The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2001-10-234 4 Prepared 10/18/01 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, October 23, 2001 . 7:00 p.m. AGENDA Estes Park Volunteer Fire Dept. Award Presentation - Fire Chief Scott Dorman: Lifesaving Awards to Captain Bo Winslow and Lieutenant Robert Hirning, and Heroism Award to John Grasso. PUBLIq COMMENT TOWN BOARD COMMENTS 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated October 9, 2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Light & Power, October 11, 2001. B. Public Works Committee, October 18,2001: 1. Police Dispatch Office Remodel & Alarm Project, $96,308. 2. Police Dept. Squad Room Addition Project, $50,600 (Preliminary Guaranteed Maximum Price). 4. Wildfire Ridge Development Agreement - Applicant requests time extension from 11/08/01 to 02/06/02. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST AND SECOND ADDITION ANNEXATION - (1) ANNEXATION AGREEMENT, (2) ANNEXATION, (3) REZONING ORDINANCE, AND (4) PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT: A. Mayor - Open Public Hearing B. Staff Report, including Annexation Agreement C. Applicant Presentation (20 min. max.) D. Town Attorney White read Resolution #42-01, Annexation Ordinance #16- 01, and Rezoning Ordinance #17-01 E. Public Testimony (the audience will be given up to 3 minutes ea. and we will alternate between those in support and opposition. If attorneys are representing a client, they will each be given a maximum of 10 minutes) F. Mayor - Close Public Hearing G. Motion (four separate motions required) to Approve/Deny: 1 Continued on reverse side I '1 1 (1) Annexation Agreement. (2) Annexation of Good Samaritan First and Second Addition, Resolution #42-01 and Annexation Ordinance #16-01. (3) Rezoning Ordinance #17-01. (4) Preliminary Subdivision Plat. 2. OR01NANCE #18-01 - ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, BLOCK 1. A. Staff Report. B. Attorney White read Ordinance #18-01. C. Motion to Approve/Deny. 3. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. 4. ADJOURN. 2 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 9, 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 gth day of October, 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 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS None. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated September 25, 2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development, September 27, 2001: Special Events Dept.: 1. 2001-2002 Rooftop Rodeo Committee Members. 2. Grandstand Furniture Replacement Purchase, $6,000+shipping. B. Public Safety, October 4, 2001: Police Dept.: 1. Wiest Dr. Street Closure 10/10/01 - Fundraising Event. Chief Richardson clarified that event representatives have amended their request to 10/18/01. 2. Elkhorn Ave. (downtown) Street Closure - Halloween Festivities. 4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, October 2, 2001 (acknowledgement only). 5. Estes Valley Planning Commission: Special Meeting September 17, 2001, and Regular Meeting September 18,2001 (acknowledgement only) .~ Board of Trustees - October 9, 2001 - Page 2 6. Ordinance #15-01 - Amending the EVDC to Rezone Park River West (Town Board held Public Hearing 9/18/01). It was moved and seconded (Doylen/Gillette) the consent agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously. l A. PLANNING COMMISSION CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): Mayor Baudek stated that if the Town Board, Applicant(s), Staff or the Public wish to speak on any of the following items, a formal Public Hearing would be conducted as follows: A. Mayor - Open Public Hearing B. Staff Report C. Public Testimony D. Mayor - Close Public Hearing E. Motion to Approve/Deny 1. PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP. Tract 14, Beaver Point, Second Addition, James M. Whittlesey/Lazy R Cottages/Applicant. 2. SUBDIVISION. Amended Plat of Part of Lots 1, 2,15 & 17, Block 10, Second Amended Plat of the Town of Estes Park, to be known as EPCO Subdivision, EPCO, Inc./Applicants - APPLICANT REQUESTED CONTINUATION TO NOVEMBER 13, 2001. As there was no public testimony, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Jeffrey- Clark) Item #1 be approved, and Item #2 be continued to November 13, 2001, and it passed unanimously. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. AUDIT (Year Ending 12/31/00). Finance Officer Brandjord presented the Audit for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31,2000, in accordance with general accounting procedures. It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Doylen) the Audit be accepted, and it passed unanimously. 2. RESOLUTION #41-01 - INTRODUCTION OF PRELIMINARY 2002 BUDGET. Finance Officer Brandjord introduced said Resolution, announcing~that the public hearing for adoption of the 2002 Budget will be held November 13 . Public Town Board Budget Study Sessions are planned 10/15 and 10/18 from 3:30-5:30 p.m. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Barker) Resolution #41-01 be approved, and it passed unanimously. 3. ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY: CM INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA) FOR LAND TRANSFER, & (2) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) FOR FUND TRANSFER - BOTH AGREEMENTS BETWEEN EPURA AND THE TOWN. Town Attorney White outlined the IGA where the Town has agreed to mak6 the three remaining payments on the Knoll Property, and the official land transfer of Lots 1 and 3, Stanley Knoll Subdivision, and the MOU authorizing the transfer of certain funds from the Light & Power Enterprise Fund to EPURA. EPURA will reimburse these funds upon the sale of the Bob's Amoco parcel to a new user on or before 12/31/02. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Gillette) the Intergovernmental Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding between EPURA and the Town be approved, and it passed unanimously. Board of Trustees - October 9, 2001 - Page 3 4. REZONING & FINAL PLAT FOR THE HABITAT SUBDIVISION, A PORTION OF LOT 33, BONNIE BRAE SUBDIVISION, HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF ESTES VALLEY/APPLICANT. Mayor Baudek opened the public hearing. Community Development Dir. Joseph presented the Staff Report, noting that the Town Board previously approved the Final Plat, however, the need for a rezoning hearing was overlooked, thus this item must be revisited. The rezoning request is from R-2 to R-1 to create four 6-7,000 sq. ft. single-family lots restricted for attainable housing. The required deed restriction assures the availability of the units for sale or rent to persons meeting the income guidelines for no less than 20 years. Â· The Planning Commission recommended approval. Bill Van Horn, Habitat Representative, stated that considerable discussion was held at the Planning Commission, however, the land use "stands on its own merit." Town Attorney White read Ordinance #13-01 zoning the property R-1 Single-Family Residential Zoning. The Ordinance includes an emergency clause. There was no additional testimony, thus Mayor Baudek closed the public hearing, and it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Gillette) Ordinance #13-01 be approved and the Final Plat be reaffirmed, and it passed unanimously. 5. LIQUOR SHOW CAUSE HEARING - (1) APPROVAL OF STIPULATION AGREEMENT & (2) FINDINGS AND ORDER OF SUSPENSION FOR DEER RIDGE, INC., dba NATIONAL PARK VILLAGE SOUTH (COUNTRY SUPER MARKET). Police Chief Richardson reported that following a meeting with the Licensee, staff prepared and executed a Stipulation Agreement. In the Agreement, staff is recommending a standard 21-day suspension of the 3.2% Retail Beer License, with the actual time served of 7 days from 12:01 a.m. Thursday, October 11 th, through 11:59 p.m. Wednesday, October 1711 The remaining 14 days will be held in abeyance for one year from the date of the "Findings and Order of Suspension." It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Doylen) the following be approved: (1) Stipulation Agreement, and (2) the Findings and Order of Suspension, and it passed unanimously. 6. BOARD ROOM REMODELING PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH DESIGN. As noted at the September 11 th Town Board meeting, this item was returned for consideration. Town Administrator Widmer advised that Chief Richardson, Judge Brown and he met and, with minor floor changes, an official Court space has been provided in the Police Dept. Randy DeMario/Heath Const. presented the final preliminary cost estimate of $766,310. Trustee Doylen questioned whether the benefit from Heath mobilizing with the Library Project remains in place, and Mr. DeMario confirmed that the Town is realizing a savings of approximately $25,000. Mayor Baudek was assured that the $766,310 cost was firm, pending any change orders initiated by the Town. Should the final GMP be significantly increased, the Town would have the ability to amend the project. Trustee Habecker stated that the cost figures do not appear out of line. Roger Thorp stated that the $766,310 figure is only for the Board Room remodel, and that he is seeking a decision on the additional Police Dept. minor remodel. . Judge Brown commented on the staff meeting that addresses his security, and records storage concerns. Trustee Doylen added that the existing room does not meet audio-visual needs of the physical audience and television audience, and there is poor ventilation, and sound. George Hockman questioned the future use of the existing Board Room and Administrator Widmer responded that the room could be used as a training/meeting room and perhaps future office space. It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Jeffrey-Clark) the Town proceed with the Town Board Remodeling Project for a Preliminary Guaranteed Maximum Price of $766,310, with the architect's fee for the Squad Room design to be obtained and submitted to the Town Board for further consideration, and it passed unanimously. 7. STANLEY PARK QUIET TITLE - UPDATE. Town Attorney White stated that all Larimer County civil filings are being reviewed and categorized into basic, Board of Trustees - October 9, 2001 - Page 4 medium and complex cases. This action was necessitated due to retirement of Judge Sullivan and appointment of three judges. The Town's case could fall into the basic and complex categories, and the Court will make the final decision 8. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A. Staff and Trustees have completed M of the presentations for the Ice Rink/Events Center. A total of 18 presentations have been planned and reception is generally very positive. Mail ballots will be mailed next week. Trustee Barker confirmed that this is an EVRPD Mail Ballot Issue and everyone within the EVRPD boundar'y is eligible. 9. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION: Section 24-6-402(4)(B), C.R.S. - Conference with Town Attorney White for the purpose of receiving legal advice on two specific legal questions as follows: (1) Fall River Estates Lawsuit, and (2) Larry & Donna Coulson vs. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, (3) Potential Litigation, and (4) 24-6-402- (4)(E) Instructing Negotiators. It was moved and seconded (Doylen/Gillette) the Town Board enter Executive Session for a conference with Town Attorney White for the purpose of receiving legal advice dn items 1 4 listed above, under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402-(4)(B), and C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(E), and it passed unanimously. Following completion of all agenda items, Mayor Baudek adjourned the meeting at 7:46 p.m., to enter Executive Session, declaring a 5-minute recess. Mayor Baudek reconvened the Board and adjourned the meeting at 8:59 p.m. John Baudek, Mayor Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk BRADFOROPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 11, 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 11 th day of October, 2001. Committee: Chairman JeffrerCIark, Trustees Habecker and Newsom Attending: Chairman Jeffrey-Clark and Trustee Habecker Absent Trustee Newsom Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Light & Power Director Matzke, Deputy Town Clerk van Deutekom Chairman Jeffrey-Clark called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS RATE INCREASE - REPORT. Ruben Blackmon, General Manager/Charter Communications reported a rate increase of $4.04 for basic cable service effective December 1, 2001. This increase is a direct result of increased programming, maintenance, and equipment costs. Areas discussed include programming and licensing fees, analog vs. digital systems, organizational changes, new technology, and FCC regulations. ITRON DATA PAC UPGRADE - REPORT. Director Matzke reported that the Dept. purchased the Itron DataPac vehicle mounted remote meter reading system in March 2000. In August, Itron announced a hardware and software upgrade to the system that further improves reading efficiency. The upgrade is available through Hometown Connections for $4,500 until November 1, 2001. After November 1St, the cost of the upgrade will be $5,000. This purchase was not anticipated or included in the 2001 Budget, however, there is sufficient funding in capital equipment to accommodate this upgrade. The Committee recommends approval to purchase the Itron DataPac upgrade from Hometown Connections at a cost of $4,500. REPORTS Platte River Power Authority (PRPA): Director Matzke presented the proposed PRPA 2002 Budget and explained that the final Budget will be adopted in December 2001. Delivery of the first gas turbine is scheduled in November. The Board approved a 15- year contract with a private company for the sale of 10,000 tons of ash per year to be used for road materials and concrete. Financial Report: The September income statement and graphs were reviewed and discussed. Project Updates: New service lines are being installed at Kiowa Ridge Subdivision. Staff is assisting with the Fairgrounds lighting project by removing and erecting light poles. The new duct system to Mall Road is in the bidding process. Power lines to create a loop feed to the Black Canyon Subdivision will be buried underground through a portion of MacGregor Ranch. A field demonstration will be conducted for new streetlights in Bond Park. Citizens will have an opportunity to view a variety of styles and choose their favorite. There being no further business, Chairman Jeffrey-Clark adjourned the meeting at 8:52 a.m. pe.vam FLUAD Rebecca van Deutekom, Deputy Town Clerk IRADFORIPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 18, 2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 18th day of October, 2001. Committee: Chairman Barker, Trustees Doylen and Gillette Attending: All Absent None Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Public Works Director Linnane, Deputy Town Clerk van Deutekom Chairman Barker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. ASPEN/BIRCH/COLUMBINE AVENUES ON-STREET PARKING - CITIZEN REQUEST TO BAN PARKING. In a letter dated August 28, 2001 to Mayor Baudek from Patrick Cipolla/632 Aspen Ave., staff was directed to research a parking ban on steep portions of Aspen, Birch, Columbine, and Driftwood Avenues. The Mayor relayed staffs recommendations to Mr. Cipolla, who subsequently asked that the request be revisited due to additional reasons not mentioned in the original August 28th letter. Following a thorough study of planning and street standard documents, Director Linnane explained that staff did not support the parking ban for the following reasons: 1) It will increase traffic speeds. 2) It will relocate on-street parking to surrounding neighborhoods. 3) Excessive on-street parking was not observed to be a chronic problem. Public testimony supporting a ban of on-street parking was heard from: Patrick Cipolla/632 Aspen, Nancy Willox/508 Birch, Bob Dewit11508 Columbine, Kevin Zurfluh/550 Columbine, Rich McGinnis/502 Elm, Laura Briggs/513 Aspen, Richard Gerwen/516 Driftwood, and Mark Rogers/446 Aspen. Concerns expressed include: child safety, street visibility limitations, winter driving hazards, and speed. Public testimony opposing the ban was heard from: Todd Plummer/556 Aspen, Nina Dixon/460 Birch, Erle Collom/528 Columbine, Terry Berger/Driftwood, Aaron CathcarUAspen, Yvonne Cocchi/619 Birch, Anne Marie Mankin/544 Birch, and Joan Banker/663 Aspen Ave. Concerns expressed include: visitor parking and increased restrictions. Committee discussion followed (lack of adequate parking, safety concerns identified by residents, pros and cons of snow routes, speed limit signage, High St. stop bars, voluntary compliance of on-street parking restrictions, and children at play signs. Police Chief Richardson addressed safety concerns, parking and abandoned vehicle laws, and enforcement challenges). Concluding all discussion, the Committee recommends approval of (1) installation of 25 mph speed limit signs on Aspen, Birch, Columbine, Driftwood, and Elm, (2) establishment of snow routes on all above mentioned streets, (3) addition of stop bars on High St., and (4) voluntary compliance of on-street parking restrictions. . BRAD....PUBLISHING.0. RECORD OFPROCEEDINGS Public Works Committee - October 18, 2001 - Page 2 LARIMER COUNTY LANDFILL 2002 PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE - PRESENTATION. Acting on behalf of Larimer County, Trustee Gillette presented the proposed 2002 Larimer County Landfill and Transfer Station fee schedule. Public hearings to discuss the rate increase are scheduled November 13th at 7:00 p.m. in the Park School Didtrict Administration Conference Rm. and November 1St at 2:30 p.m. in the County's Community Rm. in Ft. Collins. POLICE DISPATCH OFFICE REMODEL PROJECT - REQUEST TO PROCEED. Director Linnane reported that the 2001 Budgft includes a Police Dispatch Office remodel and a Dispatch alhrm system from the reception desks in the Administration, Public Works, Finance, and Police Department offices. The Dispatch remodel project consists of the following: 1. Converting the two men's and women's restrooms into one public women's restroom and one private Dispatch unisex restroom. 2. Adding a kitchenette sink and counter to the general space. 3. Adding an equipment room with an air-conditioning unit for equipment. 4. Relocating the existing conference room. 5. Miscellaneous demolition, drywall, HVAC, cabinet, carpet, electrical, and other work. , Bids were received from Westover Construction ($78,468) and Ray Duggan Builders & Design ($79,579) and do not include the alarm system or contingency. Accepting the low bid presented by Westover Construction, the total project cost (including a 10% contingency and alarm system) is listed below: Westover Construction $ 78,468 Contingencies @ 10% ~ - - 7,840 Alarm system (not to exceed) 10,000 Total: $ 96,308 The 2001 Budget includes. $80,000 for this project. The Police Dept. Vehicle and Equipment budgeted amounts could be adjusted to supplement the $16,308 balance. The Committee recommends awarding the Police Dispatch Office Remodel Project to Westover Construction, funding the total project ($96,308) as outlined above. POLICE. DEPARTMENT SQUAD ROOM ADDITION PROJECT - REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH FINAL DESIGN/BUILD PROCESS. Directdr Linnane reported that a portion of the Town Board Room Remodel Project includes expandin~ the existing Police Staff room and adding a new Police,Squad room. At the October 9t Town Board meeting, the Board directed staff to return with the architect's fee for this portion of the project. Heath Construction anti Thorpe Associates submitted the following cost estimates: Architectural Preliminary/Final Design $ 4,850 Contractor General Conditions 4,990 Construction Overhead/Profit (6%) 2,792 Direct Construction Costs 34,786 Contingencies . 3,182 Total Estimated Cost $ 50,600 BRADFOROPUBLISHINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Works Committee - October 18, 2001 - Page 3 The 2001 Budget includes $50,600 for this project. The Committee recommends approval to 1) proceed with the project Architectural Design for $4,850, and 2) proceed with the Squad Room Addition Project at a Preliminary Guaranteed Maximum price of $50,600 as presented. REPORTS. None. There being no further business, Chairman Barker adjourned the meeting at 9:35 a.m. 06*20246 Rebecca van Deutekom, Deputy Town Clerk ANNEXATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is effective the day of 2001, by and between The- Eviingelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society, a North Dakota non-profit corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Owner," and the Town of Estes Park, a-municipal cotporation of the State of Colorado, hereinafter referred to as "the Town". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Town has received a petition for annexation of the property more particularly described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto, incorporated herein, and made a part hereof (such property is hereafter referred to as "the Property"); and WHEREAS, the Owner has requested zoning for the Property, more particularly described on Exhibit "B", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the Owner has submitted a Preliminary Plat which was approved by the Estes Valley Planning Commission on October 16, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Planning Comrriission has approved the Development Plan for Lot 1 of the Property which is incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, it is toÂ· the mutual benefit of the parties hereto to enter into this agreement regarding the annexation and development of the Property in the Town and other matters as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, Owner acknowledges the Property is subject to all ordinances, resolutions, and other regulations of the Town, as they may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, Owner acknowledges that the need for conveyances and dedication of certain property, including, but not limited to, property for rights-of-ways and easements to the Town as contemplated in this Agreement, are directly related to and generated by development intended to occur within the Property; and WHEREAS, part of the consideration for the annexation of the Property into the Town is the execution and approval of this Annexation Agreement by the parties. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE PREMISES AND THE COVENANTS AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH, IT IS AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS: 1. /ncorporation of Recita/s. The Parties confirm and incorporate the 4 foregoing recitals into this Agreement. 2. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the terms and requirements of the annexation and development of the Property in the Town. Except as expressly provided for herein to the contrary, all terms and requirements herein are in addition to all requirements contained in the Estes Valley Development Code, the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan and the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, as amended, C.R.S., Section 31-12-101, et seq. 3. Zoning and Land Use. The parties recognize that it is the intent and desire.of Owner to develop the Property generally consistent with the zoning and land uses set forth in Paragraph 12 below, and that the granting of such zoning by the Town is a material consideration of the Owner's agreement to annex the Property to the Town. 4. Municipal Services. The Town agrees to make available tothe Property all of the usual municipal services provided by the Town in accordance with the ordinances and policies of the Town. The services provided by the Town include, but are not limited to, police protection, water, electricity, and fire protection. Owner acknowledges that Town services do not include, waste water services which are provided by the Upper Thompson Sanitation District. 5. Public Improvements. Required public improvements shall be designed and constructed to Town standards by Owner and at Owner's expense. Owner further agrees to-provide financial guarantees.for construction of all requÂ¢ed improvements as set forth in each phase of the development and to dedicate to the Town any otall of the improvements as required by Town ordinances. 6. Streets and Arterial Roads. On-site and required off-site streets in the public right-of-way shall be designed and constructed to Town standards by Owner at Owner's expense. 7., Land Dedication. The dedication or reservation of private open space, public easements for utilities, rights-of-way for streets and other public ways shall be by subdivision plat or appropriate instrument of conveyance acceptable to the Town. Such dedications shall occur at the subdivision of the Property unless the Town specifies another time. The Town and the Owner agree that such dedications are directly related to and generated by the development intended to occur within the Property and that no taking thereby will occur requiring any compensation. 8. Water and Waste Water Utilities. C n-site and required off-site water and ~ waste water mains and appurtenances shall be constructed to Town and Sanitation District standards by Owner at Owner's expense. 9. Zoning and Land Use. \t is intended by both parties that the full area, 2 exclusive of dedicated private open space, will be zoned and developed generally as described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 10. Conformity with Laws. Owner agrees that the design, improvement, construction, development, and use of the Property shall be in conformance with all applicable laws and ordinances and that Owner shall comply with all Town ordinances, resolutions and regulations including, but not limited to, ordinances, resolutions and regulations pertaining to annexation, subdivision, zoning, storm drainage, utilities, access to Town streets and flood control, unless specific provisions of this Agreement provide otherwise. 11. No Repeal of Laws. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute or be interpreted as a repeal of the Town's ordinances or resolutions, or as a waiver of the Town's legislative, governmental, or police powers to promote and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the Town and its inhabitants, nor shall this Agreement prohibit the enactment or increase by the Town of any tax or fee. 12. Disconnection. In the event that the Town, either by Town Board action or inaction or by initiative or referendum, takes any action contrary to the Developer's vested property rights, as described in Paragraph 34, Owner, in its sole discretion, shall have the option to disconnect the Property from the Town. In such event, Town agrees to act in good faith to accomplish such disconnection as expeditiously as possible. In the event of any disconnection as permitted in this Paragraph, the following shall apply: (a) Individual development projects (i.e. for which final plats or plans have been approved) within the Property which have been built up to 25% of anticipated final buildout shall not be included in any disconnection of the Property; (b) In the event of an action by the Town which would give rise to the disconnection remedy set forth herein, the Owner shall give the Town at least sixty (60) days written notice of such default and their intention to seek disconnection, and the Town shall have a right to do any act which would remove or terminate the Owner's right to disconnect the Property pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph during the above stated sixty (60) day period 13. Severabi/ity. The Parties agree that if any part, term, portion, or provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in conflict with any law of the State of Colorado or any federal law, the validity of the remaining parts, terms, portions, or provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular part, term, portion, or provision held to be invalid. 14. Owners' Association/Covenants. Owner may organize a unit owners' association or associations if appropriate for given parcels and/or unit types for the 3 development of the Property induding ownership of private open space and/or outlots located on the Property. If so, Owner shall form the association(s) pursuant to the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ("Act"), C.R.S. Section 38-33.3-101, et seq. The Owner shall also execute and record covenants and instruments of conveyance which comply with the Act and which adequately provide for continuous ownership, operation, maintenance, repair and replacement of common elements of the development including, but not limited to, any private roads, private common areas, private open space, outlots, and private facilities. If any portion of the Property is condominiumized, the Owner shall obtain Town subdivision approval pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code. 15. Future Cooperation. The Parties agree that they will cooperate with one another in accomplishing the terms, conditions, and provisions of the Agreement and will execute such additional documents as necessary to effectuate the same. 16. No Joint Venture or Partnership/No Assumption of Liability. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to create a partnership or joint venture between the Town and the Owner and any implication to the contrary is hereby expressly disavowed. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement does not provide for the joint exercise by the Parties of any activity, function or service, nor does it create a joint enterprise, nor does it constitute any Party hereto as an agent of the other Party hereto for any purpose whatsoever. Except as specifically otherwise provided in this Agreement, no Party shall in any way assume any of the liability of the other Party for any act or obligation of the other Party. - 17. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by mutual agreement of the Town and Owner. Such amendments shall be in writing, shall be covenants running with the land, and shall be binding upon all persons or entities having an interest in the Property subject to the amendment unless otherwise specified in the amendment. 18. Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the entire agreement of the Parties. There are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained herein, and this Agreement supersedes all previous communications, representations, or agreements, either verbal or written, between the Parties. 19. Owner. As used in this Agreement, the term "Owner" shall include any of the transferees, successors, or assigns of Owner, and all such Parties shall have the right to enforce this Agreement, and shall be subject to the terms of this Agreement as if they were the original parties thereto. In the event of a transfer of all or any portion of the Property, the transferring Owner shall be relieved of any and all obligations under this Agreement which arise after the date of such transfer with respect to the transferred Property, provided that the transferee assumes in writing all such obligations. Said written assumptions of all obligation and release of liability shall be effective only upon receipt and written approval by the Town. 4 20. Amendments to Law. As used in this Agreement, unless otherwise specifically provided herein, any reference to any provision of any Town ordinance, resolution, regulation, or policy is intended to refer to any subsequent amendments or revisions to such ordinance, resolution, regulations, or policy, and the Parties agree such amendments or revision shall be binding upon Owner. Notwithstanding the above, in the event that any provision of this Agreement is ambiguous and needs to be interpreted by referencing other documents, the Town ordinances, resolutions, regulations, or policies in effect upon the effective date of this Agreement shall control as to any ambiguity or interpretation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 21. Binding Effect This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and the transferees, successors, and assigns hereof, and shall constitute covenants running with the land. This Agreement shall be recorded with the County Clerk and Recorder of Larimer County, Colorado, at Owner's expense. Subject to the conditions precedent herein, this Agreement may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. 22. Breach of Agreement. (a) Breach by Owner, Town's Remedies. In the event of a default or breach by the Owner of any term, condition, covenant, or obligation under this Agreement, the Town may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; to protect lot buyers and builders, and to protect the citizens of the Town. The Town's remedies include: (1) The refusal to issue to the Owner any development permit, building permit, or certificate of occupancy; . (11) A demand that the security given for the completion of the public improvements be paid or honored; (111) The refusal to consider further development plans within the Property, and/or ( IV) Rezone the Property or any portion thereof which has not been developed; (V) Any other remedy available at law. Unless necessary to protect the immediate health, safety, and welfare of the Town or Town residents, the Town shall provide the Owner ten (10) days' written notice of its intent to take any action under this Paragraph during which ten-day period the Owner may cure the breach described in said notice and prevent further action by the Town. 5 (b). Breach by Town, Owner's Remedies. The Parties agree that in the event of a breach by the Town of this Agreement, Owner will have the right to seek only the remedies provided for impairment of Owner's vested property rights as set forth in Section 24-68-105, C.R.S and or disconnection of the Property or a portion thereof. 23. Cost Reimbursement. All legal, engineering, planning, publication and other costs incurred by the Town will be reimbursed by Owner. The parties agree that the Owner shall not be responsible to the Town for any litigation cost, including attorneys' fees and court costs, incurred by the Town as a result of any third party claim made against the Town arising out of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 24. Attorney's Fees. If any Party breaches this Agreement, the breaching party shall. pay the non-breaching party's reasonable costs and attorney's fees incurred in the enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 25 Transfer of the Property. Owner shall notify the Town, in writing of, any sale or transfer of the Property, and the name, address, and telephone number of the transferee. Upon the sale or other transfer of any portion of the Property, the transferor of such portion shall be released from all liability and obligation under this Agreement relating to such portion provided that all such liabilities and obligations shall be assumed by the transferee pursuant to the terms and conditions of paragraph 19 above. (unless transferee is a home buyer, a buyer of developed commercial property, or governmental entity). 26. Town Enactments Nothing contained__ruhe Agreement shall constitute or be interpreted as a repeal of existing codes, ordinances or as a waiver of the Town's legislative, governmental, or police powers to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the Town or its inhabitants; nor shall this Agreement prohibit the enactment by the Town of any fee which is of uniform or general application. 27. Specific ProWsions. The Parties agree to be bound by the following provisions which are acknowledged by the Town to provide substantial public benefits to the Owner, citizens of the Town and the public at-large: la) NCWCD and Municipal Subdistrict Inclusion. The Owner, at its sole expense, shall petition for inclusion of the property within the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Municipal Subdistrict of the Northern Colotado Water Conservancy District. Owner shall pursue the inclusion of the property within the District and the Subdistrict. (b) Wet/ands. There exists wetlands running from the western boundary of the property to the eastern boundary of the Property. Said wetlands shall be placed in an outlot at the time of subdivision of the Property. Owner shall provide for wetlands to be permanently held and maintained by the Owner or a duly formed association as more fully set forth in paragraph 14 above. 6 (c) /mpact Fees. The Owner agrees that the Town may enact by ordinance one or more impact fees for purpose of mitigating impacts to the Town caused by development within the Town so long as said fee or fees are general in nature and do not specifically impact only this Property. ld) Attainable Housing. The Owner and the Estes Park Housing Authority (the "'Housing Authority") have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding which outlines the purchase of a portion of the Property (Lots 3 and 4 of the Preliminary Plat) by the Housing Authority. Incorporated herein by reference is the Development Plan for the Housing Authority's proposed development on Lots 3 and 4. In the event Owner and the Housing Authority are unable to develop said lots as more fully set forth in the Development Plan. Owner shall have the right to develop lots 3&4 asan attainable housing project pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Estes Valley Development Code. This includes the right to transfer Lots 3&4 to another entity and/or person for the purpose of developing an attainable housing project. In no event shall any attainable housing project developed on Lots 3&4 exceed maximum development provisions set forth in paragraph 27 (g) (3) below. In the event the Housing Authority or another entity or person does not utilize Lots 3 and 4 for attainable housing, the Owner shall be entitled to develop Lots 3&4 for a total of four single-family lots to be deed restricted prohibiting further subdivision of said Lots and deed restricted to single-family dwellings; or the Owner may develop a total of 40 elderly duplex units and/or employee housing duplex units as part of the development on Lot 1. le) Lot 1 Development. Development on Lot 1 shall be allowed as more fully set forth in the Development Plan for Lot 1 subject to special review approval of the Development Plan. (f) Church. Lot 2 is proposed to be used for a church. That use shall be contingent upon rezoning of Lot 2 to allow this type of use and approval of a Development Plan for a church. In the event said rezoning is not granted or the Development Plan is not approved for a church or the Owner does not transfer Lot 2 to a church, the Owner shall be allowed to develop Lot 2 as follows: 1) Two single-family residential lots; or 2) Sixteen elderly duplex units; or 3) Sixteen employee housing duplex units. If the Owner develops the sixteen elderly duplex units or sixteen employee housing duplex units, the Owner shall incorporate those units as a part of the development on Lot 1. The Owner may develop both elderly and employee housing duplex units in any combination so long as the total number of units does not exceed 16 duplex units. The 16 duplex units shall be subject to appropriate rezoning of Lot 2 to allow said use and/or any necessary Development Plan approval. (g) Maximum Development. As consideration for the annexation, rezoning and subdivision of the Property, the Parties agree that the maximum 7 development on the Property shall be as follows: (1) Lots 5 - 12. 8 single family lots. There shall be no further subdivision of Lots 5 - 12 and the lots shall be deed restricted to single-family dwellings. (2) Lot 1. 46 residential duplex units, 34 congregate living units, 24 assisted living units. (3) Lots 3 and 4. 92 multi-family attainable housing units or, 4 single- family residential lots, or 4b duplex units as more fully set forth in subparagraph 27 (d) above. (4) Lot 2. One church or, 2 single-family residential lots or, 16 duplex units as more fully set forth in subparagraph (f) above. 04 Failure to Develop. Owners ~ understand and specifically agree that if the Property or any portion thereof is not developed as provided in pa'ragraph (g) above, the Town reserves the right to consider rezoning of the Property or any undeveloped portion thereof upon the expiration of the vesting period as set forth in paragraph 28 below. Said rezoning shall be limited to RE-1 Rural Estate zoning. m Honda Water Line. Owners acknowledges that there is a Cost Reimbursement Agreement for the water line located within Dry Gulch Road which requires any person or entity using that water line to reimburse the installing entity constructing said water line puriuant to the terms and conditions of the Cost Reimbursement'Agreement. th Height Variance. The height of the congregate care facility to be constructed on Lot 1 exceeds the height limitation in the Estes Valley Development Code. Owner shall seek and obtain a variance from the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment for the height of the congregatd care facility. In the event that the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment does not grant said height variance, the Owner shall amend 'its Development Plan for Lot 1 to reduce the height of the congregate care facility to comply with the requirenients of the Estes Valley Development Code. 28. Vested Rights. In recognitioA 02 ~he land size of the development contemplated under this Agreement, the substkintial investment and time required to complete the development of the project, the phased development of the project, and the possible impact of economic cycles and varying market conditions during the course of the development, the Owner and the Town agree that the vested property rights established under this Agreement shall commence on the effective date of this Agreement and shall continue as follows: (a) Development shall commence on Lot 1 within 1 year of special review approval of the Development Plan; and 8 (b) Development shall commence on each of Lots 2,3, and 4 within 3 years of the effective date of this Agreement; and 0) Development shall be completed on each of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 within 10 years of the effective date (the "Vesting Period") "Vested rights" shall apply only to zoning and land use approvals once those approvals have been made. After the expiration of the Vesting Period, such vested rights shall be deemed terminated and of no further force or effect; provided, however, that such termination shall not affect (a) the annexation of the Property to the Town; (b) any common-law vested rights obtained prior to such termination; (c) any right arising from Town building permits issued prior to the expiration of the vesting period; or (d) any subdivision of the Property. 29. Notice. All notices required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be hand-delivered or sent by facsimile transmission or first class mail, postage prepaid to the addresses of the parties herein set forth. All notice by hand-delivery shall be effective upon receipt. All facsimile transmissions shall be effective upon transmissions receipt, provided a hard copy is mailed the same date. All notices by mail shall be considered effective seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the United States mail with the proper address as set forth below. Either party, by notice so given, may change the address to which future notices shall be sent. Notice to Town: Town of Estes Park Attn: Rich Widmer, Town Administrator P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park , CO 80517 Notice to Owner: The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society Attn: Dave Horazdovsky, Chief Operating Officer P.O. Box 5038 Sioux Falls, IA 57117-5038 30. No Third Party Rights. This Agreement is made solely for the benefit of the Parties hereto and is not intended to nor shall it be deemed to confer rights to any persons or entities not named as Parties hereto. 31. Governing' Law. The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern the validity, performance, and enforcement of this Agreement. Should either party institute legal suit or action for enforcement of any obligation contained herein, it is agreed that the venue of such suit or action shall be in Larimer County, Colorado. 32. Heading. The Paragraph headings in this Agreement shall not be used in the construction or interpretation hereof as they have no substantive effect and are for convenience only. 9 . 1 33. No Warranties by the Town. The Town is entering into this Agreement in good faith and with the present intention, on the part of the present Town Board, that this Agreement will be complied with. However, because some of the provisions of this Agreement may involve areas of legal uncertainty, the Town makes no representation as to the validity or enforceability of this Agreement and that no such warranty is made on the part of the Town. The Owners acknowledge that the annexation and zoning of the Property are subject to the legislative discretion of the Board of Trustees of the Town. No assurances of annexation or zoning have been made or relied upon by the Owners. In the event that, in the exercise of its Idgislative discretion, any action with respect to the Property hereiri contemplated is not taken, then the sole and exclusive . remedy for the breach hereof shall be the withdrawal of the petition for annexation by the Owners,,or disconnection from the Town in accordance with state law, as' may be appropriate. Â· 34. This Agreement shall be null And void ifthe Town fails to approve the annexation, rezoning and/or subdivision of the Property as provided herein. 35. Disconnection of the Property - Utility Services. \n the event of disconnection of the Property or a portion thereof from the Town as a result of the default of the Town ih the terms and conditioni of this Agreement, the Town' shall continue to provide municipal electric service and water service to the Property if and to the extent said utility service was provided prior to disconnection. Rates payable for said services following disconnection shall be out-of-town rates pursuant to the Town's utility rate structure. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION By: Mayor ATTEST: By: Town Clerk Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this day of 2001. My Commission expires: Notary Public 10 THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY By: Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this day of 2001. My Commission expires: Notary Public 11 <C 2 of â‚¬ m O CL 1 0 % 2 m .2 -05 0- St O m M 0 -5 - 0 2 0 9% i I U.1 2 -O 41 5%1 li 0 f T; 91 49 H 11 3Â£ 62 21 23 @clEC I D u. O a. 4-; H , O -c 0 0 :42 co Z ic W >: 000 6-CON 0 -5 0 2 2 2328 12% 20offd ix ~ ag C â‚¬ E 0 250 ACDN .50 BLL Â®I O J (O 0 9 - > . 9- 10 h CD C) r to W v- A h C\1 - 1.0 Â· r r O N "=O 10 N N r OO00p 20Â§*E~*% 9*35& â€ž0 r C) 00 1~ CU r 9- 9- r (0 0- CU N 2 0 2 .C .g) CD I I E 2 CD 5 05 f A C .C 2 2/12 CD 5 2 -9 g & 2 2 -1 -0 0 Â£ 8 -~ 2 -6- E 88 # 6 5% 5 0 7 2 : A -WE TOR c a) m -1 06 O I .3060. @Â§,31.E=JÂ¢iTES @goooa=00 I .512 2 2 -- CD U. 0 9- C 0 - 3 -C 0 I CD .% 15 : 2 2 0 -C m *~-E-EcE,0Â£,Eg m m L n o I m.c u E a) >, (c E m o me $23 Cozo U)*04 0- 0-1 -5 (IMZOIDEO_lm-omm E "â€ž r .0 â€žT-â€žrâ€žV- r.-rpr r 8 t00OOOO-0 8888%2 00Â°Â°Â° 22 00Â©ooowo O 000000 Â¥- -00000"-O 000000000 452 8 8 8 8 W 0 8 ewee o co@egeee.o COGIVEYE,Wialie , e 21 4 co 00 0 0 h 00 ed o 4- O 00 * Qn O h h 00 h C v t.r),- N - 0 r w co C h Blo r c c â€ž c r re! .r =ar S o ercurro occraco 0 &!.2 r 01 0 05 0 0 0) C) C) C) C) 0 00 0) O) r O) U Z 00 LO (D L.O 10 LO r Z 0 0) C) r- LO r Z C) < C) ulch Road, Estes Park 29/2001 Ed n 5 Prospect Estates Drive, Estes Park Park, now assisted living elsewhere ect Avenue, Estes Park rbara Godbolt nds Circle, Estes Park 11 River Road, Estes Park e, Loveland Good Samaritan Village, r Drive, Loveland /14/2001 harlo yd 341 Homesteader Lane, Estes Park le, Estes Park Mied sels) 'eA!Ja >peel sels3 'eA!10 le >lied Sels) 'eA!JO bio 'puel:Jod 'eANCI el.lue>I selels3 ;se.1011!H 101 JO SJeUMO 'UOpJO9 eoepues 3N 'snquinloo sele193 1Sejoll '6 10110 SieUMO 'JeU!019 4ejoqe S>1 '>ped pllepeAO ' L lie 1.100 099 aA,lesel 841 'Â£ 101 lo SJOUAAO 'UOSIOd SAIJEW 9 el Mied sels3 'Peoh! 40uel:1 Mel MJE Ze 'Z41%~s oz >lied Sals)>371:51,~GgV~oN~.~:~ VIA3 'luepiseid 'Ae]9 00!lv Correspondence received regarding the Good Samaritan Proposal Name Address Eric W. Blackhurst, Forward Estes Park . Box 334, Estes Park et, Estes Park hards, President, Estes Park Senior Citizens Center, Inc. Board of Dir t, Estes Park 3 ' 9 ejeBeum Â£ Mled s 193 !Ja eWBeuo; e as of October 18, 2001 OH sewis3 1SeJ0II!H BugueseJdel 'Od 'Xeb' 18 uoseippnH 28*Ma Jo uoselppnH sep sewls) 1981011!H 't, 107 10 SlaUAAO 'UOSple40!El euueof sele193 15010ll!H 'g 101 JO SleUAAO 'Me4SUJe3 Women Voters, Estes Park Branch troller/CFO, YMCA of the Rockies sewls3 WeJOIPH ' L 101 10 Jel.IMO 'Sll! thie Byrne owland Retrum POOM Wol se1040!N #diey LOOZ/L/9 :04!Oads Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Robert B. Joseph, Director Date: October 18, 2001 Subject: Good Samaritan Rezoning and Annexation Background. This is a request by the Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society (Sioux Falls, SD) to rezone a 62-acre parcel FROM "RE-1" Rural Estate District TO "RM" Multi-Family Residential District and "E-1" Estate District to allow for the development of a proposed mixed use subdivision and development plan. The site is located approximately one mile north of US Hwy 34 on the east side of Dry Gulch Road. The site is adjacent to the south line of Hillcrest Estates. i NIH ,11J1/ - 7, 1 , 3-S ~RE-1 2 7. lili /1 -I | 1 RM E lul'll L I E-1 R r- This rezoning request is in conjunction with annexation, subdivision, and development plan proposals. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into twelve (12) buildable lots and three (3) outlots, along with appurtenant road rights-of-way and easements. This rezoning includes four separate use areas as described below and on the attached map. Single Family. The proposed Lots 5-12 (16-acres), generally located along the northern property line, are proposed to be rezoned to the "Ed" Estate single-family residential district, which has a minimum lot size of one-acre. The applicant has described building envelopes on the plat which provide 50-foot rear yard setbacks, which is identical to the "RE-1" setbacks and will provide a minimum distance of 100-feet between homes in Hillcrest Estates and homes in the Good Samaritan Subdivision. These lots are proposed to be approximately 2-acres each, which would potentially allow for re-subdivision into one- acre lots as a use by right with the "E-1" district. Due to this potential additional density, Staff recommends deed restrictions preventing additional lot splits be a condition of approval. Senior Assisted Living. Proposed Lot 1 (17.5-acres), located along Dry Gulch Road, is anticipated for development as a senior assisted and congregate living center and duplexes. The proposal includes assisted living (24 units), congregate housing (34 units) facilities, and twenty-three residential duplex structures (46 units), for a total of 104 residential units for the elderly. The Estes Valley Planning Commission conditionally approved (5-2 vote) the development plan on October 16,2001 (see attached development plan). Church (Religious Assembly). Proposed Lot 2 (3.75-acres), located along Dry Gulch Road, is anticipated for development as a church building. Special review is required for any religious assembly building that contains five thousand (5,000) or more square feet of gross floor area or school or day care facility. Development Plan review is required for any proposal with more than 10 parking spaces or greater than 2,000 square feet of gross floor area. There is a maximum floor area ratio .30 and maximum lot coverage of 50% in the MF district. Staff considers this use to be integral to the assisted living use and has waived the development plan submittal as per 3.3.B.1 of the Estes Valley Development Code. The annexation agreement specifies that if the lot is not developed for use by a church, then the Owner shall be allowed to develop Lot 2 as follows: 1) Two single-family residential lots; or 2) 2) Sixteen elderly duplex units; or 3) 3) Sixteen employee housing duplex units. If the Owner develops the sixteen elderly duplex units or sixteen employee housing duplex units, the Owner shall incorporate those units as a part of the development on Lot 1. The Owner may develop both elderly and employee housing duplex units in any combination so long as the total number of units does not exceed 16 duplex units. â€¢ Page 2 Attainable Housing. Lots 3 and 4 of the proposed subdivision are proposed for attainable housing development. The two lots consist of 9.5-acres, which could accommodate a maximum of 114 attainable housing units if rezoned to the "RM" district. The statement of intent on behalf of the Estes Park Housing Authority proposes a maximum of 92 units. A formal development plan submittal, consistent with the statement of intent, has been made (see attachment). The annexation agreement specifies that if the lot is not developed for attainable housing, then the Owner shall have the right to develop lots 3&4as 1) An attainable housing project pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Estes Valley Development Code. This includes the right to transfer Lots 3&4 to another entity and/or person for the purpose of developing an attainable housing project. . 2) In the event the Housing Authority or another entity or person does not utilize Lots 3 and 4 for attainable housing, the Owner shall be entitled to develop Lots 3&4 for a total of four single-family lots to be deed restricted prohibiting further subdivision of said Lots and deed restricted to single-family dwellings; or 3) The Owner may develop a total of 40 elderly duplex units and/or employee housing duplex units as part of the development on Lot 1. Site Characteristics. The site is currently undeveloped, open grassland with a large drainage way located across the southerly portion of the parcel. The site is adjacent to the Town of Estes Park and has adequate utilities. Review Criteria. The EVPC and Board(s) shall review all applications for text or Official Zoning Map amendments for compliance with the relevant standards and criteria set forth below and with other applicable provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code. 1. The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected; Staff Comment: Within the North End Planning Area, the following developments have been approved within the last few years: The Reserve, Ranch Meadow, North Ridge, and Wildfire Ridge. The majority of the North End Planning Area will not be directly affected by the proposed change. The amendment is necessary to address existing housing and care needs in the community. 2. The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley; and Staff Comment: Please refer to the "Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan" section below. â€¢ Page 3 3. The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application were approved. Staff Comment: Twelve-inch (12") water and sewer mains are located adjacent to Dry Gulch Road, and are adequate to serve the facility. Dry Gulch Road is adequate to provide vehicular access. Adequate police and fire protection can be provided by the Town. The Town will provide maintenance of the new public streets to be constructed with this development. Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan. The Estes Valley Plan divides the overall planning area into seven smaller planning areas, which reflect the natural features within neighborhoods. 'The North End" is one such neighborhood. The "north end" is comprised of 841 parcels totaling 6,525 acres. The Good Samaritan subdivision, contains twelve buildable lots on 63-acres. Following is a summary of the North End Planning Area as described in the Estes Valley Plan. North End: Special Considerations and Issues. Extensive development within the open meadow areas found in the North End Planning Area would significantly alter not only the visual integrity of the area, but would impact the image of the entire Estes Park area. The North End is visible form a number of locations within the Estes Valley, and the perceived openness of this area, if lost, will affect the image of the entire Valley. The following key issues are delineated for the North End: * With the recent water and sewer line completion to serve the Eagle Rock School, a large portion of the area is developable. (Staff Comment: The proposal intends to utilize the water and sewer lines, and provide financial reimbursement to Eagle Rock School) A Numerous drainages can be found within the planning area, creating sensitive wildlife habitat. Theses areas should be preserved from development and "setback/no disturb areas" established. (Staff Comment: The proposal complies with wetlands setback standards set forth in the development code) $ Abundant wildlife is found within the planning area, and design considerations should be given to maintaining and enhancing habitat, and minimizing disruption to migration routes. (Staff Comment: The proposal complies with wildlife habitat protection standards set forth in the development code, however the nature of this rezoning request and the proposed development will result in significant negative impacts to wildlife as compared to single family development on 10 acre lots.) I Given that the majority of the planning area is in open meadow, it is very important to preserve existing native vegetation, and locate buildings to minimize disruption and intrusion. (Staff Comment: The proposal will comply with the grading, site disturbance, and â€¢ Page 4 revegetation requirements of the development code, however food sources will be reduced to the extent that existing grassland is converted to impervious coverage.) North End: Development Guidelines. The guidelines listed below are unique to the North End and are intended to resolve or address the various issues of the North End that were identified throughout the future land use planning process. I Protect critical natural resource areas within the North End which may be adversely affected by future development. (Staff Comment: The proposal complies with wetlands setback and wildlife habitat protection standards set forth in the development code) k Revise the Regulatory System to encourage low density, low impact development in the North End. o Maintain the low-density character of the North End. (Staff Comment: This was accomplished with the implementation of the "RE" Rural Estate 10-acre zoning district; this is a request to change that zoning designation) o Annexations should occur through an annexation agreement between property owners and the Town. (Staff Comment: An annexation agreement accompanies this proposal.) North End: Future Land Use. The North End Future Land Use will generally consist of low-density residential classifications and parks, recreation and open space. (Staff Comment: This proposal is contrary to this objective.) Community Wide Goals. The Comprehensive Plan also identifies relevant community wide goals as follows: 5.0 HOUSING. The success of a community depends upon the continued availability of adequate housing for all income groups. Promoting a balance of housing opportunities will assist residents and businesses within the community. k Encourage a variety of housing types and price ranges. i Encourage housing for permanent residents of all sectors of the community that is integrated into and dispersed throughout existing neighborhoods. k Establish a balanced program of incentives, and public and private actions, to provide affordable housing. ) Provide for mixed use developments, which integrate commercial, housing, employment, and service needs. 4 Identify affordable housing opportunities on an ongoing basis. I Establish a linkage between new developments and the provision of affordable housing. â€¢ Page 5 (Staff Comment: This proposal presents a unique opportunity to address and fulfill these goals). 7.0 Economics. The area's economy, lifestyle, and environment are closely interconnected. Therefore, it is critical to explore economic development options in keeping with the scale of the community and which respect the surrounding environment. k Build on strength of retirement community. The Retired Population. A portion of Chapter 3 "Economic Overview" of the Estes Valley Plan discusses how to build on existing strengths, including the retired population. Potential strategies to attract retirees include a center providing healthy living and congregate care facilities. Rezoning Requests. The Comprehensive Plan offers the following guidelines concerning rezoning requests: The maps and text included in the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan are to serve as a general guideline to the staff, property owners and governmental entities during the implementation of the plan. The maps do not represent the zoning of the Valley, but rather a representation of general land use patterns appropriate for the Valley. Rezoning to uses other than those depicted in the plan may be appropriate if the applicant demonstrates that the proposals are compatible with the plan policies. Referral Comments and Other Issues. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Although the Division of Wildlife has expressed significant concerns as outlined in Mr. Spowart's letter, a wildlife conservation plan as defined in Section 7.8 of the Estes Valley Development Code is not required. Staff Comments. It is Staff's opinion this proposal combines a specific set of circumstances that are unlikely to combine again: elderly and attainable housing supply, adjacent to town limits, with adequate utilities and access. This presents an important opportunity that must be given very serious consideration, as there is no assurance that an opportunity of this kind will ever present itself elsewhere at a future date. This proposal of assisted congregate housing, attainable housing, and church would serve the needs of existing valley residents. There have been past attempts at retirement housing facilities within the valley, which have failed for various reasons, and it is unlikely that such a facility can be built without rezoning. Staff regards the proposed church development on Lot 2 as integral to the assisted living campus to be developed on Lot 1. â€¢ Page 6 This proposal will serve a compelling community-wide need, which supercedes specific neighborhood wants and desires. This proposal does mitigate neighborhood concerns with the single-family buffer of similar density as the subdivision immediately to the north. Also, the topography of the site will help to reduce the visual impacts of the proposed density given that the !arge building will be situated at the lower portion of the site. The concerns of the north end residents regarding the need to protect the existing low- density character of the land now zoned RE-1 are entirely valid. For this reason it is extremely important that this rezoning request, if approved, should not be used as a precedent for future re-zonings of RE-1 land to allow higher density market-rate residential development that would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Budget. Annexation would require the Town to provide street maintenance and snow removal, and police and fire protection. Action. Based on the foregoing, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed Good Samaritan Rezoning; 1) FROM "RE-1" Rural Estate TO "RM" Multi-Family Residential on Lots 1, 2,3 and 4; and 2) FROM "RE-1" TO" E-1"for Lots 5thru 12 CONDITIONAL TO: â€¢ Execution of an annexation agreement with the Town of Estes Park. â€¢ Approval of the subdivision plat. â€¢ Page 7 p hÂ»..uo~ Ur *Uu f AlÂ»Â·~1~J~-O -1 r.'. y . 1~.~3. 119 . / 4-Â»20-~ - PX J.E=/ 41'2, 4!Ls&El / r.' 2 + 611>#E .... '1. Â«Lj -12*U.f - ..Utiolip. *Â·'9 4, . 7 Ii" Â£LLEEnt,-111 /-Â».1... 1 i,$-12 -imrgnts, ' IL:2:tt IICI / RE-1 tzÂ·*~Eg-~-Â·~~~:}32 --- Ina , ), I '.... 'IZES39 --Lt'â€¢2~willrire /* ' 9 451*' 6Â£844.42Â·215*K~~Fmt~M 0 I . , i ~*A J t1*XNet, 4/. *54* t-%/ Fk"f.:,i; MR~ Aerial Photo Location and Zoning Context 1 ... .1 .Â· , t 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN \ ~\ - GOOD SAMAR/TANVILLAGE ' -3r 4 t,1 1'Â·L-32.,LAâ‚¬t%232~02=lu-,=" 9>0 ~ 2 0~ ; 4 1 +149_ &166146122Â£ 5*ir**&*1%144196*- ....7 1 Râ€ž&&~, -_f, _.~~.~.. .SENIOR LiVI,81Â£~ 91/6- ... AÂ·a-artâ‚¬d/Ff'LY.*.6/:.61/"/2126/3*992,; BE#Qgpi.rq-T ru-= 4-M/1~ \ * 1-I. ' f . - y\-*DE 11 1 *: I. .- J 274 . N 11../- \. -- =- t SPAe 1- 01=Am.L mI . liliF 3? Y '.-344Â»'. . 1 I.- t...d - Rezoning (A)~ Good Samaritan Development Plan SOUTH ELEVATION Assisted Living Building 1'_-3- 1:,12Uillm~1211Â¤Ll'JZF/6,92*keSM* mleÂ¥ _AUITH' Efe:21/-*- .frEE"zil-UMis,L<- - IF.71Â£== NORTHEAST ELEVATION ;-6 /./.-t-JL- . L Congregate Living Building Good Samaritan - Building Elevations Good Samaritan - Architect's Rendering (A)I 1 TÂ° l Â·Â·Â£Â·*44btfik,1&~Ul-~1 1,At 66(Â£1~S~U* I f."B- - b. -* L.-3-1.ye-=idill-./.& I i ~*,~~ Â· SENIOR UVItÂ«rE. â€¢/L... vt; . 1,- - -_-_~~~~17:5..4 ,~ *imh ..... idup- il 9../aimill"646.1-Â»41,&%/Met.~FIASMWK-1 -ME;*421// k ~ HOUNNG . 2,1 ---=4Â«11~2 52* x <RM -U,isres) :/*/ , Good Samaritan - Artist's Rendering Rezoning 1 1 . . , 1 -- 7-I - . .0/83/4 1 - -N. -*.=:4*l- IDE}â€¢TioN i soOD SAMAR,TAN ADDITION f#.9,1*MN*LE;*AM*LY# # del: ewi,2#/F-9-/F' 1 *14-N'-SAZZC .. N 190 p w- (*'-ditâ€¢IresÂ¢kled.14-acrâ€¢Â§*s~ . _ .t '6- r.21... 11- *'fe,),4,2â‚¬91%[ Lad#-~.-/W /4-- 13- -Â·-9~ , "A / 'Â¥-Â·/4 iel_ illl ,~72- SENIOR LiVINOn *L,%.Â·-- id. 4.,Ele -4./01/1,/IliTi ./limm/651/61:4 N - Estes Park Housing Authority Development Plan (*)~ Good Samaritan Rezoning .1 94 -Ca95 =6 J .' L' n- _R . -'7I-44)f=j'19]*43~ . 03.-TE .Ci ....-1-=j76.-25'~l,G- - $ Y -=hs,- L f/,7 /* 1 4 -tip/-8 ;33'- ,$'i- #*3 02* Aill* .-- 60.-- P \-0--/ ./. 11 CkÂ· 1'1~cr- !! [8 11- ./.- - *ba. . 12--1 AMMQ/*SPIS#2-- 29PF,1.72/r 1 1 f tÂ·. f = 29\=42.- V ...14 - 2=42 ' I. '... ._. / N= </* Good Samaritan Subdivision (4~ Public Facilities (*)~ 2 â€¢Hl been reMiewid by*~ ~ 11 1 1 U==72 North End Planning Sub-Area u Mis will h~44,0 ~*it~cal winter range / Â» i 0~i#inmgat~ impaci by' â€¢Contains 841 parcels -__7'l,Uands,tr#AfE~~~~-~y ~ and 6525 acres ~ 0'070~t*ewing antr~, getâ€žGon â€¢This project includes 12 139Â¢499Â¢f =Â«tj~ parcels, 3 outlots, and is -- ~.. iN ofetic 1*~ 62 acres. i ., 771--1 r \\ 1\ illÂ£ i 11 - â€¢ This equates to 1.8% -hhdA : L-(L --1.-4 -r--11 -Â· Â·, 11 , of parcels and 1 % of land area . A. 'k. I Wildlife Corridor (1,)~ North End Planning Sub-Area â€¢Build on strength of retirement coninnunity te= North End Planning Sub-Area: Development Guidelines and - Build a center providing healthy living and congregate care facilities Future Land Use :SME--~=' -- - â€¢Encourage a variety of housing types and â€¢ Drainages should be preserved from price ranges development and "setback/no disturb â€¢ Encournge housing for permnent areas" estabeshed reside,its of all sectors of the conununity â€¢ Design considerations should be that is integrated into and dispersed given to nmintaining and enhancing throughoul existing neighborhoods habitat. and minimizing disruption to mivation routes. â€¢Establish a balanced program of incentives. and public and private actioils, â€¢ Maintain the low density character of top,ovide affordable housing. the North End ... â€¢Identify affordable housing opportunities â€¢ Annexations should occur through an on an ongoing basis annexation agreement between properly owners and the Town. â€¢Establish a lizlkage between new â€¢ The North End Future Land Use will developments and the provision of C. Â»-*- generally co.M of [ow-deosity affordable housing, =cift- 410 residential North End Planning Sub-Area Estes Valley Planning Area It&~rdÂ·~ 1 9Â·>t'-1-6,-1 gaMI'll'W rew-nl~= "RM" and "CO" Zoning Districts 15-acre "RM" and ~CO" Zoning Districts ~~ 3 Estes Valley Planning Commission . .......1 fm.ly of .-Il) Spatial Analysis . Betty Jel, 1#, f.*ii.fly of Ell= Pll) of Letters EELE.~.c-=- IYMCA â€¢Planning Commission conducted a lilli Public Hearing at their regularly â€¢Community scheduled September meeting Development has â€¢Three hours of public testimony, with received 37 letters 1 I persons speaking in opposition, 15 â€¢ 19 of those were in people spoke in support, and 3 had general questions. opposition â€¢ 16 of those were in â€¢Vote was 3-3, with one absent. support â€¢Therefore no recommendation from â€¢2 of those were non- Planning Commission specific ./. V.le~ Improve Letters: Spatial Analysis 0- - - ~18~001 * w el-Â»4-1. F--4 E-e P- .O 0,= *34 E.- P./ -F--4, )-2 /6,1, # 94 Pli/# -Irt -=C-Mes)- =...A.-- E,-P- ~, â€¢101001 0... ac./1 W. n,~afcÂ».Eâ€¢-Pâ€¢lk w ji= 1,6*%41*5*~1'' ?594}t,/Â«Li A Am m=.-"I. =M-*l-P- #,= 1-- 1./.- 1-L,lar-a-.5,1-P- Â¥17/*01 6.qul=- 1722O~aO,dch A-.E,1-Pa,~ ~laXÂ»1 *aIWon,n Vol-, E-, P*il, er~le. Es,1- P- 0,202001 N,('UJ.~011 3Â® D- SI.-~ 2,1~~ PNk P -7' 4, ' ,Â·R f#lim/- 9.01 ...011, Uoyd .1 -.. Ur~...P-k ............ 1- P~=p- E,1-~ 0-. *P- ; L:â‚¬* '~~~-- Â· SENIOR tiv *â‚¬- ram--.-- 10==10101 al- & Plly- p.0.11 011Uâ€¢,0~-D*~.E-,P- 9'~41001 60011 0 ..di-.FO, Â¥MCA I IM, F-k]~ ........I. E.... #5=2-.E-P-8-=C~z.-0,~,neÂ©*- &:==21.-*** 4/L- ~~ - .- -. - 9- Â»rtâ‚¬Â§=kinfif# -- 91*=M Jo. 1 6- Speer- 6271*or~-alcÂ».E,W,P- *~='Illam 1- ./. 1 ~80 Cr-m t-~ Eal- P,1, I.. P....11 1 7~0 8-0- 0~,e. E-/ Palk -./.57- 2- 8/0200. 0-n .poy 3.oulle...IC. E.-P- rN- 4- '- 42 -- - -1 A -001 1-,1--I~* 00-~Lole-1.- P42<71Mr#(Ji C. I.2001 -Wâ€¢.,hrn,1{3~h,-n 1028.-0-0.â€¢*. 6,1- P- 6~~7/2001 F~,1! & Cv-Q, 80'-, oam~ 0! Ul I -c-t E,I,t- lie NW McK-~ 0,1~ . Potl-~ OR *IM.-ac,r-o,a~,0-lul~-,-Es-â€¢ .... Wal-mt)--) -Nes.~h-- 02â€¢u S'~8~001 1(,11.0~Â»,1,0--,--~oll~e ~10..... .L'*1Â»L-,Ca,11-.* . ,-- ~1:TAI - - -0.--â€ž82-*='. -. -7/2001 ~-m *v- 01 U* L -101- E=- ./E<-ne ... Spol-, WA 1 720 810,~~/ C-. Eut- M .,61*00, ...... 9.14 â€ž111 18.-Ill,e. Esl~ P- k=.-1~ Pclo,kY 121000/*1~A. Eil- Par~ m= *m. Pol=.ch,-moIL013.-Flle,ne 1188(}Oon- 01........ KS 1.~2001 --6-~ 7--0 4 - ---- b \~'.a- ~ 6-=}~ *- 8 Jc~-Flch--0. 0.-, clU4. NIc-*t~P O B,*2119 01Â¢,lco Â· B~-,~WII!,In* 7008,-10 St-. E.- P.. /212001 DIâ€¢ WOod (*)1 N:->.al Good Samaritan Rezoning 0/1/2001 Alle,/1*,POk*-7.E*1-P-k 5~1~20.-IWO......E~- P- 4 i - X . *40 1 5 M ji!11 iii n __ Occei I E 9 9.... I 0 1 it i ilf j Ut. .2 -- ~ 8 4 111 1 8. L ...80 2. '10 83 'Pi 1 4% 1 f 11, 0*9 /mE':R 19 S :1 11 , ..... 9 9 Alt . 1 Â¥ i 4.41 4 7,Â»* Â· 64' -10=Â£144 ....8 t :8 11 â€¢ 2 ~2 41\ 159Â». 4 :~;9. '11 *i h 4 1 .. .-- ' 2- 1747-2.24 1. /7\ '2 \ - 32 '14 6 0% 81 Iial Te. 24 ~1 .1~~ 1 .r ..9 , 9 V f 3 r--71 .â€¢\fow 6 .*- \t ::7 k. 1 :11 . I.X:W .. IVV. ' ... I 1- - i ' :t ~ , i ~ 6 0% ~23351 , 11 y 1 J ............. r ~ ill I / . 1 ...JI, , 16, h ...... 1 Vt Iti ux ' LL 1*i -Ipt Â· 1 .DEF : -3. 21> , 1./"... 1 11 J .:.9. 1Â· .. vvv le / 11 .4 1 . r. 1 j Â£ 4 li . A. 1 .5 ... V.I 111 \11 #k - 11 ~ , 1 ' %â€¢.V , ,'l-' I. - 1,11 , , rt - 1 A-111 j- ~ mill C i Â§; 11 : .,.43\3\1:11 111111 : , 1 11,1, VVY' IL A A h .g . 0 1- ~~,1 :/1/7 + / . A ----- jilt i 1 5 -~111 Â£ 1 1 %4 7 1 .f111 -11 'Iri? \ 11 1 ..Â£. 1 lili C \ ... '& / : 1 / 1/ - 4 - Â«. it p k 'i .: . 1 9 i ~~' ~ 1, A.AM . . I- 1. C. .. 1 <\34 \ 1 7 li 1 2 m, .1 641:E~ 1 ... :, 14 041*PS#el 4 .j , I e .00 3*\1 \ 11 \ 0 f !95.,I~ iii t 01 i Ill. 43/ JIW 0 . Â· 1~ 62- i -/11 1 \:4 j. li i. * M // r J 7.J ./ 2 2 - 5% 1 11 %' - 5, 4 9 ;1 M. _If O / ~ 41 /A 4 ..1 I . A 1. ' 3' 9. I .... Lf W..1.Â· 4/ 1. 1 5 i.feati f 411 \0 h z - i ZE Ii, 1I f 4 11 1/l i k ...... ~.. -2 3l 4 - 1 . EWSEl 4- - , 2 49 8 ' ..,. f .... ..1 4 -., tÂ· fa t, 1 2'3 94. lit /41 ~.i r- 1 ..U~ L, ; 4; i ' '.4 r 1, 11 - - 14 -141.-UL -3 L 83 1 4- _ k./. -.... 4 \ IHIP.0 2 11,1 W 8& - > 'An liM-m,7':1 uols'Alpqns ue;!Jeu,es pooe I72V . 6 9 42 . 11 \ .4 :4442\%.1 *i" -/*. z --- [tÂ° - 11 / ..... iii 1 - V ..92314\\ * - 42*9- 4 - L /9 Â¥-g: , 11 -...=- -0.,2-- 2, *â€ž + ir i .â€ž44 P -40 . A 4 bl \ 1 p . 8494 ./\ . . 5- 77 :ia:; Â·559 14: 1 4 \ /42. IN -- --- -- d.'.M 7*7::*- 20, 1 1.; 6 " 1 i,li \ \\ 19 \ 9 r 1 4 \\\\\\ 53 2151 V r G Flm - 01 .3 9~21 , ... \ \ll//~ - \ 1 11! (Ulf~ \ it'.0/ 1-- \. - 11;/ 1,111* .*R + gil 1 1 1 .1 P.. .f , 1, d" 1 Â¥ 2 Frâ€ži _ lili k 1 2 911? 11 1 \Ati-i'-1 1,14 1 14 " 2< 14 1 AT .Â· 1 4 1 4 Â·:; 5 111:,; 2 -1 j b 9:* *C i - Ch,ic I /1 - -1 q \ ..."4=L ifia'.-7 2. L '. i i- 1 1- g:.t ~2 / 1-- I , .? . 3*%2 - 2 4 1 4= *1 1 / i|b | . 4-4-m /1/:Ile X -Â¢-Â· 9%:St. I J 1~uW I m ok - 1 -14 4 %111 K U SP *It 11 3 -01 , ~1 / /.f~ 1 {/~/ff - A . - vtÂ· ~ 'r 7/ 2. 1 f .1/ / 'tijlijit, f 16 .9#ik 4 e 1 1 1 SIS!.51\< ; . It 1 - Evit i - - Â». 444 2 ' ib, --- In-n__- ia ~ ,< * f;i fAN I - 1 14- ~~{f .4; ~I ; ~" I ,*:T;f j/'j I.'1~. r;-7----/ 2-1/'131 - = e El I'*t \ \21,2 1 7 a - :3-1 ; 1 H Â· Â· - ' '1,1, 1 *U y 'A- 1,-~01 ~~ili~I , , ~\\ i \\ \ \ 1. , i l.../. I DEVELOPMENT GOOD SAMAR/TAN WLL ueld jueu,doleAea uewelues pooe DIDVE['lIA HE)lflf) AlIa 11 U i. R r P 9 Â£ siol 1/ a.&&11- AE ]176 11[1IldIWOSM '014 NIVEId iNIGIWJOIiIAGIC SN0ISIA331 '10 Gh& rul '. - 0 .t 1 0 1 4 3 3 1 /17 /1 1 / 4% 3 , A 0< 4 0 4 , f mit , r &11~ 1 7 1 4 7 /[44 1 4 1 - . \.4 ~ 4 1~ *(P-I *1---I3, /VW / ~ ~ 1 , " g - - 5 .3 0 / 4\\/ . L. C 4 0 8 Â£ 21 Â¢ / 06 -4 1 / -1-1 41 & % 3 0 v 6 + W :r 4 9 D Â¥17. 2 f. j \ / b . Â¢ .7/ I .; f, 10.- / &1 1// 19 4A 1 - \..4- 1 t .t I 2 . 1 49 f . 4 - - k -1. 0 j ': ,/ 1 f K . 4.1 X -. I V' - 1 22, 1 e /\ 4... 4 1 - (53 1 f / .j. rb &9 .1 . 06 4 4 1- 404/ 2 1. 42 ' Bi l 3 . 1 ' ./. . . 9,1 7 l .4 1 ill, -. / 0 4 .'r' 0?1 w V m 4 . , 4 3 , 4 . 1 , f A 2 ' 4 Q,- <>142~~ H 1 , 4 4 ./1 1 r /0 6, $0400,44., 3 a: < .0 1 1 ~ m .00<1 1 7. I . k- 9 l~" ' Â· ...~.3- .9 K .:. / i 4 05 4 /4 47, 1,(.. 'L , // 1 /4 . b. -3 490 -3414 \7/Â¥ 03. Le. .4 .1 1 4/ M C# 11 / r#-3~0#0;7.2. : 1 ' - 1 NZE .. 25 4 11-' 4 4 ///11 . 7 R .1 0 5,4 M 1 0 1 11 1 6 . 00-10 20!/ h - 0 0 Â·t 01 2.6 '\44 0 1 # 53 1 0 * 8 | 2 m * m 0 9 8 9 0 0 CON 4- Tr , 6 4, 4 1 0 - lu 2 ' ~ a- t , // 2 7 1 1 4 itt! + 0 - Q) 2 41 4 , 000.e- 4 4 4 6 r 3 4 8 .t .9/ 14 -l *# -. == .00. , le. 8 ,/ . Wl 1 0 hil / mI 1 1,\ J M /7/ M , 4F O S . / "A f i h 4 i \ 4, / N lig . m O 1 6? 1, .6 ' . K M Lk #2 m - ..1 ~: i t{ t w Q: 0 1 g 41 ././1...... Â· ' / ~ Lr / M ja *W / f 0 (,1 8/ 11"41 + 9/ \ 9- 0 .D 6Â· ' 4 19* 0 -1 - # 10 1 N . 6/, 11 ~Ja QZ to (NI 2 M. fl V 4 / 4 ' 1 4 2 \J f- 4 102 ..1 I.0 1 06 . . M.1 0 6 1, e 1/ 4 . , 0- 0. . 3 4 P,\ ./. 4 /9 / 6 1 , . r.1.. '' .4. '' : >) :.M : 1. - chi,~ ' 31 8 Â· 2 \ w % ON 6/vd 19~flo~~ 2 . \,94 ' 04 \ . 4 4 4 \ 1%\ \\ L 1 6 4 4 . 9 / . i 3 N , ,' w1 E-\ f , -4 Â· 4 ~UN Â£Â£ 3 , 1 0 Sll n , tz JOK . DE K DELK â‚¬ DECK D K ~ 1 1 / 1/~1 DECK / CU 41 0 -1 FL 1 4 1 - ---- 1 + ././Ii / -1.3_8â‚¬EL - - %06 47~ - 'ELYS 3 '82,1.10 N / dHO dHO W 08 Po & dHO Ak Mxvi 2% W u h- WO 1 44423 0Â£ N - h -1 92 W- i 0. Md 2*,bj 5.9 1 *w OOD SAMARITAN ADDITION BOSPNG ~ 11I1I10 'A UTLO~~- a 1N3W3SV3 N3W3393 A1I1I1O 9 OPMENT PLA AlIFYV.:1- EAS MENT WK3A/80~ il" t?ih I 1*mr GIDVTIIA HJIflf) Atia f 9 Â£ I07 ..12 h = : 0 1 .-O AIV'Id ING[ArdO'Il[Agia SNU1S1A33 Ag 31V6 NOIidINOS]a 'ON 2 1 122/?31 7 1 f 1 42; 4 5%2 'l- :81 2- , l.0 8* I i 4 /4 44 C. It /6Â· f %.5 ~ -,r k 4 3 1- 1 0 1 â€¢ e / Y . 4 6 , 1 ill Â¥11 k . / 1 11 5 d 1 f. l-lt g / lis. li / if 0-z , 2 (\P# 11 4/ 18 0 ' 6 1.1 0 Â» d 4 W 11 1 ' 1 :. 0, 1 8 / 1 ./. I / 0 1 - /1 1 1 Â«Jf /9 1 4 4 r . / 1 lili j 4 'i 4 4 , ep 19 / /33,1/j & f . 4 I 4 ' 4 â€¢t ' 7, 2 - .f// -r ./ 1 1 ir / , t' g Iii ./ el I . 1 4 . . ,./ , r- 69<la k / - , //,/ / //. //m *2*% /dw 9 1 1 , , --1 2 8 4 3 &1 t. g / 1 ... , kNO* 1 Q:19 - 4 . - 1-1 7*/11.1 1 Yf 11 1. l . f. 1 . 11 / I I. // *61 1/i 2. B/.11 // . l./ k u 1 / 0 , f./. 7 V , , f .2--,01 -/ / 80 a / r b K C 1 . 1 , Â£ . 4,/47. : 1 4 1-'g dd / , 1 / 402 . 1/ 1 1 j /4 . ' 1 ... 0. / // i , li 0 11/ , I / 4 4 4/ 7 Q ,: r.7 4 lift - / PA 1 K , 1 \ / \41 / 01 v '. /14 /4 . 01 11, , - ~~ 4-1.41 1 ... 4/ / 17 /4 1% , 0, 0 .: / /1 4 , . I. 4. 4' ,./ 4 i 4 , / 1 1 , f fr ki- , 4 4 1 , A rpi il:, M a /31 , 4 4 af // /1 I , . 4 4 1 / 1 Mi~-1 . C.. ,-'117* /1 1, 1 4 ./ / 1 4 : / / / 4 . 0 l. s 4, \ 16/ :'~ \38 4 4 /1% ./1 1 / , 1 L # 1 1 4 f ' 6 .9. 4 6, V lÂ· / I , i UNAÂ·-1 I--]3BVW ~ 7 fi# \ 1 / /1 / 1/1 . /-1 , TOO**92 lilli P 4* OF CLASS 6 ROAD BASE COU SOIL NOI103S SSO AMMOVOM 9Â£16 3-IVOS 01 1ON - 1IVal T SURFACE DOURSE 8~ WATER UNE - TO 98% STANDARD D (5' FROM EDGE OF ASPHALT AND 5' DEPTH 123----0 IalI DEVELOPMENT PLAN VILLAGE OOD SAMARITAN ADDITION \- SIV7-9 85- Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Robert B. Joseph, Director Date: October 18, 2001 Subject: Good Samaritan Subdivision, Preliminary Plat Background. This is an application to subdivide a 62-acre parcel into twelve developable lots and three non-developable outlots, and dedicate street rights-of-way and easements. The site is located approximately one mile north of US Hm 34 on the west side of Dry Gulch Road. The site is adjacent to the south line of Hillcrest Estates. This subdivision proposal is in conjunction with annexation, rezoning, and development plan review requests for the "Good Samaritan" senior assisted living proposal. This subdivision is intended to dedicate street rights-of-way, various pedestrian and utility easements, three (3) open space lots, two (2) multi-family development lots, one (1) senior assisted living lot, one (1) lot intended for a church, and eight (8) single-family residential lots. Budget. Annexation would require the Town to provide street maintenance and snow removal, and police and fire protection. Action. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Good Samaritan Subdivision Preliminary Plat, conditional to: 1. Approval of the accompanying rezoning and annexation. 2. Addition of the following note: "Lots 5 and 7 shall not receive access from Ptarmigan Trail." 3. Redesign the Ptarmigan Trail - Dry Gulch Road intersection to comply with Appendix D (1) (F) 2. 4. Final roadway construction plan shall ensure a site distance of 450 feet at both Dry Gulch intersections. 5. Any re-routing of existing electric line shall require an easement. 6. Acceptance of the improvement guarantee by Town of Estes Park Public Works. 7. A shared maintenance agreement for Lots 5,6 and 7 shall be submitted with the Final Plat. 8. The following wildlife mitigation techniques shall be included in the recorded covenants: a. Unless stored in bearproof containers, trash shall not be left out overnight and residents are not to feed wildlife. b. Residents are hereby notified hunting is allowed within the unincorporated portion of Larimer County. RESOLUTION NO. 42-01 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: The Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, in accordance with Section 31-12-110, C.R.S., hereby finds that with regard to the proposed annexation of the following described area, that the requirements of the applicable parts of Sections 31-12- 104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., have been met; that an election is not required under Section 31-12-107(2), C.R.S.; and that no additional terms and conditions are to be imposed on the annexation. The area eligible for annexation known as "GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST ADDITION and GOOD SAMARITAN SECOND ADDITION" to the Town of Estes Park is as follows: Good Samaritan First Addition A portion of Section 20, Township 5 North, Range 72 West of the 6* 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°47'35Â» 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'; Ttience 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. DATED this 23rd day of October ,2001. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 16-01 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST ADDITION and GOOD SAMARITAN SECOND ADDITION BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: Section 1. That a Petition for Annexation, together with four (4) copies of the plat of said area as required by law, was filed with the Board of Trustees on the 18 TH day of Julv, 2001 by the landowners of one hundred percent (100%) of the area and owning one hundred percent (100%) of the area, excluding public streets and alleys of the area hereinafter described. The Board, by Resolution at its regular meeting on the 14~h day of August, 2001, accepted said Petition and found and determined that the provisions of Section 31-12-107(1), C.R.S., were met; and the Board further determined that the Town Board should consider the annexation plat on Tuesday, September 25, 2001; however, at the Applicant's request, the annexation plat was continued to October 23, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Building for the purposes of determining that the proposed annexation complies with the applicable provisions of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., and is considered eligible for annexation. Section 2. That the Notice of said hearing was given and published as provided in Section 31-12-108(2), C.R.S. Section 3. That the hearing was held pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-12- 109, C. R.S., on the 23rd day of October, 2001. Section 4. That following said hearing, the Board of Trustees adopted a Resolution determining that the proposed annexation met the requirements of the applicable parts of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S.; that an election was not required under Section 31-12-107(2), C.R.S.; and that no additional terms or cohditions are to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 5. That the annexation of the following described area designated as GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST ADDITION and GOOD SAMARITAN SECOND ADDITION to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, is hereby approved: 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 Bm 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'; Then8e 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 chbrd of S 20Â°07'19" W 217.93' a distance of 218.62'; Thence S 12Â°15'25" W 222.65'; Thence al6ng 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 81.46'; 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°48'47Â» 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: Section 6. The Town of Estes Park, Colorado, hereby consents, pursuant to Section 37-45-126(3.6) C.R.S., to the inclusion of lands described above into the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Municipal SubDistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Section 7. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS 23rd DAY OF October ,2001. ORDINANCE NO. 17-01 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REZONE GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST AND SECOND ADDITION WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Planning Commission has forwarded the rezoning request of the Good Samaritan First and Second Addition from the RE-1 Rural Estate District to the E-1 Estate District and RM Multi-Family Residential District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees having reviewed the submittals of the Applicant, and the Staff Report, and heard testimony at the public hearing, has determined that the requested rezoning of the Property is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected as more fully set forth in the Staff Report; that proposed development on the Property is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley as more fully set forth in the Staff Report; and that adequate utility services, roads, and other facilities are in place and are adequate to serve the proposed development; WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has determined that it is in the best interest of the Town that the requested zoning change be granted. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: Section 1: The zoning for Good Samaritan First and Second Addition to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado shall be changed from RE-1 Rural Estate District to the E-1 Estate District and RM Multi-Family Residential District. Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced upon the approval of the Final Subdivision Plat of Good Samaritan First and Second Addition. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS 23rd day of October , 2001. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the Board of Trustees on the 23rd day of October, 2001, and published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of , 2001, all as required by the Statutes of the State of Colorado. Town Clerk 0, In my opinion, if we surveyed the residents of Estes Park this evening or for that matter the residents of the entire valley as to what are some ofthe more important issues which the Town of Estes Park will have to face over the next few years, I feel confident that two areas which would be high on the majority of the lists would be attainable housing and assisted living. The vast majority of citizens of Estes Park realize the importance of attainable housing, if we are to keep the employees that we must have here to work at entry level service positions while also attracting and keeping the professional that we need in our schools, medical center and town government as well as managers for our many stores and businesses here in town. The other area which I stated citizens would list, granted more so with the older population, is the lack of assisted living facilities here in the valley for residents who might want and need such a facility for themselves in the future, or more immediately for one oftheir loved ones. I have had people, over and over, tell me that they have lived in Estes for many years and the thought of having to leave Estes Park, because there is no such facility here, when they might require some additional level of care, just breaks their hearts. The proposal before us to start the process of having a campus here in town which will provide for both ofthese needs is something which this board must seriously consider. In my judgemen~~e are running out of opportunities for such a venture here in the valley. We have before us a proposal from the Good Samaritan Society, one of the primer nonprofit organizations in the country, to build and run an assisted living facility here in Estes Park. Good Samaritan now operate more than 200 such facilities in the United States. Let's face the fact that ifthis venture fails, with one ofthe largest and most respected providers of assisted living in the entire country, who else would undertake such a venture here? How many parcels of land are left which could accommodate such a campus? Where would we not run into the same concerns of some neighbors? --4. I am not making light of the concerns of neighbors as they should scrutinize any development proposed for their area and it is our duty, as board members, when looking at any new development to considering these concerns,but we must also consider the general welfare ofthe community, while at the same time looking at the Estes Valley Development Code which encourages the orderly and emcient distribution ofthe Estes Valley's population while promoting good civic design in any proposed development. Under this development the Estes Park Housing Authority would build and operate the attainable housing portion of the proposed development. It will be build keeping in mind the surrounding *reas and the concerns of residents. Will there be a relatively high density? Of course, that is the only way that attainable housing can possibly work; that is what makes it affordable; however the density of this attainable portion will not be built to the maximum allowed for attainable housing in our code. Keep in mind that building attainable single-family homes on an acre ofproperty just is not feasible, here or any place. To make this project a reality, all ofthe pieces as proposed by Good Samaritan must be in place. It will not work by just building the assisted living-center core portion, without the residential lots on the north and the involvement ofthe Housing Authority on the south. You might say in this case that you can't have your dessert without first eating your vegetables. I suggest that this undertaking will not only from a utilitarian standpoint be a betterment for this town and its residents, but that it will become something which we, as a community, will be proud of and I support this annexation with the rezoning and specific land uses as proposed not only because of the nature of this undertaking, but because it is an appropriate land use for this property. . 14 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Bob Joseph, Community Development Director Date: 10-18-01 Subject: Block One Code Revisions; Estes Valley Development Code Background: This is the first group of code revisions to be proposed. These revisions reflect changes based on the first year of experience working with the new code. The changes are not major; for the most part they address minor errors and omissions, and provide clarification. They also include a revision of the building height limit formula to provide flexibility on steeper lots. Also, attainable housing units are exempted from the floor area ratio limitations. The minor subdivision process is clarified, and some definitions are being added. The Estes Valley Planning Commission has held full public notice and public hearing. There was minimal public comment on these particular revisions. The Larimer County Commissioners adopted these revisions on Oct. 15. Recommendation: The Planning Commission has voted unanimously to recommend adoption of these revisions to the Estes Valley Development Code. ~ Amendments to the Estes Valley v Development Code, Block One Estes Park Community Development Department â€¢~ Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue ~'"""""* PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: October 15, 2001 N = RN,P A TITLE: Amendments to the Estes Valley . USFS Development Code, Block One If, 1 REOUEST: To make a number of changes = .-ex.Â» and corrections to the adopted Estes Valley Development Code. LOCATION: Estes Valley, inclusive of the Town o f Estes Park. APPLICANT: Estes Valley Planning Commission STAFF CONTACT: Bob Joseph APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: These Code revisions address and correct minor errors and omissions that have surfaced after the first year and a half of experience working with the Code. Other minor revisions clarify and modify existing Code provisions to produce standards that are more workable. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Estes Valley Planning Commission reviewed these proposed changes on September 17, 2001, and voted unanimously (6-0, one absent) to recommend APPROVAL to the Board of County Commissioners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed Code Amendments. REVIEW CRITERIA: All applications for text or Official Zoning Map amendments shall be reviewed by the EVPC and Board(s) for compliance with the relevant standards and criteria set forth below and with other applicable provisions of this Code. Development Code Changes, Block One p. 1 ill I i 1. The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected; 2. The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley; and 3. The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application were approved. ORGANIZATION: 1. Text to be replaced delineated with strikethrough (The quick brown fox). 2. New text delineated with underline (The quick brown fox). 3. Revisions have been organized sequentially by chapter and section. CHAPTER 1 - General Provisions Item 1: Â§1.9 D. Setbacks - Building and Structure Setbacks. 1. Building and Structure Setbacks from Lot Lines. d. Obstruction of Sight Distances in Setbacks Prohibited:_No essentially opaque fence, landscaping, wall or frccotanding sign shall be maintained between three and one half (3 1,4) and eight (8) fect above grade within one hundred (100) feet of the intersection of tho street centerlines. Sec Appendix D to this Code. Intersection and driveway sight visibility shall comply with the requirements of Appendix D, Section IV. Streets and Roads C. Intersection and Driveway Visibility. Item 2: Â§ 1.9.E. HEIGHT. 2. Measurement of Maximum Building Height on Slopes. The maximum height of buildings on slopes may be adiusted up to a maximum of 40-feet using the following calculation (see figure 1.4). This adiustment requires submittal of a site plan containing the following information: building elevations, roof design, finished floor elevation, and gradinq plan with existing and proposed contours. Mb=30+[.50(a-b)1 where: Mh=Maximum height in feet at any given point above original grade Development Code Changes, Block One P. 2 a=Elevation at highest point of natural grade of proposed building location b=Elevation at any given point M =30' M =35' Mb=40' b b 1 1 4-30+[.5(10)] 4-304[ %20)] ,.a a a .........................../.................. - 10' .. Th-Â·'.b 20' ~h.~.b Original ground surface Figure 1.4 1 Exemptions from Height Standards. CHAPTER 2 - Code Administration and Review Roles Item 3: Â§ 2.1 CODE ADMINISTRATION AND REVIEW ROLES A. Relevant Administering Bodies. The following entities shall have roles in administrating the provisions of this Code: 3. The Town of Estes Park Board of Adjustment and the Larimer County Board of Adjustment (collectively referred to as "the BOAs"); and 3. The Estes Valley Board of Adiustment [BOA1; and Development Code Changes, Block One P. 3 Item 4: Table 2-1: Code Administration and Review Roles. REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY PROCEDURE Staff EVPC Boards [1] BOA [1] Use Classification DM A A --- NOTES TO TABLE 2-1 [1] The Boards and the BOAs-=. . CHAPTER 3 - Review Procedures Item 5: Â§ 3.2.F. Summary Table-Standard Development Review Process by Application Type. Step 2-< Step 1 Application/ Step 3 7 U 4.F . l'.4 - . Pre-Application Completeness Staff Review & SteD 4 -;; .Siza.i:.:' Conference Certification Report EVPC Action Board Action Variances M A A N/A BOA Minor Subdivision M A A A A - Annexations M A A NA A - "V" = Voluntarv "M" = Mandatory "A" = Applicable "14/A" = Not Applicable "APP" = Appeals "BOA" = Board of Adiustment "SR" = Special Requirements (Refer to Text) Item 6: Development Code Changes, Block One P. 4 Â§ 3.8 DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW Table3-3 Development Plan Review Requirements Determining Factor Staff Review [1] EVPC Review Â£ All Nonresidential Developments in the CO, CH, 2 and 1-1 Zoning Districts 1 3 Add the "0" district to this chart. Item 7: , - . A All Residential or Commercial Accommodations Development. including IkE.121 k /c:luumiÂ·m tillit I: Â¥ Number of Dwelling or Guest Units 3-10 11 or more Maior alterations that also entail alteration to the number of parkina spaces, the configuration of 3-10 RV pad/campsite 11 or more RV pad/campsite parking, egress, water, sewer, drainaqe, or lighting on the premises Item 8: Â§ 3.9 SUBDIVISIONS D. Minor Subdivisions. 1. Defined. Minor subdivisions shall be defined as follows: b. Frontaqe Lots. Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land into a total of not more than four (4) lots shall be considered a minor subdivision, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing dedicated public street, and that the subdivision entails no extension of mwAidpat water or sanitarv sewer facilities. No more than a total of four (4) lots shall be created out of a lot, tract or parcel or set of contiguous parcels in the same ownership using the minor subdivision procedure. Item 9: 2. Hazard Areas. Areas with hazards as defined by Section 7.7 of this code shall not be eligible for the Minor Subdivision process. Item 10: Development Code Changes, Block One P. 5 3. Procedure for Approval of Minor Subdivisions. Applications for minor subdivision approval shall follow the standard development approval process set forth in Â§3.2 of this Chapter. ,except that no preliminary plat shall be FequiFed-: Item 11: A. Submittal Requirements. Applications for minor subdivision approval shall conform to submittal requirements for a preliminarv plat as set forth in Appendix B, Section C for purposes of Staff and Planning Commission review. The plat forwarded to the Governing Body shall conform to submittal requirements for a final plat as set forth in Appendix B, Section D. CHAPTER 4 - Zoning Districts Item 12: Â§4.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS E. Special Purpose and Overlay Zoning Districts 4. SH StanleY Historic Overlay District Item 13: Â§ 4.3 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Table 4-1 Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts Zoning Districts Additional Regulations "P" = Permitted by Right (Apply in All Use Classification Specific Use "S" = Permitted by Special Review Districts "-" = Prohibited Unless Otherwise RE-1 RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM Stated) I. ...r.QK... 97273*1. 3~ RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSIFICATIONS ~ 4%*. In RE 1 R-1, Single-family ppp PpppP Â§4.3.D.4 Household Living dwelling applies Development Code Changes, Block One P. 6 Item 14: Â§ 4.3 TABLE 4-2 Base Density and Dimensional Standards, Residential Zoning Districts. Minimum ... I.- :/. .. Minimum c Lot Building/Structure Setbacks Max. ivy' Min. Â·.*A ".3% t.*554: Standards [l] '- [2] Max."Â·Net Building Building Max. ' Lpt Zoning Density Area (sq Width Side Rear Height Width " ~. Coverage' District (units/acre) ft) (ft.) Front (ft.) (ft.) (ft) (ft.) (ft.) + - '%) , 9 40,000, Residential 5,400 sq. 60; Uses: ft./unit Lots Max = 8 and [4][5][al Greater 25-arterials; Multi- Min = 3 10 RM Senior than 15-other 10 30 20 [7] family= Senior [6] 50% Institutional 100,000 streets Institutional Living sq. ft.: Living Uses: Uses: 14 200 Max = 24 Ac. Notes to Table 4-2: [81 Single Family and Duplex developments shall have minimum lot areas of 18,000 s.f. and 27,000 s.f., respectively Item 15: Â§ 4.3.D Additional Zoning District Standards. Private Open Areas; Applicability and Minimum Set-Aside Required. A\\ residential developments and subdivisions containing five (5) or more dwellinq units shall set aside a minimum percentage of total gross land area for the purpose of private open areas in the amount shown in Table 4-3 below. See Â§7.4 for additional private open area standards. Item 16: Â§ 4.5 SPECIAL PURPOSE AND OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS B. Estes Valley Design Standards and Guidelines (RESERVED> B. Downtown Design Overlay District - RESERVED C. Highway Corridor Overlay District - RESERVED Development Code Changes, Block One P. 7 D. Stanley Historic Overlay District. 1. All development in the Stanley Historic Overlay District shall comply with the Stanley Historic District Procedures and Standards for Development, set forth in Chapter 17.44 of the Town of Estes Park Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. CHAPTER 5 - Use Regulations Item 17: Â§ 5.2 ACCESSORY USES B. Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts. 2. Additional Requirements for Specific Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning District. c. Family Home Day Care. Defined. A facility for care in the permanent residende of the provider for the purpose of providing day care and training for Ret-mere-than few,=-0) adults or children who are not related to the provider. The maximum number of children cared for shall comply with State of Colorado and the Colorado Department of Human Services rules and regulations. Item 18: Table 5-1: Accessory Uses and Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts Residential Zoning District "Yes" = Permitted "No" = Not Permitted Additional 'i 'i' Accessory Use RE-1 RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM Requirements Home Occupation Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes Â§5.2.Ble f Item 19: Table 5-2: Accessory Uses Permitted in the Nonresidential Zoning Districts Nonresidential Zoning District "Yes " = Permitted "No " = Not Permitted 8 A-1 CD CO O CH I-1 Additional Conditions-#4â€¢f , Accessory Use . I.mÂ·Â·WE.h@'-'Â· Development Code Changes, Block One P. 8 Employee Housing Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Â§5.2.BC.2.a (Including Caretaker Quarters) Item 20: Â§ 5.3 TEMPORARY USES AND STRUCTURES C. General Standards. All temporary uses or structures shall meet the following requirements: 7. Temporarv uses shall comply with building/structure setbacks established for the zone district in which the temporary use is located. Staff mav waive or adiust this provision. CHAPTER 7 - General Development Requirements Item 21: Â§7.11 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING M. Bicycle Racks. For premises requiring feAy--Â¢40) twenty (20) or more vehicular parking spaces, bicycle racks facilitating locking shall be provided to accommodate one (1) bicycle per twenty (20) parking spaces required or fraction thereof. CHAPTER 10 - Subdivisions Item 22: Â§ 10.2 APPLICABILITY/SCOPE B. Minor Subdivisions. Minor Subdivisions are subiect to full review and compliance with the standards set forth in Chapter 10, and the submittal requirements set forth in Appendix B. Development Code Changes, Block One P. 9 1. Boundary Adjustments. Boundarv Adiustments. Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjusting boundary lines... Item 23: 2. Frontaqe lots. Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land into a total of not more than four (4) lots shall also be a minor subdivision, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing dedicated public street, and that the subdivision entails no extension of water or sanitarv sewer facilities. No more... Item 24: Â§ 10.3 REVIEW PROCEDURES A. All subdivisions, including Minor Subdivisions, shall be reviewed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 3 of this Code. CHAPTER 13 - Definitions Item 25: Â§ 13.3 DEFINITIONS OF WORDS, TERMS AND PHRASES Barn/Stable. Barn/Stable shall mean a building, used exclusivelv to store farm implements, grain, hay, and other farm products and/or to shelter and feed livestock; or, a building having stalls or compartments used exclusively to shelter and feed livestock. Building Enve/ope. An area within the propertv boundaries of a lot or property within which an allowed building or structure may be placed. No portion of the building, including cornices, canopies, eaves, landinqs, or attached decks, shall extend outside the bounds of a building envelope. Floor Area, Gross shall mean the combined sum of the gross building floor area of all principal and accessory buildings on a lot, including basement gross floor area except as specifically excluded herein, as measured along the outside enclosing walls, but not including: c. Attainable housing bonus units meeting the requirements of Â§11.4. Only bonus units shall be exempt; Development Code Changes, Block One p. 10 Garage Sale, The sale or offering for sale to the general public of more than five items of personal property on any portion of a lot in a residential zoning district, whether within or outside anv building. Sales of programs and food and beverage items at school athletic events shall not be deemed to constitute garage sales. Shall be limited to no more than four (4) consecutive calendar days and occur not more than twice within a 12- month period. Statement of Intent shall include the following unless waived bv Staff at the pre- application meeting: existing conditions, development request, any requests for modifications or exceptions to the Code, and a proiect description to include: vehicular and pedestrian access, vehicular and pedestrian circulation system, density, number of units, number of lots, acreage, land use, landscaping and maintenance plan, utilities, stormwater drainaqe and erosion control, and type and amount of impervious coverage. All points of non-compliance with applicable code provisions shall also be noted, and iustification provided. APPENDIX B - Submittal Requirements Item 26: 11. SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. General Submittal Requirements 4. Statement of /ntent. All applications for a preliminary subdivision plan and final plat shall include a written Statement of Intent explaining how the proposed subdivision meets the applicable standards for review as set forth in Chapter 10 and Chapter 7 of this Code. Item 27: C. Preliminary Subdivision Plans 5. Contents. n. A proposed delineation of the limits of disturbance (LODs) for each lot, as required in Â§7.32.D of this Code. z. Names and Addresses. The names and addresses of all owners of land Development Code Changes, Block One p. 11 immediately adioininq the platted land as their names appear in the records in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder and their addresses as they appear on the tax records of the County. Item 28: D. Final Subdivision Plats. 21. Sma#Scale Plat. One copy ofplat at 1"=600' scale. This copy shall include the lot lines, section, township, and range, and tie to an established Larimer County survey monument. Item 29: 24Â·. 22.Plan Contents. m. Survevor. A certificate by the licensed land surveyor responsible for the survey and final map or plat. The signature of such survoyor, unless accompanied by his or her scal, must be attested. The signature of such survevor must be stamped with his or her seal. Item 30: 111. DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. General Submittal Requirements 4. Statement of /ntent. All development plan applications shall include a written Statement of Intent explaining how the proposed subdivision meets the applicable standards for review as set forth in Chapter 4 and Chapter 7 of this Code. Item 31: B. Sketch Plan Submittal Requirements. Development Code Changes, Block One p. 12 3. Contents. h. Final site specific lot survey for lots with slopes thirty (30%) or steeper. (Sco II.D.21.c above.) Item 32: C. Development Plan Submittal Requirements. 5. As-built Plans. As-built plans (1 Mylar + 1 paper copy + 1 digital copy) shall be submitted at the time construction of the improvements is completed. As-built plans shall include utilities, parking, building footprints, and building square footaae. Final certficate of occupancy shall not be issued prior to submittal of as-built plans. i. Development Plan Submittal Package Contents. Item 33: VII. VARIANCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE (MINOR) MODIFICATIONS--SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Submittal Requirements. 11. Field Staking. The lot corners and building corners of the proposed structure shall be field staked ten (10) business days prior to the scheduled Board of Adiustment hearing. APPENDIX D - Road Design and Construction Standards Item 34: IV. STREETS AND ROADS C. Intersection and Driveway Visibility. Development Code Changes, Block One p. 13 1. /ntersections. No fence, wall, hedge, landscaping, sign or other material or structure that will obstruct vision between a height of three (3) feet and eleven (11) feet shall be erected, placed or maintained within the tdaAgWlaF-afea sight visibility triangle formed by an imaginary line starting at the point of intersection of property lines and extending thirty (30) feet from their point of intersection, as shown on the following illustration: Sight Visibility Triangle at Intersection 1. Vbibility Ttv VI,bulty Tria,gle Property Line 30 feet Street Item 35: 3. Driveways. On the front property lines, no structure, fence, wall, hedge, or planting will obstruct vision between a height of three (3) feet and eight (8) fect shall bo crected, placed or maintained within the triangular arca formed by the edge of tho driveway and the front lot lino as shown on the following diagram: No fence, wall, hedge, landscaping, sign or other material or structure that will obstruct vision between a height of three (3) feet and eight (8) feet shall be erected, placed or maintained within the sight visibility triangle, as shown on the following illustration: Sight Visibility Triangle at Driveway / Not Buitdable-x A ~ Not Buildable frprE-hoLP-L k_ _ _ 11_ â„¢Â»4.- _-_ C 10 feet 7 ~ Parkway=~ ~ 8 It. or lest' Street Development Code Changes, Block One p. 14 The provisions of this Section shall may be waived for fences, walls, hodges or other plantiRâ‚¬}6 if it can be shown that visibility will not be restricted either because of a turnaround driveway or a parkway (tree lawn) greater than (8) feet. Development Code Changes, Block One p. 15 . ORDINANCE NO. 18-01 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Planning Commission has recommended numerous amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code; and WHEREAS, said amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code are set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, on October 15, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado approved said amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code set forth on Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has determined that it is in the best interest of the Town that the amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code set forth on Exhibit "A' and recommended for approval by the Estes Valley Planning Commission be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: Section 1: The Estes Valley Development Code shall be amended as more fully set forth on Exhibit "A'. Section 2: Whereas, in the opinion of the Board of Trustees an emergency exists, this Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced immediately after its passage, adoption and signature of the Mayor. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS 23rd DAY OF October ,2001. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor