The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2001-08-14Prepared 08/09/01 The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT TOWN BOARD COMMENTS 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated July 24,2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development, July 26, 2001: Special Events Dept.: 1. Modification to Policy Manual - Entertainment Permit for Riverside Plaza. 2. American Barrel Assn. Agreement, 8/25-26/01. B. Public Safety, August 2, 2001: Police Dept.: 1. Budgeted Vehicle Purchases. C. Light & Power, August 9, 2001: 1. Hwy. 7 Three-Phase Upgrade Contract. 4. Estes Park Housing Authority, June 13, 2001 (acknowledgment only). 5. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, July 10 and August 7, 2001 (acknowledgement only). 6. Estes Valley Planning Commission, July 17, 2001 (acknowledgement only). 7. Resolution #31-01 - Intent to Annex Good Samaritan First Addition, and Good Samaritan Second Addition. Public scheduled September 25, 2001. 8. Resolution #32-01 - Intent to Annex Carlson Addition. Public Hearing scheduled September 25, 2001. lA. PLANNING COMMISSION CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): Mayor Baudek open the Public Hearing(s). If the Town Board, Applicant(s), Staff or the Public wish to speak on a particular item, a formal Public Hearing will be conducted as follows: A. Mayor - Open Public Hearing B. Staff Report 1 Continued ort reverse side C. Public Testimony D. Mayor - Close Public Hearing E. Motion to Approve/Deny 1. SUBDIVISION. Amended Plat of Lot 3, Rock Acres Subdivision, John Ownby, Jr. & Deborah Ownby McCarly/Applicants - CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 11, 2001. 2. SUBDIVISION. Amended Plat and Rezoning for Lots 1 and 2, Grand Estates Addition, Horst Marschler/Applicant. 3. SUBDIVISION. Preliminary Plat for a Portion of Lot 33, Bonnie Brae Subdivision, Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley, Inc./Applicant. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. POLICE AND BUSINESS IN PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM - PRESENTATION. Cpi. Pass. 2. ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY - REAPPOINTMENT OF RICHARD PUTNEY, 5-vr. TERM EXPIRING 9/14/06. 3. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A. Update - Events Center/Ice Rink. 4. ADJOURN. 2 4 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 24,2001 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 24th day of July, 2001. Meeting called to order by Mayor John Baudek. Present: John Baudek, Mayor Susan L. Doylen, Mayor ProTem Trustees Jeff Barker Stephen W. Gillette David Habecker Lori Jeffrey-Clark G. Wayne Newsom Also Present: Rich Widmer, Town Administrator Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Absent: None Mayor Baudek called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT . None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS Trustee Doylen commented on her recent welcome to the Maas-Kempen Belgium Friendship Force. Mayor Baudek read Governor Owens' response to his veto of Estes Park's Marketing Bill. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated July 10, 2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Works Committee, July 19, 2001: 1. 2001 Street Overlay Contract. 2. Lease of Water Dept. Bay for RMNP Bus Maintenance. 3. Stanley Ave. Trail Construction Contract. B. Light & Power, July 19, 2001: 1. Fall River Hydro Steam Cleaning/Floor Covering Contract. 4. Resolution #28-01 - Intent to Annex Lot 8A, Summervilla Addition, public hearing scheduled August 28, 2001. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Gillette) the consent agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously. i Board of Trustees - July 24, 2001 - Page 2 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF EPURA RESOLUTION #297 - CONTINUED FROM JULY 10, 2001. As requested, Town Administrator Widmer clarified the effect on the Town's fund balances should the Town elect to assume EPURA's fund payments. In summary, the Open Space Fund contains $100,000 in 2001 and 2002 for open space purchases. If the Knoll payments were expended from this fund, there would be no effect on the Community Reinvestment Fund, however, all lands purchased from this fund are restricted to use or improvement as open space, natural areas, wildlife habitat, and parks and trails. Following discussion, and it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Jeffrey-Clark) (1) the Town assume the remaining payment obligations and rights to ownership of the Knoll property, (2) the first year's payment be expended from the Community Reinvestment Fund to preserve options until future uses of the Knoll property are decided; and (3) Town Attorney White prepare a written agreement between EPURA and the Town, same to be returned to the Town Board for approval, and it passed unanimously. 2. PRESERVE THE KNOLL & WILLOWS PROPERTIES AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE AND HISTORIC SITES - PRESENTATION. Bud Hampton, Chairman/ Estes Park Knoll-Willows Conservancy, commented on the interested bodies (EPURA, Town, Knoll-Willows Conservancy, and citizens) who have worked to preserve the concept of open space for the properties commonly known as The Knoll-Willows, and the following reports were made a part of the record: "History and Resources Documentation Report for the Knoll-Willows Properties", and "Recommendation for the Conservation of the Kno#-Willows Properties." Bound ~ signature sheets containing 3,100 signatures were also submitted for the record. In summary, the Conservancy and "the people" made the following recommendation: "THE TOWN GOVERNMENT TAKE ACTION NOW TO COMBINE THE 19.4 ACRES THAT ARE KNOWN AS THE KNOLL-WILLOWS PROPERTIES AS OUTLINED ON FIGURE 1 OF APPENDIX A INTO A SINGLE CONSERVATION AREA FOR THE BENEFIT OF TOWN RESIDENTS, VISITORS, AND THE WORLDWIDE COMMUNITY THROUGH RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND PASSIVE ENJOYMENT, AND FURTHER, THAT BY THE ABOVE ACTION(S), AND BY OTHER ACTION(S), AND FOR THE SAME PURPOSE, THAT THESE SAME PROPERTIES BE LEGALLY PROTECTED IN PERPETUITY, IN THEIR NATURAL STATE AND AS AN IMPORTANT HISTORICAL SITE. FURTHER, BUT NOT AS A CONTINGENCY TO ACCOMPLISHING THE ABOVE, IT IS URGED THAT THE TOWN SIMPLY AND APPROPRIATELY IDENTIFY THIS KNOLL-WILLOWS CONSERVATION AREA AS A MEMORIAL TO ENOS A. MILLS." The Conservancy has developed a "Plan" for a pedestrian viewing area(s) and circulation for the proposed conservation area, and Dr. Hampton reviewed goals and design consideration. Speaking on behalf of the Conservancy were George Hix (resident), and Bob Jones, Vice Chair/Conservancy (opinions expressed varied between allowing no use on the site to complete public access; this Plan represents consensus of the group). Audience comments were heard from Patrick Cipolla who commented that the desires of petition signatories were to preserve the Knoll in its natural state. Mayor Baudek expressed the Board's appreciation for the Reports; Trustee Jeffrey-Clark advised that she will submit the Reports to the Larimer County Board of Trustees - July 24, 2001 - Page 3 Open Lands Board for their review; and Trustee Doylen noted that the Town Board and EPURA have been instrumental in acquiring open space land and that any decision on this site will require careful consideration/discussion. Staff disputed the Conservancy's opinion that current public access is considered trespassing as such is not the case. Ralph Nicholas, interested party, urged the Board to confirm that they will protect this entire tract in perpetuity. No further action was taken on this issue. 3. FINANCIAL REPORT - PRESENTATION. Finance Officer Brandjord presented a "power point" program updating the General Fund for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2000, and as compared to 1999. 4. LAKE ESTES SECOND ADDITION ANNEXATION. Mayor Baudek opened the public hearing, and Community Development Director Joseph presented the Staff Report. This annexation is being considered pursuant to a Water Tap Agreement, and encompasses the property containing the Lake Shore Lodge. The existing zoning is A-Accommodations in the County, and staff recommends zoning should remain the same. Town Attorney White read Resolution #29-01 and Ordinance #10-01. As there was no public testimony, Mayor Baudek closed the public hearing. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Gillette) Resolution #29-01 and Ordinance #10-01 be adopted, and it passed unanimously. 5. RESOLUTION #30-01 - PARK USAGE RULES AND REGULATIONS, In a e memo dated July 18, Police Chief Richardson reported that juveniles congregating within Confluence Park and Riverwalk Plaza are negatively impacting the quality of life within this area (1 incidenUday/32 days). The Municipal Code allows specific rules for the use of Town-owned property that would specifically address unwanted, disruptive behavior that impedes the intended uses of Town parks and Riverside Plaza. The Police Department intends to serve the new rules to the local youth responsible, and, as the select group of known offenders has been identified, the Dept. believes it is not necessary to post signs at each of the parks. Chief Richardson confirmed that offenders will be taken into custody; if the offenders are underage, they will be released to their parents. The Resolution and Regulations have been reviewed with Town Attorney White. Town Attorney White read the Resolution, and it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Gillette) Resolution #30-01 be adopted, and it passed unanimously. 6. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION TO OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY, It was moved and seconded (Barker/Gillette) the Town Board enter Executive Session as stated above, and it passed unanimously, Following completion of all agenda items, Mayor Baudek adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m. to Executive Session. John Baudek, Mayor Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 26, 2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 26th day of July, 2001. Committee: Chairman Doylen, Trustees Barker and Habecker Attending: Chairman Doylen and Trustee Habecker Absent: Trustee Barker Also Attending: Assistant Town Administrator Repola, Director Hinze, Community Development Director Joseph, Advertising Manager Marsh, Deputy Clerk van Deutekom Chairman Doylen called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. SPECIAL EVENTS REPORT. 1. Entertainment Permit for Riverside Plaza - Request to ModifY Policy Manual. Director Hinze reported that 3 years ago the Special Events Department developed an Entertainment Permit that allowed a licensed organizer to arrange, screen, and schedule entertainment in "designated show areas" at Bond Park, Tregent Park, Riverside Plaza and Barlow Plaza. Director Hinze introduced Dick Orleans, the entertainment organizer, who requested changing the Permit to include the entire Riverside Plaza area for entertainment and not limiting the entertainers to the grass area amphitheater. The Entertainment Permit would be changed as follows: #8 - delete the words "designated show area." The Committee recommends approval of the revision to the Entertainment Permit as contained in the Policy Manual. Assistant Town Administrator Repola noted that entertainers in Riverside Plaza should not impede traffic flow thru the Plaza. 2. Event Critiques. Wool Market: June 14-17; 11 th year event; one of the top 3 fiber festivals in the United States; Alpaca exhibitors remain at the maximum; sheep and Ilamas decreased slightly; the Alpaca Breeders of Colorado support the show in large numbers. Miniature Horse Show: June 20-24; 17th year event; horse numbers down this year because of 2 other exhibitor conflicts; effortless show to have on the grounds for staff; they have requested to return in 2002. Arabian Horse Show and Cutting Show: June 27, 30/July 1 (Cutting); July 6-8 (Arabian); 7th year event; animal numbers were up over past 2 years for the Arabian Show and slightly down for the Cutting Show. Rooftop Rodeo: July 10-15; 75th year event; Rodeo was excellent; the 75th Celebration went very well; the new chutes and pens provide an easier and safer production. BRAOFORIPUSLISHINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development Committee - July 26, 2001 - Page 2 Discussion was held regarding the use of a credit card "swipe" machine during next year's Rodeo. Staff will research the benefits of using the credit card machine and adding a phone line to the ticket booth. 2. Event Critiques: (continued) Estes Cycling Challenge: June 23-24; 1St year event; 451 cyclists registered; very organized; met with Police Department and State Patrol prior to the event; all 3 races went well. Ride the Rockies: June 21-22; the cyclists stated they enjoyed the event immensely; the Kiwanis Club and Lions Club served the meals and both groups were very pleased with funds raised. 3. Contract. Director Hinze reported that the American Barrel Association will sign a contract June 30th for their event scheduled August 25-26, 2001. The Committee recommends approval of the American Barrel Association contract as discussed. ADVERTISING REPORT. Manager Marsh presented the Des Moines Register noting that the new editor of Better Homes & Gardens listed Rocky Mountain National Park as her favorite vacation destination. Manager Marsh reported that requests for vacation planners are up 6.15%, 800 Calls are down 12.65%, e-mailed requests are up 35%, and advertising general requests for vacation planners are up 16.91%. Other areas discussed include the summer promotion calendar, Engage Media test, television/newspaper schedules, and works in progress. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT. Director Joseph reported that Alison Chilcott has been hired as a Planner in the Community Development Department. Ms. Chilcott has a Masters Degree in Planning and is experienced in affordable housing issues. Director Joseph updated the Committee on upcoming Code revisions. Areas discussed include the annexation process, condominium ownership conversions, cross reference corrections, definition additions and revisions, B&B provisions, geological/wildfire hazard maps, building height variances, land use issues in the single family residential district, floor area ratios and exemptions, accessory use issues, set-back provisions, submittal requirements, subdivision standards, simplification of the Sign Code, and building permit trends. There being no further business, Chairman Doylen adjourned the meeting at 9:26 a.m. %â‚¬ vÂ« AL.kied_> Rebecca van Deutekom, Deputy Town Clerk BRADFOROPUSLISHINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 2,2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 2nd day of August, 2001. Committee: Chairman Gillette, Trustees Jeffrey-Clark and Newsom Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Police Chief Richardson, Fire Chief Dorman, Clerk O'Connor Absent: None Chairman Gillette called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. POLICE DEPARTMENT. Police and Businesses in Partnership. In a memo dated July 12th, Cpi. Pass introduced a program that would be co-sponsored with the Chamber of Commerce. In summary, when a business crime has been committed (shoplifting, fraud, etc.) Dispatch would fax pertinent information to the Chamber and then Chamber staff would alert their membership via e-mail. Staff believes minimal Police Dept. staffing levels would be required, and implementation costs would be negligible. The Committee recommends approval of the Police and Businesses in Partnership Program, commending Cpi. Pass for his initiative. Departmental Goals. The Committee reviewed Departmental Goals, listed in priority order utilizing a "multi-vote" process: â€¢ Goal One - Staffing. Objective: Department management staff will conduct an annual staffing audit and report findings to Town Administration. â€¢ Goal Two - Fair and Consistent Employee Evaluations. Objective: To ensure that all supervisors and managers within the Police Department conduct evaluations that are factual, fair, consistent and contain information concerning employee performance over a one-year period. â€¢ Goal Three - Employee Retention. Objective: Identify methods or practices for implementation within the organization for the sole purpose of employee retention. â€¢ Goal Four - Analyze and Amend Organizational Structure. Objective: Assess the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the current organizational structure and various operating levels, and effect change if required. â€¢ Goal Five - Employee Recognition/Instructor Compensation. Objective: Research and identify various employee recognition systems within the Municipal Government industry to include, but not limited to, incentive programs, employee recognition practices, compensation programs, and other various reward systems. â€¢ Follow-up Items/Tasks. Objective: The remaining issues identified during individual employee and departmental meetings are considered issues requiring attention by department management. Though these issues did not rise to the level of becoming departmental goals, they remain items of interest, requiring attention whenever possible: 1. Movement within the salary range 2. Employee empowerment 3. Training 4. Increase Police Department Budget 5. Consistent reporting system/case assignment 6, Scheduling overtime issue (11-hr. rule FLSA) 7. Communications within the department 8. Eliminate micro-management 9. Professional excellence BRADFORIPUBLISHING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety Committee - August 2, 2001 - Page 2 The Committee acknowledged receipt of the Departmental Goals as presented, and requested copies be distributed to remaining Town Board members. Vehicle Bids. Fleet Manager Mahany presented the bids for replacement of two 1997 Sedans, and explained the varying prices and trade-in values from Estes Park Auto Mall, Phil Long Ford, and Burt's Arapahoe Ford. Following discussion, the Committee recommends acceptance of the Estes Park Auto Mall vehicle bid for two Ford Crown Victoria Police Cars for a combined total amount of $35,400. REPORTS. The Committee reviewed the NIBRS 2001 Second Quarter Report. Clearance rates, particularly on drug cases, have been very successful. Chief Richardson reported on allegations concerning a local towing firm, and, depending on the outcome of the hearing, said firm could be removed from the Police Department rotational tow list for a period of one year. A letter of agreement" form will be implemented between the Department and all firms. Discussion followed on the newly-adopted Park Usage Rules and Regulations. A meeting has been scheduled August 2nd at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room with offenders, parents, media and any interested parties to discuss specifics. Staff confirmed that the regulations are applicable to everyone. Pursuant to the regulations, merchants have reported that revenues have increased, the local trade is returning, and all merchants are appreciative and supportive of the procedure. Downtown Parking. Chief Richardson advised that parking violations are down considerably ~ as compared to previous years. The decrease may be a result of changing the approach (non- adversarial stance) of Community Service Officers Fourth of July Celebration. Attendees were similar to past years, there were a few issues with fireworks, and, overall, the event was successful. Officers, CSO's, and volunteers (11) were commended for their effort on this event. FIRE DEPARTMENT (EPVFD) Thermal Imaging Camera Update. The Department has received and installed said camera. The Marys Lake Lodge sponsored a fundraising event to help pay for this equipment ($17,000), and $1,300 was raised. The Lodge Owner is planning an annual fundraising event. New Wildland Gear. A Park Service grant in the amount of $10,000 has provided 35 members .. . with shirts, pants, helmets, gloves, and head-lamps. Bids are being solicited for boots which were not included. Chief Dorman reported that the fire danger varies between high to very high, depending on rainfall, and he encouraged citizens to continue safeguard efforts against fires. There being no further business, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:00 a.m, 4-3.01 Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 9, 2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the LIGHT AND POWER COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the gth day of August, 2001. Committee: Chairman Jeffrey-Clark, Trustees Habecker and Newsom Attending: Chairman Jeffrey-Clark and Trustee Habecker Absent: Trustee Newsom Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Light & Power Director Matzke, Assistant to the Light & Power Director Mangelsen, Deputy Town Clerk van Deutekom Chairman Jeffrey-Clark called the meeting to order at 8:01 a.m. FALL RIVER HYDRO SITE DEVELOPMENT - AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. Director Matzke requested removal of this item from the agenda noting that the negotiated contract was just recently submitted to staff and has not been thoroughly reviewed. Assistant Director Mangelsen updated the Committee on the progress of the hydro plant floor and equipment cleaning and donation of a 12" replica of a water wheel from the Georgetown plant. DECORATIVE CHRISTMAS TREES ON HIGHWAY LIGHTING POLES - ADOPTION OF UNIFORM POLICY. Director Matzke explained that establishing a uniform policy to address decoration of highway light poles within Town limits would assist staff in determining which poles should be decorated during the Christmas lighting season. He reported that there are approximately 22 highway light poles on Moraine Ave. and approximately 12 light poles in various locations around Town that do not contain switched outlets. Therefore, these poles have not been decorated in past years with the standard rebar Christmas trees. There is adequate funding in the 2001 Street Lighting budget to fund the pole retrofit expense and there are adequate rebar trees to decorate the highway lighting poles along Moraine Ave. The Committee recommends establishing a uniform policy of installing decorative rebar Christmas trees on all highway lighting poles within the Town limits and that all future highway lighting poles be purchased equipped with switched outlets. Staff will proceed with retrofitting the poles along Moraine Ave. and continue with any remaining highway light poles within the Town limits subject to the availability of rebar trees. HIGHWAY 7 THREE PHASE UPGRADE ENGINEERING SERVICES - AWARD CONTRACT. Director Matzke reported that this project involves replacing approximately 20,000' of existing #2 CU overhead primary with 1/0 AL tree cable from the Baldpate Inn south to Big Owl Rd. Staff received a proposal from ESC to perform the line design and construction management for an estimated cost of $46,000. The 2001 budget includes $650,000 for this project. BRADFORD PUBLISHING Co. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Light and Power Committee - August 9, 2001 - Page 2 The Committee recommends that the contract for engineering services for the Highway 7 Three Phase upgrade be awarded to ESC at an estimated cost of $46,000. DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING REPLACEMENT - PROPOSED WORK PLAN. Director Matzke reported that since the mid 1980s, the Light and Power Department has been replacing highway and street lights within the Town limits with the goal of reducing stray light, improving energy efficiency, and improving light quality. However, the 300 plus decorative lights installed in the Estes Park Urban Renewal area produce significant stray light, have no photo metrics for efficient light distribution, and have become increasingly expensive to replace and maintain. A proposed work plan to address the task of upgrading the downtown light fixtures was discussed. The 2001 budget includes $25,000 for this project. The Committee recommends that the proposed work plan be adopted and a number of light fixtures be purchased for a demonstration purposes. REPORTS Platte River Power Authority (PRPA): Director Matzke noted that a new peak of 498 megawatts was reached Monday, August 6th at 3:00 p.m. Financial Report: The July graphs were reviewed. Project Updates: A letter has been mailed to Charter Communications outlining items to be addressed prior to approval of their change of ownership request. Bids have been requested for replacement of the pole trailer. There being no further business, Chairman Jeffrey-Clark adjourned the meeting at 8:43 a.m. /\. vam 1Â£,UA_,..0. Rebecca van Deutekom, Deputy Town Clerk Estes Park Housing Authority (EPHA) Board Meeting Date: June 13, 2001 Members Present: Sue Doylen, Lee Kundtz, Louise Olson, & Karla Porter Members Absent: Eric Blackhurst Staff Present: Sam Betters, Carolyn Coffelt, & Jean Michaelson Others Present: Guests: Mary Bauer, Norm Carver, Jay Gentile, Michelle Johnson, Sarah Rhodes, & Joe Wise The June 13th meeting of the Estes Park Housing Authority was called to order by Sue Doylen, Chairperson, at 8:30 a.m. in the Board Room of the Municipal Building of the Town ofEstes Park. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Sue Doylen asked if anyone had any changes, comments, or questions to the May 9~1 minutes. Louise Olson asked to correct the spelling o f a word. Karla Porter moved to approve the minutes with the proposed correction, and Louise Olson seconded. Minutes approved. CLEAVE STREET Sarah Rhodes and Michelle Johnson from Ponderosa Realty, property managers for Cleave Street, gave an update on the vacancies. There are currently three vacant units. Ads are currently being run. There has been quite a bit o f interest, but most applicants did not qualify because they were over income or had bad credit. Some of the applicants are reluctant to sign a one year lease. Because of the funding we received from State of Colorado Division ofHousing, Jean Michaelson will have to look into whether the lease can be shortened. Ponderosa Realty also presented tenant rent reports. The reports reflect the rent due, vacancy loss, late, maintenance and miscellaneous charges for a total due for the month reflecting payments and ending balances. Budget vs. actual statements were presented as well. Budget figures will have to be given to Ponderosa to reflect these figures. The Board agreed to have the budget statements presented monthly with the option of assessing whether monthly is necessary. The name on the budget should reflect Cleave Street to coincide with the Loveland Housing Authority's budget. Jean presented an updated version of the budget. The construction budget was $64,825,-add we have spent around $42,000. A panic bar still needs to be placed on the upstairs door in case of fire. We may want to consider painting in the fall as well. The Board felt it was best to keep aside the money that is needed to do these things, then spilt the remainder 50/50 into operation reserves and maintenance reserves. COMMITTEE REPORTS REGULATORY No report. LAND Discussion held for Executive Session. PROGRAM & FINANCIAL See section on Cleave Street. EPHA June Board Minutes - Page 1 of 3 EDUCATION & SUPPORT Louise Olson and Lee Kundtz gave a presentation to the Methodist Lutheran Church; everything went well. The Ambassadors (volunteers of the Chamber) declined the presentation, and we are still waiting to hear from Crossroads. DEVELOPMENT & Discussion held for Executive Session. RETENTION REPORTS UPDATES & OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Community Profile A newsletter of the Estes Park Community Profile was distributed. This is a snap shot ofwhat Estes Park has to offer (see attachment). Alternate Building Louise Olson has been reading on alternate ways to build and wondered whether this was something EPHA was interested in pursuing. The Board indicated that perhaps looking at the Town building codes would be the first place to start. Then look into how these structures would be viewed by permit agencies, lending agencies and tax credit situations. You also have to consider what is adaptable to this climate and soil. Rural Housing Forum ~ A Rural Housing Forum will be held for realtors and lenders on Tuesday, June 19, here at the Town Municipal building. Speakers will discuss information on funding available from USDA Rural Development to purchase a home, as well as Larimer Home Ownership and Home Improvement Programs. Flyers will also be placed in Town employee, school district, and hospital employee pay checks informing them of this program. Sue Doylen will do a poster in reference to the forum to post at various locations around Estes Park. EPHA board members are encouraged to attend. The deadline for this program is July 1 and not September as originally indicated. If there is lots ofinterest, USDA Rural Development will pre-qualify over the phone. Section 8 - Review of Program Forty-five applications were received for Section 8 vouchers. Seventeen out of20 vouchers are currently in use in Estes Park, with the others on the waiting list. Two of the vouchers are not being utilized as one desires to remain on the waiting list of a complex, and the other has been unable to locate desired housing for them and unwilling to have their existing house inspected. Jean's recommendation is that the vouchers be made available for someone else, and the Board agreed. Of the 45 applicants, 26 were less than 30% area median income (AMI), 18 at 30-50% AMI, and 1 at 50-80% AMI. We are currently meeting all the four objectives established initially. Under objective #4 which relates to fair housing, Jean has requested information from HUD in English and in Spanish in which she will put a package of information together. Sam EPHA June Board Minutes - Page 2 of 3 Betters indicated the Loveland Housing Authority is currently in the process o f applying for more vouchers and will keep EPHA posted on the status. Budget On June 12~11, Sam Betters attended a Town budget meeting. He made the following requests of the Board of Trustees on behalf of EPHA: 1. Transfer the full unspent amount (with the exception of those dollars set aside for the sewer and water taps) o f the 2001 set aside for the EPHA to its operating account and under the control of the EPHA Board of Commissioners. As opposed to the current system of the EPHA, submitting monthly draw requests to the Town for review and approval. In the event we are unable to utilize the funds for the water and sewer taps fees, we are requesting the authority to carry over the fees to the next budget year. 2. Allow the EPHA to retain any unspent funds at the end o f each fiscal year as a way of rewarding its efficiency and capitalizing the organization. 3. Approve a $10,000 increase in line item for the EPHA administration to accommodate the increased staffhours necessitated by the current efforts and activities o f the EPHA. The Town agreed to all the items requested with the exception of the sewer and water taps. The Town only gave a verbal soft commitment in reference to the sewer and water carryover. EPHA will still have to approach the Town Board if this issue occurs. The above approval is critical for the success of EPHA, and it also encourages efficiencies within the budget. The other issues to be looked into are the relationships between the Town o f Estes Park, Estes Park Housing Authority, and the Housing Authority ofthe City of Loveland. There is a Town contract for Housing Authority in Loveland to render services, but perhaps Housing Authority in Loveland should contract with EPHA. Sam Betters will talk to the Town attorney about redefining this to allow for a cleaner relationship. ADJOURN Sue Doylen entertained the motion to adjourn the Board meeting at 9:30 a.m. to go into Executive Session. Lee Kundtz moved to adjourn and Karla Porter seconded. Adjourned. Respepfully submitted, Car~yn J. Coffelt 4 4 41(k --- it Â· Ow: 01 u~ L Ji lil*-/.- -3 Assistant to the HACOL birector EPHA June Board Minutes - Page 3 of 3 BAA'FOROPUBLISHING Co. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment July 10, 2001, 8:00 a.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Board: Chair Jeff Barker, Members Joe Ball, Judy Lamy, Wayne Newsom and Al Sager Attending: Chair Barker, Members Ball, Lamy, Newsom and Sager Also Attending: Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: None Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 7:55 a.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. The minutes of the June 5, 2001, meeting were accepted as presented. b. 179 Centennial Drive; Lot 12, Centennial Hills Subdivision. Continued to the August 7, 2001 meeting at the request of the applicant. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to continue 179 Centennial Drive, Lot 12, Centennial Hills Subdivision to the August 7, 2001 meeting. 2. LOT 23, REPLAT OF A PORTION OF VENNER RANCH ESTATES, 2ND FILING, 1530 PROSPECT MOUNTAIN DRIVE, APPLICANTS: KENNETH & KATHLEEN LINDEMAN - HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Director Joseph reviewed the staff report. The applicant wishes to deviate from the 30-foot maximum height in the "E-1" Estate District to allow a maximum height of 36 feet for the construction of a new single-family residential structure. Special circumstances include a steep slope. A conforming structure would require a disjointed floor plan with multiple levels and excessive cut. Additional cut on steep slopes may have adverse effects on site drainage and stability. The requested variance is to allow a maximum height of 36 feet, an increase of 6 feet over the 30-foot height limit. Due to the slope, grading and geologic conditions, and the previously allowed 40-foot height, Staff does not consider this a substantial variance. The essential character of the neighborhood would not change. The applicant purchased the property in 1997. At that time, the maximum height was 40 feet. Staff recommends approval with conditions. The Certificate of Occupancy would not be held for the completion of revegetation; however, the planning and initial steps should be commenced. There was no corner staking of the building, which should have been available prior to the meeting. Charles Phillips was present to represent the applicants. The design of the house began prior to the implementation of the EVDC when there was only a 40- foot height limitation. Without the variance, several retaining walls and additional grading would be required. Handicap accessibility is an issue and the applicants wish to have the main living area on one level. The building is half way up the hill and the view of the roof will blend in with the hillside. There is only a small portion of the entire roof that exceeds the 30-foot height limit. The owners have chosen colors that will blend in with the hillside. It was an oversight not to have the site properly staked. 8./.FORIPUILISMING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment ~ July 10, 2001 Page 2 Applicant was commended for their planning and vicinity map. Public Comment: None. Based on the steep slope, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to approve a height variance of 36 feet as opposed to 30 feet as required in the E-1 zoning district with the following conditions and it passed unanimously. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. Submittal of a complete grading plan, including existing and proposed contours, driveway grade, drainage, erosion control during construction, and revegetation. 2. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, submittal of a height verification certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor. This certificate shall demonstrate compliance with the approved site plan. 3. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the site must be revegetated to minimize slope erosion. Revegetation shall be in compliance with Section 7.2 "Grading and Site Disturbance" of the Estes Valley Development Code. 4. Submittal of a building permit application demonstrating: a. Compliance with the submitted site plan, b. Non-reflective building materials shall be used on the roof and wall exteriors (excluding windows), c. Exterior colors shall be muted and selected to blend in with the surrounding hillside. 3. 129 WEST ELKHORN AVENUE, APPLICANT: KURT STREIB-HEIGHT AND SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4, TABLE 4-5 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Director Joseph reviewed the Staff Report. The applicant wishes to deviate from the maximum height of 30 feet and the 8 foot front setback to allow for the addition of a third story residential unit in the downtown area. The existing building, built in 2000, currently encroaches into the setback requirement on the Cleave Street frontage by 1.1 feet. The third floor addition would extend this north wall vertically, thus expanding the non-conforming structure. The height variance request is for an addition of approximately 3 feet to the maximum building height and is requested to provide parapets on the north, east and west sides of the building. The parapets are a provision of the Uniform Building Code, though the structure may be designed to satisfy the. UBC without the parapets. The mural on the east side of the structure is considered a sign under the i Municipal Sign Code, and was not permitted nor does it fall within the guidelines of the Sign Code. The requested height variance is for 3 feet for a parapet wall and the requested setback variance is for 1.1 feet, consistent with the existing structure. Staff does not consider these requests substantial. The essential character of the neighborhood would not change with the approval of the requested setback variance, though the addition of a third story will have an impact on the visual corridor of Elkhorn Avenue and Cleave Street. Because of ~ this, special considerations to the architectural design of the structure should be required. Based on the location of the existing structure, it is Staff's opinion the requested setback variance is the least deviation from the Code that will allow 8./.FOROPUILISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment July 10, 2001 Page 3 relief. It is recommended that the streetscape appearance of Cleave Street be improved. The backside of this third story will be visible from the south side of Elkhorn Avenue. Serious consideration should be given to the architectural design and appearance of this building. The legality of the exterior mural was discussed. The applicant purports that the mural is not a sign. Director Joseph read the definition of a sign from the Code. Chair Barker excused himself at 8:52 am to attend to duties at the Fairground. Kurt Streib, owner of the building, spoke regarding the mural. The mural was an effort to improve the appearance of the building from Cleave Street, not as an advertising tool. The Board discussed the determination of the legality of this mural as a sign. Public Comment: None. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Sager) that the mural was an illegal sign. Motion passed. Those voting "yes": Ball, Newsom, Sager. Those voting "no": Lamy. Board member Sager suggested that EPURA take a more active involvement in the improvement of Cleave Street. Board member Lamy commended the applicant on creating housing in the downtown area. Since the Code allows the Board of Adjustment to refuse review based on the applicant's nonconformance in regard to the sign code, Staff requested that the Board decide whether to continue discussion of the variance based on the condition that the mural would be removed. Steve Lane, architect, advised that the owner would consider removing the sign in order to proceed with the discussion today. He reviewed photos with drawings indicating the height and appearance of the proposed structure. The proposed design would aesthetically improve Cleave Street. The view from the south side of Elkhorn would be minimized by not having a parapet on that side. Will Birchfield, Chief Building Official, explained that the UBC generally requires parapets but there are some exceptions with alternatives that could apply. Steve Lane said the parapet wall was a better choice for visual screening of roof penetrations. Drainage would also be rerouted from Cleave Street to a storm drain that runs south toward Elkhorn Avenue. The setback variance is less than other existing buildings on Cleave Street and is minimal. Based on Board findings, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to approve the variance request to allow a height variance of 33 feet as opposed to 30 feet and a front yard (Cleave Street) setback of 6.5 feet as opposed to the 8 foot setback as required in the CD zoning district to allow forthe addition of a third-story apartment with the following conditions and it passed. Those voting "yes": Lamy, Newsom, Ball. Those voting "no": Sager. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null MAADFORD PUaLISâ€¢lINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment ~ July 10, 2001 Page 4 and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. Removal of the wall mural prior to final building inspection. 2. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, submittal of a height verification certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor or professional designer. This certificate shall demonstrate compliance with the approved variance. 4. REPORTS None. There being no further business, Vice Chair Sager adjourned the meeting at 9:35 a.m. Jeff Barker, Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary ....FOROPUBLISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2001, 8:00 a.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Board: Chair Jeff Barker, Members Joe Ball, Judy Lamy, Wayne Newsom and Al Sager Attending: Vice Chair Sager, Members Ball, Lamy, and Newsom Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planndr Shirk, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: Chair Barker Vice Chair Sager called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. The minutes of the July 10, 2001, meeting were accepted as presented. 2. 970 EAST LANE: LOT 48, STANLEY HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, APPLICANTS: LARRY & DONNA COULSON - APPEAL STAFF DETERMINATION OF A SEPARATE LEGAL LOT Director Joseph reviewed the staff report. This is an appeal of staff determination denying separate lot status for the east portion of Lot 47, Stanley Heights Subdivision. Staff findings were as follows: Lots 47 and 48 were owned by the same individual in 1952. That year the owner conveyed Lot 47, except for the easterly one-acre area which he retained ownership to together with Lot 48. A private restrictive covenant was in effect in 1952 that prohibited the subdivision of property in Stanley Heights into lots smaller than two acres (refer to Exhibit D of the staff report). At no time has the east portion of Lot 47 been conveyed into ownership separate from either Lot 47 or Lot 48. A conforming subdivision of the 4-acre Coulson property into two separate 2.5 acre lots is not possible. Since 1952, the east portion of Lot 47 and Lot 48 have always been owned by the same individual(s) and always conveyed together. These two areas have never been used separately or taxed separately. All deeds conveying the east portion of Lot 47 and 48 both prior and subsequent to 1972 have referred to the property in the singular (lot or parcel, NOT lots orparcels). Issuance of asecond building permit for the subject property would constitute a violation of the RE-Rural Estate, 2.5 acre minimum lot area, Single Family Residential zoning now in place. The east portion of Lot 47 does not meet the definition of LOT. Section 13.3 of the Estes Valley Development Code defines LOT as..."a platted parcel of land intended to be separately owned, developed and otherwise used as a unit." Based on the foregoing, it is staff's determination that the one-acre easterly portion of Lot 47 does not constitute a separate legal lot for which a building permit can be issued. Issuance of a building permit would violate the RE-Rural Estate 2.5 acre minimum lot area Single Family Residential zoning now in place. Applicant Larry Coulson, 970 East Lane, owner of subject property, introduced neighbors and homeowners association president who were present supporting the request. He bought the property as "one lot with the option to buy the additional one-acre lot." They bought both properties with the intention to build a house on the 1-acre lot, and use the existing residence for investment purposes. After early discussions with Bob Joseph who indicated it would be considered a single lot, he went to the County Planning Office and spoke with Al Kadera. Mr. Kadera advised that it was a legal separate lot. Mr. Hepsley of the County IR"Foâ€¢'PUBLISHING.O. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2001 Page 2 Assessor's Office advised it could be separated. These have always been separate lots; an amended plat has never been recorded to combine the two lots. All recorded deeds refer to separate lots with separate legal descriptions. On a site plan prepared by Estes Park Surveyors, (refer to handouts) this portion of Lot 47 does not touch the road so could not have been used for access purposes. Right of way was acquired from the owner of Lot 49 which bypasses the one acre lot (Lot 47). The covenants requiring the 2-acre minimum expired in 1965 because property owners did not wish to support them. The County Health Department did not foresee any problem with using a septic should they not be able to access the public utility line from The Reserve. The applicant maintains that since there has never been an amended plat, these have always been two separate legal lots. John Phipps, attorney, also was present to represent the applicant and spoke to the Board. Both immediate neighbors on each side are present and have no objection to having a house built upon the subject property. Deeds in the chain of title and real estate taxation were the only issues referred to by Director Joseph. Several lots have been included in single deeds with never the intent to combine the lots, and the same applies to tax records. Never has a metes and bounds description been used to include both lots. Mr. Phipps objected to new arguments that were presented last Friday as not sufficient time for review but wished to proceed anyway. Utilities and access should not be an issue as both are available. Mr. Phipps pointed out that the easterly portion of Lot 47 meets the definition of "Lot of Record" as defined in Section 13.3 #146 of the EVDC. Lot 47 was landlocked at the first subdivision which would create an easement by way of necessity. An access easement was granted in 1969 across Lot 49. Romers built the driveway across Lot 47 in 1982. The owner of Lot 49, George Prohaska, is willing to enter into a new access agreement across Lot 49 if necessary. The current use of the Development Code is taking away property owner rights that this is a separate legal lot. Pamphlet from Al Kadera and Definition 146 of EVDC supports their request that this is a legal lot. Private property rights have been supported on federal and state level. Mr. Phipps answered questions regarding access. Mr. Joseph showed an aerial photograph dated June 7, 1979 showing that the driveway to Lot 48, (referred to in Ms. Romers letter) was constructed and clearly appears on the 1979 photo. Mr. Coulson and Mr. Phipps clarified earlier statements for the Board. Town Attorney White advised that the zoning was not an issue. The question the Board needs to determine is whether this is a separate legal lot. Tho applicant asserts that since 1952 when Lot 47 was divided, it has been conveyed as a separate legal lot. It is staff's interpretation that it was never a separate buildable lot and has been conveyed only as part of Lot 48 since that time. Staff asserts that a third legal lot was not created in 1952 or since 1952. Mr. Phipps restated that the pamphlet describing Legal Lots from the County allows the separate lot designation. Definition 146, Lot of Record, of the EVDC also supports their right. Staff agrees that the division of Lot 47 in 1952 was a legal division but Definition 146 cannot be relied on solely to determine the question that a third buildable lot was created. IRADFOROPUILISHING CO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2001 Page 3 Public Comment: None. Board member Newsom noted that none of the neighbors were objecting and a similar access situation was present on another lot in the neighborhood. Vice Chair Sager appreciated staff's research and requested a motion. Based on the support of the neighbors, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) that staff finding was in error and that this is a buildable lot. The motion was a tie vote. Those voting "yes": Ball, Newsom. Those voting "no": Lamy, Sager. Motion failed. It was moved and seconded (Sager/Lamy) to deny the appeal to staff's position. The motion was a tie vote. Those voting "yes": Lamy, Sager. Those voting "no": Ball, Newsom. Motion failed. Due to the circumstances, discussion was continued to the next meeting when a 5th Board Member would be present to break the tie vote. 3. 2334 HIGHWAY 66, APPLICANT: JEAN SMITH, RIVER SPRUCE, INC. - SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4, TABLE 4-5 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE . Jean Smith was present and reviewed her request to add an 18X8 foot addition for storage and bathroom, and a 10X7 foot addition to the kitchen to the existing manager's building. Planner Chilcott reviewed the Staff Report and recommendations. The special circumstances and practical difficulties are adequate to justify a variance. The proposed additions should be built with the same materials and in the same style and color so the essential character of the neighborhood will not be substantially altered and so adjoining properties will not suffer a substantial detriment. Reference was made to a memo from Stan Griep, Plans Examiner for the Larimer County Building Department, which identified three building issues: (1) if there is less than 6 feet between structures, one-hour fire-wall assemblies would be required, (2) the foundation plans for the additions should be prepared by a Colorado Registered Structural Engineer, and (3) proper clearances to the power lines extending over the two additions must be maintained. An easement should be obtained for the existing overhead power line. Applicant questioned having to hire a Colorado Registered Structural Engineer. This was presented by the County plan reviewer and a building permit issue. Public Comment: None. Based on staff findings and recommendations, it was moved and seconded (Lamy/Ball) to approve the variance to allow a front setback of 9 feet with the following conditions. Motion passed unanimously with one absent. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. The proposed additions shall be built in the same style as the existing building. I.A.F./.PUILIS....COÂ· RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2001 Page 4 2. A one-hour fire-wall assembly shall be installed on all walls where there is less than six feet between structures. 3. A Colorado Registered Structural Engineer shall prepare the foundation plans for the additions. 4. Proper clearances to power lines shall be maintained per the requirements of the 1999 National Electrical Code, as enforced by the State of Colorado. 5. The property owner shall provide a setback certification by a registered land surveyor for the front setback. 6. An easement shall be provided for the existing overhead power line. 7. The driveway shall be re-identified as a restricted driveway. 4. LOT 19, KIOWA RIDGE SUBDIVISION, APPLICANT: CHRISTOPHER & CHRISTINE PISCIOTTA - HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Steve Nichol of Portfolio Group was present representing the applicant and drew the attention of the Board to the drawing which indicated those areas that exceeded the 30-foot limit. The requested variance is three feet, or 10%, which is not substantial. Vice Chair Sager noted that the site plan and vicinity map were omitted from the packet and should be included. Planner Chilcott reviewed the Staff Report. Staff findings were that special conditions on the site were adequate to justify the height variance. Public Comment: None. Based on the steep slope and the minor variance requested, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to approve a height variance of 33 feet as opposed to 30 feet as required in the E-1 zoning district with the following condition. Motion passed unanimously with one absent. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. The roofing material and extenor color of the house shall blend with the natural backdrop. 5. 3442 EAGLECLIFF CIRCLE DRIVE, LOT 7A, BLOCK 7, WINDCLIFF ESTATES 5â„¢ FILING, APPLICANT: BILL WALTERS - HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Bill Van Horn and Matthew Heiser of Van Horn Engineering were present representing the applicant. Planner Shirk distributed a recent letter from the Chambord I Association and reviewed the staff report. The lot is characterized by a 20-25% slope and is undersized for the E-1 district. A conforming structure could be built; however such a structure could be considered out of character for the Windcliff neighborhood. Staff does not consider the variance substantial. The owner purchased the lot in October 2000 after the EVDC and associated height limit were implemented. Staff findings were that special conditions on the site were adequate to justify the height variance. Scott Dorman, Fire Chief, suggested using a more fire-resistive construction material; however, this site does not appear to be located in a wildfire hazard area. The Building Department will verify at the time of building permit issuance. The Architectural Control Committee of the Alpine Meadow Home Owners Association has reviewed the request and has no objection. The letter from the Chambord (condominium) ....FOR/PUILISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS . Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 7, 2001 Page 5 Association is in opposition to the variance; however, they are located on the uphill side of the proposed residence where the height variance would not be visible. Matthew Heiser advised that the applicant agrees to staff recommendations. Bill Van Horn noted that the top of the Walters residence would probably not even come up to the bottom of the Chambord building. Every attempt has been made to tuck this into the slope and should not encroach on the view from the condo building above. Vice Chair Sager recommended the new method of showing the areas above 30 feet crosshatched on a roof design. Public Comment: Donna Raith, president of the Chambord Condominium Association, spoke in opposition to the request as it would affect their views and expressed concern over potential drainage problems. Bill Walters, owner of subject property, advised he has made the effort to reduce the appearance of height by reducing the roof pitch and will use non-reflective roof material. Bill Sharp, chairman of the Alpine Architectural Control Committee, advised that the area was created as a PUD and that is why the smaller lot sizes, but there is sufficient green space to offset that. There is no limitation in their architectural criteria for house size other than a 38-foot height limitation. He spoke in approval, as this structure will be lower than some of the newer homes going in around them. Based on the steep slope, it was moved and seconded (Lamy/Ball) to approve a height variance of 35 feet as opposed to 30 feet as required in the E-1 zoning district with the following conditions. Motion passed unanimously with one absent. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. Submittal of a building permit application demonstrating: a. Compliance with the submitted site plan, b. Non-reflective building materials shall be used on the roof and wall exteriors (excluding windows), c. Exterior colors shall be muted and selected to blend in with the surrounding hillside. 2. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, submittal of a height verification certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor. This certificate shall demonstrate compliance with the approved site plan. 6. 179 CENTENNIAL DRIVE; LOT 12, CENTENNIAL HILLS SUBDIVISION, APPLICANT: JEFF HANCOCK It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Ball) to accept the applicant's withdrawal. Motion passed unanimously with one absent. 7. REPORTS None. eRADrOADPUBLI~~INGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment ~ August 7, 2001 Page 6 There being no further business, Vice Chair Sager adjourned the meeting at 10:50 a.m. Al Sager, Vice Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary el//FOR/Pul'll'ING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission July 17, 2001, 10:00 a.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Commission: Chair Joyce Kitchen, Commissioners Wendell Amos, DeeDee Hampton, Ed McKinney, Cherie Pettyjohn, Edward Pohl, and Dominick Taddonio Attending: Chair Kitchen, Commissioners Amos, Hampton, McKinney, Pettyjohn, Pohl, and Taddonio Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Director Linnane, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent None Chair Kitchen called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated June 19, 2001. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Pettyjohn) that the Consent Agenda be accepted and it passed unanimously. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT AC Sager, Member of the Board of Adjustment - posed the question whether murals be allowed in our Town. 3. REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLAT, AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 01-08, PARK RIVER WEST, TRACT 5, BEAVER POINT FIRST ADDITION, Applicant: Richard H. Wille Trust. Director Joseph made the suggestion that discussion be made on all issues before voting is done on each item separately. Bill Van Horn, the applicant's representative, reviewed the changes made since the meeting in June. The street configuration has been changed to allow for a two-entrance loop. Another traffic study was performed with the recommendation that a interconnection to the property to the west was not beneficial. Clustering of buildings and breaking up the visual mass of the development are conflicting goals; however, this plan attempts a balance of those goals. The FAR is not a deciding factor as to the rezoning as grading can be done to satisfy the requirement in the A Zoning District. Town staff initially recommended it be rezoned to RM. There are pedestrian walkways along the highway, the sides of the lot and the river frontage as well as interior pathways. Mr. Van Horn answered questions from the Commission. In the original design, view corridors were designed to accommodate the neighbors to the east. Director Joseph reviewed the revisions made to the plan. The two lots are now individually compliant as well as the aggregate. The dedication of the public street loop eliminates the prior concerns of cul de sac issues. The revised Traffic Impact Analysis addresses the benefit of a side street connection and provides the information staff requested. The information contradicts several policies and standards in the Town's road and traffic circulation plan. Director Joseph reviewed the land area requirements for the A-Accommodation and RM zoning districts. The number of allowable units would not change, just reconfigured into triplexes or larger if the rezoning were denied. Mr. Van Horn confirmed that refusal of the rezoning would not restrict the number of units or FAR. Commissioner Amos read from the EVDC regarding lesser development closer to Rocky Mountain National Park. Mr. Van Horn noted that Beaver Point is a higher use level and reviewed other more intense alternative uses for this property. Public Comment: Al Sager made the observation that the units along Highway 34 appear to be painted all the same color. BRADFOR'PUSLISHINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - July 17, 2001 Page 2 Rich Wille responded to questions regarding color selection and landscaping at Ranch Meadow. Meredith Sloan, adjacent property owner and former family owner of subject property - spoke in favor of the proposal with the request to preserve the trees along the river and elsewhere on the property. She expressed concern about public access along the river. The river walk is part of a connective pathway system with adjacent properties and is a long- stated goal of the community. Bill Van Horn advised that an arborist reviewed the site. The plan has been revised so that the required plantings will be new. Trees will not be transplanted unless staff and an arborist approve the idea. Matt Delich, traffic engineer licensed in the state of Colorado - prepared the Traffic Impact Study. His analysis concluded that with no connection to the west, the two entrances to this property and the third to the property to the west would operate effectively. There is no significant benefit to having this connection. Cut-through traffic from the west is considered a negative impact to the River West property. His recommendation is the connection should not be made. Mr. Van Horn advised that CDOT has plans to rebuild the highway and traffic should be channeled where it can be handled. Director Linnane answered questions regarding the potential of future road development. He reviewed the Public Works policy to recommend adjacent connections. In general, the more interconnected highway and roadways, the easier it is to get around and more benefit to the public. Mr. Delich responded to a question regarding emergency vehicle access to the property to the west. This could be ~ accomplished by an easement rather than a right-of-way. His conclusion was based on the fact that all traffic will have to go to Highway 36 since there is no connection to the property to the east and no possible connection to Mary's Lake Road to the west. Director Joseph made clear that whatever decision the Planning Commission makes, it would not set precedent or change the Town policy regarding interconnecting roads. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Pettyjohn) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees the rezoning of Park River West Subdivision from A- Accommodations to RM Residential Multi-Family subject to the approval of the Development Plan, and it passed unanimously. It was moved (McKinney/ ) to approve the Preliminary Plat of Park River West listing the conditions of approval from the staff report. The question as to whether the connecting roadway to the west was part of the conditions resulted in a separate motion. The original motion was not seconded or voted upon. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Amos) that the Preliminary Plat of Park River West contain a public right-of-way to the property to the west in accordance with Appendix D.11.1.2* as a condition of approval of the subdivision. *"All subdivisions shall provide for ROW connections and street construction to adjoining properties." Those voting "yes": Taddonio, Amos, Kitchen, Pohl, Hampton and McKinney. Those voting no: Pettyjohn. Based on the need for a revised Preliminary Plat and Development Plan incorporating the required right-of-way to the west, it was moved and seconded (Amos/Hampton) to continue the Preliminary Plat and Development Plan of Park River West until the August 21, 2001 meeting. BRADFOROPUBLISHING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - July 17, 2001 Page 3 The meeting recessed at 12:33 p.m. for lunch. Meeting reconvened at 1:30 p.m. 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 01-07, LOT 16, RANCH MEADOW SUBDIVISION, Applicant: Richard H. Wille Trust. Matthew Heiser was present representing the applicant. He reviewed the proposal and answered questions from the Commission. Director Joseph reviewed the staff report. This is the final development plan of the Ranch Meadow Subdivision. The other lots were developed under the prior code. The development plan is an application for a multi-family development consisting of twelve (12) units in three buildings. The proposal meets the setback standards for the RM district. A revised landscaping plan that meets minimum planting requirements has been provided. The proposal will meet exterior lighting standards set forth in Section 7.9 "Exterior Lighting." Commissioner Amos restated his opposition to the Board of Adjustment ruling regarding the FAR interpretation. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Pohl) to approve Development Plan 01-07, Lot 16, Ranch Meadow Subdivision with the following conditions, and it passed. Those voting "yes": McKinney, Hampton, Pohl, Kitchen, Pettyjohn and Taddonio. Those voting "no": Amos. 1. The building permit applications shall include, in addition to other required information, the following: â€¢ Exterior lighting fixtures. â€¢ Building model (paintbrush, crystal rose, or sunflower). â€¢ Detailed grading plan delineating finished floor elevation and finished e grade. 2. Submittal of a Revised Development Plan incorporating the following changes: a. The following notes shall be added to the development plan: â€¢ The units located along the north and south property lines will require submittal of a setback certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor. This certificate shall be submitted to the building official at the foundation inspection. â€¢ Owner to maintain the "one-way" and "do not enter" signs, including those within the Raven Circle right-of-way. Signs shall e posted priorto issuance of final certificate of occupancy. b. A curb-cut detail shall be added to the plan, and shall be subject to approval by the Town Engineer. c. Any "one-way" and "do not enter" signs shall comply with current M.U.T.C.D. standards. 3. All Development Plan revisions shall be subject to Staff level review and approval. Any appeal shall be made to the Planning Commission. 5. AMENDED PLAT, LOT 3, ROCK ACRES SUBDIVISION, Applicant: John E. Ownby, Jr. & Deborah Ownby McCarty. Paul Kochevar was present to represent the applicants and reviewed the proposal. This is an amended plat application to vacate an easement originally platted on the "Plat of the rock Ares Subdivision of the rock Acres Addition to the Town of Estes Park." The "amended Plat of Lot 3, Rock Acres Subdivision" vacates this easement. Since the easement was created as part of the prior plat, the removal of the easement falls under subdivision review pursuant to Section 3.9 of the EVDC. The access easement was originally platted by the Ownby's to provide access from MacGregor Avenue to all three lots in the Rock Acres Subdivision because the lake and road crossing the dam had not been constructed. The applicant is opposed to items 1 and 4 of the list of conditions. The applicant does not feel it necessary to acquire the written consent of the owners of Lots 1&2 of Livingston Lake Subdivision and Lot 2, Rock Acres Subdivision, to vacate this public easement. Also, the owners of Lot 2 do not wish to enter into a road maintenance agreement with Lots 1 and 3. Director Joseph agreed to delete the first condition regarding the requirement for written consent to vacate DRADFOROPUBL.HINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - July 17, 2001 Page 4 by Lots 1 and 2 of the Livingston Lake Subdivision and Lot 2 of the Rock Acres Subdivision. The owners wish to retain their ability to develop Lot 2 for commercial uses. Based on the potential for increased traffic on the alternate access across the dam, a shared maintenance agreement is warranted. Director Joseph read a letter from the president of the homeowners association to the north. Staff does not recommend that the road across the dam be dedicated to the Town. Staff does agree with the request that a shared maintenance agreement between the three properties be established. Public Comment: Alan Brockway 620 MacGregor Ave, president of Rock Acres 1, approved the Staff recommendations. Bill Stokes, 680 MacGregor, Rock Acres 1, inquired as to where Lot 3 would have their access. Director Joseph responded that any new access would be reviewed at the time of a development plan for that property. Currently they may use the vacated easement and also the road over the dam. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that use of the road would require a shared maintenance agreement. Mr. Stokes commended staff on their recommendations. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/McKinney) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Amended Plat of Lot 3, Rock Acres Subdivision with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Lot 2 of Rock Acres Subdivision shall enter into a road maintenance agreement with Lots 1 and 2 of Livingston Lake Subdivision for the shared access prior to Town Board consideration of this request. 2. The note on the plat shall be revised to state "wetlands and the required wetlands setbacks will be shown on the plat in accordance with the Estes Valley Development Code prior to application for development on the property." 3. Owner of Lot 3 shall be restricted from use of the road over the dam, or shall participate in the shared maintenance agreement. 7. AMENDED PLAT AND REZONING, LOTS 1 AND 2, GRAND ESTATES ADDITION, Applicant: Horst Marschler (Four Winds Motor Lodge). Matthew Heiser was present representing the applicant and reviewed the request. Director Joseph reviewed the staff report. This is an application for an amended plat to move the interior side lot line that separates Lots 1 and 2 of Grand Estates Addition. The appliction also requests the rezoning of Lot 2-A from Accommodations/Highway Corridor Zoning District ("A") to Estate ("ED. The purpose of the amended plat is to adjust the interior side lot line to provide adequate setbacks fro the Four Winds Motor Lodge and related accessory improvements on Lot 1-A. The setback encroachments for the existing single family home and storage buildings on Lot 1-A are grandfathered. The one-story building on the southwest corner of Lot 1-A was converted from use as a farm utility building to use as a residence without obtaining the required permits, inspections and Certificate of Occupancy. Director Joseph reviewed staff recommendations. Public Comment: None. It was moved and seconded (Amos/McKinney) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Amended Plat and Rezoning of Lots 1 and 2, Grand Estates Addition with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. The property owner shall demonstrate Lot 1-A's compliance with all applicable density and floor area ratio provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code and submit an application to staff for review and acceptance prior to application for a building permit for the one story building convened from use as a farm utility building to use as a residence. The property owner shall then obtain all required Building Department permits, inspections, and Certificate IRACF/00/LIBLIS~INGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - July 17, 2001 Page 5 of Occupancy from the Building Department. 2. The amended plat shall dedicate a water easement for the water line on the east side of Lot 2. 3. The applicant shall move the overhead power line or bury the line underground and shall dedicate an easement for electric service on this plat. 4. The gravel drive shall comply with the setback requirements of Section 1.9.D.1.b.(2) of the Estes Valley Development Code. 5. The Dedication Statement shall be changed to remove any reference to streets as no streets are being dedicated by this Plat and utility easements shall be "dedicated" and not "reserved." Chair recessed the meeting for five minutes at 2:30 p.m. 8. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND REZONING, HABITAT SUBDIVISION, Applicant: Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley, Inc. Bill Van Horn was present representing the applicant and reviewed the request. The rezoning is a necessary part of the plan. There is currently no vacant land in the R-1 zoning district. This zoning allows the highest density and fulfills a need for affordable housing. In the vicinity there is a variety of multi-family, two-family and single family developments. Commissioner Amos advised he was on the Board of Directors for Habitat of Humanity; however, he does not have a conflict of interest. Director Joseph suggested reviewing the rezoning request first and voting on it separately. The applicable sections of the EVDC were reviewed. This rezoning request clearly fulfills all of the applicable Comprehensive Plan housing policies. Furthermore, this location is particularly well suited for the proposed R-1 attainable housing lots, given the surrounding land uses, zoning, and lot sizes. This rezoning request is consistent with the Comp Plan goals for providing attainable housing. The Code restrictions for attainable housing were reviewed. Lee Kuntz, 343 Ute Lane, on the Habitat Board for 4 years. Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley is the only organization in Town providing attainable home ownership. These homes will probably be sold for about $95,000, or $88,000 with grants. Their mortgages will be interest free. Appreciation is limited to 3% per year. Owners would not be allowed to rent the units. Public Comment: Dave Clifton, 1230 Graves Avenue - is opposed. Sewage treatment and the narrowness of proposed lot 1 were his concerns. Paul Garrett, 1230 Meadow Lane, president of Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley, Inc. - Their program helps promote stability in the service area of the economy and in their neighborhoods. Jodi Clifton, 1230 Graves Avenue - is concerned with property valuations around the neighborhood. Mike Mangelsen, 1250 Graves Avenue - reviewed his concerns and requested that his Lot 32 also be considered for rezoning. Public hearing for the rezoning was closed. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hampton) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Rezoning from R-2 to R-1 of the Habitat Subdivision with the following condition, and it passed unanimously. 1. Subject to the approval of the Preliminary Plat. IRIDFOR'PUILISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - July 17, 2001 Page 6 Mr. Van Horn reviewed the subdivision proposal. The existing road will be improved but will only be paved on the dedicated portion to the south. The rest will be gravel. Slides of the existing conditions were viewed. A utility easement to the east has not been granted, so a sanitation sewer lift station is being proposed. There will be a required homeowners association that will address the road and sewage lift station maintenance. Matthew Heiser of Van Horn Engineering, and Paul Garrett spoke regarding the financial responsibility of the lift station. There will be covenants addressing trash and other code violations. Habitat would be party to the covenants. Planned housing would be approximately 1,000 square feet, with three bedrooms. Public Comment: Dave Clifton - advised that the road had been graded recently but heavy rains wash it out. Mr. Van Horn advised a storm water management plan would improve the situation. Negotiations are still open to obtain sewer access. Jodi Clifton - spoke in opposition. Matthew Heiser and Bill Van Horn responded to questions from the neighbors and the Commission regarding their concern of the placement of a house on Lot 1. Paul Garrett advised they would be willing to work toward a good compromise. Public hearing regarding the preliminary plat was closed. Chair Kitchen suggested adding the condition of placing a building envelope on Lot 1. Bill Van Horn advised they would instead double the setback next to the Clifton's property from 10 to 20 feet. Director Joseph reviewed the staff report relating to the preliminary plat. Director Linnane's memo dated July 13, 2001, was distributed and reviewed. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/McKinney) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Preliminary Plat of the Habitat Subdivision with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. A shared maintenance agreement specifically for the Habitat lots for the private drive that accesses these lots until such time as a completed cul de sac is constructed to then applicable Town standards accepted by Public Works Department for public street maintenance and a draft of this maintenance agreement shall be provided with the Final Plat submittal prior to Town Board action. 2. A shared maintenance agreement for the shared lift station shall be provided with the Final Plat submittal, along with verification of EPSD inclusion and service, unless alternate gravity service is provided within the UTSD. 3. Installation of postal cluster boxes to serve this development shall be provided if service is not available in a nearby existing installation. 4. Approval of the subdivision plat is contingent upon the approval for rezoning. 5. An Improvement Guarantee shall be provided 6. Compliance with all points of Director Linnane's memo of July 13, 2001. 7. A 20-foot setback on Lot 1 property line adjacent to the Clifton's. 8. Town assumes no responsibility for future construction costs for the roadway. BRADFOROPUILISHING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS . Estes Valley Planning Commission - July 17, 2001 Page 7 REPORTS The first round of code revisions will be presented at the next Planning Commission, August 21, 2001. The option to begin PC meetings earlier will be at the discretion of the Chair. Staff is currently reviewing TimberCreek Chalets Development Plan. Meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m. Joyce Kitchen, Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 31-01 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: That the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, in accordance with Section 31-12-107, C.R.S., hereby states its intention to annex the area described herein. The Board of Trustees finds and determines that the Petition filed with the Town Clerk requesting annexation of the area described herein is in substantial compliance with Section 31-12-107(1)(g), C.R.S. The Board of Trustees further finds and determines that the Petition is signed by persons comprising one hundred percent (100%) of the landowners in the area proposed to be annexed and owning one hundred percent (100%) of the area, excluding public streets and alleys, and any land owned by the annexing municipality. Such area, if annexed, will be known as "GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST ADDITION and GOOD SAMARITAN SECOND ADDITION" to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado. Such area is described as follows: Good Samaritan First Addition A portion of Section 20, Township 5 North, Range 72 West of the 6th P.M. more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW corner of said Section 20; Thence along the West line of said Section 20 S01Â°31'28" W 1320.53' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence S 89Â°54'48" E 1050.00'; Thence S 66Â°48'47" W 1155.55' to the West line of said Section 20; Thence along the West line of said Section 20 N 01Â°31'28" E 456.73' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 5.503 ACRES Good Samaritan Second Addition A portion of Section 20, Township 5 North, Range 72 West of the 6th P.M. more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW corner of said Section 20; Thence along the West line of said Section 20 S 01Â°31'28" W 329.55' to the TRUE ~ POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence S 89Â°54'11" E 1596.32'; Thence N 00Â°05'49" E 60.00'; Thence S 89Â°54'11" E 618.01' to the Easterly Right-of-Way of Dry Gulch Road; Thence along said Right-of-Way S 27Â°59'12" W 465.17'; Thence along a tangent curve, concave to the East with a radius of 79.31', a delta of 15Â°43'47", and a chord of S 20Â°07'19" W 217.93' a distance of 218.62'; Thence S 12Â°15'25" W 222.65'; Thence along a tangent curve concave to the West with a radius of 1191.48', a delta of 5Â°09'59", and a chord of S 14Â°47'35" W 107.40' a distance of 107.43'; Thence S 17Â°25'24" W 252.58'; Thence S 13Â°45'57" W 87.46'; Thence S 01Â°34'55" E 120.29'; Thence S 07Â°24'37" E 124.21'; Thence leaving said Right-of-Way N 89Â°54'48" W 1801.25'; Thence N 66Â°48'47" E 1155.55'; Thence N 89Â°54'48" W 1050.00' to the West line of said Section 20; Thence N 01Â°31'28" E 990.98' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 59.149 ACRES. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with Section 31-12-108, C.R.S., the Town Board Public Hearing shall be held Tuesday, September 25, 2001 at 7:00 p.m., in the Municipal Building, located at 170 MacGregor Ave., Estes Park, Colorado, for ~, the purpose of determining if the proposed annexation complies with the applicable provisions of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk shall give the notice of the hearing as provided in Section 31-12-108(2), C.R.S. DATED this 14~h day of August ,2001. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor . Â· , .1 , ' I 4 4 if- , HIL_CRES-11 ES'~TES ~ SUEDI.Â£0ION - 1 - 1 LU~ ~OOD SAMARITAN ADDITION THE RESERVE WILDFIRE RIDGE U====62- 111/F; ~7~---~ lili /-.LONE PINE ACRES ~ ' S Vt,%4 4/Gt 4>, 34 Â£ CRIPTINN N FIRST ADDITION Section 20, Township 5 North, Range 72 West of the 6th P,M, more escrlbed as follows: the NW corner of said Section 201 thence along the West line of RESOLUTION NO. 32-01 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: That the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, in accordance with Section 31-12-107, C.R.S., hereby states its intention to annex the area described herein. The Board of Trustees finds and determines that the Petition filed with the Town Clerk requesting annexation of the area described herein is in substantial compliance with Section 31-12-107(1)(g), C.R.S. The Board of Trustees further finds and determines that the Petition is signed by persons comprising one hundred percent (100%) of the landowners in the area proposed to be annexed and owning one hundred percent (100%) of the area, excluding public streets and alleys, and any land owned by the annexing municipality. Such area, if annexed, will be known as "CARLSON ADDITION" to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado. Such area is described as follows: That part of the SW 1/4 of Section 29, T5N, R72W of the 6th P.M., and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a stone monument used as the NE corner of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29; thence South a distance of 383.50 feet; thence N88Â°23'19"W a distance of 530.98 feet; thence N52Â°39'32"W a distance of 66.57 feet; thence N71Â°51'17"W a distance of 80.99 feet; thence the following four courses and distances along the easterly line of Community Addition; thence N10Â°11'12"E a distance of 46.93 feet; thence 309.71 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve has a radius of 318.30 feet and is subtended by a chord which bears N17Â°41'18"W a distance of 297.64 feet; thence N45Â°33'48"W a distance of 165.80 feet; thence 151.17 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve has a radius of 136.40 feet and is subtended by a chord which bears N13Â°48'52"W a distance of 143.55 feet; thence S72Â°03'56"E a distance of 106.45 feet; thence S88Â°31'21"E a distance of 794.44 feet to the East line of said SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 29; thence South a distance of 229.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Except any portion contained in instrument recorded June 7,1976 in Book 1711 at Page 324. Containing 8.99 Acres. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with Section 31-12-108, C.R.S., ~ the Town Board Public Hearing shall be held Tuesday, September 25, 2001 at 7:00 p.m., in the Municipal Building, located at 170 MacGregor Ave., Estes Park, Colorado, for the purpose of determining if the proposed annexation complies with the applicable provisions of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk shall give the notice of the hearing as provided in Section 31-12-108(2), C.R.S. DATED this 14th day of August ,2001. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk or .. L \.i 5/4 . N *g~Ara~ =mc- - ... 2, e -A- 43 -i-* . L U ).,144 1.i- rr-T-r-1 31-4, ESTTY / *00. / /...7 44 4, f ..0 404 f .trTE 1 r LANC CSTC* 74 60' 1 I $ 1 ~ 0,4 1 4,4 - " 1 :PA:i 73â€¢7.4.1 U.S. N. 35 41 . , A i- 9 -**+17 At.9 .7 1 4 K , 4 . h.Â« 3 : 4,0:~tÂ«-~~ i; , / 1. PA~.. 44<~ -~â€¢4.l 06/.3 KN la f / 1, . Hillr to PARK \Â» ti"R-6.3 AID. PA Â»\ /1/M y -ar* kÂ«Ub -- -~<, LAU /97 1 ...4 1 -iftE I 1 ; . 25.- fUX :Mt: 2~. 1 r~...2' Mc. 1 A -- 0 2,411? i I 14Â»~ 02,0,1 01 7/ F.- 4 d rs , , ~ I 1 ~WOU'trA,~ ~ V 1 1 .All &74, 1 j 0-------/1 1 1 cowwumÂ¢ 400 ~ h \ r. 1 1 #1 /.- ~ -.... - 1 ! . . . 1 , j k., 2 / f 30 29 ' 14 ~ ~- 4U,=tr~.-rn,-iâ€¢~ -~'- L .. ~ Â· ' i . ! 1 â€ž Â¢ GOL, Couâ€¢3Â£ AfF- 4 - - 0-4- .... 2 1\ 0 I t' < 1 I 6 2 flothllf i*Iâ€¢--4 ! ~C) ESTES PARK SUR VEYEIRS & ENGI INEER L . 2 NC, 1-; Â·~' ESTES PARK SURVEYORS & ENGINEERS, INC, i i P,0, BOX 3047 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BLDG I ~ Town of Estes Pallâ‚¬ Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Alison Chilcott, Planner I Date: August 9, 2001 Subject: Four Winds Motor Lodge Lots 1&2 Grand Estates Addition Amended Plat and Rezoning Request Background. ~ This is an application for an amended plat to move the interior side lot line that separates Lots 1 and 2 of Grand Estates Addition to the Town of Estes Park. This application also requests the rezoning of Lot 2-A from Accommodations/Highway Corridor ("A") to Estate The site is located at 1200 Big Thompson Avenue (Lot 1 /Lot 1-A) and 571 Grand Estates Drive (Lot 2/Lot 2-A) within the Town of Estes Park. Marschler Properties, Inc owns both lots. Location Map --] 93 '.---tjig Thompson 42#4212!ghway J.-*x-N ,/lu MblE D @- -DES TATIES D 1 / ~Â»cÂ·Eline-Â»0 ,.,/\E--=9=1[-ilg'. ibmilyRes,Â¢1*------,/~ / b'/ \C ~-30 LAKEF~â€¢TOR XÂ» 4--fofÂ« The purpose of the amended plat is to adjust the interior side lot line to provide adequate set backs for the Four Winds Motor Lodge and related accessory improvements on Lot 1-A. The Planning Commission conditionally approved the amended plat and rezoning. All conditions have been satisfied, except one due to time constraints. The unsatisfied Planning Commission condition is "The applicant shall move the overhead power line or bury the line underground and shall dedicate an easement for electric service on this plat." Ed Dragon estimates that it will cost approximately $2,000 to set a new pole and move the lines. Mr. Marschler has agreed to pay the first $1,000 of the cost to relocate the overhead power line and the Light and Power Department has agreed to pay the balance. The power line currently crosses over the single-family residence on Lot 2/2A. Van Horn Engineering and Surveying has revised the amended plat, showing a new location for the overhead power line, which falls within existing easements. But, due to time constraints, the power line has not been moved. Budget. The Town's estimated share of the cost to move the overhead power line is approximately $1,000. Action. Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed amended plat and rezoning CONDITIONAL TO: 1. The applicant shall pay the Town $1,000 towards the expense of moving the overhead power line prior to recording the amended plat. â€¢ Page 2 Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Alison Chilcott, Planner I Date: August 9,2001 Subject: Habitat for Humanity Preliminary Plat and Rezoning Background. This is a rezoning request (R-2 to R-1) and a preliminary subdivision plat to create four new 6,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet lots to be restricted for attainable housing per Section 11.4 of the Estes Valley Development Code. The site is located on a portion of Lot 33, Bonnie Brae Addition to the Town of Estes Park, between Graves Avenue and Community Drive, within the Town of Estes Park. The site is owned by Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley, Inc. Location Map Mantord Avenlle C i.,1 av'J' VA'll, - 0 33_-8 \N-=1_-3-- Wr:di],~."nuc L 7 ~ - '~1161,,il j[ C., ++0menity-Site Portic n of Lot 33 Bonn e Brae Addition R-1 Single-Family Residential Zoning District. This district is established to provide opportunities for attainable single-family residential development within the Town of Estes Park and in close proximity to services. Accordingly, district regulations will allow densities of up to eight (8) dwelling units per acre, with a minimum lot area of five thousand (5,000) square feet, subject to the attainable housing limitations in Â§11.4.C of this Code. Owner-Occupied Attainable Housing. Housing that is attainable to households earning no more than eighty percent (80%) of the median income for Larimer County and who pay no more than thirty percent (30%) of their total income on housing costs. Deed Restriction Required. Attainable housing units developed pursuant to this Section shall be deed-restricted to assure the availability of the unit for sale or rent to persons meeting the income guidelines and definition set forth in Â§11.4.C above, for a period of time no less than twenty (20) years. The mechanism used to restrict the unit shall be approved by the Town or County Attorney. The Planning Commission voted to recommend conditional approval of the rezoning request and preliminary subdivision plat. Rezoning is subject to approval of the Final Plat. The following conditions remain: 1. A shared maintenance agreement specifically for the Habitat lots for the private drive that accesses these lots until such time as a completed cul de sac is constructed to then applicable Town standards accepted by Public Works Department for public street maintenance and a draft of this maintenance agreement shall be provided with the Final Plat submittal prior to Town Board action. 2. A shared maintenance agreement for the shared lift station shall be provided with the Final Plat submittal, along with verification of EPSD inclusion and service, unless alternate gravity service is provided within the UTSD. 3. Installation of postal cluster boxes to serve this development shall be provided if service is not available in a nearby existing installation. 4. Approval of the subdivision plat is contingent upon the approval for rezoning. 5. An Improvement Guarantee shall be provided. Budget. None. Action. Approval of the preliminary plat with the remaining Planning Commission conditions. â€¢ Page 2 BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 2, 2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 2nd day of August, 2001. Committee: Chairman Gillette, Trustees Jeffrey-Clark and Newsom Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Police Chief Richardson, Fire Chief Dorman, Clerk O'Connor Absent: None Chairman Gillette called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. ~ POLICE DEPARTMENT. Police and Businesses in Partnership. In a memo dated July 12th,Cpi, Pass introduced a program that would be co-sponsored with the Chamber of Commerce. In summary, when a business crime has been committed (shoplifting, fraud, etc.) Dispatch would fax pertinent information to the Chamber and then Chamber staff would alert their membership via e-mail. Staff believes minimal Police Dept. staffing levels would be required, and implementation costs would be negligible. The Committee recommends approval of the Police and Businesses in Partnership Program, commending Cpi. Pass for his initiative. ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT TO: CHIEF RICHARDSON VIA THE CHAIN OF COMNLAND FROM: CPL. COREY P. PASS SUBJECT: POLICE AND BUSINESSES IN PARTNERSHIP (PBrp) DATE: J ULY 12, 2001 CC: Sirs, I am writing to inform you of a new program tliat I want to create and implement. The program is going to be called "POLICE AND BUSINESSES IN PARTNERSHIP" or (PBIP). EPPD and the ESTES VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE will sponsor this program. The purpose o f the program is as follows: Officer A responds to a report of a business crime, such as shoplifting, fraud, etc. The officer takes the initial report and only has a description of the suspect. At that point, the officer will contact dispatch with suspect information. Dispatch will fill out an information sheet see attached, and fax it over to the Chainber of Commerce. There staff will then send out an email to over 350 businesses in the local area describing the crime and tlie suspects, with instructions tliat i f this person(s) is seen to contact EPPD imdediately. I have spoken with the Chamber to reference this and they are excited about the possibilities. This program will be a great benefit to the local business owners, the Chamber of Commerce and EPPD. I have created the recommended procedure, standards and forms required to put this into action, see - attached. The cost of this program will be very small to implement and will require very little manpower. I am leaving for vacation and will not be back until July 25,2001, but I hope to have this tip and running as clole to August 1 as practical. If you have any questions, comments or concerns please feel free to contact me. L.,4.1 /by) 7 Corey P. Pass POLICE AND BUSINESSES IN PARTNERSHIP . (PBIP) SPONSORED BY THE ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT 3 A AND THE ESTES VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PURPOSE: The purpose of this program is to decrease business crimes of area businesses, increase communication between area businesses, EPPD and EVCC, and to provide a safer place for our citizens and tourists. PROCEDURE: How many times do we take a report of a business crime (such as shoplifting, check fraud, credit card fraud, etc.) and wish that we had a way to warn the other businesses in town? This procedure will assist us in accomplishing just that. When an officer receives a report of a business crime, the officer will respond to the scene and obtain a description of the suspects, as soon as possible. The officer will then contact communications with this description and ask that it be put into the PBIP. The communications officer will then complete a form listing the descriptions of the suspect, the type of crime and a notation stating that if the suspect(s) are seen to contact EPPD immediately. The communications officer will then fax the sheet to the Chamber of Commerce @ 586-6336. A representative of the Chamber will then send out an instant email to over 350 local businesses, explaining the situation and asking for their assistance. If this occurs afterthe chamber is closed, they will send out the email first thing in the morning. The Chamber of Commerce is open as follows: Summer M-F 8-8 Contacts: Dave Thomas (Director): 586-0144 Sat. 9-8 Holly Collingwood (Mgr.): 586-3543 Sun. 9-5 Front Desk: 586-4433 Voice Mail: 586-6336 Winter M-F 8-5 Fax: 586-6336 Sat. 9-5 Sun. 10-4 The email will be sent to the businesses with a reference header stating "PBIP" that will inform them that it is an email that needs their attention, as soon as possible. It has been determined that a high amount of the businesses in the area do have computers and are on line. The number of recipients of these emails is also likely to increase, once this starts being advertised. STANDARDS: It will be up to the officer to decide if he/she feels that this would be helpful on a case by case basis. The main purpose of this program is for it to be utilized for business/property crimes where we have a description of the suspect(s); however, the potential is limitless. It has been shown time and time again that only through partnerships with our citizens, business owners and guests will we be able to keep this as safe of a place as it already is. FACSIMILE POLICE AND BUSINESSES IN PARTNERSHIP . (PBIP) SPONSORED BY THE ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE ESTES VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE DATE: TIME: OFFICER: SYNOPSIS: DESCRIPTION(1) DESCRIPTION(2) If you see someone matching this description, contact EPPD immediately @ 586-4000 m ' i. ~ 4~. '~, ~fr,~; I*Â·';,:fm~: rÂ© A , Vil ;07*11*i . 'A 3 P 1,4 :, 5 ' ,@i' ,#:3,Â¢44.7 W f 0 1 .1 2.2-. . *.4~ â€¢ ittlt?tf 1 , , ''" A> lie , 4. d ,;irt:t~Â·~~ '~,4.9 ..7.2 1 : 02 6/ VEL/~fiti:~ 1.1 4 4 1 .1 - 4, t ' 4/ 3 '11 7 f 342 4 f nu :48.v,~~1 1~ Â·*"'4-AI ~~0~'t':4 Â· 1 . 1 , ... ./ 7 ://~*Ap t, -te,4 1'.TZ''te 6 4 >,2 3%7444: 7, R a tr ., 1 I t q."*24) .1 1 i r i r. 4 1 7 / 4 .4 I p.4 9 . /2 4#.A , 73044 B' 4 0â€¢ 70 *tft. 46 4 . , r. , :. 2iia 1. 4,AY #:.,4:yt, .2, y f c :: ~ b#p: A , -f A I . I J. 6 ' '1 -~ 27 ~~ 4 + 1 E + i -, 3 1. 1 +L+1*////92<3/ 0 ''3 1 .. I .al - 4 I '= - , b. t Fe " 6, ' g * '43 ,.2 .41.20 kK1 . Â¢46 .. . A â€¢ C."3 ...3 1 t,,1849: / --,t 9 U- 3.-9 1 4 ~ 4. 2: /2 3 ..Al /â€¢ t~~ ~F ~ 1 I . 0'' i. 97;* I :& : t.4 i /- MI~"1 . I ..9/L. .59 4 ; 7. .nÂ· . - a. 12Â· 1, 41. , 9 1 Peâ€¢ 45 â€¢ ' 6:f Vt ..2Â£ 6 . -V 4.24 I I % I . /9 I -v . - u. 47. I It Itt 44 ' 4 W ,hy, 2 Â£ i,YÂ·Â·I'~'...../ : >>i. 5 -9~L -f'Â· 1 1 4 3 1 0, 9, .811 .1 1 SED: li .A.r '.: ,/.r., C ..2 4 4 I j. ' . I * 4:f, - W = P-9 ; - , ,- â€¢,i 3//1 lit 193 I Â¥- Â·Â· .1/87â‚¬, -24 - ' ,:1 ; , 4 . .-Ii j - .E 19 1 L.- -ill Â¢ N .. * 4 .1,22 22 4 ,#VI 1 - e + 4/ 9 .44 4-.'$/1.: . 11 If, F 1 k *lk , 4, .. t.-1 3 4 ..1 1:~42 j A - .-- .t *Â¥ : i. 1 . . - .'494'?Cm.Â· vt ; .3'Â·977:4 :- J . 4, t F., 43 Eff . I ;9 - * 44. rt %,,1 ~add<*, 1 , 't :â€¢ : # . $ ' 1 1 ~ â€¢ A Â· Â· C. I 7/.L - f 24 , 9 ,\ I .,1 4 4 5 , i 1 : Wt/~ - 4 11* 2,1 1 0 E 6-1 =Z 5 Iti â€¢O 0 10~ 2::i - WI OF EST S PARI~/ VENTS CENTER/ICE RINK PROJECT 193MHinOS AABIA _r ' - 0 Â·. <Riffig=/I . - 6, I. ' ...:.1/I 4:414.--,aug#ifTE,6/;1~ '1.lflillrilf 1 ' 9Â¥ r. . --- Â·Â·Â·. 2 - --m i .. E Â·MÂ·,Â·.2 -0-.41$3T*9 . r- . 1 V, . -... ~t....-t'f>iftmh>Â·Â·.Â·~*392 '~7~Â©~ . I ./-' ' 'll- I /'''r' V ~111- 1 : '44 D.:~Illillillb -1â€¢.-L- 4 * 1 , FF ~:- . ff 2Â·.R>2.-45 ; {int: kirm- , U ~Â·~~~' .B-Â·:-*-/~.rlÂ·~.'Â·- /2Â·~ L . .ru...6 91- . dw-SY/-7 -4.. 'A I. .A 7Â¥1 GY- Â·47;*I. -<:,5-~d2Â· ~ ~'/:~ ., ~Â·~17.Â· tert- . t:.3. Â·......0---2.. Â·' Â·Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·.1# I '. . Pt: . - 4 ..Â·7:64Â·'.:'.tw/,1.--'/: 1. 3~ . ~'391-~ I ..9*;&4Â·il"I * . -p . ./*, 4 09.mAItÂ· 4 + .1 91*-c:-t~ - t ..... .4.4 ,-b.,9.4#4-, /6. . ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 0 tip *_ rt .:L' ~ . 't 1, - *44- 3 1% S TOWN OF ESTES P RIG CENTER/ICE RINK PROJECT A6607 el ..PrÂ¥21. 41.-4- r.-1 PL,-=-:99~-wr=31 4IF**:'~12~ 'E F 1 B# I .Â£,f-~,:1@11.-- d r-11 "my -1 Â»1 s 101 ./1 r -- 1 0 33. EN' j!10 11111-,-t'FIN -71--1 N-1 . 5.411 -\C.--4 7-- 3 31 ' 19 r 1 1 lit (17 7 \\\ m l,M'!3-1 E--1 -1-1 LIT 1 I '' 4 = 1:10 2 - 4/ 7 E- 17 - 7- lik - '~ 7'TT _ 1- - ---El- 7 F'-4 U . / -. lilli---1 1----1 --1-4 E--6 C 2% f ~ lilli 11 1 1 ) ,- itiip--i â€žr--9.-1 --063--7 1 y 1 N 2123 k R ME * - ilI i* -' P j 1 -to; i K < 1 a. NÂ» Iltll-1 13Â£=f -1-i==3~~ rl~- h--4 rn- co - 1-->, 1 Â£91 3,%Â¥*.1 2 -- .....1. - 2,3 lili=. 1 -01 G TY Yl h \ . 1.11.1 1 -Â·.-2-,Mod '/.4 :m 'li.' *If j ~ 3 4 i. 4'i.kfi ,~EilÂ¢'.4J=24 ~ I 1 1*,44*61Â¢ =WK,~.*00..4 v -tr[ i /1- 1 It---1 - -- ''iMME; 0.1~:4 4774*1 ..709-Lpt- 1/. 4- m 2 HUTH JOI /Joluoo lu,AH c Al /lied 991,3 JO UAAol NÂ¥ld }100121 13[A37[ AMiN3 â€¢ Sale,)055Â¥ d.IO[Il IOOE 1snSny Â£1 ~31VG 11.R rE. f. Â·101 *19.4.1 ID -i- 1 ILI---1 4 ..,4 1.111 1 It ____1 L- 1/11--1 --1-1 hui I 1 1 , :'C 11 1 1 1 /r--1 11 1 -1; -- -- I 40 " -3 -371 --" 1 r - 2 2 ----1 e-- 111/N 11 -1 ---4 --- ----1 Illil lili 11 U 1//9... lili b h 3 -1 9 'EM. lilli â€¢ La V i -21 UJ "129= La -1 El---' ' lilli ' -oi E- rL-- '14 3' Z 1.= 1 1 IG- ' L--- JLQI-5-J' HNO EISVHd - Nrld M EJOI4]KI 0 luts . solutooss.V dJO41 â€ž0-,9 I =. I :3 [002 1snanv BI ~11.Va , 3-1_23 MUTH JOI /iowa BAH G HA3 /3-IEd â‚¬3193 10 UAAOJL opulo[00 . lied 93153 01 Ell<:W.'. 112: 1 0 =1 iiiiii ' ./~~~~~~~1- -i~ J L ~r r mlll 1 fr f 1 fr j. Z iâ‚¬.4 I 11111 - -1 0 41]!f il 0 O 6 * -1 ill 0 1 d 1 0- E >t -, ..lilli /11111 [13 $2 -1 v, a i. 11111 7 1, r -Â·- "m KIT , aftii?a e U Â· i' '4 4.,r...9, 3 Hilill No U.-] 1 )[UIN JOI /10}U@3 1UOAH ' HA3 /112& 50193 JO UAA01 41mH OM . SJO!410(1 00 RuIS o gleIXESV dioql opelo!03 â€¢ liEd 60153 1002 WnSny Â£1 :31Â¥0 E 01 Z O CE 0 > 97 IL- < b Â£21 L E A [13 W ul 4 E- I E 00 E- - La D i t.:)<It 4 1- ~ O C/l a 0 0 0 0 1 1-3 Il I . *MA 1 0 d.14 Et~~ 1% \ M 1 1-2 m >CL MUTH @DI /131U)3 1UJA) 9 HA 3 /31Ed solE 3 Jo LIMol 41/OH oN â€¢ SPI413 DIUG â€¢ gletoossv *0111 SCALE: 1"=8'-0 Ope]O[Ol â€¢ M.IEd 5019 //&$.- L.6 !002 lmBny Â£ mi If B n n 3 - 11 1 -- 11 1 1 11 Â¥ I In / 1 . F 11 -* 11 U U U --4- - -I)-liN .-- 9 \\ 00 - 11 \\ - 4 \\ M M t im - E \\ \\ \\ 0 f \\ Zm 1 0 0-U 0 \\ 'll Ul 0 \\ \ 0 \/ \\ M 0 E \\ O n . lA F... U - U U . 0\ U \\ U \\ \\ \\ 0 n . \\ 0 k. -U-----i-- EAST/ WEST BUILDING SECTION NOI133S DNIalIAE[ .0-08=.I 31 RUTH JOI /131Uoo lu@A3 'adHAH /31Ed 60153 JO UAAol ttleaH ON â€¢ 9131410(1 squlooluis â€¢ 919!009â‚¬V d/041 ope.Joloj â€¢ 1-'Ed Sols3 I 003 1sn:ny El :3LVG