Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2008-05-06Prepared: April 30, 2008 Revised: AGENDA ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Tuesday, May 6, 2008 9:00 a.m. - Board Room, Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 2. CONSENT a. Approval of' minutes dated February 5, 2008 3. REQUESTS a. Metes & Bounds property located at 460 Valley Road Owner: Stanton B. Peterson Applicant: Owner Request: Variance from Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.3, Table 4-2 , to allow replacement and expansion of decks on an existing residence 23.2 feet from the eastern property line and 6.4 feet from the southern property line in lieu of the required 25-foot setbacks in the E-1—Estate zoning district Staff Contact: Bob Joseph b. Metes & Bounds property located at 845 W. Wonderview Avenue Owner: Reese A., Flint H. and Regan W. Cheney and Corrine Cheney -Burke Applicant: Van Horn Engineering Request: Variance from Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.3, Table 4-2, to allow an addition to an existing residence to be built 19.5 feet from the southern property line in lieu of the 50-foot setback required in the RE — Rural Estate zoning district Staff Contact: Dave Shirk 4. REPORTS 5. ADJOURNMENT Note: 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 February 5, 2008, 9:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair John Lynch, Members Cliff Dill, Chuck Levine, Wayne Newsom, and Al Sager; Alternate Member Bruce Grant Attending: Chair Lynch; Members Dill and Sager Also Attending: Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, and Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Members Levine and Newsom, Alternate Member Grant Chair Lynch called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 2. CONSENT AGENDA a. Approval of the minutes of the January 8, 2008 meeting. It was moved and seconded (Sager/Dill) to approve the minutes. There being no changes or corrections, the minutes were approved as submitted. 3. METES AND BOUNDS PROPERTY LOCATED IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF 1895 BIG THOMPSON AVENUE, Owner/Applicant: Yakutat Land Corporation — Request for variance from Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.3, Table 4-2, to allow an existing fenced -in structure for hay storage to remain located 30.7 feet from the front property line in lieu of the required 50-foot front -yard setback in the RE-1 — Rural Estate zoning district, and variance from Section 7.6.E.1.a.2.b to allow the structure to remain 16.7 feet from the annual high-water mark of the stream corridor in lieu of the required 30-foot setback Director Joseph summarized the staff report. This is a request for variance from the setback required for the front property line and from the required stream setback to allow completion of the construction of a hay shed in the historic location used for hay storage for the commercial horse stables, Sombrero Ranches. The hay storage shed is located on an undeveloped parcel in unincorporated Larimer County, immediately north of the stables, and encroaches into the front -yard setback and stream setback. Construction of a metal framework to provide a roof over the hay was started without a building permit but halted pending resolution of this variance request. The applicant was required to request a waiver from the Larimer County Flood Plain Review Board prior to appearing before the Board of Adjustment due to the hay shed's location within the floodplain and floodway; this wavier was granted. The primary focus of this variance request is the stream setback. A prominent reason for the required setback from streams (aside from the potential impact to the floodplain and/or floodway) is to protect the natural vegetation found along streams, which has value as wildlife habitat in addition to its scenic and aesthetic value. In planning staff's opinion, the requested variance to the stream setback, which reduces the setback from 30 feet to 16.7 feet, is substantial. Staff has determined that there can be beneficial use of the property without the requested variances, that approval of the variances would not adversely affect the delivery of public services, and that the applicant purchased the property before the adoption of the current setback standards. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment February 5, 2008 2 The key question is whether the applicant's predicament can be mitigated through another method. Staff's opinion is that a conforming location for the hay shed could be found elsewhere on the property; however,the applicant shoulld have the opportunity to present a persuasive argument as to the value of the proximity of the hay shed to the stables. The Board members should use their best judgment in determining whether the applicant's request represents the least deviation to afford relief and may choose to consider the historic pattern of use of the hay storage location and its proximity to the stables. If the Board chooses to approve the requested variances, it may require conditions that secure the objectives of the Estes Valley Development Code, and staff recommends the applicant be required to restore a similar -sized area of habitat (approximately 3,000 square feet) along the stream bank to offset the loss of habitat in the hay shed location. Although use of that particular location for hay storage began years ago, stacking hay did not create a permanent footprint on the land, while construction of the hay storage shed does. If the applicant had not begun construction of the shed without a building permit, the hay storage location could easily have been moved to a conforming location, and this area could have been restored to its natural condition. Although the stream is intermittent in some locations, it is perennial in others, and it is a mapped drainage shown in the Estes Valley Development Code. The variance request was routed to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to neighboring property owners for consideration and comment. No comments were received. Public Comment: Lonnie SheldonNan Horn Engineering was present to represent the applicant. He confirmed that the stream is a "good-sized creek" when it flows. He provided information on evidence submitted to the Larimer County Flood Plain Review Board, which approved a waiver for the location of the hay storage shed. He contended the only change to the use of this historic location for hay storage is the addition of a roof over the hay. Use of this location is necessary to provide room for large trucks to deliver the hay and turn around, as well as for fork lifts used to move the hay to the horses. The applicant would prefer to use the well-worn paths already established on the site. The property owner has stated the location has been used for hay storage for approximately 45 years, well predating floodplain mapping. The applicant would have to move the location of the hay storage over 300 feet to the north to comply with the required setbacks due to the location of the property Thine and the creek; this would create a hardship for the applicant. Mr. Sheldon stated the applicant is willing to comply with the recommended conditions of approval; however, Mr. Sheldon questioned the rational between the requested variances and the requirement to revegetate an equivalent area of land. If the requested variances are not approved, the applicant will not move the hay stack (no approval is required for the hay stack alone). Discussion continued between the Board members, planning staff, and Mr. Sheldon and is summarized as follows: In lieu of revegetation, Chair Lynch suggested the applicant be required to clean up the appearance of the hay storage area. Director Joseph stated his desire to have a nexus between the purpose of the required stream setback (to protect native vegetation) and the proposed condition of approval (revegetation of an equivalent area of habitat along the stream). The purpose of the condition is to mitigate the adverse impacts of creating a permanent structure for storing the hay in its present location. In staff's opinion, the only reason provided by the applicant to perpetuate the adverse impact to the stream corridor is for the applicant's convenience and the fact that construction was begun without a building permit. Mr. Sheldon contended that the applicant would have to bring in top soil, seed, mulch, and monitor the site of revegetation, which is unreasonable in light of the variance requested. Folllowing further discussion, including the benefits of cleaning up the appearance of the site, Member Sager moved to approve the requested variances with the condition that the applicant prepare a reasonable restoration plan for revegetation along the stream, which should be submitted prior to approval of the building permit. Mr. Sheldon agreed to the condition on behalf of the applicant. Director Joseph stated the condition should include successful implementation of the revegetation plan. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3 February 5, 2008 It was moved and seconded (Sager/Dill) to approve the variance request for the Metes and Bounds property located immediately north of 1895 Big Thompson Avenue to allow an existing fenced -in structure for hay storage to remain located 30.7 feet from the front property line In Ileu of the required 50-foot front -yard setback and to allow the structure to remain 16.7 feet from the annual high-water mark of the stream corridor in lieu of the required 30-foot setback, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent. CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with the submitted application. 2. The applicant shall successfully revegetate and restore an area of 3,000 square feet along the stream, thus returning a presently non -vegetated stream bank area to a naturally vegetated condition in order to offset the long-term loss under the footprint of the shed as proposed. The applicant shall prepare this restoration plan for staff approval prior to issuance of a building permit for the structure. 4. LOT 1A, AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 1, 2, & 3, PROSPECT VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, 460 Prospect Village Drive, Owner: Edward J. & Gisela Grueff, Applicant: Bret & Jan Freedman — Request for variance from Estes Valley Development Code Section 4.4, Table 4-5, to allow stairs to be constructed within the required 15-foot side -yard setback by up to four feet; variance from Section 7.5.G.2.b(2) to allow one parking space to encroach Into the required eight -foot side -yard landscape buffer by seven feet; and variance from Section 7.5.G.2.b(3) to allow the parking lot and landcape buffer to be 40 feet from the annual high-water mark of the Big Thompson River in lieu of the required 50-foot setback/landscape buffer Chair Lynch recused himself in order to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. Member Dill acted as Chair for this agenda item. Director Joseph stated that so long as the meeting is opened with a quorum of three members, action may be taken on an item. Planner Chilcott summarized the staff report. The applicant has submitted a development plan application (#08-03), which will be reviewed by the Estes Valley Planning Commission at their February 19, 2008 meeting, to develop a two-story, 2,000-square-foot real estate office with a 450-square-foot garage and ten parking spaces on an undeveloped lot. The lot is zoned CO - Commercial Outlying, is located behind the Estes Park Brewery, and is approximately' -acre in size. The Big Thompson River runs through the site. In order to construct the building and associated parking as proposed on the development plan, the applicant is requesting approval of three variances: 1. Variance from Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) Table 4-5 in order to build fire -escape stairs eleven feet from the side property line in lieu of the 15-foot setback required in the CO -Commercial Outlying zoning district; 2. Variance from Section 7.5.G.2.b(2) in order to construct one parking space one foot from the side property line in lieu of the requirement to provide an eight -foot -wide planting area between all parking areas and side and rear property lines; 3. Variance from Section 7.5.G.2.b(3) in order to construct the parking lot 40 feet from the river in lieu of the requirement that all parking lots shall be separated from the high-water mark of river banks by a minimum of 50 feet. In considering whether special circumstances or conditions exist, planning staff finds that there are special circumstances associated with this property —the required setbacks from property lines and the river leave a small building area on the lot, and a portion of the %- acre lot lies within a flagpole that can only serve as a driveway entrance. The applicant has worked to provide a design that saves existing trees, which further reduces the buildable area of the lot. Practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with EVDC standards. Beneficial use of the property could occur without the requested variances. A smaller -scale development could be proposed that would comply with the setbacks. Staff finds the variance requests are not substantial. Approximately 68 square feet of stairs will encroach into the 15-foot side -yard setback. One 17.5-foot-long parking space will encroach into the eight -foot planting area. The requested variance to the river setback RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment February 5, 2008 4 would allow a small portion of the parking lot to encroach into the setback. Although there is a platted 30-foot-wide river setback, there is question whether this applies to the parking lot or only to buildings and structures. A stormwater-quality pond is proposed to filter runoff from the parking lot before it enters the river. The essential character of the neighborhood will not be substantially altered, and the variances, if