Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVARIANCE Lot Width Ward Minor Sub 2023-01-03 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo To: Chair Jeff Moreau Estes Park Board of Adjustment Through: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director From: Jeffrey Woeber, Senior Planner Date: January 3, 2023 Application: Setback Variance for Lot Width TBD Raven Avenue Habitat for Humanity of the St. Vrain Valley, Inc., Owner/Applicant Lonnie Sheldon, Van Horn Engineering, Representative Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the variance request, subject to the findings described in the report. Land Use: 2022 Estes Forward Comprehensive Plan Designation: (Future Land Use): Mixed Residential Neighborhood Zoning District: RM Multi-Family Residential (RM) Site Area: 0.82 Acre PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Conduct a public hearing to reconsider andmake a decision on a previously-approved request from the Applicant for a ten-foot variance to allow a lot width of 50-feet in place of the required 60-foot lot width. Location: The property is legally described as Lot 2A, Ward Minor Subdivision. It is located approximately 300 feet east of the southeast corner of the intersection of Lone Pine Drive and Raven Drive. Background The 0.82-acre subject property is in an RM (Multi-Family Residential) Zone District. It is undeveloped and was created through the Ward Minor Subdivision, approved and recorded in January 2021. The Minor Subdivision was done in anticipation of further subdividing the property, which will enable Habitat for Humanityto develop single family residences on five proposed lots. A somewhat similar variance was processed and approved by the BOA on October 5, 2021. That variance was also for 50-foot lot width, but for four lots. The current plans are reconfigured into five lots, plusa separate “outlot.” The EPDC, under Section 3.6.D., requires an applicant to “…apply for a building permit and commence construction or action with regard to the variance approval within one year of receiving approval of the variance…” Failure to do so renders the BOA approval null and void. With that being the case the variance has expired. The applicant has also reconfigured the proposed subdivision from what was initially proposed. Variance Description: The Applicantseeks a 10-foot variance to the minimum lot width standard for the RM Zone District. If approved, the property will be subdivided into five lots, each 50 feet in width. There will also be an outlot for a detention pond. Developing this property presents significant challenges related to drainage and the location of a sewer main, which would otherwise need to be relocated. Location and Context: The subject property is located approximately 400 feet from Big Thompson Avenue (Highway 34), and is zoned RM (Multi-Family Residential). Property across Raven Avenue to the north is also zoned RM and contains a multi-family residential use. RM zoned property to the west contains condominiums. Property to the east is zoned E (Estate), and containsa single-family residence. A, (Accommodations) zoned property is located south of the subject site and contains the Rocky Mountain Hotel and Conference Center. Vicinity Map Zoning Map Zoning and Land Use SummaryTable Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses SubjectMixed Residential RM (Residential) Residential Site Neighborhood Mixed Residential RM (Multi-Family North Residential Neighborhood Residential) Mixed-Use Accommodations, SouthA (Accommodations) Centers & CorridorsMotel East Suburban Estate E (Estate) Residential Mixed-Use RM (Multi-Family Residential, West Centers & CorridorsResidential)Condominiums Project Analysis Review Criteria: The Board of Adjustment (BOA) is the decision-making body for variance requests. In accordance with EPDC Section 3.6.C., Variances, Standards for Review, applications for variances shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria contained therein. The Standards with staff findings for each are as follows: 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 Finding:Special conditions exist. Development of the propertywith five lots would not be possible without the outlot, which would contain drainage improvements and an existing sewer line. The requested variance will not nullify or impair the intent and purposes of the lot width standards, the EPDC, or the Comprehensive Plan. 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: There may be beneficial use of the property without the variance. b.Whether the variance is substantial; Staff Finding:The variance is not substantial, with the 10-foot reduction in lot width being a 16.7 percentdecrease from the required 60 feet. 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 neighborhood would not be altered with a lot width of 50 feet. There are numerous condominiums in this area, which include fairly high density, attached structures. There would be little or no detrimental impact to adjoining properties. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: Public services such as water and sewer will not be adversely affected by the variance. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; Staff Finding: The Applicant was aware of the required minimum lot width, but may not have realized the difficulty of relocating existing sewer lines and providing effective drainage improvements f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: The applicant could plat and develop fewer lots without a variance. 3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. Staff Finding: The conditions affecting the Applicant’s property are not general or recurrent. 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:If the variance is granted, other applicable RM Zone District regulations would not preclude the applicant from creating five single family lots. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding:Theproposed variancewould be the least deviationfrom the EPDC regulations. 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 proposed variance is for a use permitted in the RM Zone District. 7. 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 Finding: Staff does not recommend conditions. Reviewing Agency Comments: This request has been referred to all applicable review agencies staff for review and comment. There was no objection to the proposed variance. The Public Works Department noted the need for a sidewalk along Raven Avenue, which was a condition of approval for the Ward Minor Subdivision which created the subject lot. Public Notice Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with EPDC noticing requirements. Written noticewasmailed to adjacent property owners on November 23, 2022. Legal notice published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on November 25, 2022. The application was posted on the Town’s “Current Applications” webpage on October 26, 2022. Advantages: Approval of the variance will allow development of an additional Habitat for Humanity housing unit. Disadvantages: No disadvantages have been identified by staff. Action Recommended: Staff recommends approval of the variance request. Level of Public Interest: Low. To date, no public comments have been received for the variance application. Sample Motion: I move that the Board of Adjustment approve the variance request, in accordance with the findings as presented. I move that the Board of Adjustment deny the variance, finding that \[state findings for denial\]. I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance to the next regularly scheduled meeting, finding that \[state reasons for continuance\]. Attachments: 1. Application Form 2. Statement of Intent 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. BOA Minutes, d. 10/5/2021 Contact Information Habitat for Humanity of the St Vrain Valley, Inc., Dave Emerson, Contact Record Owner(s) PO Box 333, Longmont, CO 80502 Mailing Address 303-682-2485 Phone 303-946-5190 Cell Phone Fax demerson@stvrainhabitat.org Email Same as owner Applicant Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email Van Horn Engineering, Lonnie Sheldon, Contact Consultant/Engineer 1043 Fish Creek Rd, Estes Park, CO 80517 Mailing Address 970-586-9388 Phone 970-443-3271 Cell Phone Fax lonnie@vanhornengineering.com Email APPLICATION FEES See the fee schedule included in your application packetor view the fee schedule online at: www.estes.org/planningforms All requests for refunds mustbe made in writing. Allfees are dueat the time of submittal. Revised 20 STATEMENT OF INTENT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY VARIANCE REQUEST October 18, 2022 This is a Variance Request for Lot 2A, Ward Minor Subdivision, parcel #2520316002, Located in the Southwest ¼ of Section 20, Township 5 North, Range 72 th West of the 6 P.M., Town of Estes Park, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. A similar variance was approved in October of 2021; however, it has expired. We are requesting a 10’ variance to the 60’ minimum lot width on Table 4-2in the RM zoning for this parcel with the ultimate goal to provide sorely needed Workforce Housing in Estes Park. The existing topography and utilities on the property constrain the developability of this parcel and make it rather costly to optimize the number of units Habitat for Humanity can build. The original plan for this property was to develop 5 lots at 60’ wide. The property is 300 feet long, so 5 lots would fit on the property and meet the code. In order to fit these 5 lots we would have to movethe sewer main and the drainage channel to the east end of the property. It turned out, the complications of the drainage was very difficult to design due to grades along the south and east side. In addition, the future drainage detention requirements add more complications and becomes rather costly to do so in the small amount of area along the south line. We planned to do the drainage detention along the southern 20’ of the entire property, however, directing the drainage along the south side then along the east side were not conducive to this plan. The sewer main is possible to move but would be rather costly for Habitat for Humanity to move. After further analysis, it is easier to make the drainage work by creating (5) 50’ wide lots. East of the easternmost lot will be a50’wide out-lot for the property for the future drainage detention area. With this design, we would not need to move the sewer main and keep the existing drainage path. We have provided a potential footprint to show that the building plans can fit within the setbacks of a 50’ wide lot. These plans are from past Habitat housing projects, however they may vary slightly when the building design is finalized for this project. The existing Lot 2A can easily be served by all major utilities. A sewer main runs in Raven Ave as well as across the east portion of the property. Water service exists in Raven Ave. Power service also exists on Raven Ave. Access to the five proposed lots would come off Raven Ave. There is anexisting storm drainage across the south portion that we plan to pass through. With the additional drainage area on the east portion of the property, we can create our own detention pond for this development. A wetland study was doneby Van Horn Engineering in 2009 and has determined that there are no wetlands present on the property. Dense vegetation exists in the southeast of the property due to the concentration of storm drainage across this section of the property, however they don’t contain all the qualities of a wetland. The property does not lie within a Mapped Estes Valley hazard area. In determining Practical Difficulty, the Board of Adjustment shall consider the following factors: A. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;There can be beneficial use of the property by spending the money to move the sewer and the drainage, however this variance would provide more beneficial use to the community in this time of needed workforce housing by providing more units at a cheaper cost. B. Whether the variance is substantial; The variance amounts to a 16.7% variance which is not 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; The variance would not change the number of units we could develop on this property, so we don’t believe it would affect the character of the neighborhood. There is a hotel to the south, condominium units to the west and duplex housing to the north. It is an appropriate density for this area. D. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer; The Variance would not affect the delivery of utilities. In fact it would simplify the delivery because we would not have to move the sewer main. E.Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement; The applicant did purchase the property with the knowledge of the difficulties, but thought they were easier to overcome. It turns out the grades are not very conducive to providing effective drainage and the costs of replacing sewer mains are rather prohibitive to Habitat for Humanity or to anyone looking to serve income levels at 40-60% Area Median Income with homeownership opportunities. F. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated throughsome method other than a variance.The predicament can be solved, but not without excessive costs that can not be passed on to potential homeowners or the loss of a unit. Habitat would like to provide as many units as possible given the extreme need in the area. Thank you for your consideration of this variance request, Sincerely, David Emerson on behalf of Habitat for Humanity Lonnie Sheldon on behalf of Van Horn Engineering Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 5, 2021 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually in said Town of Estes Park on this 2 day of March 2021. Committee: Chair Wayne Newsom, Vice-Chair Jeff Moreau, Board Member Joe Holtzman Attending:Chair Newsom, Vice-Chair Moreau, Board Member Holtzman, Community Development Director Jessica Garner, Planner II Alex Bergeron, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund, Town Board Liasion Barbara MacAlpine Absent:none Chair Newsom called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. New Director Jessica Garner was introduced. PUBLIC COMMENT. None APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Holzman) to approve the agenda. The motion passed 3-0. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA It was moved and seconded (Moreau/Holtzman) to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion passed 3-0. VARIANCE REQUEST, Ward Minor Subdivision,Planner II Alex Bergeron Planner Bergeron reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Habitat for Humanity,is seeking a 10’ variance to the minimum lot width standard for the RM (Residential- Multifamily) zone district to permit the subdivision of the Property into five lots, four of which are 50’ wide and one which is 100’ wide and features a 50’ drainage easement. The request is rooted in site challenges related to drainage and the existing sewer main location; the costs of remedying would be very burdensome to the non-profit entity. Staff recommended approval of the variance request. DISCUSSION: Joe Coop, VanHorn Engineering, explained that parking would be within the setbacks, exceeding the requirements. David Emerson, Habitat for Humanity, thanked the Board for their time and consideration of this project. Units will be income-restricted. Public Works Engineer Jennifer Waters noted that Public Works is in support of this variance. It was moved and seconded (Moreau/Holtzman) to approve the variance request as written with the condition of setback certificates. The motion passed 3-0. Board of Adjustment, October 5, 2021 – Page 2 REPORTS Director Garner discussed the Comprehensive Plan update process. The committee meets every two weeks, and things are progressing as planned. All documents, meetings and handouts are available at engageestes.org. There being no further business, Chair Newsom adjourned the meeting at 9:25 a.m. Wayne Newsom, Chair Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary