HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2012-11-27The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable,
high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take
great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community
by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
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 Study Session Minutes dated November 13, 2012, Town Board
Minutes dated November 13, 2012.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Community Development/Community Services, November 15, 2012.
4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated October 16, 2012
(acknowledgement only).
5. Resolution #13-12 – Schedule public hearing date of December 11, 2012, for a
new Hotel and Restaurant Liquor License Application filed by Cables Estes, LLC
dba Cables Pub & Grill, 451 S. St. Vrain Avenue.
2. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for
Town Board Final Action.
1. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. AMENDED PLAT, Lots 1A and 1C of the Replat of a Portion of Lot 4 and All
of Lot 1, Stanley Meadows Addition, Estes Park Sanitation, Applicant. Item
continued to the January 22, 2013 meeting.
Prepared 11/19/12
*Revised: 11/21/12
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
B. AMENDED PLAT, Tract B, Booth Resubdivision of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and a
portion of Lots 1, 6, 8, & 9, Elkhorn Estates, Van Horn Engineering/Applicant.
C. LOCATION AND EXTENT REVIEW, Stanley Park Multi-Use Stall Barns &
Multi-Purpose Event Center (MPEC), Lot 1, Little Prospect Addition (portion of
Stanley Park, Norris Design/Applicant.
D. SUPPLEMENTAL CONDOMINIUM MAP #1, Stone Bridge Estates
Condominiums, Phase II, Unit 1147; 1147 Fish Creek Road; Van Horn
Engineering/Applicant.
E. SPECIAL REVIEW 2012-05, A.R.T. Used Vehicle Sales; Lots 16 & 17,
Quasebarth Resubdivision; Blake Hornsby/Applicant.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. MUSEUM SENIOR CENTER MASTER PLAN CONTRACT. Coordinator Winslow.
2. EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW TIMEFRAME. Administrator Lancaster.
3. PUBLIC HEARING – 2013 BUDGET – ADOPTION. Finance Officer McFarland.
A. Highway User’s Trust Fund.
B. Resolution #14-12 - Setting the Mill Levy.
C. Resolution #15-12 - Adopting the 2013 Budget.
D. Resolution #16-12 - Appropriating Sums of Money.
4. ORDINANCE #08-12 OPTION FOR EPIC TO PURCHASE TOWN-OWNED REAL
ESTATE FOR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER. Attorney White.
5. REAPPOINTMENT OF SCOTT WEBERMEIER TO LOCAL MARKETING
DISTRICT BOARD. Town Clerk Williamson.
6. LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT.
Assistant Town Administrator Richardson.
7. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN. Director Bergsten.
8. TEMPORARY POLICY TO EXTEND TIMEFRAMES FOR BUILDING PERMITS
AND APPLICATIONS. Director Chilcott.
4. ADJOURN.
*
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado,November 13, 2012
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
Rooms 202 & 203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 13th day of November,
2012.
Board:Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees, Elrod,
Ericson, Koenig, Norris and Phipps
Attending:All
Also Attending:Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Richardson,Attorney White, and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent:None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
POLICY GOVERNANCE
Policy 1.8 –Board Standing Committee
The Board discussed standing committees and the possibility of adding additional
committees such as a Strategic Planning committee and a Finance committee. After
discussion,the Board consensus was both of the items mentioned should be discussion
by the fully Board and not a separate committee.
1.10 Annual Planning and Agendas
Section 1.10.1 would be updated to reflect the completion of the annual planning cycle
in May or June in order to prepare the following year’s budget. Milestones will be added
to the section to meet the July 1 st deadline outlined in the policy.
Section 1.10.2 would be reviewed by Administration and the Town Clerk’s Office to
ensure the timelines for agenda review and preparation are accurately stated. An
additional policy statement would be added to identify how an agenda item is added by
a Board member.
STRATEGIC PLANNING.
Town Administrator Lancaster reviewed the strategic planning process for the Town.
The purpose of a strategic plan is to work with the Board and citizens to develop
medium and long range goals for the Town to be used for capital planning and
budgeting. Once the goals are identified, an analysis of where the Town is now and
where it wants to go will be developed to assess resources needed to meet the goals,
and develop specific objectives to reach the goals.
Strategic planning must be completed at the community leve l, organizational level and
departmental level with an outlook of 10, 15 or 30 years to identify items and assess
how to move them forward in a single direction. The planning would be broken down
into five phases including: Phase I –Community Engagement –discuss key questions,
garner ideas and dream through facilitated community meetings (complete by the end of
February), Phase II –Design and Compile Input –tell the community what was heard
and draw a picture of the future through follow up workshops t o prioritize the results
(March-April), Phase III –The Plan –describe how to complete and report back to the
community and receive comments (May-June), Phase IV –Community Action –(June-
November), and Phase V –Implementation –align organizational and departmental
strategic plans, budget and resource allocation and tactical plans (ongoing).
The Board discussed the process with t he following comments: concern raised on the
use of strategic planning for a municipality which changes direction with every election;
the need to look out only 5 years versus 20 or 30 years; there is a need to communicate
the vision clearly with a yearly presentation for the community and the Board; the Board
and the community needs to understand the Town must be prepared to se rve 40,000-
50,000 even though there are only 6,500 full -time residents; need to develop an
outreach program that would reach different segments of the community that are not
reached through current processes;and define community and the communities needs
with the understanding the Town can only affect change within Town limits. The Board
reached consensus to move forward with the strategic planning process.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
The distribution of FOSH funds scheduled for December 11th would be added to the
November 27th Study Session. Trustee Elrod requested the Board discuss the use of
the Mayor’s contingency fund on November 27 th. Trustee Phipps suggested the Board
review the items being discussed at Study Sessions and whether not certain items
should be discussed at the Town Board meetings. He also raised concern on what
constitutes a decision at a Study Session, i.e. voting, consensus, etc.
There being no further business,Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado,November 13,2012
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 s aid Town
of Estes Park on the 13th day of November,2012. Meeting called to order by
Mayor Pinkham.
Present:William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Eric Blackhurst, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Mark Elrod
John Ericson
Wendy Koenig
Ron Norris
John Phipps
Also Present:Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Lowell Richardson, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
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.
Mayor Pinkham presented the f ollowing Proclamations: National Philanthropy Day on
November 15, 2012, Restorative Justice 10th Anniversary on November 15, 2012,
November as National Family Caregiver Month, America Recycles Day and Estes Park
Museum’s 50th Anniversary on October 27, 2012.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
Kay Norton Haughey/Town Citizen recognized Jean Weaver for her support of recycling
in Estes Park.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
Trustee Ericson stated the Community Development department held an open meeting
on November 12th and would hold an additional meeting on December 4 th to acquire
public input on ways to improve service in the department.
Trustee Phipps commented the Board continues to reach out to the public in order to
get the citizens involved in making decision s for Estes Park. He urged the community
to be involved in their local government.
Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated the Estes Park Housing Authority would meet on
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. in the Administration Conference Room.
Trustee Koenig informed the public the Sister Cities organization would hold its annual
meeting at the Museum on November 18, 2012, and in conjunction Nick Molle has
released a You Tube video on the bird program in Monte Verde, Costa Rica.
Trustee Norris provided an update on Visit Estes Park (VEP)activities including the
approval of the IGA between the Town and the LMD, signed contract for the new
website, and preparation to launch new Association Forum on November 15th. He
stated the bear education task force ha s over 20 members which have agreed on a
mission and target audience, agreed on key messages and identified a number of
materials already exist.
Board of Trustees –November 13, 2012 –Page 2
Trustee Elrod reminded the public of the joint meeting between the Town Board and the
Estes Valley Planning Commission to discuss the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan on
November 15, 2012 at 3:30 p.m. in Rooms 202 and 203.
Mayor Pinkham recognized Wendall Amos who recently passed,stating he was a friend
to many in the Estes Park community and contributed to Estes Park in numerous
capacity such as the Estes Park Land Trust,Estes Valley Planning Commission,
Larimer County Open Space Advisory Board,Estes Park Tree Board,and Habitat for
Humanity, to name a few.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Administrator Lancaster stated Administration met with the League of Women Voters to
discuss recycling containers and wildlife resistant containers. The Town has been
examining dual containers (trash/recycling) to limit the number of containers around
town as well as reviewing the needs in town, size of containers, fit, safety, difficulty of
use, care and area of incident. The League’s grant is for recycling containers only,
therefore, the Town would have to pay the additional cost for a dual container at a cost
of approximately $25,000. As the Town replaces containers,they would be replaced
with wildlife resistant containers.
The temporary ice rink has begun to freeze ice in anticipation of its opening before the
Thanksgiving holiday.
The Town is working with the Local Marketing District (LMD) to market Estes Park as an
art destination with the formation of a Creative Arts District.
Town Attorney White stated with the passage of Amendment 64 there will be period of
time in which the regulatory system would be formed and the Am endment tested in the
court system. CML has been developing a document to outline the Amendment to be
released to municipalities in the near future.
1.CONSENT AGENDA:
1.Town Board Minutes dated October 23, 2012, Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated October 23, 2012 and Town Board Budget Study Session
Minutes dated October 12 and 19, 2012.
2.Bills.
3.Committee Minutes:
A.Community Development/Community Services Committee, October 18,
2012.
B.Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works, November 8, 2012.
4.Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated September 4, 2012 and
October 2, 2012 (acknowledgement only).
It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Koenig)to approve the Consent Agenda
Items and it passed unanimously.
2.REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1.ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT.Director Chilcott provided an
annual report on the action plan outlined in the Comprehensive Plan , which
was intended to be reviewed and updated on an annual basis .The Planning
Commission would be presenting recommendations on updating the Plan at
the upcoming joint meeting on November 15 th ranging from no update to a
comprehensive update. The Planning Commission is recommending in 2013
that facts are reviewed and updated, and obsolete references and information
that is no longer relevant be removed. Staff would draft updates with public
input solicited at regular public meetings. There would be no additional
Board of Trustees –November 13, 2012 –Page 3
outreach or public meetings because there would be no change in vision or
concepts for the Plan.
3.ACTION ITEMS:
1.PUBLIC HEARING –2013 BUDGET.Finance Officer McFarland stated that
the proposed 2013 budget is the result of staff preparation and Board input at
three budget study sessions held in October. The 2013 budget would consist
of 12 funds with approximately $44 million worth of activity among the funds.
The 2013 budget highlights consist of revenues estimated at $11.7 million ;
General Fund expenditures of $13 million ;addition of Transportation budget to
the Visitor Center budget;additional full-time positions including Code
Compliance Officer,Shuttle System Coordinator,Community Services
Secretary, reinstate Museum staff member, re-instate vacant Police Officer
position, addition of Communications Supervisor, funding half of Restorative
Justice position which has been grant funded in the past,and re-instate fourth
Community Services Officer to work downtown in the summer;replace street
lights on Hwy 7 with LED lights; water and electric rate study;replace Big Horn
waterline replacement;addition of Conference Center marketing and sales
from Community Services to the Executive budget;perform a
compensation/classification study in 2013;major capital projects include Elm
Road mitigation,Bond Park Master Plan construction, transportation hub
irrigation, and STIP;minor capital projects include Performance park overlay,
bleacher replacement, Birch ruin mitigation, and Museum Master Plan, ongoing
capital opportunities include stall barn, MPEC, Museum storage facility and
Community Center.The proposed budget includes a 2% market adjustment to
employee salaries, 2% merit, and a 5% increase to medical benefits. The
General Fund would maintain a 25% fund balance in 2013.
Public comment has been summarized: Kay Norton Haughey/Town citizen
requested the Board address the paving of an alley in the Reclamation
subdivision which has caused a drainage issue, and funding to move the water
filling station from Fourth Street to Community Drive or Manford due to the
noise. Mayor Pinkham requested staff determine if the dr ainage issue is the
Town or Estes Park Sanitation responsibility. Pat Washburn/Chair of the
Friends of the Museum thanked the Board for the additional staff member in
2013, the retention of the $200,000 set aside for the future museum storage
facility, and requested the Board consider the funding of a temporary staff
member in 2013 to complete the assessment of the museum’s collection.Tom
Gootz/Association of Responsible Development Director requested the Board
add funding for bear proof containers in Town,and suggested the Town work
with the YMCA,which has extensive experience with dual containers and can
attest to the efficiency at excluding bears from trash and the convenient and
safe use by people. Sharry White/Association of Responsible Developmen t
Director urged the Town to include adequate staffing to address compliance of
Town’s Ordinance with regard to trash containment.Jerry Miller/Shuttle
Committee Chair reviewed the summary of recommendations for the 2013
shuttle system including additional downtown route with a trolley, approval of 5
year contract with vendor selected by the RMNP, addition of full -time Shuttle
Coordinator, start shuttle earlier in June and run later in September,review
additional sources of revenue, and review advertising options. Wayne
Groome/County resident suggested a bathroom be located at the
transportation hub. Greg Rosner/Town citizen requested the Town consider
fully funding the Library Foundation grant request for economic gardening. Jon
Nicholas/Library Foundation thanked the Board for the partial funding of the
grant to provide support of businesses in Estes Park with the support of the
Larimer County Small Business Development Council, which provides access
to statewide networks and resources.
Board comments were summarized: Trustee Elrod questioned the removal of
funding for the Museum Master Plan from and an increase from $25,000 to
$85,000. Staff would place the funding in 2012 and rollover the project to
Board of Trustees –November 13, 2012 –Page 4
2013. Trustee Ericson stated a reduction of the G eneral Fund reserve from
30% to 25% would increase funding of the Community Reinvestment fund.
The Board would determine the use of the funds in the next 2 to 3 month, i.e.
STIP, stall barn, MPEC.Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated the Town’s budget
contains funding to provide service to 40,000 -50,000 even though the
community consists of approximately 6,000 permanent residents. Trustee
Koenig commented the funding for the Library Foundation was to provide seed
money for economic gardening. Trustee Norris confirmed all Shuttle
Committee recommendations have been included in the budget. He requested
staff follow up on enforcement with regard to trash.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig)to continue the budget hearing
to November 27, 2012, and it passed unanimously.
2.FAIRGROUNDS SANITARY SEWER AND CIVIL SITE WORK CONTRACT.
Bids for the project were solicited mid October with the bid opening held on
October 29th and six bids were received:
Coulsen Excavating $338,515
Duran Excavating $369,193
American West $339,579
Connell Resources $390,813
Bob Ames Construction $317,550
Heath Construction $520,800
The civil site work would complete the necessary earthwork for both the stall
barn and the MPEC prior to frost to ensure the site is ready to build on ce a
decision is made on which building to move forward with for 2013. The
sanitary sewer line is over 1,400 ft and would serve the entire site at a cost of
$135,000. Public Works and Norris Design developed the most economical
method to complete the site work for both projects, which include the cut for the
MPEC and utilizing the cut material for the fill needed for the stall barn.
The Board understood the project to include a sewer line only and was
unaware the project included the preparation of both the stall barn and MPEC
site work.Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated a decision to move forward
solidifies the Board’s decision to move forward with both the stall barn and the
MPEC in the next couple of years.
Kay Norton Haughey/Town citizen requested the Board consider placing the
new stall barn where the current stall barns stand on the corner of Community
and Manford in order to move the smell away from the residential area on
Fourth Street.
After further discussion,it was moved and seconded (Ericson/Koenig)to
award the Fairground civil site work (grading)and sanitary sewer to Bob
Ames Construction Inc. for $317,550 with a 10% contingency of $31,755 ,
and it passed with Trustee Phipps voting “No”.
3.MUSEUM SENIOR CENTER MASTER PLAN CONTRACT.Item moved to
November 27, 2012 Town Board meeting.
4.WESTERN HERITAGE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.Coordinator
Winslow stated the Town and Western Heritage have worked since March to
define the relationship between the two entities through a n MOU, which would
be approved annually. The MOU identifies, clarifies and defines the
responsibilities for the expenses and revenues for the Town and Western
Heritage as it relates to the Rooftop Rodeo. Changes to revenue collection
include: the Town would no longer receive revenues from sponsorships;
Western Heritage would receive revenues from parking, merchandise sales,
sponsporships and behind the chute tours; Town would retain revenues from
rodeo admission, vendor fees, online ticket fees, and the Queen’s dance. With
the change in revenues, Western Heritage would incur the expenses related to
Board of Trustees –November 13, 2012 –Page 5
the parade, specialty nights, Mutton Bustin, hospitality tent, behind the chute
tours, calf catch, scoreboard, travel and training for members, royalty program,
rodeo tickets for sponsors would be purchased from the Town, and other
miscellaneous items.The Town would maintain ownership of the Rooftop
Rodeo and the recent trademark and patent of the cowboy and name would be
transferred to the Town. Any improvements made by Western H eritage would
become the property of the Town and maintained by the Town.
The Board stated concern with the 30 day termination clause which could
occur during the Rodeo and requested the agreement be reworded to allow
termination of the agreement anytime after the Rooftop Rodeo each year.
It was moved and seconded (Elrod/Blackhurst)to extend the Town Board
meeting to 11:00 p.m., and it passed unanimously.
Board comments have been summarized: Board requested the opportunity to
review the P&L and bylaws for Western Heritage; stated concern with the level
of participation in strategic planning of the Town; concern with the Town
providing liability insurance to Western Heritage members; commented the
hiring of the stock contractor should be the decision of the Town only;and the
royalty program has been contentious and requested the MOU contain
clarifying statements with regard to responsibility by Western Heritage.Several
changes were requested to section 2.14 and the addition of section 2.17 to
section 2.15.
Kay Norton Haughey/Town citizen commented any changes that would impact
the area around the Reclamation area should be the sole decision of the Town.
After further discussion,it was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Koenig)to
approve the MOU between the Town and the Western Heritage with
suggested changes, and it passed unanimously.
5.EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW TIMEFRAME.Item moved to
November 27, 2012 Town Board meeting.
Mayor Pinkham whereupon he adjourned the meeting at 11:03 p.m.
William C. Pinkham,Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 15, 2012
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer
County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on
the 15th day of November, 2012.
Committee: Chair Ericson, Trustees Elrod and Norris
Attending: Chair Ericson, Trustees Elrod and Norris
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Richardson, Director Chilcott, Coordinator Winslow,
Manager Salerno, and Deputy Town Clerk Deats
Absent: None
Chair Ericson called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
• Visitor Center Quarterly Report – Mgr. Salerno reported that 30,000 fewer people
have utilized the Visitors Center during 2012, with 3rd quarter numbers down in
July and August and rebounding in September. She said this trend mirrors sales
tax, lodging numbers, and Rocky Mountain National Park visitation during these
months, and noted that repeat visitors to the area and visitors from Front Range
communities may not be as likely to stop at the Visitors Center for information.
As technology changes, the number of telephone calls to the Visitors Center
continues to decline with 3rd quarter numbers being 27.5% lower than the same
period in 2011. The number of Ambassadors is currently down, however, four
new volunteers are scheduled to receive training.
• Verbal Updates –
o Community Services / Special Event Report – Staff is preparing for
seasonal events such as the Tree Lighting on November 17th, the Catch the
Glow Parade on November 23rd, and the Catch the Glow Fireworks on November
24th. No events are scheduled during the month of December 2012. Staff is
planning for 2013 activities including submitting a bid for the Pro Cycle Challenge
along with the cities of Loveland and Fort Collins. Museum staff toured the
Colorado History Museum and were provided with an inside look at the
operations of a larger museum facility. The Senior Center hosted a successful
Veteran’s Day lunch on November 12, 2012.
o Status of Event Financials – Staff is preparing a report to bring forward to
the Committee in February 2013. The report will contain a summary of event by
event costs, with detailed expenses available for review, as well. Coordinator
Winslow said that the online ticket sales process utilized for the Rooftop Rodeo
and Scottish Festival was a success, with the additional revenue received
covering the cost of the system software.
o Stall Barn Update – The contract for the civil site work and sewer
installation was approved at the Town Board meeting on November 13, 2012.
The Committee requested that staff maintain an open line of communication with
the Board during the project.
Community Development / Community Services – November 15, 2012 – Page 2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
TEMPORARY POLICY TO EXTEND TIMEFRAMES FOR BUILDING PERMITS AND
APPLICATIONS.
In 2010 and 2011 due to the downturn in the economy, the Town Board approved a
temporary policy extending the expiration dates for applications and building permits to
December 31, 2012. Staff reported that currently there are 350 permits that remain
open and fall within the following categories: permits that have not been paid for;
permits paid for, but no work has begun; permits paid for with work unfinished; and
unpaid permits with work started or completed and incomplete inspections. Staff is
requesting an extension of the expiration date to March 31, 2013, to provide time to
work with contractors and property owners to determine the status of these permits and
get them finalized. Without the extension permits would expire and become violations
against contractor licenses. Application could be made for new permits resulting in
additional fees, or the expired permits would be officially non-approved and closed. In
addition, in cases of unpaid permits where the applicant chooses not to proceed with
the permitted work, staff recommends that the plan fees be waived. Discussion is
summarized: staff will prioritize the open permits and address those related to life
safety issues first; permits fall under the codes and regulations that were in place when
application was made; three months should be an adequate timeframe to complete this
project; and consider implementing a policy in the future that would require a deposit
when permit applications are submitted to cover plan review fees. The Committee
recommends the temporary policy to extend timeframes for building permits and
applications be brought before the full Town Board as an action item at the
November 27, 2012, Town Board meeting.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
• Community Development Monthly Report –
o Trends in building permits and building safety inspections continue in line
with previous months with 77 inspections completed by contracted
inspector Brice Miller during scheduled vacation time taken by staff, and a
one-stop process being implemented for building permits.
o Staff continues to work on resolving issues at the Courtyard Shops
property. The building has sold and the new owner is aware of the
requirements that need to be met. Town Attorney White will follow up with
additional steps if a change of use application for the property is not
submitted this week.
o Building Division staff is preparing for the regular community assistance
visit by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) during
which a review of records for compliance with the FEMA National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) will be conducted. In addition
recommendations will be provided for participation in the NFIP Community
Rating System which can provide savings on flood insurance policies to
property owners.
o A community meeting entitled Enhancing Planning and Building Services,
was held on November 12th, with a second meeting scheduled for
December 4th from 3:30 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. at the museum meeting room.
o Nancy Hills was appointed to the Estes Valley Planning Commission to
complete the term of Commissioner Rex Poggenpohl.
o Staff will investigate anonymous complaints related to code compliance
issues both when a life safety issue is involved, and/or when determined
to have a significant community impact.
o Staff is working with local realtors to address concerns related to off-site
signage.
o Future reports on Economic Development will be provided by Assistant
Town Administrator Richardson.
Community Development / Community Services – November 15, 2012 – Page 3
ADMINISTRATION.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
• 2013 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Summary Report Compared to 2012 – As
reported at the November 13, 2012, Town Board meeting, the proposed FTE for
2013 is 112, down two from 2012’s FTE of 114.
• 2013 Budget Updates – The budget was presented at the public hearing during
the November 13, 2012, meeting of the Town Board.
• Status of Policy Development – Policies currently being addressed include: the
personnel/employee manual, capital improvement component of the CAMP;
comprehensive finance policy; and social media.
There being no further business, Chair Ericson adjourned the meeting at 9:41 a.m.
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission
October 16, 2012 - 1:30 p.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners John Tucker, Betty Hull, Joe Wise,
Kathy Bowers, Tom Gresslin, one vacant position
Attending: Chair Klink, Commissioners Tucker, Hull, Wise, Bowers, and Gresslin
Also Attending: Director Chilcott, Planner Shirk, Town Attorney White, and Recording
Secretary Thompson, Town Board Liaison Elrod
Absent: None
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 nine people in attendance.
Chair Klink stated that today’s meeting was being streamed live on the internet. This meeting
was the inaugural test run for the system.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes, September 18, 2012 Planning Commission meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Hull/Bowers) to approve the consent agenda as
presented and the motion passed unanimously.
3. STONEWOOD TOWNHOMES SUBDIVISION PLAT, METES & BOUNDS PARCEL
LOCATED NEAR 2071 HIGHWAY 66, TBD Ava Chase Lane
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This was a request to create a townhome plat for
a previously approved seven-unit residential development; formerly known as Rippling
River. No additional development was proposed, only approval to allow the individual sale
of the units. Planner Shirk stated the proposed plat complied with the approved
development plan. The property is zoned A–Accommodations, which allows townhouse
subdivisions. As required by Estes Valley Development Code Section 10.5, an outlot has
been platted and would serve as ‘general common element’, containing commonly owned
facilities such as the trash enclosure and driveways. The outlot would be owned by the
homeowners association. Each individual lot would be limited to a maximum lot coverage
of 80%.
Planner Shirk stated the application was submitted to all applicable reviewing agencies
and adjacent property owners were notified. No significant issues or concerns were
expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public
services. Staff has requested a Letter of Approval from the Larimer County Engineering
Department and as-built plans from the applicant prior to recording of the plat to ensure
easements and utilities align.
Planner Shirk stated the Planning Commission was the recommending body for this
application, with the final decision being made by the County Commissioners. Staff
recommended approval, with conditions listed below.
Public Comment
Lonnie Sheldon/Applicant representative stated the applicant desired to create
townhomes rather than condominiums. This would make it easier for potential buyers to
obtain financing.
Staff and Commission Discussion
None.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
October 16, 2012
Conditions
1. Reformat plat for recording (remove improvements).
2. As-built plans shall be submitted for review and approval prior to recording of the
plat to ensure easements and utilities align. Easement locations shall be subject to
review and approval of the respective utility providers.
3. Review and approval of Larimer County Engineering (survey review). Requires
letter of approval from Larimer County Engineering prior to mylar being sent for
recording.
It was moved and seconded (Tucker/Bowers) to recommend approval of the
Stonewood Townhomes Subdivision Plat to the Larimer County Board of County
Commissioners with the findings recommended by staff and the motion passed
unanimously with one vacancy.
4. AMENDED PLAT OF TRACT B, BOOTH RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 2, 3, 4, 7 AND A
PORTION OF LOTS 1, 6, 8, 9, ELKHORN ESTATES, 4 SEASONS INN, 1130 W.
Elkhorn Avenue
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant has requested to amend the plat in
order to vacate several unnecessary utility easements. The property, 4 Seasons Inn, is
located just east of the West Elkhorn and Wonderview Avenue intersection. Planner Shirk
stated vacating these utility easements would allow additional future development on the
property.
Planner Shirk stated the overhead electric easement covering the northern 2/3 of the
western property line would be vacated; the southern 1/3 would be retained because it is
maintained by the Light and Power Department. The western third of the water main
easement would be vacated, while the eastern 2/3 would be retained because a four inch
water main is located in that area. This easement could not be vacated until an old water
service line that used to serve the property to the west was removed. Planner Shirk stated
he anticipated the service line removal this fall, and staff would verify the work had been
done before recording the plat.
Planner Shirk stated the application was submitted to reviewing agency staff for
consideration and comment.
Planner Shirk stated the vacation of a drainage easement, platted in 1979, was also part
of the request. The Public Works department recommended this easement vacation not
be approved until a drainage study had been conducted and approved by the Public
Works department.
Planner Shirk stated staff found the following during their review of the request:
1. The applicant requests a drainage easement for the Fall River be vacated with this
plat. The Public Works Department recommends this vacation request be denied
until a drainage study is done to determine the impacts.
2. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code, including Section 3.9.E “Standards for Review” and 10.3 “Review
Procedures.”
3. Approval will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other
property in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of this
Code.
4. This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment.
5. Within sixty (60) days of the Board’s approval of the amended plat, the applicant
shall submit the plat for recording. If the plat is not submitted for recording within
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 3
October 16, 2012
this sixty-day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and
void.
6. This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park;
Public Comment
Amy Plummer/applicant representative stated the Water Department has requested the
line be disconnected to prevent the line from rusting out and possibly leaching water out
of their system. The plan is for the line to be disconnected and plugged at a location
approved by the water department. She stated the current property owner questioned the
requirement to maintain not only a drainage easement, but also a 100-year floodway
easement. The 1979 easement was created prior to the 1982 Fall River flood. The current
easement is not defined and is not accurate. Ms. Plummer stated prior to any future
development on the property, a floodplain study would be required, showing an exact
outline of the 100-year floodway. It was Van Horn Engineering’s opinion that FEMA would
govern this area, so no easement was necessary. She also stated that the drainage
easement on the river was one of only two in the entire Estes Valley. The owner would
prefer to abandon the drainage easement.
Scott Zurn/Public Works Director stated they were dealing with a 30-year-old drainage
study. Research stated that some of the data used for the study may not have been used
by the consultants conducting the study. The Public Works Department is considering
requesting an update of the area in question. Director Zurn stated when an easement is
in place, the Town has the right to maintain the area if the property owner does not. In
this specific case, there is a bridge in the area that could collect debris during high runoff.
With the easement in place, the Town would have the right to access the area to clear
debris away from the bridge.
Amy Plummer stated John Spooner/floodway expert with Van Horn Engineering reviewed
the plat and found no language on the plat as to what the 100-year floodway meant.
Typically, drainage easements allow runoff to move across property without being blocked
or diverted to cause harm downstream. The property owner does not want his property
burdened with a non-defined and inaccurate drainage easement in an area that would be
governed by FEMA. Lonnie Sheldon, Van Horn Engineering, stated that the current
easement does not allow Town access in the areas requested and recommended
dedication of an easement that would allow Town access accompanied by vacation of the
old easement.
Chris Levering/property owner stated the vacation of the current drainage easement
would allow more square footage of buildable property for future development.
Discussion occurred about abandoning the water line versus removing the water line.
Planner Shirk agreed to reword the condition to allow for abandonment.
After discussion, the Planning Commission recommended the drainage easement
dedicated with the Booth subdivision be vacated due to the following factors:
1. The drainage easement was dedicated in 1978, before adoption of Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM)
maps in 1987 (after the Lawn Lake flood).
2. The drainage easement is not well defined.
3. The river channel was altered after the 1982 Lawn Lake flood.
4. There is a recorded bridge/maintenance agreement that allows the Public Works
Department to maintain the bridge.
5. Retention of the drainage easement places an undue burden on the property
owner that is not shared by other property owners along stream and river corridors.
Conditions
1. Prior to recording plat, the water service abandonment must be completed
according to the water department’s requirements.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
October 16, 2012
It was moved and seconded (Tucker/Hull) to recommend approval of the amended
plat to the Town Board with the findings and conditions recommended by staff,
with the exception that the drainage easement shall be vacated, and the motion
passed unanimously with one vacancy.
5. AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 1A & 1C OF THE REPLAT OF A PORTION OF LOT 4 AND
ALL OF LOT 1, STANLEY MEADOWS ADDITION, 610 Big Thompson Avenue
Planner Shirk stated the applicant was requesting to combine two lots into a single lot.
The lots are owned by the Estes Park Sanitation District and contain sewage treatment
facilities. The purpose of this amended plat is to lay the groundwork for more development
of the area, as may be required by federal regulations. Planner Shirk stated a land
transfer between the Town and the Estes Park Sanitation District took place in the mid-
1990s. The current access to the Sanitation District is through the Convention and
Visitor’s Bureau (CVB) parking lot. When it was annexed years ago, the access to the
Sanitation District was via street right-of-way. When the CVB was built, the plat was
amended and the street right-of-way vacated. A 30-foot access easement was placed on
the amended plat as access for the CVB, the park shops, and the Sanitation District.
There is no currently access easement between the Town and the Sanitation District for
access through the Sanitation District’s property to the Town’s park shops. This would
need to be resolved either with this proposed amended plat, or as a separate access
agreement. It has not been determined why an easement was not created years ago.
Planner Shirk stated the request was submitted to all applicable reviewing agencies and
adjacent property owners. No significant issues, other than the access agreement, were
expressed.
Planner Shirk stated the Public Works Department requested dedication of an access
easement across the southwest portion of the plat be included on the proposed amended
plat. The Sanitation District would prefer not to dedicate a ‘blanket’ easement, but instead
write a separate access agreement document, not dedicated on this amended plat. The
amended plat would reference the separate access agreement.
Planner Shirk stated staff recommended approval of the proposed amended plat, with
negotiation by the Town of Estes Park and the Estes Park Sanitation District to have a
formal access agreement drawn up regarding the existing access to the Town park shops.
Planner Shirk stated the Planning Commission would be recommending their decision to
the Town Board, who was scheduled to hear the item on November 27, 2012.
Public Comment
James Duell/property owner stated if future improvements were required, they would be
built on the southern portion of the lot. Those improvements are yet to be determined.
There have been some expenses on the driveway and gate, which have been shared
between the Town and the Sanitation District. Mr. Duell stated he was not opposed to an
access agreement, but was concerned about clouding the plat with an access agreement.
The Sanitation District would rather have an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) in
place. The idea of the IGA was mentioned several years ago, with both parties in
agreement, but the actual document was never created.
Scott Zurn/Public Works Director stated he would be willing to work with the property
owner to draw up an IGA. He had no opposition to not showing the easement on the plat,
but would prefer the amended plat not be approved until the Public Works Department
and the Sanitation District could work out the IGA. Director Zurn preferred to table the
application until an IGA could be drawn up. The proposed parking structure at the CVB
could affect the access as it now stands.
Amy Plummer/Applicant stated the Town has an alternate route to access their shop, and
the Sanitation District did not want to dedicate an easement in a location that may hinder
future development on the property.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 5
October 16, 2012
Director Zurn stated the Public Works Department had no plans to encroach on the
district’s property with a parking structure. The Town would prefer to have the easement
through the Sanitation District because dump trucks would not be able to traverse through
the ground level of the proposed parking structure.
It was moved and seconded (Hull/Bowers) to continue the application to the next
regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting to allow discussion between the
Town and the Sanitation District concerning an access easement, and the motion
passed unanimously with one vacancy.
6. ESTES VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN BOARD
CONCERNNG UPDATE OF PLAN
Director Chilcott reported on several options available for discussion at the upcoming joint
study session between Planning Commission and Town Board on November 14, 2012 at
3:30 p.m. They were briefly explained as follows:
1. No update in 2013.
2. Review and update facts, remove obsolete references, remove information that is
no longer relevant. (No impact to budget. Staff to draft. No consultants required.
Public input at regular meetings.)
3. Develop Long-Range Neighborhood Plans (This could align with Town Board
goals. Probable consultant fees. Public input through regular meetings, community
outreach, and facilitated meetings.)
4. Update/Validate the Vision (This could align with Town Board goals. Probable
consultant fees. Public input through regular meetings, community outreach, and
facilitated meetings.)
5. Complete Update (Consultant fees estimated at more than $50,000. Extensive
public outreach and involvement both in regular public meetings and facilitated
community meetings)
6. Update as recommended by the 2010 Comprehensive Plan Task Force (Cost
could vary depending on scope. May be similar to Option 5.)
Public Comment
None.
Staff and Commission Discussion
Town Board Liaison Elrod stated in his reports to the Town Board, he has mentioned the
struggles the Planning Commission has had in determining what approach to take. He
requested Planning Commission give the Town Board their best recommendation. The
Town Board would make a decision based on their recommendation.
Discussion occurred among Commissioners and Staff. Comments included:
Commissioner Wise – Option 2 would be a good starting point in 2013-2014; review one
chapter at a time; determine what budget considerations would be necessary to update
further. Director Chilcott stated Option 2 would lay the groundwork for other options,
without changing the vision. Changes would be made during regular Planning
Commission meetings. No funds for updating the plan have been specifically proposed in
the 2013 budget. Chair Klink stated the largest difference in the options was the amount
of public outreach. Commissioner Gresslin recommended making the comprehensive plan
a working document to avoid becoming outdated in the future.
It was moved and seconded (Wise/Bowers) to recommend Option 2, with an
estimated completion date of 18 months from date of approval, for consideration at
the November 15, 2012 joint study session and the motion passed 5-1, with
Commissioner Tucker voting against and one vacancy.
Commissioner Tucker was not confident the task could be completed within 18 months,
and disagreed with reviewing the plan chapter by chapter. He would rather see the
changes made as the need arose from regular Planning Commission application reviews.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 6
October 16, 2012
7. REPORTS
1. Planner Shirk updated the Commission on the Woodland Heights fire. The burn area
was platted in the 1910s. In most cases, there were no easements of record, and
many utilities cross property lines. The Town is requesting letters from property
owners giving permission to cross property lines. This will assist in documenting utility
lines as they are located. To date, five building permits have been issued, two
additional permits are on hold, one detached garage is being rebuilt, and one
damaged home is being repaired. One of the permits being held has a water main
three feet from the main structure, and the Water Department is requiring an
easement. Discussions are ongoing with property owners who had more than one
dwelling unit on their property. Planner Shirk reported new vegetation has taken hold
and is growing quickly. The Board of County Commissioners adopted a special
resolution to provide relief for those affected by the High Park Fire. That ordinance will
be revised to fit our local needs and presented to the Town Board at a future date. The
ordinance extends the grandfathering period for nonconforming structures from one
year to two years and waives some of the building permit fees.
2. Planner Shirk reported pre-applications for single-family dwellings are up, and not only
in the fire area. Staff is also beginning to get inquiries about restarting some of the
stalled projects.
3. Planner Shirk reported on a variance request at the Old Mountaineer Restaurant
location. If all goes according to plan, the existing building would be scraped and a
new commercial building built in its place. Planning Commission will be reviewing a
development plan for the project in the next few months.
4. Planner Shirk reported the Estes Park Housing Authority hosted a design charrette at
the Colorado Housing Conference in Vail. Various professionals were brought in to
come up with a design. There may be an application in the next several months to
move forward with their plan.
5. Planner Shirk reported the following approvals at the October 2nd Estes Valley Board
of Adjustment meeting:
a. Murphy’s River Lodge – river/stream setback for new boiler room
b. Martin Residence (Rock Acres Condominiums)– river/stream setback for new
deck
c. Fall River Lodge – river/stream/wetland setback for paths and patios. Director
Chilcott reported the owners of Fall River Lodge will be submitting a rezoning
application in the near future, to change from A-1 to A–Accommodations
zoning.
d. Estes Performance, Inc – river/stream setback and maximum height variance at
the former Park Theater Mall location.
6. Planner Shirk reported the following reviews by the Town Board:
a. River View Pines Amended Condominium Map - Approved
b. Pine Knoll Minor Subdivision and The Pines North and The Pines
Condominiums - Approved
c. Promontory at Kiowa Ridge Condominiums Amended Condominium Map to
allow a deck expansion is scheduled for October 23rd.
There was general consensus among the Planning Commissioners that the format for
updating the Commission via reports is adequate, beneficial, and should continue.
There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m.
___________________________________
Doug Klink, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
Page 1
Town Clerk’s OfficeMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date:November 23, 2012
RE:Resolution #13-12 –Schedule public hearing date of December 11, 2012
for a New Hotel and Restaurant Liquor License Application filed Cables
Estes LLC dba Cables Pub & Grill,451 S. St. Vrain Avenue.
Background:
The local licensing authority is required by C.R.S. 12-47-311 to set a public hearing for
a new Hotel and Restaurant liquor license located at 451 S. St. Vrain Avenue. This
location was previously operated by Peak to Peak American Grell with a Hotel and
Restaurant liquor license that was not renewed in 2012 and the business did not open
its doors during the 2012 season.
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 Cables Pub & Grill.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Resolution #13-12.
RESOLUTION #13-12
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 Cables Estes,LLC., dba,Cables Pub & Grill, 451 S. St. Vrain
Avenue,Estes Park, Colorado, is November 8, 2012.
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,December
11, 2012,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 4.7 miles,as
measured from the center of the applicant's property.
DATED this 27th day of November,2012.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
Community DevelopmentMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Dave Shirk, Planner
Date:November 27, 2012
RE:Amended Plat,Tract B, Booth Resubdivision of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and a
portion of Lots 1, 6, 8, & 9, Elkhorn Estates, Van Horn
Engineering/Applicant
Background:The purpose of this amended plat is to vacate unused portions of
electric and water easements.
This plat would also vacate an undefined drainage for the Fall River; the Planning
Commission found the drainage easement is no longer necessary, as outlined in the
Findings below.
The overhead electric easement covering the northern 2/3 of the western property line
will be vacated; the southern 1/3 will be retained because it is maintained by the Light
and Power Department.
The western third of the water main easement will be vacated, but the eastern 2/3 will
be retained because a 4” water main is located in that area (it becomes a service line in
the western 1/3 of the lot). This easement cannot be vacated until an old water service
line that used to serve the property to the west is removed. This will happen later this
fall. Planning staff will verify the work has been done before recording the plat.
Please refer to attached map for a visual description.
Budget:N/A
Planning Commission Recommendation:On Tuesday October 16, 2012, the Estes
Valley Planning Commission held a public hearing to discuss the proposed Amended
Plat of Tract B of the Booth Resubdivision of a portion of Elkhorn Estates .
At that time, the Planning Commission found:
1.The applicant requests a drainage easement for the Fall River be vacated with this
plat. The Public Works Department recommended this vacation request be denied
until a drainage study is done to determine the impacts.
2.The planning commission recommended the drainage easement dedicated with the
Booth subdivision be vacated because of the following factors:
a.The drainage easement was dedicated in 1978, before adoption of FIRM maps in
1987 (after the 1982 Lawn Lake flood).
b.The drainage easement is not well defined.
c.The river channel was altered after the 1982 Lawn Lake flood.
d.There is a recorded bridge/maintenance agreement that allows the Public Works
Department to maintain the bridge.
e.Retention of the drainage easement places an undue burden on the property
owner that is not shared by other property owners along stream and river
corridors.
3.This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code, including Section 3.9.E “Standards for Review” and 10.3 “Review
Procedures.”
4.Approval will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other
property in the neighborhood,or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of this
Code.
5.This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff
relative to code compliance or the provision of public services.
6.Within sixty (60) days of the Board’s approval of the amended plat, the developer
shall submit the plat for recording. If the plat is not submitted for recording within
this sixty-day time period, the approval shall automat ically lapse and be null and
void.
7.This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park;
The Planning Commission voted unanimously (6-0)to recommend APPROVAL of the
proposed Amended Plat of Tract B of the Booth Resubdivision of a portion of Elkhorn
Estates CONDITIONAL TO:
1.Prior to recording plat, the water service abandonment must be completed according
to the water department’s requirements.
Sample Motion:I move for the approval/denial of the proposed Amended Plat of
Tract B of the Booth Resubdivision of a portion of Elkhorn Estates with the Findings and
Conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
Community DevelopmentMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Alison Chilcott, Director
Dave Shirk, Planner
Date:November 27, 2012
RE:LOCATION AND EXTENT REVIEW,Stanley Park Multi-Use Stall Barns &
Multi-Purpose Event Center (MPEC), Lot 1, Little Prospect Addition
(portion of Stanley Park), Norris Design Applicant
Background:This is a request for a Location and Extent Review and Special Review
for two new buildings to be located at the Stanley Park Fairgrounds: a multi -use stall
barn and a multi-purpose event center.
This is the next phase of an overall revitalization of the Stanley Park Fairgrounds.
Examples of recent development include stormwater improvements, arena
improvements, grandstand replacement, and parking lot/transit hub construction.
There are numerous problems with the existing outdated stall barns. These include
maintenance and operational issues. These new buildings would replace the outdated
stall barns located in the SE corner of the fairgrounds.
The complete application is posted at www.estes.org/currentapplications. This includes
the application form, statement of intent, plans, staff report, and agency comments.
Multi-Purpose Stall Barn. One structure would be the multi-purpose stall barn, which
would be approximately 27,000 square feet and could accommodate 95 horse stalls.
These would be removable to allow for a variety of uses. The building would also
include restrooms.
Multi-Purpose Event Center. One structure would be a multi-purpose event center.This
structure would be designed to accommodate several uses, including 140 additional
horse stalls and trade shows. The structure would be approximately 35,000 square feet.
The timeframe for this structure has not been determined. Because the timeframe for
this building (and adjacent parking lot) have not been finalized, the applicant requests
the approval period for this Location and Extent Review be five years instead of the
standard three.
Stanley Park Master Plan.This proposal complies with the Stanley Park Master Plan
adopted by the Town Board in July 2003 and modified in Summer 2012.
In 2002, the Town Board set a goal to review the Stanley Park Master Plan. This lead to the
Stanley Park Revitalization Plan Report being adopted by the Town Board in July 2003.
Since then, this plan has served as the guiding document in the redevelopment of Stanley Park,
including stormwater design and the new grandstands.
The 2003 concept plan included four buildings to be located in the general location the multi-use
stall barn and multi-purpose event center would be located.
In 2009, the Town of Estes Park contracted with Thorp Associates to prepare architectural
design criteria for new and remodeled structures at the Stanley Park Fairgrounds. These criteria
were followed with the design of the new grandstands, as well as the proposed stall barn/MPEC
buildings.
In summer 2012, the Town Board adopted a modified concept plan for this area.
This is outlined in the Statement of Intent (page 2).
The proposed buildings and location comply with the approved Stanley Park Master Plan.
Height Variances.On November 6 2012, the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
approved height variances for the two buildings. The height variance for the stall barns
is to allow cupolas to be 31-feet tall; the main roof height will be less than 30 -feet tall.
The height variance for the multi-purpose event center is to allow a clerestory to be 37 -
feet tall; the main roof will be less than 30 -feet tall.
Special Review.The proposed use –Entertainment Event, Major –requires Special
Review.
Section 3.5 Special Review Uses of the Estes Valley Development Code states “the
application for the proposed special review use mitigates, to the maximum extent
feasible, potential adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and services,
and the environment.”
Community Development staff finds the relocated barns and multi-purpose event center
will not have an adverse impact on public services or the environment, nor on nearby
land uses. This finding is based on the fact the fairgrounds have a long history in this
location,and the proposed uses are consistent with those typically associated with
fairgrounds facilities.
One nearby property owner attended both the Board of Adjustment and Planning
Commission meetings, and expressed concern about the location of the buildings and
the resultant impact on the 4th Street neighborhood. Specific concerns included
relocation of barns from the SE part of the Fairgrounds, impact of additional traffic, and
impact of odor.
Public Location and Extent Review.Because this is a publically funded project, the
development requires Public Location and Extent Review.
Per Section 3.13.A, the purpose of Location and Extent Review is “to provide an
opportunity for review of the location and extent of specified public facilities and uses
sought to be constructed or authorized within the Estes Valley, especially as to whether
such public use is consistent with the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan and
[development code].”
Per Section 3.13.D, the Estes Valley Planning Commission and Town Board “sha ll
review the extent and location of the proposed public use for its consistency with the
goals, policies and objectives stated in the Comprehensive Plan and for its compliance
with [the development code].”
Budget:Requires funding for construction,including off-site traffic improvements and
on-site utilities and landscaping.
Planning Commission Recommendation :On Tuesday November 20, 2012, the
Estes Valley Planning Commission held a public hearing to discuss the Stanley Park
Fairground Multi-Purpose Stall Barns and Multi-Purpose Event Center.
At that time, the Planning Commission found:
1.This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code, including Section 3.9.E “Standards for Review”
2.The application for the proposed special review use mitigates, to the maximum
extent feasible, potential adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and
services, and the environment. This finding is based on the assumption the
landscaping plan is implemented concurrent with construction.
3.This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment.
4.This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park;
In two separate motions, the Planning Commission voted 5-1 (with one absent)to
recommend APPROVAL of:
I.Five-year vesting period for the Location and Extent Review; and,
II.Public Location and Extent Review/Special Review for Stanley Park Fairgrounds
Multi-Purpose Stall Barns and Multi-Purpose Event Center, conditional to:
1.Compliance with recommendations outlined in the Traffic Impact Analysis.
2.Compliance with the Architectural Design Criteria for New and Remodeled
Structures at the Stanley Park Fairgrounds prepared by Thorp Associates in
2009.
3.Compliance with memos from Upper Thompson Sanitation District dated October
23 and September 13 2012.
4.Landscaping shall be installed concurrent with building construction.
5.Compliance with memo from the Estes Valley Fire Protection District dated
November 19, 2012.
Sample Motion:I move for the approval/denial of the
I.Five-year vesting period for the Stanley Park Fairgrounds Multi-Use Stall Barn and
Multi-Purpose Event Center Location and Extent Review; and,
II.Location and Extent Review/Special Review for Stanley Park Fairgrounds Multi-
Purpose Stall Barns and Multi-Purpose Event Center, subject to the findings and
conditions recommended by the planning commission.
0
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
UTILITIES &PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
RE:Final/Public Review:Location &Extent Review for Development
Plan 2012-01,Stanley Park Multi-Use Stall Barns and Multi-Purpose
Event Center (MPEC),Lot 1,Little Prospect Addition,TBD Rooftop Way
DATE October 30,2012
DEPARTMENT:Town of Estes Park Water
STAFF CONTACT:Water Superintendent,Jeff Boles,jboles@estes.org,970-577-3608
COMMENT:The Water Department has no Final/Public Review comments for the above
application.
DEPARTMENT:Town of Estes Park Light &Power
STAFF CONTACT:Line Supervisor,Todd Steichen,ts jiestes,org,970-577-3601
COMMENT:It looks like they need to change their electrical design to match what the planning
was on earlier phases for future phases.
There is a 3-phase 120/208 electrical service that is currently located on the NW corner
of Barn W that has already been paid for and installed and was intended to be used for this
project.
If they do not use this existing service there will be additional costs of over $15,000 for
extending pnmary and installing another 3-phase transformer.
There would also be additional electrician costs in the thousands for installing another 3-
phase CT.metered service.
DEPARTMENT:Town of Estes Park Public Works
STAFF CONTACT:Civil Engineer,Kevin Ash,PE,jCestesorg,970-577-3586
COMMENT:Not applicable —this is a Public Works project.
DEPARTMENT:Town of Estes Park Building Department
STAFF CONTACT:
COMMENT:
Community
Development
Memo
To:Alison Chilcott
From:Will Birchfield
Date:November 15,2012
Re:Multi-Purpose Event Center
A permit application for the Multi-Purpose Event Center (MPEC)was applied for on
June 28,2011.This was two (2)days prior to a new building code (2009 IBC)
becoming effective.
The submittals are still incomplete,including no site plans.The application will expire
no later than March 31,2013,possibly on December 31,2012.If the application is
not completed and approved prior to its expiration,the project will have to be re
designed to the requirements of the current codes,and resubmitted with a new
application.
P.O.Box 568.Estes Park,CO80517
Ph:970-586-4544 •Fax:970-586-1049
www.titsd.org
October 23,2012
Dave Shirk,Planner II
Town of Estes Park
P.O.Box 1200
Estes Park,CO 80517
Re:MPEC Building and Stall Barn
Sewer Main Extension
Dear Dave:
The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above
reference property:
1.Final alignment,pipe sizing,slope and coITect manhole numbering starting off with
existing manhole C-3A-7-1 through C-3A-7-8.
2.Details regarding inaitholes and other appurtenances.Precast manholes will be required
with concrete collars around lid and ring and raised to Final grade that are not in asphalt.
Rubber Neck will be required for water tight seal between cones and barrels and grouted
or Q-honcled on the outside before backfihling.
3.Details regarding how the pipe will be connected to the existing manhole.
4.Plans showing the proposed easement/right of way and providing the legal details for
dedication to the District.
5.A note on the drawings stating that the work he completed in accoi’dance with the UTSD
rules and regulations.
6.Proposed plans for the RV park conned ion.
7.Plans showing the location of metering for use with billing.
Environ,nentul Proleedon Through 1’?,s1ewaIer Collecdon and Trea(men(
8.Projected population for use with confirmation of collection system line sizing and
adequate lift station pump capacity.
If you have any questions or need further assistance,please do not hesitate to contact me.
Respectftilly,
Todd Krula
Lines Superintendent
Eu ‘uoiimeu fat Protection Through Was/ewater collection and Treatment
September 13,2012
Ms.Karen Thompson
Administrative Assistant
Community Development Department
Town of Estes Park
P0 Box 1200
170 MacGregor Avenue
Estes Park,CO 80517
RE:Town of Estes Park
Stanley Park Multi-Use Stall Barns DP 2012-01
TBD Rooftop Way
Final/Public Review Comments
Dear Karen:
We have reviewed the Town of Estes Park’s Stanley Park Multi-Use Stall Barns DP 2012-01
development plan for Location and Extent review of August 24,2012,We understand that the Stanley
Park Multi-Use Stall Barns project includes construction of a new restroom connected to the District’s
sanitary sewer system.The Town previously indicated that the Fairgrounds Site occupancy,including all
existing and proposed structures,is 2,689 people.
In accordance with our letter of October 12,2009.we have calculated a total number of SFEs for the
proposed site population of 2,689 people (2 taps)as 17.5 SFEs.Although,we anticipate that wastewater
flow may increase as a result of the additional restroom facility connected to the system,no additional
plant investment fee (PIP)is due for the proposed development at this time.We will continue to monitor
the peak month flow from the site and will assess additional plant investment fees to the two taps if the
peak month flow exceeds 17.5 SFEs,in accordance with Section 3.8 and 6.4.2 of the District’s Rules and
Regulations.We consider the application complete with the following additional requirements and
information requested for further review:.
P.O.Box 568 •Estes Park,CO 80517
Ph:970-586-4544 •Fax:970-586-1049
www.utsd.org
Environmental Protection Through Wastevarer collection and Treatment
1.Please confirm that the proposed site occupancy continues to be 2,689 people with the proposed
improvements.
2.The proposed restroom should be provided with metering (i.e.a water meter)for our use in
confirming wastewater flow to our sanitary sewer system and associated service charges.
3.Proposed sanitary sewer lines and laterals shall be installed in accordance with the District’s
Rules and Regulations.
4.Please confirm how the existing RV dump station is operated,including metering,so as to
confirm that we are accurately compensated through the current PIF and service rates for
discharge of wastewater to the dump station.
5.Please confirm if the wash bays will be connected to the sanitary sewer system.
6.Tn accordance with District Rules and Regulations,the proposed concessions and catering kitchen
will require an external grease interceptor.
Please call the District at 586-4544 if you have any questions,or if we may be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
2‘14fr-v—’
Chris Bieker
District Manager
Todd Krula
Lines Superintendent
Envfronme,ttaI Proteciloii Through Wastevater Colleer!o,,and Treatment
Dave Shirk
Planning Department
Town of Estes Park
Re:Development Plan 2012-01,Location &Extent Review
Multi-Use Stall Barns and Multi-Purpose Event Center-Stanley Park Fairgrounds
Dave,
I have reviewed the plans for the Location and Extent Review dated August 22,2012 for the above
referenced property.I have the following comments:
1.ISO calculations need to be completed to determine the required water flow.
2.It is estimated that 3 or 4 addItional fire hydrants will need to be installed to accommodate
needed fire flows and hydrant spacing for both the MPEC building and the Phase 1 Stall Barn
building.Hydrant locations will need to be approved by the fire code official.
3.Fire lanes will need to be Identified and approved by the fire code official.
4.The access road between the Phase 1 Stall Barn and the MPEC building will need to be
maintained.The Stanley Park Fairground Facility Master Plan (July 2012)Concept C shows a
connection between the MPEC building and the Phase 1 Stall Barn.If this connection would
close off access to the east side of both buildings an alternate access would need to be
determined and approved by the fire code official.
5.All fire hydrant requirements must be In place prior to the commencement of any construction.
6.A full set of construction drawings will be required for review of the fire alarm and sprinkler
systems.These systems are required to be installed in accordance with the 2009 IFC.
7.The fire code official would need to be involved with any variance discussion involving building
height.
Please let me know if you have any questions,I can be reached at (970)577-0900 Monday through
Friday during normal business hours.
Sincerely
Scott Dorman,Fire Chief
Estes Valley Fire Protection District
901 N.Saint Vram Avenue •Estes Park,CO 80517 P-970-577-0900 •F-970-577-0923
n
‘
—
estes multi-purpose event center
Hice-Idler,Gloria <gloria.hice-idler@stateco.us>
To:Da Shirk <dshirk@estes.org>
Da,
Tue,Nov 13,2012 at 9:16 AM
I spoke to Scott this morning.CDOT’s position on this one is that the lanes warranted in the traffic study should
be constructed to accommodate the new traffic.
If you ha any questions,please let me know.
[Quoted text hidden]
()
Town of Estes Park reply from Dave Shirk
Bilobran,Timothy <timothy.bilobranstate.co.us>Thu,Oct 25,2012 at 1:41 PM
To:Karen Thompson <kthompsonestes.org>,dshirk@estes.org
Good afternoon Dave,
Ne read through the Delich &Associates traffic study for the Stanley Park Fairgrounds as well as discussed the
proposal with Gloria,who is back in the office today.We agree with the conclusions in the traffic study,that
improements are warranted at the intersections St.Vram and both Community &4th Street.CDOT’s position is
that the improments should be constructed under an access permit prior to the opening of the Fairgrounds
E’vent Center.
Gloria did mention that she thought there was supposed to be a discussion on potential phasing.That is
something CDOT would be willing to consider proAded a phasing plan is created.
If you hae any questions,I can be reached at £7C-35C-2i63.
Thanks,
Tim Bilobran
Access Manager .
I fl’A*L9JO fl5 S A .Pp._A •3’P VT k1tA ttFLt11IIJL I 4.aJ 1
Dave Shirk,Planner II
Stanley Park Multi-Use SLi Barns A1/Add multi-use stall barn facility at Stanley Park FairgroundsfTBDRooftopWay
Applicant:Norris Design
A Development Plan 2012-01 Location &Extent Review for the above-
referenced property will he revie I by the Estes Valley Planning Commission
on Tuesday,October 16,2012 1:30 p.m.in the Board Room of the Town
Hall.You arc welcome to attend mecEing.
Please visit our website at ww 3stes.org/CurrentApplications for detailed
information.Please check this wel te two days prior to the meeting for updates,
such as meeting continuances.If you have questions or would like to comment
on the submitted application,please contact Dave Shirk at 970-577-3729,
dshirk@estes.org,or at the return address shown on the front of this card.All
public comments will be posted on the Town website.
COODF DO
(
1cif iec 1•5 7L
M
U’/)bL/
FROM:
RE:C
\
t ,k/-7
/1
4
.)
52(7
1 e-A’7
)‘/
Fwd:Stall Barns
Alison Chilcott <achilcottestes.org>Thu,Oct 25,2012 at 9:13 AM
To:Dave Shirk <dshirkestes.org>
Forwarded message
From:Kare ii Thompson <kthornpson@estes.org>
Date:Fri,Oct 19,2012 at 9:58 AM
Subject:Stall Barns
To:tomhannah54@aol.com
Cc:Alison Chilcott <achilcottestes.org>
Good Morning,Tom -
Thank you for your letter.I apologize for the Stall Barn project not being on the agenda as the postcard
indicated.After the postcard was mailed,it was determined by venous departments the project was not ready to
move forward.
Yesterday,I mailed new postcards to everyone,indicating the projects (Stall Barns and Multi-Purpose Event
Center)will be heard by the Board of Adjustment on November 6th,the Planning Commission on November 20th,
and the Town Board on November 27th.The Town Administrator and Public Works Director also received these
•notices and are aware of the hearing dates.
I apologize for the inconvenience this has caused.In the future,if you have questions about the agenda,please
see me prior to the start of the meeting and I will be happy to answer your questions.I’m usually in the Board
Room at least 20 minutes before the meeting starts,
Please let me know if I can he of further assistance.
Karen Thompson
Administrative AssisTant
Community Deeiopmen Denalment
Town of Estes Park
Phone 97Q577..72i
Fax:9?).3i3..Q’L9
kthorrionon e;a
Alison Chifrott
Community Oevelopment Director
97(1.’;7372O
Page 1
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Dave Shirk,Planner
Date:November 27, 2012
RE:SUPPLEMENTAL CONDOMINIUM MAP #1,Stone Bridge Estates
Condominiums, Phase II, Unit 1147; 1147 Fish Creek Road;Van Horn
Engineering/Applicant
Background:The applicant has
submitted a supplemental condominium
map application for Stone Bridge Estates
Condominiums.
The property is located on at 1147 Fish
Creek Road and is zoned RM Multi-Family
Residential.
The development approval provided for a
total of fourteen units (Phase I). To date,
two of the units have been built and
condominiumized; this unit represents the
third to be condominiumized, leaving an additional 11 units to be built (one under
construction).
Budget:N/A
Staff Recommendation:Planning Division Staff recommends approval.
Sample Motion:I move for the approval/denial of Stone Bridge Estates
Condominiums Supplemental Map #1 application.
Community DevelopmentMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Alison Chilcott, Director
Dave Shirk, Planner
Date:November 27, 2012
RE:SPECIAL REVIEW 2012-05,ART Used Vehicles Sales; Lots 16 & 17,
Quasebarth Resubdivision; Applicant/Blake Hornsby
Background:This is a request for Special Review approval to allow auto sales at 860
Dunraven. The use would also include automobile repairs, for which the site has been
used for a number of years.
Budget:N/A
Planning Commission Recommendation:On Tuesday November 20, 2012, the
Estes Valley Planning Commission held a public hearing to discuss Special Review
2012-05 “ART Auto Sales.”At that time, the Planning Commission found:
1.This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code, including Section 3.5 Special Review Uses.
2.The proposed special review use will not have potential adverse impacts on nearby
land uses, public facilities and services, or the environment.
3.Outdoor vehicle storage on this site is legally nonconforming, therefore Sections
5.1.L, 5.1.R, and 7.13 regarding outdoor storage do not apply.
4.This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff
relative to code compliance or the provision of public services.
5.This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park;
The Planning Commission voted unanimously (6-0)to recommend APPROVAL of the
proposed Special Review CONDITIONAL TO:
1.All vehicles shall be stored on-site and not in public right-of-way.
Sample Motion:I move for the approval/denial of Special Review 2012-05 “ART
Auto Sales” subject to the findings and conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission.
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Town Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Bo Winslow, Community Services Coordinator
Date:November 27, 2012
RE:Approval of Consulting Services for Museum and Senior Center Site
Master Plan
Background:
At the March 27, 2012 Town Board Study Session, Trustees held a discussion
regarding the development of a Museum and Senior Center Master Plan.At that
meeting, it was noted that a Master Plan would take at least six months to complete, per
Director Zurn. It was also noted at the Study Session that a final plan would not be
available until after the budget process and the no n-budgeted item would need to come
forward to the Town Board for approval.
In April, staff received direction to move forward with the development of a Request for
Proposal (RFP) for the Estes Park Museum/Estes Park Senior Center Site Master Plan.
Staff developed the RFP and a submittal deadline of August 17, 2012 was identified.
Three proposals were received in response to the Town’s RFP for this project.The
scope of work includes a program development phase and a site master plan phase.
At the October 17, 2012 Community Services/Community Development Committee
meeting, the Committee reviewed the memo describing the recommended firm. The
Committee supported the efforts of staff in defining the scope of this project, identifying
the Museum and Senior Center as two separate Divisions,and involving stakeholders in
the review and selection process. The Committee requested that the Master Plan
contract be discussed at the upcoming Town Board meeting, thus the presentation at
this meeting.
The program phase includes an in-depth study of the programming and demographic
needs as it relates to the Museum and the Senior Center for the next 20 years. The site
master plan will determine if the current footprints will accommodate the anticipated
Community ServicesMemo
growth in usage and visitation of the Senior Center and Museum and explore alternate
Town-owned properties and will propose three options or recommendations for facility
locations. The plan will result in a final recommendation for site locations and building
uses of the next 20 years.
The Town received three proposals for this project from:
Anderson Hallas Architects, PC (Golden, CO: six-month schedule / $80,383)
OZ Architecture (Boulder, CO: six-month schedule / $83,120 plus survey costs)
T.W.Beck Architects (Estes Park, CO: 18-week schedule / $14,570 plus
consultants at cost plus 15%)
A Stakeholders Committee (Consultant Selection Committee) was formed to evaluate
the proposals. This Committee consists of two Trustees, representatives from the
Museum and Senior Center’s support organizations and Town staff. Committee
members studied the RFP and the submitted proposals to fully understand the scope of
the project. Committee members subsequently completed an evaluation sheet for each
firm.
Based on evaluation scores, results of reference checks, level of prior experience with
museums and senior centers, public sector experience and degree of on -site
involvement, the Committee unanimously agreed Anderson Hallas Architects, PC to be
the best fit for the Town. It is noted that 85% of Anderson Hallas’ business experience
is in the public sector.
It is the intent of this project to utilize and expand on as much existing information as
available, including a wide variety of demographic data, at tendance and usage data,
citizen surveys, cultural and tourism aspects, as well as other significant plans and
studies from the Town. The program phase will also include an expanded community
survey by one of Denver’s leading market research firms for com munity and cultural
facilities.
The Committee feels the Anderson Hallas team will give the Town the most creative,
economically sensitive and community-minded options as possible. Their team
includes an exceptional roster of consultants and a project approach that best
addresses the RFP and Town needs.
Once the contract is approved, the Stakeholders Committee will continue to assist
Anderson Hallas as needed throughout the process. Other community groups,
professionals and users of the Museum and S enior Center will be engaged throughout
the process as needed. As part of the project, a series of public meetings and
presentations will also be included.
Budget:
The funds for this project are budgeted in the Community Reinvestment Fund.
(Account: 222-5400-544-22-02). Anderson Hallas Architects’ proposed fee is
$80,383.00. A total not-to-exceed price of $89,000 includes a contingency of
approximately 10% to cover to-be-discovered action items, desirable products or
processes not covered in the RFP.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of consulting services with Anderson Hallas Architects, PC.
The attached contract has been reviewed by Town Attorney White.
Recommended Motion:
I recommend approval/denial of the consulting services contract with Anderson
Hallas Architects for the Museum and Senior Center Site Master Plan.
TOWN ADMINISTRATORMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
From:Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Date:November 27, 2012
RE:EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW TIMEFRAME
Background:
The current policy calls for ALL employees to be evaluated at the first of the year and
the merit increases to be applied at that time. Although this is the policy, this hasn’t
been practice several years. There was an “administrative directive” that cam e out in
2006 that directed department heads to evaluate staff on their anniversary date and to
base any merit increases at that time. That is how it’s been done since that time,
however the policy stated in the personnel policies adopted by the board has the first of
the year requirement.
We are working on a major update of the personnel policy manual, but it’s not ready
yet. The Leadership team feels that evaluating employees on their anniversary date is
a more equitable model and is much more practical to implement. The workload of
getting all evaluations done at the same time, especially in larger departments such as
the PD and Public Works is considerable, and from a practical standpoint, I believe will
degrade the quality of those evaluations and discussions with employees. Also by n ot
having any connection to when an employee starts with the Town, and employee could
be hired in mid-December and be eligible for a merit increase in 14 days, while an
employee hired in mid-January would be 12 months away from a merit increase.
Lastly by using anniversary dates, it gives department heads a little more latitude to
reward high performers because not all of the merit pool is exhausted at the first of the
year.This is also the more common practice with local governments, including the
County, Loveland and Fort Collins.
Budget:
No additional budget costs. Included in 2013 proposed budget
Staff Recommendation:
That section H and Section H 1 of the Town Personnel Policy Manual be revised as
follows:
H. Performance Evaluations
Using a prescribed format, written evaluations will be completed by supervisors for each
employee below the level of Department Head. Written evaluations are given to
employees upon completion of the probationary period and at the at the annual
anniversary of the employee’s hire date each or date of promotion to a new position
year thereafter, and at such other times as directed by the Town Administrator. The
employee's supervisor will discuss completed evaluations with each employee to point
out the employee's strengths and weaknesses and to recommend ways to improve
performance.
1. Merit Increases
The Board of Trustees may authorize a merit pool for each department. Merit pay
increases are based upon the employee's performance and shall be effective the next
pay period following the employee’s anniversary date. Should an employee’s
evaluation be completed after this date, the pay increase shall be retroactive back to the
pay period following the employee’s anniversary date.
Sample Motion:
I move to modify the Section H and Section H 1 of the Town of Estes Park Personnel
Policy Manual as presented.
F. Pay Plan
All employee positions are included in the Town's classification system.
Jobs are assigned various grades, based upon levels of responsibility, nature of decisions made on the
job, and qualifications. Every Town employee in a particular job classification will be paid within the
same grade. Employees move through their respective grades on the basis of job performance. At the
discretion of the Board of Trustees, the pay plan is evaluated periodically to: (1) determine the
adequacy of existing pay rates to reflect cost of living changes and other influencing factors; and (2)
take into account any pertinent changes in responsibilities or qualifications that may impact the
classification of a job.
1. Compensation Policy
The Town of Estes Park will annually compare its salaries to market data in an effort to maintain a
competitive salary structure. Furthermore, adjustments to salaries and pay grades will adhere to this
policy for all positions excluding Light and Power positions, salaries will be compared annually to a
market consisting of Colorado cities and towns that are providing similar services and have a
population of 15,000 to 20,000 residentsmarket character similar to the Town of Estes Park. Light
and Power salaries will be compared to a market consisting of Colorado cities and towns that operate
a power or electric utility, and when possible, have a population of 15,000 to 20,000 residents.
Comparisons will include a factor to account for differences in housing prices. Median housing
prices will be used for the current or most recent year for Estes Park and the comparison
municipalities.
In order to avoid lagging behind the comparison cities and towns, adjustments will be made
following the market comparison. Adjustments as indicated by the market study will be made by the
end of September each yearannually at the beginning of the fiscal year.
A Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) as indicated by the Denver-Boulder Consumer Price Index
(CPI) as reported by the Department of Labor, will be applied to the first pay period of the following
year. The COLA will be applied to all positions within the Town of Estes Park. All adjustments will
be made contingent upon available funding.
G. Probationary Period
The probationary period allows a supervisor to train, observe, and evaluate an employee's work in
order to determine fitness for a position. All appointments (original, promotional, re- employment,
and reinstatement) are subject to a probationary period. The length of the probationary period is
determined by the employee's classification:
• The probationary period for general Town employees is six months.
• The probationary period for Public Safety personnel is one year.
All employees will be evaluated at the end of their probationary period with regard to their proven
ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the position.
If at any time during the probationary period, the Department Head determines that the services of
the employee have been unsatisfactory, the supervisor may take such appropriate action as
termination, demotion, or extension of the probationary period. This action must be approved by the
Town Administrator and is without right of appeal or hearing.
H. Performance Evaluations
Using a prescribed format, written evaluations will be completed by supervisors for each employee
below the level of Department Head. Written evaluations are given to employees upon completion of
the probationary period and at the first of each calendarat the annual anniversary of the employee’s
date of successful completion of their probationary period or date of promotion to a new postion and
year thereafter, and at such other times as directed by the Town Administrator. The employee's
supervisor will discuss completed evaluations with each employee to point out the employee's
strengths and weaknesses and to recommend ways to improve performance.
1. Merit Increases
The Board of Trustees may authorize a merit pool for each department. Merit pay increases are based
upon the employee's performance and the employee will be evaluated at the first of each
calendar year.shall be effective the next pay period following the employee’s anniversary date.
Should an employee’s evaluation be completed after this date, the pay increase shall be retroactive
back to the pay period following the employee’s anniversary date.
.
Page 1
Town AttorneyMemo
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
From:Gregory A. White, Town Attorney
Date:November 16, 2012
RE:Ordinance No. 08-12 –Approving Exclusive Option to Purchase Real Estate for
Estes Performance InCorporated –Performing Arts Center Project
Background:
Estes Performance InCorporated (“EPIC”) has determined to design, permit, construct
and operate a Performing Arts Center Project and related facilities (the “Project”)on the
“Park Theater Mall” property. In order to design and construct the Project, EPIC has
requested that the Town sell a portion of the Town’s Riverside parking lot contiguous to
the Park Theater Mall property. The Exclusive Option to Purchase Real Estate
(“Option”) grants to EPIC the Option to purchase a portion of the Town’s property as
described in the Option. The Option must be exercised on or before January 31, 2014.
If the Option is exercised by EPIC, the Town and EPIC will then execute the Real Estate
Sales Contract which is included as Exhibit B to the Option Agreement. The significant
provision of the Real Estate Sales Contract are as follows:
1.Purchase price of $1.00.
2.Closing within thirty (30) days after the exercise of the Option and execution of
the Real Estate Sales Contract.
3.Costs –EPIC is responsible for all costs of closing of the Real Estate Sales
Contract.
4.Riverwalk –At closing, EPIC shall deliver to the Town a public access easement
across the Park Theater Mall property. EPIC is also obligated to design,
construct and maintain the Riverwalk across the Park Theater Mall property.
EPIC shall also deliver a public access easement from the western side of the
Park Theater Mall property to Moraine Avenue.
5.Contingencies –The closing of the Real Estate Sales Contract is specifically
contingent upon the following:
a.EPIC receiving all necessary approvals including, but not limited to, special
review approval and variances for its Performing Arts Center Project.
b.EPIC delivering to the Town the public access easement for the Riverwalk
across the Park Theater Mall property.
c.Delivery of a public access easement from the western side of the Park
Theater mall property to Moraine Avenue for further extension of the
Riverwalk.
d.Negotiation of a Development Agreement between EPIC and the Town
addressing construction of EPIC’s Performing Arts Project as more fully
outlined on Exhibit C of the Real Estate Sales Contract.
e.EPIC shall apply for and receive approval of an Amended Plat of a portion of
Lot 33 of the Riverside Subdivision of the Town of Est es Park, which will
enable the Town to transfer the property to Purchaser.
f.Prior to closing,EPIC acquiring title to the Park Theater Mall property in order
to allow its construction of the Project.
g.The Town and EPIC negotiating an agreement which provides for reversion of
the Town’s property to the Town in the event that construction of the Project
is not commenced within three (3) years of the date of closing.
Ordinance No.08-12 approves the Exclusive Option to Purchase Real Estate which, if
exercised by EPIC,approves the Real Estate Sales Contract attached as Exhibit B to
the Option Agreement.
Budget:
The Town will incur administrative and legal expenses in negotiating the necessary
agreements which are contingencies to the Real Estate Sales Contract.EPIC agrees in
the Real Estate Sales Contract to pay all other costs associated with the exercise of its
option to acquire the Town’s property.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No.08-12.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Ordinance No.08-12.
ORDINANCE NO.08-12
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE OPTION
TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE FOR ESTES PERFORMANCE
INCORPORATED –PERFORMING ARTS CENTER PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has the authority pursuant
to Section 31-15-713 (b) C.R.S. to sell Town property; and
WHEREAS,Estes Performance InCorporated (“EPIC”) has requested that the Town sell
a portion of its property located on the western portion of the Town’s Riverside parking lot which
abuts the location of EPIC’s proposed Performing Arts Center Project; and
WHEREAS, as part of the purchase of the Town’s property, EPIC has agreed to grant a
public access easement and construct an extension of the Riverwalk across the Park Theater
Mall property which will be acquired by EPIC; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has determined it is in the
best interest of the Town to enter into an Exclusive Option to Purchase Real Estate with EPIC
which grants to EPIC the exclusive option to purchase Town property subject to the terms and
conditions as more fully set forth in the Exclusive Option to Purchase Real Estate Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1.The Exclusive Option to Purchase Real Estate Agreement attached
hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference is hereby approved.The
officials of the Town of Estes Park are hereby authorized to execute the Option to
Purchase Real Estate Agreement and perform all other necessary acts and duties as
provided in the Option Agreement.
Section 2.This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days
after its adoption and publication.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND PASSED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF ESTES PARK on this _______ day of ______________, 2012.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at the meeting
of the Board of Trustees on the _______ day of ___________, 2012, and published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the _______
day of _____________________, 2012.
_____________________________
Town Clerk
Option Agreement –Town of Estes Park and Seller Initials ___________
Estes Performance InCorporated
Purchaser Initials _______
1
EXCLUSIVE OPTION TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE
This Option Agreement entered into on the ___day of November, 2012 (the
“Effective Date”)between the Town of Estes Park,Colorado, a municipal corporation,
hereinafter called "Seller", and Estes Performance InCorporated,hereinafter referred
to as “Purchaser,”for the option to purchase two parcels of property owned by the
Town of Estes Park (the “Option Property”).
W I T N E S S E T H:
1.GRANT OF OPTION.In consideration of $1.00 (ONE DOLLAR), cash in
hand paid by Purchaser to Seller, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged,Seller hereby grants unto Purchaser, for the Option Period described
below, the exclusive right and Option to purchase the Option Property,more fully
described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference,and, upon
the exercise of the Option,to purchase the same as hereinafter provided.
2.Exercise of Option.To exercise this Option,Purchaser shall,prior to the
date on which this Option is due to expire, give Seller written notice of its exercise of the
Option.
3.Term of Option.This Option shall extend from the Effective Date to
January 31, 2014.In the event Purchaser fails to exercise this Option by this date, this
Option shall terminate on said date and be of no further force and effect .
4.Real Estate Sales Contract.At the time of exercise of the Option,
Purchaser shall execute and deliver to Seller and Seller shall execute and deliver to
Purchaser, the Real Estate Sales Contract, attached hereto as Exhibit B and
incorporated herein and by reference .
Option Agreement –Town of Estes Park and Seller Initials ___________
Estes Performance InCorporated
Purchaser Initials _______
2
5.Purchaser Representation. The Purchaser represents that, as of the
date of this Option,the following are true and correct statements upon which Seller may
rely:
a)Purchaser is a duly-organized corporation in good standing under the Laws of the
State of Colorado;
b)Purchaser will diligently pursue the contingencies which are set forth in Section
10.10 of the Real Estate Sales Contract;
6.Title Commitment to be Delivered by Seller.Title to the Option Property
shall be merchantable,and free and clear of all liens, encumbrances and defects to the
Purchaser’s satisfaction prior to closing of the Real Estate Sales Contract. Within ten
(10) days of the mutual execution of the Real Estate Sales Contract, Seller shall
provide, at Purchaser's expense, a title insurance commitment from a Title Insurance
Company of Seller’s choosing, in favor of the Purchaser on the Option Property,in form
satisfactory to the Purchaser and showing a State of Title as set forth in the Purchaser’s
proposed Real Estate Sales Contract.The premium for such insurance, if the Property
is purchased as provided in the Contract and a policy of title insurance issued, shall be
at Purchaser’s expense at closing.
7.Binding Nature of Option.This Option is for the benefit of and binding
upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
8.Memorandum of Option to Be Recorded . For purposes of recording,a
Memorandum notice of this Option shall be executed by the parties and recorded.
9.Notices.Any notice required or permitted to be delivered hereunder shall,
except as otherwise expressly provided herein, be deemed to have been given upon the
earlier to occur of (i) actual receipt by the addressee thereof; or (ii) deposit in the United
States mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested,
addressed to Seller or Purchaser, as the case may be as follows:
Option Agreement –Town of Estes Park and Seller Initials ___________
Estes Performance InCorporated
Purchaser Initials _______
3
Seller:Town of Estes Park
Attention: Town Administrator
P O Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
Purchaser:Estes Performance InCorporated
Attn:President
P O Box 3077
Estes Park, CO 80517
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Purchaser have executed this Option
Agreement dated as of _____________ in duplicate originals by their respective duly -
authorized representatives as designated below.
SELLER:
TOWN OF ESTES PARK,
a municipal corporation
BY:____________________________
Mayor
Acknowledged by:
_________________________________
Town Clerk
Option Agreement –Town of Estes Park and Seller Initials ___________
Estes Performance InCorporated
Purchaser Initials _______
4
PURCHASER:
ESTES PERFORMANCE INCORPORATED,
a Colorado nonprofit corporation,
By: _________________________________
Acknowledged by:
By: ____________________________________
Option Agreement –Town of Estes Park and Seller Initials ___________
Estes Performance InCorporated
Purchaser Initials _______
5
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Parcel 1:
The following legal descriptions are portions of the Southwest Quarter
of the Northeast Quarter of Section 25,Township 5 North,Range 73
West of the 6th P.M.
Commencing at the (approximate)Northeast Corner of Lot 34,Second
Riverside Subdivision (the Northeast corner of the slab at the southerly
edge of Fall River);thence S 16'39'E 15.9'to the true point of
beginning;
thence along the east line of said Lot 34,S 16'39'
E 128.4'thence S 78'28'E 24.2';
thence N 11'32'E 140.0';
thence N 78'28'W 35.4';
thence S 73'02'W 56.2'to the True Point of
Beginning.Area:7775 square feet,more or less
Legal Description of Parcel 2:
Larimer County Parcel Number 3525122943 (as small sliver of property between the
southern boundary of Lot 34 and Rockwell currently containing an extension to the
sidewalk and 3 trees).
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 1
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT
This REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT (hereinafter referred to as the
“Contract”) is entered into the _____ day of _______, 20___(hereinafter referred to as
the “Effective Date”) by the Town of Estes Park, a municipal corporation (hereinafter
referred to as “Seller”), and Estes Performance InCorporated (hereinafter referred to as
“Purchaser”).
P R E M I S E S:
WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of certain real property, as more particularly
described herein, and which is situated in the Town of Estes Park,Larimer County,
Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Seller desires to sell to Purchaser and Purchaser desires to purchase
from Seller all of Seller’s right, title and interest in and to the real property described
herein.
A G R E E M E N T:
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the Premises, the payment of the
sums described herein, the respective covenants, agreements and obligations hereinafter
set forth, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, Seller and Purchaser do hereby agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
SALE AND PURCHASE
1.1 PROPERTY. Upon and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set
forth, Seller agrees to sell to Purchaser and Purchaser agrees to purchase from Seller,
the real property, as more fully described on EXHIBIT A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein for all purposes, together with all rights, ways, privileges and
appurtenances pertaining thereto (hereinafter referred to as the “Property”), for the
consideration of and subject to the terms, provisions, and conditions hereinafter set forth.
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 2
ARTICLE II
PURCHASE PRICE
2.1 PURCHASE PRICE . The Purchase Price for the Property (hereinafter referred
to as the ("Purchase Price") shall be One Dollar ($1.00).
ARTICLE III
EARNEST MONEY
3.1 EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT.Purchaser shall deliver earnest money in the
amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) (the “Earnest Money Deposit”) to Seller upon
the execution of this Contract.If this Contract closes according to the terms hereof, the
Earnest Money Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser at Closing.
ARTICLE IV
TITLE STATUS
4.1 TITLE COMMITMENT. Within ten (10) business days after the Effective Date,
Seller shall deliver to Purchaser a Commitment for Title Insurance (hereinafter referred to
as the “Commitment”), together with legible copies of all instruments and documents
referred to therein as exceptions (“Exception Documents”) to title covering the Property, in
favor of Purchaser, pursuant to which the Title Company agrees, subject to the provisions
thereof, to issue at Closing an Owner Policy of Title Insurance (hereinafter referred to as
the “Owner Policy”) to Purchaser.
4.2 REVIEW OF TITLE COMMITMENT. Purchaser shall have ten (10) days after
receipt of the Commitment and the Exception Documents (as herein defined) to provide
to Seller written objections to the status of title to the Property. If such written objections
have not been received by Seller prior to the end of the above described period,
Purchaser shall be deemed to have conclusively accepted and approved the status of title
to the Property as shown by the Commitment. If Purchaser does timely deliver to Seller
such written objections, Seller shall have until Closing to cure such objections; however,
Seller is not obligated to cure such objections. Seller shall diligently pursue the curing of
any objections Seller elects to cure. If Seller fails, is unable, or unwilling to cure such
objections by Closing, Purchaser may either (i) waive such objections in writing and
purchase the Property notwithstanding such objections; or (ii) terminate this Contract by
written notice to Seller. If Purchaser elects to terminate this Contract, the Earnest Money
Deposit shall be refunded to Purchaser and neither Seller nor Purchaser shall have any
further obligations hereunder, except those obligations stated herein that survive
termination of this Contract.
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 3
4.3 CONVEYANCE BY DEED. Seller shall deliver to Purchaser, at Closing, a
Special Warranty Deed (hereinafter referred to as the “Deed”), conveying fee simple title
to the Property to Purchaser, subject to the exceptions to title contained in Schedule B of
the Commitment approved or waived by Purchaser pursuant to Paragraph 4.2 hereof.
ARTICLE V
CLOSING
5.1 CLOSING DATE. The date of closing (the “Closing Date”) shall be thirty (30)
days after the Effective Date or at an earlier or later date upon mutual written agreement
of the parties. If all contingencies described in Section 10.10 have been satisfied and
Closing does not occur, Seller will have the right to terminate the Contract and retain the
Earnest Money Deposit paid to Seller by Purchaser and the parties will have no further
liabilities to the other. In the event that all contingencies described in Section 10.10 have
not been satisfied by the Closing date, this Contract shall automatically terminate and the
Earnest Money Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser and the parties will have no further
liabilities to the other.
5.2 CLOSING COSTS.Purchaser shall pay the cost of the basic premium for an
Owner Policy of Title Insurance, the cost of a tax certificate, the closing fee, and all other
closing costs. Each party shall pay their own professional legal fees incurred in this
transaction, and any other costs and fees set out herein.
5.3 PROPERTY TAXES.The Property is currently not subject to any ad valorem
property taxes as it is owned by Seller, which is a municipal corporation. Purchaser shall
be responsible for all ad valorem property taxes assessed and payable on the Property
following the Closing, if any.
5.4 SELLER’S OBLIGATIONS AT CLOSING. At Closing, Seller shall deliver to
Purchaser the following documents which shall be duly executed and, where appropriate,
acknowledged, together with any and all items or instruments necessary or appropriate
thereto:
(a)DEED. The Deed;
(b)OWNER POLICY. Evidence of issuance of the Owner Policy,
containing no exceptions to title other than: (i) the standard printed exceptions in
Schedule B to the Commitment; and (ii) those exceptions to title contained in
Schedule B to the Commitment which are approved by Purchaser or waived by
Purchaser as described above;
(c)AUTHORITY. Any and all documents reasonably requested by the
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 4
Title Company or required by this Agreement to confirm that this transaction and
the parties executing such documents are fully authorized and empowered to so
act.
(d)FUNDS.Funds necessary to return the Earnest Money Deposit to
Purchaser and to pay any other obligations of Seller.
5.5 PURCHASER’S OBLIGATIONS AT CLOSING. At Closing, Purchaser shall deliver
to the Title Company:
(a)FUNDS.Funds necessary to pay the Closing costs; and
(b)EVIDENCE OF AUTHORITY. Any documents reasonably requested by
the Title Company or required by this Agreement to confirm that this transaction
and the parties executing such documents are fully authorized and empowered to
so act; and
(c)EASEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.Purchaser shall deliver to
Seller a fully executed Easement and Development Agreement as more fully
provided in Section 10.10 of this Contract.
5.6 DELIVERY OF POSSESSION. Possession of the Property shall be delivered to
Purchaser at Closing.
ARTICLE VI
REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND COVENANTS
6.1 SELLER'S REPRESENTATIONS,W ARRANTIES AND COVENANTS.Seller
represents, and warrants and covenants to Purchaser the following:
(a)TITLE TO PROPERTY. Seller will deliver at Closing good,
indefeasible, and fee simple title to the Property,free and clear of all mortgages,
liens, encumbrances, leases, tenancies, security interest, covenants, conditions,
restrictions, rights-of-way, easements, judgments or other matters affecting title
other than those shown on Schedule B of the Commitment and otherwise
permitted in this Contract.
(b)AUTHORITY. Seller has full power and authority to execute this
Contract and perform all of its obligations hereunder.
6.2 PURCHASER’S REPRESENTATIONS,W ARRANTIES AND COVENANTS.Purchaser
represents, warrants and covenants to Seller that Purchaser has full power and
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 5
authority to execute this Contract and perform all of its obligations hereunder.
ARTICLE VII
CASUALTY LOSS
7.1 RISK OF LOSS. Risk of loss due to casualty up to and including the Closing
Date shall be borne by Seller, except to the extent of any loss or damage caused solely
by the acts of Purchaser or its agents, employees, contractors, or invitees. Seller shall
repair and restore all damage to the Property for which Seller has the risk of loss prior to
the Closing.
ARTICLE VIII
DEFAULT
8.1 PURCHASER’S DEFAULT. If Closing fails to occur due solely to a default or
breach by Purchaser hereunder, Seller shall be entitled to terminate this Contract, and
retain the Earnest Money Deposit as liquidated damages as Seller’s sole and exclusive
remedy for default or breach by Purchaser. The foregoing sum has been agreed upon as
the amount payable by Purchaser to Seller in consideration of Purchaser having the
option to refuse to purchase the Property without any liability on account of its refusal
other than payment of the Earnest Money Deposit. It is also agreed between Purchaser
and Seller that such sum shall be liquidated damages for Purchaser’s default and
because of the difficulty, inconvenience, and uncertainty of ascertaining actual damages
for such default, the amount of damages shall be liquidated as the amount of the
consideration. Seller hereby waives any and all other of its rights or remedies at law or in
equity, for breach of this Contract by Purchaser, including, but not limited to, a suit for
damages or a suit to enforce specific performance.
8.2 SELLER’S DEFAULT. In the event that Seller shall default in the performance
of Seller’s obligations hereunder, for any reason whatsoever other than Purchaser’s
default or as otherwise permitted hereunder, as Purchaser’s sole and exclusive remedies
hereunder, Purchaser may, at Purchaser’s option, (i) purchase the Property
notwithstanding such default pursuant to the remaining terms and provisions of this
Contract, in which event such default shall be deemed waived; (ii) terminate this Contract
and receive a return of the Earnest Money Deposit and neither Seller nor Purchaser shall
have any further obligation hereunder, except those obligations stated herein that survive
termination of this Contract; or (iii) file a suit to enforce specific performance and/or
damages.
8.3 NOTICE OF DEFAULT.In the event of default by either party, the non-
defaulting party shall give the defaulting party a written notice specifying said default. The
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 6
defaulting party shall have fifteen (15) days in which to cure the default. In the event the
default is not cured within said fifteen (15) day period, the defaulting party shall be
deemed to be in default and the non-defaulting party may pursue the remedies set forth
in Paragraphs 8.1 or 8.2 above.
ARTICLE IX
NOTICE
9.1 NOTICE DESIGNATION. Any notice required or permitted to be delivered
hereunder shall, except as otherwise expressly provided herein, be deemed to have been
given upon the earlier to occur of (i) actual receipt by the addressee thereof; or (ii) deposit
in the United States mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt
requested, addressed to Seller or Purchasers, as the case may be as follows:
Seller:Town of Estes Park
Attention: Town Administrator
P O Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
Purchaser:Estes Performance InCorporated
Attn:President
P O Box 3077
Estes Park, CO 80517
ARTICLE X
MISCELLANEOUS
10.1 BINDING AGREEMENT. This Contract and all of the terms, provisions and
covenants contained herein shall apply to, be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the
parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns.
10.2 CAPTIONS. The captions employed in this Contract are for convenience only
and are not intended in any way to limit or amplify the terms and provisions of this
Contract.
10.3 TIME OF ESSENCE. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE of this Contract.
10.4 CHOICE OF LAW.This Contract shall be construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of Colorado, and the obligations hereunder are performable in the
county where the Property is located.
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 7
10.5 ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Contract contains the entire agreement of the
parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and shall not be varied, amended, or
superseded except by written agreement between the parties hereto.
10.6 COUNTERPART EXECUTION. This Contract may be executed in counterparts,
each of which shall constitute an original, and all which taken together shall constitute an
original and all which taken together shall constitute a single agreement.
10.7 DATE COMPUTATION. If any date of significance hereunder falls upon a
Saturday, Sunday or recognized Federal holiday, such date will be deemed moved
forward to the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or recognized Federal holiday.
The terms “working day” or “business day” shall mean days elapsed exclusive of
Saturday, Sunday or recognized Federal holidays.
10.8 ASSIGNMENT.Neither party may assign any or all of the Party’s right, title
and interest in, to and under this Contract to any person or entity without the prior
written consent of the other Party.
10.9 CONSTRUCTION. This Contract is the result of negotiations between the
parties, neither of whom has acted under any duress or compulsion, whether legal,
economic or otherwise. Accordingly, the terms and provisions hereof shall be construed
in accordance with their usual and customary meanings. Seller and Purchaser hereby
waive the application of any rule of law which otherwise would be applicable in connection
with the construction of this Contract that ambiguous or conflicting terms or provisions
should be construed against the party who (or whose attorney) prepared the executed
Contract or any earlier draft of the same.
10.10 CONTINGENCIES.The Closing of the sale of the Property is subject to the
following contingencies:
(a)The Closing of this Contract is specifically contingent upon the
Purchaser receiving all necessary approvals including, but not limited to, special
review approval and variances for its Performing Arts Center Project. All
approvals must be in full force and effect at the time of Closing.
(b)At Closing, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller a public access
easement as more fully set forth on EXHIBIT B attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference.
(c)Prior to Closing, Purchaser shall obtain a public pedestrian
easement from the western end of the easement property described in sub-
paragraph (b) above along the south side of Fall River to Moraine Avenue across
Lot 35 and all of Lot 42, Second Riverside Subdistrict of the Town of Estes Park,
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 8
in the form satisfactory to Seller.
(d)Prior to Closing,the Parties shall negotiate and execute a
Development Agreement which addresses construction of Purchaser’s
Performing Arts Center Project as outlined on EXHIBIT C attached hereto,and
incorporated herein by reference.
(e)Purchaser shall apply for and receive approval of an Amended Plat
of a portion of Lot 33 of the Riverside Subdivision of the Town of Estes Park
which enables Seller to transfer the Property to Purchaser. All costs and
expenses for said Amended Plat, including any necessary surveying, Plat
preparation, application fees, and engineering shall be the responsibility of
Purchaser.
(f)Purchaser has, or at Closing will have,acquired title to all the real
property upon which the Purchaser will construct its Performing Arts Center
Project.
(g)Prior to Closing,the Parties shall develop an agreement which
provides for the reversion of the Property to the Town in the event that
construction of Purchaser’s Performing Arts Center Project is not commenced
within three (3) years of the date of Closing. Said Agreement shall be a
covenant running with the Property and executed by the Parties at Closing.
10.11 LITIGATION. In the event that any litigation is filed by any third party, which
litigation contests the ability of the Purchase and/or Seller to close the sale of the Property
pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Contract, and/or seeks to enjoin the
performance of either party of the terms and conditions of this Contract, either party may
terminate the Contract upon written notice to the other party. In case of such termination,
the Earnest Money Deposit shall be returned to the Purchaser and this Contract shall be
terminated and of no further force and effect. However, both parties may mutually elect
to continue to close the sale of the Property pursuant to the terms and conditions of this
Contract.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby execute this Contract effective
as stated herein.
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 9
SELLER:
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
__________________________
By: Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
TOWN CLERK
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss
COUNTY OF ___________)
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____ day of _____________, 20 __by
_______________________, Mayor of the Town of Estes Park.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My Commission Expires: __________________________
____________________________________
Notary Public
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 10
PURCHASER:
ESTES PERFORMANCE INCORPORATED
______________________________________
By:
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss
COUNTY OF LARIMER )
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____ day of _____________, 20 __
by_____________________, ___________________ of Estes Performance
InCorporated.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My Commission Expires: __________________________
____________________________________
Notary Public
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 11
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Parcel 1:
The following legal descriptions are portions of the Southwest Quarter
of the Northeast Quarter of Section 25,Township 5 North,Range 73
West of the 6th P.M.
Commencing at the (approximate)Northeast Corner of Lot 34,Second
Riverside Subdivision (the Northeast corner of the slab at the southerly
edge of Fall River);thence S 16'39'E 15.9'to the true point of
beginning;
thence along the east line of said Lot 34,S 16'39'
E 128.4'thence S 78'28'E 24.2';
thence N 11'32'E 140.0';
thence N 78'28'W 35.4';
thence S 73'02'W 56.2'to the True Point of
Beginning.Area:7775 square feet,more or less
Legal Description of Parcel 2:
Larimer County Parcel Number 3525122943 (as small sliver of property between the
southern boundary of Lot 34 and Rockwell currently containing an extension to the
sidewalk and 3 trees).
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 12
EXHIBIT B
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
This Easement Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made as of the ______ day of ____________,
2012 by and between Estes Performance InCorporated (“Owner”), and the Town of Estes Park
(the “Town”), whose address is PO Box 1200, Estes Park, Colorado 80517, a body corporate
and politic, duly organized and acting under the laws of the State of Colorado.
1.Consideration. For and in consideration of One dollar ($1.00) and other good and
valuable consideration paid by the Town to the Owner, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, Owner hereby sells, conveys and grants unto the Town an exclusive and
permanent public easement and right -of-way over, upon, across, through, and under
the property described in Exhibit A, attached and made part hereof (the “Property”),
situate in Larimer County, Colorado, for the uses and purposes and upon the terms
hereinafter set forth.
2.Purpose. This easement and right-of-way is for the purpose of granting the Town the
right to construct, inspect, maintain, make available to the public, operate and use a
pedestrian way, known as the Riverwalk, including utilities such as water, gas, electric,
telephone, cable tv, and the like (the “Improvements”), upon, across, over, under,
through, and within the Property. No motor -operated vehicles, except Town of Estes
Park maintenance and Light & Power Department vehicles, will be allowed on the
Property.
3.Representation of Owner.
A.The Owner, for itself, its successors and assigns, does hereby covenant and
agree not to construct improvements of any kind or nature whatsoever on, over,
across or under the Property described on Exhibit A or to take or fail to take any
action of any kind or nature whatsoever which would interfere with the Town’s
use of the Property for the purposes herein granted.
B.Owner hereby represents and covenants with the Town that there are no other
parties with interest in the Property and that Owner has sole and exclusive
authority to enter into this Agreement.
4.Binding Effect. This grant of easement shall run with the Property and shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their successors and assigns.
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 13
The parties hereto have executed this Easement Agreement as of the date first above written.
ESTES PARK INCORPORATED:
______________________________
By: President
TOWN OF ESTES PARK:
By: _________________________
Bill Pinkham, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Town Clerk
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 14
EXHIBIT A
To Easement Agreement
The following legal descriptions are portions of the Southwest Quarter
of the Northeast Quarter of Section 25,Township 5 North,Range 73
West of the 6th P.M.
Legal Description of Area of Riverwalk Easement to be granted by EPIC to the Town of
Estes Park:
Beginning at the (approximate)Northeast Corner of Lot 34,
Second Riverside Subdivision (the Northeast corner of the slab at
the southerly edge of Fall River);
thence along an Arc with a Length of 75.86',a Radius of 107.0',
and a Chord with a distance of 74.3'bearing S 71'11'W;
thence S 16'57'E 11.8';
thence along an Arc with a Length of 37.5',a Radius of 60.0'
and a Chord with a distance of 36.9'bearing N 87'20'E;thence
N 72'32'E 7.4';
thence S 16'30'E 8.9';
thence N 73'12'E 31.0'to the east line of said Lot 34;
thence along said east line N 16'39'W 32.2'to the True Point
of
Beginning.
Area:2015 square feet
REAL ESTATE SALES CONTRACT -PAGE 15
EXHIBIT C
Development Agreement
The Development Agreement shall include, but is not limited to, the following matters:
1.The construction of the Riverwalk along the southern b ank of Fall River through
the Project including the following:
Construction, maintenance, and operation of public restroom facilities
within the easement area (open during normal business hours).
Design and construction of the Riverwalk (including restroom facilities) at
EPIC’s sole expense.
Maintenance and repair of the Riverwalk within the easement at EPIC’s
sole expense.
Payment of all utility charges associated with these improvements at
EPIC’s sole expense.
Waiver of water tap fees for the restroom facilities.
2.Terms and conditions of construction of the Project including hours of
construction, use of Town property for staging of construction, and impacts to
neighboring businesses.
3.Any terms and conditions of the special review approval for the Pr oject.
of my business, I certainly believe a greater effort should be made to provide
information in greater detail than a postcard and much further in advance than
a few days before a hearing.
Why doesn't the Town hold a public information meeting before considering
this option? Not a meeting hosted by the proponents, but rather one that is
hosted by the Town, so that all interested citizens and property and business
owners can understand the full implications of this possible action, ask
questions, and get information well in advance of any Town Board action?It
would seem that the Town Board, and other Town officials would welcome
this public input. This is not a topic that should show up just a few days before
an action of the Board, and for which detailed information will not be available
until sometime on the Friday after Thanksgiving, for a Tuesday night hearing.
This matter should be postponed and a reasonable, informative and deliberate
public process be established.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Allen Arms <aarms@beyondbb.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:58 PM
Subject: "The Rocky"
To: townadmin@estes.org
I am writing in regard to the proposed Performing Arts Center.
I owned a business on Elkhorn Avenue in downtown Estes Park for 15 years. Although I no longer am
involved in that business, I would like to express my opinion about the placement of the new facility.
Since I first lived in Estes Park in 1968 and worked at many businesses in town, the primary issue has
been available parking. Over the years I have watched parking in the downtown area disappear.
Building this wonderful Performing Arts Center in the center of the downtown Estes Park will eliminate
even more parking spaces.
This is a disservice to people visiting Estes, and to the downtown merchants.
Also, expecting "upscale people" attending performances at the Center to ride a shuttle is obviously
degrading, and not a good idea.
I would hope that a better location for the Center could be found.
One that has it's own parking, and would not impose an even worse parking situation than is now
available.
Sincerely,
Allen Arms
970-586-8276
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <MacDonaldbooks@aol.com>
Date: Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Subject: option to sell land for downtown theater project
To: townclerk@estes.org
As a family business and property owner on the south side of the 100 block of East Elkhorn for over 100
years, we have supported development and progress in Estes Park. Notably, 100% cooperation with the
Urban Renewal project and the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan. We encourage cultural uses in the
downtown area.
We do not feel that approving an option for the purchase of a portion of the Town property in the
Riverside parking lot is advisable. Without a design, other property owners can not understand the
impact of the structure, and the impact of the construction process on current operating businesses. The
ability to operate and maintain a business is difficult anywhere, but particularly in a seasonal location. To
argue that there must be approval of the purchase of the land before the design is completed is one
thing, but it also allows that it is acceptable to give up the land for something that is not yet designed and
the building process not understood.
In summary, please do not grant the option for the sale of Town property to EPIC.
Thank you,
Paula Steige
owner LOT 3,AMD PLAT LOTS 1 THRU 9 & E 21" LOT 10, BLK 5 2ND AMD PLAT
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: fourironj <fourironj@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:00 AM
Subject: Performing Arts Center in downtown Estes
To: townclerk@estes.org
I live in Boulder but my family has owned 2 family cabin properties in Estes Park since
1963. Both cabins are full of family and friends from May 1-Nov. 1. We love the entire
area and have raised our children to appreciate and experience the mountains, national
park, charming downtown area, and everything about Estes Park. We don’t think the
proposed Performing Arts Center (as we understand it from the information we have
and the video viewed at www.rockymountainperformingarts.org) is appropriate for
downtown Estes Park.
Our issues:
1. Reduced parking and access to downtown shopping- it looks like the new center will take parking
spaces away when spaces are already in short supply. Where will the workers, locals, restaurant
patrons, out of state tourists, valley day shoppers, and those visitors coming from the west and the
National Park find parking places ? If a high rise parking structure were built in the lot behind The Wheel
Bar and McDonald’s Bookstore, then the proposed Performing Arts Center might be more palatable
(except for losing the view south and west and the winter ice that will grow in its shadow).
