Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2016-05-03RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment May 3 , 2016 9:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair Don Darling, Vice-Chair Wayne Newsom, Members Pete Smith, Jeff Moreau, and John Lynch Attending: Chair Darling, Members Newsom, Smith, and Moreau Also Attending: Planner Audem Gonzales, Planner Carrie McCool, Interim Community Development Director Karen Cumbo, Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: Member Lynch Chair Darling called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. There were five people in attendance. He introduced the Board members and staff. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of minutes dated April 5, 2016. It was moved and seconded (Smith/Moreau) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. Member Moreau recused himself from the review of the Townsend Residence Variance item. 3. LOT 47, LITTLE VALLEY 2ND FILING; 1545 Hummingbird Drive; Townsend Residence Planner Gonzales reviewed the staff report. He stated this item was continued from the April 5, 2016 meeting in order for the applicant to provide additional information regarding the variance request. The applicant desired a front yard setback of 22 feet in lieu of the 50-foot setback required in the RE–Rural Estate zone district. The subject property is a legal nonconforming lot at approximately 2.13 acres in a zone district where 2.5 acres is the minimum lot size. A portion of the lot is very steep and unbuildable. The applicant desires to construct a proposed detached garage. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2 May 3, 2016 Planner Gonzales stated per the Board’s request, the applicant has provided elevations and a detailed drawing for the proposed garage. Planner Gonzales stated the required legal and neighbor notices were distributed prior to the first hearing on this item in April, and the application was routed to all affected agencies. Two written public comments in opposition to the variance were received in the Community Development Department. Staff Findings (see the full version in the April Board of Adjustment minutes) 1. Special circumstances exist… Staff found the lot size does not meet the 2.5 acre minimum requirement, where 50-foot setbacks apply. The subdivision was platted in 1968, prior to the adoption of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). Because of such steep slopes, platting subdivisions and lots today would require much larger lots to account for the slope. There are steep slopes on the subject property, reducing the buildable area. 2. In determining “practical difficulty”… a. Whether there can be any beneficial use…without the variance Staff found the existing single-family use can continue but any addition to the home or additional building on the site will be determined by the setbacks. b. Whether the variance is substantial Staff found the variance is substantial. The proposed garage would be almost entirely within the 50-foot setback. Local covenants require a 75-foot setback. The applicant was granted approval from the Little Valley HOA (December, 2015) to place the garage at this location. c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered… Staff found the character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered. Staff conducted several site visits and found several buildings in the neighborhood built within 75 feet of the front property lines, with some even closer. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services… Staff found approval of the variance would not have any effect on public services. e. Whether the applicant purchased the property with the knowledge of the requirement; Staff found the applicant purchased the property in 2014, after the EVDC was adopted. Zone district setbacks were in effect at the time of purchase. f. Whether the applicant’s predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3 May 3, 2016 Staff found a code compliant detached garage could be built on the site at a different location; however, the steep slopes make other location options impractical. 3. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff found the proposed location of the garage has little effect on the neighbors and the variance would be a practical decision in the placement of the proposed garage. 4. In granting such variances, the BOA may require such conditions at will… Staff found a setback and height certificate would be required during the building permit process; therefore, no condition of approval would be required for the variance approval. Planner Gonzales stated staff was recommending approval of the variance request. Staff and Member Discussion Planner Gonzales stated the home was built as a nonconforming structure. Staff was unable to locate any previous variance requests, and was unable to determine what the HOA controlled setbacks were at the time the house was built. Comments from the Board included, but were not limited to: the proposed location is the most practical for this project; during the April meeting, the applicant stated the position of the proposed garage was being shifted to allow for steps to the house; the Board requested clarification on some of the specifics of the application due to the shifting of the proposed location, unknown height, and neighbor opposition; the Board appreciates the additional information answering the questions that arose during last month’s meeting; the applicant did a good job of providing the requested information; there are many lots in Little Valley that are extremely impractical when it comes to adding any improvements. Public comment The property owner and builder, Don Townsend and Mike Aldrich, respectively, were in attendance but had no comment. Member Discussion Member Darling was supportive of setback and height certificates as part of the building permit process. It was moved and seconded (Smith/Newsom) to approve the variance request with the findings recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 4 May 3, 2016 Member Smith thanked the applicant for clarifying the application. Member Moreau returned to the dais for the next agenda item. 4. PORTION OF MYERS ADDITION, 800 MacGregor Avenue, Black Canyon Inn Variance Planner McCool reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Jim Sloan, has requested a variance from EVDC Section 7.6.E.1.b, which requires parking lots to be set back at least 50-feet horizontally from river corridors. The request is to accommodate the installation of an “overflow” parking lot within the 50-soot stream corridor setback. In 2009, the Black Canyon Inn Development Plan was approved for a mix of multi- family, duplex, single-family and accommodation units. The lower portion of the property is built with a mix of residential, accommodations, a restaurant, employee housing units, swimming pool, outdoor pavilion, and an office. In March, 2016 the Estes Valley Planning Commission (EVPC) recommended approval of an amendment to the applicant’s 2009 Development Plan (2009-03B) to convert a portion of the property to a townhome subdivision (decreasing the density from 19 to 17 units), as well as to construct an overflow employee lot on the lower portion of the site. The EVPC was the decision-making body on the amended development plan, and it was approved with conditions. The Town Board was the decision- making body for a minor subdivision and preliminary townhome subdivision plat, which was approved on April 26, 2016. The minor subdivision consisted of separating one parcel into separate parcels for the townhomes and condominiums. The townhome subdivision will accommodate the proposed 17 units. Planner McCool reviewed the variance review criteria, as follows: . Staff Findings 1. Special circumstances or conditions exist. Staff found the property is heavily wooded with a steep slope and rock outcroppings that present design challenges. The applicant searched out other portions of the site for the overflow parking area and determined there would be a substantial amount of grading and tree removal at any other location. This project in its entirety advances several adopted Community-Wide goals and policies related to land use, community design, scenic and environmental quality and economics, and recommended in the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan. 2. In determining practical difficulty: a. Beneficial use of the property without the variance. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 5 May 3, 2016 Staff found no other portion of the site is available to accommodate the employee overflow parking lot without significant grading and tree removal. b. Whether the variance is substantial. The variance request includes a parking lot that will only be utilized during the summer season as needed for accommodating employees working events such as weddings. The proposed parking surface would be a compacted base course rather than asphalt in order to minimize potential flood debris during a future flood event. It will also minimize potential surface runoff and sediment transfer into the stream. Given the sporadic use and the type of parking surface, staff found the variance not substantial. c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered…. Due to the seasonal and sporadic use of this overflow parking lot, staff found adjoining properties would not be negatively affected by this development. Creation of this parking lot may reduce the incidence of event- relating parking occurring on neighboring properties. The setback from the road, surrounding topography, and vegetation in the area will minimize the view of the parking area from neighboring property and from MacGregor Avenue. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services… Staff found the requested variance would not adversely affect public service delivery. e. Whether the applicant purchased the property with the knowledge of the setback requirement… Staff found the previously approved and permitted uses in the area, such as the Black Canyon Inn and the Twin Owls Steakhouse, are permitted within the Accommodations zone district. These uses have generated occasional overflow parking needs above and beyond what can be accommodated given the constraints of the site’s topography. The applicant is attempting to accommodate a parking need that was not foreseen by Town staff nor the property owner. f. Whether the applicant’s predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff found the applicant’s proposal cannot be accommodated through any other method except a variance. The proposed solution has the least impact to the site. 3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the Applicant’s property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 6 May 3, 2016 Staff found the request for the variance is due to the existing approved use of the subject property and the unique topographical challenges created by the rock outcropppings and cliffs on the property. The circumstances are unique to the applicant’s proposal, and are not of so general a nature to make it reasonable for the regulation to be changed. 4. No Variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing or proposed subdivision…. Staff found the variance request will not result in a reduction in the size of lots contained in an existing or proposed subdivision. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff found the applicant has demonstrated the proposed parking area cannot be located elsewhere without extensive site disturbance nor further from the stream due to the location at the bottom of a large rock formation. The variance request represents the least deviation from the river setback that will afford relief. 6. Under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited… Staff found the variance requested will not permit a use prohibited or not expressly permitted in the Accommodations zone district. 7. In granting such variance, the BOA may require such conditions as will, in its independent judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standard so varied or modified. Staff does not have any recommended conditions of approval for the Board’s consideration; however, the Board is welcome to provide conditions of approval to address any concerns that arise during the public hearing. Staff and Member Discussion Planner McCool stated the parking lot will be constructed out of road base. A grading permit will be required. It should be noted there are no retaining walls planned for this parking area. Member Newsom stated this is the most practical location for the site, and providing employee parking would be beneficial. In the event of a flood, water will be allowed to spread out and slow down here, which will be a benefit for those downstream. Public Comment Jes Reetz/applicant representative stated the proposal is strictly for seasonal overflow parking, and will not be used year-round. The material being used will not create dust. No negative neighbor issues are foreseen. There will be minimal site disturbance at this location. Asphalt is not being used to minimize the amount of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 7 May 3, 2016 runoff. The proposed base will also reduce the amount of urban heat being released into the atmosphere. Member Discussion None. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the variance request with the findings recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. 5. REPORTS A. Interim Director Cumbo reported the process for hiring a new Community Development Director continues. Of the two applicants interviewed, one was offered the position but declined the offer. The job posting has been activated again and closes May 9, 2016. The job posting for the vacant Planner position, closed May 2, 2016. Nationwide, there are a lot of Planner positions available, so competition is tight. B. Interim Director Cumbo reported the 2015 International Buildings Codes and Local Amendments were adopted by the Town Board on April 12, 2016, to become effective June 1, 2016. New fee schedules for building permits and development review will also become effective June 1, 2016. Will Birchfield and County CBO Fried held a meeting to review the new codes last week, with more than 50 people attending. C. On Monday, May 9, 2016, at 8:30 a.m. there will be a public meeting to introduce the Army Corps of Engineers Silver Jackets Team, who will be in Estes Park all next week gathering information to conduct a floodproofing study of the downtown area. This study is free to the town, and should provide valuable information regarding how business owners can further protect their buildings from future flood damage through floodproofing techniques. The information to be provided will be recommendations to property owners, and nothing will be required by the property owners. D. Member Newsom reported that most of the variance applications the Board gets are for setbacks and height. The BOA is not the building department, and to request plans is not in the purview of the board. It is his opinion the only important factor is the setback requested, and we may have lost sight of that at last month’s meeting, in requesting all the additional information. There being no other business before Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:36 a.m. ___________________________________ Don Darling, Chair RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 8 May 3, 2016 __________________________________ Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary