Planning commission approves stream-buffer variance so petitioner can build on Lot 25

The Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to approve variance VR25028, a request to waive strict stream‑buffer requirements for Lot 25 in a preexisting subdivision, allowing construction of a single‑family home on the parcel.

The variance was requested by petitioner Robert Duffy of the Rawls Company. Duffy told the commission, "We have submitted, plans or application for plans and they were denied because of a screen buffer variance." He said the petitioner plans "to put a single family home on this lot that is a very similar sizes to the 2 adjoining properties as well as the ones behind it." Commissioner Jeffrey Sprawl moved to approve the variance; Commissioner Sparks seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

Staff described the application as accompanied by an analysis from a third‑party stormwater consultant the county uses for variance cases. That consultant—referred to in the record—recommended granting the variance but included a condition suggesting that outfall locations for Lots 19 and 27 be surveyed to better establish the location of the stream. Commissioners questioned the applicability of a condition tied to Lots 19 and 27 because the variance before them covered only Lot 25. During the hearing, Duffy confirmed that his client owns Lots 19 and 27 and that a building permit had already been issued for Lot 27.

Commissioners and staff also noted that the original subdivision platting predates the county's current stormwater requirements; the petitioner said the subdivision approval dates to "02/2002," and staff advised the commission to take the intervening adoption of stormwater codes into account when weighing hardship claims.

No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition during the allotted comment periods. After discussion, the commission chose to approve VR25028 as presented. Per the commission's standard process, its recommendation will be forwarded to the Jefferson County Council for final action under county ordinance procedures.

The file record for this case includes the county master plan, the Jefferson County Code of Ordinances (Chapter 400, the Unified Development Ordinance), and the planning division staff report entered into the record as exhibits.