Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Technical Review Committee 2026-03-11 TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT Wednesday, March 11, 2026 2:00 p.m. Town Hall Board Room 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER. 1. Introductions of TRC members, staff AGENDA APPROVAL MINUTES from the November 11, 2025, TRC meeting. Acknowledgment only. ACTION ITEM: 1. Lot 2A Subdivision Final Package Freelan Heights Planner Hornbeck Consider a proposed 10-lot subdivision that would eliminate 6 existing duplex building envelopes. 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. March 5, 2026 1 2 draf t Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 4, 2025 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Technical Review Committee of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town of Estes Park on November 4, 2025. Committee: Town Administrator Travis Machalek (Chair), Public Works Director David Greear, Stormwater Engineer Greg Muhonen, Architect Joe Calvin, Architect Matt Kharchaturian Attending: Chair Machalek, Director Greear, Member Muhonen, Member Calvin, Member Khachaturian, Community Development Director Steve Careccia, Senior Planner Paul Hornbeck, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund Absent: none Chair Machalek called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. TRC members introduced themselves. AGENDA APPROVAL It was moved and seconded (Muhonen/Greear) to approve the agenda. The motion passed 5-0. CONSENT AGENDA The Minutes from the June 17, 2025, Architectural Review Committee meeting were acknowledged. AGENDA ITEM: Freelan Heights Subdivision Senior Planner Hornbeck Planner Hornbeck reviewed the staff report. The applicant, 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, allowing for a maximum of 12 units to be built. This proposal would replace the six duplex building envelopes and 12 units with 10 detached townhome lots. Staff finds that the proposal largely complies with applicable standards, with limited inconsistencies. Areas staff find inconsistent with the Master Plan are the building setbacks proposed on Lot 1 and Lot 6. TRC has the authority to grant variances to these setback requests: 1. North setback of 25 feet on Lot 6 rather than 50 feet. 2. South setback of 10 feet on Lot 1 rather than 15 feet 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. 3 draf t 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 accommodation use and which are restricted to residential use—square footage calculations. 10. The applicant shall work with staff to explicitly address the questions regarding the curvilinear roof room, as per Design Guideline C.3, specifically regarding the rooftop trellis. DISCUSSION During the discussion, Muhonen asked why fences are prohibited even though privacy screening is allowed. Staff explained that no fencing is proposed at this time, and any future fencing would require TRC review, with minor modifications possibly handled administratively. However, because this specific application includes a restriction prohibiting fencing, that option would no longer be available. Hornbeck agreed with this interpretation. Staff also noted that Condition 8 limits the height of fences and screen walls to 40 inches. Jennifer Waters, Town Engineer, explained that she reviewed the civil engineering materials and found the drainage reports acceptable, with a final report required at the construction plan stage. Concrete curb and gutter are permitted on public streets, and aesthetic considerations were evaluated with no related prohibitions in the master plan. Director Greear asked about mail delivery for the development. Hornbeck answered that he had notified the Estes Park Post Office but had not received a response. The applicant has not yet spoken with the Post Office. Applicant Presentation Brad O'Neil, co-owner and applicant, described the project's history and goals, emphasizing diversifying product types and maximizing separation between units. The lots were designed to capture views of Longs Peak, with lots 8, 9, and 10 arranged to maintain view corridors for neighbors to the north. Lot 10 will be lowered by seven feet to reduce its impact on adjacent properties. Design was taken from neighboring homes to the north with the intent of following the Master Plan guidelines. Answering questions from the Board: The driveways serving lots 7–10 are steep, but the 20-foot-wide shared drive allows for vehicle turnarounds. A street stub on the north side connects to the Black Canyon Inn and is approved for emergency access and will be a fire exit only, with a gate installed. O'Neil also explained that the previous plan would have increased the hotel inventory from six single-family units to twelve duplex units. The utility plan highlighted the placement of gas meters, with relocation options under review. The curvilinear roof form related to the trellis was discussed, and the TRC will determine whether any prohibition is subjective or objective. The landscape plan incorporates aspen trees, retaining walls built with natural boulders, and exterior lighting 4 draf t that will comply with the municipal code during the building permit review. Expansion on Condition 9 regarding square footage calculations in the final package resolution was requested. Public Comment Gerald Mayo of 265 Lookout Street and 320 Overlook Court expressed concern about preserving the hotel's historic character. He noted that while a total of 46 units are allowed, Lot 2B may permit an additional 13 units. He also raised issues regarding the previous lack of neighbor notification. Mayo also questioned the legality of the 2022 subdivision, noting that Lot 2 should currently consist of only six units. Dave Margheim of 400 Prospector Lane shared concerns about increasing the number of units from three to four farther east, which he believes will reduce available views. He also suggested limiting access to Overlook Court because of its heavy use. Committee Discussion In terms of density, 92 units were initially approved for Lot 2, comprising 46 residential and 46 commercial units. It was noted that, per the Master Plan, Colonial/Georgian style is not allowed, and development should maintain a mountain environment aesthetic. Chair Machalek emphasized compatibility with the Master Plan, with no mandatory style required, but prohibiting construction that resembles the hotel. It was confirmed that publicly accessible roads cannot be gated. 1. It was moved and seconded (Muhonen/Greear) to approve TRC Resolution 25-02 with the addition of Condition number 10, The applicant shall work with staff to explicitly address the questions regarding the curvilinear roof room, as per Design Guideline C.3, specifically regarding the rooftop trellis. The motion passed 5-0. There being no further business, Chair Machalek adjourned the meeting at 2:20 p.m. Travis Machalek, Chair Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary 5 Memo To: Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee (TRC) Through: Steve Careccia, Community Development Director From: Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner Department: Community Development Date: March 11, 2026 Subject: Freelan Heights Subdivision Final Package Objective: Conduct a public hearing to consider the Final Package application, review the application for compliance with applicable standards, and approve or deny the application. 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. 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 6 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. TRC approved the preliminary package in November 2025 with certain conditions. 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 Final 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 with 10 single-family lots. The intent if for five units to be used as accommodations (vacation rentals) and five units to be used as residential. 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. Starred (*) items below have been updated from the Preliminary Package. General Design Guidelines A. Site Planning 1. Buildings shall be sited in a manner that preserves existing land forms. 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. 7 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. 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. 8 *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: A condition of approval with the Preliminary Package was to provide details on materials used in with the Final Package. Construction plans have been updated to include a note specifying river rock or cobbles must be used. 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 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. 9 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 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 10 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. 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 11 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: A condition of approval with the Preliminary Package was to show sight distance on the Final Package landscape plan where driveways intersect with Overlook Court. Staff has since determined this standard only applies to two intersecting streets and not to a driveway intersecting with a street, as is the case here. As such, staff finds this condition no longer applicable. However, the landscaping proposed does not appear to create any conflicts with visibility. 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. 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. 12 Staff Comment: All building setbacks comply with Master Plan minimums except for two instances in which the TRC approved variances with the Preliminary Package. TRC approved a setback of 25 feet from the north property line on Lot 6 and a setback of 10 feet from the south property line on Lot 1. These variances remain in effect and no further action is needed by TRC regarding these variances. 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: • 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. 13 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, • Curvilinear, • Domed, • Geodesic domes, • Conical, and • A-frames. Staff Comment: A condition of approval with the Preliminary Package was that the applicant shall work with staff to explicitly address the questions regarding the curvilinear roof room regarding Design Guideline C.3 as it pertains to the rooftop trellis. Staff and the applicant have discussed and agree that the prohibition of curvilinear roofs is not applicable to the horizontal plane (i.e. plan view) of roof and refers to vertical plane (i.e. cross section view). Therefore, the rooftop trellis complies and all 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 14 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. 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. 15 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, • 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 16 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 *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 17 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 native shrubs and aspen and spruce trees, located to soften views of buildings. A condition of approval with the Preliminary Plat was that specific species and plant sizes shall be provided with the Final Package. The plans have been updated accordingly. *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. Staff Comment: No fencing is proposed. A condition of approval with the preliminary package was that the applicant establish covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) prohibiting fencing greater than 40-inches in height. The applicant does not intend to create a homeowner’s association, so there would be no enforcement mechanism for CC&Rs. As such, the applicant has agreed to an alternative approach to of adding a note to sales contracts and the plat which states: Fences are prohibited unless approved in accordance with the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines. *3. Retaining walls should be compatible in form, scale, and materials with the architectural details and materials of nearby buildings. 18 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: A condition of approval with the Preliminary Package was for additional details to confirm compliance with this guideline. The Final Package shows rock retaining walls on Lots 2, 4, 6, and 9. Heights range from four to six feet in height. Retaining wall locations around building foundations will limit visibility. 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. 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 native shrubs and aspen and spruce trees. 19 *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: As mentioned above, the landscape plan depicts native shrubs and aspen and spruce trees. 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: • 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. 20 • 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. A condition of approval with the Preliminary Package was for construction plans to include limits of disturbance and tree protection standards. This condition has been met. *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 include limits of disturbance and tree protection standards. 9. There shall be construction limits set for every project. 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. 21 Staff Comment: Construction plans 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% In subdivided single family detached development, 30% designated open space shall be provided exclusive of lotted area. 22 Staff Comment: Each lot includes a building envelope to limit the developable area on each lot and reserve remaining area as open space in order to meet the 30% requirement. 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: TRC approved a variance with the Preliminary Package to allow a setback of 25 feet from the north property line on Lot 6. All other lots meet the 50’ setback. 2. Residential usage: Only single family detached or duplex are allowed along the north property line. Staff Comment: Single-family homes are proposed. 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. 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. 23 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. A condition of approval with the Preliminary Package was for the plat to place shared driveways within outlot(s) to be maintained by a homeowner’s association. This requirement was driven by standards within Development Code Appendix D, of which the applicant subsequently received a waiver to from Public Works. As such, the shared driveways placed with easements are acceptable. 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 accommodations, with a cap of 92 units, or a mix of residential and 24 accommodations. The maximum allowed units under the mixed development scenario is 92, with maximums on each type of unit. 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. This is the applicable standard as there is a mix of residential units and vacation homes, which the Development Code considers an accommodations use. Lot 2B currently has 32 accommodations units and Lot 2A is proposed to have 5 accommodations units. The 37 total accommodations units reduces the 46 allowed residential units to 27. The total 14 residential units complies. Lot 2B has 8 residential units and Lot 2A is proposed to have 5 residential units. The 13 total residential units reduces the 92 allowed accommodations units to 66. The 36 accommodations units complies. There is also a cap on the total square footage of accommodations units set at 75,000, which is reduced by 1,250 square feet per residential unit. Accordingly, the 13 residential units reduce the allowed square footage to 58,750. Existing accommodation units total 43,352 square feet, meaning 15,398 square feet remains for new accommodations uses. Current square footage is determined by cross referencing licensed vacation homes with unit square footage provided by previous owners of Lot 2A. Current square footage can change year-to-year as property owners may obtain or surrender vacation home licenses. As such the square footage cap will be enforced through the vacation home licensing process. 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. 25 '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 standards and intent of the Master Plan. Disadvantages: As the proposal is consistent with the standards and intent of the Master Plan, no disadvantages have been identified. 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 Final Package, subject to the following condition: 1. All subsequent building permit applications shall demonstrate conformance with standards on maximum building height, exterior lighting, and utility meter placement. 26 Sample Motion: 1. I move to approve TRC Resolution 26-02. 2. I move to deny approval of the Final Package for the Freelan Heights Subdivision, finding that the application does not comply with the Master Plan. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Statement of Intent 3. Final Plat 4. Construction Plans 5. Concept Site Plan 6. Architectural Design 7. Photo Survey 8. Allowed Unit Calculations 9. Drainage Report (linked here due to size) 10. Draft Shared Maintenance Agreement 27 TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION 02-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT MASTER PLAN APPROVING THE FINAL PACKAGE FOR THE FREELAN HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, the Stanley Historic District Master Plan requires all new development to be approved by the Technical Review Committee (TRC); and WHEREAS, the subdivision plat associated with the Final Package is subject to review and approval by the Board of Trustees; and WHEREAS, the Final Package of the project referenced in the title of this resolution meets the requirements of the Stanley Historic District Master Plan for a Final Package; and WHEREAS, the TRC determines that the materials included in the Final Package satisfy the conditions in TRC Resolution 01-25 approving the Freelan Heights Preliminary Package; and WHEREAS, the final package, considered in conjunction with the previously approved preliminary package, includes sufficient detail for the Technical Review Committee (TRC) to determine whether the plans meet the requirements of the Master Plan, Chapter 17.44 of the Estes Park Municipal Code (EPMC) and the applicable development agreement(s). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT MASTER PLAN: 1. The Final Package meets the standards and requirements in the Stanley Historic District Master Plan and Estes Park Municipal Code Chapter 17.44 2. The setback variances approved by TRC Resolution 02-25 remain in full force and effect with this Final Package. 3. The Final Package is approved, conditioned upon all subsequent building permit applications demonstrating conformance with standards on maximum building height, exterior lighting, and utility meter placement. DATED this day of ________________ 2026. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Travis Machalek Chair, Technical Review Committee ATTEST: Karin Swanlund Recording Secretary 28 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney 29 October 23, 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 single family subdivision. We will then construct and sell 10 single family homes. 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. We request a 10’ south setback for this lot. 2. 50’ north setback for Lot 6. The property directly north of Lot 6 is Black Canyon Inn, which is not a residential property requiring the 50’ setback per the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. We request a 25’ north setback for this lot. 30 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 31 ’’ 10. FENCES,EXCEPT TRANSPARENT FENCES TO PROTECT LANDSCAPING, ARE PROHIBITED UNLESS APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES. 32 33 34 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. PLANT SIZES: At the time of installation, plants shall be no smaller than the following:(1)Deciduous trees:(a)Fifty percent (50%) of amount on site: four-inch caliper.(b)Fifty percent (50%) of amount on site: two-inch caliper.(2)Evergreen trees:(a)Fifty percent (50%) of amount on site: eight (8) feet tall.(b)Fifty percent (50%) of amount on site: six (6) feet tall.(3)All shrubs: five-gallon. 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: 35 36 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 37 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. 38 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 39 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 40 Left Elevation 29'-2" above average finished grade (30' max) 4'-10" average finished grade 4:12 pitch - all roofs 0' 10' 41 Back Elevation 42 Right Elevation 43 8 44 9 45 10 46 11 47 12 48 Lot 2A Model Unit 13 49 Stanley Lot 2A Photo Survey Views50 View 151 View 152 View 253 View 254 View 355 View 356 View 457 View 458 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 59 Prepared by and after recording return to: Bradley P. O’Neil Stanley Lot 2A LLC PO Box 2804 Estes Park, CO 80517 DECLARATION OF EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THIS DECLARATION OF EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (“Declaration”) is made as of the ____ day of ____________________, 2026 by STANLEY LOT 2A LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (“Declarant”). W I T N E S S E T H: A. Declarant is the current record owner of certain real property located in Larimer County, Colorado as legally described in Exhibit A (the “Property”). B. Pursuant to the Plat of Freelan Heights at the Stanley Subdivision, Town of Estes Park, County of Larimer, State of Colorado (the “Plat”), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B, the Property is being subdivided (the “Subdivision”), including to create Lots 1 through 10 (each a “Lot” or the “Lots”), all as set forth on the Plat. C. As of the date of this Declaration, Declarant is the owner of all the Lots in the Subdivision and desires to declare and establish (1) the specific terms of an access easement benefitting each of the Lots, which access easement is generally shown on the Plat and is specifically outlined on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Access Easement”), and (2) the obligations of the owners of the Lots with respect to the maintenance, repair and replacement of the Access Easement and the road and other improvements installed or to be installed in the Maintenance Area (defined below) by or on behalf of Declarant or the owners of the Lots from time to time (the “Improvements”). NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares that the following easement shall (i) burden the Property, (ii) shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Declarant and the owner(s) from time to time of each of the Lots (individually a “Lot Owner” and collectively the “Lot Owners”), and (iii) shall run with the Property and be subject to this Declaration and be sold and conveyed subject thereto. 1. Recitals Incorporated; Certain Defined Terms. The Recitals set forth above and the terms defined therein shall be considered terms and provisions of this Declaration, with the same force and effect as if fully set forth in this Section 1. 2. Easement Area and Maintenance Area. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Declaration, Declarant hereby establishes, grants and creates, for the benefit of Declarant, the Lot Owners, and their respective agents, licensees, and invitees, the Access Easement, which shall be a permanent, non- exclusive, private access easement to and from each Lot in and through the easement area, all as described and depicted on Exhibit B (the “Easement Area”). The Access Easement a private access easement only, and nothing herein creates a public easement or right of way for the benefit of the general public. Furthermore, the Lot Owners shall have the rights and obligations with respect to the maintenance, repair 60 and replacement of the Easement Area and the Improvements installed therein and other common maintenance areas in the Subdivision as described and depicted on Exhibit C (the “Maintenance Area”), all as described in this Declaration. 3. Maintenance and Repairs. The Lot Owners, at the respective Lot Owners’ expense, shall be equally responsible for all maintenance, repairs and replacements needed to keep the Easement Area and any Improvements installed in the Maintenance Area in good condition and repair for the purposes set forth in this Declaration, including, without limitation, the sharing of responsibility for snow removal and replacement of paving and shall have reasonable access to the Maintenance Area for such purpose. Any damage caused to the Easement Area or Maintenance Area or any related Improvements by the negligence or willful misconduct of a Lot Owner or such Lot Owner's agents, licensees or invitees shall be repaired by, and solely at the cost of, such Lot Owner. 4. Construction and Design Standards. The following are applicable to the installation, maintenance, repair, and replacement of Improvements in the Easement Area or the Maintenance Area: a. As long as Declarant owns a Lot in the Subdivision, Declarant reserves the right to approve the design and configuration of any Improvements to be constructed in the Easement Area or the Maintenance Area, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. b. All maintenance, repairs and replacements to the Easement Area or the Maintenance Area or the Improvements installed therein shall be in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, including the following design requirements set forth in Appendix D of the Estes Park Development Code: • All driveways serving eight (8) or more parking spaces shall be paved and constructed with a minimum edge radius of five (5) feet on both sides, and shall be surfaced with at least two (2) inches of bituminous paving material or four (4) inches of concrete (Appendix D. III. B. 9. a). • Where garages are used to satisfy parking requirement, the driveway apron shall be at least twenty (20) feet in length unless it is demonstrated the design will not interfere with adjoining traffic movements (Appendix D. III. B. 9. c). • Responsibility for maintaining the gravel drive connection on Lot 6 shall be shared by all property-owners in the subdivision as this access for emergency purposes benefits all ten lots. 5. Performance. Each Lot Owner, by acquiring an interest in the respective Lot shall automatically become vested with the rights provided under this Declaration and shall be burdened by the obligations contained herein. If any Lot Owner fails to perform as required under this Declaration, then any Lot Owner (individually a “Non-Defaulting Party” and collectively the “Non-Defaulting Parties”) shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enforce the terms of this Declaration. In the event of any failure to perform under this Declaration, Non-Defaulting Parties may give written notice to the defaulting Lot Owner detailing such default and the defaulting Lot Owner shall have thirty (30) days to commence to cure such default. If such cure is not commenced in such thirty (30) day period and diligently pursued to completion, the Non-Defaulting Parties shall be permitted, but not required, to cure such default, and in which case the defaulting Lot Owner shall promptly reimburse the Non-Defaulting Party for the defaulting Lot Owner’s share of the costs incurred in curing such default. Without limiting the foregoing, if a Lot Owner’s failure to perform its obligations hereunder prevents or hinders the use of the Easement Area by or for the benefit of the Non-Defaulting Parties, the Non-Defaulting Parties may immediately cure such default and the defaulting Lot Owner will be responsible for the commercially reasonable costs incurred in connection therewith. Each Lot Owner shall have the right to bring an action against another Lot Owner who violates 61 this Declaration to enforce such violation, to cause any such violation to be remedied, for injunctive relief, and/or to recover damages caused by such violation. In any legal or equitable proceeding for the enforcement of this Declaration, or any provision hereof, whether it be an action for damages, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, or any other action, the prevailing party or parties in such action shall recover from the non-prevailing party or parties all of its costs incurred in such action, including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees, and interest thereon at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum after the entry of judgement. Costs for purposes of this action shall include court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. All remedies provided herein or at law or in equity shall be cumulative and not exclusive. The failure of any Lot Owner or Lot Owners to enforce any of the conditions, covenants, restrictions or reservations contained herein shall in no event be deemed to be a waiver of the right to do so for subsequent violations or the right to enforce any other conditions, covenants, restrictions or reservations contained herein. Each Lot Owner shall indemnify, defend and hold the other Lot Owners harmless from and against any and all claims, expenses, liabilities, loss, damage and costs, including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees, and any actions or proceedings in connection therewith, incurred in connection with, arising from, due to, or as a result of the use by the indemnifying party or its invitees of the Easement Areas, and/or as a result of the indemnifying party’s material breach of this Declaration. 6. Binding Effect; Easement Runs with the Land. The Access Easement and terms of this Declaration shall constitute covenants running with the land and shall bind the portions of the Property described herein and inure to the benefit of and be binding upon each Lot Owner. This Declaration, the obligations of the Lot Owners, any other provision hereof or any easement granted herein, may not be amended or terminated except by the unanimous consent of the Lot Owners; provided that the Declarant may amend this Declaration as long as it owns a Lot in the Subdivision. If any Lot Owner sells or transfers its Lot, such Lot Owner shall be and is hereby entirely freed and relieved of any liability or obligations under this Declaration arising out of any act, occurrence or omission occurring after the consummation of such sale or transfer. 7. Recording. Declarant will duly execute and record this Declaration promptly upon recording of the final plat for the Subdivision. No amendments or other documents related to the Declaration may be recorded against the Property by any party other than Declarant, as long as Declarant owns a Lot in the Subdivision. 8. Declarant Rights. Any rights reserved to Declarant under this Declaration shall remain until the Declarant no longer owns any Lot in the Subdivision. [The remainder of this page intentionally is left blank] 62 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has caused this Declaration to be executed by its duly authorized representatives effective as of the day and year first above written. STANLEY LOT 2A LLC, a Colorado limited liability company By: Name: Title: STATE OF COLORADO ) SS COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________, 2026, by _____________________, as _______________ of Stanley Lot 2A LLC. Given under my hand and official seal, this _____ day of _______________, 2026. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 63 Exhibit A Legal Description of the Property 64 EXHIBIT B 65 EXHIBIT C 66 Freelan Heights Subdivision Final Package Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee March 11, 2026 Review Process Construction Plans/ Building Permits Staff Final Package Final Plat TRC Town Board Preliminary Package Preliminary Plat ARC TRC Planning Commission Town Board Proposal Summary of Site Planning Guidelines 1.Preserve natural landforms and vegetation. Development should fit the terrain, minimizing grading and disturbance and leaving natural features of the landscape intact. 2.Minimize grading. Avoid extensive grading to create flat lawns or building sites. 3.Preserve views. The primary concerns relate to maintaining views to the site 4.Natural drainage. Use river rock and native materials; avoid artificial or concrete drainage solutions. 5.Clustering encouraged. Combine buildings and parking to reduce land disruption. Summary of Building Placement Guidelines 1.Respect Existing Landforms & Follow Contours. Buildings and driveways should align with the site’s natural slope. 2.Solar access. Placement should allow passive solar design and minimize shading on others. 3.Screen utilities and services. Conceal trash areas, meters, and service structures. 4.Pedestrian circulation. Design safe, separate walkways. 5.Maintain intersection visibility. Limit obstructions at intersections. Summary of Landscaping Guidelines 1.Blend with native vegetation. Preserve significant trees and use drought-tolerant, wildlife-friendly native species. 2.Fences and walls. Must complement site architecture; no chain link or concrete block. 3.Retaining walls. Use stone or block; avoid exposed concrete; height over 5’ discourage, soften with plantings. 4.Irrigation and maintenance. Landscaped areas must be maintained and irrigated until established. 5.Protect vegetation. Fence construction zones and replace any removed trees. Parcel 2 Development Standards Minimum Lot Area Single Family Detached: 6,000 s.f. Maximum Building Height: 30 ft. Off-street Parking: Two covered spaces per unit, enclosed by building structure. Minimum Open Space: 30% In subdivided single family detached development, 30% designated open space shall be provided exclusive of lotted area. Setbacks from Parcel Boundary 50’ north, 25’-50’ east, 10’ south, 15’ west Summary of Building Design Standards 1.No imitation of historic styles. Replicating the Stanley Hotel’s historic look or foreign styles (e.g., Tudor, Mediterranean, A-frame) is prohibited. 2.Minimize visual scale. Vary facades lengths and rooflines to avoid large, monotonous walls. 3.Roof forms. Must be compatible and avoid mansard, gambrel, domed, or A-frame shapes. 4.Materials. Use natural elements: cedar, stone, wood. Prohibit vinyl, plastic, synthetic, or highly reflective finishes. 5.Colors. Earthy, natural tones only; white and bright colors not permitted. 6.Lighting. Subdued, downward-directed lighting to avoid glare. Parcel 2 Special Considerations •Accommodations Development: maximum 92 units •Residential Development: maximum 46 units •Mixed development: 92 total units •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. •Maximum 75,000 square feet accommodations. Advantages/ Disadvantages Advantages: The proposal is consistent with the standards and intent of the Master Plan. Disadvantages: As the proposal is consistent with the standards and intent of the Master Plan, no disadvantages have been identified. Action Recommended Staff recommends TRC approve the Final Package, subject to the following condition: •All subsequent building permit applications shall demonstrate conformance with standards on maximum building height, exterior lighting, and utility meter placement. Sample Motions 1. I move to approve TRC Resolution 26-02. 2. I move to deny approval of the Final Package, finding that the application does not comply with the Master Plan.