Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2000-09-05BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment September 5, 2000, 8:00 a.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Board: Attending: Chair Jeff Barker, Members Joe Ball, Judy Lamy, Wayne Newsom and Al Sager Chair Barker, Members Ball, Lamy, Newsom and Sager Also Attending: Senior Planner Joseph, Planner Shirk, and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent:None Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. 1. MINUTES The minutes of the August 1,2000, meeting were accepted as presented. 2. LOT 7. ROCKWOOD ESTATES SUBDIVISION. APPLICANT: MARK & KATHY SEMERAD - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4- 2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff Report. The applicant proposes to construct a detached garage resulting in a side yard setback of approximately 18 feet In lieu of the 50-feet required in the RE Rural Estate zoning district. Steve Nichol of the Portfolio Group represented the applicants. He described the limitations of the lot and the interests of the neighbors. There was no public comment. Correspondence from the Pruskauer’s and the Rockwood Estates Property Owners Association were read and noted. Based on the fact the homeowners association has endorsed the request, the adjoining property owner has endorsed the request and the location has been well thought out because of rock formations, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Sager) to approve the variance request with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Compliance with the submitted Site Plan for Lot 7, Rockwood Estates Subdivision 2nd Filing. 2. The roof ridge shall be parallel to the view corridor of Lot 8, Rockwood Estates. 3. Prior to pouring foundation, a setback certificate from a qualified professional shall be required to determine location of footing. 3. LOT 20. WHITE MEADOW VIEW PLACE SUBDIVISION. APPLICANT: DAVID & LINDA BUESING - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff Report. Staff does not find any particular hardship and recommends disapproval. Chief Building Official BIrchfield reviewed the requirements of the building code. If construction is less than 3 feet to the property line, special fire resistive construction is required. Linda Buesing read a statement regarding their request. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment September 5, 2000 Page 2 There were no comments from the public. Based on the fact the applicant failed to show any exceptional situations, it was moved and seconded (Sager/Lamy) to disapprove the variance. Motion passed 3 to 2. Those voting for: Sager, Barker, Ball. Those voting against: Newsom and Lamy. 4. LOT 3. MARY’S LAKE SUBDIVISION. APPLICANT: SST BEAR LAKE LLC. FRANK THEIS - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 7.6 E. 2. b. OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COPE Senior Planner Joseph reviewed the Staff Report. Staff feels that this is a reasonable variance request and recommends approval with one condition. The plans have been revised again that remove the building encroachment. Kimball Crangle Krisman, Manager of Mary’s Lake Lodge, represented the applicant. This is in Phase III of the project and will be constructed in about one year. The applicant feels that they will be protecting this isolated wetland and the parking area has been used historically and does not affect the wetland area. The Board members expressed concern that someone would drive past the end of the designated parking area. No public comment. Based on the fact the wetlands are being preserved, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Sager) to approve the variance request with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. The wetlands area shall be fenced off during construction to prevent unintended disturbance of the area. 2. Bumper blocks or similar restrictions to delineate the edge of the parking area are required. 3. A 6-month time extension to the one-year variance period is granted to allow for construction. LOT 39. LITTLE VALLEY SUBDIVISION. APPLICANT: DALYN SCHMIDT & MIKE MODEL - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff Report. Due to the steep, rocky, forested nature of the site, the location of the proposed garage is in an area that will have minimal visual impact on adjoining properties. Greg Westley, the builder, represented the applicants and advised the efforts made to contact neighbors and homeowners association. There was no negative response. Senior Planner Joseph read correspondence from the Little Valley Homeowners Association supporting this request. Based on the topography of the site, it was moved and seconded (Ball/Lamy) to approve the variance request with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Compliance with the submitted Site Plan for Lot 39, Little Valley 2nd Filing. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment September 5, 2000 Page 3 2. Prior to pouring the foundation, a setback certificate from a qualified professional shall be required to determine location of footing. LOT 70. FALL RIVER ADDITION. APPLICANT: JOHN MOYNIHAN - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Senior Planner Joseph reviewed the Staff Report. The owners are requesting a variance to do improvements to the exterior of the building and the addition of a deck to access the main door of the residence. The lot is steep and rocky to the rear and sides of the building. Staff finds there are unique physical constraints on the property and recommends approval. Statement of Intent refers to vacation rentals; however, the variance request is only regarding the setback. The Light & Power Department advised the request would be acceptable In regard to the power pole located next to the proposed deck. Neither the applicant nor a representative was present. Public Comment: Robert Mussman of Sunnyside Knoll Resort requested a requirement to improve on the appearance of the site. The Board requested the Chief Building Official Birchfield to comment and he advised the project was under construction with new siding. Appearance, however, is not considered under the UBC. Based on the recommendations of staff, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to approve the variance request with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Full compliance with the Unified Building Code. 2. Submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a qualified individual third party. 3. Setback reductions in accordance with the submitted site plan. 4. No use variance is being considered or granted. 7. LOT 18. WINDCLIFF ESTATES. 3rd FILING. APPLICANT: RAY VERM - SETBACK & HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUESTS FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4- 2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Senior Planner Joseph reviewed the Staff Report. The grade across the site is steep (approximately 40%). There Is an existing sewer main that crosses the property and presents another constraint on the buildable area. The setback variance is significant, however, due to circumstances appeared justified. The height variance request is substantial and perhaps could be reduced. Jim Vander Voorst of BVZ Architects represented the applicants. He reviewed the items that have already been done to reduce the variance required. They have tried to mitigate the effect of the height by located it as low on the site as possible and the use of the surrounding trees. There is no problem with the requested conditions of approval. He reviewed the other options that were available but less functional or aesthetically appealing. Board Member Sager complimented the firm for the site preparation and staking. The memo from the Larimer County Building Department was reviewed and responded to by the architects and Chief Building Official Birchfield. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment September 5, 2000 Page 4 Public Comment: John Hyatt, 3452 Eagle Cliff Circle Drive, chairman of the architectural control committee of Windcliff Property Owners Association, spoke as an individual in approval of the request. John Hackett, adjoining property owner directly downslope, spoke about his concern that the house could be lowered by increasing the grade of the driveway. George Leonard, 1440 JungfrauTrail, member of the Board of Directors of Windcliff POA, advised when his sister bought this property 3 years ago, he did not know that there would be a height limitation. Mr. Vander Voorst responded to Mr. Hackett’s comments. The former county standard was 40 feet, but because of the method of measurement, this proposal falls well below that standard. The driveway allows for a crown at the roadside and a level spot at the bottom. They have tried to mitigate as much as possible the height of the foundation level with construction design. Based on the topography of the land, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to approve the variance requests for height variance of 49.5 ft. and setback of 15 ft. with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Full compliance with the Uniform Building Code. 2. Submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a qualified third party. 3. Non-reflective building materials shall be used on the roof and wall exteriors (excluding windows). 4. Exterior colors shall be muted and selected to blend In with the surrounding hillside. 5. New plantings shall be provided around the downhill side of the structure consistent with good wildfire protection standards. These plantings shall be carefully selected and located to reduce the perceived size and height of the structure as viewed from off-site. 8. LOT 4. SUTTON LANE SUBDIVISION. APPLICANT: JOE & MARY BALL - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Board Member Ball removed himself due to conflict of interest. Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff Report. The site is located within an older established neighborhood that is characterized by unusually shaped lots. The narrowness of the lot creates extenuating circumstances and staff recommends approval. Board Member Sager requested better clarification and an improved site plan. Senior Planner Joseph commented that the new aerial photography base maps that will be available very soon would improve the Board’s ability for review. Joe Ball, 1061 Sutton Lane, reviewed his request. The lot is 65 feet wide and the cabin is at an angle. The cabin was built in 1930. The 5 ft. back addition will be used for a laundry, water heater and pressure tank, which is currently in the BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment September 5, 2000 Page 5 kitchen. The addition to the front will allow for a second story, which the old cabin cannot support. A layout of the cabin was provided to the Board. There was no public comment. Based on staff findings, it was moved and seconded (Sager/Newsom) to approve the variance request with the foliowing conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Compliance with the submitted Ball Site Plan. 2. Prior to pouring foundation, a setback certificate from a qualified professional shall be required to determine location of footing. Board Member Sager made a request that the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment did not occur after a Monday holiday. It was moved and seconded (Sager/Ball) that the meeting date not be immediately following a holiday, and it passed unanimously. There being no further business, Chair Barker adjourned the meeting at 10:47 a.m. Jeff Barker, Chair ^~fy\ LXyfuntk Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary