HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Park Board of Adjustment 2021-03-02
Prepared February 23, 2021
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services, programs, and activities and
special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT – TOWN OF ESTES PARK
TO BE HELD VIRTUALLY
Tuesday, March 2, 2021
9:00 a.m.
Estes Park, CO 80517
The Estes Park Board of Adjustmentwill participate in the meeting remotely due to the Declaration of
Emergency signed by Town Administrator Machalek on March 19, 2020 related to COVID-19 and
provided for with the adoption of Ordinance 04-20 on March 18, 2020.Procedures for quasi-judicial
virtual public hearings are established through Emergency Rule 06-20 signed by Town Administrator
Machalek on May 8, 2020 and outlined below.
Please click the link below to join the webinar:https://zoom.us/j/92464068839
Or Join by Telephone:
1.Dial US: +1-877-853-5257(toll-free)
2.Enter Webinar ID: 924 6406 8839followed by #
The meeting will also be live-streamed on the Town’s Youtube Channel and will be recorded
and posted to YouTubeand www.estes.org/videoswithin 48 hours.
Public Comment
When the moderator opens up thepublic comment period for an agenda item, attendees
wishing to speak shall:
1. Click the “Raise Hand” button, if joining onlineon the Zoom client, or
2. Press *9 and follow the prompts, if joining by telephone.
3. If you are watching live on YouTube, please call the number listed above, and mute your
computer audio for the duration of your remarks.
Once you are announced, please state your name and address for the record.
In order to participate online via Zoom, you must:
Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer.
Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience.
1
Prepared 02/23/2021
AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT – TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, March 2, 2021
9:00 a.m.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Board of Adjustment Minutes dated October 6, 2020
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Election of Officers - 2021
2. Variance Request: Lot 2, Block 2, Fall River Estates Planner Bergeron
Applicant requests approval of a variance to setbacks for a 15’ front setback and a 10’
side setback in place of the 25’ minimum setbacks of the E-1 (Estate/1-acre) zone
district.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. Comprehensive Plan
ADJOURN
NOTE: The Board of Adjustment reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda
was prepared.
2
3
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 6, 2020
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT of the
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtuallyin said Town of
Estes Park on the 06 day ofOctober2020.
Committee:ChairJeff Moreau, Vice-Chair, Wayne Newsom, Board
Member Joe Holtzman
Attending:Chair Moreau, Vice-ChairNewsom, Board Member Holtzman,
Community Development Director Randy Hunt, Senior
PlannerJeff Woeber, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund,
Absent:none
Chair Moreaucalled the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the agenda. The motion
passed 3-0.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Holtzman) to approve the Consent Agenda. The
motion passed 3-0.
VARIANCE REQUEST, 915 Moraine Avenue, Bird and Jim Restaurant
Senior Planner Woeber reviewed the staff report. The applicant requestedapproval of
a variance to setbacks along two property lines. A zero foot (0’) setback in lieu of the
minimum required twenty-five feet (25’) along Moraine Avenue/Highway 66 and a nine-
foot (9’) setback in lieu of the minimum required fifteen feet (15’) (from High Drive). This
variance involves acknowledging preexisting nonconforming setbacks for a structure
that predate the Estes Park Development Code, with a new proposed awning addition
being proposed within the setback. The subject property is within a CO (Commercial
Outlying) Zoning District. Staff recommendedapproval of this variance.
Discussion:
Chair Moreau confirmed that due to grandfathering, the clean-up of setbacks was not
needed. He also asked if the Board had the authority to grant a variance into the CDOT
right-of-way. Director Hunt clarified that the cleanest solution is to approve the zero
setbacks at the property line and then have CDOT provide permission for the overhang
on the other side of the property line.
4
Board of Adjustment, October 6 , 2020 – Page 2
Mike Daley, projectarchitect, stated that the owner is very appreciative of the temporary
use permit for outside seating and has realized they would like this to be a permanent
solution. They hope fora seasonal, five-month tent structure to achieve this, with no
enclosure plans. The framework, however, will be a permanent, year-round structure.
Chair Moreau recommended that the Board put wording into the variance that it cannot
be a year-round enclosed structure. If an addition to the building was requested at some
point, wording shouldbe included in the motion to allow for this.
It was moved and seconded (Moreau/Newsom) to APPROVE the requested
variance as proposed and detailed within the staff reportwith the inclusion that
the structure will not be permanently enclosed. The Board of Adjustment
acknowledges the existing structure on the subject property is located over
property lines at a zero foot setback, which predates zoning regulations, and
approves the additional setback encroachment requested to install an awning
over the outdoor patio seating area as proposed. The variance is approved with
findings and conclusions as outlined in the staff report.The motion passed 3-0.
REPORTS
2021 Budget process includes a proposal for a full rewrite of the Comprehensive Plan.
A DOLA application for half of the $300,000 funding has been submitted.
There are several initiatives underway for grants for local businesses to apply for
assistance due to the pandemic. Temporary winterizing of structures are a part of this.
A Planning Technician will hopefully be hired in the next month.
There being no further business, ChairMoreauadjourned the meeting at 9:40 a.m.
Jeff Moreau, Chair
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
5
6
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Memo
To: Chair Jeff Moreau
Estes Park Board of Adjustment (BOA)
Through: Community Development Director Randy Hunt
From: Alex Bergeron, Planner II
Date: March 2, 2021
RE: Setback Variance for Lot 2, Block 2, Fall River Estates
Objective:
Conduct a public hearing to consider and make a decision on a variance request for a
15’ front setback and a 10’ side setback in place of the 25’ minimum setbacks of the E-1
(Estate/1-acre) zone district.
Location:
Parcel 3522206002, legally described as: LOT 2, BLK 2, FALL RIVER EST, EP.
Present Situation:
The property as defined above (see also Attachment 1: Vicinity Map), is a vacant lot
located in the E-1 (Estate/1-acre) zone district which is 0.47 acres in size was
established in 1971. The property features Steep Slopes, which is defined in Estes Park
Development Code (EPDC) §13.2.221 as slopes that are 12% or greater.
Proposal:
As a means to mitigate perceived development challenges relatedto slope, the
applicant proposes to build their home at the upper portion of the lot, partially within the
codified minimum setbacks with access improvements encroaching into the public right-
of-way. To achieve their vision for development, the applicant seeks a variance to
reduce the front setback to 15 feet from the required 25 feet, and to reduce the side
setback to 10 feet from the required 25 feet.
Review Criteria:
The Board of Adjustment is the decision-making body for this application.In accordance
with EPDC §3.6.C. (Variances – Standards for Review), applications for variances shall
demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein.
Staff findings on these standards and criteria are outlined below:
§3.6.C.1: Special circumstances or conditions exist. Negative. Steep Slopes are
common in the vicinity of the subject property, and adjacentalready-developed
properties are also legally non-conforming as to minimum lot area.
7
§3.6.C.2(a):Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the
variance. Affirmative. Other properties in the vicinity have successfully been developed
for single-familyresidential usewith the same or similar conditions present.
§3.6.C.2(b):Whether the variance is substantial. Affirmative. The proposed variance
would reduce the front setback by 40% and the side setback by 60%.
§3.6.C.2(c): Alteration to neighborhood character/local detriment. Negative. The
character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered as a result of the
variance in the opinion of staff, but it is acknowledged that development so close to
property lines is not typical for the area, based on public comment and review of
satellite imagery (which is only approximate).
§3
.6.C.2(d): Adverse effect on the delivery of public services such as water and sewer.
Negative. Comment received by review agencies engaged in the deliveryof public
services did not suggest an adverse effect on services would be caused by the
variance.
§3.6.C.2(e): Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the
requirement. Neutral. The Statement of Intent states, from the perspective of the
applicant representative, that “the applicant was not aware of the site’s limitations when
considering both grade and setback standards” (see Attachment 3: Statement of Intent).
The level of investigation by the applicant into the characteristics of the site and the
local Development Code prior to purchase of the property has not been determined by
staff.
§3.6.C.2(f): Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some
method other than a variance. Affirmative. Staff finds a home oriented differently on the
lot, or with a different design still of a size typical of the vicinity, would negate the need
for a variance. The applicant writes in their Statement of Intent that denial of this
variance would trigger additional variances related to grading and driveway design
standards, but this is disputed by staff: the property is not subject to such standards
(specifically EPDC §7.1 – Slope Protection Standards, and §7.2 – Grading and Site
Disturbance Standards) because the lot was approved for residential use prior to the
effective date of the Code, and is exempt from the standards per the Applicability
clauses of the Sections. Similarly, an argument for the variance presented by the
applicant relates to the perception of an unsafe driveway design in the context of fire
suppression should the variance not be approved, but comment provided by the Estes
Valley Fire Protection District identifies an automatic fire sprinkler system as an
acceptable alternative for properties that have inadequate fire apparatus access due to
length, width, turning radius, or percentage of grade. The applicant has noted in the
Statement of Intent that alternative designs for the home were not prepared, and staff
believes doing so would reveal an acceptable product.
§3.6.C.3: No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances
affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make
reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or
situations. Affirmative. Steep slopes are common in this vicinity (where homes are
8
understood to meet setback requirements) and throughout Estes Park, so much so that
regulations exist for qualifying lots.
§
3.6.C.4: No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing
or proposed subdivision. Not applicable.
§3.6.C.5: Variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will
afford relief. Negative. Staff finds a home of a different design would require lesser or no
variance.
§3.6.C.6: No variance for non-permitted use. Not applicable.
§3.6.C.7: BOA may grant conditions to ensure objectives are met. Acknowledged.
Reviewing Agency Comments:
This request has been routed to reviewing agency staff for review and comment.
Comments received were either neutral, or were opposed to the variance (See
Attachment 5: Agency Review Comments).
Public Notice:
A legal notice was published in Estes Park Trail-Gazette on February 12, 2021, and a
“Development Proposal Under Review” sign was posted at the site on the same date.
Adjacent property owners received mailed notice of the proposal.
Advantages:
Approval of the variance will allow the property owner to realize a very specific
vision they have for development of the lot.
Disadvantages:
Approval of the variance may result in development of the lot which is out of
character with general development trends in this area. Review of satellite
imagery and the testimony of adjacent property ownerssuggest that other lots in
the area have been developed with adherence to setback requirements, despite
also having challenging topography.
Approval of a variance for which hardship was not evidenced in the professional
opinion of staff and for which public support was not found may conflict with the
intent of EPDC §3.6., and may create an undesirable precedent.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends DENIAL of thevariance request.
Finance/ResourceImpact:
N/A
Level of Public Interest:
Medium. To date, two letters were received from adjacent property owners opposed to
the variance. Contact was also received from the President of the Fall River Estates
HOA, who expressed a neutral view on approval of the variance while commenting on
9
how the covenants of the Association mirror Town codes(the Town does not enforce
private covenants) (see Attachment 6: Public Comments).
Sample Motion:
I move that the Board of Adjustment DENY the variance request, in accordance with the
findings as presented.
I move that the Board of Adjustment approve the variance, finding that \[state findings for
approval\].
I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance to the next regularly
scheduled meeting, finding that \[state reasons for continuance\].
Attachments:
1.Vicinity Map
2.Application Form
3.Statement of Intent
4.Proposed Site Plan
5.Agency Review Comments
6.Public Comments
10
Attachment1:VicinityMap
11
Attachment2:ApplicationForm
ESTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APPLICATION
1/13/2021
Submittal Date:
General Information
Larry & Catherine Griffin
Record Owner(s):
TBD Fall River Ct
Street Address of Lot:
2
Legal Description:Lot:
Block:2 Tract:
Subdivision:Fall River Estates
3522206002
Parcel ID # :
Site Information
.47
E-1 Estates
Lot SizeZoning
Vacant
Existing Land Use
Single Family Home
Proposed Land Use
TownWellOther (Specify)
Existing Water Service
Proposed Water Service TownWellOther (Specify)
Existing Sanitary Sewer ServiceEPSDUTSDSeptic
Proposed Sanitary Sewer ServiceEPSDUTSDSeptic
Existing Gas ServiceXcelOtherNone
Site Access (if not on public street)
Are there wetlands on the site?YesNo
Variance
Variance Desired (Development Code Section #):
Setback Variance (10' side setback, 15' front setback, per Ch.4 Table4-2 Based Density and Dimension Standards, E-1 Estates)
Primary Contact Information
David Bangs, PE, Trail Ridge Consulting Engineers
Name of Primary Contact Person
2191 Larkspur Ave, Estes Park, CO 80517
Complete Mailing Address
Primary Contact Person isOwnerApplicantConsultant/Engineer
Attachments
Application fee (see attached fee schedule)
Statement of intent (must comply with standards inSection 3.6.C of the EDC)
copy (folded) of siteplan (drawn aa scale of 1" = 20') **
1 reduced copy of the siteplan (11"X 17")
Digital copies of plats/plans in TIFForPDF format emailed to planning@estes.org
The site plan shall include information in Estes Development Code AppendixB.VII.5.
he applicant will be required toprovide additional copies of the siteplan after staff review
(see the Board of Adjustment variance application schedule).Copies must be folded.
Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517
(970) 577-3721 Fax: (970) 586-0249 www.estes.org/CommunityDevelopment
Community Development Department Phone:
12
Revised 20
13
14
Attachment3:StatementofIntent
15
16
17
18
19
StatementofIntentAddendum
20
21
22
Plan
Site
Proposed
4:
Attachment
Attachment5:AgencyReviewComments
Good afternoon,
Your application for a Variance to minimum setback requirements for Lot 2 of the Fall River Estates
subdivision yielded the following comments on the first review:
Advisory comments. These comments are intended for future consideration and no immediate action is
necessary prior to application review by the Board of Adjustment.
PLANNING:
1.Standards of Review.
a.The response to the Compliance with Standards of Review item 2.c. states that the
proposal is “similar in size and position relative to the surrounding homes in the
neighborhood.” A review of satellite imagery shows that other homes likely do meet
setback requirements. In addition, public comment received on the proposal from the
HOA informs that per the Fall River Estates HOA Declaration of Covenants, Conditions,
and Restrictions, all homes in the association are required to meet minimum setbacks.
Although the Town does not enforce private covenants, it is worth noting this
discrepancy in the context of the conditions of the surrounding area.
b.The response to the Compliance with Standards of Review item 2.e. states that to the
knowledge of the applicant/owner representative, “the applicant was not aware of the
site’s limitations when considering both grade and setback standards.” This may be
construed to reflect a lack of due diligence, and it is recommended that the applicant be
present at the meeting to address this topic should it come up during the hearing.
2.Posted Notice. §3.15 of the Estes Park Development Code requires standard notice of the
pending public hearing posted legibly at the site no later than 15 days prior to the public hearing
as evidenced by submittal of a date-stamped photo demonstrating compliance. Please be sure
to submit that photograph prior to the hearing in accordance with this requirement.
3.Meeting Request, Indemnification and Waiver. A completed Electronic Public Hearing Request
Indemnification and Waiver form is required for all public meetings as the Town is operating
largely virtual for the time being. A blank form is attached for your convenience. Please be sure
to submit this form prior to the hearing date.
PUBLIC WORKS:
1.ROW Encroachment. Due to the challenging site geometry, the driveway not only begins in the
public ROW frontage of the adjacent property, but a retaining wall for the driveway is in the
applicant's ROW frontage. For engineered structures in the ROW, a revocable encroachment
permit must be issued by Public Works. Both a revocable encroachment permit application and
agreement are attached for use in understanding how the Town would allow this circumstance
in the ROW.
UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DISTRICT:
1.Manhole. The District has no objection to the setback variances as presented. However, we
would like to note as a placeholder for future discussion the location and cut depth of the
proposed driveway. We have a manhole that is in the ROW just south of the proposed driveway,
and we will need the applicant/engineer to confirm that adequate cover, freeze protection, and
24
cut bank stabilization will be maintained with the proposed driveway cut. I do not think this
affects the variance request itself on our end, but we just wanted to make sure all are aware
FIRE:
1.Addressing. An address shall be required for this property as per the Town of Estes Park’s
addressing standards. Please contact this office regarding fire code-compliant addressing
signage requirements.
2.Emergency Access. Driveways providing access to residential lots and/or single family-dwellings,
whether public or private, shall meet the following criteria:
a.Driveways for both residential lots and/or single family-dwellings shall extend to within
150 feet of all portions of any building or home, measured at the exterior walls of the
first story.
b.Driveways which exceed 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved fire
apparatus turn around in accordance with IFC Appendix D, or as approved by the Fire
Marshal.
c.Shall have a minimum load-bearing width of 16 feet (shoulder-to-shoulder) and shall
have a minimum permanent all-weather surface width of 12 feet, which includes
electric gates or similar openings.
d.All-weather surfaces- driveways where the grade is 10 percent or greater for any portion
of the required access shall have an asphalt surface or an equivalent permanent all-
weather surface as approved by the Fire Marshal.
e.For driveways where the grade is less than 10 percent for any portion of the required
access, compacted base with crushed gravel surface material, e.g., Class 6 Road Base or
similar, is approved provided it is engineered to meet the load-bearing criteria.
f.Driveways shall be engineered to support the imposed loads of double axel fire
apparatus weighing 75,000 pounds. Proof shall be furnished from an engineer which
indicates how driveways meet this design criteria.
g.Driveways shall have minimum overhead clearance of 13’-6” and shall be free from
overhead obstructions, including but not limited to, tree limbs, overhead utility lines,
etc. Vertical clearance shall be maintained for the full driveway width.
h.Gates or similar entry obstructions shall have an approved means of emergency
operations. Electric gate operators shall be listed in accordance with UL 325, and gates
with automatic operation shall meet ASTM F2200. Electric gates shall be provided with
a District-specific Knox gate key switch for emergency access.
3.Explosives. Site work and/or construction involving the use of explosives/blasting will require an
operational permit from this office.
4.Fire Suppression. Properties which have inadequate fire apparatus access because of length,
width, turning radius, percentage of grade, and/or do not have adequate fire protection water
supply, may be required to install automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with the adopted Fire
Code. You are encouraged to consult this office to determine requirements prior to the start of
a building project. Approval by the Fire Marshal is required for building permit issuance even if
a grading permit was approved. Please furnish additional information to this office which
indicates how the project will meet the following requirements at the time of building permit
application:
25
a.An approved fire hydrant is required within 950 feet of the building, as measured along
the road and driveway as the hose would lay. Please note that fire hydrants with “white
tops” have insufficient fire flow and are not approved to meet fire flow requirements.
b.Where the length of the nearest fire hydrant is greater than 950 feet in length, fire
protection water supply shall be considered inadequate *See residential fire sprinkler
requirement.
c.For driveways that are 1,000 feet in length or greater, signage shall be required as
follows:
i.A sign at the entrance point of the driveway which states “Driveway is 1,000
feet,” or, “Driveway > 1,000 feet”.
ii.For driveways which are greater than 1,000 feet in length, a sign shall be
required at the 950-foot mark along the driveway, measured along the driveway
to where fire apparatus would park adjacent to the building.
iii.Signs shall be permanent and durable, shall have white text on a red
background, with a text height of 2-1/2 inches, shall be mounted in a readily
distinguishable location at a height of 48 inches to the top of the sign, and shall
be mounted on a 4-inch diameter steel post with a concrete footing.
d.When either the required fire apparatus access and/or fire protection water supply are
determined to be inadequate or cannot be provided, the Fire Code allows the Fire
Marshal to approve an alternative means of fire protection in lieu of meeting these
requirements. Approved alternative fire protection shall be the installation of a
residential fire sprinkler system installed in accordance with NFPA 13D, 2016 edition.
Action comments. Please make the changes outlined in the comments below and resubmit the relevant
materials prior to 5:00PM on Friday, February 5, 2021 to remain on track for the March 2, 2021 Board of
Adjustment meeting.
PLANNING:
1.Standards of Review. In order to be able to defend a favorable recommendation to the Board of
Adjustment, some elaborated responses to the Standards of Review will be necessary.
a.The response to the Compliance with Standards of Review item 2.b. simply states that it
is the “minimum required to provide relief to the applicant.” Please provide an
elaborated response to explain why that is the case.
b.The response to the Compliance with Standards of Review item 2.f. simply states that
“the requested variance is the minimum to provide relief for the proposed project.”
Please provide an elaborated response to explain why that is the case.
c.The response to the Compliance with Standards of Review item 5 simply states that “the
requested variance is the least deviation from the regulation that will afford relief.”
Please provide an elaborated response to explain why that is the case.
2.Estes Park Development Code. The Setback Variance Information section of the site plan seeks
relief from “E.V.D.C. Table 4-2,” referencing the extinct Estes Valley Development Code. Please
modify to reference the Estes Park Development Code, which is the current development code
of the Town. Please also modify the response to Standards of Review item 6.
PUBLIC WORKS:
26
1.Justification. Public Works staff require more justification for the current proposed building
placement, which relies on a setback variance. If an alternative design is proposed within
required setbacks, there will be value in comparing the two designs to understand the
imperative of a lesser setback. In summary, Public Works is not convinced that the proposed site
plan shows the only viable design.
27
28
th
Friday, February 12, 2021 at 5:00 pm MST
Public Works – Jennifer Waters (EIT, CFM)
The response representing the applicant is acknowledged. Nevertheless, Public Works staff does not
support approval of the proposed setback variance.
Response: Alternative house placements have been evaluated but no specific
design has been prepared. The imperative of the lesser setback can be
determined through review of the typical house footprint size and slope of the
site. Placing the building in the location which would allow for a home design of
typical and reasonable size and character for the area would result in a grade
difference of approximately 25-30 feet across the structure. This would result in
substantial cut and site disturbance in conflict with EPDC grading standards.
Further, we believe that utilizing the lowest slope for the home site results in a
much more practical design for the driveway and guest parking condition which
would not require vehicular parking in the property setback or adjacent to the
home within the right of way.
With the understanding that the applicant's lot was approved for single-family residential use prior to the
effective date of the \[Estes Park Development\] Code, Chapter 7.1.B - Development Restriction on Steep
Slopes is not applicable to the site design. Also, for the same reason, the applicant's lot is not subject to
other sections in Chapter 7, such as 7.2 - Grading and Site Disturbance Standards. If the applicant's lot
was subject to the Code, then a Development Plan would be required since the proposed building site is
steeper than 30% (7.1.B.4). Due to the lot's age, the applicant is allowed to avoid restrictions in Chapter 7
and escape from adhering to modern site design sensibilities. With these advantages over lots that are
subject to Chapter 7, the applicant should not be allowed to escape from the remaining standards,
including setbacks, that govern site development.
Public Works is still not convinced that the proposed site plan shows the only viable design (a smaller
home of reasonable size and character for the area could fit within the setbacks).
29
Attachment6:PublicComments
!
Gfcsvbsz!27-!3132
Bmfy!Cfshfspo-!Qmboofs!JJ
Ftuft!Qbsl!Dpnnvojuz!Efwfmpqnfou!Efqbsunfou
QP!Cpy!2311!
Ftuft!Qbsl-!Dpmpsbep!91628
Efbs!Ns/!Cfshfspo-
J!bn!xsjujoh!upebz!up!fyqsftt!nz!dpodfsot!bcpvu!uif!wbsjbodft!sfrvftufe!gps!Mpu!3-!Cmpdl!
3!pg!Gbmm!Sjwfs!Ftubuft/!Gps!uif!qbtu!uijsuz!zfbst-!J!ibwf!cffo!uif!pxofs!pg!uif!ipnf!
jnnfejbufmz!bekbdfou!up!uijt!qspqfsuz!po!Mpu!2-!beesfttfe!bt!2172!Gbmm!Sjwfs!Dpvsu/!
Gbmm!Sjwfs!Ftubuft!dpoubjot!b!wbsjfuz!pg!sftjefodft!sbohjoh!gspn!usbejujpobm!mph!ipvtft!up!
npefso!tuffm!boe!hmbtt!tusvduvsft/!J!ibwf!ofwfs!cfmjfwfe!uibu!tvsspvoejoh!qspqfsuz!pxofst!
tipvme!cf!bcmf!up!qsfwfou!bopuifs!mpu!pxofs!gspn!cvjmejoh!uif!uzqf!pg!ipnf!uifz!dipptf/!Cvu!J!
ep!cfmjfwf!tvsspvoejoh!qspqfsuz!pxofst!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!up!fyqfdu!uibu!bmm!pg!uif!ipnft!jo!uif!
ofjhicpsippe!xjmm!cf-!up!uif!hsfbuftu!fyufou!qsbdujdbm-!jo!dpnqmjbodf!xjui!uif!tuboebset!
ftubcmjtife!cz!uif!qspufdujwf!dpwfobout!gps!uif!ipnfpxofst!bttpdjbujpo!boe!uif!mboe!vtf!
sfhvmbujpot!pg!uif!Upxo!pg!Ftuft!Qbsl/!Ju!jt!nz!voefstuboejoh!uibu!uif!UpxoÉt!mboe!vtf!
sfhvmbujpot!sfrvjsf!36!gppu!gspou-!sfbs!boe!tjef!tfucbdlt!jo!uijt!sftjefoujbm!{pof/
Jo!mppljoh!bu!uif!qspqptfe!tjuf!qmbo!gps!uif!sftjefodf!tffljoh!b!wbsjbodf-!ju!bqqfbst!uibu!
uif!gspou!tfucbdl!xpvme!cf!sfevdfe!gspn!36!gffu!up!bqqspyjnbufmz!28!gffu-!boe!uif!tjef!
tfucbdl!bmpoh!uif!qspqfsuz!mjof!tibsfe!xjui!nz!qspqfsuz!xpvme!cf!sfevdfe!gspn!36!gffu!up!
bqqspyjnbufmz!21!gffu/!Uif!efwfmpqnfou!pg!uif!mbshf!qbsljoh!bsfb!xpvme!bqqfbs!up!sfrvjsf!uif!
dpotusvdujpo!pg!sfubjojoh!xbmmt!xjuijo!kvtu!b!gfx!gffu!pg!uif!puifs!tjef!qspqfsuz!mjof/!
J!nvtu!opuf-!upp-!uibu!jo!psefs!up!ublf!bddftt!gspn!uif!ÆupqÇ!ps!ijhiftu!qpsujpo!pg!uijt!mpu-!ju!
bqqfbst!uif!esjwfxbz-!xijdi!xpvme!bmtp!bqqfbs!up!sfrvjsf!tjhojÑdbou!sfubjojoh!xbmmt-!xpvme!
pddvqz!nvdi!pg!uif!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz!jnnfejbufmz!bekbdfou!up!uijt!mpu-!boe!joeffe!xpvme!
bmtp!pddvqz!b!qpsujpo!pg!uif!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz!bekbdfou!up!nz!pxo!ofjhicpsjoh!mpu/!Qvcmjd!
sjhiut.pg.xbz!xfsf!joufoefe!up!cf!qsftfswfe!up!uif!hsfbuftu!fyufou!qpttjcmf!gps!cpui!fyjtujoh!
boe!qpufoujbm!gvuvsf!qvcmjd!jnqspwfnfout!tvdi!bt!uif!spbexbz!boe!vujmjujft/!Pg!ofdfttjuz-!uif!
qvcmjd!sjhiut.pg.xbz!nvtu!bddpnnpebuf!bddftt!up!bekbdfou!ipnft-!cvu!uiftf!qsjwbuf!
fodspbdinfout!bsf!vtvbmmz!mjnjufe!up!qfsqfoejdvmbs!esjwfxbzt!qfsibqt!b!ep{fo!ps!tp!gffu!jo!
xjeui/!Uif!bqqmjdbouÉt!vtf!pg!tvdi!b!mbshf!qpsujpo!pg!uif!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz!bekbdfou!up!ijt!mpu!
bt!xfmm!bt!njof!gps!qsjwbuf!jnqspwfnfout!tffnt!jodpnqbujcmf!xjui!uif!psjhjobm!qvsqptf!boe!
joufou!pg!uibu!efejdbufe!qvcmjd!qspqfsuz/!Uif!dpncjofe!ffdu!pg!uif!tjhojÑdbou!sfevdujpot!jo!
tfucbdlt!boe!pddvqbujpo!pg!uif!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz!xpvme!cf!up!bmnptu!dpnqmfufmz!fmjnjobuf!
bmm!pg!uif!usfft!boe!wfhfubujpo!po!uijt!qpsujpo!pg!uif!mpu-!up!cf!sfqmbdfe!cz!ibse!tvsgbdftÅ
sppgupqt!boe!esjwjoh!boe!qbsljoh!tvsgbdftÅbmnptu!gspn!qspqfsuz!mjof!up!qspqfsuz!mjof!boe!bmm!
uif!xbz!pvu!up!uif!fyjtujoh!spbexbz/!Ju!xpvme!dfsubjomz!hjwf!uif!bqqfbsbodf!uibu!uifsf!ibe!
cffo!op!sfrvjsfe!tfucbdlt!bu!bmm!boe!wfsz!mjuumf!efejdbufe!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz/
30
J!voefstuboe!uif!offe!gps!njops!boe!sfbtpobcmf!wbsjbodft!jo!sfhvmbujpot!tvdi!bt!tfucbdlt/!
Pwfs!uif!zfbst-!J!sfbmj{f!puifs!qspqfsuz!pxofst!ibwf!cffo!hsboufe!njops!ps!sfbtpobcmf!
wbsjbodft-!cvu!uif!wbsjbodft!sfrvftufe!ifsf!bsf-!jo!nz!pqjojpo-!ofjuifs!njops!ops!sfbtpobcmf/
Uif!mfuufs!gspn!uif!bqqmjdbouÉt!fohjoffs!tvhhftut!uibu!uif!sfrvftufe!wbsjbodf!jt!sfrvjsfe!up!
tbgfmz!efwfmpq!b!ipvtf!po!uif!mpu-!hjwfo!uijt!mpuÉt!dpoÑhvsbujpo!boe!upqphsbqiz/!J!sftqfdugvmmz!
ejtbhsff/!Nboz-!jg!opu!nptu-!pg!uif!tjohmf!gbnjmz!sftjefoujbm!mput!jo!Gbmm!Sjwfs!Ftubuft!ibwf!
dibmmfohjoh!upqphsbqiz/!Gps!efdbeft-!ipnft!ibwf!cffo!cvjmu!uispvhipvu!uif!Ftuft!Wbmmfz!po!
tuffq!mput/!Jo!Gbmm!Sjwfs!Ftubuft!boe!fmtfxifsf-!pof!dpnnpo!bqqspbdi!up!dpotusvdujoh!b!
ipvtf!po!b!tuffq!mpu!xijdi!sfrvjsft!bddftt!gspn!uif!mpxftu!qpsujpo!pg!uif!mpu!jt!up!qmbdf!uif!
qbsljoh!boe!hbsbhf!po!uif!mpxfs!mfwfm-!xjui!uif!nbjo!mjwjoh!mfwfm!bcpwf!uif!hbsbhf/!Ju!jt!nz!
cfmjfg!uibu!uijt!bqqspbdi!jt!gfbtjcmf!gps!uif!tvckfdu!mpu!boe!jt!jo!bmm!mjlfmjippe!xibu!xbt!
boujdjqbufe!xifo!uif!dpoÑhvsbujpo!pg!uijt!mpu!xbt!psjhjobmmz!dsfbufe/!Qmbdjoh!uif!ipvtf!po!uif!
mpxfs!boe!dpotjefsbcmz!xjefs!qpsujpo!pg!uif!mpu!xpvme!opu!sfrvjsf!tvdi!esbtujd!sfevdujpot!jo!
tfucbdlt-!ops!xpvme!ju!sfrvjsf!tvdi!bo!fyqbotjwf!qbsljoh!bsfb!ps!b!esjwfxbz!xijdi!sftusjdut!
uif!gvuvsf!vujmj{bujpo!pg!uif!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz/!Uif!fohjoffsÉt!mfuufs!tubuft!uibu-!jg!bqqspwfe-!
uif!qspqptfe!ipnf!xpvme!opu!bmufs!uif!dibsbdufs!pg!uif!ofjhicpsippe-!boe!xpvme!cf!tjnjmbs!
jo!tj{f!boe!qptjujpo!sfmbujwf!up!uif!tvsspvoejoh!ipnft/!Bhbjo-!J!sftqfdugvmmz!ejtbhsff/!Uif!vtf!
pg!b!nbkps!qpsujpo!pg!uif!bekpjojoh!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz!gps!qsjwbuf!jnqspwfnfout!)uif!esjwfxbz!
boe!sfubjojoh!xbmmt*!boe!tvdi!esbnbujd!sfevdujpot!jo!uif!tfucbdlt!gspn!nvmujqmf!qspqfsuz!mjoft!
bsf!opu!gpvoe!up!uijt!fyufou!po!boz!pg!uif!jnnfejbufmz!tvsspvoejoh!ipnft/
J!dbo!qfsibqt!voefstuboe!uif!bqqmjdbouÉt!eftjsf!up!ibwf!uiftf!wbsjbodft!bqqspwfe-!ubljoh!
bddftt!gspn!uif!obsspxftu!cvu!ijhiftu!qpsujpo!pg!uif!mpu/!Uif!fmfwbufe!wjfx!gspn!uif!ipnf!jo!
uijt!mpdbujpo!xpvme!mjlfmz!cf!npsf!qmfbtjoh/!Cvu!uifsf!bsf!bmufsobujwf!xbzt!up!efwfmpq!b!ipnf!
po!uijt!mpu!tvdi!bt!bmufsjoh!uif!ipnfÉt!gppuqsjou!boe!mpdbujpo!xijdi!xpvme!cf!cpui!tbgf!boe!
npsf!dpnqmjbou!xjui!uif!fyjtujoh!mboe!vtf!sfhvmbujpot/!Jg!uifsf!ibe!cffo!op!sjhiut.pg.xbz!ps!
tfucbdlt!jo!fyjtufodf!bu!uif!ujnf!J!dpotusvdufe!nz!ipnf-!J!xpvme!ibwf!cvjmu!jo!b!ejfsfou!
mpdbujpo!boe!dpoÑhvsbujpo/!Cvu!puifs!qspqfsuz!pxofst!boe!J!bekvtufe!pvs!eftjsft!boe!pvs!
qmbot!jo!psefs!up!dpnqmz!up!uif!hsfbuftu!fyufou!qpttjcmf!xjui!bmm!bqqmjdbcmf!sfhvmbujpot!xifo!
pvs!ipnft!xfsf!dpotusvdufe-!xjui!uif!voefstuboejoh!boe!cfmjfg!uibu!puifs-!mbufs!qspqfsuz!
pxofst!xpvme!ep!uif!tbnf/!Uif!wbsjbodft!sfrvftufe!cz!uif!qspqfsuz!pxofs!jo!uijt!dbtf!nbz!
cf!eftjsfe!cvu!uifz!bsf!opu!bctpmvufmz!sfrvjsfe!up!dpotusvdu!b!ipnf!po!uijt!qbsujdvmbs!mpu<!
sfbtpobcmf!bmufsobujwft!fyjtu-!kvtu!bt!uifz!fyjtufe!gps!nf!boe!gps!puifs!qspqfsuz!pxofst!xifo!
xf!cvjmu!pvs!pxo!ipnft/!!Uif!wbsjbodft!sfrvftufe!jo!uijt!dbtf!hp!upp!gbs!jo!gbjmjoh!up!dpogpsn!
up!bqqmjdbcmf!sfhvmbujpot!boe!bmufsjoh!uif!dibsbdufs!pg!uif!tvsspvoejoh!qspqfsujft<!bu!b!
njojnvn-!uifz!dbo!boe!tipvme!cf!tdbmfe!cbdl!dpotjefsbcmz/!Uifsfgpsf-!J!vshf!uif!Cpbse!pg!
Bekvtunfout!opu!up!bqqspwf!uif!sfrvftufe!wbsjbodft/!Uibol!zpv!gps!zpvs!dpotjefsbujpo/
Sftqfdugvmmz-
Nbsd!Fohfnpfo
Pxofs!pg!2172!Gbmm!Sjwfs!Dpvsu-!Ftuft!Qbsl!
31
32
33
Mr. Alex Bergeron February 14, 2021
Planner II
Community Development Department
170 MacGregor Avenue
Estes Park, CO 80517
RE: Variance Request in Estes Park Board of Adjustment
Application dated Jan. 13, 2021 for Lot 2 Block 2 in Fall River Estates
Dear Mr. Bergeron,
We have reviewed the following items related to the referenced variance:
Letter from Trail Ridge Consulting Engineers dated Jan. 13, 2021
Estes Park Board of Adjustment Application dated Jan. 13, 2021
Drawing entitled Site Plan for Variance dated Jan. 13, 2021
and have some objections to the requested variance. In the spirit of cooperation, we will
respectfully suggest some possible adjustments to the proposed layout of the house and
driveway. Please note that our property is immediately across Fall River Court to the south of
the proposed home.
At the outset, the zoning restrictions, notably the setbacks, apply to all residents and the whole
development, and these restrictions improve the desirability of the development for all. The
openness of the development provides a feeling of spaciousness for the inhabitants, including
our wildlife. Openness provides improved views for all of our spectacular scenery. Housing
that is centrally located within its lot, without violating the agreed-upon setback requirements
helps to provide this openness. So, we ask that all the Estes Park setback requirements be
observed.
We note that the entire site development as proposed (house, garage, parking area and
driveway) is quite extensive, and will seem out of character with the remainder of the
development. The proposed house, at nearly 60 feet long, is quite wide, reducing the setback
on the east side from 25 to about 10 feet. The garage is quite close to the street, and fails to
provide the required 25 feet setback from the street. The owners could consider reducing the
width of the home in the southeast to northeast line, and extending the home to the northeast
if it is important to maintain a certain interior square footage.
Another potential improvement would be to place the garage under the home, which is often
done with steep lots. This would alleviate the setback problem at the street, provided that the
house is not moved to the south and closer to the street. Relocating the garage would allow
direct access to the garage from the lower part of Fall River Court or Blue Spruce Lane, without
the need for the significant turnaround area shown currently. Relocating the driveway to the
1
34
lower area on the lot, and minimizing the turnaround area, reduce the need to remove trees or
other vegetation, and reduce the amount of immediate runoff in the event of a rainstorm.
Runoff from the upper portion of the lot has the potential to cause significant soil erosion as it
flows downhill.
As depicted in the documents mentioned above, the proposed home would be closer to our
property than we expected, since the Town setback guidelines have not been followed.
Maintaining the Town guidelines would provide more openness and less blockage of our views.
Adhering to the suggestions herein would minimize any negative impacts to our property value,
and therefore we hope that our suggestions and comments will be carefully considered, and
the variance not approved.
Thank you for your attention to our objections.
Tom and Sally Shults
Local Address:
1064 Fall River Court
Estes Park, CO 80517
(Block 1, Lots 37 and 38)
2
35
36
37
38
NOTICE
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021, at 9:00 a.m., a virtual meeting will be held by the Estes Park Board of
Adjustment to consider an application for a setback variance for the property and purpose described
below.
Legal Description: LOT 2, BLK 2, FALL RIVER EST, EP
Type and Intensity of Use:Applicant requests approval of a variance to allow for a 10-footsidesetback
on the eastern property line and a 15-foot front setback on the southern property line. The stated
reasons for the request relate to perceived challenges with the slope of the property. Owner/Applicant:
Larry and Catherine Griffin/Trail Ridge Consulting Engineers. For more information, please visit
www.estes.org/currentapplications or contact the Community Development Department at
planning@estes.org or 970-577-3721.
40