Loading...
PZC Packet 0803934 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION August 3, 1993 Page 1 Lot 84, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Front Yard Setback Variance Public Hearing INTRODUCTION: Mark Donaldson, on behalf of Michael Beltracchi, is requesting a front yard variance for Lot 84, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. The applicant is requesting 15 feet of relief from the 25 foot setback requirement. The applicant states that extraordinary slopes at the street side of this lot present a hardship to the required setbacks. The road elevation is 8670 feet, the elevation at the required 25 foot setback is 8652, a drop of 18 feet. The actual slope from asphalt edge to setback line is 47%. The average slope across the lot, behind the setback line is just over 30%. The front 25 feet of this lot is impacted by the cut and fill necessary to build the roadway. STAFF COMMENTS: Before acting on a variance application, the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: Section 17.36.40 Approval Criteria: A. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity; Staff Response: The proposed use of this property is residential and this use is compatible with existing properties in the neighborhood. The variance will allow the property to be developed with a lesser amount of site disturbance. B. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement's of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege: Staff Response: The applicant has attempted to find a reasonable balance between the setback requirement and the construction hardships and disturbance required to build on this lot. Staff feels that topography is a legitimate physical hardship. to STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING CONBUSSION August 3, 1993 Page 2 • Lot 84, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Front Yard Setba ;k Variance i Public Hearing C. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety; Staff Response: There is 24 feet from the edge of asphalt to the garage door, which will allow extra parking to occur without interfering with travel or snow removal operations. FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 17.36.50 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance. A. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant cf special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. B. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. C. that the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: i. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty os unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; H. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity; iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. 00ON,-, STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION August 3, 1993 Page 3 Lot 84, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Front Yard Setback Variance Public Hearing STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS: Staff recommendation is for approval. Lot 84 is extremely steep and conformance with the setback regulations would result in undue hardship. The applicant has designed the residencelgarage to allow guest parking that will not interfere with the public road. This request is similar to other variances which have received approval within this subdivision. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Respectfully submitted IL(jLW4j Rick Pylman 10 I& I& ofA%V'� August 3, 1993 Page 4 Lot 84, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Front Yard setback Variance Public Hearing PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted (W Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions () Continued ('j Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date 83 3 Sue Railton, Secretary The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance. A. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special in eensi stent with the limitations on othei piope, tics in the vicinity. B. That the granting of the varinace will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially i-ijurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. C. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: ric or literai interpretation and en orcemen of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship incon- 5zis;tAnt with the objest-ives of this title; II. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicintiy; III. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the spe- - owners of other properties in the vicinity. ��enjoyed by the • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 20. 1993 Lot 84, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Beltracchi Residence Final Design Review PROJECT TYPE: Final Design Review ZONING: PUD PUD Duplex COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES, see acco. var. SITE PLAN: Average slope of lot. Max. slope of driveway. Lot coverage. Driveway is paved. Parking provided is adequate. Snow storage is adequate. Grading plan is adequate. Landscape plan is adequate. Plant sizes meet criteria. Meters are on building. Meets setback requirements. 30% Flat 10% Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes See Variance Request Other site plan issues Utility lines utilize side lot easement. BUILDING: Habitable Space. Maximum Height. Roof Form. Roofing Walls, Dominant Walls, Other Fascia Soffits Windows/Trim Doors/Trim Other Building Issues: 2590 Square feet 33 Ft. Gable with dormers MATERIAL COLOR Timberline Asphalt Weathered Wood Hardboarc Nantucket Gray Stucco Warm Beige 2x4/2x8 Berkshire Blue Plywood Warm Beige 1x4 Berkshire Blue 1x4 Berkshire Blue r. PLANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION STAFF REPORT EM August 3, 1993 • Lot 84; Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision Beltracchi Residence Final Design Review .r STAFF COMMENTS OR CONCERNS: Planning and Zoning Commission concerns at the Conceptual Review were focused on the rear elevation (south) of the garage. See elevation for revised treatment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval based upon satisfactory resolution of south elevation concerns expressed at Conceptual Review. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, - -W �I� WAJ Rick Pylman s 0 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT August 3, 1993 Lot 84, Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision Belracchi Residence Final Design Review PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted (e) Approved with recommended conditions (� Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date rJ 3 " 3 Sue Railton, Secretary 1. The archtays o •. aid -solid i u 2. The cantilever remain 3. An awning window be placed into the cantilever portion of the garage. 4. A matching window on the east elevation be installed on the same level as the existing window. 5. These changes be reviewed by staff before building permit is issued. l• PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT August 3, 1993 Lot 42/43, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Beaver Creek West, Design Changes, Final Design Review On July 6 of this year a request to change out the balcony railings on a portion of Phase 1, Beaver Creek West was tabled due to a lack of understanding of the overall project goals. Beaver Creek West has submitted additional information and is requesting approval of the railing change. The buildings are being repainted the same cclor as they now display, a beige body with blue trim. Samples will be presented at the meeting. The balcony change request is to replace the existing solid wall balcony fronts and sides with a black metal railing. The 42 inch high railing would consist of I inch square metal top and bottom rails and 1/2 inch square metal pickets on 4 inch centers. The change is requested to facilitate a more transparent look. Staff recommendation is for approval. Respectfully submitted, itr 7 `/ I-vvt4-i Rick Pylman Lot 42/43, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek ONBeaver Creek West Design Changes, Final Design Review J- PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions (✓) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date Sue Railton, SecretaryGc�-- The color to be used on the railings would be Foux Marble. PLANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION STAFF REPORT August 3, 1993 Lots 69, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Brethauer Single Family Residence Final Design Review, Re -Submittal of Conditions The Planning and Zoning Commission granted Design Review, with conditions, to the Brethauer Residence on July 6, 1993. One condition required a review of the retaining wall sections. The architect has drawn sections for review. As a re -submittal of a previous condition, staff has no formal recommendation. Respectfully submitted, Kt �ubYLW-` Rick Pylman Lot 69, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Brethauer Single Family Residence Final Design Review, Re -Submittal of Conditions PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions (4 Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued (./� Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date -93A3 Sue Railton, Secretary '4444 1 Within the next mnnth the apnlirant rc cihmit a rayicad enuth retainage wall which meets all criteria of the Town as far as designed by the engineer. revised landscape plan be in-c-Fu-die-d—w-iTF the above for this south wall. PLANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION STAFF REPORT August 3, 1993 Lots 8, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Simon Residence Conceptual Design Review This is a very Conceptual Design Review submittal for a single family home on Lot 8, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. Lot 8 is located on the uphill side of Wildridge Road and slopes up away from the road at a 35% grade. The driveway approach is a 10% grade right off the road, flattening through 7% to a relatively flat parking and maneuvering area, adjacent to the garage. An extensive retaining wall system is utilized to present a building site. The building utilizes a hip roof form with a 6/12 pitch. The building will be finished with shake shingles, stucco and lx8 lap and gap rough sawn siding. As a Conceptual Review the Staff has no formal recommendation. One concern is the driveway grade at the road connection. Staff requests a maximum grade of 41/a for the first 20 feet of driveway. Respectfully submitted, Rick Pylman Vo to Lot 8, Block Wildridge Subdivision Simon Residence M Conceptual Design Review LDJ■ PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( .111� Date RIS 3 Sue Railton, Secretary Suqqestions made: i. The driveway grace needs to be reviewed, with attention to .the grade as it enters the pub! i(; T iYht-Uf-WdY ? Tha cidinn and gturcn_di£fexeritiatinn—hetween thole ma#.a..ria.Ls._needs to be clearly indicated. colored elevation needs to be submitted, with the major stree front in color. 4. All of the retaining wall finishes need to be detailed and delineated clearly; whereas, what is the material of the retaining wall, if that wall makes a transition to another building wall, etc.. 5. Color and material samples of all of the material need to be presented. 6. Detailed set of architectural drawings need to be presented.