HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session
May 14, 2024
4:30 p.m. – 6:45 p.m.
Board Room
ACCESSING MEETING TRANSLATIONS
(Accediendo a las Traducciones de la Reunión)
To access written translation during the meeting, please scan the QR Code or click
this link for up to 48 other languages (Para acceder a la traducción durante la
reunión, par favor escanee el código QR o haga clic en el enlace para hasta 48
idiomas más):
https://attend.wordly.ai/join/FLUL-1105
Choose Language and Click Attend (Seleccione su lenguaje y haga clic en asistir)
Use a headset on your phone for audio or read the transcript can assist those
having difficulty hearing (Use un auricular en su teléfono para audio o lea la
transcripción puede ayudar a aquellos que tienen dificultades para escuchar).
No public comment will be heard
This study session will be streamed live and available on the
Town YouTube page at www.estes.org/videos
4:30 p.m. Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations for 3rd and 4th Level.
(Director Muhonen)
5:05 p.m. Relief for Downtown Business Impacts from Construction.
(Town Administrator Machalek and Director Muhonen)
Dinner provided to the Board at approximately 5:30 p.m.
5:50 p.m. Governance Orientation.
(Town Administrator Machalek)
6:35 p.m. Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions.
6:40 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items.
(Board Discussion)
6:45 p.m. Adjourn for Town Board Meeting.
Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this
meeting at approximately 4:15 p.m.
AGENDA
TOWN BOARD
STUDY SESSION
PUBLIC WORKS
Report
To: Honorable Mayor Hall
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Derek Pastor, PMP, Public Works Project Manager
Date: May 14, 2024
RE: Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations for 3rd and 4th Level
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Present to the Town Board three (3) ideas for consideration regarding the Big Horn
Parking Structure project. These concepts will guide the direction for the design of the
parking structure.
Town Board Direction Requested:
Town Board input on which option would be preferred for incorporation into a Request
for Proposal for the design of the parking structure. This will also guide staff in the
preparation of future budget requests.
Present Situation:
The Cleave Street Improvement Project is currently underway with an expected
completion date of Spring 2025. This project will eliminate 41 parking spaces on Cleave
Street that are currently used by the adjacent residents, business owners, employees,
and guests. (See Cleave Street Corridor Rendering)
Based on conversations between Public Works and the Estes Park Housing Authority,
three (3) options have been discussed regarding the future design of the Big Horn
Parking Structure:
1. Design and build a two-level ‘microstructure’ consisting of a ground level parking
accessed from Cleave Street and an additional level of parking accessed directly
from Big Horn Drive. This would provide an estimated 40-45 additional/new
parking spaces and mitigate the loss of parking spaces caused by the Cleave
Street project. This is the project concept previously shared with the Town Board
in 2023. The estimated design cost is $200,000 and the estimated construction
cost is $2,000,000
2. Design the new parking structure with two new elevated levels a parking. Based
on the topography of the slope on Big Horn, we believe both the second and third
levels would be separate and accessible from different points on Big Horn Drive.
The first level parking would still be accessible from Cleave St. We anticipate 40-
45 spaces on each level. The intent would be to have the design and
construction documents expanded to include all three levels. See the attached
Big Horn Parking Structure Concepts sketch. The estimated design cost is
$400,000 and the estimated construction cost is $4,000,000
a. Aspects of this idea were discussed with Community Development:
i. It was determined that the maximum height of this structure could
be no taller than 30ft above the average of the finished grade (1st
level of Cleave Street and 3rd level of Big Horn). There is no
concern of exceeding the height restrictions for this option
ii. The structure will need to have a 10-foot setback from the adjacent
residential building to the west (EPHA) and an 8-foot setback on all
other sides.
3. Design the structure with second and third level parking accessible from Big Horn
as described in Option 2. Additionally, design a fourth level to accommodate
residential housing units only (no additional parking). This would demonstrate
movement toward fulfilling the housing need identified in the 2023 Housing
Strategic Plan and Needs Assessment published by the Estes Park Housing
Authority. This design alternative would also include a single cab elevator to
access all levels, but would not be built until triggered by construction of the
fourth level housing units. The intent would be to have the design and
construction documents prepared now and plan to build all four levels in this
structure. The actual construction could be phased as directed by available
funding. The foundation and structural elements needed for four levels could be
built concurrently with the first, second, and third parking levels. The fourth level
housing units and the elevator could be constructed during a second phase of
construction. The estimated design cost is $800,000 and the estimated
construction cost is $8,000,000
a. Aspects of this idea were discussed with Community Development:
i. There are no density population restrictions for the proposed fourth
level of Town Housing
ii. It was determined that the maximum height of this structure could
be no taller than 42ft above the average of the finished grade (first
level of Cleave Street and fourth level at Big Horn Drive) . There is
no concern of exceeding the height restrictions for this option
iii.The setback requirements are the same as for Option 2.
Advantages:
•Forward thinking design will better prepare the Town for future growth in the
immediate area for parking and housing accommodations.
•The flexibility will be designed to implement the construction in phases or during a
single project as funding allows.
•Additional levels and available parking may exceed the expectations of the
residents and business owners concerned about the displacement of on-street
parking affected by the Cleave Street Improvement Project.
•With the Town’s current paid parking plan, additional levels would result in
additional parking revenue.
Disadvantages:
•Expanding the project scope increases the time required to complete the design
and construction. This delays commencement of this project; however, the
community may believe that added parking spaces and housing units justify the
added time.
•Expanding the project scope will increase both the design and construction costs;
however, the design and construction costs associated with retrofitting an “option
1” microstructure in the future are believed to be cost-prohibitive and not feasible.
Finance/Resource Impact:
Current Impacts: Funding is budgeted in the amount of $190,000 for the design on
Option 1 at this time. Additional funding may be available from the 2024 Parking
Revenue Funds based on the approved 45% allotment of future parking revenue funds.
Design costs are typically estimated at 10% of the total construction budget, and staff
will have a more accurate cost estimate after reviewing responses to a future Request
for Proposals.
Future Impacts: this project will increase the annual operation and maintenance cost for
Estes Park Facilities in the estimated amount of $15,000 per year.
Level of Public Interest
Given the scope and ultimate impact/benefit to the surrounding properties and
businesses and the high turnout for the public meetings, the level of public interest is
expected to be high.
Attachments:
1.Cleave Street Corridor Rendering
2.Big Horn Parking Structure Concepts
3.Parking Garage Height Requirements
4. Presentation
38.4’
11’13’
20’
20’20’
8’8’
10’5’
ATTACHMENT 1
POTENTIAL TRANSFORMER LOCATION
83'
45'
44'
71'
189'
104'
24'
24'
EXISTING PARKING LOT
41 SPACES (1 ADA)
CLEAVE ST.
BI
G
H
O
R
N
D
R
I
V
E
NEW SIDEWALK
OUTLINE OF PROPOSED 3-LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE
LOWER ENTRANCE
MIDDLE ENTRANCE
UPPER ENTRANCE
PROPERTY LINE
CLEAVE ST.
APARTMENTS
24'
NEW TRANSFORMER PAD
(CLEAVE ST. PROJECT)
PARKING LAYOUT CONCEPTS
SCALE 1" = 30'
LEVEL 1
48 SPACES
LEVEL 2
46 SPACES
LEVEL 3
42 SPACES
7 MOTORCYCLE SPACES
BIG HORN PARKING STRUCTURE
CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT FOR
https://estespark.colorado.gov/departments/publicworks
LOTS 1-7, ESTES PARK
BIG HORN PARKING STRUCTURE
U:\ENGINEERING\00-PROJECT FILES\CAD\PROJECTS\BIG HORN PARKING STRUCTURE TOPO.DWG
CONCEPTUAL
PROJECT #
APRIL 19, 2024
AS SHOWN
N/A
BOR
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
C1 2 1
PR
O
J
E
C
T
#
B
I
G
H
O
R
N
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
Y
O
U
T
CHECKED:
DATE:
DESIGNED/DRAWN:
SCALE:
PROJECT MANAGER
970-577-3957
DEREK PASTORTOWN OF ESTES PARK
PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT #:
ENGINEERING@ESTES.ORG - 970-577-3587
DRAWING ISSUE
CONTRACTOR
OF
PHONE:
EMAIL:
CONTACT:
MASTER FILE PATH:
SHEET DRAWING NUMBERREVISIONDATENO
PARKING SPACE COUNTS
41 SPACES REMOVED
14 PARALLEL STREET SPACES REMOVED
±136 SPACES ADDED
NET GAIN = ±81 SPACES, 7 MOTORCYCLE SPACES
PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS = 8'X18'
PLAN VIEW - SCALE 1" = 20'
3D RENDERING
20'
SCALE: 1" = 20'
0 40'
CLEAVE ST.
APARTMENTS
ATTACHMENT 2
SECTION VIEW LOOKING NORTH FROM CLEAVE STREET
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 10'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 10'
75
3
5
7
5
4
0
75
4
5
75
5
0
75
5
5
75
6
0
7
5
6
5
7
5
7
0
75
7
5
75
8
0
7
5
8
5
7
5
9
0
7
5
9
5
7
6
0
0
7
6
0
5
75
3
5
7
5
4
0
7
5
4
5
7
5
5
0
7
5
5
5
7
5
6
0
7
5
6
5
7
5
7
0
7
5
7
5
7
5
8
0
7
5
8
5
7
5
9
0
7
5
9
5
7
6
0
0
7
6
0
5
0+50
0+75
1+00
1+25
1+50
1+75
2+00
2+25
2+50
2+75
3+00
LOWEST FINISH GRADE
EL=7542.5
CENTERLINE OF BIG
HORN DR. ELEVATION
EXISTING GRADE ALONG
CLEAVE ST. SIDEWALK
PARKING DECK LEVEL 1
FFE=7542.5
PARKING DECK LEVEL 2
FFE=7554.5
PARKING DECK LEVEL 3
FFE=7566.5
WORKFORCE HOUSING UNITS
MINIMUM FFE=7578.5
18.0' AVAILABLE BUILDING SPACE
AVERAGE FINISH GRADE
EL=7554.5
42'MAXIMUM BUILDABLE HEIGHT PER CODE
EL=7596.5
CLEAVE ST. APARTMENTS
HIGHEST FINISH GRADE
EL=7566.5
PROPOSED WORKFORCE HOUSING
HEIGHT CODE ANALYSIS
https://estespark.colorado.gov/departments/publicworks
LOTS 1-7, ESTES PARK
BIG HORN PARKING STRUCTURE
U:\ENGINEERING\00-PROJECT FILES\CAD\PROJECTS\BIG HORN PARKING STRUCTURE TOPO.DWG
CONCEPTUAL
PROJECT #
APRIL 19, 2024
AS SHOWN
N/A
BOR
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
2 2 C2
PR
O
J
E
C
T
#
B
I
G
H
O
R
N
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
GR
A
D
I
N
G
CHECKED:
DATE:
DESIGNED/DRAWN:
SCALE:
PROJECT MANAGER
970-577-3957
DEREK PASTORTOWN OF ESTES PARK
PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT #:
ENGINEERING@ESTES.ORG - 970-577-3587
DRAWING ISSUE
CONTRACTOR
OF
PHONE:
EMAIL:
CONTACT:
MASTER FILE PATH:
SHEET DRAWING NUMBERREVISIONDATENO
4/9/24, 1:00 PM What are some typical standards for parking garage functional design? - THA Consulting Website
https://www.tha-consulting.com/parking-database/what-are-some-typical-standards-for-parking-garage-functional-design/1/4
NAVIGATION
SUBNAVIGATION
FUNCTIONAL DESIGN
What are some typical standards for parking garage
functional design?
Posted on April 8th, 2019
ATTACHMENT 3
4/9/24, 1:00 PM What are some typical standards for parking garage functional design? - THA Consulting Website
https://www.tha-consulting.com/parking-database/what-are-some-typical-standards-for-parking-garage-functional-design/2/4
The best design of a parking facility depends first and foremost on a number of factors
including user, location, federal/state/local codes, building size, functional layout, etc…
However, there are typical design standards common in many parking garage designs. The
following are some useful standards that may help answer some of your most common
questions:
Parking Space Size
The size of parking spaces allowed is mandated by the local zoning or land development
ordinances. For example, in Philadelphia commercial districts, the minimum size parking
space allowed is 8’6” x 18’0”.
The size for parking stalls should be based on typical use. A general rule for this is: the lower
the turnover, or the more urban a location is, the smaller the parking spaces can be tolerated
by users. On the other hand, areas with high turnover, and which are less urban, will
generally have larger spaces. However, variances or design wavers are often sought for
parking space dimensions when conditions justify the design.
Vehicle width vs. Parking Stall Width
A car door opening clearance is approximately 20 to 24 inches. Adjacent parking spaces share
this clearance while vehicles are parked. When parking adjacent to a built wall or structure,
a common practice is to add an additional foot of stall width to the typical space.
Vertical circulation for ramps
Ramp slopes with parking generally range from 5% to 6.67% maximum (per Building Code).
When additional overhead height is required at a tier, a speed ramp can be incorporated into
the design for vehicle circulation. Speed ramp slopes can range from 6.67% to 16 % with
appropriate transition slopes included at top and bottom.
Considering vertical circulation of floor to floor heights, these typically range from 10’0” to
12’0”. Applicable Building Codes, Accessible Codes and local codes dictate minimum required
overhead clearance heights.Typical minimum required overhead clearances are 8’-2” for van
accessible parking spaces, and 7’-0” for typical spaces and other accessible spaces. In multi-
level parking structures, van accessible parking spaces are permitted to be grouped on a
single level.
Garage footprint dimensions
The minimum dimensions for a garage footprint consist of two structural bays. Two 60 foot
clear parking modules (2-way, 90 degree parking) would result in a width of 123 feet when
including applicable structural members. On the other hand, two one-way bays with angled
parking would be slightly less wide. Additional overall parking garage width would increase in
increments of the established parking module.
4/9/24, 1:00 PM What are some typical standards for parking garage functional design? - THA Consulting Website
https://www.tha-consulting.com/parking-database/what-are-some-typical-standards-for-parking-garage-functional-design/3/4
For general planning purposes, the minimum garage length consists of the ramp, plus the
turning bays located at each end of the garage. For a garage with two-way traffic there is
typically 180 feet of ramp, two end bays of 28 feet, and two spandrel widths of 1 foot. For
improved efficiency, the garage with two way traffic with end bay parking must have 180 ft. of
ramp, two end bays of48 feet, and two spandrel widths of one foot.
Variations of a typical garage layout are sometimes required based on project requirements
or site constraints. An example is when the site will not accommodate a typical length ramp
and both structural bays are required to be ramped at half levels to meet overhead height
requirements.
A single helix with a two-way circulation design should be limited to five or six tiers because
of the number of turns required to pass all parking spaces. However, for a double threaded
helix with one-way circulation, the design allow for a vehicle to circulate up and then back
down without making a Y-turn at the top. Additionally, a crossover is provided at ramp mid-
points to allow vehicles to switch from upward to downward travel to shorten the distance
needed to exit the facility.
Accessible Spaces
Typically, accessible spaces are a minimum of 8’-0” wide with a minimum 5’-0” wide access
aisle. Two adjacent spaces may share the 5’-0”access aisle. Van accessible spaces are
minimum 8’-0” wide with a minimum of 8’-0” wide access aisle.
Accessible parking spaces should always be located in the most convenient location for the
user traveling to their final point of destination. Further, when possible, accessible spaces
should always be located in covered areas.
Federal, state and local codes should always be examined, as they may require additional
design requirements for accessible parking.
*Federal, State, and Local codes govern most of these requirements and should be thoroughly
investigated. Data presented herein should be considered guidelines only. For more specific
information and assistance with implementation of these guidelines, please contact THA
Consulting, Inc. via email at info@tha-consulting.com
Comments are closed.
4/9/24, 1:00 PM What are some typical standards for parking garage functional design? - THA Consulting Website
https://www.tha-consulting.com/parking-database/what-are-some-typical-standards-for-parking-garage-functional-design/4/4
View Our Projects
Parking Database
SEARCH
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations
Town Board Study Session
Tuesday, May 14, 2024
Purpose
Present to the Town Board three (3) ideas for consideration regarding the
Big Horn Parking Structure project. These concepts will guide the direction
for the design of the parking structure.
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 2
ATTACHMENT 4
Town Board Direction Requested
Town Board input on which option would be preferred for incorporation into a
Request for Proposal for the design of the parking structure. This will also
guide staff in the preparation of future budget requests.
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 3
Design Idea #1
• Design and build a two-level ‘microstructure’ consisting of a ground level
parking accessed from Cleave Street
• Include an additional level of parking accessed directly from Big Horn
Drive.
•This would provide an estimated 40-45 additional/new parking spaces and
mitigate the loss of parking spaces caused by the Cleave Street project.
•This is the project concept previously shared with the Town Board in 2023.
The estimated design cost is $200,000 and the estimated construction cost
is $2,000,000
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 4
BHPS Levels 1&2
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 5
Current View from Proposed 2nd Level Entrance
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 6
Design Idea #2
• Design the new parking structure with two new elevated levels a parking.
•2nd & 3rd levels would be separate and accessible from different points on
Big Horn Drive. 1
st level would still be accessible from Cleave St.
• We anticipate 40-45 spaces on each level.
• The intent would be to have the design and construction documents
expanded to include all three levels. The estimated design cost is
$400,000 and the estimated construction cost is $4,000,000
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 7
BHPS Plan View
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 8
BHPS 3D Rendering
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 9
BHPS Level 3
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 10
Current View from Proposed 3rd Level Entrance
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 11
Design Idea #3
• Design the structure with second and third level parking accessible from Big Horn as
described in Option 2.
• Additionally, design a fourth level to accommodate residential housing units only (no additional
parking).
• This design alternative would also include a single cab elevator to access all levels but would
not be built until triggered by construction of the fourth level housing units.
• The actual construction could be phased as directed by available funding. The foundation and
structural elements needed for four levels could be built concurrently with the first, second,
and third parking levels.
• The fourth level housing units and the elevator could be constructed during a second phase of
construction.
• The estimated design cost is $800,000 and the estimated construction cost is $8,000,000
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 12
BHPS Elevations
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 13
Current View from HigherElevation on Big Horn Drive
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 14
Finance/Resource Impact
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 15
•Current Impacts: Funding is budgeted in the amount of $190,000 for the design on
Option 1 at this time. Additional funding may be available from the 2024 Parking Revenue
Funds based on the approved 45% allotment of future parking revenue funds.
•Design costs are typically estimated at 10% of the total construction budget, and staff will
have a more accurate cost estimate after reviewing responses to a future Request for
Proposals.
•Future Impacts: this project will increase the annual operation and maintenance cost
for Estes Park Facilities in the estimated amount of $15,000 per year.
Questions/Discussion
Big Horn Parking Structure Design Considerations 16BBBigBBBB Horn PPP
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S
OFFICE
Report
To: Honorable Mayor Hall
Board of Trustees
From: Town Administrator Machalek
Date: May 14, 2024
RE: Relief for Downtown Business Impacts from Construction
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Discuss potential options to offer relief for downtown businesses impacted by ongoing
construction in the downtown core.
Town Board Direction Requested:
•Are there any options that the Board is interested in pursuing further?
•Are there any options that the Board would like to remove from consideration?
•Are there any options not included that the Board would like to discuss further?
Present Situation:
In 2014, the Town, Central Federal Lands Highway Division (CFLHD), and the Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) entered into agreements to fund, design, and
construct roadway and bridge improvements to improve access to Rocky Mountain
National Park by reducing traffic congestion in downtown Estes Park. The project
leverages a Town investment of $5.71 million to deliver a $42.00 million project.
Construction of the “Downtown Estes Loop” began in spring of 2023 and it is expected
to be complete by January, 2025. A term of the construction contract is that the most
disruptive work must occur during non-peak months -- January through June and
October through December.
The project is currently in its most impactful phase, with widespread disruptions to traffic
flow downtown. Local businesses are reporting financial losses attributable, at least in
part, to the intensive construction activity. While sales tax receipts are an imperfect
measure of total economic activity within Town limits, they do serve as a reasonable
bellwether for local economic health. Sales tax receipts in January and February are
down 8.71% from the same months in 2023, while the combined traffic count on US 34
and 36 is up 2.78% through the same period.
To date, most of the Town’s work to assist downtown businesses impacted by
construction has focused on being a conduit between the CFLHD project manager and
local businesses. Beyond this work, the Board also approved Ordinance 10-23 in
November 2023, temporarily suspending time limitations and waiving application fees
for supplemental temporary signs for properties directly impacted by construction of the
Downtown Estes Loop.
Proposal:
Based on research and suggestions offered by members of the Board and the public,
Staff has compiled a list of options that could provide various forms of relief to
downtown businesses impacted by construction of the Downtown Estes Loop:
Direct financial aid payments
This option would provide funds directly to downtown businesses impacted by
downtown construction. The Town has provided direct financial assistance to
local businesses at least once in the past, specifically to provide relief for local
small businesses during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. At that time,
the Town partnered with the Estes Chamber of Commerce and the Estes Park
Economic Development Corporation to distribute $280,000 in grants to local
businesses. Funding for direct financial aid payments would need to come from
General-Fund fund balance.
Further exploration of direct payments would need to address the following
questions:
•How much money should be set aside for direct payments?
•What are the eligibility criteria, including business location?
•Is there one set award level? Or different award levels depending on
impact?
•Would there be an application process?
•Would the Town administer the payments or partner with another local
entity?
•How would this apply to new or closed businesses?
Sales tax rebate program
A sales tax rebate program option would return a set amount of an impacted
business’ collected sales tax to that business to help offset construction impacts.
The Town’s Finance Department would need to manage this program due to the
confidentiality of sales tax returns. This program could only apply to the Town’s
base sales tax revenue of 4 percent. It could not apply to the 1 percent sales tax
approved by voters in 2014 and 2024.
Further exploration of a sales tax rebate program would need to address the
following questions:
•What are the eligibility criteria?
•What percentage of sales tax should be rebated?
•Should there be a cap on the rebate amount for any given business?
•How many months would the program run?
•What period would be used for the calculation?
•Is there one rebate level? Or differing levels based on impacts?
Town Utility Assistance
A Town utility assistance option would provide businesses financial assistance
with Town water and electric bills. This assistance could take the form of utility
subsidies for impacted businesses (these would need to be funded by the
General Fund), or bill deferral programs for impacted businesses.
Further exploration of a town utility assistance option would need to address the
following questions:
•What are the eligibility criteria?
•Is there a maximum subsidy amount for each business/a maximum
number of monthly bills that would be allowed to be deferred?
•How many months would assistance be offered?
Marketing match
A marketing match option would use Town funds to match business spending on
advertising intended to drive businesses to downtown areas impacted by
construction.
Further exploration of a marketing match option would need to address the
following questions:
•What are the eligibility criteria?
•What level of match funding would be offered?
•Would the Town administer the match program or partner with another
local entity?
One-Season Moratorium on Paid Parking
A one-season moratorium on paid parking option would eliminate paid parking
downtown for the 2024 season. In lieu of a paid parking season, the Town could
either return Town-owned parking spaces to the pre-2021 configuration (free with
limited areas with time limits), or implement a separate, time-limited approach.
Further exploration of a one-season moratorium on paid parking would need to
address the following questions:
•What would the costs and benefits of this approach be from the standpoint
of providing relief to downtown businesses?
•Would the Town’s parking inventory return to the pre-2021 configuration?
Or would the Town look to implement broader time restrictions in lieu of
paid parking?
•If the Board wants to implement a program of broader time restrictions in
lieu of paid parking, is it willing to allocate General Fund balance to pay for
enforcement of such a program? Does one month provide sufficient lead
time to order and install new signs, and negotiate revisions to the parking
consultant contract?
Advantages:
•The options detailed above could provide assistance to some downtown
businesses that are being negatively impacted by the construction of the
Downtown Estes Loop.
Disadvantages:
•It is highly unlikely that any program the Town develops will fully compensate
businesses for business loss due to construction. However, it is likely that any
assistance the Town can provide would help impacted businesses weather the
most impactful phase of construction.
Finance/Resource Impact:
The financial impact of the options detailed above varies and is generally scalable (i.e.
the Board can allocate as much or as little to a strategy as the budget will support), with
the exception of the one-season moratorium on paid parking. If the Board would like to
place a one-season moratorium on paid parking and enforce time-limited parking in
Town-owned parking spaces, staff estimates that approximately $545,151 would need
to be appropriated from General-Fund fund balance. Staff will prepare more in-depth
financial impact evaluations on any options the Board would like to pursue further.
Town Grant Writer Kuryllo researched business impact grants and was unable to find
any grant funding for businesses impacted by public construction. Both Grant Writer
Kuryllo and the Estes Chamber of Commerce have identified a potential source of grant
funds for a marketing match program.
Level of Public Interest:
High
Attachments:
•None
TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION
May 14, 2024
Governance Orientation.
1.Link to Presentation – Governance Orientation
2.Link to Policy Governance
3.Link to Policy 103 Town Board Code of
Conduct and Operating Principles
4.Link to Policy 105 Agendas
May 28, 2024
• CIRSA Liability and Risk as an Elected
Official
June 11, 2024
• Noise Ordinance
• Commercial/Residential Insurance
Overview
June 25, 2024
• Trailblazer Broadband Construction
Update
Items Approved – Unscheduled:
• Annexation and Re-Implementation of
Joint Planning Area
• Parking Enforcement Ordinance Updates
• Hosted Short Term Rentals
• Governing Policies Updates
• Stanley Park Master Plan Implementation
Items for Town Board Consideration:
• Bed & Breakfast and Vacation Home Cap
• Liquor License Process
• Curb and Gutter Philosophy
• Project Scoping for Capacity
Improvements on the Big Thompson River
and Fall River
• Guiding Policy for Implementation of the
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and
Readiness Plan
• Occupancy Limit Code Changes to
Comply with New State Law
• Elm/Moraine Parcel Expressions of
Interest and Next Steps
Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items
May 14, 2024