The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVARIANCE Setback 543 Ponderosa Ave 2000-09-05White Meadow View Place Setback Request Estes Park Community Development Department ImullOW Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue mom PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: September 5, 2000 REQUEST: A request by David and Linda Buesing for a variance from the 15-foot rear yard setback as required in the "E" Estate zoning district. Rd. NI Rod LOCATION: 543 Ponderosa Drive within the Town of Estes Park. FILE #: Buesing, David and Linda PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The RMVP applicant requests a variance to °°' " usFs Section 4.3.C.5 of the Estes RAMP Valley Development Code. Specifically, the applicant wishes to deviate from the mandated 15-foot rear yard setback to allow a setback of 18 inches for the expansion of an existing non -conforming residential structure. The applicant proposes to replace an existing deck with an enclosed full -season addition to a living room. Due to the close proximity to the property line, this proposal is in conflict with the Unified Building Code, and would require construction to meet one -hour fire resistance and would not be allowed any openings (doors or windows). The applicant has received three prior variances for the site. The applicant was conditionally granted a variance for the requested project in December 1997, though the construction was never carried out. The conditions of approval at that time were: 1) Survey shall be submitted by a licensed surveyor; 2) building permit application must comply with all UBC requirements; and, 3) deck may not be closer than 16" to the property line. The applicant received a variance for the construction of two bay windows located on the west side of the house in 1998. Finally, the applicant was granted a variance to build a 200 square foot addition on the south side of the house. The house was built in the extreme northwest corner of the lot, with a side yard (west) setback of approximately five feet, and a rear yard (north) setback of zero feet; the existing deck encroaches upon Lot 19 by approximately .50-feet. The applicant proposes to construct the room addition between the north side of the house and the north property line. The site has an approximately 10% slope that falls off to the east, and there are no apparent rock outcroppings or special circumstances on the site. II. REVIEW CRITERIA: All applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and criteria set forth below: 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. There are no apparent special circumstances associated with the lot. There are no steep slopes or rock outcroppings, and the size and shape of the lot are consistent with the neighborhood. 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; The principal dwelling unit is in place and inhabited. The applicants have lived in the house 14 years. Therefore, the property is already of "beneficial use". b. Whether the variance is substantial; The requested variance would place an enclosed living structure within 18 inches of the property line. This is in conflict with the Unified Development Code, and would require the structure to be built to certain firewall standards, and no exterior openings of any kind would be allowed now or in the future (including doors, windows, and vent openings.). Page #2 - Agenda Item #2.b 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; The proposal is to place a permanent structure within 18 inches of a property line, which is in conflict with the Unified Building Code due to fire safety, though one -hour fire construction would mitigate the UBC issue. The essential character of the neighborhood would not change substantially. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer; Not applicable; utilities are in place. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; and The applicant purchased the property in 1986 and has been before the Board of Adjustment regarding the subject property on two previous occasions. The applicant was conditionally granted a variance to allow construction an enclosed deck in December of 1997. The deck was not enclosed at that time, and the previously granted variance has expired. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. The applicant's house is situated in the extreme northwest corner of the lot, which leaves adequate space for additions to the east and south. Another potential option would be for the applicant to arrange a purchase of 1 S feet of property from the neighbor to the north. This would provide adequate setback for both property owners, though the neighbor may be unwilling to sell. 3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. Not applicable. The request is a result of the placement of the house on the lot, and is therefore specific to this particular lot. Page #3 - Agenda Item #2.b 4. No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing or proposed subdivision if it will result in an increase in the number of lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations. Not applicable. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. The applicant requests to construct a deck within 18 inches of the north property line. To insure minimal deviation, any building permit should be restricted the area depicted on the site drawing. Further, a surveyed site plan delineating measurements of the existing house and proposed addition should be submitted and subject to a setback certificate during construction (as determined by the Chief Building Official). 6. Under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of this Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. Not applicable. The applicant proposes to continue using the site for single family residential, for which it is zoned. 7. 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. A vote of approval should include the following conditions: • Submittal of and compliance with a revised site plan, prepared by a licensed surveyor, including building setback dimensions. • Full compliance with the Unified Building Code. • Before pouring foundation, a setback certificate from a qualified professional shall be required to determine conformance with the revised site plan. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Page #4 - Agenda Item #2.b IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, staff fords: 1. The applicant wishes to deviate from the mandated 15-foot rear yard setback to allow a setback of 18 inches for the expansion of an existing non -conforming residential structure. 2. The applicant has come before the Board of Adjustment on three previous occasions seeking variances for incremental additions to the house. 3. Due to close proximity to the property line, this proposal is in conflict with the Unified Building Code, and would require construction to meet one -hour fire resistance and would not be allowed any openings (doors, windows, or vents). 4. The applicant proposes to construct the room addition between the north side of the house and the north property line. The site has an approximately 10% slope that falls off to the east, and there are no apparent rock outcroppings or special circumstances on the site. 5. The applicant's house is situated in the extreme northwest corner of the lot, which leaves adequate space for additions to the east and south. Another potential option would be for the applicant to arrange to purchase 15-feet of property from the neighbor to the north. This would provide adequate setback for both property owners. 6. The request is a result of the placement of the house on the lot, and is therefore specific to this particular lot. 7. A vote of approval should include the following conditions: • Submittal and compliance with a revised site plan, prepared by a licensed surveyor, including building setback dimensions. • Full compliance with the Unified Building Code. • Before pouring foundation, a setback certificate from a qualified professional shall be required to determine compliance with the revised site plan. 8. Based on the lack of special circumstances such as exceptional topographic conditions or lot configuration, Staff recommends DISAPPROVAL of the requested variance to Section 4.3.C.5 to allow a rear yard setback of 18 inches in lieu of the 15-feet required. Page #5 - Agenda Item #2.b TOWN OF ESTES PARK ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUS NTAUG 1 4 ni0 APPLICATION isorommisorl Submittal Date: t) General Information Street Address of Lot: ‘,,/ '7 A il (1-e. irY"), Ci- 0 ,, ,‘ v e.. Legal Description: Lot c;Z 0 Block Tract Subdivisione Owner's Name: i, t` ,-, da 174,apfe,,asioo4. ' ,Q .•-• 1 el Phone #: 3•"",?a,-. cc---,/ 3,_,, Owner's Address: c',/ 3 6)0.., alt., 0 5 c, p.- P () Oa - 9-7 cr",2_ L:56,e5 P-t ,--k 2 0 q' 05)z Number Street Box # City State Zip Petitioner's Name: 0-m, 'oe 13 , , ,, • Phone: 5."‘il .‘ r 44 3 .74 Fax: Petitioner's Address: '13 0, 'lie(-05-1 p,r, Pa 34-ix D---24,1 Cs 626' 17e le- k. 0 Number Street Box # City State Zip Petitioner is: (check one) EY6wner 0 Lessee 0 Agent Site Information Existing Use: "j ory• Q Proposed Use: R a ,,,,,,.p,,, ,e, ‘,„ ,.. Lot Size: 2 a -Mk Zoning: 6 Sanitation District Asdetermined determined b Staff, field stakin• of variance re•uest o is CI is not re. uired. Variance Specific Variance Desired - Section #: V /POW Fadni S&77.0 4/. 2 w 1-0,20das 4 IS' 54%,3dc.e Oa, bo 116//2 /Aymi e4,4/ to /),(0,,, 5iTOM4 of 1844 (/.5'1) State why it is not practicable to comply with the ordinance: „,.ct :„ • raw, oc ;3,26 fk,r vitt) I t! -r,,Q ir.) II 1.314.1-1/43,,q01 back ▪ ia Crrl p r,0 pfLv-,t, /: , (4_ Names and Mailing Addresses of all adjacent property owners (within 100 ft., excluding ROW): 11 I'Z'& a c .c) (Use separate sheet if necessary) Signature of Owner(s) of Record Attachments 0 Statement of Intent CI 12 Copies of a Site Plan (drawn at a scale of 1" = 20')** 0 Application Fee: $50* for Town 0 1 Reduced Copy (11X17) 0 Application Fee: $420 for unincorporated Estes Valley *Additionally pursuant to Municipal Code, Applicants shall also be responsible to reimburse the Town for legal, engineering and planning costs incurred by staff and consultants as necessary for project review. **Site Plan to include the following: Property lines with dimensions, all structures, trees, rock outcroppings on the lot, topography, edge of street traveled way, adjacent structures within 100' of the lot boundaries, and an other •ertinent information. Office Use Only Date and Time of Board of Adjustment Meeting: c:\My Files\ Board of Adjustment\EVBOA Application 7/14/00