HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Planning Commission 2017-02-21Prepared: February 1, 2017
• Revised:
STUDY SESSION AGENDA
ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
11:30 a.m.
Room 202
11:30 Lunch
11:35 Action Minutes Update (5) Director Hunt
11:40 Cloud Nine Minor Subdivision & Preliminary Plat (10) Planner McCool
11:50 EVDC Amendments (35) Director Hunt
12:25 Discussion regarding possible EVDC amendment for
height limits (30)
Planner McCool
12:55 Comprehensive Plan Modernization Update (20) Commissioner Hull
1:15 Adjourn Chair Moon
Informal discussion among Commissioners concerning agenda items or other Town matters may
occur before this meeting at approximately 11:15 a.m. The public is welcome to attend study
sessions; however, public comment will not be accepted. Times are approximate.
Prepared: February 7, 2017
* Revised:
AGENDA
ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
February 21, 2017
1:30 p.m. Board Room, Town Hall
1. OPEN MEETING
Planning Commissioner Introductions
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
The EVPC will accept public comments regarding items not on the agenda. Comments should not
exceed three minutes.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes of January 17, 2017
4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2016-08, DOLLAR GENERAL, LOT 31, AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 32-35,
AND PORTIONS OF LOTS 1, 31, & 37, WHITE MEADOW VIEW PLACE, LESS 2000032927, 455
STANLEY AVENUE
Staff request to continue to March 21, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. Public comment will
be accepted.
5. CLOUD NINE MINOR SUBDIVISION, METES & BOUNDS PARCEL LOCATED AT 1595 FISH
HATCHERY ROAD
Owners: Kathleen Gagliano & Karen Cherman
Applicant: Kathleen Gagliano & Karen Cherman
Request: Subdivide one 3.13 acre parcel into four lots of record, one of which contains
an existing single-family dwelling
Staff: Audem Gonzales
6. AMENDMENT TO ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS RELATED TO
VACATION HOMES
A proposed amendment to EVDC §5.1.B regarding the Planning Commission procedure
and required findings for residential vacation homes.
7. AMENDMENT TO ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS RELATED TO
ACCESSORY KITCHENS
A proposed amendment to EVDC §4.3.D.5, §5.2.B.2.f, §13.3.130 & §13.3.130.1
regarding the removal of accessory kitchens as a permanent accessory use.
8. REPORTS
A. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
1. Dollar General Variance — Continued to March 7, 2017
B. Estes Park Town Board
1. Fall River Estates Rezoning — Approved January 24, 2017
2. Beaver Point Heights Rezoning — Approved January 24, 2017
3. Supplemental Condominium Map #5, The Meadow Condominiums — Approved
February 14, 2017
C. Larimer County Board of Commissioners
1. Prendergast Resubdivision — Approved January 17, 2017
D. Community Development Update
1. Downtown Plan Update
2. Hydrology Report Update
E. Other
9. ADJOURN
The Estes Valley Planning Commission reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda
was prepared.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 17, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Michael Moon, Vice-Chair Russ Schneider, Commissioners Betty Hull, Doug
Klink, Steve Murphree, Sharry White, one vacant position
Attending: Chair Moon, Commissioners Schneider, Hull, Klink, Murphree, and White
Also Attending: Community Development Director Randy Hunt, Planner Audem Gonzales,
Planner Carrie McCool, and Recording Secretary Karen Thompson
Absent: Town Board Liaison Ron Norris, County Liaison Michael Whitley
Chair Moon called the meeting to order at 1:3 p.m. There were six people in attendance.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
Paul Brown and Tim Hull, local residents, presented information regarding tiny houses. Mr.
Brown stated he would like to have a discussion with the Planning Commissioners and staff at a
future study session.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes, December 20, 2016 Planning Commission meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Schneider/Murphree) to approve the consent item as
presented and the motion passed 5-0 with one vacancy, and Commissioner White
abstaining.
B. Request to continue Development Plan 2016-08, Dollar General, to the February Planning
Commission meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Klink/White) to approve the consent item as presented and
the motion passed 6-0 with one vacancy.
3. REZONING REQUEST, LOT 35, GRAND ESTATES SUBDIVISION, 507 Grand Estates Drive
Planner McCool was the lead planner on this project. The applicant, Equinox Community
Investment, LLC (c/o Steve Lane) requests to rezone the parcel from CO—Commercial Outlying to
RM—Multi-Family Residential. The applicant's goal is to develop workforce housing at this
location. Planner McCool stated the requirement of a development plan was waived at this time
due to the small size and limited complexity associated with potential multi-family development.
The Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) allows a maximum of eight (8) dwelling units on the
site, or up to 16 units if classified as "attainable" housing. The development plan waiver applies
only to the rezoning; a development plan would still be required at the time the site layout is
determined. Planner McCool stated a legal notice was published in the local newspaper, and the
application was routed to affected agencies. Adjacent property owners were notified. Two
1
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 17, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
comments were received, one was supportive of the rezoning, and the other requested any multi-
family development be limited to eight units. Affected agencies had no significant comments at
this time, but reserved the right to comment once a development plan was submitted. Staff
supports recommending this rezoning request to the Town Board.
Staff and Commission Discussion
None.
Public Comment
Steve Lane/applicant stated he has owned the property for nine years and has explored several
opportunities for commercial use. The use for multi-family residential use is very viable.
Jim Docter/town resident agreed that multi-family use is an excellent use for the property. He
suggested limiting the number of units to eight.
It was moved and seconded (White/Hull) to recommend approval of the rezoning request to the
Estes Park Town Board with the findings of fact and conclusions of law, as recommended by
staff and the motion passed 6-0 with one vacancy.
4. REPORTS
A. Director Hunt reported on a vacation home code amendment that will be forthcoming.
B. Director Hunt provide an update on the Downtown Plan. The Steering Committee has looked
at draft sign code revisions. The Town will be looking at the sign code from Laramie Wyoming
as a possible draft for Estes Park. This could be a topic of discussion for the February Study
session.
C. Director Hunt provided a Floodplain Mapping update, stating the public meeting regarding the
hydrology study will take place late February or early March.
D. Commissioner White requested more discussion on tiny homes. There was a brief discussion
on this topic, with a comment being made regarding buy-in from the Town Trustees before
moving forward with any proposed code amendment.
E. Commissioner Hull gave a brief report regarding her research on the Estes Valley
Comprehensive Plan.
F. Chair Moon will communicate with County Commissioner Donnelly regarding the vacant
Planning Commission position.
G. Director Hunt provided an update on the process for reviewing vacation homes with
occupancies of nine or more.
H. Commissioner Schneider thanked Commissioner Hull for her service to the Planning
Commission as Chair.
2
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 17, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
There being no further business, Chair Hull adjourned the meeting at 2:38 p.m.
Michael Moon, Chair
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
3
4
EP
Staff Report
TOWN OF ESTES PAI
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
To: Estes Valley Planning Commission
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Carrie McCool, Planning Consultant
Date: February 21, 2017
RE: Discussion regarding possible EVDC amendment for Building Height
Planning Commission Objective:
Commence discussions regarding possible EVDC amendments to increase building
height limitations in the RM - Residential Multi-Family Zone District as well as simplify
the measurement of maximum building height.
Discussion regarding height limits in other zoning districts (e.g., Downtown Commercial
(CD) District) is also envisioned, although specific proposals have not been developed
at this time.
Code Amendment Objectives:
The objective of the code amendments is to revise the EVDC to facilitate successful
implementation of recent EVDC text amendments related to housing (Attainable
Housing Density Bonus and removal of minimum lot size requirements in the RM Zone
District).Those prior amendments and this proposed amendment would further efforts to
address housing demand, including attainable and workforce housing needs, in the
Valley by removing regulatory barriers to multi-family housing development.
Additionally, the code amendments include a simplified method of calculating building
height. The recommended text amendments contained in this report aim to achieve the
following benefits:
• Encourage efficient use of RM-zoned land;
• Capture the benefits of density;
• Increase housing supply and options in the Valley;
• Create diversity in housing inventory in terms of unit type, location and income
targeting; and
• Provide a simple, easy to understand method of calculating the building height in
the Valley.
Discussion:
The existing building height limitation in the RM - Residential Multi-Family zone district
is 30-feet. This is the same limit in our single-family zoning districts. Staff has been
contacted numerous times in recent months by developers who wish to propose
projects wherein they could take advantage of the density bonus, only to find that the
30-foot height limitation makes it impossible to achieve the needed density.
Additionally, Staff has received complaints for developers and the public that the current
method of measuring building height is complicated, cumbersome and often difficult to
understand.
As we move forward in considering an increase in building height in the RM Zone
District and modifying how building height is measured community-wide, it's always
helpful to review cognate regulations from similar communities. Staff has identified six
western mountain communities based on geographic, demographic, economic and
regulatory similarities with the Estes Valley. Five of the six "conventionally" regulate
building height, as we do it in the Estes Valley. The exception is Jackson, Wyoming, as
they are moving toward a contextual/form-based zoning code.
Municipal Land Use Code research and analysis was conducted using code sections
obtained from the communities' online Municipal Land Use Code. The code sections
referenced were the most up-to-date sections available and are limited to the highest
density residential (multi-family) zone districts. The Comparative Table below
includes the following information for comparison purposes:
• Zone District Classification
• Maximum Height Allowed
• Building Height Measurement
• Relevant Code Sections
Comparative Table:
Municipal Height Regulations in High Density Residential Zone Districts
Zone Height Maximum Building Height Measurement Code Section
Crested
Butte
R-4 30 ft.;
Max. exterior wall
height: 7 ft.
The highest vertical distance measured on any side
of the building. Said vertical distance on each side
shall be measured from the elevation of the natural
grade on each side of the highest point of the roof
surface on said side.
Sec. 16-4-930
Jackson,
WY
DC Base is 35'; 42 ft—
46 ft., depending on
density bonus, roof
pitch and 3-story
stepping
The height of a building or structure is the vertical
dimension measured from any point on the exterior
of the building or structure to the nearest point of
finished grade.
Div 1.7
Durango RM 39 ft.;
Maximum Plate
Height: 3 Stories
The vertical distance measured from the natural or
unimproved grade to the corresponding highest
point of the roof. The height measurement is not an
average, but applies to the vertical distance
between the grade and high point of a budding,
wherever the measurement is taken, except as
stated in Section 7-2-1-5E. Height may be
Sec. 3-2-2-8
February 21, 2017 EVPC Study Session Page 2 of 4
Zone Height Maximum Building Height Measurement Code Section
determined from either existing or finished grade, as
explained below:
1. Existing grade, where no grading is proposed;
Or
2. Finished grade, where such grade is not higher
than necessary to provide positive drainage
away from the building, with prior approval by
the Administrator for any regrading activity
required if regrading will change height
measurement.
Frisco R-H 35 ft. The vertical distance measured from any point on a
proposed or existing roof ridge to the natural grade
located directly below said roof point, excluding
chimneys, steeples, cupolas, turrets, clock towers
and similar rooftop decorative elements of
reasonable, balanced proportions. The building
height is thus measured parallel to the existing
grade in any direction
Sec. 180-12
Truckee,
CA
RM 35 ft. or 31/2 stories,
whichever is less.
The height limit for buildings and structures shall be
measured as the vertical distance from the highest
point of the structure to the average of the highest
and lowest points where the exterior walls touch the
natural grade.
18.08.040
Steamboat
Springs
MF 57 ft.;
Average Plate
height 35'
The maximum distance, measured vertically plumb,
from the highest point of a roof, directly above that
point of grade. Grade shall be from existing grade,
or as specified during the development review
process and indicated on a final grading plan as
part of a final development plan or final plat.
Sec. 26-132
*Jackson uses a contextual/form-based zoning code.
Only one community (Crested Butte) has a 30-foot height limitation similar to Estes
Park. Two communities (Frisco and Truckee, California) have a 35-foot height.
Durango, Steamboat Springs and Jackson, Wyoming allow significantly taller buildings
in their multi-family residential zone districts. All three of these communities are in the
process or have made significant efforts to attract affordable housing in their
communities. Durango and Steamboat Springs are working alongside their public and
private partners to provide for affordable artist housing and are targeting efforts to
attract creatives to their communities.
All six communities have rather straight forward rules of measurement. The proposed
amendment to Sec. 1.9.E.1 Rules of Measurement (See Exhibit A) includes a simple
approach in determining building height that utilizes an average between the
February 21, 2017 EVPC Study Session Page 3 of 4
preconstruction grade (lowest elevation) and the highest point with a mid average. This
average can be easily calculated by the following method:
Average the point where the building meets the ground at the
lowest and highest USGS datum elevations and average those
two points. Average the roof eave USGS datum point with the
highest point of the roof USGS datum point. Measure the
distance between those two points.
Lastly, the definition of Finished Grade has been clarified for consistency with the
above-referenced measurement of maximum building height.
Proposal:
Amend the Estes Valley Development Code as stated in Exhibit A, attached.
Action Requested:
Review draft text amendment for compliance with Estes Valley Development Code
(EVDC) §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review and provide feedback to staff
in preparation fora Public Hearing on March 21, 2017.
Attachments:
Exhibit A, Draft Estes Valley Code Amendments
February 21, 2017 EVPC Study Session Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT A
Estes Valley Development Code
CHAPTER 4. ZONING DISTRICTS
Section 4.3.C.4. Table 4-2: Base Density and Dimensional Standards
Residential Zoning Districts.
Table 4-2
Base Density and Dimensional Standards Residential Zoning Districts
Area
(sq ft.)
Minimum
Building/Structure
Property Line
Setbacks 121 171
(Ord. 25-07 §1; Ord.
15-11 §1)
Width Front Side Rear
(ft.) (ft.) (ft.) (ft.)
Zoning
District
Max. Net
Density
(units/acre)
Minimum Lot
Standards 111 14]
(Ord. 25-07 §1)
Max. Min.
Building Building
Height (ft.) Width
[8] (ft.)
Residential 40,000,
Uses: Max 5,400 sq.
= 8 and Min ft./unit [6]
_ 3 I (Ord. 25-07 RM
(Ord.
18-01 Senior §1; Ord. 15-
§14) Institutional I 11 §1)
Senior Living
Uses: Max Institutional
Living = 24 Uses: 1/2 Ac.
60;
Lots
Greater
than
100,000
sq. ft.:
200
10
(Ord.
15- 10 3-0 4- 20 [5]
11
§1)
25-
arterials;
15-other
streets
Section 1.9.E.1 Rules of Measurement, Height
E.1. Measurement of Maximum Building Height. Height shalt means the
vertical distance be-e-stablish.ed-by-algaRe measured Trutil the mean average
elevation of the finished grade ((lowest-point elevation + highest point elevation)
/ 2) along the front of the building:
(1) To the highest point of the roof surface, if a flat roof;
(2) To the deck line of a mansard roof; or
(3) To the mean height level between eaves and ridge for a gable, hip or
gambrel roof.
vertically above the existing natural terrain elevation prior to grading. Height
shall be measured as the vertical distance in feet from the original natural terrain
within the building footprint to the highest point of the finished roof-si•ti4ated
Exhibit A
February 21, 2017 Page 1 of 3
Draft #1
EVPC Study Session
feet using the folio
- FILL IN
TERRAIN Fxrempu NAT WM TERFIA N
MOP TO GRADING
- otEIGH1 L1411 LOx 1,440,1:1 1
/ OF f xi:ST iNG NIIVAN GRACE
a
NO PORTION Of
lilUILDING MAY
F x1Fmn AmOVP
r1;10 I /Jr
ENVING NIM
PRIOR TO
Cur IN TERRAIN
--- *WIWI :ACT FOt LOWS PROFILE
OF PM13TFW3 NA/kW...! TERRAIN
FILL IN Tfftliour.
HEIG*TT
POSTING
TERP.M.
Figure 1-3
M,=30' 151,=35,' Me.40'
30.j3(1 1A-14.11X-:)11
20'
roof design, finished floor elevation, and grading plan with existing and
proposed contours.
-14,-30+[.50(a b)1 where:
Mb-
b -Elevation at any given p-aiR4
Original ground surface
Exhibit A
Draft #1
February 21, 2017 Page 2 of 3
EVPC Study Session
Section 13.3.114 — Definitions of Words, Terms and Phrases
Grade, Finished shall mean the final elevation and coutour of the ground del
after topsoil has been applic to grades slopes, as measured six (6) feet from
the exterior walls of the structure after cutting or filling and conforming to the
proposed design.
Exhibit A February 21, 2017 Page 3 of 3
Draft #1
EVPC Study Session
p
TOWN OF ESTES PART(
Memo
To: Michael Moon, Planning Commission Chair
Estes Valley Planning Commission
From: Audem Gonzales, Planner II
Date: February 21, 2017
RE: Development Plan: Dollar General 455 South Saint Vrain Ave.
Continuance of Public Hearing: The application was scheduled to appear before the
Planning Commission on February 21, 2017. The Public Hearing was advertised for this
date. The project also involves three variance requests which appeared before the Board of
Adjustment on February 7th. At that time, the BOA continued the variance application to
their next scheduled meeting on March 7th. The applicant is asking that the item be
continued to the March 21st Planning Commission date.
The Planning Commission is required to accept public comment on this item at this time if
anyone from the public wishes to do so.
Cloud Nine Minor Subdivision
Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division
Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue
PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517
Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estes.org
EP
ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE & LOCATION: February 21, 2017, 1:30 PM; Board Room, Town
Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue
APPLICANT REQUEST: This application is a request to preliminary plat four
single-family residential lots located in the A-1 Accommodations zone district. The
title of the subdivision is: Cloud Nine Subdivision — Located in a Portion of the SE
1/4 of Section 16. T5N, R72W of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado.
STAFF OBJECTIVE:
1. Review for compliance with the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC)
and Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan; and
2. Provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission
LOCATION: 1595 Fish Hatchery Road, within the unincorporated Estes Valley
OWNER/APPLICANT: Kathleen Ward Gagliano and Karen Ward Cherman/
same as owner
CONSULTANT/ENGINEER: Van Horn Engineering & Surveying
STAFF CONTACT: Audem Gonzales, Planner II
PROJECT DESCRIPTION & REVIEW PROCESS: This application is a request to
preliminary plat four single-family residential lots zoned A-1 Accommodations
within the unincorporated Estes Valley. The property is currently developed with
one single-family home on one parcel of land north of Fish Hatchery Road. There
is one undeveloped parcel of land located south of Fish Hatchery Road. The
proposed subdivision is approximately 3.13-acres in size.
Maximum allowed density for this property is one home for every 15,000 SF or up
to 9 individual lots. The applicant is proposing four lots with each proposed lot
meeting the 15,000 SF minimum.
Subdivision Review (§3.9): The purpose of the subdivision review process is to
ensure compliance with the subdivision standards and provisions of this Code,
while encouraging quality development in the Estes Valley reflective of the goals,
policies and objectives found in the Comprehensive Plan.
All subdivision applications shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and
criteria set forth in Chapter 10, "Subdivision Standards".
Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat applications are reviewed by the Estes Valley
Planning Commission. Minor Subdivision Final Plats are reviewed by Town Board
or the Board of County Commissioners.
SITE DATEA TABLE:
Surveyor: Van Horn Engineering & Surveying
Parcel Number: 3516400004 Development Area: Approx. 3.13 acres
Existing Land Use: 1 single-family home Proposed Land Use: 4 single-family
homes
Zoning Designation: A-1
Accommodations (15,000 SF minimum lot
size)
Adjacent Zoning:
East: A-1 Accommodations North: E-Estate
West: A-1 Accommodations South: A-Accommodations
Adjacent Land Uses:
East: Single-family home North: Single-family homes
West: Multiple accommodations units South: Harmony Foundation Center
Services:
Water: Existing home on well (no changed
proposed for this lot, Other three lots
propose Town of Estes Park water)
Sewer: Existing Upper Thompson
Sanitation District service (Other three lots
propose UPSD service)
REVIEW CRITERIA: Depending upon the complexity of the project, this section
may be a brief summary of the standards of review or may involve a more detailed
analysis of the standards based upon issue relevant to any particular project.
1. Lots. This proposal complies with lot dimension/configuration standards
set forth in Section 10.4 of the EVDC. Each lot will meet the minimum
requirement of 15,000 SF in the A-1 Accommodations zone district.
2. Grading and Site Disturbance. Limits of Disturbance. Section 10.5.6.2
requires that limits of disturbance (LOD) be established with the
subdivision of land. This has been delineated on the preliminary plat for
Lots 1-3. The proposed LOD is located within the 50-foot river setback.
3. Tree and Vegetation Protection. The applicant/owner is hereby notified
that if significant trees are removed, now or in the future, replacement is
required in accordance with EVDC §7.3 Tree and Vegetation Protection.
4. Public Trails/Private Open Space. No public trails/private open space are
required with this subdivision. A portion of the Fish Creek trail is proposed
to cross over the west edge of Lot 4. Public Works has required a trail
easement triangle to be placed at this location for the future trail. This
requirement is to be shown on the Final Plat.
i n Estes Valley Planning Commission, February 21, 2017 Page 2 of 5
Cloud Nine Subdivision Preliminary Plat
5. Geologic and Wildfire Hazard Areas. A Debris Fan Geologic Hazard
Area is located on Lot 4. The requirement for a Geologic Hazard Mitigation
Study has been waived by Community Development Staff due to
uncertainty of the actual location of the hazard area. Town GIS mapping
may contain a locational error for this site so the requirement for a study
has been waived.
6. Wildlife. A wildlife study is not being required for this subdivision.
7. Water. The exiting home on proposed Lot 3 is served by a private well.
The other three proposed lots are required to connect to Town of Estes
Park water. The main line runs under Fish Hatchery Road. If or when the
private well fails, Town of Estes Park will require a connection to Lot 3.
8. Fire Protection. The Estes Valley Fire Protection District has reviewed this
proposal and has no comments/concerns.
9. Electric. There are existing overhead power lines running through the
proposed subdivision. These lines are already contained within public utility
easements shown on the PP. The new lots can adequately be served by
electric.
10. Sanitary Sewer. Currently there is a sewer main running under Fish
Hatchery Road. Proposed Lot 3 is currently served by the Upper
Thompson Sanitation District. The other three lots can adequately be
served by UTSD.
11. Stormwater Drainage. The on-site storm flow is currently handled as
sheet flow over the project area. The post development on-site storm flow
is proposed to be handled through a similar system of conveyance. Water
will be treated for water quality purposes via existing vegetated buffer
areas that exist downstream of the proposed building sites. Off-site
drainage onto proposed Lot 4 is proposed to remain sheet flowing into the
roadside drainage system for Fish Hatchery Road.
12. Access. Access to Lot 3 will remain as it is developed now with a gravel
drive. Lot 1-2 are proposed to share a driveway from Fish Hatchery Road.
The Final Plat is required to show this joint access easement. Lot 4 is
proposed to access from Fish Hatchery Road.
13. Public Right-Of-Way. There is no dedication of public right-of-way
associated with this minor subdivision. Fish Hatchery Road has the
appropriate ROW width at this location.
14. Annexation. The subject property is in the process of being annexed into
Town Limits per the IGA agreement between the Town and County. The
annexation is tentatively scheduled for a March Town Board date.
15. Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision is located in the Fall
River Planning Area. The future land use designation for this area is A-1
Accommodations. The Comprehensive Plan calls for riverfront
Estes Valley Planning Commission, February 21, 2017 Page 3 of 5
Cloud Nine Subdivision Preliminary Plat
accommodations which are residential in scale and present a lodge-like
character. The Comprehensive Plan also calls for large river setbacks. The
proposal is for four single-family home lots. The river setbacks are 50-feet
at this location. The proposal is very well aligned with the Estes Valley
Comp Plan.
REVIEWING AGENCY COMMENTS: This request has been submitted to
reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or
concerns were expressed by reviewing staff.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: In accordance with the notice requirements in the Estes
Valley Development Code, legal notices were published in the Estes Park Trail-
Gazette. Typical mailings include a 500-foot radius.
As of February 10, 2017, no formal written comments have been received for this
application package. Written comments will be posted to
www.estes.oro/currentapplications if received after November 10th.
STAFF FINDINGS:
Based on the foregoing, staff finds:
1. With the conditions of approval listed, this proposal will comply with all
applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code.
2. Adequate public facilities are currently available to serve the proposed
subdivision.
3. The proposed lot configurations meet minimum lot size requirements.
4. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff
for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were
expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of
public services.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed Cloud Nine Minor Subdivision
Preliminary Plat with the following conditions:
1. Show existing sewer service line to home on Lot 3 on Preliminary Plat.
2. Show joint access easement across Lot 1 and Lot 2 on Final Plat.
3. Submit maintenance agreement for shared driveway with Final Plat
submittal.
4. Remove language on Note 9 of Preliminary Plat stating the maintenance
agreement and shared access easement will be submitted with building
permit. Both are required with Final Plat submittal.
5. Remove Town Board signature block and replace with Board of County
Commissioners.
Estes Valley Planning Commission, February 21, 2017 Page 4 of 5
Cloud Nine Subdivision Preliminary Plat
SAMPLE MOTIONS:
1. I find the application substantially meets the criteria above, and move to
APPROVE the "Cloud Nine Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat" according
to findings of fact and conclusions of law, with findings and conditions
recommended by Staff.
2. I find the applicant has not provided sufficient information to review the
application per the criteria above and move to CONTINUE the preliminary
plat request to the next regularly scheduled meeting.
3. I find the application does not substantially meet the criteria above and
move to DENY the preliminary plat request.
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Statement of Intent
3. Application
4. Preliminary Plat
Estes Valley Planning Commission, February 21, 2017 Page 5 of 5
f Cloud Nine Subdivision Preliminary Plat
Vicinity Map
Project Name: Cloud Nine Subdivision
Project Description: Prelminary Plat (1595 Fish Hatchery Road)
Kathleen 1' ' Gagliano and
Petitioner(s): Karen IAA arman ‘'STES PA
COLORA,
Town of Estes Park
Community Development
Vicinity Map
1 in = 167 It
0 80 160
Feet
Printed: 2/10/2017
Created By: Audem Gonzales A
1!‘lE
DEC 28 2016
-\1
-J5
COML. reir" DEVELOPMENT
STATEMENT OF INTENT
Cloud Nine Subdivision
December 28, 2016
Cloud Nine Subdivision is a proposed Single Family Residential Development and Subdivision located at
1595 Fish Hatchery Road. The property is currently for residential use. It is proposed to be redeveloped
as 4 single family (or multifamily as the code allows) residential lots. The preliminary plan, annexation
map and final plat are being submitted for approval. The applicant is Kathleen Ward Gagliano and
Karen Ward Cherman (current owners). This application is for a minor subdivision of this existing metes
and bounds parcel to provide for two additional building sites, one developed lot and one remaining
vacant lot located along Fish Hatchery Road. The density allowed in the A-1 Zoning district allows for up
to 9 single family lots on this existing parcel, although only 4 are proposed.
Chapter 10 of the Estes Valley Development Code provides Subdivision Standards for the Estes Valley. In
that standard there are purposes which are achieved by the design of this parcel, namely:
• Orderly growth and harmonious development (neighborhood compatibility),
• Adequate and efficient street system (no new roads/right of way is required for this
Subdivision),
• Individual livable property lots (single family lots with separate utility service lines),
• Adequate, health and safe provisions for water, electric, drainage, and sewer (utility mains
currently exist to service the proposed lots),
• Protection of sensitive environmental areas and hazard areas (steep slopes and river frontage
along the northern parcels are protected by river setbacks),
• Adequate areas of open space (meeting code required impervious coverage).
The Development/layout of this plan being submitted for approval by all applicable referral agencies as
well as the planning staff, and approval boards in the Estes Valley Development region.
The following waivers are requested with this submittal:
• Waiver to Appendix Bil.D.21-Small Scale Plat-The applicant is requesting a waiver to this
requirement.
• 000 5
Submittal Date:
Type of Application
ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATI
ZsC 2 8 2016
ccvmtin
Development Plan
Special Review
Rezoning Petition
Preliminary Subdivision Plat
Final Subdivision Plat
Minor Subdivision Plat
Arneffded Plat
General Information
tie
Boundary Line Adjustment
ROW or Easement Vacation
Street Name Change
Time Extension
Other: Please specify
4 Mie tic-I-to/4
Condominium Map
Preliminary Map
Final Map
Supplemental Map
Project Name
Project Description
Project Address
Legal Description
Parcel ID #
Site Information
0-40v3 AR,\TEr% 5v81>iti15/ in V
"varz 51., got vis tePoti
/5f5 risAt Atifirdf a)/ Ro4r)
Itic -rns gDovPS
3,13 c_
e6(1,6 VT 1 4
Area of Disturbance in Acres Lot Size
Existing Land Use
Proposed Land Use
Existing Water Service
Proposed Water Service
RES/
' Town Nst Well I None
AcTown k Well I None
v• ID 4c-
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Existing Sanitary Sewer Service ▪ EPSD
Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service • EPSD
Is a sewer lift station reguired?TBD Yes
Existing Gas Service Y Xcel Other
UTSD Septic I None
UTSD Septic
To-*F/211.1/4 re ,DF SO.
I None
Existing Zoning A-I Proposed Zoning /4./
Site Access (if not on public street) try 497ztiegy ORD
Are there wetlands on the site? I Yes k No
Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete?
Yes
Primary Contact Information
Name of Primary Contact Person DII/Lb 891143
Complete Mailing Address
/048 Cis,/ CREEK RD EsTes Agie, CD To5/4
Primary Contact Person is Owner I Applicant 1)4. Consultant/Engineer
Attachments
l Application fee Digital Copies of plats/plans in TIFF or PDF format emailed to
Statement of intent planning@estes.org
Lk 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan
fk. 11" X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan
Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which
may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report,
wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information.
lown of Estes Pork P.O. Box 1200 170 MacGregor Avenue -0: Estes Park, CO 80517
Community Development Deportment Phone: (970) 577-3721 Fox: (970) 586-0249 -6 www,estes.org/CommunItyDevelopment
Revised 2013.08.27 KIT
Signatures:
Record Owner
Applicant
I' -- 7 //C 6-(7-4/ 64(, Dat6 A./C. er7),//
J 2:6 Bale /
Contact Information
Record Owner(s)
Mailing Address
Phone
Cell Phone
10744LEEn) W41217 6iitituIRAYD giIREV 044) ed-leartkpW
15 9- ,t5e/ Atiflprede itY tswg)
Fax
Email
Applicant
Mailing Address
Phone
Cell Phone
Al/A
di NC 5.4
Doner —
t. area rittrefiam L ra/7,4-04,
Fax
Email
Consultant/Engineer VA 01) ZIAG.) e414 /1)-1=P121 JSuAtt147/147 _TVC
/P‘13 1-45/4/ (ae514. AD AID
.7.39 - 6517 . 93.ecs--
1-70 . 1,‘711:2 -
Fax
Email Sa VIdlihe a 4 )t, hot 71 S /*D*01
Mailing Address
Phone
Cell Phone
APPLICATION FEES
For development within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both inside and outside Town limits
See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at:
www.estes.orq/ComDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanninqApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf
All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal.
MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION
Article 65.5 of Title 24 of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews,
Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final
Condominium Maps to provide notice of the application and initial public hearing to all mineral estate owners where the surface
estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application
for development and meet the statutory requirements.
I hereby certify that the provisions of Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met.
Names:
Record Owner PLEASE PRINT. ;,',.(L A/ /1
Applicant PLEASE PRINT c" L.;
Revlsed 2013 08.27 KT
APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
11. I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and that in filing the application I am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property.
PP In submitting the application materials and signing this application agreement, I acknowledge and agree that the
application is subject to the applicable processing and public hearing requirements set forth in the Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC).
110- I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, and that, prior to filing this application. I have had the
opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application.
The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at:
http://www.estes.orq/ComDev/DevCode
Pk. I understand that acceptance of this application by the Town of Estes Park for filing and receipt of the application fee by
the Town does not necessarily mean that the application is complete under the applicable requirements of the EVDC.
11.• I understand that this proposal may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is
incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date.
OP I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete.
P. The Community Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is
determined to be complete.
► I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to
my property during the review of this application.
IP. I acknowledge that I have received the Estes Valley Development Review Application Schedule and that failure to meet
the deadlines shown on said schedule may result in my application or the approval of my application becoming null and
void. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void.
Names:
Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: 77/ L &N e_ (1,--/-1C7 / /94!
Applicant PLEASE PRINT
Signatures:
Record Owner
Applicant
. X.977-/e42c/Vice-,16441st (2',/-72 3
1r-1L4:1., 4-~1 e i';(9ate
Revised 2013.08.27 KT
CloudNineMir
Owner Owner II Address City ST Zip
Sanctuary LLC PO Box 4563 Estes Park CO 80517
Jerome & Susan Lauer 3049 N Elena Maria Tucson AZ 85750
L Mosier/K Taylor/B Pratt/K Ward 1349 College Rd Hays KS 67601
Fall River, LLC PO Box 821025 Kenmore WA 98028
MJ Williams Co. 650 Daphne St Broomfield CO 80020
Paul Anderson MD 32 Sanford Rd Colorado Springs CO 80906
Connie Lehman 68 Stanford Ln Longmont CO 80503
Craig & Julie Smith 2231 Mastodon Dr Imperial MO 63052
Harmony Foundation Inc. PO Box 1989 Estes Park CO 80517
Hays Hospitality Group Inc. PO Box 1630 Kearney NE 68848
David & Cheng Hao Frey 1300 Fairawy Ave Story City IA 50248
Kathleen Gagliano & Karen Cherman 1595 Fish Hatchery Rd Estes Park CO 80517
EP Developers LLC 2086 Uplands Cir Estes Park CO 80517
Page 1
CLOUD NINE SUBDIVISION
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN
A PORTION OF THE SE OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.,
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COUNTY OF .ARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO.
SOL/SPRY OH EE Bair
CLONE LENGTH
BLAB
RADIUS
50555
DELTA
703'30"
CHORD BE619G1 CHORD
584•24•34E 64.40
C2 1115 655.55 WITTY NST55'04-E 96177
CS 5263 66055 74,114- 69724•51-1 3055
FOUND. ES R
w/31. NJIMMUM CAP
SHAPED 24415
(ENTER-E.A.11 .L 00261226
516„ 1162w
ROW) PIP
w/BIT
MASS CAP
FARE 1 GoNNER
511, 164. 1373W
5I531•001 303.21'
50' RWER SETTEADK
ITTFT}
yr UMW L W MISER/
1349 1m
11.05. KS 67E01
ZONED, A-1 T
0.9185737•4245 234.10
011-541.55•7
1H236.00)
(a-131/1•54)
(0016489•575.0E 234.10
FOUND MONLIMENTATION
(AS DESCRIBED)
SET /4 1466M MTh
PLASTIC CAP 126914 0.14.0.
FOUND ALI04401 MONUMENTATON
00.00 AlEASURELD/CALCUIRTED CAC/ISBNS
(00 CB DEEDED DIMENSIONS
(00.00] 1628 BHA DEPENCENT RESURVEY DIVERSIONS
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
EASEMENT SCIUNETARY
ALICUOT LINE
EK. TREE (SIZE NOTED)
•
so°
I, I\
•
..., __ .._ ,.._. HATE 605prIATIN Hipp op -1V-
FOUND I T PPF,ffir------ ".11.001, PZ.L7,... 4101
551/2/• C.LO. BRASS CAP 41
6,
-3T• MED: E
.1E15 1925
CURIDI
T
LOTHER r
516. . R736
1
1 34
20 111.C.
N
- Burr__
1
It ..,, 2G w.1
g k
kb%
r---- ••--.:!IIMIMIM501116
1
1 _.. - 7.7.••-•-1
. 16- 1
1 1
SER3VOLFW 645
"MR. .1116111•0111•5 Email NB HOS • OKI
58651'16.11 2609.69.
(561108 5 2011.161
.955
..4155
4%1
• 1
491,1,Bri
4Tf% 41114
alar/
PAUL ANDERSON
32 ANTO..
C04O4D0 5. 10 60905
20110Z E
.81Ra.
"'RN*.
079 EDP GOND.,
2055 UPLANDS PR •
ESTES PARK. CO 50517
ZONED, A-I 2
2
ERSING WPADDICP
1595 .5.
HATCHERY BOO
1.131_3 GAFGBATED AATJE
38.597,5 Sr.
6.89 AC
5861411•24/ 65.00'
($8816258 85.013)
SEE NOTE 4
Rn
RI
1111 ------
r71-4
1
0.!STE 16.52'
- CLEXJ.L, --- ------- 2_
1-:*
r
he47:41PAIRMAirAft.,--
FOLNO 04-ALLIMINIAA CAP
0/1 14 REHM
433.3
- - -
„-----r- s___---5---- \---s-----_ ---
ES _.
L.-27 5.19" - s.------S-----
_____ ------
-.,
-
95261 ------------ ------
1.........,093 (0,12.--- .,..
.- 0,-----C-----
Art 21.524)
277- --- -90------ --...; -w-----T' ,
CO-N0256•57TE 114.40' \
06.51115063 1,stP4_.
g§
59.5•
----- -- - ss
EAU MYER LIC
PO 602 521025
KENMORE WA 98028
EONELK A-1
01.0)
R8426'T0'E 439.671_
19.47')
covec
16,315. 011. R136
PALLS IA 6126)
LE.GFELF-DETELLEliQte.
A Ton. OF
S
TH
S
E SE t/4 OF SE.. H. 669, 0145 126 THE 5111 Pv.13161.1011 COUNTY, CLILOW.00, BHA
MORE FARTCULARLY 0E3016E0 AS 1051666, 10 PIT;
MOL)
POSTIOR or THE NT of BE RE 1 OF SECT. 15, TONINSHMI Nark,1014. 13 TOM Or THE 6111
PM_ HERAT CCRIITY. COLORADO. MORE PARTGuLARLY DESCRIBED AS COMMENCING AT THE EAST 1 CORNER
OF SAD 5E.. 1.6 w. ALL 6E416565 COWARD) ISDRON REHR& TO THE EAST LINE Of THE SE / OF
SRO sEcnos 55 0261163ED 39 HUANG SOFTWOVAL THENCE 5.1pooTro A DETAMISE C6 1315_23 MET
TLF EAST TINE OF 661 sE 1 TO THE EAST 410 CONNER OE WO • E MERLE SAWITOrd/ A
96T666 OF TORSI FM ALONG THE EAST-WEST OENTEROPE Or SAD SE 4 TO BE CDPER WTH CORNER
OF sap 51) AND THE TRUE P001 Of 8E0161142 151FNCE 56017 'OTT A EASTANCE OF 456.74 FEED ALONG
THE EAST-*EST CEHIERLBE OF SAP SE / TO A POINT BEARING IMPITLHE A DISTANCE Of 540.01 FEET
FROM THE WEST WTI CORNER OF 650 SC 4: THENCE N0P30•53TE A DISTANCE OF 9084 FEET IMPPLLEL TO
THE WEST urvE M BE SW 4 OF 6410 SE 1 TO A POST ON 101 9011T3ENLT PP60-0E-IVAT 1/40 OF TFE
11661 ,ATIDASITT RID', THENCE THE FOUCHING THEE COURSIZ MD 05T.= ALONG THE SOUTHER,
RICA-0F-WAY 1--•E A, THE 191,11 HATCHERY ROAD, BENCE S131162•19T A INSTANCE OF 6_67 FELT: THENCE
235 co FEET AL0A5 THE NEC Or A CANE TO ME LEFT. 5.40 CLARE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 1601•54 A
RADIUS Or 745.51 FEET AND 6 S.15666/ BY A CHORD REARTNG 09654427 A DISTANCE OF 234.10 FEET,
THENZ 716.92 FEET 616116 THE NEC Of A CHWE TO THE R10111 TO A P0111 ON TIE NORTH-SOUTH
CENTERLWE OF 246 SE 1. SAO CURIE 1410 A DELTA MIZE Of 04•1052. A RADRIS OF 150205 FEET ANO 6
SUETTENDED EFI A 21080 HARM 96601'10' A DISTANCE Of 215.67 FEET THENCE 52T5972W A INSTANCE
OF 119.91 FEET MIK 714E 114119-SOUTH DIPTERUNE Di 5,40 SE I TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINHING
268119-2
A POTION OF BE 596 OF THE SE A OF 56011051 IQ Mk 67316 CF IWE 8131 P.M. CARRIER 004.611.
02.6400. /PPE PARTICIKARLT DELPR620 AS 0016876.0 .51 1
41
E (AST CORNER Of SAP SECTION 50
WITS AL WRINGS CONTAINED HEREIN REHR& TO 716 EMI U OF BE SE OF SAID RECT. 16
CONSIDERED AS BEARING SOINSCOTN THENCE 501'1501'19'501IEW A OSTANCE OF 1315.23 FEET ALONG THE UST
HE OF SAID SE THE 5021 4 CORNER OF 5.411) SE 1 THENCE 58417 0711 A INSTANCE OF 1753.50
FEET ALONG RE FAST-WIMI CPRERNNE of 660 SE 110 A PONT BEARING Rev 1E'OrE A oiSTANCE OF
640.00 FEU FRC. T. WEST 411.1 CORNER OF 5140 SE 110PLA 1100.511'5.1TE 3 INSTANCE OF 160.48 FEET
PARALLEL To THE WEST HIE Of TIE x 1 CT SAID . 1 TO A FUNS UN THE .RTN.TY 45111-Cif --WAY UNE
OF TNE ASH HATCHEEN ROAD AN13 THE HUE ROHR OF DEGINNING; TIERCE THE 101109114 THREE CINESES
01606Z5 04.051G THE 506351661 RIGHT-OF-1.6 HIE Of THE FISH WITCHERY ROAD. THENCE
S61-00•19t A HAMM of TA TR FEET: THREE 216 16 MT 6..0 INF ANC OF A CORM To THE IEFT,
SRO COPSE PAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 1503'54 A VOUS OF FEEL MAO 6 SOBTDIDED ET A CHORD
BEARING 16185762-E A DISTANCE Or 215.27, THENCE 254.36 FEET µ06G THE MC OF A CLINE TO BE
ROW TO A MI XT MP 1500 E1ET PERPENDICULARLY TO THE WEST OF A NORTH-50L. COPERLINE OF
SMO SE E SAO CIARFE PAS A DELTA ARPE OF 0
4
00'62'PAM. Or 3.9.65 FEET AND 16 SHWERCEL, PT
A CHOPP 16•266 0926010V ENSTAIESE OF 21315 FEET; THENCE NOCF.02-E A DISTANCE 06 34 )4 FEET .
PARALLEL 10 111E NOR111-5008 CENTEPOINE OF PAZ SE I, THENCE 519011361 A DIZIANOF OF 65.00 FEET
PERPENDIELLAR TO THE N0550-5041911 14111414514E OF SAO SEE THENCE 110054124 041101111 10 THE
5426TH-SOLITH CENIFNUNE OF Mb SE 1 10 A POPO ON THE RENTERIANt 2' FALL WEFT, 14491
NoRTRESTERLY ALONG 116 CENTER:LANE OF FALL RivER TO A POW HAP R0039•53.4 FROM THE MIRE
P0421 OF 6E00560 THENCE 00036.631 PARALLEL TO THE OUT (NE OF THE RN 1 OF SAID SE 1 10 THE
110.6 PONT Of BEG6664, EXCEPTING THEREFROM FROM THE ABOVE PMCELS, ART PORTION CONTAPIED 54
THAT Ns/THOR REGC6150) AJARDH 5, 19E7 AT RECUT. NO 92011616; COANAT Of HAWK ATOP Of
005.011620
STATISTICAL INFORMArioN:
1. .665 PROFECT AREA - 136,4846 SE
AREA
OF TARO 1.1110. EFFECTIVE 1100 PL. - S.2953 SF
AREA AI PROPOSED WRNS-Of-Y. DEGILMORS H
ROI OF IMP ABOVE TOM WATER 590.104 BEV -
LEASE AREA 0
NET PROJECT AREA 130188.0 Sr
5(040 BREAKCPWR
0-206 722.040.5 S.F. HAM
29-956 0 S.F.
25-366, 0 S.F.
30-406 0 01,
4061, 14,444 or. (1111)
AVERAGE SLOPE. 856
2. NUMBER OF LOTS PROPOSED: 4
3. OCHS., MINN. LOT 526E.16,000 Sr.
TOTAL LOTS ALLMNIED-4 PER 1044041 SUMMON
100,163.6 61 / 15.000 SE/LOT. 67 1015 ALLORED
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
I. OWNERSHIP AND EASEMENT RESEARCH FOR IHIS PLAT WAS PERFOREATDO BY FIDE.111 MATIONST TILE
156LRANCE COMPANY. CCIAISTIENT NO. 585-10160505-302-2, CARD NOVEmBER 21. 2013, NO 0111419
091.1010111 AND E.EMENT RESEARCH WAS PERFORMED.
2, THE FOLTCFNIFIC SOURCES WERE USED FOR 1.01 UNE OfTERIAINATICN FOR THIS PLAT:
-UNITED STATES BUREAU OF LAND ,ARAMPAIK CO.ENDEN, 6E5U42E2 Of TOWASHM 5 RCM. RANGE 73
WEST OF THE 50011 PRINCIPAL PENDENT DPW FEBRUARY 16. 1926
-PLAT OF FALL RWER FHB, SPETI, SEVENTH AND ELGIPH ADDITIONS TO BE TOWN OF 05110 AMR
RECORDED AT RECEPTION Pa 20060091531
-PLAT Of 11006AN MEADOW SUBOTISIOR RECORDED AT RECEPTOR NO. 20160003339
-WARRANTY DEED RECORDED AT RECEPTOR NO. 42011615
-.OWN WOOL TOLE INSURANCE C(3113012 111LA 0.11.091ENT 555-10469600-362-0E
5. UNITS FOR THS SURVEY ARE THE US 5UW1 F007.
4. THE DalLE0 LEGAL DESORPTION OF BE SUBJECT PROPER(' APPEARS TO HAVE A TYPOGWAPHICAL ERROR
IN THE BEIRMC CALL FOR PAR6E. 2 Of THENCE 14I9'00•313111 A DISTANCE OF 05.00 FEET PERPENDICULAR
TO 1141 NORTH-59315 0.00061156 O6 8140 NE FT PP PUBENINBRAR NU.. 10 1140 013911RE6
NEW. OF THE NORTH-5014TH CEINTIDARE OF SND 52 / OF 516. 1551. 77.311 005 HELD.
5. NOTICE ACCORDING TO 001.61.110 LAW YOU MAT COMMENCE ANY LEGAL A011014 BASED UPON Ain
DEFECT 61 TANS SURVEY WM. TREE FEARS OMR YOU MT D6C05161 Mx DEFECT. NE 110 EVERT WAY
AR, ACTOR 16.63) UPON ANY OEEECT I5 INN SURREY BE CIABERCED MORE ToN 005 YEARS FROM TIE
CERTINCATION SHOWN HEREON.
6. HOTS OF DISTURBANCE FOR THE PROPOSED LOTS I-5 IS TO BE FROM THE NORTHERN !HER SERA.
UNE 10 THE 11010NE50 PROPERTY NEXPIDANT LINE OR SNOW HE4E03 MIRE 6 No .0605111 1JA6
DISTURBANCE FOR TIE PROPOSED LOT 4.
7. WILLING SETBACKS ME AS FOLLOWS,
FRONT ASO SP LOT ONES-155 PEAR LOT UNE5-10% RIPER SETBACK NOWA x0091 WATER)- SO'.
a. PROILBSED 0041111 60162E5 ARE sHoom FOR LC. 1,7 400 HT 3 IS THE LOT 900 THA 0609316
SINGLE FAIRLY RESIDENCE LOCATED ON R. NO PLITT SORGE 0110610/6 ME PROPOSED FOR LOT 3 AT
THIS TIME. LOT 3 IS CURRENT:, 5136/10E0 BY AN DOPING WELL UPPER THOMPSON SWINTON DISTRICT.
656.10106. (4MAR, GAS) AND BE TONA De ESTES PARK (0,4101 C).
5. ACCESS TO LOTS 1 AR!, 2 IS PROPOSED TO BE THROUGH A SHARED DRAADRAE 6 THE APPRCHTJATE
LOCATION SHOWN NERCO, T. ACCESS (AND TIE SHAM USE AGREEMENT MO CASEARMT) 6 PROPOSED
10 BE 0611561 Al 111E 1421 of ETHLE60 PERTAIT WHJCATIDA
10. T1.000 HAZARD INFORMATION 6 FROM AN OVERLAY OF ROOD INSURANCE FMTE MAP PANEL 10891 NO
HYDRAULIC MODELAND 1AA5 COMPLETED FOR THE CREATOR OF THIS PLAN.
BEARING STATEMENT'
ALL KAHN. FOR 1116 SURAT ARE BASEE, PHI THE EAST UNE OF THE 601.011.51 1 OF SECTOR 16.
TENTIOSNIP 5 NORTH. RANGE 13 WEST OF THE 510 P.. REARM. 9600 Wane ReTwEER TRE
EAST-OMPTER CORNER OF SECTOR 16 BENG A 1.57 PIPE STANDING ON MOVE THE GROUND WITT A 2.55
BRART GAP STANIFED MS. GENERAL 1.0 OFFICE SURVEY. MD ELATED 5920, AND PIE SOUTHEAST CORNER 011 RECTIOR 18 BEING A I' PPE FRB A 2-6' 401155 CAP S,AIARED U.S. GENERAL LINO OFTICE SURVEN.
1605, AIL Kamm FA.. HI.. ORE 70A1116 11(57110
FAD CHENG/DA60 M. FACT
L300 FARE. ARE
STORY 0111, IA 50746
ZONED, E
0' 1 ••111M 1_11M I I= I
FORLIFR PAROPI
MEASURED ARE...-
90.101 7 5.r.
2.97 AC
SCALE, I T 3CY
30 60 DC
541
ONAVEL 1.400110
47.68701 104 218.97'
(2-2669.05')
215.92T
04T0T2T)
ANKRIDITHEE 116571 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN FOUND 7) 6.10. 00A65
ON 01' MEC DATED 1926
CENTER-SDLEIN CORNER
STE MN, R736
0 f4 ROWE
WITH TLFFOGFE PLASTC CAP
(FOUND j4 REBAR
DEARING 50621'541 2.72'
NOT ACCEPTES As BITE CORNER)
93421•001 1755.63'
(5/30170711 1753.55')
11803.2•151 129832'
VICINITY MAP
1" - woo'
LEGEND
EX. 0201111 POLE
EX. WELL
EX. SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
EX. ST0119 SEWER MANHOLE
Ef. LIMITS OF EETECTWE 113 ANNUAL NANCE
FLOCDPLAIN (726I4 PANEL 70946)
474. CONTOUR-MINOR (I')
CONTOUR-MAJOR (5')
0C. ROAD/ORIVE
- 40. WATER UNE
OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE
-5- 00. SANITARY SEWER UNE
-ES CO. STORY SEWER LINE
I- 7
UMIES OF MAPPED GEOLOGIC RAZAR0 AREA
FoL6E1 25' ALUMINUM CAP"
STAMPED 'SE 14WE it "'AC
5 11
21.5 2674
,211"7.37:
• EX GAS uNE
-W- PROPOSEC WATER SERVICE
O PROPOSED GAS SERVICE
-CS - PROPOSED ELECTRIC SERMCE
-S- PROPOSED SAFILTARY SEWER SERVICE
PROPOSED WILDING MEIN.
-TH
582.14.30-Te 1268.19'
(66/07•07-4 1234.841
95.00'
ROUND I' PIPE 1
6./2/. BRASS GAP
14 LATENESS CORNER
516/016. ESN. R736
F06411 I T ATP
iT
11/21T 02.0. BRASS CM
CANTED 1025
SE CORNER
SIN, 164, R7301
5641006 FOLINDATION 1141
00 DUX 19139
ESTES PARK CO 66617
ZONED, A
OWNER.
MIAMI WARD GAZUMP AND 1061. WHO 464804
1595 FISH IPTCHEIN RCA:
261E6 PAH, CO 00517
PREPARED BY'
VAR NORM ENORILERING AND SURVEYING. INC
1043 FISH CEBU ROO
ESTES PARE, CO 80517
970-500-9388
DRAWN ETT:
CHECKED BY:
LAS
SAM
1
OF
1
PROD. NO.
2912-.05-22
SCALE
AS SHOWN
DATE
12-28-2018
4
EP
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Staff Report
To: Estes Valley Planning Commission
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: February 21, 2017
RE: Proposed Text Amendments to Estes Valley Development Code:
EVDC §5.1.B (Vacation Homes)
Planning Commission Objective:
Review and recommendation on proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC) §5.1.B (Vacation Homes): amendments to the Vacation
Homes (VH) regulations regarding processing of applications, standards for reviewing 9-
and-over vacations homes, and minor changes made for clarity or consistency.
Code Amendment Objective:
The objective of this proposed code amendment is to revise the EVDC to do the following:
• Require that all 2017 VH applications be filed by March 31, rather than registrations
issued by that date;
• Remove (for the time being) the requirement that all registered VH homes have a
Certification of Occupancy issued by Dec. 2016;
• Place maximum parking requirements for VHs in residential districts in this section
of code;
• Specify that VH applications in non-residential districts can be applied for after
March 31, 2017 (as they are not subject to the cap);
• Allow flexibility in the actual date of registration issuance;
• Provide additional guidance to the Planning Commission in criteria for making
determinations regarding 9-and-over VHs in residential districts;
• Clarify a number of minor language and reference ambiguities.
Proposal:
Amend EVDC Section 5.1.6 (Vacation Homes) as stated in Exhibit A ["PC Draft"], dated
Feb. 21, 2017, attached.
Staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend approval of the language in
Exhibit A to the Town Board of Trustees and the Board of County Commissioners.
Discussion:
This set of amendments has been assembled as a result of various practical
difficulties staff has observed during the administration of the VH regulations. In
some cases, they only make clear what most parties understood to be the spirit
and intent of the regulations as adopted in December.
March 31 deadline:
The most notable problem we have encountered is that the March 31, 2017
deadline to issue all operating registrations has turned out to be impossible for
some owners/applicants and the staff alike.
Most such problems have come up in connection with the need to reconcile
number of bedrooms. In some cases — less than half, but still significant — VH
applicants are reporting a certain bedroom count that does not match Larimer
County Assessor property records. The reasons vary. Sometimes, a room may
have been converted to a bedroom (legitimately or otherwise), but the Assessor's
office does not have the updated figure. A few applicants may not understand the
way bedrooms are counted. And in some cases, the Assessor's records are wrong
or incomplete (we have found records that show houses with zero bedrooms, for
example). Regardless of cause, the records must match for many reasons,
including proper registration.
The reason this affects deadline is that changing or verifying the records is a slow
process, especially for County properties. The only current ways to reconcile a
bedroom discrepancy are either: (a) go back through old building-permit records;
or (b) conduct a new building inspection. County records before 1998 are not
systematically accessible and require hand searching, and many County records
do not even exist if a house is older than approx. 1972. The Town's building
records system has older data but suffers from its own inefficiencies, many due to
obsolete software.
Building inspections can be done, but there is not clear authority to inspect just to
determine number of bedrooms. And, building inspections are not free and cannot
be scheduled on a moment's notice; travel time from Fort Collins is a factor. (The
County retains authority for building regulations in unincorporated Estes Valley.)
The bottom line is that the March 31 deadline is unattainable for some applicants
who otherwise are trying to comply, and unattainable for staff as well. A resolution
is requiring that all applications be filed by March 31, and adding flexibility as to
when the application must be completed. The Town and County are close to final
approval of an "abeyance policy" that will not interfere with VH operators' ability to
Written February 16, 2017 Page 2 of 6
honor rental contracts already in the pipeline, even if registration takes longer than
we wish.
(A collateral benefit is straightening out record-keeping glitches as they are found.
Unorganized public records would not be a formula for good government or citizen
satisfaction.)
Certificate of Occupancy (C. O.):
Fir much the same reason as above — incompleteness of records and difficulty
accessing them — this requirement has proven infeasible. The original intent was
to stop someone from getting a registration as a "placeholder" for an incomplete
house or even a vacant piece of ground, which under the cap would potentially
kick current operators out of the queue and onto a waiting list. In practice, current
regulations — specifically, the requirement for a site inspection — are keeping this
from happening in 2017.
Staff would like to suggest a longer-term solution for the C.O. matter. This
regulation seems manageable for now due to the inspection requirement, but
inspections only required in limited situations after 2017. We will work on an
acceptable mechanism and bring that forward later this year.
Maximum Parking Requirements:
These have been in EVDC for years, but with two problems: (a) they are currently
in a weird Code location where few people (including staff) know how to find them
easily; and (b) it is not clear whether they apply to VHs, since they are phrased as
applying to "accessory uses" in one- and -two-family dwellings.
Our recommendation is that the regulations be copied from their current location
in Sec. 5.2.e.(6).(b) and repeated in the vacation home section, which is what the
amendment does. The rules themselves remain the same as they have been in
residential districts.
Non-residential district VHs fall under the "Hotel, small" category for parking
regulations. This is also unchanged, but repeated here for completeness, so all
parking rules can be found in the same spot.
2017 VH deadline in non-residential districts:
This is also a March 31 issue, but deals with a different facet of VH policy. Staffs
understanding is that new VHs (whether brand-new construction or new
registration for existing structures) should be encouraged toward Accommodations
or Commercial locations, other things being equal. Removing the rigid March 31
deadline for non-residential VH applications is aimed toward this goal. Two
elements make the March 31 deadline less important in these districts to begin
with: (a) There is no cap in the non-residential districts, so hard deadlines for
Written February 16, 2017 Page 3 of 6
registration do not translate into competition to stay under the cap; and (b) 9-and-
over VHs in those districts do not go through Planning Commission review, so the
gate-keeping function of March 31 deadline in residential areas does not have the
same applicability.
Flexibility in Registration Issuance:
This one has already been discussed. Uncertainties in accessing and finalizing
records mean this provision is necessary. It would be awkward at best if the staff
held to a firm deadline to complete our work and then found we couldn't get at the
needed information; the same is even more the case for applicants. The public
does benefit from known deadlines and outcomes, but in this case there is no help
for it.
Planning Commission Guidance in 9-and-over Decision-making:
This amendment deals with the criteria for making alternative judgments in cases
where a 9-and-over residential-district application involves a property with less
than one (1) acre, and/or smaller setbacks. The amendment gives direction on the
types of criteria that in classic zoning practice can substitute for acreage and
setbacks in reducing impacts on neighboring properties. The list of criteria in the
amendment is not exhaustive, and other buffering elements can also come into
play.
It is legally required that the Planning Commission come up with objective
substitutes like these for acreage and setbacks in making their decisions, though.
Without guidance like these criteria, decisions could easily slip into becoming
"arbitrary and capricious". Those are bad words in local-government decision-
making, and get downright dangerous when a judge uses them to describe your
decision. We don't need to go there.
Minor Language and Reference Fixes:
Most of these need no explanation and are clear when read in context. A typical
example is adding the words "Off-Street" in front of "Parking", in Sec. 5.1.6.1.e.(1).
Since the old Vacation Home regulations addressed on-street parking regulation
(technically not feasible under a development code), this clears up any lingering
confusion.
Staff Findings of Fact:
The text amendment complies with EVDC §3.3.0 (Code Amendments — Standards for
Review).
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review
"All rezonings and text amendments to the EVDC shall meet the following criteria:"
Written February 16, 2017 Page 4 of 6
1. "The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected;"
Staff Finding:
The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected.
2. "The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would
allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in
the Estes Valley;"
Staff Finding:
The proposed text amendment is compatible and consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the
Estes Valley.
3. "The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability
to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the
application were approved."
Staff Finding:
Providers of public water, sewage disposal, electric services, fire protection, and
transportation services have expressed no concerns with the proposed
amendment in principle.
Advantages:
• Complies with the EVDC Section §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review.
• Clarifies EVDC Vacation Home regulations so as to conform with current realizations
and recent developments in practical administration of the Dec. 2016 amendments.
Disadvantages:
• People may find themselves weary of continued flux in Vacation Home rules.
Action Recommended:
Review the amendment for compliance with Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC)
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review and forward a recommendation the
Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners
for a final decision to approve, deny, or approve with conditions.
Written February 16, 2017 Page 5 of 6
Level of Public Interest:
High: Anything affecting vacation home regulations has been the subject of strong,
sustained interest in Estes Valley.
Sample Motions:
APPROVAL
I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County
Board of County Commissioners approve the text amendment to the Estes Valley
Development Code as presented in Exhibit A as recommended by staff.
CONTINUANCE
I move to CONTINUE this agenda item to the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting because... (state reason(s) for continuance - findings).
DENIAL
I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County
Board of County Commissioners deny the text amendment to the Estes Valley
Development Code as presented in Exhibit A, finding that . . . (state reasons for denial).
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A: Text Amendment: Sec. 5.1.B (Vacation Home) & related sections
[Amendment pkg. 2017-A, Version A]
Written February 16, 2017 Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT A
Estes Valley Development Code
Text Amendment: Sec. 5.1.B (Vacation Home) & related sections
[Amendment pkg. 2017-A, Version A)
§5.1 SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS
B. Vacation Home.
1. All vacation homes shall be subject to the following:
a. Annual Operating Registration.
(1) All vacation homes shall obtain an operating registration on an annual
basis, which shall be effective on and following the date of issuance for all of
the remaining calendar year in which it is issued, unless suspended or
revoked for cause.
(2) If the property is located within Town limits, the business license shall be
considered the operating registration. If the property is within the
unincorporated Estes Valley, an operating registration shall be obtained
from the Town of Estes Park Town Clerk's Office.
(3) Beginning January 1, 2017, the annual period for operating registration shall
begin January 1 of each year and end on March 31 of each year. Issuance of
an operating registration between April 1 and December 31 in any given
calendar year shall take place on a schedule determined by the Town Clerk's
office and such schedule shall be at the sole discretion of the Town.
(4) Pro-ration and partial reduction in any required registration fees for an
operating registration issued after January 1 in any given year shall not be
authorized.
(5) No more than one (1) operating registration shall be issued and effective in
any given calendar year for any given vacation home. An active registration
for a specific vacation home shall be transferable to a different owner in
accordance with procedures in this Code and as established by the Town
Clerk's Office.
(6) Effective December 16, 2016, vacation home operating registrations in
residential zoning districts (designated herein as zoning districts E,
E-1, R, R-1, R-2, RE, RE-1, and RM) shall be held at a maximum total
("cap") of 588 registrations in effect at any given time. This cap shall be
reviewed annually by the Planning Commission and governing Boards, in or
near the month of April beginning in or near April 2017. Applications received
at any time such that their approval would cause the cap to be exceeded shall
be held and kept on file in the order they are received and deemed complete
by the Town Clerk's Office. Registrations held on such list shall be issued
during the calendar year as operating registrations may become available.
(7) Vacation homes in non-residential zoning districts (designated as all zoning
districts except those enumerated in the preceding subsection) shall not be
included in or subject to this cap.
(8) Beginning December 16, 2016, every vacation home for which an operating
Estes Valley Development Code Page 1 of 9
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
application is made shall require that the vacation home undergo and pass an
initial inspection in accordance with this Code prior to issuance of the
operating registration.
(9) - - • e - - - • 2' 12 2 • . • • for a vacation home
'Reserved]
(10) Issuance of an operating registration for a vacation home shall not constitute a
zoning entitlement for a property's use as a vacation home, nor shall absence
of an operating registration for a vacation home constitute removal or
abrogation of a property's zoning permissibility for use as a vacation home.
However, both appropriate zoning permission and compliance and a valid
current operating registration ace-shall be necessary elements in order for
operation as a vacation home to occur.
(11) Operating registrations that are deemed active as of December 31 in any
given year shall have priority for renewal in the following calendar year over
any new operating registration applications, provided a re-application for said
active registration by the same owner is received and deemed complete, all
required inspections passed, and fees paid by March 31 of the renewal
calendar year.
(12) Local Representative. The registration shall designate a local resident or
local property manager in the Estes Valley who can be contacted by
telephone and is available when the vacation home is rented, with regard to
any violation of the provisions of this Section. The person set forth on the
application shall be the representative of the owner for immediate violation
resolution purposes with regard to the operation of the vacation home. The
local representative may be the same person as the property owner. An
annual operating registration shall not be valid unless the property owner, and
the designated local representative (if different), sign the operating
registration application acknowledging all vacation home regulations. If the
local representative changes during the calendar year, it shall be the
responsibility of the property owner to notify the Town Clerk within fifteen (15)
days of change, and to insure the new local representative is knowledgeable
of all vacation home regulations. If the property owner changes during the
calendar year, it shall be the responsibility of the new property owner of
record to transfer the operating registration into his/her name and to ensure
all other regulations in this Section are in compliance.
(13) State Sales Tax License. A condition of issuance of the annual operating
registration shall be proof of a current sales tax license, provided by the
applicant.
(14) Violations. The relevant Decision-Making Entity may deny or withhold the
renewal of an annual operating registration until a violation related to such
property, use or development is corrected, in accordance with §12.4.A.1. The
relevant Decision-Making Entity may revoke or suspend the annual operating
registration at any time in accordance with §12.4.A.2. Operating the vacation
home during any such period of suspension or revocation shall be a violation
of this Code. Appeals to this section shall be made in accordance with the
appeals process in the Estes Valley Development Code.
(15) Nothing described herein shall limit the Town or County, within their
respective jurisdictions, from exercising other remedies and enforcement
powers pursuant to Chapter 12 of this Code or other penalties and
enforcement powers as may be available at law.
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb 21, 2017 — PC meeting
Page 2 of 9
b. Estes Park Municipal Code. Properties located within the Town of Estes Park
shall comply with all the conditions and requirements set forth in the Town of Estes
Park Municipal Code, Chapter 5.20 (Business Licenses). In case of conflict between
Chapter 5.20 and provisions of §5.1B of this Code, the provisions of §5.1.6 of this
Code shall control.
c. Residential Character in Residential Zoning Districts. Vacation homes in residential
zoning districts as designated in this Section shall not be designed or operated in a
manner that is out of character with residential use of a dwelling unit by one
household. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Design shall be compatible, in terms of building scale, mass and
character, with low-intensity, low-scale residential use.
(2) For purposes of §5.1.B of this Code, "bedroom" and "sleeping room" are
deemed equivalent terms to each other, and equivalent to a sleeping space
pursuant to the currently adopted and applicable International Building Codes.
Kitchen facilities shall be limited to be consistent with single-family residential
use. No kitchen facilities or cooking shall be allowed in guest rooms, sleeping
rooms or bedrooms.
d. Postings.
(1) Vacation homes in all zoning districts shall have a clearly legible notice posted
on-site. The posted notice shall be provided by the Town Clerk's Office at the
time the operating-registration is initially applied for, shall be posted in a
prominent location inside the vacation home prior to or during the initial
inspection, and shall remain posted in the same location for the duration of its
use as a vacation home. The posted notice shall include standard contents as
determined and approved by the Community Development Department.
(2) Property Line Boundaries: The property owner or local representative shall
inform all occupants of property boundaries.
(3) Property owner or local representative shall include in all print or online
advertising the operating registration number in the first line of the property
description.
(4) Advertising shall accurately represent the allowed use of the property,
including the maximum number of allowed occupants.
(5) Neighbor Notification. Prior to issuance of the initial annual operating
registration, the owner or local contact shall be responsible for mailing a
written notice.
(a) Notice shall be mailed, with certificate of mailing or other method as
approved by staff, to the owners of properties within one hundred (100) feet
of the boundary of the subject property.
(b) Notices shall provide a name and telephone number of the local
representative and property owner. Any change in the local representative
or property owner shall require that the name and telephone number of the
new representative or owner be furnished to the Community Development
Director and owners of properties within one hundred (100) feet of the
subject property within two (2) weeks of the change. Mailed notice of such
changes shall follow the same procedure as the initial notification as
specified herein.
(c) Copies Proof of mailing certificates shall be provided to the Community
Development Director upon issuance of initial annual operating registration.
e. Parking.
Estes Valley Development Code Page 3 of 9
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
(1) Minimum Required Off-Street Parking. Except in the CD Downtown
Commercial zoning district, the number of off-street parking spaces available to a
vacation home shall not be less than two (2).
(2) Maximum Off-Street Parking — Residential Zoning Districts. This Section
applies to all vehicles that are not parked or stored in a fully enclosed garage. No
more than a total of four (4) vehicles shall be parked or stored on a lot of two (2)
acres or less. No more than a total of five (5) vehicles shall be parked or stored on a
lot greater than two (2) acres in size, but less than five (5) acres. No more than a
total of six (6) vehicles shall be parked or stored on a lot equal to, or greater than
five (5) acres, but less than ten (10) acres. No more than a total of eight (8) vehicles
shall be parked or stored on a lot equal to, or greater than ten (10) acres.
(3) Maximum Off-Street Parking — Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Maximum
parking for vacation homes in nonresidential zoning districts shall be regulated
according to the parking standards applicable to "Hotel, small"
et Employee Housing Units. Employee housing units as designated in §5.2.C.2 shall
not be designated as vacation homes as defined and regulated herein.
f:q. Attainable Housing Units. Attainable housing units as designated in §11.4 shall not
be designated as vacation homes as defined and regulated herein.
g,h. Accessory Dwelling Units. Vacation homes shall not be allowed on residential lots of
record containing an accessory dwelling unit as defined and regulated herein.
1=14 Density. Only one (1) vacation home shall be allowed per residential dwelling unit.
One (1) or more vacation homes may be allowed on an individual lot of record,
subject to all regulations in this Code and other regulations as may be applicable.
2. All vacation homes shall also be subject to the following:
a. Maximum Occupancy in Residential Zoning Districts: 8-and-Under occupants.
Except for 9-and-over vacation homes that may be approved and registered under the
provisions of this Code via Large Vacation Home Review (LVHR) application, the
maximum allowable occupancy for an individual vacation home shall be eight (8)
occupants. Occupancy shall be further limited to a maximum of two (2) individuals
per sleeping room plus two (2) individuals per vacation home.
b. Maximum Occupancy in Residential Zoning Districts: 9-and-Over occupants. A
residential structure with four (4) or more sleeping rooms may
apply for Large Vacation Home Review (LVHR) approval as a "9-
and-over vacation home", in accordance with the regulations in
§5.1.13.3. The maximum occupancy in a 9-and-over vacation
home shall be as specified in the Large Vacation Home Re-view
terms of approval; provided that occupancy shall be limited to a maximum
of two (2) individuals per sleeping room plus two (2) individuals per vacation home.
c. Maximum Occupancy in Non-Residential Zoning Districts.
Occupancy shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) individuals per sleeping room
plus two (2) individuals per vacation home. No overall maximum occupancy for a
vacation home in a non-residential zoning district shall be applicable, provided that the
vacation home is deemed to be in compliance with all Building, Fire, and Health
Codes and that a valid operating registration is issued.
d. For purposes of this Code section, occupancy shall not be counted differentially on
the basis of age or status.
e. Number of Parties:; Vacation homes in residential zone districts as those districts are
defined herein shall be rented, leased or furnished to no more than one (1) party,
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
Page 4 of 9
occupying the vacation home as a single group. Owners of the vacation home shall
not be allowed to occupy the vacation home while a party is present. All occupants
must shall be registered by name on or before the time of the party's initial occupancy.
The name registry shall be maintained by the property owner or manager, and shall
be made available to the Community Development Department upon the
Department's request.
f. Home Occupations. Home occupations shall not be operated on the site of a vacation
home, nor shall vacation homes offer ancillary services to guests.
g. Vacation homes shall be required to meet applicable Building, Health and Fire codes.
h. Except as specifically provided for elsewhere in this Code, general development
standards (Chapter 7) as required by the underlying zoning district shall be
applicable. In residential zoning districts, development standards shall be those for
single-family detached dwellings in the zoning district. In non-residential zoning
districts, development standards shall be those for "hotel, small" in the zoning district.
i. Vacation homes, whether new or existing structures, shall be subject to the
requirements of Sec. 7.9 (Exterior Lighting) for new development.
j. Initial Time Frame for Compliance. All vacation homes in ovory any residential zoning
district whose owners wish to obtain an operating registration during 2017 shall be
required to obtain apply for a new or renewed, as the case may be, operating
registration by a deadline no later than March 31, 2017. Vacation home owners in
any non-residential zoning district may apply at any time during 2017 for an operating
registration, provided that in all cases: (a) the vacation home shall not be occupied by
clients until the registration is approved and issued; and (b) the operating registration
remains valid only until December 31, 2017, subject to re-registration in 2018 or later
per requirements of this Code.
j,k. Issuance of the operating registration by the Town shall have no fixed deadline;
however, the Town shall make all reasonable effort to issue operating registration
approvals in an orderly and expeditious manner, as may be determined by the Town.
3. Large Vacation Home Review (LV-HReview) for 9-and-Over Vacation Homes in
Residential Zoning Districts.
a. The owner of record of a vacation home in a residential zoning district that has
filed a complete application for an 8-
and-under vacation home operating registration on or before March 31, 2017, may
make application for Large Vacation Home Review (LVHR) under the procedures of
this Section and Code to allow nine (9) or more individuals to occupy the vacation
home, provided that:
(1) The vacation home for which Large Vacation Home Review application is
made has four (4) or more sleeping rooms; and
(2) The vacation home is in compliance with all applicable Building, Health, and
Fire Codes, or is brought into compliance with said Codes by deadline dates
as specified in accordance with the Codes.
b. The Large Vacation Home Review application shall be reviewed and may be
approved by motion and affirmative vote of the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission's decision shall be final, except that an appeal by a party in interest of
the Planning Commission's decision may be made to the Town of Estes Park Board
of Trustees or the Board of Larimer County Commissioners, whichever has
jurisdiction.
c. Large Vacation Home Review for a 9-and-over vacation home shall comply with the
"e e C CI:
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 PC meeting
Page 5 of 9
following policies and procedures:
(1) The procedure for application, review, and approval shall comply with the
"Procedure Checklist for Large Vacation Home Review: 9-and-Over Vacation
Homes", promulgated and maintained by the Community Development
Department;
(2) The required "Vacation Home Safety Inspection Report" and "Vacation Home
Location Inspection Report" shall be provided to the Planning Commission
prior to any Planning Commission approval of a Large Vacation Home Review;
(3) The minimum lot size for a 9-and-over vacation home shall be one (1) acre,
unless the Planning Commission makes a specific finding of-fast-that the
vacation home is in conformance with applicable has demonstrated adequate
buffering or screening from adjacent and nearby properties, such that 4:4-56-8444-
development standards with a lot size of less than one (1) acre is
commensurate with Large Vacation Home use. Appropriate alternative
standards for demonstrating adequate buffering or screening shall include, but
not be limited to: orientation of the Large Vacation Home on the property away
from nearby residential structures, linear separation from other residential
structures, separation from other structures by an intervening right-of-way,
topographic features such as rock formations or grade differences, and mature
vegetation or fencing;
(4) The minimum front, side, and rear setback from any lot boundary shall be
twenty-five (25) feet or the setback under the zoning district -ef whichever is
greater, unless the Planning Commission makes a specific finding of-fact that
the vacation home
ctandards with has demonstrated adequate buffering or screening from
adjacent and nearby properties, such that a setback of less than twenty-five
(25) feet or less than the setback under the zoning district, whichever may be
applicable, is commensurate with Large Vacation Home use. Appropriate
alternative standards for demonstrating adequate buffering or screening shall
include, but not be limited to: orientation of the Large Vacation Home on the
property away from nearby residential structures, linear separation from other
residential structures, separation from other structures by an intervening right-
of-way, topographic features such as rock formations or grade differences, and
mature vegetation or fencing;
(5) An approved Large Vacation Home shall in no case be occupied by more than
two (2) occupants per bedroom plus two (2) additional occupants.
d. Denial of a Large Vacation Home Review zoning permission for use as a 9-and-over
vacation home shall not void an existing operating license for an 8-and-under vacation
home, nor shall such denial in itself void zoning permissibility for use as an 8-and-
under vacation home; provided that 8-and-under vacation home zoning requirements
in this Code and other applicable regulations remain applicable.
4. Inspections
a. Beginning December 16, 2016, inspections of all vacation homes per the
requirements of this Code shall be completed prior to initial approval of any operating
registration.
b. All vacation homes with registrations approved during calendar year 2017 shall be
inspected at least one (1) time during calendar year 2017.
c. Inspection after a violation is cured, and after a change in ownership, shall be
required.
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A —Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
Page 6 of 9
d. Inspections shall be completed by the Department in accordance with the applicable
inspection checklist as promulgated and maintained by the Community Development
Department. The checklist shall be either the "Procedure Checklist for 8-and-Under
Vacation Homes" or the "Procedure Checklist for Large Vacation Home Review: 9-
and-Over Vacation Homes", whichever may be applicable. These checklists are
hereby adopted and incorporated by reference in this Code.
5. Transitional Regulations. In order to establish an equitable method of transitioning
from pre-existing vacation-home regulations and those taking effect on December 16,
2016 and beyond, the following interim regulations shall be effective. In case of any
conflict between regulations elsewhere in this Code and the transitional regulations,
the transitional regulations shall control:
a. All 2017 operating-registration applications for vacation homes that have active
operating registrations as of December 15, 2016, shall have first priority in
application processing and operating-registration approval for 2017.
b. Within such application first-priority queue as may result from applications filed
under subsection a., sequencing of registration issuance shall be determined by the
date/time received filing stamp by the Town Clerk's Office on the face of each
application.
c. All 2017 operating-registration applications for vacation homes that do not have
active operating registrations as of December 15, 2016, but for which either or both
of the following is provided to the Town Clerk's office at the time of initial application,
shall have second priority in application processing and operating-registration
approval for 2017:
(1) a written signed contract for vacation-home occupancy during 2016 is
provided to the Town Clerk's Office;
(2) an executed and signed sales tax return establishing that sales tax has been
paid during Year 2016 to the State of Colorado for the vacation home.
d. Within such application second-priority queue as may result from applications filed
under subsection c., sequencing of registration issuance shall be determined by the
date/time received filing stamp by the Town Clerk's Office on the face of each
application.
e. All 2017 operating-registration applications for vacation homes that do not satisfy
the requisite conditions in subsection a. or c. shall have third priority in application
processing and operating-registration approval for 2017.
f. Within such application third-priority queue as may result from applications filed
under subsection e., sequencing of registration issuance shall be determined by the
date/time filing stamp by the Town Clerk's Office on the face of each application.
g. In the event the cap for vacation homes in residential zoning districts in §5.1.B.2 is
reached at any point in the 2017 queuing process, applications shall be maintained
on a waiting list in the order established within priority queues as specified above.
h. All operating registrations approved and iceuodpursuant to applications filed
between December 16, 2016 and March 31, 2017 shall initially be for 8-and-under
occupants only. The Large Vacation Home Review shall determine whether or not
operating-registration-approved vacation homes with four (4) or more sleeping
rooms may be approved as 9-and-over vacation homes.
i. All vacation home permits in effect on December 15, 2016 shall be automatically
extended and in effect through March 31, 2017. This extension shall be deemed a
separate matter from the operating registration requirements beginning January 1,
Estes Valley Development Code Page 7 of 9
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
2017. Either an approved 2017 operating registration or an extended 2016 permit
shall allow operation of an 8-and-under vacation home at a given location, provided
the vacation home remains in compliance with all other applicable regulations.
Table 4-1: Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts.
Table 4-4
Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts
Specific
Use
Residential Zoning Districts
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S" = Permitted by Special Review
"LV" = Permitted by Large Vacation Home
Review
"— = Prohibited
Additional Regulations
(Apply in All Districts
Unless Otherwise Stated)
RE-
1 RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
Low-Intensity
Accommodations
Bed and
Breakfast
Inn
— — — — — — S P §5.1B
Vacation
Home:
8-and-
under
Occupants
P P P P P P P P §5.1B
Vacation
Home:
9-and-over
Occupants
LV LV LV LV LV LV LV LV
§5.1B (Large Vacation Home
Reviews may be approved by
Planning Commission only,
subject to specified criteria)
Table 4-4: Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts.
Table 4-4
Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts
Use
Classification
SpecificA
Use
Nonresidential Zoning Districts
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S" = Permitted by Special Review
—" = Prohibited
Additional
Regulations
(Apply in All
Districts
Unless Otherwise
Stated) A-1 CD CO 0 CH 1-1
Low-Intensity
Accommodations
Vacation
Home
P P P P _ — —
Estes Valley Development Code Page 8 of 9
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
§ 5.2 ACCESSORY USES (INCLUDING HOME OCCUPATIONS) AND ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES
Table 5-2
Accessory Uses Permitted in the Nonresidential Zoning Districts
Accessory Use
Residential Zoning District
"Yes" = Permitted "No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit Additional
Requirements A A-1 CD CO 0 CH 1-1
Vacates-Home No Yes Yes No No No No §-54-4
In CD, such use shall
not be located on
the floor ground of a
b4444ing fronting on
Elkhorn Avenue.
{Ord. 02 10 §1}
§7.9 EXTERIOR LIGHTING
B. Applicability. All new development shall comply with the standards set forth in this Section.
Vacation homes as designated and regulated in §5.1.B of this Code shall comply with the
standards set forth in this Section, whether new or existing.
§ 12.7 - ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
A. Nonemergency Matters.
In the case of a violation of this Code that does not constitute an emergency or require immediate
attention, written notice of the nature of the violation shall be given to the property owner, agent,
or the Applicant for any relevant permit or registration. Notice shall be given in person, or by
certified U.S. Mail, or contact via website contact. The notice shall specify the Code provisions
allegedly in violation, and—unless a shorter time frame is allowed by this Chapter—shall state
that the individual has a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of the receipt of the notice in
which to correct the alleged violations before further enforcement action shall be taken. The
notice shall also state any appeal and/or variance procedures available pursuant to this Code.
The Board of Trustees or Board of County Commissioners, as applicable, may grant an
extension of the time to cure a violation, up to a total of ninety (90) days, if the Board finds
that due to the nature of the violation, it reasonably appears that it cannot be corrected within
fifteen (15) days. (Ord. 2-02 #3)
[REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
Estes Valley Development Code Page 9 of 9
Vacation Homes — Exhibit A — Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Feb. 21, 2017 — PC meeting
A
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Staff Report
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
To: Estes Valley Planning Commission
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: February 21, 2017
RE: Proposed Text Amendments to Estes Valley Development Code:
EVDC §4.3, §5.2, and §13.3 (Accessory Kitchens)
Planning Commission Objective:
Review and recommendation on proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC) §4.3, §5.2, and §13.3 (Accessory Kitchens): amendments to
the Accessory Kitchen regulations regarding the removal of accessory kitchens as a
permanent accessory use in residential districts.
Code Amendment Objective:
The objective of this proposed code amendment is to revise the EVDC to do the following:
• Eliminate Accessory Kitchens (often called "second kitchens") as legally allowable
accessory "uses" in the Estes Valley Development Code;
• Eliminates the possibility that an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit could be rented
out separately from the principal Single Family Dwelling to which it's attached, in
violation of EVDC;
• Eliminates the possibility that even a non-rented accessory-kitchen part of a house
could be built or maintained in circumvention of the requirements for ADUs (e.g.,
1.33 times minimum lot size, 800 sq. ft. minimum floor area, additional parking,
etc.);
• Provides for an exception in the above changes to Code so that outdoor kitchens
can be built or maintained, and also adds a definition to Code for "Kitchen,
Outdoor".
Proposal:
Amend EVDC Sections 4.3, 5.2, and 13.3 as stated in Exhibit A ["PC Draft"], dated Feb.
21, 2017, attached.
Staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend approval of the language in
Exhibit A to the Town Board of Trustees and the Board of County Commissioners.
Discussion:
This text amendment is a follow-up to the Town's decision not to approve attached
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) long-term rental regulations in late 2016. The ADU
amendment was sent forward with a "do not pass" recommendation by unanimous
vote of the Planning Commission on Oct. 18, 2016. The amendment subsequently
failed approval by the Town Board of Trustees by a vote of 3 in favor of adoption
and 4 opposed.
In an August 2016 study session with Town Board and in a September study
session with Planning Commission, staff indicated that if the ADU amendment did
not pass, it would be appropriate and necessary to remove Accessory Kitchens as
allowable "uses" in EVDC.
The Accessory Kitchens section has probably served legitimate purposes over the
years since the EVDC was amended to allow them (a quick review seems to show
that amendment was approved in 2010). There are times when someone may wish
to have a full second kitchen in a single-family residential house for reasons that
have nothing to do with renting or allowing an unrelated household to occupy that
area of the house.
However, a full second kitchen in a single-family structure — especially a full second
kitchen in a part of the house that also has a separate external entrance, which is
probably the norm for any house built under modern-day building codes — is
virtually a wide-open pathway to allowing attached ADUs without any of the ADU
regulations in EVDC.
In longstanding planning and zoning practice across the U.S., a full second kitchen
is one of the dividing lines between one unit in a "single-family" structure, versus
two units. We usually rely on at least one of four criteria in code administration and
code enforcement to determine whether it is one unit or two, and a second kitchen
(specifically a second 220-volt stove or equivalent gas-fired appliance) is the main
one on the list.
(For completeness, the other three criteria are: (a) a second electric meter; (b) a
second domestic water service line or meter; and (c) a second USPS address.
Every college town in America has a wide selection of all four types of curiosities.)
Staff has no systematic information on all the uses and purposes to which
accessory kitchens may be put in the Estes Valley. Some are no doubt not
currently functioning as ADUs. The problem is that there is no way to know where
and when that could be happening.
A few caveats:
Written February 16, 2017 Page 2 of 5
• The term "Kitchen" is defined in EVDC as a complete or full kitchen
(definition is included in Exhibit A for reference; no change is proposed).
We do not define a term such as "limited kitchen" or "partial kitchen", but
since a kitchen by definition includes 220-volt appliance service or gas
equivalent, the absence of that service by default means a limited kitchen
is under different regulations. Staff does not see a need to regulate second
limited kitchens out of existence or otherwise change their status at this
time.
• Existing accessory kitchens would become legally non-conforming
(popularly called "grandfathering").
• The amendments would only affect the eight residential zoning districts -
those beginning with letters "R" or "E". Accessory kitchens in other zoning
districts would not be affected.
• Outdoor kitchens would get a new definition under this amendment, and
would not be considered accessory kitchens. A residential dwelling could
have an outdoor kitchen as defined under the proposed amendments.
Staff's understanding is that the Planning Commission and a majority of Town
Board were quite clear in expressing direction that attached ADUs needed tight
regulation. The Accessory Kitchens provision has for some years offered a back-
door way to create potentially rentable and possibly substandard ADUs in
residential neighborhoods.
New regulations that prohibit or circumscribe activities should always have an
identifiable relationship to positive public policy. In this case, staff's perception is
that the community wishes to avoid adding density, additional traffic, and similar
things to quiet neighborhoods in the Estes Valley.
To maintain integrity in our land-use regulations, eliminating accessory kitchens is
a necessary step. Without that, the decisions in fall 2016 regarding ADUs would
basically be meaningless.
Staff Findings of Fact:
The text amendment complies with EVDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments — Standards for
Review).
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review
"All rezonings and text amendments to the EVDC shall meet the following criteria:"
Written February 16, 2017 Page 3 of 5
1. "The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected;"
Staff Finding:
The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected.
2. "The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would
allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in
the Estes Valley;"
Staff Finding:
The proposed text amendment is compatible and consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the
Estes Valley.
3. "The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability
to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the
application were approved."
Staff Finding:
Providers of public water, sewage disposal, electric services, fire protection, and
transportation services have expressed no concerns with the proposed
amendment in principle.
Advantages:
• Complies with the EVDC Section §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review.
• Removes a loophole in current Code that could allow, inadvertently or otherwise, a
land use that is currently prohibited in the code.
Disadvantages:
• A few property owners who wish to add a second kitchen for reasons unrelated to
ADU capability will find it impossible to do so.
Action Recommended:
Review the amendment for compliance with Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC)
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review and forward a recommendation the
Written February 16, 2017 Page 4 of 5
Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners
for a final decision to approve, deny, or approve with conditions.
Level of Public Interest:
High: Addressing housing attainability and affordability in the Estes Valley
Low: This particular Code amendment
Sample Motions:
APPROVAL
I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County
Board of County Commissioners approve the text amendment to the Estes Valley
Development Code as presented in Exhibit A as recommended by staff.
CONTINUANCE
I move to CONTINUE this agenda item to the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting because... (state reason(s) for continuance - findings).
DENIAL
I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County
Board of County Commissioners deny the text amendment to the Estes Valley
Development Code as presented in Exhibit A, finding that . . . (state reasons for denial).
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A: Accessory Kitchens (Feb. 21, 2017).
Written February 16, 2017 Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT A
[Feb. 21, 2017 — Planning Commission draft]
§ 4.3 — RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
D. Additional Zoning District Standards.
5. Kitchens in Single-Family Dwellings. No single-family dwelling in a residential
zoning district shall have more than one (I) kitchen as defined in this Code;
provided, however, that a single-family dwelling may also have one (1) outdoor
kitchen as defined in this Code.
§ 5.2 - ACCESSORY USES (INCLUDING HOME OCCUPATIONS)
AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
B. Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts
Table 5-1
Accessory Uses and Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts
RE-1 RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
Outdoor kitchen Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Accessory kitchen Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Ne
§5.2.B.2.f
03 10 (Ord. §1)
2. Additional Requirements for Specific Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted
in the Residential Zoning Districts.
f— Accessory kitchen
defined in Section 13.2.C.28 "Household Living."
(3) The dwelling shall have only one (1) address.
(1) Interior acce.,s shall be maintained to all parts of the dwelling to ensure
-g unit or apartment is not created.
(5 ) Land Use-Affidavit
(a) Accessory kitchens located in-a 22. • : • z "
includes sanitary facilities shall require a Land Use Affidavit-prepaFeel-by-the
Community Development Department.
(b) The Community Development Department shall record this Land
buildingper it.
f. Outdoor kitchen. A single-family dwelling may have one (1) outdoor kitchen,
either attached to the principal structure or detached, in addition to a kitchen inside
the principal structure, provided that:
(1) An outdoor kitchen shall be a minimum of 10 feet from the rear lot line and
not closer to the side lot line than the required side yard setback of the
applicable district.
(2) Cooking appliances in an outdoor kitchen shall maintain a minimum distance
from combustible materials as recommended by the appliance manufacturer
and as may be required under the applicable International Fire Code (IFC).
§ 13.3 - DEFINITIONS OF WORDS, TERMS AND PHRASES
130. Kitchen shall mean a room or space within a room equipped with such electrical
or gas hook-up that would enable the installation of a range, oven or like
appliance using 220/40 volts or natural gas (or similar fuels) for the preparation
of food, and also containing either or both a refrigerator and sink.
130.1 Kitchen, Accessory shall mean a kitchen other than the principal kitchen
associated with a single-family dwelling.
130.3 Kitchen, Outdoor shall mean a kitchen as defined herein, except that an
outdoor kitchen shall be located in an unenclosed area that may be roofed, but is
open on at least two sides and exposed to weather.