setbacksfor two existing accessory structures for a property at 458 Chiquita Lane, in the Town of Estes Park. I move to deny the requested variance with the following findings (state reason/findings). I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance to the next regularly scheduled meeting, finding that \[state reasons for continuance\]. Attachments 1. Statement of Intent 2. Application 3. Site plan 4. Reviewing Agency comments 5. Letter of Support 7 | Page 1692 BIG THOMPSON AVE.SUITE 200ESTES PARK, CO 80517PH: (970) 586-2458FAX: (970) 586-2459 2022 CORNERSTONE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.COPYRIGHT - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 60 40 425 CHAPIN LNESTES PARK, CO 80517 20 SCALE 1"=700' SITE PLAN VICINITY MAP SCALE 1" = 20' VARIANCE REQUEST 0 DENNY & ROBIN SCHALL 458 CHIQUITA LN., ESTES PARK BOUNDARY INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY VAN HORN ENGINEERING CLIENT: PROJECT TITLE: SHEET TITLE: 1) 20 THAT PORTION OF LOT 138 OF AMENDED MAP OF AL FRESCO PLACE, AN ADDITION TOTHE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO ACCORDING TO THE PLAT FILED MAY 17, 1910,BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 138; THENCE SOUTH 89THENCE NORTH 20 DEGREES 30 MINUTES EAST 135.9 FEET; THENCE NORTH 46LOT; THENCE SOUTH 87 DEGREES 35 MINUTES WEST 33.2 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTCORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT TOTHE POINT OF BEGINNING;AND ALSOA TRACT OF LAND IN LOT 138 OF AL FRESCO PLACE IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OFTHE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OFTHE 6TH P.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO-WIT; BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEASTCORNER OF TRACT DESCRIBED IN BOOK 984 AT PAGE 44 OF THE LARIMER COUNTYTRACT DESCRIBED IN BOOK 984 AT PAGE 44 OF THE LARIMER COUNTY RECORDS;THENCE SOUTH 46 DEGREES 35 MINUTES EAST A DISTANCE OF 72.5 FEET TO THECOUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:DEGREES 20 MINUTES EAST 67.7 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT;DEGREES 35 MINUTES WEST 109.5 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAIDRECORDS FROM WHICH POINT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 138 OF AL FRESCOPLACE BEARS SOUTH 42 DEGREES 18 MINUTES WEST A DISTANCE 171.4 FEET; THENCENORTH 20 DEGREES 30 MINUTES EAST A DISTANCE OF 20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62DEGREES 27 MINUTES WEST A DISTANCE OF 70.6 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY POINT OFPOINT OF BEGINNING.EVDC 4.3 TABLE 4-2REQUIRED SETBACK = 25 FEETGARAGE REQUESTED SETBACK = 20 FEETSHOP/ COVERED PLATFORM REQUESTED SETBACK = 17 FEET LEGAL DESCRIPTIONGENERAL NOTES: REQUESTED VARIANCE: 1 SHEET BY: 1 SHEET JOB NO. 990.001 MST MAY 2022 AS SHOWN REVISION: DATESCALE APPROVED BY MSTMST MST SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENCE DATE: DESIGNED BYDRAWN BYCHECKED BY GARAGE R UNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIES. 3-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE BEFORE YOU CALLDIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OF ZONED E-1 0.91 ACRES ZONED E-1 SINGLEFAMILY0.54 ACRES RESIDENCE JOHN ALLEN SHICK PARCEL NO. 3524468001 RECEPTION NO. 3524468138 BLAKE C. & SUSAN K. ROBERTSON 441 MACGREGOR AVE. 471 MACGREGOR AVE. SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENCE ZONED E-1 1.04 ACRES STEPHEN HOUSER PARCEL NO. 3524311002 SINGLE FAMILY ZONED E-1 0.63 ACRES ZONED E-1RESIDENCE 0.69 ACRESGAIL D HOLBENZONED E-1 0.22 ACRES BILL DARDEN SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENCE PARCEL NO. 3524323001 141 W WONDERVIEW AVE PARCEL NO. 3524312002 RECEPTION NO. 3254307138 499 MACGREGOR AVE. BLAKE C. & SUSAN K. ROBERTSON SHED 501 MACGREGOR AVE. 497 MACGREGOR AVE. REQUESTEDSETBACK (TYP.) G N I K D C L) I. A ) . P PUB KY TBTY C( A' GT E B N( 5 IT S DE 2 L S I EXISTING U EXISTINGWATERSERVICE TO BERELOCATED B ZONED E-1RESIDENCE ' 0.69 ACRES 5 ' 2 0 2 ' 0 3 ZONED E-1 ' 0.35 ACRES 2 . 0 PARCEL NO. 3524312001' 0 2 1 '4 2 BOOK 984 PAGE 44 ' SINGLE 0FAMILY 1 510 CHIQUITA LANE RESIDENCE DENNIS & ROBIN SCHALLGARAGE EXISTING RICHARD & SHARON FEDORACHECK ' COVERED 458 CHIQUITA LANE PLATFORM 2 SHOP WORK' 1 4 2 GARAGE PROPOSED ' 0 . 2 ' 2 8 . 7 ' 1 0 2 ACCESS EASEMENT ' 0 2 (ASPHALT) DRIVEWAY EXISTING (ASPHALT) DRIVEWAY Y A W ZONED E-1 T 0.69 ACRES FF O 0 3 T H G BANANA CABANA, LLC I PARCEL NO. 3524307140 R SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENCE 448 CHIQUITA LANE . E V W A E I V R E D N O O W T S S E C C A GARAGE ZONED E-1 0.81 ACRES PARCEL NO. 3524354129 JEFFERY & REBECCA ROBBINS 441 CHIQUITA LANE AND GUESTHOUSE SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENCE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL APPARTMENT ZONED E-1 0.51 ACRES PARCEL NO. 352435418 450 CHAPIN LANE SANDRA OLSON REVOCABLE TRUST SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENCE