HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Park Board of Adjustment 2022-04-05BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT – TOWN OF ESTES PARK
TO BE HELD VIRTUALLY
Tuesday, April 5, 2022
9:00 a.m.
Estes Park, CO 80517
The Estes Park Board of Adjustment will participate in the meeting remotely due to the Declaration of
Emergency signed by Town Administrator Machalek on March 19, 2020 related to COVID-19 and
provided for with the adoption of Ordinance 04-20 on March 18, 2020. Procedures for quasi-judicial
virtual public hearings are established through Emergency Rule 06-20 signed by Town Administrator
Machalek on May 8, 2020 and outlined below.
Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/81054816292
Or Join by Telephone:
1.Dial US: +1-877-853-5257 (toll-free)
2.Enter Webinar ID: 81054816292 followed by #
The meeting will also be live-streamed on the Town’s Youtube Channel and will be recorded
and posted to YouTube and www.estes.org/videos within 48 hours.
Public Comment
When the moderator opens up the public comment period for an agenda item, attendees
wishing to speak shall:
1. Click the “Raise Hand” button, if joining online on the Zoom client, or
2. Press *9 and follow the prompts, if joining by telephone.
3. If you are watching live on YouTube, please call the number listed above, and mute your
computer audio for the duration of your remarks.
Once you are announced, please state your name and address for the record.
In order to participate online via Zoom, you must:
•Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer.
•Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience.
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services, programs, and activities and
special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
March 30, 2022 Page 1
NOTE: The Board of Adjustment reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda
was prepared.
AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT – TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, April 5, 2022
9:00 a.m.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
CONSENT AGENDA:
1.Board of Adjustment Minutes dated February 1, 2022
ACTION ITEMS:
1.Variance Request: 460 Valley Road Planner II Bergeron
The Applicant seeks a setback of two feet, in lieu of the 25 foot minimum required for
the E-1, Estate Zoning District.
2.Variance Request: 1040 Big Thompson Avenue Senior Planner Woeber
The applicant seeks a variance to the number of accommodation units allowed, from
46 to 50.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1.Re-appointment of Members Newsom and Holtzman
2.Board Elections – tabled to next meeting
3.Discuss return to In-Person meetings
4.Comprehensive Plan Update
ADJOURN
Prepared 3/30/22
Page 2
Page 3
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 1, 2022
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT of the
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually in said Town of
Estes Park on this 1 day of Februray 2022.
Committee: Chair Wayne Newsom, Vice-Chair Jeff Moreau, Board
Member Joe Holtzman
Attending: Chair Newsom, Vice-Chair Moreau, Board Member Holtzman,
Community Development Director Jessica Garner, Senior
Planner Woeber, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund, Town
Board Liasion Barbara MacAlpine
Absent: none
Chair Newsom called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (Holzman/Newsom) to approve the agenda. The motion
passed 2-0. Moreau was unavailable.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (Holtzman/Newsom) to approve the Consent Agenda. The
motion passed 2-0. Moreau was unavailable.
VARIANCE REQUEST 375 Prospector Lane Senior Planner Jeff Woeber
Planner Woeber reviewed the staff report. This request seeks a variance to allow a 15-
foot side setback on the eastern property line in place of the 25-foot minimum required
in the E-1 (Estate) Zoning District. The applicant is proposing the construction of a
detached garage.
JR Davis, the owner/applicant, explained that the proposed location is the only place
that makes sense for this garage addition. He is planning an extensive remodel on the
house, and once the town approves this variance, he will follow up with the Home
Owners Association.
DISCUSSION: none
PUBLIC COMMENT: none
It was moved and seconded (Moreau/Holtzman) to approve the variance request as
written. The motion passed 3-0.
REPORTS
draf
t
Page 4
Board of Adjustment, February 1 , 2022 – Page 2
Director Garner discussed the Comprehensive Plan update process. The committee
meets every two weeks, and things are progressing as planned. All documents, meetings
and handouts are available at engageestes.org. There will be an update at the February
8 Town Board study session.
Packet materials for the unique variance request coming to the Board in March will be
distributed as early as possible. Please feel free to call Director Garner or Planner Woeber
with any questions prior to the meeting.
Board elections will take place at the April meeting. As their terms expire on March 31,
Members Newsom and Holtzman will need to reapply for the Board.
There being no further business, Chair Newsom adjourned the meeting at 9:20 a.m.
Wayne Newsom, Chair
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary draf
t
Page 5
Page 6
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Chair Wayne Newsom
Estes Park Board of Adjustment (BOA)
Through: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director
From: Alex Bergeron, Planner II
Date: April 5, 2022
Application: Variance Request
460 Valley Road
Stanton and Mary Peterson, Owners/Applicants
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the variance
request, subject to the findings described in the staff report.
Objective:
The applicant requests a variance to Table 4-2 of the Estes Park Development Code
(EPDC) to permit a two-foot (2’) setback in place of the required 25’ front setback on the
north property line.
Location:
460 Valley Road, which Parcel 3523400037, legally described as “COM AT PT 556 FT N,
1000 FT W OF SE COR 23-5-73, S 128 FT, W 155 FT, N 128 FT, E 155 FT TPOB; ALSO COM
AT PT 556 FT N, 1000 FT W OF SE COR, N 22.93 FT, N 89 49' W 40 FT, S 63 1' W 50.5 FT, N
89 49' E TPOB” and hereinafter referred to as “the Property.”
Background:
The Property is located in the E-1 (Estate/1-acre min. lot size) Zone District. The
Property has no street frontage (public or private), is accessed via gravel drive, which
itself extends off of the driveway of a Religious Assembly use located west of the
property at 450 Valley Road. The acreage of the Property is below the zone district
minimum lot size of one acre, and the true acreage of the site is not clear. Larimer
County’s Assessor lists the Property at 0.49 acres, though the true acreage is smaller
because the Assessor considers two separate lots as one lot. The site is actually two
separate lots, per the legal description (see “also” statement) and two deeds recorded in
1971. The deeds were created before the Town of Estes Park adopted its subdivision
standards, and the Community Development Department has determined the lots to be
separate parcels, as shown on the attached site plan. The two lots do function as one
property, and seem to be conveyed as a couple, but the smaller, upper lot is not being
considered as part of the variance request (see Figure 1: “Subject Parcel” below; and
see also Attachment 1: “Application Form,” Attachment 3: “Statement of Intent,”
Attachment 3: “1971 Deeds,” and Attachment 4: “Proposed Site Plan.”).
Page 7
Figure 1: Subject Parcel
A portion of the existing house, originally built in 1913, encroaches into the 25’ setback
area, including the deck. A variance for these encroachments was granted by the Estes
Valley Board of Adjustment on May 6, 2008.
Project Description
Overview:
The applicants are seeking a 23-foot setback variance to construct an accessory
structure two feet from the northern property line. The accessory structure would
contain garage space on the lower level, and, if authorized through the Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) process outlined in EPDC §3.16 and §5.2, an Accessory Dwelling Unit
(ADU).
Location and Context
The Property is located in the E-1 (Estate/1-acre min. lot size) Zone District between W.
Wonderview Avenue and W. Elkhorn Avenue (see Figure 2: “Vicinity and Zoning Map”
below).
Page 8
Figure 2: Vicinity and Zoning Map
Land Use Summary
Table 1: Zoning and Land Use Summary
Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses
Subject
Site Estate E-1 Single-family Res.
North Estate E-1 Single-family Res./
Vacant
South Estate E-1 Single-family Res.
East Estate E-1 Single-family Res.
West Institutional A Religious Assembly
Page 9
Review Criteria:
The Board of Adjustment is the decision-making body for this application. In accordance
with EPDC §3.6.C. (Variances – Standards for Review), applications for variances shall
demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein.
Staff findings on these standards and criteria are outlined below:
§3.6.C.1: Special circumstances or conditions exist.
Staff finding: The Property is unusual in its location, size, and configuration.
§3.6.C.2(a): Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the
variance.
Staff finding: The Property has been used as a residence for decades.
§3.6.C.2(b): Whether the variance is substantial.
Staff finding: A 23-foot setback variance represents a 92% encroachment. However,
while the smaller, northern lot is not a factor as a basis of setback distance, the two
parcels have functionally behaved as one for more than 50 years, and the variance may
be of lesser magnitude in terms of neighborhood perception.
§3.6.C.2(c): Alteration to neighborhood character/local detriment.
Staff finding: Primary structures with accompanying accessory structures are common
in the immediate vicinity and in the E-1 Zone District. The proposed structure would
replace an existing shed at the proposed location. (See also comment on §3.6.C.2(b)
above.)
§3.6.C.2(d): Adverse effect on the delivery of public services such as water and
sewer.
Staff finding: All utility agencies are satisfied with the proposed plans as presented to
the BOA.
§3.6.C.2(e): Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the
requirement.
Staff finding: Unknown.
§3.6.C.2(f): Whether the Applicant’s predicament can be mitigated through some
method other than a variance.
Staff finding: It may be possible to position the structure outside of the setback area,
though the position of the existing driveway logically leads to the proposed location and
there could be impacts to stormwater drainage with a different position.
§3.6.C.3: No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or
circumstances affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a
nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation
for such conditions or situations.
Staff finding: The Property is unusually small relative to the standards of the E-1 Zone
District, in which lots are intended to be at least one acre in size.
Page 10
§3.6.C.4: No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an
existing or proposed subdivision if it will result in an increase in the number of
lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision.
Staff finding: Deeds recorded in 1971 show the two lots in their current form before the
Town adopted its subdivision standards and are considered legitimate designators of
metes and bounds.
§3.6.C.6: No variance for non-permitted use.
Staff finding: The residential use is permitted by right in the E-1 Zone District.
§3.6.C.7: BOA may grant conditions to ensure objectives are met.
Staff finding: Staff does not recommend additional conditions.
Reviewing Agency Comments:
This request has been routed to reviewing agency staff for review and comment.
Comments received were either neutral or in favor of the request (see Attachment 5:
“Agency Review Comments”).
Public Notice:
Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with Town and State public
noticing requirements. As of the time of writing this report, several telephoned public
inquiries were received and no written comments have been received for the variance
request.
• Written notice was mailed to adjacent property owners on March 17, 2022.
• Legal notice was published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on March 18, 2022.
• Application was posted on the Town’s “Current Applications” website as of March 18,
2022.
• “Development Proposal Under Review” sign was posted at the Property prior to that
date (see Attachment 6: “Posted Notice”).
Advantages:
• Approval of the variance request would permit the owners a reasonably sized
accessory structure. Accessory structures are not uncommon in the E-1 Zone
District, which is a semi-rural, lower density zoning designation.
• Development of an ADU, if permitted through the CUP process, would create
additional housing in Estes Park. The community is currently facing a housing
shortage.
• This proposal may advance Comprehensive Plan Community Wide Policy 5.2 –
the creation of housing for permanent residents of all sectors of the community
that is integrated into and dispersed throughout existing neighborhoods.
Page 11
Disadvantages:
• The setback variance requested could be perceived as very substantial, which
calls the purpose of setbacks into question.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the variance request, based on staff findings listed
above.
Finance/Resource Impact:
N/A
Level of Public Interest:
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move that the Board of Adjustment APPROVE the variance request, in accordance
with the findings as presented.
I move that the Board of Adjustment deny the variance request, finding that [state
findings for denial].
I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance request to the next regularly
scheduled meeting, finding that [state reasons for continuance].
Attachments:
1. Application Form
2. Statement of Intent
3. 1971 Deeds
4. Proposed Site Plan
5. Agency Review Comments
6. Evidence of Posted Notice
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
N
Page 20
3/24/22, 8:10 AM Town of Estes Park Mail - Application Comments: Peterson Variance
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=f7fd0cc745&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a%3Ar3803039484497640707&simpl=msg-a%3Ar380303948…1/2
Alex Bergeron <abergeron@estes.org>
Application Comments: Peterson Variance
Alex Bergeron <abergeron@estes.org>Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 2:36 PM
To: Lonnie Sheldon <lonnie@vanhornengineering.com>
Cc: John Bostron <jbostron@aldrichbuilders.com>, Planning commdev <planning@estes.org>
Good afternoon,
Your application for the “Peterson Variance" request yielded the following comments after the first review:
Advisory Comments. These comments are intended for general or future consideration and no immediate action is
necessary.
ESTES VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
“Estes Fire has no issues with the setback.”
ESTES PARK UTILITIES
“The Town of Estes Park Utilities Department has no objection to this Variance Request. All applicable fees will be
assessed at the time of Building Permit review.”
UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DISTRICT
“New sewer service lateral from garage shall conform to UTSD Rules and Regulations, Lateral Sewer
Specifications, Appendix B.
UTSD staff be notified 24 hours prior to inspection request and shall inspect new sewer service lateral installation
before and after backfilling the ditch.”
ESTES PARK PUBLIC WORKS
“There is no objection to the applicant's request for a setback variance. This parcel is unusual in that it is
completely hemmed in by private property and does not have any ROW frontage. To access the parcel from W
Wonderview, the owner must cross four privately-owned parcels. From W Elkhorn, three private parcels are
crossed. There is no ROW on Valley Road except at its ends where it intersects W Wonderview and W Elkhorn. I
do not know what easements or shared driveway agreements, if any, pertain to this property. The survey
complexities referenced in the SOI are not apparent on the Larimer County LIL.”
Action comments. Please make the changes outlined in the comments below and resubmit the relevant materials prior
to 5:00PM on Friday, March 11, 2022, to remain on track for the April 5, 2022 Board of Adjustment meeting.
ESTES PARK PLANNING
“The site plan shows multiple 25' setbacks on the north of the property; one for the subject lot and one as if the two
lots were only one lot. If the two lots shown as one property on public maps and to some extent on this map are
indeed two lots, then the variance for a 25' setback would apply to just the lower, square-like lot and there should
be reference to setbacks for the adjoining property. Please remove incorrect setback information as it relates to the
adjoining, co-owned lot from the site plan and the other plan documents. Now with the one subject lot, it is unclear
what the 10' proposed setback line is intended to represent if the closest corner of the proposed structure is 2' from
the property line, which is the distance identified in the statement of intent. Please justify or remove references to a
10' setback from the site plan and the other plan documents.”
UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DISTRICT
“New garage/building must not encroach the 15’ Upper Thompson Sanitation District (UTSD) sewer easement
located on the North side of the property (parallel to Valley Road)…The UTSD sewer main was not identified on
Page 21
3/24/22, 8:10 AM Town of Estes Park Mail - Application Comments: Peterson Variance
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=f7fd0cc745&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a%3Ar3803039484497640707&simpl=msg-a%3Ar380303948…2/2
the plans so the District could not accurately make the determination if there is an encroachment so it was an
advisement. It would be very helpful for the Sewer main to be identified on plans.”
Please provide UTSD with proposed location of connection of new service lateral from garage/ADU.”
Thank you,
- Alex Bergeron
Planner II
Community Development Department
Town of Estes Park
970-577-3729
Page 22
Page 23
Board of Adjustment
April 5, 2022
Peterson Variance
Presented by Alex Bergeron, Planner II
Vicinity and Zoning Map
Key Points
•The Property is addressed 460 Valley Road and is located in the E-1 (Estate/1-acre min. lot size) Zone District.
•The Property is below the E-1 minimum lot size of one acre.
•The Property is coupled with a much smaller, vacant parcel, though only the larger lot is to be considered as far as it relates to the variance request.
•The applicants are seeking a 23-foot setback variance to construct an accessory structure two feet from the northern property line.
•It would contain garage space on the lower level, and, if granted a conditional use permit (CUP) by the Planning Commission, an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on the upper level.
Subject Parcel Map
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Recommends APPROVAL of the Request
Advantages:
•Approval of the variance request would permit the owners a reasonably sized accessory structure.
Accessory structures are not uncommon in the E-1 Zone District, which is a semi-rural, lower
density zoning designation.
•Development of an ADU, if permitted through the CUP process, would create additional housing in
Estes Park. The community is currently facing a housing shortage.
•This proposal may advance Comprehensive Plan Community Wide Policy 5.2 – the creation of
housing for permanent residents of all sectors of the community that is integrated into and
dispersed throughout existing neighborhoods.
Disadvantages:
•The setback variance requested could be perceived as very substantial, which calls the purpose of
setbacks into question.
Page 24
Community Development
To: Estes Park Board of Adjustment
Through: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director
From: Jeffrey Woeber, Senior Planner
Date: April 5, 2022
Application: Variance Request, Increased Accommodation Unit Density
1040 Big Thompson Avenue
Castle Peak Holdings, Owner/Applicant
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment deny the variance
request, subject to the findings described in the report.
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective
The applicant requests approval of a variance to allow an increase in the density of
accommodation units beyond the current allowance in the A Zone District.
Location
Addressed as 1041 Big Thompson Avenue, legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Lake
View Tracts, Town of Estes Park.
Background
The subject property contains a lodging/motel use, and is within an A
(Accommodations) Zone District. The original owner received approval of a
Development Plan in 1985, approving 43 Accommodation Units (rooms). During the
course of the following 37 years, an additional three units were added without
documentation or record of when they were constructed
Community Development has determined the 46 existing units are legally
nonconforming, or “grandfathered” as explained below. Given the challenges
associated with determining how and when the three additional units were added, staff
will not require the applicant to seek approval for those.
Page 25
2 | P a g e
The Town of Estes Park Zoning Code in effect in 1985 permitted the construction of 43
rooms and was replaced by the Estes Valley Development Code in 2000. Recently
renamed the Estes Park Development Code (EPDC), Section 4.4.C. requires 1800 sq.
feet per accommodation unit. According to Larimer County Assessor's records, the
property is 1.34 acres in size, or 58,370 square feet, which allows for 32
accommodation units. The 46 units are 14 units more than what would be allowable
under the current Code, and those 14 units are legally nonconforming.
Project Description
Overview
This is a request to grant a variance to allow 50 Accommodation Units, four more units
than the existing 46.
The applicable standard of 1800 square feet per Accommodation Unit is “Minimum Land
Area per Accommodation or Residential Unit (sq. ft. per unit)”, within the EPDC,
Chapter 4, Zoning Districts, Section 4.4, Nonresidential Zoning Districts, Subsection
4.4.C., Density/Dimensional Standards, Table 4-5, Base Density and Dimensional
Standards Nonresidential Zoning Districts.
Location and Context
Vicinity Map
Page 26
3 | P a g e
Zoning Map
Land Use Summary
Table 1: Zoning and Land Use Summary
Subject
Site Accommodations A (Accommodations) Accommodations
North Estate: 1 Acre Minimum E-1 (Estate) Residential
South Residential: ¼ Acre Minimum R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Residential
East Accommodations A (Accommodations) Accommodations
West Accommodations A (Accommodations) Accommodations
Page 27
4 | P a g e
Review Criteria
The Board of Adjustment (BOA) is the decision-making body for variance requests. In
accordance with EPDC Section 3.6.C., Variances, Standards for Review, applications
for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria
contained therein. The Standards with staff findings for each are as follows:
1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic
conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are
not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical
difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code’s standards,
provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or
impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards, this
Code or the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding: Staff does not find special circumstances or conditions of the type
described, nor practical difficulty. The applicant does indicate difficulty in adding
ADA accessible units, but it is unclear what the difficulties are.
2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following
factors:
a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the
variance;
Staff Finding: There is beneficial use of the property without the variance. The
accommodations/motel use has operated since approximately 1985.
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff Finding: The variance is substantial relative to the current EPDC
Accommodation Unit density standard for which the variance is requested.
Although it is acknowledged that the existing 46 Accommodation Units are
allowed, and the request for four additional is an 8.7% increase, the current Code
standard allows 32. The existing 46 Units is 43.8% above the current Code
standard of 32. Fifty Accommodation Units is 56.3% above the 32 allowed under
the current Code.
c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be
substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a
substantial detriment as a result of the variance;
Staff Finding: Staff does not find the character of the neighborhood would be
altered, and there would be no detrimental impacts to adjoining properties as a
Page 28
5 | P a g e
result of the variance other than a negligible increase in traffic during peak
season.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services
such as water and sewer.
Staff Finding: Public services such as water and sewer will not be adversely
affected by the variance.
e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the
requirement;
Staff Finding: The Development Code containing the Accommodation Unit
density standard has been effective since the year 2000. The current owner
purchased the property quite recently, in January 2021.
f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some
method other than a variance.
Staff Finding: Typically, economic hardship is not a basis for granting a
variance. This is based on best planning and zoning practices and also the
EPDC’s Section 3.6, which specifies approval of a variance is to involve “Special
circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions,
narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) …” These are not
financial or economic circumstances or conditions. The method to mitigate the
applicant’s need for ADA units is to convert existing rooms to ADA standards.
3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the
regulations that will afford relief.
Staff Finding: There is no alternative process that could allow the four proposed
additional Accommodation Units under the EPDC, other than perhaps amending
the EPDC to increase the allowable density.
4. In granting such variances, the BOA may require such conditions as will, in its
independent judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standard so
varied or modified.
Staff Finding: Staff does not recommend conditions.
The attached Statement of Intent contains the applicant’s rationale to demonstrate
compliance with the above Standards and Criteria, describing how they have
determined their variance request demonstrates compliance with each.
Page 29
6 | P a g e
Staff supports the applicant’s renovation efforts for this property, and recognizes each of
the points and rationale behind the desire for four additional accommodation units.
However, Section 3.6 of the EPDC does not provide staff or the Board of Adjustment
the discretion to approve a variance for the reasons provided by the applicant. The
applicant’s basis for the variance request appears to be primarily economic, along with
the need to provide rooms that are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA).
Review Agency Comments
The variance application was referred to all applicable review agencies for comment.
The Public Works Department provided comments (attached). The Town of Estes Park
Utilities Department has “…no objection to this proposed variance.” No other comments
were received.
Public Notice
Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with Town and State public
noticing requirements. As of the time of writing this report, no written comments have
been received for the variance request.
• Written notice mailed to adjacent property owners on March 18, 2022.
• Legal notice published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on March 18, 2022.
• Application posted on the Town’s “Current Applications” website as of March 18,
2022.
Advantages
The applicant would add four additional Accommodation Units as proposed.
Disadvantages
Approval of the variance may set a precedent where future applicants may cite
economic reasons as a basis for approval, which is not consistent with variance
standards under Section 3.6 of the EPDC.
Action Recommended
Staff recommends denial of the proposed variance described in this staff report under
“Review Criteria.”
Finance/Resource Impact
N/A
Level of Public Interest
Low.
Page 30
7 | P a g e
Sample Motions
I move to approve the requested variance, allowing four (4) additional Accommodation
Units, for a total of fifty (50) Accommodation Units on the subject property addressed as
1040 Big Thompson Avenue in the Town of Estes Park.
I move to deny the requested variance with the following findings (state
reason/findings).
I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance to the next regularly
scheduled meeting, finding that [state reasons for continuance].
Attachments
1. Statement of Intent
2. Application
3. Site plan
4. Public Works Comments d. 2/28/22
Page 31
February 9, 2022
RE: Letter of Intent – Estes Village Inn – Additional Keys Request
To Whom it May Concern,
Beacon Bay Project Management (“BBPM”), on behalf of Castle Peak Holdings (“CPH”), is submitting an
application for future alterations at Estes Village Inn, located at 1040 Big Thompson Ave., Estes Park, CO
80517. We are requesting a variance to current code, specifically section 4.4.C, to add four (4) additional
guest units to the property, bringing the total units to fifty (50) from the current forty-six (46).
CPH and Denver based Victory Investment Partners (Victory) acquired Estes Village Inn, along with Twin
Owls Motor Lodge at 700 N St Vrain Avenue, in January 2021 with the vision to convert the rundown
motels into boutique destinations that celebrate the dynamic community of Estes Park and the
surrounding Rocky Mountain National Park. Upon acquisition, CPH set out to address a variety of life,
safety and code issues that had gone unchecked and unenforced for years under prior ownership. This
includes, but isn’t limited to, the voluntary addition of fire sprinklers at Estes Village Inn, a significant
investment in the safety of our guests and the surrounding community. In total, CPH is investing over $20
million across the two hotels, generating considerable revenue for the City of Estes Park through
development fees and increased sales and occupancy tax. CPH has been excited and encouraged by the
strong support for the projects from the local community.
During the acquisition process, CPH identified that the highest and best use for the existing breakfast
room and a previously unpermitted guest room at Estes Village Inn was to convert the underutilized space
into four (4) new guest units, including two (2) Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guest rooms. The
additional revenue generated from these four (4) rooms – roughly $200,000 annually – is necessary to
substantiate CPH’s significant capital spend across the two hotels, and, more specifically, the large
investment to bring the buildings up to current code. This revenue cannot be made up anywhere else.
Furthermore, Estes Village Inn currently does not have any ADA guest units, and the conversion of any of
the preexisting units to meet ADA standards would prove to be economically infeasible due to current
conditions, specifically the existing slope of the site. The breakfast room, which is proximate to the lobby
space, is also a superior location for any disabled guests as it allows them easy access to the public spaces
without having to get in and out of their vehicle. CPH strongly believes that approving this variance
request is in the best interest our guests and the local community of Estes Park.
In summary:
• CPH acquired Estes Village Inn and Twin Owls in January 2021 intending to make a sizeable
investment across the two projects. The incremental revenue generated from these four (4)
additional rooms is necessary for CPH’s investment to make sense.
• CPH intends to make significant upgrades to address preexisting fire, life, safety and code issues
on the property. This includes the voluntary addition of sprinklers.
Page 32
• Two (2) of the four (4) new units will be ADA compliant rooms. Due to the slope of the site and
the current size of existing units, it is economically infeasible to add ADA compliant rooms
elsewhere within the project.
• CPH is proposing to convert underutilized space within the existing building envelope to its
highest and best use. Adding these units will not add any additional square footage to the site,
alter the exterior of the buildings or impact neighboring property in any way.
• CPH will meet the parking requirements as laid out in Section 7.11 of the Code requiring one
(1) parking space per guestroom and one (1) parking space per three (3) employees. The
property will have 53 parking spots, 50 for guestrooms and three (3) for up to nine (9)
employees.
• CPH believes that the current code inflicts unnecessary hardship by limiting the use of
preexisting, underutilized space within the existing square footage of the buildings. It also
inflicts practical difficulty due to preexisting conditions that limit the ability to add ADA
compliant guest rooms elsewhere on the property.
Section 3.6 of the Estes Park Development Code lays out the standards by which a variance will be granted.
We address each point below. Specific code from Section 3.6 is in blue text.
Standards for Review. All applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the standards
and criteria set forth below:
1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions,
narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other
areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict
compliance with this Code's standards, provided that the requested variance will not have
the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific
standards, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan.
Estes Village Inn has been legal, non-conforming for over 20 years as it relates to the density
calculation in Section 4.4.C. Due to the slope of the site and the size of the existing guestrooms, it is
economically unfeasible, nor practical, to add the two (2) ADA complaint rooms elsewhere on
property.
2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following factors:
a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;
No better use for the space than adding ADA guest rooms to serve these guests and bring properties
up to code, bring an existing non-permitted room up to code that has no other use, and generate
additional revenue that will support life safety investment and tax dollars for Estes Park.
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
The property currently has 46 guest rooms and has been legal, non-conforming for several decades.
No additional square footage will be added to the site, and one of the guestrooms is already
Page 33
constructed as a unpermitted room with no other uses. CPH believes that the addition of these four
(4) rooms do not constitute a substantial variance, however they will have a substantial financial
impact.
c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered
or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the
variance;
The addition of the four (4) guest rooms within the building’s existing envelope will not alter the
character of the neighborhood or impact adjoining properties in anyway. Furthermore, if the Board of
Adjustments grants the variance, CPH will be required to go through a development plan review with
the city. The project will only move forward if deemed favorable to the character of the
neighborhood. Finally, CPH has made substantial investments at both Estes Village Inn and Twin Owls
to make both properties cornerstones of the community – a significant change from the condition of
the properties under prior ownership.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as
water and sewer;
The planned renovation of the property already requires upgrades to the electrical and water service
servicing the property. The investment only helps the services in the area. Estes Park Sanitation and
Estes Park Utilities voiced no objections to the addition of these rooms during the pre-application
meeting held on January 27th 2022.
e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement;
CPH met with the city pre-purchase and on multiple occasions post-sale to discuss both Estes Village
Inn and Twin Owls. Please see below dates and persons in attendance to these meetings. This was
clearly not just an afterthought but a purposefully planned addition. In all meetings pre and post-
purchase, previous Estes Park Community Development Director Randy Hunt expressed favorable
likelihood of adding four (4) additional rooms, due to the rooms being within the building’s existing
envelope and contingent on CPH providing an updating parking plan with the required number of
spaces. It was also discussed that the revenue from these additional rooms was necessary given the
significant investment that was needed to address the extensive code and life, safety issues. These
discussions gave CPH confidence in the business plan and considerable capital investment being
undertaken at both projects. On December 1st, 2021, Estes Park Senior Planner Jeff Woeber presented
CPH for the first time with information regarding the concerns around a variance approval.
• October 22, 2020 – Attendees – Adam Hazlet (Victory Investment Partners) and Randy Hunt
(Prior Estes Park Community Development Director)
• November 23, 2020 – Attendees – Adam Hazlet (Victory Investment Partners), Mike Weiss
(Castle Peak Holdings - Owner) and Randy Hunt (Prior Estes Park Community Development
Director)
• December 1, 2020 – Attendees – Adam Hazlet (Victory Investment Partners) and Randy Hunt
(Prior Estes Park Community Development Director)
Page 34
•July 20, 2021 – Attendees – Adam Hazlet (Victory Investment Partners), Mike Weiss (Castle Peak
Holdings - Owner), Electric Bowery (Architect of Record), Gary Ruso (Estes Park Chief Building
Official) and Randy Hunt (Prior Estes Park Community Development Director)
•August 20, 2021 – Attendees - Adam Hazlet (Victory Investment Partners), Craig Middleton
(Beacon Bay Project Management), Gary Ruso (Estes Park Chief Building Official) and Randy
Hunt (Prior Estes Park Community Development Director)
•September 2, 2021 – Attendees - Craig Middleton (Beacon Bay Project Management), Randy
Hunt (Prior Estes Park Community Development Director) and Jessica Garner (Current Estes Park
Community Development Director)
•November 10, 2021 – Mike Weiss (Castle Peak Holdings – Owner), David Rochefort (Castle Peak
Holdings – Owner), Craig Middleton (Beacon Bay Project Management), and Jessica Garner
(Current Estes Park Community Development Director), Jeff Woeber (Estes Park Senior Planner)
•December 14, 2021 – Adam Hazlet (Victory Investment Partners), Mike Weiss (Castle Peak
Holdings – Owner), David Rochefort (Castle Peak Holdings – Owner), Craig Middleton (Beacon
Bay Project Management), and Jessica Garner (Current Estes Park Community Development
Director), Jeff Woeber (Estes Park Senior Planner)
f.Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other
than a variance.
No, we cannot mitigate the financial impact of the lost revenue from not developing these four (4)
rooms, nor the hardship of developing the required ADA compliant guest rooms elsewhere on the
property.
CPH is excited to invest in the reinvention of Estes Village Inn into a destination that travelers will embrace
as authentically local to Estes Park, while celebrating everything that makes the local community so
special. We look forward to further discussing the proposed variance with the members of the Board of
Adjustments in the near future.
Warm Regards,
David Rochefort
Castle Peak Holdings
Craig Middleton
Craig Middleton
Beacon Bay Project Management
Page 35
Street Address of Lot:
Lot:
Town Well
Town Well
EPSD UTSD Septic
EPSD UTSD Septic
Other None
Yes No
Variance Desired (Development Code Section #):
Name of Primary Contact Person
Complete Mailing Address
Primary Contact Person is Owner Applicant Consultant/Engineer
Application fee (see attached fee schedule)
Statement of intent (must comply with standards in Section 3.6.C of the EPDC pg.3-10-3-11,see attached)
1 copy (folded) of site plan (drawn aa scale of 1" = 20') **
1 reduced copy of the site plan (11" X 17")
Site Information
Attachments
Legal Description:
Parcel ID # :
Subdivision:
Zoning
Other (Specify)
Xcel
ESTES PARK
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APPLICATION
Submittal Date:
Block:Tract:
Record Owner(s):
General Information
Primary Contact Information
Variance
Digital copies of plats/plans in TIFF or PDF format emailed to planning@estes.org
The site plan shall include information in Estes Park Development Code Appendix B.VII.5.
The applicant will be required to provide additional copies of the site plan after staff review
(see the Board of Adjustment variance application schedule). Copies must be folded.
Other (Specify)
Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 170 MacGre or Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517
Community Development Department Phone: 970 577-3721 Fax: 970 586-0249 www.estes.or /CommunityDevelopment
Revised 2020.04.01 ks
Lot Size
Existing Land Use
Proposed Land Use
Existing Water Service
Proposed Water Service
Existing Sanitary Sewer Service
Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service
Existing Gas Service
Site Access (if not on public street)
Are there wetlands on the site?
Page 36
Cell Phone
Fax
Email
APPLICATION FEES
See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at:
www.estes.org/planningforms
All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal.
Phone
Cell Phone
Fax
Email
Phone
Cell Phone
Mailing Address
Mailing Address
Fax
Phone
Contact Information
Consultant/Engineer
Email
Mailing Address
Record Owner(s)
Applicant
Revised 2020.04.01 ks
Page 37
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
PLEASE PRINT:
PLEASE PRINT:
Date
Date
I understand that I am required to obtain a "Development Proposal Under Review" sign from the Community
Development Department and that this sign must be posted on my property where it is clearly visible from the road. I
understand that the corners of my property and the proposed building/structure corners must be field staked. I
understand that the sign must be posted and the staking completed no later t han ten (10) business days prior to the
Estes Park Board of Adjustment hearing.
I understand that if the Board of Adjustment approves my request, "Failure of an applicant to apply for a building
permit and commence construction or action with regard to the variance approval within one (1) year of
receiving approval of the variance may automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void." (Estes
Park Development Code Section 3.6.D)
I understand that a resubmittal fee may be charged if my application is incomplete.
The Community Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is
determined to be complete.
I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Members of the Board of Adjustment with proper
identification access to my property during the review of this application.
I acknowledge that I have received the Estes Park Board of Adjustment Variance Application Schedule and that failure
to meet the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application
becoming null and void. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become
null and void.
Names:
Record Owner
Applicant
Signatures:
Record Owner
Applicant
I understand that this variance request may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is
incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date.
OWNER & APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
I understand that acceptance of this application by the Town of Estes Park for filing and receipt of the application fee
by the Town does not necessarily mean that the application is complete under the applicable requirements of the
EPDC.
In submitting the application materials and signing this application agreement, I acknowledge and agree that the
application is subject to the applicable processing and public hearing requirements set forth in the Estes Park
Development Code (EPDC).
I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EPDC, and that, prior to filing this application, I have had the
opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application.
The Estes Park Development Code is available online at:
https://www.municode.com/library/CO/estes_valley/codes/development_code
As Applicant, I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that in filing the application I am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property.
As Owner, I certify the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and I am the record owner of the property.
Revised 2020.04.01 ks
Page 38
A101
2
2 2
2
1
A101
1
A101
A101
1
101
BUILDING SECTION
EXTERIOR ELEVATION
ROOM TAG
DOOR TAG
WINDOW TAG
Room Name
MATERIAL TAG
REVISION CLOUD & TAG1
1i WALL TAG
KEYNOTEXX
SPOT ELEVATION
INTERIOR ELEVATION
DETAIL CALLOUT
DETAIL REFERENCEA101
1
1 GRID LINE
LEVEL
0' -0"
CENTERLINE
PROPERTY LINE
PT-1
1 1/4"DIMENSION
BIG THOMPSON AVE.
Scale
Drawing No.
Drawn By
Checked By
Project Title
Drawing Title
Date
Project
No.
North
Architect of Record
DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK
AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND REPORT ANY
DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
No.Revisions Date By
Copyright Note
Stamp
Electric Bowery Ltd. Retains Design Copyright
over Design Drawings & Specifications.
Contractor
Humphrey Rich Construction
10200 Old Columbia Rd.
Columbia, MD. 21406
Tel 301.349.1687
Architect / Designer
Electric Bowery, Ltd.
720 Hampton Dr.
Venice, CA 90291
Tel 310.439.1771
Engineer
Ramirez Johnson + Associates
3295 Blake St. #104
Denver, CO. 80205
Tel 720.598.0774
Client
Castle Peak Holdings
228 Park Ave South
New York, NY 10003
RE
L
E
A
S
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
NO
T
AS NOTED
A0.000
COVER SHEET
001082
10.01.21
TL
ESTES VILLAGE INN
CL/LB
ESTES VILLAGE INN
GUESTROOM BID SET
OCTOBER 01, 2021
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SITE ADDRESS:1040 BIG THOMPSON AVE
ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517
PROJECT TYPE:RENOVATION OF EXISTING MOTEL COMPLEX CONSISTING OF 48 GUEST ROOM. BUILDING (B) WORK TO FOLLOW IN SEPERATE PERMIT.
T.O. FIRST LEVEL = EL. 100'-0" = 5280.00 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL
USE AND OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION
310.3 RESIDENTIAL GROUP R-1: MOTELS (TRANSIENT)
311.3 STORAGE GROUP S-2: LOW HAZARD STORAGE
ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AREA LIMITATIONS
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE V B. 20,557 SF
RESIDENTIAL GROUP R-1 WITH ACCESSORY OCCUPANCIES
ALLOWABLE AREA FACTOR: R-1 (SPRINKLERED): 7,000 (NS)
ALLOWABLE HEIGHT AND NUMBER OF STORIES: R-1 (SPRINKLERED) 40 FEET 2 STORIES
MAXIMUM EXISTING:32'-7" FEET 3 STORIES
BUILDING AREA
506.1.3 BASEMENTS.BASEMENTSNEED NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA OF A BUILDING PROVIDED THE TOTAL AREA OD SUCH
BASEMENTS DOES NOT EXCEEED THE AREA PERMITTED FOR A ONE-STORY ABOVE GRADE PLANE BUILDING.
FRONTAGE INCREASE FACTOR (EQUATION 5-5)
PERIMETER OF BUILDING HAVING A MINIMUM FRONTAGE DISTANCE OF 30'-0".
[852'-0" / 934'-6" -0.25] x 30 / 30 = 0.66
ALLOWABLE AREA (EQUATION 5-3)
MIXED OCCUPANCY, MULTISTORY BUILDINGS
(R-2):[ 7,000 + (7,000 x 0.66)] = 11,620 SF
LOWER LEVEL 8,732 SF / 11,620 SF =0.75 < 1.0 (2015 IBC 508.4.2)
MAIN LEVEL 8,916 SF / 11,620 SF + 2076 SF / 9,960 SF =0.97 < 1.0 (2015 IBC 508.4.2)
UPPER LEVEL 833 SF / 11, 620 SF =0.07 < 1.0 (2015 IBC 508.4.2)
ZONING
SYMBOLS PLOT PLAN SCALE = NTS.
A.C.AIR CONDITIONING
ADJ.ADJACENT
ADDT'L ADDITIONAL
A.F.F.ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
A.H.AIR HANDLER
ALT.ALTERNATING
ALUM.ALUMINUM
BD.BOARD
BLD'G BUILDING
BLK'G BLOCKING
CALCS.CALCULATIONS
CL.CENTERLINE
CLG.CEILING
CONC.CONCRETE
CONT.CONTINUOUS
CORR.CORRUGATED
CNTR.CENTER
DET.DETAIL
DIA.DIAMETER
DIM.DIMENSION
DWGS.DRAWINGS
(E)EXISTING
EA.EACH
ELEC.ELECTRICAL
EQ.EQUAL
EXIST.EXISTING
EXPAND.EXPANDED
EXT.EXTERIOR
F.C.FINISH CEILING
F.F.FINISH FLOOR
FLR.FLOOR
F.S.FINISH SURFACE
GA.GAUGE
GALV.GALVANIZED
G.L.GRID LINE
GYP. BD.GYPSUM BOARD
HT.HEIGHT
H.V.A.C.HEATING /
VENTILATION / AIR
CONDITIONING
INT.INTERIOR
MAX.MAXIMUM
M.B.MACHINE BOLT
MECH.MECHANICAL
MIN.MINIMUM
MTL.METAL
(N)NEW
N/A NOT APPLICABLE
N.I.C.NOT IN CONTRACT
N.T.S NOT TO SCALE.
O.C.ON CENTER
PNT.PAINT
P.T.PRESSURE
TREATED
REF.REFERENCE
REQ'D REQUIRED
RM.ROOM
S.S.STAINLESS STEEL
SIM.SIMILAR
STL.STEAL
STLS.STAINLESS
STRUCT.STRUCTURE(AL)
STOR.STORAGE
SUSP.SUSPENDED
T.B.D.TO BE
DETERMINED
THK.THICK
T.O.W.TOP OF WALL
TYP.TYPICAL
U.N.O.UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE
V.I.F.VERIFY IN FIELD
V.S.VENT SHAFT
W/WITH
W.C.WATER CLOSET
WD.WOOD
W.H.WATER HEATER
W.P.WATERPROOFING
MEMBRANE
ABBREVIATIONS
APPLICABLE CODES
2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE
2015 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE
2015 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE
2015 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE
2017 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE
2015 INTERNATIONAL FUEL GAS CODE
ESTES PARK LOCAL AMENDMENTS
GOVERNING AUTHORITY:
CITY OF ESTES PARK, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO
ESTES VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT CODE
ESTES PARK MUNICIPAL CODE / TITLE 17: ZONING
LOT AREA:58,085 SF / 1.33 ACRES
BUILDING FOOTPRINT:11,295 SF
ZONING:A /ACCOMODATIONS / HIGHWAY CORRIDOR
MINIMUM LAND AREA PERR ACCOMMODATION
(48 UNITS x 1,800 SF): 86,400 SF
MINIMUM LOT SIZE: 40,000 SF
MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 50%
FRONT SETBACK (ATERIAL): 25 FEET
SIDE SETBACK: 15 FEET
REAR SETBACK: 10 FEET
LOT LINES ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL: 25 FEET
MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 30 FEET
PROPOSED BLDG USE: HIGH INTENSITY ACCOMMODATIONS / HOTEL
(NO CHANGE)
PROPOSED BUILDING AREA:LOWER LEVEL = 8,942 GFA
(NO CHANGE) MAIN LEVEL = 10,991 GFA
UPPER LEVEL = 833 GFA
TOTAL = 20,766 GFA
NUMBER OF GUEST ROOMS:46
PARKING REQUIRED:1 SPACE PER ROOM < 750 SF = 46 SPACES
1 SPACE PER 3 EMPLOYEES = 1 SPACE
PARKING PROVIDED: 48 SPACES INCLUDING 2 ACCESSIBLE SPACES
PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS: 9'-0" x 19'-6"
DRIVE AISLE WIDTH:24'-0" TWO-WAY
BIKE PARKING REQUIRED: 1 PER 20 PARKING SPACES
BIKE PARKING PROVIDED: 5 SPACES
VICINITY MAP
Page 39
(E) BUILDING A;
14 KEYS
(E) BUILDING C;
3 KEYS
(E) BUILDING D;
8 KEYS
(E) BUILDING E;
12 KEYS
(E) PARKING
11 SPACES
(E) PARKING
24 SPACES
1 ADA
(N) PARKING
7 SPACES
1 ADA
(E) PARKING
11 SPACES
1 ADA
(E) BUILDING B;
8 KEYS (E)
3 KEYS (N)
(E) BIKE PATH
(E) POOL
PROPERTY LINE
(E) PLANTER
(E) TOTEM POLE
TO BE REMOVED
(N) SIGN LOCATION
(N) DISCOVERY
(N) DISCOVERY
PER
SEPERATE
FUTURE
PERMIT
BIG THOMPSON AVENUE
Scale
Drawing No.
Drawn By
Checked By
Project Title
Drawing Title
Date
Project
No.
North
Architect of Record
DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK
AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND REPORT ANY
DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
No.Revisions Date By
Copyright Note
Stamp
Electric Bowery Ltd. Retains Design Copyright
over Design Drawings & Specifications.
Contractor
Humphrey Rich Construction
10200 Old Columbia Rd.
Columbia, MD. 21406
Tel 301.349.1687
Architect / Designer
Electric Bowery, Ltd.
720 Hampton Dr.
Venice, CA 90291
Tel 310.439.1771
Engineer
Ramirez Johnson + Associates
3295 Blake St. #104
Denver, CO. 80205
Tel 720.598.0774
Client
Castle Peak Holdings
228 Park Ave South
New York, NY 10003
RE
L
E
A
S
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
NO
T
1" = 20'-0"
A1.000
SITE PLAN
001082
10.01.21
TL
ESTES VILLAGE INN
CL/LB
1" = 20'-0"
SITE PLAN1
BUILDING A
BUILDING B
BUILDING C
BUILDING D
BUILDING E
Page 40
DN
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN
DN
DN
A-1 A-2 A-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
DE-A
DE-B
A-A
A-B
A-C
C-B
C-1 C-2
C-A
C-C
C-D C-E
B-B
B-C
B-D
B-E
E-1
E-2
D-1
D-2
DBL. RM.DBL. RM.DBL. RM.DBL. RM.DBL. RM.DBL. RM.DBL. RM.BUNK RM.BUNK RM.BUNK RM.
SNGL. RM.
SNGL. RM.
SNGL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
SNGL. RM.
SNGL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
04
PER
SEPERATE
FUTURE
PERMIT
STRG.
04
04
04
0202
07
07
07
02
02
26
'
-
1
0
"
15
'
-
7
1
/
2
"
19
'
-
1
0
"
19
'
-
1
0
"
42
'
-
1
1
/
2
"
4' - 10"
26' - 9 1/2"
31' - 7 1/2"
50' - 3"37' - 9"7' - 9"34' - 10"39' - 8"
38' - 0"
24' - 3"
37' - 6"
37' - 9"
0"
0"
-6' - 8"
-11' - 6"
-6' - 8"
0"
LEGEND
UNDER FUTURE
SEPERATE PERMIT
(N) WALL
(E) WALL
DEMO WALL
DEMO FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES
1. REMOVE ALL EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES & FINISHES. ROUGH-INS
TO REMIAN UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. ALL FRAMING TO REMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. REMOVE ALL EXISTING WALL, FLOOR & CEILING FINISHES.
4. ALL EXISTING ELECTRICAL OUTLETS TO REMAIN PENDING GC
SURVEY WITH SUPPLEMENT OF BEDSIDE MOCKETTS AS SHOWN.
5. REMOVE ALL EXISTING INTERIOR DOORS, FRAMES, HARDWARE &
MISCELLANEOUS APPURTENANCES.
6. EXISTING PTAC UNITS TO REMAIN.
Scale
Drawing No.
Drawn By
Checked By
Project Title
Drawing Title
Date
Project
No.
North
Architect of Record
DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK
AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND REPORT ANY
DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
No.Revisions Date By
Copyright Note
Stamp
Electric Bowery Ltd. Retains Design Copyright
over Design Drawings & Specifications.
Contractor
Humphrey Rich Construction
10200 Old Columbia Rd.
Columbia, MD. 21406
Tel 301.349.1687
Architect / Designer
Electric Bowery, Ltd.
720 Hampton Dr.
Venice, CA 90291
Tel 310.439.1771
Engineer
Ramirez Johnson + Associates
3295 Blake St. #104
Denver, CO. 80205
Tel 720.598.0774
Client
Castle Peak Holdings
228 Park Ave South
New York, NY 10003
RE
L
E
A
S
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
NO
T
AS NOTED
A1.002
DEMOLITION PLAN -
LEVEL 1
001082
10.01.21
TL
ESTES VILLAGE INN
CL/LB
3/32" = 1'-0"
OVERALL DEMO PLAN - LEVEL 11
KEYNOTES (DEMO PLANS)
01 - REMOVE EXISTING EGRESS WINDOW
02 - REMOVE EXISITNG DOOR OPENING, INFILL WITH RATED CONSTRUCTION TO MATCH
SURROUNDING ASSEMBLY
03 - CREATE NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL
04 - REMOVE EXISTING PARTITION AS SHOWN
05 - EXISTING WINDOW TO BE REMOVED & REPLACED
06 - EXISTING LAUNDRY TO BE RELOCATED TO BASEMENT STORAGE @ BUILDING D
07 - REMOVE EXISTING EXTERIOR DOOR FOR (N) PRIVATE TERRACE
Page 41
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN
DN
DN
B-1 B-2
B-C
B-D
OPEN TO BELOW
B-300 B-301
PER
SEPERATE
FUTURE
PERMIT
A-1 A-2 A-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
DE-A
DE-B
A-A
A-B
A-C
C-B
C-1 C-2
C-A
C-C
C-D C-E
B-B
B-C
B-D
B-E
E-1
E-2
D-1
D-2
A1.105
3
A1.104
1
A1.102
1
DBL. RM.
A-210
DBL. RM.
A-211
DBL. RM.
A-212
DBL. RM.
A-213
DBL. RM.
A-214
DBL. RM.
A-215
DBL. RM.
A-216 BUNK RM.
B-203
BUNK RM.
B-202
BUNK RM.
B-201
SNGL. RM.
B-204
ADA RM.
B-205
ADA RM.
B-206
SNGL. RM.
C-220
SNGL. RM.
C-221
SNGL. RM.
C-222
DBL. RM.
DBL. RM.
E-234 SNGL. RM.
E-233 SNGL. RM.
E-232 DBL. RM.
E-231 DBL. RM.
E-230
A1.106
2
DBL. RM.
E-235
DBL. RM.
D-244 DBL. RM.
D-243 DBL. RM.
D-242 DBL. RM.
D-241 DBL. RM.
D-240
A1.101
2
PER
SEPERATE
FUTURE
PERMIT
5'
-
2
"
26
'
-
1
0
"
15
'
-
7
1
/
2
"
19
'
-
1
0
"
19
'
-
1
0
"
42
'
-
5
1
/
2
"
4' - 10"
26' - 9 1/2"
31' - 7 1/2"
50' - 3"37' - 9"7' - 9"34' - 10"39' - 8"
38' - 0"
24' - 3"
37' - 6"
37' - 9"
05
06
06
06
05
0404 04
03 03 03 03 03 03 03
STRG.
0"
0"
-6' - 8"
-11' - 6"
-6' - 8"
0"
FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES
1. NEW FIXTURES & FINISHES THROUGHOUT AS SHOWN.
2. EXISTING DRYWALL TO RECEIVE LEVEL 5 SKIM COAT & PREP FOR NEW PAINT.
3. NEW INTERIOR BATHROOM DOORS, FRAMES & HARDWARE THROUGHOUT.
4. EXTERIOR WORK AS PART OF SEPERATE PERMIT, SCOPE & WORK ORDER.
5. NO ADDITIONAL PLUMBING ROUGH AT GUESTROOM INTERIORS, EXCEPTING
NEW GUESTROOMS.
LEGEND
UNDER FUTURE
SEPERATE PERMIT
(N) WALL
(E) WALL
DEMO WALL
Scale
Drawing No.
Drawn By
Checked By
Project Title
Drawing Title
Date
Project
No.
North
Architect of Record
DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK
AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND REPORT ANY
DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
No.Revisions Date By
Copyright Note
Stamp
Electric Bowery Ltd. Retains Design Copyright
over Design Drawings & Specifications.
Contractor
Humphrey Rich Construction
10200 Old Columbia Rd.
Columbia, MD. 21406
Tel 301.349.1687
Architect / Designer
Electric Bowery, Ltd.
720 Hampton Dr.
Venice, CA 90291
Tel 310.439.1771
Engineer
Ramirez Johnson + Associates
3295 Blake St. #104
Denver, CO. 80205
Tel 720.598.0774
Client
Castle Peak Holdings
228 Park Ave South
New York, NY 10003
RE
L
E
A
S
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
NO
T
AS NOTED
A1.011
PROPOSED OVERALL
FLOOR PLANS - LEVEL 1
& 2
001082
10.01.21
TL
ESTES VILLAGE INN
CL/LB
3/32" = 1'-0"
PROPOSED OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 21
3/32" = 1'-0"
PROPOSED OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 12
KEYNOTES (OVERALL PLANS)
01 - PRESERVE ACCESS TO EXISTING UTILITY SPACE
02 - NEW GUESTROOM IN PREVIOUS LAUNDRY ROOM
03 - EXISTING BALCONIES, PAINT SCOPE UNDER SEPERATE REVIEW / PERMIT / WORK
ORDER
04 - FRAME OUT NEW BUNK LANDING ABOVE BATHROOM CEILING
05 - NEW WOOD GATE AT CORRIDOR
06 - NEW GUEST BALCONY PARTITIONS AS PART OF EXTERIOR SCOPE
Page 42
DN
UP
DN
K K
K
KK
K
KEY PLAN
B
D
E
C
BA
LEGEND
UNDER FUTURE
SEPERATE PERMIT
(N) WALL
(E) WALL
DEMO WALL
A-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
A-A
A-B
A-C
B-B
B-C
B-D
B-E
ADA RM.
B-206
ADA RM.
B-205
SNGL. RM.
B-204
BUNK RM.
B-201
BUNK RM.
B-202
BUNK RM.
B-203
CU
T
L
I
N
E
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
.
1
0
1
CUT LINE
SEE SHEET A.104
0"
0"
0"
TL-1 TL-02A TL-1
WF-01 WF-01
TL-1 TL-02A TL-1
WF-01
TL-02A TL-1
WD-02
10' - 2"13' - 2"15' - 1"
19
'
-
4
"
14
'
-
1
"
4'
-
1
0
"
01
02
03
04
05
04
05
05
03 03
02
010107 07
Scale
Drawing No.
Drawn By
Checked By
Project Title
Drawing Title
Date
Project
No.
North
Architect of Record
DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK
AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND REPORT ANY
DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
No.Revisions Date By
Copyright Note
Stamp
Electric Bowery Ltd. Retains Design Copyright
over Design Drawings & Specifications.
Contractor
Humphrey Rich Construction
10200 Old Columbia Rd.
Columbia, MD. 21406
Tel 301.349.1687
Architect / Designer
Electric Bowery, Ltd.
720 Hampton Dr.
Venice, CA 90291
Tel 310.439.1771
Engineer
Ramirez Johnson + Associates
3295 Blake St. #104
Denver, CO. 80205
Tel 720.598.0774
Client
Castle Peak Holdings
228 Park Ave South
New York, NY 10003
RE
L
E
A
S
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
NO
T
AS NOTED
A1.102
GUESTROOM PLANS -
BUILDING B
001082
10.01.21
TL
ESTES VILLAGE INN
CL/LB
3/16" = 1'-0"
GUESTROOM PLANS - LEVEL 1 - BUILDING B1
KEYNOTES (GUESTROOM PLANS - BUILDING B)
01 - (N) PARTITIONS AS SHOWN
02 - REVISED PLUMBING ROUGH-INS
03 - FIXED LADDER UP TO NEW BUNK AREA
04 - EXISTING CIRCULATION STAIR TO REMAIN
05 - EXISTING RATED DEMISING WALLS TO REMAIN
06 - (N) PLUMBING ROUGH-INS
07 - INFILL RATED CONSTRUCTION TO MATCH SURROUNDING ASSEMBLY
08 - (N) RATED DEMISING WALL
09 - (N) ALUMINIUM WINDOW IN NEW OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING
10 - (N) RATED ENTRY DOOR, FRAME & HARDWARE
11 - LOCATION ICE MACHINE
Page 43
Scale
Drawing No.
Drawn By
Checked By
Project Title
Drawing Title
Date
Project
No.
North
Landscape Architect
DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK
AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND REPORT ANY
DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
No.Revisions Date By
Copyright Note
Stamp
Electric Bowery Ltd. Retains Design Copyright
over Design Drawings & Specifications.
Contractor
Humphrey Rich Construction
10200 Old Columbia Rd.
Columbia, MD. 21406
Tel 301.349.1687
Architect / Designer
Electric Bowery, Ltd.
720 Hampton Dr.
Venice, CA 90291
Tel 310.439.1771
Engineer
Ramirez Johnson + Associates
3295 Blake St. #104
Denver, CO. 80205
Tel 720.598.0774
Client
Castle Peak Holdings
228 Park Ave South
New York, NY 10003
RE
L
E
A
S
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
NO
T
AS NOTED
Landscape Architecture & Planning
3000 Lawrence Street, #9
Denver, Colorado 80205
303.900.5820
www.studio-campo.com
Site Layout Plan
001081
ESTES VILLAGE INN
L4-01
1.25.2022
AJ
CP
0
SCALE: 1"=20'
2010 40
75
5
0
7555
755
5
755
5
7560 7560
75
6
0
7560
75
6
0
7565
7565
756
5
75
6
5
7570
7570
7570
7575
7575
7575
7575
7580
7580 7580
7580
7585
7585
7585
7585 7585
7565
757
0
75
6
0
7560
7560
7565
7570
7565 7565
7565
45
46
4
7
49
48
53
52
50
51
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
ADA
ROOM
ENTRY
11
ADA
17161514
10
ADA
VAN
LOBBY
ENTRY
LEVEL 01
FFE 7578'
LEVEL 01
FFE 7578'
LEVEL 01
FFE 7578'
18
19
STAFF
PARKING
12
DAYTIME LOADING
13
DAYTIME LOADING
Screen Type 2,
16 LF
Handrail = 37 LF
Concrete Planting Curbcut
Total in plan=5
Estimated DG Type 2
(Shard)
in curbcut planters = 200 SF
FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ROUTE
FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ROUTE
BUILDING B
BUILDING C
(OVERHEAD)
BUILDING A
BUILDING D
BUILDING E
BUILDING D
(OVERHEAD)
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
DISCOVERY
AREA
6'-0"6'-0"6'-0"
24'-6 1/2"
7'-5 5/8"
11'-0"6'-0"9'-0"
27'-2"6'-0"6'-2"
12'-7"7'-0"
39'-9 1/2"
8'-0"
24'-6"
9'-0"
Ø 12'-0"
21'-0"15'-0"
88'-3"
R 28'-0"
R 28'-0"
R 28'-0"
R 28'-0"
R 28'-0"
42'-0"
AREA
103.553 sq ft
AREA
51.149 sq ft
AREA
91.561 sq ft
AREA
335.333 sq ft
AREA
54.896 sq ft
AREA
302.845 sq ft
AREA
30.75 sq ft
AREA
183.506 sq ft
AREA
118.602 sq ft
AREA
287.929 sq ft
AREA
56.744 sq ft
AREA
25.416 sq ft
AREA
0 sq ft
AREA
0 sq ft
AREA
13.964 sq ft
AREA
592.688 sq ft
AREA
2428.71 sq ft
AREA
131.369 sq ft
AREA
480.959 sq ft
AREA
247.906 sq ft
AREA
33.213 sq ft
AREA
65.934 sq ft
AREA
50.82 sq ft
AREA
105.951 sq ft
AREA
132.238 sq ft
AREA
126.385 sq ft AREA
178.74 sq ft
AREA
154.035 sq ft
AREA
169.58 sq ft
AREA
115.776 sq ft
AREA
347.327 sq ft
AREA
135.23 sq ft
AREA
1078.761 sq ft
AREA
113.097 sq ft
AREA
23.758 sq ft AREA
23.584 sq ft
AREA
279.864 sq ft
AREA
825.943 sq ft
AREA
435.098 sq ft
AREA
1171.267 sq ft
AREA
177.791 sq ft
AREA
15.316 sq ft
AREA
104.447 sq ft
AREA
62.092 sq ft
AREA
31.012 sq ft
AREA
34.84 sq ft
AREA
41.976 sq ft
AREA
2774.41 sq ft
AREA
128.201 sq ft
Concrete Planter Curb
Total Estimated=1000 LF
Timber Curb Stops
Total in plan= 40
Existing Columns=7
Wrap existing bases
with metal base cap.
Landscape Boulders
Total in Plan=35
AREA
30.298 sq ft
3' Trellis
Modules
Total 5 Modules
in Plan
8'-0"
1. Layout and dimensions provided on Drawings are based on Architecture Building Grid and existing site features.
2. Verify utility locates, plant protection and stormwater pollution protection plan (SWPPP) measures are in place prior to commencing construction. Do not proceed with construction if not in compliance and maintained throughout.
3. Layout and verify dimensions prior to construction. Field stake all proposed improvements for review and approval by Landscape Architect unless indicated otherwise. Bring discrepancies to the attention of the Landscape Architect for final direction. Landscape Architect reserves right to make field adjustments and layout decisions in field as necessary at no additional cost to owner.
4. Request inspection of field staking by Landscape Architect a minimum of 24 hours in advance of performing any work unless indicated otherwise.
5. For dimensions of buildings, garages, trash enclosures, patios and related work, refer to the architectural drawings.
6. Written dimensions take precedence over scale. Bring discrepancies to the attention of the Landscape Architect for final direction.
7. Where dimensions are called as "equal," space referenced items equally, measured to their center lines.
8 Measurements are to face of building, wall or the fixed site improvement. Dimensions to center lines is indicated.
9. Provide expansion joints where concrete flatwork meets vertical structures such as walls, curbs, steps and building elements.
Typical Specific Measurement Guidelines:
10. All walkways shall be located X'-X” from finished face of buildings unless indicated otherwise.
11. All concrete walkways shall be X'-X" wide unless indicated otherwise.
12. Parking areas are dimensioned from face of curb unless indicated otherwise. (Note: This should typically be per Civil Engineer. Recommend deleting unless DW responsible for parking lot).
13. All lighting standards shall be set back 2'-6" clear from face of curb and (X'-X” on-center) (X'-X” from each other) (in locations as indicated) (define other parameter) unless indicated otherwise. (Note: Only provide if DW responsible for site lighting. If Lighting Designer, Electrical Engineer or Other providing design, layout, details, etc. coordinate with that consultant to ensure inclusion in their documentation).
14 Expansion joints in walkways shall be located at (30'-0") on center maximum unless indicated otherwise.
15. All radii of walkway intersections shall be X'-X" unless indicated otherwise.
16. All steps shall have 14” treads unless indicated otherwise.
17. All stairway perimeter handrails and accessible ramp handrails shall extend 12” beyond top riser, 12” beyond bottom riser, and be set 1.5” clear from edge of wall) unless indicated otherwise. Intermediate handrails shall be as indicated.
18. All accessible ramps shall be 3'-0” wide unless designated otherwise.
19. All perimeter fencing shall be installed 2' inside property line unless designated otherwise.
LAYOUT NOTES
LEGEND
Existing Concrete (To Be Repaired)
Concrete Curb
Paver (On Slab)
Asphalt Patch
Existing Asphalt
Paver (Pedestal Overlay)
Gravel/Rock Shard (Inflamable -Defensible Surface)
Pine Needle Path
Seeded Planting
Perennial Planting (Wood Mulch) (
Perennial Planting (Decomposed Granite Mulch)
Concrete
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
1
Variance Request, 1040 Big Thompson Avenue
Recommendation is for denial
Request is for increase in density for Accommodation Units
allowed in A (Accommodations) Zoning, on property 1.34
acres in size
Standard within Estes Park Development Code (EPDC)
adopted in 2000 allows 32 units Chapter 4, Table 4-5 is for 1
Unit/1800 square feet
Original Development Plan approved in 1985 for 43 units,
currently there are 46 units
14 of the 46 units considered legal, nonconforming
Applicant requests approval of variance to allow 4 additional
units, totaling 50
Applicant proposes 4 rooms within existing structure
Section 3.6.C., All applications for variances shall
demonstrate compliance with standards and criteria set forth
below
Estes Town Board of Adjustment, April 5, 2022
Page 47
NOTICE
On Tuesday, April 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., a virtual meeting will be held by the Estes
Park Board of Adjustment to consider an application for a variance for the properties
and purposes described below.
Legal Description: Lot 2, Block 1, Lake View Tracts, Estes Park
Type and Intensity of Use: Applicant requests approval of a variance to the standard
within the Estes Park Development Code, Section 4.4.C., for density of Accommodation
Units allowed. Applicant requests 50 total Accommodation Units, an increase of four
above the existing 46 units. The property is located at 1040 Big Thompson Avenue and
is in an A (Accommodations) Zoning District.
Owner: Castle Peak Holdings
Legal Description: COM AT PT 556 FT N, 1000 FT W OF SE COR 23-5-73, S 128 FT,
W 155 FT, N 128 FT, E 155 FT TPOB; ALSO COM AT PT 556 FT N, 1000 FT W OF SE
COR, N 22.93 FT, N 89 49' W 40 FT, S 63 1' W 50.5 FT, N 89 49' E TPOB
Type and Intensity of Use: Applicant requests approval of a variance to allow a reduced
setback for an undersized lot located in the E-1 (Estate/1-Acre Min.) zone district and
addressed 460 Valley Road. The purpose of the request is to support construction of an
accessory structure.
Owner/Applicant: Stan & Mary Peterson/Van Horn Engineering.
For more information, please visit www.estes.org/currentapplications or contact the
Community Development Department at planning@estes.org or 970-577-3721.
Page 48
3/29/2022 CURRENT PROJECTS
Submittal
Application Type Project Name Location
ending/
Decision
Making
Next
Proposed
Meeting Ex-Parte
Staff
2/1/2021 Annexation High Pines Subdivision 1,11 Riverside Dr TB tbd
6/3/2021 Rezone High Pines Subdivision 1,11 Riverside Dr PC/TB tbd yes
8/17/2021 Code Amendment RM-2 New zone district discussion only PC tbd
8/17/2021 Code Amendment Elimination of RE-1 zone continued from 11/16 PC/TB tbd
9/15/2021 Minor Subdivision Golden Leaf Subdivison 325 James St TB 26-Apr yes
1/6/2022 Development Plan Monopine cell tower 1650 Big Thompson staff -
1/12/2022 Development Plan Raven Rock TBD Marys Lake Rd PC 19-Apr yes
2/9/2022 Variance Request Estes Village Inn 1040 Big Thompson Aave BOA 5-Apr yes
2/16/2022 Development Plan Full Throttle Distillery/Restaurant 231 Moraine Ave staff -
2/16/2022 S1 Special Review Martischang storage facility 421 Stanely Ave TB 26-Apr yes
2/16/2022 Variance Request Peterson 460 Valley Rd BOA 5-Apr yes
2/28/2022 Address Change appeal Upper Stanley Village 453 E Wonderview TB tbd
3/1/2022 Code Amendment Neon Signs TB 12-Apr
key: PC-Planning Commission TB-Town Board BOA-Board of Adjustment TRC-Technical Review Committee
Page 49