Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Board of Adjustment 1990-04-05BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Board ot Adjustment April 5, 1990 Board: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman Habecker, Members Garrett, Lamson, Sager All Barker, Community Development Director Stamey, Building Official Allman, Town Attorney White, Secretary Jones None Chairman Habecker called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. and briefed those in attendance of the Board of Adjustment public hearing procedures. t' !• APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the Board of Adjustment meeting held March 1 1990were submitted and approved. ii^rcn i, ±yyu 2* Yi.gdis Lohne, 650 Moraine Avenue. Request for Variance atreTrta0rrt SfiameJ advis®d.that the subject property is located that/.a„a0R^%r\n hSa1vZee ^ea than reguestin9 a variance from this minimum Icffrl; toreg^^ift SaaTlvar/^cele whereZSthe t^tt ■'"'f B°ard authorized ordinance in question will resnii- •ir,triCt application of the without harm to other landownert-c ^^nec.es>sary hardship, and doing violenceto the pSposSIof ^oinity, and without overall planning sc^heme Tn /°de provisions and the granted Pa varfance "he inst0rasehow tha? apPUoant exceptional narrowness, shallowness byh.reason or by reason of excent i^nri ^ ' ?. slope °n his propertyextraordinary and exceptio1nal°P^??aP5J:C conditions or other denied the use of that will bethat the variance, if granted fwill Li0011?.11?10 USe‘ The fact or make a property more valuahio 1];- 11g^ h^m to make rnoney, sufficient to sustainra J3 n°J' in and of itself use of the property in , where he can make a lawful of the same character as otheJaiawfui’t,h the G°d® pr?visions, district. Director Stamey noted tha^ ■ Uses w.lthiu his zoning Bs0c%i:f AdJustment.s rev5‘en|1thYsina9pptlhrcat?on Power^t1ai^^ti^^eofX theZBoar^a^stwhethnSZderatZOn un(^er the given by the applicant is suffi(^^h.fn^er °r n0t the reaaon variance from the 10 acre requTrernent ^ reaS°n t0 allow a sketch Pla?nsS?wingrSxiJtSa1Ii? th^ applicant, submitted a possible layout fo;g54RV park lpace^Ure^ 0rl the site and a acre minimum lot size doeSP present a Ha u^ated that the 10 He stated that he felt this eta ardfhip for apPlicant. SLtraarsiltyhry further stated that this propert^^s^uniruHn BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS tsoara or Aajustment - April b, 1990 - Page 2----------------------------------- developed many years ago, has changed owners at least six times and has been in a distressed state for approximately 20 years. Applicant is seeking a reasonable economic use of the property. He stated the property doesn' t lend itself to being used as a subdivision, the taxes are significant, the economics are not there to improve existing structures, and this presents a hardship for applicant. Mr. Van Horn submitted correspondence received by applicant in support of this proposal, as follows: uppiicanr Robert Mitchell - Tiny Town Raymond L. Parker - Conoco Station Delmar & Sheryl Mason_ - R-7-11 Convenience Store Darcy Spomer - Spur Liguor Dick & Marilyn Siebenaler - Rock Museum C. Mattingly Vigdis L°hne, appeared before the Board statina financiealha;rrilLthwftrrtfty sheCes1t9r8e3ssaendd the aSS frthlrenis no6 ■proper^y in a way to make it more eoomomloal there wa/^-SeeT^r farddltt]'oe„:rnRv1raCeSsheif fhf fTs property?17 S 18 apProaohed by KV'ers asking to park on'her of the site and questioned if th?)1nt;?1S le?s®ned hy the size is a wise minimim. 10 re minimuni requirement Chairman Habecker commented that ar>ni h 1to be based upon a financial v. aPPi;Lcant s argument seems Board cannot determinrihetwrdShlp- He adviaaa that the correct, but rather can nniw or n0t the town code is property has peculiarities whior^uf^a hardship?17 n0t the aup^ortbofan?heNOp?opot1a9ie' sr?af-bY ?^°PSrty °™ers- - needs additional^RVPspaces. ting that theY feel Estes Park ac? 4J)°h Catherine rjct T^^nd'^r817^ r^^P^S^t0/ tPhr^?eprrtoypoSs°aUlth 0fHTeelset:n'thSt8'ted issues that needed toP be addressed t?tfd the/Fe ware le9al whether6©? ^ft ^h.fe t^l'ica^ haa°sCetSh h1s' & “ the \hs?ueWhyf nu0nUrarnre°sys6 H?llsetVaetedPPt1ha0tanttheha? mSt bk b-den If'pJc^rfn theis'i?rga?dt hLe lhl?a?^«isUcs ??9ra,fiTif0f •t?lis £lat Parcal noi further stated that *-a-S -n9 "UniqUe"- Heto the oente? of tL rive? ih??? P?i°n ?t the parcel 9°es than 7.5 acres plus uJ^ of h ?°Uld n!ake the Parcel less Attorney Phipps Pstated thor-i3 Cab11Ps already on the site, property owners because RV t.ari<-c;W^Uld be h31-1111 to adjacent pn?LSi?.t?pl °“pp“ BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Board of Adjustment - April 5, 1990 - Page 3 The following also gave testimony in opposition to the request: Mr. Ron Robinson, co-owner of Spruce Lake RV Park, stated that only on rare occasions is their RV park full to the point of having to turn anyone away. Cindy Oliver, owner of property to the west of Telemark, expressed concern with setting a precedent and allowing other RV parks to be developed on lots that don't meet the minimum size requirement. Charlotte Robinson, Spruce Lake RV Park, noted that in the 1990 Trailer Life Campground Directory there were 12 campgrounds listed for the Estes Park area consisting of 1,221 campsites. She does not feel there is a need for additional spaces. 2ale T,Vevf Straeten, representing himself and acting as agent Robinsonert;,iFiaY' Jrw‘' Eima Lee Hartze1' and Jean McLean Robinson, all nearby property owners, expressed their t0 the devel°Pment, stating that he has seen the ubject property go from a successful operation to its present t trlTlTrt ltnaT and1ftlt that applicant allowing junkefcS & trailers to accumulate on the site has not helped. fou? ?nri1onl 5?a??'S La^e CamP5round, commented that out of "st cue amount of open space available. indicatedaeconomic1I^1i^hi^aunnecp^OU^^ .thS has identified as far as the a^ol J1^®°?ssafry hardship has not been out of five adj^cfeift tS concerned; that four and written testimony in opposition htrth»Vlde<^ b°th 0ral granting the variance will do harm to variance, and variance if granted, would amount to ^21? ria,Pr.°PerV- The minimum size required and woniH ireduction from the to the purpose Of the code VS plgati+V.e impacts relative shallowness, or slope on t-hio ExcePtional narrowness, topographical conditions are not eOldOOi7' a1 excePti°nal not shown that topographical d ,and aPPlicant has warrants a variance, ini tSe^efoJe relaJtive the land variance request. Member SagOr seoon'dertie t° . de"y this vote was unanimous in favor of deniair!ded thG m°ti0n and the Chairman Habecker noted that- -F-ina-; ones, had not been identified and fhft- other than economic IS not sufficient to warrant OTanWncO eo.onomics in itself noted that it is not th. granting a variance. He further Adjustment to change the code stand^TdZ^ °f the Board of furth- business, the meeting was adjourned Carolyn Ji ,//Secretary