The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVARIANCE REQUEST 630 Big Horn Dr 2005-04-25 630 Big Horn Avenue Side-Yard Setback Variance 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 I.PROJECT OVERVIEW DATE:May 12, 2005 LOCATION:The site is located at 630 RMNP RMNP Big Horn Drive, within the Town of Fall River Entrance EVDC Boundary Estes Park. 34 USFS (Eagle / Rock Mac Gregor Ranch 34 (/ RMNP PETITIONER/PROPERTY Lake Estes Beaver Meadows Entrance 36 ( / 36 OWNER:Matt Whyte/Dianne and (/ Rocky Prospect Mt.36 36 7( / ( Mountain/ USFS National Marcus Cole USFS Park Marys Lake YMCA Conference Grounds STAFF CONTACT: Alison Chilcott USFS Cheley USFS Camps 7 (/ RMNP EVDC Boundary Lily Lake APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: The petitioner requests a variance to Estes Valley Development Code Section 4, Table 4-2 “Base Density and Dimensional Standards Residential Zoning Districts,” which requires a minimum side-yard setback of twenty-five feet in the “E-1” Estate zoning district. Specifically, this is a request for a 2.5-foot variance from the twenty-five- foot southern side-yard setback to add and remodel decks as described in the Statement of Intent. II.SITE DATA AND MAPS One Number of Parcels 3524307178 Parcel Number(s) 0.35 acres (15,259 sq. ft.) per Tax Assessor website Total Development Area “E-1” Estate Zoning Single-Family Residential Existing Land Use Same Proposed Land Use ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Adjacent Adjacent Land Use Zoning “E-1” Estate Single-Family Residential North “E-1” Estate Undeveloped South “E-1” Estate Single-Family Residential East “E-1” Estate Single-Family Residential with Two Detached Accessory Dwelling West Units Note: Adjacent land uses are determined from Larimer County Tax Assessor website. SERVICES Town of Estes Park Water Estes Park Sanitation District Sewer Town of Estes Park Fire Protection Qwest Phone Mapped Hazards/Physical Features Applicable to this Site? Wildfire Hazard No Geologic Hazard No Wetlands No Streams/Rivers No Ridgeline Protection No Critical Wildlife Habitat Yes – Elk Ridgeline Protection Area No LOCATION MAP “E-1”“E-1” .. nn LL yy mm “RM”“RM” mm uu MM MM aa 630 Big Horn Dr.630 Big Horn Dr. cc GG rr ee .. gg rr oo DD rr AA nn rr vv ooee .. HH gg ii BB US 34 Bypass (WonderviewAve.)US 34 Bypass (WonderviewAve.) Page #2 – 630 Big Horn Drive Side-Yard Setback Variance Request AERIAL PHOTO 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 falls within the parameters of staff-level review and will be reviewed by staff. IV.STAFF FINDINGS Staff finds: 1.Project Description/Background The Project Description/Background found in Section I of this staff report is included as a staff finding. 2.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. Page #3 – 630 Big Horn Drive Side-Yard Setback Variance Request Staff Finding: The lot is zoned “E-1” Estate, which requires a minimum lot area of one acre or 0.85 acres in new subdivisions with five or more lots. This lot is 0.35 acres, which is more comparable to lot sizes in the “E” Estate zoning district. This district requires a minimum lot area of 0.50 acres or 0.43 acres in new subdivisions with five or more lots. If this lot were zoned “E” Estate, the side-yard setback would be fifteen feet rather than twenty-five feet and the proposed deck addition would comply with the setback. Also, the location of the house on the lot impacts the proposed deck addition. As shown on the site plan and aerial photo, the house is not centered on the lot. It is located closer to the southern property line than the northern property line. 3.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 can be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. The house can continue to be used as a single-family residence. b.Whether the variance is substantial. Staff Finding: This is a request for a 2.5-foot variance from the twenty-five-foot side-yard setback, a ten-percent variance, which is substantial. However, placing a small section of deck in the setback and adjacent to an undeveloped property 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 proposed addition will not substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood. d.Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: The variance will not affect the delivery of public services. Page #4 – 630 Big Horn Drive Side-Yard Setback Variance Request e.Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement. Staff Finding: The applicant purchased the property in 2005 after the February 1, 2000 effective date of the Estes Valley Development Code. Since the EVDC is public record, the applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the twenty-five-foot side-yard setback requirement. f.Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: The applicant’s predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. The deck could be narrowed or a deck addition placed on a different side of the house. 4.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. 5.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. 6.If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding: The variance, if granted, offers the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. 7.Under no circumstances shall the staff grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited Page #5 – 630 Big Horn Drive Side-Yard Setback Variance Request under the terms of this Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. Staff Finding:The use is permitted. 8.In granting this variance, the staff may require such conditions as will, in its independent judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standards varied or modified. 9.Per EVDC §3.6.D, 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 Board of Adjustment null and void. V.STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variance CONDITIONAL TO: 1.Compliance with the submitted plans with revisions shown to reduce the deck encroachment to 22.5 feet. 2.A registered land surveyor shall provide a setback certificate verifying compliance with the variance. Page #6 – 630 Big Horn Drive Side-Yard Setback Variance Request May 19, 2005 Marcus and Dianne Cole 2223 Gilpin Street Denver, CO 80205 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: E-1 Zoning District Side-Yard Setback Variance Request for 630 Big Horn Drive Parcel Identification Number 3524307178 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: Staffreviewed and conditionally approved the above-referenced variance request on May 12, 2005. A copy of the staff report is enclosed. Pursuant to Section 3.6.D. of the Estes Valley Development Code, “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.” Should you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me (577-3720) at your convenience. Sincerely, Alison Chilcott, AICP Planner II cc: Matt Whyte, 821 Alpine Drive, Estes Park, CO 80517