Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Setback 2031 Monida Ct 2006-07-11RMNP RockyMountainNationalPark RMNP USFS USFS USFS Lake Estes MarysLake LilyLake Mac Gregor Ranch YMCAConferenceGrounds 36 EVDC Boundary EVDC Boundary Eagle Rock RMNPFall RiverEntrance RMNPBeaver MeadowsEntrance Prospect Mt. - (/34 (/36(/7 (/36 (/34 (/36 (/7 CheleyCamps USFS USFS I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND DATE OF BOA MEETING: July 11, 2006 LOCATION: The site is located at 2031 Monida Court, within the Town of Estes Park. Legal Description: Lot 68 Carriage Hills, Seventh Filing. PETITIONER/OWNER: David Habecker/Harlalee A. and Sandra L. Wilson STAFF CONTACT: Alison Chilcott APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) REQUEST: The petitioner requests a variance to EVDC §4.3.C.5 Table 4.2, which requires a minimum setback of fifteen feet from the frontproperty line in the “R” Residential zoning district. Specifically the petitioner requests a 4.6-foot variance to allow a 10-foot- by-16.4-foot, one-story sunroom addition to the existing single-family home, with the addition to be located 5.4 feet from the front property line. If this variance is approved, the sunroom addition would connect to the master bedroom. Also, an existing deck, which in the same location as, but smaller than the proposed addition, would be removed. 2031 Monida Court Front-Yard Setback Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com Page #2 – Front-Yard Setback Variance Request for 2031 Monida Court II. SITE DATA AND MAPS Number of Lots One Parcel Number(s) 34011-25-068 Gross Land Area 0.31 acres 13,503 sq. ft. per Tax Assessor Existing Zoning “R” Residential Existing Land Use Single-Family Residential Proposed Land Use Same SERVICES Water Town of Estes Park Sewer Upper Thompson Sanitation District Fire Protection Town of Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department Gas Xcel Energy Company Electric Town of Estes Park Telephone Qwest HAZARDS/PHYSICAL FEATURES Mapped Hazard/Physical Feature Applicable to this Site? Wildfire Hazard No Geologic Hazard No Wetlands No Streams/Rivers No Ridgeline Protection No Critical Wildlife Habitat Yes - Elk LOCATION MAP Page #3 – Front-Yard Setback Variance Request for 2031 Monida Court AERIAL PHOTO SITE PLAN III. REVIEW CRITERIA All variance applications shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and criteria set forth in Chapter 3.6.C and all other applicable provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code. This variance request does not fall within the parameters of staff-level review and will be reviewed by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment. Page #4 – Front-Yard Setback Variance Request for 2031 Monida Court IV. REFERRAL COMMENTS This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and neighboring property owners for consideration and comment. The following reviewing agency staff and/or adjacent property owners submitted comments. Estes Park Public Works Department See Greg Sievers’ memo to Alison Chilcott dated July 11, 2006. Fire Chief See Scott Dorman’s email to Alison Chilcott dated June 20, 2006. Town Attorney See Greg White’s letter to Alison Chilcott dated June 19, 2006. Upper Thompson Sanitation District See Reed Smedley’s letter to Alison Chilcott dated June 20, 2006. V. STAFF FINDINGS Staff finds: 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: There are special circumstances associated with this lot that are not common to most lots in the “R” Residential zoning district and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with the Code standards. The following circumstances exist: the existing house encroaches into the setbacks and there is an existing deck in the same general location as the proposed addition. 2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following factors: Page #5 – Front-Yard Setback Variance Request for 2031 Monida Court a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance. Staff Finding: There can be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. The house can continue to be used without the sunroom addition. b. Whether the variance is substantial. Staff Finding: The variance is not substantial given that only approximately ninety square feet will encroach into the setback. 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 finds that the essential character of the neighborhood will not be substantially altered and that adjoining properties will not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. No neighbors have submitted comments in support or opposition to the variance. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: Utilities in the right-of-way should be shown on the plan, as requested by Public Works. Once utilities are shown, staff will review the plan to ensure that the variance does not affect the delivery of public services. Eaves should be shown on the site plan and cannot encroach into the five-foot utility easement. This may require some redesign. The Fire Chief has reviewed the new exposure distance to the adjoining property and determined that ISO requirements will not be changed or affected. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement. Staff Finding: The property was purchased prior to the February 1, 2000 effective date of the Estes Valley Development Code and without knowledge of the requirements. The minimum-required setbacks have increased since the property owner purchased the property. Page #6 – Front-Yard Setback Variance Request for 2031 Monida Court f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: A smaller addition could be built or an addition could be built in a different location that meets the setbacks. 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 submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the applicant's property are not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 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 reduce the size of the lot. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding: The Board should use their best judgement to determine if the variance offers the least deviation from the regulations to afford relief. 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: The proposed use is permitted. 7. In granting this variance, the BOA may require such conditions as will, in its independent judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standards varied or modified. Page #7 – Front-Yard Setback Variance Request for 2031 Monida Court 8. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. All letters and memos submitted by reviewing agency staff, referred to in Section IV of this staff report, are incorporated as staff findings. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variance CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Compliance with the submitted site plan, with the exception that eaves shall be shown on the site plan to verify that eaves do not encroach into the five-foot utility easement. 2. Compliance with the comments in the Public Works’ memo dated July 11, 2006. 3. A registered land surveyor shall set the survey stakes for the building foundation forms. After the footings are set, and prior to pouring the foundation, the surveyor shall verify compliance with the variance and provide a setback certificate. Setback certificates shall also be submitted for the decks and patios.