HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2014-04-01Prepared:March24,2014Revised:AGENDAESTESVALLEYBOARDOFADJUSTMENTTuesday,April1,20149:00a.m.—BoardRoomTownHall1.PUBLICCOMMENT2.CONSENTAGENDAApprovalofminutesdatedFebruary4,20143.TRACT61AOFTHEAMENDEDPLATOFTRACTS59,61,62,&63,FALLRIVERADDITION,1350FaIlRiverRoadOwner:NickKaneApplicant:NickKaneRequest:VariancefromEVDCSection7.6.E.1.a(2)(b)whichrequiresallbuildingsandaccessorystructuresbesetbackthirty(30)feetfromtheannualhigh-watermarkofrivercorridorsor,ifnotreadilydiscernible,fromthedefinedbankoftheriver.VariancerequesttoallowstructuralrepairofexistingdeckspanningFallRiver.StaffContact:DaveShirk4.REPORTS5.ADJOURNMENTTheEstesValleyBoardofAdjustmentreservestherighttoconsiderotherappropriateitemsnotavailableatthetimetheagendawasprepared.
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSRegularMeetingoftheEstesValleyBoardofAdjustmentFebruary4,20149:00a.m.BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallBoard:ChairJohnLynch,Vice-ChairJeffMoreau,MembersBobMcCreery,WayneNewsom,andPeteSmith;AlternateMemberChrisChristianAttending:ChairLynchAlsoAttending:RecordingSecretaryThompsonAbsent:MembersMcCreery,Moreau,Newsom,SmithMemberLynchcalledthemeetingtoorderat9:00a.m.Aquorum(threemembers)wasnotpresent.Itwasdeterminednobusinesscouldbeconductedbecauseaquorumwasnotpresent.ChairLynchstatedonJanuary21,2014,theapplicantfortheEstesParkMedicalCenterNorthParkingLotExpansionProjectrequestedtheitembetableduntilfurthernotice.Themeetingwasadjournedat9:05a.m.JohnLynch,ChairKarenThompson,RecordingSecretary
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommissionIFebruary18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallCommission:ChairBettyHull,CommissionersDougKlink,CharleyDickey,KathyBowers,NancyHills,SteveMurphree,WendyeSykesAttending:ChairHull,CommissionersKlink,Dickey,Bowers,HillsandMurphreeAlsoAttending:DirectorChilcott,SeniorPlannerShirk,TownBoardLiaisonElrod,LarimerCountyLiaisonMichaelWhitley,andRecordingSecretaryThompsonAbsent:CommissionerSykesThefollowingminutesreflecttheorderoftheagendaandnotnecessarilythechronologicalsequence.ChairHullcalledthemeetingtoorderat1:30p.m.Therewereapproximately75peopleinattendance.ChairHullexplainedthepurposeoftheEstesValleyPlanningCommissionandstatedpubliccommentisinvaluable.EachCommissionerwasintroduced.ChairHullexplainedtheprocessforacceptingpubliccommentattoday’smeeting.1.PUBLICCOMMENTNone2.CONSENTAGENDAA.Approvalofminutes,January21,2014PlanningCommissionmeeting.B.AmendedPlat&MinorModificationofLot6,ProspectMountainSubdivision,570DevonDrive;Franz&CarolPeterson,Owners/ApplicantsItwasmovedandseconded(Klink/Dickey)toapprovetheconsentagendaaspresentedandthemotionpassedunanimously.3.EPMC/ANSCHUTZWELLNESSTRAININGCENTER,Lot4,StanleyHistoricDistrict;TBDSteamerParkwayNOTE:Duetothelengthofthestaffreportforthisproject,andtheneedtotranscribetheminutesassoonaspossible,thestaffreporthasbeenincludedasanofficialpartoftheminutes.TheTownBoardisscheduledtomakefinaldecisionsonthisprojectnextTuesday,February25,2014.PlannerShirkstatedtheproposalwasthedevelopmentofLot4,StanleyHistoricDistrict,toincludeaccommodationsunits,andaproposedwelinesscenter/treatmentfacility.TheapplicantisGrandHeritageHotelGroup,LLC,owneroftheStanleyHotel.Theapplicantproposestoconstructastructurecontainingfifty(50)accommodationsunits,receptionarea,lecturehall,andthetreatment/nutritioncenter.Asecondbuildingwouldhousetheweilnesscenter.PhaseIIoftheprojectwouldincludeanadditionalthirty-two(32)accommodationsunits.Thesitewillinclude30%openspace,withlotcoveragebeing37%,bothcomplyingwith
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission2February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHalltheproposedunderlyingzonedistrictstandards.ThepropertyiszonedCO—CommercialOutlying,withtheStanleyHotelpropertyzonedA—Accommodations.StanleyVillageShoppingCenter,directlyeastofLot4,iszonedCO—CommercialOutlying.TheapplicantproposestoamendthezoningmapsoLot4willbezonedA—AccommodationsaligningwiththeStanleyHotelcomplex.Thesurroundingareascontainsingle-familyresidentialareastothenorthandeast,multi-familyresidentialareastothesouthandwest,andtheKnoll-WillowsopenspaceacrossWonderviewAvenuetothesouth.PlannerShirkstatedthereisanapproximate60-footelevationdropfromthemainhoteltothesouthwestcornerofthelot.Lot5,adjacenttoLot4onthesouthwestside,isownedbytheTownofEstesParkandhasbeenplacedinaconservationeasement.PlannerShirkstatedthedesignincludesanemergencyaccesslaneonSteamerDrive,whichwouldbeclosedtotrafficexceptinanemergency.AlltrafficwouldberoutedviaSteamerParkway.Theproposedparkingareaswouldliebehindthestructures,complyingwithguidelinesoftheStanleyHistoricDistrict.Proposedloadingdockswouldbesomewhatscreenedbythestructures,complyingwiththeEstesValleyDevelopmentCode(EVDC).Severalbicyclerackswouldbeinstalledontheproperty.Therehavebeensomeminordesignchangestothestructures,whichwillbeincludedintherevisedplanstobesubmittedpriortotheTownBoardmeeting.Theseincludechangestothesemi-conicalroof,variationstotheexteriorwallstocreateoffsets,etc.PlannerShirkstatedtheprojectwasreviewedtodeterminehowitinteractswiththeEstesValleyComprehensivePlan.Pleaserefertopagesix(6)ofthestaffreportfordetailedinformation.Hestatedaccommodationsuseisasub-categoryofcommercialdevelopment.PlannerShirkreviewedthecodeamendmentsthatwouldbeapplicabletothisproject.Pleaserefertopageeight(8)ofthestaffreportfordetailedinformation.ThissectionalsoincludesinformationpertainingtotheproposedusesastheyrelatetotheuseclassificationsintheEVDC.PlannerShirkreviewedtheproposedamendedplat,whichwouldremoveaplatted“nondevelopmentarea”locatedonthewesternportionofthelot.Pleaserefertopage11ofthestaffreportforadditionalinformation,includingsomehistorybehindtheStanleyHistoricDistrictMasterPlan.Theapplicantproposestousetheplattednon-developmentareaforthehotel/lecturehall/treatmentfacility,andhasdesignatedtheeasterntriangulararea(nearTrueValueandDad’sLaundryinUpperStanleyVillage)asopenspace.PlannerShirkstatedtheproposedprojectcomplieswiththeviewcorridorsasrequiredinSection17.44.060(a)oftheEstesParkMunicipalCode(EPMC).Theapplicantandstaffconductedseparateanalysessurroundingtheviewcorridors;bothcametothesameconclusionthattheproposedviewcorridorscomplywiththecode.PlannerShirkexplainedtheSpecialReviewprocess,statingspecialreviewsaredevelopmentplansthatincludeusesthat,bytheirnature,havepotentialimpactonsurroundingproperties.Becauseofthispotential,theseusesrequireTownBoardapproval.SpecialReviewuses
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission3February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallrequire“theapplicationfortheproposedspecialreviewusemitigates,tothemaximumextentfeasible,potentialadverseimpactsonnearbylanduse,publicfacilitiesandservices,andtheenvironment.”Additionalinformationconcerningthespecialreviewprocesscanbefoundonpage16ofthestaffreport.PlannerShirkstatedtheapplicationwasroutedtoaffectedagenciesandadjacentpropertyowners.Noticestoadjacentpropertyownersextendedfarbeyondthe500-footrequirement,toincludethosepropertyownerswithaviewoftheStanleyHotel.Detailsconcerningaffectedagencycommentsareonpage17ofthestaffreport.Significantcommentsincluded:(1)ColoradoDepartmentofTransportation(CDOT)requestedandreceivedarevisedtrafficstudytoexaminetrafficvolume,anddeterminednooff-siteimprovementswouldbenecessaryforthisproposeddevelopment;(2)ColoradoParksandWildlife(CPW)expressedconcernregardingthefragmentationofhabitat,human/bearconflicts,andpossibleincreaseinaccidentsbetweenwildlifeandvehicles.Vehicleconflictscouldbeaddressedwithsignageneartheexistingopenspaceareas(Lot5andKnoll-Willows)thatwilllikelyreceiveadditionalgrazing;and(3)TheStateHistoricPreservationOfficerprovidedseveralcomments(page18ofthestaffreport)andstated“thevariationofconstructiontechniquesanddetailingmeetstheSecretaryoftheInterior’sguidelinesfornewworkinhistoriccontexts.”PlannerShirkreviewedtheapplicationforcompliancewithotherareasoftheEVDC,includingbutnotlimitedtobuildingheight,pedestrianamenitiesandlinkagerequirements,gradingandsitedisturbance,landscaping,stormwaterdrainage,exteriorlighting,outdoorstorageareas,etc.HestatedstaffrecommendedallparkingareasbecompletedwithPhaseI.Findings1.Theapplicationisconsistentwiththepolicies,goalsandobjectivesofthecomprehensivePlan,includingtheFutureLandUsePlanandtheDowntownareaplan.TheapplicationadvancesseveralCommunity-Widepolicies,asdelineatedinthestaffreport.2.TheapplicationfortheproposedSpecialReviewusemitigates,tothemaximumextentfeasible,potentialadverseimpactsonnearbylanduse,publicfacilitiesandservices,andtheenvironment.3.TheamendedplatcomplieswiththestandardsandcriteriasetforthinChapter10“SubdivisionStandards.”4.TheamendedplatandassociateddevelopmentsatisfythepurposeandintentoftheopenspaceandviewprotectionguidelinesdescribedintheStanleyHistoricDistrictMasterPlan.5.Theproposedcodeamendmentsarenecessarytoaddresschangesinareasaffected.Therearesignificantchangesintheareasincetheadoptionofthelanduseplananddevelopmentcode.6.Theproposedcodeamendmentsarecompatibleandconsistentwiththepoliciesandintentofthecomprehensiveplan.7.Adequateservicesandfacilitiesareavailabletoservethedevelopment.
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission4February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHall8.TheapplicationcomplieswiththeEstesParkMunicipalCodeChapter17.44StanleyHistoricDistrictStandardsforDevelopmentregarding:viewcorridors;openspace;sitedesign;pedestriancirculation;andsigns.9.TherequesttoexceedtheStanleyHistoricDistrictmaximumallowedbuildingheightofthirty(30)feetisallowedthroughspecialreviewapproval,andcomplieswithSection1.9.E.2MeasurementofMaximumBuildingHeightonSlopes.10.TheapplicationdoesnotcomplywithEstesParkMunicipalCodeChapter17.44StanleyHistoricDistrictStandardsforDevelopmentregardingbuildingdesign:redroof,whitewalls,buildingfacades,andconicalroof.Theproposedcodeamendmentswouldprovidecompliancetothesestandards.NOTE:Afterthecompletionofthestaffreport,theapplicantrevisedtheplansoftheconicalrooftobecompliantwiththeEPMC.11.Ifrevisedtocomplywithrecommendedconditionsofapproval,theapplicationwillcomplywithapplicablesectionsoftheEstesValleyDevelopmentCode,asdescribedintheReviewDiscussioninthestaffreport.12.ThisisaPlanningCommissionrecommendationtotheTownBoardofTrusteesoftheTownofEstesPark.13.InaccordancewithSection3.2.D,arevisedapplicationshallbeaconditionprecedenttoplacingtheapplicationontheTownBoardagenda.PlacementontheFebruary25,2014TownBoardagendarequiresaFebruary19,2014submittalofarevisedapplicationthatfullysatisfiesallconditionsofapproval.StaffandCommissionDiscussionNoneApplicantPresentationJohnCullen/applicantcongratulatedSeniorPlannerShirkandTownstafffortheextraordinaryeffortputforthbyTownstaffandothersinvolvedinthereview.IfthesaleofLot4isapprovedbyvotersonApril1st,heanticipatesconstructionofthefirstbuildingtocommenceinearlySeptember,2014.EstesParkMedicalCenterwillhaveatwo-yearwindowtobeginconstructiononthewellnesscenter.HeassuredtheCommissionthatifthehospitaldidnotconstructthewelinesscenter,hewould.Hemadeapromisetothecommunitythatthisprojectwouldbecompleted.Thewellnesscenterwouldbeabenefittotheeconomicviabilityofthemedicalcenter,andhewashonoredtobeworkingwiththemandtheAnschutzorganizationonthisproject.BrianHerwig/EstesParkMedicalCenterCEOapplaudedstaff,theengineers,andarchitectsontheproject.Hestateditwasveryimportanttothehospitaltostabilizetheirfinancesatatimewhenreimbursementsaredeclining.Hewascommittedtoprovidegreathealthcaretothecommunity,whichwouldbedifficultwithoutanewstreamofrevenue.Mr.HerwigmentionedarecentstudycompletedbytheEconomicDevelopmentCommittee,andstatedthiswouldbeagreatboostforthehospitalandthecommunity.HeappreciatedthecooperationandcollaborationwiththeStanleyHotel.
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission5February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallLuciaLiley/applicantrepresentativewaspleasedtopresenttheprojecttotheCommission.SheacknowledgedthehardworkofTownstaff,attorney,andreferralagencies.Theprocesshasbeensuccessfulduetoin-depthdiscussionanddialoguethatultimatelyimprovedtheproject.ShestatedthegoaloftheirproposalwastomeetalltheTown’sapplicablerequirements,andwasobligatedtobeveryclearaboutwhattheprojectisandisnot.ShestatedtherezoningrequestwouldmaketheproposeddevelopmentacontinuationoftheStanleyHoteluse.ShestatedtheprojectfitinverywellwiththeComprehensivePlanguidelines,particularlytheeconomicvisionstatements.Concerningtheamendedplattoremovetheno-buildline,shestatedthreemainreasons:1)Lot4isveryirregularlyshaped,creatingachallengeforbuildingconstruction;2)Itisimportanttohavealargebufferbetweentheproposedbuildingsandnearestresidentialneighborhoods;and3)Thehighestconcentrationofexistingtreesandshrubsareonthenortheasternportionofthelot;removingtheno-buildlinewouldallowthosetoremain.Additionally,thehistoricOdie’sTrailwouldbededicatedontheplatasapermanentpublictrail.Sheclarifiedtheproposedbuildingswouldnotimpacttheviewcorridors,thedevelopmentwouldcomplywiththe30%openspacerequirement,whichcouldnotincludeparkinglots,sidewalks,emergencyaccesslanes,etc.Theproposedopenspacewillbecompactandcontiguous.Shestatedtherewouldbeanother10%qualifiedopenspaceonthewesternportionofthelot(adjacenttoLot5).Ms.LileystatedtheapplicantwantedtoensurethebuildingswouldcomplementandbecompatiblewiththeStanleyHotel.ThiswasthereasonfortheamendmenttotheEPMC.TheprojectwouldbefunctionallyandvisuallyintegratedintotheStanleyHotelcomplex.Shestatedthereweresometechnicalportionsofthedevelopmentplanthatwerenotcomplete,butwouldbeaddressedwithstaffandagenciesassoonaspossible.Shestatedtheapplicantwaswillingtocomplywiththeconditionsofapproval.DavidBangs/projectengineerstatedthereweremultiplemeetingswiththePublicWorksDepartmentregardingthestormwaterdrainageplan.DiscussionsrevolvedaroundconceptualdesignstandardstodetainthestormwateronsiteandreleaseitintotheexistingdrainagesystemslocatedatthedownstreamendofStanleyVillageShoppingCenter.CalculationsarebeingfinalizedandafullreportwillbesubmittedonWednesday,February19,2014.Heprovidedanadditionaldocument(postedonthewebsiteasAdditionalOpenSpaceExhibitA)outliningtheadditionalopenspaceadjacenttoLot5previouslymentionedbyMs.Liley.AnytechnicalquestionsshouldbedirectedtoMr.Bangs.BarrySmith/corporatearchitectforapplicantstatedtheproposeddevelopmentwasanopportunityforLot4tobepartofthedowntownarea.Ideally,denseprojectsareplacedinareaswheretheyalreadyexist,sothislocationwouldbeanintegralpartofdowntownandwouldcreateasymbioticrelationshipwiththedowntownarea.Mr.Smithwassupportiveoftheamendedplatinordertobeabletomovetheopenspacetotheeasternportionofthelot,whereitwasbettersuited.HereiteratedthenewbuildingswouldnotimpacttheviewcorridorstotheStanleyHotelandManorHouse.Concerningtheconditionsofapproval,he
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission6February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallstatedrevisionswouldbemadetocomplywiththeconditions.Additionalresearchwouldbeconductedonwildlifehabitatandmigrationtoensuretheopenareasarewildlife-friendly.Mr.Smithstatedthearchitecturaldesignofthenewbuildingswouldbecompatiblewithoutbeingimposingontheoriginalhistoricdevelopment,andthedevelopmentwouldbeayear-roundfacility.PublicCommentKentSmith/TownresidentstatedhereviewedtheSecretaryoftheInterior’sruleonhistoricpreservation,anddeterminedtherewasenougharchitecturalchangetocomplywiththerule.ArthurBlume/Townresidentobjectedtoremovingtheno-buildline.Hestatedbuildinginthatareawouldnotallowwildlifetoroamfreelyintheareaandtheirhabitatwouldbefragmented.JohannaDarden/TownresidentstatedtheTownBoarddidnothavethelegalrighttoapprovedevelopmentapplicationsonpropertynotownedbytheapplicant.Shestatedtherezoningrequestshouldnotbeallowediftheapplicantdoesnotownthelandinquestion,anddiscouragedthePlanningCommissionfromrecommendingapprovaltotheTownBoard.HerwrittencommentswereplacedontheTownwebsite.PhilMoenning/Countyresidentsupportedthestaffreport,findings,recommendations,andconditionsofapproval.ChrisReveley/TownresidentacknowledgedMr.CullenformakingtheStanleyHoteleconomicallysuccessful.However,hewasopposedtothedevelopmentofLot4.EdHayek/TownresidentencouragedthePlanningCommissiontonotrequiretheentireparkingareabecompletedwithPhaseI,statingtheparkingareascouldbebuiltasneededwithfuturedevelopmentoftheproperty.Herecommendedhavinganaccessagreementtoallowpublicuseofthesocialtrailontheproperty,statingthisexistingtrailisheavilyusedbyresidentsofthenearbyneighborhood.HeencouragedtheCommissionerstopaycloseattentiontothebuildingheightstolimitviewcorridorimpacts,andwasopposedtoanyheightinexcessofthirtyfeet.SherryRuth/TownresidentstatedtheEstesValleyissurroundedbyopenspaceandwildlife.Thelossoftheno-buildareawouldnothaveanegativeimpact,andshesupportedtheproject.SteveThorn/CountyresidentsupportedtherezoningfromCOtoA,statingtheapprovaloftherezoningwouldallowthedevelopmenttoalignmorewiththeStanleyHotelthantheStanleyVillageShoppingCenter.
