HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission 2011-10-18
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission
October 18, 2011, 1:30 p.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners Ron Norris, Alan Fraundorf, John
Tucker, Betty Hull, Rex Poggenpohl, Joe Wise
Attending: Chair Klink, Commissioners Norris, Fraundorf, Poggenpohl, Tucker, Wise,
and Hull
Also Attending: Director Chilcott, Town Planner Shirk, Town Attorney White, and
Recording Secretary Thompson
Absent: Town Board Liaison Elrod
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological
sequence.
Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There was one person in attendance.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes, September 20, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting.
B. Lot Consolidation of Lots 2 & 3, Niebur Exemption Plat, 1719 & 1723 Mills Road;
Charles Santagati, Owner/Applicant. Request to combine two lots of record into one
lot.
It was moved and seconded (Fraundorf/Hull) to approve the consent agenda as
presented, and the motion passed unanimously.
3. CHANGE IN MEETING TIME FOR NOVEMBER MEETING
Director Chilcott announced the Triangle meeting will be held November 15, 2011, which
is the usual meeting date for the Planning Commission. It was discussed in the study
session to hold the regular Planning Commission meeting at 11:30 a.m., with a break prior
to the 2:00 p.m. start of the Triangle Meeting. No study session will be scheduled.
It was moved and seconded (Poggenpohl/Norris) to change the meeting time for the
November, 2011 meeting to 11:30, and the motion passed unanimously.
4. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 07-10B, LOT 3, SCHROEDER SUBDIVISION, THE
TIMBERS TOWNHOMES PROJECT
Director Chilcott stated the applicant had requested a continuance to the next meeting.
Celine LeBeau/Project manager, requested that a revision to the amended development
plan be added as a condition of approval rather than continuing the application to the next
meeting.
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant requested to amend an approved
development plan, subdivide the property into townhome lots, and submit a request for a
preliminary townhome map. The development plan was approved in 2007, three units
have been constructed along the street, and three units on the southern property line are
currently under construction. The amendment would include replacing the approved tri-
plex condominium unit (airspace ownership) with a townhome duplex unit (land
ownership). Preliminary plat recommendation would be from the Planning Commission to
the Town Board. A final plat would be submitted to the Town Board for review. Planner
Shirk stated there were no significant issues with the plat.
Focusing on the amended development plan, Planner Shirk stated there were some lots
(4, 5, 6, 10 and 11) that would exceed the 80% maximum lot coverage requirement.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
October 18, 2011
Planner Shirk stated this was a consequence created by the conversion of condominiums
to townhomes.
Planner Shirk stated the original site plan accounted for a drainage swale and stormwater
facilities in an outlot. He stated the overall lot coverage complies, and the applicant was
asking for leniency on the non-compliant subdivision lots. Staff recommended approval of
the revised lot coverage.
Planner Shirk stated staff recommended disapproval of the amendment to the
development plan, primarily due to the parking configuration. A standard parking space is
20 feet deep, and one of the proposed spaces would not allow that depth. Staff
recommended eliminating the parking space altogether. With this space eliminated, the
applicant would still be in compliance with the minimum number of guest parking spaces
available.
Planner Shirk stated the bigger issue was the driveway to one of the townhomes that
would be placed in the setback and utility easement. The development plan approval
allows this with neighbor approval. This particular driveway would not affect the public
street; however, the turning radius for the driveway would be 7.5 feet, when the smallest
public road standard has a minimum radius of 20 feet. The Public works department
recommended increasing the turning radius. Planner Shirk stated Appendix D.III.B.1 of
the Estes Valley Development Code states “safe, convenient and adequate access to
individual buildings by driveways shall be provided.” Staff suggested the proposed
driveway layout did not provide safe and convenient access.
Staff recommended disapproval of the amended development plan and recommended
approval of the preliminary townhome plat with the conditions listed below.
Public Comment
Discussion occurred with Mark Theiss/property owner about the continuance of the
amended development plan to the next meeting. Mr. Theiss suggested approving the
amended development plan with a condition of approval to revise the entrance to the
garage, placing it underneath the townhome with a straight in entrance, eliminating the
curve. Mr. Theiss stated property owners favor main-level living, and he would prefer to
provide a parking area in the location of the originally proposed driveway, close to the
front door of the dwelling. If allowed, the turn radius would not be an issue without a
garage. The timeframe was important to Mr. Theiss. Planner Shirk stated staff would need
to see the revised plat prior to approval.
Celine LeBeau/project manager presented a possible revision to the amended
development plan. Keeping the parking behind the unit and changing the turning radius to
a 14 foot interior radius, which she said should be sufficient for a truck. Planner Shirk had
concerns about placing the driveway in the setback and utility easement, but stated it
would comply with the code requirement for safe, convenient access. It was mentioned
the driveway would be very close to Unit 9. Ms. LeBeau stated she could probably shift it
away from the unit. Planner Shirk stated there is a three-foot separation requiremenb
between property lines.
Director Chilcott stated it was difficult for staff to review a proposed plan on the fly. She
understood that the Planning Commission was comfortable with approving the amended
development plan with revisions discussed at the meeting. She suggested staff could
meet with the applicant and approve the final revisions.
Staff was comfortable with the Planning Commission recommending approval with
conditions for the revised plan. Staff would require a review of the revised plan before
moving forward to the Town Board. Staff and the applicant could work this out.
Public comment
Mark Theiss expressed confusion about meeting dates for approvals. Town Attorney
White explained the process, stating the preliminary townhome plat could not move
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 3
October 18, 2011
forward to the Town Board until the amended development plan was approved. Mr.
Theiss requested a meeting with staff as soon as possible to determine deadline dates
and Town Board meeting dates.
It was moved and seconded (Tucker/Poggenpohl) to give staff final authority to
approve the Amended Development Plan 07-10B with the findings and conditions
recommended by staff; with the timing sufficient to be heard by the Town Board on
November 8, 2011; and to approve the preliminary townhome plat, and the motion
passed unanimously.
5. AMENDMENT TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING
ALTERATION/EXTENSION OF NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES
Director Chilcott reviewed the staff report. It was proposed at a previous meeting to
address a small portion of the discussion about existing ADUs. The proposed amendment
drafted by staff would allow for the interior of an existing legal nonconforming accessory
dwelling unit to be changed without expanding the amount of living space, changing the
footprint of the unit, or moving the building. The proposed amendment would not allow for
expansion of living space into the garage, if there was one, and would not allow
expansion up or out of the existing unit. Examples would be: modernization of a kitchen
by adding a dishwasher, adding a laundry facility, changing interior wall locations, etc.
Director Chilcott stated the proposed amendment would add to Section 6.4 Change of
Nonconforming Use, Item C “A nonconforming accessory dwelling unit may be altered
provided the alteration does not enlarge or move the building (See §13.3.13 Alter or
Alteration). “ Staff recommended continuance of this item to the next meeting, based on
feedback at the study session. Study session discussion included comments about
specific language for not enlarging the accessory dwelling unit rather than the building in
general; and to review the language concerning the moving of the building. Director
Chilcott stated the intent of Chapter Six was to eventually amortize the structures out of
the community. The reality of the situation with accessory dwelling units is that people see
value in them and want to modernize them. The proposed amendment would allow
improvements and discourage property owners to make improvements without obtaining
building permits, potentially sacrificing building safety. While the theory is that
nonconforming uses and structures will eventually go away, there are cases where we do
want to allow property owners more flexibility other than basic repair and maintenance.
Director Chilcott clarified that an improvement to convert an existing deck to enclosed
living space would not be allowed; the change would need to be fully contained within the
existing interior of the structure.
Public Comment
Johanna Darden/Town resident was satisfied with the proposed code amendment. She
pointed out that current nonconforming accessory dwellings can be repaired and
maintained, eliminating safety concerns.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Hull) to continue the proposed amendment
regarding alteration/extension of nonconforming uses and structures to the next
regularly scheduled meeting, and the motion passed unanimously.
6. TRIANGLE MEETING AGENDA
Director Chilcott stated the triangle meeting will include a time for public comment. The
meeting format has been revised from past meetings by including staff reports to the
members. Meeting packets will be distributed to the Planning Commission and both
Boards prior to the meeting. The packet will also be available on the Town website for
public viewing. The information in the packet will allow time for thought about the different
issues prior to the meeting.
Director Chilcott stated the agenda would be presented to the County Commission and
Town Board. Staff reports would provide more detail about code amendments and other
issues to help facilitate a productive meeting. She thought it would also be helpful to
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
October 18, 2011
determine if the process for code amendments and other issues was working efficiently
(e.g. problem statements).
Public Comment
Johanna Darden/Town resident expressed her frustration about getting her ideas for code
amendments in front of the Planning Commission, County Commission, and Town Board.
She would appreciate a clear procedure to guide a citizen on initiating a problem
statement. Town Attorney White stated there is a process, where the citizen converses
with a Town Trustee who could sponsor the item if he/she chose to do so. Ms. Darden
gave the example of a definition for open space or wildlife that she hoped would be
considered for the comprehensive plan. Comments from the Commissioners were
supportive of making it easier for the public to bring issues forward. Director Chilcott
stated she would be willing to meet with Ms. Darden to review her comments and come
up with a plan to report back to the Planning Commission.
7. REPORTS
Director Chilcott report the Problem Statement for Accessory Dwelling Units will be
presented to the County Commission and the Town Board on October 24th and 25th,
respectively.
Director Chilcott reported on a pre-application meeting for the Telemark property on
Moraine Avenue adjacent to Park River West. Currently, the property has older units at
the back of the property. The developer is proposing to build multi-family residential units
that could be used for short-term rentals.
Director Chilcott reported there was a pre-application meeting with a developer wanting to
develop the lot behind Nicky’s and adjacent to Streamside Condominiums.
Director Chilcott reported there have been no updates on the Elkhorn Lodge proposals.
There has been some discussion, but no submittals. The developer was considering
asking for a request to waive the development plan associated with the
annexation/rezoning request. The code requires that development plan be tied to the
rezoning portion of the application. A waiver could be granted if the development code is
followed for the waiver process. Staff will continue to keep the Planning Commission
updated on this project.
Director Chilcott reported the rezoning of the Witt property on West Elkhorn was approved
by the Town Board. In addition, an Amended Condominium Map for East Riverwalk
Center Condominiums was approved, which allows space for an outdoor patio for the
Time Out Sports Bar. A Supplemental Condominium Map for Park River West was also
approved by the Town Board.
The code amendment for RLUIPA and Private Schools was approved by the County
Commissioners on October 17, 2011.
There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 2:37 p.m.
___________________________________
Doug Klink, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary