The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Estes Valley Planning Commission 2009-08-18Prepared: August 7,2009 Revised: August 11, 2009 AGENDA ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, August 18, 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 - July 21, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting Correction noted at Town Board meeting July 28,2009 - The Neighborhood subdivision was created in 2005, not 1975 as listed in the June 16, 2009 minutes - 3. YMCA of the Rockies Signage Master Plan - Metes & Bounds located at 2515 Tunnel Road Owner: YMCA of the Rockies Applicant: DaVinci Sign Systems, Inc. Request: Master Plan for Signage and appeals to Sections 10.2.B and 10.5.L of the Larimer County Land Use Code (addendum to YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan) 4. STANLEY PARK GRANDSTAND SPECIAL REVIEW 09-01 - Metes & Bounds located at 1209 Manford Avenue Owner: Town of Estes Park Applicant: Thorp Associates Request: Replace existing grandstand with new 18,215 square foot grandstand facility 5. REPORTS PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS TOWN BOARD AND COUNTY COMMISSION DECISIONS The Neighborhood Preliminary Subdivision Plat Stone Bridge Estates Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps The Meadow Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps Wonderview Village Supplemental Condominium Map #2 6. 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 Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission July 21, 2009, 6:00 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Doug Klink; Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Steve Lane, Ron Norris, and Rex Poggenpohl Attending: Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Ron Norris, Steve Lane, and Rex Poggenpohl Also Attending: Director Joseph, Town Attorney White, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott, Town Board Liaison Homeier, and Recording Secretacy Thompson t f Absent: None //fr.1 +4,4 The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and pot-nedessarily the chronological sequence. AW '41 Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.4 1 j h \ 1. PUBLIC COMMENT . 4, 01. I. 16, Commissioner Hull stated as a result of last month's dgenda item on The Neighbdrhootl, she spoke with the Non-Profit Resource Center abdut 'the trdsh>issue on their#broperty Noticeable cleanup has begun, and the efforts are appfec@6df I 2. BYLAW AMENDMENT REPORT :\-N ...1.\ The bylaws are being amended such that.the study sessions Ovill~begfn approximately two hours prior to the meetings, and the mi@tinglimâ‚¬WillÂ£ set byhkadopted motion of the C. 3 2/ Commission. It was moved and sdEBRded (Norris/Frauhdorf) to API}ROVE the amendment to the bylaws changing<the studi, session alid meeting times. The motion passed unanimously. */ Ca r.; 4 1 /1 3. CONSENT AGENDA\~ 7 1-~~ Estes Va*Xlenning Cortimi&slori'Atihotes datedjune 16, 2009 : It wA<inaged. atid. seconded (Lane/Fraundorf) that the minutes be accepted as coffected, and the m~tion p~88@d unanimously. 4 X > . I ' 0"4>BAELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP - Lot 4A, Mary's Meadow Replat, north of Kiowa Driv@*tbetween Ma}y'& LakS Road and Kiowa Trail. Owner: Mary's Meadow DeVelÂ®ment; Applic*int CMS Planning & Development Planner Shitk,rbviewedihe staff report. He stated Mary's Meadow Development Plan was approvedlb~fiie Planning Commission in April, 2006, and the preliminary condominium map was approved by the Town Board in May, 2006. Preliminary plats require submittdi 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. This proposal is for a new preliminary condominium map, which will go to the Town Board following Planning Commission's recommendation. The final condominium map will go to the Town Board at the same meeting. 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 development plan approval contemplated this type of change, thus the development plan was reviewed and approved by Staff. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 2 July 21, 2009 Planner Shirk recommends conditional approval of the proposal. Public Comment: None It was moved and seconded (Norris/Tucker) to recommend APPROVAL to the Town Board for The Meadow Preliminary Condominium Map, Lot 4A, Mary's Meadow Replat, north of Kiowa Drive between Mary's Lake Road and Kiowa Trail with the following conditions. CONDITION: Compliance with Development Plan 06-01 "Mary's Meadow" The motion passed unanimously. 5. AMENDED PLAT - LOT 10, NORTH END RANCHES & TRACT#2 OF DIVISION OF LOT 20, 2112 McGraw Ranch Road. Owner/Applicant: Soniia' K. Binns; Request: Amended Plat /1 1 r \\ Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report, and stated this~is'aÂ¥equest to adjust the interior property line between two lots of record. The parcels arÂ¢Ened RE-1 Rur;tl Eitate, which has a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The owner/applicant'*ishes 7 absorb the lowei>143 meadow area of the northern lot into the southern lot prior,tolhe sale of the northern lot.,This !% line adjustment will not create any non-conformin6.s@tbacks odlot sizes and will:,not:,affect density. The properties are under a conservation eAs0ept admihistered by the Este& Valley Land Trust, who has been notified of this proposal.,The>Orrent plat shows 11 building envelope, which is going to be removed prior to presentmerit to the County Commissioners next month. 1 1 \\ A This is a Planning Commission recomqtpnd~ion* the BoardÂ»of County Commissioners. Staff recommends approval. , 1 â€ž\\ 944 4 . N ir Public and Commissioner Comment: 1 3/.t-\47 Commissioner Norris.câ‚¬mrrAded the engineeting firm for the ciarity of the drawings. He also appreciated the lette71of sapprhrom the neigti<~hood assbciation. - LK It was moved ahd seconded f(Lane/Hull) to ~ecommend APPROVAL to the County Commissioners of the'Amen;dbd Plat of Lot 16/North End Ranches and Tract 2 of the Division of-Lot 20 locht;a-Â·at- 21i'2*McG#aw Ranch Road. The motion passed un*066sly:~~~ \.C\\ ----- 6/ PRELIMINARY\CONDOMINIUNLMAP - LOT 3, STONE BRIDGE ESTATES 406..~CONDOMINIUMS>O~ner: Sfon,013ridge, LLC; Applicant: Rock Castle Development Umparly; requestlo~condorAiniumize 14 units previously approved with the Stone B}idde Estates Develobment*Man. \\ 1/ Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. He stated the Stone Bridge Estates Development Plan was 4pro*ed by/#fanning Commission in August, 2007. Planner Shirk noted Stone Bridge EstateO[#belb#ment Plan includes two lots, and this proposal would provide for airspace ownership dr the southern lot only. Planner Shirk stated a modification was granted by the County tovallow Stone Bridge to maintain the existing 60-foot right-of-way width, requiring the applicant to build curb and gutter to accommodate stormwater flow. All utilities are in place and road improvements will continue this summer. This proposal complies with the applicable standards of the EVDC. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by staff and reviewing agencies relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. The proposal today is a recommendation for approval to the Town Board. Public and Commissioner Comment: Amy Plummer/Van Horn Engineering asked for clarification on condition #3. Planner Shirk understands she is working with the county to get the construction plans approved. Closed public comment RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 July 21, 2009 It was moved and seconded (Fraundo,VHull) to recommend APPROVAL to the Town Board of the Preliminary Condominium Map for Stone Bridge Estates Condominiums with the following conditions: CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with Development Plan 07-09 "Stone Bridge Estates;" 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. The motion passed unanimously. 7. STAFF LEVEL REVIEWS 205 Park Lane - Planner Shirk notified the Commissioners of a pre-application meeting for an amended plat at this address. ./ .0,-...'.,4*. / / *42 Lemke Small Group Living Facility Development Plan4409-04, Lot 1, Pine View Subdivision - Planner Chilcott reported on the approval optpd~Lemke Small Group Living Facility Development Plan 09-04.located at 857 Moraine Avehue\She stated this development plan met the criteria to be approved at staff *le741*he applicarit,desires to build a two-story, 3,436-square-foot small group living facilitÂ¢for the Olderly on 014*03-Commercial Outlying zoned lot. The proposal includes a facilityfid house up to eight eldarifindividuals, excluding resident and non-resident caregivers, a16ng with plarp to provide sledbil#quarters on the second story in the future for an on-site4carediver. Ther@.were several commefits by reviewing agencies, and none from adjacent properip, o*nersÂ¢Fhkapplicant will bdtusing as much of the existing building as possible. Planner Chilcot{Med there are some sewer issues involving the Public Works Department and has allowed the Applicants 60 days to satisfy the conditions of approval rather than tl+stan-dard 30 days to''allow time for the conditions of approval to be resolved. The complet6%staff?teport listing conditi*ts.of approval can be view on the Town website. 3 4â‚¬h..9..r\. Safeway Fueling Station Development Plan 09-05,iltÂ»Silveilane Stables Addition - ./ 4 Planner Chilcott stated,this:was a development*lan that*met:*the criteria to be approved at staff level. The requeit is to'construct a fudlit,0 station and'car wash at the current Silver Lane Stables. Staff'tfas re2eiveh strong comrhbnt on both ends of the spectrum. The Estes Valley Board of.Adjbstment al;prdved a variance'to allow the fueling station to be built within 100 feet of a fsident <Ally zonâ‚¬dilot. The conditidriaÂ»69 approval include but are not limited to drainage, traffic, laridschplng'-9,ibl lighting. The>complete staff report and conditions of approval.can*be.viewed on thd Town we6*ite:--1 1 x \ ..,4. / Stanley Park Grandstands\Anner Chilcott stated this proposal should be on the agenda fdrfhe August Planhingcommi@sioh meeting. 0-h .1 4. 5% 1/ 4 1 StaffIstated the following applications were approved by Town Board: Sundance Suppler#ntal Condominium Map #7, Overlook Supplemental Condominium Map #3, and an AmendmenÂ¢to the Amendeb Condominium Map for East Riverwalk Center Condominiums. . 11 // There being no furtherftfusiness, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m. 1 ./ Doug Klink, Chair Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary ~ YMCA Signage Master Plan ~ Estes Park Community Development Department Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 ~ Estes Park, CO 80517 ~ Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: August 18, 2009 - - 1 9 REOUEST: Approval of a Signage Master Plan \EPS t as an addendum to the YMCA of the Rookies Â»ra thÂ·Â·---t r-+I LI-lq Dir- Master Plan. The application includes appeals to Sections 10.2.B and 10.5.L of the Larimer County Land Use Code. :654.. ...1. . USFS N/KId ..1 LOCATION: 2515 Tunnel Road LSFS FMVP 83"6-y APPLICANT: Da Vinci Sign Systems, Inc (Jay i Gerdes, 4496 Bents Drive, Windsor, CO 80550) PROPERTY OWNER: YMCA of the Rockies (Mark Holdt, 2515 Tunnel Road, Estes Park, CO 80517) STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk (dshirk@estes.org, 577-3729) SITE DATA TABLE: Consultant: Da Vinci Sign Systems, Inc Parcel Number: 3404200022 Development Area: 898 acres (+/-) Number of Lots: One Existing Land Use: Accommodations/Conference Center Proposed Land Use: Same Existing Zoning: "A" Accommodations Adjacent Zoning- East: "RE" Rural Estate, "E-1" Estate, "A" North: "O" Open (Larimer County Accommodations zoning) West: : "O" Open (Larimer County South: "E-1" Estate, "A- 1 " zoning) Accommodations Adjacent Land Uses- East: Single-family residential North: Rocky Mountain National Park West: Rocky Mountain National Park South: Single-family residential Services- ~ Water: YMCA treatment plant (licensed by Sewer: UTSD the State of Colorado) Fire Protection: Estes Park Volunteer PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: Background. The YMCA is a 900-acre conference center established in 1907, providing services to approximately 250,000 visitors a year. Services include conference facilities, lodging, horse riding, hiking, arts/crafts, and day camps. In March 2007, the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners approved the YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan, intended to outline the development of the YMCA campus. The Master Plan included a section on signage (page 35). This request is intended as a "signage plan" addendum to the current YMCA Master Plan, which is available for viewing at this address: http://www.estesnet.com/comdev/Applications/08-09/YMCAMasterPlanforweb.pdf Request. The request before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners is for approval of appeals to Section 10.2.B and 10.5.L of the Larimer County Land Use Code, as well as to incorporate this sign plan as an addendum of the YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan. This plan also satisfies the requirement set forth in Section 10.18 "Sign Plans." 1. Section 10.2.B states "signs may not be placed on or over public roads or rights- of-way, or in road or access easements, except for utility warning signs." The existing YMCA entrance sign is located within public right-of-way, and the owner desires to replace this sign with a new one in the same location. The owner requests this location in order to maximize visibility and to avoid constrictions associated with the bridge and pond. Larimer County Engineering and Planning are both supportive of this request. During the 2007 review of the Master Plan, one of the comments expressed by residents along the Spur 66 corridor is that lighting for the existing entry sign is excessive. Because of that concern, a condition of approval was "the overall lighting plan mentioned on page 35 should be developed within the first year of approval. Entry lighting should be addressed first." The applicant proposes to use internal illumination in order to minimize "light spillage." 2. Section 10.5 outlines a series of signs that are not subject to sign permits, including sub-section L, which states "on-site traffic directional signs. Signs may not exceed four square feet per face or ten feet in height." The applicant is Page #2 - YMCA Signage Master Plan and appeals requesting an appeal this section to allow fewer larger signs rather than more signs that are smaller. Larimer County planning supports this request. This appeal would not preclude the need for a building permit. 3. Sign Plan: Section 10.18 of the LCLUC requires that "a sign plan shall be prepared for all permanent signs in nonresidential districts that require a sign permit under this section". The applicant has submitted this signage master plan in order to satisfy this requirement, and as support for the waiver of future sign permits. Comprehensive Plan. Chapter six of the Estes Valley Plan includes specific planning sub-areas, including "Spur 66." This sub-area plan includes special considerations, including "the YMCA should release a master plan illustrating future development." This Master Plan process was completed in 2007, and included specific discussion of signage. YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan. The Master Plan includes the following signage concepts: â€¢ A planned system of signs developed as part of future Site and Architectural Design Guidelines. All signage should be of a themed image with a consistent style, color and material, coordinating with other site materials. â€¢ Wayfinding Signage. A coordinated sign system that provides wayfinding to both vehicles and pedestrians. The signs could consist of directional road side and pedestrian area signs, informational kiosks with site maps, and facility name signage. â€¢ Regulatory Signage. Vehicle regulatory signage that is coordinated with the site sign system. â€¢ Informational Signage. A coordinated system of signs and informational signs throughout the site. â€¢ Interpretive Signage. A coordinated set of interpretive panels educating the visitor on the site's historic and natural resources, and environmental conservation. â€¢ Major wayfinding signs, visible from streets, should be illuminated for night use. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. Larimer County Building Department. The signs are large enough to require a foundation. Therefore, a building permit is required. Page #3 - YMCA Signage Master Plan and appeals Larimer County Engineering has noted they can support this request, provided the property owner signs a standard agreement. Larimer County Planning supports this signage master plan. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, Staff finds: 1. The signage plan and appeals are consistent with the policies, goals and objectives of the Estes Valley Plan and YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan. 2. The proposed signage master plan is an addendum to the YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan. 3. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed. 4. This is a recommendation to the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed "YMCA of the Rockies Master Sign Plan" CONDITIONAL TO: 1. No sign permits shall be required for regulatory signage, informational signage, or interpretive signage, though plans shall be submitted to Estes Park Community Development to ensure consistency with the approved master plan and compliance with sight visibility requirements set forth in Appendix D.IV of the Estes Valley Development Code. 2. Approval of this plan does not affect any requirements for building permits. 3. All signage shall be of a themed image with a consistent style, color and material, coordinating with other site materials. 4. Surveyor shall verify nearest edge of entry sign is at least 40-feet from centerline of "Tunnel Road". 5. Compliance with memo from Larimer County Engineering dated July 21, 2009. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move APPROVAL of "YMCA Signage Master Plan" and appeals to Larimer County Land Use Code section 10.2.B and 10.5.L with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. Page #4 - YMCA Signage Master Plan and appeals 0 OR Dave Shirk rom: Russell Legg [rlegg@larimer.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 2:59 PM To: Dave Shirk; Traci Shambo; Toby Stauffer Subject: YMCA-Sign plan and appeals Dave; Staff would like to offer the following as clarification on the above application. 1. The YMCA is submitting the sign plan that County Planning Staff reviewed and we support approving the sign plan as an element of the YMCA Master Plan. 2. The Sign plan above also meets the specifications of a "sign plan" as defined in Sectoin 10.13 D of the Larimer County Code for Signs which by reference is adopted in the Estes Valley Code. Staff recommends approval sign plan as presented. 3. The Staff has reviewed the Sign porposed in the County ROW shown on the Sign Plan and confirm the sign has received approval from Public Works for an encroachment permit. The Board of County Commissioners are required to hear the appeal from Section 10.2 B of the Larimer County Sign code. Staff recommends approval of the appeal to Section 10.2 B. 4. Staff has reviewed the directional signs and note they are larger than permitted by the Sign Code and do recommend approval of the appeal to the signs in the locations and size . shown on the YMCA sign plan. 5. Construction of each individual sign requiring a permit is required to confirm conformance with the approved Sign plan and appeals. The permit is refereed to County lanning staff as part of the building permit for that sign via permits plus approval ocess. We will coordinate each individual permit with your staff. ease let me know i f you have any questions. Russell N. Legg Chief of Planning Larimer County, Colorado (970) 498-7690 rlegg@Larimer.org This transmission, including any attachments, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information in this message, including any reliance thereon by you or any other third person, is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy this message in both electronic and any hard copy formats. 1 r...... L '0'.+ GREGORY A. WHITE tâ€ž' Attorney at Law North Park Place 1423 West 29th Street 970/667-5310 Inveland, Colorado 80538 Fax 970/667-2527 July 17, 2009 DAVE SHIRK, PLANNER II COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT TOWN OF ESTES PARK PO BOX 1200 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 Re: YMCA of the Rockies - Signage Master Plan Dear Mr. Shirk: I have the following comments: 1. Due to the fact that the Estes Valley Development Code does not incorporate the Larimer County Sign Code, confirmation should be obtained from Larimer County Planning with regard to the ability of the Estes Valley Planning Commission to approve the YMCA Signage Master Plan and to approve exemptions from the terms and conditions of the Larimer County Sign Code. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. k Jery~fruly Yours, 4 c_14 / Greg A. White GAW/ldr (L cc: DaVinci Sign Systems~ Inc.,Jay Gerdes Fax: 970/203-9293 L. LARIMER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ~OUNTY Post Office Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-5700 FAX (970) 498-7986 MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Shirk, Planner Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 FROM: Traci Shambo, Development Services Engineer f 5 DATE: July 21, 2009 SUBJECT: YMCA of the Rockies Core Area Development - Signage Plan Proiect Description/Background: On behalf of the YMCA of the Rookies, Da Vinci Sign Systems, is requesting an appeal to allow the new YMCA entrance sign to be place in the same location as the existing sign, which is in the right-of-way of Spurr 66, a.k.a. Tunnel Road. This is an appeal from Section 10.2.B of the Larimer County Land Use Code. They are also requesting an exemption to allow directional signs to be placed on the Campus without permits. Review Criteria: Larimer County Engineering Depanment has reviewed the applicable criteria found in the Larimer County Land Use Code (LCLUC), Larimer County Rural Area Road Standards (LCRARS), Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards (LCSDS), Estes Valley Development Code, and pertinent Intergovernmental Agreements. Comments: â€¢ Engineering Staff does not have any issues with the internal signs as long as they are setback off the roadway such that they do not obstruct sight distance at intersections and along the drives. â€¢ Engineering Staff can support the appeal request to LCLUC Section 10.2.B to allow the new and improved entry sign to remain in the approximate location of the existing sign as long as the following conditions are met: o No portion of the sign, including the foundation, actual sign, and landscaping, can be within the clear zone area, which we are defining in this case as 40 feet west of the centerline of the road. o An agreement, signed by the YMCA, must be submitted that states that the YMCA acknowledges the sign is in the ROW and that, if it impedes the County's maintenance or road improvement needs in the future, it will be removed at the county's request and at the cost of the YMCA. An example of such an agreement is attached. The applicant shall modify the agreement language to suit this specific request and then we will review the modified language prior to recordation. The agreement shall be recorded prior to submitting it to us for our records. -COMMITTEDTOEXCELLENEE 0 0 o The installation of the sign in the County right-of-way will require a Right-of-Way Construction Permit from this office. Permit information can be obtained by contacting Marc Lyons, Access & Utility Permit Coordinator, at (970) 498-5709. Recommendation: As long as the above mentioned agreement is recorded and the entry sign is located a minimum of 40 feet from the centerline of Tunnel Road, the County Engineering Department will issue a right-of-way work permit for the new entry sign. Please feel free to contact me at (970) 498-5701 or e-mail at tshambo@larimer.org if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: DaVinci Sign Systems, Inc., 4496 Bents Drive, Windsor, CO 80550 Marc Lyons, County Access & Utility Permit Coordinator reading file file AGREEMENT CONCERNING BUILDING, FENCES, AND IRRIGATION PIPES IN PLATTED RIGHT-OF-WAY OF LARIMER COUNTY ROADS 3 AND 58 This Agreement is made this day of , 20 between the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado for the use and benefit of the Larimer County Engineering Department ("County"); and Edward L. Squires and Norma J. Squires ("Developers"). WHEREAS, Developers are the owners of certain real property situated in Larimer County, Colorado, described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Property"). WHEREAS, there is an existing building (stable) located in a reserved right-of-way on Lot 2 and a fence and irrigation facilities for the Property located within the dedicated right-of- way of County Road 3 and County Road 58 adjacent to the Property. WHEREAS, the location of the existing fence and irrigation facilities within a platted, dedicated right-of-way is not permitted unless specifically authorized by law and/or agreed to by the County Engineer. WHEREAS, allowing the existing stable to be located within a reserved right-of-way, may impair the future expansion and/or improvement of County Road 3 unless conditions and restriction for its use are agreed to by the County Engineer. WHEREAS, by this Agreement, the parties wish to set forth the terms and conditions under which the County will allow the stable, fences and irrigation facilitates to remain on the Property in its current location. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above stated and of the mutual covenants and promises contain herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The stable located in the reserved right-of-way may remain in its current location until such time as the County requests the reserved right-of-way to be dedicated in order to improve, maintain or further develop the reserved right-of-way. 2. The existing fence and irrigation facilities may remain in their current location until such time as the County requests their removal in order to improve, maintain or further develop the dedicated right-of-way. 3. Upon notice by the County Engineer that the County requires dedication of the reserved right-of-way as described in Paragraph 1 above, Developers or the then current owners of the Property shall: a. Execute a Deed of Dedication conveying to the County the reserved right-of-way at no cost, and. b. Relocate the stable to an area entirely outside of the reserved right-of-way at the sole cost and expense of Developers/owners. 4. Upon notice by the County Engineer that the County requires removal of the fence and/or irrigation facilities as described in Paragraph 2 above, Developers or the then current owners of the Property shall relocate the fence an(For irrigation to an area entirely outside of the dedicated right-of-way at the sole coast and expense of Developers/owners. 5. Developers/owners shall relocate the stable, fence and/or irrigation facilities as requested by the County Engineer within 30 days of the date on which written notice is mailed to Developers/owners at their last known address. 6. In the event Developers/owners fail to relocate the stable, fences and/or irrigation facilities as directed by the County Engineer, the County may undertake to relocate, remove or demolish the stable, fences and/or irrigation facilities. The County Engineer may certify to the County Treasurer all costs and expenses incurred by the County for such relocation, removal or demolition, including reasonable attorney fees, and such costs and expenses shall become a lien against the Property collectible in the same manner and with the same priority as real property taxes. 7. The stable, and those portions of the fences and irrigation facilities located within the reserved and dedicated rights-of-way shall not be improved, enlarged, altered, replaced or otherwise modified without the express written consent of the County. 8. No new buildings, structures, or fences of any kind shall be located within the reserved or dedicated right-of-way adjacent to the Property. 9. This Agreement shall be recorded by the County in the real estate records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder and shall be a covenant which runs with the Property and shall be binding on Developers', their successors, assigns, transferees, heirs and personal representatives. Should the stable, fences or irrigation facilities remain in their current locations at the time Developers convey the Property to a subsequent owner, Developers agree to provide to such subsequent owner a copy of this Agreement at the time of conveyance. LARIMER COUNTY: Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado Chair ATTEST: Deputy Clerk to the Board r L STATE OF COLORADO) COUNTY OF LARIMER) SS The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20- by as Chair of the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado. Notary Public Witness my hand and official seal My Commission Expires: DEVELOPER(S): Edward L. Squires Norma J. Squires STATE OF COLORADO) SS COUNTY OF LARIMER) Acknowledged before me this day of , 20-by Notary Public Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: C L 7 C J LARIMER 4 PLANNING AND BUILDiNG SERVICES DIVISION ~COUNTY RO. Box 119 Planning (970) 498-7683 Building (970) 498-7700 Planning Fax (970) 498-7711 Building Fax (970) 498-7667 http://www. larimer.org/planning TO: Dave Shirk, Estes Valley Planner FROM: Toby Stauffer, Larimer County Planning Department DATE: July 13, 2009 SUBJECT: YMCA of the Rockies Signage Master Plan review Project Description/Background: This is a Signage Master Plan for YMCA of the Rockies, including an exemption to allow the new YMCA entrance sign to be placed in the same location as the existing sign in the R.O.W., and an exemption to allow directional pedestrian and building identification signs on site without permits. The project site lies within the Estes Valley Plan Area of Larimer County and will therefore need to comply with the requirements contained in the Estes Valley Development Code and the agreements of the Cooperative Planning Area. Comments: After a review of the information provided, I have a few comments to offer: 1. Section 10- Signs, of the Larimer County Land Use Code, prohibits placement of signs in rights-of-way, Sec.10.2.B, and also signs that are off-premises, Sec. 10.5.E. Allowing a new sign to be placed in the same location as the existing sign, in the ROW, would extend the non-conformity of the sign and could impair visibility, or health safety and welfare of the public. Allowing the sign in the ROW would also be allowing an off-premises sign, given that the sign is not on private property but instead in the public ROW. The purpose of the sign code is to protect the health safety and welfare of the public, provide an opportunity for safe and effective identification of uses, and avoid clutter and protect and maintain the visual appearance of properties in the county. To allow an off- premises sign may impair the purpose of the sign code and open the door for other potential off-premises signs in other parts of the county. To allow the property safe and effective identification of uses, this office could support moving the sign onto private property and allowing an appeal to height or size as necessary to allow traffic and patrons to find their way to the facility. In addition to the County Commissioners, the County Road Supervisor, Dale Miller, can also approve of the location of a sign in the ROW. He could provide additional comments about the use of the ROW and issues associated with placement of a sign in the ROW, and I would suggest sending a referral of this application to him. 2. The application also requests allowing directional, pedestrian, and building identification signs within the property to be allowed without permits. The County's permit process upholds the purpose of the sign code and also allows for the review of all large signs to ensure that they are safe and properly constructed so as not to harm any member of the public. The sign code is also applied to all non-residential uses to ensure no use has an advantage over any other. To allow signs without a t~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER WMMITTEDTO-EXCE-[CE-REE permit would skip an important step in ensuring the safety of the signs and allow the YMCA an advantage that other similar uses do not have. It is my recommendation that: a. all directional signs that are larger than four square feet per face and ten feet in height be permitted through the county's process. b. all pedestrian signs that are larger than four square feet per face and ten feet in height be permitted through the county's process. c. All building identification signs that are commercial in nature and meet the requirements for a non-residential sign under section 10.11 of the land use code be permitted through the county's process. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application. Please call me at 498-7691 or e-mail me at tstauffer@larimer.org if you have any questions. A Â«Ly/5110 Toby Stauffer CC: Russ Legg, Chief Planner, Larimer County '34 01 U.Pe s L D 4- A NA Â§ 07 Af s ysTZ #Mj Iia Dave Shirk From: Stan Griep [sgriep@larimer.org] Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 7.56 AM To: Dave Shirk; Russell Legg CC: jay@davincisign.com; Tom Garton; Toby Stauffer Subject: YMCA Signage Master Plan Hi and good day. After reviewing the information on the signage master plan for YMCA of the Rockies. I only have a couple of comments. 1. We will need two sets of "to scale" plans for the signs for all sign permits with all components of construction listed, four sets of a plot plan showing sign location are needed as well for each sign and 2. We will need information on the proposed foundation system for all signs for the sign permits. Thanks, Stan Stan V. Griep Lead/Commercial Plans Examiner Larimer County Building Department Ft. Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 voice: (970) 498-7714 email: sgriep@larimer.org The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipienti you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system. 1 r' t.. *41 411%Â¥tiNO flk,dfirritict>cagge Ack!Â£010212!13 |~&31| SIGN SYSTEMS,INC. Phone: (970) 203-9292 Fax: (970) 203-9293 4496 Bents Dr. Windsor, CO. 80550 Toll Free: 1866-DaVinci June 23,2009 To: Larimer County Board of County Commissioners From: Davinci Sign Systems Jay Gerdes 4496 Bents Drive Windsor, CO 80550 Subject: New Signage for YMCA of the Rockies and exemptions The Estes Park Center Master Plan was completed in August 2006 to help insure a clear vision of growth and development of the Center. This vision included site signage. See Attached. DaVinci Sign Systems, The YMCA, BHA Design, The Neenan Co, and RLH Engineering have designed a sign program that is consistent in style, color, and materials, and is well coordinated with the surrounding buildings and landscape. On behalf of the YMCA of the Rockies, Davinci Sign Systems is requesting the following: A) Waiver to section 10.2.B Signs may not be placed on or over public r.o.w. or in road or access easements, except for utility warning signs 1) Exemption to allow the new YMCA entrance sign to be placed in the same location as the existing sign which is in the R.O.W. B) Waiver to section 10.5.L On-site traffic directional signs. Signs may not exceed four sq. ft. per face or ten feet in height. 1) Exemption to allow directional, pedestrian and building identification signs located within the YMCA Campus on private land without sign permits. ESTES VALLEY - -iiI 2.Â© IED V E B (JEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLd- JION L) 11 1 ~ JUN 2 4 2609 1/ 1 1 0 11 jl Â·Submittal Date: ---- --F J --dli i f- Development Plan t- Boundary Line Adjustment Condominium Map ~ 1- Special Review r ROW or Easement Vacation r Preliminary Map F Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change r Final Map ~ 1- Preliminary Subdivision Plat f- Time Extension r Supplemental Map 1- Final Subdivision Plat ~t Other: Please specify * 1- Minor Subdivision Plat N' M CA Itanâ‚¬2. 940 /91 0,06*eT 'k , 0.4-- F Amended Plat ' ' General Information Project Name W M CA Af> -1-4 Rock/tes D 1 ' Project Description &04*Aw CL 7 &0Â£0/,2, 7'72,d/'A.* f> 42,4 ,=?gy--42 1 Project Address 15' 5- -T-lud U #Mf Legal Description E ex ce*ac-ke d Parcel ID #3409 1-00 - 020-Section Township Range ' h Site Information Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres W//9 Â· Existing Land Use Fecred-Non Â¢ (0 (4 2 nl Proposed Land Use Existing Water Service F Town F- Well F- None F- Other (specify) Proposed Water Service r Town r well F- None E Other (specify) i Existing Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD r UTSD E Septic F None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD r UTSD r septic Is a sewer lift station required? E Yes E No Existing Gas Service r Xcel r Other E None Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? F Yes F No Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? r Yes F No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person Complete Mailing Address Attachments 57 Application fee V 1 3 00 0.-e 1- Statement of intent J 0~2'copies (folded) of plat or plan~ F 11" X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan P Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout)V V 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 .A Estes Park, CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 4 Fax: (970) 586-0249 + www.estesnet.com/ComDev [Type-of-ApplicationJ- ... Primary Contact Person is r Owner R' Applicant 1'- Consultant/Engineer Record Ownerls, /29 0 2/2 L 44 la/0- Maj\ing Address .157 5 7-unn e,/ /22' Phone 9-70 - 5-20 - 44/44 X 6 Ooce Cell Phone Fax 9-70- 5-2 6 -405 Tr Ema\\ tnflo/dt 49 9/ytea ro c A<'es, o rg 49\\cant 13 a l//' h 6 i J> 67 A ~ , 3 -7Â£ e m -S- , 2-9, c 1 . Maj\ing Address t/'9 96â€¢ /9,~,~ .0-3 <77.-0, 61 j 'h d for . CO FO â‚¬ 90 Phone 970-103-919 k Cell Phone Fax 9-1 0 -Do 3 - 9 193 Er\â‚¬* i Ct. u., @ <3~ G V /'1 6- l A i or h , 4-0 #1,-7 V ; Consultant/Engineer Mailing Address Phone 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 1,2 House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoni Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium s to give notice of their application to all m ineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been vered. This notice m ust be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. I hereby certify that the provisions of H e Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: Applicant PLEASE PRINT: iatures: -hk Record Owner Applicant Date APPLICANT CERTIFICATIOK~ â€¢ 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. .- I 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 governing the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/DevCode.) â€¢ 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 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 I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete. I 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: /yjark Â£ 1-10/4+ Applicant PLERSEPRINT. Troo, 42 er#Er b 4 Ftne ; 5,9,1 51/rjemr / i Signatures: Record Owner 433Â«2 5/--- Date 6-/1-09 1 / Applicant noh Ute,4, Dele 6-/1- 09 -71 /1 C V Revised 06/26/07 Larimer County Assessor Property Information Page 1 oi 2 4,,fillÂ© E OVE Il/--it <~ Assessor Property Information li -11 .I r A ')Ar.'â€¢ j '9 2 4 cul,9 iii i i i ' .,1 ad Ul Property Tax Year 2009 Parcel Number: 34042-00-022 Schedule Number: R0560324 Tax District: 3008 Current Mill Levy: 68.364 General Information Owner Name & Address Property Add ress YMCAOF THE ROCKIES 2525 TUNNEL RD ESTES PARK CENTER ASSOCIATION CAMP ESTES PARK 80511-0000 2515 TUNNEL RD PO BOX 800 ESTES PARK, CO 80511 Subdivision #: /040473 - S4 T04 R73 Neighborhood #: Legal Description PAR IN 4 & 5-4-73, BEG AT PT IN CEN WIND RIV RD 93 FT W OF CEN OF S BDRY LOT 6,4-4-73, BEING SE COR OF W 1/2 LOT 6, TH W ALG S BDRY LN LOT 6 TO SW COR LOT 6, TH N ALG W LN LOT 6 & LOT 2, 1743 FT TO CEN GLACIER CR, TH IN NERLY COURSE FOL: C/L GLACIER CR TO ITS JUNCTION WITH C/L OF BIG T RIV, TH IN MEANDERING COURSE BEING ERLY, TH NERLY & TH SERLY FOL C/L SD BIG T RIV TO INTSEC WITH WIND RIV RD, TH ALG C/L SD WIND RIV RD IN GEN SRLY COURSE TPOB; SE, LOT 7OFNE& LOT 8 OFNW 4-4-73; EX LOT 1, WESTERN CONFERENCE YMCA& ALBERT A HYDE IN 242- 247; EX TO CARRIE DEAL IN 320-169, TO IDA E SPRINGER IN 353-439, TO JOHN TIMOTHY STONE 353- 391, 632-151; E 1/2 OF SW 4-4-73, EX LOTS IN OVERLOOK; POR LOTS 3 THRU 5 4-4-73 & LOT 6 5-4-73 LY S GLACIER CR, EX TO TOWN OF ESTES PK IN 721-467; LOT 7 IN NE 5-4-73, EX TO MARTHA BARCLAY IN 530-85, RUTH HYDE GRIER IN 558-228, TO NELLIE ACKEN BRADT IN 506-251 ; N 1/2 OF SE 5-4-73 & NW OF SW 4-4-73, EX 619-400,747-76,776-70,776-71,804-272,824-238,1567-779,1632-457 Value Information (as of May 1,2009) Abstract Code/Description Value Type Actual Value Assessed Value Net Acres Net Sq Ft 2227 Corn/Res Improvement $630,800 $50,210 0.00 0 2220 Lodging Improvement $13,663,500 $3,962,420 0.00 0 2220L Lodging Land $2,941,000 $852,890 588.21 25,622,428 2221L Offices Land $5,000 $1,450 1.00 43,560 2227L ConVRes Land $25,000 $1,990 5.00 217,800 2221 Offices Improvement $334,700 $97,060 0.00 0 Totals: $17,600,000 $4,966,020 594.21 25,883,788 Building Improvements http://www.larimer.org/assessor/query/Detail.cfm?PropertyTypeVar=Residential&Buildi... 05/20/2009 C\1 C) .-C\1.-â€ž-â€ž-â€ž-â€ž .- â€ž- AN al O -â€ž-â€ž-â€ž-â€žâ€ž-â€ž-â€ž--â€ž-â€ž-â€ž Ki#Neâ€¢#228 8 1 00 00 l.O 0 M 09 U) 9 - C\' CY) 1Â·Â·~ ~ 00 00 00 co co co CO CO CO 00 co co CO B 8 2 O CD (D 1- T- LO LO LD LO LO LO LD LO LO 1.0 . cv cv _C)Oph SC\1000000000000 &Â°0 000000000000 0800'Â¢82@R@:S"61<&%%288885%17â‚¬~~~~~~~~c ~0Â§5Â§@CE~222%2 0>0,0.rggBEggg 0 000000000000 16 0 00:2 2 2,1-0-<.52-gE Cas=22 =. t ..Â·c ..Â· .- Ec 65 Â· d 10- 10- G.*Â®ai- 0-3& ~15 ~ ~0 0 c M C) (1) 0 Â® 0 (D (D m k 0 8 8-233 S.#2 * 5 2 E Â© Â£ E .2 -3 2 22 6 2 11 2-~-E -~ .*62 bbcoa,a,oooon'coa,-0--mooocca,063Â®J:*c O< < < < < 00 In Â£O 00 In In CO (O 0 00 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 LU LU C LO O 1- CO O C _ If') -O 2 0 J - 0- h 2 Â®Crm 1.8&30 0 - 4-; 6 -go:=6 -ouihou, c 20 0 c m gr_ CO C) too Â£ WI.OLOE ~ Â·~ ~ ~-6 ~23~4- e c\1 CD Er OO E 5 8 . Â·Â·u * 9-2 .. c 2' 0 0 2 CDOC)-mOREU)IM E>cou) ~EcvzDoco U) 00 Do 00 00 00 0 0.0 CLULU 0.91 AR COCOM Â®(3 ~ 0 09 .zzi~SgEÂ£21.110-ZZZzl 1012# tO CD N â„¢ CV H LU A L O (DOD & 10 O 9- C) OLD 4- CD CO 00 E R G :E w s 12 6. E TG E 3 & Bi @ E v ww o d. d. ~ ~ 18 E~~ * 2 5! 2; 8 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 E ci 4 25 (D h - - 1.0 0) 1.00- ,- N - 09 - CON < < CN N 0- 0- CD - - 01 00 4- C\1 - h 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- COQ C & 2 0 -00 U) 00 C 59 .m o C .C E 5 E 2 2 0 5 Â§355 R C2 2 (0 -00 0 8 1 05 2 0 200 0 % E CD t_- 9 2 9 & - 3% ::i - Fri 1 â‚¬EN= 1 -a- = -<0.0 C 2 = 1 e ~ z u O af 5 -2 20 2 --c 2 m=6 - IE .9- 0 >,2 O . r.B 822@~29% m 2 m cule-' c Zey d co -9 -5 -g *-0 b co -2 Â£0 2 06 H- Icrak-00.-30 009 1 2LLOOI- 00(0 006 CA 94{ Jorgensen 0 805 92011 illborn W. R/Herbert O illo, TX ~ rva a, Estes Par Estes Par Estes Par Estes Par Jed sels3 96902 x08 Estes Par led Sale Jed sels) 1 uiejunoIN Jepun Jed sals) *893 x08 lezeloa uuv Alled pue ueliv q!9 Blvd (el!# ueld Jelse~\I Se el.UES) Ueld Jelsevy eBeu6!S VOINA Barbara Frick mi y Cabins Diane Krotter Owner 11 thleen Falk y Taduo Jewdols!140 I Ki 0 N h h h h ~ C) 0) 2 22:=cvT: Lf)10 0 Lf)00 6 91 'cy ge 2 2*~2868*g*2 WOE c\1(DON 000000000000000000000400 000000000000000000000WOO REFeemjejBwmoEW~ .XXXX330,-0.~7~~-0 LLI LU LU LU - f f -M Ed# H-H-t+- -0 co ~ 6 -ci Â·es Ezzzzc 0-20- ooocc 0 10 (03*22Â§42-&32 E Â§9% 4 -6 UE w OOO0OOJ-Â¤2(0(0Â·b(o (0.9 -6 Â®tatree=JJE -2 .*IC-z.XMOW WILLUILLI-LLIrIZE-,hÂ£1Â£M-IJ-IJJ 00 00 â€¢r- Â·r- E ti << 6- 2 8 #6 6 - 4-, CD . 8 d 0 Z.Q - C C (0 (0 CO T & O * 9? O C E.:80% co (D LO-Ci a 2 h AR.Eo@ e i i. 1. /# 95 11 1& S Ta 5 %8 %8 ga gE e 00091.0-Â¤ .C.C Cy NgÂ¥22ggi BIBI&9555*zg R *2#g 21 ~~2149~IMd EN: ME#9 1 1-mmIIMHS<<<<Inmmuim~ *IOMMOJ<00<00 .0-2610021 Â· C\10 CO tO IÂ·- C) O O LO LO O O LO 00 LO O 4- lo w -OON *OciE~Q~'CD-COCOrd.6.65&6~ NOOMMOCD-â€¢-OM-Lf)&ij,-Cy.-COU~M '- CO m co cr) 00 (\1000.- 9.- " 1.0 - CO 9.- 91- (O 4- 000 to 91- 0 - O- O- N N O- CN N N N N C\1 0- O- O- H Q. 00 1-0 - .- CO 09 09 1.0 Of) 4- 0 1.0 h CD 91Â· C\1 C) 00 00 00 C\1 - -5 0- (D I % m (D O -8 E 'w o f N 92 0 C E Â£@2 5 2 c > e â‚¬ - â‚¬ES ~22 2312 @ *c ~g ~8&2bÂ£3%g 22%23@52 5 0- b 50 0 - sti 52 96 Z (10 * 91 CE). li 1M 9-E &1 Ji E~ 83 ji il 41 li le li 11 2 ia 91 44 45 1 ir 1~ 1 (1 2 qi 1M il 21 CE,IM â‚¬0 . 12 g -5 * 2 5% E- 3 2 2 -2 i i i i i i i ~ 5 ZE Ji }-2 *5 @ E ZE ~ ~* ~ -~ 40(â‚¬0 3 DIQâ‚¬.*<Â£2,-,-00(510**5505(00(55LLI(5405=5.J Margene Smith 2504 Cirrus Ln. Estes Park, 80517 stine Sm ith 2502 Cirrus Ln. Estes Park, 80517 Alan and Jana Jeffrey Estes Park, 80517 Linda Hanak 1481 High Vista Dr 2465 Estes Park, 80517 ide Cottages C/O Craig Bigler Estes Park, 80517 Swiftcurrent Lodge, Inc. Estes Park, 80517 Estes Park, 80517 Estes Park, 80517 Lois Hage,nennedy Estes Park, 80517 Estes Park, 80517 Estes Park, 80517 rook Dr. Estes Park, 80517 na Marquart rook Dr. Estes Park, 80517 ra Seward Brook Dr. Estes Park, 80517 Investments Estes Park, 80517 Estes Park, 80517 Estes Park, 80517 Carol Aileen Beidleman Estes Park 80517 92208 L 09(~Er '1 0~J~~~~77 4sjeM UUÂ¥ 0!IleN pueiol:1 uwor iled God PMB 254 Estes Park, Estes Park, 80 1 'Uloou aziinwos Meliells pUE Xey PJOJSSa9 "Â·'C] wouey pri *1!wed 06]ng eJecpeg e. 309 (el!1 ueld JelSEIN se eules) ueld Jelse,y eBeu6!S VOINA National Park ATTN: Vaughn Baker Rocky Mountain National Park uepl!4AA epeAA 0/0 Arron Voboril Kathleen UAAO18 UUÂ¥ O/0 Je5eu/[AA Dunraven Inn Kent Folsom CO C\1 r-00 0 9 Ent CO O * CD 0 - Ir) Co 8~2@9 LO~r-CV Ir- O- ~0~ ~ "NNENÂ°*Frd@ 55%42 % <JzzoMQ C CD - - U, U, -3 ~ l.6 - - - A A Z 00 .9 (6 <a .2 <gE h E M F 222Wxxe>95 8* Â®aÂ® .--Ex o M&Â§ itt@ilgE ge. :mgt 16 (o- EE E 1 i Â§2 @# i i %33 12 0 1 ZE 32:28amÂ£ crenc~cococomoi@#**** 0 0 M S O h W of M 1 28 -2 %8 2238-*9050 -@b _ YM gEZ% 2,26 20 60Â£12&~52Â£f~~12=-a~El@3 IA.E' 9 2.%:92Â¥- vele-2 g @0 0Â¤) c=- 0-5[I:= .x@ Ecaw -> FE@ 3 22(000 E*mo,Owl-*1(/)UITBS) & w > CO 0, 00 ili O Â· r O N M O - R 0- p /4 10 cuooc>OC)e Â·000000006)(\1-1- "1*000- 00(04-00000 1,10= CO 91- N ,- Co C) al 00 (D HO- of) 1- 91- CD - p p N N M Q 00% 0 2 N 2 0 (0 0 t o - 0 < 00 >% a) CO REES h 91 1.it 0 00 r L (D C 22'8@ m*Cl.Z-Ff.% ~ -0 LU -0 Â® co m sc/)-c:Ed# 8 cogma u % ME ~E~ ~ ~@M@2%@e~gs â‚¬g@m~ a -~ 8 ~ 4 S 83 26.N @2 z 5 @ Eig c ~ E 25!1â‚¬ EE -,DICM O. -,Ors $m >ul .J S 6-gRE 1 -go c/3 5(Do. James l 'eu ardiff A Los Angelos, CA 90034 Nevin Lewis Gates Issio KS 662 Ellen Beth Smith 38 David Meaden 78209 Fred Krannig Loveland, CO 80537 and Katherine Hil D 20910 Grace Johnston Loveland, CO 805 8 Ge eral Del ashingto DC 20090 90229 ! PJOJPBJEI 888 diung X1!Ul hrman Anne Kopera 2025 Millgreen Mill Creek, W eorge an Eilee n Stone 6131 W Wisco in Ave Vicki McDermott 2261 Pontiac (elit ueld ieiseIN Se elues) Ueld Je ;SeIN 868u6!S VOINA Attn: Monte L Schatz id and Jane Antonia Pamela Russo ginia Fullerton Mary Elizabeth/Trustee Kathleen Hines 1 st National Bank rises t. t .... ~ luE' Net E Â· 411:r -/ 'i er f -21# 1,2 ' 1 te: V. r 1, t te- 4 2, . 1. b1i & , flit- *3 I> 1 't 53~ , 1 Iv ' 05 - I I -1- Â· , fw 43 ,< i !.5 - i : i Y d 4 9 \C' ju 09 Or - 9* 1-0 5 13=m U LE 21 9 <4 .\9 -\ 4 63 ...44 ' 0 6 f P 1 . b . t 4 . - < I . t:/ a t - .1 A,", 4 /%\ 0 4> f' 1 i C \2 .4 / 4.- 7 4 4* y:.'i. =.311 ., 2* F .,4 , w 4,3 ~2 4/ _~ 3-1 31-8 -- 4 5 z. -2 V 0 -3 ItI*II I /7:24 3 %1 7 7.-A.. 111 1 05 M. C ~'Â£:1~ - 9-0 1 1 1 , 0 64< 0 f; , S \ ~ 7 40 +F 64** - P r 82- - - C.2.1 1 31 1[ C L.Â»j~~ . .rk. F - 0 - ./ \ - 47. < d- 4 <00 97 , V . 61 LU LU 0. -- >D 0C 0Â£ U, L 0, U 0 Ze Zod Z 0 D . 6 E 223 11 Nl VSS300 NM3=I 0Â¥03 33IAkI3S 021 1Â¥13NIW Â£ 'NO NOI1Â¥IDOSSÂ¥ kia 3131Ii) 'MO Vsaw 2113 30AH 110 30!SNIViNROW AVM KnOH 9NO1 Nl dIHS ONBINd 3WVN V 30 OX)0NallÂ¥>I AVAA ]NO33NIJ :9623 g i :/6 AaTn - ..f~ 7-2 ' 913 C 1 7 1 I/'lar ~ 0N3931 0002 'el HO.w O3SIABW ENOW 10 Â£ 01 SSI DDV ........... -. YMCA OF THE ROCKIES - CONFERENCE CENTER AND LODGES ' 6 N. Estes Park, Colorado \ 1 \\ 1 47 1 94 \ \\ 4% \ \ 1 \ \ B 1 M Z //Ouflo/// ~ STA 10+00 1 TRAVEL RIGH~;RN--'-4.-1 - SHOULDER ~ N 1368176.411\ | (CDOT CLASS 4 , , E 2982505.341U CROSS SLOPE , ',7. EX 66.4* 1 4. 4 i '-, ' . i i j 1 1 i l ~ . 1/ i 1 '.' ' / / 1 1 -----Â·'u---~ -- artsss 11 \ \~\ 67.13 ~ M.\ l, 1\ ~_PAVEMENT SECTON (SEE NOTE 1) 1 1 ..67.27. 21 ~ 6, \ v 1 I 68.00 , AD \\ \ \ EXISnNG SEWER MANHOLE 58.23 s Â©1\\ \\ 1 TUNNEL ROAD TYPICAL SECTION 1 \ ~~ ' ~(2' >ONG W,/ 2' CAP) (4")Â· ~ 68.79 '1.. ~i~ i ~ ~ ~, ~t\~ ~ 1 It \ DOTTED WHITE LINE i NQI}1 1 1 1. PAVEMENT SECTION SHALL BE 5- HMA ON 7~ ABC (SUBJECT TO FINAL \/ 0\61/34 \\ / i ../f -1 + Â·, DESIGN). i 69.16 un ./ 0 4 \ 1% \ K - / / 2. THE COMPAC-TED FILL NEEDED BENEATH PAVEMENTS CAN BE INORGANIC *ihill<Â·11\ , A 1 \ \1 . Â· ON-SITE OR SIMILAR OFF-SITE SOILS WITH 100 PERCENT PASSING THE -0 . J 1 lt!8!=It I * ' 5-INCH SIEVE. PLACED IN 8 -INCH MAXIMUM LOOSE UFTS AT 2 PERCENT \ 69.57 - - - / \ BELOW TO 2 PERCENT ABOVE OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT AND COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 95 PERCENT OF STANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 70.04 (AASHTO T99). , 1 b --- -- 1*1 1 3. AGGREGATE BASE (CDOT CLASS 5 OR 6XAASH-TO TIBO) RIGHT LANE / 1 f 3. ( 70.12 i 4. ALL ROADSIDE DITCHES IN EXCESS OF 4 PERCENT SHALL BE LINED WITH STONES/RIPRAP \473 6 INCH MINIMUM DIAMETER. MUST . \ \: F , 2'-~ SOLID' WHITE UNE (4-)1 \ TURN RIGH 05.66 : A :\ 6 \ \ /' ~STA 720 . :- 611 i 70.95 ~ DOUBLE YELLOW LANE LINE (4")~ i \ .\44 \T\. i , ~ 71.39 ~ - N - 71.62 SOUD WHITE CHANNELIZING LINE (8-)1 - - \ \ ~ ~~ Â· ~-- -INLY- AND -TURN ARROW'â€¢ --./- P,WEMENT MARKiNGS (TYP.) 72~04 I.-(90..J 72.30 \ t. \1-!V.~ ~x - - -- \ ~6=1114'04- -N-- \\\ - 190' RIGHT TURN LANE , 1 R=2040.00 L=400.00 12' WIDE W// 4' SHOULDER' \, : h \ MATCH EX. CROSS SLOPEÂ· ' 4 -1Â·. CH=527'07'33"E \.\. (SUPERELEVATED;1 72631 \ \\ \4 : \ \ 73.27 j' 1 \ .\. \ \ 399.36 \\ i . 1 ,~.1- b ,\ \ U r ;. ./1 \ \ 4 ~ |SOLID WHITE LINE (47.. 1. , 73.00 0 ~\0 \ k \ 1 130 r 0 I \ \ \ \\ \ i - 73.65 \ \ .- 0 : I f ' 9 1 O. 900 \ \ 1 1 f U 4 \ %# \ r . \ ~ I'/,1 /fy .1, !1 11 j 1 â€¢ Â· 1... \ . / '. il .-1.-,? ' \ 74.17 1 -4 e \Â·'3 \ ~11 -~ 1 1 r---- \\ 1 1 \ |CyRAP CHANNEL TO REMAIN'11 .4 1 \ N ----1 1 \ \ / \ ,-rl~-nt i ~,~~ ~ 6 1 # 27.EoA CLLCL INT - 1 -- \ e \ 1 ~ RIGHT LANE~ STA 13+38 1 | 4 V ~ MUST h-ES i . "4 x EL=76.0* ,. \ l i '' \ YE=:331 -~/ 75.02. / / " ' . \.- 1 1 ~ ~r*:1~ *-\~ j\0,- - ~_i~ / ~ -- SAWCLIT ~ V ,-i , ' . STOP :Â·. 1 1 1 LINE tj \ \ WHITE 24 STOP BAR (20 L.F)(90 MIL-*~ NIÂ¥21 . 1 /,7 \1 \-Â·17*~20 . / I I ..111 - \{ 1 SREET SIGN\ 1 \ W I Rl -1 VÂ¥/ 'â€¢ 1 \ .-----.RELOCATED UGHT'racÂ· , 44'475.Ef 91 ~' 76.63 ABOVE \ 4,4 ,Â·, l \ .. ,+4.A' MI. I 0 \ \" //55'92>3V~-Id*.4., , , STA; 13+67 ~1' J ' REALIGN DRIVEÂ· 3 \ STA 14+00} '~ -- ~(ASPHALT TYPICAL SECÂ·nON)i--1 f' Â·X N 1367820.97 . \ -\ .47'0MUTT i , E 2982687.43 , ~ 4)#<24 1 **02Â»Ee\. I / ;Â·' N V'\\ L 1 11 77.56 i . . -1 . 50Â· 1#10*\ ..1 X. #* I .m + i \ i. i N , 1 -) 45 -V.:/" I I 52/ HMATCH EX ASPHALTI \ \\\ I. t, 9.; ' ' ' ' \ ~r- 44.-1 0.-Â»2-' \. : \ASSOCIATION DR. ~IMATCH EXISTING| ~ : t , . li896-1 .p i :1 44\\.- -h. ir EX. RIGHT OF' WAYI-~ -Â·- 1 \IYE*8*[IL \ 7\ A INV=79.4 \ -1 . 0 \ ..%. -4. <%. f --- 7.. C ,\ ~\4 2. i. \\.4/-~7 . --. -- \ \ \ - \\ V\\ \\ . ,\'1 REPLAÂ¢t-tkisTNG cul.VERT 29|F\1 /.ES|/ ~ Rl-1 '\ \ 3 35=5109:91.-- hÂ«:~~'< ./ j - 4\\ ..1/ 1 7 .X\//\ -: 02.vÂ·.:.i...11-8. A Â« ITYPE L R]PRAP~ 44 Sheet Rpl (2 \ \36'*6'*18- .----7980- PROPOSED ASPHALT . \ 1 \4 y U Tunnel Road Turn NOTE: ALL CLEANOUTS AND STRUCTURES TO BE ADJUSTED TO FINAL FINISHED GRADE. November 21, 2007 7 I.Â·.1 PROPOSED GRAVEL ...... rÂ·,1â€žâ€ž1~ Rn'-M Revised: Apr. 4,2008 i. -: f J#A 1218 W. Ash, Suite C Revised: June 18,2008 0 Â·.-j. i. t. 99 9AOR 5-s -**s -- CONTROL OZLZ / COLOR KEY FF] DAVINCA ' PMS WARM GREY 110 ~El__] SIGN SYSTEMS. INC. r the cut widicience q jdcjituicanon PMS 479 44531; BlÂ·,tls Dr. Will<INor. C .( 1 84)55(1 PMS 279 BLUE imn.([avincisign com Ft, Ct )11il 1,4. (970) 203 f)202 FAUX PAINTED STEEL (970) 203-5)293 i)rtiver C.;<)1) .;73 7440 or(.(.le) (9701353 8446 680-10 REFLECTIVE WHITE .11 1 R. IÂ·NVER Â® ~ A~.4&: 1~ '91'A-11~1 1~ . Co-/fle # *n~ Cm./1 t' THE COLORS DEPICTED ON THIS RENDERING MAY NOT MATCHACTUAL COLORS ON FINISHED DISPLAY UNLESS; 0 OTHERWISE NOTED. PLEASE REFER TO SPECIFIED | SAMPLES OR COLOR CHARTS FOR APPROVED COLOR Job Name: SPECIFICATIONS. ' 4 3'-1 " -1-* DIRECTIONAL SIGN SPECS 4.1 ~ BACKGROUND 1/z"THICK STEEL ~ Address: _rn . 2'-1" ~ SUPPORT r X 4. RECT. TUBE .1 4 m ~ SUPPORT 4" SQUARE TUBE Designer: CASEYEASTON 4 '1 -1 1/8" THICK STEEL 7'-9,1 - - - " ,~ METAL ~ Sales: JAYGERDES 4" Scale: Noted 1 - ~ VINYL REFLECTIVE WHITE -6~ lick/ 4 71-4" - --- -- .~ ~ SUPPORT 3" SQUARE TUBE ; 9,~ 4 , U-#1*a, , Date: 03.12.09 Revisions: â‚¬37 -11-'---~~~~~~~~ ~ SUPPORT 1" SQUARE TUBE ' gfi 3 1 1 D . ~ METAL 1/8"THICK STEEL ~ 6 1 .1 . /9-1/ 1 4/2./ g'-0/ 3'-2" ' " 3.4 f . ... - ... 3(2,4 -1 GENERAL NOTES ~ Customer Approval: -.'5gr:o 6'-6" 3'-5" ' ~ D 07% '12 X Date: 6. i U Without Changes A-:f ' Â¤ With Changes As Shown A o I. D .. \ P.,4 Electrical requirements: 120V or as indicated. \ tri-1.1 -m Electrical hookup by others. ~- 21 -1.-1 C 'Â·44&61.ilk/./5 1 1 All landscaping by others. *JAA , 0- -~ 1 This artwork M copyrighted. and the exclusive / 9 Â£4- 0 La 1. a property of DaVinci Sign Systems. It is the result of the original work of its employees, and is , submitted to your organization for the sole purpose of your consideration of whether to $ or exhibition of this artwork to anyone other than employees of your organization, or the use of this artwork to construct a similar sign is strictly prohibited. In the event your organization fails to comply with the stipulations outlined above, NON-ILLUMINATED S/F DIRECTIONAL SIGN DISPLAY SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" ~ /NON-ILLLIMINATED S/F DIRECTIONAL SIGN DISPLAY ~ SCALE- 1/2'=1'-0" jEF,-6.-7 ~~Ae; d -*A~ -â€¢ - 'll- 1 /- ' -Gl ~ - DaVinci Sign Systems expects to be compensated Â·7:9Â»19.Â» I QUANTITY: 4 MANUFACTURE AND INSTALL / QUANTITY: 4 MANUFACTURE AND INSTALL $1000 for its original design work, At any time you may purchase this artwork for $1000, at whicl point you may use it however you see fit. Sale**pproval: X Date: PrGction Approval: x DateÂ·- Design # 09-162 -~ Page: of: 1 23 COLOR KEY E-i DAVINCI ~, ~~~ PMS WARM GREY 11 C L__3 SIGN SYSTEMS, ING. L. BRUSHEDALUMINUM OVERLAYS , 146 |lentb |11 1, itÂ· t,ip (111,1 <(.le/ice Of idenfijiccilion 5,MI,i,1, CO 80550 FAUX RUSTED STEEL ~ p,144 d.)\/ir\L'isign.CorÂ·n A (.â€¢â€¢111;1-~: (1,711; 20.1-!)2112 ~- ~ WWHITE ACRYLIC PUSH THRU ~ 1.11\ 1470) 20 1-929:; 04 ItuÂ·r (103) 37 4-7446 ( Irt Â¢ ItÂ·\ 107(0 131 844[; - DENVIR _ ~) METRO -. '1 1/.' Ch'in- 0#441 1-,- THE COLORS DEPICTED ON THIS RENDERING MAY NOT 1 - , u,hl Mit tL-! ~ EVAVIER ~004 1~ 1 - 24.: l r Â· -1*2Â· y. a SA-LES OR ColoRCHARTS FOR APPROVED COLOR Job Name: OTlERWISE NOWED. PLEASE REFFR TOSPECIFIED -1 1.....':1 7 rga M.t < .1 SPECIFICATIONS. m eD- 1 1*i 1*4 /6..lut 1 '(1.2-11 Address: ~IRECTIONAL SIGN SPECS 4 20'-0" Â¤ STONE CMU WITH NATURAL Designer: CASEYEASTON STONEVENEER. Sales: JAYGERDES ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET Â¤ SIGN CABINET WI [H ROUTED & PUSH THRU 1.4-CLEAR ACRYLIC WITH 7ND I SURFACE WHITE VINYL Scale: Noted 4 12'40 8'-0" b ~ METAL ALUMINUM SUPPORTS Date: 03.12.09 2-9 j - Â¤ WOOD 6" WOOD POSTS Revisions: NATURAL STONE VENEER 4 gl.01 ~ BASE BASE WITH SANDSTONE ke.. CAPS. 1 1.0" 6. V 4..4/' Â¥ R U GENERAL NOTES V Â¥ A - . 4...27 Â·Â· ~ ~ ~ Customer Approval: 44#*.5 5'-2" I .9 .. X Date: 4 9-1 ,-40.. E] Without Changes -. 1 < ! j With Changes As Shown I' t. 4 - - -Eia Electrical hookup by others. k ' Electrical requirements: 120V or as indicated. \ All landscaping by others. ..9.,i-all % This artwork is copyrighted, ind the exclusive property of D+Vinci Sign Systems. It is the result -U v j 1,10â€ž 1 . 1 Ii*m I 'MJÂ©4 - n 010112,4 -r submitted to your organization for the sole '~ - - ' ' - ~ l of the original work ofits employees, andis 4 + Ac P//,4,9. L 1,11.-%Cln , ~ purpose of your consideration of whethe, to . 9 0,9 . purchase from DaVinci Sign Systems. Datribution â‚¬'4 \ or exhibition of thjs artwork to anyone other than 4- employees of your organization, or the use of this -L \7Â¤ artwork to construct a similar sign is strictly ..9. I. ' I#. p./.- k -~14" b 2... t 14+3 .- . prohibited. In the event your organization fails to 1 1 1 1 1 1 + comply with the stipulations outjined above, rE " I 0 I -I. Na....it. -7 E. 9.. . 1 - -:, ... E I. Â«gy . -. DaVinc} Sign Systems expects to be compensated 1'Â·0" '" 1 ~>flmus/6. S1OOO for its original design work. At any time you may purchase this artwork for $1000, at which point you may use it however you see fit. Sales Approval: ~ ILLUMINATED S/F MONUMENT SIGN DISPLAY SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" Lptodictlon Approval: QUANTITY: 1 MANUFACTURE AND INSTALL X Date: Design # 09-162R1 Page: of: 2 2 - â€¢â€¢â€¢â€¢â€¢â€¢â€¢ Stanley Park Grandstand ~ Location & Extent/Special Review #09-01 Estes Park Community Development Department Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue --- PO Box 1200 ~ Estes Park, CO 80517 ~ Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW DATE: August 18, 2009 DEVELOPMENT PLAN TITLE: "Stanley Park Grandstand, 1209 Manford Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado 80517, Development Plan, July 8, 2009" LOCATION: The site, addressed 1209 Manford Avenue, is bounded by Highway 36 to the north, Manford Avenue to the south, Community Drive to the east, and Fourth Street to the west. The site is within the Town of Estes Park and has a metes and bounds legal description. PROPERTY OWNER: Town of Estes Park CONSULTANT/ENGINEER: Roger M. Thorp, Thorp Associates P.C., Architects and Planners STAFF CONTACT: Alison Chilcott APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: The applicant is planning to redevelop a 1.053-acre area of the Stanley Park Fairgrounds, which contains the grandstand, and to replace the grandstand. The lot on which the proposed grandstand is to be located is zoned CO-Outlying Commercial and is approximately 7.5 acres in size. The total size of the Stanley Park Fairgrounds is approximately 42 acres. As noted in the statement of intent, It is the intent of the Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority and the Town of Estes Park to make a series of improvements at the existing Stanley Park Fairgrounds ... the first of which will be to replace the 62-year old Granny May Grandstand with a new facility to seat approximately 2,700. The footprint of the grandstand will be 15,500 square feet with additional restroom, concession, and ticket booth space under the grandstand of 2,715 square feet. The new grandstand will front onto the existing arena just as the Granny May arena has. In addition to providing a safer, more functional, and more attractive grandstand, seating capacity will be increased from 2,100 people, per the maximum occupancy sign posted at the Granny May Grandstand, to a maximum of 2,700 per Joe Calvin with Thorp Associates. The photos below provide an overview of Stanley Park and show the existing Granny May grandstand, streets, and adjacent land uses. / 4 Â¥'L , 92 1 ' I . 11. t .. mhÂ¥ Â¥ 3 * lifi . , -1 442 3 ' Â¢ Â·1 6 ... 0 '- /0 - 9 6 C 41 Â¥ - r.4 . , â‚¬ 1 r pk , 9 ./ I ' A . 1 4 . - 4 - . ' '1. . .re Â¢ . 4 44 ., I -- .4 1.1 t - JAâ‚¬L, 7, , 4- , ar, . 4 L 4. 3 4/ 4- 4 0 . , 49 . .. 4.S r. ..6 . 4 'gr . 1 - 1 44 -r~/7 % 4 3.,1 - - â‚¬.f g .. .34 /7 I . '- r -AUIT + ~110,/5//de' T --,A-e k --I .--=1--,-1- I. 51/â€¢26.Ri~ -1~~- :-a. - .. 11.1 1,1,1-/0, rt /1-r- - -.2~42 "â€¢emt- ,/:.. *- /4. . 9.9- -litL 0, -:r I- d / . 4/Â¥Je. f , 4. :.... 1 t. .) 1 I. 4 I \ . , h k :f '214 ./ ~, t~~ y" -& '9 . -Wr - t# 6, Â·'Ailc71 f . . ': . IÂ¥ It â€¢ 1 1 , 1:4 . , 1 1 I-- /4424"Fri.. ->. . 4 * -r: \QÂ· ,Â·tji00;**ar# i. R -35....~ , .- 11 2, L 4,4 Page #2 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and Extent/Special Review #09-01 GRANNYMAYARENA ~ I . - -1.. Â£ P.4. ... lu.' i-** 2 . -7 - 10 12 ... arÂ·r, 4...ir, 9 L ema~ I.*) If, â€¢r' a f -.h2~ -*.- *-irmq OPEN ~ o .t. II. - ' 1 / -r. %... I.- .: "11 4 i , 11/ = \ -iff==..9.1 74 '*1<< #~-* 21'/1 I -1MIL_ 1.-;45=5*64:. - - .1 4 1 .--.Ii .Pr 9.:.,-= . * A L Page #3 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtentiSpecial Review #09-01 The grandstand replacement is one component of a larger revitalization plan for Stanley Park Fairgrounds. Summarized below are some of the recent key decisions concerning the larger redevelopment process. 2003 â€¢ Town Board Goal Team #5 prepared the Stanley Park Revitalization Plan. Town Board adopted this plan. 2005 â€¢ Thorp Associates, Design Studios West, and Leslie Smith prepared the Stanley Park Master Concept Plan. This was reviewed by Planning Commission and approved by Town Board in 2005. â€¢ Van Horn Engineering and Surveying completed a Storm Drainage Master Plan in the fall of 2005. â€¢ Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying began work on drainage improvements during the winter of 2005/2006. 2009 â€¢ David Evans and Associates prepared construction plans for a transit hub/paved parking on the Stanley Park property. Town staff is in the process of securing funding for these improvements, including possible federal funding. â€¢ In July the Town Board awarded an architect and engineering service contract for a Multi-Purpose Event Center (MPEC) and indoor arena at the Stanley Park Fairgrounds to Kenney Associates. â€¢ Thorp and Associates prepared Architectural Design Guidelines for Stanley Park to help guide new construction and renovation. Documents mentioned above are on the Town website at http://www.estesnet.com/comdev/CurrentRequests.aspx. An overview of the transit hub is posted, rather than detailed construction plans. II. SITE DATA TABLES AND MAPS Number of Lots/Parcels One (Portion of Stanley Park's 42 acres) Parcel Number(s) 25304-05-943 Lot Size 7.555 acres per Development 329,100 square feet Plan Sheet 1 of 5 Zoning CO-Outlying Commercial Existing Land Use Entertainment Event, Major (Stanley Park Fairgrounds) Proposed Land Use Same Page #4 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 . Water Town of Estes Park Sewer Upper Thompson Sanitation District and Estes Park Sanitation District Grandstand area to be served by UTSD Fire Protection Town of Estes Park Electric Town of Estes Park Telephone Qwest Gas Xcel Mapped Hazards/Physical Features Applicable to this Site? Wildfire Hazard No Geologic Hazard No Wetlands No Streams/Rivers No Ridgeline Protection No Wildlife Habitat Yes Existing Grandstand Proposed Grandstand Footprint (Square Feet) 13,540 sq. ft. approx. 16,446 sq. ft. approx., includes bathrooms and concessions Seating Capacity (# People) 2,100 2,700 maximum Restroom Capacity 8 women's toilets 26 added 34 total 6 men's toilets & urinals 12 added 18 total 400% increase in restroom capacity for a 29% increase in seating capacity, resulting in full compliance with the Town building code. Zoning Map --t q -44<1Â»%...,r- 1 /7 1.1 . Â«eN- .53 ./. - \7 - . 35 A CO Udgle/1/69~~utlying Commercial * .... AVOwv. PR- RM 4. l__ 4..~.11~K1~*3~~~1=1Multi-Family Reside ial Page #5 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and Extent/Special Review #09-01 III. REVIEW CRITERIA ~ Applications for approval of a special review use shall: 1. Follow the standard development approval process set forth in EVDC Â§3.2. This includes the requirement to review development plan applications and all submitted plans and reports, and evaluate them according to the following standards: a. The development plan complies with all applicable standards set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code; and b. The development plan is consistent with the policies, goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and any other relevant land use, parks and trails, capital improvement and other similar plans. 2. Demonstrate compliance with all applicable criteria and standards set forth in Estes Valley Development Code Chapter 5, "Use Regulations," of this Code. 3. Demonstrate compliance with the following requirement: The application for the proposed special review use mitigates, to the maximum extent feasible, potential adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and services, and the environment. This is also a location and extent review. The Estes Valley Planning Commission is the recommending body and the Estes Park Town Board is the decision-making body for this application. IV. REFERRAL AGENCY AND PUBLIC COMMENT This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. A legal notice was also printed in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette. Reviewing Agency Comment The following reviewing agencies submitted written comments. Estes Park Public Works and Utilities Departments See Tracy Feagans' memo to Alison Chilcott, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zurn dated July 24,2009. Town Attorney See Greg White's email to Alison Chilcott dated August 5,2009. Estes Park Fire Department See Derek Rosenquist' s email to Alison Chilcott and Roger Thorn dated July 17, 2009 and Derek Rosenquist's email to Alison Chilcott dated August 5,2009. Upper Thompson Sanitation District See Todd Krula' s letter to Alison Chilcott dated July 21, 2009. Page #6 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 Colorado Department of Transportation See Gloria Hice-Idler' s email to Alison Chilcott dated August 4,2009. Public Comment No written public comment has been received. V. STAFF FINDINGS 1. Project Description/Background The Project Description/Background found in Section I of this staff report is included as a staff finding. 2. Standards for Review Compliance with standards for review in Estes Valley Development Code Section 3.8.D Standards for Review is required. 3. Reviewing Agency Comments This request has been submitted to applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. All comments submitted by reviewing agency staff, referred to in Section IV of this staff report, are incorporated as staff findings. 4. Public Comment No written public comment has been received. 5. Stanley Park Fairground The Stanley Park Fairground is classified as a Major Entertainment Event use. This is a special review in the CO-Outlying Commercial zoning district. The Specific Use Standards in EVDC Section 5.1.C, Commercial Recreation or Entertainment Establishments also apply to the fairground use. This section states: 1. All commercial recreation or entertainment establishments shall be subject to the following standards: a. The use of firearms shall not be permitted as a part of user activities. b. A traffic impact study shall be submitted that assesses the impacts of the proposed use on existing roads, intersections and circulation patterns, and that demonstrates compliance with the traffic facility standard set forth in Â§7.12 of this Code, and/or sets forth mitigation measures to eliminate or substantially reduce such impacts. Page #7 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 2. In addition to the standards set forth in paragraph C. 1 above, riding academies, livery stables and roping or equestrian areas shall be ~ subject to the following standards: a. The minimum lot or parcel size for such uses shall be five (5) acres. b. The Applicant shall submit a plan for the management of odor, dust and waste as part of the application for special review or development plan approval. 6. Nonresidential Zoning District Density and Dimensional Standards The plan demonstrates compliance with minimum required building/structure setbacks. The plan also demonstrates compliance with the impervious coverage and floor area ratio limits. The maximum allowable impervious coverage is sixty-five percent and an approximately thirty-seven percent coverage is proposed as noted on the Overall Site Plan (Vicinity Map) Sheet 1 of 5. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is 0.25 and a 0.1395 FAR is proposed per Sheet 1 of 5. The applicant submitted a height variance application for review by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment to allow the ventilating cupolas on the grandstand to exceed the maximum allowable height by four feet four inches. The main roof of the building complies with the maximum allowable height. The Board of Adjustment approved this variance request on August 4,2009. 7. Slope Protection, Grading and Site Disturbance EVDC Section 7.1 Slope Protection Standards is not applicable to the design proposed with this development. Grading Grading is discussed under the drainage and parking sections of this staff report. Limits of Disturbance The limits of disturbance are shown on Utilities Plan (Sheet 4 of 5). There are no features in the development area that require protection with the exception of a few existing trees shown on Sheet 3 of 5. 8. Tree and Vegetation Protection The application demonstrates compliance with EVDC Section 7.3 Tree and Vegetation Protection. Three or four trees will be removed, and six new ash trees added, to the grandstand' s courtyard. 9. Public Trails and Private Open Areas EVDC Section 7.4 Public Trails and Open Space is not applicable; however, EVDC Section 4.4.D.4 Pedestrian Amenities and Linkages is. This requires pedestrian linkage internal to the site and sidewalk along the street frontage. Page #8 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 Sidewalk of at least eight-feet in width already exists along north side of Manford Avenue from Highway 7 to Community Drive as shown in the photo in Section I of this report. Redevelopment of the grandstand courtyard will improve the pedestrian feel of the courtyard, removing the asphalt paving, shown below, and replacing it with concrete paving with colored concrete accent bands. ' I . 1 * L 4., 0 .:9 tÂ· El - 18Â¢* F- 4 44 -u2__-t': Once new parking lots are constructed pedestrian connections between the parking and grandstand will also be improved. 10. Landscaping and Buffers The grandstand' s courtyard will be renovated as described above. A new landscaping bed will also be created in the courtyard. While this does not involve the planting of many additional trees or shrubs, this is a significant landscape design improvement over the current courtyard. The Estes Valley Development Code requires the following landscaping for the 1.053-acre grandstand redevelopment area. a. Eight trees and twenty shrubs along the Manford Avenue frontage (based on 300 feet of frontage); and b. Thirty eight trees and 118 shrubs on the remainder of the site (some of which can be located on the street frontage) Proposed trees and existing trees to remain are shown below. There are existing shrubs in the redevelopment area that are not shown on this plan. Page #9 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 1.43 St6nley-_P6rk Grdridstdhd Graphic legend _1299 Manfo,d Avenue,6 Estes ~ark, Colorodo /0S 17 Develbpm'dnt plan -~~uly 8,2009 I . -- -4 *hgn. ~ *jctitticÂ«a~~trbi 50:9 EÂ¥=r= 21+11 ril r Â·4...~ .st*-41 , 3.0. i Ebyt ~> '4 7 7 ~ ic,-talimt 1-~11,-3 461 ~7,92/~tgo 31 <41< 1 I $ ~/ 1 / /64' 1 4,- ...ed:=2 b. #%5.-Â» I rÂ·n. gy'EF ,~ r '4,#3 1 1 ~-1 L %2/.hi 1 1 I-1 L 3 - -,1 -TL dy 6--- 417 LU-,6 - '~/ *' 4 AL */ 1/0 rf - -Â·,crm'- -=' IJ-~-~~-el.-1--11 300' 6feet Frontige: =_* PAJ+..Â·+ . '-~~-'t- --~Â·-2'~~Â·=--4a=-_~ ~~ ~_r~~ ~* ~_~~,â€ž~~~~~2~=t~y 11-5-~'-flIZ - - If landscaping for the entire Stanley Park was evaluated, this would allow for more flexibility in locating required trees and shrubs. For example, staff would be supportive of installing fewer trees and shrubs in the grandstand courtyard and planting more elsewhere on the fairgrounds property. Landscaping along Manford Avenue serves an important purpose of screening the buildings in this 1.053-acre area from the road. The below Master Concept Plan shows landscaping envisioned for Stanley Park and shows that additional landscaping is planned with the future phases of redevelopment. 70; 4 K- 3 P-- n. . ...0, tal -4 1 422, 4. Page #10 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 11. Wetlands and Stream and River Corridor Protection EVDC Section 7.6 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection is not applicable to this project since there are no mapped wetlands, streams, or rivers on site to protect. 12. Geologic and Wildfire Hazards EVDC Section 7.7 Geologic and Wildfire Hazard Areas is not applicable to this project since the property is not in an EVDC mapped geologic or wildfire hazard area. 13. Wildlife Habitat Protection Staff routed this application to the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) for review and no comments were received. 14. Exterior Lighting The new lighting shown on the Utilities Plan Sheet 4 of 5 complies with the requirements in EVDC Section 7.9 Exterior Lighting. Lighting cut sheets will be reviewed with the building permit application. The floodlights installed on the ridgeline of the Granny May grandstand roof will be removed. i Ijl!Â·~k'*'Â·'i r, *AE'/ 1 :.1. ' I 2. The lights will be reinstalled on the roof of the new grandstand, but will be located further down the roof, closer to the arena, rather than on the ridgeline. The floodlights will be angled to shine at a lower angle than they currently do so slightly less light will shine into the night sky. Since the lights are existing they are not required to comply with EVDC Section 7.9. If lighting is replaced in the future, it should comply with the lighting regulations. Page #11 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and Extent/Special Review #09-01 15. Operational Performance Standards EVDC Section 7.10 Operational Performance Standards allows for additional conditions to be imposed upon approval of any development to ensure that it is compatible with existing uses, including, but not limited to placement of trash receptacles, and the location, intensity, and hours of illumination. Staff has not recommended any additional restrictions. 16. Off-Street Parking and Loading Minimum Required Parking/Parking Study EVDC 7.11.D Minimum Off-Street Parking Requirements does not provide a simple formula for calculating the required number of parking spaces for fairground use since this is not possible. Instead, it provides a more appropriate method of determining parking needs for the fairgrounds, i.e., preparing a parking study in accordance with EVDC 7.11.E Parking Studies. A parking study could evaluate the full range of uses at the fairgrounds, the potential for shared parking between each of the uses, and the possibility of using off-site parking combined with public transit. Completion of a parking study is the best option for ensuring that parking needs are adequately addressed. EVDC 7.11.E Parking Studies also provides the option of calculating the parking requirements for the grandstand use (not taking into account other uses at the fairgrounds) based on the off-street parking and loading standard for the most similar use to the grandstand, i.e. theater use. In the absence of a parking study, staff has provided this calculation below. This parking calculation is also summarized on the Overall Site Plan (Vicinity Map), Sheet 1 of 5. EVDC 7.11.D Minimum Off-Street Parking Requirements Theater Use 1 per 3 fixed seats; or 1 per 60 square feet of seating area, if no fixed seats Loading Group 1 Two Type B Loadings Spaces for 15,001 to 50,000 square feet of gross floor area Proposed Grandstand: Seating Capacity 2,690 Proposed Grandstand: Gross Floor Area 19,185 (Sq. Ft.) Per Development Plan Sheet 1 of 5 Minimum Required Parking Spaces 897 i Planned Paved Parking 346=t (Separately Funded Projects) Additional parking may also be constructed with future projects such as the performing arts center. Existing and Proposed Parking Below is an aerial photo showing the main parking area at the fairgrounds, which consists of a gravel/dirt parking area and an approximately 80-space paved parking lot on the southwest/south sides of the property. Page #12 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 1, i Â·'*T 44|~4 fÂ¢. M , /4 r . I. R . 14 ./ 1 3 *7 .... f .4 ~ 14%44. -' 53/ Â£ ff â€¢:' 4 **44 /-< 41, -6 O . > 21 6 Npr 4 , . . % , 7 t. 42-1 /43 , et> 2 4 - I. 4 41/ ' '44 , *% . il.al,5- -- .. 4, . *21 111 -a:a t' 4 t I. Pqt k th::~ ': 1t.. te, 7 , -0-2 1 1 '; i -1- L 44 0 71 /4 0 -<.4 i*4#1%#.'~ The planned transit hub parking, shown below, will be a significant improvement over the current parking situation. Typically, defined parking is more efficient than undefined parking, i.e., more vehicles can park in a paved and striped parking lot. The transit hub is a separately funded phase of the Stanley Park redevelopment. Staff is working to secure funding for this project from a variety of sources, including federal sources. Transit Hub Parking Lot &LU,11_hINUM,_Al/IMMd 11, U-Lea *.ti,0, ~,~,Mi. 21 ./Ail._'.'l'*1 T. -th . #.-t ..i t-KI .1 - I - .,<,- w .-at â‚¬<*1*:0 â€¢01â€¢,t â€¢4 -t k,wl' 2~3.Eâ‚¬'62i326*Van'â‚¬6.ElEleâ‚¬' 3 . OSED FUTURE BUILDING 1 % , 6. * 99.---Il-@*I 1.......LI.03.2154'1"I'll'll" :--;I-~al' I 14â€¢1~1.- Existing --v.- Eot . 42 80 * spaces 11 * ''r 'it - ~ 1; ...01' AVE. V =19' : EMES,F I I Sh.el ./.'sion' 1 18. coâ€¢,1,~â€¢.41 ;Piojeci ../Codi .Â«,1,1,~00, , 1 ..,? 1.2~ I. - 1.., 1 IERALL Sri Pt-*4 SE--Ent.2 _2Llr-U â€¢2251.- ...1 Cj | T 1 CD 1 1.' I $ E'... h.-.' . . David Evans and Associates has prepared detailed construction plans for the transit hub. Thorp and Associates is working on construction plans for the Page #13 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 47H STREET grandstand redevelopment. Thorp Associates has also provided conceptual plans for the intervening 78-space parking lot, shown below, to begin determining how the connection between these two areas will work. This connection is important to design to ensure that the two areas connect properly, e.g., the grading works for drainage purposes, and accessible parking spaces and accessible routes can be graded and constructed in compliance with applicable accessible parking regulations. Concept for Future Parking Lot (Parking & Grading Plan Sheet 3 of 5) St6nley â‚¬ark Grandstdod 1 036/. lege'l 1 209 M.,ford A..U...> m f- - E.1-1.ik,Caloic,*,~0"7 - Deve/opmdnt Plan --- ./11,4 el 2009 1 4,2-9 1/9/7 0 -- - =//=/:3Â£/uÂ£E//////7$// UÂ£* :* ' ' -- 'FÂ· Â·Â·I'Â· ~v \ Plir. L f=11. . 9 44 k.'-J"~ ./. 0- ~...2 1 . 6-Â©v.-269.0 4 5-UlSIÂ«fr- ItÂ·jR It 1 11 - -- -- ./.1 Thoro Associates PC. -91 3 of 5 Once the parking described above is constructed there will be approximately 346 paved and striped parking spaces at the fairgrounds, excluding museum and senior center parking. Additional parking may also be constructed during later phases of redevelopment, such as when the barns to the east of the grandstand are removed. Accessible Parking and Grading The number of accessible parking spaces described in the Estes Valley Development Code is intended as a guide. Local, state, and federal accessible parking codes and regulations determine the actual number and design of accessible spaces. Using this guide, if 897 parking spaces were provided, eighteen of the spaces would need to be accessible and dispersed through parking lots as required by the accessible parking regulations found in the Town Building Code. Of the seventy-eight spaces shown in the future parking lot immediately to the west of the grandstand, four would need to be accessible (see the Parking and Grading Plan, Sheet 3 of 5). Two are shown as accessible. More accessible parking spaces will be required along with an accessible route to facilities. Page #14 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and Extent/Special Review #09-01 I illd The applicant should work with the Building Department to determine the required number of accessible parking spaces and accessible routes from those spaces. A better analysis and design may be achieved if accessibility for the grandstand and transit hub areas is evaluated as a whole, rather than as independent projects. Building staff will also review accessibility in more detail at the building permit stage and/or when revisions to the parking lot are proposed, such as striping or repaving. Once the parking area adjacent to the grandstand is redeveloped, accessibility will be significantly improved over the current situation. Accessible parking spaces in the existing parking lot do not meet current standards, e.g., in terms of the cross slope of the spaces (see photo below). I .Ek ' 1 11 . , 4 1, 4 i Ilt-IIi: . 3- . -r- I 11 lilli, 111...14:"111.1 1,1 1. - .' L le:iÂ¢~ft: 1: 1 II* 17. Adequate Public Facilities The comments below relate to compliance with EVDC Section 7.12 Adequate Public Facilities. Adequate public facility improvements are required to be installed concurrent with the impacts of the development. Sewage Disposal Sewer service for the Stanley Park Fairgrounds is provided by both the Upper Thompson Sanitation District (UTSD) and the Estes Park Sanitation District (EPSD). This grandstand is served by UTSD. The Utility Plan (Sheet 4 of 5) shows upgrades to the sewer service. Sewer service lines will need to be studied to properly sized. This application was routed to UTSD and they expressed no concerns with the proposed design. Sewer service will be upgraded with the installation of a grease interceptor for the concessions area. Page #15 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 Water Staff routed this application to the Town Utilities Department for review. Water Department comments included comments about water-line sizes, which require revisions to the development plan. Drainage/Water Quality Management In September 2005, Van Horn Engineering and Surveying completed a Storm Drainage Master Plan for Stanley Park. During the winter of 2005/2006 Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying completed work on some of the drainage improvements, such as the detention basin (general location shown below). In general, the drainage improvements proposed with the grandstand redevelopment conform to the Master Drainage Plan, which envisions that most of the water from the grandstand area will drain east towards Community Drive eventually entering the existing detention pond near the Gun Club. Stormwater from the grandstand area generally flows in this direction now. B. ..IM+/LT-- r - ?W.4 =96.19:5"'ll .ur f,v'4~~ Tu 'VIV 0, I , tl "11 91 Uint , 9. 4 ' rt-* --4 â€¢mu . . -1- 1 1 Ip L. The Overall Site Plan (Sheet 1 of 5) for the grandstand shows a potential location for a temporary water-quality retention pond to retain water from the grandstand area. This pond location is also shown on the aerial photo above. A minimal amount of water from the grandstand area sheet flows to east and will eventually make its way to the on-site ponds and detention basin. Drainage improvements in the 1.053-acre grandstand area, shown on Sheets 2 through 4 of the submitted development plan, are a part of the grandstand redevelopment project. Page #16 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 A drainage plan and report for this phase of redevelopment could evaluate the proposed redevelopment for conformity with the 2005 Drainage Master Plan, design and size the temporary pond, and determine if any additional improvements are needed at this stage to bring the grandstand drainage system up to current standards. This report could also evaluate what, if any, state permits and plans need to be obtained or updated, such as the State Stormwater Management Plan and the Minimal Industrial Discharge permit. Copies of these permits and plans are required to be submitted with the building permit application. Fire Protection The submitted ISO calculations evaluated required versus provided fire flows to the grandstand and concluded that fire flows from existing hydrants exceeded the required fire flow; therefore, no additional fire hydrants were proposed. The Fire Department reviewed the submitted application, including the ISO calculations and has met with the applicant. Revisions to the ISO calculations may be required because access to one of the hydrants used in the calculations is blocked by existing and proposed Stanley Park improvements. Installation of two wet standpipes will be required and should be shown on the development plan. The Fire and Water Departments and Thorp Associates are discussing design details. Transportation Staff routed the application to CDOT and the Town Public Works Department for review. CDOT commented that they will require a traffic impact analysis. Also, per EVDC Section 5.1.C, Commercial Recreation or Entertainment Establishments, a traffic impact analysis is required that, Assesses the impacts of the proposed use on existing roads, intersections and circulation patterns, and that demonstrates compliance with the traffic facility standard set forth in Â§7.12 of this Code, and/or sets forth mitigation measures to eliminate or substantially reduce such impacts. EVDC Section 7.12 Transportation also triggers the need for a traffic impact analysis and requires that, All developments shall be required to demonstrate that there will be no significant adverse impact on existing transportation levels of service, access and vehicular movement on any arterial or collector street or intersection within one-quarter (44) mile of the site or that any such adverse impact has been mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. This phase of redevelopment will increase the capacity of the grandstand by approximately 500 seats. However, an important consideration to note is that Page #17 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 events such as the Scottish Festival will continue to generate more traffic than events such as the rodeo, even with the expanded seating capacity. Also, the Town has the ability to have police officers assist with traffic management. A traffic impact analysis would evaluate needed improvements, if any, such as construction of turn lanes on adjacent roads such as Manford Avenue, Fourth Street, Community Drive, and Highway 36 or installation of traffic lights at intersections. This analysis could be updated as additional redevelopment occurs and could also evaluate options such as realigning roads to improve safety and the impact of increasing usage of the Fourth Street access to the fairgrounds. 18. Electricity, Cable, and Phone Staff routed this plan to the Town Light and Power Department for review. Light and Power expressed no concerns with the proposed upgrades to the electric services, which are shown on the Utilities Plan on Sheet 4 of 5. Upgrades include installing a new transformer, undergrounding some of the aboveground electric infrastructure, and installing new light fixtures in the courtyard. 19. Outdoor Storage Areas, Activities and Mechanical Equipment Staff reviews development applications for compliance with EVDC Section 1.13 Outdoor Storage Areas, Activities and Mechanical Equipment. This addresses items such as dumpster locations and mechanical equipment screening. The fairground does not have one central trash collection location where dumpsters are emptied by Waste Management. Instead, dumpsters are deployed to different locations on site depending on the needs of the special event. For example, during the rodeo dumpsters are located near the grandstand. The redevelopment should be designed to accommodate a screened and animal- proof dumpster(s), located to comply with EVDC Section 7.13. - Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, conduit, meters, and vents will need to be screened, covered, or painted to minimize visual impacts. 20. Signage A general signage plan has not been submitted for review. If new signage is propoked, sign permits applications will be reviewed by the Building Department for compliance with the sign code. 21. Other A Town Board signature block should be provided rather than a Planning Commission signature block. Page #18 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and Extent/Special Review #09-01 VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the application CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Compliance with the comments in the Estes Park Public Works and Utilities Departments memo dated July 24,2009. This includes revising the development plan to satisfy the Water Department comments including the comment about water-line sizes. 2. Compliance with the comments in the Estes Park Fire Department emails dated July 17, 2009 and August 5,2009. Revised ISO calculations shall be submitted for review and approval, if required by the Fire Department, and any required revisions, such as the installation of a wet standpipe, shall be reflected on the development plan. 3. Compliance with the comments in the Colorado Department of Transportation email dated August 4,2009. 4. Sewer service lines will need to be studied to be properly sized. 5. The application shall comply with standards for review in Estes Valley Development Code Section 3.8.D Standards for Review is required. 6. Landscaping shall be installed along Manford Avenue as required by the Estes Valley Development Code. 7. A parking study shall be prepared in accordance with EVDC 7.11.E Parking Studies for review and approval and the required amount of parking provided. 8. Accessible parking spaces and accessible routes from those spaces shall be reviewed with the Building Department and any needed revisions shall be reflected on the plans. 9. A drainage plan and report for this phase of redevelopment shall be prepared and required improvements for this phase of redevelopment shall be installed. 10. A traffic impact analysis shall be submitted for review and approval and any required improvements installed. 11. The redevelopment shall be designed to accommodate a screened and animal- proof dumpster(s) located to comply with EVDC Section 7.13. The dumpster location shall be shown on the development plan for review and approval. 12. A Town Board signature block shall be provided rather than a Planning Commission signature block. Page #19 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and ExtenUSpecial Review #09-01 VII. SUGGESTED MOTIONS APPROVAL I move to recommend APPROVAL of the applications to the Town Board of Trustees with staffs' findings and conditions. CONTINUANCE I move to CONTINUE the applications to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting because... ( state reason for continuance - findings). Staff recommends that the applicant agree to this for the record at the Planning Commission meeting. DENIAL I move to recommend DENIAL of the applications to the Town Board of Trustees because... (state reason for denial - findings). Page #20 - Stanley Park Grandstand Location and Extent/Special Review #09-01 4230*fi~:maâ‚¬-59Â«99, NIF#*Df#flikt@&3*atkuu# cr~?i 13'1 *Puditbi*68&*utiliti44?43: ESTES .822Â®P ARK COLORADO Room 100, Town Hall P.O. Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Memo To: Alison Chilcott, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zurn, PE From: Tracy Feagans Date: July 24,2009 Re: Stanley Park Grandstand Special Review Metes & Bounds at 1209 Manford Ave. 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: The Light and Power Dept. will cooperate with the EPURA and will respond to requests for work and facilities upgrades on an as needed basis. Water: After review of the Special Review application 09-01 the Water Department has the following comments: 1) For verification all properties must show proof of inclusion in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. 2) A Water Fixture Count must be done with a representative of the Water Department prior to demolition and/or construction to ensure any applicable credit toward additional water fees. Any demolition done prior to the fixture count will result in forfeiture of any applicable water tap credits. 3) A 3" ductile iron pipe should be used in lieu of the proposed 21/2" feed line into the Grandstand. Any supply line greater than 2" in size will be required to have both a chlorination and pressure test. Contact the Water Department at 970-577-3622 for scheduling. 4) Backflow prevention devices will be required at some locations, contact the Cross-Connection Control Specialist at 970-577-3625 to discuss and review the requirements relating to potential hazards on the property. Public Works: The department will cooperate with the EPURA and will respond to requests for work and facilities upgrades on an as needed basis. â€¢ Page 1 Alison Chilcott From: Greg White [greg@gawhite.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 05,2009 2:08 PM To: Alison Chilcott CC: roger@thorpassoc.com; Wil Smith; Jacqueline Halburnt Subject: Grandstands at Stanley Park Alison: I have reviewed the Development Review Application filed by the Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority (EPURA) and the Town of Estes Park with regard to the construction of the Grandstands at Stanley Park. The recommendation of the Estes Valley Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees for a final decision on the application. Thanks, Greg This transmission, including any attachments, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information in this message, including any reliance thereon by you or any other third person, is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy this message in both electronic and any hard copy formats. 1 1 ( Alison Chilcott From: Derek Rosenquist Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 8:28 AM To: Alison Chilcott Subject: RE: Stanley Park Grandstand - Fire Protection Alison, We did talk with folks from Roger's office. A wet stand pipe will be necessary, and they should be incorporating that into the plans. This will negate the need to include Hydrant 3 on the plans previously provided in ISO calculations. Derek Rosenquist Training Captain Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department 970-577-3690 1 /..... ,Alison Chilcotl From: Derek Rosenquist Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1 :40 PM To: roger@thorpassoc.com; Alison Chilcott CC: Scott Dorman Subject: comments on Stanley Park Grandstand Mr. Thorp and Alison, Chief Dorman and I walked out the hydrants and routes for fire trucks today. We have a concern with using Hydrant #3 on the fire hydrant map location for ISO calculations and in the event of a fire. Access to the grandstand is blocked by a fence and a concrete drainage ramp and cannot be used in the calculations in the current situation. Also, the proposed (?) trees south of Barn U will block access from that hydrant. We researched some codes and spoke with Will Birchfield about the classification of the building, which he suspects will be a 5A. If this is the case it may trigger the requirement for a wet standpipe. He will be researching this further. If wet stand pipes are used, and they are connected to an adequately sized line, this may negate the need to use Hydrant #3 in ISO calculations. Depending on what Will finds out, there are some options we can discuss. This may be better addressed in person with myself and Chief Dorman rather than in an email. Derek Rosenquist Training Captain Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department 970-577-3690 1 ,-,42>loismICTD P.O. Box 568 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 (970)-586-4544 (970) 586-1049 Fax July 21,2009 Alison Chilcott, Planner II Town ofEstes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Application for a Special Review Stanley Park Grandstand Metes & Bounds 1209 Manford Ave. Dear Alison, The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above referenced property: 1. The District has no objection to the Application for Special Review. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you, Todd Krula Lines Superintendent cc: Roger M. Thorn Thorn Associates, PC PO Box 129 Estes Park, CO 80517 FAX: 970-586-4145 Alison Chilcott Subject: FW: Stanley Park Grandstand From: Hice-Idler, Gloria [mailto:Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 12:46 PM To: Alison Chilcott Subject: RE: Stanley Park Grandstand If the site traffic is proposed to increase by more than 20%, then a traffic impact study needs to be completed to determine if highway improvements are necessary and new access permit(s) will be required at those access points.' No TIS was included in this submittal. I realize that the grandstands are only used occasionally and the traffic from many of the events can be handled with appropriate traffic control, but the volumes at the impacted highway intersections needs to be addressed. If highway improvements are warranted, it's possible that they can't be built because of ROW constraints. So, in summary, a traffic impact study should be completed. Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor CDOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 1 C. --Â©EOVEr?% - STANLEY PARK GRANDSTAND [1~ JUN 2 4 2009 1209 Manford Avenue J U Estes Park, Colorado 80517 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STATEMENT OF INTENT It is the intent of the Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority (EPURA) and the Town of Estes Park to make a series of improvements at the existing Stanley Park Fairgrounds in Estes Park, Colorado, the first of which will be to replace the 62-year old Granny May Grandstand with a new facility to seat approximately 2,700. The footprint of the grandstand will be 15,500 square feet with additional restroom, concession and ticket booth space under the grandstand of 2,715 square feet. This 18,215 square foot facility will front onto the existing arena just as the Granny May Grandstand has for all these years. The expanded footprint of the new facility, then, will extend somewhat into the existing paved courtyard to the south, where improvements to hardscape and landscaping are anticipated. Utility improvements are being planned to serve the new facility, including upgrades to the existing electrical transformer, new and extended water and sewer lines, as well as the installation of a grease trap for the new concession stand. Improvements to the exterior character of the building will also be accomplished in order to meet the intent of the recently adopted Stanley Park Architectural Design Criteria. In all, it is hoped that the new Stanley Park Grandstand will improve services to Stanley Park's event and concertgoers throughout the spring, summer and fall seasons, and begin a high quality expansion of facilities at the fairgrounds. * *~,%-GLED--1 ESTES VALLEY (3 1.7 -I'~'.'-* - Â«DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLIC)*rION~l : 4 4* j 1..1 4. JUN 2 4 2009 il|Ill . 29* â‚¬ -Â·Submittal Date: 1- Development Plan r Boundary Line Adjustment Condominium Map E Special Review E ROW or Easement Vacation 1- Preliminary Map F Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change r Final Map r Preliminary Subdivision Plat r Time Extension r Supplemental Map E Final Subdivision Plat IN Other: Please specify r Minor Subdivision Plat Location and Extent Review IT Amended Plat ~ General Information 1 Project Name Stanl ey Park Grands tand Project Description Crandstand for Stanley Park Project Address - ' 1?09 Manford A-*enue, Estes Park, CO 80517 $ 'I TR IN NW 1/4 SE 1/4 30-5-72 BEG CEN 1/4 COR S 89 11' E 1295 FT SD PT BEING NE COR N/W 1/4'SE 1/4, 0 Legal Descriptioft s 512-Er, M 62 48yV 1137.2 Ft, TH CUR L, RAD 640.3 FT, 294.7 Fl- 1-00B CONT 7.5 AC M/L, MANFORD, EP 1 1 Parcel ID-# 25304'205*94 3 Section 30 . Township 59 Range 72W Â·Lw.,e.e.,P~...,/ -~ I Site Information 1.053 acres ' Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres Existing Land Use Grandstand Proposed Land Use CÂ·rs,nrlct-Anrl Existing Water Service E Town F Well F None E Other (specify) Proposed Water Service 2 Town E Well F None F Other (specify) 1 Existing Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD F UTSD r septic F- None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD M UTSD r Septic -IK . Is a sewer lift station required? r Yes Rk No , Existing Gas Service E xcel r Other F None Existing Zoning CO Proposed Zoning CO Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? C Yes Et No Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? IF Yes E No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person Roger M. Thorp, AIA, LEED AP Complete Mailing Address i PO Bo x 12 9, Estes Park, CO 80517 Attachments C Application fee ~ E Statement of intent IZ 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan F 11" X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan liE 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 1 0 , r G . l el 0 . 0 I. Primary Contact Person is r Owner M[ Applicant F Consultant/Engineer Record Owner(s) :[own of Estes Park Mailing Address PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone 970.577.3725 Cell Phone Fax 970.586.0249 Email bjosebh@estes.org Applicant Roger M. Thorp, AIA, LEED AP, Thorp Associates PC Arch & Planners Mailing Address PO Box 129, Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone 970.586.9528 Cell Phone 970.679.7811 Fax 970.586.4145 Email roger@thorpassoc.com Consultant/Engineer Mailing Address Phone 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 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: Tbiwn of Estes Park Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Roger M. Thorp, AIA, LEED AP, Thorp Associates PC dures: Record Owner Date Applicant (3*ge.dr~.JLAR Date 0 4. 14. 0 9 i \ L--3 t-3 l APPLICANT CERTIFICATION - 4 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. ./. I 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 governing the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valldy Development Code is available online at www.estesnet.com/ComDeWDevCode.) â€¢ 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 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 determined to be complete. I 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: Town of Estes Park Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Roger M. Thorp, AIA, LEED AP, Thorp Associates PC Signatures: Record Owner Date Applicant ~~A,06 6'3, c 'Ji,A/'41----- Date 06.2.4.09 0 0 Revised 06/26/07 0 0 STANLEY PARK GRANDSTAND - 1209 Manford Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado h INSURANCE SERVICE OFFICE (ISO) Unl i REQUIRED FIRE FLOW CALCULATION ~ W 'U~ 2 6 2008 ~ ~ 1. Fire Flow in gpm (Appendix A) F=18C(A) 0.5 where: C = Coefficient for type of Construction = 1.5 "Wood Framed Construction" as defined in Appendix C A = Floor Area (all stories excl. basement) = 19,313 sf F = Fire Flow (not to exceed 8,000 gpin) F = 18 C (A)05 = 18 x 1.5 x 138.97 = 3,752 gpm 2. Increase/Decrease based on High/Low Hazard Occupancy (Appendix C) No reduction or increase appropriate for use = 3,752 gpm 3. Automatic Sprinkler System Reduction (based on value o f #2 above) This project does not have a Sprinkler System = 0 gpm 4. Increase due to Exposure to adjacent Fire Area within 150 feet (Appendix A) Direction Separation % Limit % Calc Northwest to Wood Barn 91'-0" 10% 2% East to Metal Shed 10'-0" 25% 5% Southeast to Wood Office 17'-0" 20% 13% South to Metal/CMU Bldgs 5200" 15% 5% Total Increase 25% = 938 g]?m 5. Total and Rounding Value of #2 above 3,752 gpm Reduction of #3 above - 0 gpm Increase of #4 above + 938 gpm Total 4,690 gpm Rounded to nearest 500 gpm 4,500 gpm CALCULATION OF PROVIDED FIRE FLOW (5) Hydrants are within 400'-0" of building - see attached drawing (4) Hydrants provide 1000 gpm flo 4,000 gpm (1) Hydrant is metered and provides only 800 gpm flow 800 gpm Total Provided Fire Flow 4,800 gpm Fire Flow provided exceeds requirements 0ECE-77= ~132nr: 0 C h.: 9411 -.- \ ~En! .00,00.00 6 L \ to .3 5.R E# U M -6 0 U ro htNkh R n 1-1 / 16-8/15 r 51&78 1 45-8 &-S /Â«-9 fj ,l E ru O m.11 40 â‚¬19 1 0 0 1 0 . 1 0 1 2-'%Â£ 0 49 /1 # .0 . .0 1 - 0 7116 -F#RER,4..* 0 LY Aol LF 'ShQ Â¥ *-1 i 04 2 1 2/ 1,~ip 4 0 49 e > E| 69 (U 1 07 01 / 1 0/ . / GUJe Property line 47 Hic*â€¢ant #3 Announcer stand* ~le:19!1Â·41 swoa.19.9224 12222 f A Ah AN h h Nh Ah r 1- r- T- 1- gy Â·r- r- 10 06 ID tO Whu,00 00 00 00 CO -88~ ~NE 88088 m 00 0 00 o moo OBOUDOOogoogâ€žO&!0100000 000000000Â®0000*036020000 0000 20292â‚¬262â‚¬98 Wokokioki 5 0 G Â£ I H 0 -CON V 0 {89&05 5 0 &@ CL C 0- Â·0 0- 0- 0- 2 [1- 0- 2 LU 0- - CL - 0- 0- .= a. 0- 89 -Â®@EmI#ENE-#5835@ENg@23@@_ OBLLI 8 W 21~l~ 1~b l~IU O 01;3 0 a .3'l~ 1~~ Gr ~ ~ ~ 20 6 05 - D 6 0/ 5 6 S -23 â€¢- - 0 - 58(0(00*wwo ~m92 ~OCE (0(900 01) HSYMAw~*e=*TE 62. %5#1~_ 4 N E.DÂ® *16&622@0 8@1 > 01 N C\,1 Z x 5 5 0 gro 5 5 50)m 80.9 =Sol- 0020000-1-00(\1-000000101000 0,00< If)OÂ©~ 000029%080002*OAÂ©Ne#cou O "C\10 LOO- Q. Q. O. O. 00 0. t.O v- 0- O. O. 00 CO Q. 00 C\1 â€¢- CO - 09 0- 0 C -C 0 0 5% O EE a. . 2 (D p = & 5 >35.9 C U a) C-OIL @5 8% 2%832-ozÂ· 2 0 = * .g, 2 2 &:0 0-5 E â‚¬ E m al C b d 06 â‚¬ m g In :m @ < â‚¬ 2,2 80 b &N k 6-5-%2-guEÂ£JE205'.C?00 000 2 06 w m 06 c .O 06 2 E- C[[06 c N.c . m 8-@ In $ 2 1 M &3 Eo N E S C O CCOLLI .1 CE H --35 6 6 <I> O.0 01- CO D 1- Â»6,12 44(09 --~L- 221-0393 - n Haven 088~0551372 Iret Manske 80517 z= 9 'Je~leD 10 OBJEWel S LOZE ~sidÂ¥ 36ell!/\ eell euol Owner 11 Address y, State, Zip Francis 1036 4362 OdÂ¥ Me!Aey lepeds pue eoue!le/\ - spumspuee wed Xleums dsÂ¥ L#ZE uoluea el>lol S 41* 0 LE Seu1O4-1. uuX-1 pue ueX.Ig SAbundant Life Illiam Raitter ~25'17pine ZONE Sheet Index CO StÂ¢111?yoP_ark Grand stand 1 Overall Site Plan Commercial 2 Site Improvement Plan \1-------1-909_Manford fvenue-ir- - Outlying 3Esres-FarÂ©Colorado 80517Â«fÂ« 4 Utilities Plan - \\\ 3 Parking & Grading Plan f 5 Building Elevations Deve/opm nt -- non Lake_ Estes, ~4~ Contact Information July 8,2009' ~14 Thor~~Assooiates, P.O., Architects and Planners APPLLNfr: g.5. 525?2:a&227%7333<Â» EPUIRA) ZONE - Â· \1~Â« 1 1 ~~j- 970.506.9520 (Ph) 970.506.4145 (rax) X2104 1 CONTAOT: Roger M. Thorp fiff Email: roger@thorpassoc.corn \911 1 PBOpmuTY OWIÂ·CIR: Â»912-12\--\- Town of Estes Park 170 Maceregor Avenue, F.O. Box 1200 \ 11 - Estes Park, Colorado 00517 Residential 1 Â«In-~_122-~-__ 970.577.3725 (Fh) 970.506.0249 (Fax) Email: bjoseph@estes.org 122----22 GIVIL CrIGIrCIS: Van Worn Engineering, Ina 1043 Fish Oreck Boad Estes Park, Colorado 00517 970.506.9300 (Ph) 970.506.0101(rax) Email: amlyhe@airbitacorn ZONE STRUCTURAL 016111ZUR Micol Associates, Ins. R 2770 Da,4 Wag, Sulte 202 - 1.-afauctte, tolorado 00026 303.665.0090 (Ph) 303.665.1211(rax) Email: joen@nicolstruct.com IVEGWAMIGAL CMGIPECIR: Residential 11\\ - Integrated IMechanical, 110 223 Linder St. Suite 204 Fort (Loins, Oolorado 00524 ZONE Email: thorrlas-s@int-rnech.corn 970.556.0570 (Ph) 000.656.4359 (Fax) El-COTFRIGAL CllelllZEIR: Twofarnly ZONE 1 1 B.F. Hammond Electrical Design LLO j Residential ~ i~ Lommont, Colorado 80503 9449 Schlagel Street Z ZONE Â© 303.670.0446 (Ph) 303.651.2625(rax) CO 6 13\ R Re Ernail: bfhammond@comcast.net esldentlal Residential ,~~~ Commercial TIle UMDESSIGMED, BEING DIE OWMERS, DO HEREBY AGREE GmaTIFIGATION APP APPIeVAL ZONE Outlying SUBJECT TO THEL PBOVISIONS OF TITLE 17 09 TNE MUMICIPAL THAT TINE BEAL PROPERTY AS DESGBIBED IM TNE RM WEREWITH, AMP AS SNOWM OM THIS SITE PLAN SWALL BE APPLIGATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FILED M-Fal~ CODE OF TIle TOWN OF ESTES PAIRK,COL-OBADO AMD AMY Reslden Barn W OTINES OBDIMAMOES OF THE TOWM Or ESTES PARK, 601_OBADO PERTAINING THERETO. - Barn V ZONE OWNERS NAME: R Â© l ZONE AFFBOVAL DATE: Reslden Resldenttal c~6 1 ESTES VALLITY PLAMMIMG COMMISSIOM CHAIS DOUGLAS ILLIMI<, OWAIBFERSOM 439 zo.~ man by others-i C TW GLIFR L, BAD 640.3 FT, 294.7 r T TPOB DOM 1Â°otcntial location of 0 CO Project Address 1209 Manford Avenue, Estes Park Oolorado 00517 Â¢ R temporary water quality Parcel #: 25304-05-943 detention pond if required. pr Commercial Legal Description: TS IM MIN 1/4 SE 1/4 30-5-72, BEG Cell 1/4 Residential Barn T Final desjqn to be part of ~ B a revised -Drainage Masterr 0012 5 09 11' 5 1295 rT SD PT BEIMG 115 601% M/IN' 1/4 SE 1/4, 9 572 'FT, M 62 4-OW 1137.2 FL 5 09Â°11'00" E 1295.0' 4 7.5 AD M/L, MAMFOSP, CP \/ Manf ra *0 Proposed Grandstard n 4 ve ' Announcer it~~770--3 664 1 L=294.7 000 - - Work Area/Limits of 12=640.3' Statistical Information % 4 1- Disturbance - Sce Other O Drawings -',Shed - ZONE ~ (1 Â¢ 2) Gross/Met Project Area 329,100 st 7.555 Acres 4. -4120' f <9- / (Mo Beductions) 444 0 q.///-//A~./ ZONE O 9. 012>2 CO (3) Number of Units D\/ A 00 f CO 4 4* . â‚¬ corÂ·psyll,6 :~ P 1.n (4) Project Itt Densitg P\/A (5) Floor Area Ratio Pew Grandstand "9% 3:* Upper Level Seating Including north box seats 15,667 sf ~ *y Main Level excluding north DOX seats 3,510 sp Commercial fortistal| 2 a *39Â£27 Total for Grand5tand 19,105 sf Other Single-Story Existing Buildings Reetrooms Outlying Portistall 3020 st OFfice 0. Public liestrooms 960 E# Stanleg Park Offices 1,600 sf n. M. // Shed (to be relocated on site) 616 sf - -~ Â£Â» *~JIL Announcer Stand 600 se Shop 1,610 sf 41(-/P \1 0 Worse earns 14,460 st Partial Buildings 3,065 sf 45,924 sf Total for Other Buildings 26,739 sf i Total Floor Area All Buildings \1\\Of= o o Floor Area Batio (FAIR) 0.1395 (6 Â¢ 7) Off-street Parking (Grandstand Onlg) ZONE Parking Specs (1 per 3 seating capacitg) 097 Spaces Accessible Parking (2% of total) Id Space Manford Ave Parking design and construction is not included in this project 123 f - (0) Lot Coverage Building Footprints 43,166 sf ~ (16,427 4 for Grandstand + 26,739 50 for other bldgs) - Paved Parking Â¢ Drive Areas (estimated) 55000 4 C J Sidewalks Â¢ Plaza (estimated) 23,730 sf ZONE E Total Impervious Area 121,096 sf 37.0% Multi-Family E Total Fervious Area 207,204 sf 62.0% CO Residential u M. = 30'-0- 05 AUG 11 200 ~ |~ (11) Mcasurement of Maxirrum Building Neight on Slopes C EV[)6 1.9,52 1 a = 20.9 (20'-1034") Elevation at highest point of natural grade (SH Corner) b = 19.6 (19'-7 JR") Elevation of natural grade below rjdge (worst case) Commercial M. = 30'-0" + 0.5 x ( 20'-1034" - 19'-74,1 ) M,- 30'-734' Outlying General Notes: 30'-7" Actual height of primarg ridge above existing natural grade 34'-11" Actual height of cupola ridge above existing natural grade 1. All required improvements shall be completed or guaranteed Befer to 6rading Plan Sheet 3 For locations of points aÂ¢b prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy Refer to Building Elevations Sheet 5 For ridge heights 2. The owner shall be required to provide For the handicap accessibility in accordance with ANSI A117.1 2003 TA Thorn Associates RC. 3. Approval of this development plan creates a vested right Overall Site Plan (Vicinity Map) 1 of 5 pursuant to Article 60 of Title: 24, G.B.S., as amended. ARCHITECTS and PLANNERS Scale: 1"- 120'-0" 0 60' 120' 100' 240' Mort:h 69* 10 2 1,001000 Stanley Park Grandstand General Notes 1. Pew landscaping illustrated this plan ((5) new trees) is estimated 1209 Manford Avenue $6,000.00 installed. 2. Minor changes in utility ling aliqnments For this Grandstand Project require no easement considerations. Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Deve/opment P/an July 8,2009 Ramp Â¢ access wags provide Audio jack for wheelchair access to 20% 00 boxes alternate announoers booth 9 11 13 12 13 12 9 6 12 3 12 9 12 10 11 0 13 12 11 10 9 7\1 KEEP CLEAR ACCESS WAY KEEP GEAR ACCESS WAY |~\ 1- -- -r--r r--T - - - - 7-m- - -1 r- Thn- -1--- ---- 7-1- -r 7 i '455 liii5 N - 511 17 5 i ii i 5 ii5 4 51ii7. 10 0. 12 12. 10. 10. 10 0 | \ Cross , Aisle + 1 ~ .-r. I ~ ' ..~i: " 2' r-r/ . Iit- 1 7-1 i 1 I 1113 111 Ili 111 1 \ 1 \ 1 \ 1 1 \ Seat backs at first \ (9) rows (option) \ 11 \ 2 1 \ 1 1 \ 1 1 \ 1 1 1 1 \ 1 1 1 Alurninum bench seating 2690 Seating Gapacitg Mandrails within on enclosed aluminum ~ / ./.\\ stepped aisles riscrs I -6 Announoer booth \ 9 Upper Level Seating Plan \ ffo *KPB Scale: 1" - 20'-0â€¢ -04â‚¬R 1 1 \\ \ X \ '2391,6)(P' \ Existing arena - edge Â¢ east edge to Align ME comer, and north x - Work Area/Limits of Disturbance - ~ i \\\ I existing grandstand -~ j location \ - 1 - \ 250 d. " Existing electric _ \ 101-oil . transformer to remain f - / Steps w/ rails Â¢ gated Box seats w/ steel railings Wheelchair accessible ~ . Mew fericing Â¢ gate to - Fle:: Utilities Plan access to/from arena ort correte risers - 5eating scating spaces - Ses , 11 match existing Sheet 4 by Fairgrourid Upper Level Seating Plan \ 1 3 S \ 6 1. IiI 1% 1 971-4,1 1 \ A. KEEP CLEAR ACCESS WAY - _KEEP CLEAR ACCESS WAY 1 1 r -------------1 r----- , 2 am : 1 X i Existing Â¢ 1 1 Cross Aisle * 100-0" 1 1 4 relocated shed \ 1 Relocateld Footprints 1 Existing 1 3 E I Shedl v 1 1, ~ 1 v 1 1 3 T.- ,Â«C void space below scating _LÂ·Â·--- 1 able Chai 40# - 2*0 1 1 1 tora e Stor ge" Jan . X 7 Â·. r. 5ttullers ~__~_____~____~~~~~____~ â€¢/lie Strdle 4 - Mew trandormer at existing v 2 - -= 1 / location - 8=: Utilities Plan Woop stgle 1 UP Off'ME Sir. -4102-%4-~4 rl,.4,=;iÂ·--Li *elncesmierr~ ~1~ *99,-11" prefinished steel , Women's - - Sheet 4 bicycle racks 1 ramil 4 100'-6' -4 ~Open-~ ~ FrzIRefri~ < 7 ~ 4 09'-11'1.11 / r \ 2 1 I ji Space QLJ ~ ir - -45-9/<-1/42/16. - Outline of I Open S~)act J, 4 4 1 1 7 |A|ater entrg Â¢ backflow pfÂ·eventer 1 / I Existing building I I - r =/ 112 / 1 to be removed Â·-x Bernov! O. 1 Water 04..._,%4- Mew gates \ 1.1 f 1. Remove 12" Ash tres'.,r / Il Ill, 1, Men's *- lickets KÂ· -c_ I , ~1-ckefs*. ; I L - - - - 4 -4 - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - -1 1 90'-11 1~ 34% ap~t~~~ibilitg ~ ~100~~F; - --2~ f - 3~711) 651}t~on Z-- Femove O" - ~L~~-J~J~(U 7- ~-1 - Mew 24" wide concrete | ~- 1 Fing tree i / drain pan - IRC: Grading 1 | ~ Mew gate -~, sidewalk + ~ 1 I section of deck Mew Rene.Ing Â¢ gate to I b= Â· ----_~~J,=rcm new concreÂ·te paving w/ coIBr411____._1>/ Plan Sheet 3 - ~ I I E E X 3 match exj ng .. " -ED I , ~ M --1-~noreta accentÂ·bands -as iiiustpa~IHT<---27~~---------- ~ Timber posts on - /5 k Plew low // \ l . 4 retaining v~11 11 - -- - 0 \ sgnthetic base w/ < a // sandstone cap - typ. ~ VT'O , New storrAdrain inlet - me g- r:-~ jl Utilities F'Nt Sheet 4 Future parking lot . 1 Â·~ construction - Be: . I k Sheet 3 : 112*-consrete paving w/ ii u Uy /2\31 Belocate I i Future post mounted 11_, x . colored concrete accent 11 (6) Mew Ash shade trees / ~ 5 bands as illustrated - 1 - Re: Utilities Plan ~ 1 Van Accessible Â¢ 1 shown , i ~ Standard Accessible ~I| Â·'/44.4 ' ~.f Sheet 4 for irrigation ~ 48 '521 1-0 ~ I for new landscaping bed Femove existing asphalt Parking Signs Â£, X /illÂ»-2CX-.elt 1,6 - '*41 1 9 planting by Fairgrourd _ Arri %23:) mito \ 4 10~Â·7122eel__>,1 .agg/0,, ~i. Â· tree to remain Existing Existinul conorete Existing 12" Ash 4 331 8 ~ planting by Fairground >*%>to remain asphalt sidewalk to remain Existing / paving 7 Office # Existing 10" Fine 1 Â·Â· y'â€¢0< tre= to remain 11 /Si F- w /9=0/ 37?I '44=m=metme--,-mene=me=* 29:%9% b---*Existiv . -2------ < Â» Existing Portlstall Restrooms Existing X asphalt pavingl X ----- ---- x ------ 6 -- --- Existiry concrete h ---- -- .11[ retaining wall _ x - 98 4-x-x-x-x-x-x-x x-x-x x-x-x-x-x-x-x--L- x- x- x-x-x -x-x- x-x- x-x-x- x- x-x-x-x -x-x -x-x-x-x- X -X-X-X- - - ' - - * -M 62Â°4Â·0'00" IN 1137.2' TA~ Thorp Associates RC. Site Imorovement Plan & Main Level Floor Plan M/1/1-/lifid Fl 2 of 5 L 171 1 ARCHITECTS and PLANNERS Scale:1"-'-0" 0 101 20' 30' 40, Marth ~ Hoeql.29 1 1 . P Stanley Park Grdodstabd-- Graphic Legend / --I.--. _ propertg Lines and 1209 Mdnford Avenue49 Ill/Mjlll Limits of Disturbance Future / Indoor Estes Park, doloradop.5117 - - - - - - - - Outline oF[Existing 6pardstand Arena I ' Â· Ourb of Parkirâ‚¬ Lot Deve/00minttlan -X-X-X-X- Existing Fence Ooncrete Sidewalk -X-X-X-X- Mew renoe .= -Ju|y~8,-2009 1 :r =5 ,Â·*'~ ''f*..'~ Existing Contours #~-/ Mew Contours / 5 L__ -1 , 3 fw_g:==:ail Building footprint with Foof / Overhangs above - Be: Other 1 -- --- /460--------- -/0---------- 25.0 Manford Ave 1 TA Thorp Associates RC. Parking & Grading Plan M........ ~ 3 of 5 ARCHITECTS and PLANNERS Scale: 1" 50'-0" 0 10' 20' 30' 40' Morth - - 11 . r#*tâ‚¬ - 2.14 -. "mb; 4. .4 *4/4-'F ..pw/1 A 42; r . IL 40 Vt*/ 6.. ... '61 m I 1 4 r * Â«e 8,+ . 6 . 4 - 44 i> 2 , I . 4 0 4409' 22 0 7, 0 7 0 M .... : I I 1.* P . .3. I. . . 6 6 - r k. .4, 7 t, 0 .t .1 I - ty . A - . & X X( \ ((('Â«1 ,%~y jt-.*.f .,.. . :0 N .. 6. .. .... - .. -. - , 3,2.91 . 0. I . ' '' b JUR .. '1 , 4 h . .0 . //.2 1-2 , ...0 -0 .. .. .J- 0 45. =41 --./~~i . . /1 - .. . I. .... 0 i I.F F .. . I. .tflf#. f.1 - 1 - - ./ I . a 4 ... -L 1/4 4/7 Im....L L. , . :.' I 1 t&44 04*4 7L 4~4i i,<'d !4.. 4 1 i 4 0 - .... . f 0 h. ... . ..j, 1.1 ' 1/ . 0 â‚¬. 1 . f.' 2 . .0 .0 .. I .0 . ... 0 -0 00. c â€¢ ' .02%- .... . 6 / 4 49 r ~. 0 .. 0 " - 4 qu@: 1 A \ . 11 2% . 0 1,1 1 1 e - ' 2 4 - 4 -Ic # + 4 j I 0/ ..0 t . -. i .. 2 . .r , 1 5 ...*..P,f: ..35;t 4 4, 4 I F'~'%497.- ..4.} 4Â¢ 14 9 - ... . 11 0, 4% 42 4 . 9 9 ":'. - ,Â¢19: 2 7 -h 'W;. ..4 10% 0 e='21 -It'...'â€¢L. lk_ u. ~~~,~ .. . . . r 1 e. . 9 a . O 0 T 1 1 97 . 1. i f-- 5 /9/ U~ r .. 1 3. 1,1~I.P. /0 1 C. 1.,t $ 4, -rk,J , I . I . t~ A - 1 - 0 3 '- ')- * < 1 0 te~ 80 ..~ 1 -1 , 1-/, 4 . / X ..L ., * . .5 - . 1, ':1 ' 40 '11) 1.r ft .00'2-# .., ~ i I * * . 00 . 4 4,1 -0, - ~ - 9 1 . 0 . 0 .V.. . 4 0 Â¥ O , 4:k : $ 9 Aq- . 1 4 1'41, r ..14 4,<7 0 * 42: ... , - .94't te 2- '4I .- : s o. os ~ e 5 1 ji e - '-2 .9- â€¢ . Fif , . .. .- .. 4 1,4 9 4Â» 1 t 0 0 0 Â· 0 -4 #iÂ¥. ..1 7 v & ' ' 14 91 'lit ..~ 9 : 4 1 1 04 , A- 0 .u ' - . I '7* â€¢â€¢IL 4.4.. 1 3 0- .Alw 0 j Â£ 1. . 4.5.Ii . it:4. e*./E . * 44 tt :1#. 92. '1* 4 - \\46 1 1 14 , 1.7 7 ./ : 4 ./. 9 fl 1//r + 4 .4 -> ' I -4 1 - -/:I e , Â»*i ..t Â£ 2 44 0 36 kâ€¢ 6 1 ..Ft fir- rs: 4 ". ..3-1 Â· .,2 4Â« 1 f. 1 1, i 4 1 ' f & 0 ' 7*ju/22- -=...- -4.4, 4'113 . 147*' 9 " . . Site Legend Stanley Park Grandstand Property Lines and 1209 Manford Avenue CDâ‚¬237&<Illl/Ilâ‚¬EBM~ Limits of Disturbance ------ Outline oF Existing Grandstand Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Concrete Sidewalk- Deve/opment P/an --5- - Existing Underground Electric Service - -01-15 - - Existing Overhead Elcotric Service 6 - Existing Gas Service July 8,2009 ----------- Existing Storm Drain 00 - - Existing Sanitary Sewer' --T- - Existing Telephone Service - - - IN - - - - Existing Water Service 4599Â»Â»5009Â»596'%49Â»50649 Existing Utility to be removed -X-X-X X- Existing Fence Â· Â· - New Underground Electric Service Work Arca/Limits of Disturbance < Â·- Plew Gas Service - - -96 --- Mew Sanitarry Sewer - - - -IN---- Plew Water Service - Maintain 2" water line to servics new "clean-up" -X-X-X-X- New Fence wall hydrants \ 0 -r- -r- -E -5- -5- -E- -E- -E- -E- -m -E -E J- 1 - -E ~ Electric; Transformer \ r -~ ~ - te>~b 0 21-1 1 pÂ·pÂ· 0 Existing power Poles Existing below-grade electric ./, 1 - a 1- \ ines to i u, I â€žill . 4 3* New Decorative Light Pole Existing transformer to rernain 6 ~r ------------------------------------------------------------____--1 4 Mew Becessed Down Lights \ el - .1 ) @ Existing Manholc 11 Overhangs above - IRze: Other -=diw ----0 w 47 New 2 1/2" water entrg w/ ~ 1 C~ / backflow preventer 411 -i---7- li Building Footprint wilth Roof 1 Ill E- Bernove extent of exist. / Drawings Ill .5/1 Berrove existing below Relocate , 19 -21 \ water line as shown 4 - 1 1 4 grade electric line IRemove exist. gas service line -~ Mew sanitarg sewer ling ~ -~|1 F7 Existing Building footprint New storm drain inicts ~ serving restroorns ~ I I Existin~ 1 - ---Â·--------- -- ----- -- -- -- ------ -----\7 -122-me ExiSE sarilfary storm drain Iii .- and drain Iii .5 \ Bemove existira Down lights within 1 0 New below-grade electric line building soffits -1 ~~ sewer I ine as shown f ' 1 Pew Trees between exis-12- transformer / ~-~ - -~~ -- -) -F-%-~ _ -1~ -- 2-3\\\{- --~-~a--,1--~~ ---- -d 1 Shed j ji / \ 11 1 1 11 4 J â‚¬ i .\A P.1- . 0 0 / Existing telephone pole to remain (~ ~ Existing Trees ~ ~0, 41 1 4 L - - __ - ~ ~i~ ~'1-t~ F- 7 4. 1 at existing location Scrrove existing 7. . Mew 100 EVA transformer overhead electric: ling - -1 4 4 L LiA '4, 4 4' UNI 117 ~ 3 Â»OL 1 -91 Ed \ - - 6"9 ~67Z0?#Â»e/#hfM/*/HUN+NÂ¢N</.H#*Hy 1.9f -T, h . A Out Â¢ cap existing water line 93..1 Existing 4" water line to fIre hydrant cast of building 1 11 4 -9.4 4 ey -1 *L ,-A % * -r -*10 -'0/Wt Â¥ t> Exist. power pole and overhead 4- 040 010[*.0 - -.1 ----4651kq,/~ \0449 0.1/*:~-\0 ~7'.73/ / ,/1Â«Â· Mew below-grade electrical line from transformgr to exist. office power line to remain A +411/W . r -1 - r--Lt- -2-1------ --- -J L .:PL...-.t/#OTER&%591/"..Ill...7/I....Alu,-41& c~ ,-0- . Â¢ continuing to exist. restroorns J 4,b ~--0 Jo-- --Ii-,#MA,/Fwi'7,4.gUEN=~ i --* Rf'% 4 L#I,4~ Mew grease Intercepter -1 22 Mew 4" sanitarw sewer can:ction to existing Extend 3/4" irrigation Bernove vault Â¢ _j Bemove existin belotv )-I A ~ <p. L _-te 2- .xiy~%* /1. storm drain line ling as showr 0-1 341'40 Mew 2 1/2" water Hne to serve grandstand 1 \ *1 f/1 â‚¬-1012 Â¥ .uo -1 I e. 1 \\ '7*M .1 1 241 4 1 * 11rt~*"tal Â·%5:~2'w - -14"w 34"I.4 1_j 34"W Mew storm drain inlet _ 0 Â«1 - -t=Â»A#f 14 Itrl 11 ~1~ Â· Â· -5- Â· Â· ~~5- Â· - -15- Â· Â· -2~~'- Â· Â· -E- Â· Â· 1 x p< r.- - L*~Â£ - , 32 Â· Mew 3/4" gas service (21Â°91 pressure) f Â»Sh .4,1, 4 n -r--- r >Â«.d /4 \\\*f (6) New town standard light \ ,+ 1 6 = Pew gas meter for Grandstard Exi,4ting 411 water I inc extends 1 Ky ~ Extend 3/4" gas main to new meter poles Â¢ below-grade electrical ~ to meter pit Â¢ hwdrant within HI Ic/ rrÂ·-r-- - 2 -7 7/42 // Â»K 404/ 6 1 3 parking Cll L. irrigation controls 10 b 43 2 / 1 ,34 / 0 ~~ i ~xisting~ckffreveÂ« / i ~ >96 1% \\ -1 G 1.\ 9/ mÂ«. . 7 .... EXistirl'g- .r - - *--"â€¢;0:~,"Â·Â·Â·-Â·-r--~-",r- ..,h. Restroorr s ,1 Existing x e -' Shop 1 1 1 --1 2 44 -5 4- 1% #49.4 , 1 1 1 Â« P 1 EADNALL \670 - 4"W - _ - 494 - - - I 4"Ial I - - -~4'14 ~ - - -4"1,4 J e R X - -4"W - _ _ -4"1,4 - - 31"14 - - - -4"N - _ - _ a =73-370=x--7-X-.1371- x - x -- x - x - x ----- _X-X -.-X--X .--Â¥- 4 - p----'>~LI-ZJL-47:.4--..Rill-Ji---Al.I.4 - Â¥ al.1."'.. --Tkwhi-X-X ... 99 6"W - - - -- 6"I.4 - - - - 6"W - - - 46 6"I.<I ~Â·ONC-_Â· ~r~WÂ·-ON.[1- --6Â¤Â·-ORE _ 1-6"lÂ·4 -ORE-_Â·--6.WÂ·-OVE-_ --6.WÂ· ~H.E-.-i.--~W _OME - - -- 6"I--Â·39 - 2 -T- --T- -T- -T- T- - - -T- ~T- -T- -T- -T- T- -T- -T- -T- 9 - TRENCH DRAIN DRAN GRATE W/ NO NLET AND OUTLET * WITH GRATE CULVERTS 1 1 Â« 1 1 Manford Avenue 1 11 \\\ -IA Thorn Associates RC. j ARCHITECTS and PLANNERS j Scale: 10 - 20'-O Utilities Plan Aff....6.6 li~~ 4 of 5 O 10 20' 30 40' North Â·... Stanley Park Grandstand 1209 Manford Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Deve/opment P/an July 8,2009 Heavy screen framed /-1 openings at ~pola 9f Â® 6 f 9 0 3 Standard profile metal Standard Fascia Neavq screen Framed openings at cÂ¢pola profile metal rascia Liner panels Between upper Liner panels betwlen upper piser 4 windoip rher Â¢ windows ~ 2 11 roofing panels Standard profile metal 111 11 Standard profild metal 1 1 1 roofing panels 1 1 1 1 -- - 7633 l lili 1 Ill Bleachers withol seat backs Upper aluminum railings by Announcer control Bleachers without reat backs Upper aluminum railings by Bleacher Manufacturer booth - Sce Plan Sheet 2 Bleacher Manufacturer Bleachers with seat backs Bleachers with seat backs (first 9 rows) Lower steel railing by G.G. Concrete foundation wall (first 9 rows) Lower steel ralling by 6.6. fronting onto Arena North Elevation 'fjild-1 at 25'-0" o.c. - typ Gantilevered steel roof structure Scale: 3/32" 0 1'-0" 0 4' 0' 16' 24' 9 9 9 Â«EF t ff TE D 44) * f < beyond Ventilation cup#ia 112 Single glazed metal Single glazed metal 2x Wood trim Â¢ shingles building manufacturer's building manufacturer's gable ends 9 1 1 fixed window &3%0 Wood kick1rs 2x Wood trim Â¢ shingles standard alurnimim sÂ·tandard aluminum - 6x14 Wood beams B~ _ 1 fixed wjndow at gable ends 12 12 ---- -_ 12 Standard profile metal 3- Standard profile: metal Standard prof k metal 3 - E -~ -71-2 --1 zz u. roofing panels 3 roofing panels roofing panels Standard prof Me metal Standard profile metal roofing panels Standard profile metai I 1 E-1 Fi7 i rT-1 444 Wood beams .1~ O 1 11~71 Il~~3 1-7-1 i .--- = Fascia Fascia 4xl 4 Wood beams ~ ~ 4KO Wood kickers 4*0 Wood kickers Glass window wall in structural aluminum frame Standard vertical metal wall panels Berridge "lap" metal siding Standard vertical metal wall panels I N' 1111 11 U N - - - 1,11 1 Outline of shed I Individual letter signage Berridge 'lap" metal siding (not self illuminated) beyond i , 9 445.- 22-1_~ Or FÂ·: 1 -, L ..2 or approved substitute 11111111 'te. 46 (41 4x4 Posts w/ (4) 4x4 Posts w/ I I lili 111 1 1 -r 4x6 wood kickers 4x6 wood kickers Sgnthetic fieldstone 11 1 11 ~ 11 1 IN '4-,111.lili lilli 61]nthetiG ficidstone Synthetic Fleldstone - -- 1 111 1'1 Li 1- Synthetic fielcistons J Individual Ictter signage ~- ~ ' !11.11 1 1 1 base w/ sandstone cap (not self illuminated) 1 baae w/ sandetone cap -/ _ --- I.li- | I -2 | | bass w/ sandstone cap base= w/ sandstones cap 1 -7 -7----|- t- -r-- Outline of: existing grandstand 9 -1--\ 1 1 1 1 1 - Approximate existing gracie Approximate existing grade Mew Finished floor line 1 - 1 Difference in Existing and Proposed Finish Floor Concrete foundation wall Elevations West Elevation East Elevation 8/4/.1-/1 Scale: 3/32" - 1'-0" Scale: 3/32" - 1'-0" 0 4' 0' 16' 24' 0 4' 0' 16' 24' Heavy screen Framed openings at cupola ~ ~ 6 Qi)-) 9 10 11 Standard profile metal roofing panels Standard profile metal Standard vertical metal Individual letter signage I T.O. Gu das roofing panc15 1 Standard vertical metal wall panels (not self illuminated) 4 1 4x14 IWood beams I wall panels 12" Tall contrasting color menu board bg tenarrt Standard profile building address numerals i | 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 Standard profile metal 1 1 4*0 Wood kickers I i ' 1 132'-039' fascia metal Fascia 120'-438Â·0 Single glazed metal 1 1.09 = =1 d lili 111111111 '~UÂ« 1% 1111111 ===Ic=n===1 inill~ Ill~~~~ ~I [23UIELJOICIE]i[232223~ i ~~i i,I~i'~ ~ ~ ~r I Il~~ 4 4I EZZIIOU ~ ~~~~ ~1 building manufacturer's standard aluminum 1 1 11 11 11 'll 111'~li' 111 lit' ll ~1,11 1 Sin~Ic glazed metal I bui ding manufacturer's standard aluminum ~-Â« ~10*E_~ 10* ' ~' ~'ill ~Miw i |rp ul~l~;,i~~1 I~; i ~i ~1: :'I lvÂ·'1w Am i:~,4 ~ ,; Ai' "1' " 1 W 411111 l ill i 1 fixed window 11 1 --f 1.11!1 1, i :'11:Â·11'/ 1 M ' Â·i 1 111,!1 1 111 Synthetic Pie:Idstorne - 3 09 23 - - .2 \ ---- /\ Sgnthetic fieldstone base w/ sandstons cap ifkt;* __ _ :4- . r_ =t, 2 -~ 02.-31 - n-: 113-pr - t: _ 4 c.251 _ - bass w/ sandstone cap - Â·21 9.2 533-- -- 21-2- 1-11:-iN ---Al.-t Goncessions Fin. FIr. -- 901-11. Sljnthetic freldstorle I ~~~~Ii_ ~,r~r~~~~mg~~t~edp~ metajsidin~~--- --22--12--{_ _ ~..~-~-~~~--~~~ts- ~ -- -- -- - re inforced ~ 1 (2) 4x4 Posts w/ -7 -- --- --------- --------- Fiberglass (Lorrugated Metal ~ or approved substitute Berridge "lap" metal siding base w/ sandstone cap or approvea substitute 4x6 wood kickers 4x6 wood kickers / panels - Approximate -1 deck ceiling existing grade Fiberglass South Elevation panels reinforced tale:-3732"--TZO" Mful.1.....p....9 Sgnthetic fieldstone -Al Thorn Associates RC. base w/ 5andstone cap 5 of 5 0 4' 0' 16' 24' L It'L | ARCHITECTS and PLANNERS