HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Vacation of Easement 610 Pinewood Dr 2015-06-02
610 Pinewood Drive
Setback Variance Request
Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division
Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue
PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517
Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estes.org
E STES V ALLEY B OARD OF A DJUSTMENT
MEETING DATE:
June 2, 2015
REQUEST:
This request is for a variance from the Estes
Valley Development Code (EVDC)Section
4.3, Table 4-2, which sets a minimum setback
of 25 feet in the E-1 Estate zone district. The
Applicant requestsa variance to construct a
10x12 foot shed two feet from the side lot line.
The applicant recently received Town Board
approval to vacate an easement in the area of
the proposed shed.
LOCATION: 610 Pinewood Drive
Fig. 1 North view of the project site.
APPLICANT/OWNER:Steven and Katey
Rusch
STAFF CONTACT: PhilipKleisler
REVIEW CRITERIA:In accordance with
Section 3.6 C. “Standards for Review” of the
EVDC, all applications for variances shall
demonstrate compliance with the applicable
standards and criteria contained therein.
Fig. 2 View from streetproject site.
The Board of Adjustment is the decision-
making body for this application.
REFERRALAND PUBLIC COMMENTS: This request has been routedto reviewing
agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. A legal
notice was published in the Trail Gazette.
Affected Agencies. No concerns were expressed during review.
Public.As of May 27, 2015staff has receivedtwo letters of support from the neighbors
to the immediate west and south. Any comments received after May 27, 2015 will be
posted at www.estes.org/CurrentApplicationsfor the Board’sreviewand presented in
the staff presentation.
STAFF FINDINGS:
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 Finding: Other areas of the lot, particularly the easterly area, become
seasonably wet and boggy. Such conditions may pose substantial
maintenance issues.
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: Residential use may continue.
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff Finding: The variance is not 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 Finding: The essential character of the neighborhood would not be
substantially altered with the approval of this variance. Nearby homes have
adequate separation from the project site and many have similar sheds.
Adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of
this variance. The nearest property is a residential dwelling approximately
40 feet to the east and has provided a letter of support for the project.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such
as water and sewer.
Staff Finding: Affected agencies expressed no concerns relating to public
services for this variance.
610 Pinewood Lane Page 2 of 4
Setback Variance Request
e.Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the
requirement;
Staff Finding: According to the Larimer County Tax Assessor, the
applicant purchased the property in 2013, after the adoption of the current
setback requirements.
f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method
other than a variance.
Staff Finding: A variance appears to be the only practical option to
construct the shed, as proposed.
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.
Staff Finding: The seasonal conditions as submitted in this variance
petition are not general and recurrent in nature.
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.
Staff Finding: The variance, if granted, will not result in an increase in the
number of lots.
5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that
will afford relief.
Staff Finding: No comment.
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.
Staff Finding: This accessory use is permitted in the E-1 Estate zone
district.
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.
610 Pinewood Lane Page 3 of 4
Setback Variance Request
Staff Comment.Staff does not recommend additional conditions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variance
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
I move to APPROVE the requested variance with the findings and conditions recommended by
staff.
I move to DENY the requested variance with the following findings (state reason/findings).
610 Pinewood Lane Page 4 of 4
Setback Variance Request