granted, represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. The applicant proposes a two-story building, which reduces the footprint on the lot, and the building its stepped back to meet the river setback requirement and reduce impact to the site. Office use is a permitted use in the CO zoning district. The variance request was routed to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to neighboring property owners for consideration and comment. Comments were received from Town of Estes Park Llght and Power Department and Upper Thompson Sanitation District. No comments in support or opposition to the requested variances were received from neighboring property owners. Approval of the requested variances will) not affect the delivery of publlic services. Upper Thompson Sanitation District desires to ensure access to the sewer main adjacent to the Big Thompson River. This concern can be addressed with the development plan review. Planning staff recommends approval of the requested variances with three conditions of approvals. Public Comment: Joe CoopNan Horn Engineering was present to represent the applicant. He stated the applicant had originally wanted to construct a single -story building but had alltered the plans to better fit the lot. The proposal minimizes impervious coverage, and the applicant has made a good effort to minimize impact on the site. Lon Kinnie, neighboring property owner, raised questions regarding whether the applicant would be required to extend existing curb and gutter beyond his driveway, whether the Town would require upgrades to Prospect Village Drive (a private road), and who would pay for any required upgrades. Director Joseph stated that all property owners along this private road have a collective responsibility to maintain shared access in a reasonably functional, condition. These issues are not pertinent to the variance requests and should be brought forward during review of the development plan. Member Sager stated there are reasons for all three variance requests, and the requests are acceptable to him. It was moved and seconded (Sager/Dilll) to approve the variance request for Lot 1A, Amended Plat of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Prospect Village Subdivision, to allow stairs to be constructed within the required 15-foot side -yard setback by up to four feet; to allow one parking space to encroach into the required eight -foot side -yard landscape buffer by seven feet; and to allow the parking lot and landcape buffer to be 40 feet from the annual high-water mark of the Big Thompson River in lieu of the required 50-foot setback/landscape buffer, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent and with Chair Lynch abstaining. CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with the submitted application. 2. Planning Commission approval of the development plan application. 3. A registered land surveyor shall) set the survey stakes prior to construction, shall verify compliance with the variances, and shall provide a setback certificate. 5. REPORTS None. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment February 5, 2008 There being no further business, Chair Lynch adjourned the meeting at 10:11 a.m. John Lynch, Chair Julie Roederer, Recording Secretary Vk 460 Valley Road, Setback Variance Estes Park Community Development Department Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: April 30, 2008 REQUEST: Side/Rear Setback Variance LOCATION: 460 Valley Rd. FILE #: Peterson I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SITE DATA Owner: Stan Peterson Zoning: E-1 Estate Property Size: 0.49 acres Existing Use: Residential Legal Description: 35234-00-037. This request is for a reduction of the required 25ft. building setback (Table 4-2; 4.3.c.5) to allow for a deck to wrap around the south comer of the home. The existing building is situated only 20 ft. from the property line at the south corner. The comer of the deck extension at this same point would fall 6.4 ft. from the side property line as illustrated in the site plan. The easterly comer of the deck would be 23.2 ft. from the rear property line. The house was built in 1913 and has been recently renovated. II. REVIEW CRITERIA: All applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and criteria set forth below: 1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code's standards, provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan. The special circumstance is the placement of the home on the property back in 1913. This placement did not allow for conforming decks. Also, the lot is only !/a half acre in a one acre zoning district (E-1). 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; The home can be occupied without the deck variance. b. Whether the variance is substantial; The degree of additional encroachment is minimal considering the position of the existing building. 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 requested variance would not negatively impact the character of the neighborhood. Christopher Wood, the neighbor to the south has submitted a letter in support of this request. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer; Delivery of services would not be adversely affected. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; and The applicant did purchase the property with knowledge of the requirement. f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. No reasonable alternatives exist. 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. The conditions are site specific. 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 Page #2 - Agenda Item # number of lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations 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. 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. III. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: 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. IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOAIlENDATION: Based on the foregoing, staff finds: • The degree of additional encroachment is minimal considering the position of the existing building • The requested variance would not negatively impact the character of the neighborhood. • No reasonable alternatives exist. • The request is directly related to the everyday use of the existing building. • Delivery of services would not be adversely affected. Recommendation: Approval with the following conditions: • Full compliance with the Building Code. • Submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a qualified Surveyor. Page #3 - Agenda Item # Ilinll111llwlliilllllllllllwhlluliiiii1N II0IIIIIU��,�IIM�Ip fl1yiilplllliiPul„IIIIIIImiiillllliWM, W „ „ 0161,„uuVfi,u I�liillll��"��IIIIIII�.,,,,,,,A'N„Ili„,,,,,��,I�. 1,'1111111,111111411111111111111111'11, mP„iiiV111 111111111111111 l W' l,,, „ 11 11 mu9uup„ I16 1111111 dl' I,,, u „ 1IV,'„ II 'h , 1iliglwilul 1 �I I!�IMIw uu"N"';p11i lye m GREGORY A. WHITE Attorney at Law North Park Place 1423 West 29th Street Loveland, Colorado 80538 970/667-5310 Fax 970/667-2527 April 21, 2008 BOB JOSEPH, PLANNER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT TOWN OF ESTES PARK PO BOX 1200 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 Re: Variance Request - Peterson Residence Dear Mr. Joseph: I have no conunent. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. i V - Truly Yours, Greg GAW/ldr A. White CC Van Horn Engine ring, Ellen O'Connell Fax: 970/586-8101 P.O. Box 568 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 (970)-586-4544 (970) 586-1049 Fax April 15, 2008 Bob Joseph, Planner II Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Variance Request Peterson Residence Metes and Bounds property located at 460 Valley Road Dear Dave, The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above referenced property: 1. The District has no objection to the proposed variance request. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank You, Chris Bieker Operations Manager Upper Thompson Sanitation District cc: Ellen O'Connell Van Horn Engineering February 25, 2008 Ellen O'Connell Van Hom Engineering 1043 Fish Creek Road Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Set Back Variance, Stan Peterson Home 460 Valley Rd. Ellen, I am writing to approve the request for a set back variance on the proposed structure of the addition of a deck to the property located at 460 Valley Rd. It is my understanding that the current glans are for a deck that would encroach 5-6 feet onto the 25' setback requirement at my home 470 Valley Rd. I authorize this set back variance. If there are any other concerns that need to be addressed around the project, please feel free to contact me. rely, Cbristophesr E. Wood 470 Valley Rd. Estes Park, CO 80517 577-0962 (Hm) 970-481-6142 (Ce11) cc Stan Peterson Statement of Intent - Variance 460 Valley Road Variance Request: (compliance with Section 3.6 of the Estes Valley Development Code) Requested variances: Section 4.3.C.5.Table 4-2 `E-1' Zoning Side Setback -Existing 25' from current property line -Requesting 6' from South property line and 23' from the East property line The property located in a portion of Section 23, Township 5 North, Range 73 West is a parcel of land with street frontage on Valley Road. The land is zoned E-1 Residential, (1 acre) under the current Estes Valley Development Code with setbacks being 25' from all lot lines.. This lottis approximately 'A an acre, which would be more closely matched to the E-Estate zoning, which has 15' setbacks. The variances are requested in order to be able to replace above grade decks that were recently removed from the house with new above grade decks. The previous decks were located as shown in the attached pictures. At that time, the decks were separate. It is proposed to replace the former decks with one deck that runs along the South and East sides of the house. 1. Special Circumstances or Existing Conditions This house was built in 1913. The decks were added in 1993. It was necessary to remove the decks in order to complete extensive renovations to the house. Without the decks on the house, there is only one exit from the house. The implications of the safety hazards associated with only one exit and the desire for a continuous "wrap around" above grade deck are the motivating factors in requesting these variances. 2. "Practical Difficulty Factors:" a. These portions of the property have been used, including deck use, for many years and granting this variance would allow a historic use to continue, in virtually the same location on the property. b. The requested variance to the South is substantial when comparing 6.0' to 25' (76%) required by the current zoning (E-1). However, the lot is less than 'A an acre in size. Therefore, comparing the requested setback of 6.0' with the E (1/2 acre) zoning (10' side and 15' rear) is not as substantial (40% and 60%). To reiterate, this is a setback request for an elevated deck. The structure itself (home) is currently ±5' into the 25' setback (20%). If the deck were at grade, and not elevated, no variance would be needed. c. The variance would not substantially alter or have a major impact on the surrounding properties. The neighbor to the South of this property has been contacted regarding this proposed deck and does not have any objections. (See attached letter) d. There will be no adverse affect to the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. All existing utilities and connections will remain the same. The cleanouts under the deck for the applicants' private sewer service line will remain accessible (as the deck is elevated). e. The applicant's family has owned the land for many years and has had elevated decks on both sides of the existing structure for some 15 years. 3. The variance requested is not general or recurrent in nature, the situation is site specific. Given the special circumstances associated with the request, this is a unique request. 4. The granting of this variance will not cause an increase in density or create the ability to create new lots. 5. The proposed variance will allow the applicant to use the property as it has been used for many years with increased enjoyment and safety. The deck could be smaller; however, the applicant wishes to parallel the home and square the corner for construction simplicity, cost and architectural desires. Given the owner's desires and the most impacted neighbor's non -objection, this is the least deviation to afford relief. 6. The proposed variance request will not allow a use that has not previously been permitted on the property. NOTE: See attached letter from neighbor, letter and pictures from owner. 22 February 2008 To Whom It May Concern: I am requesting a variance to replace the decks at my house at 460 Valley Road. The decks that existed at the house had been in place since at least 1993 when my mother purchased the property. The decks were torn down in order to accomplish extensive renovations to the house in 2006. The new decks I am proposing to build are the same as the old decks with two exceptions: the deck on the south elevation would extend across the entire south side of the house (the old deck was only about half -way across) and the deck on the east elevation will be twelve feet by twenty feet (I think the old deck on this side was about ten feet by ten feet). I have been consulting with my adjoining property owner to the South at 470 Valley Road, Christopher Wood, and he has agreed verbally with my plans. I have asked him to write a letter to that effect, and will provide a copy to you as soon as possible. The new decks are necessary in order to provide alternate and safe exits from the house. Currently there is only one exit from the house on the North side. I have enclosed photos of the previous decks which existed on the South and East sides of the house, and a sketch of the proposed deck plan. I also enclosed a photo of an example of the type of deck and railing I would like to construct. Your consideration of this variance would be very much appreciated. I am enthusiastic about improving the appearance of this house and property which my great-grandmother built in 1913. Sincerely, Stanton B. Peterson 1741 Bolton Village Lane Niceville, FL 32578 (850) 543-1735 stan.peterson@cox.net ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION Submittal Date: liva"Ii`lry,; R O" - (s): Street Address of Lot G Q(e r, b Legal Description SL Block: Subdivision: 3C) 3 -- Parcel ID # j5j 4 - - Section 2 Lot Size [: '` 61. c.t.e. Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use. " a. Existing Water Service XTown Well Other (Specify) Proposed Water Service Town Well Other (Specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service EPSD K UTSD Septic Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service EPSD UTSD Septic Existing Gas Service )C Xcel Other None Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? Yes y1C No TownshiRa e Zoning AR 2 6 2008 Specific variance desired (state development code section #,. w Name of Primary Contact Person Maili t Address 6 1ti sit ` Application fee (see attached fee schedule) tatement 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") °'!Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) 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. Townof Estes Fork .as P.Q. BOK 1200 � 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Pot' CO 60517 :,".ommunity Development Deportment Phone? (970) 577 3721 -as Fax: (970) 586fi249 .9 www.eslesnel.com/ComDev Primary Contact Person is Record Owner(s) Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Owner Applicant Consultant/Engineer Fax Email GC'S b Os. . Applicant :SCA.A.ficP CA -Pa Nr42., Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email Consuftant/Engineer Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email Cu 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 www.estesnet.00m/OomDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule pdf All requests for refunds must be made In writing. Alt fees are due at the time of submittal. 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, 1 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 www.estesnetcom/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 dale. ► 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. P. 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 comers of my property and the proposed building/structure corners must be field staked. 1 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 shall 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 Applicant Se-�N-o3 . a4_,rsoA `S:\ , — Date 25 IQ 0 Revised 10/13108 MAR 2 6 2008 I iJ s Exhibit "A" A portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M.. more particularly described as follows: Commenting at a point that is 556 feet North and 1000 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 23; thence South 128.0 feet; thence West 155.00 feet; thence North 128.0 feet; thence East 155.0 feet, to the Point of Beginning, County of Lanmer. State of Colorado Also commencing at a point that is 556 feet North and 1000 feet West of the Southeast comer of satd Section 23; thence North approximately 22.93 feet to a pin marked *532; thence North 89°49' West a distance of 40 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 63°11' West a distance of 50.5 feet; thence North 89°49' East to the Point of Beginning, County of Lorimer, State of Colorado Ale No.; fit-0001906 Qm-DOC 1103313E 6f15f07 12:20 PM 1 a 0 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 DANA & BRIAN BURKE ESTES PARK, CO 80517 775 W WONDERVIEW AVE FIONA & GARY CAHILL ESTES PARK, CO 80517 496 VALLEY RD SHAUNA JOYCE EDWARDS CRAIG DUELL ESTES PARK, CO 80517 490 VALLEY RD EDWARDS INVESTMENT CO GREELEY, CO 80631 JOANNE ESKILDSEN GARDNER, KS 660301498 640 S SPRUCE ST GARY & JILL GROSE ESTES PARK, CO 80517 PO BOX 1382 LANE FAMILY TRUST ESTES PARK, CO 80517-2945 PO BOX 2945 STEPHEN & SANDRA MURPHREE ESTES PARK, CO 80517-3897 PO BOX 3897 PAULA STINSON JAMES OWEN DENVER, CO 80210 2520 S DOWNING ST SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST OF COLO. RIVERSIDE, IL 605462035 250 S DELAPLAINE RD NANCY & KEVIN SMITH ESTES PARK, CO 80517 445 D VALLEY RD ROBERT SMITH ESTES PARK, CO 80517 470 VALLEY RD CHRISTOPHER WOOD Peterson Variance - 460 Valley Rd mosolls J^1Ij lilt' I '„1I NOM � I , lyil"I�I'Nm II"IB ^^I���p per. d"N"_"OPu,y'",r 1. ail lei JI u,o 'w u�1 of rJw di ill ',I'li'il �� ul�mm111111 ill u lmmm�md 0,1,0 uul Ug� alm�� uro uNM1,14 0tik Page 2 of Idirlowvel410 tte A A r,o4N, NN, NVIAIAN " N#0 N # N ,444,1 .11081040, 010iigiOtisd1 4, ( 1111111101101111111111 1011 ,11111111111111" ,111 1111111111111111 „„„100h:, 0100,1,' 111001 11111 11111111 111010111000,0 11111 11111 11111100 „ , : '11 1' '1 II 0111,1 11116:11,11.111,4, '",.1" -1" „1,111111111"1111111:1',„.1", 01" '" ,Hqh1,1 ,111101.11H 1,111; ,1,1,0 „ 20061023_09 SW Comer 3.JPG (Resized to 96%, $1139w avtuall slizt) 1„, remni#0 NHN 1/2/20( ;j11!:11:,Ipli)1,:111,',!;11;;,„ ;;P;1101;114,ikrOgl 71o111,1111 HP111111111. ) ,r11,1110h; ;1?YitrOrerer H1111,11111. H11!1)111/111111: J1:1111,;,11,II ;;„,n ;"41„,,,ov111,1;111,1111111„1,', ; N 40( 11111111,1,111,111111,111;11,Z,11r 111:1111111111111111111111m1m11111110,r, 111111111,1111,,1,1, C , '10100000011', l'OFC1""'"11?!11111 20061023_06 SE Corner 4.JPG (Resized to 96%, $11,A, ad& oizgo Page 3 .of 1/2/2008 Page 4o. Hool000lolly 101101111111111111111111111 0000000ll 011111111111 i;BCVium i�owo,. ow. 11,1 111111111 1/2/20t NOISV38 31V0 to.-99S (0L6) Xtl! + 81126-9BS (0L6) ,3N0Hd L ISOB 00110103 51064 S3153 . 'Oil N3380 HSU 0001 ONIA3Ad flS ONV ONN133NION3 NNOH NVA Q4'02I A3TIVA 09fi Nosxatad NV1d ELIS 0 a R73W, COUNTY Ln z O a ccS J 0 o O O w v> w w < O I- c w w w w = Q 0 O z O Cr_ 0 0 w w 0 w ADDRESS: 460 VALLEY ROAD, ESTES PARK uQ 506191v38 AO SISV6 ,S1'l0t 3.00.00.00N 3- 'tam H1005) Cheney Front Yard Variance Request Estes Park Community Development Department Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 1.11101. Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: May 6, 2008 REQUEST: A request to allow a 20- foot front yard setback in lieu of the 50-feet typically required in the "RE" zone district. LOCATION: 845 W. Wonderview Avenue (Larimer County) APPLICANT: Van Horn Engineering PROPERTY OWNER: Reese, Regan and Flint Cheney; Corrine Cheney Burke (each owns 'A interest) STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk SITE DATA TABLE: Engineer: Van Horn Engineering (586-9388) Parcel Number: 3523400026 Number of Lots: One Proposed Land Use: Same Adjacent Zoning - East: "RE" Rural Estate (2.5 acre) West: "RE-1" Rural Estate (10 acre) Adjacent Land Uses - East: Single-family residential West: Rocky Mountain National Park Services - Water: Town Fire Protection: Estes Park Volunteer Development Area: 39 acres +/-. Existing Land Use: Cabin with various outbuildings Existing Zoning: "RE" Rural Estate North: "RE-1" Rural Estate (10 acre) South: "E-1" Estate (1 acre) North: MacGregor Ranch South: Single-family residential Sewer: UTSD PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The applicant requests a variance to Table 4-2 "Base Density and Dimensional Standards" of the Estes Valley Development Code to allow a front yard setback of 20-feet in lieu of the 50-feet typically required for the "RE" Rural Estate district. The purpose of this request is to allow the expansion/remodel of an existing cabin built circa 1915. The remodel would include removal and replacement of an existing kitchen, and addition of a bathroom. plIeN 1,„,1111111! 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 set forth below: 1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code's standards, provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: While the lot itself meets the minimum lot size, and shape to allow a new structure without need for a variance, the existing cabin has been in this location for nearly a hundred years, thus pre -dating setback and subdivision Page #2 ...-Cheney Front Yard Setback Request requirements. The property owners desire to renovate the existing cabin instead of tearing it down and building "from scratch." The lot contains a mapped rockfall hazard area, which is located east of the building site. As such, the applicant hired a professional geologist who has experience in the Estes valley. Terracon Engineering (reviewed by Neil Sherrod, who has consulting experience not only in the Estes valley, but also on the Castle Mountain ridge) conducted an on -site evaluation, and concluded there is "minor rockfall hazard potential." See attached report. 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 Comment: The property may continue as residential use, though the existing structure was built circa 1915 and is small compared to today's standards, and has no bath facilities. b. Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Comment: The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance is substantial. 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 Comment: The character of the neighborhood would not be affected. d. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Comment: The Cheney family has owned the property since construction of the cabin. e. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Comment: There are other options for the applicant. For example, the structure could be removed and rebuilt in a conforming location. Another option would be to locate the new bedrooms to the north or west, where they would be conforming (though interfere with an existing drive). Page #3 —Cheney Front Yard Setback Request 3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the Ieast deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Comment: The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance represents the least deviation that would afford relief. 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. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to all applicable 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. Neighbors. Staff has written correspondence from two neighbors, both of which expressed "no objections." STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, staff finds: 1. Special circumstances exist. The structure was built circa 1915, before setback regulations. 2. The property may continue to be used for residential use. 3. The Applicant's predicament could be mitigated through methods other than a variance. 4. The character of the neighborhood would not be affected. 5. The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance is substantial. b. The Board should use their judgment if the requested variance represents the least deviation that would afford relief. 7. The applicant has owned the property since before the adoption of the EVDC. 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 variance would not adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. 10. 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. 11. Approval of the variance would not result in an increase in the number of lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations. Page #4 -Cheney Front Yard Setback Request 12. Approval of the variance would not 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; Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variance to allow a front yard setback of 20-feet CONDITIONAL TO: a. Prior to pouring foundation, submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move APPROVAL of the requested variance with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. LAPSE: 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 shall automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void. Page #5 --Cheney Front Yard Setback Request April 14, 2008 Van Horn Engineering and Surveying 1043 Fish Creek Rd. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Attn: Mr. Lonnie Sheldon Re: Geologic Site Observation Bob Cheyne Variance Estes Park, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085024 Consulting Engineers & Scientists 301 North Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone 970,484.0359 Fax 970.484.0454 www.terracon,com Terracon has completed a geologic site observation to evaluate potential rockfall hazards of a single family residence located at 845 West Wonderview Avenue in Estes Park, Colorado. The purpose of this observation was to evaluate and make recommendations to mitigate potential rockfall hazards that may exist in the area of the proposed residence. It is our understanding that an addition to an existing single family residence is to be constructed adjacent to the base of the prominent outcrop located on the property. A Terracon Senior engineering geologist and engineering geologist conducted field observations of the site on April 2, 2008. Terracon was accompanied on the site by the property owner and representatives of Van Horn Engineering and Surveying. The residence is bordered on the north, east, and south by pine forest, with various outbuildings, and on the west by a gravel driveway with an existing single family residence beyond. The site is steeply sloped to the west with many granite outcroppings and boulders throughout the site. In particular, a massive outcropping approximately 30 feet in height was located approximately 300 feet east of the residence with a natural ledge spanning approximately the length of the outcropping. The ledge was approximately 10 feet wide and located approximately 17 feet above the base of the outcropping. Site drainage was generally in the form of sheet flow directed to the west and south. The site was vegetated with dense mature pine trees and shrub oak. The bedrock is highly jointed and fractured and exhibits spheroidal weathering. The weathering process and jointing from the release of stresses has caused large and small patterns of rectangular rock shapes within the outcrop. The major joint patterns are oriented horizontally and vertically. A third prominent joint pattern is located parallel to the general slope of the hillside. Jointing pattems indicate the block size of the rock would vary from approximately one foot to in excess of 10 feet in the largest dimension. The lower portion of the rock slope contains scattered boulders, trees and brush. Surface outcrops and boulders form the base of the slope adjacent to where the proposed house will be built. The massive bedrock outcroping, in our opinion, has minor rockfall hazard potential. The natural ledge, mature pine trees, granite outcrops, and boulders at the base of the slope adjacent and to the east of the proposed house will aid in protecting the residence and collecting potential rockfall from the smaller blocks. Due to the rectangular "slab -like" shape of the rock caused by Delivering Success for Clients and Employees Since 1965 More Than 95 Offices Nationwide Bob Cheyene Variance Rockfall Observations Project No. 20085024 lferron the joint patterns in the rock, the growth of trees and the irregular rough surface of the hillside it is anticipated that the majority of blocks of rock, which may dislodge over time, would not travel far down slope and come to a rest before reaching the residence. It should be noted a detailed rockfall study was not conducted on the lot and is beyond the scope of this project. We appreciate being of service to you in the geotechniical engineering phase of this project, and are prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design and consulting services. Sincerely, TERRACON CONSULTANTS, INC. Christopher M. Gemperline Engineering Geologist Reviewed by: Neil Sherrod, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist Copies: Addressee (2) Attachments: Figures 1 Geotechnical Department Manage 2 North Park Place 1423 West 29th Street Loveland, Colorado 80538 GREGORY A. WHITE Attorney at Law April 21, 2008 DAVE SHIRK, PLANNER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT TOWN OF ESTES PARK PO BOX 1200 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 Re: Variance Request - Cheney Residence Dear Mr. Shirk I have no comment. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. GAW/ldr CC: Van Horn Engineering, Ellen O'Connell Fax: 970/586-8101 970/667-5310 Fax 970/667-2527 P.O. Box 568 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 (970)-586-4544 (970) 586-1049 Fax April 15, 2008 Dave Shirk, Planner II Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Variance Request Cheney Residence Metes & Bounds property located at 845 W. Wonderview Avenue Dear Dave, The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above referenced property: 1. The District has no objection to the proposed variance request. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank You, Chris Bieker Operations Manager Upper Thompson Sanitation District cc: Ellen O'Connell Van Horn Engineering COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Shirk, Planner Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FROM: Traci Downs, Development Services Engineer DATE: April 24, 2008 SUBJECT: Cheney Residence Variance Request 845 West Wonderview Avenue Project Description/Background: This is a request for a setback variance off of a side property line. Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-5700 FAX (970) 498-7986 Comments: I . Staff assumes that any subsequent improvements on this site will not adversely impact the drainage patterns or create erosion problems in the area. Recommendation: The Larimer County Engineering Department does not have any major concerns or issues with the submittal of this proposal. Please feel free to contact me at (970) 498-5701 or e-mail at tdowns@larimer.org if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: Van Horn Engineering, 1043 Fish Creek Road, Estes Park, CO 80517 reading file file H.'IDEVREV\PLANCHK\Rcfenals ,CfriES\EsteiCheney Residence Varianu a ,,EVPA.d Monday, April 21, 2008 2:52pM Dave Shirk Cheney Residence Variance Dave, I've reviewed the variance request for the Cheney residence. Rocky Mountain National park has no objections to the granting of a variance. Larry Gamble Chief, oraonb of Planning & Compliance Rocky Mountain National Park Estes Park, co 80517 Phone (970) 586-I328 Fax (970) 586-1359 0- I al Paint 1.5 5446 to, ara own C#C- 4//Y} rvree-' keeve %u5F 600A Lik aney prtipai -Tru- aeAcii'S no/ikaf h [C, eroptUda_ a +/i rr curd /lave- s4 vr2 nn profwziruiv la,friolvf 54r,telart • h ivo dytclrms '%fir propavi a ddd74 as Sir 1 (//- /0. 3/zai7f5 970 - 2Z7-05W Statement of Intent - Variance 845 West Wonderview Ave. Variance Request: (compliance with Section 3.6 of the Estes Valley Development Code) Requested variances: Section 4.3.C.5.Table 4-2 'RE' Zoning Front Setback -Existing 50' from current property line -Requesting 19.5' from South property line The property located in a portion of Section 23, Township 5 North, Range 73 West is a parcel of land with access from Wonderview Avenue through an easement across the neighboring property. The land is zoned RE — Residential (2.5 acre), under the current Estes Valley Development Code with setbacks being 50' from all lot lines. The variance is being requested in order to remodel the existing house, built circa 1913. The existing house is approximately 1,000 square feet. The remodel will include removing a portion of the existing house (4.44 SF) in the kitchen area and then replacing it with a larger area (360 SF). The house has been vacant for a number of years. This remodel would be a step towards the house being occupied again. This house does not have any existing bathrooms in it. The addition will add a bathroom. When the house to the South West was built (855 West Wonderview), the sewer line was brought up the driveway with a second line added for the future upgrade of the subject property. Currently a large portion of the house is within the setback and the proposed addition will only be 8' (more or less) closer to the setback line. 1. Special Circumstances or Conditions Exist This house is a long standing structure, built circa 1913. Portions of the house are nestled into the hillside making the Northern portion unavailable for adding on. The current proposal will remove the existing kitchen area of the house, construct the new addition, and remodel the interior. Together with this effort, utilities and electric will be updated. 2. "Practical Difficulty Factors:" a. This structure has been used for a residence in the past. The historic structure has a very small kitchen area b. The variance is not substantial relative to the location of the existing structure on the lot and the existing setback requirement, i.e., 8/50 16° 0. c. This action would not substantially alter or have a major impact on the surrounding properties. The neighboring house to the South of the subject property is not in the sight line of the existing house. d. There will be no adverse affect to the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Currently there is a water line service pit at the Southeast part of the house water service will be relocated to the West side of the house. 3. The variance requested is not general or recurrent in nature, the situation is site specific. Given the special circumstances, the kitchen is the portion being remodeled and it is on the eastern end of the house, associated with the request and the topography on the site, the house is in a rock fall hazard area as mapped by the Robinson survey performed in 1976 (long after the house was built), this is a unique request. The applicant agrees to have a rock fall hazard report (which will be prepared by Terracon). Should mitigation•be necessary, based on the report, the applicant agrees that mitigation measures will be conditions of approval for issuance of a building permit. At this time, the report is in process. 4. The granting of this variance will not cause an increase in density or create the ability to create new lots. 5. The proposed variance will allow the applicant to use this structure as it has been used for many years in the distant past. The remodeled structure will be the primary use on the land (residential single family). Other structures on this property are storage buildings only. Instead of constructing a new structure on the property, the applicant desires to remodel the old house. This request is the least deviation to afford relief and minimize site disturbance. 6. The proposed variance request will not allow a use that has not previously been permitted on the property. ESTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION Submittal Date: Record Owner(s): ,' .,.. • C treet Address of Lot' L ' ' - \JO \, 1 1 ' , Legal Description Lot: Block: Tract: Subdivision: Parcel ID #.-2``; 2. 3 ... '1..r, Section 2- Township Ran • e AR 2 6 2008 Lot Size ±— LAD occAt.k.4 • Zoning Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use Existing Water Service y<Town r Well r Other (Specify) Proposed Water Service r Town r Well r Other (Specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service r EPSD ft UTSD r' Septic Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service r EPSD r UTSD r Septic Existing Gas Service r Xcel r Other r None Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? r Yes No I V.11 ill r.„; Specific variance desired (state development code section # .1, IP' rulon.Do• y (7,1", cr,pri I CrI.C.) li:i Application fee(see attached fee schedule) V'Statement of intent (must comply with standards set forth in Section 3.6.0 of the Estes Valley Development Code) py (folded) of site plan (drawn at a scale of 1" = 20') " VT1 reduced copy of the site plan (11" X in Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) The site plan shall include information inIstes 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 4% P.O. Box 1200 .4. 170 MacGregor Avenue -a Estes Pak CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 -IA Fax: (970) 5845-0249 www.estesnet.com/ComDev i I Contact Information Primary Contact Person is i ' Owner f""" Applicant I c Consultant/Engineerlt� `Ai - Record Owner(s) 't ( -- � . rkk �� -C��rv1 NP ( Mailing Address 1L>�,� t�jctT � . S FJ, �L ,("Id Phone 5FI y---e-AS`-e Cell Phone Fax Email Applicant , j Cam— k* - ,gyp JS r\ Mailing Address LVLt3 C % k Ctt\-12 ,� IC— ' )7.4 rJ Phone ' L _ CL.R Cell Phone —C , Fax [�J ' 0 I Email -e ( (-74L j ira-; -{ "tb u.... Consultant/Engineer t i,_,_,t Ct.3 Of r.-• eL. Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email 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 www.estesnet.com/ComDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedute.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. APPLICANT 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 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 www.estesnet.com/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. ► 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. 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 comers of my property and the proposed building/structure comers 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. 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 shall automatically render the decision oft Valley Development Code Section 3.6.D) Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: R G �i Q.1n { 1r\[r�✓ 1'\ Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Veu Covv,p Signatures: Record Owner Applicant Date .2-A7 Do g Date D-1 p Revised 10/13/06 APPLICANT 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 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 goveming the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at www.estesnet.com/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. Ob.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 comers 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 shall automatically render the decision ie utimi Valley Development Code Section 3.6.D) Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT.: )c. Ask 2 6 ?OM Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Signatures: � �,� Record Owner Date /2 Applicant Date Revised 10/13/06 a) 0 1 d C 0 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 ESTES PARK, CO 80517-2435 W W > > Q Q > > CC CC W W 0 0 uo Z Z X GARY & FIONA CAHILL PHYLLIS & JOHN GILLILAND CHARLES HIX SANTA FE, NM 87504-0728 PO BOX 728 LAND RESOURCES PROGRAM CENTER O • • • ESTES PARK, CO 80517 PO BOX 4675 MURIEL MACGREGOR • h lf) U) O O co co O 0 0M • CC d 0. W W • U) W W m a STEPHEN & SANDRA MURPHREE PO BOX 3576 SHANE & PAULETTE RING RIVERSIDE, IL 60546-2035 250 S DELAPLAINE RD NANCY & KEVIN SMITH ESTES PARK, CO 80517-9129 DENVER, CO 80225 W W 0 co Z N 0 N 0 a JOHN & JOANNA VAN VLIET UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Cheney Variance lkitolot„,„4,1R1,1, 0() 0 0 z `1 M 71) 201.1321,51„.0.j„..A r. v.3 200 WEST OAK STREET FORT COLLINS, CO 80522, 970-498-7683 L./AI-MICK UtJUN I Y bUiLuiNci DEPARTMENT Ammisai2 , s • CONCkFif MASONRY LINIfFOLINPAilON 19M11.5 & MINIMUM IEQLIMAAFN15 CONOTIE MASONRY IWFOUNIATION WAIL FO FOUNIA110N5 56" IN Pricer O LE55 51/120R11NG ONE FLOOR 6" ifFLE510 I 5CON 611 5111011E-5PLY 56" LE55 INCTA% 10 10" FOR 5110015 I/ 2" AN= CCM EecitelefOn' ININN IT' CP EACH v Cr Sti. MAE BC,V er.A.M Wri41-*4 ROW [CHINOS werAreircam SAL Pa ITV 10 Of DOC eemitaramum. 91R5 VEMICA5 0 '2" oz. WM MI6 FILLY Mal= MN. *9 Cola OM C4G55 WIN514417CCNINVU5 a kaSIkrg ea; Javr5 5Ver VeNr MAN. AWN. fa? a FOOft4 1.04 2-44 REM N WONG INGIVa 10: 10" FOR 2 FLOORS 12" FOR, F1006 INCIVa fa 20" FOR 2 FLOORS 24" FOR 5 FLOGR5 CONME MA5ONEY UNIT FOUNDATION PETAIL FOR FOUNPA1ION5 5' fig 9' IN FEU< 16" v *pa rats Vac ENVERX32 WILI" *WYNN 12. MB MCP Niae DOW MAN NM 2-44 inmecairmas wenaktemoiciu ITV VIM MAW PENA WIAINIPAL 40 VERIICAR5 an" 020LNEV s9 Oa s 059. EN& [AV CCMINIC115 a ?UMW XV .12•15 AIWA-5 1V t1I'AMI ti" H47 010eVCCV X6CWitv cr roorao MN. 2-*4 OW IN roam **FOUNPMION5 WALL5 XCMPING 9' -0" IN HIciH1AMOURN7 10 j3 IX5IGNW I3Y A COLORAPO kE615rEen 5TIZLICTLIPAL NGINM** 9,541417.1v 7 9/ II/ 95 PS (o(r) . RBEr-9RF (oCr) 3NONd va 531,3 . na >W. Ns3 cea ONIA3AlIf1S ONV ON12133NION3 NOON NVA any 1taIAHaallox Ism sTe AaNaHD Ae Nosin3a 31. SONVIHVA HOd NV' d a.LIS 1331-15.