Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1994-03-15BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission March 15, 1994 Commissioners: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman A1 Sager, Commissioners Wendell Amos, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Alma Hix, Michael Miller and Edward Pohl All Trustee/Liaison G. Hix, Community Development Director Stamey, Town Attorney White, Clerk O'Connor None Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:30 P.M. 1. MINUTES. Commissioner Miller requested the minutes be amended to reflect his negative vote concerning the motion to continue Agenda Item #3.B. for thirty days on Development Plan #94-2, Lester Schmidt/Applicant. It was moved and seconded (Brown/A. Hix) the minutes of February 15, 1994, as amended, be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. OLD BUSINESS. 2.A. Development Plan #94-2. Lot 2A. Amended Plat of Lots i and 2, Block 4. Lone Pine Acres. Lester Schmidt/Applicant. At their meeting held February 15, 1994, the Planning Commission continued this proposal for thirty days requesting the Developer provide additional information on the principle use of the building, parking, and storage management. Applicant's Representative Paul Kochevar added the following: the plan has not been altered; the parking note added to the plat for Mr. Schmidt's Dev. Plan #93-5 could be placed on this plan; and use of the building is anticipated as retail and office use only. Community Development Director Stamey reviewed the report, noting that parking management was the primary issue raised during the February 15th meeting. Public comment was heard from Ralph Nicholas, 1660 N. Ridge Ln., who stated the parking issue is far from being resolved, particularly in light of the previous development plan and the subsequent conditional approval—residents continue to be unhappy with the overall thrust of development in this area. Town Attorney White advised that the question of enforcement for approved plans lies with the Community Development Department; enforcement on violations of municipal ordinances lies with the Police Department. Linda Tucker, 1741 Lone Pine, co^ented on changing the rules to prevent the use of metal building materials, this area is a gateway and has the appearance of an industrial park. Staff responded that metal building material had been discussed during the Comprehensive Plan Workshops and that this item may be a recommendation of the Commission when the Master Plan is adopted, and that the site is zoned C-0. Director Stamey acknowledged receipt of a petition executed by 38 citizens urging this plan be denied; the petition addressed outdoor storage, restriction of "accessory" use outside of the building, more appropriate building materials (not metal) should be found, and this plan should be subject to special review. Copies of the petition were made available to the Commission. Attorney White responded: outdoor storage is regulated by the Code, depending upon the use being proposed. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - March 15/ 1994 - Page 2 accessory uses are allowed in the C-0 Zone, and the Town does not have zoning regulations that address aesthetics. The Commission further discussed enforcement concerns relative to enforcement of the parking issue, and Attorney White reviewed State law regarding notice and how violations are processed through the court system. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Brown/Amos) Development Plan #94-2 for Lot 2A, Amended Plat of Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, First Addition, Lone Pine Acres be approved contingent upon the following, and it passed by the following votes: Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Amos, Brown, A. Hix, Miller, Pohl and Sager. Those voting "No" Commissioner Burgess: 1. Vehicles are to be parked on this lot in designated parking areas and not in the street or on the adjacent lot. The parking lot in front of the building shall be used for customer service (day in/day out) and not for long-term or extended storage. Disabled vehicles shall be placed inside or within the screened storage area. 2. Landscaping and site improvements be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, or guaranteed with an Improvement Guarantee. 3. Protect the ditch from erosion along Lone Pine Drive. Town Attorney White was excused from the meeting. 3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. 3.A. Development Plan #94-3, Peregrine Point Condominimna. Lots 22 and 12, Block 10. Second Amended Plat. Town of Estes Park, David Habecker/Applicant. The Applicant is proposing to construct six 2-bedroom apartment units in two buildings, one single-family residence, plus reserve the right to construct future garages. The apartment buildings will be two-story plus a walk-out lower level. The single-family residence will have both one and two-story sections, and will house the property owners. Landscaping will be provided to meet Town requirements. With the exception of the Drainage Plan (the Applicant is reviewing several options with the Public Works Department), the Applicant has met all requirements. In consideration of surrounding neighbors, this proposal has been reduced 30% overall. The Applicant clarified why the electric power line extension was being proposed off the northeast corner: insufficient power plus typography (solid rock outcroppings); verified contour line calculations; and explained where the third handicapped parking space was located. The 16%' wide garage is a single-car garage and the future garage is 20x30' and will be a 3-car garage. Mr. Habecker confirmed that he was aware that the Commission did not approve signage. Community Development Director Stamey reviewed the staff report; the remaining requirement to be resolved is the Drainage Plan/Report; parking, surfacing, access, water and sewer lines, and landscaping requirements have been met. There were no comments from the audience. Commissioner comments included the space for the sidewalk for the southeast building relative to the garages; and location and width of the driveway. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Brown/A. Hix) Development Plan #94- 3 be approved contingent upon the following, and it passed unanimously: BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - March 15, 1994 - Page 3 1. Update/revise the Drainage Plan and Report, and specifically address comments regarding the pond discharge, improvement to the inlet/outlet/culvert system, removal of the existing culvert inlet box and installation of a flared-end section, release from the proposed south detention pond; and drainage facilities to be sized for the ultimate development. Commissioner Burgess commended the Applicant for the revised plan which is less dense then earlier proposed. 4. SPECIAL REVIEW. 4.A. Special Review #94-5, Lot 2. Sevbold Addition, Brad & Eunice__Witt/Applicant. Paul Kochevar, Applicant's Representative, reported that the Applicant is requesting approval to allow architectural projections of an average 36' in height, maximum of 38', so as to preserve the architectural theme and enhance the exterior appearance of a proposed Victorian-style home. The size of the lot is 3.5 Acres and it slopes from the highway to the river. A cross-section was presented which demonstrated how the building will be viewed from Elkhorn Ave. The proposed use is a single-family home; the site is zoned Commercial, and the owner may consider operating an antique shop in the future. The Architect was well aware of the 30' height limitation; however, this site is somewhat obscured. Staff confirmed that area homeowners were contacted and advised of this proposal; however, staff did not receive any correspondence. There were no comments from the audience. Director Stamey reviewed the staff report and read Section 17.20.050 for building height in all districts. The 3% acre site is fairly well separated from other structures. Commissioner comments included: confirmation that should a small antique shop be added and should a height variance be granted, the approval would be only for this specific request; and difficulty in granting the request as the Applicant had not displayed a compelling reason to do so. Based upon the findings that the height variance will intrude on the views for properties both above and to the side, and the visual domination of "man-made" over natural elements, it was moved and seconded (Amos/Pohl) the Commission recommend to the Board of Trustees that Special Review #94-5 be denied. Discussion followed concerning whether approval would restrict the site to a single-family dwelling. Commissioner comments included: residents have stated during the Comprehensive Plan Workshops their desire to maintain the height restriction; consistent consideration of variances; whether the Applicant could re- apply (Chairman Sager stated that if the Applicant does not exceed the height limitation, the structure could be built "by right"); the bulk of the building meets Code; and the height limitation should be strictly enforced. Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Amos, Burgess and Pohl. Those voting "No" Commissioners Brown, A. Hix, Miller and Sager. Motion failed. Based upon the significant screening, and the extent of the land and separation provided by adjacent land owners, a compelling case has been presented to extend the height limitation, in this particular case - surroundings near this specific site and topography are sufficient to protect the public interest, it was moved and seconded (Brown/A. Hix) Special Review #94-5 be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees ^ contingent upon the roof being either composition, light-weight concrete shingle, wood, or tile, and that staff BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - March 15, 1994 - Page 4 be authorized to verify that the color is sxibdued. Discussion included clarification that this approval limits the height to that being requested this date. Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Brown, A. Hix, Miller and Sager. Those voting "No" Commissioners Amos, Burgess and Pohl. Motion carried. 5. SUBDIVISIONS. 5.A. Preliminary Plat of Lots 14 and 15. Crags Subdivision. Gary Nordich/Applicant. Applicant's Representative Paul Kochevar, advised that the Applicant is proposing to replat a 5.9 acre site into six lots, ranging in size from 0.5 to 1.7 acres, for single-family development. Staff has recommended modifying the access easement by increasing the width to 45', removing lot lines, and reserving this area for street purposes. The Applicant will modify the easement to 45'; however, the owner prefers to leave the lot lines as indicated. Regarding modifying lot arrangement, the envelope size could be reduced on Lot 5; the Applicant will comply with the access for the Town and property to the east across the access easement. The Applicant will most likely not begin building on the site in the near future. Public Works Director Linnane advised that when the Moccasin Bypass was constructed, land was obtained for an underground water tank and the Town desires to retain its right to place the tank - access is required. Access concerns for the adjoining 70-acre site were discussed. Commissioner A. Hix declared a "conflict of interest" and vacated the room. Director Stamey reviewed the staff report. There were no comments from the audience. Discussion on the best building sites for Lot 5 and 6 followed, with Mr. Kochevar suggesting this item be continued one month to allow staff and Mr. Kochevar to further inspect the area, stake the building sites, and survey. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Burgess) the Preliminary Plat of Lots 14 and 15, Crags Subdivision be continued to April 19, 1994, suggesting Mr. Kochevar determine whether the Applicant would consider designating building envelopes, and it passed by the following votes: Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Amos, Brown, Burgess, Miller and Pohl. Those voting "No" None. Those "Abstaining" Commissioner A. Hix. Commissioner A. Hix resumed her position on the Commission. 5.B. Final Plat of Lots 26 and 27. Grand Estates Subdivision. Jim and Eunice Docter/Applicant. Applicant's Representative Kochevar stated that the Applicant is proposing to divide two lots into three lots of equal size. The current E-Estate zoning retires a minimum lot area of 60,000 sq. ft. A petition in favor of the proposal, executed by 14 single­ family property owners was presented. Director Stamey acknowledged receipt of letters in opposition to the proposal submitted by: Judith and Carol Whiteside, Michele Williams, Mr. and Mrs. Paul Downing, Marie Scott, Mr. and Mrs. John Gribben, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Harris, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Dyer, Mr. and Mrs. Les Allen, and Mr. and Mrs. Terry Smith, plus a petition executed by 38 citizens. Public testimony in opposition was heard from Joe Jackson, President/Lake Meadow Condominium Homeowners Association, Chuck Harris (setback), Barbara Ellis (property values), and Judith Whiteside (condominium owners were not notified). Mr. Kochevar stated that only the single-family adjacent land owners were notified. The Applicant, Jim Docter, stated that he did not intend to deviate from the required setbacks or any BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - March IS, 1994 - Page 5 other building requirements that already exist in this zoning classification, he will stay within those requirements. There is obvious benefit to the Applicant to create three lots in lieu of two, and he does not object to reasonable negotiations relative to a building structure on the newly-created lot and existing views. The Applicant is proposing to build single level custom homes on each of the three lots; he would be agreeable to limit the first lot to a single level structure, so as not to impose on the existing views of the adjacent condominiums. This 200' lot will allow the home to be situated without difficulty. A 75' setback from the north property line and single level without a steep pitched roof is also agreeable. Chairman Sager commented that the offer is extremely reasonable. The Applicant confirmed that building envelopes have not been identified on the plat. Comments generally in favor of the Applicant's statements were heard from Chuck Harris, Joe Jackson and Barbara Ellis. Marie Scott commented on density control and how existing property owners are affected when they purchase property with an understanding of how adjacent property is platted, and then that surrounding area is changed—the condominium owners are most affected by this proposal. In addition, will control include where the homes are placed? George Hockman, 1625 Prospect Estates Dr. commented on changing land uses which have occurred in Prospect Estates and lack of notification on said changes. Commissioner comments included discussion on the preservation, not increase of substantial property rights of the petitioner, current zoning (E-Estate) /rezoning, and development of smaller lots in the neighborhood. Finding that there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property; that the exception is necessary for the preservation and the enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner; that the granting of the exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the neighborhood in which the property of the petitioner is situated or^ in conflict with the purposes and objectives of the title, it was moved and seconded (Brown/Amos) the minimum lot size, with the exception that at least a 75' building envelope along the north side of Lot 27B be added to the plat, the Pinal Plat of Lots 26 and 27, Grand Estates Subdivision be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees. Discussion included the purpose/objectives of establishing minimum lot size in the E-Estate zone, reiteration of the preservation of a substantial property right/reasonable use, technical standards relative to character of the neighborhood and basis of discretion. Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Brown, A. Pohl and Sager. Those voting "No" Commissioners Amos, Burgess and Miller. Motion carried. Chairman Sager declared a recess at 3:49 P.M. Chairman Sager reconvened the meeting at 4:00 P.M. 5»C. Final Plat of Lot 3, Canaiv Subdivision, and a Portion of 51,Grand Estates Subdivision. Moreno Tewahay. Inc./Applicant. Commissioner Brown cited a "conflict of interest" and vacated the room. The proposal was presented by John Spooner/Van Horn Engineering: proposal is to adjust the internal lot line between two existing lots; there are no new parcels being created; and the adjusted parcels will retain their previous net areas. The purpose of the plat is to provide for future access to development planned for the Lake Estes Addition. The future access area is represented by the 15'-wide strip of land along the south side of Lot 51, which is being added to proposed Lot 3A. This area would be combined with an access easement across the drive-in theater BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - March 15, 1994 - Page 6 property to achieve adequate width. All three staff recommendations have been met. Senior Planner Joseph reviewed the staff report. It was moved and seconded (A. Hix/Burgess) the Final Plat of Lot 3 and a Portion of Lot 51, Grand Estates Subdivision be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees, and it passed with Commissioner Brown Abstaining. Chairman Sager noted that the Applicant must verify the access width across the drive-in theater site prior to further proceedings. Commissioner Brown resumed his position on the Commission. 4.D. Final Plat of Tract 15, Fall River Addition. Edward Investment Co./Applicant. Applicant's Representative Spooner stated that this proposal is to divide one existing 1.88 acre lot into two lots of approximately 0.94 acres or 41,000 sq. ft. The current E-Estate zoning requires a minimum lot size of 60,000 sq. ft. The majority of staff comments have been addressed. Approval of the existing access point has not yet been obtained from CDOT. The sewer line easement has been added to the plat and encroachment for Lot 15B is no longer an issue. Discussion followed concerning road access and the 25' wide strip along the east side of Lot 15A, possible relocation of the access to Valley Rd., existing character of the neighborhood, lack of lot consistency in this subdivision, and verification of the 15% slope which requires a minimum lot size of 62,000 sq. ft. Adjacent property owners were not contacted as such notification is not required for this type of submittal, and staff confirmed that there was no correspondence. As additional information is necessary for thorough consideration of the proposal, it was moved and seconded (Amos/Miller) the Final Plat of Tract 15, Fall River Addition be continued to April 19, 1994, directing the Applicant to provide a lot area analysis, consider the feasibility of realigning the driveway along Valley Rd., and staff to notify adjacent property owners, and it passed unanimously. 6.CONSENT. 6.A. Final Flat of Lots 1 and 2, Stanley Village Subdivision. It was moved and seconded (Brown/A. Hix) this item be continued to April 19, 1994, and it passed unanimously. There being no further business. Chairman Sager adjourned the meeting at 4:24 P.M. Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk