CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE:
August 2, 2016
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
846 D Street Appeal – An appeal of a decision rendered by the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding a Limited Impact application for Multiple Principal Structures at 846 D Street.
PRESENTED BY:
Danielle Campbell, Community Development Intern
APPLICANT: The owners of the property at 846 D Street and applicant for the original application and filing of the appeal is Dan Slous, 908 D Street, Salida, CO 81201. REQUEST: The owner has requested an appeal of a decision made by the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 27, 2016. As described in Table 16-A of the Salida Municipal Code (“SMC”), the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. The process for an appeal hearing is described in Section 16-2-60(e) of the SMC: (e) Appeal Hearing.
(1) Evidence. Formal Rules of Evidence shall not be followed during hearings. The chairman shall have the power to decide what evidence is material to the appeal. Written documents presented at the hearing shall be made part of the record, and public testimony shall be taken if the appeal required public notice. The burden of persuasion on appeal shall rest with the appellant. (2) Basis of a Decision. Review of the land use decision being appealed shall be limited to the record established before and relied upon by the designated decision making body. An appealing body shall not have the authority to override the provisions of this Land Use Code. Any decision shall include a basis for the decision and cite specific sections of this Code. (3) Recording. Audio recordings of the hearing shall be necessary. A written summary of the audio recording shall be made in a timely fashion following the hearing. Whenever a written verbatim transcript of such recording is requested by the appellant or when a transcript is furnished by the City pursuant to court order, the cost of preparing the transcript shall be borne in full by the appellant.
Page 1 of 3
(4) Notice of Decision. The appropriate appealing body shall hear all relevant evidence, and within a reasonable time and in no event more than fifteen (15) days thereafter, shall render its decision. The appealing body may reverse, modify or confirm the order, decision or interpretation. All decisions on appeal shall be reduced to writing, contain a concise listing of facts and reasons supporting the same and shall be promptly mailed by regular mail to the appellant.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on June 27, 2016 to review the application of the owner for a second primary structure on the property of 846 D Street. The Commission approved the application subject to 4 conditions. The applicant is appealing the second and fourth condition regarding the side setbacks on 9 th Street and the demolishing of the existing, nonconforming, detached garage: 2. The applicant will be required to demolish the detached garage before constructing the second principal structure 4. The setback on 9th Street for the new structure shall not exceed the site line of the primary structure +/- five (5) feet. The applicant would like the City Council to modify conditions 2 and 4 of the decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The request is for a modification that would allow the demolition of the addition of the garage instead of the entirety. On their original application the applicant stated to only demolish the addition to the garage, however, staff created the condition to demolish the entire garage. Additionally, they would agree to have an 8 foot side setback from 9th Street and create an additional condition for the front door of the second primary structure to be oriented to either D Street or the alley which would be set off by a porch area. The appeal request, original application, staff report, decision letter and minutes from the June 27th meeting have been included with this cover memo. SCOPE OF THE APPEAL: The appeal application indicates that the owners would like to appeal the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Within the Land Use Code Multiple Principal Structures are required to meet the following standards: 1. Scale. The entire site, including all proposed structures, shall be of a scale that is compatible with the surrounding and nearby properties. Scale shall mean the proportional relationship of the principal buildings to each other and to the neighborhood, including but not limited to height, mass, setbacks and orientation. 2. Parking and Access. Required parking shall be provided on the site for all buildings and uses on the site. Access should be consolidated to reduce curb cuts and shall be provided through alleys where available.
Page 2 of 3
3. Provision of Adequate Services. Each principal structure shall have its own municipal services, including water and sewer, in accordance with Chapter 13, Municipal Utilities, of this Code. The Planning and Zoning Commission has enacted their authority for the conditions based on the above standards for Multiple Principal Structures. The Commission created the second and fourth condition with the purpose to have the proposed second primary building to be consistent with the existing primary structure and for the property to be homogenous with the surrounding neighborhood. The Commissioners’ intent of the second condition was to create conformity of all existing structures on the property, because the detached garage does not currently follow accessory structure setbacks in the medium residential (R-2) zone district. Furthermore, the intent of the fourth condition addressed the Commissioners’ concern of establishing a similar look for the property by creating close to the same setbacks of the existing house for constancy purposes. The applicants turned in the appeal application on July 11, 2016, based upon the above conditions. Staff and the applicant scheduled a meeting to discuss the appeal and issues of the applicants’. The applicant responded with the following modifications to satisfy the concerns of the Commissioners’ and Staff. The applicants’ request the second condition be eliminated and that only the addition to the garage will be demolished. The fourth condition would be modified to create an 8 foot side setback from 9th Street and the front entrance would not face 9th Street. The entrance would be oriented to either D Street or the alley and would be set off by a porch area. The modified conditions address the majority of the Planning and Zoning Commissions concerns of disrupting the neighborhood and being consistent with the existing primary structure on the property. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Following a public hearing, a member of the City Council should make a motion to reverse, modify or confirm the June 27, 2016 decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding a Limited Impact application for Multiple Principal Structures at 846 D Street, stating the facts and reasons for supporting that decision. Attached:
846 D Street Application for the Limited Impact of Multiple Principal Structures 846 D Street Limited Impact, Multiple Principal Structures, Application Staff Report Planning Commission minutes, 6/27/16 846 D Street Letter of Decision, 07/01/16 846 D Street – Appeal Application, 07/11/16
Page 3 of 3