2. The proposed concept of parking cars at the Rodeo Grounds at Stanley Park and shuttling people
downtown and back could be the death of downtown Estes Park as we know it. We will not want to come
to downtown if we can’t park nearby. Tourists and shoppers often make multiple trips back to their
parked cars to drop off packages before continuing shopping or stopping for lunch, drinks, or dinner. The
inconvenience caused by the shuttle remote load/unload location may negatively impact shoppers’
spending habits. Downtown may become a single destination visit to the Performing Arts Center and not
the interactive walk around the charming and quaint downtown area, mixing with other visitors from all
over the United States, and spending money up and down Elkhorn Avenue.
3. The front elevation rendering is attractive but it looks to us like the height of the rooftop area far
exceeds any surrounding buildings and will take away access to views from all businesses east and north
of the new Performing Arts Center. Isn’t there a height restriction on buildings in downtown? This
building is not in character with the current architecture in downtown and because of its size dominance
may change forever the flavor of Estes Park downtown area in a negative way.
We may not be privy to all the pertinent information regarding the Town Board and
City of Estes Park’s plans for creating this Performing Arts Center, but we do not
support the location and current plans for this building in downtown Estes Park as
we understand it. We also believe there should be greater dialogue and public
discussion of such a radical change to the downtown landscape that will affect the
town for years to come. Does every shop owner within 4 blocks of the proposed
location know about this project and fully understand the potential impact on their
business ? We appreciate your willingness to listen to our opinion as property
owners in Estes Park.
Jim Gallup
To:Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Halburnt
From:Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date:November 27, 20112
RE:Appointment of Local Marketing District Board Member
Background:
Soctt Webermeier and Lee Lasson’s appointments on the Local Marketing Board expire on
December 31, 2012.Both Mr. Webermeier, Town appointment and Mr. Lasson, a County
appointment, announced they would be seeking reappointment to the Board for an additional 4-
year term.In October, an official announcement was placed in the local paper and the Town
website for the Town and County appointed positions on the Board. The Town received seven
qualified candidates and held interviews on October 17, 2012 with an interview panel consisting
of Trustees Norris and Phipps,LMD Board member Wood, and County Commissioner Donnelly.
The interview team is recommending Jon Nicholas as the County appointment and Scott
Webermeier as the Town appointment for 4-year terms effective January 1, 2013 and expiring
on December 31, 2016.The County will appoint Mr.Nicholas at an upcoming administrative
meeting.
Scott Webermeier has been on the Local Marketing District Board since its inception in 2009
and was also a member of the committee prior to the formation of the Board. He has served as
the Treasurer for the Board.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
N/A
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the appointment of Scott Webermeier to the Local Marketing District
Board for 4-year term effective January 1, 2013,expiring December 31, 2016.
Town Clerk’s OfficeMemo
Administration Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Lowell Richardson, Assistant Town Administrator
Date: 11/27/2012
RE: LMD-IGA Approval
Background:
Presented to the Town Board for consideration and approval is the 2013 IGA
(Intergovernmental Agreement) between the Town of Estes Park and the Estes Park
Local Marketing District aka: Visit Estes Park (see attached 2013 IGA document). Since
their inception the Town of Estes Park has entered into an annual IGA with Visit Estes
Park.
Primary components to the 2013 IGA are six key points:
• Employee Benefits Plan
9 Visit Estes Park pays for all costs associated with offering their employees
Town of Estes Park benefits as outlined on (pgs. 1-2)
• Destination Leadership Meetings
9 Addresses coordinating regularly scheduled meetings between both
entities to discuss mutually beneficial destination development and
maintain open communication lines (pg. 2)
• Service Level Agreements
9 To discuss the Town’s visitor center operations as a delivery point for
guests visiting our community and provide recommendations regarding
operations and service delivery (pg. 2)
• Advertising Products
9 Addresses the sale of items at the Town’s visitor center and advertising
sales by the Town including the coordination (pg. 2)
• Photography
9 Allows Visit Estes Park to use photos owned by the Town and collected
for marketing and promotion purposes (pg. 2)
• Annual Audit
9 Should an audit be required of Visit Estes Park they shall pay for costs
associated with any such audit (pg. 3)
The Visit Estes Park board has reviewed and approved the IGA as presented. Town
Attorney White has reviewed this document as well.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approving the IGA as presented
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of the 2013 Intergovernmental Agreement with the
Estes Park Local Marketing District aka: Visit Estes Park.
1
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT by and between the Estes Park
Local Marketing District (also known as Visit Estes Park), a Colorado Local Marketing District,
hereinafter referred to as the “LMD” and the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a
Colorado statutory town, hereinafter referred to as “The Town”, is effective the 1st day of
January, 2013.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the LMD is a local marketing district organized to provide the services set
forth in Section 29-25-111 (1)(e)(I)(A), (B) and (C), C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, the LMD was created pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-25-101 et
seq. C.R.S. and the Intergovernmental Agreement dated August 26, 2008 and all amendments
thereto between the Town and the Board of County Commissioners, Larimer County; and
WHEREAS, applicable provisions of the Colorado Constitution and the statutes of the
State of Colorado, specifically Section 29-20-101 et seq. C.R.S., authorize the LMD and the
Town to enter into mutually binding and enforceable agreements, including agreements
addressing the subject matter of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Town and the LMD have determined that it is in the best interest of
both entities to accomplish the efficient provision of marketing and promotional services as set
forth in the Operating Plan by the terms of this Intergovernmental Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BETWEEN
THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS:
1. Preamble. The Parties acknowledge that the recitals set forth above are true and correct,
and those recitals are hereby incorporated into this Agreement.
2. Effective Date. The Agreement shall be effective January 1, 2013.
LMD Employees Benefits Plan. To the extent permitted by law and the terms of third
party provider agreements, the Town shall allow the LMD employees to be covered for all
current Town benefits (medical, dental, vision, EAP, health club, flex plans, etc.) The LMD
shall reimburse the Town for all costs of the benefits for LMD employees plus a 3%
administrative fee for the management and administration of those services. The LMD
understands and agrees that the Town shall not be responsible for any human
resource/personnel matters as part of its provision of the benefits. Neither the LMD nor its
employees shall seek advice or counsel from the Town with regard to any human
resource/personnel issues concerning LMD employees. The LMD specifically waives any
claim against the Town and any individual employee, consultant, agent, or volunteer of the
2
Town for any act or omission in the performance or non-performance of its benefit
processing and administrative services for LMD employees. In the event that any third
party, including any employee, agent or volunteer of the LMD, makes any claim, demand,
lawsuit, or takes any other action against the Town for an act or omission in performing its
benefit processing and administrative duties, the LMD agrees to indemnify and hold
harmless the Town, its officers, agents, volunteers and employees from and against any and
all liability for any and all claims, liens, suits, demands, actions for damages, including court
costs and reasonable attorney’s fees, arising out of or resulting from acts or omissions of the
Town in the provision of its benefit processing and administrative services for LMD
employees.
3. Destination Leadership. To facilitate effective and efficient marketing operations and
destination development, which are mutually beneficial to both parties, periodic meetings of
two LMD Board members, two Town Board members, the LMD’s President & CEO or
designee and the Town Administrator or designee shall take place . The purpose of the
meetings is to open up communication channels between the LMD and the Town for the
mutual goal of advancing the destination for tourism and the economic vitality of the
community.
4. Service Level Agreement. The parties agree to meet and negotiate in good faith during
the first calendar quarter of 2013 for the purposes of reaching an agreement regarding the
minimum level of service to visitors at the Visitors Center, including without limitation such
topics as staffing, hours of operation, Call Center operations, training on delivering the new
Estes Park brand promise, and other topics of mutual concern to the parties.
5. Advertising Products. As Estes Park’s official destination marketing organization the
LMD has been responsible for launching and managing advertising programs for local
stakeholder businesses such as VisitEstesPark.com web listings, leads, brochure rack display
in the Visitor Center, etc. This includes research, new product development, promotion,
sales, servicing, fulfillment, invoicing, and collections. Should advertising sale opportunities
become present through the shuttle system, which is a service provided by the Town of
Estes Park, the Town if it so chooses, may sell advertising to local stakeholder businesses.
The Town will advise the LMD of the intent, and agrees that all advertisers must be located
within the Marketing District boundaries. Any deviation to this must be approved by the
LMD Board of Directors.
6. Photography. The LMD shall have authority to use all photographs collected, archived
and created by the Town of Estes Park prior to January 1, 2010 for uses related to marketing
and promotion and the LMD shall retain possession of said photographs for those purposes.
However, the Town of Estes Park shall have the ability to use and retain possession of said
photographs at their discretion. The LMD understands and agrees that the use of any of the
photographs may be subject to a copyright, trademark or other restriction by the original
owner/photographer of such photographs.
3
7. Annual Audit. If the Town determines, pursuant to applicable GASB Standards, that
the Town’s audit requires the inclusion of the LMD as part of the audit, the LMD shall pay
for the cost of the LMD’s portion of the Town’s audit expense.
8. Effective Date and Termination.
a. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall take effect on January 1, 2013, and shall
remain in full force and effect unless terminated earlier by mutual agreement of the
parties or as provided in subsection c. below. The parties agree that they shall review
the terms and conditions of this Agreement annually in anticipation of the
preparation of the annual Operating Plan by the LMD.
b. If, through any cause, either party fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement
in a timely and proper manner, violates any provision of this Agreement, or violates
any applicable law, the non-breaching party shall give the breaching party written
notice of said breach. The breaching party shall have thirty (30) days to correct the
breach. If the breaching party fails to correct the breach within said thirty (30) day
period, the non-breaching party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement for
cause.
c. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days written notice prior
to the end of any calendar year. Said termination shall be effective as of the last day
of the applicable calendar year. If the Town terminates this Agreement, the Town
shall, to the extent permitted by law and the terms of its agreement(s) with third party
providers, allow the LMD to purchase Town benefits for the Employees through
2013 as stated in Paragraph 3.b.
9. Annual Appropriation. Nothing herein shall constitute a multiple fiscal year obligation
pursuant to the Colorado Constitution, Article X, Section 20. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, either Party’s obligations under this Agreement are subject to
annual appropriation by the Party. Any failure of a Party to annually to appropriate adequate
monies to finance the Party’s obligations under this Agreement shall terminate this
Agreement at such time as such then-existing appropriations are depleted. Written notice
shall be given by the non-appropriating Party promptly to the other Party of the failure to
appropriate adequate monies.
10. Notices. All notices or other communication hereunder shall be deemed given when
personally delivered or after the lapse of five (5) business days following mailing by certified
mail, postage prepaid, address as follows:
ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT
Attn: Chairperson
Post Office Box 4426
Estes Park, CO 80517
4
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Attn: Town Administrator
Post Office Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
11. Relationship of the Parties. The Parties enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement
as separate and independent entities and shall maintain such status throughout the term of
this Intergovernmental Agreement.
12. Governmental Immunity. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as a waiver or
modification of the rights afforded to the LMD and/or the Town under the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act and subsequent amendments thereto.
13. Governing Law in Effect. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall be governed by
and construed under the laws of the State of Colorado.
14. Venue. Venue for all purposes shall be deemed proper in the District Court of Larimer
County, Colorado.
15. Entire Agreement of the Parties. The recitals contained herein represent the entire
agreement of the Parties, and shall be binding upon the parties hereto and their successors.
16. Amendment. No amendment or other modification of this Intergovernmental
Agreement shall be valid unless pursuant to a written instrument signed by both parties.
17. Assignment. The benefits and burdens under this Intergovernmental Agreement may
not be assigned by either party without the written consent of the other.
5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Intergovernmental
Agreement to be executed.
ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING
DISTRICT
By: _______________________________
Chairperson
ATTEST:
__________________________
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By: _______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Town Clerk
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: R. Bergsten, Utilities Director
Date: November 27, 2012
RE: Water Conservation Plan
Background:
The Town has been working with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) to
finalize acceptance of our Water Conservation Plan. This plan was originally presented
to and adopted by the Town Board in April of 2012.
In addition to some minor changes, the CWCB has requested the document be opened
for public review and comment for sixty days. The sixty-day period ended on November
19th without any public comment. Tonight we are here to accept public comment and
move forward with a recommendation to the Board to approve the plan.
Budget:
N/A, funding for this work was completed in 2011.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Water Conservation Plan.
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of the Water Conservation Plan.
Page 1 of 2
To: Town Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Will Birchfield, Chief Building Official
Alison Chilcott, Community Development Director
Date: November 27, 2012
RE: Temporary Policy to Extend Timeframes before Building Permits and
Applications Expire
Background:
In 2010 and 2011 Town Board approved a temporary policy extending application and
building permit expiration dates due to the economic downturn (minutes are attached).
Some property owners/businesses had applied for permits and decided not to begin
work because of changed economic circumstances. Others began work, but couldn’t
complete it for the same reason.
Without the extension, building permits are valid for 18 months from date of issuance.
The current extension expires on December 31st 2012. Town Board requested an
update prior to the 31st.
Issued permits due to expire fall into the following categories, the Applicant has:
▪ Not paid for permit
▪ Paid for permit, but did not begin work
▪ Paid for permit, began work, but not finished; or
▪ Began or completed work without paying for the permit and/or completing
required inspections.
In all these cases staff is working with applicants to determine the current status of
permits. Inspector Claude Traufield is contacting and working with homeowners and
Chief Building Official Will Birchfield is working with contractors as they walk in the door.
With the assistance of Consultant Don Widrig, we now have a report of open permits
due to expire on December 31st. This has enabled staff to proactively reach out to
Community Development
Memo
Page 2 of 2
applicants with open permits. We identified more than 500 open permits of which at
least 150 have been closed during the past 30 days.
Staff recommends that we extend the permit expiration deadline for another three
months, through March 31, 2013 to allow staff to continue to proactively reach out to
property owners and contractors and close out as many permits as possible.
The alternative is to let permits expire. Expired permits become violations against
contractor licenses. Contractors can apply for new permits for the same work and pay
additional fees or the expired permits are officially non-approved and closed. The Chief
Building Official can deny contractor license renewals if there are three outstanding
violations.
In cases where permits were applied for, but not paid for, applicants have incurred and
are responsible for fees. Staff recommends waiver of these plan review fees, if the
applicant chooses not to proceed with the permitted work. Many jurisdictions collect
plan review fees during the submittal process; Estes Park does not, staff is evaluating
this option.
Budget:
General Fund Revenue: Licenses and Permits/Building
Account #: 101-2300-322.10-00
Reduced revenue is roughly estimated at approximately $10,000. An accurate estimate
can be obtained, but requires staff time to review and enter fees into Excel. PTWin
cannot generate this report automatically.
Recommendation:
I recommend extending the expiration date from December 31, 2012 to March, 31,
2013, with monthly progress updates to Community Development/Community Services,
to the Town Board to be included as an Action Item at the November 27, 2012 Town
Board meeting.