HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTAFF REPORT Variance River Setback 375 Moraine Ave 2024-10-01
Community Development Memo
To: Chair Jeff Moreau
Estes Park Board of Adjustment
Through: Steve Careccia, Community Development Director
From: Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner
Date: October 1, 2024
Application: Variance Request for River Setback
375 Moraine Avenue
Greg Davis, FCEP Properties, LLC., owner
Van Horn Engineering and Surveying Inc., applicant
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the variance
request, subject to the findings described in the report.
Future Land Use Designation (Estes Forward Comprehensive Plan): Downtown
Zoning District: CO (Commercial Outlying)
Site Area: 1.6 Acres (71,791 SF)
☒ PUBLIC HEARING ☐ ORDINANCE ☐ LAND USE ☐ CONTRACT/AGREEMENT ☐ RESOLUTION ☒ OTHER
QUASI-JUDICIAL ☒ YES ☐ NO
Objective:
The Applicant requests approval of a variance to reduce the river setback to 5.5’
rather than the required 30’ under Section 7.6.E.1.a(2)(b) of the Estes Park
Development Code (EPDC).
Background:
The Fun City amusement park consists of two parcels bisected by the Big Thompson
River. A variance is sought to the required river setback on the north parcel for the
construction of a new amusement ride, a spinning coaster. The spinning coaster would
be built in the same general footprint of the existing bumper car building, which is
proposed to be demolished.
The zoning, land use, and future land use designation of surrounding properties is
summarized in the table below. Historic aerial images show the existing bumper car
2
building has existed since at least 1985 and County records indicate the site was
developed in the early to mid-1970s, prior to the adoption of river setback standards.
Zoning and Land Use Summary Table
Future Land Use
Designation (Comp Plan) Zone Uses
Subject
Site Downtown CO (Commercial Outlying) Amusement Park
North Downtown/ Suburban Estate CD (Commercial Downtown)
& E (Estate)
Office Building/
Single Family
Residential
South Downtown CO (Commercial Outlying) Amusement Park
East Downtown CO (Commercial Outlying) Mixed Commercial
West Downtown/ Mountains &
Foothills
CO (Commercial Outlying &
EV RE1 (Larimer County
Rural Estate)
Amusement Park/
Moraine Ave
Vicinity Map
Moraine Ave
3
Zoning Map
Variance Description
The applicant desires to replace the existing bumper car building with a new
amusement ride in the same general footprint which encroaches into the required 30’
river setback.
The applicant requests a variance from Estes Park Development Code Sec.
7.6.E.1.a(2)(b) which requires a 30’ setback from the annual high-water mark of the
river. The amusement ride would be constructed as close as 5.5’ from the highwater
mark of the Big Thompson River. The existing building is located approximately 4.7’
from the river at its closest point.
CD
Subject
Parcel
E
Moraine Ave
CO
4
Site Images
5
Proposed Site Plan
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. 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.
6
Staff Finding: The site was fully developed prior to the adoption of river setbacks
in the Estes Park Development Code, creating a special circumstance.
The requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent
and purposes of Section 7.6 of the Development Code – Wetlands and Stream
Corridor Protection. The purpose and intent of that section is described as:
The following requirements and standards are intended to promote,
preserve and enhance the important hydrologic, biological, ecological,
aesthetic, recreational and educational functions that stream and river
corridors, associated riparian areas and wetlands provide.
The hydraulic function of the river corridor will not be negatively impacted by the
variance. The hydraulics of a river refer to the depth, velocity, and direction of
flow. The proposed amusement ride would not impact the hydraulics of the river
in normal conditions. In a flood event the hydraulic function of the river would not
be impacted more than the current condition, as mandated by Estes Park
Municipal Code Section 18.04.190, which prohibits encroachments that result in
any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge.
Van Horn Engineering has demonstrated compliance with this requirement
consistent with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidance. The
Town’s floodplain consultant, Galloway Engineering, concurs with Van Horn’s
findings and states “the real impact of the proposed site plan changes would be
fewer blocked obstructions in the floodway, corresponding to increased
conveyance area available during a flood event.”
There will be no impact on the biological and ecological functions or aesthetic,
recreational and educational functions of the river corridor greater than the
current condition.
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: The existing bumper car building appears to be obsolete and in
need of replacement. Despite being legally built in the 1970s, it cannot be
replaced due to the adoption of river setbacks after it was built. There are no
other open areas on the site which would allow for construction of the proposed
replacement ride, meaning beneficial use of the property is greatly limited.
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff Finding: The variance is not substantial compared to the current
condition, and, in fact, slightly reduces the setback encroachment.
7
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 essential character of the neighborhood will not be
substantially altered with the variance and adjoining properties will not suffer a
substantial determent. The new amusement ride will be located in the same
general footprint as the existing building.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services
such as water and sewer.
Staff Finding: The variance will not adversely affect the delivery of public
services.
e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the
requirement;
Staff Finding: Unknown.
f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some
method other than a variance.
Staff Finding: The predicament cannot be mitigated through any other method.
2. 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: Not applicable.
3. 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: Not applicable.
4. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the
regulations that will afford relief.
Staff Finding: The variance represents the least deviation from the regulations
that will afford relief.
8
5. 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 zoning district containing the property for which the variance
is sought.
Staff Finding: Not applicable.
6. 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 any conditions.
Review Agency Comments
Public Works is not opposed to the variance request and finds the associated
Development Plan is generally acceptable, subject to technical corrections. The
development will require approval of a Floodplain Development Permit.
Public Notice
Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with EPDC noticing
requirements. As of the time of writing this report, Staff has received no inquiries
regarding the variance request.
● Written notice mailed to adjacent property owners on September 13, 2024.
● Legal notice published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on September 13, 2024.
● Application posted on the Town's "Current Applications" website.
● Sign posted on property by applicant.
Action Recommended
Staff recommends approval of the proposed variance.
Finance/Resource Impact
N/A
Level of Public Interest
Little or none.
Sample Motions
I move to approve the variance with the findings as outlined in the staff report.
I move to deny the variance with the following findings [state reasons/findings].
I move that the Board of Adjustment continue the variance to the next regularly
scheduled meeting, finding that [state reasons for continuance].
Attachments
9
1. Application
2. Statement of Intent
3. Site Plan
17 July 2024
Fun City
Attn: Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner, Town of Estes Park, Colorado
375 Moraine Ave.
Estes Park, CO 80517
Re: Statement of Intent for a Requested River Setback Variance
Mr. Hornbeck,
The intent of this letter is to detail a requested encroachment into the prescribed setback
to the Big Thompson River.
The Fun City property consists of two parcels, one on the north side of the Big Thompson
River and one on the south. Given that all proposed changes are on the northern parcel,
any reference to parcels in this letter refers to this parcel unless otherwise noted. The
subject parcel is bordered by U.S.-36 (Moraine Ave) to the north, Crags Dr to the east,
Estes Park Brewery to the west, and the Big Thompson River to the south. The Larimer
County Assessor parcel number for the subject parcel is 3525392001, and the lot is zoned
commercial outlying (CO) in the Town of Estes Park. There currently exists an enclosed
building housing a bumper car attraction on the southeasterly portion of the parcel,
approximately 4.7’ at its closest point from the north edge of the existing floodwall on the
northern bank of the Big Thompson River. The best available aerial imagery suggests that
this building has existed in its current location since at least 1993. The owner and
applicant, Greg Davis, is requesting that the existing bumper car building be removed and
replaced with an elevated spinning roller coaster. A letter was issued by Galloway
regarding the flood blockages on site, in which the existing bumper car building was
VAN HORN ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING
LAND SURVEYS
SUBDIVISIONS
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
IMPROVEMENT PLATS
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
SANITARY ENGINEERING
MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING
shown as a flood blockage. The pillars of the proposed roller coaster and fence around the
perimeter also serve as flood blockages, meaning there is no proposed changes to the
flood blockage locations on site. This proposed roller coaster will be no closer to the Big
Thompson River than the existing bumper car building. It should be noted that the
construction of the proposed roller coaster will commence immediately upon demolition
of the existing bumper car building. A setback of 5.5’ to the Big Thompson River is
being proposed, 24.5’ less than the setback prescribed by §7.6.E.1.a.(1) of the Estes Park
Development Code (EPDC). See the accompanying site plan for better detail. This
variance is being requested as part of an ongoing land use project currently undergoing
the development plan review process. While the development review process is still
ongoing, the departmental referral comments have been received and addressed in a
separate document.
For further clarification or information please contact me with the contact details below.
Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to hearing from you in the future
regarding this project,
Regards,
_________________________________
Jacob Gruver, for Van Horn Engineering on behalf of the owner, Greg Davis
Project Manager
jacobg@vanhornengineering.com
(970)-586-9388 ext. 11