Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.08 Reponse to Review Criteria RESPONSE TO REVIEW CRITERIA IN SECTION 4-115(C) 1. Special Circumstances or Conditions Exist. One or more of the following circumstances or conditions exist with respect to the specific property: a. Exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of the property at the time of the enactment of the regulation in question; b. Exceptional topographic conditions of the property; c. Other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions of the property. RESPONSE: Special circumstances exist in accordance with (a) and (b) with respect to the property. (a) The size of the property (0.36 acres) and location with respect to the road make the required 25’ front yard setback very difficult to achieve when improving the property. Considering that Garfield County regulations are intended for large, rural properties, applying these to a relatively dense subdivision with small property sizes seems unsuitable. Also, many of the neighboring properties in the subdivision contain existing structures which do not conform to the current setback requirements, for both auxiliary structures and main residences. (b) The lot slopes steeply to the west away from the road. The front yard is the only relatively level area from which to access and build the proposed structure addition. All areas west of the fence located north of the house, the existing rock wall east of the house, and the existing timber retaining wall at the west edge of the parking area are inaccessible and much steeper than 20% slope, therefore requiring additional engineering for structures and excessive earthwork to establish accessibility. 2. Not a Result of the Actions of Applicant. The special circumstances and conditions have not resulted from any act of the Applicant. RESPONSE: This criteria is met for this property because the property remains unaltered since purchase by the current owners/applicants. Also, this application is being submitted prior to any construction within the current required setback. Several variance requests have been granted for other projects in the subdivision and one was recently granted for another property, where a house was constructed within the setbacks on two sides of the property prior to the variance request being submitted. 3. Strict Application Consequence. Because of the special circumstances and conditions found pursuant to section 4-115.C.1., the strict application of the regulation would result in peculiar and exceptional, practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship on, the owner of the property. RESPONSE: This criteria is met because strict application of the regulation would prevent the owners from constructing a shop area. Also, the owners would be held to a more restrictive standard than has historically been enforced in Elk Creek Subdivision, noting the abundance of existing nonconformities as well as variances granted due to similar circumstances. 4. Variance is Necessary for Relief. The granting of the variance from the strict application of the provisions set forth in this Code is necessary to relieve the owner of the peculiar and exceptional, practical difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship. RESPONSE: This criteria is met because the granting of this variance is necessary to allow the owners to add a shop space and additional storage, built in accordance with all applicable building codes, in order to maintain a clean, respectable property which is an asset to the community. 5. Not Detrimental to the Public Good. Granting the variance will not cause substantial detriment to the public good. RESPONSE: This criteria is met because allowing the owners to create an additional shop and storage area will prevent the need to store items outside in public view and support projects which will enhance the property in the future. Many neighboring property owners have been spoken to and have expressed support for the applicants constructing this structure in the proposed location. The granting of this variance and the subsequent construction of the shop expansion will not cause substantial detriment to the public good as it will not impede anyone’s views or encroach on neighbors’ accessibility to their properties. 6. Variance Will Not Impair the County’s Zoning. Granting the variance will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of this Code. RESPONSE: This criteria is met because the intent and purpose of this code is based on rural communities with larger lot sizes and expansive level areas on which to build homes and auxiliary structures. Applying a 25’ building setback to a steep 0.36 acre lot severely limits property improvements. With consideration of both the multitude of structures in Elk Creek Subdivision which are not in compliance with current setback requirements and the many approvals of setback requests within this subdivision, granting this variance request will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the County’s Zoning Code.