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission7February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallBillRuth/Townresidentwassupportiveoftheamendedplat,statingopenspacewouldstillbemaintainedonthelot,justinadifferentlocation.Viewcorridorswouldbepreserved.SusanWolf/CountyresidentencouragedtheCommissionerstoconsidertheviewimpactsfromLakeEstes.GregMillikan/TownresidentsupportedthedevelopmentandlookedforwardtoaviewbetterthanthebackofSafeway.Hestatedtheviewshedis360degrees,notjustuphilltowardsthehotel.HewasconcernedastowhethertheallowanceofwhiteexteriorwallsandredroofswouldextendtootherareasoftheStanleyHistoricDistrict.AnneMorris/Countysupportedtheproject.Sheappreciatedthedesignsbeingcomplimentarytothehistoricarchitectureofthehotel,andthoughttheviewfromtheStanleyHoteltothesoutheastwouldbegreatlyimprovedwiththeapprovalofthisdevelopment.Publiccommentclosed.StaffandCommissionDiscussionTownAttorneyWhitestatedtheapplicationspresentedtodayareallcontingentontheclosingofthesaleofLot4.ThedecisionsmadebyPlanningCommissionandTownBoardwouldnotgointoeffectuntilthetransactioncloses.HestressedtheimportanceofvotingonApril1sttodeterminewhetherornotLot4issoldtotheapplicant.PlannerShirkstatedstaffrecommendedallparkingareasbecompletedatthesametime.Theycouldbephasedin,butstaffwouldneedtobeensuredthatPhaseIwouldhaveadequateparking.Mr.CullenaddedhewouldprefertobeginconstructionofPhaseIIimmediatelyfollowingPhaseI,andwasnotconcernedaboutphasingtheparkingareas.PlannerShirkstatedstaffrecommendedapprovalofallaspectsoftheproposedEPMC/AnschutzWelinessTrainingCenter,including:1.TherezoningofLot4fromCO—CommercialOutlyingtoA—Accommodations2.TheamendedplatofLot43.SpecialReviewoftheDevelopmentPlan(SR2014-01)4.AmendmentstotheEstesValleyDevelopmentCodetoprovideathree-yearapprovalperiod5.AmendmenttotheEstesParkMunicipalCodetopermitthebuildingstobecompatiblewiththecolorsandarchitectureoftheStanleyHotel;and,subjecttothefollowing:ConditionsofApproval1.April1,2014voterapprovaltoallowsaleofLot4,StanleyHistoricDistrict2.AllparkingshallbeconstructedwithPhaseI3.Architecture
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission8February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHalla.Buildingsshallbestepped,asdemonstratedonSheetA5.0b.Sign:Thestonebaseshallmatchthestoneusedinotherstructuresonthepropertyandotherfree-standingmonumentsigns4.TheplanmustdemonstratecompliancewithSection5.1.JHotelsregardingamountofgrossfloorareafornon-livingquarters.5.Theemergencyaccesslaneshallbereducedto20-feetinwidth,includearoll-overcurbandaconcretesidewalk.6.Thetrafficcircleshallbewidenedtothemaximumextentfeasible.NOTE:Aftercompletionofthestaffreport,thetrafficcirclewaswidenedapproximatelyfivefeetandwillnowaccommodatealargevanorsmallbus.7.TrafficstudyshallberevisedtocomplywithCDOTrequests.NOTE:Aftercompletionofthestaffreport,theapplicantmadethenecessaryrevisionsandthestudynowcomplieswiththeCDOTstandards.8.ManualofUniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)wildlifecrossingsignsarerequiredonWonderviewAvenue,nearthecrossingbetweenLotSandtheKnoll-Willowsopenspace.DesignandlocationshallbedeterminedbystaffduringConstructionPlanapprovalprocess.9.LandscapingPlan:a.Landscapingplanshallaccommodateelkmigration,withtreesfocusedclosetobuildingsandparkingareas,withoutlyingareaskeptnaturalgrasslands(withirrigation)b.Landscapingofmechanicalareas,trashenclosures,loadingareas,andparkinglotperimetershallbeinstalledwithconstructionoftheinitialhotel.c.ComplywithSection7.78.G.1.bNon-NativeVegetationapplies.10.BuildingplansshallberevisedtocomplywithEPMC17.44.060(d)(8)“Facades.”ComplianceshallbedemonstratedpriortoMarch18,2014.11.Compliancewiththefollowingaffectedagencycomments:a.CommunityDevelopmentdatedFebruary4,2014.b.PublicWorksdatedJanuary31,2014.c.LightandPowerdatedJanuary29,2014.d.WaterDepartment(JeffBoles,CliffTedder,SteveRusch)datedFebruary3,2014.e.EstesValleyFireProtectionDistrictdatedJanuary31,2014.f.EstesParkSanitationDistrict(JamesDuell)datedJanuary30,2014.g.CDOT(TimothyBilobran)datedJanuary28,2014.h.CPWdatedJanuary29,2014.Itwasmovedandseconded(Klink/Hills)torecommendapprovalofrezoningLot4fromCO—CommercialOutlyingtoA—AccommodationstotheTownBoardwiththefindingsandconditionsrecommendedbystaffandthemotionpassedunanimouslywithoneabsent.Itwasmovedandseconded(Bowers/Murphree)torecommendapprovaloftheamendmentstotheEstesParkMunicipalCode,Chapter17.44,totheTownBoardwiththe
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission9February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallfindingsandconditionsrecommendedbystaffandthemotionpassedunanimouslywithoneabsent.Itwasmovedandseconded(Hills/Bowers)torecommendapprovaloftheAmendedPlatofLot4,removingtheno-buildlineanddedicatingeasements,totheTownBoardwiththefindingsandconditionsrecommendedbystaffandthemotionpassedunanimouslywithoneabsent.Itwasmovedandseconded(Klink/Hills)torecommendedapprovalofSpecialReview2014-01,EPMC/AnschutzWellnessTrainingCenter,totheTownBoardwiththefindingsandconditionsrecommendedbystaffandthemotionpassedunanimouslywithoneabsent.ChairHullcalledafiveminuterecess.Themeetingreconvenedat3:35.4.AMENDMENTTOTHEESTESVALLEYDEVELOPMENTCODE—Sections3.3E,3.5C,&3.6DCommissionerKlinkrecusedhimselffromthisitemandleftthedais.TownAttorneyWhitestatedtheproposedamendmenttothedevelopmentcodewasnotbeingproposedspecificallybecauseofEPMC/AnschutzWellnessTrainingCenter.However,ifapproved,itmaybeapplicabletothatproject.HeexplainedtheEVDCcurrentlyprovidesthatapproveddevelopmentandvarianceapplicationsmuststartconstructionwithinoneyearofapproval,ortheapprovalwillbenullandvoid.Theproposedamendmentwouldchangetheoneyeartimeframetothreeyears.Hesupportedthecodeamendment,statingitisoftendifficultforeverythingtocomeintoplacewithinoneyearafterapproval,especiallyoncomplexprojects.Priortotheexpiration,theapplicantmayrequestatwo-yearextension,whichwouldrequireapprovalbytheTownBoardorCountyCommissioners.Additionally,thereisathreeyearvestingperiodintheColoradostatestatutes.Thedevelopmentcodeisnotinalignmentwiththestatestatutes,andtheTownwouldhaveproblemsifitneededtoenforcetheone-yearapprovaltimeframe.InregardstotheBoardofAdjustment,theapprovalperiodwillremainatoneyearunlessthevarianceapprovalisassociatedwithaspecialreviewordevelopmentplanproject.Inthatcase,theapprovalwouldhavethree-yeartimeframe.Thevariancewouldridewiththeproject,soifthedevelopmentplanapprovalwouldlapse,thevarianceapprovalwouldalsolapse.Insummary,AttorneyWhitestatedlargerprojectsneedmoretime,andtheproposedamendmentwouldprovidefortheneededtimeextension.StaffandCommissionDiscussionNone
RECORDOFPROCEEDINGSEstesValleyPlanningCommission10February18,2014BoardRoom,EstesParkTownHallItwasmovedandseconded(Bowers/Murphree)torecommendapprovaloftheamendmenttotheEstesValleyDevelopmentCode,Sections3.3.E,3.5C,and3.6.DregardingtimeframeforlapsesofapprovaltotheTownBoardofTrusteesandtheLarimerCountyBoardofCountyCommissionersandthemotionpassed5-0,withoneabsentandCommissionerKlinknotvoting.CommissionerKlinkreturnedtothedais.5.REPORTSA.SeniorPlannerShirkreportedthePlanningCommissionwillbereviewingtheEstesParkTransitCenter&ParkingStructureonMarch18,2014.B.SeniorPlannerShirkreportedtheTownBoardagendaforFebruary25,2014willincludeTheSanctuaryPreliminarySubdivisionPlat,StoneBridgeEstatesSupplementalCondominiumMap#5,theFinalPlatforStoneBridgeEstatesTownhomeSubdivision,andtheEPMC/AnschutzWellnessTrainingCenter.C.SeniorPlannerShirkreportedtheEstesParkMedicalCenterrequestedtheirproposaltoexpandthenorthparkinglotbetableduntilfurthernotice.D.DirectorChilcottreportedsixproposalswerereceivedfortheFallRiverMasterPlan.Ateamreviewedtheproposalsandinterviewedthreefinalists.WalshEnvironmentalScientists&Engineers,LLCwaschosentoimplementtheirFallRiverMasterPlan.ShealsoreportedonagrantreceivedbytheColoradoWaterConservationBoardforapproximately$80,000toapplytowardsaFishCreekMasterPlan.StaffwillbeworkingonobtainingmatchingfundsbeforesendingoutaRequestforProposal(RFP).E.CommissionerHillscommentedfortherecordhowmuchsheappreciatedstaff’spreparationfortoday’smeeting.AttorneyWhitealsoacknowledgestaff’sandtheapplicant’sgoodworkingrelationshipwhicheasedaverycomplexapplication.Therebeingnofurtherbusiness,ChairHulladjournedthemeetingat3:40p.m.BettyHull,ChairKarenThompson,RecordingSecretary
ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MEEETING DATE: April 1, 2014
REQUEST:
This request is for a variance from the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC)
Sections:
1. §6.3.C.2 Alteration/Extension of Nonconforming Structures Limited, which
requires a variance for extensions of nonconforming structures; and,
2. §7.6.E.2.b River Corridors- Exception for Lots Developed Prior to the
Adoption of this Code, which requires that all buildings and structures on lots
created prior to the adoption of the EVDC be set back at least thirty (30) feet
horizontally from the annual high water mark of stream corridors or the
defined bank of the stream.
The Applicant, Nick Kane (owner of Nicky’s Restaurant), wishes to repair and raise
an existing deck that encroaches over Fall River. Due to damage from the 2013
flood event, the applicant wishes to raise the deck 14 inches and extend it to provide
for safer access to an existing bridge and to address current floodplain regulations.
The applicant must seek a variance due to the expansion of the nonconforming deck
(built prior to the adoption of our Code) and the location over Fall River. The
Applicant received a floodplain permit for this work, but Planning staff flagged these
two code issues during the building permit review.
LOCATION: 1350 Fall River Road
1350 Fall River Road
River Setback Variance Request
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
Existing
Proposed
Extension
1350 Fall River Road Variance Request Page 2 of 6
APPLICANT/OWNER: Nick Kane, Owner; Thomas Beck, Architect
STAFF CONTACT: Phil Kleisler
REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. “Standards for Review” of the
EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable
standards and criteria contained therein.
The Board of Adjustment is the decision-making body for this application.
REFFERAL AND PUBLIC COMMENTS: This request has been routed to reviewing
agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. A legal
notice was published in the Trail Gazette.
Affected Agencies. No concerns expressed during review.
Public Comment. As of March 27, 2014 staff has not received comments from the
public. If comments are received they will be posted at
www.estes.org/CurrentApplications for Planning Commission review.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions,
narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other
areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict
compliance with this Code’s standards, provided that the requested variance will not
have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific
standards, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding: The deck is located within the regulatory floodplain, with one
pier located in Fall River. According to the Larimer County Tax Assessor,
the restaurant was built in 1961 and is legally nonconforming to current
setback standards.
2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following factors:
a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;
Staff Finding: The deck poses considerable safety concerns due to
damage from the 2013 flood event, but the restaurant may continue without
this variance.
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff Finding: The variance is not substantial.
1350 Fall River Road Variance Request Page 3 of 6
c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially
altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a
result of the variance;
Staff Finding: The essential character of the neighborhood would not be
substantially altered with the approval of this variance.
Raising the deck 14 inches provides greater clearance during future flood
events (debris backup at this location affected neighbors during the 2013
flood) and brings the deck closer to existing floodplain regulations.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such
as water and sewer.
Staff Finding: Reviewing agencies expressed no concerns relating to
public services for this variance. The applicant has worked with the Town
of Estes Park’s Chief Building Official/Floodplain Manager to ensure
compliance with floodplain regulations.
e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the
requirement;
Staff Finding: The applicant purchased the property prior to the adoption of
the current setback and floodplain requirements.
f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method
other than a variance.
Staff Finding: Shortening the deck would likely still require a variance.
3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that
will afford relief.
Staff Finding: The applicant may rebuild the deck in the same location and
size within one (1) year of the 2013 flood event. However, such a design
would likely be less safe than the proposed extension.
4. In granting such variances, the BOA may require such conditions as will, in its
independent judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standard so varied
or modified.
Staff Comment. The applicant has submitted a building permit for this
extension, which will be reviewed by affected agencies and the Town’s
Floodplain Manager.
1350 Fall River Road Variance Request Page 4 of 6
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variance CONDITIONAL TO:
1. Compliance with the approved site plan; and,
2. Note the high water marks from the 2013 flood on the building permit submittal
for the deck remodel.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
I move to APPROVE the requested variance with the findings and conditions recommended by
staff.
I move to DENY the requested variance with the following findings (state reason/findings).
1350 Fall River Road Variance Request Page 5 of 6
Existing Deck
Existing Deck
Proposed
Extension
Flood
Damage
(Slopes)
1350 Fall River Road Variance Request Page 6 of 6
Raise deck
to become
flush here
Existing Deck
2013 Flood event
A
RE
RM
RE-1
1520
1260
1360
1150
1250
1150
1200
1180
1152
1350
1440 1420 14101430
1411
1450
1431
F all R iverF a ll R iverFALL RIVER RD
SIERRA SAGE LN
W ELKHORN AVE
W WONDERVIEW AVE
0 100 200Feet
1 in = 200 ft ±Town o f Estes ParkCommunity DevelopmentExhibit A Map
Printed: 3/27/2014Created By: phil kleisler
Project Site
Town Boundary
Parcels-Larimer
Zoning
Project Name:
Project Description:
Petitioner(s):
Nicky's Variance
Extend/Repair nonconformingdeck.
Nick Kane, Owner
HIGH DR
E HIGHWAY 36MORAINE AVED E V IL S G U L C H R DF
A
L
L RIV
E
R R
D
BIG THOMPSON AVE
W ELKHORN AVEN SAINT VRAIN AVELAKE ESTES
Site
Vicinity Ma p
A
RE
RM
RE-1
1520
1260
1360
1150
1250
1150
1200
1180
1152
1350
1440 1420 14101430
1411
1450
1431
F all R iverF a ll R iverFALL RIVER RD
SIERRA SAGE LN
W ELKHORN AVE
W WONDERVIEW AVE
0 100 200Feet
1 in = 200 ft ±Town o f Estes ParkCommunity DevelopmentExhibit B Map
Printed: 3/27/2014Created By: phil kleisler
Project Site
Town Boundary
Parcels-Larimer
Zoning
Project Name:
Project Description:
Petitioner(s):
Nicky's Variance
Extend/Repair nonconformingdeck.
Nick Kane, Owner
HIGH DR
E HIGHWAY 36MORAINE AVED E V IL S G U L C H R DF
A
L
L RIV
E
R R
D
BIG THOMPSON AVE
W ELKHORN AVEN SAINT VRAIN AVELAKE ESTES
Site
Vicinity Ma p
..TVF3LCKArchitects170J.JoiniVramAve.••P0box57Lse5ParkCO80517ArchitecturePhone:970-586-3915+QX:970-586-4211Planfling&Interiors.maiI:fhoma5@twheckarchitecfs.comTownofEstesParkMarch27,204(Revised)PlanningDepartmentAttn:DaveShirk,SeniorPlanner170MacGregorAvenueEstesPark,CO80517Re:ExistingDeckrepairforNickKane,Nicky’sRestaurant,1350FallRiverRoadDearDave,Thisapplicationistorequestavariancefromtheriverfortheexistingdeckbuiltin1982.RiverSetbackDevelopmentCodeSection(7.6.E.1):30’riversetbackAlteration/Expansionofanonconforminguse(6.3.C.2):extensionoflegallynonconformingdeck.1.Reviewstandards.Specialcircumstancesorconditionsexist:Atthetimethisdeckwasbuilttherewasnoriversetbackrequired.TheriversetbackswereestablishedwiththeDevelopmentCode2000.LastSeptember’sfloodtooktwoexistingconcretepiersawaythatpartiallysupportthedeck.Theseneedtohereplaced.Wewouldalsoliketomorecloselyconformtoexistingfloodplainregulationsbyraisingtheexistingdeck14”.Thiswouldbringthebottomofthedeckstructureaboveorequaltothebottomoftheadjacentupstreambridgestructure.Inadditionwewouldheupgradingtheexistingdeckrailtoconformwithexistingbuildingcodes.2.PracticalDifficultya.Thepropertyhasbeenincontinualuseoftheexistingdeckwithoutriversetbackvariance.h.Theessentialcharacteroftheneighborhoodwouldnothealtered,norwouldadjoiningpropertiessufferdetrimentasaresultofthisvariance.Infactraisingthedeckwillhelpthedownstreamneighbors,withlessfloodingduetodebrisbackup.c.Thevariancewouldhavenoeffectonpublicservicesd.Asstatedabove,theapplicanthasownedthepropertysince1977andsotheEVDCsethackswereappliedaftertherestaurant&deckwereconstructed.e.Itwouldhepossibletomakethedecksmallerhowever,allofthesealternativeswouldimpactthepracticalusabilityoftheoutdoorspace,andstillrequireavariance.IxfraordinaryLYesignPays[.xtraordinaryl7ividends
..3.Theconditionsreflectedinthisapplicationarenotgeneral.Theyat-cspecifictothisparticularbusinessandproperty,sizeandorientation.4.Noreductioninlotsizeorincreaseinnumberoflotsisproposedbythisvariancerequest.5.Theplanproposedisnotexcessiveinmeetingtheowner’sdesireforthehighestandbestuseoftheirproperty.6.Thevariancedoesnotproposeanon-permittedorprohibiteduse.Respectfullysubmitted,ThomasW.Beck,AlA,NCARBTWBeckArchitectsP.O.Box57EstesPark,CO805170xtraordinaryPesignPaysxtraordinaryYividends
ESTESVALLEYBOARDOFADJUSTMENTAPPLICATIONAddressofLot:I57)aP4i-L-vajbmittalDate::,_/‘fRecordOwner(s):A/1e.I{Ic-_v..-_LegalDescription:LotSize_;-,Z-—---—_-ExistingLandProposedLandUseExistingWaterService/ownFWellFOther(Specify)FTownFWeIlFOther(Specify)ExistingSanitarySewerServiceVEPSDProposedSanitarySewerService_ExistingGasServiceXcelSiteAccess(ifnotonpublicstreet)-Aretherewetlandsonthesite?FYesVarianceDesired(DevelopmentCodeSection#):(L,.3.CFUTSDFSepticFUTSDFSepticFNonecLAcaJJLtFIILot:___________-.‘Subdiviston:!IBlock:tfl#:Tract:Hryj-t-t-I‘—t\‘--‘3-.zp-4’7Lc-ir77ProposedWaterServiceEPSDFOtherYNoCompleteMailingAddressNameofPrimaryContactPersonA/fkPrimaryCPrimaryContactInformationPersonis/wnerTAiDlicantFConsultantlEnrApplicationfee(seeattachedfeeschedule)FStatementofintent(mustcomplywithstandardssetforthinSection3.6.CoftheEVDC)FIcopy(folded)ofsiteplan(drawnatascaleof1”=20)**r1reducedcopyofthesiteplan(lix17’)rDigitalcopiesofplats/plansinTIFForPDFformatemailedtoplanningestes.orgThesiteplanshallincludeinformationinEstesValleyDevelopmentCodeAppendixB.VlI.5(attached).Theapplicantwillberequiredtoprovideadditionalcopiesofthesiteplanafterstaffreview(seetheattachedBoardofAdjustmentvarianceapplicationschedule).Copiesmustbefolded.‘ownorstes-‘81K...u.oxiuu.IIUcregorvenue.sesLarK.i.u1/CommunityDevelopmentDepartmentPhone:(970)577-3721.Fax.(970)586-0249..www.estes.org/CommunityDevelopment
U)EoCuI.-CuCU)0ZCuoCuoU).CuCuo.0CuW’oC‘Cu0•>.2-Cu——0.-J>flCuD<WECu0•Cu+0C2C-):30CuOszzoCuU).2Cu0.CuCuCCu—oCuCI-CU>I0U-CuE.0U)‘I0CuEU).0-ICUU)•02CUU)Cu0CczCu0CuECu.0U):3EU)0C.2CuI.2U)U)Cu:30..0:30CuC)C’)CuCuUC0CuC)CCCu3-U)CuCuUU)Cu:30U)0Cl)>U)0C)0U)U)CuC-c
.APPLICANTCERTIFICATIONIherebycertifythattheinformationandexhibitsherewithsubmittedaretrueandcorrecttothebestofmyknowledgeandthatinfilingtheapplicationIamactingwiththeknowledgeandconsentoftheownersoftheproperty.Insubmittingtheapplicationmaterialsandsigningthisapplicationagreement,IacknowledgeandagreethattheapplicationissubjecttotheapplicableprocessingandpublichearingrequirementssetforthintheEstesValleyDevelopmentCode(EVDC).IacknowledgethathaveobtainedorhaveaccesstotheEVDC,andthat,priortofilingthisapplication,Ihavehadtheopportunitytoconsulttherelevantprovisionsgoverningtheprocessingofanddecisionontheapplication.TheEstesValleyDevelopmentCodeisavailableonlineat:http://www.estes.org/ComDev/DevCocieIunderstandthatacceptanceofthisapplicationbytheTownofEstesParkforfilingandreceiptoftheapplicationfeebytheTowndoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheapplicationiscompleteundertheapplicablerequirementsoftheEVDC.Iunderstandthatthisvariancerequestmaybedelayedinprocessingbyamonthormoreiftheinformationprovidedisincomplete,inaccurate,orsubmittedafterthedeadlinedate.understandthataresubmittalfeewillbechargedifmyapplicationisincomplete.TheCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentwillnotifytheapplicantinwritingofthedateonwhichtheapplicationisdeterminedtobecomplete.frIgrantpermissionforTownofEstesParkEmployeesandMembersoftheBoardofAdjustmentwithproperidentificationaccesstomypropertyduringthereviewofthisapplication.IacknowledgethatIhavereceivedtheEstesValleyBoardofAdjustmentVarianceApplicationScheduleandthatfailuretomeetthedeadlinesshownonsaidscheduleshallresultinmyapplicationortheapprovalofmyapplicationbecomingnullandvoid.Iunderstandthatfullfeeswillbechargedfortheresubmittalofanapplicationthathasbecomenullandvoid.IunderstandthatIamrequiredtoobtaina“VarianceNotice”signfromtheCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentandthatthissignmustbepostedonmypropertywhereitisclearlyvisiblefromtheroad.Iunderstandthatthecornersofmypropertyandtheproposedbuilding/structurecornersmustbefieldstaked.Iunderstandthatthesignmustbepostedandthestakingcompletednolaterthanten(10)businessdayspriortotheEstesValleyBoardofAdjustmenthearing.IunderstandthatiftheBoardofAdjustmentapprovesmyrequest,“Failureofanapplicanttoapplyforabuildingpermitandcommenceconstructionoractionwithregardtothevarianceapprovalwithinone(1)yearofreceivingapprovalofthevariancemayautomaticallyrenderthedecisionoftheBOAnullandvoid.”(EstesValleyDevelopmentCodeSection3.6.D)Names:RecordOwnerPLEASEPRINT:/i/4/_4..11.—Signatures:RecordOwnerDate,I0—(‘4ApplicantPLEASEPRINT:/ViCftL._€_Z/eck./’SApplicantDate:I2—zIIr
Nonconlon’nlngUses,StiucturesndLots6.1AppllcabllltyCHAPTER6.NONCONFORMINGUSES,STRUCTURESANDLOTS§6.1APPLICABiLITYA.General.TheprovisionsofthisChaptershallapplytouses,structures(exceptsigns)andlotsthatwerelegallyexistingasoftheeffectivedateofthisCode,February1,2000,butthatbecomenonconformingastheresultoftheapplicationofthisCodetothemorfromreclassificationofthepropertyunderanysubsequentamendmentstothisCode.B.Signs.Forprovisionsapplicabletononconformingsigns,seeChapter8.§6.2PURPOSEitisthegeneralpolicyunderthisCodetoallownonconforminguses,structuresorlotstocontinuetoexistandtobeputtoproductiveuse.ThelimitationsofthisChapterareintendedtorecognizetheinterestsofpropertyownersincontinuingtousetheirpropertybuttoreasonablycontrolexpansions,reestablishmentofdiscontinuedusesandthereestablishmentofnonconformingbuildingsandstructuresthathavebeensubstantiallydestroyed.§6.3CONTiNUATIONOFNONCONFORMINGUSESORSTRUCTURESA.AuthoritytoContinue.NonconformitiesshallbeallowedtocontinueinaccordancewiththerequirementsofthisChapter.B.RepairsandMaintenance.Repairsandnormalmaintenancerequiredtokeepnonconformingusesandstructuresinasafeconditionshallbepermitted,providedthatnoalterationsshallbemadeexceptthoseallowedbythisChapterorrequiredbylaworordinance.C.AlterationlExtensionofNonconformingUsesandStructures.1.Alteration/ExtensionofNonconformingUsesProhibited.SubjecttotheprovisionsofthisChapter,exceptasallowedin§6.4below,anonconforminguseshallnotbealteredorextended.TheextensionofanonconformingusetoaportionofastructurewhichwasbuiltforthenonconforminguseatthetimeofadoptionofthisCodeisnotanextensionofanonconforminguse.(Ord.21-11§1)2.Alteration/ExtensionofNonconformingStructuresLimited.Exceptasallowedin§3.6.CofthisCode,astructureconformingastouse,butnonconformingastoheight,setbackorcoverage,maybealteredorextended,providedthatthealterationorextensiondoesnotresultinanewviolationofthisCodeorincreasethedegreeorextentoftheexistingnonconformity.(See§3.6,Variances;avariancemaybesoughttopermitalterationsorextensionstoanonconformingstructurenototherwiseallowedbythisChapter.)(Ord.21-11§1)D.NonconformingastoParking.1.Nonconformityastooff-streetparkingorloadingshallnotsubjecttheusetotheconditionsofthisChapter.2.Ausethatisnonconformingastooff-streetparkingorloadingshallnotbechangedtoanotheruserequiringmoreoff-streetparkingorloadingunlesstheadditionalrequiredparkingorloadingisprovided.8-1Suppl2
GeneralDevelopmentStandarj7.6WetiLJandStreamConicforProtection(2)RiverCorridors(exceptintheCDdistrict).(a)GeneralRule.Allbuildingsandaccessorystructuresshallbesetbackatleastfifty(50)feethorizontally(planview)fromtheannualhigh-watermarkofrivercorridorsor,ifnotreadilydiscernible,fromthedefinedbankoftheriver.(b)ExceptionforLotsDevelopedPriortotheAdoptionofthisCode.Allbuildingsandaccessorystructuresshallbesetbackatleastthirty(30)feethorizontally(planview)fromtheannualhigh-watermarkofrivercorridorsor,ifnotreadilydiscernible,fromthedefinedbankoftheriver.SeeFigure7-10.(Ord.2-02#5)(3)StreamandRiverCorridorsintheCDZoningDistrict.IntheCDdistrict,allbuildingsandaccessorystructuresshallbesetbackatleasttwenty(20)feethorizontally(planview)fromtheannualhigh-watermarkofstreamorrivercorridorsor,ifnotreadilydiscernible,fromthedefinedbankofthestreamorriver.Wheredefinedbanksarenotreadilydiscernible,thesetbackshallbemeasuredfromthethreadofthestream.WhereaprincipalbuildingintheCDdistrictprovidespublicaccess,includingaprimaryentrance,onthesideofthebuildingfacingastreamorrivercorridor,thesetbackmaybereducedtoten(10)feetwiththeapprovaloftheDecision-MakingBody.(Ord.2-02#5)T(c-)áFigure7-10Supp.37-29
Use this format PC Add resses.xls
Owner Owner II Address City ST Zip
Philip &Mary Ellen Tulin 1450 Sierra Sage Ln #8 Estes Park CO 80517
Suzette Hess,Candace &charles Fain 12671 S Hagan St Olathe KS 66062
Castle Mountain Lodge,LLC 1850 Fall River Rd #5 Estes Park CO 80517
Shawn &Nicole Ellis 1410 Sierra Sage Ln Estes Park CO 80517
Nick Kane P0 Box 1961 Estes Park CO 80517
HI-CS,LLC 1360 Fall River Rd Estes Park CO 80517
Michael &Beverly Phillips 1431 Sierra Sage Ln Estes Park CO 80517
RMNP c/o Larry Gamble 1000 Hwy 34 Estes Park CO 80517
Morgan Thompson Trust 6801 Monarch Dr Cheyenne WY 82009
Jeffrey &Christine Nehring P0 Box 146 Mercer WI 54547
David &Deborah Adams 1433 Sierra Sage Ln Estes Park CO 80517
Lee &Elna Beauman P0 Box 2328 Palmer AK 99645
Orlando &Susan Zullo 1824 23rd Ave Ln Greeley CO 80634
Patricia Kampfe 3275 Marble Pt Decatur IL 62521
Gayl Foshee 1411 Sierra Sage Ln #2 Estes Park CO 80517
American Bank of Baxter Springs 1201 Military Ave Baxter Springs KS 66713
The Sanctuary,LLC 3266 H Bar G Rd Estes Park CO 80517
Diversified Properties,LLC PC Box 2930 Estes Park CO 80517
Use this format for APO Add resses.xls
SELFisrrst—.—.__.J.SRT4SorR.iL1V4/_2Sr_.-1”cW/(-“L.SSCJ.HNjRACEF’GT.r’pZEIt.SEtIRV’(:1Pt4pciJ.tV•4HEp(.RAILI4rigj---—--—R.REPt..!DSWsJ,ECC5cR-mrEr..EILIktA__posT:——ERR6PLANNORTHPLANNORTHRDToHRAt.:550t40,COItT.REtES>-_.—-tER.DSEEsSECTCSIRES----VR!C.ScCPRrTEPECANS(NP.):•-.•---FAC.”.Ey.,5-LEsAN_____________EP3fl5<‘ZIE.4-...ESETR’ER.p4.JRSTj--‘.;R2IO,S.IC,NG.P/-RMFSD’,ALt.REs55T.55EE_E9-1.AAI4.OS1.___ri...•PEL\r—(IiSJO4’iqVCUTV...-OFTrTRJVWFFsHPRE-3l-pRL2s.&EJ.MPI/’VIo,CPSER,er,./5APPT,LI_IOPP.5)5pi.15s.V:j2J.MPPCR,CT5—’g.1-IPBA1(otfl.4)/2tRPJEPINsS4bAc.HERIRs4’t4FlcRops1o.EPSis:.P.L,o.4.*sIJLRI$O’.O02.p..Ri4’F3’c04c.VFRH/4.LL.4.15’s‘.RI4T_VVEXISTINGFLOORPLANOTI_PROpOFNTORAxPSTINDECK/4’EOBOTTOMOFOECKSTRUC1URISEQ/iALTOOR4OVEeOTTOMOPRIOGESTRUCTRI.PROPOSEDFLOORPLANPI_VE[EYALLIMENE/CN\,A..)SCALE:1/4w=\.AJSCALE:1/4w
.Exfet.et8urant—----:1/,—Exltlr2xEDecbeemvedardaTeej4R-a;>I/-erJ\I—N6’-l’VJF.Y-2”v.IF.-_11ItYJF.\
0 I .(,mrhne Nw 8t !‘ea,n
tk L’own I1t_
Ilpi
119 )C
Cente;Hn-Exfetfr Steel seam 3.ekn
ox
U
CiL-lIne ExItTng Steel E3n ow
Nw 42”l4Igh
/
(1
I
UI
______—
\\