Jefferson County board approves smaller home addition and side-setback but denies large garage expansion in Evergreen

The Jefferson County Board of Adjustment on Wednesday approved two variances and one setback reduction for a property at 7217 South Brook Forest Road in Evergreen but denied two requests to legalize and expand a large detached garage.

The decisions affect a 0.92-acre parcel zoned Mountain Residential 1 where the owner sought five separate variances: legalization of an existing accessory structure of 1,392 square feet (where 703 is allowed), legalization of a rear setback of 18.7 feet (20 feet required), a reduced west side setback for a house addition to 12.5 feet (20 required), authorization of accessory square footage totaling 1,896 square feet (existing plus proposed, where 1,124 is the code maximum), and an accessory-structure footprint of 1,200 square feet (685 allowed).

Jamie Hartig, staff planner for Jefferson County Planning and Zoning, told the board that staff found the first three requests — legalizing the existing accessory area, legalizing the 18.7-foot rear setback, and the 12.5-foot side setback for the proposed addition — met the variance criteria in the zoning resolution, citing topography and preexisting conditions. Hartig said staff did not find an “exceptional practical difficulty or hardship” to justify the two larger accessory-structure requests and recommended approval of requests 1–3 and denial of requests 4–5.

Applicant Steven Riggett said the primary house is small and that the addition would provide needed living space. Riggett said he built the existing garage with contractor friends and that his landscaping and stone business, Brook Forest Stone and Landscaping, stores tools and equipment off-site but uses the property for equipment storage; he told the board, "This garage addition would really help me kind of contain everything in that one area." Riggett also said the existing detached garage predated the county rule that limits accessory footprint to 75% of the primary dwelling footprint.

Board members debated alternatives, including attaching the garage to the primary structure (which staff said requires wall, roof and foundation attachment to be counted as primary), and whether the requested accessory area exceeded what is reasonable for a residential lot. Several board members said they understood the desire to consolidate tools and equipment but agreed with staff that requests 4 and 5 would conflict with the intent of the zoning resolution.

The board approved a motion (moved by Commissioner Johnson; seconded by Commissioner Milovic) to grant requests 1 and 2 — legalizing the existing 1,392-square-foot accessory area and the 18.7-foot rear setback — subject to conditions in the staff report (substantial conformance with site plan, property merger within one year, and building permit within one year). A separate motion to approve request 3 (the 12.5-foot side setback for the house addition) passed unanimously. A motion to approve requests 4 and 5 (the larger accessory square footage and 1,200-square-foot footprint) failed on a 4–1 vote (Warrington aye; Milovic, Porter, Johnson, Lester no).

The board’s conditions require a property merger and issuance of building permits within one year if any approved additions are constructed. Staff advised the applicant to work with the planner for next steps after the decision.

The case record notes steep site slopes (staff reported 10%–50% slopes on the parcel), that the existing garage predates the accessory-structure size standard, and that no public commenters spoke in opposition. The board split its decisions to approve relief closely tied to preexisting conditions and topography while denying relief that would create a substantially larger accessory building than the resolution allows.

The applicant may proceed with the approved house addition and setback relief under the stated conditions; the denied requests require the applicant to rework plans or pursue alternative options with staff.