HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2001-06-05BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
June 5,2001, 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: Director Joseph, Planner Shirk and Recording Secretary
Wheatley
Absent:None
Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
1. CONSENT AGENDA
The minutes of the May 1,2001, meeting were accepted as presented.
2- LOT 6, ROCKWOOD ESTATES 2nd FILING. 1027 ROCKWOOD LANE-
APPLICANTS: RICHARD & MURIEL PETERSON - SETBACK VARIANCE
REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant is requesting a side yard
setback variance to allow for the construction of a detached single-family
dwelling. It appears special circumstances of steep slope are present on this lot.
The applicant could build a house that met the required setbacks; however, this
would locate the structure on steeply sloping grades which would require
additional rock cut and have a larger impact on the character of the
neighborhood. Due to site conditions. Staff does not consider this request
substantial. The essential character of the neighborhood would change less with
the variance than without. The applicant purchased the property in 1986. The
“RE” zone and associated setbacks were implemented in 2000. Prior to that, the
property was zoned “E” by the County, which still had a side yard setback of 50
feet. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative
to code compliance or the provision of public services. Planner Shirk read the
staff findings into the record.
Board member Sager requested that certain information, such as the location of
manhole covers and light poles be shown on the site plan. Also a sign on site
indicating the address and owner would help the Board in locating the site for
inspections.
Roger Thorp of Thorp Associates was present on behalf of the applicant to
answer questions.
Public Comment:
None.
Based on staff findings, it was moved and seconded (Sager/Newsom) to
approve the variance request to ailow a 38 foot side yard setback in iieu of
50 feet as required in the “RE” Estate zoning district with the foiiowing
conditions and it passed unanimousiy. Ail variances granted by the Board
of Adjustment shaii become nuii and void if a Building Permit has not been
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
June 5,2001 Page 2
issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months
from the date the variance is granted.
1. Prior to pouring foundation, submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a
certified surveyor.
2. Compliance with the submitted site plan.
3. LOT 6, BLOCK 7, V\flNDCLIFF ESTATES 5th FILING. 3448 EAGLECLIFF
DRIVE, APPLICANTS: RAYMOND & LAURA FINK - HEIGHT AND SETBACK
VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES
VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE
Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff Report. The applicant wishes to deviate from
the mandated 25-foot side yard setback to allow side setbacks of 10 feet and a
height of 36 feet In lieu of the 30 foot maximum imposed by the EVDC. The
applicant desires to construct a new single-family dwelling unit with attached two-
car garage. The Upper Thompson Sanitation District has reservations
concerning the requested north side-yard variance request. Specifically, the
District has a collection line located within the north 10-foot easement. The
easement must be maintained free of obstructions for the District to operate and
maintain its collection line. The lot is characterized by 25-30% slopes, is
undersized for the E-1 Estate one-acre district being only .43 acre. Staff agrees
with the applicant that special circumstances apply to this lot. There is
permanent open space below this site. The proposal is in keeping with the
character of the neighborhood. The owner purchased the lot in November 1999
and associated height and building setbacks were implemented in February
2000. Setbacks have not changed; however, the County’s height limitation was
40 feet. Planner Shirk read staff findings into the record.
Roger Thorp of Thorp Associates was present representing the applicant.
Compliance with the requirement from Upper Thompson can be accommodated.
The neighbors from the north and south have both given approvals to the
variance.
Public Comment:
None.
Based on lot size and steepness of the lot, it was moved and seconded
(Newsom/Ball) to approve the variance request to allow a side yard setback
of 10 feet instead of the 25-foot setback and a height variance of 36 feet as
opposed to 30 feet as required in the E-1 zoning district with the following
conditions and it passed unanimously. All variances granted by the Board
of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been
issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months
from the date the variance is granted.
1. Prior to pouring foundation, submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a
certified surveyor. This certificate should verify structure corners and lower
level finished contour elevation of 90, as identified on the site plan.
2. Submittal of a building permit application demonstrating:
a. Compliance with the submitted site plan,
b. Non-reflective building materials on the roof and wall exteriors
(excluding windows).
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
June 5,2001 Pages
c. Exterior colors muted and selected to blend in with the surrounding
hillside.
d. Written approval for the building site from Upper Thompson Sanitation
District.
4. LOT 12, CENTENNIAL HILLS SUBDIVISION. 179 CENTENNIAL DRIVE.
APPLICANTS: JEFF & SUSAN HANCOCK - SETBACK VARIANCE
REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3. TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE
Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff report. The applicant wishes to deviate from the
mandated 50-foot front yard setback to allow a setback of 18-feet to allow for the
construction of a detached two-car garage. A previous discussion also included
a plan for living quarters above. Staff advised applicant that accessory dwelling
units were not allowed. The Larimer County Building Department has noted that
no inspections were conducted under Permit 939-E545 for the installation of a
500-gallon propane tank. There do not appear to be any special circumstances
associated with this lot. The applicant built the principal dwelling unit in 1993 with
an attached garage; therefore, the property may continue to be used for
residential use. The construction of the proposed structure within 18 feet of the
right-of-way would be out of character for the neighborhood. The zoned setback
at the time of construction was 75 feet from the road centerline or 30-feet from
the property line, whichever was greater. The 50-foot standard was implemented
with the adoption of the Estes Valley Development Code in February 2000. The
garage could be sited almost anywhere else on the lot and conform. Due to the
majority of the structure being within the zoned setback, it is Staff’s opinion the
request is for the maximum deviation.
The applicant, Jeff Hancock, spoke regarding his proposal and their desire to
keep the open space in the meadow area. By building in this open meadow area,
views from neighboring lots would be more affected. He noted that there is no
500-gallon propane tank on the property and that they have been on natural gas
for several years.
Bruce Gregg of Gregg Construction spoke regarding the rooflines which would be
consistent with the house. The current design of the garage has been
redesigned to exclude the living quarters.
Susan Hancock answered questions from the Board regarding reasoning for
having this garage detached.
Bruce Gregg advised that the existing garage space that is currently attached to
the house would be reduced with a remodel of the main residence.
It was moved (Sager) to table this item to allow for further Information from the
applicant. Motion died for lack of a second.
Mel Wilson was present and answered questions from the Board. He is on an
architectural committee from the area. With respect to the covenants for
Centennial Hills, this request seems too extreme. There are covenants for
Centennial Hills that are recorded; however, there is no homeowner’s association
at this time. The covenants have setbacks of 75 feet from the centerline of the
road.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
June 5,2001 Page 4
It was moved (Sager/Lamy) to table this proposal to allow the applicant to
provide more specific information regarding the proposed revision to the
house and how it fits in with the detached garage. Motion passed. Those
voting yes - Lamy, Sager and Ball. Those voting no - Barker and Newsom.
Board requested plans of their future plans for the remodel and extension of the
house. Floor plans with the renovations to the existing garage, building
elevations, future additions and correction to the submitted site plan (e.g., scale)
were requested. Chair Barker also requested the applicant to consider
preserving the meadow open space through the use of a building envelope or
conservation easement.
REPORTS:
There being no further business. Chair Barker adjourned the meeting at 9:30 a.m.
Jeff Barker, Chair
Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary