Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Planning Commission 2020-01-21Prepared January 10, 2020 The Estes Valley Planning Commission reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. AGENDA ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION January 21, 2020 6:00 p.m. Board Room, Town Hall 1. OPEN MEETING Planning Commissioner Introductions 2. AGENDA APPROVAL 3. PUBLIC COMMENT The EVPC will accept public comments regarding items not on the agenda. Comments should not exceed three minutes. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Study Session Minutes: November 19, 2019 Meeting Minutes: November 19, 2019 5. CODE AMENDMENT: AMENDED PLAT REVIEW PROCESS Planner Woeber 6. REPORTS 7. ADJOURN Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado November 19, 2019 Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the PLANNING COMMISSION of the Estes Valley, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Room 202-203 Town Hall. Commission: Chair Leavitt, Vice-Chair White, and Commissioners Murphree, Smith, Theis, and Converse Attending: Leavitt, Theis, Murphree, White, and Converse Also Attending: Town Board Liaison Blackhurst, Director Hunt, Planning Technician Kreycik, Senior Planner Woeber, Planner II Bergeron, Recording Secretary Swanlund, and Town Attorney Kramer Absent: Smith Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Director Hunt introduced new Planner II Alex Bergeron. There were two people in the audience. This study session was recorded and has been uploaded to the Town of Estes Park YouTube channel. Development Plan, Taharaa parking Director Hunt reviewed the plan in the absence of Planner Hardin. The owner is proposing to add fifty parking spaces to the property to accommodate additional restaurant patrons and wedding guests. The alternative landscaping plan does not include interior landscaping. The Planning Commission has the authority to approve alternative landscape plans. The existing facility falls under the Event Facility Code. Chair Leavitt wondered if there was anything that could be done to prevent sliding down the steep lower drive, which can be quite dangerous with cars sliding into Highway 7. Converse agreed with the steep grade issue and suggested entering through the South entrance. He also questioned what the maximum capacity is for events as there is not enough parking for over 200 people. Fire protection comments on page 3 need to be clarified. Approving with conditions or a continuance can be voted on at the public hearing. Amended Plat, Mountain Village Townhomes Planner Woeber reviewed the Amended Plat for Estes Park Resorts Townhome Subdivision, explaining the initial review in 2017 and what is being proposed today. The owner would like to reconfigure and eliminate two of the 32 lots. Code Amendment: Amended Plat reviews Planner Woeber reviewed a proposed Code Amendment to the current process in which boundary line adjustments and lot consolidations are reviewed, suggesting that a staff-level review would be sufficient for many of these applications as they have little or no impact on the surrounding properties. This is basically differentiating a Minor Adjustment from a Minor Subdivision. This would streamline the process and save time and money for all parties. Director Hunt explained that drawing a ‘development perimeter’ would still allow for dealing with matters like density in the overall footprint of a project. Unified Development Code, which we don’t have, fuses development and subdivisions. Converse would like both positive and negative examples added to staff reports. Director Hunt answered that verbal negatives could be provided. This amendment is being proposed now due to Attorney Kramer agreeing with the objective. Theis recommended keeping it to residential lots only. Planning Commission Study Session November 19, 2019 – Page 2 Code Amendment: Change of Use in Development Plans Director Hunt explained how Vacation Homes are considered a change of use. There may be some merit in rethinking how this code amendment might affect Vacation Homes. Town Clerk Williamson explained the Vacation Home registration process. Although Community Development approves the use of the home, what could occur is that a Development Plan would need to be approved due to it being considered a “Change of Use.” A change, by ordinance, to the Building Code requiring Life Safety Inspections could be done prior to a home receiving a registration is planned to be in place by April 1, 2020. Attorney Kramer noted that this is a work in progress and many things can be added, such as waivers, to make it a desirable policy decision to fit the needs of the planning process. IGA Update: Director Hunt gave an update on the current status of the IGA with Larimer County. After the November 14th meeting, there was a lack of agreement between the two bodies. The default assumption is that the current IGA is extended until March 31, 2020 and there will not be an IGA after that date. It is the responsibility of Town and County staff to figure things out. Leavitt stated that until the governing bodies state their reasons for their position, meaningful discussion and resolution won't happen. Theis noted that the Planning Commission should have some credibility when discussing the comprehensive plan to the elected officials. Converse made note of the “opt-out clause” on all of the items in Option B, thus leaving it with no teeth. Future use of Resolutions for Planning Commission Items: Director Hunt explained the lack of having resolutions for Planning Commission items. Having an accompanying resolution better memorializes the decision, though. Past decisions, where something was done by a motion, has sometimes lacked clarity in decision making. Resolutions should include areas where the Commission wants to expand on the findings, especially on conditions of approval. Attorney Kramer stated that a resolution is nothing more than a written motion, for the purpose of clarity and documentation. Questions/Future Items Development Perimeters Chair Leavitt adjourned the study session at 5:33 p.m. _____________________________________ Bob Leavitt, Chair Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission November 19, 2019 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Bob Leavitt, Vice-Chair Sharry White, Commissioners Steve Murphree, Frank Theis, Nick Smith, Dave Converse Attending: Chair Leavitt, Vice-Chair White, Commissioners Murphree, Theis, Converse Also Attending: Director Randy Hunt, Senior Planner Jeff Woeber, Planner I Linda Hardin, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund, Town Board Liasion Eric Blackhurst, Town Attorney Dan Kramer Absent: Commissioner Smith OPEN MEETING Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. There were approximately 14 people in attendance. Director Hunt introduced the new Planner II, Alex Bergeron. APPROVAL OF AGEND A It was moved and seconded (Murphree/Leavitt) to approve the agenda as presented and the motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENT Dawn James, 351 Kiowa Drive, stated that Raven Rock is now rumored to be a phased approach, which was not the original plan. She would like the documents made available to the public on the website. Richard Ralph, 395 Parkview Lane, requested the Commissioners sit in their assigned seats. (Commissioners Converse and Murphree then moved to the position associated with their nameplate). CONSENT AGENDA 1. Study Session Minutes dated October 15, 2019 2. Meeting Minutes dated October 15, 2019 It was moved and seconded (White/Theis) to approve the consent agenda as presented and the motion passed 5-0. ACTION ITEMS 1. CODE AMENDMENT: AMENDED PLAT REVIEW PROCESS Planner Woeber explained the current EVDC defines Boundary Line Adjustments (or Amended Plats), and Land Consolidation Plats as Minor Subdivisions, requiring Estes Valley Planning Commission (EVPC) review and Board approval. Typically there is little or no impact from these “Minor RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission November 19, 2019 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Adjustment” processes and noted they can be appropriately reviewed and processed by staff. Public Comment: None Commission Discussion: Converse stated he is not quite ready to vote on this due to not knowing what the potential consequences are. Theis suggested separating out Minor Adjustments and Minor Subdivisions in Section D of the Code and separately defining them in the index. Consider the fact that officials may not want to act on a Code Amendment at this time due to the current uncertainty of the future of the Estes Valley Development Code. There is no timeline set on approving this amendment. Woeber noted that this has been discussed with County Staff, but no comments have been received. It was moved and seconded (Converse/Theis) to CONTINUE the Code Amendment to January 21, 2020, citing reasons of needing more clarity, definitions of items, and feedback from County Staff. The motion passed 5-0. 1. AMENDED PLAT: 1700 Big Thompson Avenue Planner Woeber reviewed the history of the Estes Park Resort Townhome Subdivision. The project is currently being developed and the owner/applicant determined a minor reconfiguration was desired, primarily to create a bit more distance between some of the planned accommodations units. The applicant is proposing to eliminate two of the 32 lots and slightly reconfiguring some of the adjacent lots. No other changes are proposed. Applicant Discussion: Jess Reetz, Cornerstone Construction, spoke on the requested changes and was available for questions. All setbacks and building envelopes will remain the same. Public Comment: None Commission Discussion: None It was moved and seconded (Smith/Murphree) to recommend APPROVAL of the Amended Plat to eliminate two lots from the Estes Park Resort Townhome Subdivision, as described in the staff report, with findings as recommended by staff. The motion passed 5-0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission November 19, 2019 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 3110 South Saint Vrain Avenue, Taharaa Mountain Lodge Planner Hardin explained that the owner is proposing to add 50 parking spaces to the property to accommodate additional restaurant patrons and wedding guests. The EVDC would require 58 parking spaces with 18 guest units (one per unit), two apartments (2 per apartment), 18 employees in peak season (1 per 3 employees), and a 3,000 square foot restaurant (1 per 100 sq. ft). This proposal would bring the total parking to eighty-three (83) spaces, exceeding the EVDC minimum requirement in anticipation of enough parking to accommodate event guests. An alternative landscape plan has been approved by staff, omitting the requirement of interior islands. Applicant Discussion: Thad Eggen, property owner, stated that 130-145 people has been calculated to be the maximum amount for an on-site event. Shuttle bus service is currently requested of customers to be used for events to alleviate parking problems. Measures have been taken to help icy driveway