HomeMy WebLinkAboutPERMIT 920 Big Thompson Catholic Church Sign 2008-11-20
Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic Church
Sign Variance Request
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
DATE OF BOA MEETING: October 7, 2008
LOCATION:Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic Church is located at
920 Big Thompson Avenue, within the Town of Estes Park. An off-premise
sign for this church is proposed to be located on an undeveloped lot at the
corner of Vista Lane and Big Thompson Avenue. An address has not been
assigned to this lot, which is legally described as Lot 19, Block 3, Lake
View Tracts subdivision.
APPLICANT:Our Lady of the Mountains Parish
PROPERTY OWNER: Archdiocese of Denver as Trustee for the Parish
CONSULTANT/ENGINEER:Jes Reetz, Cornerstone Engineering and
Surveying, Inc.
STAFF CONTACT: Alison Chilcott (staff report preparation) and Carolyn
McEndaffer (application review)
APPLICABLE CODES: Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) and
Estes Park Municipal Code (EPMC)
REQUEST:
Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic Church owns the property bounded by
Big Thompson Avenue (Highway 34), Hillside Lane, and Vista Lane. This
property is divided into five parcels; the “church” parcel, zoned CO–
Commercial Outlying, and four R-2–Two-Family Residential zoned parcels.
The church wishes to locate a sign on the northwesternmost residential
parcel, Lot 19, Block 3 of the Lake View Tracts subdivision, and is
requesting variances from the Estes Valley Development Code and Estes
Park Municipal Code in order to do so. The approximate sign location is
shown on the aerial photo below.
Approximate Location of Proposed Sign
Specifically, the applicant requests a variance from Estes Valley
Development Code Section 8.1.A Signs in the Town of Estes Park. This
section of the Development Code requires compliance with Estes Park
Municipal Code Section 17.66 Signsand the applicant requests variances to
three sections of the Municipal Code as described below:
1.Section 17.66.060(13), to allow placement of an off-premise sign for
Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic Church;
2.Section 17.66.100(c), to allow construction of a 150-square-foot sign in
lieu of the maximum 75-square-foot sign allowed in the R-2–Residential
zoning district. The proposed sign size is approximately ninety square
feet (forty-five square feet per face); and
3.Section 17.66.110(3)b, to allow the sign to be placed within the required
eight-foot setback from property lines. The proposed sign will be
located two feet from the shared property line between the “church”
parcel and Lot 19.
Page #2 –Our Lady of the Mountains Sign Variance Request
Two-Family
–Commercial
COOutlyingR-2–Residential
Existing Land Use Zoning
(Catholic Church) Undeveloped with the exception of a meditation path
Acres
Parcel Size
Feet
130,675 3.00 Religious Assembly
Square
920 Big Thompson Ave. (US Highway 34) To Be Determined 34,935 0.80
Town of Estes Park Estes Park Sanitation District Town of Estes Park Town of Estes Park Qwest
parcel shown on Lake View Tracts subdivision plat View Tracts
PID Legal Description Address
25193-36-904 Metes-and-Bounds 25193-08-916 Lot 19, Block 3, Lake WaterSewerFire Protection ElectricTelephone
DATA TABLES AND MAPS SERVICES
II.
Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning
III.REVIEW CRITERIA
All variance applications shall demonstrate compliance with the standards
and criteria set forth in Chapter 3.6.C and all other applicable provisions of
the Estes Valley Development Code. All applications for variances from
Chapter 17.66 Signs shall also demonstrate compliance with Section
17.66.160 of the Municipal Code.
This variance request does not fall within the parameters of staff-level
review and will be reviewed by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment.
IV.REFERRAL COMMENTS
This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and
neighboring property owners for consideration and comment. The following
reviewing agency staff and/or adjacent property owners submitted
comments.
Estes Park Building Department Carolyn McEndaffer reviews sign
permits and may provide comments and additional recommended
conditions of approval at a later date.
Town Attorney See Greg White’s email dated September 17, 2008.
Estes Park Sanitation District See James Duell’s letter dated September
23, 2008.
Colorado Department of Transportation See Timothy Bilobran’s email
dated September 25, 2008.
V.STAFF FINDINGS
Staff finds:
1.Reviewing Agencies. This request has been submitted to all applicable
reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. All letters and
memos submitted by reviewing agency staff, referred to in Section IV of
this staff report, are incorporated as staff findings.
2.Section 17.66.160(3) of the Municipal Code states, in every case in
which a request for a variance from the requirements of this Chapter
\[17.66Signs\]has been filed, the Board shall not grant a variance unless
it specifically finds each and every one of the following conditions to
exist.
a.There are special circumstances or conditions, such as the
existence of buildings, topography, vegetation, sign structures or
other matters on adjacent lots or within the adjacent public
right-of-way, which would substantially restrict the effectiveness
of the sign in question; provided, however, that such special
circumstances or conditions must be particular to the particular
business or enterprise to which the applicant desires to draw
attention and to not apply generally to all businesses or
enterprises.
Staff Finding: The applicant’s statement of intent describes the
special circumstances they believe exist. These reasons include:
Page #5 –Our Lady of the Mountains Sign Variance Request
The Church parcel is currently paved with parking stalls along
the right-of-way property line; therefore, a suitable location for
the sign cannot be attained on the Church parcel.
b.The variance would be in general harmony with the purposes of
this Chapter, and specifically would not be injurious to the
neighborhood in which the business or enterprise to which the
applicant desires to draw attention is located.
Staff Finding: The Board should use their best judgment to
determine if this variance would be in general harmony with the
purposes of Chapter 17.66 Signs.
As noted in the statement on intent, the Catholic Church owns all
the adjoining properties, including the one on which a sign is
proposed to be located. All other properties are separated by right-
of-way so the sign will not be in close proximity to any non-church-
owned property.
Neighbors have not submitted written comments in support or
opposition to the proposed sign. Staff did receive a call from one
neighbor who had questions about sign design and potential off-site
lighting impacts. Sign design (materials/colors) and lighting were
not addressed in the application. At staff’s request the applicant has
now addressed this. Lighting is now proposed with electric service
provided via a service line connection to the “church” parcel.
c.The variance is the minimum one necessary to permit the
applicant to reasonably draw attention to this business or
enterprise.
Staff Finding: The Board should use their best judgment to
determine if these are the minimum variances necessary.
The setback from the right-of-way is being maintained and the
requested variance to the eight-foot setback from the shared
property line with the church property will allow the sign to be
located as close as possibly to the “church” property without
impacting the adjacent parking lot. The proposed sign location will
make the sign appear to be an on-premise sign to people driving by.
3.Section 17.66.160(d) No variance for maximum sign area on a lot or
buildingstates, other provisions of this section to the contrary
notwithstanding, the Board shall not have any jurisdiction to hear, nor
Page #6 –Our Lady of the Mountains Sign Variance Request
the authority to grant, any variance from any section of this Chapter
which limits the maximum permitted sign area on a single lot or
building.
Staff Finding: The Town Attorney, in his letter dated September 17,
2008, stated that it is his opinion that “the Board of Adjustment may
consider that the CO zoning classification applies which allows for a
maximum sign of 150 square feet.” He also recommends that this sign
be counted against the signage permitted on the CO-zoned lot.
4.Section 17.66.160(e) states, the Board may grant a variance subject to
any conditions, which it deems necessary or desirable to make the
device which is permitted by the variance compatible with the purposes
of this Chapter.
Staff Finding: If the Board chooses to approve this variance, staff has
recommended a number of conditions of approval.
5.In addition to the review standards in Section 17.66.160 of the
Municipal Code, the following review standards from the Estes Valley
Development Code Section 3.6.C. apply.
a.Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without
the variance.
Staff Finding: The church can continue to operate without the
proposed sign.
b.Whether the variance is substantial.
Staff Finding: Staff does not find that the variance requests 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 Finding: See Staff Report Section V.2.b on Page 6.
d.Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of
public services such as water and sewer.
Staff Finding: This application was routed to providers of public
services, such as water and sewer, and no concerns were expressed
about adverse impacts to the delivery of public services.
Page #7 –Our Lady of the Mountains Sign Variance Request
e.Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge
of the requirement.
Staff Finding: Per the statement of intent, the applicant has owned
this property for approximately fifty years. It is very likely that
regulations have changed during this period and that the applicant
did not purchase the property with knowledge of the requirements.
Per the Community Development Director, the first sign code was
adopted in the late 1960s/early 1970s, and these regulations have
been revised over time.
f.Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through
some method other than a variance.
Staff Finding: The applicant could submit an application to
combine the two lots into one or to adjust the boundary line between
the lots. Both applications require Town Board approval and
concurrent review and approval of a rezoning application to rezone
the land proposed to be combined with the “church” parcel to CO–
Commercial Outlying.
g.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:Staff does not find that a regulation should be
adopted to address this situation.
h.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: The variance, if granted, will not reduce the size of
the lot.
i.If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from
the regulations that will afford relief.
Page #8 –Our Lady of the Mountains Sign Variance Request
Staff Finding: The Board should use their best judgment to
determine if the variance represents the least deviation from the
regulations that will afford relief.
j.Under no circumstances shall the Board of Adjustment 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: Carolyn McEndaffer reviews sign permit
applications and is the staff person most familiar with the sign code,
to date she has not stated that this is a concern.
k.Per EVDC §3.6.D, 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
Board of Adjustment null and void.
VI.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variances
CONDITIONAL TO:
1.Compliance with the submitted application, including the proposed sign
size shown on the two submitted Sign Site Plans. However, staff shall
have the authority to approve minimal revisions to the signs in the
future without further Board of Adjustment review.
2.This sign shall be attributed to the lot addressed 920 Big Thompson
Avenue, rather than Lot 19, Block 3, Lake View Tracts, i.e., the sign
shall count towards sign allowances, such as the number of allowable
signs and maximum allowed sign area, at 920 Big Thompson Avenue.
3.A sign permit shall not be issued until a draft sign easement and a draft
electric easement are approved by staff.
4.A recorded copy of the sign and electric easements shall be submitted to
the Town within thirty days of sign installation.
5.The applicant shall obtain any required electric permits and inspections.
Page #9 –Our Lady of the Mountains Sign Variance Request