HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Setback 225 Shadow Mountain Ct 2006-03-20
DATE: March 20, 2006
REQUEST: Variance from the
“RE” Rural Estate 25-foot front yard
setback requirement.
LOCATION: Lot 5 Grey Fox
APPLICANT: Westover
Construction (Bob I.)
PROPERTY OWNER: Bob and
Joan Schultz
STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND:
REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.7.A3 of the EVDC, all
applications for Minor Modifications shall exhibit “practical difficulties” as defined in
Section 3.6.C2:
a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;
Staff Finding: The property can develop without the requested modification, though
this small modification will allow construction without blasting out a large rock
outcrop immediately behind the house, and will allow for positive drainage.
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff Finding: The Minor Modification falls within the 10% limit set by the EVDC.
Schultz Front Yard Minor Modification Request
Estes Park Community Development Department
Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue
PO Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com
RMNP
RockyMountainNationalPark
RMNP
USFS
USFS
USFS
Lake Estes
MarysLake
LilyLake
Mac Gregor Ranch
YMCAConferenceGrounds
36
EVDC Boundary
EVDC Boundary
Eagle Rock
RMNPFall River
Entrance
RMNP
Beaver MeadowsEntrance
Prospect Mt.
-
(/34
(/36(/7
(/36
(/34
(/36
(/7
CheleyCamps
USFS
USFS
Page #2 –Schultz Front Yard Setback Request
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 and the adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial
detriment. The intent of the 50-foot setbacks will be met due to a 140-foot separation
between this site and the nearest building envelope on the adjacent Lot 8, plus this
request is for a small encroachment only by the front entry.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as
water and sewer;
Staff Finding: The Minor Modification would not adversely affect the delivery of
public services.
e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement;
Staff Finding: The requirement was in place when the applicant purchased the
property.
f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other
than a variance.
Staff Finding: The house could be designed to meet the code.
STAFF DETERMINATION: Based on the foregoing, Staff has APPROVED the
requested Minor CONDITIONAL TO:
a. Full compliance with the IBC;
b. Prior to pouring foundation, submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a registered
land surveyor.
c. Compliance with the site plan.
LAPSE: Failure of an Applicant to apply for a building permit and commence construction or action
with regard to the variance approval within one (1) year of receiving approval of the variance shall
automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void.