HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTAFF REPORT Beaver Point Heights Amended Plat 2006-08-15RMNP
RockyMountainNationalPark
RMNP
USFS
USFS
USFS
Lake Estes
MarysLake
LilyLake
Mac Gregor Ranch
YMCAConferenceGrounds
36
EVDC Boundary
EVDC Boundary
Eagle Rock
RMNPFall RiverEntrance
RMNPBeaver MeadowsEntrance
Prospect Mt.
-
(/34
(/36(/7
(/36
(/34
(/36
(/7
CheleyCamps
USFS
USFS
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 15, 2006
PLAT TITLE: “Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet
of Lot 7 and 8, Beaver Point Heights, Located in the North ½, of the Northwest ¼,
of Section 35, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M., County of
Larimer, State of Colorado”
LOCATION: The site is located at 945 Moraine Avenue (US Highway 36). This
property is being annexed into the Town of Estes Park. It fronts two streets,
Moraine Avenue (US Highway 36) and High Drive (County Road #67W), and is
bordered by Rocky Mountain National Park to the west.
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNERS:
All Mountain View Inn and Suites, LLC/Same
CONSULTANT/ENGINEER:
Zach Hanson, Van Horn Engineering and
Surveying, Inc.
STAFF CONTACTS: Alison Chilcott
APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes
Valley Development Code (EVDC)
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND:
This is an amended plat/minor subdivision application. As described in the
statement of intent, this is an application to consolidate the property into two lots.
At the recommendation of staff, the applicant has revised the application to propose
one lot. The property has been developed as, and functions as, one lot. It is zoned
“A” Accommodations/Highway Corridor and is approximately 1.52 acres.
Xanterra, the new Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP) concessionaire, has a
contract to purchase the property. They intend to change the use from
accommodations to employee housing. Xanterra is also interested in constructing a
dining hall/meeting room on the property and expanding storage for the manager’s
Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the
Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue
PO Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com
Page #2 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
unit. Depending on the scale of development proposed, a development plan will
either be reviewed at staff-level or by Planning Commission. If the dining
hall/meeting room is proposed as a separate building, it will be considered an
accessory building. In the “A” Accommodations/Highway Corridor zoning district,
accessory buildings cannot exceed 1,000 square feet. A larger building would
require review and approval of a variance.
II. SITE DATA TABLES AND MAPS
Number of Parcels Proposed One
Parcel Number(s) 35352-06-005
Gross Land Area 1.52 acres, 66,175 square feet per plat
Existing Land Use Accommodations (All Budget Inn)
Proposed Land Use If the property is sold to Xanterra, the new Rocky Mountain National
Park (RMNP) concessionaire, the new property owner intends to
change the use to employee housing.
SERVICES
Water Town of Estes Park
Sewer Upper Thompson Sanitation District
Fire Protection Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department
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
Critical Wildlife Habitat Yes – Deer
Page #3 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
LOCATION MAPS WITH ADJACENT LAND USES AND ZONING
AERIAL PHOTO
Page #4 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
III. REVIEW CRITERIA
All subdivision applications shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and
criteria set forth in Chapter 10, “Subdivision Standards,” and all other applicable
provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code.
For minor subdivisions, the EVPC shall also find that approval will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other property in the
neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of this Code.
This application does not fall within the parameters of staff-level review and will
be reviewed by the Estes Valley Planning Commission and Estes Park Town
Board.
IV. REFERRAL COMMENTS
These requests have been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and
adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. The following staff
and/or adjacent property owners submitted written comments.
Estes Park Public Works Department See Greg Sievers’ memo to Alison
Chilcott dated August 1, 2006.
Town Attorney See Greg White’s letter to Alison Chilcott dated July 21, 2006.
Upper Thompson Sanitation District See Reed Smedley’s letter to Alison
Chilcott dated July 12, 2006.
Colorado Department of Transportation See Tim Bilobran’s letter to Alison
Chilcott dated August 3, 2006.
Owner of 880 Heinz Parkway (Lot 2, Block 1, Park Entrance Estates) See
William R. Jones letter to Alison Chilcott dated July 22, 2006.
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. Reviewing Agency Comments
This request has been submitted to all 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.
Page #5 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
The Public Works comment #5 should be addressed with this amended plat and
comment #9 should be addressed prior to recordation of this plat. The
remainder of the comments should be addressed during review of the
development plan and/or change of use/building permit.
The Town Attorney’s comment #1 concerning easements is no longer
applicable because the application has been revised to propose only one lot.
3. Public Comments
Staff received a letter from Williams Jones, the owner of 880 Heinz Parkway,
opposing the amended plat, expressing concern about prior development on the
lot and concern about the impacts of future development of this property, which
this amended plat could facilitate.
Mr. Jones expressed concern about the existing 3,104-square-foot, two-story
building, which was constructed in 1999 according to the Larimer County Tax
Assessor website. This building was constructed prior to the effective date of
the Estes Valley Development Code and a permit was issued by the Larimer
County Building Department. At that time, the scale of development did not
require neighbor notification or a public hearing.
Mr. Jones also expressed concern about future development. If more than 2,000
square feet of development is proposed, submittal of a development plan is
required and adjacent property owners will be notified. This plan will be
reviewed for compliance with EVDC regulations; however, view protection is
not one of the standards. The impacts of any additional traffic will be reviewed
at that time, a traffic impact analysis may be required, and CDOT will be
involved with this review since the property fronts a state highway.
4. Minor Subdivisions
This is a minor subdivision application. Staff is supportive of the revised
application to create one lot. Staff was not supportive of the original proposal to
create two lots that would have been non-conforming as to lot size and would
have required numerous cross easements. The property has been developed as
one lot with buildings, utilities, driveways, and fencing constructed and
installed without regard to the location of lot lines. The property has also been
combined into one parcel for tax purposes, i.e., there is one tax identification
number for the entire parcel.
Approval of this application would not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare, injurious to other property in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the
purposes and objectives of this Code.
Page #6 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
5. Lot Size, Dimensional Standards, and Configuration
The lot area/size, width, depth, shape, and orientation are appropriate for the
location of the subdivision and type of development and use contemplated. The
proposed lot meets the 40,000-square-foot minimum lot size requirement and
is close to a rectangular shape. The former lot lines should be labeled “former
lot lines to be vacated by this plat.”
6. Setbacks/Encroachments
The shed in the northeast portion of the property should be relocated out of the
setbacks. The exit sign is located in US Highway 36 right-of-way. This should
be relocated onto the property in a location reviewed and approved by staff.
7. Slope Protection and Ridgeline Protection Standards
This is not applicable to the proposed plat.
8. Geologic and Wildfire Hazards
There are no mapped geologic or wildfire hazards on this property.
9. Wildlife Habitat Protection
The property is in mapped deer habitat. Since no development is planned at this
time, the plat was not sent to the State Division of Wildlife for comments.
10. Wetlands and Stream/River Corridor Protection
There are no streams or rivers on this property.
11. Adequate Public Facilities
Adequate public facility requirements are not triggered with the application.
Adequate public facilities requirements will be triggered with a change of use,
e.g., from accommodations to residential use, and/or with new development.
These standards address domestic water, fire protection, sewer, electricity,
transportation, and drainage.
12. Utility Easements
Generally, ten-foot-wide utility easements are required along all property lines
and these easement are proposed along all property lines. The dedication
statement should be revised so that utility easements are not also dedicated as
drainage easements. A drainage easement that was created to benefit Lot 10 is
being vacated by this plat.
13. Plat Notes
The Property Information should be revised to reflect one lot. Note #3, which
states “Lot 6A and Lot 9A shall remain zoned A – Accommodations,” should
also be revised since Lot 9 A is no longer proposed.
Page #7 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
14. Postal Cluster Box
The postal cluster box pull-off shall be reviewed by the Post Office and the
Town. This pull-off currently encroaches onto the property. If this is not
required by the Post Office, the area shall be revegetated, otherwise an access
easement shall be provided for this pull-off.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the application
CONDITIONAL TO:
1. The application form shall be completed. The gas and lift station questions shall
be answered. The water service is listed as Town of Estes Park. This is not
correct and shall be revised. The property is served by a well.
2. The annexation plat shall be recorded prior to recordation of this plat.
3. Compliance with Greg Sievers’ memo dated August 1, 2006. Public Works
comment #5 shall be addressed with the preliminary plat and comment #9 shall
be addressed prior to recordation of this plat. The remainder of the comments
shall be addressed during review of the development plan and/or change of
use/building permit.
4. The former lot lines shall be labeled “former lot lines to be vacated by this
plat.”
5. The shed in the northeast portion of the property shall be relocated out of the
setbacks prior to recordation of the plat.
6. The exit sign located in US Highway 36 right-of-way shall be relocated onto
the property in a location reviewed and approved by staff prior to recordation of
the plat.
7. The dedication statement shall be revised so that utility easements are not also
dedicated as drainage easements.
8. The Property Information shall be revised to reflect one lot, as shall Note #3,
which states “Lot 6A and Lot 9A shall remain zoned A – Accommodations.”
9. The postal cluster box pull-off shall be reviewed by the Post Office and the
Town. This pull-off currently encroaches onto the property. If this is not
required by the Post Office, the area shall be revegetated, otherwise an access
easement shall be dedicated with this plat for this pull-off.
Page #8 – Amended Plat of Lots 5 through 10, Except the Westerly 90 Feet of Lot 7 and 8,
Beaver Point Heights
VII. SUGGESTED MOTIONS
APPROVAL
I move to recommend approval of the application to the Town Board of Trustees
with staffs’ findings and conditions.
CONTINUANCE
I move to CONTINUE the application to the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting because… (state reason for continuance - findings). Note:
With some exceptions, the applicant must agree to this, otherwise a continuance is
deemed approval.
DENIAL
I move to recommend DENIAL of the application to the Town Board of Trustees
because… (state reason for denial - findings).