The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 1994-01-11BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, January 11, 1994 7:30 P.M. AGENDA "Remember the Children" Slide Presentation - Ralph & Polly Gunn. PUBLIC INPUT. To conduct an orderly, efficient meeting, individuals will be given a maximum of up to three (3) minutes to speak on topics which are pertinent to Town affairs. Any exceptions will be given at the discretion of the Mayor. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Town Board minutes dated December 14, 1993. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development, January 6, 1994. B. Light & Power, January 6, 1994. C. Planning Commission, December 21, 1993 (acknowledgement only). 4. Amended Plat of Lots 18, 22 and 30, Grand Estates Subdivision - Corrects change of ownership and identifies a vacated street. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Community Development Committee, December 2, 1993: A. Chamber of Commerce Operating Agreement - Approval. B. 1993 Conversion Study - Presentation. C. G.I.S. Parcel Mapping Project - Approval of expenditure. 2. Planning Commission: A. Public Hearing - Amended Plat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Fall River Estates, Doug & Linda Cook/Applicant. B. Public Hearing - Final Plat of Lot 26, Block 1, Fall River Estates, D. A. Lienemann/Applicant. C. Public Hearing - Final Plat of a Portion of Tract A, Prospect Estates Subdivision, Third Filing, Neil Solomon/Applicant. D. Public Hearing - Special Review #93-7 for Lot 1, Valley Vista Addition, Nicholas Stanitz/Applicant. E. Resolution - Referring the EPURA Estes Park Redevelopment Program (the "Plan") Third Amendment to the Planning Commission for a public hearing scheduled January 18, 1994 (item tabled October 12, 1993). 3. Presentation of Water Rate Ordinance - Approval. 1 4. Fire Department 1993 Annual Report and Election of Officers - Fire Chief Rumley, Secretary Chrastil. 5. Appropriation of funding ($55,700) to the Estes Park Housing Authority. 6. Resolution - Posting Notices. 7. Adjourn Meeting. Town Board Convene as Estes Park Housing Authority. 1. Appointment of Secretary. 2. Approval of 1994 Budget: A. Marys Lake Lodge Employee Housing Project - $52,000 Habitat for Humanity - 3.700 Total $55,700 3. Marys Lake Lodge Employee Housing Project: A. Agreement with Larimer County - Approval. B. Agreement with the First National Bank of Estes Park - Approval. 4. Staff Report and Recommendations. 2 Town of Estes Park, Lartmer county , Colorado, . ...... Â· Â·, 19. ~3* December 14 Minutes of a .Regular. . . meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the . j4th . day of ....Â·D.e:embeF, A.D., 19. 93. at regular meeting hour. H. Bernerd Dannels Meeting called to order by Mayor ......................... H. B. Dannels Pregent: Mayor Trustees: George J. Hix, Mayor ProTem Gary R. Brown, Robert L. Dekker, Susan L. Doylen, Stephen W. Gillette, Also Present: Gary F. Klaphake, David Habecker Town Administrator Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk Absent: Absent: None Mayor Dannels called the meeting to order at 7:31 P.M. Award Presentation. Eric M. Notheisen, Executive Director and Terry Urista, Northeast Regional Representative - Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police (C.A.C.P.) presented the Professional Standards Compliance Award to Police Chief Racine and the Police Department. With the Accreditation, Estes Park is in a very select group of individuals dedicated to professionalism. All in attendance congratulated the Police Department for the achievement. Award Presentation. Town Administrator Klaphake presented the Government Finance Officers Association Financial Reporting Achievement Award to Finance Officer Vavra, Finance Department, and Steve Jackson/CPA. Presentation of the award for calendar 1992 is the seventh consecutive award for the Department. The Board commended staff for the accomplishment. PUBLIC INPUT. Frank Hix briefed the Trustees on the "Parade of the Years" special event scheduled May 28-30, 1994 which commemorates the opening of the Estes Park tourist season, when, in the past, Stanley Steam Mountain Wagons met the trains in Loveland and Lyons to bring the first tourists to the valley. Mr. Hix extended an invitation to the Trustees to ride in the vintage automobiles May 28th from Loveland to Estes Park. The Board's consensus was to name Frank Hix as the official Town representative for this special event. The Mayor may also issue a proclamation in honor of "John Dillon Days" for his contribution to the preservation of vintage cars. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Town Board minutes dated November 23, 1993. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development, December 2, 1993. B. Special Events, December 9, 1993. It was moved and seconded (Dekker/Hix) the Community Development Committee minutes dated December 2, 1993 be omitted from the consent calendar and acted upon separately and it passed unanimously. It was moved and seconded (Dekker/Hix) the consent calendar be approved, Board of Trustees - December 14, 1993 - Page 2 as amended, and it passed unanimously. Community Development Committee, December 2, 1993. Trustee Dekker commented that pursuant to a presentation made by Lani Van Eck, Community Development Specialist/Larimer County Human Development Department, the Committee recommended approval of a funding request in the amount of $2,000 for the Affordable Housing Information System. As the Estes Park Housing Authority will conduct its first meeting in January, it was moved and seconded (Dekker/Hix) the funding request be continued to the Town Board meeting scheduled January 25, 1994, and it passed unanimously. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Special Events Committee, December 9, 1993: A. Report on Decision Model and 1994 Budget. Town Administrator Klaphake reviewed the Event Decision Model which listed 22 special events by priority. The 1994 Special Event Budget was also reviewed. B. Lions Club Concession Stand Agreement. The Committee recommended approval of the 1994 Lions Club Concession Stand Agreement which provides for 15% of the gross sales to be paid as rent for the premises, plus a $75.00/year flat fee toward natural gas expenses. All insurance coverages have been revised to at least $150,000/injury and $600,000/occurrence. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Habecker) the 1994 Lions Club Concession Stand Agreement be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. Board Room Sound System - Authorization to Purchase. Administrator Klaphake and Clerk O' Connor brie fed the Trustees on a proposal submitted by National Speaker and Sound to purchase and install a new sound system for the Board Room. The proposal was submitted in two phases: Phase I hardware $6,357.00 and labor $1,143.00 for a total of $7,500.00. Phase II hardware is $3,647.50 plus $1,637.00 for labor. The total project is $12,784.50. The 1993 Budget contains $7,500 for this expenditure; the remaining funds must be transferred from the 1994 Contingency Fund. It was moved and seconded (Dekker/Hix) the National Speaker and Sound proposal be accepted, and that $5,285.00 be transferred from the 1994 Contingency to Administration, and it passed unanimously. 3. Appointments, Re-Appointments, Resignations: A. Appointment to Estes Valley Public Library District. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Habecker) Kathleen Hannigan be appointed to complete the 5-Year Term currently held by Barbara Ludwig who has resigned. Ms. Hannigan's term will expire December 31, 1996. This recommendation will be forwarded to Larimer County for their approval. B. Reappointment to Estes Park Building Authority. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Doylen) Richard D. Widmer be re- appointed to a 3-Year Term on the Estes Park Building Authority; term expiring January, 1997, and it passed unanimously. C. Municipal Judge Resignation. James M. Littlejohn submitted his resignation as Municipal Judge effective December 31, 1993, following 17+ years of service. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Habecker) that, with regret, the resignation be accepted. Appropriate acknowledgement of the resignation will be forthcoming. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Dekker): (1) John Easley, Assistant Municipal Judge serve as Acting Municipal Judge, with his Board of Trustees - December 14, 1993 - Page 3 salary being on a pro-rata basis during the interim, and (2) the Clerk advertise the position. All resumes will be reviewed by Town Attorney White and the Mayor. The filing deadline will be January 30, 1994. D. Appointment to the Museum Advisory Board. The Museum Advisory Board has recommended David E. Steiner be appointed to a 2-Year Term, expiring January 1, 1996. Mr. Steiner is replacing Duke Sumonia. It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Habecker) Mr. Steiner be appointed as stated above, and it passed unanimously. 4. Extension of Transfer Station Agreement with A-1 Transfer. Trustee Gillette declared a potential conflict of interest and stated he would refrain from discussion and voting. Frank Lancaster, Natural Resources/Larimer County requested the Town execute an additional 10-year extension (1/31/2004) to the Agreement concerning the Solid Waste Transfer Station. The current Agreement expires January 31, 1994. Attorney White further clarified the Agreement. It was moved and seconded (Brown/Doylen) the Transfer Station Agreement with A-1 Transfer be extended to January 31, 2004, and it passed unanimously, with Trustee Gillette Abstaining. 5. Resolution #33-93 Modifying the Conference Center Lease Purchase Agreement between EPURA and the Town. Town Attorney White reviewed a resolution authorizing the First Amendment to the Conference Center Lease Purchase Agreement necessitated by EPURA refunding their 1989 bonds. Section 4.1 Commencement of Lease Term; Renewals, and Exhibit "B" Base Rentals of the Agreement have been revised. The current and proposed base rental schedules were reviewed. The bond refunding resulted in a $700,000 savings ($300,000 present value), and the bond rating for uninsured bonds remains the same at Baal. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Brown) Resolution #33-93 Modifying the Conference Center Lease Purchase Agreement be approved, to include authorization that the Town Board may make any revision as necessary as long as the changes are not substantive in nature, and it passed unanimously. 7. Resolution #34-33 Intent to Annex Kenofer Addition. Resolution #34-33 declares the Town's intent to annex Kenofer Addition which contains 3.5 Acres located south of Riverside Drive and the Crags Lodge area, and sets the public hearing date for said annexation on January 25, 1994. Requested zoning is E-Estate. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Habecker) Resolution #34-33 be approved, and it passed unanimously. 8. Light & Power Utility Easement. Town Attorney White briefed the Trustees on a utility easement granted by Stephen L. and Charles E. Pinckney, Jr. to the Town for property located at the southwest i of the southwest 4 of Section 33, Township 3 North, Range 72 West of the 6th P.M., Boulder County. The language contained in the easement will be used to update the Town's existing standard easement form; it is not staff's intent that all such easements will be presented to the Trustees for their approval. However, as this particular easement requires that the Town be held responsible for any damage to any improvements caused by installation of the electric distribution system, said easement was submitted for approval. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Dekker) the Light and Power Utility Easement be approved, as presented, and it passed unanimously. 8. Community Development Committee, December 2, 1993: A. Chamber of Commerce Operating Agreement. The Committee recommended approval of the proposed 1994 Operating Agreement with the Chamber of Commerce. However, 1 , Board of Trustees - December 14, 1993 - Page 4 Community Development Director Stamey reported that the I Agreement has since undergone changes that revised all fees, although the basic total contract amount has been reduced from the agreement of 1993. It was moved and i seconded (Brown/Gillette) the 1994 Chamber of Commerce Operating Agreement be referred to Community Development i Committee scheduled January 6, 1994 to finalize all fees, and it passed unanimously. 9. Town Administrator's Report - None. There being no further business, Mayor Dannels announced that the next Town Board meeting will be held January 11, 1994 and adjourned the meeting at 8:30 P.M. , ................ Mayor .................. Town Clerk BRADFORIPUILISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development Committee January 6, 1994 Committee: Chairman Dekker, Trustees Hix and Doylen Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Klaphake, community Development Director Stamey, Advertising Manager Marsh, Museum Director Kilsdonk, Clerk O'Connor Absent: None Chairman Dekker called the meeting to order at 8:30 A.M. ADVERTISING REPORT. 1994 Operating Agreement with Chamber of Commerce for Fulfillment Program. The Committee reviewed this Agreement in December; however, following revisions made during the Town Board meeting, this item was referred to the Committee for further review. Following is a list of comparative changes for 1994: Item 1993 1994 Difference Direct Response Labels 42,500 @ $.30/ea. $12,750 40,000 @ $.31/ea. $12,400 $ (350.00) Readership Service Labels 42,500 @ $.05/ea. 2,125 40,000 @ $.0515/ea. 2,060 ( 65.00) Mail Preparation 85,000 @ $.18/ea. 15,300 80,000 @ $.1854/ea. 14,832 (468.00) Statistical Reports 1,056 1,056 -0- Operator Charges 68,000 @ $.60/charge 40,800 65,000 @ $.618/charge 40,170 (630.00) Quantity Shipping 542 Units 542 558 16.00 Net Projected Difference $72,573 $71,076 ($1,497.00) The 1993 Agreement contained fees based on actual numbers plus a guarantee; the guarantee in the 1994 Agreement has been eliminated. Following discussion, the Committee recommends approval of the 1994 Chamber Operating Agreement. 1994 Visitors Guide - Report. Staff presented copies of the 1994 Visitors Guide. The Guide is a project of the Accommodations- Chamber Book Committee which began in April, 1992. Through an RFP, Market Reach was selected to re-design the book into a magazine format. Market Reach was also selected to manage advertising sales and the production of the Guide. Of the 185,000 Guides produced, 85,000 are allocated to advertising responses. The balance is allocated to local, regional, and Conference Center distribution. The Guide replaces the multi-piece response packet and will be mailed at a nominal increase in postage of 3/10's of $.01. Production costs of $120,000 were paid entirely by participating advertisers--there were no Town funds involved in the production. When questioned why the service industry was not well represented, Susie Blackhurst/Market Reach, advised that advertisers were comprised of 50% retail, service and attractions, and 50% accommodations. Some service businesses may be of the opinion that BRADFOROPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development Committee - January 6, 1994 - Page 2 the Guide does not reach their market/clientele. However, the opportunity exists for the service industry, as well as any other business located within the "market area" to advertise in the Guide. The Accommodations-Chamber Book Committee established a policy identifying the market area with the following boundaries: east on Hwy. 34 to the Dam Store, east on Hwy. 36 to the Hwy. 36/66 Intersection; south to Allenspark, and west to Continental Divide/Trail Ridge Store. Exceptions include advertisers who provide a service or product unavailable in the area and, in the opinion of the Committee, an advertiser that will extend the stay in Estes Park (i.e. nearby ski area, airlines). Advertising from a factory outlet center has been denied as shopping is available in the Estes Valley. To date, the Guide contains 144 advertisers. The Committee commended Advertising Manager Marsh and the Accommodations-Chamber Book Committee for the production of such a quality product. 1993 Conversion Study - Presentation of Results. Chris Cares/RRC Associates, presented an overview of the Conversion Study, noting that the 1994 Visitors Guide (mentioned above) is highly supported by the study--it is an extremely effective piece of advertising. The 1993 Study also compared information from two previous studies conducted in 1985 and 1988. The study profiled the Estes Park tourist market and focused on the effectiveness of the Town's magazine advertising. The sample for the 1993 study was created from a list of 52,227 magazine inquiries; a total of 5,000 persons were surveyed, with a return of 1,228 = 22%. The study was designed to profile the following: Demographic Characteristics Geographic Origins Trip Characteristics Quality of the Estes Park Experience Improvements/Suggestions/Complaints about Estes Park Request For Information Trip Planning and Motivations Important Sources of Information in Planning a Trip to Estes Park Financial Impact from the Advertising Campaign Conversion Ratios Analysis of Each Publication RRC Associates is continuing its work on the economic return; however, it appears that from the Town's advertising budget of $150,000, the Town realizes in excess of $400,000. staff noted that the study provides an excellent tool in evaluating the advertising program. The Committee acknowledged receipt of the 1993 Conversion Study and commended RRC for their presentation. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (G.I.S.) PARCEL MAPPING PROJECT - REOUEST APPROVAL OF FUNDING. Community Development Director Stamey reported that as part of the effort to complete Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan, it has become apparent that the land divisions within the planning area (north end to the switchbacks, south to Lily Lake, east to Pole Hill and west to the RMNP boundary) must be mapped. The existing data base that has been created is more generalized and, based upon readily available data, staff contends that it is important to develop the ability to answer detailed and site-specific land use issues. To address this issue in a cost-effective manner, staff has obtained parcel division information from Larimer County that would allow staff to create a current G.I.S. data set of maps. Each parcel in the planning area can be mapped, coded with ah existing land use, zoning, and future land use/zoning information. Using "Windows" and an "Arc View" program, maps can be readily BRADFORIPUBLISHINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development Committee - January 6, 1994 - Page 3 produced. The cost of creating this data base is $10,000 and it should take approximately 4 weeks to complete. Using a cost-share approach, staff contacted Larimer County and RMNP and they have signed an agreement confirming their participation of $2,500/ea. Therefore, the Town's portion would be $5,000. Jeff Rashid/DSW, provided a thorough computer demonstration of the system. Mr. Rashid would provide training for Senior Planner Joseph and the system can be "networked" between various departments. Staff has not yet had an opportunity to define a user fee schedule. Administrator Klaphake reported that various departments that may have use of this type of data base will be assembled to review and discuss the system. The Committee recommends approval of the request, suggesting funding be provided from the 1993 Carry-Over Funds (reserve). Following this meeting with staff, conclusions will be reported at the Town Board meeting scheduled January 11. The Committee expressed their appreciation to Mr. Rashid for his presentation. MUSEUM REPORT. Director Kilsdonk presented the Museum Report for November, including monthly statistics identifying visitation, membership, volunteers and research requests. The Museum Curator advertisement drew 31 applicants. Director Stamey, Cathey Dunn/Longmont Museum Curator and Director Kilsdonk are serving as the Hiring Committee. Interviews will begin the week of January 10 and staff anticipates hiring the employee by the end of the month. The Teddy Bears and Other Stuffed Toys Christmas Exhibit closed December 31. The Museum is now closed until April 2. On May 27 an exhibit of clothing worn by Estes Park women from the 19th and early 20th centuries will be featured. A grant for approximately $25,000 will be submitted to the Institute of Museum Services for general operating support. 1994 Program Schedules were distributed at the Library, Town Hall and the Museum. Frank Hix commented on the 1993 John Dillon Days and Parade of the Years events which drew 1,749 people. To increase participation, attendance, and success, and to increase the parking area, Mr. Hix requested 2 gates be installed along the fence in the area east of the Museum (2% acrest). This area has been cleaned and is now used by the Rodeo Grounds to accommodate various stock. In addition, the event could utilize Barn W should inclement weather prevail. The Committee recommends approval of the request, allowing staff to resolve all details. Mr. Hix will attend a Parade of the Years planning meeting January 29 and he will provide a report during the February Committee meeting. There being no further business, Chairman Dekker adjourned the meeting at 10:21 A.M. / & d ,â‚¬<z-, cr-' F .F7&C. ill' Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk BRADFORD PUBLISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Light & Power Committee January 6, 1994 Committee: Chairman Hix, Trustees Dekker and Brown Attending: All Also Attending: Ass't. Administrator Widmer, Light & Power Director Matzke, Clerk O'Connor Absent: None Chairman Hix called the meeting to order at 10:27 A.M. CITIZEN TELECOMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY GROUP. On November 4, 1993, the Committee appointed Al Wasson as Chairman to serve on said Advisory Group, and Chairman Hix announced that the following will assist Mr. Wasson: Dick Webb, Eric Blackhurst, George Hix, Rich Widmer, and Richard Matzke. A Mission Statement, Strategy, and Action Steps were prepared and submitted for review. The anticipated length of term is three months. The Mission is to influence providers of telecommunications services to place such facilities and service capabilities in the Estes Park area so that business development dependent upon such facilities and services may occur and that residential users will be provided with modern facilities in quantities sufficient to meet their needs. The Group anticipates meeting with US West in March to present a proposal and request. Chairman Wasson also reviewed new technologies available and general trends in the telecommunications field. The Committee recommends approval of the creation of said Advisory Group, Mission Statement, Duration of Term, and Members. The Group will report to the Committee on a regular basis. The Committee expressed their appreciation to Mr. Wasson. ELECTRIC UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT - APPROVAL OF REVISED FORM. As discussed during the December 14, 1993 Town Board meeting, Town Attorney White prepared and submitted a revised Grant of Easement and Right-of-Way Form for approval. The proposed form includes a warranty of title paragraph and tree-trimming language along with the rights granted. In addition, the new form does not refer to power transmission facilities. The Committee recommends approval of the form as presented. REPORTS. Electric space heat electric rate class change. January 1, 1994 was the date established to no longer provide the Residential Rate for customers with electric space heat using over 20,000 kWh/yr. By letter, the Department advised over 200 affected customers of the deadline, and four options were identified; a brochure entitled "What is demand" prepared by Dencor was also provided. Response has generally been positive. To date, there have been no customers requesting the loan option for conversion to natural gas. All demand meters in stock have been installed. Thermal Storage Units are being installed in the Engineering Office, Administration Office and Board Room. Heat is collected during off-peak hours (10:00 P.M.-6:00 A.M. and 1:00 P.M.-3:00 P.M.) and distributed during the day. Director Matzke reviewed the Financial Reports for November and Year End. 1992 and 1993 were record years for work orders: 278 in 1993 and 245 in 1992. A total 147 customers were added to the system in 1993. Staff also reviewed various graphs which indicated sales were up 3.2% from 1992. During February's meeting, Director BRADFORDPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Light and Power Committee - January 6, 1994 - Page 2 Matzke will present information citing how Estes Park's rates compare statewide. Project Updates: The Learning Resource Center and two faculty houses have been connected for the Honda School Complex; and service has been connected for the Hospital Addition. The Department is working on removing all Christmas decorations, and CIRSA recently conducted training for drivers of maintenance vehicles. Approximately 25 employees attended the 6-hour course (CIRSA assessed $1.50/employee). As reported in November, staff did travel to Saratoga, Wyoming to exchange information/ideas particularly concerning time-of-day rates and energy storage heaters. PRPA recently completed construction of a small building at the Tallant Park Substation to be used for radio equipment/SCADA. The wire trailer previously authorized has been received. Staff will arrange a tour of the Fall River Hydro Plant for Committee members to review the plant restoration project. Prior to presentation to the Committee, Town Attorney White is currently reviewing all documents. KRKI Representative Czapp expressed the station's appreciation to the Department for their recent assistance in restoring service; the outage was caused by high winds. Platte River Power Authority. Ass 't. Administrator Widmer reported that Leona Stacker/Longmont and Ray Emerson/Loveland have joined PRPA's Board of Directors. The 1994 Budget has been adopted and it includes approval of funding for various research development projects. PRPA was recently approached to financially assist the Barlow Group in designing an alternative for a power plant Â· using wood chips. $50,000 was approved for this effort which includes a 100% return plus use of the research if appropriate. PRPA will most likely buy-out for cash a $20+ Million bond issue. PRPA hired a firm to review Moffat County's opinion that PRPA is delinquent on taxes related to impact fees for the Craig Station. Based upon the report stating the County used incorrect information, PRPA has not accepted any further liability. Additional information will be forthcoming. PRPA recently settled a sexual harassment suit for $265,000 plus all attorney fees; a consultant has been hired to educate employees to avoid further incident. With the exception of $200,000, PRPA's insurance carrier paid all costs. There being no further business, Chairman Hix adjourned the meeting at 11:28 A.M. C' / (f k-UulÂ· 47. tPUU.0 Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk BRADFOR/PUBLISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission December 21, 1993 Commissioners: Chairman Al Sager, Commissioners Wendell Amos, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Alma Hix, Michael Miller and Edward Pohl Attending: Chairman Sager, Commissioners Amos, Brown, Burgess, A. Hix, Miller, and Pohl Also Attending: Trustee/Liaison G. Hix, Community Development Director Stamey, Deputy Clerk Kuehl Absent: None Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. MINUTES. Minutes of the November 16, 1993 meeting were approved as noted and submitted. 2. CONSENT ITEM. Amended Plat. Lots 18. 22. 30. Grand Estates Subdivision (Comfort Inn). This plat corrects a change of ownership and identifies a vacated street, and includes vicinity map, graphic clarification (former street), and street vacation information. It was moved and seconded (Pohl-Brown) that the Amended Plat, Lots 18, 22, 30, Grand Estates Subdivision be recommended for approval, and it passed unanimously. 3. SUBDIVISIONS. 3.a. Amended Plat. Lots 1 & 2. Block 3. Fall River Estates. Doug & Linda Cook/Applicants. This request proposes to adjust the internal lot line 20 feet to the north between Lots 1 and 2, creating no additional lots. The Planning Commission previously approved a development plan for 16 accommodation units, plus manager's quarters for Lot 1. Applicant's Representative Paul Kochevar stated: 1. The plat will include a note identifying easement for the hike/bike path, with the exact location to be determined. 2. Easement across Outlot F to serve Lot 1 gives access from Fall River Court. The wording on the original recording is being updated and will be added to the plat when recording is complete. When access is placed, the center line of the existing access will be the center line of the 60 foot agreement, with exact placement at the discretion of the owner of Lot 1. 3. Easement language, "Ten foot easements adjacent to this original lot line are hereby vacated", has been added to the plat. 4. Location of the buildings and parking areas will be adjusted to preserve many of the existing trees. 5. Vicinity map and monumentation as found and/or set has been added to the plat. BRADFORDPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission Meeting, December 21, 1993 - Page 2 Director Stamey noted that Mr. Kochevar addressed all concerns contained in the staff report. Director Stamey commended both the Cook family and the Lienemann family for their cooperation regarding the hike/bike path easement. Ken Czarnowski, resident of Fall River, expressed his concern regarding the possible destruction of wetlands and requested the Commission delay action on this development. Chairman Sager explained this development has received approval. Surrounding property owners should contact the developers directly regarding their concerns. Chairman Sager thanked Mr. Czarnowski for his efforts toward making the Commissioners aware of the importance of preserving the wetlands. It was moved and seconded (Brown-Burgess) the Amended Plat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Fall River Estates, be favorably recommended, recognizing applicant Is grant of easement for the hike/bike path along Lots 1 and 2, and it passed unanimously. 3.b. Final Plat. Lot 26. Block 1. Fall River Estates. D.A. Lienemann/Applicant. Applicant' s representative Paul Kochevar stated the developer proposes the subdivision of one multi- family lot into five single family lots, consisting of 5.7 acres. Mr. Kochevar explained that the following staff concerns have been addressed: 1. A note has been placed on the plat stating that one single family dwelling unit may be constructed per lot. 2. Before the final plat is submitted to the Town Board, drainage discharge points, erosion protection, and culvert locations will be placed on the road and sewer plan profile and submitted to the Public Works Department. 3. Sewer and water crossing requirements will be met. 4. Existing transformer, underground power lines and power easement locations will show on the road plan profile. 5. A note will be placed on the plat stating the requirement of a pressurized water system for each lot. 6. Dedication statement has been modified per Town Attorney. 7. Quit claim to the Town will be provided for Outlot B. 8. A note will be added to the plat identifying the utility easement affected by the private road crossing east of Outlet A. 9. An Improvement Guarantee will be provided for streets, utilities and drainage, prior to Town Board approval. Director Stamey stated that Mr. Kochevar addressed all staff concerns. It was moved and seconded (Amos-Hix) the Final Plat, Lot 26, Block 1, Fall River Estates be favorably recommended, and it passed unanimously. 3.c. Final Plat. Portion of Tract A. Prospect Estates Sub- division. Third Filing. Neil Solomon/Applicant. Applicant's representative Bill Van Horn stated that this subdivision consists of 27 lots. This plat modifies four lots in the second filing enlarging the lot size to a minimum of 18,000 square feet. Each lot is for single family dwellings except I BRADFORIPUBLI SHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission, December 21, 1993 - Page 3 that Lots 11 and 12, 14 and 15, 16 and 17 may be developed with zero lot line setbacks on one side (2 attached units). Mr. Van Horn addressed the following concerns: 1. Additional dedication for Peak View Drive. 2. Configuration of drainage easements. 3. Developer responsible for detail work necessary to prevent washing of sand and gravel onto the streets. 4. Zero setbacks on Lots 11 and 12, 14 and 15, 16 and 17 only if lots are sold together and built as double units, and a note regarding this added to the plat. Ed McKinney expressed concern regarding the size of the lots, the drainage easements on some of these lots, and the existence of only one access road, realizing that the location for a second access road will be difficult to determine. Chairman Sager commended Mr. McKinney for recognizing this problem is not easily resolved. George Hockman, 1625 Prospect Estates Drive, stated he is not opposed to the development of the area but is concerned about the need for additional access roads recognizing safety hazards. Several suggestions for a second access road were proposed, but it was noted that grades and Town standards would make construction difficult. Public Works Director Linnane stated that the slope and site distance requirements would make it impossible to construct another access point without the use of substantial fill and switchbacks which would eliminate some lots. Mr. Van Horn stated that there is in existence an emergency access through the southeast corner. Chairman Sager requested Mr. Van Horn identify this access as a possible emergency escape route for residents. Commissioner Amos stated that the Town and the developer should continue to work toward a solution to the access road dilemma. It was moved and seconded (Brown-Hix) that Final Plat of a Portion of Tract A, Prospect Estates Subdivision, Third Filing, be favorably recommended with clarification of utility easement areas, Improvement Guarantee, and construction plans prior to Town Board approval, and it passed unanimously. 4. SPECIAL REVIEWS. 4.a. Special Review #93-7. Lot 1. Valley Vista Addition. Nicholas Stanitz/Applicant. Chairman Sager opened the public hearing. Applicant's representative Paul Kochevar stated the applicant is proposing to develop 24 affordable, for rent, housing units, in four buildings. The wildfire hazard and the site grading will be defined in more detail in the Development Plan which will be submitted upon approval of the Concept Plan. Forty-one parking spaces are proposed. However, the Planning Commission recommended that the design incorporate the ability to construct 48 spaces. The developer plans to charge *$600 rent. The buildings will be placed to preserve as many trees as possible. Ron Harvey commended the developer for his efforts and offered his services regarding affordable housing survey work. Director Stamey read a letter of opposition from adjacent landowner C. George Seifert, Sr. Chairman Sager closed the public hearing. Director Stamey reported that studies performed by the Town indicate the need for affordable housing and the Talmey-Drake survey revealed the number one concern of the citizens is affordable housing. The Planning Commission recommended the developer provide one BRADFOR/PUBLISHING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission, December 21, 1993 - Page 4 trash enclosure per building and designated cluster mail boxes. It was moved and seconded (Brown-Burgess) that the Special Review 93-7 be favorably recommended with positive findings on the following, and it passed unanimously: 1. Location suitability considering nearby land uses, roads, utilities, and environmental characteristics. 2. Building and site design to avoid visual impact, damage to the natural environment, and departure from the character of the neighborhood. 3. Social, economic, and community needs. 4. Consistency with district objectives. 5. Attention to wildfire hazards. 6. Additional parking provision to avoid parking on Moccasin Bypass, mail cluster boxes, additional trash enclosures, and detailed grading, landscaping and vegetation information. 7. Before final approval, the Town and developer produce documentation to ensure the affordability provision. 5. REPORTS. Director Stamey announced the January 18th Planning Commission meeting may convene at 10:00 a.m., depending on agenda, and again at 1:30 p.m. for review of the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. Director Stamey requested attendance of the Planning Commissioners at the Larimer County Planning Commission meeting in Estes Park on January 19th at 7:30 p.m. Discussion will include the Intergovernmental Agreement and review of the new entrance to Rocky Mountain National Park. Ed McKinney commented on the availability of park fees collected through Larimer County for use in the Estes Valley. Mr. McKinney was referred to Stan Gengler, Director of the Estes Valley Recreation and Park District. There being no further business, Chairman Sager adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m. 71- IGR.Q Tina Kuehl, Deputy Town Clerk I.A.FOROPUILISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission Â· December 21, 1993 Commissioners: Chairman Al Sager, Commissioners Wendell Amos, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Alma Hix, Michael Miller and Edward Pohl Attending: Chairman sager, Commissioners Amos, Brown, Burgess, A. Hix, Miller, and Pohl Also Attending: Trustee/Liaison G. Hix, Community Development Director Stamey, Deputy Clerk Kuehl Absent: None Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. MINUTES. Minutes of the November 16, 1993 meeting were approved as noted and submitted. 2. CONSENT ITEM. Amended Plat. Lots 18. 22. 30. Grand Estates Subdivision (Comfort Inn). This plat corrects a change of ownership and identifies a vacated street, and includes vicinity map, graphic clarification (former street), and street vacation information. It was moved and seconded (Pohl-Brown) that the Amended Plat, Lots 18, 22, 30, Grand Estates Subdivision be recommended for approval, and it passed unanimously. 3. UBDIVISIONS. 3. Amended Plat. Lots 1 & 2. Block 3. Fall River Estates. Doug Linda Cook/Applicants. This request proposes to adjust the int nal lot line 20 feet to the north between Lots 1 a 2, creati no additional lots. The Planning Commi on previously roved a development plan for 16 accomm tion units, plus ager's quarters for Lot 1. A leant's Representative 1 Kochevar stated: 1. The plat will in de a note identifyin sement for the hike/bike path, wi the exact locati o be determined. 2. Easement across Outlot to serv t 1 gives access from Fall River Court. The wo 'n n the original recording is being updated and will e added to the plat when recording is complete. a ss is placed, the center line of the existing a ess wil be the center line of the 60 foot agreem , with ex placement at the discretion of the ner of Lot 1. 3. Easement lang e, "Ten foot easements a cent to this original 10 ine are hereby vacated", has n added to the plat. 4. Locat' n of the buildings and parking areas w be ad ted to preserve many of the existing trees. 5. icinity map and monumentation as found and/or set has been added to the plat. aRNOFOR/ PUSLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development Committee January 6, 1994 Committee: Chairman Dekker, Trustees Hix and Doylen Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Klaphake, Community Development Director Stamey, Advertising Manager Marsh, Museum Director Kilsdonk, Clerk 0'connor Absent: None Chairman Dekker called the meeting to order at 8:30 A.M. ADVERTISING REPORT. 1994 Operating Agreement with Chamber of Commerce for Fulfillment Program. The Committee reviewed this Agreement in December; however, following revisions made during the Town Board meeting, this item was referred to the Committee for further review. Following is a list of comparative changes for 1994: Item- 1993 1214 Difference Direct Response Labels 42,500 0 $.30/ea. $12,750 40,000 @ $.31/ea. $12,400 $ (350.00) Readership Service Labels 42,500 @ $.05/ea. 2,125 40,000 @ $.0515/ea. 2,060 ( 65.00) Mail Preparation 85,000 0 $.18/ea. 15,300 80,000 @ $.1854/ea. 14,832 (468.00) Statistical Reports 1,056 1,056 -0- Operator Charges 68,000 @ S.60/charge 40,800 65,000 0 $.618/charge 40,170 (630.00) Quantity Shipping 542 Units 542 558 16.00 Net Projected Difference $72,573 $71,076 (01,497.00) The 1993 Agreement contained fees based on actual numbers plus a guarantee; the guarantee in the 1994 Agreement has been eliminated. Following discussion, the Committee recommends approval of the 1994 Chamber Operating Agreement. ~M#~sitors Guide - Report. Staff presented copies 06-elie 1994 Visitoi!'9*flaj~e. The Guide is a project of the Aadm~odations- Chamber Boo]Ce-L.~tee which began in April, 199,2/tvhrough an RFP, Market Reach was $*dicted to re-design th---â€¢â‚¬Sk into a magazine format. Market Reach ~4also selected t/4/a-n-~ge advertising sales and the production of the-thAde - Q~ 185,000 Guides produced, 85,000 are allocated to advephi,-Pig responses. The balance is allocated to local, regional,~ference Center distribution. The Guide replaces the ,0,El-piece 1hmense packet and will be mailed at a nominal,flcrease in post:aghtef 3/10' s of $.01. Production costs ~g~5120,000 were paid entirer,~y participating advertisers--tl-fe were no Town funds involved in -Ehqjroduction. When ques~p#Cd why the service industry was not well re'Pq~ented, Susie -ittkhurst/Market Reach, advised that advertiser,Lwere corn~fE-ed Of 50% retail, service and attractions, and-*Cg *Eammodations. Some service businesses may be of the opinion that+d S.ADFORD PUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development Committee - January 6, 1994 - Page 2 1993 Conversion Study - Presentation of Results. Chris Cares/RRC Associates, presented an overview of the Conversion Study, noting 1.8. that the 1994 Visitors Guide (mentioned above) is highly supported by the study--it is an extremely effective piece of advertising. The 1993 Study also compared information from two previous studies conducted in 1985 and .1988. The study profiled the Estes Park tourist market and focused on the effectiveness of the Town's magazine advertising. The sample for the 1993 study was created from a list of 52,227 magazine inquiries; a total of 5,000 persons were surveyed, with a return of 1,228 = 22%. The study was designed to profile the following: Demographic Characteristics Geographic Origins Trip Characteristics Quality of the Estes Park Experience Improvements/Suggestions/Complaints about Estes Park Request For Information Trip Planning and Motivations Important Sources of Information in Planning a Trip to Estes Park Financial Impact from the Advertising Campaign Conversion Ratios Analysis of Each Publication RRC Associates is continuing its work on the economic return; however, it appears that from the Town's advertising budget of $150,000, the Town realizes in excess of $400,000. Staff noted that the study provides an excellent tool in evaluating the advertising program. The Committee acknowledged receipt of the 1993 Conversion Study and commended RRC for their presentation. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (G. I.8.) PARCEL MAPPING PROJECT - 1.t. REOUEST APPROVAL OF FUNDING. Community Development Director Stamey reported that as part of the V effort to complete Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan, it has become apparent that the land divisions within the planning area (north end to the switchbacks, south to Lily Lake, east to Pole Hill and west to the RMNP boundary) must be mapped. The existing data base that has been created is more generalized and, based upon readily available data, staff contends that it is important to develop the ability to answer detailed and site-specific land use issues. To address this issue in a cost-effective manner, staff has obtained parcel division information from Larimer County that would allow staff to create a current G.I.S. data set of maps. Each parcel in the planning area can' be mapped, coded with an existing land use, zoning, and future land use/zoning information. Using "Windows" and an "Arc View" program, maps can be readily produced. The cost of creating this data base is $10,000 and it should take approximately 4 weeks to complete. Using a cost-share approach, staff contacted Larimer County and RMNP and they have signed an agreement confirming their participation of $2,500/ea. Therefore, the Town's portion would be $5,000. Jeff Rashid/DSW, provided a thorough computer demonstration of the system. Mr. Rashid would provide training for Senior Planner Joseph and the system can be "networked" between various departments. Staff has not yet had an opportunity to define a user fee schedule. Administrator Klaphake reported that various departments that may have use of this type of data base will be assembled to review and discuss the system. The Committee recommends approval of the request, suggesting funding be provided from the 1993 Carry-Over Funds (reserve). Following this meeting with staff, conclusions will be reported at the Town Board meeting scheduled January 11. The Committee expressed their appreciation to Mr. Rashid for his presentation. HAMMO PILISHING COÂ· RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission December 21, 1993 Commissioners: Chairman Al Sager, Commissioners Wendell Amos, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Alma Hix, Michael Miller and Edward Pohl Attending: Chairman Sager, commissioners Amos, Brown, Burgess, A. Hix, Miller, and Pohl Also Attending: Trustee/Liaison G. Hix, Community Development Director Stamey, Deputy Clerk Kuehl Absent: None Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. MINUTES. Minutes of the November 16, 1993 meeting were approved as noted and submitted. ~f SUBDIVISIONS. a.- Amended Plat. Lots 1 & 2. Block 3. Fall River Estates. A Doug & Linda Cook/ADplicants. This request proposes to adjust 01 "'I the internal lot line 20 feet to the north between Lots 1 and 2, creating no additional lots. The Planning Commission previously approved a development plan for 16 accommodation units, plus manager's quarters for Lot 1. Applicant's Representative Paul Kochevar stated: 1. The plat will include a note identifying easement for the hike/bike path, with the exact location to be determined. 2. Easement across Outlot F to serve Lot 1 gives access from Fall River Court. The wording on the original recording recording is complete. When access is placed, the center is being updated and will be added to the plat when line of the existing access will be the center line of the 60 foot agreement, with exact placement at the discretion of the owner of Lot 1. 3. Easement language, "Ten foot easements adjacent to this original lot line are hereby vacated", has been added to the plat. 4. Location of the buildings and parking areas will be adjusted to preserve many of the existing trees. 5. Vicinity map and monumentation as found and/or set has been added to the plat. Director Stamey noted that Mr. Kochevar addressed all concerns contained in the staff report. Director Stamey commended both the Cook family and the Lienemann family for their cooperation regarding the hike/bike path easement. Ken Czarnowski, resident of Fall River, expressed his concern regarding the possible destruction of wetlands and requested the Commission delay action on this development. Chairman Sager explained this development has received approval. surrounding property owners should contact the developers directly regarding their concerns. Chairman Sager thanked Mr. Czarnowski for his efforts toward making the Commissioners aware of the importance of preserving the wetlands. It was moved and seconded (Brown-Burgess) the Amended Plat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Fall River Estates, be favorably recommended, recognizing applicant' s grant of easement for the hike/bike path along Lots 1 and 2, and it passed unanimously. .a.MI* Final Plat. Lot 26. Block 1. Fall River Estates. D.A. J.6 Lienemann/Anplicant. Applicant' s representative Paul Kochevar , stated the developer proposes the subdivision of one multi- family lot into five single family lots, consisting of 5.7 acres. Mr. Kochevar explained that the following staff concerns have been addressed: 1. A note has been placed on the plat stating that one single family dwelling unit may be constructed per lot. 2. Before the final plat is submitted to the Town Board, drainage discharge points, erosion protection, and culvert locations will be placed on the road and sewer plan profile and submitted to the Public Works Department. 3. Sewer and water crossing requirements will be met. 4. Existing transformer, underground power lines and power easement locations will show on the road plan profile. 5. A note will be placed on the plat stating the requirement of a pressurized water system for each lot. 6. Dedication statement has been modi f ied per Town Attorney. 7. Quit claim to the Town will be provided for Outlot B. 8. A note will be added to the plat identifying the utility easement affected by the private road crossing east of Outlot A. 9. An Improvement Guarantee will be provided for streets, utilities and drainage, prior to Town Board approval. Director Stamey stated that Mr. Kochevar addressed all staff concerns. It was moved and seconded (Amos-Hix) the Final Plat, Lot 26, Block 1, Fall River Estates be favorably recommended, and it passed unanimously. he. Final Plat. Portion of Tract A. Prospect Estates Sub- division. Third Filing. Neil Solomon/Applicant. Applicant's â€¢ representative Bill Van Horn stated that this subdivision Ar /,th consists of 27 lots. This plat modifies four lots in the second filing enlarging the lot size to a minimum of 18,000 square feet. Each lot is for single family dwellings except that Lots 11 and 12, 14 and 15, 16 and 17 may be developed with zero lot line setbacks on one side (2 attached units). Mr. Van Horn addressed the following concerns: 1. Additional dedication for Peak View Drive. 2. Configuration of drainage easements. 3. Developer responsible for detail work necessary to prevent washing of sand and gravel onto the streets. 4. Zero setbacks on Lots 11 and 12, 14 and 15, 16 and 17 only if lots are sold together and built as double units, and a note regarding this added to the plat. Ed McKinney expressed concern regarding the size of the lots, the drainage easements on some of these lots, and the existence of only one access road, realizing that the location for a second access road will be difficult to determine. chairman Sager commended Mr. McKinney for recognizing this problem is not easily resolved. George Hockman, 1625 Prospect Estates Drive, stated he is not opposed to the development of the area but is concerned about the need for additional access roads recognizing safety hazards. Several suggestions for a second access road were proposed, but it was noted that grades and Town standards would make construction difficult. Public Works Director Linnane stated that the slope and site distance requirements would make it impossible to construct another access point without the use of substantial fill and switchbacks which would eliminate some lots. Mr. Van Horn stated that there is in existence an emergency access through the southeast corner. Chairman Sager requested Mr. Van Horn identify this access as a possible emergency escape route for residents. Commissioner Amos stated that the Town and the developer should continue to work toward a solution to the access road dilemma. It was moved and seconded (Brown-Hix) that Final Plat of a Portion of Tract A, Prospect Estates Subdivision, Third Filing, be favorably recommended with clarification of utility easement areas, Improvement Guarantee, and construction plans prior to Town Board approval, and it passed unanimously. /Ii SPECIAL REVIEWS. /&% aD 6.- Special Review #93-7, Lot 1, Valley Vista Addition, Nicholas Stanitz/Applicant. Chairman Sager opened the public * I hearing. Applicant's representative Paul Kochevar stated the applicant is proposing to develop 24 affordable, for rent, housing units, in four buildings. The wildf ire hazard and the site grading will be defined in more detail in the Development Plan which will be submitted upon approval of the Concept Plan. Forty-one parking spaces are proposed. However, the Planning Commission recommended that the design incorporate the ability to construct 48 spaces. The developer plans to charge *$600 rent. The buildings will be placed to preserve as many trees as possible. Ron Harvey commended the developer for his efforts and offered his services regarding affordable housing survey work. Director Stamey read a letter of opposition from adjacent landowner C. George Seifert, Sr. Chairman Sager closed the public hearing. Director Stamey reported that studies performed by the Town indicate the need for affordable housing and the Talmey-Drake survey revealed the number one concern of the citizens is affordable housing. The Planning Commission recommended the developer provide one trash enclosure per building and designated cluster mail boxes. It was moved and seconded (Brown-Burgess) that the Special Review 93-7 be favorably recommended with positive findings on the following, and it passed unanimously: 1. Location suitability considering nearby land uses, roads, utilities, and environmental characteristics. 2. Building and site design to avoid visual impact, damage to the natural environment, and departure from the character of the neighborhood. 3. Social, economic, and community needs. 4. Consistency with district objectives. 5. Attention to wildfire hazards. 6. Additional parking provision to avoid parking on Moccasin Bypass, mail cluster boxes, additional trash enclosures, and detailed grading, landscaping and vegetation information. 7. Before final approval, the Town and developer produce documentation to ensure the affordability provision. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a proposal has been presented to the Board of Trustees by the Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority requesting the Board modify the Estes Park Downtown Redevelopment Program (Plan) by amending plans, guidelines and proposals for land uses and development in the Stanley Historic District; and WHEREAS, the Board has been advised by the Town Attorney and has determined that the proposed modification (third amendment) constitutes a substantial change to the Plan, as provided in the Colorado Urban Renewal Law; and WHEREAS, the Board hereby finds that, in accordance with the Urban Renewal Law, it is necessary to submit such proposed modification to the Estes Park Planning Commission for its review and recommendation as to conformity with the Estes Park Comprehensive Plan for the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: 1. The Board hereby finds that the proposed modification substantially changes the Estes Park Downtown Redevelopment Program (Plan). 2. In accordance with the Urban Renewal Law, this proposed modification shall be submitted to the Planning Commission effective January 18, 1994. The Planning Commission shall consider, review same, and make recommendations to, the Board regarding the conformity of such modification with the general plan for the development of the municipality as a whole. 3. A public hearing shall be held before the Board of Trustees regarding such modification of the Plan on the 8th day of February 1994, at 7:30 p.m., in the Board Room (Room 103), 170 MacGregor Avenue. 4. Notice of such hearing shall be provided in compliance with the Urban Renewal Law. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF , 1994. TOWN OF ESTES PARK BY: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk , VISUAL AIDES FOR PRESENTATION Presentation on WATER RATE STUDY FINDINGS Prepared for TOWN OF ESTES PARK BLACK & VEATCH Progress by Design January 11, 1994 tio.D:Â»-098:109Â»?9909 ~60'94,4AQBQb92844 .A.N:Nte:N'K.NIN: A ------81 ' I C) XXXXXXX7% ...â€¢ ............. l l 51&209920.8.Â»30-4- m 45/8~bgbpb*$:4- g*40&441'dw /5 ; 03:<12:3:<12:30 :% 3.:% : ./ :3 /-- / * ... -- -- -% -- -- -- -- -- -- lilli I . I I N E I 4%4141>10>i" 0. 60'A,%1% (D ' 29$2529$829 *, #. #. #, #. #, 4, ~,'#,'~,'#,'#,'#.'# '* '1*,,i,;,Â·i,# o i Iii I EÂ·:, i 1 C 1 1 2 pro.Â°1 1 1 - --1 1 0 86%6 -02=-Gy=aÂ»Z----=-Â«-=-62:kc--:-ey=-ON:Â»y~-â‚¬--aÂ»-.yo-X6-6-0-I:V.U---76-.-=â‚¬-9 05 10%4â‚¬1 lAM - 7.- i i l i . 1 ! 1 1 xx>000<Â» i./ ..:.....:%.:%.:..>....>.:$.......>....: ..>.1 < . ! , 1 1 ! 1 S 5 0) ilittifitill f illill 0 0 LO 93. Financial Plan Summary Capital Improvements ~Addl. Revenue -Proposed Rates 966L 266L 966L Thousands $2,500 $2,000 - - 009' L$ 000' L$ 0$ 7 ..2 i f .4 i r 1 - 11 lili 1 J JeleAA Mina Mold pedlund 12!013UJUIOO lequep!sey Cost of Service Summary Test Year 1999 e0!A,les Jo :soO 666 L lim selebl Duils!)(El WOJ:I Aebl I - 009$ 4 - 002$ Thousands $1,000 $800 - 0017$ 23 . t 0$ & g 1 51 8 12 11 1'= 29@82 3. 09 = 92 31 333&335 3 6 E 4 22 f 5 29 22298:22 4 4 Ul . a {9 th i 81 0 . . -----e. 44,4 44 -,4 *a .4 00$22228 08 .1 8 .2 m el ex 142 91 11 man:Ze: -64,4,aW,IM =1&&&g EEGE 2 2 2 0 CO M, i~ i: i~ *ap ! 1 55222:2 â‚¬9 ..4--00 g ----O-- -. -----M. 11 .4 .8 4 , 00..Mow] 31 9 2 32 = 1 s *230*3@ =1 I 9 14 44 44 . 64 . Mi *Med/EE 51 9 = = 0 ==32 - M,nou,000 51 2 .3 e e . - 40 0 o 21 82 0, S /2 ------ dedaNXI 5:8 E 5 6 E 2 Ef lil Em im gs g= 9 228:222 N N el 4 4 - 1< - 0 ..99 6 lz= i - .6- 00.0000 61 52 3; 11 E q 3 g 00.000 m >t M 31 - 2 I 5 2 2 5 & & 3 3 1=' 1 8,9 'fi Ya gl 00 W MEE E M 8 2 L U.1 - -1 ::2:8:8 - i =5 h= iz in 4 8- I . I -----N E 0 2 0 i g 4 -NNeSâ‚¬ld 3 08 1 09ey 228 99 3 --Il.- I N 000 0-0 91 .4.44. 3 8 EE i ill ------- ..- 2 -2 O 0 ur) U' to O U) h --r..clgÂ· 2 8 4-2 .48.4.4.44. 3;~ 2 82 22 -1 83:Basts!9! -1 3: 3,1 UN :1 61 ------- 5.E ..1-Â·-r<-- . . (9 . <O - M W) j ,/ o.----- g~e 1, R EB IN-NIN- 11.= - -- - doododd : 34= 8 000..00 q - 2- ------- ........ :E 0 . 5 1 : 2 5821 E 1/15 4 *<5 f N .61 i oq.-26,0/ g NN k iND 23 liEE 22' -23 d O U,O 11.ird liro iy1 4-6 2,500 gallons Mnimurn Charge Mnimum Charge Ex Rabas | 1999 500 gallons Mnin-,m Charge COMPARISON AND PROPOSED UGH 1999 Charge - $ p- 1,000 ga e - Â« bil 500 gallons Mnimum Cha192091 2 500 gallons Mnirrum Cha Mnimum Char mum Cha Rual -Rual eq 1104% BUJOISM MOI OSâ‚¬: FF sueqi 500 gallons Mninum Cha r 2.500 gallons Residential C,1 8 -------'-.-- 0 01 ~~5=*gr~:/4%~ 3â‚¬~ .+45* rti Â·*it=t'-La.14&2Ell* | I ~El#'!~-912+4-1.-t['11,Il'I rl. -11 1 1 '~ja- IF ' 1 (42*JE'*05Zt,Â¢tlt~& mity*44!ill,ti0~g-14.4,1'i 'itÂ·,4 'Irl . - 1 le-jic#&4/8/9%,1/14/-/#0/94*2144=isfr34-Moffi 41 --- 2':1 I=--~ c:-@U>11 -499 F-1.w.4,~ ..R- 4,111 Pr' 1 -& - #'- t -f#4- ~~T 9=2' L I 7 1* !41 ~2. Â·911Â¥F-Â·i:IÂ»LF#404 4I i~di.r7:Ut=~4 251 1 11. E-li~'Tti-~#-4#S ~.44.. 1 11.:JI.,Ill ~.1 7 -4:11'd'--+1 6.1 tifil~ .Â·++41 + .1 !1!! T -Â· -' 11. r=i:1 --*U j. &:G.J-- 1Â¥tliti=.74-AW-ffvÂ·Â·A*f~.1-,E~1'~'liF# 341.-~, w. ........,913-+1=.....=23 . 1 ! LO O Typical Monthly Residential Bill 666L 966L 966 L +66L Bulls!XEl (5,000 gallons us 18.18 16.80 15.17_ ___15.85 .............. E- Dollars 20 15 0L BRAOFOROPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS j Public Works Committee November 19, 1993 Committee: Chairman Habecker, Trustees Doylen and Gillette Attending All Also Attending: Assistant Town Administrator Widmer, Trustee Dekker, Public Works Director Linnane, Water Superintendent Goehring, Deputy Clerk Kuehl Absent: None Chairman Habecker called the meeting to order at 10:10 A.M. WATER RATE STUDY Public Works Director Linnane explained that three Financial Plans have been prepared by Black & Veatch since 1989. These plans have anticipated the end of the approximate $700,000/year MDC revenue source in 1993. At the conclusion of each Financial Plan, the public was notified of a possible rate increase starting in 1994. John Gallagher, of Black & Veatch, presented the preliminary study which includes the projection of water sales revenue, the cost of service, and the design of cost rates. Water rate increases are needed because of necessary capital improvements to upgrade the transmission and distribution system. The 1993 reserves stand at $2.3 million and the goal is to maintain a reserve of $1.3 million reserve by 1999, after 6 years of capital improvements. These reserves are needed to cover capital emergencies that may result from catastrophic occurrences. The $1.3 million is a financially healthy reserve. Four water classifications were designated (residential, commercial, pump flow, and bulk) and the following rate structure was recommended for approval: Minimum Charge Structure: Charge customers the cost of billing the customer, repairing and maintaining the meter, maintaining smaller mains, and the minimum cost of 2,500 gallons of water, plus a charge for the actual water used. The total increase over the six- year period would be $75/residential (5,000 gallon average) per year and $360/commercial per year (25,000 gallon average). Following are the projected percentage increases over the next six years: 1994 5% 1997 9% 1995 7% 1998 5% 1996 9% 1999 5% The committee recommended an ordinance be prepared by the Town Attorney using the Minimum Charge Structure and presented to the Board of Trustees at their January 11, 1994 meeting. BmZE~:P~H EXTENSION Direct:27~2~h,~rted that $138,000 was budgeted for capital improvements during~T99ihLith $8,700 remaining in this fund.___...i/// was suggested this money-88*4*,WL to continue the bika.-e!-Fr-om Matthew Circle to the corner of (33~es Avenue. The encumbrance o f these funds=â€¢aaâ€¢~e-!185Uffect the budget. The committee recommaÂ§,0-~N~li7960 remaf~D-.miB the capital improvemen_&6,-,01-be encumbered in 1993 to order lete this ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 13.32 AND 13.38 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, WITH REGARD TO WATER RATES AND CHARGES WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has determined that it is necessary to amend Chapters 13.32 and 13.38 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Estes Park. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO. Section 1. Section 13.32.010 (B) shall be amended as follows: 13.32.010 Definitions B. "Bed and Breakfast" means a dwelling in which the owner or tenant lets rooms and/or provides table board. Bed and Breakfast accommodations shall be treated for the purpose of Section 13.32.012 as a multi-family dwelling with each individual room available for rent as an individual dwelling unit. For purposes of Section 13.32.110, Bed and Breakfast shall be considered a commercial use. Section 2. Section 13.32.010 shall be amended by the addition of the following subsections. H. "Residential Consumer" means a water consumer whose majority of water use is for personal, domestic and household use. I. "Commercial Consumer" means a water consumer whose majority ot water use is for a commercial use including, but not limited to the following: 1. Commercial Accommodations. 2. Retail Sales. 3. Bed and Breakfast. 4. Restaurants. 5. Camp Grounds. 6. School and Churches. 7. Governmental and Utility Agencies. 8. Service Businesses. For purposes of the Water Rate Schedule, a commercial accommodation shall include any dwelling or accommodation unit or units which are rented for a period of less than 30 days during any portion of a calendar year. J. "Pump Flow Consumer" means a consumer that cannot be served by gravity from the Town's water system and requires a Town maintained pump station for service. K. "Bulk Water Consumer" means a consumer as defined in Section 13.38.010 of this code. L. "Rural Service" means all water service for consumers located outside the corporate limits of the Town of Estes Park. M. "Urban Service" means Â·all water service for consumers located within the corporate limits of the Town of Estes Park. Section 3. Section 13.32.110 shall be amended as follows: Section 13.32.110 Water Rate Schedule. A. Applicability. The water rate schedule is applicable to water service for all consumers receiving water service from the Town's water system. B. Rates. The rates for water service to all consumers on the Town's water system is as more fully set forth on the Town's Water Rate Schedule on file in the office of the Director of Public Works. C. Payment. All bills shall be due and payable within 15 days of the date of the bill. Bill will become delinquent 30 days from the date of the bill. D. Contract Period and Conditions. Service shall be for a minimum period of 12 months and, thereafter, until terminated. Notice of request to terminate water service must be given with 10 days written notice prior to end of each annual term. Water service is subject to this code, ordinances of the Town, and rules and regulations of the Water Department. E. Minimum Rate. A minimum rate shall be charged for each meter for which a connection fee has been paid, from the date of the payment of the connection fee to the date on which the meter is connected to the Town's water system, and thereafter at the rate set forth in the Water Rate Schedule. The consumer shall notify the Town of the date of first use of the water from the Town's Water System. In the event that service is terminated, the minimum rate shall not apply, and at such time as the terminated service is restored, the connection charges as set forth in this Chapter shall be paid. -2- Section 4. Section 13.32.130 shall be deleted. Section 5. Section 13.38.040 shall be amended to read as follows: 13.38.040 Rates. The rates for bulk water users shall be as more fully set forth on the Town's Water Rate Schedule on file. If a bulk water user consumer is also a pump flow consumer, said consumer shall be charged the pump flow rate. Section 6. The water rate schedule referred to in Section 3 shall be the same as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 7. These water rate changes shall be in force and effect as of the billing period beginning March, 1994. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO THIS DAY OF JANUARY, 1994. TOWN OF ESTES PARK By: ATTEST: Town Clerk I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduded and read at a meeting of the Board of Trustees on the ___ day of , 1994, and published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado on the day of , 1994. Town Clerk -3- 9 11 1512,988 21 88&38/6 im p i 22218RZ 8 1121131 â€¢I OBRRE88 11 4 Mul/511 la 8 â€¢, ====s== & 51/2331 -" 48 855/8 13 21 NUNSNEW al 22===== 1 211121151 8 RE 982 8 P 1 1 11611Â£119all E ! 11 =~ il 22802!28 NNelâ€¢4 ' ' ----23 9 1- 2 11 88:2288 1 21 2221111*/1 20 ==2=8=8 N Al #Â¢00212* .8 - ~ ~~~BERR 90 3 51,33,8 i#11 2 6 4 1 1 3 -11 lilliam RR 1 BOISISIZZZ 6161 ,-N~:NN,414 2 2282622 l A.INIAN 2 ~~| 22225!22 01' : Â· 000Â©00000 i. i - 'f H i i 1l SZ-ENe- s 14 -1 1 1 liWN 4-6 Exhibit "A" Charge 1995 pe, 1,000gallcnesheaboallissed .-1 mog Bulk [Ii] JAN 6 1994 GARRETT W. RAY 3630 W. County Road 50 Fort Collins, CO 80521 USA Phone (303) 484-8797 Jan. 4, 1994 Town Board Town of Estes Park Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Prooosed water rate increases I have read the stories in the Trail Gazette reporting on the proposed increases in water rates. I am especially concerned at the proposed increases for part-time residents, which seem quite unreasonable. I am disturbed by the statement (I don't recall whether by a trustee, employee or consultant) that "if seasonal residents bought water year-round...we would not be raising the rates today." Of course, we are "buying water," or more accurately, "buying no water. " The statement creates the impression that we seasonal residents are being punished for our failure to use unnecessary amounts of a limited resource. Our water is turned on for only four months each year. During the other eight months when we use no water, we still pay the minimum charge of 17.59 per month -- roughly $140 per year toward maintenance of the system. That seems like a reasonable enough contribution. I hope the trustees will re-think the fairness of the proposal. ''/-1 Sincerely, Garrett W. Ray c>N (790 Larkspur, High Drive) BLACK & VEATCH 1400 South Potomac Street, Suite 200, Aurora, Colorado 80012, (303) 671-4200, Fax. (303) 671 -4285 January 7, 1994 Mr. Bill Linnane, P.E. Director of Public Works Town of Estes Park P. 0. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Mr. Linnane: We are pleased to submit our Water Rates report. An executive summary precedes the detailed text of the report. Tables referenced in the report are at the end of each chapter. Your assistance in providing guidance and information for the study has been invaluable. This opportunity to be of service to the Town is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, 04- 0. SUW- - ~ John A. Gallagh'6r alh . ~% Prind on 44 44 uo 0-% 4 CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary 1-1 A. Introduction 1-1 B. Study Findings 1-1 2. Financial Plan 2-1 A. Revenues 2-1 1. Water Sales 2-1 2. Fire Protection Payments from General Fund ........... 2-1 3. Tap Fees 2-1 4. Interest Income 2-2 5. Miscellaneous Revenue 2-2 B. Revenue Requirements 2-2 1. Operation and Maintenance Expense ................. 2-2 2. Debt Service 2-2 3. Routine Capital Improvements ...................... 2-2 4. Major Capital Improvements ..................... .. 2-3 C. Beginning Balance 2-3 D. Indicated Revenue Increases 2-3 3. Cost of Service Analysis 3-1 A. Total Cost of Service 3-1 B. Allocation to Functional Cost Components ................. 3-1 1. Functional Cost Components 3-1 2. Determination of Allocation Factors .................. 3-2 3. Allocation of Total Cost of Service ................... 3-3 a. Plant Investment and Capital Costs .............. 3-3 b. Operation and Maintenance Expense ............. 3-4 C. Distribution of Costs to Customer Classes .................. 3-4 1. Customer Classes 3-4 2. Units of Service 3-4 3. Allocation of Total Cost of Service ................... 3-5 4. Customer Class Costs of Service 3-5 TC-1 CONTENTS (Continued) 4. Rate Design 4-1 A. Existing Rates 4-1 B. 1999 Cost of Service Rhtes 4-1 C. Proposed Rates - 1994 Through 1998 4-2 D. Typical Monthly Water Bills 4-2 TABLES Table 2-1 Cash Flow Analysis 2-5 Table 2-2 Historical and Projected Operation and Maintenance Expenses 2-6 Table 2-3 Major Capital Improvement Program 2-7 Table 3-1 Net Cost of Service To Be Allocated 3-7 Table 3-2 Allocation of Plant Investment and Capital Cost to Functional Cost Components ........................ 3-8 Table 3-3 Allocation of Operation and Maintenance Expense to Functional Cost Components 3-9 Table 3-4 Estimated Units of Service 3-10 Table 3-5 Allocation of Total Cost of Service to Functional Cost Components 3-11 Table 3-6 Unit Costs of Service 3-12 Table 3-7 Allocation of Costs to Customer Classes ................. 3-13 TC-2 TABLES (Continued) Table 3-8 Demand Related Public Fire Protection Allocation Basis 3-14 Table 3-9 Adjusted Cost of Service ... . . . 3-15 Table 3-10 Comparison of Adjusted Cost With Revenue Under Existing Rates 3-16 Table 4-1 Comparison of Existing and Cost of Service Rates 4-4 Table 4-2 Comparison of Adjusted Cost With Revenue Under Cost of Service Rates 4-5 Table 4-3 Comparison of Existing and Proposed Rates for 1994 Through 1999 ................................. 4-6 Table 4-4 Comparison of Typical Monthly Bills Under Existing and Proposed Rates, Urban Residential Customer with 5/8-Inch Meter 4-7 TC-3 r â€¢ 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Introduction The Town of Estes Park, Colorado (Town) provides water service to more than 3,200 customers. The Town's water operations are financially self-sufficient with funding for capital and operating requirements derived primarily from water rates. In order to continue to provide reliable water service, the Town is commencing a major capital program that will upgrade the transmission and distribution system over the next six years. The Town, recognizing the importance of financially planning for these capital improvements, authorized Black & Veatch to perform a comprehensive rate study. The procedures, findings and recommendations of the study are summarized in this report. The water rate study includes the following elements: â€¢ Projection of water sales revenue needed to meet revenue requirements for the six-year study period, 1994 through 1999. â€¢ Analysis of cost of providing water service to customer classes. â€¢ Design of cost of service rates. B. Study Findings The principal findings of the water rate study are as follows: â€¢ Revenue under existing rates is inadequate to meet projected revenue requirements and maintain an adequate operating reserve. The following revenue increases are projected to meet these criteria for 1994 through 1999: 1-1 Annualized Water , Year Sales Revenue Increase (90) 1994 5.0 1995 7.0 1996 9.0 1997 9.0 1998 5.0 1999 5.0 Cumulative 47.2 â€¢ A comprehensive cost of service analysis has been performed for the 1999 test year to determine each customer class' share of water service costs. The analysis is documented in Chapter 3 and summarized in Table 3-10. â€¢ Cost of service rates have been designed for 1999 which will increase annual water sales revenue by 47.2 percent. A comparison of existing and cost of service rates is shown in Table 4-1. â€¢ Rates were also designed for 1994 through 1998 which will increase revenue by the percentages indicated above and provide a smooth transition from existing rates to cost of. service rates over the study period. Table 4-3 shows proposed rates for 1994 through 1999. 1-2 , 7 -â‚¬ 2. FINANCIAL PLAN 2. FINANCIAL PLAN A financial plan has been developed for the water utility for the six-year study period, 1994 through 1999. This plan is summarized in the cash flow shown in Table 2-1. A. Revenues Revenues for the Water Fund come from water sales, fire protection payments from General Fund, tap fees, interest income, and other miscellaneous sources. 1. Water Sales About 74 percent of projected Water Fund revenue is derived from water sales to retail and bulk water customers. As shown on Lines 2 through 9 of Table 2-1, water sales revenue is derived from existing rates and from projected increases. Revenue from existing rates is discussed in this section, and revenue from proposed increases is discussed on Page 2-3. Water sales revenue under existing rates is based on a detailed analysis of historical water billing records. Based on this analysis, the number of water customers is expected to increase 55 customers annually. Revenue from existing water rates is projected to increase from $998,100 in 1994 to $1,102,200 in 1999 in recognition of this expected growth. 2. Fire Protection Payments from General Fund The Town annually transfers monies from the General Fund to the Water Fund to recognize the annual costs of providing fire protection. As shown on Line 10 of Table 2-1, this amount is expected to increase from the budgeted level of $94,400 in 1994 to $103,900 in 1999 based on estimated system growth. 3. Tap Fees Tap fee revenue is derived from plant development and water rights tap fees assessed to new water taps. Under the current fee levels, this revenue is projected to total $275,000 annually during the study period as shown on Lines 11 through 13 of Table 2-1. 2-1 4. Interest Income Line 14 of Table 2-1 shows projected interest income in the Water Fund. Interest income is calculated using a four percent annual interest rate applied to average annual Water Fund balances. Interest income is projected to average about $63,000 annually during the study period. 5. Miscellaneous Revenue Miscellaneous revenue is derived from bulk water surcharges, bulk water dispenser fees, material and meter sales, and other miscellaneous sources. Annual revenue from these sources is projected to average $41,000 during the study period. B. Revenue Requirements Projected revenue requirements of the Water Fund include operation and maintenance expenses (0&M), debt service on existing bonds, and routine and major capital improvements. 1. Operation and Maintenance Expense About 55 percent of Water Fund expenditures during the study period areÂ·for 0&M. Historical and projected 0&M is summarized in Table 2-2 and consists of the costs for personnel, materials, supplies, and contractual services incurred to supply, treat, and distribute water on a routine basis. Future 0&M is expected to increase from $1,019,800 in 1994 to $1,219,600 in 1999, based on 1994 budgeted costs and a four percent annual inflationary allowance. 2. Debt Service Revenue-backed general obligation bonds in the amount of $3,355,000 were issued in 1991 to finance the Mary's Lake Water Treatment Plant. Annual debt service on these bonds averages $319,000 during the study period. The Town does not plan to issue additional bonds during the study period. 3. Routine Capital Improvements Routine capital, shown on Line 32 of Table 2-1, includes expenditures for equipment, vehicles, and service lines. The 1994 routine capital costs of $124,100 are based on the budget estimate. Since 1991, routine capital expenditures have averaged about $60,000 annually. Beginning in 1995, routine capital costs are 2-2 anticipated to approximate historical levels and are projected to increase from $60,000 in 1995 to $70,200 in 1999. Projected costs are based on estimated annual inflation of four percent. 4. Major Capital Improvements The Town's proposed major capital improvement program for the water utility is shown in Table 2-3. This $2,905,500 program (1994 cost level) consists entirely of distribution system improvements. Annual water looping projects totalling $1,645,000 (1994 cost level) comprise 57 percent of the proposed capital program. The looping projects are forecasted to increase from the budgeted level of $145,000 in 1994 to the desired level of $480,000 (1994 cost level) by the year 2001. The desired level is based on the Town's estimated cost of nearly $12 million to replace steel water pipe (123,000 feet) over a 25-year period. The phasing of these costs allows the gradual increasing of water rates necessary to support the program. The remaining $1,260,500 (1994 cost level) of the major capital program is shown on Lines 2 through 7 of Table 2-3. These projects include a one million gallon storage tank, pressure reducing valve, and northern interconnections. As shown on Line 9 of Table 2-3, an annual inflation allowance of four percent is added to the Town's estimate. The total infiated costs of the major capital improvement program are $3,017,000 for the study period. C. Beginning Balance The Water Fund balance includes unrestricted carryover monies from previous years. This balance is available to supplement annual revenue to meet expenditures in the Water Fund. As shown on Line 1 of Table 2-1, a beginning Water Fund balance of nearly $2,360,000 is estimated based on the 1994 budget. D. Indicated Revenue Increases The Water Fund cash flow projection is shown in Table\2-1. Annual water sales revenue from existing rates is projected to be insufficient to meet revenue requirements during the study period. The annual revenue shortfalls (Line 36) are expected to be met from cash reserves and increases in water sales revenue. 2-3 Annual water sales revenue increases have been developed that will gradually stabilize the Water Fund cash fiow. The following increases are projected to meet this goal: Annualized Water Sales Revenue Increase Year (%) 1994 5.0 1995 7.0 1996 9.0 1997 9.0 1998 5.0 1999 5.0 During this transitional process Water Fund reserves are projected to decrease from nearly $2,360,000 at the beginning of 1994 to about $1,168,000 at the end of 1999. 2-4 TABLE 2-1 CASH FLOW ANALYSIS Line Budget Projected NO. 1994 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 $$$$$$$ 1 BEGINNING BALANCE 2,359,900 2,359,900 2,305,500 1,532,500 1,395,600 1,306,300 1,217,300 SOURCES OF FUNDS Watir Sales Revenue 2 Revenue from Existing Rates 989,100 998,100 1 0019,000 1,039,800 1,060,500 1,081,400 1,102,200 Rivenue from Indicated Increases Percent Months Increase Effective 3 1994 5.00% 12 49,900 51,000 52,000 53,000 54,100 55,100 4 1995 7.00% 12 74,800 76,400 78,000 79,500 81,000 5 1996 9.00% 12 105,200 107,200 109,300 111,500 6 1997 9.00% 12 116,900 119,200 121,500 7 1998 5.00% 12 72,200 73,500 8 1999 5.00% 12 77,300 9 Total Water Sales Revenue 989,100 1 ,048,000 1,144,800 1 ,273,400 1 ,415,600 1,515,700 1,622,100 10 Fire Protection - Gen Fund 94,400 94,400 96,300 98,200 100,100 102,000 103,900 Tap Fees 11 Plant Development 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 12 Water Rights 150,000 150,000 150.000 150,000 150,000 150.000 150,000 13 Total Tap Fies 275,000 275,000 275,000 275,000 275,000 275,000 275,000 14 Interest Income 90.000 93,300 76,800 58,600 54,000 50,500 47,700 Miscellaneous Revenue ' 15 Bulk Water Surcharge 13,800 13,800 13,800 13,800 13,800 13,800 13,800 16 Bulk Water Dispenser 7,100 7,100 7,100 7,100 7,100 7,100 7,100 17 Material Salis 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 18 Meter Sales 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 19 Misc/Other 2.000 2,000 2.000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 20 Nonoperating 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 21 Total Miscellaneous Revenue 41,100 41,100 41,100 41,100 41,100 41,100 41,100 22 Total Sources of Funds 1,489,600 1,551,800 1,634.000 1.746,300 1,885,800 1,984,300 2,089,800 USES OF FUNDS Operation & Maintenance 23 Source of Supply 98,100 98,100 98,200 98,300 98,400 98.500 98,600 24 Water Treatment 273,200 273,200 284,100 295,500 307,400 319,500 332,200 25 Distribution 253,200 253,200 263,300 273,900 284,800 296,100 307,900 26 Customer Accounts 97,300 97,300 101,200 105,200 109.300 113,700 118,200 27 Administrative & General 298,000 298,000 310.000 322,500 335,300 348,800 362,700 28 Total Operation & Maintenance 1 ,019,800 1,019,800 1,056,800 1,095,400 1,135,200 1 ,176,600 1,219,600 Debt Service ~ 29 Existing 316,100 317,300 321,200 319,400 317,000 319,200 320,700 30 Proposed 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 Total Debt Service 316,100 317,300 321,200 319,400 317,000 319,200 320,700 32 Routine Capital Improvements 124,100 124,100 60,000 62,400 64,900 67,500 70,200 33 Major Capital Improvements 145,000 145,000 969,000 406,000 458,000 510,000 529,000 34 Total Uses of Funds 1,605,000 1,606,200 2,407.000 1.883,200 1.975,100 2,073,300 2,139,500 35 Annual Surplus (Deficit) (115,400) (54,400) (773,000) (136,900) (89,300) (89,000) (49,700) 36 ENDING BALANCE 2,244,500 2,305,500 1,532,500 1,395.600 1,306,300 1,217,300 1,167,600 2-5 . 000000888800 ..h. g *00* WM *00**M&OMooo***~ i ':* S KV *Ex *M F ,ri ei . r< K 0 2 Es E :22 9 4 . - 5 k Ii-- 000 Â§Â§Â§Â§ E .8 6 .:252 02 B =-05- m Z 2=2 S %2-** : Lriu,-54- - M ~Ii *~12& *O il#***O*** O*0000~~-#*06 *008&* 5-00*9**O*000#**~ * S NE- 5< 04Â¥52 2% 0 *Mel* ~ 2 2=8 : %2&% W M.-1% 0 p - O-0000 8Â§Â§Â§0Â§ Â§00*Â§Â§ Â§00Â§Â§Â§Â§0Â§ 000 Â§Â§8Â§ 1 8 Cy: 31 .1489! VE N Zee= 2 2 8=8 * 892* g ..In 1 - r 0Â§0000 Â§Â§* 5 0 4 ~ 0 0 Â§ ~ 8 Â§ 0 0 Â§Â§Â§Â§ 0 Â§ 000 Â§Â§8Â§ 1 E NE I 0*44+ 1* d -Ne,-0 I 2-0 Xm:x : ':22- 0 - N - N - - a ~. 8Â§Â§8 20 Â§8Â§Â§Â§08Â§ 0Â§0000 5115Â°Â§ 0Â°Â° 268 2 8 222Â· 2 800888808 000 Â§Â§Â§Â§ Cy . 0 0 .41@5 .2 9 . 2 N 0.-0 0 ...5% il- Â§880 3 31&* 98 1 Â£08Â§08 2 29% . N-N- al Â§Â§m E ., I 9%998 2 E NE Gy #gi #6 9 i Ncrio St g 89& 0 0#40 0 ..0. I Cy M P N M M -0 N - N 9 8828 0233 ma g RREEÂ° E 2 8Ze MENB 21. O - at 4 e)- i /2332 W WNE -a g ENe, to g : N 0 2 2 82%* g aeÂ·idÂ¥ -- m b. Ram 1-06 *G & 1-320-8-~-R O/%9 RE & ER 0 mAE. . du, 0. .: cy-.. 4.. 0. 8 ==: ewei MO- O . I O - NER *-0 ~.12.al-' R EA-*RE . 0. .0 // CD,O/CD-GIN/. WS! ~; ~~ ~~~~EZZ~29 02 .2 &29Â© E .U,2%2 gn 0- S- mes#gguid:Si 1~~- 6-AxÂ°R 11~ 02*0 Â§ 32*522 8 30 2 ER 0-22230-:-8-~G- tO - Cy I Cy ... N -O 0 N . O N ..4 11-Rea. m daicâ€¢ioN AN g a.cy &2-92-400-Mi M - el N - il- 880% 00 *Mil E 9.Clea 9*Z.RE N_U). 9..-CDON U) V N - 8 812 0:R:82:920 2 .& E tz : 6- 65#KeyÂ¥6--cy- -O.00 Ne--- . - --- L f E :. i i /1 2 1 R Â§ 1,1 4 i L r mif ? 13 I 1 ii. 1 & 2 2 '-~ 0 ~~4 93wf; zii; 2% 112 *6 : A~.:=ed efil; Milit,51]3-1 011821%1131.1 = )82 2 N tâ‚¬;6e&*E =%i*12a live 12 61:**i 0021,9 138*'Â° 3232- Mig==311=~Ra- 8,552, 3giÂ£Â£ii=ii8:2:4 0 -- N - 0 5 C. E 0 -- ic.22019 5 0 ge. 2 2 0% 2 0 :i 2 2 o Z~:111 =f/AS:! 144352 a. C.C.- ... 121 -Ne. too h..0- .1. I 1.DON.00-Ne.U,0 1%00,0-Gl (9 9 U, I N.0,0- ...LOON. C, N N . cy . N N . I N . 09 e . M . M M . CD Y . 7 ... 7 9Â· . . 2-6 009'612'1 009'9111 ' 009'6104 ESÂ£'810'1 921'Â£10'1 Â£49'Cze 886'UB 922'896 MFO 1Â¥101 1991 1092 1995 1997 Estimated Budget ted TABLE 2-2 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES 80,803 85,1 22,627 48,005 59,137 79 ZO'ESC 69Â£'Sle 449'09Â£ 106'Eec lejeleg V Ullupv le SUPPLY sesuedx3 eneflts sul O 00 gue 1Â¥2N39 P NOLLVEUSINIMOV sluminsuo eoue - in0 |qol 1 tuleA V 0000 0000 4 O to- to - 0, C,1 82 10- 14 84 co g- N g. col toi 000 000 31 0 0-0-0 OON OLD 0 N 10 - 1- (D E-~-W-N-~-~ a) CO F G B -: ei câ‚¬ Q-2:gg 8-> mm o o 2 Ed 2 - N 3 160000)- SLLZZZZ 2 6 .- W / M LO (0 h 0 0) 0z 2-7 Proiect Name 1994 Total Annual 145,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 1,645,000 he Green Zone 550,000 182,000 hern Interc nnec 140,000 40,000 000210'â‚¬ 000'629 000.019 000*994 000'904 000'696 000'94 1 (e) S.LSOC) O31V1=INI -IV1O1 hern Interconn 140,000 000'064 000'044 000'06Â£ 000'Ze6 000'941 SleA@l Jsoo .66 7 - 1 MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM hern Interc nnection 140,000 TABLE 2-3 luemed inoi jo ele] uoi jellul lenuue uo peseg (e) 1994 COST LEV hern Interconn etion 4, _.1 9 +1 3. COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS 3 3. COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS The goal of a cost of service analysis is to distribute the costs of providing utility service to the customer classes in accordance with their service requirements. A cost of service analysis is completed in three major steps as follows: Step 1: Determine the total annual cost of providing utility service. Step 2: Allocate the total cost to functional cost components. Step 3: Distribute functionally allocated costs to customer classes. The cost of service analysis serves as a basis for determining the equitability of existing rates and the design of new rates. A. Total Cost of Service Fiscal year 1999 is used as a test year for developing cost of service since it is representative of water utility operations during the study period. As shown in Table 3-1, the total test year cost of service equals $1,622,100 and consists of O&M of $1,219,600 and capital costs of $919,900 less miscellaneous revenues of $517,400. B. Allocation to Functional Cost Components 1. Functional Cost Components The total cost of service may be classified and assigned to five basic functional cost components including base, extra capacity, customer, direct to pumped flow customers, and direct fire protection. Base costs vary directly with the quantity of water used under average day load conditions. Extra capacity costs represent those costs incurred due to customer peak demands for water in excess of average day usage. Total extra capacity costs are subdivided into costs associated with maximum day and maximum hour demands. Customer costs vary in proportion to the number of customers served by the system and are subdivided into costs associated with billing and costs associated with meters and services. 3-1 Certain portions of the water system are not utilized in providing service to bulk water customers. Cost related to portions not utilized are not assigned to these customers. Costs uniquely associated with serving pumped flow customers are assigned directly to them. Costs associated with fire hydrants are assigned to the direct fire protection cost component. 2. Determination of Allocation Factors The utility is comprised of various facilities, each designed and operated to fulfill a given function. In order to provide adequate service to its customers at all times, the water utility must be capable not only of providing the total amount of water used, but also of supplying water at maximum rates of demand. Since all customers do not exert their maximum demand for water at the same time, capacities of water facilities are designed to meet the coincidental demands of all classes of customers. For every facility on the system, there is an underlying average demand or uniform rate of usage exerted coincidentally by the customers for which the base cost component applies. Comparison of historical system coincidental maximum day and maximum hour demands to average day demands results in appropriate ratios for the allocation of capital costs and operating costs to base and extra capacity cost components. A maximum day to average day ratio of 2.5 is used based on analysis of historical monthly water production records. This indicates that approximately 40 percent of the capacity of facilities designed and operated for maximum day demand is needed for average or base use. Accordingly, the remaining 60 percent is for maximum day j extra capacity requirements. Since maximum hour water usage also utilizes facilities designed and operated for average day and maximum day demands, the costs associated with meeting maximum hour demand are allocated to base, maximum day extra capacity, and maximum hour extra capacity. A ratio of maximum hour to annual average day water use of 4.0 is based on staff estimates. This ratio indicates that 25 percent of the capacity of facilities designed and operated for maximum hour demand is needed for average or base use, 37.5 percent is required to meet maximum day extra capacity demand, and the remaining 37.5 percent is for maximum hour extra capacity demand. 3-2 Â· -3 3. Allocation of Total Cost of Service a. Plant Investment and Capital Costs. Capital costs include capital improvements financed from operating fund revenues and debt service. A reasonable method of assigning capital costs to functional components is to allocate such costs ' on the basis of plant investment. The estimated test year plant investment in water facilities consists of plant in-service as of December 31, 1992, and the estimated cost of proposed major capital improvements through the year 1999. The allocation of plant investment to functional cost components is made using the base and extra capacity ratios previously developed and is shown in Table 3-2. Plant investment is allocated to cost components on a design basis recognizing the principal component governing the design of the facility. Thus, source of supply facilities are used to meet average day rates of usage for all customers, and the investment in these facilities is allocated to the. base cost component. The purification and transmission systems are used to meet maximum and average day demands, and thus, the investment in these facilities is allocated to maximum day and base cost components. Distribution system costs generally vary with the number of customers served by the water utility and the potential fire protection demands. These criteria are used in the allocation of distribution system investment. Half of the distribution system investment is considered common to all customers to recognize the potential fire demands that all customers place on the system., This portion is allocated to maximum hour, maximum day and base cost components. The remaining half is assigned to only those customers that use the distribution system. Since this portion of distribution system costs is assumed to vary with the number of customers, it is allocated on the basis of the number of accounts. Meter costs vary in proportion to the number of customers served and are, therefore, allocated to the customer cost component. Meter investment costs are based on estimated replacement costs of meters in-service. The investment in general plant is generally related to supporting all other investment. Thus, it is allocated to each cost component according to the allocation of all other investment. The resulting allocation of plant investment of $14,811,400 is shown on Line 11 of Table 3-2. This total line is used as the basis for allocating 1999 test year capital costs of $919,900 to cost components as shown on Line 13 of Table 3-2. 3-3 b. Operation and Maintenance Expense. Projected 0&M for the test year is allocated to cost components as shown in Table 3-3. 0&M related to source of supply, treatment, distribution, and administration and general is allocated to . functional cost components in generally the same manner as plant investment. Customer accounts expense is allocated to the customer billing cost component. The resulting allocation of total O&M of $1,219,600 is shown on Line 10 of Table 3-3. C. Distribution of Costs to Customer Classes 1. Customer Classes Water customers have been separated into residential, commercial, pumped flow, bulk water, and fire protection classes. The classes group together customers with similar service requirement characteristics and provide a means for allocating costs to customers. Customers within these classes are further recognized as being either urban or rural. 2. Units of Service Estimated units of service for the customer classifications are summarized in ' Table 3-4. Service requirements for each class are based on average daily water use projections, estimates of each class' maximum day and maximum hour demands, and billing and metering requirements. The base cost responsibility of each customer class is related to the quantity of water used by each class under average day load conditions. Average day quantities are based on an analysis of the Town's water billing records. The responsibility for extra capacity costs varies with the extra capacity requirements for maximum day and maximum hour demands of each class. Average day usage and capacity factors, representing the estimated relationship between individual class peak demand and average day usage, are used to develop extra capacity requirements for maximum day and maximum hour demands. The estimated capacity factors are based on an analysis of each class' monthly usage characteristics. Fire protection costs are either direct or demand related. Direct costs are related to maintenance of fire hydrants and lines. Demand related costs represent the portion of extra capacity costs related to meeting potential fire demands. An allowance of fire flow requirements of 1,000 gallons per minute for three hours is used to develop fire demand units of service. 3-4 3. Allocation of Total Cost of Service The allocation of test year cost of service to cost components is summarized in Table 3-5. The O&M allocation (Line 1) is developed in Table 3-3. The capital cost allocation (Line 2) is developed in Table 3-2. The total cost of $1,726,000 is derived by deducting $413,500 of miscellaneous revenues from $2,139,500 of total O&M and capital costs. Miscellaneous revenue items are allocated to cost components based on the function they reimburse. For example, water rights tap fees (Line 5) are allocated to the base component. Meter sales (Line 10) are allocated directly to the customer meter component. Most of the revenues are allocated to functional cost components based on total allocated cost. The General Fund transfer for fire protection is deducted from costs at the end of the allocation procedure as described in the next section. 4. Customer Class Costs of Service The initial step in determining class cost of service is to calculate unit cost of service. The development of unit costs of service for each functional cost component is shown in Table 3-6. Urban unit costs, shown on Line 9, are based on the total allocated cost of service (Line 1) divided by the total equivalent urban units of service (Line 8). Unit costs are adjusted to recognize the current Town policy of applying a 60 percent surcharge to rural rates. Adjusted unit costs are shown on Lines 10 and 11 for urban and rural customers, respectively. The total unit costs of service applied to the respective service requirements for each customer class results in the allocated class cost of service shown in Table 3-7. Total costs of service for each class are based on unit costs of service from Table 3-6 and units of service from Table 3-4. The Water Fund receives a transfer from the General Fund to help offset fire protection costs. Test year fire protection costs of $130,500 are partially reimbursed by the General Fund transfer of $103,900. The remaining fire protection costs are assigned to all other classes in proportion to their estimated fire demand requirements developed in Table 3-8. This reassignment is shown in Table 3-9. The adjusted cost of service is the sum of the original allocated costs and the fire protection adjustment. 3-5 A comparison of the cost of service for each customer class with revenue under existing rates and the indicated percentage adjustment in the level of revenue for each class required to meet those costs is shown in Table 3-10. An overall revenue increase of 47.2 percent is indicated, which is equal to the cumulative sum of the annual revenue increases shown on Page 2-4. 3-6 000 00000000000 000 00000000000 h cv- o 03 0-0-A-0.-0 0-0 cv h 006 C')~ Lr) ON shÂ· LO- O (4 Câ‚¬ C) CU A C\1 O Nto 91-- --- --4. M lo - - P -4 - - S ./.-/ ...* a) a, 4 c > 0' 0 .Q 61 882Â£ WI 5 6 1% 4 f & 9 18 5.-2 0 2, Em* 2 8 Z CÂ»-2 1 06 0 0 2..= m 5 5,3 E = b -4 4 2 2 9 3 0 co ilim i i + g ~ i -a -3 C -1 lEo @. o -160-22%0Z @ 4 3 5 .O 2 9 *h %% 2 i.w % Me a â‚¬Â®o 2,2 6 E 00 00=5 k- Jill-,-90(055#Z< 0 - (V (9 91Â· to CD h m C) O - CU M 91- LO (D h CO Z1 3-7 NET COST OF ~t='4'Za~311Cd E ALLOCATED tenance Expense $1,219,600 pital Cost 919,900 009'6Â£ L'8$ 30IAHEIS =10 1SO (00*'Z 19) enue/\ew sel 00 1 '829' 1$ BOIAHEIS 30 1900 13N 6 L TABLE - 3nN3AEIB 93-1VS B31VM-NON PERATING COST Line g Â· I g 1.6 - O U e 8 5 1 &* E CR. &2 0- 0- U. .6; 0 0 g =E 44 2 26/ 25 0 e 214, Cul JI 0 0 0 0 Cy Og X M i 5 Â» 0 XI- M t. olaf m 0 < 6 4 E z L g ZO - 2 01 5 g 2 E * .49 a; o e OO 59 g El- 3 st 868 -a. Cl : (2 61-â„¢e,qu,vtÂ·-cow Z1 3-8 DOE'9â‚¬ 008'98 sjue,pAH 001 1 009 006'EZ OOZ'61 009'SE 009'99 1 L 00â‚¬'024 luuld ieleueE) 0 1 005'ZE 000'61 004'999'2 009'869 1 006'0Z8'S 006'99Â£'4 00â‚¬ 1 18'41 weli}SeAUI illeld lulol 1 L 9680 %Eli 00 %000 K '9101 lo peNed E L 009'2 00 1 *69 1 008.5â€¢ 002'92 005't95 004' IZZ 006'616 1900 1VlldVO :10 N011Â¥0011V Â£ I Direct mmon to All Direct Common t Customers from Line Customer mer Distribution Mains (a), (b) 623,900 935,800 935,800 2,495,500 Billing Billing Cu ooz'Z99 ooz'Z99 SieleIN 004'9 004'9 sdo!Ales ALLOCATION OF P MENT AND CAPITAL COST OMPONENTS 004'Â£92 00,298 006'98 1 002'99Z eBelols Puification System 1,988,900 2,983,300 Transmission Mains (a) 2,503,000 1,001,200 1,501,800 su!,gul Jeligu3pug-4 lit ISI~0 Ile 01 UOUJUIC otio; su pelwoollu su!%2W uoqnq!4$!a (q) 9609 - u.leisis uoilnq!49!p Wo4 peAJeS Siell.,01SnO 01 UOUJUI suigul JeB,*al pue 4Ou!-EL - suiwvy uo!.ss!ulsuwl :SAAO~o; Sp *,01UeAU! edid uo peseg (w) 440,100 440,100 008'81 pedwnd Jol) sesnoH dlund (S,ell,O;Sno MOI:1 PLANTINVESTMENT 88 r.1 LO 10 0 - - I . iz 0 82 r CO (9 -: 0 0- 0 SEE Â§% R 2%% 2 22 Z =10 4,Â·C E-= 2 965.5 /1 28 0 82 El 2 Wi 81/0 an Jl 0 Co . 2 m Z 0 0 0 Â£ A m 6. 0 Z J r O 1 ZO m 01 0 88 8 8 i 2 .co. <Z ,E Z ZI. % 88 2 2 5 00 -â€¢01 f E W g 0-0 -0 -Â¤ OZ == 1.6 3 ,-Â§ 5 2 -4 = LL 2 - Mia m O N O -- C 0, 88888 882 COONHO) N. h <0 22Â¥55 . N 0. (135 5 - e ; 8 - lit/m LOUT 2 - g .0 13 0 g 1, m 0 2 c -g t C O .% * 8,1 25 8 Â§ j&.dâ€¢13 t:,=OHEr E 61 - el CO ~ toer- 00 0 0 ZI 3-9 009'9 000 0 000'02 1 JeueE) 9 0!W~!u!.wpÂ¥ to Pumped Direct 006* 1 Z 009'91 1 001991 008'St 000'96Â® 009'Â®04 TIV 1V101 0 1 mers Protection Common to All Direct Common Custome Customer omer TABLE 3-3 002'9t' 002'94 009'08 esued)(3 uognq! ALLOCATION O AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSE 002'91 1 slunooov Jell,01Sno 30,800 Test Year 1999 'suigul Jell lue;SAS UO!1nq!49!p wo, peAJes S,eutolsno 01 Uoulwoo 01 peigiel Jepl,!glueJAO 'uo!10ejo,d 041 Pe]!P o 99 01 UOWWOO O pewlel Jap :s,eleul c);Z 01,0 969 1 SNoip se pe 900 Ig uoqnq!4310 (q) Source of Supply 98,600 Water Treatment 332,200 - s 'ew uo!,ssilusugu :SM011O; SH AJO;UeAU! ed!d uo peseg (9) ins (a) on Expense I- 0 0 21 C 2' ZI R g 2 m 092 E & 10. i Al 2 - - - â‚¬ i m== 9 cy k CON N V 1 5/25" EEnnEs 282 Â£ g = IN 0.- 0 M . .1 0 4 N- 1 - 4 002% 320*we 050 0 Â¥ 0 E â€¢81 Me; =1 53250 Â£13Â®98Â§ 3 2% O - % i 12.Â§ 0 to- 2 i =1 ERZE" 92,Â»=115 9 BE/Â° N Of OEO 0 32 0 , 12 0 9 11 E Z:53 116= 0 9=M= m m 2' CIO O. 1% e 36 -GE v 10 N 2 1 w .O LL D .222 31,1-= /1/1 22&2%~ BEE# ' 0 10 0 2 100=12 BEOQ E I - -Ne'>11,) uNCOC}O- 1-To Une Annual Demand Demand Total Equivalent Number f Average M mm ~ Maximum Hour Requirements Number of 285% 13,272 BLS'St 999'99 luny Imol 273,851 27,504 9/6.2 909'69â‚¬ 1Â¥101 El 1,000 gal 1,000 pd Factor Factor lt;:a:& it;{}a~nd ESTIMATED UNI SERVICE 4,127 No. Cust Class Usa e sa e ro ection uo!10910 Bulk Water 888 50 5 00 55 21 5 3 U -1- 12. C (0 ~th F Eu 1 N el - - 01. , U- 01 -1 11 S *Â§* i KÂ° 0 Â°Â°Ii 5 *E . tri 4 00- It- t; 0 Â¤e E% 6 Â§Â§Â§ 8 59 9 8 255 8*fiEZZI E-Sild ~ 2@ 8 8.22@ E 2 Z f J 2 El- -- -- cy - - Sgtgo,BE 0025 0 lin %58 9 6 -O --N N 1.4 0 -6 4 O -O 0 0 1- co els u.1 1- OZ ,- 5 W El gz U.10 0 0. 0 002% 22'% Â§1. 42# 2 el= g E ,-093 - CD 1- E ii ~ rl O 0 O H 0 a 0 Â§Â§Â§ * 2Â§ - INIE 612 21- mme 2- *Mil =52 - *Â§Â§ 2/2/Â§* tit Â®1 .- â€¢t 00:fite cir) N - co Â§Â§Â§ 882292882Â§* 000000000 16 oicici 10- 8- A- O4619Ld ge . 0 E- RES EY-in c -12 lu Z 2 * Z E U E < a 8 00 8 C Â® 1 * B!32 &1 â€¢age Z , CDO-. EWL~ 022ER*2#%#12 00 1,-.-Emas,JZ< -Ne) 4Â·10(ONIC)0-6100 Y OZI ----- 3-11 (004) to Pumped Direct 000'58 006'ZEZ 009'691 001.40& 002'999 006'244 000'98Z' 1 BOIAHEIS 301900 13N W Direct Customer 168,200 168,200 TABLE 3-5 FUNCTIONAL CO Test Year ALLOCATION OF C 009' 0 MoO ez) (9) enueAew seles JeWM- uonoejoid el!; JOI 006Â£01$ Jo Je#SUW4 pury iweueE) sepnlog Ce) TOTAL COST OF SERVICE (,!01;90) s,~d~n Â§ 830 ==4 CD .:h- 0, to N-. N E; &** &?12 3 .i 4- Ui L- 0 e S g 822 .N,0 4 000 0 Intrt Q ,0.01* to ti% 589 mz@ m 01 2 Ir Ed 1 0 CK ~ t-0 gg S}22 096 2 53 0. to 09. M 10 - h 2 8 4 - e NNY ~ *~ Â·E N N = 00. Oi -N 822 4- (Do 0 8&'R 8 1<10 M h. * N Cyâ„¢to Di Â§*Â§ 2 E W X H 4404 3} .0 J r' 2 u.1 0 00 -1 0 2 ' wER .O. O-- CD n.0. N N 1 Cy 231 m - N 088 E#g 2 .,clut 2-232 R Â§ M8m meN 3 4~ N CO -- 0 W a O O *E co W 0 Z & 0 0 0 Z 02 W < e 0 O " 00 6 80 2 5 Z D Zal r C- 31 C D< W 3 0]m g@ UJ C. > UJ co 0 - N el-In (0 h Â® C) 0- ZI - P 3-12 1,000 gal 1,000 gp 1,000 # of bills equiv. meters # of bills 1,000 gal # of hydrants Extra Cap Ity , to Pumped Direct Total Base Billing Customers Protection 6209 12'9* 42â‚¬196'0 8ZZLS*798 COST OF SE - 1,726,000 442,900 104,100 159,600 237,900 5,400 L9g6E9 199.05 8ZZLSF *98 0882 mmon to All Direct Custome Line Customer stomer Fire OZ9056-8* 99â‚¬25 1 59/ UNIT COSTS OF SERVICE Test Year 1999 zes ZZ,v 91!un ugq 1ueloA'nblrizw 1!un Jed $ - 30IA UNITS OF SERVICE otal Units of Service e 4 x 160%. ne 10 x 160%. 3Â§ 1. - 4 â‚¬ 11: 1 Â§ 1 - I eT 4 - M 2 50-LL 0 2 Eg S 3Â§ 58 33 6Â§ 1Â§ 88 8 -1 la ~= 4 2% Kg '45 - E - 1 i* ; 1 E K 8 ga w % 3 Â§/0 24 31 21. 2Â§ 4 e ZE - 2 0 gi a) - W 2* 5% 21 Â§ 18 298 98 12% .0 0% Cy-2 5 28 38 2Â§ *Â§ Â§ ~Â§ 55 0% RR 3% a 7 - co Ch ma - 5 5 41 ~ t 4 - - g 1- S O 05 0 2 -0 -0 2Â§ 8@ 33Â§ 1 gB 9Â§ eji :1Â§ 81Â§ E $2 N A 0 - *3 == 4.0 4 2% & 8 8 88 N 8 - 9 0, 1% 0 7 25 -- 0 8Â§ M - 4 2 - 4 0,- 4. m W 44 7 4 D .% 8 - 2 O - -01 2 e 5 2 0 - m r/ - 8 1 1 2 i g a *3 11 i {2 1 112% bi 12 3 (2% 23 N -- 8 1 1 1 . e a. E 1- cgcc O a. m U 2 2 01 - N M * 10 0 h. 0,0 - N M 4Â· lo Â©h 00 Â® ZI - p p.- -- p.- -- 3-13 00â€¢*,1 009'48 1 002'9* OOZ'Â£9 *soc u 000'92 004.5 006'ZEZ 006'99 009'691 001501 003'999 006*244 000*92Â£*1 S - 33!AMBS 50 1900 17101 Â£8 umped Direct Base Billing ng Customers Protection 4,127 455.132365 48.930670 4.870494 1 1.522198 77.148846 Cus omers 284.457728 4.539557 0.951374 009.1 00:211 002'04 006'5Â£ 009* 00Â®2â‚¬Z 009*2*1 s- i.00 IR,ny IN,01 ZZ ALLOCATION OF COSTS O CUSTOMER CLASSES Une Customer ZZE'Â£1 to All TABLE 3-7 OZO' 98 424,600 002'*2 - eopues Jolsoo 009'Â£9 l ~ - 90!Ates J NIT COSTS OF SERVICE - $ per unit of Service - $ 54 $ - eotA.les # $ - 831AJOS J $ - 00!/ues 10 Commerchl uolloeloJd eJ!3 08 LOC') ALO COCOU CO=1-09- , CO C) . K ait K 006 Cy CO (0 - 32 00 000 -0 Â® 00 000 0- 0- 0-0-0- 0 0 00 000 -D cy CO NOCD Mj-.I- cy CO 41 (0 H O Â®a t- A- 0964 0)-C) . 4- 0 0 CO C) 4- 03 N CON O O h O N CD A C) ON--ACD 14 0 N n - p *- 0 - CV - - E Z 00 OO 0- 0- 00 -E2 9 00 N 2 - -- 0000 3%3 C\1 0 N Cy Â® N .6 LL 00 E*c 00 10 1.0 JOE EE .* 0 :E iz 3 3 4 12 5 moo- :rcroo-m O - Cy M U 10(O N 00 M Z1 3-14 %9/6/ 000'080'66L 000'08 L L 0094 le!]uap!se %98.28 lej~ni~il~~cH~n %00.OOK 000'088'600' L 69Z'E 000'09K'Z 19101 oK (1) (4) (5) (6) Assumed Assumed To I Allocation Basis Customer Class Duration Water Use Accounts Percent esidential 1,500 180,000 284,220,000 ommercial 630,000 9,420,000 000'09Â£'80 L 000'089 k 009'8 le!0Jell,WO PROTECTION ALLOCATION BASIS DEMAND RELATED PUBLIC FIRE gal per minutes gallons 000'oek K 0094 Mold pedwn Test Year 1999 umped F 122:222 TABLE 3-8 URBAN 11) uulnloo x (t) ulunloo (e) 1,) uwnioo x (e) ulunloo (q) Line 009' L 00000 00000 000 0 0000 a) (0 (D C) CO (D C\1 4 48 N- c;60-ui M LO N - - 10 CU 0 H - 00066 000066 00000 000000 CO-4,1~0) - ao - 0 aol 0- â‚¬ O 4- (C) Lo N- - h LO 81 -- 00000 000000 00000 000000 (0 10 N N O COLOLOWCOO 4-(0-00-4-af co- câ‚¬ ai 4 Lrit< c) CU 4- CU h (D - 10 C\1 10 10 C) LL C, 22=2- H u q 1 - 0 1 0 0 O A 0 0, el-Z M 0 0 38z LO N 42 0 0 E 1 38% 0 --8 -9 E .O - E 420LL~ m Ca) 3 0- _1 g a) 2 E & i E < 40 E B m EE-0 0) k- cr -ii E 0 0 J h J 83 o mOO-LL .MO CO 1-1- 0 -CU 0 4- 10 (Chma)O- Z1 3-15 Adjusted Une ~,f ,~~~onnt :Mi:Y 000'0 L9 miny le;01 00 L'229' L (006'80 0 000'9ZZ' L 1V101 EL ADJUSTED SERVICE URBAN Prot ction Mol pedwnd ~323232 0 32 32 32 32 r (M h Cum-N- h (0 0, N Uj. K US (5 10 cy * (9 10 6 CO W 0000 000 000 000 CONO OLD E Â®.9 6 (9- CO-(6 h. e to-N - CD CO (0 Or > 9.= Â®DXT 0 CO U.1 0/ 000 g 000 0 Gl 0- cq aT ui- O N - 0- U O CD CL 0 0 33 E iii E m 0 0- .022 0 3 O - N e 4- Ir)(Or*cow J ZI 3-16 00*'908 006'8 Lt' le!;uep!se ARISON OF ADJUSTE Adjusted Indicated Customer Class Increase 431,900 303,70 42.2 %2.Zl, 002'20 CL 001'229' L 1V1O1 0 k WITH REVENUE UNDER EXIST ATES ne Revenue 008'00 L 008'99 K le!01eululo 8'92* leilly lejol Test Year 1999 omm rcial 556,600 009'88 TABLE 3-10 URBAN mped Flow JeleM MI Total Ur ivunw 4. RATE DESIGN 4. RATE DESIGN The principal consideration in designing rate schedules is to establish rates to customers which are reasonably commensurate with the cost of providing water service. Theoretically, the only method of assessing entirely equitable rates for water service would be the determination of each customer's bill based upon his particular service requirements. Since this is impractical, schedules of rates are normally designed to meet average conditions for groups of customers having similar service requirements. Practicality also dictates the use of a rate schedule which is simple to apply, reasonably recovers costs from all classes, and is subject to as few misinterpretations as possible. A. Existing Rates Existing water rates have been in effect since January 1988, and consist of a $10.87 monthly minimum charge which includes the first 2,500 gallons of water use and a volume charge of $1.72 per thousand gallons for use over 2,500 gallons. There is an additional $5.00 monthly charge and $0.11 per thousand gallon volume charge for pumped flow customers. Bulk water users pay only the volume charge based on all usage and a $2.83 per thousand gallon surcharge in lieu of a water connection charge. Rural customers are assessed a 60 percent surcharge on their water rates. B. 1999 Cost of Service Rates The cost of service allocations described in previous sections of this report provide the basis for designing water rates. The allocations provide the unit costs of service used in the rate design process and a basis for determining whether proposed rates will reasonably recover costs of service from customer classes as well as provide the total level of revenue required. Test year cost of service rates have been developed which will proportionately recover each customer class' cost of service. The proposed rates use nearly the same structure as existing rates. However the minimum charge varies by meter size, and the volume charge is different for each customer class. The proposed minimum charges are designed to recover all customer related costs such as meter reading, billing and collecting, meter repair and replacement costs, distribution mains maintenance and replacement, and volume related expenses 4-1 associated with the monthly volume allowance of 2,500 gallons. Proposed 1999 urban monthly minimum charges range from $14.70 for 5/8- and 3/4-inch meters to $45.80 for 4-inch meters. The proposed volume charges are applicable to all monthly water usage in excess of 2,500 gallons and are designed to recover base and extra capacity costs associated with treatment, storage, transmission and distribution of water. Volume charges vary by customer class. to recognize differing class demand characteristics. The Town has established a policy of applying a 60 percent surcharge to rural rates. This policy is maintained in the cost of service rates. A comparison of test year 1999 costs of service with water sales revenue under 1999 cost of service rates is shown in Table 4-2. As indicated, cost of service rates result in virtually 100 percent recovery of the cost of service from each customer class. C. Proposed Rates - 1994 Through 1998 Rates have been designed for 1994 through 1998 to meet the following criteria: 1. Increase water sales revenue by the percentages shown on Page 2-4. 2. Provide a smooth transition from existing rates to 1999 cost of service rates over the study period. Existing and proposed 1994 through 1999 rates are shown in Table 4-3. Rural rates include a surcharge of 60 percent. D. Typical Monthly Water Bills A comparison of typical monthly urban residential water bills .produced by existing and proposed rates is shown in Table 4-4. The typical residential customer uses an average of 60,000 gallons of water annually or about 5,000 gallons per month. Proposed rates will increase the typical urban residential monthly water bill as follows: 4-2 . Urban Residential Monthly Bill For 5.000 Gallons Water Usage Amount Increase ($) Existing Rates 15.17 Proposed Rates 1994 15.85 0.68 1995 16.80 0.95 1996 18.18 1.38 1997 19.65 1.47 1998 20.53 0.88 1999 21.45 0.92 4-3 . 1. TABLE 4-1 COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND COST OF SERVICE RATES Test Year 1999 Existing Rates Cost of Service Rates Volume Charge Volume Charge Urban Rural Urban Rural $ per 1,000 gallons $ per 1,000 gallons Residential First 2,500 gallons Minimum Charge Minimum Charge Over 2,500 gallons -,$1.72 $2.78 $2.70 $4.32 Commercial First 2,500 gallons Minimum Charge Minimum Charge Over 2,500 gallons $1.72 $2.78 $2.81 $4.50 Pumped Flow First 2,500 gallons Minimum Charge + $5.00 Minimum Charge Over 2,500 gallons $1.83 $2.89 $4.31 $6.90 Bulk Water (a) First 2,500 gallons $2.78 Minimum Charge Over 2,500 gallons $2.78 $3.23 $5.16 Existing Rates Cost of Service Rates Meter Minimum Charge Minimum Charge Size Urban Rural Urban Rural inches $ per bill $ per bill 5/8 $10.87 $17.59 $14.70 $23.55 3l4 $10.87 $17.59 $14.70 $23.55 1 $10.87 $17.59 $15.50 $24.80 1 4 $10.87 $17.59 $18.40 $29.45 2 $10.87 $17.59 $19.00 $30.40 3 $10.87 $17.59 $33.75 $54.00 4 $10.87 $17.59 $45.80 $73.30 (a) An additional $2.83 per 1,000 gallons shall be assessed to bulk water customers for 20 years in lieu of a water connection charge. A bulk water customer that is also a pumped flow customer shall be charged the pumped flow rate. 4-4 TABLE 4-2 COMPARISON OF ADJUSTED COST WITH REVENUE UNDER COST OF SERVICE RATES Test Year 1999 Adjusted Cost of Service Rates Line Cost of Annual Percent No. Customer Class Service Revenue Recovered % URBAN 1 Residential 431,900 432,000 100.0% 2 Commercial 556,600 559,000 100.4% 3 Pumped Flow 23,600 24,600 104.2% 4 Total Urban 1,012,100 1,015,600 100.3% RURAL 5 Residential .418,900 424,400 101.3% 6 Commercial 156,300 154,200 98.7% 7 Pumped Flow 9,600 8,700 90.6% 8 Bulk Water 25,200 25,200 100.0% 9 Total Rural ' 610,000 612,500 100.4% 10 TOTAL 1,622,100 1,628,100 100.4% 4-5 0 9 0 S 8 -9 .1 1,1....O. 1,3 . O.000 , 31 93 0, 3,2 5 it:%2*:2 9 . 9 -- 44 -44 -44 , 6 E - il 58 3 *5 ' 22*9822 4 #th~ Ci ejui fil U -- 2 -----CO. 8 I MR - 1 8822288 1 S 3 3 RIRI:NESW = 8835- 89222*2 2 2 22 5 -----M. Iq.N.N.00 8 : 00 17,10 I OU, 1 89%3:%2 e. NCING!01.10 1 2 4 Cle'l.Câ‚¬ir< 222222 $2 S 1 8:85228 @,2 60 &3 2 ~ 9 2%22*31 44 40) 44 44 44 i! f ~= im 25 7 228:222 0- NN el . 4-r< 1 - 2. .4-64.444444 -----Nat 9 al i --1- W 111 2 81 5 8 j 1 0000000 1 21 &2 &2 .2 .0 9 22022%91 â‚¬ 9 > 5 6 6 6 6 E E E E M m.i.. 1 - il 88 *6 Â§9 Â§2 - -: 80988:Â° - 22 ------. --NNeidd 'P& 8 28 5 03 .3 )8 , 902ES@g 92 92 .â‚¬idd.-ei -----Ncy 44 44 44 44 ~4 44. GEE alf = = 2 Â£9 Â§* *8 i* : -1 2%2:28:2 Ul .-p--M# ==== 8 miaa,22 82 RR mas:@30) i ui N N. 3 --h.... . 44 - .4 ---- -44-4444-- 50 6 E E 2 1 8 9 1E4 f ~ *R *R ES ===05,00 g"= 0606066 2 2 == I s ======= 1122 * 2/ g eE3 69/- 4 i8*1 55 5Â§ 8 7:02 11 . 2 1 3 RIS 0. f 2 *<-8 Â§Â§ Â§Â§ Â§Â§ S.<~~2, .~ - I .01Â£ ----N.1 - 439 1,1 ~Wew iwiw 2 ES 69 2 822252 00.0000 - U> fi 11 - Ed uiro â€¢Lid ims ift 4-6 Mhinnum Charge Mnimum Charg Mhimum Chai Mr,Imum Charge Imum Cha Mt,imum Charge Mbinum Charge an Rud Urban Rwal Uban Rual MEmum Charge Mnimum Charge mum Cha m 01 Mhirnum Charge $5.74 995Â£$ COMPARISON OF EXISn AND PROPOSED RATES FOR 1994 UGH 1999 )ling 0, pessesse eq lie 01~9;Jeujoj;=~J pedwnd e e~, mon pedwnd 04 gallons gallons gallons Residential . C,1 1.0 tOlD If) tOlD 1.0 t O Lo LO O 10 LO C,1 ON=f 1.0 al CD ON 7 COLr) Al 03 , 0,1 0 Woo# 6 N 4 CD t.O 0 e d o. I --w C\IMCD 4- 4- 4 LO tO O (D pl 00 CO (0 01 (0 CONCD CO CU CO C) C) to -1.-C\1 C)91-0 (C! cu h O,10 K o :ocrj odd e d : - e CU CO CD 91- 4- 4- tO If) LO N 0- CO LO -0910 NG)-COLD AC)-co to C, 0 (D e CU (D 99 h - U) O 4- (n CU CDr- UD C) a e. * K d (DC)- 46640 (C; cid - Cri id --PI- CUC\1 M COCOC')4-1 4- 91- LO tO In O 0) 00 AÂ© 1.0 91- CO C) 0 91- CO 0,0 W - (9 10 N W - %0 00 03 10.d ONâ€ždai K O 6 4 - - C\1 N (\1 N W (9 91- 4- LO 20 2 2 13 1, Al O Cy (D â€ž CN 1 01 9 9 9 h r-r- (C! (D (D (D LO 1.0 tO --- 46 0 4 d o N 4 d N 4 d - pl- - e N (9 6 CD (9 91- Er 91.1 491 000-COU) AC)-COLO Na)-CO LO NG)- COLD CD M co CO cu o Q (04-e-c) A 10 4- N O N (O 10 CO - R itift, . I I N 4 4 ,-64064 ddoN 4 Ui N C; U CrS Al N N CU (\1 M CO CO (9 cD 09 4- 4- LU O NANÂ®LON M COLON CO LO N - M LO N C . C000.Al-po O COON C) 0 CO CO LO CU C) 0004 0 10 0 o N e :oN uSK M. (5 .e 16 --pl--- r W N N C\lcD CO CO CO CD 4- X CD U.1 2% Â®-2 0 - cu CQ W LO (DAma)O -CU M 4- LO C 28 8 4-7 12.70 13.60 14.15 14.70 12.70 14.15 14.~0 9 L.DE 80*EE ZO ZE 98.92 89 92 6*.DE 9ZOE L 9'8L 99.ZE 28.98 EC Le 89 88 6t,*92 980, 88.88 Igge LE ZE SL'/9 Z9817 ZEE# 89'88 60+8 9 L 12.70 13.60 14.15 EL.LS 94.Vt 99'04 Z L 12.84 13.80 15.43 Urban Residen Customer With 5/8 - inch Meter Proposed Rates COMPARISON O AFEC-:27 UNDER OLSE 9994 8 L 1995 DZEE 6L 0E ESTES PARK FIRE DEPARTMENT (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 January. 4, 1994 TOWN BOARD The following is the year end report submitted for your review. The RUN REPORT for 1993 is as follows: FIRE TYPE NUMBERS MAN HOURS Structures 24 486 Grass and Forest 24 295 Auto and Fuel Flush 37 505 EMT Assists 37 207 False Alarms 24 312 Haz-Materials 11 131 Chimney 13 204 Dive Team 5 67 Standby/Inter Agency 16 714 We responded to 191 calls in 1993: 70 calls inside city limits 121 calls outside city limits Total dollars lost estimated at $625,000. Training hours for the 34 full time members during 1993, are 2,402, resulting of an average of 71 hours per man. Between E.P.V.F.D Members and the E.P.V.F.D Reserve members they spent 1500 volunteer man hours for fund raisers. 4spectÂ¥ly Submitted, ~aCK Rumley' Chief, E.1.V.F.D. DIAL 911 FOR EMERGENCY ESTES PARK FIRE DEPARTMENT (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 January 4, 1994 TOWN BOARD The following is submitted for your approval. These individuals were elected by the Department at the regular meeting on December 7, 1993. CHIEF Jack Rumley 1ST ASSISTANT CHIEF Edward Ford 2ND ASSISTANT CHIEF Scott Dorman SECRETARY/TREASURER Mark Chrastil Your consideration of these officers will be appreciated. Sincerely, . . f 0 Vulvt.- , - Mark D. Chrastil Secretary/Treasurer DIAL 911 FOR EMERGENCY ESTES PARK FIRE DEPARTMENT (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 ACCOUNT BALANCES REPORT BY YEAR As of 12/31/93 EPVFD-All Accounts Page 1 1/ 3/94 1/ 1/93 12/31/93 Acct Balance Balance ASSETS Cash and Bank Accounts EP MONEY MARKET 40,765.73 21,541.31 GENERAL CHECK Ending Balance 219.52 4,773.39 plus: Checks Payable O.00 O.00 TOTAL GENERAL CHECK 219.52 4,773.39 PN MONEY MARKET-LARGE PURCHASE FUND 45,946.04 42,559.21 Total Cash and Bank Accounts 86,931.29 68,873.91 TOTAL ASSETS 86,931.29 68,873.91 LIABILITIES Checks Payable O.00 O.CO TOTAL LIASILITIES O.00 O.00 TOTAL NET WORTH 85,931.29 68,873.91 (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 SUMMARY REPORT BY ACCOUNT 1/ 1/93 Through 12/31/93 EPVFD-GENERAL CHECK Page 1 1/ 3/94 : Category Description GENERAL CHECK INCOME/EXPENSE INCOME DEPOSIT 21,324.42 INTEREST 71.52 VOID CHECK 1,260.09 TOTAL INCOME 22,656.03 EXPENSES ADMINISTRATION 1,725.59 , BANK CHARGE 30.00 DEPARTMENT 10,041.78 DUES 947.00 EQUIPMENT 5,979.98 MISC 375.00 NEW OR UPGRADE 4,454.86 RADIO NEW 2,177.70 RADIO REPAIR 1,273.92 TELEPHONE 4,702.89 TRAINING. 5,186.70 VEHICLE REPAIR 1,206.74 TOTAL EXPENSES 38,102.16 TOTAL INCOME/EXPENSE -15,446.13 TRANSFERS FROM EP MONEY MARKET 20,000.00 TOTAL TRANSFERS 20,000.00 OVERALL TOTAL 4,553.87 ESTES PARK FIRE DEPARTMENT (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 SUMMARY REPORT BY YEAR 1/ 1/93 Through 12/31/93 EPVFD-Selected Accounts Page 1 1/ 3/94 Category Description 1993 INCOME/EXPENSE INCOME DEPOSIT 41,998.28 INTEREST 2,172.89 VOID CHECK 1,260.09 TOTAL INCOME 45,431.26 EXPENSES ADMINISTRATION 8,393.88 BANK CHARGE 30.00 DEPARTMENT 12,291.78 DUES 947.00 EQUIPMENT 17,510.08 MISC 1,375.00 NEW OR UPGRADE 6,063.49 RADIO NEW 4,494.16 RADIO REPAIR 1,273.92 RETURNED CHECK 13.00 . TELEPHONE 4,702.89 TRAINING Â· 5,186.70 VEHICLE REPAIR 1,206.74 TOTAL EXPENSES 63,488.64 TOTAL INCOME/EXPENSE -18,057.38 TRANSFERS TO GENERAL CHECK -20,000.00 FROM EP MONEY MARKET 20,000.00 TOTAL TRANSFERS - 0.00 OVERALL TOTAL -18,057.38 ESTES PARK FIRE DEPARTMENT (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 SUMMARY REPORT BY ACCOUNT 1/ 1/93 Through 12/31/93 EPVFO-EP MONEY MARKET Page 1/ 3/94 Category Description EP MONEY MARKE INCOME/EXPENSE INCOME INTEREST 775.58 TOTAL INCOME 775.58 TOTAL INCOME/EXPENSE 'tu. -9 CO TRANSFERS TO GENERAL CHECK -20,000.00 TOTAL I i//11 Â·4 2, f- '-fi, 0 -20,000.00 Â¥,1.41,-e-.6.-1, OVERALL T0TAL -19,224.42 b I ES PARK rIMt Utl'AM I Mt=N I (Volunteer) P.O. Box 1200 ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517 SUMMARY REPORT BY ACCOUNT 1/ 1/93 Through 12/31/93 EPVFD-PN MONEY MARKET Page 1 1/ 3/94 Category Description PN MONEY MARKE INCOME/EXPENSE INCOME DEPOSIT 20,673.86 INTEREST 1,325.79 TOTAL INCOME 21,999.65 EXPENSES ADMINISTRATION 6,668.29 DEPARTMENT 2,250.00 EQUIPMENT 11,530.10 MISC 1,000.00 NEW OR UPGRADE 1,608.63 RADIO NEW 2,316.46 RETURNED CHECK 13.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 25,386.48 TOTAL INCOME/EXPENSE -3,386.83 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the "Colorado Sunshine Act of 1972" as amended, requires a municipality to designate a public place to post notices of its meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: 1. That the lobby area immediately adjacent to the Administrative Offices in the Estes Park Municipal Building, located at 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado is designated as the Public Place for Posting Notices of Meetings of the Board of Trustees. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF , 1994. TOWN OF ESTES PARK By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk SENT BY:HAMMOND CLARK WHIT ; 1- 3-94 3:11PM ; 6699380* +1 303 586 0249;# 2 AGREEMENT This Agreement effective this day of , 1994 by and between the ESTES PARKROUSING AUTHORITY, a body corporate and politic of the State of Colorado, ("Estes Park"l, the LARIMER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY, a body corporate and politic of the State of Colorado, ("Larimer County"), the MARY'S LAKE LODGE, L.P., a Colorado Limited Partnership, (-Mary's Lake), and the FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ESTES pARK, a National Bank, ("the Bank"). WHEREAS, Estes Park has been established pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-4-101, et. seq., C.R.S., for the purpose of providing decent, safe and affordable accammodations and housing for the Town of Estes Park, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Larimer County has been established pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-4-501, et. seq., C.R.S., for the purpose of providing decent, safe, sanitary and affordable accommodations within Larimer County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Mary's Lake owns certain real property known as the Mary' s Lake Lodge located near the municipal boundaries ot the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, and within Larimer County. colorado, and WHEREAS, Mary's Lake has proposed to construct and operate decent. safe, sanitary and affordable accommodations at Mary's Lake Lodge, ("the project") for the purpose of providing said accommodations to residents of Larimer County and the Town of Estes Park; and WHEREAS, the Bank has agreed to provide construction loan financing to Mary' s Lake for the purpose of the construction of said accommodations, and WHEREAS, pursuant to their statutory powers, Estes Park and Larimer County have the requisite authority to enter into agreements for the purposes of providing decent, safer ganitary and affordable accommodations, and WHEREAS, all Of the parties to this Agreement have determined that it is in the best interest of the parties to enter into this Agreement for the purpose of constructing and operating an affordable housing project to serve the residents of Larimer County, Colorado and the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, and WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable statutes of the State of Colorado and the governing documents and authority of Mary's Lake and the Bank. all parties hereto are authorized and have the requisite authority to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Mary'e Lake shall construct and operate the Summer Housing Program at Mary's Lake Lodge pursuant to the terms and conditions of said program as more fully set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Estes Park shall transfer to the Bank the sum of Fifty Two Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($52,000.00) for the purpose of providing monies for the construction of the project. Said funds shall be disbursed by the Bank according to the terms and conditions of the Agreement between the Bank and the Town as more fully set forth on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Larimer County shall have the responsibility of supervising the operation of the project following construction in order to insure that said project complies with the provisions of Exhibit "A". Larimer County may assign this responsibility in its sole discretion to Estes Park. 3. The parties understand and agree that for five (5) years fram the opening of the project for operation the rents charged by Mary's Lake for occupancy of the project shall be subject to appropriate rent control to insure that the project is available to persons of low income. In order to insure that said rent control is in force, the parties agree that at least thirty t30) days prior to the anniversary date of the opening of the project, the parties shall agree in writing as to appropriate rent controls for each year. 4. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall be in force and effect for five (5) years from the opening date of the project. This Agreement shall terminate upon said five (5) year anniversary or sale or transfer of the property in which Estes Park has been reimbursed am provided in Paragraph 5 B below. 5. The parties understand and agree that for a period of five (5) years from the opening date of the project. the real property shall not be sold or transferred either directly or indirectly without either of the following. A. In the event of sale or transfer of the project from Mary's Lake to any other party, the transferee shall agree in writing to continue the project under the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms and conditions of Exhibit 'A" or; B. Estes park shall be reimbursed a pro-rata share of its Fifty Two Thousand Dollars and 00/100 Dollars ($52,000.00) based upon the number of years of operation of the project prior to the effective date of the sale or transfer. Said sums shall be reimburbed to Estes Park at the time of the sale or transfer o f the property. -2- J SENT BY:HAMMOND CLARK WHIT ; 1- 3-94 3:13PM ; 6699380+ +1 303 586 0249;# 4 This obligation shall be a covenant that runs with the real property upon which the project is constructed and said covenant shall be in the form set forth on Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein and recorded in the offices of the Clerk and Recorder, Larimer County, Colorado. 6. The parties understand and agree that the obligations and responsibilities of Estes Park and Larimer County herein are only the obligation of Estes Park for diabursement of funds as set forth herein and the obligation of Larimer County for supervision of the project in order to insure compliance with the terms ot this Agreement. It shall be the responsibility of Mary's Lake and, if applicable, the Bank, for the obtaining of all necessary permits for the construction from any governmental authority, including but not limited to Larimer County, Colorado and the State of Colorado, for the construction and operation of the project. 7. The parties understand and agree, other than the financial commitment of Estes Park set forth in Paragraph 1, there is no financial commitment on the part of Estes Park and/or Larimer County for the project. Mary's LaKe and the Bank agree and warrant that the amount of funds necessary for construction and completion of the project prior to opening date is sufficient to pay all costs of construction of the project including all necessary contingencies. Mary's Lake and the Bank further agree and warrant that other funds are available for the operation of the project which are adequate to insure operation of the project for a minimum of one {1) year fram the opening date. There shall be no obligation on the part of Estes Park and/or Larimer County to provide any further funding for the pro-ject and both Mary' a Lake and the Bank hereby affirmatively state that there shall be no demand of any kind whatsoever for any further funding for the project or operation thereof. 8. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and may be amended only in writing and said amendment being executed by all parties to this Agreement. The parties underetand and agree that it may be necessary to amend or supple- ment this Agreement in order to adequately effectuate the financing of the project, the construction of the project and/or the operation of the project. In that event, the parties agree to use their best efforts to amend or eupplement this Agreement to effectuate said financing, construction and operation of the project. 9. In the event of default by any party to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the non-defaulting party shall give the defaulting party written notice of said default. The defaulting party shall have thirty (30) days after the mailing of said written notice to cure said default. In the event that said default is not cured within that period, the non-defaulting party may terminate thim Agreement. In the event of termination of the -3- Agreement, the non-defaulting party shall be entitled to all damages incurred by reason of said default, including, but not limited to all reasonable attorneys' fees, expert witness fees and court costs incurred by the non-defaulting party. In the event the non-defaulting party doe5 not terminate this Agreement for said default, but determines to keep this Agreement in full force and effect, the non-defaulting party shall have the right of an action for specific performance against the defaulting party. In that event, the non-defaulting party shall be entitled to all damages incurred by reason of said default, including all reasonable attorneys' fees, expert Witness fees and court costs incurred in enforcing the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 10. All notices, demands or other documents required or desired to be given, made or sent to either party, under this Agreement, shall be made in writing, shall be deemed effective upon mailing or personal delivery. If mailed, said notice shall be mailed, postage pre-paid, certified mail, return receipt requested as follows: Estes Park Housing Authority P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Larimer County Housing Authority Mary'= Lake Lodge L.P. 2625 Mary's Lake Road LPR Estes Park, CO 80517 First National Bank of Estes Park P.O. Box 2390 Estes Park, CO 80517 11. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and venue for any civil action with respect thereto shall be proper in only Larimer County, Colorado. 12. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. This Agreement may not be assigned by any party hereto without the written consent of all of the other parties. -4- 13. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be for any reason held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, in any respect; such invalidity, illegality or unenforceablity shall not effect any other provision hereof and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or Unenforceable provision has never been contained herein. ESTES PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY By: ATTEST: LARIMER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY By:. ATTEST: MARY'S LAKE LODGE L.P. By: ATTEST: FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ESTES PARK By: ATTEST: I 1 EXHIBIT "A" 10 June, 1993 PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION HANDOUT SUMMER HOUSING PROGRAM AT MARYS LAKE LODGE FOUR IPÂ©EMT' PROGRAMI 1. AN APPROPRIATE FACILITY A. CLEAN, DECENT, AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SUMMER EMPLOYEES in a facility which is appropriate, safe and accessible Â· A "moth-balled" facility Is brought on line for housing. Â· Owners of Marvs Lake Lodge offer existing 9,000 sq ft wing, community room, utilities and parking. B. RATES AT $200+/- PER PERSON PER MONTH for a double occupancy room. Summer Package Rate - June 1 - August 31: Reservation Fee (non-refundable): $120 per person Double Room, Type A (15 Rooms): $615 per person Double Room, Type B (7 Rooms): $570 per person Payment is made in three equal installments on June 1, Julyl, August 1 A $100 security deposit is required. 6% Discount for full payment in advance Summer participants can extend the period of stay before and/or after the summer on a weekly basis at the same rate, i.e., 1/4th the monthly installment Shon Term Summer Daily, Weekly, Monthly Rates $240 per person per month for a double occupancy room with bath; $70 per week; $12 per day 2. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION A. FREE TRANSPORTATION to and from downtown Estes Park 20 Estes Park TralleY provides service to new stop at Marys Lake Lodge. Â· Town provides free passes to residents of the Program. 3. LOCAL FINANCING A. FINANCING IS PROVIDED BY LOCAL LENDERS who share an interest in community re-investment Â· Financing arranged for improvements at a level which can be supponed by the summer occupancles. Â· First National and Estes Park Banks offer to jointly finance the construction improvements. B. THE SHORTFALL IS FUNDED BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY Â· Estes Park Housing Authoritv offers to fund the difference between the total cost of improvements and the financeable loan, in return for a five year commitment to the Summer Housing Program. 4. EMPLOYER PARTICIPATION A. LOCAL BUSINESSES CAN PARTIPATE in a simple and trouble-free way Â· At a public presentation,"Pre-construction reservation commitments" are offered to the public. Â· If the demand exceeds the 44 available beds, the Town will conduct a lottery to assure equal access to all applicants. Â· Local businesses and individuals can commit to reserving beds for the next five summers, as lollows: Five year contracts are offered for a limited time only. Summer spaces can be reserved in advance for the next five summers at the rate of $200 per bed per year (double occupancy room). The employers five annual payments of $200 include the non- refundable Reservation Fee of $100, plus the non-refundable Deposit of $100 which is credited against the August rent. (Note: The employefs occupant pays $570 or $615 for the Summer Package, less the $100 pre-paid deposit). Employers reserve the right to charge the cost of the Reservation Fee and/or the Deposit to employees for whom they have reserved space. Contracts can be sold, assigned or transferred by the holder. 21 1 - 1 - ... ...../...Ilill..........liv Contract holders will be identified in all publicity as SuDDorters of the Summer Housing Program at Marys Lake Lodge. A $100 per person deposit is required with the initial request for reservation, with the balance of $100 due on April 31, 1994. Initial deposits will be placed in escrow at First National Bank of Estes Park. Should the project be suspended or terminated, deposits will be refunded within 30 days. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Burt Wadman 586-5237 or Tucker Wood 586-5737 22 JAN 03 ' 94 13: 29 GUARANTEE MUTUAL P.2/9 AGREEMENT This Agreement effective this ___ _ day of , 1994 by and between the ESTES PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY, a body corporate and politic of the State of Colorado, {"Estes Park"), and the FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ESTES PARK, a National Bank, ("the Bank"). WHEREAS, the parties hereto along with Larimer County Housing Authority and Mary's Lake Lodge, L.P. ("Mary's Lake") entered into an agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference for the purpose of constructing and operating an affordable housing project known as Mary' s Lake Lodge, located near the Town of Estes Park, Colorado in Larimer County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, said Agreement provides for the transfer of certain funds by Estes Park to the Bank for use in construction of the project; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth further terms and conditions of the transfer of said funds by Estes Park to the Bank and the disbursement of said funds to Mary's Lake under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. NOW, TEEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL CONDITIONS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Estes Park shall transfer to the Bank the sum of Fifty Two Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($52,000.00) for the purpose of disbursement by the Bank to Mary's Lake for the construction of the Mary's Lake Lodge affordable summer employment housing project, ("the project"). The Bank and Mary's Lake have previously entered into a construction loan agreement for the purpose of providing construction loan funding by the Bank to Mary's Lake for the project. 2. The Bank agrees, prior to the disbursement of any of Estes Park's funds to Mary's Lake, to certify in writing to Estes Park that the project can be completed and ready for occupancy and operation with funds available to the project through the construction loan funding of the Bank, and the funds transferred by Estes Park to the Bank. None of Estes Park' s funds shall be disbursed by the Bank until such time as Estes Park has received said certification fram the Bank. It is the intent of this section that none of the funds of Estes Park shall be disbursed by the Bank until such time as the Bank has assured Estes Park and warranted to Estes Park that adequate funds are available, including Estes Park's funds, for the completion of the construction and operation of the project, including, but not limited to, enough operational funds for the project to be operated for a minimum of one year. 3. In the event that the project is sold or transferred during the first five (5) years after opening of the project, the Bank hereby warrants and guarantees that in the event that Estes Park is not reimbursed as provided for in Paragraph 4B of Exhibit "A", the Bank shall immediately, upon receipt of written notice from the Town, pay the Town its appropriate amount of reimbursement which is unpaid. 4. The term "sale and/or transfer" set out in Paragraph 48 of the Agreement shall mean for the purposes of this Agreement a transfer through either judicial or public trustee foreclosure of any security agreement held by the Bank on the project. 5. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and may be amended only in writing and said amendment being executed by both parties to this Agreement. 6. In the event of default by either party to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the non-defaulting party shall give the defaulting party written notice of said default. The non- defaulting party shall have thirty (30) days after the mailing of said written notice to cure said default. In the event that said default is not cured within that period, the non-defaulting party may terminate this Agreement.. In the event of termination of the Agreement, the non-defaulting party shall be entitled to all damages incurred by reason of said default, including, but not limited to all reasonable attorneys' fees, expert Witness fees and court costs incurred by the non-defaulting party. In the event the non-defaulting party does not terminate this Agreement for said default, but determines to keep this Agreement in full force and effect, the non-defaulting party shall have the right of an action for specific performance against the defaulting party. In that event, the non-defaulting party shall be entitled to all damages incurred by reason of said default, including all reasonable attorneys' fees, expert witness fees and court costs incurred in enforcing the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 7. All notices, demands or other documents required or desired to be given, made or sent to either party, under this Agreement, shall be made in writing, shall be deemed effective upon mailing or personal delivery. If mailed, said notice shall be mailed, postage pre-paid, certified mail, return receipt requested as follows: Estes.Park Housing Authority P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 First National Bank of Estes Park P.O. Box 2390 Estes Park, CO 80517 -2- . 8. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and venue â€žfor any civil action with respect thereto shall be proper in only larimer County, Colorado. 9. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. This Agreement may not be assigned by either party hereto without the written consent of the other party. ESTES' PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY By:. ATTEST: FIRST NATIONAL BANK IN ESTES i PARK : By:. ATTEST: -3- EXHIBIT "A" 10 June, 1993 PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION HANDOUT SUMMER HOUSING PROGRAM AT MARYS LAKE LODGE FOUR POONIT PROGRAM 1. AN APPROPRIATE FACILITY A. CLEAN, DECENT, AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SUMMER EMPLOYEES in a facility which is appropriate, safe and accessible A "moth-balled" facility Is brought on line for housing. â€¢ Owners_CLMaryslakeicdge offer existing 9,000 sq ft wing, community room, utilities and parking. B. RATES AT $200+/- PER PERSON PER MONTH for a double occupancy room. Summer Package Rate - June 1 - August 31: Reservation Fee (non-refundable): $120 per person Double Room, Type A (15 Rooms): $615 per person Double Room, Type B (7 Rooms): $570 per person Payment is made in three equal installments on June 1, Julyl, August 1 A $100 security deposit is required. 6% Discount for full payment in advance Summer participants can extend the period of stay before and/or after the summer on a weekly basis at the same rate, i.e., 1/4th the monthly installment Shon Term Summer Daily, Weekly, Monthly Rates $240 per person per month for a double occupancy room with bath; $70 per week; $12 per day 2. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION A. FREE TRANSPORTATION to and from downtown Estes Park 20 Â· Estes Park Trollev provides service to new stop at Marys Lake Lodge. - Town provides free passes to residents of the Program. 3. LOCAL FINANCING A. FINANCING IS PROVIDED BY LOCAL LENDERS who share an interest in community re-investment Â· Financing arranged for Improvements at a level which can be supported by the summer occupancles. Â· First National and Estes Park Banks offer to jointly finance the construction improvements. B. THE SHORTFALL IS FUNDED BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY Â· Estes Park Housing Authoritv offers to fund the difference between the total cost of improvements and the financeable loan, in return for a five year commitment to the Summer Housing Program. 4. EMPLOYER PARTICIPATION A. LOCAL BUSINESSES CAN PARTIPATE in a simple and trouble-free way Â· At a public presentation,"Pre-construction reservation commitments" are offered to the public. Â· If the demand exceeds the 44 available beds, the Town will conduct a lottery to assure equal access to all applicants. Â· Local businesses and individuall can commit to reserving beds for the next five summers, as follows: Five year contracts are offered for a limited time only. Summer spaces can be reserved in advance for the next five summers at the rate of $200 per bed per year (double occupancy room). The employer's five annual payments of $200 include the non- refundable Reservation Fee of $100, plus the non-refundable Deposit of $100 which is credited against the August rent. (Note: The employers occupant pays $570 or $615 for the Summer Package, less the $100 pre-paid deposit). Employers reserve the right to charge the cost of the Reservatioh Fee and/or the Deposit to employees for whom they have reserved space. Contracts can be sold, assigned or transferred by the holder. 21 Contract holders will be identified in all publicity as Suegorters of the Summer Housing Program at Marys Lake Lodge. A $100 per person deposit is required with the initial request for reservation, with the balance of $100 due on April 31, 1994. Initial deposits will be placed in escrow at First National Bank of Estes Park. Should the project be suspended or terminated, deposits will be refunded within 30 days. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Burt Wadman 586-5237 or Tucker Wood 586-5737 22 January 5, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO: Estes Park Housing Authority FROM: Gary Klaphake, Town Administrator ~f r-<-2. ~ Rich Widmer, Ass't Town Administrator 4-1-- j~ Steve Stamey, Community Development Director~ SUBJECT: Housing Report and Recommendations Attached is a report which summarizes previous and current housing activities and provides recommendations for a 1994 work program for the Housing Authority. I. THE ESTES PARK VALLEY HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT The Forward Estes Park Foundation commissioned a housing study by Rosall, Remmen and Cares, Inc. (RRC) in 1990. The study was based on a random survey of local employees and a survey distributed to all local employers. The study found the housing problem in the Estes Park area to be widely recognized. In the rental housing area, the report found 30% of renters are paying in excess of 30 percent of income for housing. To a great extent, the group found most in need of assistance in Estes Park is the young. The study recommended three groups most in need of assistance: seasonal workers, those having household incomes below $20,000, and renters in general. The strong preference for all groups was for units with two or more bedrooms. The study identified a need for construction of at least 310 new units, with an additional 245 households currently in need of some type of financial assistance with housing costs. II. ADMINISTRATION A. Staff. Town staff recommends Community Development Director, Steve Stamey, as the principal staff support for the Estes Park Housing Authority. It is anticipated all needed Housing Authority work can be accomplished with existing town staff with the utilization of consultants as appropriate. B. Organization. All staff reports will be made to the Housing Authority directly, at the regular annual meeting or special meetings, or to the appropriate Housing Authority committee, as established. C. Mission. The Estes Park Housing Authority was created as a means of responding to the lack of affordable housing in the Town for low and moderate income individuals or households. Organizations like the Housing Authority work more effectively if they have a defined mission. Staff recommends adoption of the following as the mission of the Housing Authority: The mission of the Housing Authority is to increase the housing supply for seasonal workers, those having household incomes below 80% of the median household income, and renters in general, by building or causing to be built new units or rehabilitating existing units, either by itself or in partnership with private or public entities. Detailed objectives to accomplish the mission of the Housing Authority should be adopted periodically, as the goals of the organization become more specific. 1 D. Larimer County Housing Authority. On December 2, 1993, the Community Development Committee recommended approval of a funding request of $2,000 from the Larimer County Human Development Department to support the Affordable Housing Information System (AHIS) being developed by the county. The Town Board, on December 14, 1993, continued the request to the Town Board meeting of January 25, 1994, to allow time for the Housing Authority to consider the request. Staff, after further consideration, recommends that the Town not participate in this funding. The reasons for this are uncertainty as to the usefulness of the data and a desire to use the resources of the Authority more directly toward the accomplishment of its mission. The data will be available at a later date for purchase by the Authority if it decides the data is needed. E. TABOR Considerations. Town Attorney White has advised staff that, in his opinion, the TABOR requirements do not apply to the Housing Authority. Money transferred from the Town to the Authority falls under the Town's TABOR requirements, but the Authority itself is exempt from these requirements. However, until there have been court decisions on this subject, it would be prudent for the Town to take a conservative approach for any large expenditures or commitments. At the very least, until the law is clarified, a written legal opinion should be obtained prior to the Town committing to any large project. III. HOUSING ACTIVITIES Housing Study Group. On September 3, 1992, the Housing Study Group (George Hix, Eric Blackhurst, Lauren Dannels, Paul Kochevar, Ann Racine, David Walker, and Dick Weiss) reported their findings to the Town's Community Development Committee. A. The Town establish a Housing Authority which will be served by existing staff and a five member advisory committee. B. The Housing Authority facilitate development of affordable housing: 1. Public/private partnerships. 2. State/federal programs. 3. Agency sub-contract administration. C. Town adopt incentives to encourage development of affordable housing by the private sector: 1. Waive building permit fees. 2. Waive water tap fees. 2 3. Modify the zoning regulations to allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre, subject to special review and excellent site and building design. A pre- application conference for an affordable housing development be required. This would include representatives of the applicant, Planning Commission, Housing Authority, and Staff. 4. No more than 30 dwelling units will be permitted in one development/location. 5. The Housing Authority will request both the Upper Thompson and Estes Park Sanitation Districts to waive their sewer fees. 6. Town consider applying for available grants to assist an affordable housing project. D. Affordability. 1. Define affordability as 80% or less of median household income. 2. Guarantee affordability for 20 years through deed restriction. E. Housing Authority lead with development of a moderate income housing project. Marys Lake Lodge Housing Program. On July 13, 1993, the Town approved a letter of interest to participate in the Marys Lake Lodge summer employee housing program. A. An Appropriate Facility 1. Clean, decent affordable housing for summer employees. 2. Rates at $2001 per person per month for a double occupancy room. Summer Package Rate (June 1 - August 31): Reservation Fee (Non-refundable) $120/person Double Room, Type A (15 rooms) $615/person Double Room, Type B(7 rooms) $570/person Payment made in three equal installments on June 1, July 1, August 1. A $100 security deposit is required. B. Free public transportation to and from downtown Estes Park. 1. Estes Park Trolley provides service. 2. Town provides free passes to residents. 3 C. Local Financing 1. Financing is provided by local lenders who share an interest in community re-investment. Financing arranged for improvements at a level which can be supported by the summer occupancies. 2. The Estes Park Housing Authority will fund the difference between the total cost of improvements and the financeable loan, in return for a five-year commitment to the Summer Housing Program. D. Local business participate in a simple and trouble-free way. 1. If the demand exceeds the 44 available beds, the Town will conduct a lottery to assure equal access to all applicants. 2. Summer spaces can be reserved in advance for the next five summers at the rate of $200 per bed, per year (double occupancy room). Survey of Rental Housing. On November 5, 1992, Ron Harvey submitted a draft report to the Community Development Committee on a "Survey of Rental Housing in the Estes Park Areal' dated November 4, 1992. Mr. Harvey reviewed the survey fin detail concluding that there appears to be good evidence to support a need for units below $300/month; "affordable" housing needs of the low to moderate income group are being met by 80% of the present inventory, and there is a demand for more two and three bedroom rental units in the $550 - $725 per month range. Affordable Housing Study Group. First National Bank has offered to establish and fund an affordable housing, study group in 1994. The purpose is to evaluate alternative affordable housing projects in Colorado,and report the finding to the Town's Housing Authority. First National Bank has budgeted $5,000 in 1994 towards this effort IV. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following actions for implementation of an affordable housing program. A. Request for Proposals (RFP). The Town of Estes Park issue an RFP for construction of affordable housing. The Town would offer the following incentives: 1. Density of 15 units per acre. 2. Waiver of building permit fees. 3. Waiver of water tap fees. 4 4. Submit a request to the respective sanitation district for a fee waiver. The Town would review proposals on a competition basis and award the incentives to the best proposal based upon design, location, quality, innovation, rents, and management. B. Land Banking. As a further incentive, the Town of Estes Park select an appropriate site, option the site, and place on the November, 1994 ballot an election question of whether or not to purchase the site over time, which would be granted to an affordable housing project (free or at a reduced cost). C. Grant. The Town of Estes Park could budget for and make an outright cash grant to a development proposal. This could also be an election question. Staff's opinion is that the land option is a better approach. D. Combination. A combination of approaches A. and B. would involve the density and fee waiver incentives, as well as a land contribution. E. Public/Private Grants. The Town of Estes Park could pursue grants from corporate, social, and perhaps church entities throughout Colorado. There probably would be requirements for a local cash match. F. State and Federal Grants. These funds are scarce but could be applied for to leverage a project. Involvement of these funding sources also adds state and federal rules and regulations and paperwork. Staff recommends that the Housing Authority focus on action items A. Request for Proposals, and action item B. Land Banking, as a 1994 work program. This would start with site(s) selection, preparation of RFP, review of proposals, developer selection, and an election on site acquisition, if necessary. 5 ..