HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - Workshop Urban Renewal Authority and Urban Renewal Plan 1988-10-12BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Town of Estes Park
Workshop:
Plan
Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority and Urban Renewal
October 12, 1988
Attending:
Mayor Dannels, Trustees Aldrich, Barker,
Dickinson, Garrett, Habecker, and Hix,
Town Administrator Klaphake
Facilitator: Carl Neu/Neu and Company
Mr. Neu reviewed his roll as the moderator for the EPURA Work-
shops which began September 14th, and which will continue on
October 12, 13, 26, November 9, and 22nd, 1988. It is anticipat-
ed the workshops will aide the Town Board in their deci-
sion -making process.
Bob Joseph, Technical Planner/EPURA. Technical Planner Joseph
presented a slide program of joint Town and EPURA completed
projects for the past five (5) years, and offered a brief de-
scription of each, which included: (1) the realignment of
Virginia Drive, (2) Phase I Streetscape, (3) "pocket park" which
was formerly the Peacock Building which was damaged during the
1982 Lawn Lake Flood, (4) Phase II Streetscape, (5) Bartlett
Building, Nagl Walkway, and Park Place Mall improvements, (6)
various facade improvements, (7) Rockwell Loop, (8) Cleave Street
parking lot improvement, including a pocket park, (9) Tregent
Park, (10) Transit Center, (11) Streetscape III, including the
Service Station and Realty Office improvements, (12) access point
improvements for the Deli building on East Elkhorn Avenue, (13)
Mountain Man Restaurant improvements, (14) Highway 34/36 Inter-
section traffic and landscaping improvements, (15) Riverside
Plaza Project, including the Post Office and Dark Horse parking
lot improvements, (16) and former Ice House building parking lot.
Correspondence from the following was received and read into the
record of these proceedings: Karen and John Tucker, P. O. Box
2753, Estes Park, CO 80517. Jerry Brownfield, 350 E. Elkhorn
Ave., Estes Park, CO 80517. Louis J. Klingel, 543 Grand Estates
Dr., Estes Park, CO 80517.
Town Administrator Klaphake briefed those present regarding the
Talmey Telephone Survey; results should be available in the near
future.
Tom Watts, President/ARD. P. 0. Box 3814, Estes Park, CO 80517.
Mr. Watts read a letter concerning the results gathered from the
ARD survey which was placed in the Trail Gazette. 4,370
questionnaires were distributed, 727 responses were received. In
summary, the responses stated "what has been done is good, but
slow down urban renewal." 75% stated the URA funds should be
kept separate from Town funds; excess money should be returned to
the schools, hospital, and the Town. 75% stated East Riverside
Drive should not be widened, a mall should not be constructed in
the middle of Elkhorn Avenue, 165,000 square feet of commercial
space should not be added downtown, and a new municipal building
and conference center should not be constructed. 60% stated a
multi -level 850 space parking garage should not be constructed
and approximately 50% desire additional small riverside parks.
The findings were attached to Mr. Watts' letter.
Rowland Retrum/ARD. 650 Freeland Court, Estes Park, CO 80517.
Mr. Retrum summarized his impression of the opinions expressed in
the in the ARD survey, including "basic philosophy of Estes
Valley Development (the primary objective should be the best
quality of life for Estes Valley residents); Purpose and
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Workshop/EPURA and URA Plan - October 12, 1988 - Page two
Authority of EPURA (EPURA has overstepped its original purpose
and authority); Use of EPURA for General Economic Development
(EPURA's scope should be expanded to include the entire Town, the
Stanley Park indoor arena, ski area, and promotion of tourism);
EPURA Finances and Costs (special district taxes should not be
diverted to support downtown redevelopment); EPURA's Performance
(EPURA has done a good job to date, but some regretted that Estes
Park is losing its unique mountain character and becoming too
much of a tourist Town like many others); Has EPURA Increased
Retail Sales in Estes Park (some doubted EPURA's claim to having
generated a 72% increase in business in Estes Park, and they
attributed the increase that did occur to increased population
and the increase in the number of people visiting Rocky Mountain
National Park); Should Downtown Business be Subsidized by the
General Public (downtown business should finance its own develop-
ment and not ask the general public to do so beyond the repair of
flood damage); Should the Downtown Redevelopment Program be
Revised (respondents were overwhelmingly in favor of revision,
curtailment, or abolishment. Most opposed the development of
more retail space; many favored a moderate program developing
more surface parking).
Norm Ream, 671 Heinz Parkway, Estes Park, CO 80517. Mr. Ream
commended EPURA for all efforts thus far; however, it is now time
for the entire community to re -assess the program, to determine
what has been accomplished and the long-term consequences over
the next ten years. Other needs of the community must also be
considered.
Seymour Graham, 146 Stanley Circle, Estes Park, CO 80517. Mr.
Graham presented the accounting of the 1987 Abstract of Assess-
ments and Levies supplied by the Larimer County Assessor and
Treasurer. Mr. Graham stated certain entities receive less money
due to the tax increment which belongs to EPURA. EPURA received
$244,868 for the '87-'88 tax year. The Town should stop spending
any more money on EPURA projects for the next few years. Mr.
Graham also stated EPURA had performed a beautiful job with
Streetscape; however, can we afford to spend any more money? We
need to re-evaluate what we have done.
Greg Rosener, 1914-C Water's Edge, Fort Collins, CO. Mr. Rosener
stated only those taxes collected within EPURA's boundary were
subject to the tax increment. Mr. Rosener also commented on the
Stanley Village Shopping Center, increased number of tourists due
to Streetscape improvements, importance of retaining the Town
Board's role of overseeing projects and EPURA's role of complet-
ing projects, economic future of Estes Park, services, EPURA's
good job in administrating and getting projects completed, and
their lack of public relations/citizen interaction.
Ed Jungbluth, Executive Director/Chamber of Commerce, P. O. Box
3050, Estes Park, CO 80517. Mr. Jungbluth commented on Estes
Park's tourism industry which relates to services for the commu-
nity, competition for the tourist dollar, retention of both the
Town Board and EPURA, and the way of life for all residents of
Estes Park.
Al Sager, Chairman/Planning Commission, P. O. Box 1787, Estes
Park, CO 80517. In Mr. Sager's opinion, the results brought
about by EPURA and its directors have been worthwhile; however,
work is not done. Projects such as riverside improvements from
Moraine Avenue west to West Elkhorn, improvements from Tregent
Park to West Park Center, riverside improvements on both sides of
the Big Thompson River to Picadilly Square, riverside improvement
from East Riverside to Highway 36 and across to, at least, the
Chamber of Commerce and to the pocket park and playground and
picnic area across the river. Mr. Sager complimented EPURA for
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Workshop/EPURA and URA Plan - October 12, 1988 - Page three
doing a fine job. Mr. Sager urged the Town Board not to delay
unnecessarily with future projects as aforementioned.
Neil Rosener, 844 Vista Lane, Estes Park, CO 80517. EPURA has
been a success which can be verified by increased Sales Tax
Revenues. The biggest mistake that could be made is to begin
sowing the seeds for the shutdown of such a successful project.
Mr. Rosener urged the Town Board to continue EPURA, and stated
the two separate boards should be retained, primarily due to the
financial and planning aspects. Concerning possible amendments
to the Plan, a mandatory review every 3 - 4 years should be
scheduled for public input. Projects such as riverfront improve-
ments, completion of the West Park area, automobile traffic
movement, and funding for future maintenance (15-20 years) should
all be continued.
Cyrus F. Wood, P. O. Box 1500, Estes Park, CO 80517. Tourism
competition within the State is very high as witnessed by
comparisons between Vail and Estes Park with regard to the
accessibility to lodging, shopping, and eating areas during all
hours.
Richard A. Wood, Vice President/Forward Estes Park Foundation.
Mr. Wood reiterated the Foundation's total support for the
continuation of the Estes Park Downtown Redevelopment Plan. In
the early 1980's, Estes Park had lost 1/3 of its share of the
"economic pie" to other areas within the State, and showing
negative growth since 1978, many public meetings were held;
without community involvement/education, revitalization would not
have happened without the Urban Renewal process. The Estes
Valley community planned for this revitalization which was
invisioned to take approximately 20 years, not five. Mr. Wood
urged the Town Board to continue to pursue the Estes Park Down-
town Redevelopment Plan and pursue it with two separate boards.
The Foundation is emphatic that both boards be kept separate. A
formal review process of the plan, possibly every five years
(1993), "is a must" to re-examine our goals and objectives and to
re-educate ourselves so as to make intelligent decisions. Mr.
Wood also suggested the Town Board review the Foundation's survey
conducted during the Spring and which were presented April 12th.
Eric W. Blackhurst, P. O. Box 334, Estes Park, CO 80517. Mr.
Blackhurst is a strong advocate of the Estes Park Urban Renewal
effort, this process must continue under some form of separate
administration so Estes Park can continue to prosper. Mr.
Blackhurst reviewed tourism trends, improved quality of life for
citizens due to EPURA, future concerns and a list of 10 recommen-
dations: (1) possibility of expanding EPURA's boundary to
include the Stanley Park Fairgrounds, (2) address the need for a
conference center, enclosed arena, etal, (3) increase EPURA
support to the Town for maintenance, (4) continue river pedestri-
an walkways, (5) encourage public/private partnerships, (6)
maintain separate boards and staffing for EPURA and the Town
Board, (7) increase communications between governing bodies and
area citizens, (8) use combined resources to meet area needs, (9)
address the parking issue with downtown merchants, and (10)
schedule a review of the urban renewal process at the end of the
next five years.
Paul Van Horn, long-time Estes Park resident. Mr. Van Horn
stated EPURA has been very extravagant in their expenses, partic-
ularly with Riverside Plaza; bonded indebtedness and interest
rate (all should be done to reduce this debt as quickly as
possible and abandon any future development). Mr. Van Horn is
thoroughly opposed to EPURA as it has been operating this last
year.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Workshop/EPURA and URA Plan - October 12, 1988 - Page four
Lou Canaiy, P. O. Box 3228, Estes Park, CO 80517. EPURA has
done a beautiful job; however, EPURA should be recessed for a
minimum of 3 - 5 years --our priorities change every year.
Sharon Seeley, P. O. Box 958, Estes Park, CO 80517. Ms. Seeley
is associated with the Park Theatre Mall property. EPURA has
accomplished a great deal; however, they do not work with the
people, especially in matters such as condemnation. Ms. Seeley
proposed EPURA take a new look at working with the people who
love Estes Park and who are being forced to improve the Town at a
cost no one can afford. Ms. Seeley stated she will present a
theatre building modification plan in hopes of entertaining
positive discussion between the property owners and EPURA.
James A. Durward, 251 W. Elkhorn Avenue, Estes Park, CO 80517.
Dr. Durward urged the Town Board to continue one of the most
significant community projects that Estes Park has experienced.
Dr. Durward commented on tourism, particularly "destination
vacations." Dr. Durward submitted recommendations, as follows:
Phase I - develop more parking in the 300 block of West Elkhorn
and relieve the parking around East Elkhorn by adding postal
delivery service; Phase II - continue Fall River beautification
from Confluence Park to West Park Center and from Confluence Park
to Moraine; Phase III - continue the Big Thompson walkway to the
Chamber of Commerce and the 9-hole golf course; Phase IV - street
beautification from Moraine to Big Thompson. The community must
remain focused on the purpose of what and why the community voted
for the extra 2% sales tax; if URA is scrapped, Dr. Durward
believes a referendum vote would immediately be scheduled to
eliminate the additional 2% sales tax.
Frank K. Normali (Stanley Hotel) P. O. Box 2960, Estes Park, CO
80517. Property tax increment in the Town has primarily come
from the Stanley and Stanley Village. Since EPURA's inception,
most new jobs have not been created within EPURA's boundary, they
have been created by the Stanley Hotel and Stanley Village. The
Hotel is included within the boundary. Are the improvements
shown during the slide program coming from URA funds or are they
being influenced by Urban Renewal investment? Mr. Normali
commented on the tax increment, which in Mr. Normali's opinion,
largely consists of Stanley Hotel and Stanley Village Properties;
investment in the URA district, EPURA has invested 100% of the
tax increment to areas not producing; private redevelopment which
occurred at no cost to the Town or taxpayer. Stanley Village has
substantially paid for the downtown improvements, EPURA got
Stanley Village, the Town got EPURA improvements, and the Stanley
Hotel got a terrible entrance and they helped pay the bill. The
Hotel has contributed much and received nothing. The Town has an
obligation to remember what the Hotel's contribution has been;
they too need driveways, landscaping, lighting, 'etc. --why not
allow some of the tax increment to go back for investment on
Stanley Hill --"when will it be our turn?"
Bill Van Horn, P. O. Box 456, Estes Park, CO 80517. Mr. Van
Horn agreed with those statements made by Mr. Normali and reit-
erated most of the tax increment is supplied by Stanley Village;
a proper balance must be made between land that is prepared for
beautification efforts, and land that is going to produce income
for public needs. Mr. Van Horn expressed concerned regarding
possible assumption that the increase in the tax increment will
continue; the bonded indebtedness; Stanley Village was not
developed due to the inception of EPURA; their involvement with
EPURA during development "was the most expensive thing and nearly
killed the project"; there is an obligation in the public sector
to weigh a cost -benefit; landscaping expense; the Town Board's
responsibility to issue guidelines to EPURA; and EPURA's review
process in addition to that of the Planning Commission.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Workshop/EPURA and URA Plan October 12, 1988 - Page five
Elaine Hostmark, P. 0. Box 134, Estes Park, CO 80517. Ms.
Hostmark complimented improvements completed thus far by EPURA;
however, she too is concerned with the costs. Ms. Hostmark is
particularly interested in the difference between the generous
budget of EPURA compared to the "bare bones" budget of the
Library. EPURA should not be eliminated --the following walkways
should be completed: east to West Park Center, Fall River
continued as far as possible, from the intersection of Highways
34/36 east to Peacock Park, and from the west side of the Big
Thompson along the Post Office. Hopefully these walkways will
not necessitate any condemnation of adjacent property. Addition-
al space for shops should not be developed; the Municipal Build-
ing should not be relocated for at least 15 years; whatever is
necessary should be spent on providing additional parking; the
economic picture is beginning to decline and the increment will
not keep growing.
Richard Wood, 165 Virginia Drive (business), Estes Park, CO
80517. As a businessman for the past 16 years, Mr. Wood stated
he was heavily involved in the formation of EPURA and the Down-
town Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Wood concurs re-examination of the
goals and objectives is in order. There is a tremendous amount
of both partial as well as misinformation circulating around the
community, misconceptions pertaining to EPURA's legal authority.
Mr. Wood also addressed the merchant's investment, "crisis
management", traffic congestion, long-term portions of the Plan
relating to education and review, pride in the community, sound
planning and decisions based upon complete and accurate informa-
tion.
Rowland Retrum. Questioned if the verbatim comments supplied by
the ARD survey would be given due attention. Mr. Neu, -confirmed
all information would be gathered for presentation to the Town
Board.
Mayor Dannels, Board of Trustees. Expressed their appreciation
to all those in attendance and urged public participation at all
public meetings.
There being no further testimony, the Workshop was adjourned.
Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk