Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2011-07-26Prepared 7/15/11 * Revised 7/21/11 ** Revised 7/22/11 TOWN OF ESTES PARIc_ The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high -quality, reliable services for the benefit of our citizens, visitors, and employees, while being good stewards of public resources and natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, July 26, 2011 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. (Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance). PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated July 12, 2011, Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 8, 2011 and July 12, 2011. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minute a. Public Safety, Utilities, and Public Works Committee, July 14, 2011. 4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated June 21, 2011 (acknowledgement only). 5. Resolution # 10-11 — Schedule public hearing date of August 9, 2011 for a New Hotel and Restaurant Liquor License Application filed by Uribe LLC dba El Mex-Kal Restaurant, 160 First Street. 2. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for Town Board Final Action. 1. CONSENT ITEMS: * 1. Lot 1, Sundance Mountain Subdivision, 1531 Fish Hatchery Road; Livingston Amended Plat; Jane Livingston/Applicant. Applicant requested continuance to August 23, 2011. 3. ACTION ITEMS ** 1. RTA APRLICATION THIRD PA�TECONOMINC ASSESSMENT Item to be discussed at the Study Session. A special meeting will be scheduled. ** 2. TRANSPORTATION VISIONING COMMITTEE PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS. 3. EXPIRED BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS. Chief Building Official Birchfield. ** 4. ORDINANC€ #17-11 AUTOMATIC c KL-€R SSYSTEM-AMENDMENTS TO THE 2009 INTERNATIONAL BI I DING CODE. Public comment will be heard. Item moved to August 23, 2011. 5. ACCEPTANCE OF PROSPECT AVENUE BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS. Director Zurn. * 6. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE. ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 8, 2011 Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in Room 202 & 203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 8th day of July, 2011. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Trustees Blackhurst, Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, Levine and Miller Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Directors Bergsten, Chilcott, Kilsdonk, Kufeld, McFarland and Zurn, Assistant Finance Officer McDougall, PIO Rusch, Town Clerk Williamson Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. BUDGET POLICY AND FLOW CHART Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the budget flow chart for 2012 and stated the Town of Estes Park produces a one-year budget annually. The budget process starts in July with the Town Board and departments meeting during a study session to discuss priorities, revisions to the 2011 budgets in July, draft budget for 2012 due mid August, review of budgets by Administration, final proposed 2012 budget due by mid September, budget study session meetings held on Fridays in October, 2012 budget hearings at Town Board meetings in November, supplemental 2011 budget in December and rollovers of applicable expenditures to 2012 budget. 2011 YEAR TO DATE REVIEW Assistant Finance Officer McDougall reviewed the year-to-date financials stating the revenues are at 24% of budget and expenditures are 36%. The funding for the Local Marketing District and the Fire District has been moved from transfers to the Community Service grants account The net income for Light and Power is up $583,644 with 98% of the revenue from electric sales. Expenditures have increased with the work being completed for the Fish Creek circuit upgrades. The net income for Water is down $250,129 with 95% of the revenue from water sales. Expenditures have decreased in 2011 with the completion of the upgrades to the Marys Lake Water Treatment facility. Finance Officer McFarland stated sales tax has increased each month except January in 2011, with the year 6.3% ahead of 2010. The indicators used, hotel occupancy, traffic counts and park visitation, indicate May would be a flat month for sales tax. ECONOMIC OUTLOOK/2012 BUDGET COMMENTS Finance Office McFarland provided an overview of the current economic climate. The unemployment rate jumped to 9% in April demonstrating a slowing of the rebound with payrolls growing at the slowest pace in 8 months. Households continue to pay down credit card debt, auto and student loans (non -revolving credit) increasing, retail sales continue to play large part of U.S. economy, and existing home sales fell with 31% of May transaction included foreclosed properties. Estes Park continues to fare well amongst other mountain communities. The local real estate market continues to be soft for vacant land and condominiums; however, single-family home sales are recovering. 2012 BUDGET/POLICY GUIDANCE Finance Officer McFarland stated the 2012 budget would include a 1 to 2% increase for sales tax revenues. The Finance department continues to consolidate funds when possible and currently maintains 12 funds including the General Fund, Special Revenue (Community Reinvestment, Conservation Trust, Open Space, and Community Service), RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session — July 8, 2011 — Page 2 Internal (fleet, information technology, vehicle replacement), Fiduciary (police pension and theater), and Enterprise (light & power, water). The long term trends demonstrate expenditures continue to outpace revenues. Without new revenue sources, the Town would need to cut services in the future and reprioritize goals. Capital Asset Management Plan Public Process PIO Rusch suggested the Town could conduct an online survey to receive input on the ranking of projects and their importance to the community. She stated the public would need to become familiar with the projects and recommended a public meeting that could be filmed and rebroadcasted to the community and available on the web. Board discussion followed and is summarized: a survey would become an opinion poll for issues that are complex; a public session would be beneficial to educate the public on the projects; it is the Board and staffs responsibility to determine the appropriate projects; involving the public at this point would be premature because the plan does not contain objectives or goals; a citizen survey of Town services has been sent out and an additional survey at this point in time may be confusing; and in order to be transparent the CAMP information should be made available to the public for review. The Board agreed 1) the CAMP should be made available on the website with a list of items and the description for the general public's review; and 2) a ranking of projects by the Board would be completed by year and not by projects only. Community Reinvestment Fund, Fund Balances & General. Fund — CRF Relationship Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the fundbalances projected for 2011 for each of the fund types: General Fund — $3.6 million or 32%, Special Revenue funds — $147,055 or 5%, Internal Services funds - $1.9 million, Fiduciary $415,296 and Enterprise - $5.5 million. The General fund would see a decrease in fund balance below the established 30% fund balance starting in 2012 if current expenditures and funding commitments continue moving forward and no new revenue sources become available. The fund balance would be 10% by 2015. At the same time the Community Reinvestment fund (CRF) balance would grow to $6 million with $800,000 transferred from the General fund each year. To maintain a 30% fund balance in the General fund, the transfers to the CRF would have to be reduced from $800,000 to $250,000 in 2012 and decrease to $200,000 by 2015, thereby reducing the transfers to the CRF by $2.3 million over the next four years. Discussion followed on the need to do an analysis of the Internal Revenue fund balances, more specifically the Vehicle Replacement fund to determine an accurate fund balance. Staff would review and provide a recommendation to the Town Board during the budget study session meetings including the potential of decreasing transfers from the General fund if it is determined the Vehicle Replacementfund is fully funded. The Board requested the Theater fund budget reflect realistic expenditures. The Board discussed the current fund balance of 30% and questioned how it was established. Staff stated communities that are sales tax driven tend to have higher fund balances because of the potential volatility of the economy. Trustee Blackhurst suggested the Board consider a reduction in the General fund balance to 25% to use the funds for projects such as road improvements. Staff would review past fund balance history and provide a recommendation on fund balance targets and transfers for review during the budget process. Community Service Grants The Town has provided grant funding to local organizations serving the citizens of the Town through grants approved during the budget process. The amount of funding has been reduced the past few years as the budget has been cut. Other communities have concluded that non -profits should be financed through private funds and not the local government. Staff questioned if the Board would maintain the current funding levels for 2012. Board discussion was heard including the need to require the entities to provided RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session — July 8, 2011 — Page 3 additional information on how they are funded; the need to determine if entities require local funding to maintain services; establishing quarterly payments rather than lump sum payments at the first of each year; and setting a cap on annual funding such as 5% not to exceed $300,000. The Board expressed a need to continue to invest in the community through grants. Staff would review the letter and application sent to entities each year to outline changes including quarterly payment, the need for additional information related to funding sources, and a qualifying statement that approved funding would be dependent on sales tax collection. Staff would provide recommendations during the budget process on the percentage, cap and quarterly payment process. Trustee Elrod requested the Town review the funding for the Scottish Irish festival, a privately organized event. Administrator Halburnt stated Town funding has been reduced from $100,000 to $50,000, and the Town provides a number of in -kind services for the sales tax generating event. Financial Commitments to other Taxing Districts. The Town current funds the Fire District with 7% of sales tax and the LMD received $89,000 in 2011. Discussion followed amongst the Board on funding: the MOU with the Fire District would have to be updated to reflect any change in funding; the Town has an obligation to the District and the voters to maintain the current commitment to the district; questioned the financial stability of the districts; and a new MOU should be developed to address the need for the Fire District to become financially independent and any increase in mill levy should decrease the Town's financial support proportionally. The LMD has requested the Town help pay for improvements to the CVB to provide the district with more space on the second floor and their own phone and computer systems. Employee Compensation and Benefits Employee raises have not been included in the budget for the past two years. Staff has proposed a 3% increase, which equates to $300,000 with $180,000 from the General fund. Trustees Blackhurst, Miller, Koenig and Levine agreed the Town needs to reinvest in the employees; however, they requested more information on the proper increase to bring employee salaries in line with the cost of living. Trustee Elrod commented the employees have jobs with full benefits. An insurance committee consisting of <a representative from each department has been formed to review the current health insurance, self insurance versus full insurance and options to keep premium increases down for 2012 while maintaining quality health insurance. A survey was developed to receive input from the employees on health care premiums. The committee would present Administration with a proposed option for consideration during the budget process. Utility Fund Transfers Deputy Town Administrator Richardson stated since 1945 the utility departments have transferred funds to the General fund and have reported the transfer as rent, franchise fees, salaries, land rental, payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT), and to fund other transfers established by the Board at the time. No official documentation was found for the practice of transferring Enterprise funds to the General fund; however, the auditors have reported the transfer since 1945. An informal survey of 28 other municipally owned utilities in Colorado found 79% transfer funds with an average of 7.5%, 41% charge additional fees, 17% have written policies, and the funds transferred are used to fund general services of the municipalities. These practices are consistent with the Town of Estes Park's business model. A written policy outlining how transfers are determined and what the purpose of the transfer would formalizes the process. The Board agreed a written policy should be developed to outline the percentage and the use of the transfer. The Board stated 8.5% would be appropriate for 2012. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session — July 8, 2011 — Page 4 Potential Revenue Sources Town Administrator Halburnt stated property tax revenue is such a small portion of the annual revenues that it would not be worth investigating an increase. With the recent sales tax legislative that removed the cap, a sales tax increase of .5% could be approved by the voters and earmarked for streets and roadways. Discussion followed on setting a time limit on an increase, concerns with earmarking the funds and questioned if sales tax funds could be used to fund an enterprise fund. Staff has discussed a potential Stormwater and Streets Utility with the Board in the past to generate revenue to address concerns, and has suggested a flat fee could be added to utility bills. The Board discussed and reached consensus that staff -explore an increase to sales tax to fund an enterprise fund for streets to be submitted to a vote in 2012 and provide education to the public during the upcoming year. A sales tax increase would allow improvements to be funded by both the visitors and the citizens that use the road system. Budget Document The Board suggested the following changes: include the 2011 budget numbers next to the proposed 2012 budget numbers; the Board should review larger items such as $20,000 to $30,000 items and include an all other line item; and the budget review process should be completed at a higher level. Staff would review options and provide the Board with examples. Budget meetings The meetings would be reduced to three meeting on Fridays in October because of the reduction in the number of funds. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 12:00 p.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 12, 2011 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 12th day of July, 2011. Meeting called to order by Mayor Pinkham. Present: Also Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor Chuck Levine, Mayor Pro Tem Trustees Eric Blackhurst Mark Elrod John Ericson Wendy Koenig Jerry Miller Greg White, Town Attorney Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator Lowell Richardson, Deputy Town Administrator Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. SWEARING -IN CEREMONY. Officer Andrew Hart was officially sworn in as a Police Officer after completing required training. PUBLIC COMMENT. Lindsay Lamson/Town citizen requested the Board consider the timing of agenda items, especially during, the peak tourist season, in an effort to allow the business community to participate in the meetings. He also requested advance notice of items coming forward to the Boardto allow public comment. Johanna Darden/Town citizen requested there be no more paving in Bond Park and events needing more space should be moved tothe fairgrounds. The Open Space Initiative Funds should not be used to fund additional improvements to the property. Information on funding related to the Elkhorn RTA project should be made available to the public for review. Lou Larek/Town citizen commented the neighborhood on 3rd and 4th streets have requested new 15 mph speed limit signs. They also request the Town consider another location for the proposed MPEC because of the increase in traffic to the neighborhood. Charley Dickey/Town citizen stated the Town Administrator contract should be delayed until after the town has received the current citizen survey results. The item should also have adequate public notice and public comment should be heard. Elizabeth Fogarty/County citizen suggested the item be postponed until October to allow the business community the opportunity make public comment and review the contract. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS. Trustee Elrod stated the Estes Valley Planning Commission agenda for July 19, 2011 has been posted. Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 2 Mayor Pro Tem Levine stated the kickoff for the United Way campaign fundraising efforts has begun and would support three local groups including EVICS, Kids Cafe and the Learning Place. 100% of the donations remain in Estes Park to support the nonprofits. Trustee Miller stated the LMD held a contest to increase the number of Facebook fans and the winner received a prize package. He reviewed recent statistics revealing marketing efforts are moving in a positive direction. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. None. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated June 28, 2011 and Town Board Study Session Minutes dated June 28, 2011. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes. A. Community Development/Community Services, June 23, 2011. 4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated May 17, 2011 (acknowledgement only). 5. Estes Park Tree Board Minutes- dated January 7, 2011 and February 4, 2011(acknowledgement only). It was moved and seconded (Levine/Miller) the Consent Agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. LIQUOR ITEMS: a' 1. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP — FROM HOSPITALITY SPECIALISTS, INC. DBA MOLLY B RESTAURANT TO GAST HAUS ESTES PARK INC. DBA MOLLY B RESTAURANT, 200 MORAINE AVENUE. Town Clerk Williamson reviewed the application stating all required paperwork and r fees had been submitted. The applicant has completed the required T.I.P.S. training on April 30, 2011. Mayor Pro Tem Levine reminded the applicant to uphold the liquor laws and: to not serve the underage or over serve the public. It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Miller) to approve the transfer of the application filed by Gast Haus Estes Park Inc. dba Molly B Restaurant for a tavern liquor license. 3. ACTION ITEMS: 1. RESOLUTION #09-11 AGAINST THE PROPOSED REVISION TO REGULATION NUMBER 11, PART A TO EXPAND THE EMISSIONS & INSPECTION PROGRAM TO THE ESTES PARK AREA. Town Administrator Halburnt stated the town would be included in the emission testing beginning January 2012. The Town has been working with the County on the issue to address the concerns related to the required testing by the Air Quality Control Commission. The IM240 emission testing would not be an efficient or effective way to address ozone air pollution because of the small number of resident vehicles in the area, the overwhelming number of tourist vehicles during the summer ozone season, the far distance to drive to centeralized test stations, and the hardship of driving to the test stations for the Town's older population. Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 3 The Town has addressed the issue of pollution through the development of the shuttle system and the new transportation hub. Trustee Miller commented on what he thought was an inappropriate email by Doug Decker/Colorado Public Health and Environment sent to local businesses on the economic impact of testing requirements and requested staff send a letter to the Governor's office in protest of the communication. Trustee Blackhurst concurred and stated he would not be in support of the testing. Town Administrator Halburnt stated Mr. Decker had done a good job of keeping staff informed of his communications. John Nicholas/Town citizen expressed appreciation to the Board for addressing the issue and recommended public comment be solicited prior to the hearing in September. He stated 42% of the residents are part-time and register their vehicles in other states currently, and the number would increase and additional revenue would be lost if mandatory emission testing is required. Lindsay Lamson/County citizen stated alternate transportation would have more impact than testing. Testing would be an undue burden on the citizens. Charley Dickey/Town citizen would support the resolution and thanked the Board for addressing the issue. Town Administrator Halburnt confirmed the Board "wanted staff to draft a letter to the Governor about Mr. Decker's emails to the local auto businesses. After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Ericson) to approve Resolution #09-11, and it passed unanimously. 4. REPORTS: 1. RAW WATER RIGHTS DISCUSSION. Attorney White provided the Board with a review of the Town's water rights and the Augmentation plan, an integral part of the Municipal water system designed to maximize` the ;.us�e°ofthe Town's water rights. The Town has two types of water rights, contract (Bureau of Reclamation — 500 feet, Colorado Big Thompson (CBT) allotment — 1217 units, Windy Gap allotment — 300 acre feet) and direct flow (Glacier Creek — 2.0 cfs, Estes Park Town Company Pipeline and Estes Park Water: Company Pipeline — 2.0 cfs, Estes Park Cascade Diversion — 1.55 csf, Estes Park Cascade Diversion Enlargement — 3.45 cfs). The pros and cons of each water right was outlined and is summarized: Bureau of Reclamation — Pro: Senior water right, firm yield, low cost Con: Single use, Marys Lake treatment only CBT Windy Gap Direct Flow Water Pro: Senior water right, firm yield, low cost, can be rented or transferred Con: Variable yield, Marys Lake treatment only Pro: Fully consumable, used for augmentation plan, can be rented or transferred Con: Variable yield, high cost, Marys Lake treatment only Pro: Glacier Creek treatment, used for augmentation plan, no volumetric limitation, low cost Con: Very junior right Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 4 Other notable comments are summarized: BOR water right must be used first; up to 20% of CBT water can be carried over to the next year if an extra fee is paid; CBT water has to be used first; Windy Gap water is too expensive to rent for agriculture purposes; the bond for Windy Gap will be paid off in 2017; and Direct Flow rights are not available if called by a senior right and are not useable in the winter due to icing at the Glacier Creek plant. An Augmentation Plan was conceived to address priority issues related to Direct Flow rights. Windy Gap water is used to pay back the rivers for water consumed during non -priority periods, not water taken from the river. This allows the Glacier Creek plant to be operated during the summer months. Integrated Operations or the in lieu program allows CBT water to be used in place of Windy Gap water when it is not physically available for use in the Augmentation Plan. Attorney White stated the Town has adequate water rights for the system for future water system demands with the use of the Augmentation Plan and Integrated Operations. The Water department would conduct a study in the future to determine water right needs through full build out of the valley. Other issues for the Town's water supply include the Firming Project that would remove water from the west slope for use on the east slope. The Town is not a participant in the project; however, the Town has an interest in the Carriage contract to ensure the Integrated Operations would be maintained. The Colorado River issues could limit CBT water in the future. Other issues include climate change and environmental concerns related to endangered species. 5. ADDITIONAL ACTION ITEMS: Elizabeth Fogarty/Vice President of=EALA stated the membership was polled and the members have requested the contract be considered in October. Lindsay Lamson/County citizen stated the concern revolves around the process and the community would like to, review the criteria used to evaluate the Administrator. The citizens would like to have the opportunity to have input on the attributes that should be reviewed. Mayor Pinkham stated the Town Administrator evaluation process has been developed over the last few years and has been reworked to develop a performance matrix established around the Town's goals. The Town Board is responsible for establishing the contract. The Town Administrator contract requires a semi-annual review to be completed in July. The time for public comment would be during the development of Town goals. 1. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION. Trustee Miller questioned the need for an executive session because the evaluation had already been delivered to the Town Administrator and the Town Attorney. He recommended the Board consider an alternate process for evaluating the Town Administrator that includes public and staff input. He would not support reviewing the contract 6 months prior to the expiration and suggested the Board review the contract in September or October. Trustee Koenig concurred and offered a substitute motion. Trustee Erlod also expressed concern with the delivery of the evaluation to the Town Administrator and the Town Attorney. He would not support entering executive session to discuss the evaluation or the contract. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Ericson) to enter Executive Session for the discussion of a personnel matter; not involving any specific Board of Trustees - July 12, 2011 - Page 5 employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session; any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies that do not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees - Town Administrator Annual Review, and the motion failed with Trustees Koenig, Ericson and Blackhurst voting "Yes" and Trustees Miller, Elrod and Levine voting "No" and Mayor Pinkham voting "No" to break the tie. It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Levine) to enter Executive Session for the discussion of a personnel matter; not involving any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session; any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies that do not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees - Town Administrator Annual Review and for the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators regarding Town Administrator Employment Contract, and the motion failed with Trustees Elrod, Ericson, Koenig and Miller` voting "No". Trustee Miller and Koenig both expressed the evaluation and the contract should be discussed separately. The process for the reviewing the evaluation should be established for both the Board and the public. 2. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT. Trustee Blackhurst stated delaying the Administrator contractor until 60 days before the expiration is impatiently unfair to the Administrator and is not good policy for establishing goals and policies for 2012. He would recommend the Board consider a contract within the next 60 days. It was moved and seconded (Miller/Elrod) to continue the Town Administrator employment contract until the first regular Town Board meeting in October, and it passed with Trustees Blackhurst and Levine voting "No". Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting 9:34 p.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk William C. Pinkham, Mayor RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 12, 2011. Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in Rooms 201/202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 12th day of July, 2011. Board: Attending: Also Attending: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees Blackhurst, Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, and Miller Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees Blackhurst, Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, and Miller Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Town Attorney White, Director McFarland, and Deputy Town Clerk Deats Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. TOWN -OWNED PROPERTIES. The Trustees continued their review and discussion of Town -owned properties including employee housing. Following the last discussion, properties with structures were removed from the properties list, except for the employee housing units, as vacant properties may have a higher potential for usage. Town Administrator Halburnt said the Town collects $3,520 in monthly rents from the tenants in the employee housing units and added that the tenants are responsible for all utilities including electricity, water, gas, telephone, trash, and television services. She said the rental agreements state that the Town, as the property owner, is responsible for the roof and the exterior of the structures, and added that the leases may need to be more comprehensive as to the Town's responsibilities. She said that Public Works Department staff is currently working on creating an employee housing rental policy. In regard to the monthly rents currently being charged for the units, Trustee Blackhurst stated an analysis of the units including number of bedrooms and baths, and the size and condition of the units would be required to determine if the rents are at, above, or below market, and suggested that the Estes Park Housing Authority (EPHA) would be a good source of rental market information. Town Administrator Halburnt said currently 73% of Town employees live within the Estes Valley Development Code lam nning area and that it is im o�rtant to have em llooyee housing available in a resort community. Trustee Ericson suggested the Board discuss 1. whether the Town should be in the rental business, and 2. a policy statement addressing employee housing rental property. Trustee Blackhurst said the Trustees' task is to generate a philosophical statement as to whether or not the Board supports Town -owned employee housing, with the administrative tasks being a responsibility of staff. The Mayor summarized by saying that information from EPHA and the policy being drafted by Public Works staff will be helpful for the Board as they discuss a philosophical statement regarding employee housing at a future session. The Trustees proceeded with their review of the properties listed and identified properties that might present opportunities for sale or redevelopment, such as the Fish Hatchery property, Lot 4 Stanley Addition, and property located at Moraine Avenue and Elm Road; and properties that are subject to conservation easement restrictions. They suggested minor changes to the format of the document that will be used for future discussions on best uses for Town -owned properties. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session — July 12, 2011 — Page 2 The Mayor called a recess for dinner at 5:40 p.m. and resumed the meeting at 5:55 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Town Administrator Halburnt initiated discussion on economic development in the Estes Valley and said that other organizations, such as the Estes Valley Partners for Commerce, the School District, and the Northern Colorado Economic Development Center are also involved in similar discussions. She said in response to a Town Board goal to develop an economic strategy by exploring grant opportunities, Town staff secured $1,132,092 in grant support in 2010. Mayor Pinkham noted that many changes have taken place in the community, the nation and the world, since the 2017 Team met to develop a vision for economic sustainability for the Estes Valley, and said that Colorado State University (CSU) has the resources to draw on to assist in scenario development, bring the community together, and to provide ideas on how to proceed, and to define roles and responsibilities. The Mayor will be meeting with Kathay Rennels of CSU's Economic Development Office, to further discuss an economic development program. Trustee Miller proposed the creation of a commission with representatives from various organizations and the Town charged with development of an economic development program and the responsibilities of addressing economic development issues. Trustee Blackhurst questioned whether economic development should be the Town's responsibility or that of the private sector, said government's role is to provide and maintain infrastructure, and expressed concern that the Town would be asked to fund economic development. Mayor Pinkham invited the Trustees to join him in meeting with Kathay Rennels and said that he will share the results of the meeting with the Board which he expects will include recommendations on next steps to take in working together towards economic viability. RTA APPLICATION UPDATE. Following Board approval, the Town of Estes Park Regional Tourism Act application was submitted to the State. Town Administrator Halburnt said six other applications had been submitted, and informed the Trustees of upcoming dates on the application timeline, including: • July 14, 2011 — Applicants notified by Office of Economic Development and International Trade (OEDIT) of any missing or incomplete items. • July 21, 2011 — Applicant submit all missing or incomplete items to OEDIT. • August 2, 201-1, Genclusion of final app' DIT and payment required from applicant for Third Party Analyst. • August 9, 2011 - Payment due from Applicant and forwarded to the Third Party Analyst along with the application. Town Administrator Halburnt said the next step is for the Trustees to determine whether to stay in the process and move forward with the application and payment of the required fee. She said the amount of the fee is dependent upon the number of applicants and estimated the charge could be in the neighborhood of $17,000 to $30,000. A goal of the Regional Tourism Act (RTA) is to bring people and money into the state and increase Colorado sales tax. Applicants were encouraged to think big and come up with projects that would produce the most bang for the buck. Through the RTA, the State will distribute $50 million in tax increment financing (TIF) to approved projects over a 30-year period. Attorney White said State statute does not define how the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session —July 12, 2011 — Page 3 monies will be split up. Kimberly Campbell, Elkhorn Project, Inc., (EPI) said that per the application, EPI is limiting their allocation request to $1.5 million of TIF per year. The Trustees discussed the possibility of scheduling a special meeting if additional information pertinent to their decision on how to proceed with the application is received. Staff will provide the Trustees with additional information related to the mechanics of the RTA and an analysis of what the other applicants are requesting. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. This item was not discussed due to the lack of time. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:43 p.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 14, 2011 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY/UTILITIES/PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 14th day of July, 2011. Committee: Attending: Chair Blackhurst, Trustees Ericson and Koenig Trustees Ericson and Koenig Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Chief Kufeld, Dir. Bergsten, Dir. Zurn, and Deputy Town Clerk Deats Absent: Chair Blackhurst Trustee Ericson called the meeting to order at 8:0 PUBLIC COMMENT. None UTILITIES. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purpose 1. Water Conservation Plan Update , Dir Water Conservation Plan was developE provide protection, for the domestic wat shutdown. The,Town is in theprocess t from the Colorado Water Cons Although the Town is not req t d t Northern Colorado>Co water departments to ha i Tong -term and short-t plan is expected rttpl t d opened for sixty days. PUBLIC WORKS. file September art of the proceedings. oiled that the Town's current 2, the purpose of which is to upply incase of a water treatment plant f updating the plan through a grant received ervation Board (CWCB) in the amount of $34,075. o e thee; plan with the State of Colorado or the rise ru n rp�D strict (NCWCD), the state encourages e a conservation plan in place, therefore it is in the best erm financial interest of the Town to complete the plan. A draft e co e e by at which time public comment will ACCEPTANCE ::F PRfJSPECT AVENUE BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS. In tkae spring of-2 6 ® = oncrete_work_completed by L-a arge-was-determined_ts-be out of compliance with the specifications outlined in the Prospect Avenue Bypass Improvements contract. Staff negotiated a settlement with LaFarge which included defined areas of replacement to satisfy the requirements of the contract. Approximately 1100 square yards of pavement were removed and replaced in May of 2011, and LaFarge has agreed to reseed all areas disturbed by the contractor during construction. Dir. Zurn reported that the overall quality of the pavement is not up to par, but that the removal of additional pavement could be detrimental and reduce the life span of the street. A site walk-through was conducted on June 28th and staff is recommending acceptance of the project after the reseeding has been completed. The Committee recommends acceptance of the Prospect Avenue Bypass Improvements to be included as an action item on the Town Board meeting agenda. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. Pedestrian Crossings and Phasing of Signals. Dir. Zurn reported that the upgrades to the intersection of Moraine and Elkhorn Avenues that was completed by CDOT in RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works Committee — July 14, 2011 — Page 2 March 2010, have optimized traffic flow, increasing the capacity of the entire system by more than 15%. CDOT is dedicated to working with the Town of Estes Park to reach optimum pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and will continue to monitor the traffic progression. MISCELLANEOUS. Dir. Zurn said variable message signs and radio information will be used beginning this weekend to provide visitors with information about the transportation hub and shuttle system. A survey is also being conducted related to the visitors' experiences using the hub and shuttle system. Trustee Koenig requested that signage be installed to more clearly direct visitors to the hub. She said the current signage appears to direct traffic down Fourth Street instead of Manford Avenue. She also asked for signage to identify the Fairgrounds as the Stanley Park Fairgrounds by installing an add -on to the existingfign. There being no further business, Trustee Ericson adtourn;.e , meeting at 8:26 a.m. Cynthia Depts, Deputy rn Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission June 21, 2011, 1:30 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners Ron Norris, Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Rex Poggenpohl, Rick Grabish Chair Klink, Commissioners Norris, Fraundorf, Tucker, Hull, and Grabish Interim Director Chilcott, Town Planner Shirk, Town Attorney White, Town Board Liaison Elrod, and Recording Secretary Thompson Commissioner Poggenpohl, Planner Shirk The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were seven people in attendance. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT Darrel Franklin/County resident spoke of the desire to expand the living space on his property. The current regulations prohibit him from expanding living space in an existing detached accessory structure. Commissioners recommended that Mr. Franklin schedule a meeting with Community Development staff. 2. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of minutes from May 17, 2011 Planning Commission meeting. It was moved and seconded (Fraundorf/Norris) to approve the consent agenda as presented and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. 3. AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 1, SUNDANCE MOUNTAIN SUBDIVISION, located at 1531 Fish Hatchery Road, AKA "Livingston Amended Plat" Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. The property owner currently owns both lots involved in the application. Lot 2 is subject to a conservation easement which prohibits any additional development except the existing driveway and a sanitary sewer line. The property owner desires to expand the existing house on Lot 1 and has asked for removal of the building envelope on Lot 1. The underlying zone district setbacks would apply. Interim Director Chilcott stated the applicant was granted a setback variance from the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment on April 5, 2011. Staff received comments from the Light & Power Department concerning an overhead power line, and requested it be placed in a dedicated aerial utility easement. She stated the applicant may request a continuance to allow more time to address Utilities Department comments. Public Comment Jeff Moreau/applicant stated the property owner was concerned that the power line located above the house could be increased from the existing single-phase to potentially three-phase power. He understood the town's position for the utility easement request, and stated that moving the line underground could require crossing the river. Mr. Moreau requested a continuance of the Amended Plat in order to resolve the utility line issue. Staff and Commission Discussion Reuben Bergsten/Interim Utilities Director stated the Light & Power Department's position was that this property has a power line running across it that is not in a dedicated easement, and in an effort to clean up the existing records, they are requesting a utility easement be dedicated. If desired, the property owner could relocate and bury the line. The property owner would be responsible for associated costs. He stated there was discussion about either re-routing the power line across the river or around the dwelling. Neither would be an easy option, as the guy wires necessary for a rerouted above -ground line would make the project prohibitive, and a river crossing could possibly conflict with the sewer system. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission June 21, 2011 Planner Chilcott read the Utilities —Light & Power comments: 1) the requirement of a 15- foot aerial utility easement for the power line that crosses over the existing structure; 2) adequate clearing from the power line to the structure per the National Electric Association Code; and 3) a meeting with the Light & Power Department to determine if additions to the dwelling would require an electrical upgrade. Another Light & Power issue on this property was the location of the existing power pole to the proximity to the proposed garage location. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Hull) to continue the proposed amended plat to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. 4. REPORTS Religious Land Use & Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) and Schools Planner Chilcott stated staff has prepared draft code language for amendments to the EVDC concerning RLUIPA and schools. The draft language has been reviewed by the Town Attorney, and will also be forwarded to the County Attorney for review. The proposed amendments would treat schools and religious assemblies the same by allowing them in the same zone districts and requiring the same type of review processes. In terms of residential zone districts, religious assembly is allowed only in the RM— Residential Multi -Family zone district, and schools are permitted by right in all zone districts. The proposed amendments would allow, by special review, religious assemblies and schools in the R-2—Two-Family Residential and RM-Multi-Family Residential zone districts. An example of one religious assembly this would impact is the Lady of the Mountains Catholic church, which owns R-2 land. The code amendments would allow expansion of the church onto their R-2 zoned land without going through a rezoning process. In terms of non-residential zone districts, the proposed amendments would allow Religious Assemblies, Membership Clubs, Lodges, Associations, and Schools in the A — Accommodations zone district as a permitted use by right. In Estes Park, most religious assemblies are on A —Accommodations or CO —Commercial Outlying zoned land, and a few in R-2. The proposed amendments would allow for religious assemblies to continue in those locations. The proposed amendments would remove the special review process for religious assemblies over 5,000 square feet of gross floor area. A private school not associated with a religious assembly would be treated the same as a private school associated with a religious assembly. Chair Klink directed staff to publish a legal notice and place the item on the July agenda. Accessory -Dwelling Units-(ADUs-) There was general consensus among the Commission to bring Accessory Dwelling Units back before the Commission. Interim Director Chilcott explained that attached ADUs are currently allowed on properties with 1.33 times the minimum lot area of the zone district. Detached ADUs are not permitted. There are some existing detached ADUs that were legally grandfathered in with the EVDC and can be maintained, but not expanded. Chair Klink suggested discussing proposed amendments for existing detached, legally non -conforming ADUs. Interim Director Chilcott recommended the Commission review and follow the direction given by Town Board. Chair Klink recommended discussing this at the July study session and meeting. Interim Director Chilcott stated that when looking at the treatment of non -conforming ADUs, the Commission should also look at and think about non -conforming uses in general. She was concerned about the unintended consequences if ADUs were RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission June 21, 2011 3 separated from other non -conforming accessory uses. Staff would be willing to research how other communities handle non -conforming uses. When asked about rebuilding after a fire, Interim Director Chilcott explained that if it was a legal non -conforming use, the owner would be allowed to rebuild if a permit is pulled within one year and construction completed within three years. If it was an illegal use, the owner loses the right to rebuild. If the owner wants to make modifications during the rebuild, they may have to apply for a variance through the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment. Chair Klink suggested reviewing ways to allow legal -nonconforming detached ADUs. Townhomes & Land Subdivision of Multi -Family and Accommodation Developments Interim Director Chilcott stated this code amendment was approved by the County Commission on June 20, 2011. Stanley Hotel Carriage House Remodel Interim Director Chilcott stated the Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee met on June 14th and reviewed and approved Phase I of the Carriage House remodel. Other Chair Klink stated if there was a topic the Commission was interested in getting a report on, they could discuss it briefly at study session, and staff would report on the topic at the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 2:20 p.m. Doug Klink, Chair Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary TOWN of ESTES PARK Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Date: July 22, 2011 RE: Resolution # 10-11 — Schedule public hearing date of August 9, 2011 for a New Hotel and Restaurant Liquor License Application filed by Uribe LLC dba El Mex-Kal Restaurant, 160 First Street. Background: The resolution is required to set a public hearing for a new Hotel and Restaurant liquor license for a new restaurant located at 160 First Street. This location was previously operated by Pura Vida with a Beer and Wine liquor license that expired in April 2011. The location was then operated without a liquor license during the month of June as Los Pinos Mexican restaurant. The business was closed by the property owner. The current business owners have restaurants in both Windsor and Milliken and have licensee at both locations. F Budget: N/A Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the resolution to set the public hearing for the new Hotel and Restaurant liquor license for El Mex-Kal Restaurant. Sample Motion: -11. Page 1 RESOLUTION #10-11 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: That the filing date of the application for a New HOTEL AND RESTAURANT Liquor License, filed by, URIBE, LLC, dba, EL MEX-KAL RESTAURANT, 160 First Street, Estes Park, Colorado, is July 8, 2011. It is hereby ordered that a public hearing on said application shall be held in the Board Room of the Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue, on Tuesday, August 9, 2011 at 7:00 P.M., and that the neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of said application and hearing shall be the area included within a radius of 3.6 miles, as measured from the center of the applicant's property. DATED this 26th day of July, 2011. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees From: Town Administrator Halburnt Date: July 22, 2011 RE: RTA Grant Application — Next Steps TOWN or FETES PA I 011 Background: A majority of the town board voted to submit a Town of Estes Park Regional Tourism Authority Grant application by the deadline of June 30, 2011. The State released the list of 7 applicants and a brief summary of each project. The Office of Economic Development and International Trade (OEDIT) notified the town and Elkhorn Project Inc. (EPI) of missing and incomplete items on July 14. EPI submitted the clarifying items on July 15. OEDIT has indicated the third party analyst process could cost $17,000-$29,000 depending upon the final number of applicants and if a revision is required. Next Steps: On Tuesday, August 2, the final application is due and payment will be requested for the Third Party Financial Analyst. Shela Tatro from OEDIT provided the following clarification: "On August 2"d, OEDIT will be concluding our final review of the applications for completeness and requesting payment from the applicants for the Thirds Party Analyst. The a payment is due on A t i ! nil ha d to to make a determination if they are interested in applying for the RTA program." The next required decision point from the town board is if the town wants to stay in the process. If we do, the town must commit to write a certified check/cashier's check for the required third party analysis by Tuesday, August 9. It has been suggested that a special meeting be held to make this decision. Staff is trying to locate all of the applications to determine how much RTA money has been requested by each one. If the board needs further information to make a decision, please let us know. Regional Tourism Project Proposals — Preliminary Prepared by Elkhorn Project, Inc. — 7/25/11 The following information is from the Montrose, Glendale, and Douglas County applications, and newspaper articles about the Pueblo and Denver -Aurora applications. The content and methodology of each application is different, so for many categories there are no apple -to -apple comparisons Denver -Aurora This proposal includes the development of a Gaylord Enterprises 1,500-room hotel with a large conference center and western-themed entertainment complex, and the re -location of the National Western Stock Show in Aurora close to DIA. Glendale A %-mile riverwalk, modeled on the San Antonio riverwalk, is proposed on Cherry Creek with a navigable channel, extension of the Cherry Creek bike path, a trolley system, a 28,000 sf covered plaza, a 4,000 seat outdoor amphitheater, Rugby Hall of Fame, and 3,000 space parking garages. Douglas County The Colorado Sports and Prehistoric Park is in the Sterling Ranch Development. It includes a Youth Sports Village, modeled after one developed by ESPN, and the Lamb Spring Archeological Preserve & Museum. It also includes development of the Sterling Ranch Town Center, a mixed -use retail center with an outdoor amphitheater. Pueblo Completion of the riverwalk and convention center area, which has had $264,000,000 invested in it over the last 20 years. The project includes expansion of the Professional Bullriders Association headquarters with a Bullriders University and arena, expansion of the convention center with a 10,000 sf exhibit hall, new parking garage, and 2nd hotel, an Aquatic Center, and $65,000,000 of new retail/mixed use development. Montrose Great Colorado Adventures includes 141 potential projects in a large area around Montrose including improvements to the Black Canyon National Park, a large reservoir, Uncompahgre River improvements with a kayaking facility, a horse race track with old west town, and an Earth Science Environmental Laboratory. Estes Park The Elkhorn Project is a restoration of the historic Elkhorn Lodge and its many significant buildings. The main lodge building will be restored with a restaurant and banquet facility, grand lobby and pool/spa area, and expanded with a new hotel wing. The other buildings will be renovated and converted into a living history village with 2-3 museums. The Estes Park Performing Arts Center will be constructed on Fall River in a park -like setting. The project includes the extension of the existing riverwalk to the site and a small parking garage. A 50-acre ski adventure park will be developed on the hillside behind the lodge. uuuuuuuuuumc; I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Funding Source Plan "C" Funding Source Plan "B" Funding Sources Plan "A" Elkhorn RTA Project Funding Sources 511 . 0 k 0) 3 0 k Cu � 4- CU R 0 2 o 0 0 \ Cri k % cts 7 Cs After speaking with Mr. § k 0 m \ Cu OJ \ k 3 § L. / 0 0 -0 u k k ) o \ j 4 ' L. CU & « Cu / [ o v § E / y J oQs 2 m o & L k u o % 2 x / E � 0 / 0 Cu L •e 0 \ k c M. o 0 m rzi ® _ 0 § 0 » J- L- f k Denver/Aurora project « , Park and Prehistoric Park Douglas County frastructure co E � CU 0 0 0 , , aJ 0 O 0. 0. u c ro p N O CU E u N Q `" a) N U CD ' a) as u on N a) m - Y CU a 0 0 m ac 4-,0 L U N a) a) a) d N ate.+ p O O o 03 N a) CD d p 00 O co rn rn Riverwalk Project 00 C .0 00 ¢ C O Ci CI L O ro CO 4-,c •4 u a) m ay 0 O c >' u a ro N .; a -0 0 Q 7 s_ U 2 .ca) 0 C. 4-, O in L O U Os •m c o = O 'a.+ 0) 3 0 ? U N }' y cl) Cs CCS CO u O C > 4— O CDCD a) L O N u .0 N O Q ro - .4:'E O 1- CC CO 4-.0, 0_ L Q O a-+ aJ vs OD.O 0 C s 'O ate, aI) C ;� C as C 'L L C CL C C o 0 ro c O a O E to co L 1-1 r• i/4 v? C v' -!-I C c 0 en +'CU in L +1 a 0_ u oc' N N a•+ 4-, L (a Vi N = C V OU Q t .0 0_ = (0 C 0 '3 t ca O 'v 'u a) a) a) > a 0) 0) +. I- H H 'cs V H H • • • They antjcipate over the life of the project RTA TIF debt payments to total $135,000,000 • • • • Great Colorado Adventures 4) Montrose A multi -jurisdictional project involving five governmental entities t +r ro -a - a) C ro .0 CO no O CD +J CO C w N O 0 U t g- 0 3 C :C O 0 a)0) ro 47, C an = 0 aa)) >. ca 0 O a 0 a WCU t C +W V a" •N 0. 01 a.' u 0 a✓ CO sr = `+�` u C �. o Q t a) N ro a) v C a) a) 2cci a) Q 0. a) 7 N C V C y _ a — a) el - a4-,R en O O C C 7 t6 en a0 s Lu t 4- _0 a i aui a, 0. s .O G .0 C Q 0 a••+ O N a) O C11C 4 a) ,} LO a) 0 N 0 C C L0 QS O 4.2 a) u C 'IS C CCs c 1... as E C 0 0co C C sm. O o IN) O O .0 i > a) = in Z a) +� _0 0 2 r -0 _ C ro a.d = a '� c u 0 - Q u_H (.9 • • • of the federal budget approval process • • • at Available (copy not available spoke with URA Director) § 0 0 _ a. E g cs E q a c a 3 2 as § O. ° » 2 -74 to ro ƒ c t % E 6 ƒ E m c 7 $ / k . 0 / VI Iii G © \ 7 L. 2 u ® c 6 2In- 2 / C > 7 -0 As 2 E 2 to p 2 0 L a) = — p a) 1- a) c « m C \ = t — CU 2 co ; a • » CC ° o » 2 2 a 2 $ w e m e TVC requests Board approval to obtain public input The Transportation Visioning Committee (TVC) was established as the result of a May 2010 Town Board decision. Its purpose is to envision the transportation needs of the Estes Valley 15-20 years into the future. Upon completion of our process —gathering information from recently completed local studies, projects completed in other communities, and public involvement, the TVC will provide the Board with transportation vision and recommendations for the Estes Valley. • You were presented at a recent study session with the Purpose, Assumptions, Special Considerations, the Approaches and Issues we have been working with. • We also presented you with information and specific topics the three workgroups discussed. (Information Distribution, By -Pass and Road Reconfiguration, and the Parking and Shuttles). We are here tonight to present you with our thoughts for a "Public Outreach and Input" process and to ask for your approval to move forward. • We believe we need to ask the general public and members of the Estes Park Community for their ideas and suggestions in identifying the future transportation needs of the valley. Specifically the goal of the public process is to learn what our community members: o view as issues o see as priorities, and o offer as ideas to address the issues • We have discussed a variety of ways to do this, for example: • The TVC will host a minimum of three facilitated, public round table type meetings o 1 daytime meeting o 1 evening meeting o 1 meeting focused toward downtown business or building owners • Meetings will be informal, in a dialogue/discussion format, and focus on collecting ideas and comments from the community. • Laurel L. Kubin, Director of the Larimer County Office of the CSU Extension Program, and her staff are available to provide professional facilitation of the meetings at no cost. • Kate Rusch is providing assistance for our public notification needs. If you approve our plan to conduct these community meetings, it is our expectation to hold the meetings during the last two weeks of September. Are there any questions? TVC request for Board Approval 072211 frm 072211 Transportation Visioning Committee In the event the town board approves public comment sessions, Lowell Richardson, Fred Mares, and John Ericson met with a potential facilitator to review what the process might look like. They met with Executive Director and Facilitator Laurel Kubin, who is a county employee and works for the CSU extension office. She helped the group develop this Facilitation Statement to focus any public comment. "Focusing on the desired ambiance, culture, and character of Estes Park, what transportation alternatives enhance that ambiance, culture, and character?" TVC update for the Board of Trustees Purpose (John) The Transportation Visioning Committee (TVC) was established as the result of a May 2010 Town Board decision. Its purpose is to envision the transportation needs of the Estes Valley 20 years in the future. Based on today's experience and through a process of gathering information from recently completed studies, projects completed in other communities, and public involvement, the TVC will provide the Board with transportation recommendations for the Estes Valley. Assumptions (Jerry) • Visitors will find the means to get to Estes Park • Individual vehicles will continue to be the prevalent means of transportation • Today's parking and traffic issues are seasonal only. During non -peak times of the year parking and traffic issues are non existent • A longer peak tourism season is anticipated, approximately 45 days now but increasing in the future • A projected 40% growth in the front range population in the coming 20 years has the potential to increase visitations to the Estes Valley • Downtown will remain the town center Special consideration is being given to: (Wayne) • Ideas which serve local needs as well as visitors • Ideas that move people and goods, not just vehicles • Ideas that enhance both the visitor experience and the Estes Valley business climate • Ideas that are within a local, historical, and natural context • Ideas designed to protect our natural environment and respect our existing neighborhoods • Ideas that improve our sustainability (Economic, Environmental & Social) • Utilizing existing infrastructure where possible • Relationships and special needs for the YMCA and RMNP • The possibility that improved traffic flow may increase the number of visitations to the Valley during our busiest season TVC Board update 062411 Page 1 of 6 frm TVC update for the Board of Trustees Approach (Wayne) • Meeting schedules and format • Guest speakers • Studies reviewed o 2003 Traffic Study o 2035 Front Range Transportation Study o 2005 Parking Study o Victoria Transportation Policy Institute Economic Studies o The Complete Streets program o The student sponsored Shuttle Bug Study o LMD 2010 Survey • Statistical Information — fact vs. perception o State and Front Range demographics, trends, and growth projections have been considered The Issues (Wayne) The major transportation issues identified for the Estes Valley are seen as Downtown congestion, parking and air quality during peak visitor times or as a result of special events. The three most significant factors are: o Traffic to and in Downtown (People who want to be Downtown) o Traffic through Downtown (People who want to be somewhere else, e.g. YMCA or RMNP, but are routed through Downtown) o Parking (Seasonal or event specific) The Workgroups (Wayne) Three Workgroups were established to identify and discuss specific issues or needs and to provide recommendations for potential solutions. 1. Information Distribution — Moderator Fred Mares 2. By -Pass and Road Reconfiguration Workgroup — Moderator Stan Black 3. Parking and Shuttles — Moderator Kimberly Campbell TVC Board update 062411 Page 2 of 6 f m TVC update for the Board of Trustees Information Distribution Workgroup (Fred Mares) The Information Distribution Workgroup is looking at way to direct travelers to their destinations through the use of efficient, easy -to -use communications strategies. We believe the use of more effective information directing travelers where they want to go, may be one of the least expensive ways to help relieve congestion through the downtown corridor. Communications techniques we are studying include: • Current signage throughout the valley: What exists? Can it be improved? • How can we capture traffic before getting into the valley? What new technologies can be used to help with this endeavor? • Are there ways to direct traffic to outlying areas, such as RMNP and the YMCA, rather than funneling them through downtown? • How can we provide clear directions to appropriate parking areas? By -Pass and Road Reconfiguration Workgroup (Charley) The By-pass and Road Reconfiguration Workgroup is considering a wide spectrum of opportunities for reducing seasonal and special event traffic congestion in the downtown core area. While population has grown substantially across the Front Range and Estes Valley, peak traffic counts are stagnate and have not reflected that growth over the last decade. We feel that a significant economic opportunity exists in finding traffic solutions to improve the visitor and resident experience. Discussions have included: • ldenii-fying causes-o-f-r-oad-congestion. • Relieving frustration for motorists with a downtown destination. • Possible alternatives for motorists headed only to RMNP or YMCA • Seasonal re-routing vs. permanent alternative routes. • One-way couplets, round abouts, bike lanes • Optimal solutions to capture business opportunities. • Under use of existing alternative routes. • Possible new construction and its impact. • Proposed remedies. Local or CDOT implications? TVC Board update 062411 Page 3 of 6 frm TVC update for the Board of Trustees Parking and Shuttles Workgroup (Kimberly Campbell) The Parking & Shuttles workgroup is looking at a wide range of options focused on getting residents and visitors out of their cars and to their destinations efficiently. Our focus is on improving the visitor and resident experience. We believe that the less time people spend in vehicles looking for parking or trying to figure out where they are going, the more time and money will be spent in shops and restaurants in town. Topics being discussed by our workgroup include: • How to increase shuttle ridership: Pay to park? • Shuttle efficiency: Is the shuttle system effectively getting people where they want to go? Why would somebody use the shuttle instead of parking downtown? • Downtown parking: Do multiple small lots create more traffic congestion than fewer, large lots or structures? • Use of remote lots with shuttles vs. downtown parking lots; best use of the land and positive impact on business • Elkhorn Avenue: Wider sidewalks vs. curbside parking? • Employee parking: What are tradeoffs between downtown parking for employees vs. residents & visitors? Public Process (Fred Mares) Collect ideas from the community — public input • TVC to host three public, round table type meetings a) 1 daytime meeting b) 1 evening meeting c) 1 meeting specifically focused toward the downtown business or building owners • Meetings will be informal, in a dialogue/discussion format, and focus on collecting ideas and comments from the community • An experienced, volunteer facilitator to conduct these meetings is highly recommended • Chair Jerry and/or John will open each meeting with a brief overview of: a) Purpose b) Scope c) Data — brief statement TVC Board update 062411 Page 4 of 6 frm TVC update for the Board of Trustees d) TVC areas of concentration • The facilitator will conduct the meetings concentrating on three areas: a) What do community members view as issues b) What are community members priorities c) What do community members see as ideas d) Comment cards will be furnished by the TVC for members of the public • Additional methods to collect community input may include: a) a Town email address for comments b) a Town mailing address for hard copy input c) use of the Town's website to provide additional information and updates • Kate's assistance will be required prior to and throughout the public process • A series of press releases will be generated to provide the purpose, location, and expectations for the meetings and announce the other forms of input, e.g. email and postal service • Issue a thanks to those who participated Synthesis of ideas - Evaluate and incorporate the public input • The public input will be categorized, consolidated, and reviewed by the TVC • Ideas and suggestions will be provided to the specific workgroups for consideration • Workgroups will evaluate and incorporate the input into their findings as appropriate Completion of the Public Process The input received from the public will be included as part of the TVC's report to the Board. • Public comment regarding the TVC's recommendations will occur at the TVC's formal presentation to the Town Board • The output of the TVC will be informational in nature similar to other studies undertaken and will not directly result in changes to ordinances or codes. • Recommendations may or may not be selected by the Trustees for implementation at sometime in the future. At that future time, it will be appropriate for the Town to solicit public comments regarding the projects chosen pnor to implementation. Conclusion & Discussion (Jerry and John) As the Committee has progressed a few early thoughts have begun to coalesce. TVC Board update 062411 Page 5 of 6 frm TVC update for the Board of Trustees • "....one of the things we're discovering is how interrelated everything is. The workgroup topics were formed as a matter of convenience for study but as you're finding out that it's all part of a synergistic whole...." J. Miller, 2011 • A Transportation Plan is an integral part of the Valley's long term vision and comprehensive plan for growth, economic development, and land use. • It may be possible to organize potential traffic and congestion remedies into near term, mid term and long range opportunities for implementation. TVC Board update 062411 Page 6 of 6 frm Transportation isioning Committee Committee Members John Ericson, Co -Chair Jerry Miller, Co -Chair Stan Black Kimberly Campbell Peggy Campbell Charley Dickey Wayne Groome Jacqueline Halbumt Cory LaBianca Fred Mares Rex Poggenpohl Lowell -Richardson (Alternate) Greg Rosener Annika Van der Werf support personnel Larry Gamble John Hannon Frank Theis Gary Van Horn Scott Zurn EP Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt TOWN OF ESTES PARK From: Will Birchfield, Chief Building Official Date: July 26, 2011 RE: Expired Building Permit Applications and Permits Background: At the April 27, 2010 Town Board meeting, staff proposed implementing a temporary policy whereby applications and building permit expiration dates would be extended until January 1, 2011 due to the downturn in the local economy. Staff has received positive feedback and additional requests to continue the extension of expiration dates beyond the strict letter of the code. The economy has not significantly improved as hoped. Therefore, staff proposes to continue the temporary policy to not expire applications and permits, and to not assess the fees associated with expired applications and permits through the end of 2011. Budget: N/A Staff Recommendation: The Community Development/Community Services Committee recommended extending the expiration date through the end of 2011, with the option to reassess the —economic—situation at the end of llie year to d 1irre--strour extended through 2012 as well. Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of extending the application and building permit expiration dates to January 1, 2012. Page 1 Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt OWN or F,STES From: Scott A. Zurn, PE, CFPM, Public Works Director Date: July 21, 2011 RE: Prospect Avenue By -Pass Improvements Background: In the spring of 2010, the concrete work completed by LaFarge was determined to be out of compliance with the specifications outlined in the Prospect Avenue Bypass Improvements contract. Staff negotiated a settlement with LaFarge which included defined areas of replacement to satisfy the requirements of the contract. Approximately 1,100 square yards were removed and replaced in May of 2011. LaFarge North America, Inc. has completed final improvements of the Prospect Avenue By -Pass Project. A final site walkthrough was conducted by Public Works on June 28th The final item to be completed by LaFarge is reseeding of all areas disturbed by the contractor during construction of the project. LaFarge has agreed to complete this item. Budget: N/A Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends final acceptance of the project after seeding is completed. Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny the final acceptance of Prospect Avenue By -Pass improvements as completed. Jackie Williamson To: Kate Rusch Subject: RE: Town of Estes Park News: Town Board to hear report,public comment on Prospect/Bypass repairs July 26 From: Dave Tanton (Verizon) fmailto:dtanton@verizon.neti Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 10:52 AM To: Jerry - Miller Cc: Kate Rusch Subject: Fw: Town of Estes Park News: Town Board to hear report,public comment on Prospect/Bypass repairs July 26 My comment is "Move on for God's sake! The horse is dead already.". The road is fine, although the guy who did the striping was either drunk, or had WAY too much coffee when he laid down the double -yellows! Original Message Pro l K-.504 IRVEivh To: Kate Rusch Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 10:44 AM Subject: Town of Estes Park News: Town Board to hear report, public comment on Prospect/Bypass repairs July 26 7.15.11 Attached you will find news from the Town of Estes Park: The Estes Park Town Board will hear a report on the Prospect Ave. and Moccasin Bypass repairs July 26. The public is encouraged to comment. a. News release.7.15.11.Town Board to hear report, public comment on Prospect, Bypass repairs.doc Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kate Kate Rusch Public Information officer Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 desk 970.577.3701 cell 970.215.3930 www.estes.org You received this email because you subscribed to the Town of Estes Park news list. We do not buy or sell email addresses. If you no longer wish to receive emails through this list, please reply to this email with the word `UNSUBSCRIBE' in the subject line and we will honor your request. 1 Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees From: Town Administrator Halburnt Date: July 22, 2011 RE: Economic Development Initiative TOWN or ESTES PARI ADMINISTRATION Background: In 2010, one of the town board goals was to develop an economic strategy by exploring grant opportunities. As a result, the town staff brought in $1,132,092 in grant support in 2010. In 2011, Mayor Pinkham, who was part to the town's 2017 team, began renewed discussions on economic development in Estes Park. On May 16, Community Services Director Kilsdonk was invited to attend a meeting organized by Partners for Commerce discussing economic development in the Estes Valley. On May 23, 2011, Mayor Pinkham, Administrator Halburnt, Community Services Director Kilsdonk, and Larimer County Manager Lancaster met with Don Churchwell of the Northern Colorado Economic Development Center to discuss ways to approach economic development in Estes Park. The informal notes from this meeting were shared with the town board. On June 9, Mayor Pinkham, Trustee Elrod, Administrator Halburnt and Todd Jirsa met with Kathay Rennels to begin discussions about an economic development in Estes Park. The informal notes from this meeting were shared with the town board. On June 16, the School Board hosted a meeting at which intergovernmental managers, their boards, and other public officials were invited to join the public in listening to what to say regarding economic development. Kathay Rennels led the discussion on how the entities could begin working together on economic development. Mayor Pinkham and I met with Kathay Rennels July 13 to discuss starting a renewed initiative. The informal notes from this meeting were shared with the town board. Budget: None at this time. Staff Recommendation: Mayor Pinkham is asking the town board to take formal action on moving forward with an Economic Development initiative. It is important to decide if the town board members formally support moving forward. Some ideas for first steps include: 1. Creating a small group of partners (those who will help us) to start the effort. 2. Decide who will lead the effort and who will pay for that person's time. We need continuous management of the project. 3. Work with CSU to assign a facilitator, perhaps as a graduate student project. 4. Define economic development and decide what the issue is we are trying to solve. 5. Hold a meeting in late September or October to being asset mapping. Identify our assets and opportunities and create subgroups on the main issues. Ms. Rennels is willing to kick off this meeting and work with the group on a 1/4ly or semiannual basis. All interested community groups should be invited. 6. The people who should participate are the ones who will be affected by economic development. 7. Don't implement solutions without identifying them through the process. In other words, don't come into the meetings with pre conceived notions of what needs to happen, let the process work it out. Proposed Motion: I move to approve/deny moving forward with an economic development initiative.