The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSTAFF REPORT Variance 1041 Pine Ln 2024-10-01 Community Development Memo To: Chair Jeff Moreau Estes Park Board of Adjustment Through: Steve Careccia, Community Development Director From: Kara Washam, Planner I Date: October 1, 2024 Application: Variance Request for Side (East) Setback 1041 Pine Lane, Estes Park Steven and Janet Hood, Owners/Applicants Michael Daley, Architect, Consultant Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the variance request, subject to the findings described in the report. Land Use: 2022 Estes Forward Comprehensive Plan Designation: (Future Land Use): Neighborhood Village Zoning District: Two-Family Residential (R-2) Site Area: 0.98 Acres (+/- 42,759 SF) ☒ PUBLIC HEARING ☐ ORDINANCE ☐ LAND USE ☐ CONTRACT/AGREEMENT ☐ RESOLUTION ☒ OTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL ☒ YES ☐ NO Objective: The Applicant requests approval of a variance to reduce the side setback along the east property line to three feet (3') in lieu of the ten feet (10') side setback required in the R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Zone District under Section 4.3.C.4. (Table 4-2) of the Estes Park Development Code (EPDC). Background: The subject property is in the Lake View Tracts Subdivision and contains one single- family residence constructed in 1963 and a small cabin also constructed in 1963 that is currently used as a short-term rental (VHL# 021-21). The lot is 0.98 acres and is conforming to dimensional standards and use. Existing access to the property is by a gravel driveway from Pine Lane. 2 The Applicants/Owners purchased the property in 2014 as a vacation/second home with plans to retire to the residence full time and construct an attached garage. When the Applicants purchased the property, they received an Improvement Location Certificate (ILC) from Green Mountain Survey dated November 13, 2014 (Attachment 3). The ILC incorrectly showed the building setback between the existing residence and the east property line as 29’ +/- at the narrowest point. This measurement led the Applicants to believe that the proposed attached garage would meet the 10’ setback requirement. The Applicants have now reached retirement and wish to proceed with constructing an attached garage. However, a recent site plan of the lot done by Van Horn Engineering, dated July 26, 2024, shows the existing building setback as 19.8’, nearly 10 feet less than what the Applicants were told when they purchased the property (Attachment 4). Variance Description The Applicants request a variance to allow a reduced side setback of three feet (3') along the east property line in lieu of the ten feet (10') side setback required in the R- 2 (Two-Family Residential) Zone District. The Applicants propose to construct an attached garage with a new access drive and will remove the existing driveway. Proposed Site Plan 3 Location and Context: The 0.98-acre lot is located at 1041 Pine Lane, approximately 400’ southeast of the intersection of Big Thompson Avenue (Hwy 34) and Hillside Lane. The subject property and the majority of adjacent properties are zoned R-2 (Two-Family Residential) except the parcel to the north, which is zoned A (Accommodations). Vicinity Map Zoning and Land Use Summary Table Comprehensive Plan (2022) Zone Uses Subject Site Neighborhood Village R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Residential North Mixed-Use Centers and Corridors A (Accommodations) Self-Storage South Neighborhood Village R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Residential East Neighborhood Village R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Residential West Neighborhood Village R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Residential 4 Zoning Map Project Analysis Review Criteria: The Board of Adjustment (BOA) is the decision-making body for variance requests. In accordance with EPDC Section 3.6.C., Variances, Standards for Review, applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. The Standards with staff findings for each are as follows: 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. 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: Special conditions exist due to the topography on the west side of the property. The existing residence was constructed on top of a rock outcropping with an approximately 20’ drop-off on the west side. An attached garage on the west side of the property would not be feasible, resulting in the east side of the property as the only suitable location for the development of an attached garage. 5 Existing Conditions Photo 1 (Approximately 20’ drop-off on west side of the existing residence) 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: There can be beneficial use of the property without the variance and a garage, but that feature is common in the neighborhood and desired in winter weather conditions. b. Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Finding: The variance request for a three feet (3') side setback in lieu of ten feet (10') is substantial. 6 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 proposed attached garage. The proposed location is where the Applicants currently park their vehicles. The existing residence at the adjacent lot to the east (1051 Pine Lane) is constructed at a much higher elevation and well over 25’ feet from the shared property line. This existing drive at 1051 Pine Lane and a row of evergreen trees lend to the visual separation of the lots. Existing Conditions Photo 2 (Existing drive on the adjacent property approximately 25’ east of the shared property line) d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: The placement of the garage will have no impact on existing public services, including water and sewer. 7 e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Finding: The Applicants purchased the property in 2014 without the knowledge that the existing setback on the east side would not be wide enough to construct an attached garage. The Applicants received an Improvement Location Certificate (ILC) when they purchased the property that incorrectly showed a much wider side setback between the existing residence and the east property line. f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: A detached garage could be developed at the lower elevation on the west side of the property. However, there is a steep change in elevation of approximately 20 feet. The potential for icy steps in winter conditions could pose a safety risk for the Applicants who wish to age in place at the residence while they enjoy retirement. 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: Not applicable. 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: Not applicable. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding: The proposed variance would be the least deviation from the Development Code. 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 zoning district containing the property for which the variance is sought. Staff Finding: The Applicants request a setback variance to construct an attached garage. This is an accessory use permitted by right in the R-2 (Two- Family Residential) zoning district per Table 5-1 of the EPDC. 8 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. Staff Finding: If the variance request is granted, Staff would like to condition the Applicants/Owners to remove the existing driveway as shown on the Site Plan (Attachment 4) prior to establishing a new driveway for the proposed garage. No lot shall be allowed more than two (2) driveway openings pursuant to Appendix D.III.B.5.d. of the Estes Park Development Code (EPDC). Review Agency Comments The application was referred to all applicable review agencies for comment. Public Works supports removal of the existing driveway access as shown on the Site Plan (Attachment 5). Fire-resistance rating for the proposed garage addition is required in accordance with the 2021 International Residential Code (IRC). Compliance with this requirement will be reviewed by the Building Division when a building permit application is received (Attachment 6). Public Notice Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with EPDC noticing requirements. As of the time of writing this report, no comments were received. ● Written notice mailed to adjacent property owners on September 13, 2024. ● Legal notice published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on September 13, 2024. ● Application posted on the Town's "Current Applications" website. Advantages This variance would allow the Applicants to construct an attached garage to protect their vehicles during winter conditions and to reduce the safety risks of accessing their vehicles via an exterior route. Disadvantages There are no known disadvantages of the variance to allow a reduced side setback along the east property line to three feet (3') in lieu of the ten feet (10') side setback required in the R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Zone District. Action Recommended Staff recommends approval with conditions of the proposed variance described in this staff report, with setbacks consistent with the Site Plan (Attachment 4). Finance/Resource Impact N/A Level of Public Interest Little or none. 9 Sample Motions I move to approve the variance request for three feet (3’) side setback along the east property line for the subject property addressed as 1041 Pine Lane in the Town of Estes Park, with conditions aforementioned above and with findings as outlined in the staff report. I move to approve the variance request for three feet (3’) side setback along the east property line for the subject property addressed as 1041 Pine Lane in the Town of Estes Park, with alternative conditions [state conditions] and with findings as outlined in the staff report. I move to approve the variance request for three feet (3’) side setback along the east property line for the subject property addressed as 1041 Pine Lane in the Town of Estes Park, without conditions and with findings as outlined in the staff report. I move to deny the requested variance with the following findings [state reason/findings]. I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance to the next regularly scheduled meeting, finding that [state reasons for continuance]. Attachments 1. Application 2. Statement of Intent 3. 2014 Improvement Location Certificate (ILC) 4. Site Plan 5. Public Works Referral Comments 6. Building Division Referral Comments . 1041 Pine Drive, Hood Residence Side Yard Variance Request Standards for Review Reply: 1 . Special Circumstances Exist – the house is an existing house located on top a rock outcropping to the west (about a 20’+- drop off in that direction), cut into the rock on the northside when built, where an existing 5’ high cut currently exists and continues to deepen to the north, and a steep embankment on the front or south side of the entry patio and walk toward Pine Drive. This leaves only the east side as a potential location for this garage. The clients bought the property 10 years ago with the intent to retire here full time and build this garage. Retirement is here for them, and they desire an attached enclosed 2 car garage to protect them and their vehicles in the winter. Based on the above topography of the site, the only side to accomplish this is the east side. The recent survey for this project discovered the previously believed east property line location at purchase (per ILC) is now 9’ closer to the house than purchase documents portrayed. This will not allow for a 2-car garage, if meeting the 10’ side yard setback. We are requesting a variance to 3’ side yard setback (measured to the garage wall with a 2’ separation to the overhang). The property to the east, 1051 Pine Drive, is developed and has existing drives which the closest drive is 25’ east of this property line and several feet higher in elevation with built retaining structures in place, it has a home which are much further from this requested variance, and we believe not effecting by this request. 2. We have studied many options and find no other option than the one requested, to obtain an attached two car garage. We see a request for a two-car garage as consistent and reasonable with most homes in the neighborhood and on the most single family lots of Estes Park. A connected garage is seen here as essential to a retiring couple for their safety due to weather risks going forward. We do not see this effecting the character of neighborhood as the adjacent properties are all built on, the drive and home to the east has been in place for many years, and the location of this proposed garage is where the owners currently park their cars when here on weekends. The addition has no effect on water or sewer services to these or other houses in the area. The owner purchased the property 10 years ago with the understanding the east property line to be 29’+- at the NE house corner to property line and 38’+- at the SE house corner to the property line, per the ILC. Those distances per the new correct survey have reduced respectively to 19.8’ from 29’+- and 26.6’ from 38’+-. We are proposing to extend the garage 8’ south of the existing house to even get it to a size that can hold two cars. Any further extension to the south would present too steep of a grade from the proposed garage to Pine Drive. 3. We do not believe this request is either general or recurrent in nature. 4. This variance has no effect on the size of the lots in the subdivision. 5. We believe a variance would represent the least deviation from the regulation that will afford relief. 6. NA 7. TBD 170 MACGREGOR AVE. P.O. BOX 1200, ESTES PARK CO. 80517 WWW.ESTES.ORG Community Development Department Planning Division 970-577-3721 planning@estes.org PROJECT ROUTING REFERRAL FORM AGENCY Public Works REVIEWER Jennifer Waters SIGNATURE DATE 9/9/2024 ☒ No Comments except as notes below ☐ Resubmittal Required ☐ Comments Provided via Comment Letter (attached) SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: Public Works does not object to approval of the setback variance based on the geologic conditions that present difficulties in locating the garage elsewhere. Also, the applicant intends to abandon an existing access and establish a new driveway for the proposed garage. Access and drainage issues may otherwise be addressed during the building permit process. 170 MACGREGOR AVE. P.O. BOX 1200, ESTES PARK CO. 80517 WWW.ESTES.ORG Community Development Department Planning Division 970-577-3721 planning@estes.org PROJECT ROUTING REFERRAL FORM AGENCY Building Department REVIEWER Dan Wester SIGNATURE DATE 9/11/2024 ☐ No Comments ☐ Resubmittal Required ☐ Comments Provided via Comment Letter (attached) SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: 170 MACGREGOR AVE. P.O. BOX 1200, ESTES PARK CO. 80517 WWW.ESTES.ORG Community Development Department Planning Division 970-577-3721 planning@estes.org 2021 International Residential Code (IRC) CHAPTER 3 BUILDING PLANNING TABLE R302.1(1) EXTERIOR WALLS EXTERIOR WALL ELEMENT MINIMUM FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING MINIMUM FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE Walls Fire- resistance rated 1 hour—tested in accordance with ASTM E119, UL 263 or Section 703.3 of the International Building Code with exposure from both sides 0 feet Not fire- resistance rated 0 hours ≥ 5 feet Projectio ns Not allowed NA < 2 feet Fire- resistance rated 1 hour on the underside, or heavy timber, or fire-retardant-treated wooda, b ≥ 2 feet to < 5 feet Not fire- resistance rated 0 hours ≥ 5 feet Opening s in walls Not allowed NA < 3 feet 25% maximum of wall area 0 hours 3 feet Unlimited 0 hours 5 feet Penetrat ions All Comply with Section R302.4 < 3 feet None required 3 feet For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm. NA = Not Applicable. a. The fire-resistance rating shall be permitted to be reduced to 0 hours on the underside of the eave overhang if fireblocking is provided from the wall top plate to the underside of the roof sheathing. b. The fire-resistance rating shall be permitted to be reduced to 0 hours on the underside of the rake overhang where gable vent openings are not installed. PDF from: http://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IRC2021P2/chapter-3-building- planning#IRC2021P2_Pt03_Ch03_SecR302.1