Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Excess Floor Area 1895 Fall River Rd 2023-05-02 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo To: Chair Jeff Moreau Estes Park Board of Adjustment Through: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director From: Jeffrey Woeber, Senior Planner Date: May 2, 2023 Application:Variances for Total Square Footageand Cumulative Square Footage for Employee Housing 1895 Fall River Road Kinley Built LLC, Owner/Applicant David Bangs, Trail Ridge Consulting Engineers, Representative Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the variance requests, subject to the findings described in the report. Land Use: 2022 Estes Forward Comprehensive Plan Designation: (Future Land Use): Mixed-Use Centers and Corridors Zoning District: CO (Commercial Outlying) Site Area:2.3 Acres PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENTRESOLUTIONOTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Conduct a public hearing to consider and make a decision on a request from the Applicant for two variances. The first variance request would allow employee housing units to exceed the maximum allowable 800 square feet per unit. The second request would allow the total cumulative square feet of employee housing to exceed that of the total square footage of the commercial use. 1 Background The 2.3-acre subject property is in a CO (Outlying Commercial) Zone Districtand contains an existing structure, previously used for office and retail space. The current owner intends to continue the commercial/office use, add additional commercial/office area, and eight new employee housing units. Employee housing units are allowable as an Accessory Use under Section 5.2.C.2 of the Estes Park Development Code (EPDC). The Applicant submitted a Development Plan for the project, which relies on the requested variances in order to proceed. Variance Description: The Employee Housing use is subject to certain limitations under the standards within the EPDC. The applicant is requesting variances to the following two development standards: 1. EPDC Section 5.2.C.2.a.1.b., Additional Requirements for Specific Accessory Uses in Nonresidential Zoning Districts – Employee Housing, to allow individual dwelling units used for employee housing to exceed 800 square feet of gross floor area. Eight, two-bedroom employee housing apartment units are proposed, each 1200 square feet in size. 2. EPDC Section 5.2.C.2.a.2.b., Additional Requirements for Specific Accessory Uses in Nonresidential Zoning Districts –Employee Housing, to permit total cumulative square footage of the employee housing units to exceed that of the principal use.Existing and proposed commercial/office square footage would total 8470 square feet. The total, cumulative square feet of the proposed employee housing is 9680 square feet, 1210 square feet more than allowed. Location and Context: The subject property islegally described as All of Binns Addition to the Town of Estes Park and is located on Fall River Road, approximately ¾ mile west of the intersection of Fall River Road and West Elkhorn Avenue. This area has a variety of zoning and established uses, including single-family and multi-family residential, accommodations and commercial. This area is a mixture of Town and unincorporated Larimer County, which includes properties adjacent to the subject property to the north, east and west. The unincorporated property to the west (on the north side of Fall River Road) contains an accommodations/lodge use. The unincorporated parcel to the east contains two single-family residences. Properties to the south across Fall River Road are within Town boundaries and contain single family residences and accommodations/cabins. Vicinity Map Zoning Map Zoning and Land Use SummaryTable Comprehensive PlanZone Uses SubjectMixed Use Centers & RM(Residential) Commercial/Office Site Corridors Mountains and Foothills Unincorporated Larimer North Undeveloped (County)County SouthSuburban EstateE-1 (Estate)Residential Unincorporated Larimer East Neighborhood Village Residential County Mountains and Foothills Unincorporated Larimer West Lodging (County)County Project Analysis Review Criteria: The Board of Adjustment (BOA) is the decision-making body for variance requests. In accordance with EPDC Section 3.6.C., Variances, Standards for Review, applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. The Standards with staff findings for each are as follows: 1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code’s standards, provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding:Special circumstancesexist, although not with the physical condition of the property. Employers in Estes Park and the Estes Valley have long facedserious challenges in hiring and retaining employees due to the lack of housing in the Estes Park area. The eight proposed employee housing units can alleviate these circumstancessomewhat. The requested variance will not nullify or impair the intent and purposes of the employee housing standards, the EPDC, or the Comprehensive Plan. 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 may be beneficial use of the property without the variance. b.Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Finding: The variance to exceed the 800 square foot maximum to 1200 square feet is 50 percent more than allowed. The variance to allow the employee housing to exceed the commercial square footageby 1210 square feet is somewhat substantial, 14 percent greater than what is allowed. The two- bedroom, two-bathroom apartments are more desirable and provide more flexibility than what is possible with the 800 square foot limitation, according to the applicant. 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: The character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered.There would be minor impacts to this area with the employee housing units being larger than allowable. However, adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment if the variance is approved. Parking is adequate for the proposed uses. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: Public services such as water and sewer will not be adversely affected by the variance. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Finding: The applicant was aware of the employee housing size requirements when the property was purchased. f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: The applicant could add employee housing that is smaller, and meets the square footage requirements of the EPDC. There is no method other than the variance to establish the employee housing at the size that is proposed. 3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. Staff Finding:The conditions affecting the Applicant’s property are not general or recurrent. 4. No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing or proposed subdivision if it will result in an increase in the number of lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, 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 proposed variance would be the least deviation from the EPDC regulations. 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 variance is for a use permitted as an Accessory Usein the CO Zone District. 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 does not recommend conditions. Reviewing Agency Comments: This request has been referred to all applicable review agencies staff for review and comment. There was no objection to the proposed variance. The Upper Thompson Sanitation District “…has no concerns with the Variance Request pertaining to square footage.” Public Works “…supports approval of the variances to facilitate the construction of new workforce/employee housing.” Town of Estes Park Utilities “…has no objections.” Staff notes there may be additional agency comments regarding the Development Plan application for the project. Public Notice Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with EPDC noticing requirements. Written notice was mailed to adjacent property owners on April 12, 2023. Legal notice published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on April 14, 2023. The application wasposted on the Town’s “Current Applications” webpage on February 20, 2023. Advantages: Approval of the variance will allow development of more and larger employee housing units, which is needed in the Estes Park area. Disadvantages: There may be a slight increase in traffic on Fall River Road when the employee housing is fully occupied. Action Recommended: Staff recommends approval of the variance request. Level of Public Interest: Low. To date, no public comments have been received for the variance application. Sample Motion: I move that the Board of Adjustment approve the variance requests, in accordance with the findings as presented. I move that the Board of Adjustment deny the variances, finding that \[state findings for denial\]. I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variances to the next regularly scheduled meeting, finding that \[state reasons for continuance\]. Attachments: 1. Application Form 2. Statement of Intent 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. Proposed Architectural Plans EC I VR E S N A S 104'-0" DW F 104'-0" W/DDN UP W/D DN A1 DNDN 103'-6" UP UPUP 40'-0" Sheet No: F 103'-6" DW 103'-0" DW F D-Plan 103'-0" /UPPER Architecturals DN W/D SF Sheet Title: UP EA UNIT680 SF/MAIN530 1210 SF TOTAL W/D DN DNDN 102'-6" UPUPUP F 102'-0" DW 5,190 SFCOMMERCIAL 530 SF/ UNIT4,240SF TOTAL 680 SF/UNIT5,440SF TOTAL 160'-8" DW Develpmt Plan2/15/2023 101'-6" F Issue:Date: DN W/D 101'-6" UP W/D DN DN UPUP Apartment Upper Level 3/32" = 1'-0"Apartment Main Level 3/32" = 1'-0"Ground Floor 3/32" = 1'-0" F 101'-0" DW 101'-0" 2'-0" DW 100'-6" F DN W/D 100'-6" UP W/D DN DN UPUP 115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115 '-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0 "115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0"115'-0" F 100'-0" DW 100'-0" 36'-0" Kinley BuiltMixed Use/Workforce Housing 8 12 8 12 FIELDSTONE BALCONIESBLACK METAL RAILINGS 8 12 8 12 ASPHALT SHINGLESWEATHERED WOOD ASPHALT SHINGLESWEATHERED WOOD FIBER CEMENTBOARD + BATTENDARK BRONZE Estes Park, Colorado 80517 A R C H I T E C T U R E P. C. 1692 Big Thompson Ave, Ste 100 RAILING FIELDSTONE BALCONIESBLACK METAL RAILINGS FIBER CEMENT LAPSIDING, DARK BROWN ASPHALT SHINGLESWEATHERED WOODFIBER CEMENT VERTICAL CHANNELSIDING, DARK BROWN 12 12 FIBER CEMENT LAPSIDING, DARK BROWN METAL ROOF, VERTICALWEATHERED WOODAT UNIT ENTRIES North Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" FIBER CEMENT LAPSIDING, DARK BROWN South Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" 12 8 ALUMINUMSTOREFRONT AT COMMERCIAL SPACES BASIS 12 8 © BAS1S.com West Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" 970.586.9140 Architecture, P.C. 12 4 APPROX LINE DARK SKY LIGHTFIXTURE, TYPOF EXISTING GRADE FIBER CEMENT VERTICAL CHANNELSIDING, DARK BROWN 29'-6" FIBER CEMENT VERTICAL CHANNELSIDING, DARK BROWN DARK SKY LIGHTFIXTURE, TYP Ridge + 115'-0" + 140'-6"T.O. Wall+ 134'-0"+ 100'-6" Upper GradeLower Grade 12 8 12 8