HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Park Planning Commission 2022-06-21AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION – TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, June 21, 2022
1:30 p.m.
AGENDA APPROVAL
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
CONSENT AGENDA:
1.Planning Commission Minutes dated April 19, 2022
2.Large Vacation Home, 851 Peakview Drive
ACTION ITEMS
1.Code Amendment Removal of RE-1 Zone Director Garner
2. Rezone 800 Castle Mountain Road RE-1 to R2 Director Garner
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1.CompPlan Update Director Garner
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.
Prepared June 15, 2022 1
2
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, April 19, 2022
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK PLANNING
COMMISSION of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado.
Meeting held VIRTUALLY in said Town of Estes Park on the 19 day of April
2022.
Committee: Chair Matt Comstock, Vice-Chair Matthew Heiser,
Commissioners Joe Elkins, Howard Hanson, Janene
Centurione.
Attending: Vice-Chair Heiser, Commissioner Centurione, Commissioner
Elkins, Commissioner Hanson, Director Jessica Garner,
Senior Planner Jeff Woeber, Planner II Alex Bergeron,
Planning Technician LJ Baur, Recording Secretary Karin
Swanlund, Town Attorney Dan Kramer, Town Board Liaison
Barbara MacAlpine
Absent: Chair Comstock
Vice-Chair Heiser called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved and seconded (Centurione/Hanson) to approve the agenda. The
motion passed 3-0. Commissioner Elkins was not available.
PUBLIC COMMENT none
CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved and seconded (Hanson/Centurione) to approve the consent agenda.
The motion passed 3-0. Commissioner Elkins was not available.
ACTION ITEMS
1.Raven Rock Development Plan Planner II Bergeron
Planner Bergeron reviewed the staff report and the history behind the Raven Rock
Development Plan. This proposal includes 38 townhomes that present as duplexes
(19 buildings), spread over approximately 10 acres and zoned Accommodations (A).
The units are to be sold as residential dwellings to individual owners. The owners
would be able to use their properties as short-term rentals. The townhomes and out
lots contained therein are platted and recognized by Larimer County and the Town
of Estes Park. Staff recommended approval of the development plan.
DISCUSSION:
Vice-Chair Heiser asked about the easements on the plotted lots.
Owner/Applicant James Mackey was available for questions and presented a short
slide show explaining the background and current plans for Raven Rock.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Bob Shafer, 508 Promontory Drive, expressed concern with traffic. The traffic study
was done in February, which is very different from a summer month.
Sherry Flannery, 565 Lakewood Court, asked if dark sky lighting would be enforced
with the development.
Rick James, 305 Kiowa Drive, asked if a crosswalk would be installed to access
Mary's Lake.
Kevin Conrad, 2240 Arapaho Road, had concerns about the outflow from detention
ponds which will flow into the Arapaho Meadows subdivision.
Michael Keilty, 2441 Arapaho Road, stated that drainage flow drains into his
property from the proposed development plan. Trespassing is another concern.
Claire Ray, 2461 Arapaho Road, expressed the same concerns as Michael Keilty.
dra
f
t
3
Planning Commission – April 19, 2022 – Page 2
STAFF RESPONSE:
Planner Bergeron confirmed that Dark Sky requirements would be enforced.
Jennifer Waters, Public Works Engineer, stated that the traffic study was done in
February 2022, and no other traffic elements were needed. The traffic study did not
predict much pedestrian traffic, but Public Works could have further discussion on
installing a crosswalk. She also noted that any land disturbance would need to be
accompanied by storm drainage best practices.
Joe Coop, Van Horn Engineering, spoke on the drainage issues. The drainage swell
is part of phase one, and a detention pond on the north will collect most rainfall
during large storms, thus helping the Arapaho Meadows subdivision with heavy
storm runoff.
It was moved and seconded (Heiser/Centurione) to recommend approval of the
development plan in accordance with the findings as presented. The motion
passed 4-0.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
1. Senior Planner Woeber reviewed the Stanley Home Museum annual review. As
a part of the Board of Trustees' request for a Special Review Use (S2)
Application filed by the Historic Stanley Home Foundation for the property
addressed 415 Wonderview Avenue on a parcel zoned E-1 (Estate), the
operation was subject to 13 conditions. Condition 13 stated that "an initial annual
review shall be given to the Planning Commission after one year of operation."
The submitted report outlined the other 12 conditions.
RJ Lara, Executive Director of the Stanley Home Museum and Education Center,
was available for questions and highlighted the compliance with the conditions.
One of the main differences is that the tours are restricted to 8 people per tour
instead of the 12 suggested. Conservation talks were initiated, as requested.
2. Planner II Bergeron gave a brief update on CPAW. There has been some
organizational turnover which may affect the timeline. CPAW is looking for a
consultant to help update our Code on landscaping and plant lists. Other Code
elements will likely wait until the post-Comp Plan overhaul.
3. Director Garner discussed having a special study session in May to review and
learn more about the RM-2 Code Amendment or Commissioner training.
Consultants Ayres Associates are not available on the scheduled May 17
meeting date and have requested a virtual meeting on May 10 at 3:30 p.m. as an
alternate. Heiser stated that he would prefer the training to come first.
4. Discussion on returning to in-person meetings was had. Training will have to
take place for staff and the Commission. Having no projects coming to the
Commission in May, it will likely be June before the first in-person meeting.
5. May 12 will be a community-wide event on Choices for the CompPlan. This will
be bi-lingual and will take place at the Elementary School gym.
There being no further business, Vice-Chair Heiser adjourned the meeting at 3:00 p.m.
_______________________________
Vice-Chair Heiser
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
dra
f
t
4
5
Local Property Manager Contact Information
Name
Physical Address
Mailing Address
Phone Number
Email Address
Attachments
PID
Required Setbacks:Front
Existing Setbacks:Front
Stalement of Intent Required?
Life Safety Inspection Required?Wi
noising Desartrnerd Otficial
LotSize (9
.2-C Side 3.-C Rear
W 80 Side ‘1.2—Rear
YES
CN
Zone District
___________
Maximum Number of Occupants Allowed
Number of Approved Parking Spaces
Staff Recommendation:PPRGAL
Scheduled Hearing Date—a V fl-z_
‘a
5
DENIAL
Estes Park Planning Commission Use
manning Commission Chair Date
APPROVED DENIED
IEIlectpvg 2O2204D1
ESTES PARK
LARGE VACATION HOME
REVIEW I AMENDMENT
Submittal Date:5/Z/u’CL new ownerLi occupancy updates bedroom uodate
Owner Information
Vacation Home (VH)Address (PEyg ‘_)-zc o
Homeowners Name
Business Name Nic
Mailing Address i/O £nj,qtx,tcz.,L’J Sri-c(qt&T5s.‘WI’c1
Phone Number
________________________________________________________________
EmailAddress Cvaa’it <j,
Ec1E ?ft&Cc)Qosii
3
Site Information
VH Certificate #32 5,Number of Bedrooms old ‘lnewVH Life Safety Number Q’LjiL.
Number of Existing Off-Street Parking Spaces ‘t)
Number of Occupants Proposed (Maximum allowed is 2 per bedroom plus 2)old /0 new I ‘2..
sj;cisn (YaflC)ç’i’03C2C)‘iL&i’¶5C3E.L
1.snc t.j E4j4 t-(c’tj vit En-rccs •Paa’4 CC
‘1c ,,-j.E7LW .ia Pnz -;w-’
(2r1o)..7Rc—.3S’-(le’,..S;chcrCCcc\ac.urym
°S25Q Fee t\ic Copy of property site plan or building permit
Owner Certification
As Owner,I certify the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and I amtherecordowneroftheproperty
4 Date ;k,Record Owner __n
_________
Office Use
Date
U:\Planning\Ap p1irations Form s_Reterences\Appl ication Forrns\U rgeVacation Horn eReviewApp
6
7
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Matt Comstock, Chair
Estes Park Planning Commission
From: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director
Date: June 21, 2022
Application: Amend the Estes Park Development Code and Estes Park Municipal
Code to Eliminate the RE-1 (Rural Estate) Zoning District
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the
development plan request, subject to the findings described in the staff report.
Land Use:
Comprehensive Plan Designation: (Future Land Use) Public, Rural Estate (ten acre
minimum), Rural Estate (2.5 acre minimum)
Zoning District: RE-1
Site Area: 74.03 Acres
(Mark all that apply)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Amend the Development and Municipal Codes to eliminate the RE-1 (Rural Estate)
Zoning District.
Note: This Code amendment is accompanied by a rezoning ordinance that rezones one
Town-owned parcel currently zoned RE-1 to another Zoning District (R-2), following the
standard protocols for the rezoning process.
Location:
Parcels 3522400923, 352318901, and 352342014
Background:
The RE-1 Zoning District is a low-density, large-lot residential zoning district with a very
small presence in Estes Park. Only three Town parcels are zoned RE-1, and none of
8
2
them are developed for single-family use. Of the three parcels zoned RE-1, two are
owned and managed by the National Park Service, and are petitioning to disconnect
from Estes Park. In the Joint Planning Area era, the RE-1 District was almost
completely a Larimer County zoning district, which is still the case today.
The Zone District’s creation pre-dates the Joint Planning Area and the adoption of the
former Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) in Nov. 1999, and the wholesale
Valley-wide rezoning that accompanied those changes. Although the history is unclear,
staff has anecdotal evidence that the Zoning District was originally created by Larimer
County in the early- to mid-1990s – pre-dating the EVDC, although not by many years.
Before Nov. 1999, RE-1 zoning only applied to land in unincorporated Larimer County,
as the Town had no RE-1 or equivalent Zoning District.
Around the time of the Valley-wide rezoning in 1999, RE-1 zoning was applied to the
three parcels inside Town. From older County and EVDC zoning maps, it appears the
RE-1 District remained fairly unchanged on the map from its creation until the IGA
dissolution in 2020. See Attachment 3 for the Estes Valley Zoning Map as it existed in
January 2018 - not long before the IGA ended on April 1, 2020.
The vast majority of land zoned RE-1 during the Joint Planning Area timeframe was in
unincorporated Estes Valley, as the 2018 Zoning Map shows. Judging from spot-checks
of Town zoning maps over the years, it seems not much land inside Town was ever
zoned RE-1.
Presently, only three parcels inside the Town currently are zoned RE-1. Map 1 below is
a close-up of the Town’s Zoning Map in the upper Fall River corridor, showing all three
of the parcels, which are very near each other. The light greenish-gray color is RE-1,
with three asterisks showing each of the three parcels. A more detailed map and
discussion is found in the exhibits.
All three parcels are publicly owned. The westernmost parcel above the Castle
Mountain Road cul-de-sac is owned by the Town and is the site of a large water tank.
The two larger parcels to the east are part of Rocky Mountain National Park and are
undeveloped.
Project Description:
Staff is seeking approval to amend both the Development and Municipal Codes to
eliminate the RE-1 Zoning District.
The Purpose for eliminating RE-1 zoning is twofold:
1. The amendment will remove a Zoning District that serves no useful purpose
inside the Town of Estes Park. It is a residential Zoning District that requires a
10-acre minimum lot size. As noted, (a) there are only three parcels currently
zoned RE-1; (b) all are essentially undeveloped; (c) none are likely to ever
develop as RE-1 parcels; and (d) the one viable parcel is easily shifted to the R-2
Zoning District. Otherwise, there aren’t many eligible 10-acre parcels feasible to
9
3
rezone to RE-1. Essentially, eliminating the RE-1 District declutters the
Development Code.
2. A second reason is more fundamental. In an environment in which attainable and
workforce housing is a critical need, it is hard to see how a 10-acre lot, single-
family-only Zoning District has a role to play in the Town of Estes Park. Estes
Park and vicinity have no shortage of sizeable single-family houses on large
individual lots - i.e., unattainable housing for most citizens or families.
Additionally, in many planning textbooks and research articles and papers, 10-
acre-lot residential zoning is identified as sprawl development. For an example,
please refer to the following link from the US Environmental Protection Agency:
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/documents/essential_smart_growth_fixes_
rural_0.pdf (see especially Section 6 [p. 30] forward.)
It is important to note that nothing in the Town’s proposal to eliminate RE-1 zoning is
designed to push the same proposal in unincorporated Estes Valley. Discussion and
decisions about that are Larimer County’s choice and prerogative.
Other parcels measuring 10 acres or more do exist inside the Town in various locations.
Attachment 4 is a list of all the 27 parcels inside the Town measuring 10 acres or more.
Of the 27 such parcels, seven are residentially zoned and the other 20 are various types
of commercial zoning. A review of this list reveals the following:
• Approx. 40 percent of the parcels (12 out of 27) are owned by a public or quasi-
public entity (Town, Federal, etc.) – entities that are highly unlikely to propose a
single house on a 10-acre or larger lot;
• As the Comments column shows, nearly all are already developed, and most in
ways that would almost certainly preclude (re)developing them under single-
family 10-acre zoning.
Theoretically, any of these 27 properties could someday be rezoned to RE-1 under
current Code. In practice, the odds of that happening are very small. Staff would
conclude that few or none of our current 10-acre-plus parcels in Town would likely need
or benefit from rezoning to RE-1.
Attachments 1 and 2 (Exhibits A and B) are the proposed actual Code language for the
Development Code and the Municipal Code respectively. Both exhibits consist almost
entirely of struck-through language; nothing is added except a few conjunctions and
commas to keep the grammar and syntax appropriate.
10
4
Location and Context:
Map 1
Project Location
Table 1: Zoning and Land Use Summary
Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses
Parcel
3522400923 Public (INS) RE-1 (Rural Estate) Water Storage
North Parks, Recreation,
Open Space Federal Land (N/A) RMNP
South Residential R-2 Residential
East Rural Estate RE-1 (Rural Estate) RMNP
West Rural Estate R-2 Residential
11
5
Table 1a: Zoning and Land Use Summary
Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses
Parcel
352318901 Rural Estate RE-1 (Rural Estate) RMNP
North Parks, Recreation,
Open Space Federal Land (N/A) RMNP
South Accommodations MF (Multi-Family) Residential
East Rural Estate RE (Rural Estate) RMNP
West Rural Estate R-2 Residential
Table 1b: Zoning and Land Use Summary
Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses
Parcel
352342014 Rural Estate RE-1 (Rural Estate) RMNP
North Parks, Recreation,
Open Space Federal Land (N/A) RMNP
South Accommodations A (Accommodations) Accommodations
East Rural Estate Federal Land (N/A) RMNP
West Rural Estate RE RMNP
Project Analysis:
The text amendments comply with EPDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments – Standards for
Review).
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review
“All rezoning and text amendments to the EPDC shall meet the following criteria:”
1. “The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas
affected;”
Staff Finding:
The amendment to the Code is limited to eliminating one Zoning District that
demonstrably serves no useful purpose in the Town, and may serve to undercut
efforts to resolve the workforce and attainable housing shortage.
2. “The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would
allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the
12
6
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in
the Estes Valley:”
Staff Finding:
There is no specific “development plan” associated with this Code Amendment.
Rather, the amendment addresses specific policy goals arising from various adopted
policies, including the 2022 Town Board Strategic Goals and the 2016 Housing
Needs Assessment.
3. “The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to
provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the
application were approved.”
Staff Finding:
Town, County, or other relevant service providers would not be significantly
impacted regarding their respective services and facilities if this Code Amendment
is approved.
Reviewing Agency Comments:
Staff consulted with the Town Utilities Department and with the National Park Service
regarding the proposed amendment. The National Park Service petitioned the Town to
remove the two RE-1 parcels and one RE parcel from the Town’s boundaries
(disconnection), which will be presented to the Board of Trustees in July, accompanying
the Code Amendment and Rezoning request. National Park Service (NPS) land is
already not subject to local zoning control, so the zoning designation is essentially
irrelevant, and the parcels will not be re-zoned since they are likely to be removed from
the Town’s boundaries, pending the Town Board’s determination.
The Town has no other identified uses for its property, aside from the storage tank.
Water tanks and similar utility infrastructure are an allowed use by right in all zoning
districts. Based on discussions with the Town Utilities Dept., the Town-owned parcel is
not likely to redevelop, and if this changes, the Zoning designation will mirror adjacent
parcels (R-2). No objection or concern about zoning changes to the remaining one
parcel has been noted.
Advantages:
• Generally complies with the EPDC §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for
Review.
• Removes a Zoning District that serves no discernible purpose in Town, which
simplifies the Development Code.
• Provides for the opportunity to create much needed housing units by eliminating a
Zoning District that could result in less-affordable housing in Town.
Disadvantages:
• There may be the impression that removing a large-lot, low-density residential
district will compromise the Town’s image and character as a “small mountain
village.” This term does not accurately characterize Estes Park in 2021, and in any
case, there is nothing inherently “village-like” about 10-acre single-family lots.
13
7
• There may be the impression that “it’s not broken, so why fix it?” Staff would suggest
that waiting until something breaks, and then trying to fix it, isn’t good planning.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval of the Code amendment as proposed.
Public Comment/Outreach:
Staff held an online neighborhood meeting via Zoom on Monday, November 1, 2021. To
review the meeting recording, please use this link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-
Z__boustY8jeDK0zHB63Rhz5i57GJJ_/view?usp=sharing
The meeting was attended by seven community members, and questions ranged from
the use of the Town-owned parcel and if it would change, and if the National Park
Service had plans for their parcels, which the NPS does not have plans to develop, but
in the current circumstances, they are not required to comply with local codes and
regulations. A question was posed about how people would be notified about the RMNP
disconnection when it goes to the Town Board for review, and the sites will be posted
with a sign, along with a notification to adjacent property owners, on the Town’s
website, and in the newspaper.
Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with Town and State public
noticing requirements. As of the time of writing this report no other public inquiries were
received aside from the inquiries during the neighborhood meeting, noted above.
• Legal notice was published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on June 3, 2022.
• Information was posted on the Town’s “Code Amendments” webpage as of June 3,
2022.
Sample Motion:
I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Code Amendment in
accordance with the findings as presented.
I move that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Code Amendment,
finding that [state findings for denial].
I move to continue the Code Amendment to the next regularly scheduled meeting,
finding that [state reasons for continuance].
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A: Eliminating RE-1 Zoning District in the Estes Park Development Code
2. Exhibit B: Eliminating RE-1 Zoning District in the Estes Park Municipal Code
3. Estes Valley Zoning Map, January 2018
4. List of parcels inside Town boundaries measuring 10 acres or more
14
CHAPTER 4. ZONING DISTRICTS
§ 4.1 - Establishment of Districts
The following zoning districts are hereby established. They may be referred to by their
name or their district letter abbreviations.
A. Residential Zoning Districts.
1. RE-1 Rural Estate
21. RE Rural Estate
32. E-1 Estate
43. E Estate
54. R Residential
65. R-1 Residential
76. R-2 Two-Family Residential
87. RM Multi-Family Residential
(…)
CHAPTER 4. ZONING DISTRICTS
§ 4.3 - Residential Zoning Districts
A. List of Districts/Specific Purposes.
1. RE-1 Rural Estate Zoning District. This district is established to protect and
preserve some of the most rural areas of the Estes Valley in which significant
view sheds, woodlands, rock outcroppings, ridgelines, other sensitive
environmental areas and low-density residential development comprise the
predominant land use pattern. This zone implements the "Rural Estate (RE-1)"
future land use designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The district
regulations allow for the development of low-density single-family residential
uses, generally at densities no greater than one (1) dwelling unit per ten (10)
acres.
15
21. RE Rural Estate Zoning District. This district is established to permit
relatively low-density single-family residential development in areas of the
Estes Valley where this is the established and predominant land use pattern.
This zone implements the "Rural Estate (RE)" future land use designation
contained in the Comprehensive Plan. New residential development is
encouraged to incorporate rural residential conservation designs, such as
clustering and other open space preservation techniques, in order to preserve
the existing rural character and limit development in sensitive environmental
areas such as steep sloped areas. The regulations contained in this district will
permit continued, low-density residential development, generally at densities
no greater than one (1) dwelling unit per two and one-half (2.5) acres.
32. E-1 Estate Zoning District. This district is established to preserve the
predominantly lower density residential uses that have been established in the
Estes Valley. This zone implements the "Estate (E-1)" future land use
designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The district regulations
permit single-family residential uses at densities of one (1) dwelling unit per
acre.
43. E Estate Zoning District. This district is established to encourage moderate
density single-family residential uses in areas of the Estes Valley convenient to
services and the key highway corridors. This zone implements the "Estate (E)"
future land use designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. District
regulations are intended to continue the predominant single-family detached
use, while providing for additional parks, open space and trail/bikeway linkages
to Downtown Estes Park and existing systems whenever possible. District
regulations permit single-family residential uses at densities of two (2) dwelling
units per acre, with a minimum lot area of one-half (½) acre.
54. R Single-Family Residential Zoning District. This district is established to
preserve and encourage relatively high-density single-family residential uses
primarily within the Town of Estes Park. This zone implements the "Residential
(R)" future land use designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. District
regulations are intended to continue the predominant single-family detached
use, while providing for additional open space and trail/bikeway linkages to
Downtown Estes Park and existing systems whenever possible. District
regulations permit single-family residential uses at densities of four (4) dwelling
units per acre, with a minimum lot area of one-quarter (¼) acre.
65. R-1 Single-Family Residential Zoning District. This district is established
to provide opportunities for attainable single-family residential development
within the Town of Estes Park and in close proximity to services. Accordingly,
district regulations will allow densities of up to eight (8) dwelling units per acre,
with a minimum lot area of five thousand (5,000) square feet, subject to the
attainable housing limitations in §11.4.C of this Code.
16
76. R-2 Two-Family Residential. This district is established to encourage
development of relatively denser residential housing, including two-family
dwellings (duplexes) as well as single-family detached housing, primarily within
the town limits of Estes Park. This zone implements the "Two-Family (R-2)"
future land use designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. District
regulations will allow a minimum lot area of eighteen thousand (18,000) square
feet for single-family uses and twenty-seven thousand (27,000) square feet for
two-family dwellings (duplexes).
87. RM Multi-Family Residential. This district is established to provide
opportunities for multi-family residential development. This zone implements
the "Multi-Family (MF)" future land use designation contained in the
Comprehensive Plan.
B. Table 4-1: Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts.
Table 4-1
Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulatio
ns (Apply
in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S1 or S2" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-
1
R-2 RM
RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSIFICATIONS
Household
Living
Single-
family
dwelling
P- P P P P P P P In R-1,
§4.3.D.4
applies
(Ord. 18-
01 §13)
Two-
family
dwelling
— — — — — — P P (Ord. 15-
11 §1)
Multi-
family
dwelling
— — — — — — — P §5.1K
(Ord. 02-
10 §1)
17
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulatio
ns (Apply
in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S1 or S2" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-
1
R-2 RM
Mobile
home park
— — — — — — — S §5.1I
Group Living
Facility,
Large
Senior care
facility
— — — — — S2 S2 S2 §5.1I
Large
group
living
facilities
— — — — — S2 S2 S2 §5.1I
Group Living
Facility,
Small
P P P P P P P P
INSTITUTIONAL, CIVIC AND PUBLIC USES
Day Care
Center (Ord.
6-06 §1)
S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 §5.1F
Family Home
Day Care,
Large (Ord.
6-06 §1)
S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 §5.1F; As
accessory
to a
principal
residential
use only
Government
Facilities
Public
Safety
Facilities
P P P P P P P P §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
18
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulatio
ns (Apply
in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S1 or S2" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-
1
R-2 RM
Trail/Trail
Head
P P P P P P P P §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
Utility,
Major
— — — — — — — — §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
Utility,
Minor
P P P P P P P P §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review;
Use shall
not include
office,
repair,
storage or
production
facilities
All other
Governme
nt
Facilities
P P P P P P P P §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
Hospital
— — — — — — — S2
Park and
Recreation
Facilities—
Public
P P P P P P P P §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
19
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulatio
ns (Apply
in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S1 or S2" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-
1
R-2 RM
Park and
Recreation
Facilities—
Private
S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 §5.1.W,
Specific
Use
Standards
Park and
Ride
Facilities
— — — — — P P P
Religious
Assembly
— — — — — — S2 S2 §5.1.O
(Ord. 19-
11 §1)
Cultural
Institutions
S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 §5.1.V
(Ord. 13-
18 §1(Exh.
A))
Schools
— — — — — — S2 S2 §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
(Ord. 19-
11 §1;
Ord. 13-
18 §1(Exh.
A))
Senior
Institutional
Living
Continuing
Care
Retirement
Facility
— — — — S2 S2 S2 S2 §5.1I
20
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulatio
ns (Apply
in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S1 or S2" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-
1
R-2 RM
Congregat
e Housing
— — — — S2 S2 S2 S2 §5.1.I
Skilled
Nursing
Facility
— — — — — — — S2 §5.1.I
Transportati
on Facility
Without
Repairs
— — — — — P P P §3.13,
Location &
Extent
Review
ACCOMMODATION USES
Low-
Intensity
Accommo-
dations
Bed and
Breakfast
Inn: 8 and
under
occupants
P P P P P P P P §5.1U
Bed and
Breakfast
Inn: 9 and
over
occupants
S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 P §5.1U
Vacation
Home: 8
and under
occupants
P P P P P P P P §5.1B
Vacation
Home: 9
LV LV LV LV L
V
L
V
LV LV §5.1B
(Large
Vacation
21
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulatio
ns (Apply
in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S1 or S2" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-
1
R-2 RM
and over
occupants
Home
Reviews
may be
approved
by
Planning
Commissio
n only,
subject to
specified
criteria)
COMMERCIAL/RETAIL USES
Wireless
Telecommuni
-
cation
Facilities
Attached
and
concealed
(stealth)
antennas
P P P P P P P P §5.1T
Antenna
towers,
microcells
P/S
1
P/S
1
P/S
1
P/S
1
— — P/S
1
P/S
1
§5.1T
RECREATION USES
Golf Course
P S2 S2 S2 — — — — §5.1C
ACCESSORY USES: SEE §5.2 "ACCESSORY USES AND ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES."
TEMPORARY USES; SEE §5.2, "TEMPORARY USES AND STRUCTURES."
22
(Ord 18-01 §13; Ord. 6-06 §1; Ord. 02-10 §1; Ord. 15-11 §1; Ord. 19-11 §1; Ord. 29-16 §1; Ord.
09-17 §1; Ord. 17-17 §1; Ord. 31-17 §1(Exh. A); Ord. 05-18 §1(Exh. A); Ord. 13-18 §1(Exh. A);
Ord. 05-19 , §1(Exh. A))
C. Density/Dimensional Standards.
(…)
4. Table 4-2: Base Density and Dimensional Standards Residential Zoning
Districts.
Table 4-2
Base Density and Dimensional Standards Residential Zoning Districts
Zoning
District
Max. Net
Density
(units/acre
)
Minimum Lot
Standards [1] [4]
(Ord. 25-07 §1)
Minimum
Building/Structure
Property Line
Setbacks [2] [7]
(Ord. 25-07 §1; Ord.
15-11 §1)
Max.
Buildin
g
Height
(ft.) [8]
Min.
Buildin
g
Width
(ft.)
Area
(sq ft.)
Width
(ft.)
Front
(ft.)
Side
(ft.)
Rea
r
(ft.)
RE-1 1/10 Ac. 10 Ac. 200 50 50 50 30 20
RE 1/2.5 Ac. 2.5 Ac. 200 50 50 50 30 20
E-1 1 1 Ac. [3] 100 25 25 25 30 20
E 2 ½ Ac. [3] 75 25-
arterials
; 15-
other
streets
10 15 30 20
R 4 ¼ Ac 60 25-
arterials
; 15-
other
streets
10 15 30 20
R-1 8 5,000 50 15 10 15 30 20
Formatted Table
23
Zoning
District
Max. Net
Density
(units/acre
)
Minimum Lot
Standards [1] [4]
(Ord. 25-07 §1)
Minimum
Building/Structure
Property Line
Setbacks [2] [7]
(Ord. 25-07 §1; Ord.
15-11 §1)
Max.
Buildin
g
Height
(ft.) [8]
Min.
Buildin
g
Width
(ft.)
Area
(sq ft.)
Width
(ft.)
Front
(ft.)
Side
(ft.)
Rea
r
(ft.)
R-2 4 Single-
family =
18,000;
Duplex =
27,000
60 25-
arterials
; 15-
other
streets
10 10 30 20
RM (Or
d. 18-01
§14)
Residential
Uses: Max
= 8 and
Min = 3
Senior
Institutiona
l Living
Uses: Max
= 24
5,400 sq.
ft./unit [6]
(Ord. 25-
07 §1;
Ord. 15-11
§1; Ord.
24-16 §1;
Ord. 20-17
§1)
Senior
Institution
al Living
Uses: ½
Ac.
60;
Lots
Greater
than
100,00
0 sq.
ft.: 200
25-
arterials
; 15-
other
streets
10
(Ord
. 15-
11
§1)
10 30
[9](Ord.
24-16
§1; Ord.
20-17
§1)
20 [5]
Notes to Table 4-2
(1) (a) See Chapter 4, §4.3.D, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for single-family residential
subdivisions that are required to set aside private open areas per Chapter 4, §4.3.D.1.
(b) See Chapter 11, §11.3, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for clustered lots in open space
developments.
(c) See Chapter 11, §11.4, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for attainable housing.
(d) See Chapter 7, §7.1, which requires an increase in minimum lot size (area) for development on steep slopes.
(Ord. 2-02 §1)
(2) See Chapter 7, §7.6, for required setbacks from stream/river corridors and wetlands. (Ord. 2-02 §5; Ord. 11-02
§1)
24
(3) If private wells or septic systems are used, the minimum lot area shall be 2 acres. See also the regulations set
forth in §7.12, "Adequate Public Facilities."
(4) Reserved.
(Ord. 27-17 §1(Exh.))
(5) Minimum building width requirements shall not apply to mobile homes located in a mobile home park.
(6) Single-family and duplex developments shall have minimum lot areas of 18,000 s.f. and 27,000 s.f., respectively.
(Ord 18-01 §14; Ord. 24-16 §1)
(7) All structures shall be set back from public or private roads that serve more than four adjacent or off-site
dwellings or lots. The setback shall be measured from the edge of public or private roads, the edge of the
dedicated right-of-way or recorded easement or the property line, whichever produces a greater setback. The
setback shall be the same as the applicable minimum building/structure setback. (Ord. 11-02 §1; Ord. 25-07 §1)
(8) See Chapter 1, §1.9.E, which addresses measurement of maximum height of buildings. (Ord. 18-02 §3; Ord. 20-
17 §1)
(9) Maximum height for multi-family buildings in the RM Zoning District shall be thirty-eight (38) feet, for
developments that comply with the provisions of Sec. 4.3.D.5 (Attainable Housing Incentive) or Sec. 4.3.D.6
(Workforce Housing Incentive) of this Code. (Ord. 20-17 §1)
(Ord 18-01 §14; Ord. 2-02 §1; Ord. 2-02 §5; Ord. 11-02 §1; Ord. 25-07 §1; Ord. 15-11 §1; Ord.
24-16 §1; Ord. 20-17 §1)
D. Additional Zoning District Standards.
(…)
Table 4-3
Minimum Private Open Areas
Zoning
District
Minimum Private Open
Areas
(% of Gross Land Area)
Adjusted Minimum Lot Size/Area (Ord. 2-
02 #4)
RE-1 30 7.00 acres
RE 30 1.75 acres
E-1 15 0.85 acres
E 15 0.43 acres
R 15 0.21 acres
Formatted Table
25
Zoning
District
Minimum Private Open
Areas
(% of Gross Land Area)
Adjusted Minimum Lot Size/Area (Ord. 2-
02 #4)
R-1 15 4,250 square feet
R-2 15 Single-Family = 15,300 square feet;
Duplex = 22,950 square feet
RM 15 No Reduction in Minimum Lot Size
2. Lot Size.
(…)
b. Exception for Lots with Private Water/Sewer . The minimum lot
size for lots serviced by private wells or private septic systems shall be
two (2) acres in all districts, except the RE-1 zoning district.
(…)
CHAPTER 5. - USE REGULATIONS
§ 5.1 - SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS
(…)
F. Day Care Centers and Large Family Home Day Care. Day care centers and large
family home day care shall be subject to the following standards:
(…)
5. Day care centers in the E, E-1, and RE and RE-1 residential zoning districts shall be
adjacent to an arterial street.
(…)
§ 5.2 - ACCESSORY USES (INCLUDING HOME OCCUPATIONS)
AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
(…)
26
B. Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts.
1. Table of Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures.
(…)
Accessory
Use
Residential Zoning District Additional
Requirements
"Yes" = Permitted
"No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
Accessory
dwelling unit
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No §5.2.B.2.a
1.33 times
minimum lot area
required
Barns and
stables
Yes Yes Yes No No No No No None
(Ord. 15-03 §1)
Day care
center (Ord.
6-06 §1)
No No No No No No No Yes §5.1.F; §5.1.O; as
accessory to a
permitted
religious
assembly use
Family home
day care,
small (Ord. 6-
06 §1)
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes §5.2.B.2.d
Home Occupation
As accessory to a
principal
residential use
only
Fences and
walls
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes §7.5.H
Garages,
carports, and
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes §5.2.B.2.d
and §7.11
27
Accessory
Use
Residential Zoning District Additional
Requirements
"Yes" = Permitted
"No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
off-street
parking areas
used to serve
the residents
of the
property
Golf
clubhouses,
including
space for the
sale of golf or
other sporting
equipment,
food and
refreshments
Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No As accessory uses
to golf courses
only
Home
occupation
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes §5.2.B.2.e
(Ord 18-01 §18)
Kitchen,
Accessory
(Ord. 08-17
§1)
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No §5.2.B.2.f
(Ord. 03-10 §1)
Kitchen,
Outdoor
(Ord. 08-17
§1)
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Micro wind
energy
conversion
systems
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes §5.2.B.2.g
(Ord. 05-10 §1)
28
Accessory
Use
Residential Zoning District Additional
Requirements
"Yes" = Permitted
"No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
Office
(Ord. 20-
18 §1)
No No No No No No No S2 §5.2.B.2.i
Private
greenhouses
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes •
Private
schools
No No No No No No Yes
(Ord.
19-
11
§1)
Yes As accessory to a
permitted
religious
assembly use
only;
§5.1.O
Satellite dish
antennas 39
inches (1
meter) or less
in diameter
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Accessory to a
principal
residential use
only
•To the maximum
extent feasible,
but only where
there is no
impairment to
acceptable signal
quality, such
satellite dish
antenna shall be
located in the rear
yard of the
residential use
Satellite dish
antennas
greater than
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes •Accessory to a
principal
residential use
29
Accessory
Use
Residential Zoning District Additional
Requirements
"Yes" = Permitted
"No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
39 inches (1
meter) in
diameter
only
•To the maximum
extent feasible,
but only where
there is no
substantial
impairment to
acceptable signal
quality, such
satellite dish
antenna shall be
located in the rear
yard of the
residential use.
•To the maximum
extent feasible,
the satellite dish
antenna shall be
screened from
view from
adjacent public
rights-of-way
(including trails)
Small wind
energy
conservation
systems (Ord.
21-10 §1)
CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP §5.2.B.2.h
Solar
collector
(Ord. 11-11
§1)
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Square footage of
ground-mounted
solar collectors
shall be calculated
as the area of the
30
Accessory
Use
Residential Zoning District Additional
Requirements
"Yes" = Permitted
"No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit
RE-
1
RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
solar panels, not
the structure
footprint.
Storage or
parking of
trucks, cars,
or major
recreational
equipment,
including but
not limited to
boats, boat
trailers,
camping
trailers,
motorized
homes, and
house trailers
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes §5.2.B.2.h
Swimming
pools/hot tubs
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
(…)
CHAPTER 7. - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
§ 7.1 - SLOPE PROTECTION STANDARDS
A. Density Calculation for Residential and Accommodation Development on
Steep Slopes in Excess of 12%.
31
1. Applicability. These density calculation provisions shall apply to all new
residential and accommodation development in the Estes Valley, except for the
following:
a. Single-family residential development on a lot created and approved
for such use prior to the effective date of this Code.
(Ord. 8-05 #1)
b. Development within the RE-1 Zoning District.
(Ord. 18-02 #1)
2. General Rule. Notwithstanding the maximum densities permitted by the
underlying zoning district, the minimum lot area for new residential and
accommodation development on parcels containing slopes twelve percent
(12%) or greater shall be determined by the following formulas:
a. All Residential Zoning Districts (Except RM) : For each percentage
point by which average slope exceeds twelve percent (12%), the base
zone minimum lot area requirement shall be increased by one
thousand (1,000) square feet, as shown in Table 7-1 below.
Table 7-1
Density Calculation/Lot Area Adjustment for Steep Slopes by Zoning District
Zoning
District
Base Minimum Lot
Area
Adjusted Minimum Lot Area (Square Feet)
@ "x"% Slope
15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
RE-1 10 acres No Slope Adjustment Required
RE 2.5 acres 111,900 116,900 121,900 126,900 131,900
E-1 1 acre 46,560 51,560 56,560 61,560 66,560
E ½ acre 24,780 29,780 34,780 39,780 44,780
R ¼ acre 13,890 18,890 23,890 28,890 33,890
R-1 5,000 sf 8,000 13,000 18,000 23,000 28,000
R-2 (SF) 18,000 sf 21,000 26,000 31,000 36,000 41,000
Formatted Table
32
Zoning
District
Base Minimum Lot
Area
Adjusted Minimum Lot Area (Square Feet)
@ "x"% Slope
15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
R-2 (2-F) 27,000 sf 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
(…)
CHAPTER 10. SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
(…)
§ 10.4 – LOTS
(…)
C. Flag or Flagpole Lots. Flag lots (also known as flagpole lots) may be allowed subject
to the following standards:
1. Permitted Zoning Districts. Flag lots shall be allowed only in the RE-1, RE, E-
1, E, R and R-2 Residential Zoning Districts.
(…)
§ 10.5 - SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS
(…)
D. Sidewalks, Pedestrian Connections and Trails.
(…)
2. Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be required as follows:
a. Sidewalks shall be required on one (1) side of any public or private
street in all zoning districts, except in the RE-1 and RE Zoning Districts.
Sidewalks may not be required where unusual topographic or
environmental conditions make installation infeasible or would result in
a significant adverse impact on sensitive natural resources.
33
b. In all zoning districts, including the RE-1 and RE Zoning Districts,
sidewalks on both sides of a street may be required along roads where
the EVPC determines there will be significant pedestrian usage.
c. In all residential zoning districts, including the RE-1 and RE Zoning
Districts, when a residential lot abuts an arterial street, sidewalks shall
be provided to provide public access and connection to adjacent
properties.
(…)
CHAPTER 11. – INCENTIVES
(…)
§ 11.3 - OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENTS
(…)
B. Eligibility. Residential open space developments are permitted in the RE-1, RE and
E-1 zoning districts.
(…)
E. Development and Design Standards
(…)
2. Lot Size.
a. General Rule. Subject to the exceptions listed below, the minimum lot
sizes for single-family detached lots within approved open space
developments shall be as follows:
Zoning District Minimum Lot Size/Area for Single-Family Detached Lots
RE-1 2.5 acres
RE 1.0 acres
E-1 0.5 acres
Formatted Table
34
(…)
4. Open Areas.
a. Minimum Amounts Required . Open space developments shall
provide the following minimum amount of private and/or public open
areas:
Zoning District Minimum Open Areas (% of Gross Land Area)
RE-1 70%
RE 50%
E-1 40%
Formatted Table
35
Title 5 - Business Regulations and Licenses
(…)
Chapter 5.20 - Business Licenses
(…)
5.20.110 - Additional provisions for vacation homes and bed and
breakfast inns.
(…)
(b) Residential zone vacation home cap.
(1) Vacation home licenses in residential zoning districts (designated for the
purposes of this Section as zoning districts E, E-1, R, R-1, R-2, RE, RE-1, and RM)
shall be held at a maximum total ("cap") of 322 licenses in effect at any given
time. This cap shall be reviewed annually by the Town Board, in or near the
month of April. Applications received at any time such that their approval
would cause the cap to be exceeded shall be held and kept on file in the order
they are received and deemed complete by the Town Clerk's Office.
Applications held on such list (the "waitlist") shall be issued during the calendar
year as licenses may become available.
(…)
Title 17 – Zoning
(…)
17.66.130 - Sign regulations in all single-family residential zones (R-1,
R, E-1, E, RE, RE-1).
36
CUMULUS DR
L
A
R
K
S
PUR
RD
C O N C O R D L N
BIG
HORN DR
RAVE
N
A
V
E
BOYD LN
OTIS LN
F
I
R
AVE
GRAVES AVE
R I V E R SI D E D R
MOCCASINCIRC L E D R
C LAR A D R
D A V I S S T
FALLRIVERRD
UPPE R HIGHDR
S
U
M
M
I
T
D
R
E W O N D E R V I E W A VE
VIRGINIA DR
E ELKHORN
A
V
E
R A M S HORNRD
H I L L CREST
L
N
K E R R R D
LIT
T
L
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
R
D
NO
B
L
E
L
N
LITTLEV
A
L
L
E
Y
D
R
4THST
C O U N T Y R O A D 6 1
HIGH PINE DR
WINDCLIFF
D
R
BLUEBIRDLN
WINDHAM DR
EAGLEROCK D R
S U N DA N C E CIR
ZIOLACT
S U M MI
T
L
N
FISH
CREEK
WA
Y
N SAINT VRAIN AV
E
WWONDERVIEWAVE
N O B L ELN
WILDFIRER D
EAGLECLIFFRD
DEVON DR
C E N TENNIAL
D
R
WI
N
DHA M
L
N
BLUEBIRD LN
DRYGULCHRD
R
E
U
N
I
O
N
LN
LAND E R S AVE
HIGH DR
L A K E S H O R E D R
PROSPECT AVE
BI
R
C
H
A
V
E
GL ACIER VIEW LN
RAMBLING DR
NORTH RIDG ELN
R A NGEVIEW
RD
COUNTRY CLUB DR
HIGH ST
G O L F C O U R SERD
CASTLEMOUNTAIN R D
W PEAKVIE W D R
MANFORDAVE
RAINBOWDR
HIGHDR
CLEAVE ST
S T A NL E Y C I R C L E D R
PEAK VIEW DR
BRODIE AVE
P
O
W
E
R
PLANT
KO
R
A
L
C
T
BROOK DR
L AKEWOOD CT
SPR U CEAVE
PINEWOOD LN
RIV
ERSIDE
LN
BA
I
L
E
Y
L
N
LUMPYRIDGERD
C LIFF RD
G R I F F I T H C T
3RDST
T
Y
R
O
L
E
RNEL N
BIGTHOMPSONAVE
H B A RGRD
MC
C
R
E
E
R
Y
L
N
C H EROK
E
E
D
R
CHICKADEE
LN
ELM
AVE
N
O
T
A
IA
H
R
D
SPRINGST
PA
W
N
E
E
D
R
B E A C H L N
M I N D ST
STONEGATE DR
COYOTERUN
C A N Y O N R I V E R R D
1STST
CIRCLE D R
5T H ST
L O N G S T R L
COLEMANR D
TRAILBLAZERWAY
ASPEN
DR
B RO A D V IEW R D
SOUTH LN
SUNN Y LN
S
U
N
S
E
T
L
N
LO
T
T
S
T
SUN
R
I
SE
CT
D A R C Y D R
ASSO CIATIO
N
DR
FAR VIEW LN
BAK
E
R
DR
B L U E B ELL D R
JUNIPER
LN
HOLID AY LN
2N DST
PA W NEE LN
RAMSHORNDR
SAMPSONCT WILDLIFE L
N
MORAINE AV
E
H I G H L A N D L N
CHEROKEECT
DUNRAVEN ST
P R O S P E C T O R L N
COMANCHE ST
MEEKER DR
P I O N E E R L N
CH A S M DR
PINE LN
VE N N ERRANCHR D
PONDEROSALN
CARING L N
SANBORN DR
PROSPECT PARKDR
ACACIA DR
I N D IAN TRL
WOODSTOCKDR
C Y T E W O RTH
R
D
ASPENVALL
E
Y
R
D
S
A
N
B
O
R
N
D
R
K A L EY C OT TAG E R D W
NOR
T
H
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
HONDIUS WAY
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
R
WILLOW LN
PARKVI
E
W
LN
PINEMEADOWDR
CIRR
U
S
L
N
J
A
C
O
B
R
D
C
OLUM
B
I
N
E
D
R
M
A
C
CRACKE N LN
E
A
G
L
E
C
L
I
F
F
D
R
SSAINTVRAINAVE
WHISPERINGPINESDR
L O W E R B R O A D V I E W
AV
A
L
O
N
D
R
MILLSDR
MILLSDR
COOKOUT
W
A
Y
C R AGSDR
CR
A
G
S
D
R
E
A
G
LE C L I FF CI R CLE
D
R
E
L
M
R
D
MOSSROCKDR
ROCKRIDGERD
JUNIPERDR
U PLAND S CIR
UPLANDSCIR
STANLEY
CIRCLEDR
POWELLY LN
LA
U
R
E
L
L
N
CREEKSID E C T
F
I
S
H
C
R
E
E
KRD
L A R K S P U R AV E
HUMMINGBIRDDR
C U R R Y L N
NORTH LN
PINE KNOLL DR
P I NEKNOLL D R
SW S T E A M E R P K WY
A U D U B O N ST
FALLRIV
ERLN
SUTTON LN
POND
E
R
O
S A DR
OV E R L OOKC
T
BEL L E VUE DR
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
6
6
HIGHWAY66
CH
A
S
M
D
R
L O R Y L N
M
C
G
R
A
W
R
A
N
C
H
RD
PUMADR
PUMA
DR
ASPENA
V
E
ASPEN
AVE
F ISH HATCHERYRD
MESA D R
MESADR
WIND
RIV
E
RTRL
K I OWA DR
KIOWADRMOUNTAINSIDEDR
J
U
N
G
F
R
A
U
T
R
L
R O C K CANYONRD
CIRCLED R
CIRCLE
D R
E V E R G REENLN
LONGS DR
SE R E NITY L N
R I D G E R D
RIDGERD
S A D D L E B A C K L N
ASSOCIA TIONDR
JOELES
T
E
SDR
T
A
N
A
G
ER
RD
FAIRW
A
YCLUB
CIR
WELKHORN AVE
P U Z ZLEG RASS
C
I
R
TRAN Q U I L L N
M O R AI N E A V E
MO
R
A
I
N
E
A
V
E
B
I
G
H
O
R
N
TRL
U
T
E
LN
U T E LNCLIFFLN
PTARMIG
A
N
T
R
L
P T A R M I G AN T RL
RA
V
E
N
C
I
R
RAVEN CIR
HIGHWAY
7
FLOWERLN
DAVIDDR
W I N D H A M C T
D U N RAV E NLN
D O LL A R L A K E D R
M
O
O
N
TRAILWAY
B
L
A
C
KSQUIRRELDR
FAITHWAY
T
U
N
N
E
L
R
D
TUNNE
L
R
D
W
I
L
D
W
O
O
D
D
R
SLEEPYHOLLOWRD
GAILLAR
D
I
A
RD
BA
K
ERDR
FA M IL Y LN
S A I N TFRA NC I SWAY
VI
S
T
A
VIEW
L L O YD LN
SPIRIT
L
N
DEER PA T H C T
CARYSPL
SI
L
V
E
R
T
R
E
E
L
N
PINEWOOD LN
SOLOM O N DR HIGH A C R ES DR
SU
N
N
Y
MEAD
LN
M O O N R I D G E R D
RANCH CIR
M E A DOW
CI
R
DEKKERC IR
OURAYDR
CEDAR LN
HAYBARN HILL RD
ASPEN G L ENCA
M
P
G
R
OUN
D
RD
L I T TLEBEA V E R D R
H E R M IT PAR K RD
H E R MIT PA RKRD
RIVERSIDE DR
HUMMING
B
I
R
D
LN
CENTER LN
NIMBUS DR
UPPER HIGH DR
IVY ST
ELK ISLAND WAY
DR
I
F
T
W
O
O
D
A
V
E
UPPER VENNER RD
WOODLAND CT
BR
A
E
S
I
D
E
L
N
CANYON COVE LN
MOC
C
A
S
I
N
PIN
E
C
O
N
E
W
A
Y
MOUNTAINSIDE DR
UT
E
C
T
EVE
R
G
R
E
E
N
POIN
T
R
D
UPPER LARKSPUR RD
EA
G
L
E
L
N
BI
R
D
I
E
L
N
BLUE
S
P
R
U
C
E
D
R
CO
L
U
M
B
I
N
E
A
V
E
FAWN CT
C
T
THU
N
D
E
R
L
N
PA
R
L
N
ROCK CANYON RD
ROC
K
W
O
O
D
CIR
VA
I
L
C
T
B
A
K
E
R
D
R
STE
A
M
E
R
CT
TIMBERMOUNTAIN LN
MOU
N
T
A
I
N
VIEW
C
T
GRAY HAWK CT
WILLOWSTONE DR
C
R
E
S
T
V
I
E
W
C
T
LOOK
O
U
T
S
T
LO
W
E
R
CO
O
K
O
U
T
FA
I
R
W
A
Y
C
L
U
B
L
N
CONIFER LN
ASPEN
BRAN
C
H
C
T
MO
U
N
T
A
I
N
VI
E
W
L
N
PR
O
S
P
E
C
T
ES
T
A
T
E
S
C
T
P
O
N
D
E
R
O
S
A
D
R
EA
S
T
L
N
CA
M
E
L
O
T
C
T
WALLACE LN
BI
E
R
S
T
A
D
T
L
N
BR
O
O
K
C
T
SUN
R
I
S
E
C
T
WA
P
I
T
I
PL
F
E
R
N
O
D
E
S
S
A
L
N
WILLO
W
S
T
O
N
E
CT
AVAL
O
N
DR
STEELE CT
PI
K
A
L
N
WAPITI CIR
WI
L
D
W
O
O
D
L
N
RESPONSIBILITY
DR
MON
I
D
A
C
T
BIRC
H
A
V
E
F
A
I
R
W
A
Y
L
N
GI
A
N
T
T
R
A
C
K
R
D
BROOK DR
JUNC
O
L
N
SU
M
M
E
R
S
E
T
LN
LAUREL LN
EL
K
ME
A
D
O
W
CT
KI
N
N
I
K
I
N
N
I
C
C
T
BROOK LN
SKYLINE D
R
MIDDLE HIGH DR
UNIVERSITY DR
TA
N
A
G
E
R
R
D
RANG
E
VIEW
C
T
KENDALL DR
L
A
W
N
L
N
P
E
C
K
L
N
TURQ
U
O
I
S
E
T
R
L
BLUE MIST LN
DALL
M
A
N
DR
PROSPECT PARK DR
WI
L
L
O
W
C
T
EL
K
RI
D
G
E
CT
STAGELINE RD
HA
L
L
E
T
T
HE
I
G
H
T
S
D
R
N S
H
A
R
O
N
C
T
OUTPOST LN
SIOUX
C
T
WES
T
O
N
LN
SUNRISE LN
RAVEN CT
FALCON LN
SU
T
T
O
N
L
N
WIL
D
E
R
N
E
S
S
LN
PR
O
S
P
E
C
T
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
D
R
WESTVIEW LN
KAL
E
Y
COT
T
A
G
E
R
D
E
KE
R
R
R
D
COLUMBINE AVE
TW
I
N
D
R
GIANT TRACK RD
SAINT VRAIN LN
SP
U
R
L
N
BRADL
E
Y
L
N
BU
C
K
A
R
O
O
CT
N MO
R
R
I
S
C
T
S SH
A
R
O
N
C
T
R
O
C
K
W
O
O
D
LN
S
CLOVER LN
MISTY MANOR DR
HIGHW
A
Y
3
6
S MO
R
R
I
S
C
T
NORT
H
C
T
SO
U
T
H
C
T
ASPE
N
TREE
D
R
S
C
R
A
B
B
I
T
W
A
Y
CRA
G
S
C
T
FIL
B
E
Y
C
T
RE
S
P
E
C
T
L
N
HONDIUS CT
DOLLAR LAKE DR
BROADVIEW LN
BO
D
Y
D
R
G
R
E
E
N
P
I
N
E
C
T
6TH GREEN LN
S SA
I
N
T
VRAI
N
A
V
E
KALLENBERG DR
ROCKWOOD LN E
DEL LN
SHADOWMOUNTAIN C
T
CT
RID
G
E
VIEW
L
N
RO
C
K
W
O
O
D
L
N
W
EA
G
L
E
C
L
I
F
F
L
N
SIERRA SAGE LN
G
O
V
E
R
N
O
R
S
L
N
PRO
M
O
N
T
O
R
Y
DR
AS
P
E
N
L
N
DR
CHAL
E
T
RIDG
E
C
T
SLE
E
P
Y
H
O
L
L
O
W
C
T
L
A
K
O
T
A
C
T
HA
L
B
A
C
H
L
N
D
R
RIVERRO
C
K
CIR
OL
Y
M
P
U
S
L
N
E
ASPENCLIFF
CT
GEM L
A
K
E
T
R
L
GLACIER DR
CA
R
R
I
A
G
E
D
R
HIGH
VISTA
DR
S
S
A
I
N
T
V
R
A
I
N
A
V
E
HIGH
VISTA
LN
CEDAR
RIDGE C
I
R
SU
N
N
Y
AC
R
E
S
C
T
BERTHOUD DALE LN
P
I
N
E
R
I
V
E
R
L
N
SH
A
D
Y
L
N
PAR
K
L
N
PROSPECT HIGHLANDS RD
MCGRAW RANCH RD
M
A
C
G
R
E
G
O
R
A
V
E
UTILI
T
Y
D
R
DRIPPING SPRINGS LN
R
A
M
S
H
O
R
N
R
D
C H A S E
PINE
RIVER CT
HIGH
PINE
S
D
R
OL
Y
M
P
U
S
L
N
W
RO
C
K
W
O
O
D
LN
N
BERTHOUD DALE LN
S
T
A
R
W
A
Y
HOT SPUR LN
R
I
D
G
E
L
N
UP
P
E
R
HI
G
H
D
R
TH
U
N
D
E
R
MO
U
N
T
A
I
N
L
N
PARK RIVER
P
L
C
H
R
I
S
T
M
A
S
TR
E
E
L
N
OLYMPIAN LN
FIN
D
L
E
Y
CT
H O M E S T E A D LN
SUMMERSETCT
OLD
M
A
N
M O UNTAINLN
VIRGINIALN
VIRGINIAD
R
NSAINTVRAINAVE
STAN
L
E
Y
A
V
E
WIE S T D R
COURTNE Y LN
V A LLEY VIE
W
RD
FALL
RI
V
E
R
C
T
F
A
L
L
RIVER
D
R
BL U E SPRUCEDR
UPPERHIG
H
DR
TANAGER RD
LARKS
P
U
R
R
D
M
ILL S L N
A
L
P
INE C I R
HI G H W A Y 6 6
CHIEFS HEAD RD
PTA
R
M
I
G
A
N
L
N
L
O
C
H
VALE
YPSILON
LN
N A R CISSUS
D
R
A V A LN
MA
R
M O T DR
LA U RELL
N
CHAR-FALL
RIV E RC
T
D E E R M O UNTAIN
M
A
RI GOLD LN
F A R V I E W D R
O L D R A N G E R D R
KEN W O OD
L
N
IVY
L
N
FRIE
N
D
S
HIPLN
M
INERAL RD
EAGLECLIFFDR
W
IN
D
CLIF
F
D
R
TE
R
R
A
C
E
L
N
CLIFF RD
A S P E N K N O L L DR
S I L VE R WINDCIR
R O C KLNFELLOWSHIP
B EAR L A KE
R
D
S N U G G LERS
C O V E DR
F
L
O
W
E
R
CIR
MESAD RLONGHOUSEWAY C
E
D
A
R
C
L
I
F
F
DR
Z
E
R
M
A
T
T
T
R
L
E
I
G
ER
TRL
N
IMBUS
D
R
T
E
DDYS
TEE
T
H
D
R
DORSE Y D R
B I G H O R N TRL
SI
LVERSAGE CTM
A
RIPOSACT
S
AIN
T
M
O
R
IT
Z
T
R
L
SUTTON LN CUL V E R R D
S HADCT
W PRO SPECT
MOUN T AINRD
PROSP E C T MOU N T AINDR
PR O S P E C T
M O U N T AIN C T
M
A
R
Y
S
L
A
KERD ACA C I A D R
BAL
D
PATECT
LO
N
G
V
I
E
W
D
R
F
I
S
H
C
R
E
E
K
R
D
PON D E R O S A A V E
WHISPERIN G PI N E S D R
ARAPAH O R D
BRISTL E C O N E C T
U
P
L
A
N
D
S
C
I
R
FISH
CREEKRD
GR
A
H
A
M
L
N
JOHNSE
N
L
N
W IN D H A M D
R
SK E T C H B
O
X
LN
MATTHEW CIR
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
R
P
R
O
S
PEC
T
M
O
U
NTAIN
RD
VIL L A G E G REENLN
MORGAN
ST
VALLEY RD
JAME
S
S
T
M
A
R
Y
S
L
A
K
E
RD
HIL
L
R
D
ME
A
D
O
W
L
N
RIVERSIDE DR
HI
G
H
VI
S
T
A
LN
M I D D L E BROA D V I E W
ST
R
O
N
G
A
V
E
HOND
I
U
S
CIR
MA
C
G
R
E
G
O
R
L
N
CR A B -
LO
N
E
P
I
N
E
D
R
AP
P
L
E
LN
R
ED TAIL HAW K D R
PTARMIGAN
L
N
KIO
W
A
T
R
A
I
L
PINE
W
OOD
S C O T T AVE
PROSPECT ESTATES CT
E
L
K
HOL
L
O
W
C
T
R A N GEVIEW RD
GRA
N
I
TELN
M U M M Y L N
CHIQUITAL
N
CHAPIN L N
C
H
A
P
IN
L
N
BIGHORNDR
BIG
H
O
R
N
D
R
F
R
E
E
L
A
N
D
EL K T R AILCT
VISTA L N
PONDEROSA DR
DANDIEWAY
BLUEVALLEYDR
FISH CREEK RD
ROCKWOOD LN
R
O
C
K
W
O
O
D
L
N
BR
O
A
D
V
I
E
W
L
N
KIOWA
C
T
GR E Y F O X D R
RAMBLING
D
R
R OCKWELLST
W
R
I
V
E
RSIDEDR
ST
FAWN
LN
E
R
IVER
S
I
DEDR
BL
A
C
K
C
A
N
Y
O
N
D
R
WE
S
T
L
N
NORTH LN
EA
S
T
L
N
HOMESTEADER
L
N
P
A
N
O
R
A
MA
C I R
LAKEFRON T S T
G
R
A
N
DESTATES D R
HILL
S
I
D
E
L
N
S P R U C E DR
S
T
E
A
M
ER D R
HO
N
D
I
U
S
L
N
LA
R
K
S
P
U
R
LN
U
P
P
E
R
HEINZ PKWY
HIGHVIE
W
H
E
I
N
Z
PKWY
UPPER BROADVIEW
TURQUOI S ETRL
AX
M
I
N
S
T
E
R
L
N
P
RO
S
P
E
C
T
M
OUN
T
AIN
RD
JU
N
I
P
E
R
D
R
TA
L
L
P
I
N
E
S
D
R
PINE
KNOLLLN
L
E
X
I
N
G
TONLNL
E
X
INGTON
L
N
LEXINGTON LN
M
O
R
GAN ST
MARCUS LN
S
S
A
I
N
T
V
R
A
I
N
A
V
E
FALL RIVER RD
HIGH
W
A
Y
3
6
HO
N
E
S
T
Y
P
L
ST
O
R
M
L
N
RAINBO
W
D
R
B
E
A
R
L
A
K
E
R
D
H I D E A WAYLN
LITTLEP
R
O
SPECT
R
D
LIGHTNING
R
D
MORAINE PARK C A M P G ROUNDRD
DEVILSGULCHRD
ASPENBRO O K D RASPE N G ROVECIR
LITTLE B E A V E R DR
ROOFTOPWAY
MARYS LAKE RD
R-1
R-1
A
s
p
e
n
B
r
o
o
k
EastForkFish Creek
Buc
k
C
r
e
e
k
Wind Riv
e
r
Fi
shCree
k
Big
H
orn
C
ree
k
EastFork F i s h Creek
BlackCanyonCreek
B i g T h o m p s onRiver
B i g T h o m p s o n River
W in d R iv er
G l a c i e r C r e e kGlacierCreek
B
lackCanyon
C
r
eek
B i g Thom p s onRiver
FallRiver
Fish Cre e k
Beaver Brook
Aspen
Brook
Fall River
F ish C r eek
Bi g ThompsonRiv e r
FallRiver
LAKEESTES
MARYSLAKE
LILYLAKE
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
CD
CD
CD
CD
CD
CH
CH
CH
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EE
E
E
EE
EE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
I-1
I-1
I-1
I-1
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
RE-1
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2
R-2R-2
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
E-1
O
O
O
O
O
O
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RMRM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
£¤36
£¤34
£¤36
£¤34
£¤34
£¤36
UV7
UV66
Important Disclaimer:
This map shall be used to identify the boundaries of the zoning districts shown hereon. These boundaries followproperty boundaries as delineated on this map.
This map shall not be used to:Establish specific legal lots lots of record, or individual parcel boundaries; orEstablish property descriptions for legal conveyance of parcels of land.
Individual property boundaries are subject to frequent change, and recent changes may not be reflected on this map.
Larimer County and the Town of Estes Park cannot anticipate and do not assume responsibility or liability forsubsequent, secondary use of this map.
No representation or warranty is made as to the completeness or accuracy of this map for any use other thanthe intended use of identifying zoning district boundaries.
Estes ValleyOfficial Zoning Map
Printed: 4/7/2018
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Multi-Family Residental
Two Family: 27,000 sqft min. (R-2)
Multi-Family: 3-8 du/acre (RM)Commercial
Commercial Outlying (CO)
Commercial Downtown (CD)
Commercial Heavy (CH)
Office (O)
Single Family Residental
Rural Estate: 10 acre min. (RE-1)
Rural Estate: 2 1/2 acre min. (RE)
Estate: 1 acre min. (E-1)
Estate: 1/2 acre min. (E)
Residential: 1/4 acre min. (R)
Residential: 5000 sqft min. (R-1)Adopted Nov. 3, 1999 Revised Jan 8, 2018
Accomodations
Accomodations (A-1)
Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) Boundary
Town Boundary
Planned Unit Development
Existing Open SpacePrivatePublic
Industrial
Restricted Industrial (I-1)
Stanley History District
Accomodations (A)[
File: Zoning42x53.mxd
37
Attachment 4
Address Zoning Acres Comments
1. 650 Elk Trail Ct. E-1 10.5 Town-owned open space
2. 555 Prospect Ave. RM 10.5 Estes Park Health (hospital)
3. 1501 David Dr. RM 12.3 privately owned
4. 465 W. Wonderview Ave. E-1 12.4 'Rockside LLP'
5. 961 Old Ranger Rd. RE 16.0 privately owned
6. 1901 Ptarmigan Tr. RM 17.5 Good Samaritan Society
7. 1950 Fall River Rd. E-1 33.0 privately owned
1. 640 Elm Rd. I-1 10.3 Town (landfill, recycle)
2. 1050 Marys Lake Rd. A 10.5 Spruce Lake RV Park
3. 189 Twin Owls Ln. A 13.1 Black Canyon Inn
4. 451 E. Wonderview Ave. CO 13.9 Stanley Village S.C.
5. 3501 Fall River Rd. A 14.4 Della Terra
6. 1260 Fall River Rd. A 16.8 Streamside
7. 380 Community Dr. CO 17.0 Community Center EVRPD
8. 1001 N. Saint Vrain Ave. CO 17.3 FED - Bur. of Reclamation
9. 600 W. Elkhorn Ave. CO 22.0 Elkhorn Lodge
10. 370 Fish Creek Rd. CO 27.7 FED - Bur. of Reclamation
11. 1520 Fall River Rd. A 28.9 Castle Mtn. Lodge
12. 1665 Highway 66 A 30.7 Elk Meadow RV Park
13. 333-A E. Wonderview Ave. A 34.4 Stanley Hotel Lot 1 campus
14. 2225 Fall River Rd. A-1 35.0 privately owned
15. 1601 Brodie Ave. CO 37.0 Estes Park R-3 School District
16. 400 N. Saint Vrain Ave. CO 39.8 FED - Bur. of Reclamation
17. 1600 Fish Hatchery Rd. A 42.1 Harmony Foundation
18. 220 4th St. CO 49.0 Fairgrounds
19. 1754 Fish Hatchery Rd. A-1 75.5 Town owned tract
20. 1480 Golf Course Rd. CO 181.0 EP Golf Course
38
39
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Matt Comstock, Chair
Estes Park Planning Commission
From: Jessica Garner, AICP, Community Development Director
Date: June 21, 2022
Application: Request to Rezone Parcel 3522400923 from RE-1 (Rural Estate) to R-2
(Two-Family Residential) Zoning District
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the
Rezoning request, subject to the findings described in the staff report.
Land Use:
Comprehensive Plan Designation: (Future Land Use) Public
Zoning District: RE-1
Site Area: 4.07 Acres
(Mark all that apply)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Conduct a public hearing to review a Town-initiated Code Amendment (Rezoning) from
the RE-1 (Rural Estate) Zoning District to R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Zoning District,
review the request for compliance with the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan and Estes
Park Development Code (EPDC), and recommend approval to the Town Board.
Location:
The subject property, addressed as 800 Castle Mountain Road, Parcel #3522400923, is
located north of Castle Mountain Road.
Background:
The RE-1 Zoning District is a low-density, large-lot residential zoning district with a very
small presence in Estes Park. Only three parcels are zoned RE-1 in Town, and none of
them are developed for single-family use. Of the three parcels zoned RE-1, two are
40
2
owned and managed by the National Park Service, which is petitioning to disconnect
the parcels from Estes Park.
The one remaining westernmost parcel above the Castle Mountain Road cul-de-sac is
owned by the Town of Estes Park, and is the site of a large water tank.
The Zone District’s creation pre-dates the Joint Planning Area and the adoption of the
former Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) in Nov. 1999, and the wholesale
Valley-wide rezoning that accompanied those changes. Although the history is unclear,
staff has anecdotal evidence that the Zoning District was originally created by Larimer
County in the early- to mid-1990s – pre-dating the EVDC, although not by many years.
Before Nov. 1999, RE-1 zoning only applied to land in unincorporated Larimer County,
as the Town had no RE-1 or equivalent Zoning District.
Staff has also submitted a request to amend the Estes Park Development Code to
eliminate the RE-1 Zoning District, which affects the three parcels mentioned above.
Since The National Park Service is petitioning to disconnect the two parcels (and an
additional parcel not associated with this request) from the Town, the only affected
parcel is Parcel 3522400923, which if approved, would be zoned as R-2 to reflect the
adjacent parcel zoning designations.
Project Description:
Staff is seeking approval to rezone the RE-1-zoned parcel to R-2. The purpose for
rezoning the parcel is also detailed in the accompanying staff request for a Code
Amendment to eliminate the RE-1 Zone District, and staff requests to change the zoning
of the Town-owned parcel from RE-1 to R-2 to remove the defunct Zoning designation
and reflect the surrounding zoning of the adjacent parcels.
An additional rationale for the rezone request pertains to the acreage of the parcel,
which does not meet the development standards for RE-1 currently. RE-1-zoned sites
require a maximum of one unit per ten acres, and the site acreage is 4.07 acres, which
falls below the minimum threshold for development.
The Town has no stated intention to redevelop the parcel, and anticipates the site being
used indefinitely for water storage.
41
3
Location and Context:
Map 1
Project Location
Table 1: Zoning and Land Use Summary
Comprehensive Plan Zone Uses
Parcel
3522400923 Public (INS) RE-1 (Rural Estate) Water Storage
North Parks, Recreation,
Open Space Federal Land (N/A) RMNP
South Residential R-2 (Two-Family
Residential) Residential
East Rural Estate RE-1 (Rural Estate) RMNP
West Rural Estate R-2 (Two-Family
Residential) Residential
42
4
Project Analysis:
The text amendments comply with EPDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments – Standards for
Review).
All applications for Town-Initiated Code Amendments (Rezonings) shall be reviewed by
the Estes Park Planning Commission and Board(s) for compliance with the relevant
standards and criteria set forth below and with other applicable provisions of the EPDC.
In accordance with Section 3.3.D. “Standards for Review”, all applications for rezoning
shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards and criteria as follows:
1. The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected.
Staff Finding: Affirmative. Staff recommends the Planning Commission and Town
Board eliminate the RE-1 Zoning District from the EPDC, and if approved, this parcel
will require a new Zoning designation to complement the surrounding parcels, which is
R-2.
2. The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would allow, is
compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and
with the existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley.
Staff Finding: Not applicable. The development plan for this application has been
waived as there are no changes in use or intensity of use to the site being proposed
with this application. Staff has routinely waived this requirement in recent years, per
authority of EPDC §3.3.B.1.
3. The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to provide
adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application were approved.
Staff Finding: Affirmative. Staff finds that the Town maintains the ability to provide
adequate services and facilities to this location, and comments received from affected
agencies indicate no concern with the proposal, including the Utilities Department.
Reviewing Agency Comments:
Staff consulted with the Town Utilities Department regarding the proposed amendment.
The Town has no other identified uses for its property, aside from the storage tank.
Water tanks and similar utility infrastructure are an allowed use by right in all zoning
districts. Based on discussions with the Town Utilities Dept., the Town-owned parcel is
not likely to redevelop, and if this changes, the Zoning designation will mirror adjacent
parcels (R-2). No objection or concern about zoning changes to the remaining one
parcel has been noted.
43
5
Advantages:
• Generally complies with the EPDC §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for
Review.
• Rezones a parcel to align with adjacent surroundings and to remove a Zoning
designation that will no longer be in effect, if approved.
• Provides for the opportunity to simplify the Development Code and rezone the Town-
owned parcel to a more complementary designation in the area.
Disadvantages:
• There may be the impression that “it’s not broken, so why fix it?” Staff would suggest
that waiting until something breaks, and then trying to fix it, isn’t good planning. If the
Code Amendment request is approved, there is no RE-1 Zone District, and this site
will require a new Zoning designation.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning request as proposed.
Public Comment/Outreach:
Staff held an online neighborhood meeting via Zoom on Monday, November 1, 2021. To
review the meeting recording, please use this link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-
Z__boustY8jeDK0zHB63Rhz5i57GJJ_/view?usp=sharing
The meeting was attended by seven community members, and questions ranged from
the use of the Town-owned parcel and if it would change, and if the National Park
Service had plans for their parcels, which the NPS does not have plans to develop, but
in the current circumstances, they are not required to comply with local codes and
regulations. A question was posed about how people would be notified about the RMNP
disconnection when it goes to the Town Board for review, and the sites will be posted
with a sign, along with a notification to adjacent property owners, on the Town’s
website, and in the newspaper.
Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with Town and State public
noticing requirements. As of the time of writing this report no other public inquiries were
received aside from the inquiries during the neighborhood meeting, noted above.
• Legal notice was published in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette on June 3, 2022.
• Information was posted on the Town’s “Code Amendments” webpage as of June 3,
2022.
Sample Motion:
I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Rezoning request in
accordance with the findings as presented.
I move that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Rezoning request,
finding that [state findings for denial].
44
6
I move to continue the Rezoning request to the next regularly scheduled meeting,
finding that [state reasons for continuance].
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A: Zoning Map
2. Water Division email
3. Exhibit C: Photos of Public Notice Signs
45
46
Re: Rezoning Castle Mtn. water tank property to R-2
Inbox
Chris Eshelman
4:07 PM
(11
minutes
ago)
Repl
y to
all
to me, Reuben, Steven, Travis, Jessica, Planning
Hi Randy,
The Water Division has no issues with the zoning change. At this time, we have no
plans to develop for a different use. Please let me know if you have any further
questions.
Chris
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:51 AM Randy Hunt <rhunt@estes.org> wrote:
Reuben, Steve, Chris,
As noted last week, Planning Commission has asked that we move ahead on
eliminating the RE-1 Zoning District. Doing so would be we have to rezone the water
tank property to another zoning district, since we can't legally have property zoned for a
district that doesn't exist.
The water tank site is the only Town property affected. The other two parcels on the
attached map are National Park; we're working with them on rezoning for those.
All Estes Park zoning districts allow utility infrastructure, so in one sense the
choice doesn't matter. Other things equal, it's a best practice to have zoning districts
match the zoning around them and nearby. The map shows adjacent properties in Town
are all zoned R-2 (Two Family Residential.) Rezoning the tank property would not
change any existing land-use permissions for the property or structure, and wouldn't
involve any changes on the ground.
Do you have any concerns if the tank property is rezoned to R-2?
If no concerns, could one of you please email planning@estes.org with a statement that
Utilities / Water Division has no objection to this rezoning?
I would say it's also helpful if you can state in the email that Utilities has no plans to
develop the property for two-family residential use. That will help calm community
concerns if any emerge.
We're looking at holding a neighborhood meeting in early November, and we'll invite
you to attend. The Planning Commission public hearing is expected on Nov. 16, and
Town Board will hold a final hearing later - the Dec. 14 TB seems to be a likely date.
47
None of these would be mandatory attendance, but I think it wouldn't be a bad idea,
especially the neighborhood meeting.
We're happy to answer any questions or discuss further as you wish.
Thanks,
RAH
-----
Randy Hunt
Community Development Director
Town of Estes Park
170 MacGregor Ave.
PO Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
direct: 970-577-3719 (working remotely; email is preferred)
main: 970-577-3721
email: rhunt@estes.org
http://www.estes.org
--
Chris Eshelman
Water Superintendent, Town of Estes Park
970-577-3630
ceshelman@estes.org
48
49