Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/07/2006

Home

--'.-.-------------------- Z.B. November 25,2006 - Page 3 In 1998, the previous owners of Pice me's land platted the area and created eight frontage lots along Skunk Hill Road. They retained one 20-acre parcel, and had appeared before the zoning board to request a variance from the front- age requirements to build a house. The zoning board had granted a dimensional variance with the condition that there would be only one house on the parcel. A deed restriction was not imposed, but conditional language accompanied the approval. Ultimately, the board denied Piceme's application, relying exclusively on the condition set forth in the earlier variance. Piceme sued. DECISION: Judgment in favor of Pic erne. The previous owner never applied to the board for subdivision approval, but was content to obtain a dimensional variance from the zoning board, limit- ing the use of the parcel to a single dwelling. Piceme, however, applied to the platting board for s~bdivision approval, a matter that had not and could not be adjudicated by the zoning board in 1998, because a zoning board of review had no authority to divide or regulate the subdivision of land. Essentially, the platting board misapplied the doctrine of administrative fm~ty. That doctrine provided that a zoning board, when considering a subse- quent application for substantially similar relief, was without power to reverse its prior decision - absent a material change in circumstances. In 1998, the zoning board considered an application for a dimensional vari- . ance. Ultimately, the very nature of the relief requested distinguished Piceme' s requested subdivision approval materially from the prior request for a dimen- sional variance. see also: Noonan v. Zoning Bd. of Review, 159 A.2d 606 (1960). Settlement - Neighbor wants settlement decision to apply to him as well Cqunty claims decision has nothing to do with him Citation: Nichols v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of La -Plata, U.S. Dist. Court for the District of Colorado, No. 04-cv-01387- WYD- MER (2006) COLORADO (09/25/06) - Nichols wanted to build a pond or lake on his ranch and sell the soil removed during construction. After being advised that a gravel or topsoil business would not be allowed within the zoning district, Nichols applied for a special use permit. A permit was then issued, with several restrictions. After several months, Nichols wanted to modify the plan. While Nichols' operating conditions had not changed, he wanted Simil~I conditions to those that had been negotiated with the county by his neighbor, VanDenBerg, who @ 2006 Quinlan Publishing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048. , I , i 1 I , \75