conditions. David Bangs, Trail Ridge Consultant Engineers, reviewed the parking requirements. He is proposing to increase the access drive to 24 feet. Considerable discussion was had on the steepness of the driveway road grade. A minor regrading is planned to help with icy/slippery roadways. Exit lane possibilities were considered, but they were not traffic-friendly. CDOT did not allow a turn lane. The owner is seeking an access easement with neighboring property. Landscape plans are being reconfigured to remove the interior landscape islands, but not decreased. This will create a buffer to the highway and neighboring properties. There is a small stormwater drainage pond on the northeast side of the parking lot connecting to the road-side ditch. Traffic site distance to the west is 600 feet, 1000 feet to the east. Public Comment: Richard Ralph, 395 Parkview Lane, expressed concerns with the Estes Valley Development Code and staff authorizing decisions regarding the alternate landscaping plan. He stated that a waiver is granted by the Board of Adjustment, not the Planning Commission. A request to table this application until the owner and staff can revise the plan to conform with the Development Code was made. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission November 19, 2019 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Applicant response: Bangs stated that Section 7.5.C.2 appropriately applies to alternative landscape plans. The interior islands are roughly 15% of the landscape area. Commission/Staff Discussion: Hunt stated that the Planning Commission’s primary criteria for landscaping requirements are the total quantity of landscaping and if it provides buffering. The 25% criteria in the Code pertains to minor modifications, not landscaping. It is within the Planning Commission’s authority to approve or not approve due to it being a discretionary matter. Attorney Kramer agreed with Hunt’s statements. Leavitt thought the alternative landscape plan was within the parameters of the Code. Converse requested input from the Fire Marshall before the start of development as that was not provided to the planning department. Theis stated that the applicant has improved emergency access, thus meeting their requirements. It was moved and seconded (Theis/White) to APPROVE the Taharaa Mountain Lodge application, according to findings of fact with findings and conditions recommended by Staff including the condition that the Development Plan meets Estes Valley Fire Protection District standards; though if a response is not received within 30 days, the application is approved without the added condition. The motion passed 5-0. REPORTS: • In answer to the public comment question related to Raven Rock, Director Hunt stated that they have applied for grading excavation permits for some of the infrastructure. Financial security for the entire infrastructure of the project has been put in place. It is common to stage construction projects with an approved development plan within two years. David Hook, Town Engineer, stated that the grading permit was not yet approved. The only thing that was approved was the stockpiling of dirt coming from the Estes Park Chalet. • Reminder about the free DOLA workshop in Greeley on December 7th. The registration deadline is December 1st. • The IGA with Larimer County has been extended to March 31, 2020. It is uncertain where things will go from there. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission November 19, 2019 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall • The Stanley Hotel Art Center has not yet been filed. Permits for the new parking lot and moving of the Carriage House have been approved. • There are no required items for the December 17th meeting. It was decided by Chair Leavitt to forego the December meeting unless some unexpected, significant business arises. ADJOURN There being no further business Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m. _________________________________ Bob Leavitt, Chair _________________________________ Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary Memo COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT To: Estes Valley Planning Commission From: Jeffrey Woeber, Senior Planner Date: January 21, 2020 RE: Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code 1) Allow a an Amended Plat, a Boundary Adjustment, or a Land Consolidation Plat to be Defined as a “Minor Adjustment,” and to be Processed as a Staff Level Review 2) Increase the time for submitting a Subdivision Plat for Recording from the Current Sixty (60) Days to One Hundred and Eighty (180) Days Planning Commission Objective: Review and provide a recommendation for a proposed text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC), to allow a Boundary Adjustment, Amended Plat, or Land Consolidation Plat to be defined as a “Minor Adjustment,” and to be processed as a staff level review. The amendment also proposes increasing the time for submitting a subdivision plat for recording from the current 60 days, to 180 days. Code Amendment Objective: Currently the EVDC defines an Amended Plat, Boundary Adjustment, or a Land Consolidation Plat as a Minor Subdivision, requiring Planning Commission review and Board approval. As typically there is little or no impact from these “Minor Adjustment” processes, they can appropriately be reviewed and processed by staff. Staff proposes changes to the EVDC, summarized as: 1. Amend Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.9 Subdivisions, to differentiate a “Minor Subdivision” from a “Minor Adjustment.” A “Minor Adjustment” would be an “Amended Plat,” “Boundary Adjustment,” or a “Land Consolidation Plat.” There are existing definitions in the EVDC of “Boundary Adjustment” and “Land Consolidation Plat.” Staff has added a definition of “Amended Plat” as this is not currently defined in the EVDC. Minor Subdivisions will continue to be limited to subdivisions involving not more than four lots, with each fronting onto an existing street and not requiring extension of public facilities. These Minor Subdivisions are currently defined as “Frontage Lots.” Minor Subdivision would require Planning Commission review and Board approval as they do now. A Minor Adjustment would be a staff level review. JANUARY 21, 2020 EVPC CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDED PLAT PROCESS PAGE 2 OF 4 2. Amend Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure, G. Summary Table—Standard Development Review Process by Application Type, by adding a “Minor Adjustment” category which specifies a required staff review. 3. Amend Chapter 10, Subdivisions, Section 10.2 Applicability/Scope, to differentiate a Minor Subdivision from a Minor Adjustment, consistent with what is proposed for Section 3.9 (see No. 1., above). 4. Amend Chapter 13 Definitions, Section 13.3 Definitions of Words, Terms, and Phrases, by amending the existing definition of Minor Subdivision, to be consistent with the rest of this proposed code amendment (see No. 1., above). 5. Amend Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.9.F.1. Effect of Approval of a Minor Subdivision, and Section 3.9.F.3. Effect of Approval of a Final Subdivision Plat, by increasing the time period to submit a plat for recording, after approval, from the current sixty (60) days, to one hundred and eighty (180) days. Background, Discussion: There has been some inconsistency in past years in Community Development’s processing of Amended Plats and similar, where lots or parcels are consolidated (combining two or more into one), or where a lot line or lot lines are slightly adjusted. Staff has found examples where Amended Plats have been processed at staff level. This has not caused any issues that staff is aware of. However, staff recently realized that strict interpretation of the applicable review procedures within the EVDC, Section 3.9 require any of these to be processed as a “Minor Subdivision,” rather than, for example, a “Minor Modification to an Approved Final Plan” as provided for in Section 3.7. Minor Subdivisions require review by the EVPC and Board approval. Any subdivision process that creates an additional lot, or lots must appropriately go through a review and approval process involving public notice, public meetings, Planning Commission review, and Board approval. However, for Minor Adjustments, that do not involve creation of any additional lots or building sites, there is little or no impact and they can be appropriately processed by staff. Staff has detailed the revisions to the Chapters as outlined above, in Exhibit A. Staff has other revisions within Chapters 3 and 10, for consistency and clarity. These include a provision for compliance with the requirements within the EVDC’s Appendix B, Submittal Requirements as determined by the Community Development Director. This is due to the EVDC’s Appendix B currently having no specific requirements or references whatsoever to Minor Subdivision, Amended Plat, Boundary Adjustment, or Land Consolidation Plat. Apparently this was an oversight on the part of the original authors of the EVDC. Applying all of the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat requirements listed within Appendix B is unnecessary, and many are inapplicable. The increase from the 60 day time period to 180 days is to provide a better, more reasonable period to submit a plat for recordation after approval. This will allow much more flexibility for both the applicant and for staff, and avoid unnecessary extensions or expirations. Staff recommends the Estes Valley Planning Commission recommend approval of the language in Exhibit A to the Town Board of Trustees and the Board of County Commissioners. JANUARY 21, 2020 EVPC CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDED PLAT PROCESS PAGE 3 OF 4 Staff Findings: The text amendments comply with EVDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments – Standards for Review). §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review “All rezoning and text amendments to the EVDC shall meet the following criteria:” 1. “The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected;” Staff Finding: Although the EVDC states this finding is applicable to a proposed “text amendment” such as that proposed herein, staff notes it would seem to be mostly applicable to a rezoning (zoning map amendment). There are no specific areas or conditions that would be affected by the proposed amendment to the EVDC. Staff finds this Standard for Review No. 1 is not applicable to this Code Amendment. 