HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOA Staff Report 02.25.2008Exhibits for Cyphers Variance Request BOA February 25th, 2008
Lthrblt
Letter
r, v:
`A- o `./)
)Exhibit
., i
A
Proof of Mail Receipts
B
Proof of Publication
C
Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended
D
Application
E
Staff Memorandum
F
Staff Power Point Presentation
BOA 2/25/2008 CR
Cyphers Variance
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST Variance from Front Yard Setbacks
APPLICANT / OWNER Stephan & Kelly Cyphers
LOCATION 78 Willow Creek, Parachute, CO
(Battlement Mesa)
EXISTING ZONING
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
PUD
Denial
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY:
The subject lot is identified as Lot 10, Block 7, Willow Creek Village, Section I. The 9,188
sq. ft. lot is currently improved with a single-family dwelling unit.
Rock—
Rdaining Wan
Willow Creek Trail
A36`4091'
R•20000'
L.128.00'
CB=fl 6T50'3T'W
CH -125.83`
L
Lot 9 3S0 ` Lot 71
win
8
•
BOA 2/25/2008 CR
2. SUMMARY OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE
As represented in the Application due to a surveying or construction error, the northwest
corner of the existing garage encroaches six (6) inches into the front yard setback. The
Applicant was made aware of this issue prior to purchasing the subject lot.
3. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE
§ 9.05.03 of the Zoning Resolution outlines the criteria that must be met in order to grant
a variance. Specificlly, the granting of a variance must demonstrate the following:
(1) By reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of the
specific piece of property at the time of enactment of this Resolution; or
STAFF RESPONSE: This standard is only applicable to lots/parcels created prior to the
enactment of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. Willow Creek Village was plated in
1981 therefore, the requested variance is not in compliance with this standard.
2
BOA 2/25/2008 CR
(2) By reason of exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary and
exceptional situation or condition of such piece of property.
STAFF RESPONSE: The subject lot is relatively flat. The need for the requested variance is
not a result of the topographic conditions of the property. Staff finds that the requested
variance does not comply with this standard.
(3) That the variance granted is the minimum necessary to alleviate such
practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the owner of said property;
STAFF RESPONSE: A variance is not required to place the existing dwelling unit on the
subject property. Since a variance is not required to alleviate practical difficulties or undue
hardship upon the property owner resulting from exceptional topographic conditons or the
shape of the subject lot any variance granted would not be the "minimum nesassary". The
requested variance is not in compliance with this standard.
(4) That such relief maybe granted without substantial detriment to the public
good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the
General Plan or this Resolution;
STAFF RESPONSE: Allowing deviation from the standards identifed in the existing land use
code will set a precident for future requests. Approval of requests such as this one will only
send mix messages to developers and subcontractors throughout Garfield County. Future
developments might deliberately violate setback requirments knowing the Board's actions
would allow for this. The Applicant was aware of the existing violation at the time of
purchase. Staff, cannot recommend approval of the requested variance.
(5) That the circumstances found to constitute a hardship were not caused by
the applicant, are not due to or the result of general conditions in the district,
and cannot be practically corrected;
STAFF RESPONSE: This standard requires that the Applicant demonstrate that the
requested variance is not the result of general conditions in the zone district. Front yard
setbacks are a general conditons of the district. The requested variance is not in compliance
with this standard.
4. SUMMARY
The requested variance does not comply with the standards identified in §9.05.03 of the
Zoning Resolution. In order to grant a variance the Applicant must demonstrate to the
Board of Adjustment that the request is in compliance with these standards. Staff cannot
recommend approval of the requested variance.
3
BOA 2/25/2008 CR
5. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board
of Adjustment.
2. That the hearing before the Board of Adjustment was extensive and complete, that
all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties
were heard at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the request for a variance is not in
compliance with any of the requirements of §9.05.03 of the Garfield County Zoning
Resolution.
6. STAFF RECOMENDATION
It is the recommendation of Staff that the Board of Adjustment deny the request for a
variance allowing the deviation from the front yard setback requirement identified as a
condition of the Battlement Mesa PUD Low Density Residential Zone District.
4