HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Parking 1665 Highway 66
1665 Hwy 66Loading AreaSetback Variance
Estes Park Community Development Department, Planning Division
Room 230, Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue
PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517
Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estes.org
E STES V ALLEY B OARD OF A DJUSTMENT
MEETINGDATE& LOCATION:September13,2016, 9:00AM; Board Room, Town Hall, 170
MacGregor Avenue
APPLICANT REQUEST:This is a request for a variance to Estes Valley Development Code
(EVDC) Section 7.11.O.2.b. Off-Street Parking and Loading: Location. The Variance would
allow ain lieu of the110-footrequired setbackfrom the
centerline of the street (Mills Drive).
The purpose of the Variance is to allowthe loading area of the entertainment event facility to
be located within the setback.
Staff recommends approval.
LOCATION: 1665 Hwy 66, within the Town of Estes Park
VICINITY MAP:See attachment
APPLICANT/OWNER:Michelle Oliver / Randy Jackson (Elk Meadow RV Essential Group LLC)
STAFF CONTACT: Audem Gonzales, Planner I
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:This is a request to grant a variance to allow for
setback in lieu of the 110-foot required setback from the centerline of the street (MillsDrive). This
entertainment event facility went through the Special Review Development Plan process and was
conditionally approved on July 26, 2016. Onecondition of approval isto gain Varianceapproval
to the loading area setback. This application is a result of that condition.
The property is currently zoned A-Accommodations. The development area is approximately 5
acres in size and contains two designated wetland areas. Currently, the area is being used for
RV storage and campground uses. Property to the south is zoned A1-Accommodations and is
development with single-family homes. Property to the east is zoned CO-Commercial Outlying
and is developed with a commercial business.
REVIEW CRITERIA:VDC, all
applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria
contained therein. The Board of Adjustment is the decision-making body for this application.
REFERRALAND PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Public Notice. Written notice has been mailed to 23 surrounding property owners. A legal notice
was published in the Trail Gazette.
webpage.
Affected Agencies. This request has been routed to reviewing agency staff for review and
comment. No major comments/concerns have been received by reviewing agencies.
Public Comments. Staff has received six written public comments as of September 7, 2016.
Any written comments received after this date will be posted to
webpage under public comment.
The written public comments are all opposed to the Variance request. The reasons stated include;
a dramatic effect on the quality of life for all adjoining neighbors, heavy truck traffic and idling, and
and the magnitude of the Variance request.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions,
narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other areas or
buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this
impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards, this Code or the
Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
The development area is approximately 5 acres in size and is zoned A-Accommodations.
The setback requirements for this area are 15-feet from the front property line for the
building location and 110-feet from the centerline of the street for the loading area location.
Applying the 110-foot loading area setback requirement and 50-foot wetland setback
requirement at this specific location would leave approximately 50-feet for the loading
area. The applicant has expressed in their Statement of Intent that the logical placement
of the loading area is adjacent to the proposed parking lot and situated at the entrance of
the kitchen for deliveries.
2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following factors:
a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;
Staff Finding:
Without the Variance, the loading area would need to be relocated on the site. With the
approved development plan, it would need to be located on the north end of the building
which would require a redesign of the structure. The kitchen was placed near Mills Drive
to have loading access close to the road, which is a typical orientation for a buildings
loading area for accessibility reasons. The EVDC requires a loading area which the
applicants state cannot be placed anywhere else along the building.
1665 Hwy 66. loading area setback variance
Page 2 of 5
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff Finding:
The Variance request is for a 56% reduction from Code requirements. Staff finds this
request to be substantial. The applicant has proposed to mitigate potential effects by
landscaping the area south of the loading area, between the building and Mills Drive.
c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or
whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the
variance;
Staff Finding:
The character of the area would be substantially altered with the loading area location.
The property is zoned A-Accommodations. Property to the south is built residentially but
is zoned A1-Accommodations. Allowing the loading area to be located closer to the
centerline of the street than is required will have an effect on the residential neighborhood
to the south. The proposed street buffer landscaping as well as loading area landscaping
will help to mitigate that effort. The applicant has stated that the current use of the site is
RV storage and campground and landscaping and screening are currently not present.
The property to the east is also a commercial property that contains a parking lot with
heavy usage. There is no screening associated with that development. Staff has
received no complaints about that operation in regards to screening.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water
and sewer.
Staff Finding:
This Variance would not affect the delivery of public services.
e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement;
Staff Finding:
The requirement for the 110-foot setback was in place when the owner purchased the
property. Staff made the applicant aware of this requirement during the Development
Review process. The purpose for placing the loading area at this location was to access
the kitchen, utilize the parking lot, minimize the need for additional site grading or
impervious coverage.
f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a
variance.
Staff Finding:
In order to meet Code requirements, the entire building would need to be redesigned. This
would be feasible in principle, but it is unclear whether other redesign issues may emerge
if that happens. The new placement of the loading area may require a redesign of the
parking lot as well. The loading space must access the kitchen for deliveries.
3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the
the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions of situations.
1665 Hwy 66. loading area setback variance
Page 3 of 5
Staff Finding:
The conditions of this application are not general to the Estes Valley. This site has several
setback issues that are not generally all found on Accommodation lots such as street
setbacks, loading area setbacks, wetland setbacks, etc. All these setbacks greatly limit
the development potential of the site. The approved building proposal is for up to 750
people. That size of building is difficult to place on the site.
4. No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing or proposed
subdivision if it will result in an increase in the number of lots beyond the number otherwise
permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations.
Staff Finding:
No reduction in lot size or increase in number of lots is proposed by this variance request.
5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford
relief.
Staff Finding:
A setback Variance would be the least deviation from Code that would allow the loading
area to be located at this site.
6. Under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use
expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of this Code for the zone district
containing the property for which the variance is sought.
Staff Finding:
The variance does not propose a non-permitted or prohibited use.
7. In granting such variances, the BOA may require such conditions at will, in its independent
judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standard so varied or modified.
Staff Finding:
The BOA should explore additional screening requirements to further screen the loading
area. Neighboring properties are concerned with idling and visual effects.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variance
CONDTIONAL TO:
1. No specific conditions are recommended at this time.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
I move to APPROVE the requested variance with the findings and conditions recommended by
staff.
I move to DENY the requested variance with the following findings (state reason/findings).
1665 Hwy 66. loading area setback variance
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity map
2. Statement of Intent
3. Application
4. Site plans
5. Landscaping Plan
6. Building Elevations and Floorplans
1665 Hwy 66. loading area setback variance
Page 5 of 5