BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA

Transcription

1 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Peak One Dr. PO Box Frisco, CO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA January 17, :30p.m. Buffalo Mountain Room County Commons 0037 Peak One Dr., SCR 1005 Frisco, CO Commission Dinner: 5:00pm Call to Order Approval of Summary of Motions: May 17, 2017 Approval of Agenda: Additions, Deletions, Change of Order REGULAR AGENDA: PLN Lot 53, Peak Seven West, Variance to front setback Request for a new residence and garage to encroach 10' into the 25' front setback; Lot 53, Peak Seven West,.513 acres, zoned R-2. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Countywide Planning Commission issues Follow-up of previous BOCC meeting Board of Adjustment Issues

2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MOTIONS May 17, 2017 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerry Westhoff, Ryan Taylor, Mark Provino, Anthony Lord STAFF PRESENT: Don Reimer, Planning Director, Keely Ambrose, Assistant County Attorney Jerry Westhoff, Vice Chairman, called the meeting of the Board of Adjustment to order at 5:33 p.m. in the absence of Chair George Resseguie. Approval of Summary of Motions: The Summary of Motions of the January 18, 2017 meeting was approved as submitted. REGULAR AGENDA PLN Appeal of Code Administrator Determination An appeal of Administrative Decision Deny a Class I Site Plan Review Regarding Lot 18 and Lot 21 Gold King Placer Unsub; including Code Determinations on: 1) Merger of nonconforming Parcels (Sec F); 2) That the parcel is considered Unplatted (Sec F (10)); and 3) That a Nonconforming Parcel Plan Review is Required (Sec C) DISCUSSION: The BOA discussed the staff report and the applicant s presentation, and agreed with Staff s recommendation that the parcels should not be deemed merged. The BOA also agreed that there was no evidence of platting of the parcels, and that the parcels when considered separately were each less than 20 acres, meaning a non-conforming parcel plan was required for each parcel. The BOA discussed modifying Finding 3 from the staff report, to state that each parcel considered separately is less than 20 acres and therefore requires a non-conforming parcel plan review for each parcel. MOTION: Mark Provino made a motion to grant in part and deny in part the applicant s request for appeal of an administrative decision to deny a Class I site plan review associated with Building Permit application B , with the modification of the third finding contained in the staff report. Ryan Taylor seconded the motion which was approved on a vote of 4-0. Findings: 1. Based on historical evidence and findings of hardship for Gold King Placer property owners in similar situations to the applicant, the BOA finds that the applicant s parcels are not merged per Section F of the Code. 2. There is no evidence of a subdivision plat meeting Summit County requirements for the parcels in Gold King Placer; therefore the applicant s parcels are unplatted per the Code. 3. Staff correctly used the definitions and provisions in the Code in determining that each parcel considered separately is less than 20 acres, therefore requiring a nonconforming parcel plan review for each separate parcel. DISCUSSION ITEMS Countywide Planning Issues: Don Reimer informed the BOA that the County is currently in the process of updating the Countywide Comprehensive Plan and invited them to participate in the process. Page 1 of 2

3 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Don Reimer Planning Director Page 2 of 2

4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT fax Post Office Box SCR 1005 Frisco, Colorado STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: Board of Adjustment Sid Rivers, Planner II FOR: Meeting of January 17, 2018 SUBJECT: Planning Case PLN17-143: A request for a variance from the 25-foot front setback for a new residence to be located 15 feet from the front property; Lot 53, Peak Seven West, 0.51 acres, zoned R-2. APPLICANT: Marc Hogan, BHH Partners OWNER: REQUEST: Michele Marie Trumbull-Oare A request for a variance from the 25-foot front setback for a new residence to be located 15 feet from the front property, with the garage entry and building façade to be located 21 from the front property line. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Location: 255 Protector Place, Peak 7 area, Breckenridge Legal Description: Lot 53, Peak Seven West Existing Zoning: R-2 Proposed Use: Single family residence Total site area: acres/ 22,336 square feet Adjacent land uses: North: acres parcel (unplatted), vacant, zoned A-1 South: Lot 52, Peak Seven West, zoned R-2 East: Lot 54, Peak Seven West, vacant, zoned R-2 West: 4.59 acre parcel (unplatted), vacant, zoned Reed PUD DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Per R-2 Zoning Proposed Lot Size: 20,000 s.f. Minimum 22,335 s.f. Existing Lot Setbacks: Front: to garage entry and building facade 15 to roof eaves and architectural features Rear: Sides: 15 15

5 BACKGROUND The plat for the Peak Seven West subdivision was recorded on June 12, 1970 at Reception # The subject parcel is Lot 53, a 0.51 acre parcel zoned R-2. The subject parcel is a uniquely shaped lot that fronts on the Cul-de-sac area of Protector Place (CR 916). From the front of the lot, the site slopes dramatically downhill at grades in excess of 30%. The average slope of this site is 50%. Subject Parcel: 255 Protector Place The applicant is requesting a setback variance to encroach into the required 25 foot front setback. This variance will allow for the construction of a new 2,533 square foot single family residence and 509 square foot garage. The proposed garage entry and building façade will be located 21 from the front property line, while roof eaves and architectural design elements will be located 16 * from the front property line. Based on the extreme steepness of this lot, Staff supports this proposal for a garage and portions of the single family residence to encroach in to the front setback as further discussed in this staff report. * 16 as measured on the building plans provided. The applicant s request is for a front setback of 15 PLN17-143: Lot 53, Peak Seven West BOA January 17, 2018 Page 2 of 6

6 CRITERIA FOR DECISION Per Section , the following criteria and standards shall be met and findings made by the Board of Adjustment to approve variances to development regulations and standards except variances to minimum lot size requirements: 1. The strict application of the County's Zoning Regulations would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon, the property owner in the development of the property because of special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography or other extraordinary or exceptional physical conditions. 2. The variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public health, safety and welfare. 3. The variance can be granted without substantial impairment of the intent of the County's Zoning Regulations. 4. Granting the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege in excess of that enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district. 5. Reasonable use of the property is not otherwise available without granting of a variance and the variance being granted is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use. 6. The parcel for which the variance is being granted was not created in violation of County zoning or subdivision regulations, or in violation of Colorado State Statutes. The strict application of the County's Zoning Regulations would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon, the property owner in the development of the property because of special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography or other extraordinary or exceptional physical conditions The Peak Seven West subdivision was recorded in Lot 53, Peak Seven West, is a vacant lot. This site is constrained by steep downhill slopes in excess of 30%. The average slope of the entire lot is 50%. Other lots in this subdivision have also had challenges to development. Front setback variances have previously been granted to Lots 57 & 58, both of these lots also slope steeply downhill. The proposed building elevation, shown below, illustrates the steep existing grade of the site. Proposed Building Elevation (South) Garage access from Protector Place PLN17-143: Lot 53, Peak Seven West BOA January 17, 2018 Page 3 of 6

7 The applicant has created a well-designed residential layout that accommodates the extreme topography of this site. A four story home with a single car garage is proposed. The proposed garage entry and building façade will be located 21 from the front property line, while roof eaves and architectural design elements will be located 16 front the front property line. An undue hardship would exist without the granting of a front setback variance. Due to the steep topography, increased site grading and disturbance would occur if the proposed residence were required to meet the 25 front setback requirement. If the residence were to meet the setback requirements, it is likely that the driveway would not meet Code standards and that the building could exceed the height limits in the Code. The variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public health, safety and welfare Granting this variance will not have any negative impact to the public health, safety, or welfare. This proposal was referred to all of the applicable review agencies and no comments were provided. The Engineering and Road and Bridge Departments did not have any concerns with this proposal. Additionally, while the proposal encroaches into the front setback, there are no proposed encroachments into any utility easements and none of the utility providers expressed concern with the proposal. The variance can be granted without substantial impairment of the intent of the County's Zoning Regulations The applicant is proposing a new single family residence which includes a garage. With the exception of the front setback, the home has been specifically designed to fit with the development constraints of the lot and meets the Code requirements for building height, driveway access, and parking. Granting a variance for this proposal is consistent with the County Zoning Regulations because the proposed development complies with all County development regulations and applicable development standards, excluding the front setback requirement. Granting the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege in excess of that enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district The Board of Adjustment must find that granting a variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege in excess of that enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district. The BOA has granted front setback variances throughout Summit County on steep lots, including two for neighboring properties in the Peak Seven West subdivision with similar circumstances. Historically, the BOA has deemed that a single family residence can have a maximum building footprint of 1,200 square feet in size, and a two-car garage of up to 400 square feet in size. This has constituted the minimum necessary for reasonable use. The footprint of the proposed structure will be 1,012 square feet in size. The proposed residence will consist of four stories for a total 2,533 square feet of residential space. There will be a single car garage totaling 509 square feet in size. While the exact area of the garage exceeds the minimum necessary standard, Staff supports the garage as designed. The garage has been designed to accommodate a single car with additional storage area. In practicality, the garage can hold a vehicle within an 8 foot by 21 foot (168 square feet) area. The garage floor plan is shown on the following page. PLN17-143: Lot 53, Peak Seven West BOA January 17, 2018 Page 4 of 6

8 Proposed Garage Granting a front setback variance for the proposed residence and garage as proposed would not constitute a grant of special privilege since the residential floor plan and garage have been carefully designed to fit the constraints of the site and the variance would be consistent with previous applications in similar circumstances. Reasonable use of the property is not otherwise available without granting of a variance and the variance being granted is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use The Board of Adjustment must find that reasonable use of the property is not otherwise available without granting a variance and the variance being granted is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use. Due to site s steep topographic constraints, without granting a front setback variance, a single family residence could not reasonably be constructed on the subject property. Such construction would result in increased site grading and disturbance. Additionally, the BOA has previously determined that a 400-square-foot garage is a reasonable size for a two-car garage. The applicant is proposing a uniquely shaped home and single car garage, resulting in a 509 square foot garage. Staff considers the garage as designed to be the minimum necessary for reasonable use of this property, and the construction of a garage and driveway access on this property would not be possible without a front setback variance. PLN17-143: Lot 53, Peak Seven West BOA January 17, 2018 Page 5 of 6

9 The parcel for which the variance is being granted was not created in violation of County zoning or subdivision regulations, or in violation of Colorado State Statutes Lot 53, Peak Seven West, was created via a plat, recorded June 12, 1970, recorded at Reception # Summit County subdivision regulations began in The subject parcel was created legally and does not have any zoning, subdivision or state statute violations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment approve PLN17-143; a request for a variance from the 25- foot front setback for a new residence to be located 15 feet from the front property, with the garage entry and building façade to be located 21 from the front property line; Lot 53, Peak Seven West, 0.51 acres, zoned R-2 with the following findings. FINDINGS 1. The strict application of the County's Zoning Regulations would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon the property owner in the development of the property because the lot s steep topography precludes the construction of a setback-compliant structure. 2. The variance can be granted without substantial impairment to the public health, safety, and welfare because the location of the proposed structure is outside of the existing utility easements and the variance will not result in issues with any other Code requirements. 3. Granting this variance is consistent with the County Zoning Regulations because the proposed structure will comply with all applicable development standards, excluding the required front setback. 4. Granting the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege as variances to setback requirements have been granted within Summit County for similar properties with constraints including topography. 5. Reasonable use of the property is not available without granting a variance and the variance being granted is the minimum necessary for reasonable use since the proposal is sited in the most reasonable location and designed to fit with the site development constraints. 6. The parcel for which the variance is being granted was not created in violation of County Zoning or Subdivision regulations or in violation of Colorado State Statutes because the subject property was legally created in 1970 via the plat for Peak Seven West recorded under Reception # ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Slope analysis 4. Building Plans 5. Draft Resolution PLN17-143: Lot 53, Peak Seven West BOA January 17, 2018 Page 6 of 6

10 0525 Acc Apt nr d CR USFS Am Acc Apt y Wa an eric er ica Am CR Ti CRmbe 91 r W 8 ay CR CR Lone Hand Way Acc Apt 0205 Acc Apt n Protector Pl CR Ada ms Way W ay Acc Apt Acc Apt Dr ws 6 rto Ba Sh o ad CR oe 012 Ci 9 r 0091 Sn ow sh PLN17-143: 255 Protector Place; Lot 53, Peak Seven West Variance request for a new SFR and garage to encroach 10' into the 25' front setback This map is for display purposes only. Do not use for legal conveyance. Not necessarily accurate by surveying standards, and does not comply with National Mapping Accuracy Standards Summit County Government Feet 800

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22 RESOLUTION NO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE COUNTY OF SUMMIT STATE OF COLORADO A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLN A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE 25-FOOT FRONT SETBACK FOR A NEW RESIDENCE TO BE LOCATED 15 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY, WITH THE GARAGE ENTRY AND BUILDING FAÇADE TO BE LOCATED 21 FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE; LOT 53, PEAK SEVEN WEST, 0.51 ACRES, ZONED R-2 (Applicant Marc Hogan, BHH Partners), and; WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the Board of Adjustment for a variance from the 25-foot front setback for a new residence to be located 15 feet from the front property, with the garage entry and building façade to be located 21 from the front property line; Lot 53, Peak Seven West, 0.51 acres, zoned R-2, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Department has reviewed the application and recommends approval with conditions to the Board of Adjustment; and; WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment reviewed the application at a public hearing on January 17, 2018, with public notice as required by law and considered the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing; and; WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment finds as follows: 1. The strict application of the County's Zoning Regulations would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon the property owner in the development of the property because the lot s steep topography precludes the construction of a setback-compliant structure. 2. The variance can be granted without substantial impairment to the public health, safety, and welfare because the location of the proposed structure is outside of the existing utility easements and the variance will not result in issues with any other Code requirements. 3. Granting this variance is consistent with the County Zoning Regulations because the proposed structure will comply with all applicable development standards, excluding the required front setback. 4. Granting the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege as variances to setback requirements have been granted within Summit County for similar properties with constraints including topography. 5. Reasonable use of the property is not available without granting a variance and the variance being granted is the minimum necessary for reasonable use since the proposal is sited in the most reasonable location and designed to fit with the site development constraints. 6. The parcel for which the variance is being granted was not created in violation of County

23 Zoning or Subdivision regulations or in violation of Colorado State Statutes because the subject property was legally created in 1970 via the plat for Peak Seven West recorded under Reception # NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE COUNTY OF SUMMIT, STATE OF COLORADO THAT a request for a variance from the 25-foot front setback for a new residence to be located 15 feet from the front property, with the garage entry and building façade to be located 21 from the front property line; Lot 53, Peak Seven West, 0.51 acres, zoned R-2, is hereby approved. ADOPTED THIS 17 th DAY OF JANUARY, ATTEST: COUNTY OF SUMMIT STATE OF COLORADO BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT George Resseguie, Chair Sid Rivers, Planner II