2. “The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley:” Staff Finding: There is no “development plan” associated with this and in fact it involves subdivision review standards and regulations. Staff notes although there is no development plan being allowed by this Code Amendment, nothing within the Code Amendment is contrary to any recommendations, policies, or intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. “The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application were approved.” Staff Finding: Town, County or other relevant service providers would not be significantly impacted regarding their respective services and facilities, if this Code Amendment is approved. Advantages: • Generally complies with the EVDC §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review, as applicable. • Establishes and clarifies a review procedure for Amended Plats and similar that can streamline the process, which benefits both the Town and the residents of the Estes Valley. • Provides a more reasonable and realistic time period to submit a plat for recordation. Disadvantages: • Adds slightly to Code length and complexity. Action Recommended: Review the amendment for compliance with Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review, and forward a recommendation to the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and the Board of Larimer County Commissioners for a final decision to approve. Level of Public Interest Low. Little input or public comment has been received. JANUARY 21, 2020 EVPC CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDED PLAT PROCESS PAGE 4 OF 4 Sample Motion: APPROVAL I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and the Board of Larimer County Commissioners APPROVE the text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code as presented in Exhibit A as recommended by staff, with findings as recommended by staff. CONTINUANCE I move to CONTINUE this agenda item to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting because…. (state reason(s) for continuance). DENIAL I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and the Board of Larimer County Commissioners DENY the text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code as presented in Exhibit A, finding that . . . (state reasons for denial). Exhibit: Exhibit A (Red font with strikethrough is the existing Code text which staff proposed to delete, the red underline font is that which would be added.)  EVDC Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.9 Subdivisions  EVDC Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure, G. Summary Table—Standard Development Review Process by Application Type  EVDC Chapter 10, Subdivisions, Section 10.2 Applicability/Scope  EVDC Chapter 13 Definitions, Section 13.3 Definitions of Words, Terms, and Phrases, 235. Subdivision, Minor § 3.9 - Subdivisions A. Purposes. The purpose of the subdivision review process is to ensure compliance with the subdivision standards and provisions of this Code, while encouraging quality development in the Estes Valley reflective of the goals, policies and objectives found in the Comprehensive Plan. B. Applicability. All subdivisions shall be subject to the approval procedures set forth in this Section. C. Procedure for Approval of Subdivisions (Except Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments) 1. General. Subdivisions are approved in two (2) stages: first, a preliminary subdivision plan is approved, and second, a final subdivision plat is approved and recorded. The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with fina l approval authority for both preliminary and final subdivision plats, depending on the location of the property. 2. Procedure for Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plats. Applications for preliminary subdivision plat approval shall follow the standard development approval process set forth in §3.2 of this Chapter. 3. Procedure for Approval of Final Subdivision Plats. Applications for final subdivision plat approval shall follow the standard development approval process set forth in §3.2 of this Chapter, except that Step 4 (EVPC R eview and Action) shall not apply. D. Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments. 1. Defined. Minor subdivisions shall be defined as follows: Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments are categorized as follows: a. Frontage Lots Minor Subdivision . Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land into a total of not more than four (4) lots shall also be a minor subdivision, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing street, and that the subdivision entails no extension of pu blic facilities. No more than a total of four (4) lots shall be created out of a lot, tract or parcel or set of contiguous parcels in the same ownership using the minor subdivision procedure. Frontage Lot subdivisions shall be titled as a "Subdivision." (O rd. 18-01 #8; Ord. 8-05 #1) b. Boundary Adjustments . Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes, shall be considered a minor subdivision for review procedure. Boundary Adjustments shall be titled as a "Boundary Line Adjustment" for properties not within a platted subdivision or "Amended Plat" for properties within a platted su bdivision. Minor Adjustment. Minor Adjustments are Amended Plats, Boundary Line Adjustments , or Land Consolidation Plats: The final map shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. The area added to each lot shown hereon by such adjustment is to be considered an addition to, shall become a part of, and shall be conveyed together with, each lot as shown." (Ord. 8-05 #1) c. Land Consolidation Plats . Unplatted contiguous legal lots approved for single -family residential development can be combined with a land consolidation plat. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as a "Land Consolidation Plat." The final plat shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes." (Ord. 8-05 #1) (1) Amended Plat. An Amended Plat is a process to amend a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat is a revision to a recorded subdivision plat, or a portion of a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat may reconfigure lots, vacate interior lot lines, change or eliminate a platted building envelope, or correct drafting or technical errors. An Amended Plat shall not create additional lots or building sites, and shall not result in the creation of lots that do not comply with zoning standards. An Amended Plat that involves easement and/or right-of-way vacation or dedication, involves more than five (5) lots, or that necessitates new or modified public improvements shall require a public hearing before the Town Board of Trustees. (2) Boundary Adjustment. shall mean the division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjustin g boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. (3) Land Consolidation Plat. Unplatted contiguous lots approved for single-family residential development can be combined with a land consolidation plat. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as “Land Consolidation Plat.” The final plat shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: “Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes.” 2. Hazard Areas. Except Land Consolidation Plats, a Areas with geologic hazards as defined by §7.7 of this Code shall not be eligible for the minor subd ivision process. (Ord. 18-01 #9; Ord. 8-05 #1) 3. Procedure for Approval of Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments. Applications for minor subdivision or minor adjustment approval shall follow the standard development approval process set forth in §3.2 of this Chapter. , except that Land Consolidation Plats shall not be subject to review by the Planning Commission. Land Consolidation Plat s shall follow the review timeframe established for Final Plats. (Ord. 18-01 #10; Ord. 8-05 #1) 4. Submittal Requirements. Boundary Line Adjustments and Amended Plats A Minor Adjustment shall follow the applicable subdivision submittal requirements within the EVDC Appendix B. II., as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. involving exchange of land shall require deeds describing the resultant parcels, signed and dated by owners, and dated and sealed by a Notary Public, to be submitted with the Mylars. (Ord. 18-01 #11; Ord. 8-05 #1) 5. Modifications and Waivers. The Community Development Director, or designee, shall have authority to grant modifications and/or waive standards set forth in Chapter 10 in conjunction with an Amended Plat, Boundary Adjustment or Land Consolidation Plat. Approval of requested modifications and/or waivers shall require that the Director finds that approval of such modification and/or waiver: (Ord. 8-05 #1) a. Advances the goals and purposes of this Code; (Ord. 8-05 #1) b. Either results in less visual impact, more effective environmental or open space preservation, relieves practical difficulties in developing a site or results in the use of superior engineering standards than those required by this Code; (Ord. 8-05 #1) c. There will be no increase in the intensity of use; and (Ord. 8-05 #1) d. There will be no increase in development and/or demand for services that necessitates compliance with EVDC standards. (Ord. 8-05 #1) E. Standards for Review. All subdivision applications shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and criteria set forth in Chapter 10, "Subdivision Standards," and all other applicable provisions of this Code. For minor subdivisions, the EVPC shall also find that approval will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other propert y in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of this Code. F. Effects of Approval. 1. Effect of Approval of a Minor Subdivision or Minor Adjustment. Within sixty (60) one hundred and eighty (180) days of the Board's approval of the minor subdivision or minor adjustment, the developer shall submit the minor subdivision or minor adjustment final plat for recording. If the minor subdivision or minor adjustment plat plan is not submitted for recording within this sixty-day one hundred and eighty day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void. (Ord. 8-05 #1) 2. Effect of Approval of a Preliminary Subdivision Plan. a. Within twelve (12) months from the date of the final approval of a preliminar y subdivision plat, the developer shall submit an application for final subdivision plat for either all or at least one (1) phase of the proposed subdivision. b. An approved final subdivision plat for any phase of the preliminary subdivision plan shall extend the life of the preliminary subdivision plan for an additional twelve -month period from the date the final subdivision plat is approved. If the original twelve -month period or any successive twelve-month period expires before a final subdivision plat i s approved, then the preliminary plan approval automatically lapses and becomes null and void. c. During the period in which an approved preliminary subdivision plan is effective, no subsequent change or amendment to this Code or any other governing ordina nce or plan shall be applied to affect adversely the right of the Applicant to proceed with any aspect of the approved development in accordance with the terms of such preliminary subdivision plat approval. However, the Applicant shall comply with those lo cal laws and regulations adopted subsequent to the approval of such preliminary subdivision if the Estes Valley Planning Commission determines, on the basis of written findings, that compliance is reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare. 3. Effect of Approval of a Final Subdivision Plat. Within sixty (60) one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of the Board's action on the final subdivision plat, the Applicant shall make all required revisions, if any (see §3.2.E above), and shall submit the final subdivision plat to the Town for recording. If the final plat is not submitted fo r recording within this sixty-day one hundred and eighty day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void. § 3.2 - Standard Development Review Procedure G. Summary Table—Standard Development Review Process by Application Type. "V" = Voluntary "M" = Mandatory "A" = Applicable "N/A" = Not Applicable "APP" = Appeals "BOA" = Board of Adjustment "SR" = Special Requirements (Refer to Text) Step 1 Pre- Application Conference Step 2 Neighborhood & Community Meeting Step 3 Application/ Completeness Certification Step 4 Staff Review & Report Step 5 EVPC Action Step 6 Board Action Minor Subdivision (Ord. 18-01 #5 M V A A A A Minor Adjustment V V A A N/A N/A § 10.2 - APPLICABILITY/SCOPE A. General. Prior to subdividing any tract of land in the Estes Valley, including land being annexed into the Town, the subdivider shall comply with all of the standards set forth in this Code and obtain approval pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 3. No building permits shall be issued for any improvement or work on any parcel not subdivided in compliance with this Chapter. No owner or agent of the owner of any land located within an addition or subdivision shall transfer, sell, agree to sell or negotiate to sell any land by reference to, exhibition of or by the use of a plan, plat or map of an addition or subdivision bef ore such plan, plat or map has been approved pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter and Chapter 3 of this Code and recorded in the office of the clerk and recorder of Larimer County, Colorado. B. Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments. Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments are subject to full review and compliance with the applicable standards set forth in Chapter 10 and the applicable submittal requirements set forth in Appendix B ,.as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. (Ord. 18-01 #22) 1. Frontage LotsMinor Subdivision . Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land into a total of not more than four (4) lots shall also be considered a minor subdivision, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing street, and that the subdivision entails no extension of public facilities. No more than a total of four (4) lots shall be created out of a lot, tract, parcel or set of contiguous parcels in the same ownership using the minor subdivision procedure. Frontage Lot Minor sSubdivisions shall be titled as a "Subdivision." (Ord. 18-01 #23; Ord. 8-05 #1) 2. Boundary Adjustments Minor Adjustments. Minor Adjustments are Amended Plats, Boundary Line Adjustments, or Land Consolidation Plats: Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes, shall be considered a minor subdivision for review procedure. Boundary Adjustments shall be titled as a "Boundary Line Adjustment" for properties not within a platted subdivisio n, or "Amended Plat" for properties within a platted subdivision. The final map shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. The area added to each lot shown hereon by such adjustment is to be considered an addition to, shall become a part of, and shall be conveyed together with, each lot as shown." (Ord. 8-05 #1) 3. Land Consolidation Plats. Unplatted contiguous legal lots approved for single -family residential development can be combined with a Land Consolidation Plat. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as a "Land Consolidation Plat". The final map shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary li nes of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes." (Ord. 8-05 #1) (Ord. 18-01 #22, 23, 10/23/01; Ord. 8-05 #1, 6/14/05) (1) Amended Plat. A process to amend a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat is a revision to a recorded subdivision plat, or a portion of a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat may reconfigure lots, vacate interior lot lines, change or eliminate a platted building envelope, or correct drafting or technical errors. An Amended Plat shall not create additional lots or building sites, and shall not result in the creation of lots that do not comply with zoning standards. An Amended Plat that involves easement and/or right-of-way vacation or dedication, or involves more than five (5) lots, or that necessitates new or modified public improvements shall require a public hearing before the Town Board of Trustees. (2) Boundary Adjustment. The division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. (3) Land Consolidation Plat. Unplatted contiguous lots approved for single-family residential development can be combined with a land consolidation plat. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as “Land Consolidation Plat.” The final plat shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: “Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes.” CHAPTER 13. – DEFINITIONS § 13.3 - Definitions of Words, Terms and Phrases 235. Subdivision, Minor shall mean subdivision for the purposes of boundary adjustments; or shall mean subdivision into a total of not more than four (4) lots, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing dedicated public street and the subdivision entails no extension of municipal facilities.