HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission 2005-01-18RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005,1:30 p.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Municipai Buiiding
Commission:
Attending:
Aiso Attending:
Absent:
Chair Richard Homeier, Commissioners Wendell Amos, George
Mix, Bill Horton, Betty Hull, Joyce Kitchen, and Edward Pohl
Chair Homeier, Commissioners Amos, Hix, Hull, Kitchen, and Pohl
Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, Planner
Shirk, Town Board Liaison Habecker present at study session, and
Recording Secretary Roederer
Commissioner Horton
Chair Homeier calied the meeting to order at 1:32 p.m.
1. CONSENT AGENDA
a. Estes Vaiiey Planning Commission Minutes dated December 21, 2004.
It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hull) that the Consent Agenda be accepted,
and the motion passed unanimousiy with one absent.
2. ELECTiON OF OFFiCERS
it was moved and seconded (Amos/Hix) that Commissioner Kitchen be
nominated for Chair, and the motion passed unanimousiy with one absent.
it was moved and seconded (Hix/Amos) that Commissioner Pohi be nominated
for Vice-Chair, and the motion passed unanimousiy with one absent.
It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hix) that the Community Deveiopment
Administrative Assistant or designee be appointed as Recording Secretary,
and the motion passed unanimously with one absent.
3. PUBLiC COMMENT
None.
4. BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT, A PORTION OF THE SE Vi. OF THE SE V* OF
SECTION 27, T5N, R73W OF THE 6th P.M., 1660 & 1671 Hummingbird Lane,
Appiicant: Stephanie Johnson
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This is a request to adjust the common
interior lot line between two existing lots. The applicant, who owns the lot at 1660
Hummingbird Lane, proposes to shift the lot line shared with the property at 1671
Hummingbird Lane to the north to create an area for an addition on the rear of the
existing cabin. Both properties are zoned “E-1” Estate, which requires a minimum lot
size of one acre. This lot-line adjustment would have the effect of enlarging 1660
Hummingbird from a .50-acre lot to a .62-acre lot and decreasing 1671 Hummingbird
from a one-acre lot to a .88-acre lot. This action requires the Planning Commission
to grant a minor modification for the minimum lot size of 1671 Hummingbird Lane,
which has a minimum lot size of one acre. With the exception of minimum lot size,
this proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code. Section 3.7 of the EVDC allows for the Planning Commission to grant minor
modifications up to a maximum of twenty-five percent (25%) from minimum lot area
requirements. Although there is currently enough land area to put an addition on the
front of the cabin, the applicant feels that placing the 400-square-foot addition on the
rear of the cabin, which is currently 780 square feet, would have less impact on the
overall character of the neighborhood. Planner Shirk suggested this minor
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
modification advances the goals and purposes of the Estes Valley Development
Code and would result in less visual impact and more effective environmental or
open space preservation and noted that staff is supportive of the request. There has
been some question as to whether a right-of-way exists between the two homes,
therefore the applicant, the owner of the adjoining property, and the owner of the
property to the east will file quit claim deeds to abandon the right-of-way. The
request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agencies and to adjoining
property owners for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns
were expressed by reviewing agency staff relative to code compliance or the
provision of public services. No comments were received from adjoining property
owners.
Public Comment:
The applicant, Stephanie Johnson, was present and requested clarification on the
quit claim deeds to be filed. Lee Leuthold, owner of the adjacent property at 1671
Hummingbird Lane, was also present and stated his agreement with the requested
boundary line adjustment.
It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hull) to recommend approval to the Board
of County Commissioners the Boundary Line Adjustment, a Portion of the SE
Va of the SE 1/4 of Section 27, T5N, R73W of the 6th P.M., 1660 & 1671
Hummingbird Lane, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff,
and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and the following
conditions.
1. Reformat the plat for recording (remove improvements).
2. The applicant shall file quit claim deeds abandoning any right-of-way for both
properties.
5. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 04-16, THE PROMONTORY, PROPOSED LOT 6, REPLAT
OF MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION, 2625 Mary's Lake Road, Applicant: Rock
Castie Development Co.
Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. This is a development plan application to
build twenty-two residential/accommodations units on proposed Lot 6 of the Mary’s
Lake Replat. This is an 8.59-acre lot with an average slope of 25.3 percent. The lot
is currently zoned “A-1” Accommodations/Highway Corridor; however. Planning
Commission recommended rezoning to “A” Accommodations/Highway Corridor
conditional on approval of the development plan. Four unit types are proposed; all
are three-bedroom units with two-car garages. Three of the units will be
handicapped-adaptable. Four Type A, six Type B, five Type C, and seven Type D
units are proposed. Planner Chilcott noted that if the recommended conditions of
approval are met, the development plan will be consistent with the policies, goals
and objectives of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan. The proposed uses, i.e.,
residential and accommodations, are permitted in the “A” Accommodations/Highway
Corridor zoning district. The proposed density is allowable and all units meet the
required setbacks. Instead of 9,000 square feet of net land area per unit, 12,990
square feet must be provided because the slope of the lot is over twelve percent.
Compliance with the requirements in Estes Valley Development Code Section 7.1.B
“Development on Steep Slopes” may be required for Units 9,10, and 11.
Planner Chilcott noted that the site design on the south side of the cul-de-sac near
Mary’s Lake Estates was revised after the plan was routed to adjacent property
owners. The driveway that was proposed within a few feet of the adjacent property
owners’ lots has been eliminated at the recommendation of staff. Use of an alternate
driveway necessitates a waiver from the maximum-allowed four units per driveway.
A unit was also relocated from the southern portion of the lot, where it had been
placed in significant cut, to the northern portion of the lot near Mary’s Lake Estates
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
where it has less impact on the land. Neighbors were notified of this change; they
are in agreement with the change but requested that additional trees be planted to
buffer their homes from the unit and that the driveway enter the residence on the
east side rather than the north.
The proposed landscaping for the site meets or exceeds the requirements of the
Estes Valley Development Code. Parking calculations were provided for residential
use of the property. Eighty-six spaces are provided; only forty-nine spaces are
required. Impacts of the proposed development on existing transportation levels of
service were reviewed with the preliminary plat for the Mary’s Lake Replat and
improvements to Highway 7 were recommended by the Planning Commission at that
time. Accessible parking will be provided for the handicapped-adaptable units.
Planner Chilcott stated that the site is in a steep slope hazard area and a wildfire
hazard area. Review of building permits by the Larimer County Wildfire Safety
Specialist will be required and the condominium declaration must address wildfire
hazards and how defensible spaces will be maintained. Director Joseph noted that a
detailed grading plan shown at a scale of 1" = 10’ with two-foot contours will be
required with individual site plans as building permits are applied for. The
development plan meets adequate public facilities requirements except for the traffic
load on the cul-de-sac.
The request was submitted to all applicable reviewing agencies for consideration
and comment. The request was also submitted to neighbors for consideration and
comment. Written comments were received by Dan and Pam Vandenburg, former
Mary’s Lake Lodge condominium unit owners, expressing concerns about the
compatibility of residential development next to Mary’s Lake Lodge and parking
overflow from lodge, as well as noise and disorderly behavior by Lodge patrons.
Staff does not believe that concerns with the operation of Mary’s Lake Lodge should
restrict development on adjacent lots. Mary’s Lake Lodge parking should be
addressed with the Mary’s Lake Lodge development plan review, while loud music
and drunken and disorderly behavior should be addressed through the Estes Park
Police Department.
Public Comment:
Frank Theis, CMS Planning, was present to represent the applicant. He stated that a
geologist had inspected the site and found no hazards from falling rocks. He asked
for clarification on the requirements for submitting grading plans. Mr. Theis stated
that they will continue to work with Community Development staff to preserve trees
and comply with all landscaping requirements.
Joe Ford, owner of the property at 2800 Kiowa Trail, was present. He stated that the
opposition that neighbors had to the Kiowa Trail extension does not apply to the
Promontory development and that they are supportive of this request.
It was moved and seconded (Hix/Pohl) to approve Development Plan 04-16, The
Promontory, Proposed Lot 6, Replat Of Mary's Lake Subdivision, with the
findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed
unanimously with one absent and the following conditions.
1. The development plan shall be contingent on approval and recordation of the
Mary’s Lake Replat and the rezoning request.
2. The development plan shall be rerouted to affected agencies for final
comment. Compliance with these comments shall be required.
3. A detailed grading plan shall be submitted for staff review and approval prior
to submittal of building permits. The grading plan shall be at a scale of 1” =
10’ with two-foot contours and shall include a site-specific survey of existing
contours. If development on any portion of the site is on land with a slope of
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
thirty percent or more, compliance with the requirements in EVDC §7.1.B
Development on Steep Slopes shall be required. Proposed grades greater
than twenty-five percent shall be noted on the plan. Retaining walls shall be
shown with top and bottom of wall elevations noted and wall details provided.
All driveway grades shall be called out.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the required State erosion
control plan and application shall be submitted to staff.
5. The development plan shall be revised to include drainage arrows and shall
demonstrate positive drainage, e.g., positive drainage for Units 13 through 16.
6. The limits of disturbance on the southern portion of the lot near Units 19
through 20 shall be more narrowly defined.
7. Grading shall be reviewed and approved by staff to ensure that trees are
protected, e.g., grading near Units 4, 7, and 8 may disturb tree roots that will
lessen the trees’ chances of survival. Unit 19 shall be shifted to the south to
increase chances that the forty-two-inch ponderosa to the north will survive.
8. A note shall be added to the landscaping plan stating that trees shall not be
planted within five feet on either side of a water or sewer main.
9. The landscaping plan shall be revised to be consistent with the development
plan, e.g., the shared driveway shall be removed and the fourth unit near the
Mary’s Lake Estates property line shall be shown, and landscaping shall
screen Unit 20 from the adjacent property to the north.
10. The Promontory condominium declaration shall address wildfire hazards and
how defensible spaces will be maintained.
11. A geologic hazard report shall be submitted for review and approval by staff
and the Colorado Geological Survey prior to final approval of the development
plan. The recommendations in this report shall be followed.
12. The condominium declaration shall address animal-proof dumpsters.
13. A cut sheet for the proposed lighting fixture shall be submitted for staff review
and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
14. The parking calculations on the development plan shall clarify that they are
based on residential use.
15. A key shall be provided for Unit 20 Type B to allow for cars to turn around
without backing into the public right-of-way. The driveway shall be shortened.
16. The shared driveway widths shall be increased to twenty feet.
17. Compliance with comments received concerning the drainage plan shall be
required.
18. The development plan shall be revised to show underground electric service
to all units and to show transformer locations and sizes.
19. There are two units are numbered “20” on the development plan. One shall
be renumbered. There is no unit numbered “12.”
20. Finished floor elevations for both floors shall be shown on the development
plan.
21. The note stating “Utility provisions to Lot 5 See Note #15” shall be corrected.
Note #15 refers to proposed addressing.
22. The Planning Commission signature block shall be revised to remove mention
of the Town Board of Trustees.
6. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 04-16 & PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP, THE
PROMONTORY, PROPOSED LOT 6, REPLAT OF MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION,
2625 Mary's Lake Road, Applicant: Rock Castle Development Co.
Planner Chilcott recommended that The Promontory Development Plan #04-16
serve as the preliminary condominium map because the preliminary condominium
requires compliance with the same adequate public facility standards with which the
development plan must comply.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
It was moved and seconded (Hull/Kitchen) to recommend approval to the Town
Board of Trustees of the Preliminary Condominium Map for The Promontory,
Proposed Lot 6, Repiat Of Mary's Lake Subdivision, with the findings and
conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with
one absent and the foiiowing conditions.
1. Conditioned on the approval of Development Plan 04-16.
7. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 04-14, BEAR CREEK LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS,
BUILDING B, AMENDED PLAT OF FALL RIVER CHALET CONDOMINIUMS,
1280 Fall River Road, Applicant: Jim Randy Company, Inc.
Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. This is a development plan application to
construct a 3,750-square-foot, two-story building to accommodate two residential/
accommodations units, an office area, and a laundry facility. The property is zoned
“A” Accommodations/Highway Corridor and the current use is accommodations: it is
immediately east of Nicky’s restaurant. There is an existing 6,000-square-foot, two-
story building housing six residential/accommodations units on the property. This
development plan was submitted for review at the July 2004 Planning Commission
meeting but was withdrawn due to concerns about proposed encroachment of
parking spaces into an existing access easement that runs east/west through the
property. The applicant is in the process of vacating the access easement.
This application falls within the parameters of staff-level review but will be reviewed
by the Planning Commission because the development plan is serving as the
preliminary condominium map. The proposed development complies with all
standards set forth in Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.4, Nonresidential
Zoning Districts and meets the guidelines of the comprehensive plan.
Planner Chilcott stated the applicant/owner has done a good job of site planning to
minimize impact to existing trees. Staff believes that the existing trees and shrubs on
the property satisfy the intent of the landscaping requirements. When the existing six
units were approved for condominiumization at the August 17, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting, trail construction was required; the applicant must construct
trail adjacent to US 34. A thirty-foot setback from Fall River is required.
This property is adjacent to US Highway 34; the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) has reviewed this plan and commented that the issue of
increased traffic volumes must be addressed and a new permit may be required.
Planner Chilcott recommended that the proposed ten-foot-wide utility easements
along the north, east, and west property lines be dedicated by separate document
prior to issuance of a building permit.
The request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agencies for
consideration and comment. Comments from the Estes Park Sanitation District
concerning service-line size and deck size have been addressed.
This request was also submitted to neighbors for consideration and comment. Nicky
Kane, the property owner to the west, has expressed concerns about groundwater
problems. The building is required to be engineered to work with existing site
conditions, e.g., soils and groundwater. A letter was received from Timothy Dow, Mr.
Kane’s attorney, stating that no encroachment should be allowed in the western
access easement for Nicky’s Restaurant. A surveyor is verifying that the dumpster is
located outside that easement. Two parking spaces that encroach into the easement
by one foot will be redesigned so they are outside the easement.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
Public Comment:
Kerry Prochaska of Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying was present to
represent the applicant. He stated the applicant has no objections to the staffs
recommended conditions of approval.
It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Hull) to approve Development Plan 04-14,
Bear Creek Luxury Condominiums, Building B, Amended Plat of Fall River
Chaiet Condominiums, with the findings and conditions recommended by
staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and the following
conditions.
1. The development plan shall be updated to reflect information on the recorded
condominium map, inciuding vacation and dedication of easements, location
of new water line to existing buiiding, and notation that the old water line will
be removed.
2. The development plan shall be revised to show existing and proposed
dumpster locations.
3. The parking calculations shall be revised to include the two required guest
parking spaces and an additional two parking spaces shall be provided.
4. The proposed ten-foot-wide utility easements along the north, east, and west
property lines shall be dedicated by separate document prior to issuance of a
building permit.
5. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, all required Colorado Department
of Transportation (CDOT) approvals shall be submitted to staff and
construction of any CDOT-required improvements shali be installed or
guaranteed in accordance with EVDC §10.5.K Public Improvements.
6. No encroachments into the access easement that serves Nicky’s restaurant
shall be permitted.
7. A copy of the vacated access easement must be provided to staff prior to final
development plan approval.
8. Trail construction shall be required as described in the Bear Creek Luxury
Condominiums subdivision improvement agreement.
8. PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP, BEAR CREEK LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS,
BUILDING B, AMENDED PLAT OF FALL RIVER CHALET CONDOMINIUMS,
1280 Fall River Road, Applicant: Jim Randy Company, Inc.
Planner Chilcott recommended that The Bear Creek Luxury Condominium
Development Plan #04-14 serve as the preliminary condominium map because the
preliminary condominium requires compliance with the same adequate public facility
standards with which the development plan must comply.
It was moved and seconded (Kitchen/Hix) to recommend approval to the Town
Board of Trustees of the Preliminary Condominium Map for Bear Creek Luxury
Condominiums, Building B, Amended Piat of Fail River Chalet Condominiums,
with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion
passed unanimously with one absent and the following conditions.
1. Conditioned on the approval of Development Plan 04-14.
2. Buildings A and B shall be designated on the preliminary condominium
map.
9. BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT, REZONING REQUEST, AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN 04-15/LOCATION AND EXTENT REVIEW; VISITOR INFORMATION
CENTER; LOT 2, STANLEY MEADOWS ADDITION; East of the Current Visitor
Center at 500 Big Thompson Avenue; Applicant: Town of Estes Park
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This is a request for an amended plat to
combine one platted lot and one metes/bounds parcel into a single lot of record, to
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
rezone two parcels from “CO” Commercial Outlying to “CD” Commercial Downtown;
and for approval of a Development Plan/Location and Extent Review to buiid a new
Visitor Center/Convention and Visitor Bureau building and accompanying parking lot.
The amended plat is necessary to build the structure in the proposed location
because the current lot line runs through the middle of the building site. The plat
should include a “limits of disturbance” that preserves the wetlands located in the
western portion of Lot 1. The amended plat will also vacate a right-of-way along the
eastern property line and replace it with an access easement due to the design of
the parking lot.
The rezoning is proposed in order to allow the visitor’s center to be an extension of
the downtown area. The rezoning from “CO” to “CD” allows for a closer setback to
the river for the building and parking lots, thus allowing a primary entrance to the
visitor’s center to be just off the existing rivenwalk trail. Planner Shirk noted that the
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment approved a setback variance to allow the building
to be located further away from the highway than the maximum-allowed setback of
sixteen feet at its January 4, 2005 meeting. One of the principal concepts of the
development is to provide parking for visitors to walk downtown or ride a transit
system into Rocky Mountain National Park. The current parking lot at the site
provides forty parking spaces on the north side of the river and twenty parking
spaces on the south side. The new parking lots will provide a total of 250 parking
spaces.
Planner Shirk stated that although landscaping standards for the “CD” zoning district
are lower, staff recommends the rezoning be conditioned on meeting landscaping
standards for the “CO” district. The applicant proposes to use Colorado Department
of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way for landscape planting, which will require
approval from CDOT. Landscape plans for the southern parking lot were not
included in this proposal but will be reviewed by Community Development staff. This
proposal complies with the standards for river setbacks and parking lot setbacks in
the CD zoning district.
Planner Shirk stated that the design of the proposed parking lot requires the
Planning Commission to grant minor modifications to the lane-width standards as
found in the Estes Valiey Development Code Section 7.11.0.3. The required curb-
to-curb width for a 60° parking layout with one-way double-loaded aisles is 62 feet;
the applicant proposes 56 feet. This falls within the 25% Planning Commission
review parameter as set forth in Section 3.7 Minor Modifications. In addition, the
proposed 56-foot curb-to-curb width aliows for future conversion to a 90° parking
layout with one-way double-loaded aisles, which requires a minimum of 57 feet. The
applicant proposes a 60° parking layout to facilitate the preferred one-way traffic
patterns in that area. Planner Shirk also noted that the 24-foot drive aisle stemming
from where the two 18-foot travel lanes come together near the interior landscape
island should be redesigned for an 18-foot width, which may allow for additional
parking spaces, will help direct traffic and prevent two cars from side-by-side travel
down that aisle, and will help direct traffic and prevent vehicles from mistakenly
entering the “one-way” aisle. Interior curbing should be “layback” or “rollover” style to
aid larger vehicles in turning corners.
The proposal includes two drainage and water-quality management ponds to catch
run-off from the parking lots which addresses a concern stated by Alpine Anglers.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has expressed the need to ensure access to the
river for yearly maintenance. The applicant is working with the Bureau of
Reclamation to obtain their approval of this project.
Planner Shirk stated that the request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing
agencies and to adjacent property owners for consideration and comment.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
8
Comments were received from the Estes Park Department of Building Safety, Estes
Park Public Works Department, Town Attorney Greg White, Estes Park Sanitation
District, Upper Thompson Sanitation District, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, and Alpine Anglers.
Public Comment:
Steve Lane of Basis Architecture was present to represent the applicant. He stated
that the project was designed in collaboration with the Town of Estes Park
departments. He stated that rezoning was the best course of action to provide the
necessary parking and keep the river connection in order to make the site a primary
link to the downtown area. He noted that the applicant accepts the conditions
recommended by staff. Commissioner Kitchen stated that she would like to see
more flexibility in the parking areas for additional RV parking to be provided. Mr.
Lane stated that the issue would be re-examined.
Kerry Prochaska of Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying was also present to
represent the applicant. Chair Homeier questioned whether there were EPA
concerns regarding old electrical service to the site. Mr. Prochaska stated that when
the Bureau of Reclamation vacated the site a Phase I environmental review was
done and no contamination was found.
Chair Homeier stated his objection to the rezoning request, noting that it seemed
more appropriate to maintain the current “CO” zoning and request the necessary
variances for that zoning than to change the zoning to “CD”.
It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Hull) to recommend approval to the Town
Board of Trustees the Amended Plat to combine one platted lot and one
metes/bounds parcel into a single lot of record for the Visitor Information
Center, Lot 2, Stanley Meadows Addition, with the findings and conditions
recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent
and the foiiowing conditions.
CONDITIONS:
1. Placement of wetlands in a platted no-disturb area. This shall include the
required setback.
2. The amended plat dedication statement shall be amended in accordance with
Town Attorney White’s memo to Dave Shirk dated December 28, 2004.
It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Hix) to recommend approval to the Town
Board of Trustees of the Rezoning Request to rezone two parcels from “CO”
to “CD” for the Visitor information Center, Lot 2, Stanley Meadows Addition,
with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion
passed with one absent and the following conditions. Those voting “Yes”:
Amos, Hix, Kitchen, and Pohl. Those voting “No”: Homeier and Hull.
CONDITIONS:
1. Approval of the amended plat and development plan/location and extent review.
2. The landscaping plan shall not be exempt from “parking lot perimeter” or from
“street frontage buffer” standards set forth in the Estes Valley Development
Code.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 18, 2005
2.
It was moved and seconded (Kitchen/Hull) to approve the Development Plan 04-
15/Locatlon and Extent Review, Visitor Information Center, Lot 2, Stanley
Meadows Addition, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff,
and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and the following
conditions.
CONDITIONS:
I. Colorado Department of Transportation letter to allow landscaping/sign in the
right-of-way shall be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit.
Compliance with the memo from Will Birchfield to Dave Shirk dated December
21, 2004; memo from Greg Sievers to Dave Shirk dated December 27, 2004;
memo from Town Attorney White to Dave Shirk dated December 28, 2004;
compliance with the memo from Ron Duell to Dave Shirk dated December 15,
2004; and compliance with the memo from David Brand to Dave Shirk dated
December 30, 2004.
Copies of applicable federal permits shall be submitted with building permit
applications.
The existing easements (B907 P89 and B1041 P542) will shall to be modified
prior to issuance of a building permit. Verification shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department.
The plat should include a “limits of disturbance” that preserves the wetlands
located in the western portion of Lot 1.
The access aisle where the two north one-way drives come together should be
reduced to 18 feet.
The northern sidewalk should be 8 feet wide and labeled as such.
Interior curbing should be “layback."
Staff shall review the required landscaping plan for the southern parking for
compliance with Estes Valley Development Code standards before construction
of the parking lot.
The following notes shall be included on the landscaping plan:
a. Plants that will exceed six (6) inches in height shall not be planted within
three (3) feet of a fire hydrant.
b. Trees with a mature height of more than twenty-five (25) feet shall not be
planted under utility lines.
10. Approval by the Town Board of Trustees of the Amended Plat and Rezoning
request.
II. A landscape island shall be placed on east side of the RV parking spaces in the
north parking lot and on the west side of the RV spaces in the south lot.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
9. REPORTS
None.
There being no further business, meeting was adjourned at 2:47 p.m.
Richard Homeier, Chair
JulU Roedeper, Recording Secretary