The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Estes Valley Planning Commission 2009-07-19Prepared: JOIy 7,2009 Revised: AGENDA ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:00 Study Session, Rooms 201 and 202, Town Hall 6:00 p.m. Meeting, Board Room, Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT The EVPC will accept public comments regarding items not on the agenda. Comments should not exceed three minutes. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of minutes - June 16,2009 Planning Commission Meeting 3. BYLAW AMENDMENT 4. PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP - Lot 4A, Mary's Meadow Replat, located on Kiowa Drive Owner: Mary's Meadow Development Applicant: CMS Planning & Development Request: Approval of 35-unit residential condominiums 5. AMENDED PLAT - BINNS PROPERTY - Lot 10, North End Ranches & Tract 2 of Division of Lot 20, located at 2112 McGraw Ranch Road Owner/Applicant: Sonya K Binns Request: Lot Line Adjustment 6. PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP - STONE BRIDGE ESTATES - Lot 3, Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision, located at 1125-1196 Fish Creek Road Owner: Stone Bridge, LLC Applicant: Rock Castle Development Co. Request: Approval of 14 condominium units 7. REPORTS STAFF-LEVEL REVIEWS Lemke Assisted Living Facility - DP 09-04 Safeway Fueling Facility - DP 09-05 PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS TOWN BOARD AND COUNTY COMMISSION DECISIONS ON APPLICATIONS REVIEWED BY PLANNING COMMISSION Sundance Supplemental Condominium Map #7 Overlook Supplemental Condominium Map #3 East Riverwalk Center Amendment to the Amended Condominium Map 8. ADJOURN The Estes Valley Planning Commission reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Reguiar Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission June 16, 2009, 1 :30 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Doug Klink; Commissioners Alan Frallndorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Steve Lane, Ron Norris, and Rex Poggenpohl Attending: Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Steve Lane, Ron Norris, and Rex Poggenpohl Also Attending: Director Joseph, Town Attorney White, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott, Town Board Liaison Homeier, and Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Chair Klink introduced new Commissioner Rex Poggenpohl, who is representing Larimer County and replacing Wendell Amos. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT Paul Newendorp/Sustainable Mountain Living Group extended an invitation to all community organizations to a meeting on Thursday, June 18~h at Town Hall. The meeting will include discussion to propose a transition initiative for the future of the Estes Valley and its ability to become a sustainable community within 20 years. Fred Mares/Town Resident suggested online posting of the agendas and documentation for public meetings seven days prior to the meeting date. If changes are made, please post a revision date. Director Joseph noted more people are using the website, and Staff will keep the information as current and accurate as possible. 2. STAFF REPORT Planner Shirk notified the Planning Commissioners that the Mary's Meadow Development Plan 06-01 8, The Meadow Replat, and the Preliminary Condominium Map has been withdrawn by the applicants, Jim Tawney and Frank Theiss. 3. MEETING CHANGE AND BYLAW AMENDMENT The Planning Commission meeting time is established in the bylaws and Planning Commissioners discussed revising the bylaws to change the meeting time from 1 :30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., with study session beginning approximately two hours prior to the meeting depending on the agenda content. Commissioner Klink stated the time change would hopefully result in better attendance and more public comment. This proposed change could occur on a trial basis and be revisited in the future based on public input and logistics. The bylaws include a provision requiring that notice of proposed amendments to the bylaws be given to each Planning Commission member in writing at least seven days prior to the meeting. Town Attorney White advised that the Planning Commission could waive this requirement if all members agreed to the waiver. It was moved and seconded (Klink/Hull) to waive provision in the bylaws requiring that notice of proposed amendments to the bylaws be given to each Planning Commission member in writing at least seven days prior to the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valiey Planning Commission 2 June 16, 2009 It was moved and seconded (Klink/Tucker) to amend the bylaws to read: "...with the time set by an adopted motion of the Commission," to start study sessions prior to the meeting, with the exact time depending on agenda content, and to start Planning Commission meetings at 6:00 p.m., beginning with the July 21, 2009 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Estes Valley Planning Commission minutes dated May 19, 2009 BLUE SPRUCE SUBDIVISION - Lot 1,Blue Spruce Subdivision and a portion of Lot 10, Greeley-Boulder Colony, located at 2250 Highway 66. This is a request to adjust the internal lot line between two lots originally created in 1918. , It was moved and seconded (Norris-Lane) that the consent agenda be accepted as amended, and the motion passed unanimously. Lane and Poggenpohl abstained. 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 09-03 - BLACK CANYON INN CONDOMINIUMS MASTER PLAN The Lodges at Black Canyon Inn Condominiums located in the east 1/2 of section 24, Township 5 North, Range 73 West, located at 800 MacGregor Avenue Owner/Applicant: Sloan Investments, LLC c/o Jim Sloan Staff Report: Planner Shirk noted this is a request for approval to build 26 dwelling/accommodation units. The development plan also includes renovations to some existing buildings and units. Assuming approval and build-out, this would bring the total to 59 units. The applicant proposes development in the eastern portion of the site. Planner Shirk stated the Overlook Condominium owner's association issued a letter opposing the emergency access through their property. The Applicant has talked to the Overlook board on this issue. Also, comments were received opposing Building G (units 1 -5), which has since been removed from the proposal. Planner Shirk noted there is a Supplemental Condominium Map that includes dedication of this emergency access easement that will be going before the Town Board on June 23,2009. Planner Shirk noted this proposal does require modifications to street standards; namely, the length of the cul de sac. The developer is proposing more vehicle trips per day (VTD) than code allows on a cul de sac. This modification was approved due to the planned emergency access connection between the Black Canyon property and the Overlook property. The development complies with the setback requirements of 50-feet from wetlands areas, and the building height will also comply. Planner Shirk noted the Building department has a few issues which will need to be addressed prior to approval. There is also a condition of approval to add a trail along MacGregor Avenue. A correction to the sewer line to the Ridgeview Condominiums will be required. Staff is recommending that 2:1 tree replacement be required for those trees being removed. Concerning the wildlife assessment report, three mitigation techniques were recommended: 1) timing of construction, 2) fence considerations, and 3) bear-proof trash containers. The applicant has requested a reduction in the parking requirement from 2.25 spaces per unit to 1.5 spaces per unit. This request is based on historical usage, and will reduce the impervious coverage. Planner Shirk noted this proposal complies with the density requirements, which were based on the residential land use category. He also noted this proposal includes improvements to four employee housing units. Planner Shirk stated that although Units 1-5 have been removed from this proposal, it does not preclude the developer from submitting a new development plan to construct these units in the future. Public Comment: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 June 16, 2009 Kerry Prochaska/Cornerstone Engineering, representing the applicant, noted the electrical will be worked into the existing subdivision and will provide a loop service for the entire area. He noted the emergency access easement will not be a thoroughfare, as it will have a locked barrier across the entrance. Mr. Prochaska noted the developer disagrees with the 2-for-1 tree replacement condition, and is requesting no tree replacement. Mr. Sloan believes there are enough shrubs and other landscaping that will suffice for landscaping. Planner Shirk stated a district buffer is required along the east side of the property where many trees are being removed. Ruthie Cosby/Town ResidenVOverlook Condominiums HOA Treasurer notified the Planning Commission of the overwhelming "No" by the HOA for the emergency access ~ easement, with concerns of unintended consequences, liability, additional costs to homeowners for improvements and/or maintenance, etc. Johanna Darden/Town resident opposes this development. Patricia Wedan/Town resident believes Mr. Sloan is very conscientious and will do the best job possible to preserve as much as possible. Gale White/Town resident has concerns about increased traffic and lighting. He would like the Planning Commission to consider the percentage of accommodations units versus single-family units. Planner Shirk commented the entrance to the development will be reconfigured to become safer. The Traffic Impact Analysis indicates one vehicle for every 1.4 units, and the anticipated increase on weekends during peak hours is 15 vehicle trips per day. Bill Darden/Town resident approves of the plan, but has concerns about being able to actually use the emergency access easement in an emergency. Closed public comment. Comments from the Commissioners included: Commissioner Norris is pleased with the overall project, and agrees with the trail construction and tree replacement; Commissioner Tucker would like to see tree replacement 1:1; Commissioner Fraundorf supports an approved maintenance agreement for the easement, and believes tree replacement should be 1:1; Commissioner Poggenpohl agrees with the 2:1 tree replacement. He also supports the additional 25" right-of-way for future use; Commissioner Lane supports the emergency access easement and a lesser standard than the 2:1 tree replacement; Commissioner Hull supports 2:1 tree replacement; Commissioner Klink is concerned that the trail is not a high priority. He believes the new trail should be paved to St. Bart's church, due to the anticipated high use. Director Joseph explained the two trail options to the Commission: 1)build the trail, 2)provide cash in lieu of building to pay for their share of the future trail construction. It was moved and seconded (Tucker/Klink) to APPROVE the Black Canyon Inn Development Plan #09-03 conditional to the findings and recommendations noted by staff. The motion passed unanimously. CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with approved development plan and architectural plans. Approval of this development plan shall supersede all previous development plan approvals. 2. The development plan shall be revised to account for the following: a. Proposed Units 1 -5 (Building G) and appurtenances shall be removed from the plan. b. Submittal of a phasing plan outlining sequential utility installation (including fire hydrants and stormwater facilities) and development of units. c. Architectural renderings for the proposed bear-proof trash enclosure. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 4 June 16, 2009 d. Delineate number of significant trees to be removed, and include number of replacement trees (one replacement tree for each significant tree removed). e. Include the note: Significant trees to remain shall be subject to maintenance requirements set forth in Section 7.5.J of the Estes Valley Development Code. f. Include the note: No construction activity shall be initiated between April 1 and July 15 of any year. 3. Compliance with the following memos/letters/emails: a. EPSD to Dave Shirk dated May 13, 2009. b. Greg Sievers to Dave Shirk dated May 8,2009. c. Greg White to Dave Shirk date April 16,2009. d. Public Works (Tracy Feagans) to Dave Shirk dated April 24,2009. e. Estes Valley Recreation and Park District to Dave Shirk dated April 21, 2009. f. Will Birchfield to Dave Shirk dated April 27,2009. g. Corps of Engineers to Dave Shirk dated April 14, 2009. h. Scott Zurn to Dave Shirk dated June 2,2009. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading/building permit for new development: Development Agreement and form of guarantee shall be submitted. a. An emergency access easement through the Overlook condominiums shall be recorded with the Larimer County Clerk. This easement,shall also provide for emergency access through the Black Canyon property to the Overlook condominiums, maintenance, and shall be subject to review and approval of Town Staff prior to recordation. b. Final construction plans shall be approved by the Town of Estes Park Public Works Department, EPSD, and the EVRPD. c. The "sheep fence" as noted on page 5 of the wildlife impact assessment shall be removed. 5. PRELMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT - THE NEIGHBORHOOD - Lots 15,16, and 17, Block 2, The Neighborhood, Owner and Applicant: Pawnee Meadows, LLC Staff Report: Planner Chilcott stated this is a request to subdivide three lots into five lots in The Neighborhood subdivision. The original 1975 subdivision had 30 homes, with 15 deed restricted to be attainable housing. This application would increase the number of lots from 30 to 32, with the additional two lots being deed restricted. Most of Phase I has been completed. Pawnee Meadows, LLC is in the beginning stages of developing Phase 11. This development is helping to meet an important need for affordable housing in this community. Homes are currently being sold for approximately $100,000 less than the median home price in the area. This proposal, if approved, will keep the project viable in today's economy, reduce infrastructure costs, keep selling prices down, and result in increased home size. All of the proposed lots are conforming within the zoning district. Staff finds the application complies with the subdivision criteria in the EVDC. The applicant is also asking for a reduced setback on one side from 10 feet to 7.5 feet, with a greater setback on the opposite side. Staff is supportive of this reduced setback. This change would require an approval of a minor modification by the Planning Commission. The infrastructure that was planned prior to this application is sufficient to handle the two new proposed lots. If approved, a number of agreements would need revision, including but not limited to: Development Agreement stating a 30-lot development should be changed to 32 lots; an updated Attainable Housing Agreement stating which lots would be designated as attainable housing; and an agreement between the Town of Estes Park and the Housing Authority to ensure the correct income category for buyers should be revised from 15 homes to 17. Planner Chilcott commented the area is in a mapped elk habitat area, which creates a fencing issue. The applicant has shown proposed fencing of the rear yards, which could tie into each other and restrict elk movement. Planner Chilcott reminded the Commissioners of the 40-inch fence height limit in mapped wildlife habitat areas. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 5 June 16, 2009 Migration openings are required every 40 feet if the fence is higher than 40 inches. In hindsight, Director Joseph stated there should have been a master fencing plan for this subdivision. He believes the fencing issue is a function of the relatively small lot sizes. Planner Chilcott noted there will need to be some revisions for the utility easements if the setbacks are changed. She also stated the lot numbering system needs to be revised to differentiate between the old subdivision and the new subdivision. There is also a neighborhood trash issue on some lots, and Planner Chilcott stated most of this junk is on a lot donated by Pawnee Meadows, LLC to the Estes Park Non-profit Resource Center. Code Enforcement Officer Andrew Hart has been working with the Resource Center Board to clean up the area. Planner Chilcott reminded Commissioners that those lots are not part of this proposal. There is also a house that is owned by Pawnee Meadows, LLC, which needs to be removed before a road to the proposed lots can be built. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Public Comment: Paul Kochevar with Pawnee Meadows/Applicant clarified the change in the side setback would involve taking 2.5 feet from one side and adding it to the other side of the lot which would then have a 12.5 foot setback, with no increase in the building area. He would like to make this setback issue an amendment to the application. Mr. Kochevar noted the fence along the south side of the lots will not be solid. Also, the side fencing will be allowed up to the back of the garages or entryways. Commissioner Hull voiced her disappointment in Mr. Kochevar in dealing with the trash in the subdivision. Marion Dougherty/Town resident has concerns about the trash in the area, as well as the fencing issue. She is also opposed to any fencing of the lots. Also, she is opposed to changing the type of structure on the lots from one-story to two-story. Sandy Osterman/Town resident is concerned about the trash that blows into the Talon's Point neighborhood from The Neighborhood. She is also opposed to the area fences and believes they violate the requirements. These issues have been ongoing over the last couple of years. Planner Chilcott noted the applicant has been working with Community Development staff in recent weeks to work on the issues addressed today. A motion to continue was made by Commissioner Lane and later withdrawn. Director Joseph stated a failure by the Planning Commission to act on today's application is deemed a recommendation of approval to the Town Board. Director Joseph reminded the Commission that fencing can only be addressed on lots under this proposal. Applicant Kathryn Kochevar asked for compassion on this project and wants the Planning Commission to realize the reason she and her husband, Paul Kochevar, began this project with the goal of helping residents of the community realize the benefits of homeownership, not with the goal of making a larger profit. She wants to be able to provide affordable housing in the community, and would hope to be provided some leniency on the fencing. Closed public comment. Commissioner Norris suggests the developer come up with a communication plan to address the trash problems with neighbors. He supports a 40-inch fencing plan and the minor setback modification. Commissioner Fraundorf indicated the 40-inch fencing plan needs to be very specific. He also supports the setback modification. It was moved and seconded (Tucker/Lane) to recommend approval of The Neighborhood Preliminary Subdivision Plat to the Town Board of Trustees with the findings and recommendations in the staff report and the following conditions. The motion passed with Commissioner Hull abstaining. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 6 June 16, 2009 Conditions: 1 1. Compliance with the submitted application., 2. No changes to the original Neighborhood subdivision approval are approved except those noted in the staff report. 3. A minor modification to the side-yard setback to allow platted 7.5-foot side setbacks on one side, provided there is a 12.5-foot setback on the opposite side. 4. Fencing on individual lots shall be restricted to 40 inches in height. 6. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE, BLOCK 12 a. WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION - revisions to Â§7.8 of the Estes Valley Development Code, including, but not limited to, removal of the Colorado Division of Wildlife from the review process and updating wildlife habitat maps. Staff Report: Director Joseph stated Planning Commission directed Staff to produce a very short and concise code fix that would address the role of the Division of Wildlife and would also firm up the Planning Commission's position in their ability to turn down a development proposal based on mitigation. This proposed draft focuses on when a wildlife habitat assessment is triggered, and removes elk calving as a trigger for a wildlife habitat assessement since elk calving occurs throughout the entire Estes Valley. Concerns brought forth by the Commission included - Commissioner Klink is concerned about the large number of raptor areas on maps as well as other areas that would trigger assessments, Commissioner Hull prefers the calving areas remain in the maps, would like to see "Division of Wildlife" removed from E.5, would like to see calving, lambing, and fawning as well as raptor areas back in the code. In 4.a., Commissioner Hull does not recall seeing any "requirements of this Section;" and would like the words "and effective" be added into 4.b. to read Plans found to be adequate and effective by the Decision- Making Body shall become binding upon the Applicant. (Note: ..'and effective' was removed from the language in the final motion to recommend approval to the Town Board) Finally, Commissioner Hull prefers a qualified wildlife biologist over a qualified person. Director Joseph stated this revision pertains mainly to when an assessment is triggered that could result in-a finding of adverse impact. This finding of adverse impact would be taken out of the hands of the Division of Wildlife and be given to Planning Commission, Town Board, and County Commissioners, and further narrows it to remove calving as a trigger since calving occurs valley-wide. Commissioner Norris suggests in 4.b. to use 'Wildlife study and any mitigation plans must be found adequate and effective...; in H.2.d, he believes a list of examples should be included. Commissioner Lane supports all changes. Commissioners Tucker and Hull approve of the maps. Commisssioner Fraundorf supports the changes. Commissioner Poggenpohl believes this short-term fix is acceptable. Public Comment: Fred Mares/Town resident submitted a letter to the Commissioners that states his support of a wildlife code that compliments an open space plan. He is concerned there is no revision listing requirements for mitigation and implementation, nor mention of density or reduced footprint. Johanna Darden/Town resident agrees with Fred Mares and believes any code revisions should err on the side of all wildlife. Mark Elrod/Town resident believes a "qualified person" is not acceptable. Also, he disagrees with the removal of the ability to change the maps when errors are found. Closed public comment. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 7 June 16, 2009 Commissioner Lane questions inserting "effective" into Section 7.8.F.4.b, because you cannot determine if a plan is effective until after it has been in place for a period of time. It was moved and seconded (Klink/Norris) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees the proposed wildlife habitat code revisions with the following additional modifications as approved by the Planning Commission: Section 7.8.E.1, continue to use the map language from December, 1996; Section 7.8.E.5, strike "after consultation with the Division of Wildlife"; Section 7.8.F.4.b, modify to read "wildlife studies and any mitigation plans found to be adequate by the Decision-Making Body shall become binding on the applicant;" Section 7.8.H.1, strike "and is acceptable to the Staff." The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Norris wants Town Board to know this is a first step in improving the wildlife code and urges Town Board to proceed with an open space study. Commissioner Hull supports the ability to amend the maps, and prefers to have calving and fawning in the code. Commissioner Lane is interested to see what Town Board opinion is on remaining problems. Commissioner Tucker believes this code will allow the Commission to be more effective. Commissioner Fraundorf wants to fine tune the code. Commissioner Poggenpohl suggests creating checklists for conservation plans. Commissioner Klink looks forward to hearing from Town Board on other issues to address. 7. REPORTS Planner Chilcott reported there are two staff-level development plans under review, one being a Safeway fueling station at the current Silver Lane Stables, and the other a small group living facility at 857 Moraine Avenue. Both positive and negative written comments have been received on the Safeway project. The Safeway plan also includes a height variance request that will go before the Board of Adjustment. Director Joseph noted that staff had a pre-application meeting for the Stanley Park grandstand renovation. There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 5:35 p.m. Doug Klink, Chair Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment June 2,2009,9:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair Chuck Levine, Members John Lynch, Bob McCreery, Wayne Newsom, and Al Sager; Alternate Member Bruce Grant Attending: Members Levine, Lynch, McCreery, Newsom, and Sager Also Attending: Director Joseph, Sign Code Officer Carolyn McEndaffer, and Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: None Chair Levine called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None 2. CONSENT AGENDA a. Approval of minutes dated April 7,2009 It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Sager) to approve the minutes as presented, and the motion passed unanimously 3. METES & BOUNDS PARCEL IN THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK SUBDIVISION, located at 205 Virginia Drive - Request for variance from EPMC 17.66.060, Prohibited Signs (12) Roof Signs, and variance from EPMC 17.66.130 (1)(5)(7) Nonconforming signs. Request to allow a prohibited sign' located on a roof more than 45 degrees from vertical. Staff Report: Director Joseph stated the applicant, Vega LLC, wishes to dhange the lettering on the sign face of an existing roof sign at the Courtyard Shops to advertise Vega Tapas restaurant, which is located in the former Smiling Elk Restaurant location. The property is owned by Trail Inn, LLC and is zoned CD - Commercial Downtown. It is approximately .67 acres in size and is a mixed-used property. The applicants, Ron and Carolyn Kilgore, are the current tenants. Director Joseph reviewed the history of this patticular sign, noting the sign code was interpreted incorrectly and permitted in error for the previous business, Smiling Elk Restaurant. The correct interpretation is an effort to allow a wall sign on a very steep roof. All Board of Adjustment members commented on the difficulty of interpreting the two various ways that were highlighted in the staff report. Director Joseph believes special circumstances exist, due to the fact the restaurant is tucked back toward the rear of the property at the top, with little actual frontage on Virginia drive for exposure to the public. The current location of the sign is one of the few. places it can be seen from the public right-of-way. Director Joseph noted it is Staff's opinion that the current tenants were not aware of the nonconforming issues related to this particular sign until they came in to the building department to request a permit to change the sign. The Kilgore's assumed they would be able to maintain the current sign and use it as advertising for Vega Tapas Restaurant. Planning Staff supports this variance request. Sign Code Officer McEndaffer has reviewed the square footage of the existing sign and has determined it is within the limits for the allotted square footage. Director Joseph recommends approval of the requested variance with conditions. He noted this variance approval is good only for this particular sign. Changes to the existing RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Val!ey Board of Adjustment 2 April 7,2009 sign can only be for i-epair and maintenance, and also the sign lettering if new tenants move in. These changes can be done without Board of Adjustment review. Director Joseph stated any new owners that want to change the size of the sign or install a new sign will have to apply for a variance if they want it in the same location. Board and Public Comment: Member McCreery thinks this particular sign has a ridge-line building effect, being higher than any surrounding signs. Although he does not object to this sign, it is not a type of advertising that he would continually support. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Lynch) to APPROVE the Request for variance from EPMC 17.66.060, Prohibited Signs (12) Roof Signs, and variance from EPMC 17.66.130 (1)(5)(7) Nonconforming signs with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the submitted application. Change of copy will be permitted as part of the variance without further review by the Board of Adjustment provided it does not result in a new violation of the effective sign code at the time of the change. 2. At, or prior to, the time of issuance of a sign permit for the roof sign, the applicant shall obtain permits for any Vega signs on the Courtyard Shop property that require a permit. 4. REPORTS 4 5 t . Director Joseph told the members about the-Sign Code Task Force that has been meeting for dbout four Weeks: This comrhittee is' discussing existing sign code issues and will prdvide / 1 / 1 4. C 3 suggestions as toÂ· how to address thode isslids?He dave a brief history of the current sign co'de. After the task force makes its recomniehdatiohs, Staff',Will bagin drafting language to take to thd Planhing Cominission for review arid abproval. There was discussion between Staff and the Board concerning banners and the regulations and exceptions currently in force. It was noted that enforcement continugs to be a problem and the task force is aware of that issue. There being no further business, Chair Levlne adjourned the'mebting at 9:30 a.m. Chuck' Levine, Chair a H L 11 I Karen Thompson, Recording Secrdtary 0 BYLAWS OF THE ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION I. MEETINGS A. Following adoption of the Estes Valley Development Code, regular meetings of the Commission shall be held on the third Tuesday of each month in the Board Room of the Town of Estes Park Municipal Building, with the time set by an adopted motion o f the Commission. Meetings shall begin at 1:30 p.m. If the Chair determines that any matter before the Commission cannot be heard and considered for action 6,6 within a reasonable time frame at the meeting, said matter may be continued, heard, and considered at a specifically scheduled special meeting or the next regularly scheduled meeting. Such matters shall have priority at the next meeting. B. Special meetings of the Commission may be held at any time at the request of the Chair; at the request of a majority of the membership of the Commission; at the request of the Board of County Commissioners; or at the request of Board of Trustees. Notice of at least three (3) calendar days shall be given to each member of the Commission by telephone, personal service or by fax. Time, place, and purpose of Special Meetings shall be specified in the notice. C. Regular study sessions of the Commission shall be held at 12 p.m. in the Administrative Board Room of the Municipal Building approximately two hours prior to each regular meeting. with the exact time depending on agenda content. No official action shall be taken and no quorum shall be required for the study session. The study session shall be open to the public. Unless requested by the Chair, participation in study session shall be limited to the Commission and staff. II. MEMBERS/QUORUM A. The Commission shall consist of seven (7) members as specified in the Intergovernmental Agreement between the County and the Town. The number of members of the Commission may be changed by agreement between the County and the Town. B. A quorum for transaction of business shall consist of four (4) members. C. Actions shall be by a majority vote of members present when a quorum is present except when a larger majority is required pursuant to State Statute or pursuant to Town and County Agreement. D. In a meeting where a quorum is not present, all scheduled matters shall be rescheduled for hearing at the next regular Commission meeting, or at a special meeting. -1- Revised 06/16/09 nl. OFFICERS , A. The Commission, at its regular meeting in January of each year, shall elect a Chair, Vice-Chair, and appoint a Secretary. The Secretary shall not be a member of the Commission. B. The duties and powers of the officers of the Commission shall be as follows: Chair shall: 1. Preside at all meetings of the Commission and maintain proper decorum by controlling the meeting, avoiding duplication of testimony, and avoiding demonstration(s). 2. Call special meetings of the Commission in accordance with the bylaws. 3. Sign the documents o f the Commission. 4. Ensure that all actions of the Commission are properly taken. 5. The appointment o f Chair shall alternate between the Town and County appointees each year. < Vice-Chair shall: 1. During the absence, disability, or disqualification of the Chair, exercise and perform all of the duties and be subject to all the responsibilities of the Chair. 2. The Vice-Chair shall also alternate between the Town and County appointees, opposite that of Chair. Chair Pro Temp shall: 1. During the temporary absence, disability, or disqualification of the Chair and Vice- Chair, be elected to perform the duties and be subject to the responsibilities of the Chain Secretary shall: 1. Sign or attest the signature of the Chair or Vice-Chair on the documents of the Commission. 2. Prepare and keep the minutes of all meetings of the Commission in an appropriate ( and designated file. -2- Revised 06/16/09 3. Give and serve all notices required by State Statute, Town or County regulations or the bylaws. 4. Prepare the agenda in consultation with the Chair for all meetings of the Commission. 5. Be custodian of Commission records. 6. Inform the Commission of correspondence relating to business of the Commission and attend to such correspondence. IV. ATTENDANCE/TERM All members shall attend all meetings, including special meeting of the Commission, if possible. In the event any member misses three (3) consecutive regular meetings or a total of four (4) regular meetings in a calendar year, the Town or the County may remove its appointed member and designate a new member to fill the vacancy. The County appointed member who is subject to Town approval may be removed by the County without Town approval. However, the County shall receive Town approval for the replacement member. V. STAFF Legal The Town Attorney shall serve as the primary legal advisor to the Commission. The Commission and staff shall be authorized to consult with the County Attorney on matters relating to the unincorporated portions of the Area. As required, either or both the County and Town Attorney shall attend meetings of the Commission. Staff The Town shall provide the professional staff to the Commission. Said staff may either be employees of the Town and/or independent contractors. The staff shall be responsible for all necessary reports and studies requested by the Commission, review of all development and land use proposals, attendance at all Commission regular and special meetings and any other work necessary to staff the operation of the Commission. The staff shall also forward and report to the Board of Trustees of the Town and Board of County Commissioners all development and land use proposals that are forwarded to those bodies for action. VI. CONSENT AGENDA t -3- Revised 06/16/09 A.. An item may be placed on the consent agenda if it is non-controversial and staff and Applicant have agreed on the findings and conditions of approval. B. The following procedure will generally be followed by the Commission when considering consent agenda items: 1. Any Commissioner or member of the public may request that an item be removed from the consent agenda and be discussed as a full agenda hearing item. The reason for the request should be stated. 2. The item pulled from the consent agenda will be placed at the start of the regular hearing agenda. The Chair will then conduct an abbreviated public hearing on each item which has been removed from consent, based on the issues raised by those requesting removal. 3. Only one motion is required for all consent items. VII. GENERAL A. All maps, plats, correspondence, and other documentation shall be filed in the office of the Town of Estes Park Community Development Department and adequate < materials sent to the Commission members. Any materials presented at a hearing or meeting by the Applicant or public shall become part of the official record and at the discretion of the chair may not be returned. B. The Chair may allow "personal appearances" at the beginning of each meeting by any citizen desiring to speak on any planning matter not on the agenda. The Commission shall not take action on items presented under personal appearances. Any statement made shall be relevant to land use matters and shall be not more than three minutes per person in duration. VIII. AMENDMENT, These Bylaws may be amended by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Commission, provided that notice of said proposed amendment is given to each member in writing at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. IX. PROCEDURES The Commission shall establish such procedures for the orderly operation of the Commission. Approval or subsequent amendments of these procedures shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of members of the Commission. 4- _ Revised 06/16/09 Approved this day of ,1999. ESTES K\LLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Bv: Chair Â·\1*I'ES'I': BU Approved this day of ,1999. BOARD OF COUN'n' COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF LARBIER BF Chair .vm-'EST: BP Approved this day of '1999. TOWN OF ESTES PARK BF Alayor .\'rrEST: Towii Clark -5- Revised 06/16/09 Amended and approved this day of 4 2009. ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION BY ChairÂ· 'I'OWN OF ESTES PARK COMMUNI'll' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT By: Director 11'11'EST: By . F -6- Revised 06/16/09 June 13,2009 C ' Subject: Estes Valley Development Code, Section 7.8 Wildlife Habitat Protection - Draft 7 To: Estes Valley Planning Commission (Please place this letter in the public record) I will begin by expressing my appreciation to Alison Chicott and Bob Joseph for their efforts in creating the more comprehensive approach to the Wildlife and Habitat Protection code revisions which have been discussed in previous Planning Commission hearings. The energy, the research, and the more forward thinking approach taken in drafts 1 through 6 is certainly worthy o f note. I would also like to commend the Planning Commission for recognizing the synergy between an Open Space Program and the intent of the Wildlife and Habitat Protection section of the EVDC. Your approach of tabling the proposed code revision until an Open Space Study has been completed is a valuable demonstration oftaking the "bigger picture" view of planning for the Valley's future. I would urge the Planning Commission to continue demonstrating leadership by F.--- : resubmitting the Open Space Study, without the requirement for an accompanying plan, to the Board of Trustees for their approval of funding. I have great confidence that the work done by the Planning Department and the time and energy invested by the Planning Commission will not be wasted. I look forward to a comprehensive code revision based on the combined Open Space Study and the investment already made in the development a new wildlife habitat code. As an interim measure the decision was made to provide a minimal revision to EVDC Section 7.8 Wildlife Habitat Protection, correcting the three problems discovered as a result of the Wapiti Crossing Condominium hearings. The three problems are: 1) The Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) was placed in a decision making role, contrary to what they believe their mission to be; 2) The code did not contain explicit language allowing the Planning Commission the authority to deny an application based on this section of the EVDC; 3) Although the code requires a Wildlife Conservation Plan, including measures to mitigate "any potential adverse impacts" created by the development, it does not require that the mitigation measures be effective. The only requirement is that the applicant must submit the document. Draft 7 of Section 7.8 does correct the first two problems. CDOW has been removed from the decision making process and draft 7 states in Section 7.8.F.4.a (page 3) "The Review and Decision-Making Bodies shall issue a finding as to whether the application, including the wildlife conservation plan, complies with the requirements of this section." It goes on to say in paragraph c (page 4) that "Applications that do not comply with Section 7.8 of this code shall be denied." However, nowhere in this revision is there a clear statement of the actual "requirements" as referenced in the previous paragraph. It is left for argument and interpretation that the requirements may be the six items listed in the Review section (buffers, fences, lighting, refuse disposal, etc....there is no mention of reduced density or reduced footprint as mitigation methods) or perhaps the requirements might be the list of topics required to be included in the Wildlife Conservation Plan. In either case this proposed revision falls short; it does not address the third problem. Not only is there no explicit list of requirements, there is no language requiring a Wildlife Conservation Plan to be effective in mitigating any "significant adverse impacts" caused by the proposed development on the identified habitat. ~ In addition, draft 7 creates a new issue by introducing a Wildlife Habitat Map not yet The existing code clearly defines 5 unique types of habitat which require a mitigation plan. This proposal removes 2 of the five specific habitats and links the remaining 3 to the map. <- adopted for use and by changing the criteria which trigger a Wildlife Conservation Plan. If the map is to be used to replace today's criteria, it should be used in context, complete with the definitions of"critical wildlife habitat" and the redefined criteria as proposed in the now tabled, more complex code revision. In summary, this attempt to provide a simplified code change does correct 2 of the three problems found in the existing code. It does not clearly state the requirements it references in the new language nor does it require a mitigation plan to be effective, a flaw in today' s code. In addition it introduces a new map for use, but incomplete, without its supporting definitions, criteria, requirements, and documentation. I ask the Planning Commission to either reconsider the previous complex revision in it's entirety or to make the 3 simple correctioAs needed for today's code, but please do not dilute the intent of either by introducing a third ineffective hybrid of the two. Respectfully, Fred R. Mares 895 Elk Meadow Court ' June 15,2009 Subject: Posting of application documents & Staff Reports on the Town website To: Estes Valley Planning Commission (Please place this letter in the public record) I have heard on many occasions the Planning Commission and the Town Board express their interest in, and their appreciation for, public comments and participation. In that spirit and during this time of redefining processes and improving communications, I urge the Planning Commission to consider some simple process improvements which would greatly enhance your communication with the public and would allow for more well prepared input from the public. My recommendations are: 1) to post the agenda for the next meeting on the Town's website a minimum of 7 working days prior to the meeting L 2) to post all the documents relevant to that agenda, including the Staff Report, a minimum of 7 working days prior to the meeting 3) to include either a revision date or a revision number on every significant document posted on the web, including the Staff Report It is often difficult to adequately review, discuss, ask questions of Staff, provide letters to the Commission or Board in ample time to be included in notebooks, or to thoughtfully prepare comments for a meeting without appropriate advance notification of the topics to be heard and the Town's position. In support ofthis request I offer examples from this past week. â€¢ The Planning Commission agenda was not available on the Town's website until Monday AM â€¢ Draft 7 of the Wildlife Habitat Code was not available on the Town's website until Monday AM â€¢ The Staff Report for the Neighborhood application was updated sometime between Wednesday morning and Friday afternoon with no date change or revision number â€¢ The only announcement of the withdrawal of the Mary's Meadow application was the posting of the applicants letter to Staff, dated June 9,2009. It is still shown as continued to the Planning Commission for the 06/16/09 meeting on the "Applications Currently Under Review" web page 1 On many occasions I have heard Planning Commissioners express preference to have written comments in their notebooks for proper review prior to Commissions meetings. The suggested process changes would greatly improve compliance with their request. Respectfully, Fred R. Mares 895 Elk Meadow Court Cort '' THE ESTES VALLEY TRANSITION INITIATBVE Transitlgoi n. 1) movement or passage from one position, state, concept, etc., to another; change What is it? A proposal/concept for the Estes Valley whereby we move from a "carbon intensive", unsustainable community to a low carbon/sustainable future for our community. The initiative is envisioned to be a 20-year effort, involving all of us in the community. Why should we do this? Peak Oil is upon us, meaning world oil production will be declining, and oil price rising in the years ahead. Further, climate change is also upon us, and we all need to reduce our carbon footprint. Our present way of lifd is simply unsustainable with respect to climate, oil, and other non-renewable resources. Is this a brand new concept? No. Several communities in England have already successfully transitioned from "oil dependency to local resilience and sustainability". Several communities in the U.S. are now "in transition". Who will be involved in implementing this transition? All organizations, agencies, and groups will need to be involved. It is envisioned that Sustainable Mountain Living Will serve as the catalyst to move the process along. SML can not implement the < 3 transition alone. What is involved in creating a "communitv vision" 20 vears into the future? We will have to formulate strategies and answers to issues such as the following: ENERGY: What will the price of oil/gasoline be in 2030? What will our electricity costs be? How much distributed (roof-top) solar electric generation will there be in 20 years? What will be the effect of the soon-to-be carbon tax on fossil fuels? Will Platte River Power Authority still be generating electricity from coal? Will we have the regional and national grid system fixed by 2030, or will we be facing rolling power outages due to peak load demand? FOOD SUPPLY: As oil prices and transportation costs rise over 20 years will Safeway be able to stock affordable fruits and produce grown in far away places? What can we do to begin raising food products in the Estes Valley? Should we create community gardens and/or year-round greenhouses? TOURISM: How will rising oil/gasoline prices affect future tourism? What will this mean to the Park, YMCA, local businesses and city tax revenues? DEMOGRAPHICS: What will the Estes Valley population be in 2030? What will be the age distribution? More retired/seniors? Fewer school children? Will we need different types of social safety nets? 92 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION: Wilm we need a new type of local public transportation? Will we need to build a network of facilities in public parking areas for drivers to recharge their plug-in or electric cars while shopping or visiting the Park? Etc., Etc. !!! The concept of "Transition" requires us to know what we are transitioning to, which means we must first create a vision of what we want the future to be in Estes Park. So we will have to think "outside the box", and be visionary in our thinking. But if we can succeed in making such a transition our community will certainly be-in a better situation than those communities who ignore the present realities in hopes that technology or + some other magic event will come to their aid so they can "carry on as usual". Let us all join together ina spirit of partnership and trust as we embark on a bold new future for our community! , -2 40 I , f.. 0 ~ The Meadow - ~ Estes Park Community Development Department Preliminary Condominium Plat Map ~I--â€ž0 Municipal Building, 170 MaeGregor Avenue ~ PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: July 21,2009 REQUEST: Preliminary condominium map zi: RANP i .-~f/-~< approval The Meadow development plan. - 1 -Ul) 1--7 / * ISPS J 00 LOCATION: North of Kiowa Drive between Marys Lake Road and Kiowa Trail, within the Town =, U 1.2151251 -12 o f Estes Park. OWNER: Marys Meadow Development Inc RMVP - |11~ ~ r4-J~1~ USES T APPLICANT: CMS Planiiing and Development STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk SITE DATA TABLE: Engineer: Van Horn Engineering and Surveying Parcel Number: 3402438004 Development Area: 5 acres Number of Lots: One Existing Land Use: Under development per approved development plan DP 06-01 "Marys Meadow" Proposed Land Use: Multi-family Existing zoning: "A" Accommodations residential/accommodations Adjacent Zoning- East:: "A" Accommodations North: "A" Accommodations West:: "A" Accommodations South: "E-1" Estate Adjacent Land Uses- East: Undeveloped North: Undeveloped West: Accommodations South: Residential Services- Water: Town Sewer: UTSD ~ Fire Protection: Estes Park Volunteer f PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission approved the Marys Meadow Development Plan in April 2006, and the Town Board approved the preliminary condominium map in i May of that same yedr. Preliminary plats require submittal of a final map within one year of approval or they automatically become null and void; the property owner did not submit the required final map within that time frame, therefore the preliminary approval has expired. Unlike plats, developmbnt plans do not expire. The property owner filed an amended development plan this past winter (February 2009), which was approved by Staff The development plan of record includes the same number of units originally approved (35), though they are in a slightly different configuration (two four-plexes were amended to four duplexes). The original develobment plan approval contemplated this type of change, thus the development plan was reviewed and approved by Staff. The condominium map is consistent with the approved development plan, which was reviewed for general development and zoning standards. Approval of the preliminary condominium map would allow for individual sale of the units, and does not otherwise affect the development plan. REVIEW CRITERIA: Depending upon the complexity of the project, this section may be a brief summary of the standards of review or may involve a more detailed analysis of the standards based upon issues relevant to any particular project. This proposal complies the applicable standards of the EVDC, specifically: Section 3.9.E "Standards of Review" for subdivisions, and Section 10.5.H "Condominiums, Townhouses and Other Forms of Airspace Ownership." 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. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, Stafffinds: 1. Pursuant to C.R.S.30-28-110, sub-section 4(a), "no plat for subdivided land shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners unless at the time of the approval of platting the subdivider provides the certification of the county Page #2 - The Meadow Preliminary Condominium Plat Map tÂ¥ treasurer's office that al] ad valorcm taxes applicable to such subdivided land, for years prior to tliat year in which approval is granted, have been paid." 2. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code, as well as the approved development plan. 3. This request bas been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. 4. This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL o f the proposed Preliminary Plat of The Meadow Condominiums, CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Compliance with Development Plan 06-01 "Marys Meadow;" SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the preliminary condominium plat to the Town Board of Trustees with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. Page #3 - The Meadow Preliminary Condominium Plat Map r"J) L.J C t BETeurp=--n- h Â»; Prt# 0 V lalp Ih~ _ <UN __1_9--2009 'll STATEMENT OF INTENT Prepared 6/ 19/2009 Phbliminary and Final Condo Map THE MEAD OW Lot 4a - Mary's Lake Replat The subject property is 5.062 acres located between Marys Lake Road and Kiowa Trail east of Marys Lake Lodge. This property has an approved Development Plan for 35 residential condominium units. Phase I is under construction with the first duplex completed and a second duplex undeiway. This application is for a Preliminary Condo Map for the entire project and a Final Condo Map for the first two units, 341 and 345 Kiowa Drive. 15/ rh ESTES VALLEY \-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICAT[9* ~Submiltal Date: 11~|.- -1~ r Development plan r Boundary Line Adjustment Condominium Map 41 1 41. 14 1- Special Review F ROW or Easement Vacation ,]K,Preliminary Map 64&4- ]P' 1~ Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change Â£~D< Final Map Er 1 11 4 T b' 1[ll- 1- Preliminary Subdivision Plat r Time Extension r Supplemental Map r f M r Final Subdivision Plat 1- Other: Please specify 1 2 11 r Minor Subdivision Plat ] 2- _ E Amended Plat Project Name ike_ MEADOLAD Project Description 35- - Unrr- 2-ES,DF_1~TAL- CONDZ>M(Dio!-00% Project Address 61 C 4-. Â·34 5- K.(000* DR-. Legal Description LOT- 4-A . MAANS MEADOW RET'LKT Parcel ID # 340.2-41% 06+ Sjction 2 Township 4 M Range 73 kl - V I i 2 .i: f ' r.. m,V il=-4~ . - -4~ Sitelitfo-rniation -0 Â¥t-Â·Â·4;41 ..2*t.*43&74.12 ~-*-i, 2 --4 1,15. I e._ r 4. *Â·Â·/ 1'/Â· - 3 .4 .h -+ 1Â·.'*t.*,22 4 ,t.5-10:9- Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres 5.642_ Existing Land Use CON 5,r grAFTED O,6 DEVE.Lof'.MENT PUUJ *06 -01 Proposed Land Use .341 UAL T AE-61 D E-uTIAL- 42>lerk:>14 1 01 url. S Existing Water Service K Town F Well F None F Other (specify) Proposed Water Service M Town E Well F None F other (specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service E EPSD N( UTSD F Septic F None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD K UTSD r septic Is a sewer lift station required? F Yes F~ No Existing Gas Service g Xcel F- Other F None Existing Zoning A Acto M Proposed Zoning .SAME- Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? F Yes K No Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? 9<~ Yes F No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person FRAN k. iKE{ S Complete Mailing Address Po Bo>< 4(6 E-STES FARK.., 40 606 17 Attachments ]PC Application fee ~< Statement of intent K 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan ~ 11 " X 17"reduced copy of plat or plan Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report, wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information. Town of Estes Park + P.O. Box 1200 4 170 MacGregor Avenue 4 Estes Park, CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 4 Fax: (970) 586-0249 4 www.estesnet.com/ComDev 1Â« 07 (.. 1 -51111'll -'t '44 4 Primary Contact Person is r Owner K Applicant E Consultant/Engineer [L 1. ]1-- . ~ - illk Record Owner(s) p.01Â¢4122<J MEATDOk) DEN E-1-23 F'ME-63 1- Mailing Address (SZZ) FALL_ Akle-R- 124), g 7 t It - - Phone 2-1 4- 68 11 1 .9 L L --f. - 1 Cell Phone /' 9 ' - Fax 1114 Â» Email pH litÂ«--i 4â€ž Applicant CMS> PLAUN31&16 1. DE-via AFMF jOT Mailing Address Fl) 130>< #I 6 Phone 577 -7 74'+ Cell Phone 2 3, / -4 ZZED Email PTRE-ls .3 @ GHA{L. COM wax 577 - 9 744 (, ConsultanVEngineer VAN 61Â£0 2-Ah ,ELor:, i lop c,-IC.1 N~ 6 Mailing Address CO43 F f 514 62Â£F K AD - Phone 96 - 9388 Cell Phone Fax Email ~ APPLICATION FEES For development 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/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plafs, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. I hereby certify that the provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: 3 A Al E 9 \11 Â· -7 4 6,1.~ /9 15 g Applicant PLEASE PRINT: FRAN K TA El S Signatures: . / Record Ow~4-4:2*Â·t--sC_b KE,0-12-I--70-2-17 Date 4 /4 9 /69 App c /5~---Â£_-- Date 4 -(7 -07 7/ . r APPLICANT CERTIFICATION- > I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best ot my knowledge and that in filing the application I am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property. 4 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). 4 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 proposal may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date. â€¢ 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. â€¢ I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to my property during the review of this application. I acknowledge that I have received the Estes Valley Development Review Application Schedule and that failure to meet I~ the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application becoming NULL and VOID. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: 3 4 10, a g [17 - T-,4- te /9 6 0/ Applicant PLEASE PR/NT: FRAM IC- 111Â£16 - 6-1-15, PLANIoit\~6 + bEyELOPMENT Signatures: Record Owner Date 4,1/01 ApplicaW Â»LU-=KU Date g - L 1 -01 Revised 06/26/07 ., Legend 0,00 PLATTED AND MEASURED INFORMATION Pre liminary Condominium Map of EASEMENT 10' CONTOUR 2' CONTOUR / 9-94 The Meado'w Condominiums FINISH GRADE CONTOURS I ~.1 1 51 \ \41\ \ 1 \1 of Lot 4A, of Merry' s Meadow Replat ------ PHASING LINES (SEE NOTE #17) \31 E BURIED ELEC LINE - SEE ELEC PLAN DETAIL SHEET - ETC -ETC - BURIED COMM LINES - ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE AND CABLE a Portion of Section 2, Township 4 North, SEE ELEC PLAN DETAIL SHEET 1 / 0 - 0 11\2 - OHU- OHU- OVERHEAD ELEC, TELE AND CABLE UTILITY EA MEA N-MOTORI /~ / 1 % 1 \TRA EASEMENT Range 73 West of the 6th P.M. Toum of -T-T-T- BURIED TELE \ 15' WIDE. BUILDING Â§ETBACK , 0/ h lia .fl WWW WATER LINE (DUCTILE IRON PIPE/COPPER) - 5' BURY MIN. 3+ ~7 6.0 1 efo. 6 Estes Park, County of Larimer, State of c Â¢ C X 4<~1 <1. Aj /4-~ '-4:< , 1/4, 6 Colorado .Cr S SEWER LINE (PVC) - 5' BURY MIN \0 Z //. \' 'e W W GAS LINE (POLYETHYLENE DIRECT BURIED) 3' BURY, ALL SERVICE LINES WILL BE 14" ,-h EASEMENT ~'% ~~~~~448,41 57/440\4 \ 4~ -00 24' :UTILITY W- =2**i=*@=*=de@==S===m=%=%*=*=& 4 PERFORATED PIPE >8= \ ~>4~' W~ILITY AN~ . ----- BUILDING SETBACKS 000052 / q %. \ .Su DRAINAGE EA#~*IT + LIMITS OF DIST. =.O 1 07 -" - NEIGHBORING PROPERTY UNES 2 M& 03,~ 2 1\ 19% 40\ . 0 POWER POLE z82 4 \1- W 6~4932,-~\ 0/ *(1 4 LIGHT POLE g \~~~~~ P~I~ MAN~ 1/ 16 J) NEÂ« 1'(RE C Â· / 2/ | ~ ELECTRIC PEDESTAL |PE 'FROM ~1Â«- *, 1~ ~ ~ .4 .4 4\\9 9 f ? 1 ~Al)1~41 m CABLE PEDESTAL A P FOR THIS 275'!11/ 4- 6 16 f MENT ,4 tj / \ 4'x*# 1 ~Y~~I<VI 2>fe'.3\41* .;~~4 9~ 1.11'k ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER/SWITCH //7 WEE < â‚¬4 . â‚¬ 42 * 6 m TELEPHONE PEDESTAL 0 WATER VALVE 1~ UNIT 22 1. 4.# - (Â«* *6:8 1 .1 / ...1 4: ML=8098 \ >Â»9\ \ UL=81 08 1 SINGLE /-- Ah DETENTION F*Urle \ 0.- \ 2 T U FIRE HYDRANT 1 k.. 1\ % f l j 0 0, \ 6 Â® SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE Pâ‚¬* 0- / I N./. UNIT 1 Â· SING i @ STORM SEWER MANHOLE L=810Â£ ML=81 Nt 2 .1 .6 2.7-- %Â»:9 L=811 SINGL 1 %*t~~~cigag!~ c--4\ \ 6, ~ Z Ici /1/ ML=8095 ~U) z < ~ - @ BIKE RACK ~ \ 1 .. (11% 4 -75 C ~ Im* -' .U - 1 Â·* '\\< URâ‚¬N CLuitA i, 0 3 -6 ''< AS'Ej&"Tq 1 *.6 4\ 4%~ LE TO BE \ fl \ 19' \ Â¥Â¢\\ \# te . %. ~ TRASH PAD (FENCE ENCLOSED) O 1 --/ A~l Â§ EN~~, ~ ~=F r-~: r ~~~<~p<Â· ~~~}~ ~141 bUPL ' #\ ~>,PH*l(2 A 42>1<1 Mt= 9 6 \14 U 8106 1 Â»k 44* * <: 4, 1 : 1 DECIDUOUS TREE AS NOTED ./ ~cs- UNIT 20 0.01 ,â€¢1 t. HASE 6 Â» .21 <tjil:)),1/'til i UNIT 25 1b 'LX \ 4 2 - .... . 1 .Â· LIMIT 19 \~ t~ 1 <:8 ,~Â· "..,1 '<h \ 3 0 \ '~ NIT Â·- -- EXAMPLEf ~\~272~ 4'4.41 [t.g '. .1 X 4-PLJ ~ j 11 '*( ~ \ , SINGLE Â»L.-- 4*i-- Â·--~,Ii-4\ 0 4 44 14 1 1 ,#11 / L ,=8104, ML-809 F POSSIBLE~ ~,~ i 03 of w * .1~ Q +Jr 1814 1( ~ }j,4 .,~i; {7~=8105 ~TEEE>~*~~~~l' *~fi~Â»1 0 *Xe 1 .1 , 1 40 <30 r-2 4 \ KIt ,.1.14 9 i j UNIT H \V / 44/I ; ' - .\\ ) )142/73 36 \ d., 1. \th 4 .4 SINGLE UNIT 7 0 \ ML=8093 1 4 1,64. ~ ~ ~#4 ~|~: ''' '....~~~ <. '~' ..' 0 't#.O UL=810 ,\ OR Tw k 44 ... \ . LtÂ« / 4 4-- 12=291) \ 1 . 1 \\ 1.\ f m' 04 f ~ 15' 1 1 1 UNIT 15\ 1 1 Â·<4~/~t N., 45.4.\ ... 1. 7 \ 74 402>< ..., 0 Q 24 18> SETB . I X \.A .. 4 \> 90\\\ 4 p . 1 :14 "* DSCAPE: , . \\Y 005 . 4< 41- SCALE: 1" = 40' 0/ 04 \ 31. .,~UPL 15 K \ \-.\ Ng Â·UTILITY \ =8105 1 Â·0<4~p' j / NZE ..~ ~;.*~ /: . 1 94% /94-,15>002 \ 1/41 E EASE t 0430 'Â§~ ~ ~ , .5'.~~ 1 ~ ~ UNIT ~14, ~41 \00,0.~5'*T E. '4 - S'*45 <\ 4444 00 0 40 80 120 6 4 441\ 0?ANAGE .4 \ 4 *O 24 1~ \ UNIT 11 19' 1%\ \ 1/ :4 e (OP 1. 403Â§, 2,7194*,r,b ...... .0 f>=21 240 \% 7\\ N 0 - 902 t62 ACRES Â«\-1 0.37 4, Â» ' 4 2 ,; dtit.> c #44 4 Â»iNS <,9. CÂ· UNIT 1 \ . * 4 n NOÂ¢ R#M 40 <42/7 4 y Â» <I j /1 L...,A* 94 4 Â£71 D ., Â·,-0 4. 0* ~4/7 44 014 'rek . : \ ,/TA .2<*. -M . 35 \44 \.4 4-PL ~ ul 9.\ A Â·A 42\ 6+ CO \1 \ r .6&/ ~CONCRETE W C WT.X. *Â·~h4 \\14.DRAI 7Â¢kÂ« e~ IÂ» GO ~ ~ Â©4. Â© UNIT 161 \\1 A ColliON 1 \ , 1, -3#.1.-226fEE-NOTE.#15 /7 PICAL 7 ' , 0 \ \\.l 4 SWAtE ~ ~ 1 1~ ~ .+\\ ..\ \4~ UNIT ~9 G 04 . w N 40: 1 M -- .. 64\ ron. - -- % EM -1#,1 ET 7 \ 0299- fk~* 1 - UNIT 7 *--i T 2 -\ f OHU--~-~r, UNIT 6 " mm, 9/ ..~ ' *:544?,9- ' ' UNIT 5 . UNIT 4 18' 2-PLEt Â·?*en- TO T OR ' < PHASE 1- 2-PLEX .~~~c- UNIT 3 f r.4 .: ./ .~41 h..th-~--~ 42 COMMON~f \..-- ML =8111 , 4% a + BUILDING \ .\ - LL=8101 ./-1.=./*. UL=811Q . 4 \ 1- 9 4\\ = Re\& 3 . r. 4.1 ' ML=8115 IN- Mel#-- .Z:=5: LL=8100 - -*w.. aa*/17 1.0 03 , \ SID K LL:=8105 4 -~' \ ~ \~4*Nk>. \ k \\\ 44,%,%% \ * - 2>. - 'tgE0818' UNIT 2 ' 3 3 4* \64. C812\34 \4<~ 62) 1 K UNIT 1 h \ 4 2- LE)( XML= 106 . /)(\ t.)3 32%?Z% 0%> \ Â»4Â»<th -ANJ BUILDING SETBAC \MARY'*j ~ 0 - \ SCAPE BUFFER M er-2- , 1 7:|.. p.,4..:1' /Â·..11 64 \1- 0 . ~~ -/. \ .. 4 , N 9 -9Â¢kâ‚¬ i . * 1 0// ; ~ 1 1 1, , 21- 1 410 .2 LL= 96 1 .S- , 4 % 0 HC RAMP 1' WI E oURE~k U.U l'.10 4 QRTO' . \ L \ ....124 5 1 CWRB ~CHAhE 1 9.0 3.Ic 1 -MOTORIZED TRAIL SEMENT 81 ' 14 AND O' WIDE UTILITY EMENT \ . k. L , Vi \\ CA \. ./ h - G. 1 191 ....3 3%-42'\ f F.ers- . ~ ~ ~ \ 1 1-ED 149 NA \1 - 4, EMERGENCY 2 1 -- 1 PROMONTORY ~' TE 1 1 -44 1 1.N\- 1 ~ 20' 65/3 ~1:@4%r \8 m \/ 4* ENTRANCE DR. ~@~I.f,~*4*~ :~~~~~4%<FE-' . 1. ..GRA A 23' i GR \ 0 11< _ Â£ I. O , 2y # u ; . - A / .*, 24* lia DRAWN BY: 7 1 \ v CHECKED BY: SITE *~94 jo \1 MI*R MT N ~ JIVe FF 81p9.0 -1,1-t FF4104.75 ~|1Â·3 ~<~ ~Â·~~1\\ pÂ· ~ij U=1~) 44&9-849.~ U_8*g U=?.. U-6 (ft]*a U-5 [~| 0-4 ~~U-3 .~-2 ~gu-1 < R\<. 13\\ \\\12 \ 1193 e.. LAS Bull[DING - \ BUIL.~~ .Z> BUIL[~ING Bull[DING Â«k~Lfr--- --E -~ \ \ , 1 IG -0 -~~J~:404 ~ /1 1"=40' ~ '1=22Dr-lio -Il /~ e ++ ;+ CONCRETECISTERL =L---2- E----1-==f_ -4. ir /W2F- - 91/rr-2.- ~ s.,pf *' SCALE - TO BE REMOVED ix ///- - T ~0 DR. ~ Â»$10WA\\ CE DATE: rÂ¥ : A '11 /; \ th,1â€žâ€ž,IIAIIIA,lyb~~,IiIAâ€žNI>,)70Â·yA),C;7;7177-HLD7707,Â·H-Auâ€ž,1â€žr,u,11â€žIlltâ€žâ€žlitâ€ž',7;,il,lillllll/;lll~573391â€ž,lilll,I~*74Iâ€žâ€ž, vvul//////////////Itt'I~4/' 10Â·0 Â·' c.Â· ~ 06-18-2009 (/1); 1441 2 42.24 /9* u - 4, x.,xi.6-) U ----'Â·--- S 89'ji'D~-2--494.02' 7 51 BUILDING SETBACK -1 A~D LAND*CAPE BUFFER, SHEET 7. 1111\ - SIGHT DISTANCE PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER EXISTING POSTAL _/~ SIGHT DISTANCE ~.0> 4 \ ~ ~ .â€¢:. :.. ;84'SIDEWA Â· 39 ~~Â·Â· ~~Ll, ~ < DRIVE INTERSECTION KIOWA DR. CLUSTER BOX DRIVE INTERSECTION U /a... 0 0 0 \\ - 641' 174' TO INT.- / w - w w ~ 1 u J JO w w U L Vicinity Map UNPLATTED LOT 1" = 1200' 7 ifi , ' LOT 29, KIOWA RIDGE / . E-1 ZONE d Jul_ 1 5 2009 11 ~ E-1 ZONE LOT 30, KIOWA RIDGE LOT 1 KIOWA RIDGE E-1 ZONE E-1 ZONE PROJ. NO. 2005-11-01 18 NOISIAEIM 31Â¥0 133HS Â»7/ AINIMOGNOO Vt 107 103Â£0@d 0-0 . Map of The Meadolu Condominiums of Lot 4A of SURVEYOR' S NOTES: DEDICATION: Melrly' s Meadou Reptolt \ KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING THE OWNERS OF \ %.0/ 1) SUBJECT PROPERTY CONTAINS 5.062 ACRES. THAT PART OF SECTION 2, T4N, R73W OF THE 6th P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, ---21â‚¬1. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO WIT: \ %.%*. a Portion of Section 2, Township 4 MEADOW REPLAT. THIS LINE IS ASSUMED TO BEAR SOUTH 89'31'22" EAST. LOT 4A, MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT, A PORTION OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 73 2) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS PLAT IS THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 48, OF MARY'S \ WEST OF THE 6th P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO \ ~ NON-DISTURBANCE , CONDOMINIUMS. CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION IS THE MEADOW CONDOMINIUMS COMMON INTEREST 3) SECUITY TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY'S COMMITMENT #S0291913, AMEND. NO. 2, THE PLAT CONTAINING 5.062 ACRES MORE OR LESS, HAVE BY THESE PRESENTS CAUSED THE SAME TO BE \ North, Range 73 West of the Gth OF MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION, MARY'S LAKE REPLAT, AND MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT WERE SURVEYED AND CONDOMINIUMIZED INTO UNITS TO BE KNOWN AS THE MAP OF THE MEADOW PORPON A . USED FOR ENCUMBRANCE RESEARCH. COMMUNITY DECLARATION, AS RECORDED AT RECEPTION #__________, DATED ---- DAY ~ OF LOT 2A /\ . 6 I \ / j ......21,21 4) ALL MEASURED AND PLATTED BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THIS PLAT ARE THE SAME OF -_-_-_--, 20__, OF THE LARIMER COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER. WITNESS OUR HANDS / AND SEALS BELOW. ex ./ li :4 P.M. Town of Estes Park, County AS THOSE ON THE PLAT OF MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT. 24' WIDE UnLITY AND %\ / REBAR 5) NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION MARY'S MEADOW DEVELOPMENT, INC. -t. NO CAP of Larimer, State of Colorado BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THE DATE YOU FIRST DRAINAGE EASEMENT j~:~ ~ \ / THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE CERTIFICATION DATE / ~ DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN / SHOWN HEREON. A / \ i \ 7 h / 1 1 - \ 9, 63, / 1 / \ / %.% lo \29 / 4 ji / , STATE OF COLORADO) BY JAMES W. TAWNEY, PRESIDENT 0 - )SS CO 0 .. 1.5.* Legend COUNTY OF LARIMER) 2 0, / .1 1 / UTILITY AND'~ U) 3% / O.00 PLATTED AND MEASURED INFORMATION / DRAINAGE EASEMENT ~ / GCE \ \\44 SEE SURVEYOR NOTE #4 THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS _-_ OF , Q 02- Of/ A --00 / \ 0 FOUND 1 " PLASTIC CAP ON A 20__ BY JAMES W. TAWNEY, PRESIDENT OF MARY'S MEADOW DEVELOPMENT, INC. A6O13Â· ~/ + ji /693P,6( 4Â·~Â· 0, \ Xfj #4 REBAR, LS #9485, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ..2 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. 9 I FOUND 1" PLASTIC CAP ON A MY COMMISSION EXPIRES . /42 , '44.4 / #4 REBAR, LS #26974 CONDOMINIUM NOTES: ., t. -.OL L. 1 LCE LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS 77\ Â·Â·: . 1) THIS LOT SHALL BE USED TO CONVEY HISTORIC ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE DRAINAGE AND \ \ lt> 1 /\ EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE _x / ...., ~ 4~ WEE GCE GENERAL COMMON ELEMENTS SHALL ACCEPT DEVELOPED POINT DISCHARGE STORM WATER FROM ADJACENT LOTS WITHIN NOTARY PUBLIC s \Y 10' WIDE UnLITY F AND DETENTION FACILITIES MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT, MARY'S LAKE REPLAT AND MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION (EXCEPT LOT 1 ~ AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT 1, MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION). ALL DEVELOPED STORM FLOWS FROM ADJACENT LOTS WITHIN b \ / -___--____- EASEMENT MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT, MARY'S LAKE REPLAT AND MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION LOTS LIENHOLDER' S STATEMENT: 15' UTILITY, DRAINAGE - l ./ \ / 1 0 (EXCEPT LOT 1, MARY'S LAKE SUBDIVISION) SHALL BE DIRECTED FOR DETENTION TO THE 43**9* :5 0 00 AND LOPE EASEMENT j / 0. eL ~ __ __ _ ___ - ___ __ EASEMENT CENTERLINE EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE AND DETENTION FACILITIES ON THIS LOT 4A. LOT 4A SHALL HAVE THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY AGREE AND CONSENT TO THIS PLATTING AND DOES ALSO ~Â¥EE- 1 / ...\ \ / .....to. SOLE DISCRETION TO CHANGE THE POINT DISCHARGES AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES FROM THE CONSENT TO THE DEDICATION OF THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS DEPICTED HEREON A. GCE \ 2 .*':.6. ...... TOWN LIMITS AS OF ADJACENT LOTS SO LONG AS THEY CAN SHOW THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO RECEIVE THE FROM THEIR LIEN IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF SAID PLATTING. ' r Y. JULY 5,2006 DRAINAGE FROM SAID SUBDIVISIONS. LOT 4A SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL MAINTENANCE 1 1/3 \ PLATTED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE Â· OF THE DRAINAGE AND DETENTION FACILITIES WITHIN LOT 4A. DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE IS NOT e SEE CONDOMINIUM NOTE #3 t -'/Rff/h # ~4~ 8' NON-MOTORIZED , NEIGHBOR PROPERTY LINE )ss . GCE \ , :,L Y~ THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TOWN. BY, ______________ AS VICE PRESIDENT OF U.S. BANK, N.A. C 32@@4' ~Â« 3 8 1 \An TRAIL EASEMENT \ PROPERTY LINE 2) DIRECT ACCESS FROM MARY'S LAKE ROAD SHALL BE PROHIBITED. ALL LOTS SHALL w- #*42, Z a. /Â· RECEIVE ACCESS FROM KIOWA DRIVE, KIOWA TRAIL AND/OR PROMONTORY DRIVE, STATE OF COLORADO ) ,~3.7-; /3 \ lt-l/ NX 3) THE AREA OUTSIDE THE PLATTED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SHALL ALLOW UTILITY AND \ COUNTY OF LARIMER ) \ 5,7/ 54 'h , 9....... -1 :Mmmm:WV DECK DRAINAGE FACILITIES ALONG WITH THE RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN, INSPECT, OPERATE /Le. 1), \ -) REPAIR AND REPLACE SUCH UTILITY AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES. ' THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ___ DAY OF __________ 20___ BY, AS VICE PRESIDENT OF U.S. BANK, NA ..7 \ 4) THE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECORDED AT RECEPTION #20060020812 SHALL CONTINUE â‚¬ '% f t CONCRETE IN EFFECT AS TO THE UNITS OF THIS CONDOMINIUM MAP. \ r-=m WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. 1 431? Â¢D 1 ASPHALT MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 3%31 it 1 , 1 1 ... 5) ANY LAND NOT CONDOMINIUMIZED BY THIS MAP SHALL BE CONSIDERED GCE, SUBJECT TO 110...1. , THE DECLARANT RIGHTS FOR FUTURE CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT SET FORTH IN THE 19330*. / \ 4 0 CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION ALL DESIGNATIONS OF LCE SHALL BE CONSIDERED FINAL ~ \ Â· ALLOCATIONS OF LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS. ANY DESIGNATION OF GCE MAY BE REVISED OR AREA RESERVED FOR 27 ~ REALLOCATED BY THE DECLARANT IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND NOTARY PUBLIC \ FUTURE CONDOMINIUM UNITS / \ / IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY. 1 .4, /\ \ BOARD OF TRUSTEES' CERTIFICATE: GCE 1 i/ *4* 1, /1 : APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO BY A RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON THIS _____ DAY f.\ It.... 15' UTILITY AND \ LOT 4A \ /1 SQUARE OF __________ 20_ SLOPE EASEMENT / \ GCE \ ~,Â·Â·. 1/2" REBAR MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT \ 5.062 ACRES 1 .. 220,500 SQFT , / 1 TOWN CLERK MAYOR r AREA RESERVED FOR 27 .90>. N \ ~ FUTURE CONDOMINIUM UNITS \ / 4.160 NOTICE OF APPROVAL: .j \ / \ fo./ . .0 \ f /1.16 e / \ \ ARTICLE 68 OF TITLE 24, C.R.S. AS AMENDED. e \ / 1 #4 REBAR APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN CREATES A VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT PURSUANT TO ' ; 1 PC #6499 ~.18'22'NE ' k SCALE: 1" = 40' S./9-F SURVEYOR' S CERTIFICATE: 7% lÂ«- \0 SCE \ - 0 40 80 120 1, LONNIE A. SHELDON, BEING FIRST DULY SWORN ON HIS OATH, DEPOSES AND SAYS: THAT 0 \ // 10.18 HE IS A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO; THAT _1530Â·w \ 1 , THIS SURVEY DOES DEPICT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY AND WAS N \ ..... MAP WAS MADE SUBSEQUENT TO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF UNIT 7 AND 8; THAT THE 7 // 57' / ~ENTERLINE 15' WIDE; \0~--------__ 1 <63\ \\'4\\ MADE BY HIM OR UNDER HIS DIRECT SUPERVISION AND RESPONSIBLE CHARGE; THAT THIS \ , 17 /0 UTILITY EASEMENT HEREON WERE READ BY HIM AND THE SAME ARE TRUE OF HIS OWN KNOWLEDGE; AND THAT SURVEY WAS ACCURATELY REPRESENTED ON THIS MAP; THAT THE STATEMENTS CONTAINED /4/<D . , 2.4, , THIS MAP CONTAINS ALL OF THE INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SECTION 38-33.3-209, C.R.S. 25.â‚¬ 2[*mil .6.\\ , , 1 25.3' 1 1 8 UNIT 8 | P.E. & P.L.S. #26974 | UNIT 7 in GCE | S GCE +\\\ / 25.3' 1 1 //,O 41/ 'a-* 25.0' Â£60' WIDE 69 %< , El] \ 04\ \\Â« , /4 \ R-0-W 61,Gui / \ AREA RESERVED FOR 6 1 , 0 000.'0'3 ~t r AREA RESERVED FOR 6/ -~ FUTURE CONDOMINIUM UNITS ..0.00. , / FUTURE CONDOMINIUM,dNITS *... :EA#/ 1 03 &/ \39, Â«Â»O. r \ \MARY'~\ <ljf ~~- , i .f... - - I. i#fifip/Zilf#Erf/e 63 15' UTILITY AND // 1 20' UTILITY EASEMENT ku) 1/92 SLOPE EASEMENT -~--- 1*~ -- ~ ~36940<9\Ft j \ 4/ \Â«34 1 31 0 4/ al , I i \3k \ / ,Â·.,.~AND NON-MOTORIZED TRAIL EASEMENT -Fre'121 .2%5Â·1Â£_ -- - 45' b \ - WIDE -1 l '. CP/ 48.0' GCE Â« , / *'Â·Â·4 DR. - 4 Aff -7/# 4 10 / //i Â·g GARAGE I GARAGE 2 - - PROMONTORY \\'i- R-0-W m GCE . . N .1 N \ GCE r LU b UNIT 8 , UNIT 7 4 , 40 U) â„¢ _SEM~921 -3222' _ \\ 6Â© . / CHECKED BY: 51 / 10' UTILITY DRAWN BY: 13~4 ><33 8 / /Â· : ,,..Â£ 25~ENT . ..__39~392 -78.-f- 48.0' ./ 1 JWC 21Â£ uÂ·, 1 /-- LAS -yuk-Â«-4-Â· >- 1 --- - \\ SCALE 1" = 40' '11 \ 1\ 1 BASIS OF BEARINGS glk;-11*~~Â«S; SITE- \~ ,- DR. \~ ~IO\A~'~~\~~ CD S 89'31'22" E 494.02' cvat*:21 DATE: 06-15-2009 60' WIDE KIOWA DR. SHEET R-0-W Â« -~EÂ©[EDÂ¥[2 1 Vicinity Map 3 1 / 1 ~ JUL 15 2009 ~. oF 1" = 1200' PROJ. NO. 2005-11-01 18 NOISIA3& 31Â¥0 ONIA3Ahln Sld Â£+0 L 00 'NHVd SGUSN '06.Ze / 94 SMAINIMOGNOO ALOCIVEN GIHI, IMIcIGIN ALOCIVEM S,ANVM 10 Vt 107 1&*Q Map of The Meadou) Condom,iniums 8 of Lot 4A of Mary' s Meadow Repht SURVEYOR' S NOTES: a Portion of Section 2, Township 4 6. ELEVATIONS ARE MEASURED FROM THE CENTER EAST )(6th CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. AS MONUMENTED BY A 3" U.S.G.L.0. BRASS CAP ON A 2" PIPE AND ASSUMING THE TOP OF SAID CAP HAS AN ELEVATION OF 8054.9'. North, Range 73 West of the Gth THIS MONUMENT IS LOCATED S86'24'28"E A DISTANCE OF 306.67' FEET FROM THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF LOT 4A, MARY'S MEADOW REPLAT. 7. INTERIOR WALLS ARE NOT TO SCALE. THEY ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. P.M. Town of Estes Park, Countly of Larimer, State of Colorado 1 7' 17' /3777â‚¬775/7. 373738% E'- F'- ''11111Ilill;i'Illitillill :.. D. /56" < E'%93 ~~ C,- ~~Â· ~ ~. , > j-CE . f 0,- 11 1 1 ----------- ieli Â· , PATIO" ATTIC SPACE Â«* 19'--4" - p, C53,1 1 17' 634 - 01 1 1 P 8,~6 . '9Â»~ 999- ~1 - ) . .+D .9 . . I. , 1 2 A -23'-11" 11 ~"- 23'-9" . A . 4 39.-43. PATIO BEDROOM 2 Â· f ICE ' Â· 8'-3" 72:-%9#Â· rÂ® - -4. 't. D D' UNIT 8 FAMILY V LIVING/DINING ROOM ROOM ~ 20'-103" UNIT 8 UNIT 7 20'-10~" 14'-10 1 '-0~'- 18'-1" <7 - 23'-73" O ' Â«Z 20'-101" UNIT 8 1Â»* UNIT 8 -4 4 FAMILY 24'-03" c q**-4 BEDROOM 2 U ....4 4 ROOM SECTION E-E' LIVING/DINING ROOM 14'-10" 23'-23" 1 1 23' 23" ' SCALE: 36" = 1' ax-94 GARAGE A 7 |~ KITCHEN A' A BATH 2 BATH 3 - 311-43" A' 8â€ž- -4. - -8,1 UNIT 7/UNIT 8 FINISH FLOOR O ENTRY ~ 1'-63.-1 = -- + UNIT 7 E- ~ 1 r/112/-7====9 =F\~u UNIT 7 dthu 1 81,3 Elv = 8111.5' - -r----- E- F- POWDER 3% MASTER BATH ROOM xi BATH 2 GARAGE ~lr- - 31'-113" 1!3'-s" KITCHEN -El BATH 3 re DRYER 11 ~ --333 =- STORAGE CL. tul-th 31 SCALE: 56" = 11 - 1~ - 1-1.-4. BEDROOM 3 - r-.. - I i ~POWDER L__ ROOM MASTER BATH CL. ENTRY ~. F= CL. 1 MASTER |lwASHER/ - STORAGE ATTIC SPACE 't BEDROOM DRYER BEDROOM 3 CLOSET 4 CL. ATTIC SPACE j q~ ;-Jnl:=L MECHANICAL ROOM ~ . GCE - -24'-2" gil 11 E-- ' -2 Â©-1 1 t*24.-Â°1-8 - ENTRY < 81,-1 - UNIT 7 K,2/.Â· DECK . 5>44 L=.1 11~"- - 8'-3" 8'-6" 9' NO>O> LCE >f~/// CL. / E' UNIT 8 UNIT 7 MECHANICAL ROOM B- 1 02%%%?=9-1 B - - 23'-43" - 20'-103" -23'-11" 8"- - Â· 23'-Â¢ Â·Â· 1. 10' 1 1 ~-1 - -63â€ž . 7, 4 8'2 MAIN FLOOR LOWER FLOOR SECTION D- D' SECTION F- F' C , //// / DECK'// SCALE: 36" = 1' L 2.4,f-/i/.Â·ff. -'L.'.4 ~-1 SCALE: 36" = 1' SCALE: JC = 10 < 10' SCALE: )6" = 1' C- C- 1 1 4 12 / N ATTIC SPACE ATTIC SPAC~/55:5~~ 11 8 C BE \~ GCE GCE ~ / ATTIC SPACE ~ ATTIC SPACE / ATTIC SPACE / 1 GCE GCE GCE 1 UNIT 7 ~ ' 17'-5" r---. . UNIT 8 17'-5" UNIT 7 17'-5" 11 - 1 1 1 UNIT 7/UNIT 8 MASTER BATH ROOM HALL gÂ·-1â€ž 9.-4"LIVING/DINING ROOM POWDER KITCHEN g'-5~" 1 CLOSET MAS. W/D POW KITCHEN LIVING/DINING ROOM CLOSET MAS. w/D pow KITCHEN LIVING/DINING ROOM DECK MAIN FINISH FLOOR LE r '-03" C ELEV = 8111.15' UNIT 8 | -11,Â·-03" BORM RM DECK - BDRM Rlvl LCE - LOWER FINISH FLOOR -24'-1~" 24'-1~" It 3 18'-7~" 20'-93" ~ , 18'-7*' 20'-4â€ž . 0, ELEV = 8101.00' 1.-03.J 1 1 1 1 9~ 9.-1 FAMILY FAMILY FAMILY BATH 3 BATH 2 ROOM PATIO BATH 2 BATH 3 BDRM STORAGE CL. CL. MECH RM CL. BEDROOM 3 ROOM MECH RM CL. BEDROOM 3 ROOM PATIO LCE 3 LCE 23'-4" 23'-Â¢ 30' 41' M, .1â€¢ 1 0, - * 1 m LU I 0 SECTION A-A' SECTION B-B' SECTION C-C' DRAWN BY: SCALE: Ji" = 1' SCALE: 36" = 1' CHECKED BY: SCALE: A' = 1 LAS SCALE 1" = 4< DATE: 06-15-2< SHEET la Beef-**f 2 OF 1~~ JUL 15 2009 2 - PROJ. NO. 2005-11- NOISIAEN 31Â¥0 ONIA]AkinS ONV 3N1e 3 OH NVA HU SwnINIMOGNOO ALOCIVGIM GIHi .IMIdGIN ALOC[VS[* S,AZIV 10 Vt 107 gLQ M 4 .% . Ig North End Ranches Amended Plat Estes Park Conimunity 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: July 21, 2009 1*P A =L REOUEST: To adjust the interior property .:e 34 line between two lots o f record. --0.'.. 34 u - LOCATION: 2112 MeGraw Ranch Road, 30 36 a,cky -/ 7 within unincorporated Larimer County. hktional Ivt>tntain USFS - OWNER/APPLICANT: Sonya K. Binns (2112 MeGraw Ranch Road, Estes Park, CO 80517) STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk SITE DATA TABLE: Engineer: Van Horn Engineering (Joe Coop), 586-9388 Parcel Numbers: 2508105-010, -024 Development Area: 47.8 acre Number of Lots: Two Existing Land Use: Single-family residential and undeveloped Proposed Land Use: Same Existing Zoning: "RE-1" Rural Estate Adjacent Zoning- East: "RE-1" Rural Estate North: "RE-1" Rural Estate West: "RE-1" Rural Estate South: "RE-1" Rural Estate Adjacent Land Uses- East: Single-family residential North: Single-family residential West: Single-family residential South: Single-family residential Services- Water: Well Sewer: Septic Fire Protection: Estes Park Volunteer PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: This is a request to adjust the interior property line between two lots of record. The property totals approximately forty-eight acres, and is zoned "RE- 1" Rural Estate, which has a minimum lot size of 10-acres. The property owner desires to absorb the lower 1 /3 of the northern lot into the southern lot (the meadow area), prior to sale of the northern lot. Adjustment of the property line will create any non-conforming setbacks or lot sizes, and will not affect density. The properties are under a conservation easement held by the Estes Valley Land Trust, who has been notified of this proposal. REVIEW CRITERIA: Depending upon the complexity of the project, this section may be a brief summary of the standards of review or may involve a more detailed analysis of the standards based upon issues relevant to any particular project. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code 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 o f public services. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, Staff finds: 1. Pursuant to C.R.S.30-28-110, sub-section 4(a), "no plat for subdivided land shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners unless at the time of the approval of platting the subdivider provides the certification of the county treasurer's office that all ad valorem taxes applicable to such subdivided land, for years prior to that year in which approval is granted, have been paid." 2. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code. 3. 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. 4. Within thirty (30) days of the Board's approval of the amended plat, the developer shall submit the final plat for recording. If the amended plat is not submitted for recording within this thirty-day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void. Page #2 - Amended Plat of Tract 2 of the Boundary Survey and Division ofLot 20, North End Ranches and Lot 10, North End Ranches Cj 5. This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Board of County Commissioners; Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL o f the proposed Amended Plat o f Tract 2 of the Boundary Survey and Division of Lot 20, North End Ranches and Lot 10, North End Ranches. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed amended plat to the Board of County Commissioners with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and authorization for the chair to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature. Page #3 - Amended Plat of Tract 2 ofthe Boundary Survey and Division ofLot 20, North End Ranches and Lot 10, North End Ranches %31 --- D 0 0 - ESTES 00~Â® PARK 0 - COLORADO - , . . ox ZOO, ses ark, '- 0 1/ Memo To: Dave Shirk and Bob Goehring From: Tracy Feagans Date: June 26,2009 Re: Binns Amended Plat, 2112 McGraw Ranch Road Background: The Public Works and Utilities Departments have enclosed progress comments regarding the submittals received to date and remain general as the submittals are not complete and construction drawings for the public improvements have not been submitted. It is important to note that these Departments reserve the right to make additional comments and revise comments as more detail is provided in the subsequent submittals and development plans. Light & Power: We have no comments or concerns. â€¢ Page 1 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ~ I.ARIMER A~COUNTY Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-5727 FAX (970) 498-7986 E-mail: colemacl@larimer.org MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Shirk, Planner, Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 FROM: Traci Shambo, Development Services Engineer 73 DATE: June 25,2009 SUBJECT: Binns Amended Plat Proiect Description/Background: This is an amended plat of lot 10, North End Ranches and Tract 2 of the division of Lot 20, located at 2112 McGraw Ranch Road, to reconfigure the lot line between the two lots to incorporate a portion of land the applicant values on Tract 2 into Lot 10. Review Criteria: Development review staff from this office has reviewed the submitted materials per the criteria found in the Larimer County Land Use Code, Road Manual, Access Code, and Storm-Water Management Manual. Easements: 1. Any easements being vacated, created or relocated relative to this proposal will need approval from the proper utility authorities. 2. We assume that any improvements associated with this request will not adversely impact the drainage patterns on either site. If the site drainage is altered, a drainage report will need to be submitted for staff to review. 3. It does not appear that additional accesses or change to the existing access from MeGraw Ranch Road are being proposed with this application. As a result, this office does not have any access related concerns. Staff Recommendation: The Larimer County Engineering Department does not have any major concerns or issues with this proposal. Please feel free to contact me at (970) 498-5701 or email me at tshambo@larimer. org if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: Van Horn Engineering, Joe Coop, 1043 Fish Creek Road, Estes Park, CO 80517 Sonya K. Binns, 2112 McGraw Ranch Road, Estes Park, CO 80517 File H:\DEVREV\PLANCHK\Amended Plat, Easement & ROW Vacations\Binns Amended Plat.doc GREGORY A. WHITE Attorney at Law North Park Place 1423 West 29'b Street 970/667-5310 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Fax 970/667-2527 June 24,2009 DAVE SHIRK, PLANNER II COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT TOWN OF ESTES PARK PO BOX 1200 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 Re: Amended Plat - Binns Dear Mr. Shirk: I have the following comments: 1. The Dedication Statement shall be changed to dedicate public utility easements using the dedication language for public utilities which is found in the Estes Valley Development Code. 2. The Plat shows a 50 foot building setback line around the perimeter of both of the two new lots. Note No. 14 refers to the 50 foot building setback. It is my opinion that this setback line should be removed from the Plat as setbacks for this zoning district may change in the future. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. fer-i Tr~Aours, / C. L j-A ~ Gre*y A. White CC: Van Horn EngineeL Joe Cool~ Fax: 970/586-8~ , GAW/ldr Page 1 of 1 Dave Shirk From: Suzanne & Alan Miller [as.miller@beyondbb.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 5:06 PM To: joevhe@airbits.com CC: Dave Shirk Subject: Binns Amended Piat Dear Mr. Coop, On behalf of the North End Property Association, Inc. we wish to share our support for the application submitted by Sonya K. Binns. Binns Amended Plat Lot 10, North End Ranches & Tract 2 of Division of Lot 20 2112 McGraw Ranch Rd. We are grateful for her conservation easement to the Estes Valley Land Trust as our organization supports these important contributions in the North End. Thank you for affording us the opportunity to comment on this amended plat. Sincerely, Suzanne K. Miller President, NEPOA 6/1 6/lnno R E Â©IP U V [E =% 1 . 4 4, 1 1 1 1 -'WI- 1 1-9 1 -A M,MY, 2 7 2009 ~ ~ STATEMENT OF INTENT AMENDED PLAT OF TRACT 2 OF BOUNDARY SURVEY AND DIVETON OF LOT 20, NORTH END RANCHES AND LOT 10, NORTH END RANCHES Sonya K. Binns is the property owner of both properties in the proposed Amended Plat. The subject properties are two parcels, comprised of 47.813 acres, located within the North End Ranches Subdivision, located at 2112 MeGraw Ranch Rd. They are Lot 10 of the North End Ranches Subdivision and Tract 2 of the Boundary Survey and Division of Lot 20, North End Ranches. Lot 10 contains most of the improvements that Mrs. Binns currently uses and Tract 2 is essentially a vacant property. She would like to adjust the property line between her two properties in order to incorporate a portion of land she values on Tract 2 into Lot 10. .This portion of land has been called David's Meadow for years due to her deceased husband's affinity for the meadow. She has recently put this portion of land into a Conservation Easement, restricting any improvements, with the Estes Valley Land Trust and would like to move it onto her Lot 10. She no loRger wishes to keep Tract 2 due to financial constrictions and would like to sell it. This Amended Plat would allow her to have and control the future of"David's Meadow." In addition to placing a Conservation Easement on the meadow, both Lot 10 and Tract 2 have also been included in the Conservation Easement in order to be restricted from any further subdivision. Therefore, only two parcels will be allowed on the 47.813 acres of land she currently owns. The proposed Lot 20B also has a building envelope placed upon it by the Conservation Easement, thereby limiting the location of any structures on the lot. The purpose of this was to maintain the view corridor that can be seen from Devil's Gulch Road. There are a few utility considerations that have gone into this Amended Plat. â€¢ The North End Water Company currently serves water to Lot 10 and this will continue to occur. There is a blanket easement for the water lines as shown on the plat, therefore, no further easements have been provided for them. â€¢ Tract 2, after modified will be know as Lot 20B, was divided after the North End Water Company was created and was not permitted a water tap at the time. The Boundary Survey and Division of Lot 20 created two lots that were both in excess of 35 acres, therefore, Tract 2 was permitted a well by the State Water Engineer's office. Since Tract 2's creation, the owner and her family have constructed the well and storage tank with the intentions of building a residence on the property, however, the residence never materialized. These improvements will become the property ofthe new Lot 20B ifthe project gains approval. â€¢ The gallery well located in "David's Meadow" is a historic well that was part of the original homestead prior to the subdivision ofNorth End Ranches. It will be located on the same lot as the historic homestead if this project is approved, however it has not been used for domestic water since the creation of the North End Water Company. It has however, been maintained and used for landscape irrigation and livestock watering. â€¢ The septic field for Tract 1 of the Boundary Survey and Division of Lot 20, North End Ranches, currently falls on Tract 2 of said division. The septic field was built in the 1950's and thus Tract 1 has prescriptive rights to continue the use of the septic field. A private easement has been placed on the field for the benefit of Tract 1. however ifthe use of the septic field is ever abandoned, the easement will be vacated with the abandonment, as would a prescriptive easement. Both proposed lots will be serviced by septic fields also. â€¢ Electricity for the proposed lots will be serviced by Estes Park Light and Power. They currently have facilities crossing the property and will have service to the properties after the proposed Amended Plat As for access, both lots will be accessed off of MeGraw Ranch Road. The driveways are already in place, however future construction on the proposed Lot 20B may alter the location with an approved access permit. -- 1 i.1 Jj/,6-1 *. i 1,9 4 ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION FÂ«y-3-3 1*,71*Ar i L.*,ly-1 |~| MAY 2 7 2009 ~ ~ Submittal Date: 57â‚¬.7~'Ze>Oct 10 UL- 313 #29Â»*FÂ®#4*64*1Â·343941*fj~*I-*7:fÂ·13%~RifyiÂ»7.422Â£46i?4*342Â·*7Â·k< 14 41 itt 31 19 , Â©**.- r. 1- Boundary Line Adjustment CondorAITTIEr?Ti-101'MT~ f :1Â«41 ' Developmen: Plan " t; 1 7411 :M f- Special Review ~ F ROW or Easement Vacation r Preliminary Map :cÂ· :4.i i~~ Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change F Final Map 114 1 1 Preliminary Subdivision Plat r Time Extension f- Supplemental Map *. . .t 4 Â·Â· i:. r Final Subdivision Plat f- Other: Please specify e. S 1-- Minor Subdivision Plat 4â€¢ 1 2 A Amended Plat 2 -" Gen@ral;ltiforniation 1. , 0Â·, ,: Â·., 1 --Â· .. *r.; r 1 r. : - I.â€¢Ir " I 4: - Â» !..,8, . 7/*Al /1,t~utct 71-f . ~ i Project Name â€¢ , Project Description 4â‚¬uc hy!â‚¬.1 0 6 + prtop er/q hlâ‚¬ 64-/up./.4 ZP,7eA#r Id Z I I Z Ar Gro u; R a,.& W Â·t, Project Address t Â· A . Legal Description Let to, Ajorti Fi,J )4-,uiv< + -fArt k af- Divicten. O-I-I.Jzo lk,j 1 , Parcel ID # 2 SZ)9 / â‚¬-0/0/024 Section f-,8 Township ~90 Range 7 2 CU Site Information- 1 . 0 Â·- 4'9~- 19 . -f, Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres q 7,90 IL<,-a-,4 1 1 2 Existing Land Use St 'Able FL-u k, R.eck inatita C Proposed Land Use â‚¬r.q.e Â¥U,vul'~ te,<de.J-pal Existing Water Service 1- Town g Well f- None E Other (specify) A )6,4Â£ Ar d 61'aL,- Proposed Water Service F Town r Well r None F Other (specify) 4 1 It ti Existing Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD r uTSD X Septic F None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD r urso 9 Septic Is a sewer lift station required? F Yes g' No Existing Gas Service r xcel r Other P< None Existing Zoning Q.6 - L Proposed Zoning /25 - 1 Site Access (if not on public street) 044,-zu,u /9a.,4 04 ~667 r/ Are there wetlands on the site? E Yes 0 No Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? , Yes r No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person 70 6-- 66,~ ; 1/54. 4,74 62Â·tq,kiee/,1,1 Corriplete Mailing Address /043 /~91-A. d,eetâ‚¬ Ect., EST@25- fh,-2, Â£30 'i>Z?.O -0.- Attachments 0 Application fee < Statement of intent 0 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan 0~ 11 " X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan 0' Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report, wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information. Town of Estes Park 4 P.O. Box 1200 4 170 MacGregor Avenue 4 Estes Park, CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 -6 Fax: (970) 586-0249 4 www.estesnet.com/ComDev 4.11 4. i C p *0414!Â«atidifi'*r*Â»~~ Primary Contact Person is E- Owner F Applicant X' Consultant/Engineer f, 9 .-1- Record Owner(s , 5119 0 k 23/06,1-s - Mailing Address 2/12- #c 61-a,Â£5- Aa. e-A /4/- ~ a/ks 72/4 CO l Phone ' Cell Phone Fax Email Applicant .Sz-,â‚¬- a.< 005,1,8,~ Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email Consultant/Engineer ~3 .1- 2/0,01'L Evi~,07 eer, ~9, JEe- gbe~> CEL:4ct) Mailing Address 1043 Fl D- Creelt 2-J. ~ E rk.Â·r 91.-l< CO â‚¬351=1- Phone ? 70 /06 Â·- 9399 1 Cell Phone 970/ 943 â‚¬210 Fax 970 / -5%6 -<2701 Email bonv'ke @airbi-As . ce.14 APPLICATION FEES For development 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/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. I hereby certify that the provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: doâ€¢r/4 K. 81*UNS Applicant PLEASE PRINT: 5'OUYA 14 - B'uâ€¢8 -ignatures: Record Owner Date 5-2-7-05 -ul~(~-i*:,a Applicant Date â‚¬-11-09 l r.: 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. 4 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 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 doveming the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at www.estesnet.corn/ComDev/DevCode.) I 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. â€¢ l understand that this proposal may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date. â€¢ I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete. * The Commlinity Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is determined to be complete. â€¢ I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to - my property during the review of this application. $ I acknowledge that I have received the Estes Valley Development Review Application Schedule and that failure to meet the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application becoming NULL and VOID. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT.Â· d o "VA- d . 11 (N Aj i Applicant PLEASE PRINT: 40"YA K. 73Â¢,uu i Signatures: Record Owner Date 6 -17-05 Applicant 5yl ,/-73 C C>' Date 5-277-09 Revised 06/26/07 ( ANNANNAN N If) LO LID LD LO 00 moo @2 000-JAODOO" 999940= xeoooz 2 % F- â‚¬ â‚¬ c c- cO 0 0 0. C. 0. 0 >. e DE = .E (D r 0 0- Z< umm 82 M Â£ D O 0 â‚¬%%0 00 H m C M % 2 0 1* M g M 90*932%629 a = O Z~ .2 a (0 X= ENEE EFESE;Â§50*o 09 LL N N N C\1 ,- O- r- h N r Q- NO- r -0 0 mE $ er = 399. *Ed 6 98239%29 c 0-10-9 = 1% 338Â° 23 -EE @2 0 3-3 (0 06 06 0 W o 0 J - LO -C 2c CE 0 EIrgiroDIhico Ir 3~*WE~~~kE~N : ~~EMEDEE-- (0 H O O J 0(00 x -96~ERRICOmmu-Im r~~ MGr~~nwell ox 4150 urst, NC 28374 5-4326 A & Peter K Plaut McGraw Ranch Rd :sZ pfrk'~8 8051 Cynthia Doyle 915 Devils G Estes Park O 8051 & Diane L Kofford Estes Park O 8051 Estes Park 8051 60451 Estes a 80517 cCreery Estes r , 80517 Owner Owner 11 Address State, Zip leanore ~yr~ 688005117 Devils Gulch Rd Estes Park, CO 80 1 Estes Park 1 Estes Par Estes leld pepllel.UÂ¥ SUU!8 ADJACENT PROP OWNERS Box 960 N8622-031 1 . PRELIMINARY- AMENDED PLAT Â¤0 S3501'00"W 18.50' ~ (S35'01'00"W 18.56' OF TRACT 2 THE OF BOUNDARY SURVEY AND DIVISION OF LOT 20, NORTH END RANCHES AND LOT 10, NORTH END RANCHES, LOCATED IN THE ~ & SOO'36'27"E 72.49' ~ SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 5 AND THE NORTHEAST A OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 72 WEST OF THE 6th P.M., COUNTY OF ~ r (SOO*33"'E 72.51') ~ * | Of 22 LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. \%% 10' PUBLIC UTILI A-- ~ \- / -.- 0 99 CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATIONÂ·. EASEMENT i ' 1 : \ il I /------- KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT SONYA K. BINNS, BEING THE OWNER OF THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1 OF SECTION 5 AND 0 4 THE NORTHEAST 1 OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 72 WEST OF THE 6th P.M,, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, BEING MORE W *>-. 497? 22 2 10' PUBLIC UTILITY PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO WIT: C 10'. / 0 ,- 777-------- 2>2 931 EASEMENT PARCEL 1: TRACT 2 OF BOUNDARY SURVEY AND DIVISION OF LOT 20, NORTH END RANCHES, LOCATED IN SECTION 4,5 AND 8, 6/ 4 4 a TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 72 WEST OF THE 6th P.M., ACCORDING TO PLAT FILED DECEMBER 12, 1989 AT RECEPTION NO. 0 d 1 1 \%~23< 4, TRACT 1 / % 20' WIDE PUBLIC OVEBHEA 9 / /1 040 89057252, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. 3 00<24 1 BOUNDARY SURVEY AND UTILITY â‚¬*REMENT PARCEL 2: LOT 10, NORTH END RANCHES, LOCATED IN PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 4,5,8 AND 9, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 72 WEST (388'13'14"E 995.28') OF THE 6th P.M, ACCORDING TO FLAT RECORDED NOVEMBER 4, 1955 1 -- DIVISION OF LOT 20, NORTH --- f 44% LOT 3 / 4)/ CONTAINING 47.81 ACRES MORE OR LESS; HAS BY THESE PRESENTS CAUSED THE SAME TO BE SURVEYED AND SUBDIVIDED INTO LOTS EE < :1 END RANCHES ~ NORTH END RANCHES TO BE KNOWN AS THE AMENDED PLAT OF TRACT 2 OF BOUNDARY SURVEY AND DIVISION OF LOT 20, NORTH END RANCHES AND LOT 10, 11 <i it AN ~ ;1 1 ZONING RE-1 , / &/ 4 2).6 ZONING RE-1 NORTH END RANCHES, AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE EASEMENTS FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF UTILITIES AS ARE LAID OUT i, ' Mid 2 1 1-1 1,9Â·Â·Â· . -- / &1 4 444 AND DESIGNATED ON THIS PLAT, WITNESS HER HAND AND SEAL THIS DAY OF 20__. BUILDING ENVELOPE i., ~. 1-1 L 57.05' i 44 2 1 116 3.50 ACRES MORE OR LESS N - SEE NOTE #4 I ' V SONYA K. BINNS (0 0, 0-41 N //- 1 - f /4 STATE OF COLORADO ) 1 Nt S88 13'05' E 995.39' 44 1 1 / hi L-- / 1 -- - , 'r .44936, EX] -1 ~ z8 )SS COUNTY OF LARIMER ) 8 1 1 21 * 9 50' WIDE PRIVATE SEPTIC FIELD EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF TRACT 1 / BINNS. 4. THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ...-. DAY OF , 20__ BY SONYA K. IM 1 , ij 0/~SEE NOTE #7 PLATTED 30' RIGHT OF WAY 1 1 / f~,0.7 - /55*22;-.f - / / /42 SEE NOTE #6 | 1 ~ / 449 if,1 hi,7. MY COMMISSION EXPIRFS 1%1 1 U D N78'38'00"W 436.97' WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. EXISTING WATER Â¢ISTERN / S' 1 LOT 20B 1 1 1 NOTARY PUBLIC 41** ts // //e '4453 ~ --- SEE NOkE #10 1 L--------- PIIASTIC CAP IS #9485 \ 70 5/ 1 20.502 ACRES IND ,#Â£i3553&OSI Z WATER LINE SERVICE TO TRACT 1 t ' 100- OIU A 84 RFRAR . i i r r. A 1 1 . 1 r. A r-. V , Ur. a Z W ZI' C S 00' -200{ \ 1 , 16 .1 Lm, W .V 1 U MI/1. 1 Ill LOTS 6&90F *.'- - 1 1 F REPLAT OF THE REPLAT OF re 04 \ - r 0 5 7 i . V ..,V'll IU_U....'.-2233 NORTH END RANCHES .*-- , \ LOTS 6&9OF ZONING RE-1 ~ NORTH END RANCHES VICINITY MAP ZONING RE-1 NO SCALE PROJ. NO. 2008-09-21 >{0018 Â¥61008--L_ - ~3OM 600Z-Or-9 SNIA]AanS OH NVA 1 9 00 ')INVd SN,LSTI SGIHONVH aNGI H.LHON L [909 00Â¥801 MBVd S3153 * 'ahl 333@0 2*01 1, ...... .. I ./ .....0 .. 0. 1 - .. . 0 4 , .- .. .1 . A , 0 I . I ... 0 . - -- 0 .. , 1 11 â‚¬ .A I . 0 1 , 0 . 6 - -'' 1 .-1 : - ..1 1 - 0, 00 : 1 --1 . . 0 1. 1 0- - 1 - 0-1 0 1. 1 I ./ . 1 . . I 0. .... . I . - 1 :''i - 11 0 . 0 0 0- 1. 4 : .... . I ... .2 0 . / 4 . 4 0 0.0 0.0 . I: 0 . e. . I . 00 . .. - 11\. . O. ' 0 . 0 1 - -1.1.- '. i .1- 0 - I I /0/ I - :''i - 11.0.1 1- 1 0 1 1Â·~2 :* 0 1 r.:. . 1 - . ../4 . .. . 0 2 . , : . . 0 . 1 I. . 1 .0 4 - .. . 0. 0 . 1 1.: '-,1 . I . . .0 . .. . - 0- 4 , I I 0 I . 1 1 - I. .20. 2 . .. 1 0 - 0 . =I'/- - 11...0 , I. . 1. 1 ID. 0 -- 0 1 .- 0 -- 1 0 .. . D .: . - AD . I . . . . . I - 2 1. I. 1 - . 4 .1 . a -' '- 0 0 0 :I'll- 11 0. .. 0 0 1 - 1 0 - . 4 1 . '' . 4 , 0 ' - 0 0- I ' 0 '1' 0 -i . . I .. ... .... . I e . 4 . - 11 0 0 0 1 1- 1 .. . 0 . 1,-0 0 1 -I --' ... 1 e. e. 0 0 . 0 0 0 e . 7 0 0. ' 0 .. 6 - ' li . 0 I -' 11 - I . 0 A . 0.; 2 â€¢ 01:11 ... . I . e . 0 . 1 1 -: 1 -'0 : 0 1 10 0 - . - .0 - 01 . . 0 1 -, I . I. .. . I. .. . 0 ' 1 : 1 .... 0 0 - A 4 2 .. .1 -- 0 1,1 . . 0- 1 . 0 . : 0 0 . I .A A. A A . . . ID. 0 . : 0 11 -1 -p 'A 0 . 0 1 . - I - 01 0 -1 -1. 1- 0. 0 - 1 I . 0 1- 1 1 I - I. I . 1 1 . 11: 0 0 11.0 - I ./ . . I 04 4 , 0 0 . .... I ./ 0- 1 - - - 1 -0 1 - e 1 1 0-I-, 1 1 0 1 - - 0-1 1 - . ..0 I.. I I - 1 - I D =le . 1. il. 0 . 1 = 0 - .1 - - 1 I A A - 1 -1 . 1 0. 1 ./ . 0 - - 1 0 . 0 0. 1. . . 4 0 . . 1. . 0 . 0 1 - . 1 :.-1 - d 1 0 0 , 0: . 1 6 . 1. 0 . 0 1 - 1 - 0 0 - 0 , A- ' ' -- I 11 - .... - :1- 0 1- 1 .. e . 1 0. - 0 :. 1 - - 1. .. . .... . I . 1 1 0 0 .- 10 -1 0 0 .. 1 -- -l - 0 1 - 9 I A ...0 . 11 .. 62 / ...1 ./ 11 . 1 ... . 0 0 1 : 1 0 ... 0 .: 1 -- 1 - - - 0 1 . ell 0 .... 0 . 1.- 1 0 . 1 .. 0 1 ... ..1 ..1 - 0 . 90 0. .. .. 0 1 . 1 0- 1 . 0 .. .- . 0 -0 0 . 0 .- D - 0 - D . 0 ': - 1 0 1 - 0 '- 1 1 . . - -1 0 0 0= : - . 1 1 1 10 1 10 --'-- I.-0 1: ..0- 1 1: .. : 1 0 . I. 0. 1 - . . . 1- 1 ,. re:- .. '- : '.0 1 - -- 0 1 0 .. .. 0. . . . 1 0 ..= .1 . 1 0 . 1 . - 1 -0 - - 1 = F 1 :-' '- 0. I ... 0 1 0 : . 1 - 0 1. I 0 0 --44- . ~ ... - . 7...9/izillilillillillilliliwill. 1 1 -0 - - 1 1 1 ..: . 1 . 1 10 11 0. . .: 0. e - ----- 0 * ~ 00 JIB-m - 0 --0- E n "P 1 .. 0 :1 0 -0 -0 ... .... a. --; Stone Bridge Estates - ~ Preliminary Condominium Plat Map Estes Park Community Development Department *I~-=,0 Municipal Building, 170 MaeGregor Avenue --- PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: July 21, 2009 REQUEST: To condominiumize fourteen units ~- RAAVP ~ 1/ previously approved with the Stone Bridge Estates 1 1211 efu-nginmal<* 7 / - USFS / development plan (ten units in Phase II are not 2Â« -M264'*V included in this application). -- 36 Rocky " Ivbultain USFS LOCATION: South of 1043 Fish Creek Road, - Palk within the Town of Estes Park. ~ USES RA+IP OWNER: Stone Bridge LLC, William G. Van Horn ~1 Â» APPLICANT: Rock Castle Development Co. STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk SITE DATA TABLE: Engineer: Van Horn Engineering and Surveying Parcel Number: 2531168003 Development Area: 2.71 acres Number of Lots: One Existing Land Use: Under development for detached multi-family residential Proposed Land Use: Multi-family residential Existing Zoning: "RM" Multi-family residential Adjacent Zoning- East: "RE" Rural Estate (2.5 acres) North: "RM" Multi-family residential West: "CO" Commercial Outlying South: "CO" Commercial Outlying Adjacent Land Uses- East: Single-family residential North: Undeveloped West: Institutional (18-hole golf course) South: Institutional (18-hole golf course) Services- Water: Town Sewer: UTSD Fire Protection: Estes Park Volunteer PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission approved the Stone Bridge Estates Development Plan (DP 07-09) on August 21, 2007. That approval provided for twenty-four units; this proposed condominium map would allow for individual sale of fourteen of those units. The development plan included two separate lots, where this condominium map would provide for airspace ownership for the southern lot. The northern lot is not under consideration at this time. The condominium map is consistent with the approved development plan, which was reviewed for general development and zoning standards. REVIEW CRITERIA: Depending upon the complexity of the project, this section may be a brief summary of the standards of review or may involve a more detailed analysis of the standards based upon issues relevant to any particular project. This proposal complies the applicable standards of the EVDC, specifically: Section 3.9.E "Standards of Review" for subdivisions, and Section 10.5.H "Condominiums, Townhouses and Other Forms of Airspace Ownership." 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 ofpublic services. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, Staff finds: 1. Pursuant to C.R.S.30-28-110, sub-section 4(a), "no plat for subdivided land shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners unless at the time of the approval of platting the subdivider provides the certification of the county treasurer' s office that all ad valorem taxes applicable to such subdivided land, for years prior to that year in which approval is granted, have been paid." 2. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code, as well as the approved development plan. 3. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. 4. This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed Preliminary Plat of Rambling River Condominiums, CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Compliance with Development Plan 07-09 "Stone Bridge Estates;" Page #2 - Stone Bridge Preliminary Condominium Plat Map 2. Compliance with memo from Greg White to Community Development dated June 24,2009; 3. Compliance with memo from Public Works to Dave Shirk (et al) dated June 26, 2009. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the preliminary condominium plat to the Town Board of Trustees with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. Page #3 - Stone Bridge Preliminary Condominium Plat Map GREGORY A. WHITE Attorney at Law North Park Place 1423 West 29th Street 970/667-5310 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Fax 970/667-2527 f. June 24,2009 DAVE SHIRK, PLANNER II COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT TOWN OF ESTES PARK PO BOX 1200 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 Re: Preliminary Condominium Map and Final Condominium Map - Stone Bridge Estates Condominiums Dear Mr. Shirk: I have the following comments: 1. The Preliminary Condominium Map and the Final Condominium Map indicate that the owner of Lot 3 of Stone Bridge Estate Subdivision is Paul H. Van Horn Trust. The Town and Rock Castle Development Company, Inc. entered into a Development Agreement for improvements to Fish Creek and Stone Bridge Condominiums. Said Development Agreement states that Lot 3 Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision was owned by Rock Castle Development Company, Inc. I have been provided a copy of the proposed Stone Bridge South on Fish Creek Condonâ‚¬niums Community Declaration. Said Declaration states that Declarant, Stone Bridge Estates, LLC is the owner of the property. The Final Condominium Map needs to be executed by the owner of the property. 2. The Preliminary Condominium Map Note No. 1 states that "the area of the 30 foot creek setback is dedicated as open space to meet Town standards..." This Note should be changed to reflect that the 30 foot creek setback is reserved as open space. The Final Plat also contains a statement that the "area within 30 feet of the high water line of Fish Creek was dedicated as open space on the Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision Plat". The Note on the Final Plat also needs to be changed to reflect reservation of the 30 foot wide open space area. There was no dedication of the open space on the Subdivision Plat. 3. The Dedication Statement on the Final Condominium Map shall include, prior to recording, the recording information of the Condominium Declaration. 4. Article IV of the Condominium Declaration reserves a total number of 14 units in the Condominium Interest Community. The real property subject to the Declaration is Lot 3 Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision. I assume for purposes of in.y review that the reservation of 14Â· units on Lot 3 is consistent with the approved Development Plan. 5. The Final Condonlinium Map needs to indicate that all portions of Lot 3 which are not a part of Phase 1 are General Common Elements. Not designating the remaining portion of Lot 3 not in Phase 1 as a general common element would subdivide Lot 3 into three separate parcels. 6. Declaration. Article 8 - Restriction on Use, Alienation Occupancy. The Staff needs to ensure that the restrictions on the property in Article 8 of the Declaration are consistent with any condition of approval of the Development Plan for the property. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. /Vdrv Truk Yours, f \/2. Â»14 - Greory A. White GAW/ldr CC: Van Horn Engineering, Amy Plummer Fax: 970/586-8101 ESTES EMIÂ® PARK . . 10/ ....... 1.4 - /141- f COLORADO M.U.-box 1200, Estes Park, UU 8051 / Memo To: Dave Shirk, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zum From: Tracy Feagans Date: June 26,2009 Re: Stone Bridge Estates Condominiums Lot 3, Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision 1175 & 1177 Fish Creek Road Background: The Public Works and Utilities Departments have enclosed progress comments regarding the submittals received to date and remain general as the submittals are not complete and construction drawings for the public improvements have not been submitted. It is important to note that these Departments reserve the right to make additional comments and revise comments as more detail is provided in the subsequent submittals and development plans. Engineering: Public Works Department has no comments except for the applicant must be in full compliance with Larimer County requirements and agreements. Light & Power: We have no comments or concerns with the understanding that all past applicable comments remain intact. Water: After review of the Preliminary Condominium Map and the Final Condominium Map the Water Department has no comments. â€¢ Page 1 /4*ESÂ« /4Ff. â‚¬ UPPER / 4 /7<~0,+Dismic@ ,-p~~0+M~" P.O. Box 568 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 ~ (970)-586-4544 1 11 Ill (970) 586-1049 Fax --40 June 19, 2009 Dave Shirk, Planner II Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Stone Bridge Estates Condominiums Lot 3, Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision 1175 & 1177 Fish Creek Road Dear Dave, The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above referenced property: 1. The District has no objection on the Preliminary Condominium Map or the Final Condominium Map. you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you, 5471 Todd Krula Lines Superintendent Upper Thompson Sanitation District ec: Van Horn Engineering, Amy Plummer 1043 Fish Creek Road Estes Park, CO 80517 FAX: 970-586-8101 Email: amyvhe@airbits.coin .i'. .' STA*TEMENT OF INTENT - STONE:BRIDGE ESTATES, CONDOMINIUM MAP; PHASE L PREIMINARY AND FINAL MAPS ~ gil ~. r s This Phase I submittal:of Stone Bridge Estates;Condominiums consists of 2 residential. units (1175 and 1177) on Lot 3, Stone Bridge Estates Subdivision. A total of 14 tlitits<Are proposed to be constructed and mapped as condominiums on Lot 3. All utility main lines N . have been installed td sdAB Lot 3<per requirements of the subdivisidn andilevelÂ®ment plan review process. The condomit*Win ihab is congisteni With the apprd<ied;116*elopmeiit + plan. ' :2 f'.1. :1. t. 11"E '11 ...7 t. P..rmilh...,.T'~i , .2 . 4;,1- r N :k~$ ...4'. 6 . 'll Per The Estes Valley Development Code, Section 3.2.B. 1, "Staff shall hlv#ihe discretion to sli* 16â‚¬Mittal-time'fr 6'66.-(8}1134?~I#ljÂ·It,Â¢4*>098â‚¬Â«HM}Â§# this (~ submittal to fit within the 2009 Estes Valley PlaAning Commission;Application & Review Schedule as follows: Submittal deadline- 27 2009, Planning Commission + 2 :M*tlng j2*4312 Ju12,299?,filhf t!6442~~~defiw{~~~}ADÂ®f Â¥ieiai2 Â§tdArAÂ£Al~k i i , I Vt 0. '. 1 â‚¬ â€žÂ¥r~ .6:6 04'; Spy' - 1,+6Â¢â€¢ *stpteswSAdivisioq',#, refep.tly~gone)HroughÂ®~:i*Â§.li,4.teâ‚¬~w:pt,PE@s>nd ?11 :ptilit~,1:f; i ni m~.1 v1~es to, (Lot:3.44,9 ins,6.ged,;Â·mjnbr:iliV~Nf ls:4#*ledit4482-4*9 the:pr@P?tRaryirry , ' r. cpkidonlirlilitq,jInap YViliptl.Jllstifips -a:Shbrtqqefi schpdule:~ r.1 ..:j, 911' p,t - Â·iN?I * 40 tril;.j, 1 1Â© +'~'~";~7 2 Â·: 2 .62-tn *113 ..0, iTD:1~ 'g 2*Â· ~':~1 .175' jÂ¢,ec 04'Â·Â·Â·4#74 5 1(-:311*11:~D "~ 414, 2Â·.46 ,9wirc .,f , - Utility:and road construction draiwings,.ISO. calculations,#the drainage reports wetlands h 4Â·,ereport, and,other such documents required for condominiummapsand subdivisions were all submittedand reviewed as part,of the,Stone,Bridge Estates.Subdivision tand; a Â·- , e Development Plan review process and will not be resubmitted now. 23,3 :' 129.41. U i,Itifflf W , i.te. i , :.1.: .k, 10.24 f,7., .t v.:Â·'-i,r-' t .. 4't iÂ·/ ,Â·ef.3.20 f: a.~ [EE*SUMIS , .1 4 ' 7 #49 2 6 WA.JFI~ 10 UL- IIi ti[ MAY 2 7~09 l ESTES VALLEY <33 7=7=VanorMEJ Â£ bEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION , "; 4 ~Submittal Date: U* 027 , -2.0 9 ~ ~ Nfill 37 3019 ~1-1' f ' F Development Plan F Boundary Line Adjustment Cond&minium Man-- D---1. -.- r Special Review F ROW or Easement Vacation 1~0'Preliminary Map D-14 f- Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change tV Final Map i ~~% LF- r Preliminary Subdivision Plat r Time Extension r Supplemental Map , 7 r Final Subdivision Plat 1- Other: Please specify 1 ' r- Minor Subdivision Plat 4 F Amended Plat ' .6 Getieral:InfdrmationÂ«,42Â·. 44-Â·Â»2 ..4 . - f :. I .. 4 ,, 6 'â€¢4Â· â€¢' 3/â„¢ 8 -<:2 L E Project Name C-Jâ€¢ miniumt &+ong- BridÂ¥- Edâ‚¬113 : Project Description Con JonÂ·tin / Lk-c 2 0<03 (1115 1 Ill-4 A 19 prâ€¢râ€¢W ' Project Address 1115 0-4 '~1~77 ls-,sh C.r.Â£21<. teoqcl , 1~ -T>a-r 19:~ ' Legal Description 6+ 3 , 39-on. ar,-~ Etrl-.hA 'Su,62>v,160,0 parcel ID # .258// 41100 5 Section Township Range dit@ Infdrmhtiori Â· 0 5.4, 1 4 4 1 / 0 + '. I - Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres 2.-11 Existing Land Use portia,(ly AVR.loe-4 r.,&406ia-1 ~Plulti Fab#W Proposed Land Use HAL Iti Fl.nO ly ' Existing Water Service 121-own r Well r J<lone E Other (specify) Proposed Water Service Pt-own r Well F None F Other (specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD 1'0 UTSD r Septic F- None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD Fl UTSD r septic Is a sewer lift stati,required? F Yes 10'No Existing Gas Service 1/ Xcel F Other F None Existing Zoning RM Proposed Zoning RM Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? 10 Yes F No Phâ€¢. I Bu; 1.linys a.re- tohelru,rlk.~ Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? (|P~ Yes F No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person 49 pluinml,r i V OA 14ori, Er#A urim f Complete Mailing Address /643 Fi/4 0-44*4 â‚¬J 6-125 Ark. go EDÂ¥+7 Attachments IP' Application fee 0"02â‚¬5 10 Statement of intent F~ 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan I'Vil "X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan 12"Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report, wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information. Town of Estes Park + P,O. Box 1200 4 170 MacGregor Avenue .5 Estes Park, CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 4 Fax: (970) 586-0249 4 www,estesnet,com/ComDev ' (3 f ---" ~, Primary Contact Person is F Owner r Applicant 1'~--Consultant/Engineer + 1 ~[- Record Owner(s) SÂ·,2Â»./EbS& 049 LLC Who.Â«.. s. jLn Wor,~ -rit Mailing Address 47 3 0 6, Co/)Mt Sdit, zo G fo.SDK 464â€¢ Ef'Fs R.Lk. - Ft. Collins O Ce> %062-6 ' ft Phone 970 - 222'- <9 g3 970 - 524- 590 0 Cell Phone 970 - 9/0 -7998' bc;- Fax 970 -223-54/73 Email rockeg st/.64.02./opâ€¢,u.Ct<P Zlne.;/, 60,6,_ -3.9 - Applicant ,1 ock, 6'45-04 DR,2/p mz,7-1- 28. 61#t, 206 Pr. E.li:t' CD Mailing Address 4710 45.4Â·rk C.}lcOe- ~ . t Phone 970- 123- 5 983 Cell phone 3204 64# son : 970- 3/0- 7998 Fax 970 -24 3- 5973 Ema\\ r,C,keqÂ¥/-/e.42.Vejo,P rna,5-498--; j. 60Â»L ConsuMba,,n~An~g r~~s ~t':~t~~'~29 j~ hj~ft:~'2~37 jl,Jjxrvky; p~ (/lnl~ ,~une,N#~ Phone 970 - 586-9388 x /2 Cell Phone Fax 970 - 526 - 1/0/ Email amÂ¢ 1/4(E air 6,6, Co/10 APPLICATION FEES For development 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/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. I hereby certify that the provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: 5*Air/#r LLC. Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: 8~4 40Â·46.n 1 1/,4 Ad, ythlha,n 4. i,6 1JDYL- Applicant PLEASE PRINT: ' 2 Signatures: Record Owner ate ~lc 10 i 1@419Â»~/di Applicant V AA 4\Â»~~-~~ Date -W/-2. C." 7 4 i' < APPLICANT CERTAFICAMON< * 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/Com Dev/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. 4 I understand that this proposal 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 determ ined to be complete. â€¢ I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to my property during the review of this application. I acknowledge that I have received the Estes Valley Development Review Application Schedule and that failure to meet I the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application becoming NULL and VOID. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. Names: 6-*,u-6,-Â·,-~r- LLC Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: 5204 Naâ€¢,4.n tu- A*1 . UJ,~1",4 4$. ~*C~Ork, Applicant PLEASE PRINT: ti Signatures: Â« 3/}~ 1/79 1/ Record Owner y,C~;~J\ ku,0 Date Applicant 14Â»Â»6Â»-- Date 5-1 265 9 Revised 06/26/07 '07.,Afia-i~/075#151.11/~.,l.F-4,6. LO 31*Ef 60 0 8 O 00 0 (D 25020 00 00 LD ~ 82 gOOEX <000 Ho-Y (, co'-20 0 CL @ cd- co EL E @$@%im8em 2: '05 6 2 al -86 -5 CD LU __1 0_ R W 0 CO 5E c&â€žÂ£% ~CDOON C.0-1 -to CO 0>92-&9?Etit:Er 2> x * 0 M -2 K U -a .52 FLO -9_~â€ž< ILL (0 0--ILL N w UJ U] OLD Â¤) LO ~ CO M O 08009888220818 CD N 0- 0- C\1 4- J CD C) O. 10 - 6- . -92 -5 a) m R 0 t 0- I â‚¬ 8 Â·r- 0 3 >. & 1 LL H C> 0 8 3 f g I 2 OU)~O.Â·XOLL-~~M ~d E &~Ruby S Held 6262-8805 thleen Cannon Henry Brevoort, IV -2814 ounty Rd 20 Loveland O 80537 Joseph J Szoke Creed Rd Estes Park, O 80517 Owner 11 Address City, State, Zip Susan L Faulkner Catherine Boedenauer 12 ~0 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LLLP ounty Rd 66 th Ave I esel.Id 'ideIN wn!u!luopuoo leu!=I pue XJBU!u]!leid sejets3 efippe euois Trust chbent&~0a J'Zrhard Pedersen James D & Jean Austin 6 PRELIMINARY MAP OF STONE BRIDGE ESTATES CONDOMINIUMS PHASE I LOCATED ON LOT 3, STONE BRIDGE ESTATES SUBDIVISION A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31 AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 72 WEST, TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO SCALE: 1" = 40' SHEET 1 OF 1 0 40 80 120 31, BASIS OF BEARINGS STAMPED: NOO'32'00"W 'W 2677.84') 1 CORNER SECTION 32 <RE ZONING) (Â«39 - Lu FOUND #4 R BAR f/ BY GRADER LADE poot U,QUO - 7----- -- A ... K--- ...~.. /9----- \ -- - ~ ~~ Â·-- __22---STABILIZED-DONSTRUCTION 7.7.-1.-un_-: -- - *Ii ~W- I - .-- - I j -9 '-*.--- .%-I -I b-- '%' - *. -_0- M - t< .- ENTRANCE -- ~ ~ r Â»/ H 4 POWER POLE TO ----- - 3' TAPEAs */ 3'- -- -- - - - - POWER POLE TO BE . 3 1 SINGLE* ~ 4- --- BE REMOVED .IN PHASE Iii < CURB OPENING 7549.48' 60' RIGHT-OF-WAY REMOVED\ OVERHEAD-.. 61 ./07 - 8' WIDE (Pi-'ISH C~REEK ROAD ~ " ~ ' TO REMAIN Â·-c. ~p ~ . ... / ELECTRIC LINE *0 (SEE ELECtRIC PLAN- - - ---__ _ GENERAL NOTE ,114) Â· - .... .. . - -~ ~ - CONCRETE PAN - . r .. -I I / , ..A - POWER POLE T ~BE SIGH 1 DIST*Ner-~-EMO' ~ SIGHT DISTANCE - 1150'+ I . \ r. . Â®r 1 +-Â· Â· Â·Â· -- r - e 16*'ER /0.2 iv.uL â€žL:Â·:141-U --- e - POÂ¥(ER POLE TO~BErREMOVED) ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~~ 1.1* CD - rl REI.le/ED J 4 -- - -, - ./ 4. 0 J u J /J J EP-4 EP-4 *â€žz~ EP-4 1 - EP-4 . EP-4 4,--EP--4 - -4-- EP--4 ~- - - - .-1 -4-- . _241_=_~ EF-4rfp-~ - EP-6 -1*i-hER-6 --EF.T--EP-6 - EA.4 P-6 tl'-4 rl 6 --- ---.DF=2=a EPA Â· - -EP-6 EP.-1-.z=Â£2~ EN=4--EP-6 ---~ c -2q.GO' N16'14'00' -- . --r~7*TER TOEP WIRE.li,STAUATION ~ '' - ' J - C U 0 -, 1-~-v~Q~=~~~.~~' U \ ..7 -=-a -/&122913;=.4//r.-24 ..12-I- - . - - 8 -0'39 1 -O 00 11 , - .5----~ -- -4.-6 C -0 EG--1----T-7 c c f..Z Of LO FP-5 En I -= --EF=r== EE=f~ Â· . ZIP.. c / C E - ~ g - A M - M M - N EP-4 - EP 4 9/ -AA-M- / & Â·Â· 1 1 -- a---3- A -AL- --, - 4 - wo 71 1 M â€ž m- - IM --M-- i. - AA - M - u tyh ->O 3 - M.-. 1 re-/6/ i i - - - -T--9-FY/6 OHE ,-x176.78' ---Â·Â· 1 (' ' 7 AND 1.Â·Â· -Â·-Â·Â·Â·Â· 1 IE - t.- . 70' . r-1 " re 1 26.ZA'Ak> --Â·Â« I TYPE- 'C' INLE 9.05' r-9.08' ' *i-~'r:int-9.00, ---7 - -7 Ju 9 U L- 7.54 DEA f 114:Efla1 ---Ii.-Ii.,I.-=-=I.*.,I- - - _:_ __ --, * ,- __-___ 911?~2 - -- --7-+ .~=7---- / 1 V UTilq 8 2.\ - Â·Â· AL .54\ Â« \ L* 1 7 -- -- -0, ASEMEW _1 --1 -_________A__4_____ 1 - . _ 6 - ~~1~ 5- 7 -7 -r- 3/401~:21: EEVi-75*6. l~~~9~1Epii51------ .pzz-ZI~.-2- - ii)-7 -R-4.7.--- z 1 W w, 1 1 Â£ ELECIRIC 7 -1 / At -4 *0 1/Â» / / ~~VELMANÂ¥ AERIAL- IU '~S - b - Â·130'57' S.15'38'40;'W -111- -T- --5- 5'38'40"W 64.Ub PROPOSEp'96 C . 00 W 103 >tfit *4 1 / ' - pÂ£.1~_~~Crt- \ 0 P P.i A rr E I / NECTID CONDUIT I ER 4 Zi 4 -- .29"E it 10' UTILITY AND - 1(No CH,1~ TO CTRIC k# ~ 60.00' \ . 5-041- - J.7542: ,)3 0 15590* - 4 7--Â·-Â«2â‚¬424- Â·. ' 1,88.13'EN[wSECTIONS Â· - 1 7 -.1 '. ) (i#i-~EV: 7546.0 1 Â»:r * 18" ADS PIPE W/ FLARED - \1 - 1. 6 DRAINAGE EA*EMEN *- 9%~ ~I =19[L r -K- LL ' BUILDINw L* < /66\ 1 * sopm OF PEE) / 1\ - 1 1 I GCE - - \ 190 -4'al-Ld N167(10&4&*-u_\_r -It 403.32' / ar 0 ) I \. il/z~ I .:---- - 495 1/1 - Â« / \ \. 17' z* Ij / e ..1 >544 ) --- 1 +Il- -- - -,77 -714-1 / / \ 1 - \4 17 veâ‚¬ r \ -~1 N, 1.9 DRAINAG 1%11 - ..18 -4 1- ' 4 t. 1 til- 1 _f~*0- -_ *1\- / 4 516.08' Ger 1 1 \1 044 ''' i 15 - ral 1 Â· CAH'.t.1 / ..19 ---- .---- -D - ,â€ž39, . p J . 1-It] .94 1 , f \ 0"10- \ 1 - W 4,0 - - L. 1 v ..4 - .I - V C *Vt 4 / I + A . M /4 4124 > EASEKENT ' 2 LOT th:* 405<D~ /Y + 4 051 \ 3/ /.- - 1,1 /23'--_ - .m. Â·<- i W~--4--10' UlTUT< 3 MENT . T.L... ,, ----- 2.7 Q-acres KiL ( 15' WIDE SANITARY 11 1 1 '26 049 - _~---41--D'-UT+Lly EASEMEN --zo722 ._ 4 - 9' DRAINAGE EA MENT, 0 't.. SEWER EASEMENT oIL -- 140 -2 /.Sk- . RECORDED 1/12 \ 11 /1 -74:14 UNIT 1175 ~ UNIT 1177 -1- 6\396 RECORDED 5/22/2009 ~ .Â· . .oil.~ PARCEL #20090001755 1 9' DRA NAGE Â£\SEMEN-[96 ~ PARCEL #20090033206 , 02' FlÂ§H CREEK 5.*.FISH CREEK 3.00 SE Â¥-1- {0 11 /O.2.2 oRÂ» SE - - MSete~t:<~,-<LiA4 -\ 1 1~ le OA' #*090001755 1 LARIMER COUNTY RECORDS ~ fROAD Â» ROAD n. ' UPPER --- \16 UPPER \> \ wt).eÂ·em---8,YFEMALA/N- ..1 \\- 1 7340.- O - \ DRAINAGE EASEMENT ' =7553 "' 44 , /.f 7.-17.m5 \ . '.46 FFE=7553.5 ~'-A' 9 1** A.JÂ·Â·bCÂ«-91 -2-------04Â·>Â« 3 -, t - '%< 104Â§89 \2MDOW 1 * U : -4. (A 543.0 ' 4 1 S16'27'12"W 5,114.1.. . -.-.7 I'Â·ei\ 7 &/eyâ‚¬ br 1755'51Â¢Â·--1T~566'1~94 1 f. Gr\?i\ (0 PARCEL #20090001755 1542' 1165, I - LOWER ' A a \ \\ \\ 4/' 6 \4 4 '>4, -' FUTURE UNITS 1157 AND 1167 -~44 7538 - , .- 01 G - p 5.09 '27'12 4'1'447-fitÂ»-1-0 \ I 40'. g 1 IT ~ -- ilf, 238 SF $5 538.5 â‚¬ Â»- 1-1 - * Â£29 k 00 -. 0- 1-1 -- 4*# m 00 Â¥- Q: C) ,--1 /1/ 11.---1-- N -*- k L -- 0 0/ Z, \ V-4 -h - 1 3- i F TW 1 zb# >T 1 (3}.g 1 \ 0 Â»-7 -- ' ' 117,810 s.f. 04 . 9. f -5. 4 / t44 3,4 . ' ~ 11:CE[ c.4 .%.. , / / - 4 % -f--1 . >4. ./ h . - -T=- -=22 -b $- &2 1% 5.4 /g 11 f / 0 . 2 ** ./ 4 I _ a TL-Â·--/MQJ--Â·Ck- \ \ 4 41 \ \ / h \ ./ q 092 \ \ - 1 / 7 RIMER COUNTY RECORDS w ../. / | PARCEL 0 1. 7 $ 1 \ \ PNP / ~ 2 ~ 055/1 it .~. - 0 1Â· 1 11-- Y / El - 02 ./ Â»*1Â« EDI LOOD - CL % , A. \ en .,41. ./ Al\t\Ni \\ 1 - 1 6 9' FFE LOWER 21 4 \\\\ \\. (esÂ¥ ~ 4/, A Nel NT <s.)-er------~~ \ \v/ ---4 * . G / j \ \\#111.1 / \ \ / r- /.1 -7-6-/73, 1 > FFE=~7543 1*n \\)3.- , //75~400;. C>03 5*0 0+ \\ // 11 /> \62== ./4 - - Di FEE=~ LCE .~ 2 ux/ BILL VAN HORÂ·4, TRUSTEE OF 4 G , 9 47 4 (CO-ZONING 4, P-6 \1 CP N ---Â·â€¢2\ \ \.1 1 , OWNER: to X--1.- P 1 - w L----- 1 4 0 ; CENTER FIll 6*E<& \ La ~. ~ < -RKF- .14 - I / 16 "W- . \ 4 - 61 1 ' 1 h \1 .03 4 4 1 f \61\ f i /11 1 \ 30' CREEK 9 ...1. P.O. 80X 456 Ak (SFB AE ~~~~C~1~~4~ 110 fi 41521127,5252 T6 LO- B RY ESTES PARK, CO 80517 ~ . ALTER 1/ / 6-47â‚¬â€¢ 2 Z\ L ~ FA~1@e- ~~- -~ -SF I .01 41 4 . ,*oust 1. Â» 0 ~5Â« ~ , \ ~It 11 4/1 Pys) - a , BOX 9> CONAEr \1 U - 142Â© \046% h PAUL H. VAN HORN TRUST C-'1 ASETBACK â€ž ' GCE * .- I M An 452 , 31 0 \ "0\ / sÂ«Â»35, 5 \ Â·- EASEMENT tk STONE BRIDGE LLC 4730 SOUTH COLLEGE, SUITE 205 , Â»Â·. ~3 8 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 Mn . -- 4 3 441Â« PA ;73% 00.- ' ~y..00-0-- -Nufk.7~\ 1#%P .,~sd/f -idee,1. 0 \ 0 /// ./ . 4 -3(31-Oj/-Â»42-1 10' UTILITY 970-223-5483 m ,~ , , -\ 7491#,AE '4\RIP~ APPLICANT: <03 ,%3B~a~.~>29* ./ ~Â«/15~eltfrf3%=C\(45.98,),14 \\ //46/ 4 .... 2/IN\\\\ + ROCK CASTLE DEVELOPMENT CO. L 4730 SOUTH COLLEGE, SUITE 205 20_ - FORT COLUNS CO 80525 } , 4 970-223-5423 219 SF (N02'36'49" - . 1 - 00' E N78'17'05"W O~ SF - - , D-- ' (3â‚¬ FROM mwmER UNE LOUND #4 REBAR : 294)* 00.02') 0 .. , 4@94 9 4 0 0 8 9/25: f Ex VV/De < OF FISH CREEK) , , (14.95') 69 U G (~ ZONIN~ 1 13% . / 0 4, f * 4/ 1 .,.Arn ZEÂ© \Â·z-~--TI , - , 6 // /- -.---'-%1' / f f \\ / --- 4 -- UL-LI BRODIE AV 2 4 3 rk 1;\1 , ~ . -- OF- 7.0- 00 ON 4 a: 0 34<, f. M . ~518*36'3647 82.33\k N. .19*34 1 _jfÂ«_-3-K- ./ / 10 1:.Dill - j i. cn-Â»,t-Â·Â·-777-- - r. Â« .-b --- 4 4 le- 1 -- r JL-J\- Pn k /0 // /// SILT FENCE TO BE LIMITS OF , %-/)---- <' ...,$04-1 -- ' ~. / T5N R72W lf--D- DISTURBANCE .. 4 ,~, ~~ka-;<~D H--4.--. ./ *\ 1 (EXCEPT IN LOCATION WHERE CREEK % 41: LA ..- --.........,S&k-- 7535- IK i rdf~43~c-' 4 / ------ At' 2.13 r= --/1/1 0 0 84 4 L_J i -4 SEC 30 SEC 2 #/\J % -*-*+ h' PEDESTRIAN . â„¢~Â·<\ Ill-LlÂ· m.- U Er 2 00 STABILIZATION IS TO TAKE PLACE) BRIDGE - I-:k'-/ 111> (CO ZONING~ *,oV J -3*p--1 - - ; i.-11./-21 1 SEC 31 SEC 3 ~ ~[-- . 11 ., 11 J 1- j r 4 m 45 923 331-Â· mia- 1 4, Ot ly LANE_ ' &L 11 0 01 e fal 0 SITE # 22 tr- /Q got ./05 8 2 2 LEGEND 44 1 -FEE te 39 0 ,0 91__t-2 Sm --44NE MQIENi LOT INFORMATION: t0% t~i~-_--~ ~~_ _~ f~ AlÂ«-~x>Â«-~00Â·- 1. THE AREA OF THE 30' CREEK SETBACK IS RESERVED AS OPEN SPACE TO MEET TOWN STANDARDS OF 15% OPEN SPACE ON RM -SF - SILT FENCE LOCATION / LOD LOT 3 1 -7 >P, GU/t- t-/TE .-/.I DEVELOPMENTS. 2. THE FLOOD PLAIN AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT WAS APPROVED BY FEMA ON MARCH 28, 2008 AT CASE NO. 07-08-0941 R. S EXISTING SEWER LINE GROSS AREA- 117,810 S.F. - 2.705 ACRES (0.00) DEEDED DIMENSIONS FLOOD PLAIN AREA - 9152 S.F. = 0.21 ACRES I -4-All 72 80% REDUCTION - 7322 S.F.= 0.17 ACRES DRAWN BY: 3. THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THIS LOT IS A MEANDER LINE FOLLOWING THE CENTERLINE OF FISH CREEK. COURSES AND DISTANCES TO - W WATER MAIN 0.00 MEASURED AND/OR CALCULATED NET - 110,488 S.F. = 2.54 ACRES REPRESENT FISH CREEK ARE SHOWN HEREON FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ACREAGE SHOWN IS COMPUTED TO THE PHYSICAL CENTERLINE - w%- WATER SERVICE LINE BEARINGS & DISTANCES DENSITY - 14 UNITS PER 2.54 ACRES = 5.52 UNITS PER ACRE OF FISH CREEK AS OF SEPTEMBER 2007, O FOUND 1 " PLASTIC CAP ON A #4 REBAR, OPENSPACE - 25,077 = 21.3% CHECKED BY: - G - GAS LINE LS #26974 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED lili 1>23 5 \ hi 4. NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE 1 lil i Ill 41-L e~ h.-0 SCALE 1"=40' YEARS AF-TER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED - OHE- EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC GCE GENERALCOMMON ELEMENT MORE THAT TEN YEARS FROM THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN. -Ep - ELECTRIC PRIMARY 07/15/2009 DATE: LCE LIMITED COMMON ELEMENT NOTE: -es - ELECTRIC SERVICE CORRECTED 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION DASH-DOT LINES WITHIN A LOT DESIGNATE CONDOMINIUM SHEET PHASES ONLY. UTILITY NOTES: - PHASE I 10-I-7419 4 UTILITY POLE ALL PORTIONS OF LOT 3, STONE BRIDGE ESTATES 1. THE WATER AND SEWER MAIN LINES PROPOSED DURING THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCESS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. [g ELECTRIC PEDESTAL - Â· - PHASE BOUNDARY SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF ESTES PARK, NOT INCLUDED IN 2. THE ELECTRIC CONDUIT FOR LOT 3 HAS BEEN BURIED AND ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER HAS INSTALLED LINES TO SERVE LOT 3. m TELEPHONE PEI)ESTAL - - - EASEMENT BOUNDARY PHASE I OF THE CONDOMINIUM MAP ARE GENERAL COMMON ELEMENTS AND ARE RESERVED FOR FUTURE VICINITY MAP OF 3. FISH CREEK ROAD UPGRADE PLANS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED. Â® MANHOLE ---- OPEN SPACE BOUNDARY/ CREEK SETBACK CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT. |[REÂ©EOVE SCALE: 1" = 1000' ~L)) PROJ. NO. 2005-04-11 ., C b 18 NOISIA321 31Â¥0 3NVI N3SNHO 30100 'MBV 31S3 3NOH VISN 306 6 NOLS 103rOald VATI}VIT 0 NOIJH