HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Technical Review Committee 2025-11-04TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT
Tuesday, November 4, 2025
1:30 p.m.
Town Hall Board Room
Estes Park, CO 80517
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER.
1.Introductions of TRC members, staff
AGENDA APPROVAL
MINUTES from 6/17/25 ARC Acknowledgment only
ACTION ITEM:
1.Lot 2A Subdivision Plat, Freelan Heights Subdivision Planner Hornbeck
Order of Procedure for Hearing:
Staff presentation
Applicant team presentation
Public Comment
Committee discussion; motion and second; roll-call vote
ADJOURN
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services, programs, and activities and special
communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
November 4, 2025
1
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, June 17, 2025
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Architectural Review Committee of
the Stanley Hotel Historic District, Larimer County, Colorado. The meeting
was held virtually via Google Meet on June 17, 2025.
Committee: Joe Calvin, Architect; Steve Lane, Architect
Also Attending: Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner; Don Darling, Applicant; Brad
O'Neil, Applicant; Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary.
The meeting was called to order at 11:00 a.m.
AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved to approve the agenda and minutes from June 9, 2025, by Architects
Calvin and Lane.
STAFF PRESENTATION
Senior Planner Hornbeck reviewed the staff report. The applicant desires to construct a
single-family house on envelope "F" of the Overlook Condominiums subdivision plat. This
will be a model home, and the applicant anticipates that additional homes will utilize the
same general floor plan, design, and materials.
Applicant O'Neil presented the revisions made since the last meeting. The turret design
has been modified to feature eight paired window openings. Changes were also made
to the deck structure, including adjustments to the height relationship between the deck
and stone elements, the addition of stone columns as deck supports, and a color
change to the deck seal to create a coordinated appearance. The trellis has been
redesigned as powder-coated metal with a rounded shape to address fire safety
concerns. Additionally, the chimney cap will have a non-reflective finish rather than a
shiny appearance.
Applicant Darling addressed future modifications for the remaining houses in the
development. He explained that the other houses may incorporate slightly different color
variations and exterior façade treatments while maintaining overall design consistency.
Darling inquired whether another meeting would be required to review these subtle
modifications, noting that they do not have specific details about the other homes
available for presentation at this time.
PUBLIC COMMENT: none
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Architect Lane was happy with the changes, stating that they definitely improved the
building design. Architect Calvin agreed.
Motion: It was moved to issue a finding that the new (current) design complies with the
relevant guidelines contained in the Master Plan.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 a.m.
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
draf
t
2
The Town of Estes Park is committed to providing equitable access to our services. Contact us
if you need any assistance accessing material at 970-577-4777 or townclerk@estes.org.
Memo
To: Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee (TRC)
Through: Steve Careccia, Community Development Director
From: Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner
Department: Community Development
Date: November 4, 2025
Subject: Review of New Development Associated with the Freelan Heights
Subdivision
Objective:
The Technical Review Committee (TRC) will review the proposed subdivision for
compliance with the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and
Design Guidelines and other relevant standards.
Present Situation:
The Stanley Historic District is governed by the Stanley Historic District Master Plan
Development Standards and Design Guidelines (Master Plan), as well as portions of the
Municipal Code and Development Code, and development agreements for each parcel
within the district. According to the development agreement for the subject parcel, all
subdivisions require the applicant to go through the Town’s subdivision process
contained in the Development Code. This means the subdivision will be subject to
review and approval by Town Board. However, the Master Plan also states “new
development” in the district is subject to the standards and process outlined in the
Master Plan. The improvements associated with the subdivision qualify as “new
development” so they remain subject the Master Plan and TRC review.
3
The Master Plan requires TRC to review all new development first as a Preliminary
Package, followed by a Final Package. This is in addition to review by the Architectural
Review Committee (ARC). The ARC reviewed and approved model home plans for the
proposed subdivision in June, 2025, finding them compliant with relevant design
standards. This completes the necessary ARC review, provided future construction is in
general conformance with those plans.
Part III of the Master Plan includes general design guidelines applicable to the entire
district and specific development standards and special considerations for each
individual parcel. The Master Plan states: The specific guidelines and standards which
are incorporated into Part III of this document shall be used in the review process to
direct the character of design for all development within the Stanley Historic District.
Proposal:
The applicant, Mr. Brad O’Neil, manager of Stanley Lot 2A LLC, has submitted a
Preliminary Package application for the Freelan Heights Subdivision. The subject
property is Lot 2A of the Stanley Historic District Subdivision. The site is currently
platted with six duplex envelopes, meaning a maximum of 12 units could be built. This
proposal would replace the six duplex building envelopes and 12 units with 10 detached
townhome lots. A detached townhome has the same appearance as a single-family
home, but provides additional certainty on building locations on each lot through a
platted building envelope.
The Master Plan, accessible here, contains standards on site planning, building
location, building design and landscaping. Listed below are all applicable standards
from the Master Plan, followed by staff analysis. Staff finds that the proposal largely
complies with applicable standards, with limited inconstancies. Areas staff finds
inconsistent with the Maste Plan are the building setbacks proposed on Lot 1 and Lot 6.
TRC has the ability to grant a variance to these setback requirements.
General Design Guidelines
A. Site Planning
1. Buildings shall be sited in a manner that preserves existing land forms.
4
Natural land forms are important in creating the appeal and the special character of the
Stanley Historic District. The objective is to fit buildings to their sites in a way that leaves
natural massing and features of the landscape intact. The most visually dominant and
distinctive natural characteristics of the parcels should be left in their natural condition.
Scale buildings so that they do not dominate the site.
Staff Comment: The rock formations on the western portion of the site are the most
visually dominant and distinctive natural characteristics and will be left in their natural
condition. Outside of this area, the majority of the site has slopes between 14 and 20
percent. New construction on slopes in this range necessitates some disruption to
existing landforms; however, the grading plan shows grading focused around individual
building footprints, rather than creating large, flat building sites with extensive overlot
grading. This is consistent with the objective of siting buildings in a manner that fits
them to their sites and leaves as much natural landscape intact as possible.
2. New construction should be compatible with existing adjacent residential buildings
and uses.
When planning new construction, analyze the setting for the new building. Look at the
siting and mass of other buildings in the residential neighborhood. Notice the setbacks,
heights, parking arrangements and building shapes. Observe the building forms and
materials of surrounding buildings. Be aware of the elements that are repeated nearby,
such as certain roof pitches, window shapes and porch and entrance orientations. New
construction should blend with the residential neighborhood without copying other
buildings.
Staff Comment: The site is located between single-family homes to the north and the
Overlook Condominiums to the south. The proposed muted earth tone colors, cedar
wood siding, natural stone, timber framing, and roof pitches are all similar and
compatible with surrounding buildings. The proposed building orientation leaves view
windows southwest towards Longs Peak.
3. Grading.
5
Overlot grading for the sole purpose of creating flat building pads is prohibited within the
Stanley Historic District. Foundations that step up or down with the natural slope of the
site can greatly reduce site disturbances. Extensive grading to create large flat lawn
areas is prohibited unless appropriate to grades at building site.
Staff Comment: Proposed homes use walkout basements to work with the existing
topography. Extensive grading to create flat lawns is not proposed.
4. Drainage.
Culverts and flow dissipaters are to be constructed in a manner that reflects the natural
character of streams in the Rocky Mountain region. River rock and cobbles are
required. Use of angular rip-rap and exposed concrete is prohibited. Minor
drainageways that are created to collect and convey storm water shall be constructed of
materials and revegetated so as to appear natural.
Staff Comment: Details on materials used in drainageways does not appear to be
provided in the Preliminary Package. But, pursuant to a staff recommended condition of
approval, this is a detail that will be included with the Final Package for staff and TRC
review to ensure compliance with the guideline.
5. Buildings shall be sited in a manner that preserves significant vegetation.
New construction and landscaping shall respect and be compatible with natural
vegetative patterns. Consult the Landscape Section for additional discussion.
Staff Comment: The Development Code defines significant trees as deciduous trees
four-inch diameter at breast height or larger and as conifers eight-inch at breast height
or larger. It appears approximately 20 significant trees will be removed due to new
construction and approximately 25 new trees are proposed. Buildings do appear sited in
a manner to minimize loss of trees. For example, buildings on lots one and two are
clustered towards the common lot line.
6. Buildings should be sited in a manner that preserves significant views.
The primary concerns relate to maintaining views to the site. Projects should be
designed so they complement rather than dominate the natural landscape. Views
6
should also be considered in the preparation of a landscape plan, particularly where
plant material will be considerably larger at maturity.
Staff Comment: The most significant views of the historic district are those from the
south towards the Hotel. Those views will not be impacted. Views from the homes north
of the subject parcel will be impacted but not to an unexpected extent given
development is permitted on the subject property; and given the proposed building
orientation leaves view windows southwest towards Longs Peak.
7. Site design should not change natural drainage patterns.
Site grading should be sensitive to existing land forms and topography in the area so
that the natural setting may be preserved to the greatest extent possible. Every effort
shall be to minimize the limits of construction on the site and all stock piling of materials
and equipment storage shall occur within those limits. Abrupt grade changes on
property lines are not permitted. Grade changes within tree driplines should be avoided.
When modifications are necessary, surface drainage systems such as swales and
detention basins are preferable to underground systems. Drainage designs should
avoid the concentration of runoff and acceleration of the rate of runoff. Site design
should be executed in a way which will avoid drainage impacts such as erosion and
road damage both on-site as well as downstream. Slopes steeper than 3-to-1 shall be
stabilized using natural materials and revegetated. Cuts and fills should have good
surface drainage and must be revegetated and terraced or controlled by retaining walls
to protect against erosion and sedimentation. Silt fencing shall be established in a
continuous barrier on all downslope boundaries of the development site prior to
earthmoving activity. Additional silt barriers and silt settlement areas shall be
established along drainage courses as necessary to prevent erosion and the flow of
transported sediments beyond site construction areas. These erosion/ siltation control
facilities shall be maintained throughout construction activity until disturbed areas are
successfully revegetated.
Staff Comment: Minimal changes to natural drainage patterns are proposed.
8. Clustering of buildings and parking is encouraged
7
Efficiencies in design result from building clustering when it applies to appropriate
building types and land uses. Service needs can be combined in a central location.
Access roads and utility services to scattered areas within a site can be reduced and
disruption of the natural land forms and vegetation can be minimized through clustering.
Building clustering may result in a visually more cohesive design solution. Clustering
may also provide more usable open space.
Staff Comment: Buildings and parking lots appear clustered to the maximum extent
feasible for detached homes.
B. Building Placement
1. Buildings should respect existing landforms.
Buildings should be located so that earthwork can be minimized. Emphasis should be
placed on building locations that fit existing contours rather than those that require a
building solution that would dominate the site.
Staff Comment: As mentioned above, the plans show grading focused around individual
building footprints, rather than creating large, flat building sites with extensive overlot
grading. This is consistent with the objective of minimizing earthwork and placing
buildings to fit within existing contours.
2. The alignment of roads and driveways should follow the contours of the site.
By meandering roads to follow land forms, it is possible to minimize cuts and fills,
preserve natural drainage patterns, and produce roads that are easily negotiated.
Efforts should be made to construct roads parallel to contours. When roadways or
drives must be located on cross slopes, they are preferred to be cut into the slope rather
than placed in a location creating a fill condition.
Staff Comment: Roads and driveways will require modest cut and fill. Finished grades
appear to generally be within a few feet of existing grades.
3. Site design should consider solar access.
Building placement and planting materials should accommodate passive solar designs.
Maintaining solar access to adjoining building sites, roadways, and parking shall be
considered during the review process.
8
Staff Comment: There do not appear to be negative impacts to solar access for
adjacent properties. All lots appear to have the opportunity to accommodate passive
solar design.
4. Site design must consider the placement and screening of service areas and auxiliary
structures.
Utility meters and service functions should not be visible on the primary facades of
buildings or in front yard areas. Minimize the visual impact of trash storage and pickup
areas. Screen trash and service areas with landscaping, berming or fencing. Consider
snow accumulation in planning access to trash receptacles and service areas. Auxiliary
structures should be architecturally compatible with the rest of the site development.
Staff Comment: No new service areas are proposed. Information of individual utility
meter placement shall be reviewed with building permit applications.
5. Site design around intersections must provide a clear view of intersecting streets.
In order to allow drivers a safe visibility at intersections, no obstruction in excess of two
feet high may be placed within a triangular area formed by the streets at property line
and a line connecting them at points 25' from the intersection of the street lines. Trees
pruned high enough to permit driver visibility may be permitted.
Staff Comment: As reflected in a recommended condition of approval, staff requests the
applicant demonstrate conformance on the landscape plan provided with the Final
Package by showing sight distance where the proposed driveways intersect with
Overlook Cout
6. Site design should facilitate pedestrian circulation.
Care should be taken to provide pedestrian circulation that is separate from and does
not conflict with vehicular circulation. A master pedestrian circulation plan for each
parcel shall be developed by the developer at the time of initial development review
process.
9
Staff Comment: A sidewalk currently exists along Overlook Court, terminating at the cul-
de-sac. The low volume of traffic does not warrant new sidewalks on the shared
driveways.
7. Building Setbacks.
The Technical Review Committee may adjust interior line setbacks based upon
innovative site design, site planning, and access. Each parcel has perimeter setbacks
which shall be maintained.
Staff Comment: The applicant requests variances to two required setbacks. A 10-foot
setback from the south property line on Lot 1 is requested, rather than the required 15
feet. The lot to the south has no development in this vicinity (the nearest building is
approximately 200 feet south) and contains a drainage easement, prohibiting future
development. Staff recommends the TRC approve a variance to allow the requested 10
foot setback as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of
the Master Plan.
A 25-foot setback from the north property line on Lot 6 is requested rather than the
required 50-foot setback. The variance would allow the building site to be shifted north,
avoiding steeper parts of the site. The property to the northwest is zoned ‘A’
(Accommodations) and currently the closest buildings are approximately 250 feet north.
The property to the northeast is zoned ‘RM’ (Residential Multifamily) and has two
existing townhomes approximately 130 feet to the northeast. Staff recommends the
TRC approve a variance to allow the requested 25 foot setback as a design solution
advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan.
C. Building Design
1. New buildings designed to imitate historic styles of the Stanley Hotel will not be
approved.
The Town considers that the integrity of the Stanley Hotel historic structures will be
compromised by the introduction of new buildings that appear to be older than they
really are and, therefore, will not approve historic imitations. The following architectural
styles and motifs are prohibited in Stanley Historic District Ordinance:
10
• A-frame structures,
• Geodesic dome structures,
• Mediterranean motifs,
• Tudor or mock tudor,
• Swiss chalets,
• Highly ornate Victorian,
• Rustic frontier,
• Colonial, and
• Other historical or period design motifs that have a strong connection or
• association with other regions or which have no historical connection with Estes
Park.
Staff Comment: Building design does not imitate historic styles of the Stanley Hotel
2. Building designs should attempt to minimize the apparent scale of buildings.
Buildings can be made to seem larger or smaller depending on the proportional
relationship of the building elements that comprise the building front. Doors, windows,
roof shapes, siding, lighting and signs should all be considered carefully in order to
create an appropriate scale of development.
Staff Comment: The applicant modified the original model home building design based
on ARC feedback to ensure apparent scale is minimized, particularly on the rear, three
story facades. The ARC provided direction to minimize the apparent building scale,
which the applicant has incorporated, resulting in more stone across the lower level, use
of stone piers for the deck, and greater spacing between windows.
3. Rooflines of buildings should be designed to be compatible with surrounding building
forms.
Clashes in styles and materials should be avoided. The objective in determining roof
shape is to establish a visual order to building clusters. The following roof forms are
prohibited in Stanley Historic District:
• Mansard or fake mansard,
• Gambrel,
11
• Curvilinear,
• Domed,
• Geodesic domes,
• Conical, and
• A-frames.
Staff Comment: Rooflines are compatible with surrounding building forms.
4. Roof surfacing materials should be selected to help new buildings blend with their
surroundings.
The use of similar building materials throughout areas that are seen together provides a
very strong link that unifies the varying architectural features of the buildings. Preferred
materials are cedar shingles, resawn shakes (to give a less rustic appearance than
heavy shakes), standing seam metal roofs in colors that approximate the color of
weathered cedar shingles and composition shingles. The following roofing materials are
prohibited:
• Untreated aluminum or metal,
• Reflective materials,
• Brightly colored roofing materials such as bright red, blue, yellow, or similar
colors that are highly visible,
• Red tile roofs, (tile roofs may be allowed in shades of grays and browns that
approximate the color of weathered cedar shingles),
• Roof color should approximate the color of weathered shingles; however, colors
which blend with the background natural materials, such as forest green, are
acceptable.
Staff Comment: The new shingle roofs are gray in color, similar to surrounding
buildings.
6. Allowable Building Height.
Care must be exercised in siting structures and orienting roofs so that allowable height
of 30 feet as regulated by the Stanley Historic District Ordinance is not exceeded.
"Building height" is defined by ordinance as the vertical distance from the average of the
finished ground level at the center of all walls of a building to the highest point of the
roof surface, exclusive of chimneys, ventilators, pipes and similar apparatus.
12
Staff Comment: The model home building plans met this requirement; however, due to
height being measured from average grade, each building permit application will need
to demonstrate conformance.
7. Facade lengths must be varied.
The objective of this requirement is to ensure that buildings do not become
overpowering. A change in the planes of walls, changing the direction or providing some
variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. Structures must exhibit a
prominent shift in the facade of the structure so that no building façade appears
unbroken. Each shift shall be in the form of either a change in building façade alignment
or a change in roofline height, or a combined change in facade and roofline.
Staff Comment: Varying rooflines, decks, wall bump outs, and changes in materials are
used such that buildings do not appear overpowering.
8. Building should be constructed of natural wall materials.
The use of natural materials such as redwood and cedar, and accent stone is
encouraged. Wall materials should convey a sense of human scale and warmth. Stones
should be laid in a manner that conveys the appearance of a structural element rather
than as a veneer facing another material. They should not convey an overly urban or
industrial character. The following wall materials are prohibited:
• Thick shake shingles,
• Ceramic tile,
• Slump block,
• Weeping mortar,
• Plastic or vinyl siding,
• Used brick,
• Synthetic stone products,
• Precast stone or concrete imbedded with stone fragments,
• Lava rock,
• Clinkers,
• Asphalt siding,
13
• Exposed concrete block (architectural or split-face block may be acceptable),
Plywood siding, and
• Aluminum siding.
Staff Comment: The buildings will use natural materials, including cedar siding, natural
stone, and timber framing.
9. Exterior wall colors should harmonize with the site and surrounding buildings.
On exterior walls the predominant tone should tend toward warm earthy hues, whether
in the natural patina or weathered color of the wall surface itself or the color of the paint,
stain or other coating. White walls are not permitted. Accent colors on the wall surfaces
can enliven buildings; however, their location should be confined to entries and
gathering points which do not disrupt the overall harmony of the area. Body trim and
accent colors as per Historic Code. In most cases, only one or two accent colors should
be used in addition to the base color. Doors may be painted a bright accent color or
they may be left natural wood finish. Harshly contrasting color combinations should be
avoided. Brilliant, luminescent, or day-glow colors will not be approved. The colors
found in the landscape around Estes Park, the dark green of forests, the gray-brown of
mountains, and the tan of grasses all relate well to wood and stone masonry. Colors
indigenous or associated with other parts of the country should be avoided, such as
colonial and tropical paint schemes.
Staff Comment: Predominant colors are earth tones.
11. Exterior lighting systems should be chosen with care so that glare is not created and
light is not cast on neighboring properties.
The objective is to provide subdued night lighting illuminating only what needs to be lit
to promote safe and pleasant use. Lighting with a number of low intensity sources close
to the area requiring illumination will in nearly all cases be more effective than lighting
with a remote single source. Generally, exterior lighting should direct light downward
and the light sources should not be visible from neighboring property.
Staff Comment: Building permit review will ensure use of appropriate light fixtures.
D. Landscaping
14
1. Landscape plan.
Off-site views of building masses shall be substantially softened with plantings of large
coniferous trees carefully located to create a natural appearance which blends with
existing vegetative patterns. The landscape plan should reflect the landscape character
of an area. On those sites where the existing vegetation is considered a significant
attribute of the site, the siting and design of buildings shall retain the existing significant
vegetation wherever possible.
The landscaping should reflect the native vegetation patterns and plant materials.
Outward orienting portions of the landscape shall be planted with the same species of
plants which are found on the adjacent undisturbed areas. New plantings should blend
in with the existing landscape so that several years hence all traces of the site
disturbance will have disappeared. Proper landscaping transition to adjacent properties
and natural areas should be provided without strong demarcation. All disturbed areas
must be revegetated. Landscaped areas should be planned as an integral part of the
project and not simply located in left-over space on the site. Landscaping should
complement the architecture of adjacent buildings and not hide it.
Staff Comment: The landscape plan depicts aspen and spruce trees, located to soften
views of buildings. Specific species and plant sizes will need to be provided with the
Final Package.
2. The design of fences and walls should harmonize with the site and the buildings.
Walls and fencing can only be used to provide privacy or service area screening.
Screening should not dominate the buildings or the landscape. Planting may be
integrated with screening schemes in order to soften the visual impact. The tops of
screens should generally be maintained horizontal. If the ground slopes, the screen
should be stepped. Fencing may be allowed around private areas provided it is attached
to the building, does not adversely impact elk or deer migration patterns, and does not
adversely impact common open areas. Fencing materials should be compatible with the
materials and color of the surrounding or the prevailing building materials and color in
adjacent developments. Unacceptable fencing materials include chainlink, plywood,
chain and bollard, and slump block.
15
Staff Comment: No fencing is proposed. Staff recommends a condition of approval that
the applicant shall establish covenants, conditions, and restrictions prohibiting fencing.
3. Retaining walls should be compatible in form, scale, and materials with the
architectural details and materials of nearby buildings.
Retaining walls may not be faced with any material disallowed for buildings. Rock facing
on walls should be applied in a manner that makes the rock appear as a structural
element rather than a veneer. Specially formed architectural block or stone are
encouraged wall materials. Retaining walls over 24 inches high may require railings or
planting buffers for safety. Low retaining walls may be used for seating if capped with a
surface of at least 12 to 16 inches wide. Retaining walls must be designed to minimize
their impact on the site. Retaining walls over 5' tall are discouraged. In situations where
a series of walls occur, landscape material shall be planted within benched terraces to
soften the appearance of the walls. Architectural block or stone construction material is
encouraged. Exposed poured-in-place concrete retaining walls are not acceptable.
Staff Comment: Potential retaining walls are shown on Lots 2, 4, 6, and 9. Heights
generally appear limited to five feet or less. Staff recommends a condition of approval
that the Final Package include additional details to confirm compliance with this
guideline.
4. Site furnishings and paving materials should be selected to complement the
architectural style of the building and the paving and site furnishings of surrounding
properties.
Staff Comment: No site furnishings are proposed. Asphalt drives will match existing the
street.
5. Consider site conditions, drought tolerance, and hardiness when selecting plant
species.
Soil conditions, exposure, wind, temperatures, and other factors vary. These factors
should be considered in the choice of plant materials. Soils tests to determine soil
amendment mixes shall be required. Plant species selected should be compatible with
the activity of the particular area.
16
Drought tolerant plant species shall be used wherever possible to reduce water
demand. Only plant materials acclimated to the Historic District environment shall be
used. Select plant material to be tolerant of browsing by elk and deer.
Staff comment: The landscape plan depicts aspen and spruce trees. Specific species
will need to be provided with the Final Package.
6. Native vegetation shall be encouraged. The use of blue grass turf is not allowed
except in Parcel 1 and 4 (retail use).
Staff Comment: The landscape plan depicts aspen and spruce trees. Specific species
will need to be provided with the Final Package.
7. Significant existing vegetation is an attribute to any site and the vegetation should be
protected and retained.
Areas that are not disturbed do not have to be revegetated and projects which retain
existing vegetation are much more desirable to prospective buyers. In addition, the
more areas left undisturbed as a result of construction, the less erosion problems will be
produced from the site.
Site disturbance shall be minimized in the layout, grading, and drainage design of all
development sites, drives, and parking areas. This goal of minimizing site disturbance
has been established in order to minimize the impacts of erosion, siltation, and removal
of existing vegetation. The removal of significant, mature trees should be avoided. In the
event of removal of existing mature trees, a tree replacement plan shall be submitted to
the technical review committee. To achieve these goals, site disturbance limits shall be
established based on approval site grading plans and fenced, prior to any earthmoving
or site preparation activity.
Site preparation activity will require fencing constructed of 2" x 4" lumber with horizontal
rails set at a maximum 30" height above grade. This fencing is required to
accommodate elk and deer, minimizing disturbance to the seasonal passage of wildlife
through the site.
Builders and developers should avoid the following hazardous situations, all of which
can kill trees:
17
• Placing backfill into protected areas or on top of roots of trees to be saved.
• Felling trees into protected areas.
• Driving construction equipment into or through protected areas.
• Bumping into trees with construction equipment and/ or driving over the top of
• their roots.
• Stacking or storing supplies in protected areas.
• Changing site grades which cause drainage to flow into, or to collect in,
• protected areas.
• Trenching underground utilities through root zones.
Staff Comment: As mentioned earlier, it appears approximately 20 significant trees will
be removed due to new construction and approximately 25 new trees are proposed.
Buildings do appear sited in a manner to minimize loss of trees. For example, buildings
on lots one and two are clustered towards the common lot line. Staff requests final
construction plans include limits of disturbance and tree protection standards.
8. All trees to be removed shall be removed in a manner that will not damage the
remaining trees.
Any trees that are to remain that are damaged during the clearing operation must be
repaired in an approved manner or by a tree expert as soon as final clearing has been
completed. After construction is completed, temporary barriers, surplus materials, and
all trash, debris and rubbish shall be removed from the site. All backfill shall be clear of
building material, stone, and rubbish.
Retained existing trees (more mature trees, especially) will undergo "post operative
shock" caused by the construction activity. All possible safeguards should be taken to
minimize these effects and to provide optimum growth conditions. Foliage feeding and
liquid fertilizer root feeding may be appropriate. Branch and foliage thinning may be
desirable also.
Staff Comment: Construction plans will need to include plans for tree protection.
9. There shall be construction limits set for every project.
18
Any vegetation which is removed without specific approval beyond those established
limits of disturbance must be replaced with large specimen plant materials of similar
species.
Staff Comment: Construction plans will need to include limits of disturbance.
10. Generally the seasons for planting in Estes Park are from April to September.
Staff Comment: The applicant’s contractors shall understand appropriate planting times.
Should any plants not survive, they will need to be replanted.
11. Landscape Maintenance Requirements.
All planting areas except native seeded areas shall be irrigated until landscape material
is established.
Staff Comment: Irrigation is proposed.
Parcel 2 Development Standards
Minimum Lot Area Single Family Detached: 6,000 s.f.
Staff Comment: Minimum lot size proposed is 6,474; however, this standard is not
applicable since the development will be considered a detached townhome project in
accordance with the Development Code definition, which allows individual townhome
lots to be constructed on smaller lot sizes subject to approval from the decision-making
body.
Maximum Building Height: 30 ft.
Staff Comment: The model building plans met this requirement. Due to height being
measured from the average grade, each building permit application will need to provide
this calculation to confirm compliance.
Off-street Parking:
Two covered spaces per unit, enclosed by building structure.
Staff Comment: A two-car garage is proposed with each unit, plus driveways which can
accommodate guest parking.
Minimum Open Space: 30%
19
In subdivided single family detached development, 30% designated open space shall be
provided exclusive of lotted area.
Staff Comment: The applicant proposes a detached townhome project, which does not
require any designated open space. However, open areas are provided on the
individual lots, which will remain open due to lack of fencing.
Parcel 2 Development Standards – Special Conditions
1. A minimum buffer setback of 50' shall be established along the north property
line of Parcel 2.
Staff Comment: As discussed previously, at variance to allow a 25-foot setback is
requested.
2. Residential usage: Only single family detached or duplex are allowed along the
north property line.
Staff Comment: Detached townhomes proposed, which have the same
appearance as single-family homes, but provide additional certainty on building
locations on each lot through a platted building envelope.
3. Accommodations usage: A maximum of nine (9) building footprints, not to exceed
3,600 s.f. of gross floor area each, shall be allowed along the north properly line
(with 50' setback). These may be constructed as one (1) or two (2) for sale units
or a maximum of two or four accommodations units. One enclosed parking space
per each accommodation unit.
Staff Comment: There will not be more than nine accommodation building
footprints along the north property line.
4. Residential development: A 25' minimum building setback is required at the east
parcel boundary adjacent to Parcel 3.
Staff Comment: Not applicable.
5. Accommodations development: Building setback along the east property line is
50 feet.
Staff Comment: Not applicable.
20
6. If accommodations are developed at the north edge of the parcel, the balance of
the property shall be developed for accommodations with no single building
footprint to exceed 120 feet in length.
Staff Comment: The longest building façade length is approximately 65 feet.
7. Prior to development on Parcel 2, a private street system built to Town of Estes
Park Public Street Standards must be constructed by the developer and shall
connect Parcel 2 with a public street. Street location must meet Technical
Review Committee approval.
Staff Comment: Overlook Court provides access to Steamer Parkway. There are
two separate private drives proposed to access units in the development, one
shared by lots one and two and one shared by all other lots. These drives must
be placed in a platted outlot and be maintained by a homeowners association in
accordance with Development Code Section 10.5.H.7.b and to ensure access to
a public road, in accordance with Appendix D, subsection III.A.
8. Parking for accommodations shall be clustered with no extensive surface areas.
Staff Comment: Each unit has individual parking.
9. Mixed residential/accommodation shall be as follows:
a. Residential shall occur on the north portion of the parcel
b. The total number of mixed residential/accommodations units shall not
exceed 92 units. Each residential unit constructed shall reduced the
number of remaining accommodations units allowed by two units. Each
two accommodation units constructed shall reduce the number of
remaining residential units by one unit.
c. Each residential unit constructed shall reduce the allowable square
footage for accommodations by 1,250 square feet.
Staff Comment: The Master Plan establishes a maximum number of units
allowed on Parcel 2. Parcel two was subsequently subdivided into Lots
2A, the subject property, and Lot 2B, the previously built development to
the east. The Master Plan envisioned three development scenarios for
Parcel 2, including all residential, with a cap of 46 units, all
21
accommodations, with a cap of 92 units, or a mix of residential and
accommodations. The maximum allowed units under the mixed
development scenario is 92, with maximums on each type of unit and
applies here. For each residential unit built, the 92 permitted
accommodation units decreases by two units. For every two
accommodations units built, the 46 permitted residential units decreases
by one.
Lot 2B has 30 accommodations units and Lot 2A is proposed to
have 5 accommodations units. The 35 total accommodations units
reduces the 46 allowed residential units to 28. The total 15 residential
units complies.
Lot 2B has 10 residential units and Lot 2A is proposed to have 5
residential units. The 15 total residential units reduces the 92 allowed
accommodations units to 62. The 35 accommodations units complies.
There is also a cap on the total square footage of accommodations
units set at 75,000. TRC approved a variance on July 12, 2022 to allow a
maximum accommodations square footage of 76,776. That maximum is
reduced by 1,250 square feet per residential unit. The 15 residential units
reduce the allowed square footage to 58,026. Existing (39,422 s.f.) and
proposed (17,865 s.f.) accommodations square footage is 57,287, under
the allowed maximum. To ensure the allowed maximum is not exceeded,
staff requests the plat document which lots are accommodations units and
which are limited to residential use only.
Site Specific Guidelines for Parcel 2
1. Garage/driveway orientation.
Drive/ garage location and orientation should be well integrated with site terrain and
residential architecture to enhance neighborhood curb appeal and reduce impacts to the
site and neighboring development.
22
'Walkout' siting is best suited for home sites where the terrain slopes downward from
the driveway to the rear of the site. Garages are located at the upper level of the home
to avoid site disturbance and costly excavation.
'Garage Under' siting is preferred for homesites with sloping terrain that rises up from
the driveway elevation. Garages are located at the lower level of the home avoiding
steeply sloped driveways.
By providing additional garage setback from the front facade of the house, garage and
parking areas are less visible on more narrow homesites.
To reduce the impacts of paved surfaces (impervious cover), driveways should taper
beyond the immediate garage/parking area.
Staff Comment: Driveways and garages are located to minimize impacts to the site.
Their locations will not necessitate significant additional site disturbance or excavation
beyond what is necessary for construction of the buildings generally. There will be
minimal visibility of garage doors from Overlook Court.
Advantages:
The proposal is consistent with the intent of the Master Plan.
Disadvantages:
The application is inconstant in two cases with Master Plan setback standards. In
particular, the north setback on Lot 6 and south setback on Lot 1 do not comply with
Master Plan minimums. However, staff recommends TRC approve variances to these
standards as design solutions advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the
Master Plan and with existing development on the property.
Level of Public Interest:
Public interest in this proposal appears moderate. As of this writing, no formal public
comments have been received; however, staff has received two inquires on the project.
Any comments received will be posted at estes.org/currentapplications.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends TRC approve the Preliminary Package, including the following
variances and conditions of approval:
23
Variances to Allow:
1. North setback of 25 feet on Lot 6.
2. South setback of 10 on Lot 1
Approval shall be conditioned upon submittal, review, and approval of the items
below in accordance with the Master Plan, or Development Code as applicable:
1. Details on materials used in and around drainage facilities shall be provided with
the Final Package to demonstrate river rock and cobbles are used rather than
angular rip-rap or exposed concrete.
2. Limits of disturbance and tree protection standards shall be shown on
construction plans.
3. Specific species and plant sizes shall be provided with the Final Package.
4. Additional details regarding retaining wall material and height shall be provided
with the Final Package.
5. Sight distance shall be shown on the Final Package landscape plan where
driveways intersect with Overlook Court.
6. The Final Package and subdivision plat shall depict shared driveways within
outlot(s) to be maintained by a homeowners association.
7. Each building permit application shall provide building height calculations, details
on exterior light fixtures, and utility meter placement.
8. Within the CC&Rs for the subdivision, the applicant shall place a prohibition on
the installation or construction of fencing and screen walls over 40 inches in
height.
9. The Final Plat shall designate which lots permit accommodations use and which
are restricted to residential use.
Sample Motion:
1. I move to approve TRC Resolution 25-02.
2. I move to deny approval of the Preliminary Package for the Freelan Heights
Subdivision, finding that the application does not comply with the Master Plan.
Attachments:
24
1. Resolution
2. Statement of Intent
3. Concept Site Plan
4. Preliminary Plat
5. Architectural Design
6. Landscape Plan
7. Photo Survey
8. Allowed Unit Calculations
9. Drainage Report (linked here due to size)
25
TRC RESOLUTION
02-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE STANLEY HISTORIC
DISTRICT MASTER PLAN APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS THE PRELIMINARY PACKAGE
FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE FREELAN HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS, the Preliminary Package of the project referenced in the title of this resolution
meets the requirements of the Stanley Historic District Master Plan for a preliminary package;
WHEREAS, while adequate for a Preliminary Package, the materials include insufficient
detail for the Technical Review Committee (TRC) to determine whether the plans meet the Final
Package requirements of the Master Plan and the applicable development agreement with regard
to the conditions listed below and;
WHEREAS, a Final Package in conformance with the Stanley Historic District Master Plan
shall be submitted for TRC review and decision.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLVES AS
FOLLOWS:
New development associated with the Freelan Heights Subdivision project Preliminary
Package meets the standards and requirements in the Stanley Historic District Master Plan and
Estes Park Municipal Code Chapter 17.44, subject to the variances below:
1. TRC approves a variance to allow a setback of 25 feet from the north property line on
Lot 6 as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the
Master Plan.
2. TRC approves a variance to allow a setback of 10 feet from the south property line on
Lot 1 as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the
Master Plan.
New development associated with the Freelan Heights Subdivision project Preliminary
Package is approved, conditioned upon submittal, review, and approval of the following items in
accordance with the Master Plan, or Development Code as applicable:
1. Details on materials used in and around drainage facilities shall be provided with the Final
Package to demonstrate river rock and cobbles are used rather than angular rip-rap or exposed
concrete.
2. Limits of disturbance and tree protection standards shall be shown on construction plans.
3. Specific species and plant sizes shall be provided with the Final Package.
4. Additional details regarding retaining wall material and height shall be provided with the Final
Package.
5. Sight distance shall be shown on the Final Package landscape plan where driveways intersect with
Overlook Court.
6. The Final Package and subdivision plat shall depict shared driveways within outlot(s) to be
maintained by a homeowners association.
26
7. Each building permit application shall provide building height calculations, details on exterior light
fixtures, and utility meter placement.
8. Within the covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the subdivision, the applicant shall place a
prohibition on the installation or construction of fencing and screen walls over 40 inches in height.
9. The Final Plat shall designate which lots permit accommodations use and which are restricted to
residential use.
DATED this day 4th of November, 2025
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Travis Machalek
Chair, Technical Review Committee
ATTEST:
Karin Swanlund
Recording Secretary
27
October 29, 2025
Estes Park Community Development
Statement of Intent
Freelan Heights (Stanley Lot 2A)
Summary
We are proposing a for-sale 10-unit mixed residential/accommodations development on
Lot 2A within the Stanley Hotel Historic District in Estes Park. Lot 2A is a 3-acre vacant
site with A-Accommodations zoning and is the remaining development parcel within the
Overlook residential/accommodations community consisting of 40 existing units. The 6
building envelopes within Lot 2A were initially platted for single family homes but were
recently approved for 6 duplexes yielding 12 units.
We are proposing to revise the plat replacing the 6 building envelopes and surrounding
common area with a 10-lot subdivision. We will then construct and sell 10 detached
townhomes to be built within the 10 lots.. We believe this development will provide certain
benefits and advantages to the Stanley residential community including: a distinct product
type not currently offered within the Overlook neighborhood, a preferred unit type for
primary and second home buyers, buildings with smaller massing, and expanded
landscaping between the buildings.
The individual units will be two stories above grade with finished walk-out basements.
Total unit square footage is anticipated to be in the 3,200 to 3,600 sf range. Each unit will
have a 2-car garage and feature up to 5 bedroom/bath suites. Exterior amenities include
south or west facing decks on the main and upper levels and a patio on the lower level.
Except as noted in the variance request section below, the site plan, exterior building
designs and residential/accommodations unit mix will conform with the development
standards and design guidelines within the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. Exterior
siding will consist of natural materials with an appropriate mix of textures and muted
colors that will complement the existing Overlook units. High volume ceilings and
abundant natural light is planned for the interior spaces.
All units will utilize energy efficient designs and construction materials. We anticipate
providing EV charging stations within the unit garages.
Variance Request
With the goal of maximizing unit separation, we are lowering the density from the
approved 12 units to 10 units and requesting variances for the following setback
requirements:
1. 15’ south setback for Lot 1. The property directly south of Lot 1 contains a drainage
easement. Accordingly, we request a 10’ south setback for this lot.
28
2. 50’ north setback for Lot 6. It appears the Stanley Historic District Master Plan
established the 50’ setback along Lot 2A’s north property boundary as a buffer to help
protect the mountain views enjoyed by the residential properties to the north of Lot 2A.
However, the property directly north of Lot 6 is vacant, non-residential land owned by
Black Canyon Inn. Furthermore, this property has no mountain views due to the large
rock outcropping on the western portion of Lot 6. The property to the north and east
of Lot 6 is currently platted for 8 townhomes but the owners of Black Canyon Inn
recently purchased this property with the intent of rezoning it to Accommodations and
building additional hotel units on this property. Accordingly, we request a reduction of
the 50’ north setback requirement for Lot 6 to 25’, which is the setback requirement for
the eastern property boundary of Lot 2B (the Overlook development).
We believe the site plan with these two set-back variances is advantageous to, and in
conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan and the Guidelines.
Respectfully,
Brad O’Neil
Estes Valley Partners
Don Darling
Darling Enterprise
29
30
31
32
33
34
Stanley Lot 2A
Model Unit Design
preliminary design subject to final refignments
Design Compliance
Floor Plans
Elevations
Perspectives
Model Unit Location
p 2
p 3
p 4-7
p 8-12
p 13
Long's Peak and Continental Divide View to the West
Prospect Mountain and Estes Park View to the South
Lake Estes View to the East
June 16, 2025
35
Compliance with Stanley Historic District Master Plan
Key Design Guidelines Proposed Design
Building Form
Development shall provide a unified high quality architectural character with a
variety of building configurations designed to fit the site and create visual
interest with varied rooflines, building footprints, and entry treatments. Roofs
have a minimum pitch of 4:12 and maximum allowable height of 30’ as
defined.
The exterior design of the house has a variety of architecturally distinctive
elements including varying wall planes on each façade, exposed heavy
timber roof framing, and a prominent turret element designed to showcase
the panoramic views from inside. All roofs have a 4:12 pitch and the
uppermost ridgeline has a maximum allowable height of 29’-2”.
Materials
Exterior materials should be in keeping with the mountain environment and
be compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. The use of natural
materials such as redwood and cedar, and accent stone is encouraged. Wall
materials should convey a sense of human scale and warmth. Stones should
be laid in a manner that conveys the appearance of a structural element
rather than as a veneer facing another material. They should not convey an
overly urban or industrial character.
The exterior materials align well with the mountain environment and are
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The use of cedar wood siding
provides a natural texture and warm appearance. Stonework at the base of
the walls is composed of natural stone giving this material the look of a
structural element and effectively complements the wooden siding. The
combination of these materials including the heavy timber framing enhances
the house’s integration with its natural surroundings.
Colors
On exterior walls the predominant tone should tend toward warm earthy
hues, whether in the natural patina or weathered color of the wall surface
itself or the color of the paint, stain or other coating.
The wood siding features gray/brown stain on the primary walls and a darker
gray/brown stain on the accent walls. The roof shingles and the stone base
will compliment the wood siding with gray/brown tones. Trim will be dark gray.
Decks
Attached decks and patios shall be encouraged but not required for all units.
These shall be spacious, private functional outdoor living spaces carefully
sited and partially enclosed by building walls, low landscape retaining walls,
and plantings. These shall be constructed using the same stone and wood
materials and detailing used on the building exterior.
The house includes decks at each upper level and a lower-level patio that are
spacious and functional. The second level deck, featuring a pergola structure,
is partially enclosed by walls on two sides providing privacy from adjacent
houses. The careful siting of these decks, especially the second level deck
with its elevated views, enhances the house’s relationship with the site.
Miscellaneous
Careful consideration of wind protection, solar orientation, framing of
desirable views, privacy, and varied entry treatments shall be clearly
demonstrated in the building architecture and its relationship to the site and
neighborhood buildings.
The panoramic views of the continental divide to the west to Lake Estes to
the east are framed by the extensive use of glass, the 2-story turret element
and spacious second level deck. All levels at the rear elevation feature large
windows and sliding glass doors maximizing solar gain and natural light.
2
36
Up
Game
Table
Wet Bar
Mech
Storage
Bedroom Suite 5
Bedroom Suite 4
Family
Patio
Lower Level Main Level Upper Level
Long's Peak and Continental Divide
Prospect Mountain and Estes Park
Lake Estes
Views
Kitchen
Family
Dining
Master Suite
Laundry
Entry
Up
Dn
FP
FP
2-Car Garage with Storage
Deck
Dn
Open to
Below
Bedroom Suite 3
Bedroom Suite 2
Deck
Bar Fridge
Fire
Pit
Linen
FP
Floor Plans
•3,612 finished sf
•2 levels above grade with walkout lower level
•5 bedroom suites
•3 outdoor spaces with upper level heated deck
Up
Grille
Pantry
Mech
3
37
Front Elevation
A
B
H
A - Vertical cedar siding with gray/brown stain
B - Vertical cedar siding with darker gray/brown stain
C - Dry stacked stone to compliment siding with gray/brown tones
D - Dark gray trim
E - Windows and doors with dark gray frames
F - Heavy wood timber framing with redwood stain
G - Dark gray metal railings
H - Asphalt shingles to compliment siding with gray/brown tones
C
D
F
E
G
4
38
Left Elevation
29'-2" above
average finished
grade (30' max)
4'-10" average
finished grade
4:12 pitch - all roofs
0'
10'
5
39
Back Elevation
6
40
Right Elevation
7
41
8
42
9
43
10
44
11
45
12
46
Lot 2A
Model Unit
13
47
6
5
4
3
2
7 8 9 10
1
KEY
EXISTING TREE TO KEEP
PLANTED ASPEN TREE
PLANTED SPRUCE TREE
NATIVE SHRUB
1.5" ROCK BORDER
NOTES:
ALL PLANTINGS TO BE WATERED
WITH DRIP IRRIGATION .
3' ROCK BORDER AROUND PERIMETER
OF EACH UNIT (1.5" ROCK).
ALL TREES TO BE PLANTED AT LEAST
10' AWAY FROM UNIT
PLACED MOSS ROCK
ST
A
N
L
E
Y
L
O
T
Es
t
e
s
P
a
r
k
,
C
O
PARK
LANDSCAPING
PR
O
J
E
C
T
:
REVISIONS
INITIAL:DATE:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
GF
CHECKED BY:
LANDSCAPE PLAN
SHEET:
1
PR
O
J
E
C
T
:
REVISIONS
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
INITIAL:DATE:
DATE:
08/28/2025
DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:
SHEET:
48
Stanley Lot 2A Photo Survey Views49
View 150
View 151
View 252
View 253
View 354
View 355
View 456
View 457
Stanley Allowable Residential and Accommodation Units per Stanley Historic District Master Plan (SHDMP)
9/20/2025
Lot 2B (Overlook Condos) resi and accom units Lot 2A (Freelan Heights) accom units allowed based on SF
Unit #SF Resi Accom Max accom SF per SHDMP 75,000
301 792 792 Overage approved by TRC 7/12/2022 1,776
303 864 864 Revised max accom SF 76,776
305 864 864
307 792 792 Lot 2B resi units 10
311 792 792 Lot 2A resi units 5
313 864 864 Total resi units 15
315 864 864 Accom SF reduced by each resi unit (1,250)
317 792 792 Total accom SF reduced (18,750)
321 792 792 Allowable accom SF 58,026
323 864 864
325 864 864 Lot 2B accom SF total (39,422)
327 864 864 Lot 2A accom SF allowed 18,604
329 792 792 Lot 2A accom SF per unit 3,573
341 792 792 Lot 2A accom units allowed 5
343 864 864
345 864 864 Total resi and accom units allowed per SHDMP
347 864 864 Lot 2A resi and accom units 10
349 792 792 Lot 2B resi and accom units 40
314 1,755 1,755 Total Lot 2A and 2B units 50
316 2,175 2,175 Total resi and accom units allowed 92
318 1,755 1,755
320 2,175 2,175 Total accom units allowed per SHDMP
322 1,755 1,755 Lot 2A accom units 5
324 2,175 2,175 Lot 2B accom units 30
326 1,755 1,755 Total Lot 2A and 2B accom units 35
328 2,175 2,175 Total accom units allowed(1)62
330 1,755 1,755
332 2,175 2,175 Total resi units allowed per SHDMP
334 1,755 1,755 Lot 2A resi units 5
336 2,175 2,175 Lot 2B resi units 10
402 1,755 1,755 Total Lot 2A and 2B resi units 15
404 2,175 2,175 Total resi units allowed(2)28
406 1,755 1,755
408 2,175 2,175 (1) Each resi unit reduces accom units by 2: 92-(15x2)=62
410 1,310 1,310 (2) Each 2 accom units reduce resi units by 1: 46-(35/2)=28
412 1,290 1,290
414 1,310 1,310
416 1,290 1,290
418 1,310 1,310
420 1,290 1,290
Total SF 54,216 14,794 39,422
Total units 40 10 30
58