Nelson Garage Setback Variance ACTIVITY #: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE: PL-15-1053 January 11, 2016 at 6:00 pm PETITIONER: PETITION: LOCATION/LEGAL: ZONE DISTRICT: AREA OF PARCEL: Randy and Kellie Nelson Setback variance for the construction of a garage. Lot 6 Steamboat Hills Subdivision Mountain Residential Estate (MRE) 1.01 acres SETBACKS: Required: 1. 50 from west property line 2. 80 from the centerline of CR 35 STAFF CONTACT: Proposed: 1. 22 11 variance 2. 31 variance Alan Goldich, agoldich@co.routt.co.us ATTACHMENTS: Narrative Site Plan and elevation RC Road & Bridge comments History: This lot was created in 1969 with the recordation of the Steamboat Hills Subdivision plat. It is only 1.01 acres. When the County applied zoning, the MRE zone district was the most appropriate for the situation. In 2004 the owners of this lot obtained a variance and waterbody setback permit to construct a garage. The application in 2004 had two options for the location of the garage. One in the general location that this application is for and the other south of the creek at the northern end of the parking area. There was discussion that the garage could be built outside of the required setback but that requiring that would put it closer to the creek. The BOA approved the variance application which would have allowed the owner to construct the garage in the general location that is being requested at this time. The garage was never constructed and both of the approvals lapsed. Variances have been approved for multiple lots in this subdivision. On May 13, 1974, variances were approved for Lots 1, 4, 13, and 15 to allow for the construction of single family residences (SFR) on those lots. At the same time Lots 13 and 15 obtained setback variances to reduce the setbacks to 75 from the property line instead of the required 100. Lot 13 fronts on CR 35 and 1 of 11
Board of Adjustment January 11, 2016 Activity # PL-15-1053 Nelson Garage Variance Lot 15 is accessed off of Whiskey Hill Lane which comes off of CR 35. Lot 13 does have a detached garage. Lot 7 does have a detached garage. It is not in the property line setback and therefore did not need to obtain a variance. On April 8, 2002, Lot 19 obtained a setback variance to construct a detached garage 10 from the south property line instead of the required 50. Site Description: This lot is located in a narrow valley with views that are oriented towards Walton Creek Canyon. After turning into the driveway off of the County Road (CR) 35, there is a creek approximately 80 away (approximately 120 from the centerline of the CR). The area in between the CR and the creek is relatively flat. This is where the landowners park. Once crossing the creek, the lot slopes steeply to the north. There is currently no driveway that crosses the creek. The creek is only crossed by a footbridge. On the north side of the creek is a 3 story residence that has decks on the south and north sides of the residence. To the east of the driveway and parking area is a shed. Proposal: The applicant wishes to construct a garage on the flat area in between the creek and the CR, to the east of the parking area and next to the shed. This location is in the setback from the western property line and the setback from the CR. The footprint of the proposed garage would be 26 x 26 and the height would be approximately 16. Staff Comments: This lot is legal non-conforming. The minimum lot size in the MRE zone district for a lot that is on individual septic is 5 acres. As stated before, when the County adopted zoning, the MRE zone was the one that most fit this lot and subdivision. The Waterbody Setback regulations do not take into account the degree of the encroachment into the setback. No matter if you are 5 or 45 from the high water mark of the waterbody, the standards are the same. No matter where the garage is constructed, a Waterbody Setback permit will be required for either the access road or the structure. Even though a variance was approved for a garage in this location, the BOA is not obliged to agree with past decisions if you do not agree with those decisions. ***Issues for Discussion*** Are there other places on the property that this structure could be built that are outside of the property line setback? (criteria #1 and #3) Would the approval of this application diminish the value of the property owner to the west? (criteria #4) Setbacks for MRE Zone District Property Line Setback Proposed Required Variance South: 49 80 from centerline 31 of CR 35 West: 22 1 50 22 11 Routt County Planning Department 2 of 11
Board of Adjustment January 11, 2016 Activity # PL-15-1053 Nelson Garage Variance Applicable Regulations Routt County Zoning Resolution 3.4.6 The Board of Adjustment may authorize, upon application in specific cases, a variance to the strict application of the terms of the Routt County Zoning Regulations relating to setback restrictions. The Board may grant such variance only if all of the following conditions are found to exist: 3.4.6.A.1 Peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties or an unnecessary and unreasonable hardship will be imposed on the property owner if the provisions of this Resolution are strictly enforced. Petitioner Comments: Due to the size of the lot and the water body setback there is no location on the lot for construction of a garage which does not require a variance. Staff Comments: There is an area to the north of the existing residence that this structure could be built on. According to the applicant s representative, the grades in this area are about 18%. The threshold the Planning Department and the Subdivision regs use to determine if land is buildable or not are slopes 30% and above. Based on this threshold, the area behind the residence is available for development. There also appears to be room to construct the garage to the south of the creek that is outside of the setback. Based on this, staff has not been able to identify a hardship to meet this requirement. 3.4.6.A.2 Circumstances creating the hardship were in existence on the effective date of the regulations from which a variance is requested, or created subsequently through no fault of the appellant. Petitioner Comments: The zoning regulations for the MRE zone have been in existence since prior to construction of the existing residence in 1984. Staff Comments: This lot was created in 1969 prior to the adoption of the zoning regulations. The residence was constructed in 1984, more than 10 years after the variance criteria was adopted by the County. 3.4.6.A.3 That the property for which a variance is requested possesses exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition which does not occur generally in other property in the same Zone District. Petitioner Comments: The property is exceptionally narrow and the existing water body requires a variance to construct the proposed garage. Staff Comments: Since this lot is non-conforming for the MRE zone district, this situation does not generally occur on other properties that are in the MRE zone district, but staff has identified areas that this structure could be built on without a variance. 3.4.6.A.4 That the variance, if granted, will not diminish the value, use or enjoyment of the adjacent properties, nor curtail desirable light, air and open space in the neighborhood, nor change the character of the neighborhood. Petitioner Comments: The variance if granted will not diminish the value, use or enjoyment of adjacent properties since many of the existing homes on the roadway already have front garages on the residences. Staff Comments: There are 2 lots in the Steamboat Hills Subdivision that are on CR 35 that have garages. One obtained a variance in 1974. The other is not in the property setback, therefore it did not need to obtain a variance. It is in the waterbody setback applicability area but was constructed prior to the County adopting Waterbody Setback regulations, therefore not needing this permit. Routt County Planning Department 3 of 11
Board of Adjustment January 11, 2016 Activity # PL-15-1053 Nelson Garage Variance The adjacent property owner has expressed concern that the proposed structure will block their view of Walton Creek Canyon. They have said that this view was cited as contributing to the value the appraisal of their home received. However, no formal comments were received. 3.4.6.A.5 The variance, if granted, will not be directly contrary to the intent and purpose of this Resolution or the Routt County Master Plan. Petitioner Comments: The variance if granted will not be directly contract to the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations since the garage is being constructed ware are enough away from the road right of way to disturb use of the roadway. Staff Comments: The Master Plan does not specifically mention variances and if the Board agrees that this application is in compliance with the above standards, then it would appear to be in compliance with zoning regulations. The applicant has made the case that denying this request would require them to construct the garage closer to the creek, which would have greater impacts to the waterbody than the proposed location. The Master Plan has several policies encouraging the protection of the environment and prohibiting the approval of development proposals that would lead to the degredation of the environment. Board of Adjustment Options: Approve the variance if the above noted tests are met. Approve conditionally if the above noted tests are met or can be met by the application of certain conditions, or if certain conditions are necessary to mitigate concerns. Table for specific reasons; e.g. more information, site review, etc. Deny the variance if it does not meet the criteria stated above or if the variance would create a health or safety hazard or would negatively impact public welfare. FINDINGS OF FACT that may be appropriate if the Variance is DENIED: 1. An unnecessary and unreasonable hardship will not be imposed on the property owner by requiring the garage to be constructed outside of the property line setbacks. 2. The variance will diminish the value, use or enjoyment of the adjacent properties, because it will block the western adjacent property owner s view of Walton Creek Canyon. FINDINGS OF FACT that may be appropriate if the Variance is APPROVED: 1. Peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties and an unnecessary and unreasonable hardship will be imposed on the property owner if the provisions of this Resolution are strictly enforced because. (If a motion to approve is made, the motion maker shall provide a finding of fact to support the approval.) Routt County Planning Department 4 of 11
Board of Adjustment January 11, 2016 Activity # PL-15-1053 Nelson Garage Variance 2. Circumstances creating the hardship were created subsequently through no fault of the appellant because the lot was created in 1969, prior to the adoption of the zoning regulations. 3. The property for which a variance is requested possesses an extraordinary and exceptional situation and condition which does not occur generally on other properties in that the site. (If a motion to approve is made, the motion maker shall provide a finding of fact to support the approval.) 4. The variance, if granted, will not diminish the value, use or enjoyment of the adjacent properties, nor curtail desirable light, air and open space in the neighborhood, nor change the character of the neighborhood because the configuration and size of the structure is generally in conformity with the adjacent properties and neighborhood. 5. The variance is not directly contrary to the intent and purpose of this Resolution or the Routt County Master Plan as there are no apparent conflicts with RCZR standards or RCMP policies. CONDITIONS that may be appropriate include the following: 1. The building shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Routt County Building Department. 2. If construction of the building does not commence within 1 year, this variance shall be subject to another review with full submittal. 3. This approval is specific to the plans submitted in the application. Any change in footprint, size, height or site location will be subject to a new application. 4. A certified survey of the location of the structure must be completed prior to the issuance of a building permit. If the applicant is in need of a foundation permit and unable to provide a survey in a timely manner, the applicant may sign a letter of responsibility stating that they will comply with the setback approved by the Board of Adjustment. 5. Best Management Practices (BMP s) shall be utilized during construction to prevent erosion and drainage flow onto adjacent properties, drainage to the east of the parcel and the county road right of way. 6. A Grading and Excavation Permit shall be obtained prior to the Planning Department signing off on any building permit for the garage. 7. All exterior lighting shall be downcast and opaquely shielded. 8. Revegetation of disturbed areas shall occur within one growing season with a seed mix which avoids the use of aggressive grasses. See the Colorado State University Extension Office for appropriate grass seed mixes. Routt County Planning Department 5 of 11
6 of 11
7 of 11
8 of 11
NORTH 20' Horizontal Scale 0 10' 20' 40' 1" = 20' Contour Interval 2 Foot 9 of 11
Map of Alternative Locations 10 of 11
ROAD & BRIDGE P. O. Box 773598 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 Phone: 970-879-0831 Fax: 970-879-3992 January 4, 2016 Alan, The Routt County Road and Bridge Department would like to submit the following Conditions of Approval for the permit application numbered TPL-15-1053. This is for the Nelson Setback Variance. The following are the conditions of approval as submitted by the Routt County Road and Bridge Department. 1. From the plan submitted, it appears that County Road 35 is not centered in the Right of Way and is offset to the north. The foot print for the shed is approximately 30 from the edge of the road. Please inform the property owner that the side facing the road could be affected by snow plowing operations and that the Road and Bridge Department is not going to change its plowing operations to accommodate the new structure. Since no architectural drawings were provided, if they build a structure with a roof that sheds snow, it could have quite the buildup of snow against the structure with what slides off the roof and what accumulates in that spot from roadway snow removal. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Mike Mordi, P.E. Assistant Director Routt County Road and Bridge 11 of 11