Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Landscaping Buffer Rambling River Condos 1986 Dallman Dr 2004-04-06 DATE: April 6, 2004 REQUEST: A request by Bryce Dallman for a variance from the 25- foot landscaping buffer requirement. LOCATION: 1986 Highway 66, within unincorporated Estes Park. FILE #: River Bend on the Spur Condos, 4/2/04 SITE DATA TABLE: Parcel Number: 3534400019 Total Development Area: 2.09 acres Number of Lots: One Existing Land Use: S.F. Residential Proposed Land Use: Accommodations (sold into condominium ownership) Existing Zoning: “A” Accommodations Adjacent Zoning- East: “A” Accommodations North: “A-1” Accommodations West: “A” Accommodations South: “A” Accommodations Adjacent Land Uses- East: Accommodations North: S.F. Residential West: Undeveloped South: Accommodations PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The applicant, Bryce Dallman, requests a variance to Section 7.5.F.2b(6) “No Development in Street Frontage Buffer Area” of the Estes Valley Development Code to allow a driveway to be located within the mandated arterial street frontage buffer landscape area. A development plan is currently under review in the Community Development office, with an anticipated April 20 Planning Commission hearing. The applicant proposes to build eleven accommodation condominiums; these would be for accommodation use Dallman Landscaping Buffer Request 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 RMNP RockyMountainNationalPark RMNP USFS USFS USFS Lake Estes MarysLake LilyLake Mac Gregor Ranch YMCAConferenceGrounds 36 EVDC Boundary EVDC Boundary Eagle Rock RMNPFall River Entrance RMNP Beaver MeadowsEntrance Prospect Mt. - (/34 (/36(/7 (/36 (/34 (/36 (/7 CheleyCamps USFS USFS Page #2 –Dallman Landscaping Buffer Request only, and could not be used for year-round occupation by a single-family. A primary reason the proposed condominiums could be used only for accommodation use is the lack of parking. The applicant is opting to build eleven units where over forty “hotel rooms” could be built. Section 7.5.F.2b(6) “No Development in Street Frontage Buffer Area” states “Within the street frontage buffer, there shall be no development, parking or drives, except for access to the portion of the site not in the buffer, which is approximately perpendicular to the right-of-way, underground utility installation, pedestrian and bicycle paths, allowable signs, and necessary lighting.” The “development” proposed to be within the setback buffer is a driveway, which would be allowed if it were simply crossing over the landscape buffer area. The variance is to that portion of the language that reads “approximately perpendicular to the right-of-way”. The driveway is proposed to be parallel to the right-of-way for approximately 200-feet. Staff had initially advertised a variance request to allow the driveway to be located within three-feet of the property line. The EVDC allows this standard to be waived if the adjoining property owner provides consent in writing; CDOT has provided this consent. Therefore, this variance request is not necessary. REVIEW CRITERIA: In accordance with Section 3.6 C. “Standards for Review” of the EVDC, all applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria set forth below: 1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code’s standards, provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the specific standards, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: It is Staff’s opinion the narrow shape of the lot, the river setback requirement, and the 25-foot highway buffer combine to create special circumstances associated with the lot. 2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following factors: a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance; Staff Comment: The property may continue as residential use. b. Whether the variance is substantial; Page #3 –Dallman Landscaping Buffer Request Staff Comment: The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variances are substantial. c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance; Staff Comment: The variance request would allow development in an area that is normally reserved for landscaping. The buffering is “intended to help mitigate the physical, visual and environmental impacts created by development.” The proposed development is a significant change from the existing single-family dwelling and pond (which would be filled in). Based on the purpose of the buffer in relation to the development, there would be an impact on the neighborhood. Therefore, Staff recommends additional screening is included to balance the variance relative to the standard. d. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Comment: The applicant is not the owner of the property, but is proposing to development the site. Mr. Dallman had a pre-application meeting with Community Development Staff to discuss this proposal, and has knowledge of the requirement. e. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Comment: It is unlikely the site could be developed to the proposed density without the requested variance. 3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Comment: The applicant could redesign the site to eliminate the garages from units 7-10, which would then allow shorter driveway aprons, and could result in locating the driveway further away from the property line. 4. In granting such variances, the BOA may require such conditions as will, in its independent judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standard so varied or modified. Staff Comment: A vote of approval should include the following conditions: a. Approval of a development plan for the property. b. A minimum of two (2) 8-foot tall evergreen trees shall be planted between units 6 and 7 and, a minimum of two (2) 8-foot tall evergreen trees shall be planted Page #4 –Dallman Landscaping Buffer Request between units 8 and 9. These shall be delineated on the landscaping plan for the development plan. c. A minimum of two (2) 8-foot tall evergreen trees shall be placed between the proposed driveway and the north property line. These shall be delineated on the landscaping plan for the development plan. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. At the time of this report, no significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, staff finds: 1. The applicant, Bryce Dallman, requests a variance to Section 7.5.F.2b(6) “No Development in Street Frontage Buffer Area” of the Estes Valley Development Code to allow a driveway to be located within the mandated arterial street frontage buffer landscape area. 2. The purpose of the request is to build eleven accommodation condominiums. 3. The site is located at 1986 Highway 66, within unincorporated Estes Park. 4. The property may continue to be used for residential use. 5. The Applicant's predicament could not be mitigated through some method other than a variance. 6. The Board should use their best judgment if the requested variance is substantial. 7. To mitigate the impact on the character of the neighborhood, Staff recommends additional screening is included to balance the request in relation to standard to be varied. 8. The requested variance does not represent the least deviation that would afford relief. 9. The applicant does not own the property, but is aware of the requirement. 10. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. 11. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. 12. The submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the property are not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 13. Approval of this variance would not result in an increase in the number of lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations. Page #5 –Dallman Landscaping Buffer Request 14. Approval of these variances would not allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of this Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. 15. Failure of an Applicant to apply for a building permit and commence construction or action with regard to the variance approval within one (1) year of receiving approval of the variance shall automatically render the decision of the BOA null and void. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL Section 7.5.F.2b(6) “No Development in Street Frontage Buffer Area” of the Estes Valley Development Code to allow a driveway to be located within the mandated arterial street frontage buffer landscape area CONDITIONAL TO: a. Approval of a development plan for the property. b. A minimum of two (2) 8-foot tall evergreen trees shall be planted between units 6 and 7 and, a minimum of two (2) 8-foot tall evergreen trees shall be planted between units 8 and 9. These shall be delineated on the landscaping plan for the development plan. c. A minimum of two (2) 8-foot tall evergreen trees shall be placed between the proposed driveway and the north property line. These shall be delineated on the landscaping plan for the development plan.