Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Board of Adjustment 1985-11-07# BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS / Board of Adjustment November 7, 1985 Board: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman Wood, Members Brown, Laing, Lamson, Sager Chairman Wood, Members Laing, Lamson, Sager Town Attorney White, Town Planner Stamey, Town Engineer Widmer, Building Inspector Jones, Clerk O'Connor Member Brown VINCENT CHUNG/ESTES VILLAGE MOTOR INN, 1040 BIG THOMPSON AVENUE - VARIANCE FROM DENSITY ALLOWED IN C-Q ZONE: Mr. Paul Kochevar, representing the owners, submitted an application seeking a variance from the density allowed in the Commercial Outlying District. The owners would be allowed to construct 43 units on the property if all the structures were connected to form one building. The owners do not desire to connect all the structures due to the obstruction of the "view corridor" of adjoining property owners and expense of the connection itself. Planner Stamey read the follov/ing correspondence: Paul Kochevar/Estes Park Surveyors..............10/22/85 Vincent Chung/Estes Village Motor Inn........10/16/85 Robert Young (adjacent property owner).......10/31/85 The schedule for construction is anticipated to be: review of the development plan by the Estes Park Planning Commission November 19, 1985, request for building permit November 20, 1985, completion of the project prior to the 1986 summer season. Planner Stamey summarized a staff report which was dated November 7, 1985. The report listed site data, project description, which indicated the site had non-conforming density, issues and concerns and alternatives. A total of 52 parking spaces have been provided. Town Attorney White advised he, along with staff, reviewed the variance request to verify the legalities of the Board of Adjustment in granting such a request. Town Attorney White read a portion of the Board of Adjustment Powers and Duties - "....In order for an applicant for a variance to be granted a variance, he must show that, by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or slope of his property, or by reason of exceptional topographic conditions or another extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition of his proper­ ty, he will be denied the use of his property for any economic use...." The Board also discussed the setback requirements. The two buildings have a 10' side setback along the west property line. C-0 District regulations now require a 15' setback. Town Attorney White advised the variance request seeking relief from the density regulations could not be amended to include the setback variance. No further action was taken concerning the setback requirements. Member Sager stated this site was not a lot different from any other tracts of land in the Estes Park area; the request did not meet the criteria stated by Town Attorney White; it would be imprudent to grant the variance with the possibility of adopting a new zoning ordinance; there is a possibility that the new zoning ordinance will provide the owners with the relief they need. Member Sager moved the Estes Village Motor Inn variance request be denied. Member Laing seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned. (D ) Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk