Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2013-09-10 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment September 10, 2013, 9:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair Jeff Moreau, Vice-Chair Bob McCreery, Members John Lynch, Wayne Newsom, and Pete Smith; Alternate Member Chris Christian Attending: Chair Moreau, Members McCreery, Lynch, Smith and Newsom Also Attending: Director Chilcott, Planner Kleisler, Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: None Chair Moreau called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. He introduced the Board members and staff. There was a quorum for the meeting. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. There were three people in attendance. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 2. CONSENT Approval of minutes of the August 6, 2013 meeting. It was moved and seconded (McCreery/Smith) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented and the motion passed unanimously. 3. METES & BOUNDS PARCEL, 217 Big Horn Drive Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. The property at issue is located at 217 Big Horn Drive, and the applicant has requested a variance from the Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.3 Table 4-2, which requires buildings and accessory structures be setback a minimum of ten (10) feet from the side property line in the RM–Multi-Family Residential zone district. The applicant has requested to encroach approximately five (5) feet into the side setback to construct a proposed deck. Planner Kleisler stated the lot size is 0.14 acres, just over 6,000 square feet. The minimum lot size for a single-family dwelling in the RM zone district is 18,000 square feet. The existing dwelling is very close to the property line, and sits partially in the setback. The proposed deck would be located on the north end of the property. Planner Kleisler stated the application was routed to affected agencies and adjacent property owners, and a legal notice was published in the local newspaper. No concerns were expressed by agencies or neighbors. Staff Findings 1. In determining whether special circumstances or conditions exist, staff found: a. The existing dwelling is partially located within the side setback. According to the Larimer County Tax Assessor, this single-family home was built in 1939 and is legally nonconforming to current setback standards. 2. In determining practical difficulty, staff found: a. The residential use may continue without the variance. b. The variance was not substantial c. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered with the approval of this variance. Nearby homes are generally the same size or larger, with some having decks similar in scope to the one proposed. Adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of this variance. The nearest property is a residential dwelling approximately 23 feet to the south. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2 September 10, 2013 d. Affected agencies expressed no concerns relating to public services for this variance. e. The applicant purchased the property in late 2011, after the adoption of the current setback requirements. f. A variance appears to be the only practical option to construct a functional deck. 3. Staff found the proposed variance represented the least deviation from the regulations that would afford relief, and the functionality of the proposed deck may be limited if built within the required setbacks. 4. Staff found they could determine compliance with the variance without an official setback certificate. Staff recommended approval of the variance, with conditions listed below. Conditions 1. Compliance with the approved site plan. Staff and Board Member Discussion Member Moreau asked about the waiver of the setback certificate. He questioned whether the official setback certificate was being required unnecessarily on many projects. Member Newsom stated there have been instances where the plans have changed after the approval, requiring a setback certificate. Director Chilcott stated staff can frequently verify compliance without requesting an official setback certificate, and the building inspector can often make that determination. She stated there are parameters when a certificate is necessary, and staff would not be comfortable with changing policy to waive all setback (and foundation) certificates. She would review the current policy with staff. Public Comment Steve Randall/applicant asked for clarification about the compliance verification after the deck is constructed. Planner Kleisler stated a letter would be mailed following the meeting providing direction for the completion of the project. It was moved and seconded (Lynch/Smith) to approve the variance request as presented with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously. REPORTS Director Chilcott reported on the parking structure design charrettes presented last week. The Town board will proceed with the selection made at the meetings. She stated the design team will submit a development plan. The front setback must be a minimum of eight (8) feet and a maximum of sixteen (16) feet from the property line. Director Chilcott stated a variance request for the front setback was likely, and a special Board of Adjustment meeting may be considered. Construction is planned to be completed by late May, 2014. She stated a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to hear the variance request and the development plan may be necessary to fit the project into the tight schedule. Director Chilcott will be reviewing timelines to make sure all legal deadlines can be met. In the CD–Commercial Downtown zone district, the purpose of the setbacks is to create a pedestrian area and allow views of the Visitor Center. There was some discussion during the presentation about the proposed lighting on top of the structure possibly exceeding the 30 foot height limit. She stated the proposed structure would contain three levels of parking, with the top level being exposed. She would stay in contact with the Board as to timelines and would appreciate cooperation to keep the project moving. Director Chilcott stated no new applications for the proposed performing arts center have been received. Will Birchfield, Floodplain Manager, has received some information from FEMA regarding the floodplain in that area. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3 September 10, 2013 When asked by Member Newsom about the status of Fall River Village, Director Chilcott reported all building permits have expired and there has been some damage to some of the unfinished buildings. Chief Building Official Birchfield has been talking to an owner’s representative concerning what would need to be done to reinstate work on the project. There being no further business, Chair Moreau adjourned the meeting at 9:24 a.m. ___________________________________ Jeff Moreau, Chair __________________________________ Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary