Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2012-10-02Prepared: September 12, 2012 Revised: AGENDA ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:00 a.m. - Board Room Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 2. CONSENT Approval of minutes dated August 7, 2012 3. UNIT 19, BUILDING 3, ROCK ACRES CONDOMINIUMS, 660 MacGregor Avenue Owner: Cecilia Martin Applicant: Steve Lindberg Request: Variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E(1)(a), which requires buildings and accessory structures in the RM-Multi-Family Residential be setback a minimum of 30-feet from the defined bank of stream Request to allow a proposed deck approximately 20 feet into the stream setback. Staff Contact: Dave Shirk 4. LOT 18, AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 18, 17B, AND A PORTION OF LOT 17A, SUNNY ACRES SUBDIVISION, 481 W. Elkhorn Avenue Owner: Pat Murphy Applicant: Pat Murphy Request: Variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E.1.a(2)(b), which requires building and accessory structures in the A - Accommodations zone district be setback a minimum of 30 feet from the annual high-water mark of stream corridors, or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream. Request to allow a setback of approximately nine (9) feet in lieu of the 30-feet required to allow construction of a proposed structure to enclose new boiler. Continued on next page [Type text} 5. LOTS 17,18,19, BLOCK 5, ESTES PARK, & LOT 34, RIVERSIDE 2ND, ESTES PARK, LESS BOOK 1685 PAGE 740, 116 E. Elkhorn Avenue, (formerly known as Park Theatre Mall) and Fall River and a portion of the Town's Riverside Parking Lot. Owner: Park Theatre Mall, LLC Applicant: Estes Performance Inc. (EPIC) Request: Variance from EVDC Section 4.4, Table 4-5, which limits structure height to 30 feet above natural grade in the CD - Commercial Downtown zone district. Variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E.1.a(3), which requires all buildings in the CD -Commercial Downtown zone district be set back at least 20 feet from the annual high-water mark of stream or river corridors. Request to construct a building approximately 62 feet above the natural grade, which spans Fall River. Staff: Dave Shirk 6. LOTS 1 & 2, WITT Owner: Applicant: Request: Staff: 7. REPORTS 8. ADJOURNMENT SUBDIVISION, 900 W. Elkhorn Avenue Robert & Card Fixter Robert & Carol Fixter Variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E.1.a.(2)(b), which requires buildings and accessory structures in the A - Accommodations zone district be setback a minimum of 30 feet from the annual high-water mark of stream corridors, or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream. Variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E.2, which requires accessory structures in the A - Accommodations zone district be set back at least 50 feet from the delineated edge of a wetland. Request to allow existing recreational walkway and sitting area to remain. Alison Chilcott A meeting packet is available for review in the Community Development Department and the Estes Valley Library two business days prior to the meeting. The Estes Valley Board of Adjustment reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2012, 9:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair John Lynch, Members Bob McCreery, Wayne Newsom Jeff Moreau, and Pete Smith; Alternate Member Chris Christian Attending: Chair Lynch, Members Smith, McCreery, Newsom, and Moreau Also Attending: Planner Shirk, Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: None Chair Lynch called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. There were two people in attendance. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 2. CONSENT Approval of minutes of the July 3, 2012 meeting. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented and the motion passed unanimously. 3. METES AND BOUNDS PARCEL, 552 W. ELKHORN AVENUE Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Picnic in the Park, LLC (Rick and Angie Wing) requests a variance from the 30-foot river setback to allow an egress landing/stair and walk-in cooler; a variance from the 25-foot arterial setback to allow a trash enclosure; and a variance to allow the trash enclosure in the front yard instead of the rear as required by the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). The property is zoned CO --Commercial Outlying. The purpose of the request is to facilitate a change of use to the building. The building department has worked with the applicant to comply with the building codes and various approvals for a commercial restaurant. Planner Shirk stated the proposed use is a take-out restaurant. The concept is to make available meals for take-out, including but not limited to sandwiches, rotisserie chicken, and wood -fired pizza. The interior of the structure would also undergo changes to facilitate the restaurant use. Planner Shirk stated this was an allowed use in the CO zone district, and the conversion was not significant enough to warrant a development plan. Planner Shirk reviewed the special circumstances, stating the lot is a legal conforming lot, although extremely small. He stated the lot size of 0.03 acres was significantly undersized for this zone district, with the minimum lot size being 0.91 acres (40,000 sq ft). Planner Shirk stated it was staff's opinion that the lot size was a significant hardship. The triangular shape of the lot squeezes the building area into the middle of the lot, making it a very difficult lot to work with, and rendering the existing structure completely within the required setbacks. These factors are compounded by the arterial street setback and river setback. The proposed egress landing and stairs are required by the building code, and would be located above an existing paved area, for which a variance was granted several years ago. The proposed trash enclosure would replace an existing trash structure, which is currently located in the front yard but not fully enclosed. The new enclosure would be animal resistant, fully enclosed, include landscaping, and be located out of the river setback. The proposed walk-in cooler would be a new addition, and would be located within the required 30-foot river setback. Staff recommended the cooler be painted to match the color of the existing building. Regarding impact on the neighborhood, Planner Shirk reported there were three concerned neighbors that contacted staff. All live directly south of the proposed location. The neighbors wanted to ensure the applicant was meeting all the code requirements. Staff routed the application to all affected agencies, and no significant concerns were RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2 August 7, 2012 expressed. In this case, the Health Department was not notified. However, they were involved in the building permit process. It was staff's opinion the request to locate the walk-in cooler in the river setback or to locate the trash enclosure in the front yard setback would not have any effect on noise or air quality, and would not be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood. Planner Shirk reviewed the findings of the request, as listed in the staff report, Staff recommended approval of the variance requests with the conditions listed below. Staff and Member Discussion There was brief discussion about the noise level of walk-in coolers. Public Comment Rick and Angie W ing/applicants, explained that the dumpster was an issue from the beginning. Due to the current location, the public tends to use it as their personal dumpster. The desire was to remove the dumpster from public view to avoid this use, and to protect it from animals. The improvements to the egress landing and stairs would make this exit available to the public. They stated the walk-in cooler was a health department request. It will sit on a concrete pad and have a maximum noise level of 77 decibels. In comparison, the adjacent river had a noise level higher than 77 decibels. Randy Williams/attorney representing the properly owner stated the owner was in agreement with the variance requests and fully supported the staff recommendations. Mr. Williams stated the primary concerns from those objecting to the requests are use issues, which are allowed for this zone district. Verd Bailey/adjacent property owner objected to the variance requests, stating the main concern was the potential noise from the walk-in cooler, and he had concerns about parking on the lot. He was opposed to the type of business proposed for this building. If approved, he would appreciate having the walk-in cooler enclosed, and the west side of the building revegetated. Mr. Bailey referred to a court decision concerning self-imposed hardships, and suggested this be a consideration the Board should consider. Steve Lane/architect stated all the mechanical equipment for the cooler would be outside, and the compressor for the cooler would be on the cooler roof. There was a brief discussion between Mr. Lane and the Board concerning the required grease trap, where the sewer main was located, and if there was a stormwater drain. Public comment closed. Conditions 1. Compliance with the site plan and building design, as approved by the Board of Adjustment. 2. Setback Certificate. Prior to final inspection, a registered land surveyor shall provide to the Community Development Department a signed and stamped certificate that specifically verifies that the structure complies with the approved variance, and shall include a specific reference to the distance to property lines. Staff recommends a surveyor set survey stakes for foundation forms to ensure compliance with the approved variance. 3. Walk-in cooler shall be painted to match the color of the building. 4. Trash enclosure shall be fully enclosed with locking doors, and shall be painted to match the existing building. 5. The trash enclosure shall be screened with landscaping. At a minimum, two shrubs shall be planted on the north side of the trash enclosure and one coniferous' tree on the east side. The landscaping plan shall be subject to review and approval of staff, and shall comply with the landscaping requirements delineated in Section 7.5 of the Estes Valley Development Code. a The staff report indicated a deciduous tree, and the change was mentioned during Planner Shirk's report to the Board. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2012 It was moved and seconded (Moreau/Smith) to approve the variance request with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously. 4. REPORTS Planner Shirk reported on a variance approved approximately one year ago at 2855 Eagle Cliff Drive. The applicant wanted to build cbloser to the road due to the steepness of the lot. The site plan with the variance request included a retaining wall. After construction began, it was determine the bedrock was stable enough to not require the retaining wall; however, the Wind Cliff Homeowner's Association was opposed to the disallowance of the retaining wall. It was decided at staff level to not require the retaining wall. There being no further business, Chair Lynch adjourned the meeting at 9:55 a.m. John Lynch, Chair Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary Rock Acres River Setback Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estes.org ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING DATE: October 2, 2012 REQUEST: Variance from the Estes Valley Development Code Section 7.6.E.1.a(1) Stream Corridor Setback to allow a 9-foot setback in lieu of the 30-feet typically required. LOCATION: 660 MacGregor Avenue, Unit 19 APPLICANT: Steve Lindberg, builder PROPERTY OWNER: Cecilia Martin PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: Section 7.6.E.1.a(1) Stream Corridor Setback to allow a 9-foot setback in lieu of the 30-feet typically required. The purpose of the variance request is to allow a deck. Part of the deck would be built over an existing patio, and extend further toward the river. This is the only unit that does not have a deck. Surveyor: Van Horn Engineering (Survey work) Parcel Number: 3524321019 Existing Land Use: Multi -family residential Zoning Designation: RM Multi -Family Adjacent Zoning: East: RM Multi -Family West: E-1 Estate Adjacent Land Uses: East: Multi -family residential West: Single-family residential Services: Water: Town Development Area: 200 square feet (+1-) Proposed Land Use: Same North: A Accommodations South: CO Commercial North: Accommodations South: Undeveloped Sewer EPSD REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. "Standards for Review" of the EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. These standards are included in the Board notebooks. REFFERAL 9AMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUEE: This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. At the time of this report, no significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Neighborhood Comments. As of September 21, staff received comments from two members of the condominium association, both of which were informational in nature, and one of which included opposition to the variance, though a smaller variance could be supported (see attached emails); Condominium Association. Prior to issuance of a building permit, formal written approval from the condominium association is required. The applicant has been notified of the required letter. FINDINGS: 1, This request complies with review criteria set forth in Section 3.6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code. 2. Special circumstances exist and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with Code standards. 3. The variance is not substantial, 4. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, nor would adjoining properties suffer a substantial detriment. 5. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of public services. 6. The variance represents the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. 7. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. 8. The submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the property are not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 9. Failure 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 shall automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval conditional to: 1. Compliance with the site plan and building design, as approved by the Board of Adjustment. 2. Written approval from the condominium association shall be provided prior to work. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move APPROVAL (or disapproval) of the requested variance with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. Iw' ` Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2, 2012 Page 2 of 2 660 MacGregor Variance Request 4r mRi,ww II ""gNYIW�I IIIIIIII YAV6u Toll uVuv'i"I^;"'°,IS�II'^Y,w Igb'I du'„uo'ml^q�of"'N'Mf'dl'"PY�'IIVI,NgI'li 'N'dud^,Np"Illgdl o"II IY �o'i IVluma"'llll ulu IIIICI^I°'i m!Vlllll Ix vmumu� hwI .III w^' 'l ml I � � � w I III' I Y I I tl Q° I I � �11161 V I IL � II ��u"16'N I � III u 77 L. N u' L. M' I I"""Idl I 4 I I � u � I I I uu�r I I I � �I I I I I II uu�IIN uu� I I I L° I Q I I I I N Vru' �i I � III I III I � u L.. I I� Y Il�lllulull� III � hull II llv�' IWI� HNN ^V I�IIIIV9IIIIJIIIIY I' ulY�iluduudY��IYI�I�IYI NN R� I II III IYI�I IIIe IV ���'uml I II �ium� �� Illlllllllllh � a uuu�" �� ���ul������ uu uuuuuomum dl � IIIII�I",,,,,�� ����w ��um� ����������� ���„ �r'uupllll, 11,1 ul1p„il„ r��ll��ll� I' I � m iu I u ry� I I�� wM III"' °°ilil'ill�� Ni l VIM�NeIiVRP"' NImNN�y „,„VIhIVIu II Il lu ulllllu p LuhVIIVI p��mlh"''nimuNIIIVI W I u�pi gv lil ul l llll I �ry,NI I ^ryY� , , llUluim 11 a uulu",WII NMI IIII hill huuul 1pl „dl "u I �I YigllluWq'^ hll „Hl1d,1111 "lo'ullnoloNll ��II III„idNwV' p IIIIIII� I IIYIVIV���iYIlVllluilViinfiild � uI�I�VIP1181VIGNIIVII � h����I;II;;I;;;p,p,I����Wu�„rl;;p„ v .1111'I Ilv llllll1 IIIIlllllllllll,iillll 1 II iIj 'gill lil L � I �iiiul'iijll IIIII 1 IIIIIIIiuYIIIIIIIIVIVI'QQW�IIIIII �� O� I11111111111111111111MWNVood Ii lul.I IIiIoollioIIYlloolotovol�wIIIIII�IIII�VI�J�I�IIII�IIIIINIII��IIIiIIIIINuII 'Ij,m IY (III III IIIII ICI VIVI IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII'IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIII J�� �'I I YIIIIIViIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII (IIIII llllil Ill l u u m urro ip,� III 1 1111 m������ Mom io��n l uprv' I„ Iry^ , II N I IIII' 1�>'A mm V �lllli �dlllll1111 IIII Im Iml �YoIII IIII VIM 4� V I II � I. 4 V �� � I�ul�l�l� II III �VV rl II Y III ,II III �I pp V d I IIIIIII I IIIVuI., l I I, I I IIII ul II II II II L.II�IIIIIII.. �I I. ul II u uuuuuul III nll I II Im O V u I I (IIIIIII II�IIII II��,��,��..�����JIII III IIIII. A...... �uu Ily,l,m„IIIIIII II uul)))� u.11� IIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII„liglll. 2/2, Town of Estes Park Mail - Re: Comments on 970-577-3729: Reply thank you Dave..keep me informed. Re: Comments on 970-577-3729: Reply thank you Dave..keep me informed. JoyceSerhan@aol.com <JoyceSerhan@aol.com> Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM To: dshirk@estes.org In a message dated 9/12/2012 9:30:24 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, shi estes.o writes: Hello Ms. Sherhan- The application being processed through our office is a request to vary from the stream setback requirement of 30-feet. This requires review and approval from the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, and the meeting Is scheduled for October 2; we will forward your comments to the Board for their consideration. You are also welcome to attend the meeting to speak in person In addition to approval from the BOA, the property owner will need to obtain approval from the condominium association. The property owner, builder, and association president have all been notified of this requirement. If you have any other questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your time and consideration. -dave David W. Shirk, AICP Planner, Estes Park Community Development Department PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 www.estes.org dslhlrk@estes.org ph: 970-577-3729 fx: 970-586-0249 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:14 PM, <JoyceSerhan@aol.com> wrote: September 11, 2012 Dear Mr. Shirk: As owners, @ Rock Acres, we feel that a 20 feet patio into the stream path setback is a bit extreme. If we allow one owner 20 feet over the stream others will follow suit. limit 19 owner, begins the new planned patio from his concrete slab, from the back of his townhouse, and extends it out 10 feet he will be in line with other existing patios. Consistency is the key! We don't understand why this is being handled by your office, rather than by homeowners vote. Why did your office process and solicit the request, before it goes out to the homeowners for approval? Did unit 19 owner circumvented our Rock Acres HOA Board of Directors? Just asking! Unable to attend last meeting, therefore not informed of any approvals or disapprovals on this issue. s:0,small..googie.00m/mall/?ul=2&Ik=6e02499adc&v iew=pt8seardh=Inbox&th=139bb6d6e8e-e54dB ,12/12 Town of Estes Park Mail - Re: Comments on 970-577-3729: Reply thank you Dave..keep me Informed. If you are looking for a vote of yes or no, our answer is po on 20 feet, but a yes for 10 feet. Thanking you in advance for contacting us on this matter. Respectfully, Unit 14 Owner - Rock Acres David W. Shirk, AICP Planner, Estes Park Community Devolopment Department PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 www.estes.org dshirk@estes.org ph: 970-577-3729 fx. 970 .. -4249 ape://mall.google.00m/mail/7uI=2&lk=6ed2499adc&view =pt&search=lnbox&th=139bb6dbe8ee54d8 Town of Estes Park Mall - Approv E 'a 17 P P. A q. edc Addition to Unit 19 Rock Acres • Cedlia Martin Approval of Deck Addition to Unit 19 Rock Acres - Cecilia Martin gayleconsulting@aol.com <gayleconsulting@aol.com> To: achilcott@estes.org Cc: dramtngal©msn.com, lindbergep@aol.com Alison, Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:31 AM I am the President of the Rock Acres I Homeowners Association and will be working on getting the Association approval for the deck addition to Unit 19. Dallas Armstrong is the complex manager and she is authorized to represent the association as well. At this point, the Board has given informal approval and we will be completing our process quickly so you have all the information needed to go forward. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 719-244-6900. Gayle White President Rock Acres Homeowners Association Alison Chllcott <achilcott@estes.org> To: gayleconsulting@aol.com Cc: Dare Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Thank you. I have copied Dare Shirk so he is aware too and will print a copy of this email for our files. We also received a site plan for the proposed deck from Van Hom Engineering.. [Quoted text bidden] rs://mail.google.com/maiW/Of?ul=2&ik-5bb48m637&v Iew =pt&search=Iinbox&th=l394a0628523a7d7 Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:40 PM ESTES PAR Inter -Office Memorandum To: Community Development From: Jeff Boles, Cliff Tedder, Steve Rusch Date: 09/18/2012 Re: Final/Public Review: Martin Residence Variance Request, 660 MacGregor Avenue The Water Department has no Final/Public Review comments for the above application. July 25, 2012 JUL ' 2012 COMMUNRY DEVELOPMENT Estes Valley Board of Adjustment A variance s requested in order to construct a new deck at 660 MacGregor Avenue at Unit 19 of Building #3. The deck is too close to the Black Canyon Creek. Current Residential Code requires a 30-foot setback from the creek for existing structures... We estimate the new deck would be about 10 feet from the creek edge. The owner, Cecilia Martin, would like to have a deck on the creek side of her townhouse. All four of her neighbors in the Building #3 complex have existing decks along the creek. These decks are also very close to the creek. The condo association does not have a problem with her having a similar deck. The plans for Cecilia's proposed deck call for slightly greater distance from the creek as determined by a line drawn between the outermost points of the Unit 18 and 20 decks. Steven E. Lindberg on behalf of Ceciliartin Estes Park Business License #761. Larimer County Contractor License CL0073. 970-215-9428 PO Box 2654 Estes Park, CO 80517 Submittal Date: ia,:.ud�:h Il,eru;ld�d I Record Owner(s): Street Address of Lot: Legal Description, Subdivision: Parcel ID # : ludtu';ppr'dr.!Ipi,r,ly Lot Size Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use Existing Water Service 7 Town Proposed Water Service Pfi Town Existing Sanitary Sewer Service Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service Existing Gas Service ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION Zoning Well ''.III Other (Specify) r Well 'ill - Other (Specify) EPSD I UTSD EPSD III"" UTSD Other r None Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? �Yes ariance Desired (Development Code Section #): % l °roirrlr ri / 1.,¢dioDilr-dDILO .Dm@ Name of Primary Contact Person Complete Mailing Address Primer Contact Person is r Owner L` AIIicant r" Consultant/En ineer Application fee (see attached fee schedule) Statement of intent (must comply with standards set forth in Section 3,6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code) 1 copy (folded) of site plan (drawn at a scale of 1" = 20') ** 1 reduced copy of the site plan (11" X 17") ** The site plan shall include information in Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B.VI1.5 (attached). The applicant will be required to provide additional copies of the site plan after staff review (see the attached Board of Adjustment variance application schedule). Copies must be folded. 'Town of Estes PorkP.O. Box 1200.4, 170 MacGregor Avenue.e. Estes Park. CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 .e. Fax: (970) 586.0249 .e. www.estes.org/ComDev Revised 1 i /2utr w, bbbb..tbbb b• ':'"•.'• • -...b.••••••••••••••...b-b.b.'''..b:b.b.--- • APPLICATION FEES For variance applications within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at, .111 Ali requests for refunds must be made in writing, Ali fees are due at the time of submittal. Revked 1 /20/09' 410, APPLICANT CERTIFICATION ► 1 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. ► 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 Valley Development Code (EVDC). ► I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, 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 Vallley Development Code is available online at: ► 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 EVDC. ► 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. ► I understand that a resubmittal fee will 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 Valley 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. ► I understand that I am required to obtain a "Variance Notice" 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 than ten (10) business days prior to the Estes Valley 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 Valley Development Code Section 3.6.D) Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT Applicant PLEASE PRINT Signatures: Record Owner Applica Date Date n,.,,dw 1 a ,enn more restrictive standard than found in another applicable ordinance, statute or regulation, this Section shall apply. 2. No person shall engage in any activity that will disturb, remove, drain, fill, dredge, clear, destroy or alter any area, including vegetation, within a wetland that falls in the jurisdiction of the federal government and its agencies, except as may be expressly allowed under applicable federal laws or regulations. (Ord. 8-05 #1) D. Boundary Delineation. 1. Qualified Professional Stream/river corridor and wetland area delineation shall be performed by a qualified professional that has demonstrated experience necessary to conduct site analysis. Delineations shall be subject to Staffs approval. 2. Stream and River Corridor Boundaries. Stream and river corridors shall be delineated at the annual high-water mark, or if not readily discernible, the defined bank of the stream or river, as those terms are defined in Chapter 13 of this Code. Regulated stream and river corridors shall include only those streams and rivers as identified on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map found in Appendix A. The rivers delineated on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map are the Big Thompson and Fall River. Streams delineated on the Map include various named and unnamed streams and minor drainages, some of which are intermittent. (Ord. 2-02 #5) 3. Wetland Boundaries. a. Mapped Wetlands. Boundary delineation of wetlands shall be established by reference to one (1) of the following wetland maps and identification documents, which are available for reference in the Town of Estes Park Community Development Department and which are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this Code: (1) National Wetlands Inventory prepared by the U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; and (2) Colorado Natural Heritage Program maps. b. Unmanned Wetlands. The review of a development proposal may discover a potential wetland that has not been mapped or for which the boundaries have not been clearly established, In such instances, the Applicant shall retain a qualified wetland expert to delineate the boundaries of the wetland according to accepted professional standards. E. BufferlSetback Areas. 1. Stream or River Corridors. a. Building/Structure Setbacks. (1) Stream Corridors (except in the CD zoning district). All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annuals high-water mark of stream corridors, or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. See Figure 7-10. (Ord. 2-02 #5) 7.32 Variance APO 1 N r1 N M 1-i 0 n Cr .-1 0 N N I-4 1/40 0 M N 1` 00 . ti N N N N 11) 0 u7 V) V) CO 0 000 V1 U V) Vl LQ/) O N .�-� N N l0 V1 N N u0 0 0 0 0 o a 0o O O 0 N o0 0o O o0 00 o O oo to O o O M 00 CO CO 00 CO 00 tO 00 CO 00 in CO 1.13 CO (.o $.o CO 00 CO CO 03 CO CO u1 < 0 0 0 0 0 o Z o 0 o a z z O z z o o Z Z o 0 0 .0 y a LE° .w- ac0_aTi O- C C 0 N o N u a) O ▪ 0) U H 0• .e I- • W CO • CLI J W {} 0) 0 ) c 0 114 Seminole Dr Robert McDonald 6882 E Baker PI Kristin Whitten 179 Metcalf Ln a) 0 I/) c c c .se 0) O m�y N C{ a a) 110 o • E G up c n > > N ain # v v) 4., 0 o°0 -0 0 ai v. m "' a o Z (0 M cmE (0 m M r-I '-1 V cr M W N O 0 0 I. T M 1� 0 N 0 0 .-1 in -1 M r-i 0 OS N M t0 M O V1 1-1 00 N t0 V1 CO -* ri N Westminster t I- 0 • c C a C C a ▪ o o o 0 0 0 ro c c v C C= t a J ;.7 W =, a Q uJ Cynthia Koiiski Lori Zimmerman Sloan Investments, LLC Larry & Sherrill Duckro Brian & Louise Desmond 6801 S 27th St 3100 S 30th St PO Box 152 F & KA Clauson 7225 Carmen Dr PO Box 4226 17588 E Dickinson PI Margaret Hauser ro .c ro E 0 James & Elizabeth Sulhoff Shawnee Mission 8919 Linden Ln a O -NC CP t. O N a 0 ris tn 0) aa'' L -I .9 w 1240 S Ward Ct 0 10 > cD 0) 0- Tv c • C Q C 6 10 O M O v a' c E • o 2569 53rd Ave Russell & Sandra Anson PO Box 20576 1919 N Summit Ave Martin Residence Variance APO 11/12: Town of Estes Park Mall - Fwd: Unit 19: Reply Fwd: Unit 19: Reply JoyceSerhan@aol.com <JoyceSerhan@aol.com> To: dshirk@estes.org From: JoyceSerhan@aol.com Sent: 9/25/2012 4:28:04 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time Subj: Unit 19: Reply Rock Acres River Setback Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax 970-586-0249 www.estes.org ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT METING IATE: Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:30 PM October 2, 2012 - Unable to attend this meeting. My response below. ftfigalljEja: Variance from the Estes Valley Development Code Section 7.6.E.1.a(1) Stream Corridor Setback to allow a 9-foot setback in lieu of the 30-feet typically required. LOCATION: 660 MacGregor Avenue, Unit 19 APPLICANT: Steve Lindberg, builder PROPERTY OWNER: Cecilia Martin PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: Section 7.6.E.1.a(1) Stream Corridor Ips://mal .google.com/mallitul=2tklk=6ed2499addmiew=ptiltsearch.inbox8dh=139ffc44b140e678 7/12 Town of Estes Park Mall - Fwdf. Unit 19; Reply Setback to allow a 9-foot setback in lieu of the 30-feet typically required. The purpose of the variance request is to allow a deck. Part of the deck would be built over an existing patio, and extend further toward the river. This is the only unit that does not have a deck. Surveyor: Van Horn Engineering (Survey work) Parcel Number: 3524321019 Development Area: 200 square feet (+1-) Existing Land Use: Multi -family residential Proposed Land Use: Same Zoning Designation: RM Multi -Family Adjacent Zoning: East: RM Multi -Family North'. A Accommodations West: E-1 Estate South: CO Commercial Adjacent Land Uses: East: Ivillii-familyresidential North: Accommodations West, Single-family residential South: Undeveloped Services: Water: Town 1 Sewer: EPSD BEVWWL 1 1TF1 I4: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. "Standards for Review" of the EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable September 25, 2012 Dear Estes Valley Board of Adjustment: First, thank you for the update on the deck request from Unit 19. There are some details that 1 would like to review, before I can honestly agree to this request. My concerns are as follows: 1. I would like to see a copy of the site Blueprint design of the proposed 200 ft.deck, What type of wood, a natural color, stain or paint? 2. I would support a valiance less than 10 feet from the water stream. 3. Will other residence be able to gain access, and cross over the deck, from the back of the units, without causing W W W 3? I am not in agreement to building a fence behind unit 19, to keep traffic fromcrossi ng. Believe me owners guests, and fanilies will be walking behind your unit. 4. Last, but not least an approval letter from all the Condominium owners, agreeing to this proposed deck. I don't know who stated that all units have patios; I do not have a patio behind my unit. I don't believe it's unfair, not having a deck behind your unit, it's a cost choice. These are my concerns an opinions, if all the owners are in agreement, I have no problemwith the proposed (9 ) foot variance from the stream to beautify and enhance unit 19. ps://mail.google.com/maH lui=28Jk=6ed2499adc&v lew=pt&seardr=inbox&tha 139ffct4b140e678 R S 1—' 8 3 gnu.MARTIN i 5 SITE PLAN vAN, l In MID SURYEYINo • .A% 70 xsaioi ui[ ncxsor� Bi' 19 ROCK ACRES CONDOMINIUMS uu" Murphy's River Lodge Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estes.org ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING DATE: October 2 2012 REQUEST: Variance from the required 30-foot river setback to allow a setback of 5.6- feet for construction of a 4' x 7' mechanical shed. This application also requires a side yard setback variance of 6-feet instead of the 15-feet typically required. LOCATION: 481 W. Elkhorn Avenue (Murphy's River Lodge, formerly American Wilderness Lodge) APPLICANT: Pat Murphy (owner) PROPERTY OWNER: Murphy's River Lodge PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The applicant requests a variance to Estes Valley Development Code Section 7.6.E.1,a(2)(b) regarding river setbacks to allow a river setback of 5.6-feet in lieu of the 30-foot setback required, and a variance to Table 4-5 to allow a side yard setback of 6-feet instead of the 15-feet typically required. The purpose of the variance request is to allow an attached 4`x7' mechanical shed for a new boiler to replace the original boiler. The new addition would be located in the northeast corner of the lot, and would be attached to the existing structure. The existing boiler is difficult to access, and the owner's contractor, Tony Schaffo with Associated Real Estate Services, suggests the new boiler be located so it is more accessible. The Utilities Department has agreed to allow the new structure be located in an electric easement, though any lines relocated in association with this construction must be at the owner's expense. The Utilities Department noted the deck to the west is located in the easement, is considered non -conforming, and cannot be rebuilt in the future; this should be noted on the building site plan. Special circumstances exist: 1. The existing structure was granted a variance with original construction, which means any addition requires a variance. 2. The river setback was increased from 8-feet to 30-feet with the adoption of the Estes Valley Development Code. Approval of the variance would not nullify the purpose and intent of the river setback requirement, which is intended to preserve wildlife riparian habitat and ensure functional drainage. Approval of the original variance and construction of the river wall diminished the quality of wildlife habitat and removed any fringe wetlands or hydrologic benefits. Engineer/Surveyor/Consultant: Van Horn Engineering (survey work) Parcel Number: 3525252018 Development Area: 50 square feet Existing Land Use: Accommodations Proposed Land Use: Same Zoning Designation: A Accommodations Adjacent Zoning: East: CO Commercial Outlying North: CO Commercial Outlying (PUD Plan) West: CO Commercial Outlying (PUD Plan) South: RE-1 Rural Estate Adjacent Land Uses: East: Commercial North: Accommodations West: Accommodations South: Single-family residential Services: Water: Town of Estes Park Sewer: Estes Park Sanitation District REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. "Standards for Review" of the EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. These standards are included in the Board notebooks REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. At the time of this report, no significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. FINDINGS: 1. This request complies with review criteria set forth in Section 3.6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code. 2. Special circumstances exist and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with Code standards. 3. The variance is not substantial. 4. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, nor would adjoining properties suffer a substantial detriment. 5. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of public services. The Utilities Department has approved this slight encroachment into an overhead electric easement. 6. The variance represents the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. 1! Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2 2012 Murphy's River Lodge Variance Request Page 2 of 3 7. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. 8. The submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the property are not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 9. Failure 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 shall automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void. 10. Approval of this variance will not supersede any required floodplain development permits. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval conditional to: 1. Compliance with the site plan and building design, as approved by the Board of Adjustment. 2. The site plan shall note the deck encroaches into the electric easement and is nonconforming and cannot be rebuilt. 3. Any relocation of electric lines shall be at the owner's expense. 4. Any disturbed areas shall be successfully revegetated within one growing season. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move APPROVAL (or disapproval) of the requested variance with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, O U Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2 2012 1�'ii Murphy's River Lodge Variance Request Page 3 of 3 ',IY" 'Wvmonnlll11lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll111011l 111111111111111111111111111111111 ''6, °.wu llM111,1llll',111I111IR1.IIII1J 'I�IIu dlm..,nitiuM61111�MM1�41'Id'n'll,l"�'MV III .. 11100011111,1,Q11111'1141000000000000000000000000000000V11111111111111 IIIIIIIMMNI 1 uII 1111IMMMIN 1414141141414141411414114114141111. 11111 mmr 1.10,1I10 NW? of IWf mlm toirovvprawaval III0..I IIII�uuuuumuuuuulN IIli11111 mRRRRYII RRRRR'RRRRR'IMII IIIIIIIII 11111111111 mil uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuillililm" J41111 opo oloIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II II II ill II dl "�Illlli ull 1119' 1'i IVII'I 'II', 1 III"' ° I III III°'0I'l � I�iB' dull I I �i 4 I Ili IJuI ill i ill 11i II II i"I° �I u�lll' I'u Ilii wl Sul I �Illlluulnl l .V I I� olll��_uVdl L14,IVII wil I IIIII �IdN 91VL�ull�l�ll. 0 b,4 10/.1i064044e. volc 11111 11111111111111111111111111 11 1,111111 ,w,,,N11,, Pt nu 1111111111111111111 1'1'1'11111111 11:;:, $11 1V1111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111 111111 1,1111111111111,11111111111IIIII ,111111111111111AA E ?""IliK,,,,„,.9 4.' 2. I .b f A a tiL 1- of zI 0, U-1 E5I- 0 g 1 ...z. 0 v, co moc.sox 17/ 011 1"'ll'I''111'1111111.1"11111:1'1111'11111111.1111;1111111111111111111.1111.1.1likiirl".11"11°111111'111,1,',I.,111' 11 1111111.111111 1111111111111111,11rAIA mu 1 1. I 11111111111111111'111111'11111111.111111111111111,1111111111,11111111111111111111111,ritli.iiillii.pil 111111111111111111111111 I 11 1 1111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 '111 11 1 1 "11111111111111111111 iY611,1111111111111.11.1111 1111111I1111111111v1111111111111111 1111111111111111111 111 11111111111, 1111111111111111 ,,, 111 '111111111111,1111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111' 11111 II1,11111111111110i.oiyIIII 101. Hil.:111.1111,11,11111,1111111111111111olov 11111"111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111101 1,..,11111.11,11111.111,11ffimmil MURPHY Seeptember 6, 2012 Statement of Intent fio We would like to build an approximate 5x5 shed to store a new boiler. The current boiler is in poor condition and we would like to replace it with a new one. We would like to avoid heating problems in the Winter. The old boiler is located in a pit in the crawl space. My contractor Tony with Associated Real Estate Services recommends that a new boiler be installed outside the building in the new 5x5 structure so it will be up to code an more readily accessible. Thank you for your consideration. Pat Murphy Owner Murphy's River Lodge P.3 MURPHY ARSI Lot Mae Existing Lend Use Proposed Lend Use _ .W Etdsdng Weber Service 1 Town Proposed Water Service r Town Existing Sanitary Sewer $etvlce Proposed 4anitary Sewer Service Exf8I n® Gas 8endoe Fc xeel S ka Access ;If not on public street) Are there wetland* on the te? ESTES VALLEY BOARD OP ADJUSTMENT APPUCATION to le r Weil r Other (Specify) Well r Other(spedty) EPBD f UT$o r ENID r ulso r- Other r None ante Desired (Development Code Section a): Name of Primary Contact Person Complete Meiling Address Prnnal Contact Person is r Application fee (see attached fee schedule) ✓ Statement of intent (must comply with standards est forth In Section 3.6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code) ✓ 1 copy (folded) of site plan (drawn et s ,ate of 1 " = 20') ✓ 1 reduced copy of the site plan (11" X 1T") • The Rite plan she i Include intonation ,n Estes Valley Deve:epment Code Appendix B_V 1.5 (attached). he applicant win be requited to provide additional copies of the site plan after staff review .see the attached Board of Adjustment vedenoe application schedule). Copies must bs folded p.1 p.1 Town or Rstes Pork., P.O. Box 12004 17DMocGreeor Asrews w tip Pais. CC 80E17 Community Devstopm n, Clpprttneef Phone: f97Q1577-37Z M ♦ vox [P70) 586-024➢ -a www estes.oror—airOos Revised i}/Rsp MURPHY ARSI Coneolta ffEngtneer Miffing Address_ Phone, Cal Phone Fax IOW 303 469 14710417-8109 p.2 p.2 APPLICATION PEEK Pore variance epalicationo within the Estee Valley Planning Area, both Inside and outside Town limns See the fee schedule included ii your application packet or view the fee schedule online at: htlo:llwww.natea.aYNConlpeviSohedutea&FardPlannlnctAoalfcationFeeBchodule.od f All requests for refunds met be made in writing. AN fees ars due atolls lime of submittal. Ravbsd 11/2210P General Development Standards § 7.0 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection Figure 7-10 (2) River Corridors (except in the CD district). (a) General Rule. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. (b) Exception for Lots Developed Prior to the Adoption of this Code. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. See Figure 7-10. (Ord. 2-02 #5) (3) Stream and River Corridors in the CD Zoning District. In the CD district, all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream or river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream or river. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. Where a principal building in the CD district provides public access, Including a primary entrance, on the side of the building facing a stream or river corridor, the setback may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the approval of the Decision -Making Body, (Ord. 2-02 #5) Murphys River Lodge Variance APO .-1 03 tf? N m u) a N M 0 H en.-1 iq O O O O p 0 oO co m co CO N. 1- 0 0 < 0 0 S 0 c 4 c an d L 1 f0 C VPw 0 Z' 1 0> ++ v—i 0 w 'u CO J Q to (.) Z N CLI Q V w c 3 0 01 c 0 10047 Allison Ct 1015 Crabapple Dr Comanche Forks, LLC N y c D ce a m L .c u ea CD a u1 N ull N PO Box 637 N u J J 4) Qi c 7 E E a u a+ ao ro 4 iu it m 1023 Cadiz St Mary Marecek Charles & Laura Chamberlain e Variance APO Murphys River Town of Estes Park Mall - y's River Lodge north line Improvements Murphy's River Lodge north line improvements Reuben Bergsten <rergsten@estes.org> To: Amy Plummer <amyvhe@airbits.com> Cc: Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org>, Patmurphyrealtor <patmurphyrealtor@aol.com>, Todd Steichen <tteichen@estes.org>, Joe Lockhart <pockhart@estes.org> Amy, Thanks for expanding the drawing, it look great. Light and Power approves the encroachment for the boiler with one reservation: the plat must note that the encroachment of the deck on the west side was not approved and in the future rnust not be replaced when the deck is removed. Reuben [Quoted text hidden] Regards, Reuben Bergsten, Utilities Director Ph: 7 3 is it the truth? la it fair to alf concerned? 14411 it build goodwill and better friendships? 14411 it be beneficial to all concerned? tps://mall.google.com/malV?ui=28.1k=6ed2499adc&view=pt&sear h=inbax&msg=139e18a1b65e2333 Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:38 PM 9 UOL -60 31Y0 dio NONLIO C1-60-010Z 014 Toad .0t „l 31VOS 1.,11 10102-66g OL6 N0A - 9006-9K 0L6 L 1.606 03 11.10d 6903 - 130%1 480.13 4s;4 I, V 04d z Z D 0 n co 0 5 F- - OD C) °C) < 0 F- 0 Z z ° --J U- LL C) LJ c) (3 CD IL LL: LJ 0 L6 a < CL < F-- 4 11 V) F- LJ V) La V) Z Ld01y W 4 W < Estes Performance, Inc. Variance Request Maximum building height and river setback Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estes.org ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING DATE: October 2, 2012 REQUESTS: (1) Allow construction of a performing arts center with a maximum height of approximately 62-feet instead of the 30-foot maximum allowed; and (2) Allow an atrium to span the Fall River instead of the required 20-foot setback. LOCATION: Former Park Theater Mall site. the Riverside Parking lot. 116 E. Elkhorn Avenue and APPLICANT: Estes Performance Incorporated (EPIC) PROPERTY OWNER: Park Theater Mail LLC; Town of Estes Park a portion of PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The applicant requests variances to Section 4.4.C4 (height) and Section 7.6.E (river setback) to allow the construction of a performing arts center. This arts center would be located in the downtown commercial area,and would include: (1) A state-of-the-art 760 seat performing arts theater, with associated spaces such as box- office, lobby„ 'green room', dressing rooms, and stage shop; (2) Commercial and office space; and, (3) An enclosed atrium that would span the Fall River. View from Moraine & Elkhorn Intersection The art center would be built where the Park Theater Mall was located prior to its destruction by fire in October 2009. The theater would also extend into the existing Riverside Parking lot, eliminating approximately twenty existing parking spaces. Please refer to attached drawings for site plan, flooplan, and building elevation details. Architect: Thorp Associates (Roger Thorp) Parcel Numbers: 3525120017 (north side of river); 3525122034 (south side of river); 3525122933 (Riverside Parking lot); and a portion of the Fall River (ownership verification pending) Existing Land Use: Undeveloped (former Park Theater Mali); public parking Zoning Designation: CD Commercial Downtown Adjacent Zoning: East: CD Commercial Downtown West: CD Commercial Downtown Adjacent Land Uses: East: Retail; public parking West: Retail Services: Development Area:.622 acres Proposed Land Use: Performing arts center (theater) on south side of river; retail/restaurant/office on north side of river North: CD Commercial Downtown Water: Town of Estes Park (will probably require main extension down Rockwell Street South: CD Commercial Downtown North: Retail South: utility (phone company); public parking Sewer: Estes Park Sanitation District Review Process: The applicant has decided to apply for the height and river setback variances as the first step in obtaining necessary land use approvals to build the center. The Board of Adjustment is responsible only for the height and setback variances requests. The Planning Commission and Town Board will review the overall development plan as a Special Review. The use is classified as an 'Entertainment Event, Major (Indoor Facility)'. Examples of indoor event facilities include stadiums, sports arena, coliseums, and auditoriums. This use is allowed as a Special Review in the CD Commercial Downtown district. Due to the traffic generated by a theater, this use requires submittal of a traffic impact study that sets forth mitigation measures to eliminate or substantially reduce such impacts. This traffic study will be submitted and reviewed with the Special Review. Special Review allows the Town Board final approval of the application, and requires the use demonstrate compliance with applicable criteria of the development code, and that the application 'mitigates, to the maximum extent feasible, potential adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and services, and the environment.' Estes Valley Board of Adjustment October 2, 2012 Estes Performance, Inc. Variance Request Page 2 of 7 Because there are additional review processes to follow should the Board of Adjustment approve the requested variances, Staff recommends that changes to the building design should not be brought back to the Board of Adjustment unless they result in additional variances. For example, Section 4.4.0.2 of the development code states `to the maximum extent feasible, each principal structure on a site shall avoid long flat or blank walls that face a public street.' This may require design changes as the review process moves forward, and revisions should consider community design standards outlined in the comprehensive plan. As noted above, the Board of Adjustment is responsible only for the height and setback variances requests. Building Height: The first variance request is to vary from the maximum allowed height of 33-feet (adjusted for slope). The height variance being requested is for the auditorium 'fly -area' above the stage, the balcony, and the adjacent atrium. The fly -area above the stage is the area where stage backdrops are raised above the stage when not in use and for quick changes of stage scenery between acts, and is where stage lighting is rigged. This by its nature requires a tall structure, more than twice the height of the stage. River Setback: The second variance request is to waive the required 20-foot river setback to allow the atrium to span the Fall River. Floodplain development will require a floodplain permit. This floodplain permit would be issued by the Chief Building Official, who serves as the Town's floodplain manager. This permit would be coordinated with required Federal approvals such as a 'Letter of Map Revision' (FEMA) and a '404 Permit' from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Prior to issuance of any permits, the property owner will need to provide verification of river ownership (the plat that created the lots did not address river ownership). REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. "Standards for Review" of the EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. Please refer to the Statement of Intent for the Applicant's comments regarding the review standards. 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 Valley.,u, �.,,.�....... _��..,,.�....�,�, Board of Adjustment, October 2, 2012 Estes Performance, Inc. Variance Request Page 3 of 7 Staff Finding (Height): The examples for special circumstances listed above relate to the typical variance request for property line setbacks. These are examples, and the list is not exhaustive. Staff finds that the proposed use — a theater — is a special circumstance. Auditoriums require a structure taller than 30-feet in order to accommodate the fly - area above the stage. Because auditoriums by their nature are taller than 30-feet, staff finds the approval of such variance would not nullify the purpose and intent of the development code. Staff Finding (River Setback): The 20-foot downtown river setback may be reduced to 10- feet by the Decision -Making Body (Town Board) if primary entrance is provided on the riverwalk. The intent of allowing the reduced setback in the downtown area is to facilitate pedestrian oriented development and use of the Riverwalk. Because the applicant desires t0 incOrpOrate the View Wwest along Rive velk from confluence Park riverwalk into the building design, staff finds the approval of such variance would not nulllify the purpose of the downtown river setback as long an easement is granted to provide for public access through the riverwalk area. (?','�''a..,. 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: The property could be put to beneficial use. However, the proposed use could not be located anywhere without a height variance, b. Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Finding: The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variances are substantial. Staff finds they are not, due to the nature of the proposed use. Estes Valley Estes Performance, Inc. Adjustment, 2, 2012 Page 4of7 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 finds the urban character of the neighborhood would be enhanced by the proposed use. Chapter Six of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan outlines several community -wide policies, addressing issues such as land use, community design, mobility and circulation, and economics. Some policies that apply to this proposed use include: Vlew Notllnresl from Rockwell/Riverside Intersection • Encourage existing and future community commercial uses to locate within a compact, well defined downtown business district. • Encourage the concentration of cultural uses and activities in the downtown business district. • Provide a pedestrian -friendly downtown environment which provides for pedestrian movement, areas for relaxing, gathering and window shopping. • Encourage outdoor public spaces, including spaces for outdoor gathering, dining, nature and people watching, • Sustain and support the existing tourism industry and marketing programs. • Establish the basis for a sound tourism market and sustainable economic climate. • The natural colors of wood and stone are most desirable for building exteriors • Facades should be broken up with windows, doors or other architectural features to provide visual relief. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer; Staff Finding: No utility providers have expressed significant concerns regarding this application. The applicant should be aware there are numerous utility service lines in the area that will need to be relocated at the applicant's expense. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; and Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Estes Performance, Inc. Variance Request Staff Findings: The property was donated with intent to build a performing arts center. f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: The proposed auditorium and atrium could not be built without the requested variances. 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: Staff finds the required Special Review supersedes formulation of a general regulation regarding theaters. 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 Tots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations. Staff Finding: N/A 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding: The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variances represent the least deviation that will afford relief. 6. Under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of this Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. Staff Finding: The proposed uses are allowed. 7. 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 has included possible conditions of approval below. The Board should use their best judgment if those conditions satisfy this requirement. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. At the time of this report, no significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment„ October 2, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Estes Performance, inc. Variance Request Public Comment. As of September 27, staff had not received any comments or inquiries from the public. FINDINGS: 1. This request complies with review criteria set forth in Section 3.6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code. 2. Because additional review processes will follow, the Board of Adjustment finds that amendments to the site and building design that result from the Special Review process shall not require additional Board of Adjustment review. 3. Special circumstances exist and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with Code standards. 4. The variances are not substantial. 5. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, nor would adjoining properties suffer a substantial detriment. 6. The variances would not adversely affect the delivery of public services. 7. The variances represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. 8. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. 9. The submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the property are not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 10. Failure 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 shall automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval conditional to: 1. Compliance with the site plan and building design, as approved by the Board of Adjustment, unless building design is modified during the Special Review review process. 2. Height Certificates shall be required at the foundation and framing inspections (standard for buildings over 25-feet tall; must be prepared by a registered land surveyor, and requires survey control point be established prior to site work). 3. Recording of a public access easement for the riverwalk, with the location to be determined with the Special Review. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move APPROVAL (or disapproval) of the requested variance(s) with the findings and conditions recommended by staff 11 Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2, 2012 " Estes Performance, Inc. Variance Request Page 7 of 7 7/12 Town of Estes Park Mall - 116 E. Elkhorn In x lYUV 11' A 116 E. Elkhorn Hice-Idler, Gloria <Gloria.Nice-Idler@dot.state.co.us> Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:36 PM To: "dshirk@estes.org" <dshirk@estes.org> CDOT has no comment regarding this proposal. Gloria Hice-idler Region 4 Permit Manager 1420 2^d Street Greeley, CO 80631 (970)350.2148 s://mae.google.com/mail/7u1=2&lk..6ed2499adc&v iew =pt&search=inbox8:th=139d5bb5dde9c8a3 '12/12 Towh of Estes Park Mall - Fwd: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT — 116 E Elkhom - EPIC Height Variance FIN... Fwd: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT --116 E Elkhorn - EPIC Height Variance FINAL REVIEW (UNCLASSIFIED) Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:30 AM To: Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Forwarded message From: McKee, Terry A NWO <Teny.A,McKee@usace.army.mil> Date: Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM Subject: RE: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT —116 E Elkhom - EPIC Height Variance FINAL REVIEW (UNCLASSIFIED) To: Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Karen, My office is aware of this project. After we finish the coordination with SHPO we will permit the work at this site under a Department of the Army nationwide permit No. 3 for the replacement of building abutments in Fall River. The Corps file No. for this project is NWO-2012-1858-DEN. Terry McKee Corps of Engineers 303-979.4120 ---Original Message -- From: Karen Thompson [mailto:ktho pson estes.o ] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 3:14 PM To: 01 Greg White; 02 Frank Lancaster; 04 Scott Zurn; 05 Kevin Ash; 06 Jen Imber; 07 Susie Parker; 08 Jeff Boles; 09 Reuben Bergsten; 10 Todd Steichen; 11 Will Birchfield; 12 Tim Spears; 13 Eric Rose; 14 Skyler Rorabaugh; 15 Derek Fortini; 31 Gloria Hice-idler, 42 Chris Bieker; 43 Todd Krula; 44 Melissa Dueil; 41 Jim Duell; robert.g.haas; McKee, Terry A NWO; 51 Alpine Anglers - Trout Unlimited Subject: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT-116 E Elkhom - EPIC Height Variance FINAL REVIEW REFERRAL FOR COMMENT FINAL/PUBLIC REVIEW This email is to notify you that Planning staff has accepted the variance application listed below as complete and scheduled it for review. Project Address: 116 E. Elkhom Avenue (former Park Theatre Mall) - Lots 17,18,19, Block 5, Estes Park; tps://mail.google.com/mall%Ni=2AIka6ed2499adc&v iew=pt&search=inbox&th=139bb1b114a2ff82 Inter -Office Memorandum To: Community Development From: Jeff Boles, Cliff Tedder and Steve Rusch Date: 09/18/2012 Re: Final/Public Review: Variance Request, Estes Performance Inc. (EPIC), 116 E. Elkhorn Avenue The Water Department has no Final/Public Review comments for the above application. '11/12 Town of Estes Park Mail - Fwd: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT — 116 E Elkhorn - EPIC Height Variance FIN — nu. Fwd: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT -- 116 E Elkhorn - EPIC Height Variance FINAL REVIEW Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:09 PM To: Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Forwarded message From: Todd Stelchen <tsteichen@estes.org> Date: Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:45 AM Subject: Re: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT — 116 E Elkhorn - EPIC Height Variance FINAL REVIEW To: Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Cc: 01 Greg White <greg@gawhite.com>, 02 Frank Lancaster <1Iancaster@estes.org>, 04 Scott Zum <szum@estes.org>, 05 Kevin Ash <kash@estes.org>, 06 Jen Imber <jimbe ..estes.org>, 07 Susie Parker <sparker@estes.org>, 08 Jeff Boles <jboles@estes,org>, 09 Reuben Bergsten <rbergsten@estes.org>, 11 Will Birchfield <wbirchfield@estes.org>, 12 Tim Spears <spears er-stes.org>, 13 Eric Rose <e • e@estes.org>, 14 Skyler Rorabaugh <skyler@e • ..conn>, 15 Derek Fortini <dfortini@estes.org>, 31 Gloria Hice-Idler <gloria.hice- idler@dot.state.co.us>, 42 Chris Bieker <chris@utsd.org>, 43 Todd Krula <todd@utsd.org>, 44 Melissa Duell <MeIissa@utsd.org>, 41 Jim Duell <jklepsd@• :stoffice.net>, "robert.g.haas' <robert.g.haas@usps.gov>, 46 US Army Corps of Engineers <terry a.mckee@usace.army.mil>, 51 Alpine Anglers - Trout Unlimited <alpineanglers_tu@q. com> Light & Power has no concerns with this variance request. Todd, Todd J. Steichen Town of Estes Park Light & Power Division Line Superintendent 970-577-3601 tsteicheneestes.org On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> wrote: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT -11"kIALJ .4111;1, IC REVIE This email is to notify you that Planning staff has accepted the variance application listed below as complete and scheduled it for review. tpc/imail.google.com/maliflul.284k.6ed2499adc&viewmpt&search=inboatth=13902a72be4b7bd Town of Estes Park Malt Performing Arts Center variance request Performing Arts Center variance request Scott Dorman <sdorman@estes.org> Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:33 AM To: Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Davie, The Estes Valley Fire Protection District does not have any concerns with the height variance request of 40ft. The building will need to comply with all of the adopted building and fire codes. Exterior access across the river on both sides of the building will be required and maintained. This will allow for fire attack, hose line deployment, and rescue from either side of the river. Fire Chief Scott Dorman Estes Valley Fire Protection District Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:04 PM To: Scott Dorman <sdorman@estes.org> Hi Scott - The structure would be about 60-feet tall. Does this affect your comments? Also, this is the first step. They will have to go through development plan review later. That is when we will pin down hydrant locations and such. -dave [Quoted text hidden] David W. Shirk, AICP Planner, Estes Park Community Development Department PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 .estes.org dshirk estes.org ph: 970-577-3729 fx: 970-586-0249 Scott Dorman <sdorman@estes.org> To.. Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Yes, 60 ft may have a hugh impact on our ability to protect the building with a single 75 ft aerial ladder truck. I will need to check with ISO to see what we wi€II be required to have to protect this structure. A additional new aerial would cost the District between $800,000- $1 mil, plus a location to house it. ISO will be here on Monday for our 10 year review, I'll ask them what, if any, Impacts a building like this would cause. Obviously, we do not have the funds to purchase an additional aerial. Scott [Quoted text hidden] rs://mail.google.com/mall/jut=28ik=6ed2499adc&v lew=pt&search=inbox&th=139bb545b9246ee4 Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:33 PM • 1111111161 Iliilr,l ��1111Ip1��M,,,11� a�ui IIIu4�l �1VlII �I�IV�IIII �I����. NJ 11v�llll ulillllLllll�� �lllllll�lll�Ill���iiiiiIii11"'Ii�lllll1l�l� I�II 11�I muU. II 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111liiotld������ .� mum III 1�u1IIiI„I uNojulii UlVuuul u 1111 111111111111111111111111111111111111 Thorp Associates, P.C. Architects and Planners ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Variance Submittal Requirements August 22, 2012 STATEMENT OF INTENT (PROPOSED USE) The Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center, as conceived by the Board of Trustees of the Estes Performance InCorporated (EPiC), is a self-sustaining, state-of-the-art 760 seat performing arts theater, underwritten with private funding and made possible by the gift of the Seeley Property (formerly the Park Theatre Mall) by the Seeley family, extending from Rockwell Street to East Elkhorn Avenue. The Center will be further supported by income from retail and commercial leases fronting onto East Elkhorn Avenue. The entire project is tourist -oriented with the retail and commercial frontage on East Elkhorn, plus a public lounge and outdoor deck overlooking the street and a unique "Winter Garden" and restaurant connecting the retail/commercial component of the project with the Riverwalk and performing arts theater. To make the project possible, the Board of Trustees of EPIC is requesting a variance of Section 4.4 C4 (Height Variance) as well as a variance of Section 7.6,Ela(3) (River Setback) to allow no setback from the river along the 75 foot width of the property. '31 Stanley Ave. #100 *PO Box 129 *Estes Park, CO 80517+970,586.9528 •303-534-1378•Fax:970.586.4145 •www.thorpassoccom Thorp Associates, P.C. chitects and Planners ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Variance Submittal Requirements August 22, 2012 SPECIFIC CODE STANDARD TO BE VARIED In order to construct a fly gallery in the Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center to performance quality standards, the Applicant is requesting a height variance to Code Section 4.4C4 "Table 4-5: Density and Dimensional Standards for the Nonresidential Zoning Districts," which calls for a 30-foot building height limit in the Town's CD zoning district. To accommodate a full fly gallery, automated rigging equipment and a walking grid above the stage, a height variance of 28'-10" will be necessary. (See attached drawing.) The applicant is also requesting a river setback variance from Code Section 7.6 E 1 a(3) "Stream and River Corridor Setback in the CD Zoning District" so that the river can be built over, similar to the situation where the original building "bridged" the river. 131 Stanley Ave. #100 •PO Box 129 *Estes Park, CO 80517•970.586.9528 •303-534-1378•Fax:970.586.4145 •www.thorpassoc.com IS TA Thorp Associates, P.C. Architects and Pianners ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERFORMING ARTS CENTE Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Variance Submittal Requirements August 22, 2012 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW 1. Special Circumstances The "Special Circumstances" that exist with this development and are not common to the remainder of Estes Park's downtown "CD" zoning district is the need to accommodate a full 40-foot fly gallery above the stage of the performing arts center. With a 20-foot high proscenium arch, the fly gallery must be a minimum of 40-feet (twice the proscenium height) in order to fully raise scenery from view. Above the 40-foot height of the fly gallery is the automated rigging equipment and then a small, but essential walking grate, which will add the flexibility required of the fine local and traveling shows and concerts that the theater will serve. Without the ability to fully "fly" scenery and use "automated" rigging equipment, etc., the auditorium's ability to support a higher quality program will be drastically limited, rendering the project inadequate. As there are already a number of undersized and inadequate performance halls in the community, Estes Performance InCorporated (EPIC) will not pursue the project further without the height variance, allowing a more state-of-the-art performance hall. 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; Other uses of the property may be possible without this variance, but it is not possible to build Estes Park a premier, fully functional auditorium without the variance that would allow the full fly gallery. b. Whether the variance is substantial; The variance needed for a fully functional fly gallery would be 28'-10" (See Height Calculation attached.), which is a substantial variance. 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 Park Theatre Mall, which burned in October of 2009, was a substantial building in scale, looming over the Riverside Parking Lot to the east and attached to the retail shops, movie theatre and tower along Fall River. While the proposed performing arts theater is somewhat taller, due to the fly gallery, the scale of the auditorium is "stepped" back from the parking lot by the smaller scaled "back of theater," and still meets well with the existing retail building to the west of the auditorium. The Project addresses East Elkhorn Avenue as only a two story structure (similar to others nearby), due to the design of the roof garden, which sets back a partial third level lounge far enough as to not be visible from the street. In other words, the essential character of the neighborhood (dense, tourist -oriented, commercial properties) will change little from what it was previously and the project would add to the tourist base visiting Estes Park due to the year round nature of the performing arts theater, which would actually lend more tourist traffic (market share) to adjoining properties. 131 Stanley Ave. #100 *PO Box 129 *Estes Park, CO 80517.970.586.9528.303-534-1378•Fax:970.586.4145 •www.thorpassoc.com 1� d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer; The Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center will not in any way adversely affect delivery of public services and may even upgrade such services in some instances. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Estes Performance InCorporated (EPIC) realized that a height variance would be necessary in order to construct a quality performing arts center, since the existing height limit was only 30 feet. f Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. The only alternative to mitigate the predicament would be to sink the auditorium 28'-10" into the ground so that the parapet walls would be the required 30 feet above grade. This alternative, based on a soils investigation (Geotechnical Exploration Report #1122054, dated July 17, 20I2 performed by Earth Engineering Consultants.; Inc.), would be impossible because of bedrock and water levels. The design has already been lowered to the limit of the soils report. TA Thorp Associates, P.C. Architects and Planners Height Calculation Point 'a' = Elevation at Highest Point of Existing Grade Point 'b' = Elevation of Natural Grade below SE corner of Stage Slope = point 'a' - point 'b' Maximum Allowable Height = 30'-0" + 0.5 x Slope Maximum Allowable Elevation = point `b' + Max Allowable Height = Requested Parapet Elevation above point 'b' Requested Variance = Requested Elev - Max Allowable Elev Height of Park Theatre Tower (for reference only) Grade Elevation at Base of Tower Elevation at Top of Primary Mass Height at Top of Primary Mass Elevation at Top of Block Corner Extensions Height at Top of Block Corner Extensions Civil Architectural % 7530.90 100'-0" 7524.70 93'-9 1/2" 6.20 6'-21/2" 33.10 33'-1 1/4" 7557.80 126'-10 3/4" 7586.57 155'-8" 28.77 28'-9 1/4" 86.92% 7534.00 7598.60 64.60 7601.20 67.20 Refer to Plans and Elevations for the location of Points 'a' and 'b'. 103'-1 1/4" 167'-8 1/2" 64' -7 1/4" 170'-3 3/4" 67'-2 1/2" Thorp Associates, P.C. Architects and Planners ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Variance Submittal Requirements August 22, 2012 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW (Cont.) 1. How does the proposed building relate to its site and to its neighbors in terms of setbacks, height, massing, scale, frontage, materials, open space, landscape, and topography? Being in the CD Zone in downtown Estes Park, the building will have the standard eight foot setback along the street frontages (East Elkhorn Avenue and Rockwell Street), although some minor adjustments will be necessary along Rockwell Street as the project design is refined. Side yard setbacks will match the side lot lines, utilizing firewall construction. Care has been taken throughout the Schematic Design process to minimize the height variance requested for the auditorium in an attempt to maintain the iconic presence of the Park Theatre tower in the downtown community. Although the overall scale of the performing arts center is considerable, the building is made up of three components (commercial section facing East Elkhorn Avenue, Winter Garden component over Fall River, and the performance auditorium), which help in breaking up the massing of the building. Further, along East Elkhorn Avenue, the third level (lounge and roof garden) has been stepped back from the street frontage in order to maintain the predominant two-story character of the street frontages. The atrium or "Winter Garden" walls have been punctuated by large areas of glazing material and the clearstory skylight design helps maintain a bright, natural landscaped environment year round. At the same time, the mass of the performance auditorium is setback from finished grade by the lower walls of the backstage support areas. The visual height of the auditorium is further softened by strong horizontal lines capping the building. The building as presently designed will be finished in well detailed brick masonry, with native stone and precast concrete accents and wainscoting. Where roofing material is visible, primarily over the Winter Garden, standing seam metal panels in a quiet blue-green color, to blend with natural foliage, will tend to soften the scale of that section of the building, which needs a larger volume of space to maintain an indoor botanical garden character. Because the building is being designed to fit within the existing topography of the site (meeting sidewalk elevations along East Elkhorn and the Riverwalk, as well as maintaining existing elevations along the Riverside Parking Lot), the performing arts theater component of the project has been located on the lowest section of the property, minimizing its height. Landscaping, except for that which will enhance the "outdoor" character of the Winter Garden, will be limited to primarily returning any construction damage to the Riverwalk to its original condition. Since the Winter Garden will be able to simulate an open landscaped park next to the river, including the final connection of the always accessible Riverwalk, no additional "open space" is planned. 2. What measures have been employed to ensure that the proposed building is appropriate to downtown, refer to: a. Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.4, to the maximum extent feasible, each principal structure on a site shall avoid long blank walls that face a public street, and b. Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan, including, but not limited to Chapter 6. 1.0. Land Use, 2.0 Community Design, 6.0 Scenic and Environmental Quality. In viewing historic photographs of downtown Estes Park, it is evident that from the inception of the Transportation Building at 116 East Elkhorn, right up until the October 2009 131 Stanley Ave. #100 •PO Box 129 *Estes Park, CO 80517•970.586.9528 •303-534-1378•Fax:970.586.4145 •www.thorpassoc.com Park Theatre Mall fire, the building had `maintained a dominant influence on the character of the Estes Park community. Taking a cue from the historic character of early mountain towns, the building facades of the project have been broken up with a "timeless" brick detailing, reminiscent of early 20'h century masonry construction. Utilizing brick, stone and precast elements, the scale of the building is minimize to a more personal level. Even the Winter Garden has been structured to mimic the architectural character of an open industrial building, similar to the original Transportation Building's construction. Based on the present opportunity to infill this abandoned core property with a new cultural iconic structure that will not only complement the existing nature of the tourist -oriented business, but broaden the tourist market with new and innovative activities, this project will also promote a renewed interest and affinity for the natural environment of the river flowing through it, and provide a focus to sustain and support the existing tourism industry and marketing programs within the community. With the performing arts center being a year round pursuit, including restaurant and retail amenities, the project will have the ability to strengthen the already sound tourism market to be a broader, more sustainable economic engine. 3. What measures have been employed to ensure that the proposed building responds to or enhances the Park Theatre historic resource? Although it would be inappropriate to match the architectural character and detailing of the Park Theatre and tower, as copying would dilute the iconic presence of that facility, a "tip of the hat" to its roots as an early 20`h century American structure is not only appropriate, but essential to "comfortable" interaction and interrelationship of the two complexes. Extreme care has been exerted during the design of the Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center to be certain that this new complex, though considerable in scale, would not overpower or disrupt the iconic view of the tower as people approach the Town, for instance, from Highway 34. Soil investigations were accomplished along the river to determine the lowest possible elevation the auditorium and fly gallery could be founded, in order to minimize its height and ensure the continued dominance of the 67 foot high Park Theatre tower as an iconic beacon for our community. The inclusion of a continuously open Riverwalk connection through the Winter Garden further strengthens the Theatre and its tower's tie to the downtown commercial area. 4. Anticipated Development Tinting At this time, the general development timing is as follows: River Work: August 2013 November 2013 Foundations: April 2014 - July 2014 Superstructure: July 2014 October 2015 Finish Work: October 2015 April 2016 Opening: May 2016 A Al 2012 COMMUorly DEVELOP ak!!d 6';c1r ld'P:.1 F. c";Id4 an oec vaae ' OS t ad tend Use, Re5a1-1, VraterSoivrow 1LVtalon • "" e1'I', maid Witortioullos tasso" r" !$iml°,'' Sort4da n pub sire ik .,,,v 411) ,! 'a r n." i v u '? YN[r a ea 0040b r"I°1iYwurlo PnIml M) 64thpirwlih chinch** J%;':' fr A G1t VMYel':lo40,: i or thiii Itlit tit 34411 `a(1' 6 X'7" 'a s it s kthoft :larks l , " "$IBA l l6+er » « n `� nrUrA: pEi, d .anAlS`ie'tar 'igyihe1i:pIO 'S��AR7 r *Nl*i4Y urtqu 'eiPt''pp5idlddalt toplitmf'04 +fp741r affietiguOr, gni voir Wniusi bir. forded, rded , TOlitter Is1�ol r;Doi oop o,aI,d':arrNa ismoisyslOodo PO Box' 129, Estes 970.586.9528 90.679. 811 970. 586 .414 5 ro APPLICATION FEES For variance applications within the Estes Valley planning Area, both Inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included In your application padcet or view the fee schedule online at htto://www,estes.orojCompsv/Schedules&Fees/planninaAsollcstionFeeSchedule.pdf All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. Revised 11/2 /09 PPLICANT CERTIFICATION ► 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 1 am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property. 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 Valley Development Code (EVDC). 110- I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, and that, prior to tiling this application, I have had the opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application. The Estes Valley Development Code Is available online at: htto:/lwww.estes.orc/ComDev/DevCode • 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 EVDC. ► 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. / 3. understand that a resubmittai fee will 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. t► I grant permisslon 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 Valley 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 fuit fees Mil be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. > I understand that 1 am required to obtain a "Variance Notice' sign from the Community Development Departmentand that this sign must be posted on my property where it Is clearly visible from the road. 1 understand that the corners of my property and the proposed bullding/structure corners must be field staked. I understand that tie sign must be posted and the staking completed no later than ten (10) busliness days prior to the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment hearing. 1 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 Names: Valley Development Code Section 3.6.D) Record Owner PLEASE PRINT• Record Owner PLEASE PRIM: Park Theater Mali, LLC Town of Estes Park Applicant PLEASE PRAM Epic ]?erformance InCor Grated (EPIC)`' Signatures: (3'4 PLIftiik„ 4 Olk014L;L Record Own -�� ��"'�r;: aa:F: r `� �� ,,.pate Record c wne'r Date Applicant pp �'� ;: : ; :��"�, �: °. `� "� Date Revssed 11 /20I LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARK THEATRE MALL LLC Parcel: 35251-20-017 Lots 17, 18, & 19, B1k 5, Estes Pk Parcel: 35251-22-034 Lot 34, Riverside 2"d, Estes Pk, Less 1685-740 The following legal description is a portion of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 25, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M. LOBBY / RESTROOMS/ RIVERWALK EASEMENT TO TOWN: Beginning at the (approximate) Northeast Corner of Lot 34, Second Riverside Subdivision (the Northeast corner of the slab at the southerly edge of Fall River); thence along an Arc with a Length of 75.86', a Radius of 107.0', and a Chord with a distance of 74.3' bearing S 71' 11' W; thence S 16'57' E 11.8'; thence along an Arc with a Length of 37.5', a Radius of 60.0' and a Chord with a distance of 36.9' bearing N 87'20' E; thence N 72°32' E 7.4'; thence S 16°30' E 8.9'; thence N 73' 12' E 31.0' to the east line of said Lot 34; thence along said east line N 16°39' W 32.2' to the True Point of Beginning. Area: 2015 square feet TOWN OF ESTES PARK PROPERTY The following legal description is a portion of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 25, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M. TOWN OWNED PROPERTY TO EPIC: Commencing at the (approximate) Northeast Corner of Lot 34, Second Riverside Subdivision (the Northeast corner of the slab at the southerly edge of Fall River); Thence S 16°39' E 15.9' to the true point of beginning; thence along the east line of said Lot 34, S 16°39' E 101.7' thence S 82' 05' W 76.1; thence S 32°31' E 5.5'; thence S 86'32' E 78.4' thence S 78'28' E 26.0'; thence N 11 °32' E 134.7'; thence N 78"28' W 34.4'; thence S 73'02' W 56.2' to the True Point of Beginning. Area: 8445 square feet, more or less 1,. oraing Districts § 4.4 Nonresidential Zoning Districts 4. Table 4-5: Density and Dimensional Standards for the Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Table 4-5 Density and Dimensional Standards Nonresidential Zoning Districts Zoning District r— Minimum Land' Area per Accommodation or Residential Unit (sq. ft. pe unit) Minimum Lot Size [7] Minimum Structure BuEidingl Setbacks [4] [8] Max. FAR Max. Lot Cover - age (%) Area (sq ft) Width (ft) Front (ft.) Side (ft) Rear (fL) Max. Bldg Height (ft.)19] A Accommodation Unit =1,800 [1]; Residential Units: SF = 9,000; 2-Family = 6,750;15 MF = 5,400 40,000 [2] 100 [3] Arterial All other streets 15 [6] 10 [6] 30 N/A 50 A-1 10,890 15,000 [2] 50 [3] Arterial = 25 [5]; All other streets = 15 15 10 30 .20 30 CD Accommodation Units Only 1,800; SF & 2-Family (stand-alone) = 000; Dwelling Units (1st Floor) 1 unit per2,250 square feet of gross land area Dwelling Units (2nd Floor) No minimum gross land area per unit (Ord.15-03 ti 3) Accommo- dation uses = 20,000 All other uses = n/a SF -Family (stand- alone) = 25; MF (stand- alone) = 100; All other uses = nla rni` mum = 8 Maxi- mum = 16 If tot abuts a residential property = 10; All other cases = 0 If lot abuts a residential property = 10; All other cases = 30 2.0 nla CO nia Lots fronting arterials = 40,000 [2]; Outdoor Commercial Recreation( Entertain- ment = 40,000 [2] All other lots = 15,000 [2] Fronting arterials = 200; All other lots = 50 Arterial = 25 [5); All other streets =15 15 (6] 15 [6] 30 .25 65 Supp. 5 4.21 Genera! Development Standards § 7.6 Wetlands and Stream Condor Protection Figure 7-10 (2) River Corridors (except in the CD district). (a) General Rule. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. (b) Exception for Lots Developed Prior to the Adoption of this Code. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. See Figure 7-10. (Ord. 2-02 #5) (3) Stream and River Corridors in the CD Zoning District. In the CD district, all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream or river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream or river. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. Where a principal building in the CD district provides public access, including a primary entrance, on the side of the building facing a stream or river corridor, the setback may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the approval of the Decision -Making Body. (Ord. 2-02 #5) Supp. 3 7-29 1 11 1 ',11414,41,144'11,1:,11„1,11141144441',:4 mow, „p„, i, 0 ctf N 111'1'1'111,IIIIIIIIIy ntersection View Northwest from Rockwe IIIIVi;d;NVlfl�'�', �'p!'NiI�P�Pu',41!�� i ti 1111111111111111111 "uuuuuuunmuuum uu m uu m i U 0 a) ;,,,',„1,„,1,,::,:i„'„„,1,11111111111111111111111 11' ntersection c _c _se w 06 0 E a) •Eci. 2 0 a) m 10111111111110111111111111111111111111111111111,1, Accent 1111111111111111111 tract Precast Interior Walls atural Stone Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center General Color Palette 8/22/12 Illec,arucal! 4 Photovoltaic 11FooftOp EquOment Root Structunr. rrlotor4 4ing Ho1,5te, hr Rd Pro5c.coluirn (..,oritriactleAn Automatic Fire Cdugrtatol---- Sound rerluipnicrkt Stage L3afile Prapat51------- pror,c,tniom OperAillf- FIv Galler 411 P c,al e: 11 /t3 I V.trscri:cocy Roof Vent 11-- Movable Equipment ection • it/-1&ricliron "open" Structure t1 IJ 111 Ill uuu uuuw Stage /(7/7///,W07////7 //// // Dr -ing Ro -- Roof 151 -6' IF, N idl ron 14-0" .:(5" )Floiien Sc try Li(Liroet., Cott Litt 13attent, ,crviorn, Archk 1217; 'IP Oet-f,'"Jtale: r5,5cericry 11,0".,f," tPIC. Variance - Park Theatre Mall w V N 01 N NNNNN CO NNNONN Y+ N N N N N tll r CO N p. 0 0 r-I si 1-1 r-I . i ri M ,-1 t1 a-i lD .--1 r I .--I a --I r-1 .-1 ,--I .--I N . I 4-1 O COItt 1/1 O 111 In L l Idl Ifl Ill In u1 VI N Ir1 In 711 Ill 111 1l1 Vl 111 Lll vl N nl N .00 0 N-7 m 00 I`• 000 00 00 CO 00 00 CO 00 CO CO 00 CO 03 CO CO CO 03 00 CO CO 00 00 NZJOX00000000000000000000000 1.1 177 Hunter St ro ro 2 PO Box 4528 PO Box 948 PO Box 771690 Y Y Y .X R 0. 0s r0 11 v r0 D_ I7 a 1/41 W W W I_ 0 c 0) 0 V a a 0. ro N • Z Ifl0.1 r I d• Ql R_ t10 r4 d e0 c PO Box 3783 to 1D 0 0 0 a. c a 0 Lri c 1 a 0 ro 0 td a U1 a PO Box 2800 a 1= 4-. c O 2 u 0 CC W n r-I 0 J J C 0 r w W ri Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y -.V Y 111 td • 4.0 y � W VI LLI PO Box 2775 PO Box 3824 c f0 no 713 J a c c 0 co 0 a W PO Box 654 KH Investments, LLC 7 c a O 644 Planet PI J rn 2 a 1,1 al N W PO Box 3455 Elisabeth Bowers Trust ro a V1 In W 980 Scott Ave co 0. i In W Po Box 3223 r0 0. M i W PO Box 3052 CO a a h W CO a W O CO c 0 '-0.x 5 Idi 0 N a. Frederick & Cheri Houser O. (1) y W PO Box 1125 0. -c a c t ro a 6L a 0. 0. O 0 t cc m O. 1/1 i W 265 Steamer Ct a `0 O a C7 c at 61 .c m C 0 0 u 0` a R 0.0 c s 00 Z r-1 O r1 Donna Goodemote PO Box 3005 0 n c 0 472 Humboldt St 0 O CO 2305 Broadway St Theatre Mal 0) 01 Own of Frstet.ParkMail - Fwd: Upcoming Theatre Issue https://mail.google.comlmail/?ui=2&ik=aIa80c521 a&view=pt&search... Fwd: Upcoming Theatre Issue 2 messages Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Carol & Pete <carolpetesmtth@aol.com> To: kthompson@estes.org Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:29 PM Original Message From: Arthur Blume <arteut@padblume.com> To: jeff <jeff@dallmanconstruction.com>; Smith Pete <carolpetesmith@aol.com>; Wayne Newsom <newsom@frii.com> Sent: Fri, Sep 28, 2012 2:03 pm Subject: Upcoming Theatre Issue Gentlemen I know each of you through social contact, sports contact, volunteer projects, community commissions and boards, etc. I have come to respect each of you and appreciate our contacts. I have some comments about the theatre issue soon to fall into your collective laps so to speak. The comments below are my personal opinions and are supported by Estes Park Repertoire Theatre Company members. 1. Why did the introduction of this 20M (now 21 M?) face changing project first appear in the Denver Post. I have been told by people directly involved in the project that it is a "National Project" and should be introduced in "Denver...." 2. This "national thrust organization" is a direct spinoff of "SOPA." "SOPA", and the other several similar groups over the last 16-20 years have been local and have tailed to build a community theatre because local support could not be generated. 3. The new group like "SOPA' has some interesting financial reports. One wonders exactly what and how much they have. 4. I have and I expect you have seen the media presentation of the project. Notice that the 'theatre" aspect seems to be a minor part of the "'show." The "designed structure" seems to be the "star" of the presentation. sense that some personal "'egos" have entered this project. 5. Height variance needed. EP has a quaint skyline in keeping with the mix of our community. We are not an "Aspen or Vail" nor are we geared up to be that kind of place. Our community has drawn some 5800-6000 year round residents who are just friendly people not "Hollywood" type folks. A height variance would "grandfather" such future growth and totally change this community's face for the "better or worse'?" 6. As the Founder/Managing Director of a community theatre group I have been asking questions the last 6 years of "SOPA" and the new group about how each project will "support" local not-for-profit/501 (c) (3) groups. The general answer is that they will "include them" but never have a workable plan. This will become worse with the new organization which sells itself on "national exposure.." Contracted "survey groups" support the base feeling of the "group' supporting the new theatre project. I do not believe their story line. Also a 700+ seat theatre is much too large for "local" audiences and the theatre design does not blend into our community. A community owned multi -purpose building would be good for us. Seating 200-300 and available to all the scores of local theatre/musical/miscellaneous groups who are formed by locals. Our group has plans 9/173/,nI? 1•?1) PF 'n of Estes Park Mail - Fwd: Upcoming Theatre Issue https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=ala80c521a&view=p &seprcl,.. for such a building that run in the range from 500,000 to 1,500,000. 7. Lastly, but not the only other point, is parking. This issue is ducked by the theatre group. The attitude is someone else will deal with that (the citizens?) issue. It is mentioned that people can "walk from the CVB like theatre goers in Chicago, etc." or "the town can build a high-rise garage" which after loosing a couple of dozen parking places to the new building already seem to duck the issue, etc. Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts. I don't envy your having to de& with this issue. Our community should have never gotten to this issue because we as a community should have dealt with a community structure for these purposes years ago. Respectfully, A. W. (Art) Blume III Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM To: John Lynch<john@johnlynchwoodworking.com>, Bob McCreery <rbmccreery@aol.com>, Alison Chilcott <achilcott@estes.org>, Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Cc: Art Blume III <arteut@padblume.com> Listed below is a letter from Arthur Blume that was originally sent to Pete Smith, Wayne Newsom, and Jeff Moreau. Please consider it Public Comment to go with the EPIC Variance Application. Thank you. Karen Thompson Administrative Assistant Community Development Department Town of Estes Park Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 kthompson@estes.org (Quoted text hidden} aoszo ul a•-rn PM October 2, 2012 To The Board of Adjustment Members:'P John Lynch Jeff Moreau...... Bob McCreery Pete Smith cpmmury aEvE opygg Wayne Newsom Chris Christian Gentlemen, Those advocating a proposed Performing Arts Center are coming before you today requesting a variance from the Valley -wide height limitation as stated in the Estes Valley Development Code, 1.9.E. They would like to build a structure on Elkhorn Avenue that is to be an appalling 62 feet high. Yes, 1 am concerned about the effect this tall building would have on our unique, view -driven community. However, my major concern is with the precedent this variance would establish. Isn't this 'the camel's nose under the tent flap'? Doesn't this open the door for a future developer who wishes to build a 6 story apartment building elsewhere in the Valley? He can rightfully say, "Hey! You've already allowed a building at that height. Why not mine?" What justification could you rely upon? In reviewing your minutes, I see that you've approved 79 of the 84 variances that have come before you in each of your meetings dating back eight years to December, 2004, often despite citizen input to the contrary. You have disapproved only 3 in all that time. Many members of our community with whom I've spoken think of you as a `rubber stamp' committee and are skeptical about the depth of your individual thinking as well as the scope of your discussions. I pray we're wrong, especially in this instance. I beg you to consider this variance very carefully and disapprove it. You must know this a very slippery slope. Please, please do not approve a variance that may have many future unintended consequences. Very Sincerely Yours, 1"�.� , .lilt K&Gv to .Caf 4ff ie; • . n aeee-v-s÷c.eco...cvo..--,7zeoT.:ee,zrrep)-‘re i-poe #ozciAdoffe; or .e/ozdi-eez/z,tie.e/e2 ce* Adt‘ de-447- sa2,20V+ 17,elPf"eeede lefierec, goe-e~rea,Zo-," ,ezp! Qi�2CL� stm dQ /J?LO'2C �-D7 Ct / ---14-ece7-ec;z4 cZ G� .cta eaar.e.goZ7ve,r,-e‘er.,e.e .2r."22:07-/ /e.z f‘e er, 9(e/ fr76) di Estes Valley Partners for Commerce Estes Valley Board of Adjustment: The Estes Valley Partners for Commerce is a local business organization that provides business to business resources, support, tools and networking opportunities to create a stronger business foundation for our Estes community. As Partners we want to assist Iocal businesses to become stronger and more successful. This project is in our wheelhouse! We had a presentation last Thursday by the EPIC Board and immediately sent out a survey to our membership to ask if they supported the project. An overwhelming 97% support the construction of the Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center. Some of the additional comments that were made include: Variances should be granted. Cultural & economic advantages this project will give the Estes Community far out way any outcome obtained by following the written rules. This venue will help with the year-round attraction issue we have all been seeking. PARKING needs to be addressed, ideally, a downtown parking structure. Great use of downtown real estate, beneficial to all. Thanks to EVPC for gathering responses. Great service to the biz community and for creating a business voice that can be heard as one voice. I think it's the most exciting, fabulous project that's happened in this town since the Park was created in 19151 This is a tremendous asset for the performing arts in town (both local and outside shows) and a beautiful, modern addition to a gap on Elkhorn and behind in the heart of our downtown. This project will enrich the community as well as drive business & income to Estes Park. Our membership overwhelmingly supports this project. COM LAIT7iv;de "-"P te-cY (-•11 /2 2-7744'4 116(-4z.e1,--ee Lw7/ j,:f„t;tj w-c(i lU.?_teeeti.idc.J �/ �7�ac.K Sf ��(/ Prasizoe-e42.- ✓�2a����;w. �-ee ba�.� , Mofe �'e(�yp 7(--7k A(Z/y-dx4 -ro k Qe—G_ 4e,4)4e-775 . 6c); lei. . -r-ek (5---c.)(vx el a_ 0,L Li a :ylw.L,/ p.J.,,a&v, dwy Nrr Y 'D EL 0 T siatol... CJOM Wiktit--6— t) outteiva bi.p_k_.)..A,T milig:76,1, , 0 ithk,„( kikak5L- ct,6-k-5,:_i% .4,,,t_ cc \/c0;caAtca..., a)-tivA-- C52-40-A,, • Atili-tAt:4- (1. VO-v- le)-4,c, b-A;u32' ci1:41 LA)L4S—fi _ -SP--9--i— abuLka4A.__ 41/4cLi c otwi-vt- trg-ttc-A cLca k4ith&ii..6.1„-, 46a gdAu2,.._ ,i- ,)cutcfo, L &f-,u-Lk Livwklic,L_ 64c-ct 01.0(A.,dtko. --At-ez._ ‘4 ukticuLt_) 1„, 4714.4...,4_,:vciAict.. .. ustivi1/4, loks._ 0.... % ituv31- es-Q Muz} , __ AiL ra,C64, --kawtr- cub4- sak,u,cd),Q (),,t (Id(.' CCArl ,12A&A)A-vin&-z-t- :too --tvaat CAS2( etbor\CLAA. Pak LVY-L,CLCV JActurc 04 Vd1/L' -k2- VQ-44 IYLCUUL tucu.. 6L_ Csuftii (31 kk1-6-6,r) COOL C ')"'NrY talS2( (U1L-Wk &CA ML-fk. ith(Or (-):\ 46. ,,,.,,„, ab„___ te)-614,9_ (10, kYlLttUL C), 623:d " %AN 0, VU,,V,, C...U.xlc d ' GLAAA._ \IQSLiAtE3LiAk j A€ Ak&-A “.),Q__ 4z,) t,t-i/ruz. , a_.) pk_ ArYUA-A0 L.Q. )-- LLAA.,cf , V-te.j.0 LIA. vy eAsut.w„di 1 or AQ )thlf.,FAIKL..i Outcd.._ .4464k \, 4 lu ., ' vA- &'-'-'\-- t., LA IliC6-- Cit. ill"-c4- 1/W`AAA-C4-41>a.-;47-A--tiLYA, -e_a)si-s2-2 %l DIJ J-- l�K q rc V V A-C21 COMMUNIiIr /v F Ei-4,, /fr/---77 6 td(7 \hloci *L7/1 4407e .X P/no_sii0 ,w(-7/4 A/ ',v/-6z) I _ 0_17,4 /121- r L i/cr 7iY* 741 Gy.a 2 UJ < 1! `T. \Nt\ N\\\\\\ 1 (11 CL 0 0 LL Tv 0 b 0 CNI Om EL: z -(7) 0 cn en 1— e< x 0 0 .0 CC > —1 2 2- 0 0 "Li-72 m CO co c), 0 = 0 -0 03 z(I) m 0 5 3 0 N O CN k 0 O W CL South Elevation O • UQ aZ N z a)g caa oo O� co co O U Q OU sQ 1— Fall River Lodge Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586.0249 www.estes.org ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING DATE: October 2, 2012 REQUEST: (1) Variance from Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) Section 7.6.E.1.2(b) which requires buildings and accessory structures be setback a minimum of 50 feet from the annual high water mark of river corridor and (2) a variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E.2 which requires accessory structures be setback at least 50 feet from the edge of a wetland. If approved, this will allow a gravel path and two flagstone patios to remain in the locations shown on the attached site plan. The patio is within 16 feet +/- river per the plan and the path encroaches into the wetlands. LOCATION: 900 W. Elkhorn Avenue (Fall River Lodge) within Town limits (Lot 2 Witt Subdivision) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: Robert and Carol Fixter PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The purpose of the variance request is to allow a gravel path and two flagstone patios to remain in the location shown on the attached site plan. The requested variance is the first of a series of land use approvals needed to bring the property into code compliance. The attached May 3, 2012 email from Dave Shirk to Bob Fixter describes other needed approvals. The request before the Board of Adjustment concerns the river and wetlands setback variances on Lot 2, Witt Subdivision only. Engineer/Surveyor/Consultant: Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying Parcel Number: 35234-22-001 Existing Land Use: Accommodations — Small Hotel Zoning Designation: A-1 Accommodations/Low Intensity Services: Water: Town of Estes Park Sewer: Upper Thompson Sanitation District N4 ADJACENT LAND USES AND ZONING 11111111 � ou�duiyu, 900 West Elkhorn Avenue A-1—Low-lntenskyAccommodatans - Previously Outlyfng Commercial E-1 µ Estate Single -Family Residential REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. "Standards for Review" of the EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. These standards are included in the Board notebooks. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2 2012 900 West Elkhorn Avenue - Fall River Lodge Variance Request Page 2 of 5 c REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. A legal notice was published in the Estes Park Trail Gazette. Reviewing agency and public comment is attached for Board review and consideration. Public comment submitted prior to receipt of variance application is not attached, but is available for review in the Community Development office, with the exception that Mr. Wynstra requested his prior letters be included. FINDINGS: 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 Finds: The Statement of Intent notes that "a worn fisherman's trail previously followed the majority of the constructed path." The flagstone patios could have been constructed in compliance with the minimum required setbacks. The Board of Adjustment should determine whether or not approval of the requested variances will nullify the purpose and'intent of the wetlands and river setback requirements, which are intended to: Promote, preserve and enhance the important hydrologic, biologic, biological, ecological, aesthetic, recreational and educational functions that stream and river corridors, association riparian areas and wetlands provide (t=voc 7.6 Purpose and Intent).. The statement of intent notes improvements made to the wildlife habitat by the current property owners due to trash and fence removal. The Estes Valley Development Code does allow for recreation, education or scientific activities in buffer/setback areas provided a management plan establishes long-term protection. Public trails have been constructed in setbacks in accordance with this code provision. To date, staff has not interpreted this so broadly as to allow removal of wetlands or construction of patios for wedding use. 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 can be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. The small hotel can continue to operate. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2 2012 Page 3 of 5 900 West Elkhorn Avenue - Fall River Lodge Variance Request G b. Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Finding The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance is substantial. The gravel path and patios encroach into river and wetlands setbacks and have impacted wildlife habitat. The applicant's statement of intent notes noted they improved wildlife habitat on the property by removing trash and fencing habitat. 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 finds that if the patios are used for weddings or gatherings with music and at night, it may have a substantial impact on the character of the adjacent residential neighborhood. Adjacent property owners have expressed concerns about neighborhood impacts and detriment, as described in the attached letters. d. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Finding: The minimum required river and wetlands setbacks were in place at the time the time the property owner's purchased the property in 2011. The applicant proceeded with construction of the gravel path and patios without the required land use approvals. e. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Comment: The applicant could remove the portions of the path and patios that do not comply with the Estes Valley Development Code and construct a code compliant patio and gravel path. 3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Comment: Given that the patios and gravel path are constructed, the requested variance represents the least deviation. Prior to construction other options were available. 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 Comment. If the Board votes to approve the requested variance, recommended conditions of approval are below. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment October 2 2012 Page a of 5 900 West Elkhorn Avenue - Fall Raver Lodge Variance Request STAFF RECOMMENDATION: If the Board chooses to approve the requested variances, staff recommends approval conditional to: 1. Compliance with the memo from the Division of Building Safety dated September 27 2012, which includes the requirement to obtain floodplain and grading permits for completed work. Permits shall be submitted no later than October 19, 2012 and any required work shall be completed no later than November 2, 2012. 2. The applicant shall submit a management plan that establishes Tong -term protection of the buffer/setback area no later than November 2, 2012. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to APPROVE the requested variance to allow the building to remain as constructed ... (state reason/findings). I move to DENY the requested variance with the condition that revised plans be submitted for review and approval within 30 days and full compliance within 90 days... (state reason/findings). Note: If not completed within this time frame staff will pursue additional code enforcement action (which may include court) Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2 2012 Page 5 of 5 900 West Elkhorn Avenue - Fall River Lodge Variance Request ESTES 900 W. Elkhorn Dave Shirk <dshirk©estes.org> To: bfixtera@aol.com Cc: Alison Chilcott <achilcott©estes.org>, Lowell Richardson <Irichardson©estes.org>, Greg White <greg©gawhite.com>, Will Birchfield <wbirchfield©estes.org> Hello Mr. Fixter, Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:33 PM This correspondence is intended to provide a summary of your proposed wedding use and the recent development activity near the river for your property located at 900 W. Elkhorn. Flagstone Patio, Bridge, and Gravel Pathway The flagstone patio, bridge, and gravel pathway recently installed required variances and permits. Lot 1. In order to keep these improvements in place, you will need to apply for and obtain a variance from the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment for flagstone patios and bridge on Lot 1 that are within the 50 foot -river setback river and/or wetlands setback. The flagstone patio can extend 30 percent into 50-foot river/wetlands setback, without a variance. This means the patio can be located 35-feet from the high water mark of the river or the edge of wetlands without a variance. If you apply by May 23rd, the Board of Adjustment can review your application on July 3rd. If you would like to apply by May 23rd, please contact us as soon as possible. Lot 2. When Lot 2 was created, limits of disturbance (LOD) were platted. These LOD restrict where development activity can occur. That portion of the trail and the bridge that are located on Lot 2 are outside of these platted LOD. In order to keep these in place, you would need to amend the plat of record, which requires a land surveyor, review by the Planning Commission, and approval by the Town Board. In addition to the requirements outlined above, the grading in the floodplain requires a floodplain permit. Please contact the Division of Building Safety to discuss. 577-3726. A final note on the gravel path: Please contact Will Birchfield, Chief Building Official to discuss ADA accessibility. Staff recommends your architect Steve Lane be involved with this discussion. Weddings (and Corporate Events) Your property is currently zoned, A-1 Low -Intensity Accommodations, which provides for low -intensity accommodations with very limited accessory uses. With this A-1 zoning, you can host small weddings when the wedding party and all guests stay in your lodge overnight. You may wish to amend your business license to include the full -scope of your business activities. If you wish to host weddings that cater to both on and off -site guests, you can apply for a rezoning to A-Accommodations/Highway Corridor. This would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Town Board and would require a development plan describing your desired business activities. If you apply by May 23rd, the Planning Commission can review your application on July 17th, and Town Board on August 24th If you would like to host larger wedding parties with guests that stay off -site, you will need to apply for a temporary use permit. We can review a temporary use permit for the three weddings you have booked with approximately 80 guests per wedding. Please note, staff has concerns about wedding parties of this size, specifically the impact on the surrounding single-family residences, and may not be able to approve wedding parties of that size. When you apply, please address hours, number of people, wedding location, and crowd control (noise, street crossing, trespassing), parking (e.g. letter from the Church agreeing to parking), street crossing for staff review. if you have any questions about the temporary use permit application and review standards we provided to you at our last meeting, please feel free to meet. Alison Chilcott, Director Community Development Department Town of Estes Park P© Box 1200 170 MacGregor Avenue (970) 577-3720 (phone) (970) 586-0249 (fax) achilcott@estes.org www.estes.org Review Date: 2012-09-27 Review By: WB Variance Request Review Lots 1 & 2 Witt Subdivision — 900 W. Elkhorn Ave. The Division of Building Safety has reviewed the application for the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment for the above -referenced property and has the following comments. ❑ All new construction shall comply with all applicable accessibility laws. It is the responsibility of designers, developers and owners to comply with laws that Town staff does not have the authority to interpret nor the responsibility to enforce, such as ADA, Federal and State Fair Housing Acts, etc. Additionally, the designer shall specifically detail how the proposed development shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the 2009 IBC, Chapter 11. ❑ The designer shall address accessibility requirements, as required for all areas of primary function on commercial properties. Detailed accessibility specs are required. ❑ A detailed Code Analysis by a Colorado Design Professional is required. ❑ Grading plans and permits are required prior to and are separate from building permits. A grading permit is required prior to any grading or excavation (Estes Park Municipal Code §14.12.030) ❑ Floodplain Development permits are required for any and all activity in the floodplain. ❑ All construction documents shall be prepared by Colorado Design Professionals and shall bear the appropriate wet stamps. ❑ All requirements of approved variances shall be conditions of any and all permits related to this development, now and in the future. C:IDOCUME-11KARENT-1.ENGILOCALS-11TemplTemporary Directory 1 for 900w_elkhornave_variancerequestreview.zip1900 W. Elkhom Ave._Variance Request Review.doc Revised 10/17/2006- CB APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Complete and submit a Town Floodplain Development Permit Application for any and all proposed construction activity within floodplain boundaries. (a) Accurately describe the proposed activity. (b) Do not complete the bottom portion of the Town Application/Permit. (c) Submit individual applications for each location where activity is proposed within the vertical boundaries of any watercourse channel. 2. If proposed activity occurs within the vertical boundaries of any water course channel: (a) Submit a copy of the relevant section of the applicable FIRM (Flood Insurance Rate Map), and identify the specific location of each activity. (b) Submit a copy of the appropriate river profile, from the flood insurance study, with the site of each activity accurately identified. (c) Submit an accurate cross section of the watercourse at the site of each activity. (d) Cross sections shall accurately specify both existing and proposed conditions. (e) Cross sections shall include both vertical (elevations) and horizontal dimensions (distances) and references (benchmarks). (f) Cross sections shall include the BFE, and both floodplain and floodway boundaries. (g) The Engineer of Record shall be responsible for monitoring all activities approved by the Floodplain Development Permit. A Letter of Compliance, from the Engineer of Record shall be submitted upon completion of said activity, stating the work was performed in compliance with plans and specifications approved by the permit. (h) The Engineer of Record shall certify that the construction activity did not change (increase) the floodplain. Any and all construction activity within a watercourse channel (including its vertical boundaries), or within wetlands shall be approved by the Department of the Army (Corps of Engineers). (a) Submit a copy of the permit issued by the Corps of Engineers, or, (b) Submit a copy of the letter issued by the Corps of Engineers stating a permit is not required. (c) Contact Address: Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Tri-Lakes Project Office 9307 State Highway 121 Littleton, CO 80128-6901 Contact Person: Terry McKee 303-979-4120 4. Submit an accurate site plan, detailing all construction activity proposed within floodplain boundaries. (a) Identify floodplain and floodway boundaries. (b) Identify all reference marks (benchmarks). (c) Detail all property lines. (d) Submit documentation of all required easements. (e) Detail public right-of-ways. (Right -of -Way Work Permits may be required.) 5. Submit construction plans and specifications, sealed by a Colorado Registered Engineer. Said Engineer shall be the Engineer of Record. Special inspections and letters of compliance may be required. (i. Submit $50.00 fee per Section 17.28.090 of the Municipal Zoning Code. Received Date Received By Town of Estes Park Application for Floodplain Development Permit Permit Number Name of Applicant Date Address Phone Location of Proposed Development: Description of Development: (residential, non-residential, mobile home, bridge utility crossing, etc.) NOTE: Attach to the application the following information where applicable: Plans in duplicate, drawn to scale showing the nature, dimensions, and elevations of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage facilities; and the location of the foregoing. Specifically the following information is required: (1) Mean Sea Level (MSL) elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures; (2) MSL elevation to which any structure is floodproofed; (3) certification by a registered professional engineer or architect that the floodproofing methods meet the community floodproofing criteria; (4) a description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated; and (5) base (100-year) flood elevation data for a development or subdivision greater than 50 lots or 5 acres. The proposed development is located in the The following is to be completed by the Building Official Floodway Flood -fringe The Base Flood Elevation at the development site is: _,,,„ feet Source Document: Plan Review MSL Elevation or depth number to which the structure is to be elevated: .._�..................... feet MSL Elevation or depth number to which the structure is to be floodproofed: feet All necessary information and certificates are attached. ❑ Yes ❑ No ACTION The proposed development is not in conformance with applicable Floodplain Management Standards (explanation attached). Permit is denied. O The proposal is not in conformance with applicable Floodplain Management Standards (explanation attached) and the application is referred to the Board of Adjustment for variance action. O I have reviewed the plans and materials submitted in support of the proposed development and find them in compliance with applicable Floodplain Management Standards. Permit is approved. Date Signature Building Construction Documentation Received The certified as -built MSL elevation of the lowest floor of the structure is feet. The certified as -built MSL floodproofed elevation of the structure is feet Certificates of a Colorado registered_professional architect, engineer or land surveyor documenting these elevations are attached. ❑ Yes 101 No Certificate of Compliance Issued: ❑ Yes ❑ No Date Signature )/12/12 Town of Estes Pa I - Variance request for 900 W. Elkhorn T E I „RICE ARK Variance request for 900 W. Elkhorn Scott Dorman <sdorman@estes.org> To: Alison Chilcott <achilcott@estes.org> Alison, Alison C II lIW;. t <43.ch con 6pli';511e u,,e,/VilJ> Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:04 AM The Estes Valley Fire Protection District does not have any concems with the variance request dated August 22, 2012, for the Fall River Lodge (Robert and Carol Fixture) located at the above referenced address. However, any bridge or building construction would need to be reviewed for potential obstructions during high water. Please let me know if you have any questions. Scott Dorman, Fire Chief Estes Valley Fine Protection District ntps:J/mail.google.comlmall/u/0/7uf=2111k=5bb48ca6378a taw=pt8aearchalnboffith=139bb701b11fcf48 • P.O. Box 588 • Estes Palk CO80517 Ph:970-580 4544• Fax 970-588-1049 August 31, 2012 Dave Shirk, Planner II Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Variance/Rezoning Request 900 West Elkhorn Ave. Witt Subdivision Rezoning, Lots 1 & 2, A-1 to A Dear Dave: The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above referenced property: 1, The District has no objection to the variance or proposed rezoning request. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully,(44/% CG�vC.4 Todd Krula Lines Superintendent Environmental Protection Through Wastewater Collection and Treatment 4M UTILITIES & PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS RE: Completeness Review: Variance Request, Fall River Lodge, 900 W. Elkhorn Avenue DATE: September 4, 2012 DEPARTMENT: Town of Estes Park Water STAFF CONTACT: Water Superintendent, Jeff Boles, bole sta& .or 970-577-3608 COMMENT: The above Variance Request Application is complete for Water Department review. Should project design or scope change during the review process the Water Department reserves the right to request additional information as needed. DEPARTMENT: Town of Estes Park Light & Power STAFF CONTACT: L&P Crew Chief, Joe Lockhart, i'lockhart egiArs, 970-577-3613 COMMENT: Light & Power has no comments or concerns with this request. DEPARTMENT: Town of Estes Park Public Works STAFF CONTACT: Civil Engineer, Kevin Ash, PE, k COMMENT: 970-577-3586 DEPARTMENT: Town of Estes Park Building Department STAFF CONTACT: COMMENT: ./12 rTown of Estes Park Mail Fwd: REFERRALF MMENT Fall River Lodge Variance, Lots 1 & 2, Wit.. Fwd: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT - Fall River Lodge Variance, Lots 1 & 2, Witt Subdivision - FINAL REVIEW Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> To: Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:07 PM Forwarded message From: Todd Stelchen <tsteichen@estes.org> Date: Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:10 PM Subject: Re: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT- Fall River Lodge Variance, Lots 1 & 2, Witt Subdivision - ANAL REVIEW To: Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Cc: 01 Greg White <greg@gawhiiite.com>, 02 Frank Lancaster <flancaster@estes.org>, 04 Scott Zum <szurn@estes.org>, 05 Kevin Ash <kash©estes.org>, 06 Jen Imber <jimber@estes.org>, 07 Susie Parker <sparker@estes.org>, 08 Jeff Boles <jboles@estes.org>, 09 Reuben Bergsten <rergsten@estes.org>, 11 Will Birchfield <wbirchfield@estes.org>, 12 Scott Dorman <sdorman@estes.org>, 13 Eric Rose <erose@estes.org>, 14 Skyler Rorabaugh <skyler@evrpd.com>, 32 Rick Spowart <rick.spowart@state.co,us>, 46 US Army Corps of Engineers <t ny.a.mckee@usace.army.mil>, 51 Alpine Anglers - Trout Unlimited <alpineanglers,,tu@q.com> Light & Power has no concerns with this variance request. Todd. Todd J. Steiichen Town of Estes Park Light & Power Division Line Superintendent 970577-3601 tsteichen@estes.org On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> wrote: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT This email is to notify you that Planning staff has accepted the variance application listed below as complete and scheduled it for review, .s j/mall.gong€a.comlmalil?u1=2&€k=6ed2499adc&v few = pt&seardh=€nbox&th=13967288ea992801 Inter -Office Memorandum To: Community Development From: Jeff Boles, Cliff Tedder and Steve Rusch Date: 9/18/2012 Re: Final/Public Review: Rezoning Request, 900 W. Elkhorn Avenue, Lots 1 & 2 Witt Subdivision The Water Department has no Final/Public Review comments for the above application. 10 '12/12 of of Estes Park Mail - Fwd: REFERRAL FOR' i •MMENT - Fall River lodge Vartanoe, Lots 1 & 2, Wit.. ai � »� illll®IIIIIIIIIIII�7 �' � y K Fwd: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT - Fall River Lodge Variance, Lots 1 & 2, Witt Subdivision - FINAL REVIEW (UNCLASSIFIED) Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> To: Dave Shirk <dshirk@estes.org> Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:31 AM Forwarded message From: McKee, Terry A NWO <Terry.A.McKee@usace.army.rnil> Date: Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:58 AM Subject: RE: REFERRAL FOR COMMENT- Fall River Lodge Variance, Lots 1 & 2, Witt Subdivision - FINAL REVIEW (UNCLASSIFIED) To: Karen Thompson <kthompson@estes.org> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Karen, If any work requires the discharge of dredged or fill material, and any excavation associated with a dredged or fill project, either temporary or permanent in an aquatic site, which may include ephemeral and perennial streams, wetlands, lakes, ponds, drainage ditches and irrigation ditches, this office should be notified by a proponent of the project for Department of the Army permits, changes in permit requirements or jurisdictional determinations pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Identify what the project is. Also, the work in an aquatic site should be identified by the proponent of the project and be shown on a map identifying the Quarter Section, Township, Range and County or Latitude and Longitude, Decimal Degrees (example 40.55555; -104,55555) and the dimensions of work in each aquatic site. Any loss of an aquatic site may require mitigation. Mitigation requirements will be determined during the Department of the Army permitting review. Terry, Any questions call: Mr. Terry McKee U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Denver Regulatory Office 9307 South Wadsworth Boulevard Littleton, CO 80128 (303) 979-4120 —Original Message ----- From: Karen Thompson [mailto:kthompson estes.org] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 4:34 PM To: 01 Greg White; 02 Frank Lancaster; 04 Scott Zurn; 05 Kevin Ash; 06 Jen Imber; 07 Susie Parker, 08 Jeff Boles; 09 Reuben Bergsten; 10 Todd Steichen; 11 Will Birchfield; 12 Scott Dorman; 13 Eric Rose; 14 Skyler Rorabaugh; 32 Rick Spowart; McKee, Terry A NWO; 51 Alpine Anglers - Trout Unlimited tps://mail.google. m/mall/24w Milo=6ed2499adc&vlaw -pt&search=Inbox&th=139bb1b3fa6b7698 Subj: RE: Updates Please on 900 w. Elkhorn Date: 5/3/2012 2:51:11 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time From: 0 ; t To: WM Hi Ken- 4COMMUNIIY DEVEL0PMENTJ Alison and I discussed this issue at length today. We expect the Fixter's to submit for a temporary use permit for weddings soon. We are communicating to the Fixters that if they desire to continue that use, they will need to apply for a rezoning to the "A" Accommodations district — this differs from the A-1 in that additional uses such as restaurants and wedding facilities are allowed; this is not a rezoning that our department would support. If they opt to apply for a rezoning, you would be duly notified. We are communicating to them the code violations regarding development in the river setback (trail/patios/bridge), and will outline their options (remove improvements and restore or apply for a variance); if they opt for a variance, you will be duly notified. David W. Shirk, AICP Planner, Estes Park Community Development 1200 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 ph: 970-577-3729 fx: 970-586-0249 dshirk@estes.org From: Kwynstra@aol.com (mailto:Kwynstra@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:08 AM To: Dave Shirk Subject: Updates Please on 900 w. Elkhorn Hi Dave, Could you please give me updates on what is going on at 900 W. Elkhorn and their Wedding Site plans. Neither Jackie Love (next door neighbor) or myself completely understood what was the final decision regarding that subject as you indicated Fixters may still be able to file for certain permits and what that entails. Thanks. Ken and Kay Wynstra Thursday, June 07, 2012 AOL: Kwynstra rage 1 oY 1 R. Yesterday's meeting ( on June 5th) Subj: RE: Yesterday's meeting ( on June dth) Date: 6012012 2 55:22 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time From ill r To: �nstra o :coif Thanks Ken, please call me Frank, SEP 2 7 2012 EliOPMENTI I need to follow up further on this ends but'' initial _n�ron see where this stands. 1 ms should have been �� for not much differently, mo I in _...... ror.., d. believe�rrs3fram the Trustees before I� u� 1 need to �r ability to respond. m sure what dir�ecfi if � decisive on this, although I would like to be, but 1 have ony been here two weeks and still getting the lay of the land. Frank —Original Message — From: Kwynstraeaol.com jmailto:Kwynstra@aol.corn] Sent Wed 616 2012 6:21 PM To: Frank Lancaster Subject Yesterdays meeting ( on June 5th) Dear Mr. Lancaster, Is it o.k to address you as Frank? Thank you for meeting with my wife Kay, Norm Love and myself regarding the "situation" at 900 West Elkhorn. 1 know time was short but we also know you have an extremely busy schedule. I feet it necessary to e-mail you because up to this point, you have not been informed of the situation of our and neighbors opinion, disaster regarding protocol of that property and the "go ahead" plans of The Riders. From our knowledge and proof of that situation, they, "Raters", never got permission from the building, planning department but just went ahead with their "Wedding Site" and even after the Town of Estes Park found out about what they had began, and had violated many things, continuance of that project proceeded with only a slight pause. The Town planning department told them they needed to put the wet land back to the original condition, remove the foot bridge across that part of the wet lands, had violated setbacks in the food plain and it is still there with now taik from the planning department of possibly considering temporary usage and setback availability. Us and neighbors (16 and counting) have signed a petition asking for NO Wedding Site for the integrity of the neighborhood. PLEASE, do not allow this to happen in any way and the project must be stopped. It isn't as this is anything new as we and neighbors have been working against this sine It began in March with NO Permits and it continues. Please read the letters written. Please keep us informed as we and neighbors will continue this objection and meetings until it is shut down. Why should violators care of violations as long as violators get what they have wanted anyway. 890 West Elkhorn Ken Wynstra, nn ^/,1 q A I%T V.���..Arn 17.1,5 WC OMMLI,I, DEVELOPMENT TO: The Board of Adjustments, Trustees of the Town Board, and Frank Lancaster RE: Zoning and variance applications for 900 W Elkhorn and it's Adjoining lot September 17, 2012 We, Ken and Kay Wynstra live next door to 900 W Elkhorn, at 890 W. Elkhorn. Below are our reasons why the Fixter's should not be allowed these application requests. 1. Before the Fixter's purchased 900 W Elkhorn, the land was in a natural state for fishermen and animals. Fixter's have violated the 30-foot river setback, built a bridge on wetlands, cut two roads down the slope down to the river (and It appears, Fixters workers have thrown the trees cut down in the river and on "The Island ") — pictures enclosed), and have made walkways and sitting areas. Why has the City of Estes turned a blind eye to this? 2. Fixter's previously rezoned from Commercial to A-1 Accommodations, establishing a small hotel of 30 people. We believe this was to run their business in town and run a small hotel at the same time, with no supervision (as advertised in their VRBO add). Rezoning to A accommodations would allow them up to 100 people by non -guests for weddings and conventions. They already have their brochure in place. We, as next door neighbors, have endured their 30 person hotel all summer. There has been increased noise with children in the river and on the playground, reunions, weddings, and partying on the patio. Their swim spa, 65 feet from out bedroom window, has not been operational. We have experienced one wedding complete with wedding tent, lights, large speakers, DJ, and partying. We purchased our property for its natural beauty, peace and serenity. All that would be gone! There are already 38 wedding venues in Estes Park. This zoning would bring increased calls for noise violation enforcement, multiple cars and trucks, partying, and possible motor homes. 3. All the commercial lots they mention in their application are developed with single family residential homes. We are a residential neighborhood between Old Ranger Drive and Fall River Lane. One owner's exploitation should not demise an entire neighborhood with loss of financial investment and quality of life. There are 34 signatures' protesting this development on Fall River. Thank you for this consideration! Pictures enclosed. Respectfully, Ken and Kay Wynstra a s Bc.+857e-, tod-lar‘ds '''1111114'N'4" .111. II' 01,0I' " ah "0000' 01,0"000i om+lp07 1110107010 11 f!"4iPiil l a�,4^,IVJ ^nhi@'I.'' II "io 0000001010,1 11111111111111111111111111111111111 m�'IMMiu 1liiii,,0l010000lll0 , dl 'lllllll"1111ir OII��,4i„INuu�W"� 11111111111111111 007000 0ml0000llllili ilh�00000, ,Nh 1 of- Cocks N1'11'1111111 1.1)));(:,:wiy„uu, kopds xe4 -4� wd-1a,,,d.r April 12, 2012 Town of Estes Park Departments of Planning and Development Building inspections, Permits, and any Departments concerned 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Neighbors of 900 West Elkhorn And the West lot adjacent to that address Petition to Not Allow a Wedding Site Dear officials of the Town of Estes Park, This petition is in regard to the possible consideration of allowing a Wedding Site either permanent or temporary at the Lot West of 900 West Elkhorn at the upper and lower part of that Residential Lot which is down by the River. We are neighbors and concerned citizens that in our opinion would be directly affected by noise, possible fire, possible intoxication of guests, sanitation issues (unsightly porta pots), unsightly portable tents, traffic danger and congestion, guests crossing West Elkhorn and disturbing the Peace and tranquility that a River brings to this area. We the owners and neighbors do hereby sign and register our concern and Petition to not allow this development. Names, Addresses, date of signing, ect. : FoR ?1�'QX 525..Ir 1~n dC rvroil5 s :..L. V 5l .°141 5 crnl'1'‘ \X c� m 81-9z90 J! ;I-r,, 00.01. F i/ £ A 9f/ av/ c, n(� (� p �} Seib, 5.-cr, fame K t.Lr i« situ � Q f 4170 i\ �l�vct Li j �Gt{+tYLowG Estes Park Planning and Development Board of Adjustments, and Town Manager of Estes Park- Mr. Frank Lancaster Ken L. Wynstra 890 West Elkhorn Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 It is with much anxiety that I feel it necessary to refute letters sent to you from Cornerstone Engineering and Robert and Carol Fixter of 900 West Elkhorn in Estes Park, Colorado. In my opinion, there are misleading and omitted "Truths" in these letters sent to you. All statements are my opinion and followed by what I belief IS THE TRUTH! Both of those letters were dated August 22, 2012. We as neighbors never saw trash, barbed wire, ect. and it seems to imply that area was a trash dump. That is not true. I had walked that area a few times before "Fixters"bought the property and other Neighbors did as well. Who knows if there was any real items listed but we certainly did not notice it. We DID NOTICE the wet lands which one could not easily walk through and understood that a large portion of the land Had to be in the Ftoodplain. In March and early April of 2012 there were chainsaws, bulldozer -bobcats, and gravel trucks delivering gravel and delivering flat flagstone and tearing up the hillside of "Fixters" property. This went on for a lot of days so the Saturday Morning after that horrendous week I felt I must go to "Fixters" and find out what was going on. I met Carol Fixter in their driveway and asked that question. Her reply was," we are building a Wedding site" and my reply was "Carol, you never told us that". Her reply back with a smile on her face was "Ken, we don't have to tell you everything". They didn't tell us everything and a few days later after meeting with E.P. planning department found out they had not told the Town of Estes Park either and had not applied for permits. We have 34 signatures on a petition in your information packet from neighbors who vehemently oppose this variance with the "Fixters and the next step of having a Wedding Site in a Neighborhood. Estes Park already HAS 38 Wedding sites and this is in a NEIGHBORHOOD! As you have probably experienced yourselves, modern Weddings are Party Time with Loud music (often with a D.J.) drunkenness, Police calls, sometime fights, loud and unpleasant use of words and whatever. Use your memory and imagination! "Fixters" somehow managed to forget or omit Wedding site in their letter to you. They are in many violations already and they just continued to pursue what they wanted. Another thing; was a defoliant sprayed down before the gravel and stonework? It washes into the River when it rains. If it wasn't, what will they do when grass and weeds come up ? Defoliant? This should have NEVER gone This Far and now they want to go further. PLEASE do not allow this to happen at The River or allow parking on the adjacent lot!! "SOME WOULD RATHER ASK FOR FORGIVENESS THAN ASK FOR PERMISSION". If that happens, what is the point of permits?? Who would bother to get them? I Ken L. Wynstra--- (970) 577-0887 or cell (970) 215-9749 Subj: Fixter Variance and Zoning Applications Date: 9/25/2012 9:48:39 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time From: �,�} �, "�.. To: CC: i J MOP We are long time residents on Fall River Lane directly across the Fall River from the Fixter's property at 890 a 900 West Elkhorn Avenue. As are many of our neighbors, we are seriously concerned about the excavation and degradation of wetlands and probable setback violations that have occurred on the Fixter's property, without the approval of or permitting from the Town or the Corps of Engineers. Further, we are opposed to the proposals to allow for large wedding and retreat functions to be held at the Fixter's house and Tots, considering the noise, traffic, and offensive behavior that may likely ensue. Neighbors have already been disturbed by the bright lights, and loud and late occurring music from a wedding celebration earlier this summer. We strongly support those local residents who have also expressed their opposition to the property owners' applications for variances and a possible zoning change. rageiu1L Donald H. Lickfett Gloria A. Lickfett 410 Fall River Lane Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6950 (20120308) The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. ham;/ :_.:.::.:.:...:..JA ,:,,.,:„w. Wednesday, September 26, 2012 AOL: Kwynstra September 27, 2012 TO: Alison Chilcott - Director of Community Development Department, Estes Park FR: Jon and Josiane Edy - Property Owners of 560 Fall River Lane, Estes Park RE: Fall River Lodge - 900 Elkhorn Ave, Estes Park As a follow up to our meeting on August 22, 2012 in your office, we wanted to provide you our thoughts on the recent Letter of Intent regarding the Fall River Lodge. During a visit to Estes Park in 2010, we fell in love with the town and immediately began looking for a home to purchase. We closed on our home on Fall River Lane in July, 2011. For us this was to become our second home for the time being with the future thought of it becoming our retirement home. We felt we did our due diligence in understanding the adjoining property zonings, including having a survey completed, during our time in which we decided to purchase our home. With certainty we can say, had one of the adjoining properties be zoned for "A -Accommodations", we would not have considered the purchase of this home. As you can imagine discovering months after the purchase that one of our new neighbor's intent is to change the zoning and develop wetlands for commercial use, we were appalled to think that the town of Estes Park would allow such a change in the natural setting of Elkhorn Estates. Rezoning from "A-1" to "A" Accommodations Impacts: • Noise/Disturbance level (music, sound systems) to increase as a result of having up to 100 people at the venue. • lncrease in traffic/parking - where do up to 100 people attending the venue park their cars? • Handicap Access - What does handicapped access consist of regarding the proposed project? Is this included in the environmental impact report? • Managing curfews and intoxicated guests down by the river and on the home property -who is accountable for the guests? • Restroom access by the river? Port -A -Potty's by the river? • Property values will decrease for adjoining neighbors. • Property management along the river - how to keep guests off of others properties? • Trash and debris left by the up to 100 guests. • Increase in liability for damage to adjoining properties. Wetlands Impact: • We are concerned with the lack of compliancy with regards to the wetlands area close to the river given our current knowledge of the rules and regulations. ttr /wl.j hfqptate. o. s/LA NDWAT ER /WETL.., SP go6RAm /WFTLANDRE6ii LATIO Pages/ eLla dRev at oo p!x • To date already there is a bridge built going over a standing water area. • Also, there are two large flag stone areas (to our knowledge already used for two wedding ceremonies this summer) that are less than 30 feet of the high water mark of the river and within --10 feet of our property line. • What happens to the wildlife that used to enjoy this area? Photographs: • Figure 1 o Shows the border of our property at 560 Fall River Lane and 900 Elkhorn. How will the river edge be protected from guests attending an event here? a Noted are sketches of what is currently developed on the lower part of the property at 900 Elkhorn. • Figure 2 o Map from Larimer County Assessor's office showing adjoining property lines. • Figure 3 o Access areas created to get to the river including the bridge that was built and does not seem to be mentioned in the Letter of intent. • Figure 4 o Shows the flagstone gathering area by the river. o River erosion at the river edge already happening. • Figure 5 o Corner stake of our property at the river edge with flagstone gathering area in the background. In Summary: • We do not support the change in rezoning per the Letter of Intent. • We would be very disappointed in the Town of Estes Park should they agree to this change. • More than 34 adjoining neighbors also disagree with this rezoning proposal. • It is causing us to rethink our remodeling plans to make our home the dream home that we had intended to create at the time of purchase. • There is no easement in our deed to allow trespassing or traffic from adjacent property. It appears that the proposed project for the Fall River Lodge does not meet the high standard of quality of life that the residents in Estes Park currently enjoy which could certainly be jeopardized should a project like this become approved. In closing we greatly appreciate your consideration with regards to protecting our property that we truly enjoy in Estes Park Sinc M.Edy josiane C. Edy 5 attachments included II 1 ,011 11111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111 11 1111111111111011111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111,110111111k 111111'111111111 111111111 1010100000100voomiol1111111111111111111111'„0„ 0,11111111\1111111 1110 010 1111111 m0000 0111111111 010,,,, , 00001 00101 1,11111111111111 10 1111111 r(DC4 1101111011111110111100.1.111.1 111111111110'011:110 1 .111111 1'11111 0'11°1 1,0 goi 000 0, 01:I 01000010 ,1111, 00100111111001 110111111111111111111111111111111111N 1,00 1.11011111111111.1„111.0111111 11111'0 "1111110 A001 111111110101:10 1 111 11111111'1'iy 1111,111111111111111111111111111111111111111.,ik 0100011V11111111111111111111(1I 1111111111111111 111111111 1010 ;11111111111111111 '111111111111111111111111110„1 !!! 1111111111111111111111'11111111111111111'11111111 11111111111111' 'r$'1100 Im'o'ilii01-00.07711110"Hoovo0001, 0000,00000100.„. 01000000,000001:111„ 00000 111.1„„ 1111 0000000001 101 1,100,00100N11111 :°11111011!:',11'0011111011001,11 11111110001pH11101111110111, 111111111.1.1.1.1...1,11111 1 100 , 001 1 0 100 1,10 1110000-1011""" 110 11, 1,11 11111111111100,11111y, 11111111, 11,1111,1 0001100010 0111 1• 11111111111111111111111111111111111111' 11111111 111110111110001111111111111101000000 1111111111110010001 1011 11,111f 11 0111 011111100001010 1111111 10,Aum '1, 0010„„11111111111111111111111111,111, 1111 100;11°0111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111111;1'J 110100001101, 011111100100 011111 111100Y 00111, 1111,11010009,11,r1000 000uu 004 611111111110101010101101110101010111111011111iiiiiii 6 101 1,1,1p4 11011,10 001111111111 11111 11001,•111110111111 °L10 L100111111111 1100 00000001 00000 10000001 001 1111101' 10E110001110 11100100 11110,11, 0111111'01 01, 0110011100000 IV 101111111111111111 11111100100 111 1001,11011111 1101,1„0000,,1 111111111 „D1 00010010111° """""" 0000'1' 111111111111111111 1,111, 1,111 00°111111 111111110100111111111110111111111111111111 111111111111 Iiiiiiiii1,11111111111111101111111111100 111111111111111111111111111100 w111111000ur ,,.11,11111111111 00011111111 IIIIIII11111111;01110111111111111111111117771 " ..;.'10;1001101010 1.0000,1 „.01, 'All 111111 11111111111111111111111111!It.e 111111111 , 11111111111 1111111111111111111110111111111111"1 1 11111,11111111111111111110,L00 110 1111111111111111111110010hli 11111111111101110111111111101110101° 00000000 01000000001 ,#;0060000,0000 crg 111100111111" 110IA011111111111111111111))11110111111100000 i0000111111111 1111111m 111!„,„ 10000111101 1111 1,011111111111111111111111111111111111111111110 HI 10 '1 11111111111111 ° l'11111111111011111111° 1100000 111111111,, ,111111 111111111111111111,1 01.11,111111111111,01[1 111 j1,.1111111111111111111[ 00111.0111:111111111111111000 ;11 00000000' 0.1000 000 100 000 111 11111'00110°1' 11'/T„ il , 111.311.1„ u0000110110111111111111111111111111111111111011111 0111111110 11111111'11' 1100111111111111111111111111r IlL;01011,0,y,011111111111111?11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111101111111111111111111111111111111111110 11111 00001 11.1111111111111 00000000 00 11 .111 1 6 611001100,111. looIllo111111110 '1 ,',011',11',11111'01011,111010101010010001m00000 . 1111111111111111111111111111111111111110011101 , 0 1 11111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111 ' '111111111111'lliiiii 1,11 , 11'111111111111111 00011010000010111111111001111100011010.0.1 001010111111111111111111111111111100 00111 1111111111111 1 1,1111 0I10,111111:0::::IIIIIIIIIIII1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111110001 r 11'1 010001110 „ w 11.001.11.111.1.1.1.01'1"„,;;1$11.0100111111.1 401 11 """"1111110"'1100,1111111111 1111, 1I11,11111111 ,01111111110um,,,,,,00 10 00000 0111 1100011A 001'1110111111111111'111111111111111 11110 ill .111011111y11111111'1111.1111111111111111.... 0111, ,101 11111111100 111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111110001::::::::11111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111110140011111111111111111111111111111111111111101111,1111',!11 "10 11111111, 1 0 100000100111111111111111100 .1111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111'11'1111111'1'1'1'1'1'1111I 11111IIIIIII1 111011016 001100000000000000000000 ,01111011111111111111111111111111111111111111111111101101114'''k.,0 ?(It9 , 11111101101100001°°''°' ) (11100111111101010 1 111001000111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111 1111111°00',1 iloo1011100vv0000010000000,01,00,1,, unnun u.....011111111111000000000,11 hoI00000mII11111111Ijjjjjj111IIIIIIIIIIII1111V1111111001 10100000111111111111111111100000o0o0000 11111111'11111111I11111 0001111111111111111191111 000 , 00000 'III 0 111111111111 1,111111110111110100000010 1.1110000 ,00111101110:111111 1111'1'111111111111,11111111110101111011:161 11,10: 111111111111111111, 11111 h 11 I 1111111'11 000,0011,00001,1001011010111111 11, 0 10 0111111111111111q1100000: 0111 ' 10,1. `1 1111111111110011111 .00.01111111111111111111111 A0111 i11111111100000011.111V11111111111hoi .1.0111111 III „ „„.000. „0.1111'111 111"'"010000000 1111111111!100011 l'ul111111.111 00,0000004p 0110 00010111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111 001 1111,1111111111111111111 111111111111111111111 0110 01111111111111101 1111111111 101110000011110110 111111111111111111111111111111111 0111111111111111111111111111191 101110111110111111111 114111111114:1M,,, 10 )I1 1111111111111111111111111 Wank' Cooky Land Information Lamar n pod ';Olf COOkant.,,, f.00(40/2uution 444413414,000 4/444,1 nove./ Cam annocaTinanis NOMINO 4447,4,74,441144 470 314344110 2101.1001, IONO1011, Sel,1!!110C,D 9,117, '44 4 )111 2314601P , 474,44:04440 IN OYU 44,40 HP,, k 4 44, 2501141111 ilvrivov esmres :114,97,111,10 ANT $ 044 '44, 44,4 444: „444 44' 4,4 342.1444015 4444444444.44,744'444,74,444rex.,4774444 IS2140111117 •Cisufe.._ 2. 0:11maP11411111111.0w1411P111111a1140caunIdefaulLaspx1PAKEL111111•3523422001 1111 11111 0000010 1"1111"11111,1111'11, 1111111111000000100000000000 1111111111 1111001111i1111,'11'0111111111111111111111 of-7 7/10/12 7:44 P Asslasmant TraParal Own,er oCJI 1.14.7,4,24,110,4 .41Ad sea p,747,14141:1114111;17,111h111'.14, Exp4o '4411,04144,414477,74 ..1„.:1„.1„.1„.1„..1.1„1„0 00 1.1.1„1„, 1,11,111.11,1111, 1,0,7 olloonnii,01„.,„ .111111 111111111 . '1111111111,1100400 1111 fi"""""""""illill1111'11111111111'111 '1 011111111111111111110 11:1 11111111 v11.11 111414.- 1,11, - pill 12110111M 111111111 1111111111111111 I 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111 ,21111111:11 00,1111111-111"1"111111"""1111111111111111111111111011111111101 10010001 1111 01 101111111 1111.111 hile01111000100000amoo'lla101010010000onn"11111111 Eepoio 11 - - ?tlliipiolompo 4513404010 44747, 3621.444444 peg. 1 of 1 0,1,110,;:4„„4„a2N,14 DIDII111111", ,,,I, ,„„ ,ry 9/2c/12 „2„ duo Wyk Mu X Y8 „',i- P l A Town of Estes Park Fixter Variance and Zoning Applications Fixter Variance and Zoning Applications donglor cdonglorl@mindspring.com> To: achilcott@estes.org Cc: "Pinkham, Bill" <sbpinkham@beyondbb.com> �ELOPM..E TI Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 9:48 PM We are long time residents on Fall River Lane directly across the Fall River from the Fixter's property at 890 and 900 West Elkhom Avenue. As are many of our neighbors, we are seriously concemed about the excavation and degradation of wetlands and probable setback violations that have occurred on the Fixter's property, without the approval of or permitting from the Town or the Corps of Engineers. Further, we are opposed to the proposals to allow for large wedding and retreat functions to be held at the Fixter's house and Tots, considering the noise, traffic, and offensive behavior that may likely ensue. Neighbors have already been disturbed by the bright lights, and loud and late occurring music from a wedding celebration earlier this summer. We strongly support those local residents who have also expressed their opposition to the property owners' applications for variances and a possible zoning change. Donald H. Lickfett Gloria A. Lickfett 410 Fall River Lane Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6950 (20120308) The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com https://mail.google.mm/mall/u/o/7u1=28dk=5bb48ca6376Wiaw=ptasearchainbox&th=13a00b0cd1a893ec Stanton B. & Mary P. Peterson 460 Valley Road Estes Park, CO 80517 (850) 543-1735 stan.peterson@cox.net September 24, 2012 Planning & Zoning Department Town of Estes Park 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517 wst 25 2072 ICQMMI�NfTYDEV .__ iopMENT Re: Variance and Rezoning Request for 900 West Elkhorn & Adjacent Lot To Whom It May Concern: We are extremely concerned about and opposed to the variance and rezoning request submitted by Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying, Inc. (CES) an behalf of their clients, Robert & Carol Fixter and the Fall River Lodge at 900 West Elkhorn and the adjacent lot. This variance was submitted after the fact that trees had been bulldozed, walkways constructed, and flagstone patios built within the Fall River setback and trail easement along the Fall River. This was a flagrant violation of city ordnances and disregard of the city's planning process. The Fixter's claim of ignorance of setback and floodplain requirements is irrelevant and quite frankly incredible given that they are the owners of another business establishment in Estes Park. As a fly fisherman and concerned environmentalist, I am astonished that this construction work was allowed to take place on essentially public property, and would like to see the owner's fined and required to return the land to it's natural state at their own expense. As property owners living a mere few hundred yards from the Fall River Lodge, we have experienced first-hand the noise and disturbance caused by the business. We have heard load music and loud voices coming from the business late into the night, and can only imagine what disturbances would be generated by a "100" guest wedding venue operating seven days a week. For this reason we are adamantly opposed to their request to change the zoning from A-1 to A. We are extremely proud of your hard work in making Estes Park a beautiful and desirable place to live, and hope that you will disapprove this variance and rezoning request. My great-grandmother built our cabin here in Estes Park in 1913 in a quiet and peaceful residential neighborhood, and we would very much like to see that character preserved. YoursVery Respectfully, espectfully, Stan & Mary Peterson Seotember Keith & Sharon Carson 470 Fall River Lane Estes Park, CO 80517 (402) 332-2589 RE: Zoning and Variance Application for 900 W Elkhorn Ave and Adjoining Lot To whom it may concern: We choose to build our property on Fall River Lane because of the natural beauty of the neighborhood, the peace and quiet, and most of all the wildlife that roams freely throughout the yards and water. Because we are unable to enjoy our home as often as we like we decided to make it a rental property until we are able to retire and move to Estes Park permanently. We are against to rezoning 900 W Elkhorn Avenue lots 1 & 2 to A accommodations. There are currently 38 wedding and event venues in Estes Park and our concern is that if the accommodations are changed the noise, chaos and parking will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, wildlife, the peace and quiet, and the number of renters that request to stay at our property year after year. This property is our home please don't change what we love about it. Thank you for your help with this matter. Sincerely, Adh Keith and Sharon Carson -the. 14 O e:e 4-he. y1 e !? 00A g we., hive, ,btu he -- ' ,� ' y/y IN Estes Valley Planning Commission Sept. 25, 2012 Dear Sirs: We are writing this letter to protest the request for a variance of zoning laws by Robert and Carol Fixter regarding the property at 900 West Elkhorn and adjoining lot. As we understand, they have already had one variance to allow them to change the zoning to allow a small hotel. Now they want to change the zoning again. The town, the planning commission and citizens have spent time and money and had lots of debate to establish these zoning laws. If they are constantly changed and variances allowed, we have wasted the time, money and effort spent establishing the zoning. This is a quiet family neighborhood and most of us have lived within the covenants that were in effect when we bought our property. It was our responsibility to check the zoning laws. We have already had one property that was built on a too -small lot and was allowed to happen. We don't need more of this kind of situation. The noise and traffic and parking problems for this new venue are not in character for this neighborhood and would be very disruptive. It probably would not bother us as much as it would the "closer" neighbors, but we do feel we should all be considered before changes are made. We feel the zoning laws should be enforced. We do hear the sound from Performance Park at our property, but it is not excessive and we feel it is for the good of the community, not for personal gain. If the proposed wedding/events site were to be allowed it would probably bring noise, chaos, drunkenness, a liquor license and possible police calls. For these reasons we feel the request for a zoning change should be denied and the bulldozing, etc. done against the regulations should be restored. For the Lane Family Trust yr Request for Variance and Rezoning, 900 W. Elkhorn, Witt Subdivision Owner — Robert & Carole Fixter We ask there be NO approval of requested variance, rezoning or development agreement on this property. We are in disagreement with the following requests cited on their application and attached submittal letters. PROJECT DESCRIPTION /AREA OF DISTURBANCE — Fixters protest that they were not informed by previous owner about "area of disturbance". it is not the responsibility of neighbors or Town to make adjustments because of their poor diligence prior to purchase. We purchased Lot 4 of the new Witt Subdivision and cleaned it up. Wynstras bought Lot 3 and cleaned it up. Fixters bought Lots 1 & 2 and cleaned them up. That's what every responsible person does. Fixters do not deserve any special consideration for this. VARIANCE /WETLAND, "FISHERMAN'S TRAIL" - - When we purchased Lot 4 in 2005 it was obvious this trail was a pattern formed by elk and deer. Fishermen prefer fishing from the bank on the opposite side of the river, not in the grassy wetland. In coordinating the annual spring cleanup of the river beginning in 2006, no rusty stained water was noted in the wetland area. However, it should be noted that a permanent foot bridge is now located in this area. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT / LOT - - Prior to our lot purchase we visited the Town Planning Commission to be sure a single family residence could be placed with the required setbacks. Also at the time of purchase we signed a covenant restricting fencing, external buildings, mobile homes, animals and operation of a business. The intent to maintain a residential setting is obvious. Therefore, it is important the zoning on the remaining unimproved lot NOT be changed to accommodate a PARKING LOT for up to 100 nonresident guests. This should not be allowed through rezoning, development agreement or any other vehicle they devise. REZONING - - This is a residential neighborhood. All surrounding properties are residential in nature. We enjoy the sounds of nature and the river. We do not want - - - 100 non guests revolving through our neighborhood on a routine basis - - Amplified noise from loudspeakers, DJ's, bands - - Alcohol and the abuses that go with its use - - Bright Lights - Unsightly lineup of portable potties - an unimproved lot filled with parked cars - When we heard the property had sold we were pleased and looked forward to meeting our new neighbor. However, the past year the quiet ambience of our lives has been besieged with requests for variance, temporary variance, rezoning and trial weddings. The current application for rezoning and variance will destroy the integrity of our neighborhood. Please do not approve. Norman and Jacqueline Love - - 880 W. Elkhorn Planning & Zoning Department Town of Estes Park 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517 On Ern Riurr 525 fall River Lane Estes Park, Colorado $051 7 September 20, 2012 Re: Variance Request for 900 West Elkhorn & Adjacent Lot I would like to comment on the above variance request that I understand is pending before the Town of Estes Park. I strongly oppose said variance being granted. As a former member of the Planning Commission, 1 was involved when initial discussions were had regarding the Witt Property when they approached the Town to use their home as a combination B & B and place to sell their antiques. At that time there were serious concerns regarding the residential nature of the area and what affect that would have on the quality of life for the other residents. This new proposal to have weddings and a possible hotel on the ' 1 West Elkhorn & Adjacent Lot properties would be a travesty of the planning and zoning process...not to mention the negative affect on the neighboring property owners. It appears from their actions to date that the current owners have decided to ignore town regulations and simply go forward and do whatever they wish regardless of the detriment to the Town, its regulations and their neighbors. I understand that trees have already been bulldozed, a road/pathway built and floodplain and wetlands possibly violated. By their actions, the owners clearly do not care If they violate Town ordinances and appear to challenge the Town to do anything about their careless and possibly illegal actions. 1 do not want to see the Town of Estes Park become a place where zoning becomes an "after the fact" rubber stamping of people's callous, self-centered and uncaring actions. I urge that their variance be denied and that the Town take all necessary actions to have the property returned to its previous, unaltered state. 57r4--/uite, CC/ Q AI'L_mhti 5 & E.,14 Ratti Gag_ v,3o,c 11 PRO-T s Y 46 ZvtiiivG e 4� �..� Rom.,-t Cpav i f r x -4-i ., woCN? 15 5,414,4541 5kOGk1^5 US v v to. &/&_) r.1 IS TN a J EI6rt 4 t 10E: AS IGN0>U Xec 6 11) celvwm14 74110 pruc e1J eta PRo Tfs i c f Sr .G Ar PR07tsT, Wffo IADoLg .1)6 71(1114--11,0f.►16It' Ouits 1 �l'1'�Pirt ✓�✓L 1 �, � -�' �� i4 �� ZrjPvi r Ga'd fr09101Zyv � h 1 do -go /)cT IA) A fL piovv.tu,theInd � --qk(r Jo. I 6-14\ 5p 4 Ilvj eittiza-1 toe,t,,0 0e , 5 AR L s p f enri-7 if Lu8 B- 6 ) G 0 EvetiT tit 06.3 ��r►� f vdf putzo, Yeete4 ovapci 4 U,r P R o T hJT c.vdt 4 h J �� e �,� 00)� n 4l 6ry y b prevk-14 -t -13 NoNSEA✓Si cr4 L 2_0.vins r.-GQ(17 VAR►�o �t �cn �iw, � w- l �� Rd a.-0( � gz.L.4 C /v2 f 110 COMMUNITY April 12.2012 Town of Fstec Park Departments of Planning and Development Building inspections, Permits, and any Departments concerned 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Neighbors of 900 West Elkhorn And the West lot adjacent to that address Petition to Not Allow a Wedding Site Dear officials of the Town of Estes Park, This petition is in regard to the possible consideration of allowing a Wedding Site either permanent or temporary at the Lot West of 900 West Elkhorn at the upper and lower part of that Residential Lot which is down by the River. We are neighbors and concerned citizens that in our opinion would be directly affected by noise, possible fire, possible intoxication of guests, sanitation issues =unsightly porta pots), unsightly portable tents, traffic danger and congestion, guests crossing West Elkhorn and disturbing the Peace and tranquility that a River brings to this area. We the owners and neighbors do hereby sign and register our concern and Petition to not allow this development Names, Addresses, date of signing, ect. : 3 i° 4-0 Pc.cr0 - "rvq_ Ai 91 F PaA.k, WC.S7 7 1/111111, October 1, 2012 Ross and Sue Bethel Ms. Allison Chilcott Director of Community Development 170 MacGregor Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Request for Variance, 900 W. Elkhorn Dear Ms. Chilcott: I apologize for the late comment but have recently become aware of the request for Variance at 900 W. Elhorn which would allow for wedding parties of up to 100 guests at that site. We are the owners of 503 Fall River Lane, Unit A and enjoy the quiet setting and abundance of wildlife in the neighborhood. We feel the requested variance would create large disturbance of the neighborhood and destroy the peaceful setting we so enjoy at our second home. Sound often funnels up the river (we can hear the parties at the Elkhorn Stables) and we can only imagine the disturbance having a wedding party with 100 guests, within a block of our deck, would have on our peaceful setting. We ask that the petition for a variance to allow the wedding site be denied! Sincerely, Ross Bethel Denver Home: fires 6.6t2t0 Sue Bethel 2457 S. Leyden St. Denver, CO 80222 303-489-7881 Estes Home: 503 Fall River Lane Estes Park, CO 80517 The following public comment was submitted by Ken Wynstra prior to the submittal of the variance application. On September 27, 2012, Mr. Wynstra specifically asked that this information be included as public comment for the variance request. rrf Alison Chilcott From: Alison Chilcott Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 10:59 AM To: 'Kwynstra @ aol.com' Subject: RE: Out of Office AutoReply: Another signature We have a pre -application meeting scheduled on July 10th with the Fixters, Cornerstone Engineering, and other departments. I expect to receive a sketch plan in early July showing the trail and patio. Alison Chitrott, Director Community Development Department Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 170 MacGregor Avenue (970) 577-3720 (phone) (970) 586-0249 (fax) ach iicott@estes.o rq www.estes.orq From: Kwvnstra0aol.com (ma�o,KwvnstraCalaol.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 5:23 PM To: Alison Chilcott Subject: Re: Out of Office AutoReply: Another signature Hi Allison. I talked to Kimball Bass today and we both thought it best to have their original signatures on the petition so I sent them a form today and they will sign it and send it back. Anything else new with Fixters and their pursuit? Ken Wynstra In a message dated 6/18/2012 8:55:20 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, achilcott@estes.orq writes: I am out of the office and wiii respond to your email when I return on Tuesday, June 19th. If you need assistance before then, please contact: Administrative Assistant Karen Thomspon 970-577-3721 k homoson@estes.orq or Planner Dave Shirk 970-577-3729 dshirk ©estes.orq Thank you. Alison Chilcott Community Development Director Alison Chilcott =rom: Sent: To: Subject: Alison Chilcott Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:42 AM 'Kwynstra @ aol. corn' RE: Another signature I don't have a preference. Whatever works best for you and your neighbor is fine. Alison Chilcott, Director Community Development Department Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 170 MacGregor Avenue (970) 577-3720 (phone) (970) 586-0249 (fax) ghi'icott estes.orq www.estes.org From: Kwvnstra@aol,com [mailto:Kwynstraaaol.comj Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 8:55 AM To: Alison Chilcott Subject: Another signature Hi Allison, • nave another neighbor that would like to sign the petition. They own the house at 340 are Bass. They have the home rented occasionally through 'ponderosa" management are adamant about not allowing a wedding site at 900 W. Elkhorn. They are wondering if a Fax'd signature or e-mail signature on the petition is o.k, or do I page and then send it back to me for original signature. Please let me know. Thanks. Ken and Kay Wynstra Fall River Lane and their names and now live in Oklahoma. They need to send them the petition 1 Alison Chilcott From: Kwynstra @ aol.com Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 6:06 PM To: Alison Chilcott Subject: Re: More signatures on the petition, ect. Dear Allison, Thank -you for your response. We are so sorry but we feel we must stay on this.No doubt, us and our neighbors life would change. As you probably know, Kay had ovarian cancer four years ago and our life has already changed and this would add more unpleasantness to our life (and our neighbors). Thank you for offering another meeting and we will come at your convenience, however, Kay has a meeting with her cancer Doctor in Boulder on Wednesday Morning at Boulder Cancer Center. Anytime other than that time would be fine. Kay Wynstra Ken and In a message dated 6/11/2012 4:33:40 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, achilcott©estes.oro writes: Ken, Community Development received the additional signatures. I expect to meet with the Fixter's this week. Would you like to meet this week to discuss your experiences over the weekend in more detail? Alison Chilcott, Director Cor rnunity Develownenrt Deportment Town of Estes Pork PO &>.x 1204 / 70 MacGregor Avenue (970) 577-3720 (phone) (970) 249 (fox) wWW.este;. w fl From: CK ynstraCa@aol,com [mailto:Kwyngra@apl.cQln) Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 12:53 PM 1 j4 Otk To: Frank Lancaster; Alison Chilcott Subject: More signatures on the petition, ect. Dear Frank and Alison, Just to let you know, we have more signatures on the petition to stop the Wedding Site at 900 W. Elkhorn. We now have 29 signatures. Us and the Neighbors still do not understand how "Fixters" could break laws is developing that site and you are allowing them to file for Variance and Temporary use permits. In a ridiculous analogy, it would be if someone was caught going fifty miles per hour over the speed limit and when caught, instead ask the City, State,ect. to change the speed limit to accommodate their law breaking. Please stop this now so us and the neighbors are not forced to continue this upheaval in our lives. Ken and Kay Wynstra 890 W. Elkhorn r.S. The Wedding this past weekend was noisy and with blaring lights. When they brought it inside at approximately 9:45 P.M. It was almost as loud as windows were still open and all outside lights still on. As you are aware, they plan another Wedding July 5th, 2012. One neighbor was told by Bob Fixter, they plan to have ten Weddings this Summer alone. Alison Chilcott From: Alison Chilcott Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 2:56 PM To: kwynstra© aoi.com Cc: Frank Lancaster; Will Birchfield; Eric Rose; Wes Kufeld Subject: 900 West Elkhorn Avenue Attachments: CodeComplianceHandout.pdf Hello Mr. Wynstra, This is in follow up to our phone conversation this afternoon. The 900 West Elkhorn Avenue Temporary Use Permit application is not complete and has not been approved. I spoke to Bob Fixter today so he is aware of the status. I also informed him that I may be able to review and approve the permit today if I receive a complete application. Also, the Town has not issued a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy to allow occupancy as a small hotel. Will Birchfield, CBO, completed an inspection on Wednesday June 6th; a number of items remain to be addressed, including a functional sprinkler system with an independent power source. The current approved use is as a single-family residence. The Chief Building Official has approved up to eight guests sleeping in the single-family residence. You can operate a B&B with up to eight guest rooms in a single-family house. This does not include approval to host weddings. Given concerns expressed by neighbors such as yourself, I have notified Eric Rose in the Police Department that Police may receive noise and/or trespass complaints. In the A-1 district the maximum noise level is 55 dBA from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm and 50 dBA from 8:00 pm — 7:00 am, Staff has requested that the property be brought into voluntary compliance with Town codes and regulations as soon as possible. Please call to schedule a time to meet and discuss any questions. Allison Chilcott, Director Community Development Department Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 70 MacGregor Avenue (970) 577-3720 (phone) (970) 586-0249 (fax) achiicon@estes.orq www.estes.ora 0 +�w Alison Chilcott from: Frank Lancaster gent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 2:54 PM To: Kwynstra@aol.com Subject: RE: Yesterday's meeting (on June 5th) Thanks Ken, please call me Frank, I need to follow up further on this end, but my initial reaction is this should have been handled much differently. I believe Alison and her staff had their hands tied somewhat in their ability to respond. I'm not sure what direction, if any came from the Trustees and before I jump in, I need to see where this stands. I'm sorry for not being more decisive on this, although I would like to be, but I have only been here two weeks and still getting the lay of the land. Frank Original Message From: Kwvnstra@aol.com [mailto:Kwvnstra@aol.comj Sent: Wed 6/6/2012 6:21 PM To: Frank Lancaster Subject: Yesterday's meeting (on June 5th) Dear Mr. Lancaster, Is it o.k. to address you as Frank? Thank you for meeting with my wife Kay, Norm Love and myself regarding the "situation" at 900 West Elkhorn. I know time was short but we also know you have an extremely busy schedule. I feel it necessary to e-mail you because up to this point, you have not been informed of the situation of our and neighbors opinion, disaster regarding protocol of that property and the "go ahead" plans of The Fixters. From our knowledge and proof of that situation, they, "Fixters", never got permission from the building, planning department but just went ahead with their "Wedding Site" and even after the Town of Estes Park found out about what they had began, and had violated many things, continuance of that project proceeded with only a slight pause. The Town planning department told them they needed to put the wet land back to the original condition, remove the foot bridge across that part of the wet lands, had violated setbacks in the flood plain and it is still there with now talk from the planning department of possibly considering temporary usage and setback availability. Us and neighbors (16 and counting) have signed a petition asking for NO Wedding Site for the integrity of the neighborhood. PLEASE, do not allow this to happen in any way and the project must be stopped. It isn't as this is anything new as we and neighbors have been working against this since it began in March with NO Permits and it continues. Please read the letters written. please keep us informed as we and neighbors will continue this objection and meetings until it is shut clown. �y should violators care of violations as long as violators get what they have wanted anyway. i Ken Wynstra, 890 West Elkhorn 900 W. Elkhorn, Owners Robert & Carole Fixter Objection re Lots 1 and 2 Witt Subdivision rezoning and REZONING OR TEMPORARY VARIANCE PROBLEMS )1 JUN 042012�.���, 11 trt ELOPMENT e4,2012 PARKING — Rental parking at church across Hwy 34 with off duty town police is no solution. Fixters can be denied rental parking anytime because of accidents or other abuse. However, a zoning change is permanent. Town will be an accomplice to pedestrian or auto accidents on W. Elkhorn (US 34) as they have approved this situation. This route is a popular walk on the Town path for tourists and US 34 is a popular outing to RMNP by motorcycle and passenger vehicles. ALCOHOL — Wedding receptions are no longer sedate affairs. This will add to ALL concerns listed here. BATHROOM FACILITIES- Fixters have advised they anticipate gatherings of 80 people. NOISE — Noise such as speaker amplified music amplifies greatly on the river. Fixters have advised they anticipate an 11 o'clock cut off, but noise will be a problem any time of day. Rivers are a magnet for people and gatherings will be drawn to walk river along lots 3 and 4. The opposite direction is wet land. RIVER SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS We understand the house on Lot 1 encroaches on current river setback requirements. However, it seems unreasonable to allow further enhancements to this encroachment such as a firepit, permanent foot bridge and graded gravel path. Part of the Towns mission statement is to "be good stewards of public resources and NATURAL SETTINGS'. In conclusion, we are a neighborhood. Neighbors work in annual river clean up. Neighborhood gatherings are planned around the Duck Race. We are considerate of the many wildlife that share this river. At a meeting of Estes Park residents explaining process Russ Legg, Latimer County Land Director said, "Code exists to protect the integrity of residential neighborhoods. In their initial use request to the Town dated 7 /21/2011 the Fixters advised no major changes were required and they had adequate parking. The project is rapidly growing and the Town solution has been to suggest obtaining a Variance, Temporary Variance, Rezoning or a trial run on weddings. At this time the Town has 33 properties available to host weddings according to Visitor Services. Is there really any added $ value to the Town in changing this zoning? We request denial of any zoning changes and enforcement of existing codes. Ken and Kay Wynstra, Lot 3 890 W. Elkhorn, 577 0887 Norman and Jackie Love, Lot 4 880 W. Elkhorn 577 0966 GIS Latimer County 1 ration Locator 1 �. t i_,_._1 / ('fable Of Contenk' l I s cted aq[tletS NAti • -35234 3/28/2012 Dave Shirk From: ent: fo: Subject: Kwynstra©aoi.com Thursday, May 03, 2012 5:52 PM Dave Shirk One thing I forgot to mention Hi Dave, Sorry I forgot to mention in my previous e-mail that was sent to you a short time earlier Please do not allow" Fixters"to submit for a "temporary" use permit for weddings. Temporary Or permanent,it would be completely unacceptable to us or the other neighbors. Ken and Kay Wynstra Dave Shirk From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Ken - Dave Shirk Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:54 PM 'Kwynstra@aol.com' RE: Updates Please on 900 w. Elkhorn Alison and I discussed this issue at length today. We expect the Fixter's to submit for a temporary use permit for weddings soon. We are communicating to the Fixters that if they desire to continue that use, they will need to apply for a rezoning to the "A" Accommodations district this differs from the A-1 in that additional uses such as restaurants and wedding facilities are allowed; this is not a rezoning that our department would support. If they opt to apply for a rezoning, you would be duly notified. We are communicating to them the code violations regarding development in the river setback (trail/patios/bndge), and will outline their options (remove improvements and restore or apply for a variance); if they opt for a variance, you will be duly notified. David W. Shirk, AICP Planner, Estes Park Community Development 1200 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 ph: 970-577-3729 fx: 970-586-0249 dshirk@estes.orq Frorn: l(yuynstraaaol.com (mailto:Kwynstra(aaol.comi Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11;08 AM To: Dave Shirk Subject: Updates Please on 900 w. Elkhorn Hi Dave, Could you please give me updates on what is going on at 900 W. Elkhorn and their Wedding Site plans. Neither Jackie Love (next door neighbor) or myself completely understood what was the final decision regarding that subject as you indicated Fixters may still; be able to file for certain permits and what that entails. Thanks. Ken and Kay Wynstra Town of Estes Park, Colorado Estes Park Police Department 170 MacGregor Estes Park ,Colorado 80517 Ken and Kay Wynstra 890 West Elkhorn Estes Park, Colorado 80517 577-0887 or cell (970) 215-9749 Dear Estes Park Police Department, April 16, 2012 The letters I am giving you have already been given to the Estes Park Planning Departments and Department of Inspections. Kay and I felt you should also have copies because if this is approved by those departments, it is our opinion that it may also involve the Police Department of Estes Park because of, in our opinion, of the areas of concern listed in these letters and of possible disturbances it is important to inform the Estes Park Police Department. These disturbances may not happen but as many of you may know from attending "Wedding Receptions" yourselves, it is more than probable that all of these events could happen which makes your jobs even more difficult. We certainly do not need these kinds of situations in our neighborhood. This IS a residential neighborhood. Thank you for reading our concerns and if you have any questions, please feel free to contact us or to voice your concerns to the other Town Departments. Sincerely, Ken and Kay Wynstra xv ILL DEVELOPMENT .. �+....... WAIT( Town of Estes Park April 12, 2012 Departments of Planning and Development Building inspections, Permits, and any Departments concerned 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Neighbors of 900 West Elkhorn And the West lot adjacent to that address Petition to Not Allow a Wedding Site Dear officials of the Town of Estes Park, This petition is in regard to the possible consideration of allowing a Wedding Site either permanent or temporary at the Lot West of 900 West Elkhorn at the upper and lower part of that Residential Lot which is down by the River. We are neighbors and concerned citizens that in our opinion would be directly affected by noise, possible fire, possible intoxication of guests, sanitation issues (unsightly porta pots), unsightly portable tents, traffic danger and congestion, guests crossing West Elkhorn and disturbing the Peace and tranquility that a River brings to this area. We the owners and neighbors do hereby sign and register our concern and Petition to not allow this development. Names, Addresses, date of signing, ect. p.4.44 Q Ild G,,,., r 8 `7 Lep kit ei7e 2ucL,ie A e e() ril 12, 2012 Town of Estes Park Departments of Planning and Development Building inspections, Permits, and any Departments concerned 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Neighbors of 900 West Elkhorn And the West lot adjacent to that address Petition to Not Allow a Wedding Site Dear officials of the Town of Estes Park, This petition is in regard to the possible consideration of allowing a Wedding Site either permanent or temporary at the Lot West of 900 West Elkhorn at the upper and lower part of that Residential Lot which is down by the River. We are neighbors and concerned citizens that in our opinion would be directly affected by noise, possible fire, possible intoxication of guests, sanitation issues (unsightly porta pots), unsightly portable tents, traffic danger and congestion, guests crossing West Elkhorn and disturbing the Peace and tranquility that a River brings to this area. We the owners and neighbors do hereby sign and register our concern and Petition to not allow this development. Names Addresses, date of signing, ect. : 4—It{ 1.2 lroto( ace ...LL .0 .P 2(. ... efrt erz./ ied9'e/e tfd 40/ April 12, 2012 COMMUNYCTY Dllli"r, Town of Estes Park Departments of Planning and Development Building inspections, Permits, and any Departments concerned 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Neighbors of 900 West Elkhorn And the West lot adjacent to that address Petition to Not Allow a Wedding Site Dear officials of the Town of Estes Park, This petition is in regard to the possible consideration of allowing a Wedding Site either permanent or temporary at the Lot West of 900 West Elkhorn at the upper and lower part of that Residential Lot which is down by the River. We are neighbors and concerned citizens that in our opinion would be directly affected by noise, possible fire, possible intoxication of guests, sanitation issues (unsightly porta pots), unsightly portable tents, traffic danger and congestion, guests crossing West Elkhorn and disturbing the Peace and tranquility that a River brings to this area. We the owners and neighbors do hereby sign and register our concern and Petition to not allow this development. Names, Addresses, ae of signing, ect. : � tom. �..L►r1.d � cmod.r¢.Q.:f ¢. e..r... 36 Qkvo+r k,yl- qtg erkvI. c20.51 ......................................... Z6, P• qe,4 &A/v.1, L-h • ctc-7 O ;J ! C uWes- L. e6S(7 ...... /7 140,1. Allison Chilcott-Director of Community Development 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Ken L. and Kay M. Wynstra 890 West Elkhorn Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear Director A. Chilcott: April 3, 2012 in our opinion, us and some of our neighbors are affected by the House -Hotel at 900 West Elkhorn and lot just West of 900 West Elkhorn, we feel we had been misinformed on the nature of what would take place at that address and adjacent lot. This is our opinion and our heartfelt and honest interpretation from us of what has transpired and is happening on that property. it is our opinion. Bob and Carole Fixter pursued purchasing that property of 900 West Elkhorn and to change the zoning because it was zoned commercial and we were told by them that it would actually be good for us and others because if it stayed as commercial, anything could happen such as it becoming a gas station or even a prostitution house ( which of course was a joke) I know they were joking on that statement but believe they were trying to convince us on the zoning change. We received ONE notice from Estes Park that there was a proposed zoning change. We NEVER received a second postcard telling us (and neighbors) of a Board meeting regarding of the actual change. 1 haven't been able to talk to ALL the neighbors but the ones I have, they also claim they did not receive that notice. Why couldn't that be sent by certified and return receipt to us and neighbors? Bob and Carole did not even tell us until recently that they also purchased the adjacent lot to them and we didn't know of their Wedding site plan until approximately last week, March 29 or 30th when machinery started tearing up the land down by the River and gravel was being brought in. We were also told by Bob and Carole that the" Wedding Tents" would be on top of the lot and not by the River. Perhaps that is the plan but we are now skeptical of anything promised because in my opinion, truth has not been in the open so far so why would it be different now. Again, this is just my opinion but we are more than disappointed with actions rather than words. Wetlands and so much more are an issuer! That is a subject still to be dealt with. Why would The Town of Estes Park even allow a "Hotel" status in a residential neighborhood? West of us on the River is a commercial area with many Hotels, Motels and resorts, ect. But this is putting a Hotel Status and Wedding site in the middle of (what was) a quiet neighborhood and the potential of destroying the PEACE. PLEASE, somehow reverse this situation. It should not be the job of neighbors to take this to a new level. Sincerely, Ken and Kay Wynstra Town of Estes Park, Colorado Regarding, Bob and Carol Of 900 West Elkhorn, Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Ken and Kay Wynstra 890 West Elkhorn Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear Town of Estes Park and managers of Estes Park, 90o a)w £7KflneAJ April 2, 2012 UNITY "" DE EL,' I, Ken Wynstra and Kay Wynstra are direct neighbors to the owners and residents of 900 West Elkhorn. We have been increasing anxious of the development at 900 West Elkhorn. These are SOME of the concerns: After confronting Bob and Carol with some of our concerns yesterday, March 31, some of the concerns on the West adjacent lotto them have been somewhat cleared up, however, only verbal promises have been given to us and will not be satisfied until it is a written contract with them and must be passed on to possible future buyers of that property. The pool -spa is only 62 feet from our bedroom as is the playground, but somewhat further. We have four Grandchildren and know the noise they can make with supervision, let alone who knows how many children will occupy that at any given time let alone possible drunken adults! My wife Kay is designated handicapped and has had surgery 3.7three years ago for ovarian cancer. She is still medically tested every six Months and is also treated three or four times a year at the Boulder Pain Clinic for continuous back pain as she has five discs in her lower back that cannot be repaired. Our neighbors at 900 West Elkhorn plan to have the Pool -spa open late at night and what about the playground area? Kay often goes to bed early from her never ending pain between 8:00 P.M. and 8:30 P.M. with rests in the afternoon . Our bedroom is 62 feet from the Pool -spa. We will become prisoners in our own home without peace and possible loud drunkenness and music and lights. This just cannot happen. We paid a very high price for our lot and building of our home seven years ago and can see peace and value slipping away. If it is in the power of the Town of Estes Park, PLEASE do not allow this to happen! Why not have the pool and play area moved from the East side to the West side of 900 West Elkhorn or have restrictions with "teeth" on noise and hours of operation. Please take into consideration Kay's health issues as we were here before this proposed chaos ( in our opinion) takes place. We do not begrudge Bob and Carol a successful business venture but not at their neighbors expense and Peace. At the very least, please have them put up sound barriers with acceptable hours to us and posted signs of no drinking, loud behavior or music and NO Smoking as I have a history of severe asthma. To our understanding, the zoning was changed at 900 W. Elkhorn to accommodate eight or more people and who knows how many will be in that house at any given time. We were told by Bob and Carol they would not have more than 80 for a wedding. 80??11 Please be aware of the possible chaos that could bring to the area that is still in the Township of Estes Park. As we stated earlier in this letter, we do not begrudge them a profitable business as long as it is not at their neighbor's expense. We look forward to your input in this matter before too much time is passed and cannot be easily reversed, as changes are rapidly progressing. Sincerely, Ken Wynstra and Kay Wynstra 0/0' Ken and Kay Wynstra 890 West Elkhorn Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear Bob and Carol, 411 Bob and Carol Of 900 West Elkhorn, Estes Park, Colorado 80517 March 31, 2012 APR 02 2012 DIVELOP It is with great disappointment and sadness that Kay and I find it necessary to write this letter. Neither Kay or myself got very much sleep last night as we are quite upset on what was once just you converting 900 W. Elkhorn to weekly rental units into what is now, in our opinion, into an unsightly wedding facility on the beautiful Fall River. When you first spoke to us (Months ago) about possibly purchasing the Witt's home there was no mention of you purchasing the adjacent lot for development for a Wedding facility and later when you did mention it to us there was no mention that a Wedding facilty would be down by the River. Now, the machinery is destroying that area and what was once a place of Peace and Serenity will be gone. When we purchased our lot from The Witt's approximately seven years ago, it was very expensive but we purchased it because of the Peace that only a River can bring. The view we HAD from our living area in our home and deck, the beautiful Peaceful sound the River brings, is and will be gone unless you PLEASE stop the upheaval of the land. The noise and danger in our opinion will be intolerable. Last week when a terrible fire destroyed almost five thousand acres of land in the Mountains West of Denver, many homes and a number of lives were lost and brought to light how quick a fire can destroy. Because of the wind, it traveled at over fifty miles per hour. Some people lost everything and some DID lose their lives. Have you considered the possibility of that happening HERE. Weddings often involve extreme partying, drinking and SMOKING. These conditions can easily lead to careless cigarette and cigar buts starting uncontrollable fires putting your neighbors in peril and possibly Estes Park. We plead with you to stop this development down by the Beautiful Fall River in consideration of your selves and your neighbors. Consider the liability. PLEASE. Ken and Kay Wynstra End of Ken Wynstra's public comment that was submitted prior to the variance application. CORN4sTONE ENOINE6RING* 811RVEYING.INC September 12, 2012 Mrs. Alison Chilcott Community Development Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Letter of Intent for the "Fall River Lodge" Suite 200 0 80517 one: (970) 586-2458 Fax: (970) 586-2459 Dear Alison, Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying, Inc. (CES) on behalfof our client Robert and Carol Fixter, are pleased to submit a variance request for a recreational walkway and sitting area built along Fall River across Lots 1 & 2 Witt Subdivision. Owners/Lien Holders The subject properties are currently owned by Robert and Carol Fixter. Adjacent Properties & Zoning Current zoning of the subject properties is Al- Accommodations; a request is being reviewed to change the zoning to A Accommodations with a limitation of up to 100 people, this would allow the use of the property by non -guests. Surrounding properties vary from CO -Commercial Outlying to the west and E-Estate to the south. The submitted site plan helps differentiate the surrounding zoning. Proiect Description After purchasing the property in 201 1 the Fixters began upgrading and improving the property both visually, aesthetically and bringing the structure up to current building and fire code. A portion of the property is slopes steeply toward the river with a flat portion of land adjacent to Fall River. Some of this area is within the 100-year floodplain and wetlands. Prior to the Fixters work to clean-up the area adjacent to the river, it was filled with trash (tires, barbed wire, bottles) and fencing that prohibited the movement and use by wildlife. When the trash had been cleared the Fixters decided to improve the eroded fisherman's trail along the river. The improved trail is 4-feet in width and consists of gravel. Along with the path, two flagstone sitting areas where installed for recreational use of the property guests. The Fixters were unaware of the 50-foot river setback and floodplain requirements for the walkway and sitting area. Currently, a trail easement encompasses that portion of property adjacent to Fall River for future expansion of the Town Of Estes trails system. This easement was granted with the platting of Witt Subdivision. wL As outlined in the Estes Valley Development Code 3.6 C.2 Standards for Review "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 -A worn fisherman's trail previously followed the majority of the constructed path b. Whether the variance is substantial; -No structural or permanent structures have been built 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; -Taking into account the amount of trash removed, this has been a considerable benefit to the subject and surrounding properties. Prior to the clean-up wildlife was unable to use this area and water in the wetlands was stained red from rusted fencing and trash. Now, elk actually use the constructed path and the water has cleared to a more natural pigment. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer -No utilities or utility easements are within the area. Should utilities ever be located in this area, the improvements are temporary in nature. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; -The Fixter's believed they were within their property rights to clean-up and improve their property d. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance; -A floodplain permit will need to be obtained from the Town of Estes Park building department. Requested Variances We are requesting variances to the following codes from the Estes Valley Development Code: EVDC 7.6.E.1.a — Stream or River Corridors. Building/Structure Setback The sitting areas and a portion of the improved walkway has been installed within the 50-foot river setback EVDC 7.6.E.2.b- Wetlands. Setback The constructed walking path and the flagstone patios have been constructed within the 50-foot wetland setback Development Agreement A development agreement is being prepared to allow the use of the adjacent property which is also owned by the applicant. The agreement will allow the two properties to be used as one as long as single ownership. The main use of the adjacent property will be for parking when needed for meetings or small events. Rezoning Request The applicant recently went through a rezoning process from CO- Commercial Outlying to A-1 Accommodations. The reason for the rezoning was to allow small events and meetings to be held on the property. Unfortunately, the A-1 zoning district does not allow the use of the property by non -guests, so local organizations could not use the property for meetings as was the Fixter's intention. The applicant is requesting the zoning be changed to A -Accommodations with a limit to Hotel/Motel use and a maximum of one hundred (100) people. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Jes Reetz Planner To: Board of Adjustments re: 900 West Elkhorn Ave. To Whom It May Concern: Ekr We have been working on remodeling our house since last October, 2011. We have filled a large roll -off dumpster from cleaning up around the our two lots, it appeared to be an old dump site including: old tires, barbed wire, bottles and an abundance of rusty metal wire, turning the Wetlands water and awful shade of orange. We have also hauled away another equivalent of a roll -off of dead trees, limbs, and logs from down below. We took down hundreds of feet of fence and donated it to the town, thus allowing the wildlife to roam free and natural. In this process, we made a rock pathway leading to 2 small flagstone areas. Unfortunately, one of our neighbors called the Army Corps of Engineers to inquire about our work. Thus, the Army Corp of Engineers came to evaluate our project.They came and gave us a Federal permit stating that we only affected .007 of an acre during our improvements and are allowed .1 of an acre before special permits are necessary. We bought our extra lot directly from the previous owner last October and nothing was said about "Areas of Disturbance" and parking not being allowed on the extra lot. We are trying to do the best we can to keep a nice home and business. We would like to request being allowed to keep the rock and flagstone patios. Respectfully, Bob & Carole Fixter 900 West Elkhorn Ave. Estes Park, CO 80517 ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION Submittal Date: 08/22/2012 Record Owner(s): Robert & Carol Fixter Street Address of Lot: 900 West Elkhorn Ave. Legal Description: Lot: 1&2 Block: - Subdivision: Witt Subdivision Parcel ID # : 35234-22-001 & 35234-22-002 Tract: - Lot Size -- 2.5 Acres Zoning A -Accommodations :wh Existing Land Use Small hotel with abili to host meetin ! s, non- i' rofits & small events Proposed Land Use Small hotel with ability to host meetin•s, non-,*rofits & small events Existing Water Service IX Town II°'° Well V Other (Specify) Proposed Water Service rx Town Well II Other (Specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service EPSD IX UTSD i Septic Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service r EPSD rX UTSD Septic Existing Gas Service K Xcel IG"""""' Other r- None Site Access (if not on public street) Elkhorn Ave. Are there wetlands on the site? IX Yes No Variance Variance Desired (Development Code Section #): Estes Valley Development Code 7.6.E.1.a Stream or River Corridors. Building/Structure Setback Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person Jes Reetz - Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying Complete Mailing Address Prima Contact Person is Attachments 1692 Big Thompson Ave, Suite 200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Owner iA. .Iicant IX Consultant/En. ineer Application fee (see attached fee schedule) Statement of intent (must comply with standards set forth in Section 3.6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code) IX 1 copy (folded) of site plan (drawn at a scale of 1" = 20') ** $x 1 reduced copy of the site plan (11" X 17") ** The site plan shall include information in Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B.VII.5 (attached). The applicant will be required to provide additional copies of the site plan after staff review (see the attached Board of Adjustment variance application schedule). Copies must be folded. Town of Estes Park .c P.O. Box 1200 -A 170 MacGregor Avenue 4. Estes Park. CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 - Fax: (970) 586-0249 .. www.estes.org/ComDev Revised 1 1 /20/09 •"- !'1".11 Record Owner(s) Robert & Carol Fixter Mailing Address P.O. Box 1633, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone 970 586-4367 CeII Phone (303) 524-4048 Fax 970 5864367 Email bfixter@aol.com Applicant Mailing Address Phone CeII Phone Fax Email Consultant/Engineer Mailing Address Phone Robert & Carol Fixter P.O. Box 1633, Estes Park CO 80517 970 30 970 586-4 524-4048 586-4367 bfixter aol.com Cornerstone Enqineerinq and Surveying, Inc. 1692 Big Thompson Ave, Suite 20(kEstes Park, CO 80517 (970) 586-2458 Cell Phone Fax _1970) 586-2459 Email ireetztaces-ccc.com APPLICATION FEES For variance applications within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both Inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at: qiitME I All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. Revised 11/20/09 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I. 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. ► 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 Valley Development Code (EVDC). ► I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, 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 Valley Development Code is available online at: .kg1,,, ®stes,s,ai g, D vlavv . ,g ► 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 EVDC. P. 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. ► I understand that a resubmittal fee will 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. ► 1 acknowledge that I have received the Estes Valley 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. ► 1 understand that I am required to obtain a "Variance Notice" 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 than ten (10) business days prior to the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment hearing. ► l 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 Valley Development Code Section 3.6.D) Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRrnrr Robert Fixter Applicant PLEASE PRINT Robert Fixter Signatures: Record Owner Date Applicant Date ti Revised 11 /20/09 Installed gravel walkway connection to existing wooden steps (looking southwest) Installed gravel walkway looking west (looking west) ea ' S �; } 111'1� 1 Installed flagstone patio to mew S (looking eel Installed flagstone patio to the eaS(looking east) I� IIIIIIIII illil11 mp "dugl11IVi1141IIIIIIIIV � � i���!��,Illlllllllumpi "IhCi IIVIuiilii„ '�i Ihilllll�,ggl�ViliuJVpiiV�pV'V�'i�IV,P��RVii, III VI uo �illl�l�ll"Ilil�WliIlliil 14ltlnl�lu0uuulllullllullllllulllllllllll� MI1 w u�4mmuii1iwi du uMl 14441414111111111 �4� 111111111111111111144111111111111111111111111111111111111111� 1��11111111111111111111IRIIIl���������y�� �� � �uuum�uuuuu oulNVll'I "' m �VI� �iiiiliillumuuuuuuuumuuumll41���I���.'^ ;III"''p4111I1u iuuuuullll0lu �u „III !ul jjwwwwww llw "HI 1111111""""""11111111110110ooll000000luollotioilooloolo wllllll 11 l V° 11 wl uo Ill°loiliili ��1144441144,111,111,11,414444 ,!111IIIIIIINiliil illlllllluuumm�lllllul 141,14 Installed flagstone patio to the west (looking south) Installed gravel walkway between flagstone patios (looking west) dliluiiulll111i 1111111111111111 1111111111111111111111 Installed gravel walkway and easterly flagstone patio (looking south) General Development Standards 7.6 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection (1) National Wetlands Inventory prepared by the U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; and (2) Colorado Natural Heritage Program maps. b. Unmapped Wetlands. The review of a development proposal may discover a potential wetland that has not been mapped or for which the boundaries have not been clearly established. In such instances, the Applicant shall retain a qualified wetland expert to delineate the boundaries of the wetland according to accepted professional standards. E. Buffer/Setback Areas. 1. Stream or River Corridors. a. Building/Structure Setbacks. (1) Stream Corridors (except in the CD zoning district). All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream corridors, or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. See Figure 7-10. (Ord. 2-02 #5) Supp. 8 7-28a General Development Standards Figure 7-10 § 7.6 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection (2) River Corridors (except in the CD district). (a) General Rule. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. (b) Exception for Lots Developed Prior to the Adoption of this Code. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. See Figure 7-10. (Ord. 2-02 #5) (3) Stream and River Corridors in the CD Zoning District in the CD district, all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream or river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream or river. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. Where a princiipaI building in the CD district provides public access, including a primary entrance, on the side of the building facing a stream or river corridor, the setback may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the approval of the Decision -Making Body. (Ord. 2-02 #5) Supp. 3 °r 29 General Development Standards § 7.6 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection b. Parking Lot Setbacks. Except in the CD zoning district, parking lots shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream or river corridors, or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream or river. In the CD district, parking Tots shall be set back at least twelve (12) feet from the delineated edge of the river or stream corridor. 2. Wetlands. a. To the maximum extent feasible, wetlands shall not be included as part of a platted development lot. b. All buildings, accessory structures and parking lots shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the delineated edge of a wetland. See Figure 7-10 above. Development on lots that were approved for single-family residential use prior to the adoption of this Code shall be exempt. (Ord. 2-02 #5; Ord. 18-02 #1) 3. Private Open Areas and Landscaping Credit. All stream corridor and wetland setback areas shall be credited toward any relevant private open areas requirements or landscaping and buffer requirements. F. Development Standards. 1. Prohibited Activities. No person shall engage in any activity that will disturb, remove, fill, drain, dredge, clear, destroy or alter any area, including vegetation, within stream or river corridors, wetlands and their associated buffer/setback areas, except as may be expressly allowed in this Section or Code. 2. Utilities. Utilities may be allowed in a buffer/setback area only if the Decision -Making Body determines that there is no practical alternative. Any disturbance of the buffer area shall be reclaimed by regrading and revegetation. Provisions for reclamation of the disturbed area shall be included in any development or improvements agreement for the project, with adequate collateral to guarantee that the reclamation will be completed. Utility corridors in buffer/setback areas shall be located at the outside edge of the area and access roads for maintenance of utilities shall be located outside the buffer/setback area. Access for maintenance of utilities in buffer/setback areas should be at specific points rather than parallel to the utility corridor. 3. Recreation, Education or Scientific Activities. Structures and improvements for recreational, educational or scientific activities such as trails, fishing access and wildlife management and viewing may be permitted in a buffer/setback area provided that a management plan that establishes long-term protection of the buffer/setback area is submitted and approved. G. Preservation of Vegetation. All existing vegetation within the stream/river corridor or wetland buffer/setback area shall be preserved, and where necessary to provide adequate screening or to repair damaged riparian areas, supplemented with additional native planting and landscaping. H. Wetland Mitigation Requirements. 1. Restoration shall be required according to an approved wetland mitigation plan when a wetland or its buffer is altered in violation of law or without specific permission or approval by the Decision -Making Body. Supp. 4 7„30 General Development Standards ( § 7.6 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection- 2. All approved alterations of wetlands must be mitigated by replacement or enhancement on the site or within the same drainage basin on a one-to-one basis with equivalent or better biologic and hydrologic functions. (Ord. 13-99 §§B, C, 11/3/99; Ord. 2-02 #5, 2/12/02; Ord. 18-02 #1, 12/10/02; Ord. 8-05 #1, 6/14/05) § 7.7 GEOLOGIC AND WILDFIRE HAZARD AREAS A. Applicability. All new subdivisions and development, including residential development on lots of record approved prior to the effective date of this Code, shall comply with the procedures and standards set forth in this Section. (Ord. 18-02 #1; Ord. 8-05 #1) B. Interpretation. The provisions of this Section shall be interpreted to apply in conjunction with all other applicable local, county and state land use requirements. Whenever a provision of any other land use regulation conflicts with the intent of this Section, the provisions of this Section shall apply. C. Description of Regulated Hazard Areas. Hazard areas regulated by this Section shall include all areas that are or that may become hazardous due to environmental conditions. The hazards include, but are not limited to, the following: wildfire, avalanche, landslide, rock fall, mud flow and debris fan, unstable or potentially unstable slopes, seismic effects, radioactivity, ground subsidence and expansive soil and rock. D. Professional Qualifications. Ail maps and reports required by this Section must be prepared by or under the responsible direction of a duly qualified professional. (Ord. 8-05 #1) 1. Wildfire hazard analysis required bythis Section must be prepared byor under the Y q p p direct supervision of a professional forester with at least two (2) years'experience with wildfire hazards in the Rocky Mountain region. (Ord. 8-05 #1) 2. Geologic hazard analyses required by this Section must be prepared by or under the direct supervision of a professional geologist with experience in engineering geology or geotechniical engineering. (Ord. 8-05 #1) 3. Engineering work required by this Section must be prepared by or under the direct supervision of a licensed professional engineer who is experienced in the engineering specialty (e.g., soils, slope stability) required to meet the objectives of this Section. (Ord. 8-05 #1) E. Wildfire Hazards. (Ord. 8-05 #1) 1. Wildfire Hazard Areas. (Ord. 8-05 #1) a. Mapped Wildfire Hazards. Wildfire hazard areas shall include all those areas shown as "high -tree" fire hazard areas on the Wildfire Hazards Resource Map in Appendix A. (Ord. 8-05 #1) b. Unmapped Wildfire Hazards. Wildfire hazard areas shall also include areas located outside of the mapped wildfire hazard areas that are identified by the Colorado State Forest Service or the Larimer County Wildfire Safety Specialist, or designee, as hazardous areas. (Ord. 8-05 #1) Supp. 6 7-3l Variance APO M '-1 M N i r^-1 � i M O LLn -I-I -' N an-i n 0 Q -I-I r-1 N - Ne-I 0 u1 .-I iA N LA In O O M In in In O In m u1 In In O N tit In u'1 No0o0rno0dt00 o0o oo0o000000mo 0o 00 0o 0o v 00 00 IO 00 r4 00 CO 00 n CO CO 00 00 00 IJD 00 CO O0 CA 00 N O O O O_ 0 0 O u1 O< O O O 8 O O O O O O 0 0< 0 PO Box 1094 Monument 20095 Lost Arrowhead 0 n0 c a) L L - L L - L - L 4' L c L L L L L MI C o a CL CO - O. c v c a 0. 0. as • 0.. v c. a n. iv y a Q� .. O�J O -p N tel j 0 0 �' G1 N N 3 d• 40 = N N �' > 0• ) W- 0) iYil 0. O tail • ro IV 0 N H w+ N 0 c Y 4+ i a1 ++ ++ O ++ u1 `J X w w -.J W co C7 w w w N w CO J W w C7 0 w u1 2 w 410 Fall River In PO Box 2401 PO Box 1765 58 Dockside Dr PO Box 257 PO Box 962 331 Fall River Ln PO Box 456 264 Lincoln St i 0▪ ) T is at c c at t L 0 ro V Y L 0J 0 Kathleen Baker A w c .c (00 c 0 0) c O Donald & Gloria Lickfett William Van Horn Russell & Kimball Bass cc 0 v 415 Fall River Ln 14115 S 234th St Keith & Sharon Carson 6935 N Federal Blvd tns as 0 S Z 0 —Li E L ar .0 O cc Barbara Braun Trust PO Box 189 Estes Park Christian Scientists Fall River Lodge Variance APO h 1„'"1