HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2022-02-22February 22, 2022
4:45 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.
5:30 p.m. -Dinner
The Town Board of Trustees will participate in the meeting remotely due to the Declaration of
Emergency signed by Town Administrator Machalek related to COVID-19 and provided for with
the adoption of Ordinance 04-20.
To view or listen to the Study Session by Zoom Webinar
ONLINE (Zoom Webinar): https://zoom.us/j/91077906778 Webinar ID: 910 7790 6778
CALL-IN (Telephone): 877-853-5257 (toll-free) Meeting ID: 910 7790 6778
If you are joining the Zoom meeting and are experiencing technical difficulties, staff will be
available by phone for assistance 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting at 970-577-4777.
4:45 p.m. Facilities Master Plan Final Draft.
(Manager Landkamer)
5:10 p.m. Northern Water Inclusion Process.
(Director Bergsten and Legal Counsel White)
5:40 p.m. Environmental Sustainability Task Force Recommendations.
(Assistant Town Administrator Damweber)
6:05 p.m. Renaming Request for a Portion of Children's Park to
"Women's Heritage Plaza". (Town Administrator Machalek)
6:15 p.m. Semi-Annual Compliance Review with Board Governing
Policies – Policy 1.10 Self-monitoring of the Board. (Mayor
Koenig)
6:20 p.m. Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions.
6:25 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items.
(Board Discussion)
6:30 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
VIRTUAL
Page 1
Page 2
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Jon Landkamer, Facilities Manager
Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Date: February 22, 2022
RE: Facilities Master Plan Final Draft
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Present to the Mayor and Board of Trustees the Facilities Master Plan for final review
prior to consideration for adoption at a future public meeting.
Town Board Direction Requested:
Review and provide feedback on the FMP document and provide confirmation of the
recommendations presented by the Facilities Master Plan team.
Present Situation:
The goal of the Facilities Master Plan (FMP) is to address both the immediate, short-term,
and long-term facility needs for the Town of Estes Park (TOEP). This plan will serve as a
"road map" for the future development and operation of all TOEP facilities. The planning
horizon of the FMP is the next twenty years, with a special emphasis on the next five to
ten years. To this end, the FMP will:
•Provide a comprehensive document that identifies the building and employee space
needs to aid the TOEP in budgeting, scheduling, and administering all major building
renovations and new building construction capital projects.
•Ensure that all new near-term and mid-term capital building and major renovation
projects are planned in conjunction with, and in support of, a long-term (20-year)
strategic vision.
The FMP Team has been recently working through the concepts and operational
impacts related to concept of moving the Police Department operations out of Town
Hall. This concept will be the number one priority recommended in the FMP. The FMP
Team conducted a public meeting after the last study session and we were pleased with
the participation from community members. An electronic feedback form was completed
by 137 respondents and provided invaluable insight to the service needs of the
community. The information gathered from our survey has been incorporated into the
plan. With this study session, Phase 4 of the FMP (Facilities Master Plan Production) is
complete.
Page 3
Proposal:
The FMP Team has strived to present a plan that will deliver flexibility for the future. We
understand that big ideas take considerable time to implement, and thing could change
dramatically in the future. A flexible FMP will help future Boards adapt to those changes.
The FMP supports the Town Board strategic key outcome area of Infrastructure in the
adopted 2022 Strategic Plan Objectives, which states; “4.B.1. Develop and implement
an annual budget contribution mechanism for facility expansion needs as identified in
the Facilities Master Plan.” Also under, Outstanding Community Services, Goal; “8.A.
Develop a strategy and funding source for Town facility site acquisitions as identified in
the Facilities Master Plan.” And, Strategic Objective; “8.A.1. Pursue "right of first refusal"
purchase options on the top three opportunity sites identified in the Facilities Master
Plan.”
Advantages:
•The FMP identifies future opportunity sites that may enable Town operations some
flexibility and provide better customer service to our residents and visitors.
•The FMP identifies deferred maintenance issues and helps align those with future
budgeting processes.
•The document considers Town customer service goals and workflow improvement
opportunities.
•The FMP highlights work place consolidation opportunities to more effectively deliver
Town services.
•It surveys building security and recommends improvements for the safety of our
employees and customers.
•The FMP encourages collaboration and public interaction through enhanced space
utilization.
•Accessibility to the Town’s facilities and programs will be evaluated and the subsequent
recommendations for improvement will inform the Town’s ADA transition planning.
•Identifies funding opportunities and strategies for future implementation
Disadvantages:
•This project will take considerable staff time, commitment, and financial resources for a
successful outcome
Finance/Resource Impact:
The 2022 budget allocates financial resources for the Town to pursue “right of first
refusal” on opportunity sites as identified at our last study session. Consideration should
be given to start the process of programming the space needs for the Police
Department to begin the design process and development of a realistic budget number
to advance the concept.
Level of Public Interest
The public interest is expected to be moderate.
Attachments:
1.Facilities Master Plan – Final Draft
2.FMP Team – Slide Presentation
Page 4
2022 FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Attachment 1
Page 5
Acknowledgements
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS
Wendy Koenig, Mayor
Patrick Martchink, Mayor Pro Tem
Carlie Bangs, Trustee
Marie Cenac, Trustee
Barbara MacAlpine, Trustee
Scott Webermeier, Trustee
Cindy Younglund, Trustee
KEY TOWN STAFF
Jon Landkamer, Facilities Manager
Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Travis Machalek, Town Administrator
Wes Kufeld, Chief of Police
Suzanna Simpson, Management Analyst
Kate Rusch, Public Information Officer
Duane Hudson, Finance Director/Treasurer
Nathan Schlichtemier, Information Technology
Systems Administrator Manager
Vanessa Solesbee, Parking and Transit Manager
Ryan Barr, Pavement Manager/ GIS Support
OTHER STAKEHOLDERS
Claudine Perrault, Director of the Estes Valley
Library
CONSULTANTS
STUDIO Architecture – Jeff Dawson and Morgan
Daly
BBC Research and Consulting – Kevin Williams
StudioTerra – Carol Adams
PCD Engineering – Peter D’Antonio and Jacob
Goodman
Cover photo: Visit Estes Park/Darren Edwards
Page 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 4
What Is A Facilities Master Plan? ................................................................................................................ 4
Goals of the Facilities Master Plan .............................................................................................................. 4
Relevant Estes Park Planning Efforts .................................................................................................... 5
How The Plan Was Developed ..................................................................................................................... 5
Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................. 6
WHERE WE ARE TODAY ...................................................................................... 7
Key Town Facilities Included in the Plan .................................................................................................... 7
Physical Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 8
The Tiering System ...................................................................................................................................... 8
The Estes Valley Main Library................................................................................................................ 9
The Past, Present and Future of Town Hall ................................................................................................ 9
The Operational Status of Existing Facilities ........................................................................................... 12
COVID-19’s Impact on The Town’s Future Workplace......................................................................... 13
Town Staff Reponses to COVID-19 Workplace Changes .................................................................... 13
Financial Status of Existing Facilities ....................................................................................................... 14
Operations Funding .............................................................................................................................. 14
Town Revenues & Budgets .................................................................................................................. 14
Capital Funding .................................................................................................................................... 15
Capital Improvement Plan .................................................................................................................... 15
CHARTING A PATH FORWARD ........................................................................ 17
Police Department & Town Hall - Three Options ..................................................................................... 17
Option 1 - A New Town Hall Downtown .................................................................................................... 18
Option 2 - Services Split Between Several Locations ............................................................................. 19
Option 3 - A Consolidated Campus Outside of Downtown ..................................................................... 19
Other Options Considered ......................................................................................................................... 20
Stakeholder Input on Police Department and Town Hall......................................................................... 21
Page 7
Other Facilities Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 24
A Financial Comparison of the Options .................................................................................................... 25
Fiscal Model ................................................................................................................................................ 25
Comparable Police Facilities ................................................................................................................ 26
Phasing Strategy ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Phase I ................................................................................................................................................. 28
Phase II ................................................................................................................................................ 28
Potential Revenue Sources ........................................................................................................................ 29
CONCLUSIONS AND INITIATIVES .................................................................. 30
Initiative 1: Plan and Budget for a New Police Department Facility ....................................................... 30
Initiative 2: Take Care of What We Have ................................................................................................... 30
Initiative 3: Identify Land Acquisition Opportunities ............................................................................... 30
Initiative 4: Explore the Idea of a New Civic Campus .............................................................................. 31
................................................................................................................................. 31
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 32
Appendix A – Comprehensive List of Town Facilities ............................................................................. 33
Appendix B – Building Data Sheets .......................................................................................................... 34
Appendix C – Table of Expected Useful Life by Component .................................................................. 35
Appendix D – Community Survey Responses ......................................................................................... 36
35
38
48
51
Page 8
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 4
INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN?
This first ever Town of Estes Park Facilities Master Plan (FMP) is a roadmap for the management and
development of facilities. It is guided by the mission of the Town:
Provide high-quality, reliable services for the benefit of our
residents, guests and employees, while being good stewards of
public resources and our natural setting.
The plan sets the framework for responsible decision-making and will facilitate ongoing stewardship of
buildings and properties in an efficient and effective manner. It creates a common vision for Town facilities
that will guide the replacement of aging infrastructure; inform the development of spaces to support the
community and staff in the delivery of essential services; adapt to a changing environment; and operate and
maintain facilities efficiently.
This plan describes the current state of the Town’s facilities and the projected challenges the Town faces if
existing practices are continued. The plan identifies opportunities to transform the Town’s facilities based on
decisions made by the Town’s leaders. The FMP considers a long-term strategy to fund facility changes,
evaluate the future disposition of existing facilities and provides a data-driven investment and
implementation strategy for the Town’s buildings to ensure long-term financial and operational efficiency.
Finally, the plan describes how to implement recommended options and forecast the funding necessary to
achieve the FMP’s goals.
GOALS OF THE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
The goals outlined in the FMP were established to keep the focus on the citizens, guests, employees, and
customers of Estes Park – the users of the Town’s facilities. Safety, service, quality, and stewardship,
served to inform the FMP process, from data collection to tiering, to stakeholder engagement, and ultimately
to planning for the future of Estes Park. The purpose of the FMP is to be good stewards of the Town’s
assets, provide a fiscally achievable plan, and to lay the groundwork for the decision-making of future
opportunities.
Safety – ensure safe delivery of services for the community
Service - meet the changing needs of the community and staff
Quality - use best practices in construction and management of built facilities (facilities for the next century)
Stewardship – responsible use of money and properties
5 Page 9
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 5
HOW THE PLAN WAS
DEVELOPED
Beginning in 2019, the FMP was developed
through a series of on-site investigations of
existing key facilities; interviews and surveys
with Town staff; several work sessions with
the Town board; and a public input session
in December 2021. Relevant Town planning
studies and adopted plans were also
reviewed and incorporated into the plan,
including the 2018 Downtown Plan and the
associated 2018 Downtown Parking
Management Plan, as well as the 2021
Strategic Plan, and the in-progress
Comprehensive Plan.1 Beyond exploring
current conditions, the COVID-19 pandemic
and subsequent response both interrupted
the process and informed the plan.
Specifically, the facility condition
assessments for medium and low tier
facilities were abbreviated so the final FMP
could meet schedule and delivery goals.
Staff surveys were conducted during the
pandemic to better understand the future
needs and potential shift in the use of the
Town’s facilities. The key findings from the
Facilities Master Plan are listed on the
following page.
1 Both Downtown plans are available on the Town website: https://estespark.colorado.gov/Downtownplan. Information
on the comprehensive planning process is available at https://estespark.colorado.gov/comprehensiveplan.
Relevant Estes Park Planning
Efforts
In developing the Facilities Master Plan, the study
team reviewed key planning documents and efforts
approved for use by the Town Board.
2018 Downtown Plan. This plan provides a 20-year
community driven vision for the Downtown core.
Downtown Estes Park currently serves as the
economic nexus of the community. The Downtown
Plan considered steps the community should take to
ensure the continued prosperity of the core, while
balancing the need for improved resilience in the
face of fires, floods, and changing economic
conditions. The plan paid particular attention to the
Town Hall site, noting it as a community focal point
and recommending redevelopment of the site to
incorporate civic, commercial, residential, and
parking uses. The facilities master plan builds on
these goals with the options considered for the
future of the Town Hall area.
2018 Downtown Parking Management Plan. In
conjunction with the Downtown Plan, the Town
conducted a comprehensive analysis of Downtown
parking. The plan addressed three main areas:
seasonal paid parking, an employee parking
program, and a Downtown parking expansion. This
facilities master plan included key findings from this
plan, especially related to the need and costs of a
potential parking structures on the Town Hall site.
2022 Comprehensive Plan. As the Town moves
forward with the facilities master plan, it will be
important to consider the ongoing comprehensive
planning process. The Comprehensive Plan
analyzes basic community information and
establishes goals and objectives for land use,
community design, growth management, mobility
and circulation, housing, scenic and environmental
quality, hazard mitigation, economic well-being, and
intergovernmental coordination policies, among
other matters. It is expected that plan will be
presented to the Town Board for adoption at the end
of 2022.
6 Page 10
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 6
KEY FINDINGS
·Town Hall has served the community well for many
years, but it is beyond its useful life and additional
investment in the building no longer makes economic
sense.
·Police Department spaces in Town Hall are
inadequate in many ways. Furthermore, this
department should not be in Downtown because of
safety concerns. A new Police Department facility is
crucial to ensure the safety of the community, officers,
and detainees. The FMP recommends the Town
move forward with the planning and construction of a
new Police Department facility outside of Downtown
during the first phase of the implementation of this
master plan.
·Some Downtown presence for the Town is important
to many in the community. The Police Department
could have a small police annex, along with other
Town facilities desired by the community. This likely
would include expanded and enhanced public
restrooms near Bond Park to serve the community.
·Other facilities such as Power and Communications
- Dekker building, Fleet Services, and Streets
Services are in need of repair or
renovation. Additional study is needed to adequately
define the cost and scope of repairs and upgrades for
other facilities.
·There are limited land opportunities in Estes Park for
new and relocated facilities, requiring flexibility in
the plan. The Town will need to capitalize on new
opportunities, and the FMP provides a framework to
assist Town leaders with decision-making when
options arise.
7 Page 11
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 7
WHERE WE ARE TODAY
The Town’s Facilities Division acts as property manager to all publicly owned buildings and properties and
oversees the efficient operation of all systems related to proper building function. The Town of Estes Park
currently has 37 facilities ranging from office buildings to maintenance shops. Town employees occupy 13 of
these facilities. The Facilities Master Plan identifies 11 of the 13 facilities and focuses on 8 of them. The
Trailblazer Broadband/Power and Communications and Water Division office facilities are identified in the
plan but were recently renovated with the anticipation that they will have 20 years or more of life remaining,
thus they are not a focus of the FMP. The Estes Park Events Complex is also identified in the plan but is
one of the newer facilities, therefore it is not a focus in the plan either. Since Town Hall houses the majority
of the Town’s departments and services, it became the highest priority facility in the FMP.
KEY TOWN FACILITIES INCLUDED IN THE PLAN
1. Town Hall
2. Police Department (in Town Hall)
3. Power and Communications - Dekker
building
4. Trailblazer Broadband/Power &
Communications building on Woodstock
Drive (not analyzed)
5. Water Division (not analyzed)
6. Fleet Services
7. Streets Services
8. Estes Park Museum
9. Parks Division
10. Estes Park Visitor Center
11. Estes Park Events Complex
12. Off Site Storage Facilities (not mapped or
analyzed)
8 Page 12
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 8
PHYSICAL FINDINGS
The first task in the Facilities Master Plan effort was to inventory key existing Town facilities and prepare an
analysis of the Town’s most used buildings. The physical and operational features of each facility were
compiled through a facility condition assessment and a space utilization analysis. The accessibility and life
safety components of each facility were also identified in the analysis. Estimated replacement costs were
established to help the Town prioritize the building repairs and renovations moving forward.
A facility condition assessment is a systematic inspection that examines the safety and function of existing
structures, the historical energy use of building systems, and the physical status of interior and exterior
systems and components. The eight key facilities were assessed by level 2 site visits to score the condition
and functionality of their systems. The building systems were categorized as roofing, exterior cladding,
exterior openings, interior finishes, HVAC, plumbing, electrical, or lighting. The system assessments
identified the years remaining and a “replace by” year, along with an estimated cost to be replaced, for each
system. Each building system was given a score of 1-5* and the general criteria for each score is listed
below.
*Score 1-5: focused on determining whether the system (component) was functioning at the time of the
assessment, evaluating the system’s remaining expected useful life (EUL), expected future operating costs,
and operating condition.
The scores were translated into condition ratings of (1) Poor, (2) Fair, (3) Good, (4) Very Good, and (5)
Excellent. The facility condition assessments were focused on future maintenance and potential future
improvements.
The utilization of space, both physically and operationally, were also examined in each of the eight facilities.
The physical utilization was measured by the gross square footage (GSF) and the net square footage (NSF)
to provide us with an efficiency rating. The operational utilization of the facilities was measured by the
current usage of each facility by department and the full-time employee (FTE) count. The existing square
foot per FTE was identified for each of the eight facilities to measure against industry standards.
All of these factors were given an overall rating or condition rating. The building efficiency rating, space
utilization rating, and the building systems condition ratings were combined to complete the overall building
s. Using the data collected from the analysis, the facilities were then grouped into high, medium, and low
priority categories, or tiers, depending on their physical status. All of findings for each facility were compiled
into a Building Data Sheet. The specific data for each of the eight key facilities can be found in Appendix B –
Building Data Sheets, at the end of this document.
THE TIERING SYSTEM
Based on the results of the analysis, the FMP assigned each of the Town’s key facilities to one of the
following three categories:
Highest Priority
·Highly utilized facilities or facilities with safety and/or code violations
·Facilities with aging building systems that need replacement or costly repairs
·Facilities that no longer meet current space or functional needs, especially when they impact most
staff and/or the customer service functions of the Town
Facilities in this category include Town Hall, Police Department and associated off-site
storage.
9 Page 13
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 9
Medium Priority
·Facilities that need minor upgrades or
improvements
Facilities in this category include
Power & Communications - Dekker
Building, Fleet Services, Streets
Services and associated off- site
storage.
Low Priority
·Facilities that are in good shape
Facilities in this category include
Estes Park Museum, Parks Division,
Visitor Center, Estes Park Events
Complex and associated off- site
storage.
After the facility condition assessments and
rankings were completed, it was clear that this
FMP should focus on Town Hall and Police
Department since significant functional,
operational and maintenance issues were
identified. Therefore, the FMP focuses primarily
with Town Hall, and Police Department housed
within it, before making specific recommendations
for additional key facilities that fell lower in the
tiering system.
THE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE
OF TOWN HALL
Town Hall has served the community well for
many years. The building was built in the 1930s
and was originally used as the fourth school for
The Estes Valley Main Library
The Estes Valley Library is a popular local
institution with significant visitation. From its
website, “Bringing over 100 years of library
service to the Estes Valley and surrounding
communities, the Eses Valley Library was
begun in 1916 by the Estes Park Woman’s
Club. The first library was opened in the
schoolhouse with 262 volumes. Now with
over 40,000 traditional collection items, and
over 600,000 digital items, the library serves
over 12,000 local residents, hundreds of
seasonal residents, and many thousands of
visitors to Estes Park and Rocky Mountain
National Park.”
Library staff were engaged and provided
input during the FMP’s development. Since
the main library building is physically
connected to the Town Hall structure, any
decision related to the future of Town Hall
will have a measurable impact on the main
library. Prior to moving forward with any of
the recommendations in this plan related to
the Town Hall structure, the Town should
consult and coordinate with library staff to
ensure that library goals and community
needs continue to be addressed.
Town Hall was originally built as a school.
10 Page 14
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 10
the Town school system. After the construction of the current Estes Park Middle School, the building was
converted into Town Hall in 1974.
Currently Town Hall is occupied by staff from departments including the Town Administrator’s Office, Public
Works, Finance (including Utility Billing), Human Resources, Town Clerk, Community Development
(Planning and Building), and Police
Department (including Emergency
Communications Center & Restorative
Justice). The facility houses the core
services of Town government. Along
with the Library, the Town Hall area
represents the civic center of Estes Park.
While this plan recommends moving
some or all services away from the site,
numerous stakeholders and staff see the
importance of maintaining some Town
presence at the site to maintain the
sense of place fostered by the current
facility.
Given the initial use of the building, the layout of Town Hall is not suited to provide the services required for
residents and visitors, and hinders the effectiveness of Town staff and administration. Halls and stairways
originally designed for school passing periods and rows of lockers are not easily converted to meeting
space, offices or other administrative and public uses. Additionally, many of the core physical and
Town Hall today
Town Hall is challenging to navigate for residents and guests.
11 Page 15
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 11
mechanical systems (such as the elevator) will require substantial investment in the near future to address
accessibility, operational, and safety limitations. The number of entrances and layout of the building also
makes it difficult to secure and challenging for residents to navigate. Beyond the physical characteristics, as
discussed later in this plan, Town Hall is currently very expensive to operate and maintain compared to
modern, energy efficient facilities.
The current police facility in Town Hall is entirely inadequate. The department has been shoe-horned into a
space that jeopardizes the Police Department’s ability to respond to emergencies and keep officers, staff,
and residents safe. A recent study indicated that the police department requires a minimum of 15,000
square feet of interior space to serve its mission. It is currently operating out of approximately 7,000 square
feet. Furthermore, officers must park their specialized vehicles in a congested public parking lot where they
are vandalized, and when emergencies arise, they are forced to navigate through pedestrians and civilian
vehicles to respond. The Police Department should not be in Downtown due to the limited size of its current
space, the lack of specialized construction to adequately support police department uses and the many
safety concerns.
Many residents and staff recommended using the Town Hall site to help achieve broader Town objectives,
such as workforce housing, while moving some or all of Town services away from the Downtown core. The
study team agrees that there are many potential uses for the Town Hall site in the future (although as a
matter of due diligence, the study team considered the potential value the Town might see from a sale of the
Town Hall property).
Below is an image from the 2018 Downtown Plan showing a vision for the potential redevelopment of the
Town Hall parcels. The future of Town Hall and the Town hall property will require a phased process with
many opportunities for public input and deliberation. This master plan calls for maximum flexibility, and
identifies the most logical first step in this process, moving Police Department out of the Downtown to a new
facility and establishes a framework for the Town to use in making decisions after the initial phase.
The Town Hall site re-imagined in the 2018 Downtown Plan.
12 Page 16
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 12
THE OPERATIONAL STATUS OF EXISTING FACILITIES
In addition to the facility condition assessments, which primarily addressed the physical status of the
existing buildings, the FMP process also reviewed the operational and organizational conditions of Town
Hall. Many stakeholders were engaged during the FMP process, including Town staff and department
directors, the Town Board members and staff at the Estes Valley Library. During the study, the team worked
with Town staff to understand facilities needs through:
·Tours of all pertinent facilities with the Facilities Manager
·A detailed survey of staff on current facilities conditions and future needs
·Interviews with department directors regarding future staffing requirements and facility needs
·Stakeholder meetings with key department staff and the Facilities Division, and
·Surveys of staff during the pandemic to understand changes in work habits and facility needs
Based on this input, the study team identified the following key considerations regarding current and future
facility operations:
·Many staff indicated that the current facilities make it challenging to interact with the public. Key
concerns about serving residents include:
o The current Town Hall facility is difficult to navigate for the public, often customers have
difficulty finding the service they need.
o Multiple entrances to the building cause confusion and present security issues.
o Many of the meeting spaces are inadequate due to space constraints, noise concerns,
and the difficulty of scheduling.
o The Police Department is finding that their work, which used to be more seasonal in
nature, is becoming more consistent year-round putting further strain on their officers,
equipment and space.
·Several departments expressed concerns about storage space:
o Most of the departments reported needing additional storage space. For some
departments, such as Police Department, specialized storage facilities are needed and
the current facility does not meet these needs.
o While many departments see
digitizing files and information
as a potential path forward,
there are some technological
and staff barriers to
implementing this change.
·Access to Town Hall is a challenge for
both staff and residents, especially
during the seasons with heavy visitor
traffic. Some of these concerns were
related to convenience while other
individuals identified safety concerns
with vehicular, pedestrian, and police
traffic.
13 Page 17
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 13
COVID-19’s Impact on The Town’s Future Workplace
The COVID-19 pandemic that began in early 2020, and has continued into 2022, has changed the way
people work. It has impacted individuals and organizations across the globe, and the full extent of its impact
has yet to be seen.
The Town has been working in a hybrid fashion for nearly two years and this will likely continue as new
strains of the virus disrupt daily activities. In the meantime, multiple research studies show that workers in
many industries would prefer to remain in the hybrid work model – spending some time in the office and the
remainder of their time working remotely. The 2021 Work Trend Index Annual Report by Microsoft charted a
path toward this hybrid world and recommends organizations take the following steps to adapt:
·Create a plan to empower people for extreme flexibility - “Every organization will need a plan that
puts people at the center and encompasses policy, physical space, and technology.”
·Invest in space and technology to bridge the physical and digital worlds.
·Combat digital exhaustion and isolation.
·Prioritize rebuilding social capital and culture.
·Rethink employee experience and compete for the best and most diverse talent.
This hybrid work model will be a valuable tool that the Town can use to address its growth while keeping
pace with its service delivery needs. The pressure to provide traditional office space will likely decline as
more flexible work arrangements and the use of online services become more prevalent in the future.
Furthermore, workplaces are evolving to provide more amenities that better support innovative and
collaborative work cultures with less square footage. This hybrid approach offers a clear opportunity to
consolidate workspace and be more efficient in the future.
Town Staff Reponses to COVID-19 Workplace Changes
Given the major changes to the workplace during the COVID-19 pandemic, the FMP team conducted a
survey which asked Town staff about virtual work in the future. As shown in the graph below, a substantial
number of Town staff reported that they would be able or prefer to work from home (WFH). Many staff
expressed favorable opinions about working from home with the option to use “Hoteling” or “Touchdown”
spaces periodically at a Town facility.
Based on this survey, the study team groups existing Town staff into three distinct segments:
·Town staff who are ready to implement a more virtual work environment. Many of these staff
expressed interest in working at least part of the time in a virtual environment. In order to support
14 Page 18
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 14
these staff who are ready and able to WFH, the Town should explore potential hoteling and touch
down spaces and ensure these staff have access to appropriate computer and IT infrastructure to
work from home.
·Town staff who prefer to working in a full-time office environment. A portion of staff indicated that
they feel like virtual work is not as effective for their role even though an on-site presence is not
necessarily required for their job. For those staff, the Town should further explore the barriers to
remote work for these staff and look for ways to make their onsite work space efficient.
·Some Town staff are required to be onsite. These roles include Police Department staff and
maintenance and facility staff. For these staff, the Town should ensure that future facilities continue
to provide adequate in-person work spaces.
The following graph shows the approximate proportion of staff in each of the three segments.
FINANCIAL STATUS OF EXISTING
FACILITIES
Operations Funding
The Town currently funds facilities operation and
maintenance through annual allocations in the Town
budget. The Facilities Division received $1.1 million in
the 2021 budget with $880,000 designated for
maintenance and operations. According to Town staff,
the facilities maintenance and operations budget funds
Town Hall operations and maintenance and some
general facilities work across the Town, however many
services (e.g., events, museum, utilities) fund the
operation and maintenance of their own facilities. In the
future, the Facilities Division may work with Town
Finance staff to develop a comprehensive analysis of
operation and maintenance funding across the Town’s
funds.
When analyzing the operations and maintenance of
Town Hall, the study team made a conservative
assumption that Town Hall accounts for half of the Facilities Division operation and maintenance budget.
Town Revenues & Budgets
Sales Tax. As shown below, the
majority of Town funding comes from
sales tax receipts. These funds typically
provide for general government
services. Major facilities improvements
will require dedication of at least some
portion of Town sales tax to achieve the
goals outlined in this plan.
Recent Trends. While the COVID-19
pandemic initially resulted in
substantially decreased sales tax
revenues, tourism and associated
spending rebounded in 2021.
15 Page 19
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 15
Given the size of Town Hall (30,000 square feet), the per-square foot operations and maintenance cost of
that facility is $14.56. Based on a 2018 analysis from the GSA, typical government office buildings cost
$6.93 per square foot to operate in 2018 while high performing buildings (well-maintained or new buildings
with energy efficient improvements) cost $5.33 per square foot to operate. When controlling for inflation,
2021-2022 operation and maintenance costs for high performing buildings would be closer to $6-7 per
square foot. Using this revised metric, a new facility with lower operations could save the Town substantially
over the life of that facility.
Capital Funding
One of the key constraints identified by the Town of Estes Park facilities master plan team is the ability of
the Town to fund all aspects of facilities management, however this problem is particularly acute when
examining potential capital investments. The Town currently has limited reserves and has little or no
bonding capacity related to current assets or revenue streams. The current facilities budget allows for day-
to-day operations and maintenance, but there is no long-term solution to major capital investments.
The study team worked with the Town’s finance director to review the current status of the Town’s capital
finances and document potential opportunities and challenges related to funding future facilities
investments.
Capital Improvement Plan
The Town recently implemented a capital improvement planning process designed to document projected
investments over a five-year period for capital assets in the Town in addition to the overall estimated capital
needs. The capital improvement plan (CIP) developed through this process identifies the required
investment across each of the following Town funds:
1. General Fund;
2. Community Reinvestment Fund;
3. Open Space Fund;
4. Trails Fund;
As shown in the 2021 Town Budget Bugle, sales taxes provide more than two-thirds of the Town’s general revenue.
16 Page 20
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 16
5. Street Improvement Fund;
6. Parking Services Fund;
7. Light & Power Fund;
8. Water Fund;
9. Stormwater Fund; and
10. Fleet Maintenance Fund
For each fund, the CIP identifies investments over the next five years and investments in “Out Years.”
Facilities investments are typically tracked in and made from the general fund in the CIP. While the CIP
does not currently report facilities expenditures separately from other general fund expenditures, the Town
provided BBC with a detailed view of all items in the CIP. Based on this information, for the most recent CIP,
the Town expects to spend approximately $1.5 million on facilities investments over the five-year period
starting in 2020. One way to understand the magnitude of capital needs is to compare the “Out Years”
capital spending to the average annual spending for a particular category. This provides an estimate of the
amount of time it will take the Town to implement its CIP. For facilities in the Town of Estes Park, the “Out
Years” value of improvements needed is approximately $46.7 million. Given the current annual rate of
spending (approximately $300,000/year), at the current rate of investment it would take the Town more than
150 years to fully implement the facilities portion of the master plan.
It is important to note that three items in the current CIP account for nearly $45 million of the total facilities
CIP:
1. Town Hall relocation ($14.8 million)
2. Police Department relocation ($14.8 million); and
3. Public works service center facility ($14.8 million).
Based on discussions with Town staff, the values for those three items are rough estimates.
The 2022 Town Budget includes funding for the right of first refusal properties that might meet the needs of
a new Police Department facility.
17 Page 21
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 17
CHARTING A PATH FORWARD
POLICE DEPARTMENT & TOWN HALL - THREE OPTIONS
The FMP has identified three potential options to address the Town’s future facility's needs. The options
were developed to maintain flexibility so that as land becomes available, the Town can be opportunistic and
implement the option that fits best. The options also address desire to consolidate departments or disperse
them within the Town depending on which direction the Town moves. One of the options anticipates
maximum consolidation and may yield the greatest efficiency while other options assume that separation of
some departments from others will be necessary and may lead to some duplication of common space.
As part of the FMP process, a number of properties outside of downtown, also known as opportunity sites,
were studied to determine if the anticipated programs for both a new Police Department facility and a new
Town Hall building would fit. The study found that there are a number of properties that could meet the
program for each of the individual buildings, however, to create a civic campus and allow both of the new
facilities and their associated parking to fit on one site, multiple properties would need to be assembled.
Since this FMP is focused on maintaining flexibility for the Town, and there are a number of decisions that
must to be made prior to selecting property for new Town facilities, the specific properties reviewed in the
test-fit study have not been included in the FMP.
The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated how well Town’s staff are able to adapt to change with remote
work becoming more and more prevalent and desirable. Surveys of the community during the development
of the FMP indicated a preference for keeping some services Downtown. The obvious challenge with
services remaining Downtown is that they compete for parking during the tourist season and make access
difficult. The benefit of keeping some services Downtown is that it maintains the Town’s presence near the
heart of the commercial center of the community. The major benefit of moving all of the Town’s services out
of Downtown is the potential to create a new civic campus that would likely help the Town make parking
more convenient, consolidate services and space, and establish a new civic architecture and landscape
aesthetic for the Town.
There are a number of similarities between each recommended option. All of them include a relocated
police station that is larger than the department’s existing space in Town Hall. All options also require a new
Town Hall structure or structures to meet the Town’s goals. Finally, all of the
options include public restroom facilities at Bond Park. The primary
difference between the three options is the location of Town Hall services
and whether they are consolidated outside of Downtown at a site to be
identified in the future or dispersed between Downtown and another site.
The diagrams below are intentionally conceptual in nature and reflect the fact
that land opportunities for the Police Department facilities are unknown at
this time and options will be explored as one of the first steps in
implementing this master plan. The yellow circle reflects “Downtown” and the
green circle reflects an area outside of the Downtown core. In all three
options, Police Department is shown to grow in size as the current facility is
inadequate.
18 Page 22
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 18
OPTION 1 - A NEW TOWN HALL DOWNTOWN
In Option 1, Police Department moves out of Town Hall as soon as practical and their new, larger facility is
built in the first phase. The Town Hall building is then demolished and a new Town services building is
rebuilt in its current location along with the additional parking necessary to meet future needs. In this case
the Town will need to decide whether to build a new facility sized to fit the remaining departments or if a
larger building should be built to include alternative programs such as workforce housing, retail or office. As
shown in the image below, Option 1 is similar to the Resilient Design Study #4 (Alternative 2) in the 2018
Estes Park Downtown Plan. The white buildings indicated with the number 2 are mixed-use/civic buildings
surrounding a new parking structure.
New
Mixed-use &
Civic Buildings
New
Parking
Structure
Resilient Design Study #4: Town Hall Site (Alternative 2) in the Estes Park Downtown Plan
19 Page 23
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 19
OPTION 2 - SERVICES SPLIT BETWEEN SEVERAL LOCATIONS
In Option 2, Police Department again moves out of Town Hall as soon as practical and their new, larger
facility is built in the first phase. However, this option anticipates that some services will move out, preferably
to a location near the new Police Department facility, and others will remain. As mentioned earlier, since a
number of FMP survey respondents felt that some of the Town’s services should remain Downtown, this
option leaves the size of the Town’s presence flexible in the future. For instance, a sufficient amount of land
may not be available outside of Downtown and/or the Town may decide that it is important to maintain a
significant presence in its current location. At minimum, the Police Department could have a small police
annex at the Town Hall site coupled with expanded and enhanced public restrooms near Bond Park to serve
the community and visitors. Once the size of the Town’s presence Downtown is established, the Town will
then have to decide if some portion of the site should be made available for partial or full redevelopment.
OPTION 3 - A CONSOLIDATED CAMPUS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN
In Option 3, Police Department again moves out of Town Hall as soon as practical and their new, larger
facility is built in the first phase. In this scenario, most, if not all, of the Town’s services are then relocated
20 Page 24
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 20
out of Downtown, again preferably near the new Police Department facility, to a new location to create a
larger, consolidated civic campus. Finally, the Town Hall site is made available for full redevelopment, and
the Town will need to determine the future use of the property and whether to redevelop the land with a
partner or move forward with redevelopment on its own.
OTHER OPTIONS CONSIDERED
The FMP briefly explored the continued operation of Town Hall in its current state. This approach was
quickly rejected because Police Department’ functions are seriously hindered by their current space and
location Downtown. As one of the highest priority facilities, they need to be relocated to better serve the
Town’s residents and guests. Second, the existing building was originally constructed as a school, and
funds were never allocated to significantly modify the building’s systems or the layout to convert it to
municipal office building. Third, the ongoing operation and maintenance costs to occupy the existing
Town Hall building greatly exceed industry standard. Fourth, the existing building systems, including the
building envelope, mechanical systems and elevator would need significant and costly improvements to
meet current energy and accessibility codes. Finally, there are serious security concerns with the
current mix of public and private uses in Town Hall which makes lock-down and shelter-in-place extremely
challenging in emergency situations.
The second option that was considered included the construction of a new Police Department building
outside of Downtown and the remodel of the existing Town Hall building to support the remaining city
departments. Many of the same issues mentioned above affect this option while additional costs would likely
be triggered by the reorganization of Town Hall’s interior after Police Department vacates the 7,000 SF of
space they currently occupy. This option was not outright rejected, but it would face serious hurdles such as
the previously mentioned remodel cost, the scale and complexity of the systems upgrades, and the sizable
reorganization of the interior to backfill the police department’s vacated space. If other factors in the future
make the other recommended options impractical, then the Town could choose to revisit this option and
Resilient Design Study #4: Town Hall Site (Alternative 1) in the Estes Park Downtown Plan
Existing
Town Hall
Building
Existing
Main Library
Building
New
Mixed-use
Buildings
New
Parking
Structure
21 Page 25
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 21
proceed with the remodel and reorganization of the existing Town Hall building. As illustrated above, this
option could be similar to Town Hall Site (Alternative 1) outlined in the 2018 Estes Park Downtown Plan.
STAKEHOLDER INPUT ON POLICE DEPARTMENT AND TOWN HALL
While many of the past Town
planning processes including
the Downtown Plan and
Parking Assessment have
included or endorsed potentially
moving Town Hall and Police
Department outside of the
Downtown core, some of the
options presented in this
facilities master plan represent
the most concrete steps
towards relocating some or all
of Town Services. As a result,
the study team worked with
Town staff to solicit public
opinion on the various options
through a public meeting and
survey.
The public meeting was held on December 2, 2021 and had more than 32 attendees. The study team
presented the three options for future Town Services facilities and solicited input from residents and key
stakeholders. A number of themes emerged from the discussion including:
·Many residents expressed difficultly accessing Town services at Town Hall due to transportation
and parking concerns;
·A number of residents expressed support of maintaining a Town presence in the Downtown core;
·Many residents were concerned about how the proposed facilities changes might impact the
Downtown library;
·Some residents suggested that the Town Hall site would be more useful if it were converted to
workforce housing or mixed-use development;
·A number of participants encouraged the Town to find the most cost-effective solution to providing
services to residents.
An excerpt from the community meeting presentation.
2021 Community Survey
In preparing for the community meeting and survey, the study team reviewed results from the 2021
Community Survey. Overall, 7 in 10 residents rated service by the Town as excellent or good. Residents
also rated public safety as a top priority and expressed support for the work done by Police Department.
Key concerns identified in the survey included the variety and affordability of housing. These findings
informed the study team’s proposed options for future facilities investments and the potential
redevelopment of Town Hall.
22 Page 26
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 22
Along with the public meeting, the study team also created an electronic survey via Survey Monkey and
distributed it to meeting participants. Town communications staff also provided a link to the survey on social
media and an article published in the Estes Park Trail Gazette2 advertised the results of the public meeting
and encouraged residents to respond. The study team received and analyzed 137 responses to the survey.
As shown below, the most commonly used service by service respondents when visiting the Town Hall area
was the library (65%) followed by the public restrooms (44%).
When asked about the three options for Town Hall Services, most of the survey respondents preferred
relocating all services to an area outside of Downtown. Among High Frequency users of Town Hall, there
was a slight preference for rebuilding Town Hall Downtown. The least popular option was splitting Town
services between multiple locations.
2 Police Chief outlines need for new facility. Estes Park Trail Gazette. December 6, 2021. Accessed January 27, 2022
at https://www.eptrail.com/2021/12/06/police-chief-outlines-need-for-new-facility/
65%
44%
41%
34%
32%
27%
16%
15%
15%
14%
5%
Library
Public Restrooms
Parking to visit other downtown…
Town Board or Other Public Meetings
Town Clerk
Paying a utility bill
Police Services
Public Works
Town Administrator's Office
Community Development (Planning and…
Human Resources
Proportion of Respondents
Services Used When Accessing Town Hall Area
44%
36%
51%
37%
42%
34%
19%
23%
15%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
All Respondents
High Frequency Users
Low Frequency Users
Preferred Option
Consolidated Campus not
Downtown
New Town Hall Downtown
Services are split between
multiple locations
23 Page 27
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 23
When asked to identify their least preferred option for future Town services, the most commonly selected
option was splitting services between multiple location.
Due to the lack of developable land in Estes Park and the need for the facilities master plan to be adaptable,
the study team worked to capture the key attributes that residents find most important in locating Town
services. These responses can help future Town stakeholders and decision makers evaluate future plans or
proposed facilities strategies. The key values according to survey respondents are shown below. Many of
the most important considerations related to accessing Town services.
A summary of the responses to each question in the survey can be found in Appendix D.
25% 32% 42%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
All respondents
Least Preferred Option
Consolidated Campus
not Downtown
New Town Hall
Downtown
Services are split
between multiple
locations
15%
17%
22%
26%
28%
29%
29%
30%
32%
32%
39%
0% 5% 10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%
Minimizing service disruption while
building new facilities
Creating a civic campus (co-location of
Town services and other amenities)
Keeping as many services downtown as
possible
Moving services out of downtown
Keeping operating costs low
Maximizing the services available in one
location
Maintaining a municipal presence in the
downtown area
Maximizing ability to access Town services
online
Easy access
Minimizing cost of building new facilities
Convenient and ample parking
Respondent Priorities (%)
24 Page 28
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 24
OTHER FACILITIES RECOMMENDATIONS
In addition to the issues facing Town Hall and Police Department, other facilities are also in need of repair
and renovation. These facilities were categorized as either medium or low priority facilities in the FMP.
Below is a list of those facilities and a description of the work required to address any anticipated
deficiencies.
Power and Communications - Dekker Building (medium priority)
This building needs minor upgrades and repairs, especially to its HVAC system. The two radiant tube
heaters are past their expected useful life (EUL) and will begin to increase maintenance costs while their
performance decreases. The office area furnace is well past their EUL and the ducting and diffusers are
insufficient for the open office space. The seven exhaust fans in the building are also well past their EUL
and are recommended to be replaced.
Fleet Services (medium priority)
This building needs minor upgrades. The HVAC components are beyond their useful life. The fluorescent
lighting in the North Bay is insufficient with dead lamps and poor coverage. Fluorescent lighting that is
typical in this building can only be switched on or off so building occupants often unscrew bulbs or plug in
supplemental lights and turn off overhead lighting entirely. To improve occupancy comfort and productivity,
it’s recommended to replace fluorescent fixtures with LED tube lighting and on/off switches with dimmable
switches.
Streets Services (medium priority)
This building needs minor upgrades and repairs. Radiant heaters serving the vehicle areas are 5 years past
EUL and should be replaced. Fluorescent lighting that is typical in this building can only be switched on or
off so building occupants often unscrew bulbs or plug in supplemental lights and turn off overhead lighting
entirely. To improve occupancy comfort and productivity replace fluorescent fixtures with LED tube lighting
and on/off switches with dimmable switches.
Parks Division (low priority)
This building is in relatively good shape. Improvements were recently made. The fluorescent lighting at the
works stations could be upgraded to LED fixtures, to improve occupancy comfort and productivity. The
vehicle bay lighting is insufficient and results in poor lighting conditions. New LED lighting is recommended
for this facility.
Estes Park Museum (low priority)
This building is in relatively good shape. Most of the
building’s lighting systems have been upgraded to
LED fixtures. The HVAC equipment is heated and
cooled by a combination of gas furnace units and
electric cooling and RTUs using the same fuels. The
RTUs are 5 years past their useful life, and are
recommended for replacement.
Estes Park Visitor Center (low priority)
This building is in relatively good shape. It is
recommended that the fluorescent office lighting and
exterior lighting be upgraded to LED, for user comfort
and building efficiency. The Estes Park Museum
25 Page 29
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 25
Water Division (low priority)
This building was recently renovated and was
not analyzed.
Trailblazer Broadband/Power and
Communications Building (low priority)
This building was recently renovated and was
not analyzed.
Off Site Storage Facilities (varies)
These buildings are either in relatively good
shape, in need of minor upgrades/repairs or
in need of extensive upgrades/repairs.
However, these facilities were not analyzed in detail because they are ancillary to the other facilities, and in
some cases, they present security issues for the Town.
While the FMP only briefly analyzed eight key assets following the in-depth study of both Town Hall and
Police Department, the data collection methods utilized can be applied to further study these or other
existing Town assets.
A FINANCIAL COMPARISON OF THE OPTIONS
Over time, the city’s cost to continue operating Town Hall building is likely to be greater than the cost to
demolish the existing structure and construct and operate new energy-efficient buildings that are custom-
built for city offices and services. Town Hall will be expensive to renovate since so many of its systems have
exceeded their useful life. The original structure was never built to house city offices, civic events (Town
board meetings) or police functions, so the FMP recommends that the Town invest in new facilities that will
better serve its staff and the community in the future.
In order to develop the fiscal model to evaluate the most cost-effective option recommendation in the FMP,
the following assumptions were used:
·Town Hall’s current annual operation and maintenance (O&M) cost per square foot is $14.56 which
is more than the GSA’s recommended average annual O&M cost of $6/SF.
·O&M costs for new facilities would be lower than current costs, but might not achieve the GSA
standard.
·Generally, construction costs increase, or escalate, over time. Construction costs for a new police
facility are currently projected to be approximately $650-$700 per square foot in 2023.
·A new civic facility would likely cost less than a police facility since it has fewer highly specialized
building systems and furniture fixtures and equipment (FF&E). A new building that could house city
offices is estimated to cost between $500-$600 per square foot in 2023 or 2024.
FISCAL MODEL
OPTION 1: Build a new Police Department building outside Downtown, demolish the existing Town
Hall structure and rebuild Town Hall Downtown to support any remaining city departments.
The Estes Park Visitor Center
Estes Park Visitor Center
26 Page 30
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 26
·This option would also require the
construction of a new parking structure to
support the new Town Hall structure and
its staff.
OPTION 2: Build a new Police Department and
Town Services buildings elsewhere in Town as
well as redevelop the Town Hall property to
include some city offices and other commercial
and residential uses that support the goals of
the Downtown Plan.
·This option could place the burden of a
new parking structure on the developer of
the new Town Hall site if a public-private
partnership was created.
·If not, then a new parking structure would
need to be built by the Town to support
the variety of uses developed on the Town
Hall’s site.
OPTION 3: Build a new Police Department and
Town Services buildings outside Downtown
and sell or redevelop the Town Hall property for
a different use.
·This option is the most likely to avoid the
cost associated with the construction of a
new parking structure since enough land
could be purchased to provide surface
parking or parking could be shared with
the events complex if a nearby site was
available.
·If the Town Hall’s land were sold, it could
also help recover some of the cost
associated with the construction of the
new buildings.
Using the three scenarios described above, the
study team created a financial model to compare
the fiscal impacts of the potential options for Police
Department and Town Services. Due to the
complexity involved with any of these scenarios, it
will be important for the Town to revisit these
models and assumptions as the Board moves
forward with implementation of the facilities master
plan.
The model comparing the three options includes
the following assumptions:
·Structured parking would be required if
Town Services remain Downtown;
Comparable Police Facilities
Recently built police facilities in
comparable communities along the Front
Range include the Towns of Timnath,
Firestone, Erie, and Windsor.
Timnath
·Town Population: 4,000
·Construction Start: 2021-2022
·Size: 22,000 SF
·Cost: $13,434,000
·Cost/SF: $610
Firestone
·Town Population: 14,000
·Construction Start: 2018-2019
·Size: 30,000 SF
·Cost: $16,000,000
·Cost/SF: $533
Erie
·Town Population: 30,000
·Construction Start: 2014-2015
·Size: 17,000 SF
·Cost: $6,200,000
·Cost/SF: $365
Windsor
·Town Population: 25,000
·Construction Start: 2009-2010
·Size: 15,000 SF
·Cost: $4,000,000
·Cost/SF: $267
If we assume an annual construction cost
escalation of approximately 6%, then the
average construction cost/SF for a
comparable police facility built in 2024 is
estimated to be between $650/SF and
$700/SF. At 15,000 GSF, we estimate
the new Police Department building will
cost approximately $10,500,000 to
construct plus the cost of land,
design/engineering, contingency and
other fees for a total project cost of
approximately $15,000,000.
27 Page 31
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 27
·Land values are higher in the Downtown core than other areas where the Town might construct a
Town Services facility;
·Remodeling Town Hall would cost less than rebuilding the facility, but the difference would be
limited due to the age of the facility, deferred maintenance, and need for substantial changes for
accessibility and safety;
·Construction and operation costs would increase at a moderate pace over time (3 percent);
·New facilities would have lower operating costs than remodeled or existing facilities; and
·A new Town services facility could have a slightly smaller footprint than the current Town Hall due
to efficient use of space and gains from virtual work (25,000 square feet for a new facility compared
with 30,000 square feet for the current facility).
·A new building built outside of Downtown could either utilize existing surface parking facilities, for
instance, if a site were located near the Events Complex, or it could build new surface parking if
sufficient land is acquired.
It is important to note that while, as a matter of due diligence, these models consider the value of the Town
Hall property, it is likely that the Town would choose to redevelop the property to meet other community
goals rather than sell the property.
When using these assumptions to create a model, it allows the Town to understand the relative fiscal
impacts of the three most likely facilities development scenarios. It is important to understand that many of
the variables impacting these models can change quickly given external economic conditions and that those
changes may result in substantially different financial model results. The study team modeled the three
options over a period of 20 years and included the cumulative costs to the Town of each option. It is likely
that any facility would last beyond 20 years as many organizations plan for 30, 50, or even 100-year
buildings.
Based on the assumptions discussed above, building a facility outside of Downtown represents the most
fiscally beneficial option to the Town over a 20-year period.
28 Page 32
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 28
PHASING STRATEGY
There are several key decisions that the Town will need to make to implement the recommendations in the
Facilities Master Plan.
Phase I
The first decision in Phase 1 is whether the Town should acquire land outside Downtown to build a new
Police Department Facility. If the answer is yes, then time and money must be spent to locate the land,
design and build the new Police Department Facility. If the answer is no, then Police Department will
continue to languish in Town Hall and public safety will be jeopardized.
Phase II
The next decision the Town faces following the relocation of Police Department, is whether the Town should
relocate some or all of the remaining city departments. If the answer is yes, then time and money must be
spent to locate the land, design a new facility and construct a new building. If the answer is no, then the
Town will need to decide if the Town should remodel the existing building or construct a new building in its
place.
If the Town decides to remodel the existing facility, then time and money will need to be spent to program,
design, and complete a remodel and consider whether to build additional parking to support city and public
uses Downtown. If the Town decides it does not want to remodel the existing building, then the Town will
need to either build a new building for itself on the site, redevelop the existing Town Hall property with a
partner to establish an alternative use or sell the land. If the Town decides to redevelop the property, one
option would be to build a project similar to the mixed-use building envisioned in the Downtown
Plan. Another option could be to develop an alternative use that would benefit the community, like workforce
housing. In either case the Town could decide to occupy a portion of a new building with a police substation
and a few Town offices.
29 Page 33
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 29
POTENTIAL REVENUE SOURCES
Based on a review of the current Town budget, the CIP, and discussions with the finance director, it appears
unlikely that the Town will be able to fund substantial facilities improvements under the current fiscal
circumstances. One possible revenue source would be something similar to the 1 percent sales tax that
Town residents approved in 2014 for four specific purposes (trail improvements, street maintenance,
emergency response systems upgrades, and the community recreation center). This sales tax will expire in
2024. One option would be to ask voters to renew the tax and use a portion of the tax for facilities
investments. Based on discussions with Town staff, in future years the 1 percent sales tax could generate
approximately $3.2 million/year. Based on recent bond issuances by the Town, this level of revenue would
service a 20-year debt of between $35 million and $40 million. Additionally, with all facilities improvements,
the Town might consider a variety of funding sources beyond traditional bonding including:
·Certificates of Participation
·Energy Saving Performance Contract
·Energy as a Service
·Infrastructure as a service
These financing mechanisms often include a trade-off between the overall cost of financing and the risk
assumed by the municipality.
Reuse of the Town Hall property could be funded using a variety of mechanisms depending on the desired
uses. Workforce housing or mixed-use development might use a public private partnership (PPP) between
the Town, private developers, other governments, or nonprofit organizations. Additionally, many state and
federal entities have funding available for urban redevelopment and renewal (for example the Colorado
Main Street Program operated by the Colorado Division of Local Affairs).
30 Page 34
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 30
CONCLUSIONS AND INITIATIVES
The Facilities Master Plan focuses on the highest priority needs – moving Police Department out of
Downtown and the need to address the inadequacies of the existing Town Hall facility. It also sets up a
system to analyze and prioritize other Town facilities in need of improvements. It identifies potential funding
sources to implement the first phase – a new Police Department facility. The plan recognizes that the status
quo, leaving Town Hall to operate as-is, would be unsustainable, costly and fiscally irresponsible.
Recommended initiatives are described below.
INITIATIVE 1: PLAN AND BUDGET FOR A NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT
FACILITY
1. Allocate the funds to begin programming, site selection and design processes (1-3
months)
2. Complete a programming and budgeting exercise to establish what should be built
(3-6 months)
3. Begin a site selection effort to identify a suitably sized property and location (3-6
months-preferably concurrent with the programming work)
4. Purchase property (2-3 months)
5. Design, estimate and permit the new building (9-12 months)
6. Build the building (14-16 months)
7. Relocate Police Department from Town Hall to the new building (1 month)
It is estimated it will take 30 to 42 months to relocate Police Department out of
Downtown after the Town decides to move forward and assign the financial resources
necessary to begin and complete the new Police Department facility project.
INITIATIVE 2: TAKE CARE OF WHAT WE HAVE
In addition to the issues facing Town Hall and Police Department, other facilities are
facing repair and renovation needs. Since the focus of this FMP was on
recommendations to address the significant difficulties faced by Town Hall and Police
Department, more in-depth facility condition assessments for the mid- and low-tier
buildings should be completed to prioritize upgrades and preempt costly emergency
repairs.
INITIATIVE 3: IDENTIFY LAND ACQUISITION OPPORTUNITIES
The availability of land in suitable locations for new Town facilities is limited. During the
FMP process, the properties along the Highway 7 commercial corridor near the Estes
Park Events Complex were identified as well suited for both a new Police Department
facility and a new civic campus should the Town choose to move services out of the
existing Town Hall building. There are also compelling potential synergies with the
nearby Events Complex--such as sharing its existing surface parking lot. The Town
may want to actively search for land it could redevelop and establish a right-of-
31 Page 35
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 31
first refusal to purchase target properties or it may prefer to wait until appropriate
sites become available and act on them at that time.
INITIATIVE 4: EXPLORE THE IDEA OF A NEW CIVIC CAMPUS
Although the creation of a civic campus outside of Downtown is a major undertaking
and may take time to realize, the FMP identified this as the best-case scenario. The
creation of a consolidated, civic campus is a powerful idea which could yield
significant benefits for the community. It could be a compelling long-term goal for the
Town if the political will and funding is available to make it a reality.
There are a number of opportunities the Town could realize if it decided to create a
new civic campus. First, it would help establish the Town’s civic identity outside of
Downtown. Second, the new facility could create an exciting place for residents to
gather, do business and recreate by integrating thoughtful building and landscape
design, incorporating easy access and wayfinding, taking advantage of indoor-outdoor
connections and providing links to existing services. Finally, the Town could include
other compatible, synergistic uses such as cafes, retail shops, and other cultural and
community amenities to create a new destination for residents and guests.
The Project for Public Spaces organization
identifies a number of key elements that help
define “Placemaking” and should be kept in
mind during the development of a civic center
concept. They recommend that designs nurture
and define community identity, foster frequent
and meaningful contact, draw a diverse
population, promote a sense of comfort, create
improved accessibility and build and support
the local economy. Visit their website at
www.pps.org for more information about
Placemaking. 32 Page 36
Acknowledgements
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS
Wendy Koenig, Mayor
Patrick Martchink, Mayor Pro Tem
Carlie Bangs, Trustee
Marie Cenac, Trustee
Barbara MacAlpine, Trustee
Scott Webermeier, Trustee
Cindy Younglund, Trustee
KEY TOWN STAFF
Jon Landkamer, Facilities Manager
Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Travis Machalek, Town Administrator
Wes Kufeld, Chief of Police
Suzanna Simpson, Management Analyst
Kate Rusch, Public Information Officer
Duane Hudson, Finance Director/Treasurer
Nathan Schlichtemier, Information Technology
Systems Administrator Manager
Vanessa Solesbee, Parking and Transit Manager
Ryan Barr, Pavement Manager/ GIS Support
OTHER STAKEHOLDERS
Claudine Perrault, Director of the Estes Valley
Library
CONSULTANTS
STUDIO Architecture – Jeff Dawson and Morgan
Daly
BBC Research and Consulting – Kevin Williams
StudioTerra – Carol Adams
PCD Engineering – Peter D’Antonio and Jacob
Goodman
Cover photo: Visit Estes Park/Darren Edwards
This page was intentionally left blank Page 37
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 32
APPENDICES
34
Appendix A – Comprehensive List of Town Facilities ............................................................................. 33
Appendix B – Building Data Sheets.......................................................................................................... 34
Appendix C – Table of Expected Useful Life by Component .................................................................. 35
Appendix D – Community Survey Responses ......................................................................................... 36
35
38
48
51
Page 38
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX A 1
APPENDIX A – COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF
ALL TOWN FACILITES
3235ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX A
Page 39
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX A 2
Building ID Building Name Building Use Division Building No. Street Name
Gross Area
(S.F.)
Year
Constructed
FA-TH Town Hall Civic Center General Fund 170 MACGREGOR 30507 1930s(1974)
FA-LPD Power & Communications - Dekker Building Public Service Power & Communications 615 ELM 12980 1990
FA-EC Estes Park Event Complex Civic Auditorium Community Services 1125 ROOFTOP 36943 2014
FA-FLT Fleet Services Public Service Public Works 575 ELM 6510 1979
FA-MU Estes Park Museum Community Center Cultural Services 200 4TH 6016 1967
FA-PS Parks Division Public Service Public Works 600 BIG THOMPSON 2771 2005
FA-PD Police Department Police Department General Fund 170 MACGREGOR 5904 1974
FA-VC Estes Park Visitor Center Community Center Community Services 500 BIG THOMPSON 8284 2005
FA-ST Streets Services Public Service Public Works 577 ELM 9600 1975
FA-WD2 Water Division Public Service Water 1360 BROOK 8624 1978
FA-BB Trailblazer Boradband/Power & Communications Public Service Power & Communications WOODSTOCK 3200 1977
FA-CC Conference Center Civic Auditorium Community Services 201 SAINT VRAIN 25581 1991
FA-FGS Fairgrounds/Rodeo Grandstands Civic Auditorium Community Services 1209 MANFORD 19189 2010
FA-FISH2 Fish Hatchery 2*Rental Public Works 1703 FISH HATCHERY 1380 1907
FA-FISH3 Fish Hatchery 3*Rental Public Works 1705 FISH HATCHERY 1080 1947
FA-FISH1 Fish Hatchery 1*Rental Public Works 1707 FISH HATCHERY 1912 1946
FA-GWTF Glacier Creek Water Treatment Facility Public Service Water 480 CARING 9500
FA-HH Hydro House*Rental Public Works 1750 FISH HATCHERY 940 1909
FA-LPS Light & Power Storage Public Service Light & Power 640 ELM 8400
FA-MWTF Mary's Lake Water Treatment Facility Public Service Water 899 LAKEWOOD 6000
FA-MRR Moraine Restroom Public Service Public Works 157 MORAINE 575 1976
FA-MUH Museum Hydroplant Community Center Cultural Services 1754 FISH HATCHERY 1912 1909
FA-OP O'Connor Pavilion Community Center Community Services 1700 FISH HATCHERY 2200 2005
FA-PP Performance Park Civic Auditorium Community Services 417 ELKHORN 646 2003
FA-PPRR Performance Park Restroom Public Service Public Works 417 ELKHORN 576 2004
FA-RRR Riverside Restroom Public Service Public Works 110 RIVERSIDE 518 1976
FA-MUA Museum Annex Community Center Cultural Services 220 4TH 7850 1980
FA-PV Pavilion Civic Auditorium Community Services 1115 ROOFTOP 25909 2014
FA-SH Stanley House*Rental Public Works 179 STANLEY CIRCLE 1556 1939
FA-SB1 Storage Building 1 Public Service General Fund 1701 FISH HATCHERY 1680 1965
FA-SB2 Storage Building 2 Public Service General Fund 1709 FISH HATCHERY 21565 1940
FA-TPRR Tregent Park Restroom Public Service Public Works 261 ELKHORN 884 1986
FA-PS1 Visitor Center Parking Structure Public Service Public Works 691 SAINT VRAIN 120146 2017
FA-FISHRS Records Storage Public Service General Fund 1711 FISH HATCHERY 384
FA-FISHREO REO Garage Public Service General Fund 1706 FISH HATCHERY 600
FA-PIC Picnic Shelter Public Service Public Works 500 BIG THOMPSON 500
FA-FISHORR Fish Hatchery Old Restroom Public Service General Fund 1700 FISH HATCHERY 288
FA-SSS Salt/Sand Storage Public Service Public Works 650 ELM 3150
FA-THS Transit Hub Shelter Public Service Public Works 1209 MANFORD 280
FA-LPSSS Substation Shop Public Service Light & Power 2009 MARYS LAKE 932
FA-LPLES Lake Estes Substation Public Service Light & Power 875 SAINT VRAIN 910
FA-LPMLES Mary's Lake Electrical Substation Public Service Light & Power 2009 MARYS LAKE 930
FA-MUW Museum Workshop Community Center Cultural Services 200 4TH 200
FA-MURMNP Rocky Mountain NP Museum Community Center Cultural Services 200 4TH 920
FA-MULC Log Cabin Museum - Cobb-Macdonald Community Center Cultural Services 200 4TH 351
FA-MUBC Birch Cabin Education Building Community Center Cultural Services 324 MACGREGOR 645
FA-MUED1 Education Community Center Cultural Services 324 MACGREGOR 8925
FA-MUED2 Education Community Center Cultural Services 324 MACGREGOR 20
FA-MUHPMO Hydroplant Museum Office Community Center Cultural Services 1746 FISH HATCHERY 990
FA-PSG Parks Shop Greenhouse Public Service Public Works 600 BIG THOMPSON 1000
FA-PDSC Police Dept. Storage Cabin Police Department General Fund 170 MACGREGOR 120
FA-FSTA Fairgrounds Stable A Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1620
FA-FSTD Fairgrounds Stable D Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1620
FA-FSTG Fairgrounds Stable G Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-FSTK Fairgrounds Stable K Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1620
FA-FSTL Fairgrounds Stable L Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1620
FA-FSTC Fairgrounds Stable C Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1620
FA-FSTTSB Fairgrounds Stable Tack Stall B Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-FSTTSF Fairgrounds Stable Tack Stall F Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-FSTTSH Fairgrounds Stable Tack Stall H Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-FSTTSI Fairgrounds Stable Tack Stall I Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-FSTTSJ Fairgrounds Stable Tack Stall J Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-FEXO Exhibitor's Office/Fairs & Events Only Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 177
FA-FABC Fairgrounds Announcer Booth C Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 240
FA-FSB Fairgrounds Shoeing Barn Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 560
FA-FSTV Fairgrounds Stable V Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 7595
FA-FLOG1 Fairgrounds Log Building at Entrance 1 Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 242
FA-FTB Fairgrounds Ticket Booth Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 60
FA-FMS Fairgrounds Maintenance Shop Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1600
FA-FTH Fairgrounds Tool House Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 242
FA-FC&C Fairgrounds Chutes & Corrals Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 200
FA-FRP&C Fairgrounds Roping Pens & Chutes Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1440
FA-FSTU Fairgrounds Stable U Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 3900
FA-FPJS Fairgrounds Portable Judges Stand Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 96
FA-FAB Fairgrounds Announcer's Booth Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 180
FA-FLOG2 Fairgrounds Log Building at Entrance 2 Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 242
FA-FMO Fairgrounds Manager's Office Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1322
FA-FSTT Fairgrounds Stable T Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 6500
FA-FEXB Fairgrounds Exhibit Building Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 2850
FA-FHAYB Fairgrounds Hay Barn Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 4800
3236ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX A
Page 40
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX A 3
FA-FSO Fairgrounds Show Office Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 104
FA-FHBW Fairgrounds Horse Barn W Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 16000
FA-FRR Fairgrounds Restrooms Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 960
FA-FSTE Fairgrounds Stable E Community Center Community Services 1209 MANFORD 1720
FA-WFREPH Water Fall River Estates Pump House Public Service Water 2000 FALL RIVER 204
FA-WTMPH Water Thunder Mountain Pump House Public Service Water TUNNEL 164
FA-WPEPH Water Prospect Estates Pump House Public Service Water 1660 PROSPECT ESTATES 144
FA-WBS Water Booster Station Public Service Water FALL RIVER 120
FA-WGCGH Water Glacier Creek Gatehouse/Headworks Public Service Water 480 CARING 830
FA-WCWPCS Water Crystal Plant Chemical Storage Public Service Water HIGHWAY 7 2030
FA-WSCADATLMS Water SCADA Tank Level Monitoring Site Public Service Water 1001 PROSPECT MOUNTAIN 72
FA-WBTFB Water Big Thompson Filter Building Public Service Water 112 PROSPECT MOUNTAIN 112
FA-WKEPH Kiowa Estates Pump House Public Service Water 450 KIOWA 224
FA-WMSCADABS Water Municipal & SCADA Base Station Public Service Water PROSPECT MOUNTAIN 100
FA-WMLRWPS Water Mary's Lake Raw Water Pump Station Public Service Water MARYS LAKE
* indicates rental property
3237ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX A
Page 41
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 1
APPENDIX B – BUILDING DATA SHEETS
3238ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 42
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 2
3239ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 43
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 3
3240ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 44
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 4
3241ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 45
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 5
3242ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 46
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 6
3243ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 47
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 7
3244ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 48
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 8
32 45ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 49
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 9
3246ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 50
APPENDICIES
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B 10
3247ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX B
Page 51
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX C 6
APPENDIX C – TABLE OF EXPECTED
USEFUL LIFE BY COMPONENT
TYPICAL SYSTEM LIFE CYCLE DURATION
System and component life cycles used to determine cost model data for this project are based on the
average service life of as indicated in the Preventive Maintenance Guidebook: Best Practices to Maintain
Efficient and Sustainable Buildings published by the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA)
International. When life cycle information is not provided by BOMA, values have been assigned by the
Consultant Team using its best professional judgement.
32 48 Page 52
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX C 7
Table #1. Typical System Life Cycle Duration
SYSTEM LIFECYCLE
(In Years)
SYSTEM LIFECYCLE
(In Years)
Roofing Interior Finishes
Composite Shingle 20 Floors 15
Membrane (TPO/EPDM) 25 Walls 10
Metal Panels 25 Interior Doors 25
Modified Bitumen 20 Ceiling (ACT and Grid) 20
Standing Seam Metal 35 Ceiling (Painted Drywall) 20
Exterior Cladding
Stucco/EIFS 15
Siding 30
Masonry/Stone 50
Exterior Openings
Hollow Metal 25 Conveying Systems
Vinyl / Fiberglass 15 Elevators 35
Wood 20 Lifts
32 49 Page 53
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX C 8
SYSTEM LIFECYCLE
(In Years)
SYSTEM LIFECYCLE
(In Years)
HVAC Lighting
Cooling 25 Controls 15
Controls 20 Fixtures 20
Distribution 30 Wiring 30
Heating 30
Terminal and Packaged Units 15
Fire Protection
Fire Alarm Notification 15
Plumbing Fire Detection - Devices 15
Fixtures 30 Fire Detection - Wiring 30
Domestic Water Distribution 30 Fire Suppression - Sprinklers 30
Sanitary Waste 30 Fire Suppression - Standpipes 40
Smoke Detection 10
Electrical
Branch Wiring 30 Specialties and Equipment
Devices 20 Bathroom Accessories 20
Service and Distribution 40 Built-In Items 30
Institutional Equipment 40
32 50 Page 54
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 6
APPENDIX D – RESIDENT SURVEY
This appendix provides details about the resident survey used to gather resident input on various options
considered in the facilities master plan. The survey was launched on December 2, 2021 as a part of a public
meeting about the facilities master plan. The survey was advertised via the public meeting, flyers, and a
newspaper article. The survey collected 137 responses. The survey instrument is included below followed
by charts providing the responses to each question.
32 51 Page 55
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 7
SURVEY INSTRUMENT
Facilities Master Plan Community Survey
Introduction
The Town of Estes Park is developing a facilities master plan – a roadmap that will guide the management,
maintenance, and construction of Town facilities. As a part of this effort the consulting team has identified
four key findings:
●Town Hall has served the community well for many years but is beyond its useful life and investing
further does not make economic sense.
●Police services should not be in downtown because of safety concerns; its facility is inadequate.
●Other aging facilities are facing major repair/ renovation.
●There are limited opportunities to purchase land in the town, requiring flexibility in the plan.
Based on these findings, we would like input on the most important considerations for future town facilities.
Current behavior
1. How frequently do you visit Town Hall at 170 MacGregor Ave? [Choose one]
●Once a week or more
●More than once a month, but less than once a week
●About once a month
●A few times a year
●Once a year
●Less than once a year
2. What services do you typically use when visiting the Town Hall area? [Randomize – check all that
apply]
●Police Services
●Paying a utility bill
●Community Development (Planning and Building)
●Town Clerk
●Human Resources
●Utilities (non-billing)
●Public Works
●Town Administrator’s Office
●Town Board or Other Public Meetings
●Library
●Public Restrooms
●Parking to visit other downtown establishments
32 52 Page 56
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 8
3. How do you typically get to town hall? [Choose one]
●Walk
●Drive
●Bike
●Transit
●Para-transit (Via Mobility)
4. How did you learn about the Facilities Master Plan? [Choose one]
●I attended the presentation on 11/18
●I watched a recording of the presentation made on 11/18
●I saw the project flyer
●None of the above
Key Facilities Considerations
5. What are the top three most important considerations for the Town as it pursues future facility
investments? [Randomize and choose top 3]
●Easy access
●Convenient and ample parking
●Maximizing the services available in one location
●Creating a civic campus (co-location of Town services and other amenities)
●Keeping operating costs low
●Minimizing cost of building new facilities
●Maintaining a municipal presence in the downtown area
●Keeping as many services downtown as possible
●Moving services out of downtown
●Maximizing ability to access Town services online
●Minimizing service disruption while building new facilities
6. What Town Hall services are most important to have co-located (e.g., paying a bill and getting a
permit)? [Short answer]
32 53 Page 57
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 9
Testing scenarios
The facilities master plan will ultimately recommend one of three scenarios for locating services now housed
in Town Hall. Below we provide a basic overview of these three scenarios along with the pros and cons of
each scenario.
Concept 1 – New Town Hall Downtown
●New Police Services building is phase 1
●Town Hall is rebuilt downtown (no redevelopment of the site for other uses)
●Likely need additional parking at Town Hall to meet needs
●Town Services remain downtown
32 54 Page 58
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 10
Concept 2 – Consolidated Campus not Downtown
●New Police Services building is phase 1
●Town Hall is relocated outside of downtown, preferably near Police
●Site becomes available for redevelopment for other uses
●Parking required on new site
●Limited Town government presence in downtown
3255 Page 59
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 11
Concept 3 – Services are split between multiple locations
●New Police Services building is phase 1
●Some Town Hall services are relocated outside of downtown, preferably near Police
●Town Hall site available for partial redevelopment for other uses
●Parking required at both sites
●Town government presence remains in downtown
3256 Page 60
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 12
7. Which of the concepts do you like the most? [Choose one]
●Concept 1 – New Town Hall Downtown
●Concept 2 – Consolidated Campus not Downtown
●Concept 3 – Services are split between multiple locations
8. Why? [Short answer]
9. Which of the scenarios do you like the least? [Choose one]
●Concept 1 – New Town Hall Downtown
●Concept 2 – Consolidated Campus not Downtown
●Concept 3 – Services are split between multiple locations
10. Why? [Short answer]
Demographics
11. Do you live within the town limits of Estes Park? [Choose one]
●Yes, year-round
●Yes, part-time/seasonal
●No, I live outside town limits
12. Do you work or live downtown? [Check all that apply]
●Work
●Live
●None of the above
13. Are you Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino? [Choose one]
●No, not Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino
●Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino
14. What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) [Check
all that apply]
●American Indian or Alaskan Native
●Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander
●Black or African American
●White
●Other
3257 Page 61
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 13
15. In which category is your age? [Choose one]
●18-24 years
●25-34 years
●35-44 years
●45-54 years
●55-64 years
●65-74 years
●75 years or older
16. Do you have any additional comments about the Facilities Master Plan? [Short answer]
3258 Page 62
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 14
Q1. How often do you visit Town Hall?
A few times a year 40%
Once a week or more 18%
More than once a month, but less than once a week 12%
About once a month 12%
Less than once a year 7%
Don't use services at Town Hall 7%
Once a year 4%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q2. Top Services Used When Accessing Town Hall
Library 21%
Public Restrooms 14%
Parking to visit other downtown establishments 13%
Town Board or Other Public Meetings 11%
Town Clerk 10%
Paying a utility bill 9%
Police Services 5%
Public Works 5%
Town Administrator's Office 5%
Community Development (Planning and Building)5%
Human Resources 2%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q3. How do you get to Town Hall?
Drive 85%
Walk 15%
Bike 1%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q4. How did you learn about the FMP?
None of the above 30%
I watched a recording of the presentation made on 12/2 22%
I saw the project flyer 21%
Email 8%
I attended the presentation on 12/2 8%
Facebook 6%
Word of mouth 2%
Newspaper 2%
Total 100%
Percentage
3259 Page 63
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 15
Q5. Respondent Priorities
Convenient and ample parking 13%
Easy access 11%
Minimizing cost of building new facilities 11%
Maximizing ability to access Town services online 10%
Maximizing the services available in one location 10%
Maintaining a municipal presence in the downtown area 10%
Keeping operating costs low 9%
Moving services out of downtown 9%
Keeping as many services downtown as possible 7%
Creating a civic campus (co-location of Town services and other amenities)6%
Minimizing service disruption while building new facilities 5%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q6. What services are important to have co-located?
Utilities and permits 35%
Everything 25%
Everything but police 10%
Town clerk and utilities 7%
Don't know 6%
Utilities and library services 5%
Other 5%
Consolidate online 4%
Community meetings and library services 2%
Related services 1%
Town clerk, public meetings 1%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q7. Preferred Concept
Consolidated Campus not Downtown 44%
New Town Hall Downtown 37%
Services are split between multiple locations 19%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q8a. Why is "New Town Hall Downtown" your preferred option?
Central location 35%
Central location, but move police 25%
Sense of community 10%
No reason to change 7%
Better for environment 6%
Easy access to town officials 5%
Cost minimization 5%
Total 92%
Percentage
3260 Page 64
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 16
Q8b. Why is "Consolidated Campus not Downtown" your preferred option?
Easier to access 45%
Downtown is for tourists 20%
Opportunity to redevelop downtown 14%
Other 11%
Cost effective 9%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q8c. Why is "Split services" your preferred option?
Move police out of downtown 39%
Don't know 17%
Keep government downtown 17%
Cost effective 17%
Other 11%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q9: Least Preferred Concept
Services are split between multiple locations 42%
New Town Hall Downtown 32%
Consolidated Campus not Downtown 25%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q10a. Why is "New Town Hall Downtown" your least favorite?
Too much congestion 38%
Misses opportunity to redevelop downtown 22%
Downtown is for tourists 13%
Other 9%
Cost/Benefit 6%
Services have outgrown downtown 6%
Downtown property too valuable 3%
Doesn't solve current issues 3%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q10b. Why is "Consolidated Campus not Downtown" your least favorite?
Compromises town identity 40%
Inconvenient 32%
Cost 20%
Other 8%
Total 100%
Percentage
3261 Page 65
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 17
Q10c. Why is "Split services" your least favorite?
Confusing 36%
Inconvenient 26%
Inefficient 17%
Other 12%
Costly 10%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q11. Do you live in Estes Park?
Yes, year-round 60%
No, I live outside town limits 30%
Yes, part-time/seasonal 7%
None of the above/Prefer not to answer 3%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q12. Do you work or live in the Town of Estes Park?
None of the above/Prefer not to answer 68%
Work 19%
Live 8%
Both 6%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q13. Do you identify as Hispanic/Latino?
No, not Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino 65%
None of the above/Prefer not to answer 35%
Total 100%
Percentage
Q14. What is your race?
White 77%
None of the above/Prefer not to answer 22%
American Indian or Alaskan Native 1%
Total 100%
Percentage
3262 Page 66
ESTES PARK FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – APPENDIX D 18
Q15. What is your age?
55-64 years 31%
65-74 years 26%
45-54 years 15%
None of the above/Prefer not to answer 13%
35-44 years 7%
75 years or older 6%
25-34 years 3%
Total 100%
Percentage
3263 Page 67
ESTES PARK
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 1
Facilities Master Plan Team
•Jon Landkamer -Town Facilities Manager
•Chief Wes Kufeld -Town Chief of Police
•Kate Rusch -TOEP Public Information Officer
•Suzanna Simpson -TOEP Management Analyst
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
•Consultants-Carol Adams, StudioTerra; Jeff Dawson and Morgan Daly,
Studio Architecture; Kevin Williams, BBC Research & Consulting
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE Snm10TERRA ■
BBC
RESEARCH& CONSULTING
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 2
Attachment 2
Page 68
Tonight's Agenda: D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
•:•
•:•
•:•
.... �
.... � .... �
Introduction to the FMP
Key findings
Options
Financing Considerations
Recommendations/Next Steps
Questions & Comments
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 3
What is a Facilities Master Plan? D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
A roadmap for the management and development of TOEP facilities,
which should be guided by meeting the mission of the Town:
"provide high-quality, reliable services for the
benefit of our residents, guests and employees, while
being good stewards of public resources
and our natural setting"
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 4
Page 69
Key Findings
❖Town Hall has served the community well for many years,
but it is beyond its useful life and additional investment in
the building no longer makes economic sense.
❖Police Department spaces in Town Hall are inadequate
in many ways. A new Police Department facility is crucial to
ensure the safety of the community, officers, and
detainees. The FMP recommends the Town move forward
with the planning and construction of a new Police
Department facility outside of Downtown.
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 s
Key Findings
❖Some Downtown presence for the Town is important to many in
the community.
❖Other facilities such as Power and Communications -Dekker
building, Fleet Services, and Streets Services are in need of
repair or renovation. Additional study is needed to adequately
define the cost and scope of repairs and upgrades for other
facilities.
❖There are limited land opportunities in Estes Park for new and
relocated facilities, requiring flexibility in the plan. The Town will
need to capitalize on new opportunities, and the FMP provides a
framework to assist Town leaders with decision-making when
options arise.
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 6
Page 70
Police Department and Town Hall Options D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
❖The plan has identified three potential options to address the Town's future
facility's needs.
❖The options were developed to maximize flexibility so that as land becomes
available, the Town can be opportunistic and implement the option that fits best.
❖All three options include a relocated police station that is larger than the
department's existing space in Town Hall.
❖The primary difference between the three options is the location of other Town Hall
services and whether they are consolidated outside of Downtown at a site to be
identified in the future or dispersed between Downtown and another site.
Option 1
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 7
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
A New Town Hall Downtown:
New Police Services Building is Phase 1
Town Hall is rebuilt downtown, and Town services remain downtown
No redevelopment of Town Hall site for other uses
Likely need additional parking at Town Hall to meet needs
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 8
Page 71
Option 2 D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Services Split Between Several Locations:
New Police Services Building is Phase 1
Some Town Hall services are relocated, preferably near Police
Town Hall site available for partial redevelopment for other uses
Adequate parking required at both sites
Some Town government presence remains in downtown
Option 3
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 9
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
A Consolidated Campus Outside of Downtown:
New Police Services building is Phase 1
Town Hall is relocated outside of downtown, preferably near Police
Town Hall site available for redevelopment
Limited Town government presence in downtown
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 10
Page 72
Public Meeting and Survey
Public Meeting -December 2, 2021
Conducted via Zoom with more than 30 participants
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Most people who commented were supportive of moving police services and many
were supportive of moving more town services. Many individuals expressed
support for the Library and a continued Town presence in the downtown area
Commenters expressed enthusiasm for using the Town Hall property to help
address housing affordability
Meeting was recorded for future viewing by community members
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 11
Public Meeting and Survey D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Community Survey (137 responses)
o Participation encouraged at the meeting, through social media, and on local
news sites
o Moving all Town services was the most popular option, splitting was the least
o Most important considerations:
Parking (39%)
Keeping costs low (32%)
Easy access (32%)
Maximizing online services (29%)
Maintaining a presence downtown (29%)
Maximizing services in one location (28%)
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 12
Page 73
Page 74
Phase 2 Roadmap D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Decision: Relocate
some or all of
Town Hall Services
Yes
No
I
Decision:
Remodel existing
facility?
-
Decision:
Sell Town Hall' Site?
Complete complex
renovations and
construct parking
structure
Build new facility
with appropriate
parking
7
�
Sell land
Determine
alternate use
(e.g. workforce
housing)
Select management
or procurement
method (e.g. public
private partnership)
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 15
Key Initiatives D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
1 ✓1 Board considers adoption on March 8, 2022
(S) Plan and budget for a new police facility
I� Take care of what we have
Identify land acquisition opportunities
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 16
Page 75
Thank you I
Questions or Comments?
� �----
D TOWNOF ESTES PARK
COLORADO
Town Board Study Session: February 22, 2022 17
Page 76
TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION
MEETING
February 22, 2022
Northern Water Inclusion Process.
No packet material will be provided for
this item.
Page 77
Page 78
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S OFFICE Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Jason Damweber, Assistant Town Administrator/Staff Liaison to the
Environmental Sustainability Task Force
Date: February 22, 2022
RE: Environmental Sustainability Task Force Recommendations
Purpose of Study Session Item:
The purpose of this Study Session is to provide the Town Board with an opportunity to
discuss the Environmental Sustainability Task Force Report, which was presented to
the Town Board at its February 8 meeting.
Town Board Direction Requested:
Staff requests direction from the Town Board regarding next steps pertaining to the
recommendations in the Task Force’s report.
Present Situation:
The Town Board created the ad-hoc Environmental Sustainability Task Force (ESTF)
through Resolution 55-21 on June 22, 2021. The stated purpose of the ESTF was to
develop recommendations for the Town Board regarding the Town’s role in initiatives,
strategies and tactics to advance environmental sustainability. A report with the Task
Force’s recommendations was presented to the Town Board on February 8.
Proposal:
Discuss the Environmental Sustainability Task Force report and provide direction
regarding any specific recommendations the Town Board would like staff to begin work
on this year. Staff proposes that longer term and/or more labor and resource intensive
recommendations be further discussed and considered later this year during the Town
Board’s strategic planning process. That will enable us to plan and budget for carrying
out recommendations the Board would like to see implemented.
Advantages:
Evaluating and implementing strategies based on the ESTF recommendations will
advance the cause of environmental stewardship.
Page 79
Disadvantages:
Implementing strategies will require shifting existing job responsibilities and/or adding
staff and other resources in order to carry them out.
Financial/Resource Impact:
To be determined.
Level of Public Interest:
High
Attachment:
1) Environmental Sustainability Task Force Report
Page 80
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Attachment 1
Page 81
Environmental Sustainability Task Force
Final Report
Respectfully Submitted to the Town Board
by the Appointed Members of the
Environmental Sustainability Task Force
Gordon MacAlpine, Chairperson
Thomas Keck, Vice-Chairperson
Thomas Beck
David Diggs
Patricia Donahue
William Fryer
Lisa Hutchins
Douglas Sacarto
Barbara Werner
January 31, 2022
Page 82
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Contents
Preface and Acknowledgments, iii
Sustainable Energy, 1
Opportunities to reduce GHG pollution through adoption of renewable energy sources, energy
efficiency in buildings, electric vehicles and multi-modal transportation, and outdoor
equipment electrification. Recommendations 1-20 (20)
Prepared by:
•Thomas Beck
•William Fryer
•Thomas Keck
•Gordon MacAlpine
Solid Waste Management, 14
Policies and actions to reduce environmental contamination and GHG pollution due to solid
waste disposal in landfills: through community-wide source reduction, increased recycling, and
composting of organic waste. Recommendations 21-43 (23)
Prepared by:
•Patricia Donahue
•Lisa Hutchins
•Barbara Werner
Institutional Factors for Sustainability, 21
Sustainability policies and programs in Town operations; Town planning, budgeting, and capital
improvements; and delivery of Town services. These institutional reforms concern the entire
range of sustainability best practices, as outlined in Appendix 5. Recommendations 44-51 (8)
Prepared by:
•David Diggs
•Douglas Sacarto
Endnotes, 30
Appendices (separate documents)
1.ESTF Public Engagement
2.Lakes Computation
3.Colorado Plastic Pollution Reduction Act (HB 21-1162)
4.Strategy for Early Implementation of Colorado Plastic Pollution Reduction Act
5.American Planning Association Sustainability Scorecard
Page 83
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Preface and Acknowledgments
The Estes Park Town Board of Trustees created the Environmental Sustainability Ad -Hoc Task
Force (ESTF) under Town Policy 102 through Resolution 55 -21 on June 22, 2021, to provide a
detailed exploration and evaluation of options for Town involvement in env ironmental
sustainability initiatives. Its scope is limited to developing recommendations for the Town
Board regarding the Town’s role in initiatives, strategies, and tactics to advance
environmental sustainability, with those recommended strategies and ta ctics having
proposed timelines for implementation.
The Town Board established "Public Safety, Health, and Environment" as Outcome Areas in
the 2021 and 2022 Strategic Plans. It is committed to promoting policies that encourage
environmental stewardship and making data -driven decisions to improve and protect the
quality of the environment in the Town and surrounding areas, as well as evaluating ways
that the Town can advance the cause of environmental sustainability.
The ESTF consisted of nine members appointed by the Town Board, with support from the
Assistant Town Administrator. The group met regularly (usually virtually) every other
Tuesday, beginning on August 17, 2021. All meetings were open to the public, with
supporting materials made av ailable in advance by the Town Clerk’s Office.
Broad public input was solicited in various ways, including widely noticed opportunities to
submit comments on the Town’s ESTF web page, two public listening sessions held on
October 14 and November 16, and an online survey with responses from 221 residents and 22
commercial businesses. Detailed results from all public engagement processes are contained
in Appendix 1 of this report.
The scope of environmental sustainability is broad, and with a limited timefram e and
resources the task force divided into three subgroups to work in parallel on specific
recommendations for the Town to p romote environmental sustainability and resiliency, with
particular focus on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution to combat clim ate change—the
most pressing environmental threat of our time.
The report's recommendations range from straightforward and immediate to complex and
long-term actions. Each report section was researched and written by the subgroup
members; sections and reco mmendations are not listed in a prioritized order:
Sustainable Energy—The report's first section spotlights many opportunities to reduce
GHG pollution through adoption of renewable energy sources, energy efficiency in
buildings, electric vehicles and multi-mobility, and outdoor equipment electrification.
(Thomas Beck, William Fryer, Thomas Keck, Gordon MacAlpine )
Solid Waste Management —The second section outlines a large catalog of policies and
actions for the Town to reduce environmental contamination and GHG pollution due
to solid waste disposal in landfills: through community -wide source reduction,
increased recycling, and composting of organic waste. (Patricia Donahue, Lisa
Hutchins, Barbara Werner)
Page 84
Preface and Acknowledgments iv
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Institutional Factors—The last section addresses sustainability policies and programs
in Town operations; Town planning, budgeting, and capital improvements; and
delivery of Town services. These institutional reforms concern the entire range of
sustainability best practices. (David Diggs, Douglas Sacarto)
There are many environmental challenges not explicit ly discussed in this report that require
additional actions by our community --wildfire, flooding, threats to water supplies and air
quality, loss of wildlife corridors, noise and light pollution, invasive plant species, and more,
where the challenges often are becoming more extreme due to climate change. Some of
these may be in the purview of other governmental organizations. A comprehensive catalog
of sustainability concerns and ongoing efforts to promote sustainability would provide a basis
for coordination and cooperation . The task force calls respectfully on the Town Board to
address t hese problems with an ongoing strategy and practices for environmental
sustainability.
The Environmental Sustainability Task Force expresses its sincere gratitude to Jason
Damweber, Assistant Town Administrator, who provided the essential administrative support
for the task force, and whose experience and judgment benefitted every stage of our work.
Some individuals made special efforts to advance the work of the task force, and we wish to
acknowledge them personally: Matt Allen, Cathy Alper, Bunny Beers, Reuben Bergsten, Chris
Bieker, Sarah Clark, Marina Connors, Christy Crosser, Kimberly Disney, James Duell, Kara
Franker, Jessica Garner, Beth Headley, Randy Hunt, Greg Muhonen, Duane Penney, Rex
Poggenpohl, Alice Reuman, Gary Rusu, Brian Schaffer, Don Sellers, Judi Smith, Vanessa
Solesbee, Liz Spalding, and Jeff Woeber.
The task force also thanks each person who attended a taskforce meeting or listening session,
responded to a survey, or submitted comments. Your ideas and recommendations have
helped importantly to identify problems, opportunities, and priorities in strengthening the
sustainability of our community.
Cover background photo courtesy of Visit Estes Park.
Page 85
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Sustainable Energy
Introduction
Environmental sustainability requires steep and rapid reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
which are the major causes of global warming and climate change. As illustrated in the left diagram
below, burning of coal and gas has caused a rapid and un precedented rise in atmospheric CO2 levels,
which are much higher than in the past 800,000 years. The vertical axes represent temperature
changes on the left and CO2 in parts per million (ppm) on the right. The measurements were made
using oxygen isotopes and CO2 in ice cores, as well as direct methods. The CO2 level in 2021 reached
420 ppm, as compared with pre -industrial levels near 270 ppm.
Credit: World Economic Forum 2018 Credit: Scott Denning 2020
The roughly periodic atmospheric CO2 fluctuations in the past are understood as resulting from
Earth's orbital characteristics (Milankovitch cycles) coupled with the natural carbon cycle. Relative
temperature fluctuations directly mirrored the CO2, with low levels representing past "glacial periods"
(also called ice ages) and high levels representing warmer "interglacial periods." We are currently in
an interglacial period, and our fossil fuel burning is disrupting the natural functioning of the planet.
Trends in tropospheric and stratospheric temperatures, measured using satellites, demonstrate
conclusively that the increasing CO2 and other increasing greenhouse g ases are responsible for
currently rising global temperatures.
The right diagram above (by Scott Denning, Monfort Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado
State University) illustrates projected global temperature increases, compared with pre -industrial
levels, from climate models. The shaded area denotes 1.5 –2.0 degrees Celsius (2.7-3.6 deg. F), above
which effects of climate change will become so catastrophic that vulnerable countries and many
people will not survive. The red line projects the situation for continued, business-as-usual carbon
burning; the orange line indicates dramatic improvement if electricity were no longer derived from
fossil fuels; the light green line shows even more improvement for proposed ambitious GHG emission
reductions world-wide; but only the dark green line for prompt cessation of all fossil fuel burning stays
below 2 deg. C. If we were to stop burning carbon right now, the temperature would continue to rise
for a decade or more, flatten out, and then decline. That represents the best (perhaps only) hope for
future generations.
Page 86
Sustainable Energy 2
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Greenhouse gas emissions in Fort Collins, Larimer County, and Colorado result primarily from
electricity generation, buildings with natural gas, and internal combustion engines. Fort Collins and
Larimer County monitor CO2 emissions, and their most recent reports show percentages indicated on
the left above. In Fort Collins, electric energy at 46% is the worst offender.1 It combines with natural
gas use and travel to account for roughly 90% of emissions. In Larimer Count y, vehicles and buildings
(with electricity and natural gas) account for 97% of emissions.2 The right-hand diagram from the new
draft Colorado GHG Metrics Dashboard indicates that the largest con tributors to Colorado’s GHG
emissions are electricity generation, transportation, and buildings.3 Estes Park’s Strategic Plan
includes adding more renewable energy generation and storage for residential and public buildings, as
well as improving building efficiency and design, along with cleaner transportation.
Climate models for Estes Park and vicinity are consistent with measured temperatures here having
increased by about 2 deg. F since the 1980s.4 The same models project roughly an additional 3 deg. F
increase during the next 25-30 years, with associated impacts on soil moisture, flora, fire, smoke, and
water. All of this will affect our quality of life and tourism. As recent fires testify, the situation is
already dire. How bad it will get is up to us. With fossil -fueled inertia and general lack of political will,
municipalities like Estes Park must play a role if global temperatures are to be held close to 1.5 -2.0
deg. C. In this section of the report we make recommendations for reducing our GHG emissions from
electricity, buildings, and engines.
Electric Energy
The Sun’s energy striking the Earth is more than 10,000 times the total energy used by humanity.
Under the Infrastructure Key Outcome Area in the 2022 Estes Park Strategic Plan, Objective 3.A.1.
states: "Consider implementing the recommendations of the Environmental Sustainability Task Force
to support renewable energy and storage sources for use by the Town and by individual residents."
Also, "solar incentives" have been identified in Planning Commission discussions as important issues
to be addressed prior to completion of the new Comprehensive Pl an. Such distributed energy
generation should be emphasized for sustainability, economics, and resiliency, the latter in case there
are problems with the primary grid as has been happening in California, Texas, and Louisiana.
Page 87
Sustainable Energy 3
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Residential Solar Generation
According to a report published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), roughly 75% of
residential structures in Estes Park may be suitable for solar energy generation .5 As of Nov. 10, 2021,
only 1.47% of electric services in the Estes Park Power and Communications service area had solar or
wind net-metered systems (158 net-meters out of 10,742 registered electric meters). There are
excellent opportunities for improving our sustainability and resiliency by adding more clean solar
generation, which is significantly under -utilized here.
Ways of encouraging and facilitating solar generation on residences, as well as bringing desirable
recognition to Estes Park, could include the advantages of becoming a solar “high achieving
community” under the auspices of an organization like the Colorado Solar & Storage Association 6 or
the Solsmart program.7 Estes Park could also streamline permitting processes, thereby reducing so -
called soft costs, by adopting available software packages like NREL’s SolarAPP+ or Solsmart’s similar
application, which is already being successfully employed in 29 other Colorado communities. For
example, Steamboat Springs significantly increased residential solar generation by attaining a
Solsmart “silver” designation, while reducing their solar permitting fee to $0 and limiting the
permitting process to five working days. In addition, if Solar United Neighbors were to select Estes
Park for a “solar co -op” with organized buying power,8 that opportunity for residents should be
supported by the Town.
According to NREL, the costs for residential solar installations declined an additional factor of roughly
three over the past 10 years, while solar panels have become more efficient and r eliable.9
Furthermore, 26% federal tax incentives have been extended through 2022, and low -cost loans are
available through the State of Colorado. The RENU program is a statewide residential loan program
sponsored by the Colorado Energy Office in partnership with Elevations Credit Union. It makes home
energy upgrades affordable by offering low -cost, long-term financing for energy efficiency and
renewable energy improvements. With existing incentives, installed and operating first -rate
residential 5 -6 kW photovoltaic systems may now cost in the neighborhood of $12,000-$13,000. It
would also serve our sustainability goals if Estes Park were to follow examples set by Fort Collins,
Nederland, and Boulder County by making available $1 ,000 solar installation grants for those with
qualifying financial status.
Recommendation #1: Educate the public about solar opportunities on residential buildings,
and encourage solar development by becoming a solar high achieving community and adopting
programs for reducing soft costs. Offer local incentives for those with qualifyin g financial status.
Recommended timeline: 2022 -2023/ongoing.
Commercial Solar Generation
On Nov. 10, 2021, there were only eight commercial net-metered systems in the area serviced by
Estes Park Power and Communications. This is a small fraction of the many businesses that could
benefit from cleaner, less expensive energy, along with associated good will of customers. Other
destination communities like Breckenridge and Durango give special recognition to establishments
deriving a significant fraction of their electric energy from the Sun.
Routt County also participates in the State of Colorado’s C-PACE program, which enables owners of
commercial and industrial buildings to finance up to 100% of eligible energy efficiency, renewable
energy, and water conservation improvements. Another related grant, called the MainStreet Open for
Page 88
Sustainable Energy 4
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Business Grant, is funded by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) as a response to helping
local businesses recover from COVID -19 and transition to greener energy.
Recommendation #2: Provide information to businesses about solar generation and funding
opportunities. Also, give recognition to solar -generating business establishments, with displayable
certification placards. Recommended timeline: 2022-2023/ongoing.
Residential or Commercial Battery Storage
Energy storage batteries associated with residential or comme rcial buildings can be valuable for
making energy available during what would otherwise be electricity interruptions. In addition, they
can shift excess energy from midday, when there may be more solar generation, to late afternoon or
evening when there is peak energy use. In the latter case, “time -of-use” electricity rates may make
utility-provided energy cost significantly more. Multiple batteries can also be beneficially accessed by
a utility, with permission of the owners, and used as a microgrid. Micro grids are gaining favor for
providing localized emergency energy or for shifting of available energy to level -out or stabilize the
main power grid.10 The solar 26% tax incentive applies to battery purchases, as long as they are used
for storing solar energy.
Battery storage makes the most sense for three scenarios: 1) for areas where there may be primary
grid electricity interruptions ; 2) for regions with mandatory time -of-use rates; and 3) for customers
with utilities that significantly subsidize battery costs in exchange for potential access to the batteries.
Examples of utilities that cooperate with customers on beneficial battery access and use include
Green Mountain Power in Vermont and Holy Cross Energy in Colorado.
Recommendation #3: Provide information on battery storage to all electricity customers. If
mandatory time-of-use rates go into effect, then revisit this issue. Encourage electricity providers to
consider the potential benefits of subsidizing residential or commercial batterie s for grid resilience.
Recommended timeline: 2022 -2023.
Solar Generation on Public Buildings and Land
Estes Park has Town-owned and operated buildings or structures that could beneficially accommodate
significant amounts of solar generation. Examples inclu de the Event Center, the Pavilion, the Museum
Annex, the Water Division facility on Fish Creek Road, the Visitor Center, and the Visitor Center
Parking Garage. In the cases of the Event Center and the Pavilion, considering azimuth orientations of
both sides of the buildings, roof slopes, roof areas, and using NREL’s solar potential analysis program ,
solar installations on those two buildings could generate as much as 800,000 kWh of energy over the
course of a year. That would supply about 100 homes using an average of 8,000 kWh per year.
With its primary roof orientation slanted toward the south an d slightly west (ideal for solar generation
during prime-time usage), the Parking Garage is an outstanding opportunity for solar generation as
well as sustainability recognition by visitors. If the available upper story space were equipped with
raised solar panels, the energy generation could be of order 560,000 kWh per year, which could
provide energy for 70 homes using 8,000 kWh per year.
A question that comes up often is "Why doesn’t Estes Park have a shared community solar garden?"
That was considered several years ago on a website called “EVSolarGarden”, with the conclusion that
Estes Park does not have necessary available land space. Having solar panels on public buildings or
Page 89
Sustainable Energy 5
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
structures could actually function in a similar manner like a shared solar garden. In addition,
community solar gardens are being successfully deployed on closed landfills that do not serve any
other purpose.11 A highly regarded company called Sandbox Solar in Fort Collins has previously
pointed out the potential for a beneficial solar garden that could power 100 homes at the closed
landfill site on Elm Road.
With changes to the Organic Contract between the Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) and the
municipalities it serves, a customer or a town can contract with a third party for installation of solar
facilities and purchase power from that third party. A variation of this cou ld be Utility Owned
Distributed Solar (UODS), which has been successfully employed by the largest public utility in the
country, CPS Energy in San Antonio. UODS is especially suitable for applications with larger arrays on
public buildings, parking structu res, or landfills. An important advantage would be having energy
produced locally, as opposed to being dependent completely on a distant source. In this regard, the
PRPA has recently issued a Request for Proposals (RFP), a portion of which calls for the creation of up
to 250 MW of new solar generating capacity. With a solar “capacity factor” of 0.25 (the useful fraction
of peak capacity), this would result in about 62.5 MW of average available power or about 550,000
MWh of available energy per year. The RFP specifically solicits proposals for distributed-energy solar
installations and storage in the owner communities . Since the total energy for the specific projects
mentioned above would be only about 2,120 MWh per year, there are numerous opportunities here.
For projects like those discussed in this section , associated generation and storage could function as
back-up microgrids in the event of disruption or a need for smoothing of the main grid. In that regard,
it is noted that recently-introduced bi-partisan Colorado House Bill HB22-1013 (“Microgrids for
Community Resilience Grant Program”) specifically targets municipal utilities and remote communities
like Estes Park. It is an integral part of efforts to establish a smarter, safer, and more reliable grid.
Recommendation #4: Request proposal information in a timely fashion and give strong
encouragement for PRPA RFP proposals for solar generation and battery storage involving our public
buildings and parking structure, as well as the unused landfill on Elm Road. The RFP proposals are due
by February 18, 2022, with projects selected in 2022, so timing is critical. Also, investigate state-
supported opportunities for establishing resilience microgrids in Estes Park. Recommended timeline:
2022/as soon as possible.
Solar Generation on Schools
As another example of how solar generation can be advantageous, more than 7 ,000 schools across
the country are benefitting from reliability and cost savings by hosting solar facilities, including
schools in Glenwood Springs and Carbondale .12 Furthermore, a report in EcoWatch illustrates how a
school district in Arkansas was able to provide substantial raises to teachers by going solar.
Fortuitously, some of the Estes Park schools have ideal southwest -facing roof space, angled at roughly
20 degrees. Solar facilities can also be advantageously installed on our schools’ flat roofs.
Two groups of local high school students and their instructors, supported by the Estes Park Education
Foundation, are currently considering a “feasibility study” for putting solar generation on Estes P ark
school buildings. In addition to possibly facilitating cleaner, more sustainable and less expensive
energy, the students will learn about solar technology and terminology.
Page 90
Sustainable Energy 6
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Financial support may be available for school projects. The City of Steamboat S prings and its Routt
and Moffat County partners received a $2.1 million grant award from the Colorado Department of
Local Affairs Energy Impact Fund for regional solar projects on government facilities as well as for the
Moffat County School District.
Recommendation #5: Although the Estes Park schools are not included in Town governance, we
recommend that their sustainability efforts be encouraged and supported as much as possible.
Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
Wind Energy Generation
Another abundant source of renewable energy for residential or commercial use is wind power.
Whereas people generally envision “horizontal -axis” wind turbines with propellers, “vertical axis”
turbines are becoming more common, especially for residential use.13 They are less conspicuous,
rotate more slowly, and can generate at lower wind speeds. As with solar panels, there are options for
different amounts of power generation; and the electricity can be used, stored in a battery, or net-
metered to function in coordination with the local utility. Current regulations for wind power
generators may be found in the Estes Park Development Code, Chapter 5, Paragraph 5.2.B.2.g. These
regulations do not adequately take into consideration vertical axis wind generators.
Recommendation #6: Reconsider the Development Code regulations for wind generators, taking into
consideration vertical axis configurations. Recommended timeline: 2022-2024.
Use of Existing Generating Stations and Lakes for Emergency Power and Storage
Colorado communities like Gunnison are taking advantage of local lakes for hydropower .14 In that
regard, several informed citizens have proposed utilizing stored or pumped energy potential in our
local lakes. In 2021, a representative for the Western Area Power Administration acknowledged the
Estes Power Plant on Lake Estes as a viable back -up electricity resource if there is an interruption
during future replacement of power lines from the Front Range to Estes Park. Correspondingly, it is
also reasonable to consider locally generated hydropower as a back -up resource in case the regional
grid is interrupted by natural disaster s, which may be increasingly common with climate change.
There are two Estes Valley hydroelectri c power plants, at Lake Estes and Mary’s Lake. Characteristics
of the Estes-Power-Plant: installed generation capacity = 45,000 kW (three 15 MW turbines); plant
factor = 26.2 % (ratio of average power load to generation capacity, so average operation is about a
fourth of rated capacity). Characteristics of the Mary’s-Lake-Power-Plant: installed generation
capacity = 8,100 kW (one 8.1 MW turbine); plant factor = 58 %. Mary’s Lake and Lake Estes constitute
part of the Colorado-Big-Thompson-Project. Water from Grand Lake passes through the Alva A dams
Tunnel to Mary’s Lake. Then, the Prospect Mountain Conduit and Tunnel carry water from Mary’s
Lake to the Estes Power Plant penstocks. After entering Lake Estes, the water flows further down for
multiple uses along the Front Range.
Either of the above generation resources could provide emergency power if necessary. As an example,
the Sustainable Energy subgroup members considered the Estes Power Plant utilizing Mary’s Lake
water. We can ask how much water needs to pass through the Es tes Plant turbines in order to
generate 10 MWh of energy (enough to power more than 400 average homes for a day). This may be
compared with the Mary’s Lake surface area in order to estimate how much that lake level might drop
Page 91
Sustainable Energy 7
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
in order to supply the emergen cy energy. The answer is about 6 inches, which could be compensated
by adding water from Grand Lake. See Appendix #2 for Lakes-Computation physics and math details.
This is just one example of how emergency energy could be produced and utilized if necessary. The
Mary’s Lake Power Plant could also provide additional emergency generation with water coming
directly through the Adams tunnel from Grand Lake. Furthermore, it ma y be possible to modify
existing facilities to pump Lake Estes water, back through the penstocks and the Prospect Tunnel, to
Mary’s Lake. This could provide storage of energy during peak power production, for later release to
the Estes Power Plant during peak power load. Estes Park should consider significant resiliency
opportunities involving existing lake and generation facilities.
Recommendation #7: Arrange with our local utility to have preparations in place for using water in
Mary’s Lake to provide up to 10 MWh of electric energy in case of emergency. This can be done in
coordination with the Western Area Power Association when the new electric lines are being brought
up from the Loveland area, and the old lines are being removed. Also, investigate the use of Lake
Estes and Mary’s Lake for pumped energy storage. Recommended timeline: 2022-2024.
Building Sustainability
As indicated in the GHG emission diagrams above, buildings and related uses of natural gas rank
among the top two or three GHG emitters i n Fort Collins, Larimer County, and the State of Colorado.
This is a situation that can be substantially improved by educating the public on how to optimize
building energy use practices, by facilitating energy audits and making existing buildings more ene rgy
efficient, and by requiring or incentivizing sustainable practices in new or remodeling construction.
Behavioral Energy -Saving Practices and Improved Energy Efficiency in Existing
Buildings
According to the Colorado State University (CSU) Extension, beneficial behavior and making a house
more energy efficient can reduce energy bills and associated emissions by upwards of 20 -30%. This
may include simple things like turning off electrical appliances when not in use, employing LED
lighting, dialing down the heating temperature in winter or dialing up the cooling temperature in
summer, and washing clothes in cold water. The above CS U reference contains a relatively short,
useful energy-saving checklist for homeowners, and a more comprehensive list has been made
available by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory .
Initial retrofitting steps toward significantly improving sustainability in existing buildings should
involve building energy audits or assessments . In that regard, a program called “Efficiency Works” is a
collaboration between the Platte River Power Authority and the utility departments of its four owner
municipalities. Funded by each participating utility for its respective customers, services include
affordable home energy assessments (various levels, $60 cost for in -person assessments) and
information on available rebates for products and retrofits (eligibility criteria apply).
Homeowners can begin the process by contacting a call center in Utah, where by scheduling
arrangements can be made to have an auditing crew travel from Fort Collins, Loveland or Longmont.
The process would be more convenient and sustainable if someone here in Estes Park were available
to carry out energy audits. The trained auditors follow standard procedures like putting a blower fan
in the front door and depressurizing the house , so air comes into the house through any leaks around
Page 92
Sustainable Energy 8
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
windows, electric outlets, or a fireplace. Then the auditors can use an infrared camera to document
temperature anomalies showing locations of potentially wasteful leaks. Other important procedures
can include checking for insulation around heating pipes or ducts. The auditors prepare a report which
homeowners may use for their own modifications or for co nsulting with associated businesses. Once
an audit takes place, a homeowner can access a list of approved Efficiency Works consulting
businesses in places like Fort Collins, Loveland, or Longmont, whereby the resident may qualify for
rebates that may not be available in Estes Park. Unfortunately, there are currently no registered
Efficiency Works consultants in Estes Park, and these valuable opportunities are under -utilized here.
Recommendation #8:
A.Ask a local group, such as students in the high school sustainability class, to take ideas from existing
lists of home energy -saving practices and prepare a short energy -use pamphlet, which the Town could
make widely available to residents, either in print or electronic format.
B.To increase the effectiveness of Efficiency Works for customers of Estes Park Power and
Communications (EPPC), the Town should hire or designate and train an employee of EPPC with
expertise in energy efficiency . This individual would be compensated from EPPC enterprise funds.
Duties would include:
(1) promoting Efficiency Works by educating customers about the program and available rebates.
(2) Carrying out energy audits or inspections as requested by EPPC cust omers.
(3) Recruiting and incentivizing local contractors to take part in the Efficiency Works program.
Recommended timeline: 2022 -2023.
New Building Construction
Whereas behavioral practices and retrofitting an existing building can save considerable amounts of
energy, money, and pollution, new building construction or remodeling is also very important. As
indicated in the Estes Park Adopted Building Codes and Local Amendments , Estes Park has adopted a
number of widely recognized building codes, like the International Building Code, the International
Residential Code, and the International Energy Conservation Code. These codes, as amended, are well
regarded, but there is considerable room for improvement. The Town of Basalt, in coordination with
Holy Cross Energy, has been emplo ying highly sustainable, high -performance, all-renewable-electric
building practices15; and Estes Park in coordination with our utility and PRPA should consider similar
initiatives. Furthermore, Fort Collins has been working with three residential projects that are
exploring the intersection between “Zero Energy Ready Home” efficiency standards, solar
generation/storage, and distributed energy resource management systems (DERMS) in very creative
ways.16
Recommendation #9: The Estes Park Community Development Department in coordination with the
Planning Commission and the Town Board should require or incentivize the following construction
practices. Recommended timeline: 2022 -2024.
This section includes practices that are also important for retrofitting existing buildings to make them
more energy efficient.
1.Sustainable, high-performance houses built here should be required to have the highest
standards for tight envelopes, insulation, windows and doors. Well-sealed houses will take
optimal advantage of the best energy -efficient heating or cooling practices, while fresh, healthy
Page 93
Sustainable Energy 9
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
air in the living environment is provided by “energy recovery ventilators.” The latter use
“waste” exhaust air to warm incoming “make -up” air by utilizing air -to-air heat exchangers.
What are other cities and states doing to promote sustainability in the built environment? A
search of incentives revealed this interesting resource – dsireusa.org – which is funded by the
US Department of Energy. Denver is supporting these much -needed affordable housing and
sustainable built projects by providing incentives that could include a fee reduction, an
enhanced site development plan process which will reduce the overall number of required
submittals and associated review cycles, and dedi cated resources to expedite reviews of
construction plans.17
Locally, how do we encourage the use of more efficient, innovative products in new homes and
remodels? Incentives such as reduced permit fees and rebates on efficient water heaters and
other appliances can be a good start. We need to make it as easy and affordable as possible for
homeowners, architects, designers, and builders to choose sustainable materials, lighting,
appliances, and finishes in new and remodel projects.
2.All new houses should take advantage of beneficial electrification and eliminate new gas
hookups. Building sustainable homes means moving away from appliances and equipment that
would otherwise burn natural gas, and installing cleaner and higher -efficiency electric
appliances. All-electric homes are healthier, safer environments, and they significantly reduce
environmental harm if the electricity is derived from clean, renewable sources like solar or
wind.18 Cities in California have been leading the way toward limiting or barring new gas
facilities, and more recently Denver19 and New York City20 are phasing out or banning new gas
hookups.
3.New construction should involve modern, highly efficient heat pump technology for heating
homes during the winter and cooling during the summer .21 Heat pumps have improved
dramatically in recent years in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, cost, and availability.22 They
provide more energy -efficient heating than any sort of direct, conventional method because
they function by extracting heat from the environment (a ir, ground, or water) and moving it
into the desired space, rather than creating heat from fuel. By reversing the operating process,
the same equipment provides cooling, thereby reducing the reason for having energy -wasteful
air conditioning. Air-source heat pump systems can transfer two to five times more thermal
energy than they consume in electrical energy, for a “coefficient of performance” (COP) of two
to five. The equipment optimized for cold climates like the Estes Valley, can provide heat down
to temperatures of -20 F (with somewhat lower efficiency).23 The most affordable heat pumps
are air source, and they are becoming very popular in Colorado. The homes in the Basal t Vista
development use only air-source heat pumps for heating water as well as heating the indoor
environment. Larger heat pumps can be used for entire houses, and mini -split ductless window
units can be added to heat or cool individual or multiple rooms .24 Ground or water-source heat
pumps are more expensive, but they can serve multiple homes.
Regarding another alternative to air conditioning, a new special white paint absorbs less heat
than it reflects. A roof surface coated with this paint can be cooled below the surrounding
temperature without consuming power. Information about developments like this should be
made available locally.
Page 94
Sustainable Energy 10
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
4.All new homes should take advantage of clean renewable energy as much as practical. They
should make use of opportunities for passive solar heating, and they should be ready for solar
PV installation and EV chargers with electrical pre-wiring or electric capacity.
5.All new construction should be equipped with at least a 200A electric service, which will allow
for beneficial practices like EV charging and the use of heat pumps.
6.It has been stressed repeatedly that there should be some means to incentivize developers
away from building wastefully oversized homes, which are bad for the environment, wildlife,
and affordable home availability.25 In the City of Boulder, homes with larger square footage
have more stringent energy rating index (ERI) requirements.
7.New construction should have low-flush toilets, as well as low-flow shower heads and faucet
aerators.26 The existing water supply to the Estes Valley is currently sufficient and of very good
quality; but, in the face of climate change, continuation of that supply is not assured.
8.Estes Park should require a permitting review process for acquiring new hot tubs for both new
construction and existing homes . Hot tubs are particularly wasteful of electric energy. The
amount of energy expended depends on use, climate conditions, hot tub size, hot tub
construction, and hot tub coveri ngs. In the Denver area, hot tub contributions to electric bills
can range from $50/month to more than $100/month.27 Considering an average of $75/month
and an electricity cost of $0.11/kWh computes to more than 8000 kWh/year, which is higher
than the entire energy use for many homes. This should be recognized and addressed as a
serious sustainability issue.
Vehicle and Equipment Electrification
Fossil fuel internal combustion engines (ICE) not only generate GHGs but also emit multiple harmful
air pollutants. Small two-cycle motors emit much more harmful air pollutants and noise pollution than
larger four-cycle motors on a per unit basis .
Electric Vehicles (EVs)
The Town should convert its fleet to electric vehicles as rapidly as is feasible.
Recommendation #10: Replace the Town's ICE police vehicles with electric vehicles because of the large
amount of idling and high mileage usage that police vehicles incur. EVs also have superior acceleration
compared to ICE vehicles which would be valuable for police patrol cars. The Boulder County Sheriff's
Department has already begun converting their vehicles to EVs. Boulder's experience shows their Tesla
Model Ys’ operating expense is only $0.03 a mile versus $0.18 (one sixth of the cost) of the Ford
Explorers they will be replacing. New York City is also ordering nearly 200 EVs in 2022 for police and
first responders.28 Recommended timeline: as soon as possible.
Furthermore, an EV's lifetime is much greater than an ICE vehicle. Model Y motors are rated for 1
million miles, and the battery pack is rated for 300,000 -400,000 miles. Brake pads shouldn't need to
be replaced because they're only used for emergency, lay -down-rubber braking. Normal braking is
regenerative, with the motors recharging the battery. The only recurring replaceable parts are tires
and windshield wipers. There are no belts, hoses, or fluids (except windshield washer) to be regularly
replaced.
Over several years, this would result in large cost savings for the Town of Estes Park because of the
very low maintenance and significantly longer operational lifetimes for EVs and per mile fuel
Page 95
Sustainable Energy 11
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
(kilowatts) cost which are only half to one-fifth of ICE vehicles. With a nationwide gas price at $3 .40
per gallon when this report was written and Estes Park Power & Communications/PRPA electricity at
$0.11 per kWh, the cost per mile for an average ICE car is two to five times more than the cost for an
EV, depending on the charging source.
Recommendation #11: Include requirements in vendor contracts establishing a date for converting
the contract vehicles used for Town projects to electric vehicles. Recommended timeline: 2022-2023.
Recommendation #12 : Establish incentives for residents to convert to personal electric vehicles
sooner rather than later , by offering the following incentives. Recommended timeline: 2022 -2023.
1.Charging incentives: Create substantially reduced year-round residential late night (~1AM-4AM)
electricity rates to further increase the operational savings of EVs versus ICE vehicles. This could
also be used for delayed appliance operations such as clothes dryers and dishwashers which
would also have the benefit of reducing peak electrical usage and therefore reduce th e use of
the greenhouse gas generating PRPA “peaker” plant.
2.Parking incentives: Allow longer summer free parking and reduced parking rates for local EVs
than for ICE vehicles. Make a small percentage of the most desirable Town parking spaces EVs
only.
Public EV Charging
Alternating Current (AC) Level 2 (8kW) J -1772 Charging: Maximum AC charging speed is limited by the
capacity of the car's internal rectifier, which is typically no more than 11 kW. There are two free
ChargePoint J-1772 8kW dual port chargers at the EP Visitor Center Parking Garage entrance and one
dual port ChargePoint charger in the Town Hall/Library parking lot. This charger is free for three hours
but has a $25 fee after that. There are two Blink dual-ported chargers at the National Park V illage
shopping center. There are three J-1772 chargers opposite the “The Pavilion at the Stanley" for a total
of 13 J-1772 Level 2 charger plugs in Town. There are also three Tesla Destination Chargers at the
Sweet Basilico Restaurant.
Recommendation #13 : Install an additional three Level 2 dual ported J -1772 chargers in three of the
larger Town parking lots and a dual ported charger in the Estes Valley Community Center parking lot
to provide eight additional charging ports which would bring the Town total level 2 ports to 21.
Suggested timeline: 2022 -2023.
Level 3 Direct Current (DC) Fast Charging : There are two Combined Charging System (CCS Type 1) and
CHAdeMO ChargePoint 125kW DC fast chargers and two medium speed (62kW) ChargePoint DC
chargers at the EP Visitor Center. Rates are $0.45/kWh and a $15/hr parking charge after 30 min of
free parking. There are two FreeWire (EVConnect) DC chargers (that share 120kW) at the National
Park Village shopping cen ter. There are seven Tesla version 2 (150 kW) Superchargers at the Stanley
Hotel. Tesla is in the process of making their Superchargers available to non -Tesla vehicles.
The Sustainable Energy subgroup members believe that the 13 DC fast chargers in E stes Park are
probably adequate for the near term (~next 18 months) and possibly for a longer term if the opening
up of the seven Stanley Tesla Superchargers to other EVs and availability of Tesla's CCS Type 1 adapter
happens by then.
Page 96
Sustainable Energy 12
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
However, a major concern is that there is no charging available in Rocky Mountain National Park
(RMNP). Many EVs do not have enough range to drive a Trail Ridge Road round trip without charging.
There are two free ChargePoint 62kW DC medium speed chargers in Grand Lake, but that wil l not be
adequate as EV adoption grows.
Recommendation #14 : Initiate discussions with RMNP about adding charging stations in the middle
(Alpine Visitor Center) and west side (Kawuneeche Visitor Center) of the Park. One concern is that the
Park may not have the electrical infrastructure for direct DC fast charging. Possible solutions for this
are the FreeWire chargers that are in National Park Village or Electrify America's chargers that use
Tesla's PowerPacks. These internal batteries can be charged at rela tively low power AC levels and then
use the internal batteries to charge EVs at a relatively high (120 kW) DC power level. As EV adoption
grows, the lack of fast charging in RMNP may substantially impact EP tourist visitation and therefore
Town revenue. Because of the importance of this, the Town should fund all or part of the RMNP DC
chargers’ cost if the National Park Service does not have enough funds available to implement th e
proposal. Suggested timeline: 2022-2024.
Residential EV Charging
Recommendation #15 : Include installation of a NEMA14 -50 AC garage outlet in the building code for
new single family residential homes. At the time of construction, this should add less than $100 in cost
to the house if the breaker panel is in the garage. Recommended timeline: 2022-2023.
Recommendation #16 : Require installation of one Level 2 AC charger for every three housing units for
multi-unit rental housing. Ideally, this would not only apply to new construction but also retrofitting
existing multifamily housing. Recommended timeline: 2022-2023.
Power Tools
Recommendation #17 : The Parks Division should convert from 2 -cycle ICE power tools to battery
powered electric tools. This applies to both vegetation maintenance tools such as weed trimmers,
edgers, lawn mowers, snow blowers and to forestry tools such as chainsaws and pruners. Heavy duty
commercial electric versions are available for all these types of tools. This video link (starting after the
2-minute mark) gives specific examples of available heavy duty commercial electric tools and
information on how extremely polluting 2 -cycle ICE motors are. Recommended timeline: as soon as
possible.
Recommendation #18 : Follow California's lead and prohibit sales of new 2 -cycle power tools and also
make the citizenry aware of the Colorado state incentive ($150) to replace existing ICE 2 -cycle lawn
mowers with electric versions. This incentive is only available spring through fall.29 Recommended
timeline: 2022-2023.
Recommendation #19 : Hold a widely advertised electric vehicles, electric chargers, and electric
equipment exhibition each year in the Event Cen ter. This could be highly useful not only for residents,
but also for visitors. Many people in the Estes Valley are not adequately informed about what is
available in the rapidly changing market for electric vehicles and chargers. In addition, there is a lack
of information in terms of evolving electric power equipment. Recommended timeline: 2022-
2023/ongoing.
Page 97
Sustainable Energy 13
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Multi-Modal Transportation
A multi-modal transportation network is an essential feature of an environmentally sustainable
community. It reduces climate -warming greenhouse gases by providing safe and accessible alternative
transportation options for both residents and visitors to get around town. With commendable
foresight and direction from the Transportation Advisory Board and Public Works Department, the
Town Board approved Public Works Policy 851 in April 2019. Policy 851 requires data collection and
progress reporting:
1.The Town will periodically collect, review and report performance data and benchmark
measurements to demonstrate the effectiveness of this policy. This will include the number of
projects completed, number of projects incorporating Complete Streets infrastructure, actual
infrastructure added, number of transit and non-motorized users, and community attitudes and
perceptions.
2.The Transportation Advisory Board and the Shuttle Committee are encouraged to provide
ongoing feedback and act as a conduit for public participation on the implementation of
Complete Streets practices.
The Public Works Department finished the 4th Street project using Complete Streets principles and
has proposed a similar plan for improving Moraine Ave nue from Davis Street to Mary ’s Lake Road.
Recommendation #20: The Public Works Department should submit a full multi-model transportation
report to the current Town Board for review . Further, we encourage the Town to keep the community
informed about ongoing implementation of Policy 851. Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
Concluding Considerations and Recommendations Related to
Sustainable Energy
In order to gauge the success of the above sustainability efforts to reduce GHG emissions from
electricity use, natural gas use, and gasoline engines, Estes Park and the surrounding area will need to
be monitored for estimated GHG emissions on a monthly or yearly basis. That can be done indirectly
by tracking the electricity we receive from the PRPA and by tracking the natural gas we receive from
Xcel. Keeping track of emissions from motors and transportation will be more difficult.
Taking advantage of existing data along with continued monitoring can lay the groundwork for a
“Climate Action Plan” (referenced later in this report along with a recommendation) whereby
emission reduction targets are set. An example could be reducing electricity and natural gas
associated GHG emissions by 25% in 2025, compared with 2020, and by 80% in 2030. Many other
municipalities in Colorado (e.g., Aspen, Boulder, Breckenridge, Carbonda le, Colorado Springs, Denver,
Edgewater, Fort Collins, Frisco, Golden, Lafayette, Lakewood, Longmont, Manitou Springs, Telluride,
Vail, Westminster, and Wheat Ridge) have Climate Action Plans. Invariably, they have well intentioned
goals or targets, but those goals may be unattainable in cases where there is inadequate
understanding of future developments. For instance, Fort Collins’ Climate Action Plan calls for GHG
emissions reductions of 20% by 2020, compared with their 2005 monitoring baseline. However, they
did not adequately take into account issues like increasing population and land development, so their
GHG reduction as of 2019 was only 7% compared with 2005. Este s Park would be well advised to wait
until after the Comprehensive Plan is completed be fore developing a Climate Action Plan with realistic
emissions targets.
Page 98
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Solid Waste Management
Introduction
With respect to solid waste, the Solid Waste Management subgroup members focused on fo ur broad
areas for preserving existing natural resources and reducing litter and methane: 1) increasing Estes
Park’s recycling rate; 2) reducing the amount of trash the community sends to the Larimer County
Landfill; 3) eliminating the worst single -use plastics from sale and use; and 4) conducting a program of
ongoing recycling education. The Solid Waste Management subgroup members believe the
recommended measures will go a long way toward helping our community be more sustainable, do its
part to lower GHG emissions, and protect our area’s natural beauty. These measures will also position
the Town to be more environmentally friendly in the eyes of residents and visitors, which in turn will
contribute to a continuing and robust tourist economy.
While the Solid Waste Management subgroup recommends that the actions outlined below be
adopted as soon as possible, there is acknowledgement that in some cases there are budgetary,
contractual (such as the county’s contract with Waste Management), or other constraints,
necessitating a longer time frame.
Increasing the Community Recycling Rate to 40% by 2025
Although recycling has been available in Estes Park for a remarkable 32 years (and is in fact the
longest-running recycling program in Colorado30), today less than half of respondents to the 2021
National Community Survey (NCS) indicated a belief that Estes Park’s recycling was adequate.31
Despite the longstanding local program, many residents apparently do not even realize they can
recycle here.32
Recycling reduces the staggering amount of refuse sent to landfills. It keeps taxes lower by conserving
expensive landfill space, preserves natural resources like timber, water, and minerals, saving energy,
and decreasing pollution.33 While Larimer County has established a target county -wide recycling rate
of 40% by 2025, Estes Park is starting way behind that goal with a dismal rate of only 7%.34 According
to Larimer County Solid Waste staff, single -stream curbside recycling throughout the Estes Valley
would substantially increase the area’s recycling rate.35 Using other towns as a model, the Solid Waste
Management subgroup recommends that free, unlimited curbside recycling be paired with volume -
based landfill/trash fees. For example , volume -based fees have worked extremely well in Loveland,
which has the highest recycling rate in the state at 58% (the city says it ’s closer to 60%).36 Their “pay
as you throw” program has been successful in funding Loveland’s recycling program and increasing
community participation.37 Volume-based landfill/trash fees would allow haulers to offset the costs of
offering free, unlimited curbside recycling, and train the public to think first about composting and
recycling before pitching everything into the garbage can.
As confirmation of these recommendations, a recently-released 2021 report by Ecocycle and the
Colorado Public Interest Research Group found five factors that determine high recycling rates:
1.A universal curbside recycling program, where every resident is provided with a recycling bin;
Page 99
Solid Waste Management 15
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
2.Volume-based pricing for landfill trash (“pay as you throw”) as opposed to flat rates for all
trash;
3.Drop-off centers or curbside programs for disposal of yard debris;
4.Clear guidelines on what can be recycled; and
5.Dedicated staff and funding for recycling programs.
As for businesses, commercial operations in Estes Park find recycling to be a challenge. An informal
survey conducted by the League of Women Voters’ Community Recycling Committee (CRC) in spring
2021 revealed that some mid- and low-priced lodging establishments in the Estes Valley have
encountered obstacles to recycling such as time constraints, lack of staff, and fees nearly as high or
higher for recycling versus landfill disposal.38 Through Doering Disposal, the cost to empty a two cubic
yard (2 CY) dumpster of trash for businesses is $85, while the cost to empty a 2 CY recycling dumpster
is $65. Waste Management charges $163 per month for trash picked up weekly and $198 per month
for recycling picked up weekly.39 If it is to work and be successful, recycling must be made free and
convenient for both residents and businesses.
Recommendation #21: Work with Larimer County and waste haulers to achieve the following.
Recommended timeline: see each item.
1.Expand the Estes Park Residential Recycling Center days and hours of operation to Monday -
Saturday, 8AM-4PM with no lunch closings, and increase recycling center staff as necessary.
Recommended timeline: 2023.
2.Expand recycling at the Residential Community Recycling Center to include plastic film, plastic
clamshells (such as for berry containers) and other plastic containers, block polyethylene
(Styrofoam), durable plastics, and scrap metal. Recommended timeline: 2025.
3.Adjust prices so that sending trash to the landfill or transfer station is more expensive than
recycling. Recommended timeline: 2022.
4.Provide a cardboard compactor for businesses to make cardboard recycling easier for them.
Recommended timeline: 2024.
5.Prohibit customers from putting any recyclable materials into the transfer station landfill
section, including mattresses, electronics, appliances, and other recyclables. Recommended
timeline: 2023.
Recommendation #22: Working with waste haulers, create ordinances to achieve the following.
Recommended timeline: see each item.
1.Require waste haulers to provide recycling bins to all residents in the Estes Valley (and bear -
proof landfill/trash bins to residents who do not yet have them) and offer unlimited curbside
recycling pickup at no charge. Recommended timeline: 2023.
2.Require all residential and business waste haulers operating in the Estes Valley to provide
curbside (or dumpster/alley) recycling at no charge for multifamily complexes, businesses,
organizations, and institutions, paired with volume -based landfill/trash hauling fees.
Recommended timeline: 2023.
3.Require lodging facilities, including vacation and short -term rentals, to provide recycling cans or
bins next to the landfill/trash cans or bins a s a condition of their operating permit, and make
Page 100
Solid Waste Management 16
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
the operators responsible for guests using those services properly. Recommended timeline:
2023.
4.Require that any trash hauler operating in the Estes Valley not allow recycling to be put into
landfill trash and monitor compliance. Target: 2025.
Recommendation #23: Work with the Chamber of Commerce, Visit Estes Park (VEP) and the CRC to
achieve the following. Recommended timeline: see each item.
1.Provide illustrated materials for lodging establishments that instruct guests on how to recycle
and be “bear aware.” Operators would conspicuously post this signage near the front desk,
inside the vacation home, and in individual hotel rooms. Recommended timeline: 2023.
2.Expand special collection events throughout the year for recyclable materials such as
mattresses, paint and stain, electronics, paper shredding, hazardous waste, batteries,
microwaves, textiles, CDs/DVDs/VHS tapes, and appliance salvage, among others.
Recommended timeline: 2023.
3.Assist businesses in finding better, easier, and cheaper ways to recycle. Recommended timeline:
2023.
4.Make recycling the norm for VEP, the Chamber, and the Estes Park Visitors Center.
Recommended timeline: 2022.
Recommendation #24: Regularly update the Town website to include information on where and how to
recycle, as well as composting information, a list of licensed trash haulers, a map of water refill station
locations, and other sustainability information. Recommended timeline: 2024/ongoing.
Recommendation #25: Lead the way in making recycling of office paper, cans, bottles, and plastic (and
later, green waste) the norm throughout the Town of Estes Park organization. Recommended timeline:
2022/ongoing.
Recommendation #26: Make it a requirement to purchase paper products (office paper and stationery,
toilet paper, paper towels, etc.) with at least 80% recycled content (or alternatively, made from 100%
bamboo) for Town use by officials and staff. Recommended timeline: 2023.
Recommendation #27: Create zero-waste guidelines for event organizers holding an event on Town
property, and work with private groups and event venues to implement zero-waste practices into their
own activities. For example, the Town could require event organizers on Town property to provide
reusable or recyclable drinkware, cutlery, napkins, plates, and bowls; single-use items that are recyclable
within the Larimer County recycling system; and provide a sufficient number of side-by-side
landfill/trash and recycling bins for the event. Recommended timeline: 2023.
Recommendation #28: Increase the number of waste disposal bins in the downtown area and require
that all public waste disposal bins on either public or commercial property within the Estes Valley be
wildlife-proof and include side-by-side landfill and recycling sections along with illustrated, state-of-the-
art instructional signage. Recommended timeline: 2023.
Recommendation #29: Repaint trash bins with different colors to differentiate between trash and
recycling, making sure to relabel the “trash” section as “landfill” and to clearly label what is accepted in
the recycling container. Recommended timeline: 2023.
Page 101
Solid Waste Management 17
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Recommendation #30: Place a state-of-the-art landfill and recycling bin (as noted above) at the Estes
Park welcome sign installed by the Rotary Club on Highway 36. Recommended timeline: 2023.
Reducing Methane Emissions from Landfilled Food Waste and
Yard Debris by 90% by 2023
Methane, almost identical in composition to natural gas, is at least 80 times more powerful
than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere.40 One of the biggest landfill emitters of
methane is rotting material from green waste41—that is, uneaten or spoiled food, kitchen scraps, and
yard debris. By making compost from green waste that would otherwise emit methane, we can create
a carbon sink—materials that actually absorb carbon dioxide gas emissions from the atmosphere.42
Although methane is a very powerful greenhouse gas, fortunately it’s short -lived compared to carbon
dioxide. That means we can achieve significant reductions in greenhouse gases within the next decade
just by cutting off sources of methane leaks into the atmosphere .43
All of Estes Park’s trash, whether picked up by Waste Management or Doering Disposal, or taken to
the transfer station, ultimately ends up in the county landfill. (L ikewise, anything that goes down the
garbage disposal ends up in the landfill t oo.) According to Larimer County officials, the current landfill
is scheduled to close in 2023 -2024. A new landfill site has been selected north of Wellington, 80 miles
from Estes Park. To lower methane gas and the increased CO2 emissions that will be generated by
trash haulers taking garbage to a site farther away, the best solution for the Town is to reduce the
amount of community -wide trash destined for the landfill, particularly methane -producing food
waste. One way the community can do this is by compo sting all green waste and yard debris. Duane
Penney, Larimer County’s Solid Waste Director, has encouraged Estes Park to go forward with creating
its own composting center.44.
Yard debris such as branches, pine needles, pinec ones, and leaves are another potential source of
compost material. Sadly, these materials are usually put out with curbside trash or tossed into the
transfer station landfill section. Even the much -touted Christmas tree collection taking place each year
in Estes Park fails to help the environment. Most residents assume the trees are recycled into mulch.
Unbeknownst to them, the trees are simply shredded and dumped into the landfill.
Routine food waste is an appalling practice—economically, environmentally, and from a social justice
standpoint. Even with rising food insecurity, American homes, grocery stores, and restaurants toss a
third of their perfectly edible, nutritious food into the landfill.45 To reduce this waste, the Solid Waste
Management subgroup recommends the community continue to donate uneaten but still good,
prepackaged food to Crossroads Ministry and determine whether Crossroads is capturing all the
uneaten food it can handle from restaurants , institutions, and stores. We also recommend the Town
work with CRC and the Chamber of Commerce to capture unsaleable food stock that cannot be
donated to Crossroads and explore ways to use it before it spoils, as well as assisting food
establishments in learning how to efficiently separate green waste. It is in the best interest of food
service businesses to adopt anti-waste measures, since they can save $7 for every dollar invested .46
Page 102
Solid Waste Management 18
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Recommendation #31: Establish a Town-operated, wildlife-inaccessible composting center (possibly
with Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment grant funds) where residents, institutions,
and businesses can drop off green waste at no charge. The resulting compost can be sold to the public
for use in gardening and landscaping to build healthy soil. Recommended timeline: pilot in 2023; scale
up in 2024 and 2025.
Recommendation #32: Create a Town-operated chipper/shredder facility, where residents, institutions,
and businesses can drop off their yard debris and Christmas trees at no charge. This material would be
added to the composting material. Recommended Timeline: 2023.
Recommendation #33: For residents who want curbside service, invite a private hauling service to
provide fee-based community curbside pickup of green waste year-round, and yard debris and
Christmas trees on a seasonal basis. Recommended timeline: 2024.
Recommendation #34: Ensure that food establishments have a private service to pick up fats, oil, and
grease to reduce or eliminate that material going into the landfill. Recommended timeline: 2024.
Recommendation #35: Require that any trash hauler operating in the Estes Valley not allow green
waste, yard debris, or compostable materials to be put into landfill trash. Recommended timeline: 2026.
Recommendation #36: Have Public Works monitor the old Estes Park landfill at Moraine Avenue and
Elm Road for methane emission and research the feasibility of capturing methane gas for energy use.
Recommended timeline: 2022.
Eliminating the Worst Single -Use Plastics by 2024
Up to half of all plastic products are made for one-time use, and are used for mere minutes or even
seconds before being tossed in the garbage.47 Two of the most pernicious single-use plastics are
plastic bags and plastic water or beverage bottles. More than 17 million barrels of oil are required to
meet the American public’s demand for single -use plastic water bottles.48 At 3,000 times the cost of
tap water,49 bottled water is a ridiculous waste of funds. Contrary to popular belief, bottled water is
almost never safer to drink than water from the tap.50 In fact, plastic beverage bottles can leach toxic
chemicals into the liquid they contain.51 A long and growing list of states, communities, and
countries—particularly those that are tourism -dependent—are environmentally so far ahead of Estes
Park that they have moved beyond simply banning plastic bags and bottles and are now focusing on
phasing out other harmful items such as single -use cups, stir sticks, straws, six-pack rings, and
cutlery.52 Make no mistake: these bans are the wave of the future.53
That is because the environmental cost of single-use plastics is steep. The production of these and
other plastic products creates greenhouse gases,54 with a whopping 91% of plastics ending up as litter
or landfill trash rather than being recycled.55 In fact, plastic bags, cups, lids, bottles, straws, packaging,
and the like have become the most common forms of trash found in the American landscape.56 Once
plastics are in the landfill or out in the landscape, t hey emit methane as they decompose.57 Worse yet,
as plastics degrade they break down into microplastics 58 that are eaten by wildlife, pollute the water,
soil, and atmosphere, and even enter our own human bodies, causing cancer, birth defects, lowered
Page 103
Solid Waste Management 19
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
immunity, and endocrine disruption.59 Microplastics now pollute every corner of the globe, including
the Arctic and Antarctic.60 In 2019, microplastics were even discovered in the rain falling on Rocky
Mountain National Park.61
Recommendation #37: Regulate some single-use plastics by doing the following. Recommended
timeline: see each item.
1.Accelerating the phase-in of the 2021 Colorado Plastic Pollution Reduction Act (see Appendix
#3), which manages plastic bags and polystyrene (Styrofoam) containers, with the Town
accepting the revenue the fees generate. Recommended timeline: 2022.
2.Not purchasing water or beverages in plastic bottles with municipal funds. Recommended
timeline: 2022.
Recommendation #38: Work with the Chamber of Commerce and CRC to achieve the following.
Recommended timeline: see each item.
1.Research and provide a list of sup pliers for Estes Park businesses to help them comply with the
new state (and possibly local) laws related to solid waste disposal. Recommended timeline:
2022.
2.Set up convenient “bag banks” at key points around town, where visitors and residents can pick
up a clean, donated reusable bag for shopping at no charge . (See Appendix #4) Recommended
timeline: 2022.
3.Make straws an upon-request-only item in food establishments. Recommended timeline: 2022.
Recommendation #39: Direct fees associated with Colorado Plastic Pollution Reduction Act toward the
following. Recommended timeline: 2024.
1.Funds to help retailers and food establishments transition away from the sale of single-use
plastics over to reusables or recyclables.
2.Funds to set up locked dumpster cages to keep wildlife away from business dumpsters.
3.Installing water refill stations at the Visitor’s Center, the Town Hall, the Library, each floor of
the Community Center, at outdoor public restrooms, and throughout the downtown area.
4.Creating a reusable traveler’s souvenir takeout dining set for sale at the Visitor’s Center and
online through VEP, consisting of metal “tiffins” (containers for holding takeout or picnic food),
reusable cutlery, straw, lid and drink cup, cloth napkin, and reusable bag to hold it all, with the
Estes Park logo on the bag and on larger items in the kit.
5.Environmental, wildlife, and nature interpretive signage.
6.Conducting robust and ongoing environmental public education campaigns.
Public Education
Changing community norms require reminder and education. An ongoing program of public service
information will support the community as it moves toward greater mindfulness and sustainability.
Recommendation #40: Encourage the public to carry a reusable water bottle or cup with them instead
of relying on bottled water and nonrecyclable cups. Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
Page 104
Solid Waste Management 20
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Recommendation #41: Encourage the Library continue to offer free sustainability classes on topics such
as how to recycle correctly, home composting, how to reduce junk mail, information on home energy
efficiency and heat pump installation, repair “café” nights, where to apply for free energy upgrades or
low-interest energy-efficiency loans, how to reduce household food waste to save money, etc.
Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
Recommendation #42: Run weekly ads in the Estes Park Trail-Gazette and Estes Park News with
sustainability tips and remind community members and visitors what can and cannot be recycled.
Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
Recommendation #43: Offer age-appropriate recycling and composting projects for children at Estes
Park public and private schools, as well as the Library. Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
Concluding Considerations Regarding Solid Waste
Management
The recommended actions outlined above would put Estes Park in the forefront in Colorado and
nation-wide, although it’s important to remember that in time these measures are destined to come
for all American communities, not just ours. Even so, these actions are only a starting point. As U.S.
communities move toward sustainability and phase out disposables, even more steps than the ones
outlined here will be needed at the local level. By taking the initiative now, Estes Park can show
visitors we care about the environment and are prepared to act—ensuring that we’re a fit community
to act as gateway to Rocky Mountain National Park.
Page 105
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Institutional Factors for Sustainability
Introduction
Estes Valley’s environmental sustainability is under threat from increasingly severe drought, wildfires,
flooding, and habitat degradation due to climate change, compounded by pressures on our
community from exponential growth in tourism with overuse of resources.
Town government has responded to these growing threats with a range of important actions. But
lacking a comprehensive sustainability plan and coordinated climate action policy, these actions have
been piecemeal and limited compared to the sustainability programs of other p remier Colorado
mountain communities.
Comprehensive Sustainability Planning and Programs
A core feature of sustainability policies is their systematic concern with community, economy, and
environment. All three of these aspects of a Town's goals, policie s, and programs must be addressed
in balance for sustainability. This multi-level framework, sometimes called the "triple bottom line " or
the "pillars" of sustainability , is essential for effective, sustainable responses to the problems we face.
Models for Estes Park
Other mountain towns and county governments in Colorado have seen the importance of
sustainability as the core of their planning and development frameworks. Many premier mountain
destination communities have had sustainability plans and programs for more t han a decade. These
include Aspen and Pitkin County, Breckenridge and Summit County, Durango, Steamboat Springs and
Routt County, and Vail and Eagle County.
These towns and counties have detailed sustainability plans, climate action policies, permanent
community sustainability advisory boards, staff managers for their sustainability plans, and the towns
have (or are pursuing) Sustainable Destination certifications. Their institutional policies and extensive
program experience provide a rich resource for Estes Park to rapidly construct its own frameworks for
sustainability.
Recommendation #44: Create a permanent Environmental Sustainability Advisory Board.
Recommended timeline: 2022-2023.
An Environmental Sustainability Advisory Board would provide community guidance and
recommendations to the Town, as requested by the Town Board or the Town Administrat or, regarding
climate action policies, sustainability policies and programs, annual Strategic Plan recommendations,
and environmental sustainability recommendations to the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee.
The Advisory Board will coordinate with other Town advisory bodies, such as the Transportation
Advisory Board and the Parks Advisory Board, on energy or environmental aspects of issues that may
pertain jointly.
Page 106
Institutional Factors 22
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Members should include residents from the Town and adjacent county areas within the scope of the
Comprehensive Plan or within the service area of Estes Power and Communications. Staff designated
by directors of Community Development, Power and Communications, Public Works, and other
appropriate Town departments may participate in board meetings as ex-officio members.
The Estes Park Sustainability Coordinator (see below) should serve as the primary liaison to the Advisory
Board and provide staff support for board meetings. Other staff support should be provided, as
required, by Town departmental staff as assigned by the Town Administrator.
Recommendation #45: Establish sustainability as a core feature of the Comprehensive Plan.
Recommended timeline: 2022.
For Estes Park to realize the benefits of a comprehensive sustainability plan, like those adopted by
other destination communities, sustainability principles need to be applied throughout Estes Park's
new Comprehensive Plan.
Currently under development, with funding from DOLA, the Comprehensive Plan is incorporating
resiliency principles in alignment with DOLA's resiliency standards. Resiliency is only a subset,
however, of sustainability principles.
DOLA has, in fact, made American Planning Association (APA) guidelines, titled Comprehensive Plan
Standards for Sustaining Places (Sustaining Places), its reference standard for local community
development and planning, and these standards are built on sustainability principles.
The APA sustainability standards do not prescribe plan provisions. Instead, presented as a
"scorecard," they comprise a reference standard of sustainability principles and best practices. The
scorecard is used during plan development to assess ("score") plan elements for their strengths and
gaps in building sustainability. To that end, the Town should:
1.Use the APA sustainability standards "scorecard" in development of Comprehensive Plan, and
provide the APA scorecard (see Appendix #5) to each member of the Comprehensive Plan
Advisory Committee and other interested parties for their individual use in assessing the many
provisions of the new plan as they are formulated and to identify sustainability principles that
have not yet been incorporated in the plan.
2.Use the APA scorecard to create a sustainability index for the final Comprehensive Plan. Use of
the APA scorecard during plan development will provide deep transparency regarding the goals
and standards used in the plan's development. Used systematically, the scorecard also
automatically "indexes" provisions of the final plan according to the principles of sustainability
that they address or implement. This "sustainability index" will provide a roadmap to the plan's
sustainability provisions. The sustainability index also can establish an important link between
annual Strategic Plan goals and specific provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, a s outlined next
under Recommendation #46.
Recommendation #46: Fully integrate sustainability into the Town’s annual strategic planning.
Recommended timeline: 2022/ongoing.
The annual Strategic Plan is a lynch pin between Town Board policies and specific programs and
investments to address community needs. It also is where the vision, goals and sustainability
principles of the Comprehensive Plan can systematically support and guide actions in the Strategic
Page 107
Institutional Factors 23
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Plan (and in the Capital Improvement Plan because each CIP project lists goals in the Strategic Plan
that it supports).
To be fully effective, sustainability plans also require performance measures, ongoing project
performance assessments, and project realignments: "You can't manage what you don't measure ."
The Strategic Plan is perfectly suited for this function if performance measures and baseline data are
defined for its goals and objectives. To that end, and related to the preceding recommendation, the
Town should:
1.Align goals and objectives in the annual Strategic Plan with sustainability principles and ground
them on provisions in the Comprehensive Plan. Use the APA Sustainability Standards scorecard
(as adopted for the Comprehensive Plan) to specify the sustainability principle(s) and
practice(s) that are aligned with individual Goals and Objectives in the Strategic Plan. This
alignment can be presented in the Strategic Plan matrix by adding, under each "Outcome
Area," an initial "Sustainability Principle" column and then a "Practice" column.
By using the same sustainability standards reference, the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan
and the goals/objectives of the Strategic Plan (and CIP projects) are linked through their shared
alignments with specific sustainability principles/practices.
2.Establish performance measures for each Goal/Objective in the Strategic Plan. Performance
metrics and review periods (for example, one, three, or five years) should be set for each goal in
the Strategic Plan. Performance measures may derive from the Comprehensive Plan or be
developed in response to changing circumstances. Prescribed review periods will "schedule" a
future Strategic Plan objective to review performance for that goal based on objective
measures.
3.Require baseline data for key performance measures in the Strategic Plan. Baseline data should
be collected, in many cases as an initial phase or objective for goals in each year's Strategic
Plan. In some cases, however, collection of baseline data may be complex, requiring an
extended effort to assemble. In these cases, the activity should have performance measures,
but may need to commence while baseline data are still being compiled.
Climate Action Policy
When Colorado adopted the statewide "Climate Action Plan," it also called for new initiatives in every
community for rapid reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to secure a sustainable future. To
help guide this shared campaign, th e state then prepared the Colorado 2020 GHG Pollution Reduction
Roadmap (Roadmap).
The "Climate Action Plan" sets three important deadlines for GHG emission reductions r elative to a
2005 baseline: 26% by 2025; 50% by 2030; 90% by 2050. The Roadmap analysis confirmed that
current technologies can carry these goals forward, but additional actions and supporting policies are
needed to achieve the timelines. The Roadmap states:
State government cannot do this work alone. It is going to take the commitment, expertise,
and engagement of Coloradans from diverse perspectives and from across the state to further
refine, mobilize and implement key actions identified in this Roadmap.
Page 108
Institutional Factors 24
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
The Roadmap also spotlights the important role of local government in reducing GHG emissions from
the largest sources in Colorado: transportation, electricity generation, buildings, and methane from
landfills and sewage plants.
Recommendation #47 : Develop Climate Action Policy. Recommended timeline: 2022 -2023.
Suggested provisions in a community -wide Climate Action Policy include the following:
•Assign high priority to concerted response by Town government to the imminent and seve re
dangers of wildfires, flooding, and habitat degradation due to climate change.
•Adopt provisions of the Colorado Climate Action Plan as sustainability goals for Town
departments and commit to close cooperation with Larimer County in its Climate Smart
initiatives.
•Direct Town departments to expedite initiatives aligned with the Roadmap that reduce GHG
emissions in transportation, electricity usage and generation, buildings, and waste
management.
•Establish an Environmental Sustainability Advisory Committee. (See Recommendation #44)
•Direct creation of two staff positions: Environmental Sustainability Manager and Grant
Development Manager. (See Recommendations #48 and #50.5)
•Direct adoption of sustainability policies and practices for Town operations and facil ities. (See
Recommendation #49.2)
•Direct Estes Power and Communications to adopt a clean energy, sustainability, and GHG
pollution reduction plan (Clean Energy Plan). (See Recommendation #51)
Estes as a Sustainable Community
Residents and visitors alike are drawn to Estes Park by the natural beauty of the Estes Valley and the
wild majesty of Rocky Mountain National Park. The ESTF community surveys and listening sessions
(see Appendix #1) confirm a broad-based desire for strong leadership by the Town in preserving and
enhancing the area’s environmental sustainability .
Recommendation #48: Create an environmental Sustainability Manager position. Recommended
timeline: 2022-2023.
Many Colorado communities, including the mountain destination towns that can serve as models for
Estes Park, have established a position of sustainability coordinator or manager to direct their
sustainability programs, engage and support their community sustainability council/advisory board,
and coordinate programs across their town government. The sustainability manager role is considered
essential for accomplishing the Town's sustainability goals.
Suggested responsibilities for an Environment al Sustainability Manager position include:
•Serving as liaison to the Town's environmental Sustainability Advisory Board; provide support
for the board's meetings.
•Coordination and outreach with Town departments concerning sustainability policies,
programs, and new initiatives; organize and support staff training in sustainability principles.
Page 109
Institutional Factors 25
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
•Collaboration with the Town's grant development manager in identifying and formulating
sustainability initiatives and funding opportunities.
•Liaison to Visit Estes Park, Estes Park Chamber of Commerce, and other community
organizations regarding sustainability and managed destination programs. (See
Recommendation #49)
•Liaison to sustainability offices/programs of Estes Valley schools and special districts, Lari mer
County, state offices, and other governmental jurisdictions.
•Collaboration with Town departments in development of sustainability performance measures
and baseline inventories. Participation in program performance reviews related to
sustainability me asures.
•Serve as a staff resource regarding sustainability principles and practices for the Town Board's
annual Strategic Plan.
•Preparation of annual sustainability progress report.
The Sustainability Manager's extensive management responsibilities, ongoin g interdepartmental
functions, and high-profile community engagements recommend a manager -level position that is
located centrally in the administration.
Recommendation #49: Reposition Estes Park as a Sustainable Destination. Recommended timeline:
2022-2025/ongoing.
To help make Estes Park a sustainable community for visitors and its own residents, the Town should:
1.Support the sustainability initiatives of Visit Estes Park. With a realignment of staff and
addition of a sustainability manager position, VEP is working to establish the Estes Valley as a
sustainably managed tourism destination. The Town should cooperate fully in these new
initiatives.
2.Adopt sustainability policies and practices for Town operations and facilities. In consultation
with VEP, identify the Sustainable Destination standards for Town operations and facilities for
implementation to the extent feasible. Integrate sustainability awaren ess and skills into staff
training.
3.Conduct sustainability education campaigns for residents and visitors that:
•Raise awareness in the community and with Estes Park businesses about the value of
sustainability practices, explain the Town's sustainability p lanning, and spotlight current
accomplishments. Use Town newsletters, have displays and literature at the Visitor
Center and at events, host a sustainability tent at festivals.
•Create a sustainability portal on the Town website to educate residents and vi sitors about
resources and Town policies and programs for sustainability.
•Cooperate with VEP's Sustainable Destination educational outreach to Town partners and
stakeholders and its information campaigns for current visitors and values -based tourism
markets.
Page 110
Institutional Factors 26
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Funding for Sustainability
Adoption of sustainability principles and practices in Town policies and programs often can yield
ongoing benefits at modest expense. But more substantial costs are associated with new staff
positions and training, heightened community outreach, baseline data inventories, matching funds for
sustainability grants, and investments for renewable energy and beneficial electrification projects.
Funding mechanisms or sources therefore must be aligned with recommended actio ns for greater
community resilience and environmental sustainability. Principal funding mechanisms for the Town
and the broader community include grant funds, tax funds, and municipal or district bond funds, plus
revenue sources from Town enterprise fund departments, specifically Estes Park Power &
Communications. (See Recommendation #51 regarding Estes Park Power & Communications)
Recommendation #50 : Strengthen the framework for funding sustainability. Recommended timeline:
2022/ongoing.
Suggestions for how to strengthen the framework for funding include:
1.Coordinate all funding mechanisms by aligning them with shared sustainability principles. In
addition to identifying sustainability principles and practices for Strategic Plan goals/objectives
(see Recommendation #46), sustainability practices should be a feature of grant proposal
workplans, sales tax funds, and bond issuances.
Bond Funds
2.Make sustainability a management principle in all bond issuance s. A $114 million general
improvement bond issued in 2021 for a school district demonstrates how the terms of
municipal and district bonds can infuse sustainability into project execution. The bond 's
mission statement explicitly establishes sustainability as a guiding principle. Environmental,
social, and economic sustainability will be examined in planning and design for every project
financed. And following principles of sustainability for communi ty engagement, residents will
rank their sustainability priorities for the different projects. This strategy builds sustainability
into the projects funded, whether by grant funds, tax funds, or bond funds; it also can
strengthen community support for the funding proposal.
Grant Funds
Greater grantmaking capacity is a key tool for financing new sustainability initiatives and accelerating
reductions in GHG pollution. This is especially true with the availability of state funding under the
Colorado GHG Pollution Reduction Framework and pending dispersal of $1.2 trillion in federal funding
through the states and directly in federal grants under the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (Infrastructure Act).
The Town of Estes Park has a track record of successful grant awards to launch major community
investments, achieved through skilled staff grantsmanship and relationships with key funders,
combined with Estes Park's stature as a world -class tourist destination. These past successes justify
expanding the Town's internal capacities for concurrent grant development, preparation of technically
and organizationally complex proposals, and coordination for multi -jurisdiction projects.
Page 111
Institutional Factors 27
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
Investments in these capacities can return far greater benefits to the Town, as shown by the awards
issued in 2020 from the Colorado Renewable & Clean Energy set aside. Estes Park can be praised for
securing a $15,000 EV planning a ward from this source. That was, however, the smallest award;
twenty-seven recipients received awards totaling almost $10.7 million —an average greater than
$395,000. Crested Butte, Breckenridge, and Creede received $250,000, $650,000, and $650,000,
respectively. Estes Park's track record shows the Town's competitiveness for major awards; with
greater priority placed on grants planning, coordination and preparations, Estes Park can be better
prepared to undertake major projects through new funding opportun ities in the future.
3.Promote grant development as a strategic investment.
4.Create an interdepartmental Grant Development Team. Team members would include Town
department directors (or senior designees), the Environmental Sustainability Manager, and the
Grant Development Manager who serves as Team coordinator. The Team functions to match
Town Strategic Plan goals/objectives and the programmatic needs of Town departments with
grant award opportunities and requirements, to prioritize grants, and to coordinate
interdepartmental grant proposals.
5.Establish (or reclassify) a position as Grant Development Manager. The position would have the
following suggested responsibilities:
•Research federal and state grant opportunities that align with the Comprehensive Plan
and are supportive of Strategic Plan goals. Maintain cooperative relationships with
funding agencies.
•Serve as a staff resource for the Town Board's Strategic Plan development process.
•Serve as coordinator for the Grant Development Team and interdepartmental grant
development.
•Guide proposal development to meet grant submission specifications and deadlines.
•Help identify opportunities for interjurisdictional projects and participate in related grant
development efforts.
•Prepare progress reports and an annual report for the Town Board on grant
opportunities, development goals, timelines, and status.
The Grant Development Manager's extensive management responsibilities, ongoing
interdepartmental functions, intergovernmental relations, and complex project development
responsibilities recommend a manager -level position that is located centrally, e.g., Finance
Department or Administrator's office.
Estes Clean Energy Plan
Estes Power and Communications (Estes Power) is one of the Town's most powerful tools for
community sustainability programs and reduction of GHG emissions, but that potential has had
limited development. A comprehensive clean energy, sustainability and GHG pollution reduction plan
(Clean Energy Plan) should be implemented by E stes Power that incorporates industry best practices.
A comprehensive plan is needed to cut GHG pollution in alignment with the Colorado Roadmap. It also
can be an essential tool in minimizing network costs to supply rapid growth in electric demand with
Page 112
Institutional Factors 28
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
widespread adoption of electric vehicles, building electrification, and distributed energy sources, as
discussed in other parts of this report.
Recommendation #51 : Establish an Estes Clean Energy Plan in accordance with industry standards as
outlined below. Recommended timeline: see each item.
The American Public Power Association (APPA) Smart Energy Provider program delineates benchmark
standards and evaluation guidelines that Estes Power should adopt, and the following recommended
measures to initiate a Clean Energy Plan correspond to just a subset of benchmarks in APPA's
standards of industry best practices.
1.Compile a baseline "catalog" of clean energy incentive programs. Recommended timeline:
2022.
A reference catalog of incentive measures should be compiled as a baseline for development of
a Clean Energy Plan by surveying the diverse programs of other electric utilities that promote
renewable energy and beneficial electrification. The APPA information clearinghouse is one
resource for this effort.
Closer to home, incentive programs of an electric distribution co -op in Colorado may be a good
starting point. La Plata Electric Association (LPEA) has an extensive program with building
efficiency audits and rebates for building efficiency improvements and for beneficial
electrification, including HVAC heat pumps, hot -water heat pumps, and induction
ranges/cooktops. It provides rebates for electric outdoor equipment (e.g., snow blower, lawn
mower, leaf blower, chainsaw + battery), to help replace serious air pollution and noise sources.
For electric mobility, it has rebates for e-bikes and provides free home level-2 electric vehicle
smart chargers (or rebates if purchased); rebates also are offe red for commercial and public -use
EV charging stations. These programs reflect sustainability's "triple bottom -line." For example,
their rebate for conversion of a gas range to induction electric is more than for electric -to-
induction conversion because gas conversion will remove long-term costs of GHG pollution.
2.Implement a portfolio of incentive programs from the catalog. Recommended timeline: 2022 -
2024/ongoing.
Measures in the portfolio should be selected following sustainability principles, with comm unity
participation and "triple bottom -line" performance measures, including GHG reduction
effectiveness. How specific incentives affect network peak demand will be an important
consideration. LPEA provides smart EV chargers for free because their chargers enable central
control of one of the fastest growing demands on their network; limiting charging to real -time
off-peak periods yields a three -year payback on their incentive costs.
3.Prepare a GHG emissions inventory for the Estes Valley. Recommended timeline: 2023.
In consultation with other Town departments, compile baseline inventories for the Estes Valley
of GHG emissions from major sources, including transportation, electricity usage and
generation, buildings, waste management, and out door gas equipment. These data provide a
basis for performance measures to continuously improve GHG emission reduction programs.
Resources are available specifically to assist local governments (e.g., ICLEI—Local Governments
for Sustainability ; Mountain Towns 2030 ).
Page 113
Institutional Factors 29
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
4.Organize and invest in distributed energy generation and storage. Recommended timeline:
2022-2027/ongoing.
Estes Power should take leadership in development of distribut ed energy generation on its
network to spur develop and to help manage network demands. That role requires
interjurisdiction collaboration (i.e., Estes Valley School District and Upper Thompson Waste
Management) and joint initiatives with its counterpart utilities in partnership with PRPA.
Working with the Estes Valley School District, for example, Estes Power can facilitate solar
installations that supply a school's entire electrical consumption and cut total costs over the life
of the equipment. Almost every respondent to the ESTF residential survey said that adoption of
solar energy by the school district is important; nearly half gave it the highest level of
importance.
With recent innovations, Estes Power also can partner with the school district to r eplace
polluting diesel buses with electric, which then serve as dispatchable electric storage for the
network, while cutting school bus operating costs —a significant item in school district budgets.
Electric school buses recharge during off -peak periods, when they are idle, and then supply
power to the utility grid during on-peak periods, yielding net cost reductions for the school
district and savings for the utility, as well as health benefits by eliminating GHG and other
pollution in diesel exhaust.
A pilot program that employs electric school buses as DERs is now underway for Durango School
District 9-R and the La Plata Electric Association (LPEA), with grant support from the regional Air
Quality Control Commission. LPEA has led development and contributed $130,000 to the pilot
project. LPEA identified a crucial grant opportunity, designed the proje ct, secured school
district participation, provided grant matching funds, engaged the vendor, and purchased the
equipment to connect electric buses as a dispatchable power source for the utility's distribution
network. Having confirmed 60kW/bus dispatchabl e power, LPEA now expects payback of its
costs in eight years.
Estes Power should evaluate a similar pilot project with the Estes Valley school district. With at
least $50 billion designated by the Infrastructure Act for electrification of school buses, su ch a
project might well be expanded to include all four municipal utilities and their school districts
on the PRPA grid, providing a large shared distributed resource, as well as pollution reduction
on a major scale.
More generally, however, the LPEA proje ct demonstrates the diverse roles that Estes Power
should be prepared to undertake in fostering distributed energy resources, such as those
spotlighted in other parts of this report, and achieving key goals in an Estes Clean Energy Plan.
Page 114
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
30
Endnotes
1 https://ftcollinscap.clearpointstrategy.com/
2 https://www.larimer.org/sites/default/files/uploads/2021/cslc_public_brochure_final_12.7.2020.pdf
3 https://cohealthviz.dphe.state.co.us/t/EnvironmentalEpidemiologyPublic/views/DRAFTGreenhouseGasMetricsDashoard -
MGH/GreenhouseGasMetricsDashboard?:showAppBa nner=false&:display_count=n&:showVizHome=n&:origin=viz_share_lin
k&:embed=y&:deepLinkingDisabled=y
4 https://www.rockymountainclimate.org/images/extremes/LarimerExtremesFinal.pdf
5 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/65298.pdf
6 https://cossa.co/solar -and-storage-friendly-communities/
7 https://solsmart.org/how -we-help/what-is-solsmart/
8 https://coops.solarunitedneighbors.org/coops/denver -solar-co-op-2/
9 https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2021/documenting -a-decade-of-cost-declines-for-pv-systems.html
10 https://www.energy.gov/oe/activities/technology -development/grid-modernization-and-smart-grid/role-microgrids-
helping
11 https://cleantechnica.com/2021/11/24/a -bright-future-for-landfill-solar-yes-landfill-solar/
12 https://www.asumag.com/green/sustainability -initiatives/article/20856800/solar -array-in-colorado-district-will-
completely-offset-electricity-use-at-elementary-school
13 https://www.panparks.org/vertical-axis-wind-turbines/
14 https://www.gunnisontimes.com/articles/taylor -park-dam-may-soon-produce-hydropower/
15 https://www.holycross.com/basalt-vista-affordable-housing-project/
16 https://revivefc.com/
17 https://www.denvergov.org/content/denvergov/en/mayors -office/newsroom/2020/new-pilot-program-encourages-
more-sustainability-and-more-afford.html
18 https://rmi.org/insight/gas -stoves-pollution-health/
19 https://www.naturalgasintel.com/denver -looking-to-phase-out-natural-gas-in-commercial-multifamily-buildings/
20 https://news.yahoo.com/in -significant-climate-change-action-new-york-city-bans-new-gas-hookups-
173727046.html?guccounter=1
21 https://www.energysmartcolorado.com/take -action/beneficial-electrification/
22 https://sealed.com/resources/winter-heat-pump/
23 https://rmi.org/heat -pumps-a-practical-solution-for-cold-climates/
24 https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/ductless -mini-split-heat-pumps
25 https://www.npr.org/2021/09/04/1033585422/the -housing-shortage-is-significant-its-acute-for-small-entry-level-
homes?utm_source=pocket -newtab
26 https://www.homeserve.com/en-us/blog/how-to/home-water-conservation/
27 https://moneyning.com/shopping -smart/what-does-buying-a-hot-tub-really-cost-6-hidden-expenses-to-consider/
28 https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/30/22860068/nyc -police-car-electric-ford-mustang-mach-e
29 https://raqc.org/program/mow -down-pollution-residential/
30 Started by the late Jean Weaver, a longtime Estes Park resident. See: https://www.lwv -
estespark.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=706933&module_id=390961
31 2021 National Community Survey commissioned by the Town of Estes Park.
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/polco.nrc/viz/TheNCSReport -EstesParkCO2021/About?publish=yes%C2%A0
32 ESTF Public Comment Listening Session, October 14, 2021, and informal polling conducted by CRC in May 2021
33 “Recycling Basics” (see “Benefits of Recycling”), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]
https://www.epa.gov/recycle/recycling -basics
34 Virtual meeting between Lou Perez, former project director with Larimer County Solid Waste Department and CRC, May
2021. In 2020, Waste Management reported to Larimer County that they hauled 63,544 cu bic yards of trash and 4,386 cubic
yards of recycling from Estes Park. This includes the amount of both trash and recycling that Doering takes to the transfer
station, as well as recycling from the Estes Park Residential Recycling Center.
35 Ibid.
36 https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local -news/colorado-remains-one-of-the-20-worst-states-in-the-nation-when-
it-comes-to-recycling
37 Ibid.
Page 115
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
31
38 Informal polling conducted by CRC in May 2021
39 Per research by Marina Connors of CRC, sent by email December 13, 2021. Thanks to Marina Connors for obtaining this
information.
40 “A Crucial Opportunity in the Climate Fight,” Environmental Defense Fund, https://www.edf.org/climate/methane-crucial-
opportunity-climate-fight See also, “The Importance of Methane,” US EPA https://www.epa.gov/gmi/importance -methane
41 “Sustainable Management of Food Basics,” US EPA https://www.epa.gov/sustainable -management-food/sustainable-
management-food-basics
42 Judith D. Schwartz, “Soil as Carbon Storehouse: New Weapon in Climate Fight?” Yale Environment 360, March 4, 2014,
https://e360.yale.edu/features/soil_as_carbon_storehouse_new_weapon_in_climate_fight
43 “Methane Emissions Are Driving Climate Change. H ere’s How to Reduce Them.” United Nations Environment Programme,
August 20, 2021, https://www.unep.org/news -and-stories/story/methane-emissions-are-driving-climate-change-heres-how-
reduce-them
44 Conversation between Duane Penney and ESTF member Barbara Wer ner; October 17, 2021.
45 “Food Waste FAQs,” US Department of Agriculture. The USDA estimates that 30 -40% of perfectly good food goes to the
landfill, based on estimates from USDA’s Economic Research Service of 31% food loss at the retail and consumer level s,
corresponding to approximately 133 billion pounds and $161 billion worth of food in 2010. This amount of waste has three
far-reaching impacts on society: 1. Wholesome food that could have helped feed families in need is instead dumped in
landfills; 2. L and, water, labor, energy, and other inputs that are part of producing, processing, transporting, preparing,
storing, and disposing of discarded food are completely wasted; and 3) Needlessly discarding food contributes to methane
production and global clim ate change. https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs
Those who need further convincing may want to explore the shocking videos posted on TikTok by Dumpsterdivingfreegan,
showing examples of the wanton food waste practiced daily by food stores across the nation.
46 Lauren Manning, “Restaurants Can Earn $7 for Every $1 They Invest in Fighting Food Waste,” AgFunder News, February
13, 2019 https://agfundernews.com/breaking -restaurants-can-earn-7-for-every-1-they-invest-in-fighting-food-waste-new-
report.html#:~:text=AgFunder%20Network%20Partners -
,Restaurants%20Can%20Earn%20%247%20for%20Every%20%241%20They,Fighting%20Food%20Waste%20%E2%80%93%20
new%20report&text=February%2013%2C%202019 -
,Restaurants%20can%20earn%20%247%20for%20every%20%241%20they%20invest%20in,Resources%20Action%20Program
me%20(WRAP).
47 https://plasticoceans.org/the-facts/
48 Courtney Lindwall, “Single-Use Plastics 101,” Natural Resources Defense Council, January 9, 2021
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/single-use-plastics-101
49 “Reasons to Avoid Bottled Water ,” Harvard University https://green.harvard.edu/tools -resources/green-tip/reasons-
avoid-bottled-water
50 Ibid.
51 Jenny L. Carwile, Henry T. Luu, Laura S. Bassett, Daniel A. Driscoll, Caterina Yuan, Jennifer Y. Chang, Xiaoyun Yee, Antonia
M. Calafat and Karen B. Michels, “Polycarbonate Bottle Use and Urinary Bisphenol A Concentrations,” Environmental Health
Perspectives, National Institutes of Health, May 12, 2009 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2737011/
52 Kevin Forestieri, “Mountain View Bans Plastic Food Ware for All Restaurants Starting in 2023,” Mountain View Voice,
November 16, 2021—this is just one of the growing number of tourist locations going beyond bans on plastic bags and
polystyrene takeout containers. https://mv -voice.com/news/2021/11/16/mountain-view-bans-plastic-food-ware-for-all-
restaurants-starting-in-2023?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Issue:%202021 -11-
19%20Waste%20Dive%20Newsletter%20%5Bissue:38141%5D&utm_term=Waste%20Dive
53 “Banning Single-Use Plastics,” Environment America, https://uspirgedfund.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/US%20Single -
Use%20Plastics%20-%20Coastal_1.pdf. In the United States, nine states (one de facto) and five territories have banned
single-use plastic bags. A list of the 157 countries that have banned single -use plastics like bags can be found at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-out_of_lightweight_plastic_bags. A list of the 29 countries that have banned single -use
takeout polyethylene (Styrofoam) can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase -out_of_lightweight_plastic_bags.
Canada will ban all plastic bags, straws, stir sticks, six -pack rings, plastic cutlery and food takeout containers by the end of
2021 ( https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/environment/520071 -canada-is-banning-all-plastic-straws-
cutlery-by). The United Kingdom will ban all polystyrene cups and plates, plastic straws, plastic earbuds, and plastic utensils
by 2023 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk -politics-58360064). And France has had a total ban on plastic bags, cups, plates,
and cutlery since 2020 (https://www.globalcitizen.org/fr/content/plastic -bans-around-the-world/).
54 Brooke Bauman, “How Plastics Contribute to Climate Change,” Yale Climate Connections, August 20, 2019
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/08/how -plastics-contribute-to-climate-change/
55 Laura Parker, “A Whopping 91% of Plastic Isn’t Recycled,” National Geographic, December 20, 2018
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/plastic -produced-recycling-waste-ocean-trash-debris-environment
Page 116
Estes Park Environmental Sustainability Task Force - Final Report January 31, 2022
32
56 “Litter in America: Results from the Nation’s Largest Litter Study,” Keep America Beautiful Inc., January 2010
https://kab.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/LitterinAmerica_FactSheet_LitterOverview.pdf
57 “Greenhouse Gases Linked to Degrading Plastic,” University of Hawai’i News, August 1, 2018,
https://www.hawaii.edu/news/2018/08/01/greenhouse -gases-linked-to-degrading-plastic/
58 Microplastics Wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microplastics
59 Claudia Campanale, Carmine Massarelli, Ilaria Savino, Vito Locaputo, and Vito Felice Uricchio, “A Detailed Review Study on
Potential Effects of Microplastics and Additives of Concern on Human Health,” National Institutes of Health, US National
Library of Medicine, February 13, 2020 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068600/
60 “Impact of Plastic in the Polar Regions,” British Antarctic Survey, National Environmental Research Council, October 1,
2017-October 1, 2020 https://www.bas.ac.uk/project/impact -of-plastic-in-the-polar-
regions/#:~:text=Microplastics%20have%20been%20found%20in,a%20variet y%20of%20marine%20species
61 George Wetherbee, Austin Baldwin and James Ranville, “It Is Raining Plastics,” U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S.
Geological Survey, 2019 https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2019/1048/ofr20191048.pdf
Page 117
Page 118
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S
OFFICE
Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
From: Town Administrator Machalek
Date: February 22, 2022
RE: Renaming Request for a Portion of Children’s Park to “Women’s Heritage
Plaza”
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Review the Town’s process for renaming parks and consider setting a public hearing to
rename a portion of Children’s Park to “Women’s Heritage Plaza” at a regular meeting
of the Town Board.
Town Board Direction Requested:
Direction on whether the Town Board wishes to consider the proposed renaming at a
public hearing during a regular Town Board meeting.
Present Situation:
On November 5, 2021, the Town received a request to rename a portion of Children’s
Park to “Women’s Heritage Plaza” in order to properly define the area where the new
Estes Park Women’s Monument is located. This monument was brought to life by a
dedicated group of volunteers who would like to ensure that the name of the area is
consistent with its new use as a place to learn and reflect on the contributions of women
to our community. The Estes Park Women’s Monument project team voted to submit
the proposed name “Women’s Heritage Plaza” to accomplish this goal.
Proposal:
Per Policy 208 (Naming of Town-Owned Parks, Open Spaces, and Facilities), the Town
will only change the name of an existing park, open space, or facility if the following
three conditions are met:
1.There are compelling reasons to consider such a change;
2.There is a thorough study of the change consisting of a public hearing at a
regularly scheduled Town Board meeting; and
3.There is a unanimous vote of the Town Board.
If the Board believes that there are compelling reasons to consider this renaming, the
next step would be to direct staff to schedule an action item for a public hearing at a
regular Town Board meeting to consider and vote on this proposed change.
Page 119
Advantages:
•The proposed name change would reflect the new use of the area and solidify
recognition of this location as a place to learn about and reflect on the
innumerable contributions that women have made to our community.
Disadvantages:
•None
Finance/Resource Impact:
The costs of renaming may be borne by the Town, or the Town Board may request that
the cost of renaming (adding/replacing signage) be borne by the group recommending
the change.
Level of Public Interest
Medium.
Attachments
•Renaming Request
•Policy 208
•Location of Subject Property
Page 120
RECEIVED
�;JI/ 0 5 2021
Town of Estes Park BY· ·t2LJ.D JIME• f 003
Request to Re-Name a Town-Owned Park, Open Space, or facil�-----------..J
1.Applicant General Information:
Name: _Ron Wilcocks_
Date: 11/5/2021
Address: _PO Box 2317 ___ _
City/State: Zip Code: ___ Estes Park, CO 80517 __ _
Telephone: 970-581-7909
Does the Applicant Represent an Organization? YES If Yes,
Name of Organization: Estes Park Women's Monument project
2.Nature of Re-Naming Request: Park
Location: ___ Along the Riverwalk, East of Children's Playground where the new Estes Park Women's
Monument has been installed -------
Proposed Name: ___ Women's Heritage Plaza. ___ _
3.Re-Naming Justification:
We feel that this request meets all aspects listed for justification as follows,
Specific Purpose: To properly define the new area where the Estes Park Women's Monument is located
Historical Feature: To properly highlight the new historical feature (the new Monument) of Estes Park
Geographic Location: To better define the area in terms of the new Monument that now occupies the
area
Deceased Individual: This monument does honor historical Women of Estes Park, some of whom are
deceased.
Geographic Feature: The new Estes Park Women's Monument is a new downtown geographic feature.
Donation/Sponsorship: This Monument was donated to the Town
Adjoining Community Explanation of Justification Attached (Required)?* Yes, See below
The new Estes Park Women's Monument was created via a grassroots, community-based effort to
enhance our Town. The Monument has succeeded in this enhancement goal in many ways, but it is felt
that a further improvement will be to rename the area to be consistent with its new use. This area is
already being heavily visited by guests and locals and leading to a better and richer understanding of the
Women who helped make our Town great. The Estes Park Women's Monument project Team voted to
submit this proposed name change for this area to be consistent with the new use• of this area. The
Attachment 1
Page 121
Team strongly supports this new name for this area to make this area known as the Women's Heritage
Plaza. For example, "I'll meet you at 11:00 at the Women's Heritage Plaza along the Riverwalk". This
new area has a specific purpose, is a new historical feature, has a specific geographic location,
represents some decease individuals, is a new downtown geographic feature, and the Monument was
built via community donations.
Signature:_
/kJ/
____ r'?.....r..--_____,�=---__.�.__\ _____ _
Date: 11/5/2021
Print Name: Ron Wilcocks
*please ensure that the justification addresses the conditions for re-naming contained in Policy 20$.3.b.i
Page 122
Effective Period: Until superceded
Review Schedule: Biennially
Effective Date: 09/14/2021
References: Governing Policies 1.1.3 and 1.3.2
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE
208
Naming of Town-Owned Parks, Open Spaces, and Facilities
1.PURPOSE
D ,____,@
To establish a consistent and systematic approach for selecting names for Town-owned
parks, open spaces, and facilities.
2.POLICY
Maintaining consistent and understandable procedures for naming and re-naming
Town-owned parks, open spaces, and facilities is crucial for identification purposes.
These names aid emergency response, help to develop a sense of place, and help to
honor community leaders.
The Town of Estes Park will follow the procedures outlined in this policy to name or re
name any Town-owned park, open space, or facility. When choosing a name for a
Town-owned facility, park, or open space, the Town will endeavor to ensure that such
names: (1) are appropriate; (2) aid in the identification and location of the property or
facility in question; and (3) encourage the donation of lands, facilities, and funds to the
Town.
3.PROCEDURE
a.Naming a New Town-Owned Park, Open Space, or Facility
Policy 208
Revisions: 0
i.Working Name for Facilities under Consideration or Construction
All new facilities under consideration or construction will be given a working name
by staff.
ii.Naming Criteria
In order to be considered, proposed names for a new Town-owned park, open
space, or facility shall be reflective of at least one of the following criteria:
1)Specific purpose of the facility (e.g., Museum, Events Complex)
2)Geographic location
3)Prominent geographic feature or local reference point
4)Adjoining subdivision/community
Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
09/14/2021
Page 1 of7
Attachment 2
Page 123
5)Historical feature
6)A deceased individual (see section 3.a.iii)
7)An individual or group via a donation or sponsorship agreement (see section
3.a.iv)
iii.Naming a Park, Open Space, or Facility after a Deceased Individual
Consideration shall be given to the naming of a Town-owned park, open space, or
facility after a deceased individual only if both of the following conditions have been
met:
1)The individual has been deceased for at least three (3) years; and
2)The individual has made significant contributions to the Town through a
long-term commitment to the residents and guests of the Town of Estes
Park.
iv.Individual or Group Donations or Sponsorships
Consideration shall be given to the naming of a Town-owned park, open space, or
facility after a group or individual based on a donation or sponsorship only if such
donation or sponsorship comprises 75 percent or more of the overall value of the
park, open space, or facility. This provision shall not apply to any naming rights
sold for the Estes Park Events Complex.
v.Sponsorship Naming Rights
Sponsorship naming rights made by contract, for a specific period of time, are
exempt from this policy.
vi.Naming Process -Parks and Open Spaces
Policy 208
Revisions: 0
The naming of a new Town-owned park or open space will follow the process
below:
1)Public Announcement: When the Town signs a contract to create a new
park or to purchase land to be used as a park or open space, the Town
Clerk's Office will publish a legal notice in the paper of record inviting the
public to submit prospective names for the park or open space. The
deadline for submitting names will be two weeks from the date of the printed
legal notice. The legal notice shall refer to the property by description, in
addition to common/informal names. The Public Information Office will also
notify the community of the opportunity to participate through a news
release and other appropriate channels.
2)Review and Recommendation: Within two weeks of the deadline to submit
names, the Town Clerk will submit to the Parks Advisory Board all of the
names received that meet the criteria in section 3.a.ii. The Parks Advisory
Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
09/14/2021
Page 2 of?
Page 124
Board will review the submitted names, and make a recommendation to the
Town Board.
3)Notice of Recommendation: A legal notice shall be published in the paper
of record as soon as reasonable after the Parks Advisory Board submits its
recommended name to the Town Board. This legal notice shall include the
proposed name, a description of the park or open space to be named, and
the time and place of the Board Meeting at which the recommendation will
be considered. The legal notice must be published at least 30 days prior to
the Town Board meeting where the recommendation will be considered.
The Public Information Office will also notify the community of the
opportunity to participate through a news release and other appropriate
channels.
4)Town Board Review and Approval: Upon receipt of the recommendation
from the Parks Advisory Board, the Town Board will consider the
recommended name at a regular Board meeting as an action item.
vii.Naming Process -Facilities
Policy 208
Revisions: 0
The naming of a new Town-owned facility will follow the process below:
5)Public Announcement: When the Town signs a contract to construct a new
facility, the Town Clerk's Office will publish a legal notice in the paper of
record inviting the public to submit prospective names for the facility. The
deadline for submitting names will be two weeks from the date of the printed
legal notice. The legal notice shall refer to the facility by description, in
addition to common/informal names. The Public Information Office will also
notify the community of the opportunity to participate through a news
release and other appropriate channels.
6)Review: Within two weeks of the deadline to submit names, the Town Clerk
will submit to the Town Board all of the names received that meet the criteria
in Section 3.a.ii.
7)Notice of Submitted Names: A legal notice shall be published in the paper
of record as soon as reasonable after the Town Clerk submits the list of
qualifying names to the Town Board. This legal notice shall include the
qualifying proposed names, a description of the facility to be named, and
the time and place of the Board Meeting at which the recommendation will
be considered. The legal notice must be published at least 30 days prior to
the Town Board meeting where the recommendation will be considered.
The Public Information Office will also notify the community of the
opportunity to participate through a news release and other appropriate
channels.
Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
09/14/2021
Page 3 of7
Page 125
8)Town Board Review and Approval: Upon receipt of the list of qualifying
names from the Town Clerk, the Town Board will consider the
recommended name at a regular Board meeting as an action item.
b.Re-Naming a Town-Owned Park, Open Space, or Facility
i.Conditions
Policy 208
Revisions: 0
The existing names of Town-owned parks, open spaces, and facilities are deemed
to have historic recognition. The Town of Estes Park will not change the name of
any existing Town-owned park, open space, or facility unless: (1) there are
compelling reasons to consider such change; (2) there is a thorough study of the
change consisting of a public hearing at a regularly scheduled Town Board
meeting; and (3) there is a unanimous vote of the Town Board.
Additionally, the Town Board will consider renaming a Town-owned park, open
space, or facility to commemorate a person or persons only when said person or
persons: (1) is/are deceased, (2) has/have made a major, overriding contribution
to the Town; (3) has/have made contributions that have not been honored in
another manner; and (4) has/have notable historic significance to the Estes Valley.
Potential re-naming applicants should consider other appropriate options to
memorialize individuals including, but not limited to, plaques, memorial benches,
and memorial trees.
ii.Requests to Re-Name a Town-Owned Park, Open Space, or Facility
Any requests to re-name a Town-owned park, open space, or facility shall use the
following procedure:
1)The applicant shall submit a completed "Request to Re-Name a Town
Owned Park, Open Space, or Facility" application form (Appendix A) to the
Town Clerk.
2)The application will be reviewed for completeness based upon the naming
criteria set forth in section 3.a.ii of this policy.
3)Completed applications will be forwarded to the Town Administrator and
Town Board.
4)If the Town Board wishes to consider the proposed re-naming, the Board
will set a date to consider the proposal as an Action Item on a Town Board
Meeting Agenda.
iii.Costs of Renaming
The Town Board may request that any cost of renaming (e.g. the replacement of
signs) be borne by the individual or group recommending the change.
iv.Noticing of Google
Upon any renaming, Town staff will endeavor to ensure that said renaming is
reflected on Google Maps as soon as possible.
Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
09/14/2021
Page 4 of7
Page 126
c.Naming of Meeting Rooms in or on Town-Owned Parks, Open Spaces, or
Facilities
Meeting rooms located in or on Town-owned parks, open spaces, or facilities may be
named administratively by the Town Administrator.
d.Revocation of Name
Under extraordinary circumstances that would cast a negative image upon the Town,
any naming of Town-owned parks, open spaces, or facilities in honor of an individual,
family, or group may be revoked at the discretion of the Town Board.
e.Naming of Streets
All streets will be named in accordance with Policy 421 (Addressing and Street
Naming Policy).
Approved:
9 / \� l 'cOL.-\Date
Policy 208
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
09/14/2021
Page 5 of 7
Page 127
APPENDIX 1 -Request to Re-Name a Town-Owned Park, Open Space, or Facility
Town of Estes Park
Request to Re-Name a Town-Owned Park, Open Space, or Facility
11. Applicant General Information
Name: _____________ _
Address: ____________ _
Zip Code: ____________ _
Does the Applicant Represent an Organization? YD ND
If Yes, Name of Organization: _________________ _
12. Nature of Re-Naming Request
Park D OR Open Space D OR Facility D
Location: ____________________ _
Proposed Name: __________________ _
13. Re-Naming Justification
Policy 208
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
Date: ____ _
City /State: ____ _
Telephone: ____ _
09/14/2021
Page 6 of 7
Page 128
D Specific Purpose D Historical Feature
D Geographic Location D Deceased Individual
D Geographic Feature D Donation/Sponsorship
D Adjoining Community
Explanation of Justification Attached (Required)?* YD ND
Signature Date
Print Name
*Please ensure that the justification addresses the conditions for re-naming contained in Policy 208.3.b.i
Policy 208
Revisions: O Town of Estes Park, Town Administrator's Office
09/14/2021
Page 7 of 7
Page 129
. ·-.,�-t. •• , -' �-:·.�••� .... � , P' :. ,., 1 .-'
' . . �ocation of Subject Property;
}, ..·•' .
f' ,,'\� > ·•�Jff'' _l_ • ' --Ni I.,, •''1' ,..-� '• II -' ' ..• . 1:-f�� �--....._ �-"'
f.,: .. �
.1
-· .. ••· • •. . \ ... \ •. .• ��- .•. :,..'f ;·-' . � .
....: f-. • -� • ,. �
Attachment 3
Page 130
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S
OFFICE
Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
From: Town Administrator Machalek
Date: February 22, 2022
RE: Semi-Annual Compliance Review with Board Governing Policies – Policy
1.10 Self-Monitoring of the Board
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Conduct semi-annual self-monitoring of compliance with Town Board Governing
Policies per Governing Policy 1.10.
Present Situation:
Policy 1.10 (Self-Monitoring of the Board) establishes a semi-annual review process to
ensure that the Town Board is systematically and rigorously monitoring its compliance,
both individually and collectively, with the Board’s adopted Governing Policies.
Monitoring is on an exception basis, which means that discussion at the Study Session
will be limited to Town Board member concerns about compliance with the policies
listed in section 1.10.6.
Finance/Resource Impact:
N/A
Level of Public Interest
Low
Attachments
1. Town Board Governing Policies
Page 131
Attachment 1
Page 132
Introduction
These Governing Policies, as adopted by the Board of Trustees, incorporate four categories of
policy. The first category is the Governance Process, which clarifies the board's own job and rules,
how they work together and how the Board relates to the citizens of Town of Estes Park. Category
two is Board/ Staff Linkages which outlines the delegation and accountability through the Town
Administrator. The third Category is Executive Limitations which describes the prudence and ethics,
and limitations of the authority and responsibilities of the Town Administrator in his/her role as the
Chief Appointed Official for the board directing the staff of the Board of Trustees. The first three all
work together to efficiently and effectively implement the fourth Category, which is the vision,
direction, and policy of the Board of Trustees. These describe what benefits will occur, for which
people, at what cost.
To further its accountability to the citizens and taxpayers of the Town of Estes Park, the Board
of Trustees adheres to the following principles of governance:
1.Ownership: The Board connects its authority and accountability to its "owners" -the citizens
and taxpayers of the Town -seeing its task as servant leader to and for them.
2.Governance Position: With the ownership above it and operational matters below it,
governance forms a distinct link in the chain of command and authority. The Board's role is that of
commander, not advisor. It exists to exercise that authority and properly empower others rather
than to be management's consultant, or adversary. The Trustees-not the staff-bears full and
direct responsibility for the process and products of governance, just as it bears accountability for
any authority and performance expectations delegated to others.
3.Board Holism: The Board of Trustees makes authoritative decisions directed toward
management and toward itself, its individual Trustees, and committees only as a total group. That
is, Town Board authority is a group authority rather than a summation of individual authorities.
4.Goals Policies: The Town Board defines, in writing, the (a) results, changes, or benefits that
should come about for specified goals (b) recipients, beneficiaries, or otherwise defined impacted
groups, and (c) at what cost or relative priority for the various benefits or various beneficiaries.
These are not all the possible "side benefits" that may occur, but those that form the purpose of the
organization, the achievement of which constitutes organizational success. Policy documents
containing solely these decisions are categorized as "Goals" in the policies that follow.
5.Board Means Policies: The Board of Trustees defines, in writing, those behaviors, values
added, practices, disciplines, and conduct of the Board itself and of the Board's
delegation/accountability relationship with its own subcomponents and with the management part of
the organization. Because these are not decisions relating to Goals, they are called "Board Means"
to distinguish them from "Ends" and "Staff Means". These decisions are categorized as
"Governance Process" and "Board Management Delegation".
2
Page 133
6.Management Limitations Policies: The Board makes decisions with respect to its staff's means
decisions and actions only in a proscriptive way in order simultaneously (a) to avoid prescribing
means and (b) to put off limits those means that would be unacceptable even if they work. These
decisions are categorized as "Management Limitations" in the policies that follow.
7.Self-Enforcing -These policies are collectively adopted by the Estes Park Board of Trustees
and as such only the board and individual trustees are responsible for compliance both individually
and collectively.
3
Page 134
TOWN OF ESTES PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES
GOVERNING POLICIES MANUAL
Table of Contents
Category 1. Governance Process
Policy 1.0
Policy 1.1
Policy 1.2
Policy 1.3
Policy 1.4
Policy 1.5
Policy 1.6
Policy 1.7
Policy 1.8
Policy 1.9
Policy 1.10
Governance Commitment
Governing Style
Operating Principles
Board Job Description
Mayor's Responsibility
Reserved
Board Appointed Committee Principles
Board Liaison Roles
Board Committee Principles
Annual Planning and Agendas
Self-Monitoring of the Board
Category 2. Board/Staff Linkage
Policy 2.0
Policy 2.1
Policy 2.2
Policy 2.3
Policy 2.4
Governance -Management Connection
Delegation to the Town Administrator
Town Administrator Job Description
Monitoring Town Administrator Performance
Town Attorney
Category 3. Staff Limitations
Policy 3.0
Policy 3.1
Policy 3.2
Policy 3.3
Policy 3.4
Policy 3.5
Policy 3.6
Policy 3.7
Policy 3.8
Policy 3.9
Policy 3.10
Policy 3.11
General Town Administrator Constraint
Customer Service
Treatment of Staff
Financial Planning
Financial Condition and Activities
Asset Protection
Emergency Town Administrator Backup and Replacement
Emergency Preparedness
Compensation and Benefits
Communication and Support to the Board
Capital Equipment and Improvements Programming
General Town Administrator Constraint -Quality of Life
4
Page 135
Policy 3.12
Policy 3.13
General Town Administrator -Internal Operating Procedures
Town Organizational Plan
Category 4. Ends Statements
Policy 3.0 Ends Statements and Key Outcome Areas of the Board of
Trustees
5
Page 136
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.0 POLICY TITLE: GOVERNANCE COMMITMENT
Within the authority granted to it by Colorado Revised Statutes, the purpose of the Town of
Estes Park Board of Trustees (the "Board"), on behalf of the citizens of Town of Estes Park, is
to see to it that the Town of Estes Park government 1) achieves results for citizens at an
acceptable cost and 2) avoids unacceptable actions and situations.
1.1 The Board of Trustees will approach its task with a style which emphasizes
outward vision rather than an internal preoccupation, strategic leadership more
than administrative detail, clear distinction of Board and staff roles, collective rather
than individual decisions, future rather than past or present, and proactively rather
than reactively.
1.2 The operating principles and commitments of the Board of Trustees, as it relates to
the working relationship between the Trustees, staff and citizens of the Town of
Estes Park, are to emphasize fairness; responsibilities as elected officials; respect;
honesty and integrity; and communication.
1.3 The job of the Board of Trustees is to make contributions which lead the Town
Government toward the desired performance and to assure that it occurs. The
Board's specific contributions are unique to its trusteeship role and necessary for
proper governance and management.
1.4 The responsibility of the Mayor is, primarily, to establish procedural integrity and
representation of the Board of Trustees and the Town to outside parties (as
delegated by the Board).
1.5 The Board expects of its members ethical and businesslike conduct.
1.6 The Board of Trustees may establish committees to advise the Board in carrying
out its responsibilities. Other than those statutorily required, all committees
appointed by the Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees exist so that Board
decisions (a) will be made from an informed position, and (b) will be made in a
public forum consistent with Board policy.
1.7 The Board of Trustees may appoint an individual Trustee to serve as the official liaison
of the Board to Town Boards and Commissions. The Board of Trustees may appoint an
individual Trustee to serve as the official liaison to other community groups.
1.8 Board Committees, when used, will be assigned so as to reinforce the wholeness of the
Board's job and so as never to interfere with delegation from the Board to Town
Administrator. The purpose of Board Committee's shall be to provide more indepth
discussion and information on the specific areas assigned to the Committee.
6
Page 137
Committee's may not vote or adopt policy, but may make recommendations to the Town
Board for action.
1.9 The Town Board will prepare and follow an annual agenda plan that includes (1) a
complete re-exploration of Goals policies and (2) opportunity for continuous improvement
in Town Board performance through Town Board education, enriched input, and
deliberation.
1.10 The Board of Trustees will systematically and rigorously monitor compliance with these
adopted policies, both individual and collectively, to determine the extent to which
policies are being followed.
7
Page 138
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.1
Rev 7-25-17 POLICY TITLE: GOVERNING STYLE
The Board of Trustees will approach its task with a style which emphasizes outward vision
rather than an internal preoccupation, strategic leadership more than administrative detail,
clear distinction of Board and staff roles, collective rather than individual decisions, future
rather than past or present, and proactive rather than reactive.
In this spirit:
(1)The Board of Trustees will operate fully aware of its trusteeship and
stewardship obligation to its constituents.
(2)The Board of Trustees will conduct itself individually and collectively with
whatever discipline is needed to govern with excellence through:
1.Being committed to matters such as policy making principles, role
clarification, speaking with one voice and self-policing of any
tendency to stray from governance adopted in Board policies.
2.Individual Board members' thorough preparation for meetings and
regular attendance.
3.Continuation of Board development including orientation of new
members in the Board's governance process, participation in
relevant continuing education, and periodic Board discussion of
process improvement.
(3)The Board of Trustees will direct, the organization through the careful
establishment of broad written policies reflecting the Board's values and
perspectives. The Board's emphasis will be on impacts on the Town outside
the organization, not on the administrative means.
(4)The Board of Trustees, as trustee for and working with the citizens of the Town
of Estes Park, will be the primary initiator of policy, and will also be receptive to
other policy initiatives from citizens and staff. The Board, not the staff, will be
responsible for Board performance as specified in the policy entitled Board Job
Products.
(5)The Board of Trustees will be accountable to the Citizens of the Town of Estes
Park for competent, conscientious and effective accomplishment of its
obligations as a body. It will allow no individual, committee or entity to usurp
8
Page 139
this role or hinder this commitment.
(6)The Board of Trustees will monitor and discuss the Board's own process and
performance, and ensure the continuity of its governance capability through
continuing education and training.
(7)A member of the Board of Trustees who votes in the minority is free to express
his/her dissent but will respect the process and legitimacy of the majority
decision.
(8) All Town Trustees will respect legitimacy of the opinions and reasoning of other
Trustees when and after making board decisions.
(9)Agree not to hold grudges or bring disagreements from past actions into future
decisions.
(1 O)A member of the Board of Trustees who, in their sole opinion, believes they
have a conflict of interest or for any other reason believes that they cannot
make a fair and impartial decision in a legislative or quasi-judicial decision, will
recuse themselves from the discussion and decision. Any recusal will be
made prior to any board discussion of the issue.
(11)Any Trustee may choose to abstain from voting on any question, at their sole
discretion. If there is not conflict of interest or reason for recusal as outlined
in 1.1(10), the trustee may participate fully in Board discussions of the issue,
yet abstain from voting, should they so choose.
9
Page 140
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.2
Rev 7-25-17
POLICY TITLE: OPERA TING PRINCIPLES
The operating principles and commitments of the Board of Trustees, as it relates to the
working relationship between the Trustees, staff and citizens of Town of Estes Park, are to
emphasize fairness; responsibilities as elected officials; respect; honesty and integrity; and
communication. As such, the Board shall adopt and comply with a Board Code of Conduct
and associated Operating Principles
10
Page 141
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.3 POLICY TITLE: BOARD JOB DESCRIPTION
The job of the Board of Trustees is to lead the Town Government toward the desired
performance and to assume a good faith effort toward those objectives. The Board's
leadership is unique to its trusteeship role and necessary for proper governance and
management.
1.3.1 The products of the Board shall be:
1.Linkage: As the Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees places a high
value on open, participatory government, the board will produce the
linkage between Town of Estes Park government and the Citizens of
Town of Estes Park.
A.Needs Assessment: The Board of Trustees will strive to identify the
needs of the citizens as they relate to Town of Estes Park's activities
and scope of influence, and shall translate such knowledge into the
articulation of Board Objectives policies (see definition below).
B.Advocacy and Ambassadorship: The Board of Trustees will act as
the representatives of the citizens to the Town of Estes Park
government, and shall take steps to inform and clarify:
i.the citizens relationship with government, and
ii.the organization's focus on future results, and as well as present
accomplishments.
C.Communication:
i.Any Board member expressing a personal point of view on a
matter of Town business must include language which states
the views expressed do not represent the view of the Town,
rather they are the official's personal opinions, unless
previously authorized to speak on behalf of the Board of
Trustees, or when articulating a position official adopted by
the Board of Trustees.
ii.ii. Board members should recognize that they may be legally
liable for anything they write, present online or say.
2.Written governing policies that, at the broadest levels, address each
category of organizational decision:
A.GOVERNANCE PROCESS: Specification of how the Board of
Trustees conceives carries out and monitors its own task
11
Page 142
B.STAFF LIMITATIONS: Constraints on staff authority which establish
the prudence and ethics boundaries within which all Town
Administrator and staff activity and decisions must take place.
C.BOARD/STAFF LINKAGE: How power is delegated and its proper
use monitored; the role, authority and accountability of the Town
Administrator (and the Town Attorney) ..
D.OUTCOMES: Organizational products, effects, benefits, to answer
the questions for (what good, for which recipients, and at what
cost?).
3.The Board will produce assurance of:
A.Town Administrator performance (in accordance with policies in 2A
and 2B)
B.Town Attorney performance (in accordance with policies in 2A and
2B)
4.Adopted resolutions, regulations, ordinances, and fee schedules; legislative
positions; the Audit; the Budget; Boards and Commissions; and statutorily mandated
items.
1.3.2 Role of Town Trustees
1.3.2.1 Representation:
i.Providing leadership for the Town on behalf of the citizens of Estes Park.
ii.Representing and acting in the best interest of citizens of the Town of Estes
Park.
iii.Being knowledgeable of issues, researching background information,
attending regularly scheduled meetings, and acting as a resource for citizens'
concerns.
iv.Serving as a conduit for information from citizens to the Town Administrator
and the Mayor in responding to questions and individual problems.
v.Finding a balanced approach for addressing competing interests among
constituent groups to ensure the community is fairly represented.
vi.Representing the Board of Trustees on standing committees of the Town for
the purpose of monitoring major Town activities and policy implementation.
1.3.2.2 Legislative:
I.Serving as the governing body of the Town and holding all legislative and
corporate powers of the Town specifically granted or implied by statutory
provisions and the Municipal Code.
II.Enacting ordinances, resolutions and policies for the governance of the
Town of Estes Park and protecting the life, health and property of its
citizens and visitors.
Ill. Establishing policy for the direction of the Town Board and Town Staff.
IV.Establishing fiscal policy, financial targets, and budget goals for the Town
government.
12
Page 143
V.Having final decision making responsibilities over pertinent land use
issues and application of development code requirements within the Town
of Estes Park.
1.3.2.3 Quasi-Judicial:
i.Acting in a quasi-judicial manner in matters brought before it that relate to
public hearings, appeals, land use, and liquor licensing.
ii.Making decisions concerning quasi-judicial matters based upon testimony
presented at formal hearings which are normally conducted during regularly
scheduled Town Board meetings.
iii.Not accepting nor seeking outside input or lobbying that attempts to influence
their decision prior to the quasi-judicial Public Hearing. Any and all ex parte
communication shall be disclosed at the beginning of the hearing. Not doing
so may cause a Trustee to be disqualified from the proceedings.
1.3.2.4 Communications:
I.Following a formal decision, acting as a united body, not as individual
Trustees, and acknowledging the decision of the Town Board.
II.The Town Administrator is the sole point of contact between the Trustees, as
policy makers, and Town Staff.
Ill. Interacting with the media, governmental entities, the public or other bodies
as individual Trustee and not as a representative of the majority of Trustees
unless an official position or legislative action has been established or
authorized to do so.
IV.Communicating to the Mayor and other Trustees items of importance from
their respective committees and providing information that may be necessary
to keep other members aware of important Town activities or critical
functions.
V.In times of community emergency, it is important that the Town Board speak
with one voice. The Mayor, or the Mayor Pro-Tern, if the Mayor is not
available, shall speak for the Board during an emergency. Other trustees will
refer all requests for information to the Mayor or Mayor Pro-Tern. The Mayor
will coordinate all communication with the incident commander and the Town
Administrator. The purpose of this policy is not to restrict the communication
of the trustees or the Mayor, but to insure all communication is timely and
accurate and is in concert with the incident response plan.
13
Page 144
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.4 POLICY TITLE: MAYOR'S RESPONSIBILITY
REV 2 2016
The responsibility of the Mayor is, primarily, to establish procedural integrity and
representation of the Board of Trustees and the Town to outside parties (as delegated by
the Board). Accordingly:
1.4.1. The responsibility of the Mayor is to consistently guide the behavior of the
Board with its own rules and those legitimately imposed upon it from outside
the organization.
1.4.1.1. Meeting agendas and discussion content will be only those issues
which, according to Board policy, clearly belong to the Board to
decide, not the Town Administrator.
1.4.1.2. Deliberation will be fair, open, orderly and thorough, but also efficient,
limited to time, and kept to the point.
a. 1.4.2. The authority of the Mayor is to preside over meetings and to sign documents
as authorized by the Board of Trustees and to preside over the evaluation of the
Town Administrator by the Town Board.
1.4.3. The Mayor shall not act on behalf of the Town in any unilateral manner, except
as approved by the Board of Trustees. This shall include any appointment of
committee or board positions, making any financial or other binding obligations
on behalf of the town, or expressing the official position of the Town on any
matter.
1 .4.4 Representation:
1 .4.4.1 Provide leadership for the Town of Estes Park.
1.4.4.2 Serve as the primary representative of the Town of Estes Park in official
and ceremonial functions.
1.4.4.3 Represent the Town in interaction with other government agencies.
1 .4.4.4 Be the spokesperson for the Town unless the Town Board has decided
otherwise.
1.4.4.5 Represent the Town Board as a liaison with the Town Administrator to
promote the timely flow of information between the Town Board, Town Staff
and other governmental organizations.
1.4.4.6 Represent the Town on the Platte River Power Authority Board.
1.4.5 Enactment:
1.4.5.1 Mayor in conjunction with the Town Board and Town Administrator
enforces the ordinances and laws of the Town.
1.4.5.2 Signs all warrants (see section 2.12.020 of the Municipal Code).
14
Page 145
1.4.5.3 Executes all ordinances and resolutions authorizing expenditure of money
or the entering into a contract before they become valid.
1.4.5.4 Mayor with, Town Board approval, appoints members of committees, and
other entities that may be necessary from time to time for the effective
governance of the Town.
1.4.5.5 Facilitating policies and procedures for the effective management of the
Board, establishing Town goals in conjunction with the Town Board,
promoting consensus and enhancing Board performance.
1.4.6 Mayor Pro Tern -Mayor Pro Tern shall assume all duties of the Mayor in the Mayor's
absence in accordance with Section 2.16.010 of the Municipal Code.
1.4.7 -Mayoral Appointments
1.4.7.1 -Board Standing Committees -"At the first regular meeting following the
certification of the results of each biennial election, the Mayor shall appoint
three (3) Trustees to the following standing committees: Community
Development/Community Service and Public Safety/ Utilities/Public Works;
and the Mayor shall appoint two (2) Trustees to the Audit committee with the
Mayor serving as the third member.
(Ord. 26-88 §1(part), 1988; Ord. 7-03 §1, 2003; Ord. 10-10 §1, 2010; Ord.
10-14 §1, 2014; Ord. 13-15, § 1, 9-22-2015)
1.4.7.2 Special Assignments -
The Mayor may nominate trustees to serve on committees, community
groups, or in some other capacities as a representative of the Town. The
Mayor shall present the nomination of any such appointments to the Board
for approval at a regular town board meeting. The Mayor will make every
effort to distribute special assignments equitably among the members of the
Board.
1.4.7.3 Special committees. -Special committees may be established by the Board
of Trustees. The Mayor shall appoint all members of any special committee
subject to the approval of the Board of Trustees. (EP Municipal Code
2.08.020)
1.4.8 Voting Privileges -The Mayor has full voting privileges for items coming before the
Board of Trustees. (Ord. 04-16)
15
Page 146
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.5
Rev 7-25-17 POLICY TITLE: Reserved
16
Page 147
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.6
REV 4/15/15
POLICY TITLE: BOARD COMMITTEE
PRINGPLES
For simplicity and clarity in this policy, the term "Committee" shall refer to any board, commission, task
force, council, committee or any other volunteer group of citizens.
The Board of Trustees may establish committees to advise the Board in carrying out its
responsibilities. Other than those statutorily required, all committees appointed by the Town
of Estes Park Board of Trustees exist so that Board decisions (a) will be made from an
informed position, and (b) will be made in a public forum consistent with Board policy.
Accordingly:
1.6.1 Committees which are appointed by the Board of Trustees.
1.6.1.1 -It is the policy of the Board of Trustees to encourage citizen
involvement in town affairs, as well as to avoid conflicts involving trustees who
serve on committees, boards, commissions and organizations. For these
reasons, the trustees have agreed that a trustee shall serve only as a liaison to
town committees, commissions and boards.
1.6.1.2 -Other than those legislatively directed, committees may not speak or act
for the Board of Trustees except when formally given such authority for specific
and time-limited purposes. Expectations and authority will be carefully stated in
order not to conflict with authority delegated to the staff.
1.6.1.3 -Committees appointed by the board are to help the Board of Trustees
do its job, not to help the staff do its job. Committees ordinarily will assist the
Board by preparing policy alternatives and implications for Board deliberation.
Committees are not created by the Board to advise staff. The Board
understands that at times the Town Administrator or Town Staff may convene ad
hoc or ongoing advisory boards to serve as advisors for operational issues.
These advisory groups are subject to the same limitations as Board appointed
committees.
1.6.1.4 -In keeping with the Board of Trustees' broader focus, committees
normally will not have direct dealings with current staff operations. Committees
cannot exercise authority over staff.
1.6.1.5 -Because the staff works for the Board, they will not be expected to
obtain approval of a committee before taking action unless otherwise authorized
by state statute, Board policy, or federal regulation.
1.6.1.6 -Because of the differing nature of committees, some of which are
defined by state statute, the Board shall have and keep current an operating
policy defining the role of different committees and setting forth rules and
procedures for Town of Estes Park committees (Operating Policy 102).
17
Page 148
1.6.1. 7 -The authority and responsibility of any committee will not duplicate the
authority or responsibility of:
a)The Board of Trustees
b)Town Staff
c)Any other committee
d)Town Auditor
e)Town Attorney
1.6.1.8 -All committees will undergo a regular sunset review, at least once every
five years, unless otherwise provided for more frequently and according to a
staggered schedule to be adopted separately by the Board of Trustees.
1.6.1.9 -Said sunset review shall include a review of the Board and
Commission's Mission Statement, and of the Board of Trustees' charge to the
Committee of their role, responsibility and authority.
1.6.2 -Outside Committees
At times a Trustee may seek to serve or be asked to serve on an outside
committee not appointed by the Board of Trustees. A Trustee may seek or be
asked to serve on an outside committee in an official capacity representing the
Board and the Town of Estes Park, or as an individual Board member, not as the
official representative of the Town or the Board.
1.6.2.1 -Official Representation
a)No Trustee may represent the Town or the Board of Trustees or represent
themselves as being an official representative or speak for the Town or the
Board without have first been officially designated as the Town's
representative by the Board of Trustees at a regular meeting of the Board.
b)The Mayor may nominate trustees to serve on committees, community groups,
or in some other capacities as a representative of the Town. The Mayor shall
present the nomination of any such appointments to the Board for approval at a
regular town board meeting. The Mayor will make every effort to distribute
special assignments equitably among the members of the Board.
c)A trustee serving on an outside committee shall not chair the outside
committee, board, commission or organization (with the existing exceptions
of the Platte River Power Authority Board or the County Open Lands
Board) without prior approval of the full Board of Trustees.
1.6.2.2 -Individual Representation
a)Individual trustees have the right to participate as an individual in any
outside group or committee.
18
Page 149
b)When participating as an individual trustee, the trustee should clearly
express to the committee membership that he/she is there as an
individual and do not speak for nor represent the Town of Estes Park or
the Board of Trustees.
c)When participating on any outside committee, trustees should be cautious to
avoid any real or perceived conflict of interest and any involvement that
could compromise the role of the trustee in any quasi-judicial actions or other
decisions.
19
Page 150
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.7
REV 4/15/15
POLICY TITLE: BOARD LIAISON ROLES
Trustees may serve as the official liaison of the Board to Town committees. The Board of
Trustees may appoint an individual Trustee to serve as the official liaison to other community
groups.
1. 7 .1 Appointment -The Mayor may nominate trustees to serve as a Board Liaison. The Mayor
shall present the nomination of any such appointments to the Board for approval at a
regular town board meeting. The Mayor will make every effort to distribute special
assignments equitably among the members of the Board.
1.7.2 Term - A Trustee shall serve as the Town Board Liaison solely at the pleasure of the
Town Board, with no specific term limit.
1 . 7 .3 Duties of a Liaison
1. 7 .3.1 Communicate with the committee when Board of Trustees communication is
needed and to serve as the primary two-way communication channel
between the Town Board and the committee or community group.
1.7.3.2 Review applications, interview candidates and make recommendations to the
Town Board for final approval.
1.7.3.3 Serve as the primary Trustees' contact for the committee or community
group.
1.7.3.4 Attend assigned committee or community group meetings when requested or
whenever appropriate, in the opinion of the Trustee liaison. Trustee liaisons
are not expected to attend every meeting of the committee or group.
1.7.3.5 The liaison is not a member of the committee and when in attendance at a
meeting is there as an observer for the Board of Trustees and a resource for
the committee. Participation in board discussions should be minimal and
restricted to clarification of Town Board positions or collection of information
to bring back to the full Town Board.
20
Page 151
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.8
Rev 7-25-17 POLICY TITLE: BOARD STANDING COMMITTEES
For the purpose of this policy, Board Committee is defined as a sub-committee of the Board of
Trustees and membership is composed solely of Town Trustees.
1.8.1 Board Committees -The Board shall have the following Board Committees (EP Municipal Code
2.08.010)
1.8.1.1 Community Development and Community Services Committee -Responsible for
discussions of issues and policy associated with Community Planning, Building
and Code Compliance, Fairgrounds and Events, Museum, Senior Center, Visitors
Center, Finance and Administration
1.8.1.2 Public Works, Utilities and Public Safety Committee -Responsible for
discussions of issues and policy associated with Police, Engineering, Facilities,
Parks, Streets, and Utilities.
1.8.1.3 Audit Committee -Responsible for supervising and working with the Town
Auditors in the preparation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and any
other formal audits, as required.
1.8.2. Board Committees, when used, will be assigned so as to reinforce the wholeness of the
Board's job and so as never to interfere with delegation from the Board to Town Administrator.
The purpose of Board Committee's shall be to provide more indepth discussion and information
on the specific areas assigned to the Committee. Committee's may not adopt policy, but shall
make recommendations to the Town Board for action.
1.8.3 The following principles shall guide the appointment and operation of all Town Board
Committees:
1.8.3.1 Board Committees may not speak or act for the Board except when formally given
such authority for specific and time limited purposes. Expectations and authority will
be carefully stated in order not to conflict with authority delegated to the Town
Administrator.
1.8.3.2 Board Committees cannot exercise authority over staff. Because the Town
Administrator works for the full board, he or she will not be required to obtain
approval of a Board, Committee or Commission before an executive action.
1.8.3.3 Board committees shall consist of no more than 3 trustees so that the committee is
never a quorum of the Town Board.
21
Page 152
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.9 POLICY TITLE: ANNUAL PLANNING AND AGENDAS
1.9 The Town Board will prepare and follow an annual agenda plan that includes (1) a complete
re-exploration of Goals policies and (2) opportunity for continuous improvement in Town Board
performance through Town Board education, enriched input, and deliberation.
Accordingly:
1.9.1 The Town Board annual planning cycle will conclude each year on July 1, so that
administrative planning and budgeting can be based on accomplishing a one-year segment of
long-term Goals.
1.9.1.1 The cycle will start with the Town Board development of its agenda for the next
year. In April-May of each year, the Board will adopt its key objectives for the
following year.
1.9.1.2 The Town Board will identify its priorities for Goals, objectives and other issues to
be resolved in the coming year, and will identify the information-gathering
necessary to fulfill its role. This may include consultations with selected groups in
the ownership, other methods of gaining ownership input, governance education,
and other education related to Goals issues (e.g. presentations by advocacy
groups, demographers, other providers, and staff).
1.9.1.3 The Board of Trustees, with the assistance of the Town Administrator at the
commencement of the Town Board annual planning cycle, prepare a tentative
agenda plan for the following year's meetings.
1.9.2 AGENDAS
1.9.2.1 Regular Board Meetings -The Town Clerk will prepare the agenda for any regular
meeting of the board, in consultation with the Town Administrator and staff. A draft
agenda will be distributed to the Board of Trustees for comment prior to the
publication of the agenda.
Individual trustees may request agenda matters for Town Board consideration at
least two weeks prior to the regular board meeting. If any Trustee objects to an
item on the draft agenda when distributed, the Town Administrator will only place
items on the agenda with the direction of a majority of the Board.
The Town Administrator may add routine administrative and consent items to any
Board agenda.
1.9.2.2 Study Sessions -The Town Board will approve the schedule for upcoming Study
Sessions. The Mayor, Trustees or staff may request or recommend any appropriate
22
Page 153
matters for Town Board consideration; however the Town Administrator will only
place items on a Study Session agenda with the direction of a majority of the Board.
1.9.2.3 By an affirmative vote of a majority of the Trustees present at a meeting,
additional matters may be added to the agenda of any such meeting, as long as it is
allowed by statute.
1.9.3 The Town Board will attend to Consent Agenda items (those items delegated to the Town
Administrator yet required by law or contract to be Town Board-approved, or minor non
controversial or routine matters) as expeditiously as possible.
1.9.4 Monitoring reports due and/or submitted to the Town Board will be on the Town Board
Meeting agenda for acceptance. Discussion of the reports will be only for indication of policy
violations or if the Town Board does not consider the Interpretation to be reasonable. Potential,
extensive policy revisions under consideration will be scheduled during a Town Board Work
Session or future Town Board Meeting.
23
Page 154
POLICY TYPE: GOVERNANCE PROCESS
POLICY 1.10 POLICY TITLE: SELF -MONITORING OF THE BOARD
The Board of Trustees will systematically and rigorously monitor compliance with these adopted
policies, both individual and collectively, to determine the extent to which policies are being
followed. Accordingly:
1.10.1. The purpose of monitoring is simply to determine the degree to which Board
policies are being met. Monitoring will be as automatic as possible, using a
minimum of Board time so that meetings can focus on creating the future.
1.10.2 Self-monitoring of compliance with these policies will be completed by the Town
Board twice a year, in August and February at a regularly scheduled Board Study
Session. Monitoring shall be on an exception basis.
(a)The Town Administrator will notify the Board of the scheduled self-monitoring
session a minimum of two weeks prior to the meeting.
(b)Each Board member should review the policy list in section 1.10.6 prior to the
scheduled study session
(c)Any Board member who has a concern about compliance with any of the policies
listed in 1.10.6, or who wishes to discuss the content or interpretation of any of
the policies, should notify the Mayor at least one week prior to the meeting.
( d)Discussion at the Study Session will be limited to those polices brought to the
attention of the Mayor by a member of the Board. All other policies shall be
deemed in compliance.
1.10.3 In every case, the Board of Trustees will judge whether (a) the interpretation is
reasonable, and (b) whether data demonstrate accomplishment of, or compliance with,
the Town Board's interpretation.
1.10.4 In every case, the standard for compliance shall be "any reasonable Town Trustee's
individual interpretation" of the Board of Trustees' policy being monitored however, the
Board of Trustees is the final judge of reasonableness, and will always judge with a
"reasonable person" test (what a reasonably prudent person would do in that context).
Interpretations favored by individual board members do not constitute a "reasonable
person" test.
1.10.5 Actions determined to be not compliant with a reasonable interpretation of Board
of Trustees' policies will be subject to a process agreed to by the Town Board.
1.10.6. Town Board Compliance Review Schedule
24
Page 155
1.1 Governance Style
(2)(5)-(11)
1.3 Board Job Description
1.3.1.1.C.i Board Communication
1.3.1.3 Performance review of Town Administrator and Town
Attorney
1.3.2.3 Quasi-Judicial Actions
1.3.2.4 Trustee Communications
1.4 Mayor's Responsibility
1.4.1 Meetina Leadership
1.4.3 Refrainina from Unauthorized Unilateral Actions
1.4.4 Representation
1.4.7.2 Special Assignments
1.6 Board Committee Principles
1.6.1 Committees Appointed by the Board
1.6.1.1
1.6.1.2
1.6.1.4
1.6.1.6
1.6.1.7
1.6.2 Outside Committees
1.6.2.1 -Official Representation
1.6.2.2 b&c Individual Representation
1. 7 Board Liaison Roles
1. 7 .1 Mayoral Appointments
1.7.3 Duties of A Liaison
1.8 Board Standing Committees
1.8.2 Use of Board Committees
1.8.3 Principles for Board Committees
1.9 Annual Planning and Agendas
1.9.1 Annual Planning
Adopted Town Policies
103 Town Board Code of Conduct and Operating Principles
107 Board E-mails
Adopted 7/9/2019
25
Aug & Feb
Aua & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aua & Feb
Auq & Feb
Aua & Feb
Aua & Feb
Aua & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Auq & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Aug & Feb
Biannually -
following Town
Board Elections
Annually March
Page 156
26
Page 157
Revised 7-8-2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
GOVERNING POLICIES MANUAL
Table of Contents
Category 2. Board/Staff Linkage
Policy 2.0 Governance -Management Connection
Policy 2.1 Delegation to the Town Administrator
Policy 2.2 Town Administrator Job Description
Policy 2.3 Monitoring Town Administrator Performance
Policy 2.4 Town Attorney
1
Page 158
Revised 7-8-2014
POLICY TYPE: BOARD/STAFF LINKAGE
POLICY 2.0 POLICY TITLE: GOVERNANCE -MANAGEMENT CONNECTION
The Board of Trustees' official link to the operation of departments of Town Government and
staff is the Town Administrator.
2.1 The Board of Trustees' job is generally confined to establishing the broadest
policies; implementation and subsidiary decision making is delegated to the
Town Administrator.
2.2 As the Board's primary link to the operations of Town government, the Town
Administrator's performance will be considered to be synonymous with
organizational performance (within the scope of the Town Administrator's
authority).
2.3 Monitoring Town Administrator performance is synonymous with monitoring
organizational performance against Board policies and Staff Limitations. Any
evaluation of Town Administrator performance, formal or informal, may be
derived only from these monitoring criteria.
2
Page 159
Revised 7-8-2014
POLICY TYPE: BOARD/STAFF LINKAGE
POLICY 2.1
Revised 7/8/2014
POLICY TITLE: DELEGATION TO THE TOWN
ADMINISTRATOR
The Board of Trustees' job is generally confined to establishing the broadest vision and
policies. Implementation and subsidiary decision making is delegated to the Town
Administrator as specified in the Estes Park Municipal Code 2.28.
2.1.1 Only decisions of the Board of Trustees, by majority vote, are binding on the Town
Administrator.
2.1.2 With the exception of the Town Attorney and the Municipal Judge, the Town
Administrator shall have line authority over all Town departments. This authority shall include
supervision and control over day to day functions and management decisions required to carry
out the objectives of the Board of Trustees.
2.1.3 The policies, goals and objectives of the Board of Trustees direct the Town Administrator
to achieve certain results; the policies permit the Town Administrator to act within acceptable
boundaries of prudence and ethics. With respect to the policies, the Town Administrator is
authorized to make all decisions, take all actions and develop all activities as long as they are
consistent with any reasonable interpretation of the policies of the Board of Trustees.
2.1.4 The Board of Trustees may change its policies, thereby shifting the boundary between
Board and Town Administrator domains. Consequently, the Board may change the latitude of
choice given to the Town Administrator, but so long as any particular delegation is in place, the
Board will respect and support the Town Administrator's choices. The Board will not allow the
impression that the Town Administrator has violated policy when the Town Administrator
supports an existing policy.
2.1.5 No individual member of the Board of Trustees has authority over the Town
Administrator. Information may be requested by individual Board members, but if such
request, in the Town Administrator's judgment, requires a material amount of resources or is
detrimental to other necessities, the Town Administrator may ask for majority Board action on
such a request.
2.1.6 It is understood that at times it may be in the best interest of the Town to waive or grant
exceptions to adopted Board policy. The Town Administrator shall request Board approval for
any policy waiver or exception prior to its implementation.
2.1.7 Should the Town Administrator deem it necessary to, or inadvertently, violate a Board
policy, he or she shall promptly inform the Board of Trustees. Informing is simply to guarantee
no violation may be intentionally kept from the Board, not to request approval. Board
response, either approving or disapproving, does not exempt the Town Administrator from
subsequent Board judgment of the action.
3
Page 160
Revised 7-8-2014
2.1.8 The following decisions shall be the responsibility of the Board of Trustees.
Implementation and subsidiary decision making for all other items is delegated to the Town
Administrator.
1.Establishment and approval of all Utility Rates
2.Establishment and approval of Community Development Fees
3.Establishment of purchasing approval limitations contained in the Town Procurement Policy.
4.Approval of any increase to staffing levels The Town Administrator may approve positions
funded by grants, which would not impose additional costs to the Town in addition to the
grant funds and any temporary positions for which existing budgeted funds are allocated.
5.All changes to the Town Budget as allocated and adopted by the Board of Trustees.
6.Any sale, purchase or lease of real property
7.Any changes to employee benefits
8.Any issue that, in the opinion of the majority of the Board of Trustees, concerns a
substantial policy determination and/or is of a controversial nature with the public that
warrants Board involvement.
9.Approval of Intergovernmental Agreements, subject to the provisions of the Town
Procurement Policy.
10.Approval of any substantive change to the scope, design, development or construction of
any capital project.
4
Page 161
Revised 7-8-2014
POLICY TYPE: BOARD/STAFF LINKAGE
POLICY 2.2 POLICY TITLE: TOWN ADMINISTRATOR JOB DESCRIPTION
As the Board's primary link to the operations of Town government, the Town Administrator's
performance will be considered to be synonymous with organizational performance (within the
scope of the Town Administrator's authority).
The Town Administrator's job contributions can be stated as performance in two areas:
2.2.1 Board outcomes are met and policies are followed.
2.2.2 Town government operation within the boundari es established in Board policies on STAFF
LIMITATIONS.
2.2.3 The official job description for the Town Administrator shall be the as adopted by the Town
Board and as incorporated by reference in the Employment Agreement between the Town and the
Town Administrator.
5
Page 162
Revised 7-8-2014
POLICY TYPE: BOARD/STAFF LINKAGE
POLICY 2.3 POLICY TITLE: MONITORING TOWN ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE
The Board of Trustees will systematically and rigorously monitor Town Administrator job
performance to determine the extent to which goals are being achieved and whether operational
activities fall within boundaries established in management limitations policies. Accordingly:
2.3.1. The purpose of monitoring is simply to determine the degree to which Board policies
are being met. Information which does not do this will not be considered to be
monitoring. Monitoring will be as automatic as possible, using a minimum of Board
time so that meetings can focus on creating the future.
2.3.2. A given policy may be monitored in one or more of three ways:
(a)Internal Report: Disclosure of compliance information to the Board of Trustees
from the Town Administrator.
(b)External Report: Discovery of compliance information by a disinterested party
who is selected by and reports directly to the Board of Trustees. Such reports
must assess executive performance only against policies of the Board, not
those of the external party unless the Board has previously indicated that
party's opinion to be the standard.
(c)Direct Board Inspection: Discovery of compliance information by a Board
member or the Board of Trustees as a whole. This is a Board inspection of
documents, activities or circumstances directed by the Board which allows a
"prudent person" test of policy compliance.
2.3.3 In every case, the Board of Trustees will judge whether (a) the Town Administrator's
interpretation is reasonable, and (b) whether data demonstrate accomplishment of, or
compliance with, the Town Administrator's interpretation.
2.3.4 In every case, the standard for compliance shall be "any reasonable Town Administrator
interpretation" of the Board of Trustees' policy being monitored however, the Board of
Trustees is the final judge of reasonableness, and will always judge with a "reasonable
person" test (what a reasonably prudent person would do in that context). Interpretations
favored by individual board members or by the Board of Trustees as a whole do not
constitute a "reasonable person" test.
2.3.5 Actions determined to be not compliant with a reasonable interpretation of Board of
Trustees' policies will be subject to a remedial process agreed to by the Town Board.
6
Page 163
Revised 7-8-2014
2.3.6. The Board of Trustees will conduct an annual formal evaluation of the Town
Administrator which will include a summation examination of the monitoring data
acquired during that period.
Town Administrator Performance Expectations Review Schedule
3.0 General Executive Constraint Internal Annually March
3.1 Customer Service Internal Annually March
3.2 Treatment of Staff Internal Annually March
3.3 Financial Planning/Budgeting Internal Quarterly Apr., July,
Oct., Jan.
3.4 Financial Condition & Activities Internal Annually March
External Annually June
3.5 Asset Protection Internal Annually March
3.6 Emergency Town Administrator Backup Internal Annually March
and replacement
3.7 Emeraency Preparedness Internal Annually APril
3.8 Compensation and Benefits Internal Annually September
3.9 Communication and Support to the Board Internal Annually March
3.10 Capital Equipment and Improvements Internal Annually March
3.11 Quality of Life Internal Annually March
3.12 Internal Procedures Internal Annually July
3.13 Town Organizational Plan Internal Annually July
Revised 3-25-2014
7
Page 164
Revised 7-8-2014
POLICY TYPE: BOARD/STAFF LINKAGE
POLICY 2.4 POLICY TITLE: TOWN ATTORNEY
The Town Attorney represents the Board of Trustees as specified in the Estes Park Municipal Code
2.24.020 (3) and anyone acting on its behalf so long as they are not acting in conflict with the Board of
Trustee or its policies.
2.4.1 Ethical Obligation of Town Attorney
2.4.1.1 The Town Attorney at all times will be guided by, and subject to, the Colorado Rules
of Professional Conduct for Attorneys and specifically Rule 1.13 Organization as Client
2.4.2 Accountability of the Town Attorney -
2.4.2.1 The Town Attorney shall report directly to the Town Board. The purpose of the
Town Attorney is to ensure that the Board's actions take place with competent and
prudent legal counsel and representation.
2.4.2.2 The Town Attorney is accountable to the Board acting as a body, never to any
individual Board member or group of members, nor to the Town Administrator.
2.4.2.3 If individual Board members request information or assistance without Board
authorization, the Town Attorney may refuse such requests that require, in his/her
opinion, an inappropriate amount of staff time or funds or is disruptive. In such a
case, the requesting member may choose to bring the request to the Board.
2.4.2.4 Town Attorney accountability is for all resources, including personnel, under his or
her control. Therefore, any accomplishments or violations due to actions of a
subordinate of the Town Attorney are considered to be accomplishments or
violations by the Town Attorney.
2.4.2.5 The Town Attorney may accomplish the "Job Products" of the position in any
manner not imprudent, unethical, or in violation of the prohibitions listed below
under "Limitations on Town Attorney Authority."
2.4.2.6 The Town Attorney may use any reasonable interpretation of Board policies as
they pertain to his/her authority and accountability. The Town Attorney is
authorized to establish all further policies, make all decisions, take all actions and
develop all activities as long as they are consistent with any reasonable
interpretation of the Board's policies.
2.4.3 Job Products of the Town Attorney
8
Page 165
Revised 7-8-2014
2.4.3.1 Timely opinion on documents and contemplated decisions or actions of the Board,
the Town Administrator or other Town Officials holding the authority to make such
decisions. Requests to the Town Attorney to provide opinions about the wisdom of
policy of decisions shall be discouraged.
2.4.3.2 Timely opinion on the legal ramifications of pending or actual laws, regulations,
court decisions, and pending or threatened litigation.
2.4.3.3 Timely opinion on the legality or propriety under the law of the Board's processes.
2.4.2.4 Timely opinion on the legality or propriety under the law of pending or actual acts
or omissions of any Trustee, Board, Committee, Commission, the Town
Administrator or other Town employee or official.
2.4.3.5 When requested or appropriate, alternate language or action to achieve Board or
Town Administrator intentions in a lawful manner.
2.4.3.6 Timely and thoughtful advice and recommendations on the range of legal options
available.
2.4.3. 7 The Town Attorney shall endeavor to provide professional advice based upon the law
as determined by the Town Attorney and also other considerations as may be
appropriate to the decision. The Town Attorney should refrain from influencing
policy based upon the personal belief of the attorney.
2.4.3.8 Litigation:
(i)Advice regarding avoidance of litigation or settlement of potential litigation.
(ii)Timely provision to the Board and the Town Administrator on the status of
settlement negotiations and all threatened/actual litigation.
(iii)Settlement of litigation, with authority as obtained from the Board.
(iv)Diligent and competent representation of the Board, the Town, and the Town's
officer's agents and employees in litigation.
(v.) The Town may carry out its obligation to defend Town officials and employees
from third party claims by using the services of the Town Attorney's office. The
Town Attorney will be responsible for determining conflicts of interest in such
defense and advise the Board and individuals involved. The Town Attorney may
advise the Board to retain separate counsel to represent the Town, its individual
officials, and/or employees.
2.4.3.9 Adequately brief the board on emerging legal issues and trends affecting the Town.
2.4.4 Limitations on Town Attorney Authority. The Town Attorney shall not:
2.4.4.1 Exercise authority over Town Administrator or staff.
9
Page 166
Revised 7-8-2014
2.4.4.2 Violate applicable codes of professional ethics and conduct.
2.4.4.3 Treat the public or staff in a disrespectful or unfair manner.
2.4.4.4 Incur expenditures or fiscal encumbrances beyond those authorized under Board
Policy.
2.4.4.5 Unreasonably withhold information from the Town Administrator, nor shall the Town
Attorney fail to cooperate with the Town Administrator in the performance of his/her
official functions.
2.4.5 Evaluation of Town Attorney performance.
2.4.5.1 Town Attorney accountability is only for job expectations explicitly stated by the Board
in this document. Consequently, the provisions herein are the sole basis of any
subsequent evaluation of Town Attorney performance, though he or she may use any
reasonable interpretation of the Board's words.
2.4.5.2 The Board of Trustees will monitor the Town Attorney's performance with respect to
these expectations on a routine basis.
2.4.5.3 Any modification to the compensation paid the Town Attorney shall be as specified in
the Estes Park Municipal Code, section 2.24.030.
10
Page 167
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
GOVERNING POLICIES MANUAL
Table of Contents
Category 3. Staff Limitations
Policy 3.0 General Town Administrator Constraint
Policy 3.1 Customer Service
Policy 3.2 Treatment of Staff
Policy 3.3 Financial Planning
Policy 3.4 Financial Condition and Activities
Policy 3.5 Asset Protection
Policy 3.6 Emergency Town Administrator Backup and Replacement
Policy 3. 7 Emergency Preparedness
Policy 3.8 Compensation and Benefits
Policy 3.9 Communication and Support to the Board
Policy 3.10 Capital Equipment and Improvements Programming
Policy 3.11 General Town Administrator Constraint -Quality of Life
Policy 3.12 General Town Administrator -Internal Operating Procedures
Policy 3.13 Town Organizational Plan
1
Page 168
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.0 POLICY TITLE: GENERAL TOWN ADMINISTRATOR
CONSTRAINT
Within the scope of authority delegated to him/her by the Board of Town Trustees, the
Town Administrator shall not cause nor allow any practice, activity, decision or
organizational circumstance that is either unlawful, imprudent, or in violation of commonly
accepted business and professional ethics.
3.1 The quality of life in the Town of Estes Park depends upon the partnership
between citizens, elected officials and Town employees. Therefore, within the
scope of his/her authority, the Town Administrator shall not fail to ensure high
standards regarding the treatment of our citizens.
3.2 With respect to the treatment of paid and volunteer staff, the Town
Administrator may not cause or allow conditions that are unsafe, unfair or
undignified.
3.3 With respect for strategic planning for projects, services and activities with a
fiscal impact, the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either the
operational or fiscal integrity of Town government.
3.4 With respect to the actual, ongoing condition of the Town government's
financial health, the Town Administrator may not cause or allow the
development of fiscal jeopardy or loss of budgeting integrity in accordance
with Board Objectives.
3.5 Within the scope of his/her authority and given available resources, the Town
Administrator shall not allow the Town's assets to be unprotected,
inadequately maintained or unnecessarily risked.
3.6 In order to protect the Board from sudden loss of Town Administrator
services, the Town Administrator may have no less than two other member(s)
of the Town management team familiar with Board and Town Administrator
issues and processes.
3. 7 The Town Administrator shall have an Emergency Preparedness Process in place for
the coordination of all emergency management partners -Federal, State, and local
governments, voluntary disaster relief organizations, and the private sector to meet
basic human needs and restore essential government services following a disaster.
3.8 With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees,
consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
2
Page 169
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity.
3.9 The Town Administrator shall not permit the Board of Town Trustees to be
uninformed or unsupported in its work.
3.10 With respect to planning for and reporting on Capital Equipment and
Improvements Programs, the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either
operational or fiscal integrity of the organization.
3.11 With respect to Town government's quality of life for the community the
Town Administrator shall not fail to plan for implementing policies of the
Board regarding economic health, environmental responsibility and
community interests.
3.12 With respect to internal operating procedures, the Town Administrator will
insure that the Town may not fail to have internal procedures for the well
being of the Town to promote effective and efficient Town operations.
3
Page 170
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.1 POLICY TITLE: CUSTOMER SERVICE
Rev 7-25-17
3.1 The quality of life in The Town of Estes Park depends upon the partnership
between citizens, elected officials and Town employees. Therefore, within the
scope of his/her authority, the Town Administrator shall not fail to ensure high
standards regarding the treatment of our citizens.
3.1.1 The Town Administrator shall not fail to encourage the following basic attitudes
in employees:
3.1.1.1 The Citizens of The Town of Estes Park deserve the best possible
services and facilities given available resources.
3.1.1.2 Prompt action is provided to resolve problems or issues.
3.1.1.2.1 -"Prompt Action" shall be interpreted as:
•Citizens receive initial responses at a minimum acknowledging the
receipt of the contact, within two business days
•The appropriate process required to resolve the problem is
initiated within three business days, whenever possible.
3.1.1.3 Attention is paid to detail and quality service is provided that
demonstrates a high level of professionalism.
3.1.1.4 Each employee represents excellence in public service.
3.1.1.5 Each employee is "the Town" in the eyes of the public.
3.1.2 The success of Estes Park Town Government depends upon the partnership between
citizens, , elected officials and Town employees. Accordingly, regarding the treatment of
citizens and customers, the Town Administrator shall not:
3.1.2.1 Fail to inform citizens of their rights, including their right to due process, as
they relate to the operations and responsibilities of the Town.
3.1.2.2 Ignore community opinion on relevant issues or make material decisions
affecting the community in the absence of appropriate community input.
3.1.2.3 Allow the community to be uninformed (or informed in an untimely basis)
about relevant decision making processes and decisions.
4
Page 171
3.1.2.4 Ignore problems or issues raised by the community or fail to address them in
a timely manner, where the Town Administrator has been delegated the
authority to act, or to fail to inform the Board of issues where he/she may not
have the authority to act.
3.1.2.5 Allow incompetent, disrespectful or ineffective treatment from Town
employees.
3.1.2.6 Unduly breach or disclose confidential information.
5
Page 172
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.2
Rev 7-25-17 POLICY TITLE: TREATMENT OF STAFF
AND VOLUNTEERS
With respect to the treatment of paid and volunteer staff, the Town Administrator may not
cause or allow conditions which are unsafe, unfair or undignified.
Accordingly, pertaining to paid staff within the scope of his/her authority, the
administrator shall not:
3.2.1 Operate without written personnel policies that clarify personnel rules
for employees.
3.2.2 Fail to acquaint staff with their rights under the adopted personnel rules
upon employment.
3.2.3 Fail to commit and adhere to the policies of Equal Employment
Opportunity and Fair Labor Standards Act.
3.2.4 Fail to make reasonable efforts to provide a safe working environment
for employees, volunteers and citizens utilizing Town services
3.2.5 Operate without written volunteer policies that clarify the
responsibilities of volunteers and of the Town for all volunteers.
6
Page 173
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.3
Rev 7-25-17 POLICY TITLE: FINANCIAL PLANNING
With respect for strategic planning for projects, services and activities with a fiscal impact,
the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either the operational or fiscal integrity of Town
government. Accordingly, the Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which:
3.3.1. Deviates from statutory requirements.
3.3.2. Deviates materially from Board-stated priorities in its allocation among
competing budgetary needs.
3.3.3. Contains inadequate information to enable credible projection of
revenues and expenses, separation of capital and operational items,
cash flow and subsequent audit trails, and disclosure of planning
assumptions.
3.3.4. Plans the expenditure in any fiscal year of more funds than are
conservatively projected to be received in that period, or which are
otherwise available.
3.3.5. Reduces fund balances or reserves in any fund to a level below that
established by the Board of Town Trustees by adopted policy
3.3.6. Fails to maintain a Budget Contingency Plan capable of responding to
significant shortfalls within the Town's budget.
3.3.7. Fails to provide for an annual audit.
3.3.8. Fails to protect, within his or her ability to do so, the integrity of the
current or future bond ratings of the Town.
3.3.9. Results in new positions to staffing levels without specific approval of
the Board of Town Trustees. The Town Administrator may approve
positions funded by grants, which would not impose additional costs to
the Town in addition to the grant funds and any temporary positions for
which existing budgeted funds are allocated.
7
Page 174
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.4 POLICY TITLE: FINANCIAL CONDITION AND ACTIVITIES Rey 7-25-17
With respect to the actual, ongoing condition of the Town government's financial health, the Town
Administrator may not cause or allow the development of fiscal jeopardy or loss of budgeting
integrity in accordance with Board Objectives. Accordingly, the Town Administrator may not:
3.4.1. Expend more funds than are available.
3.4.2. Allow the general fund and other fund balances to decline to a level
below that established by the Board of Town Trustees by adopted policy, ,
unless otherwise authorized by the Board.
3.4.3. Allow cash to drop to a level below that established by the Board of Town
Trustees by adopted policy, unless otherwise authorized by the Board.
3.4.4. Allow payments or filings to be overdue or inaccurately filed.
3.4.5. Engage in any purchases wherein normally prudent protection has not
been given against conflict of interest and may not engage in purchasing
practices in violation of state law or Town purchasing procedures.
3.4.6. Use any fund for a purpose other than for which the fund was established
, unless otherwise authorized by the Board.
8
Page 175
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.5 POLICY TITLE: ASSET PROTECTION
Within the scope of his/her authority and given available resources, the Town Administrator
shall not allow the Town's assets to be unprotected, inadequately maintained or unnecessarily
risked.
Accordingly, he or she may not:
3.5.1. Fail to have in place a Risk Management program which insures against
property losses and against liability losses to Board members, staff and the
Town of Estes Park to the amount legally obligated to pay, or allow the
organization to be uninsured:
3.5.1.1 Against theft and casualty losses,
3.5.1.2 Against liability losses to Board members, staff and the town itself in
an amount equal to or greater than the average for comparable
organizations.
3.5.1.3 Against employee theft and dishonesty.
3.5.2. Subject plant, facilities and equipment to improper wear and tear or
insufficient maintenance ( except normal deterioration and financial
conditions beyond Town Administrator control).
3.5.3. Receive, process or disburse funds under controls insufficient to meet
the Board-appointed auditor's standards.
3.5.4. Unnecessarily expose Town government, its Board of Town Trustees or
staff to claims of liability.
3.5.5 Fail to protect intellectual property, information and files from loss or
significant damage.
3.5.6 Acquire, encumber, dispose or contract for real property except as
expressly permitted in Town policy.
3.5. 7 Allow internal control standards to be less than that necessary to satisfy
9
Page 176
generally accepted accounting/auditing standards recognizing that the
cost of internal control should not exceed the benefits expected to be
derived.
10
Page 177
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.6 POLICY TITLE: EMERGENCY TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPLACEMENT AND BACK UP
In order to protect the Board from sudden loss of Town Administrator services, the Town
Administrator may have no fewer than two (2) other members of the Town management team
familiar with Board of Town Trustees and Town Administrator issues and processes.
3.6.1. The Assistant Town Administrator shall act in the capacity of Town
Administrator in his/her absence. In the absence of the Town
Administrator and Assistant Town Administrator a Town Department Head
previously designated by the Town Administrator will act in the capacity
of Town Administrator.
3.6.2. The Town Administrator shall provide the necessary training needed to
enable successful emergency replacement.
11
Page 178
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.7 POLICY TITLE: EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
The Town Administrator shall have an Emergency Preparedness Process in place for coordination
of all emergency management partners -Federal, State, and local governments, voluntary disaster
relief organizations, and the private sector to meet basic human needs and restore essential
government services following a disaster.
3.7.1 The Town Administrator shall be responsible for the assigned
responsibilities identified in the Town of Estes Park Emergency
Operations Plan
3.7.2 The Town Administrator shall not fail to have a business continuity plan for
the Town.
3.7.3 In the event of an emergency, the Town Administrator shall not fail to take
appropriate action immediately to ensure the safety of the public and public
and private assets, including authorizing specific actions by Town staff and
declaring an emergency on behalf of the Board of Town Trustees
12
Page 179
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.8
Rev 7-25-17 POLICY TITLE: COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS
With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees, consultants, contract
workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity
of the Town. Accordingly, pertaining to paid workers, he or she may not:
3.8.1. Change his or her own compensation and benefits.
3.8.2. Promise or imply permanent or guaranteed employment.
3.8.3. Establish current compensation and benefits which deviate materially
for the regional or professional market for the skills employed:
3.8.4. Establish deferred or long-term compensation and benefits, without approval
of the Town Board.
13
Page 180
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.9 POLICY TITLE: COMMUNICATION AND SUPPORT TO THE BOARD
The Town Administrator shall not permit the Board of Town Trustees to be uninf ormed or unsupported in its
work.
Accordingly, he or she may not:
3.9.1 Let the Board of Town Trustees be unaware of relevant trends, anticipated adverse
media coverage, material external and internal changes, and particularly changes in
the assumptions upon which any Board policy has been previously established.
3.9.2 Fail to submit monitoring data required by the Board (see policy on Monitoring Town
Administrator Performance in Board/Staff Linkage) in a timely, accurate and
understandable fashion, directly addressing provisions of Board policies being
monitored.
3.9.3 Fail to establish a process that brings to the Board of Town Trustees as many staff
and external points of view, issues and options as needed for informed Board choices
on major policy issues.
3.9.4 Present information in unnecessarily complex or lengthy form.
3.9.5 Fail to provide support for official Board of Town Trustees activities or
communications.
3.9.6 Fail to deal with the Board of Town Trustees as a whole except when fulfilling
individual requests for information.
3.9.7 Fail to report in a timely manner any actual or anticipated noncompliance with any
policy of the Board of Town Trustees.
14
Page 181
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.10 POLICY TITLE: CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AND IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMMING
With respect to planning for and reporting on capital equipment and improvements programs, the
Town Administrator may not jeopardize either operational or fiscal integrity of the organization.
Accordingly, he or she may not allow the development of a capital program which:
3.10.1 Deviates materially from the Board of Town Trustees' stated priorities.
3.10.2 Plans the expenditure in any fiscal period of more funds than are conservatively
projected to be available during that period.
3.10.3 Contains too little detail to enable accurate separation of capital and operational
start-up items, cash flow requirements and subsequent audit trail.
3.10.4 Fails to project on-going operating, maintenance, and replacement/perpetuation
expenses.
3.10.5 Fails to provide regular reporting on the status of the budget and on the progress
of each active project, including data such as changes and the financial status of
each project, including expenditures to date.
15
Page 182
POLICY TYPE: STAFF LIMITATIONS
POLICY 3.11 POLICY TITLE: GENERAL TOWN ADMINISTRATOR CONSTRAINT-QUALITY OF LIFE
With respect to Town government's quality of life for the community, the Town Administrator shall not
fail to plan for implementing policies of the Board regarding economic health, environmental
responsibility, and community interests.
16
Page 183
POLICY 3.12 POLICY TITLE: GENERAL TOWN ADMINISTRATOR CONSTRAINT-INTERNAL PROCEDURES
With respect to internal operating procedures, the Town Administrator will ensure that the Town has
internal procedures to promote effective and efficient Town operations.
17
Page 184
POLICY 3.13 POLICY TITLE: Town Organizational Plan
With respect to internal organizational structure of the Town, the Town Administrator will maintain a
current organizational plan ( organizational chart) of the Town, in a graph ical format including through
the division level. The Town Administrator will update the plan annually. The current plan shall be
included in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report each year, and presented to the Board of
Trustees at the first regular meeting following the certification of the results of each biennial election.
Revised 3-25-2014
18
Page 185
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
GOVERNING POLICIES MANUAL
Ta hie of Contents
Category 4. Ends Statements
Policy 3.0 Ends Statements and Key Outcome Areas of the Board of Trustees
1
Page 186
POLICY TYPE: BOARD ENDS STATEMENTS
POLICY 4.0
Rev 10/11/2016 POLICY TITLE: Ends Statements and Key Outcome Areas of the
Board of Trustees
1.Robust Economy -We have a diverse, healthy year round economy
2.Infrastructure-We have reliable, efficient and up to date infrastructure serving our residents, businesses and guests
3.Exceptional Guest Services -We are the preferred Colorado mountain destination providing an exceptional guest
experience.
4.Public Safety, Health and Environment -Estes Park is a safe place to live, work, and visit within our extraordinary
natural environment
5.Outstanding Community Services-Estes Park is an exceptionally vibrant, diverse, inclusive and active mountain
community in which to live, work and play, with housing available for all segments in our community.
6.Governmental Services and Internal Support -We provide high-quality, reliable basic municipal services for the
benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while being good stewards of public resources
7.Transportation -We have safe, efficient and well maintained multi-modal transportation systems for pedestrians,
vehicles and transit.
8.Town Financial Health -We maintain a strong and sustainable financial condition, balancing expenditures with
available revenues, including adequate cash reserves for future needs and unanticipated emergencies.
2
Page 187
Page 188
March 1, 2022 – Special Study Session
•Childcare Funding Guidelines
•Vacation Home Fee Study
March 8, 2022
•2022 Street Improvement Program
Overview
•Town Shuttle Service to the YMCA
Campus
April 12, 2022
•Downtown Loop Updates
April 26, 2022
•2022 Paid Parking Program Update
May 10, 2022
•CIRSA Liability and Risk as an Elected
Official
•Town Board Orientation 101
Items Approved – Unscheduled:
•Town Board and Chamber Board Meet
and Discussion
•Governing Policies Updates
•Quarterly CompPAC Update
•Downtown Loop Updates as Necessary
Items for Town Board Consideration:
None.
Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items
February 22, 2022
Page 189
Page 190