The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2001-11-27Prepared 11/21/01 Â» Revised 11/26/01 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, November 27, 2001 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT TOWN BOARD COMMENTS 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated November 13, 2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Works Committee, November 15, 2001: 1. 2001 Water Loop Project Change Order, $9,380. 2. 2001 Water Loop Project Addition: Kearney & Sons, $45,026 and Cornerstone Engineering, $6,750. 3. Budgeted Equipment Purchases: Swenson Sanders (3), MacDonald Equipment Co., $9,072.00. 4. Municipal Building Air Conditioning Design/Build Project, Thorp Associates/Poudre Valley Air, $170,000. 5. Resolution #47-01 - Causeway Underpass/Fish Creek Intersection Project. 4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, November 13, 2001 (acknowledgement only). 5. Estes Valley Planning Commission, special meeting November 15 and regular meeting November 20, 2001 (acknowledgement only). 6. Â»Resolution #48-01, amending Sleepy Hollow Covenants for conveyance of Outlot A to Rocky Mountain National Park Associates. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. FINAL PLAT & FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP OF LAZY R COTTAGES, JAMES M. WHITTLESEY/APPLICANT (Continued from 11/13/01). Community Development Dir. Joseph. 2. RE-APPOINTMENT - ESTES VALLEY PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES. Re-appointment of Cami Sebem and Steve Little to 4-yr. terms, expiring 12/31/05 - Mayor Baudek. 3. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. NOTE: The Board of Trustees will conduct one Town Board meeting +in December, December 11, 2001; the 12/25/01 meeting has been cancelled. A Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, 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 13th day of November, 2001. Meeting called to brder- by Mayor John Baudek. Present: Susan L. Doylen, Mayor ProTem Trustees Jeff Barker 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: John Baudek, Mayor, Stephen W. Gillette, Trustee Mayor ProTem Doylen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Laurie Button, Chairman/Town "Helping Hands" Committee gave a report on the Town's "Helping Hands" Committee (Badali, Franklin, Mangelsen, A. Steichen, Larson, and R. van Deutekom). Money from the sale of the Town's Annual Christmas Ornament is given tothose in need (serious illness, etc.) in the community. Local artist Herb Thomson (now deceased) provided the artwork for this year's ornament, and $1.00 from the sale of the 6maments will be contributed to Thomson's Scholarship Fund. The ornament is $8.00/ea., and a limited quantity is available at Town Hall, Hallmark, and YMCA. The remaining inventory of 1998 and 1999 ornaments were displayed and offered at no charge. Mr. Thomson provided a series of 4 drawings for future use. PUBLIC COMMENT None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS Trustee Habecker commented on the failed Event Center/Ice Rink election, urging the Town Board and community to give support for future consideration of this project. Mayor ProTem Doylen commended Harry Hutcherson and the Committee for their work in promoting said facility. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated October 23, 2001, Town Board Budget Study Sessions 10/15, 10/18, 11/01 and 11/06. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development, October 25, 2001: Special Events Dept.: 1. EVRPD Agreement for use of Barn W mid-January to April, 2002. B. Public Safety, November 1, 2001: Board of Trustees - November 13, 2001 - Page 2 Police Dept.:, 1. Budgeted Radio Equipment Upgrade, $105,000. C. Light & Power, November 8, 2001: 1. Award trenching contracts (2) to , Drake Contractors, $27,415 and Duell Excavating, $15,261. 2. Utility Pole Trailer Purchase, $11,927. 4. Estes Park Housing Authority, September 12, 2001 (acknowledgment only). 5. Estes Valley Planning Commission, October 16, 2061, and Special Meeting October 22, 2001 (acknowledgement only). 6. Resolution #43-01 - Intent to Annex Stauffer Addition, schedule public hearing on January 8,2002: + It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Barker) the consent calendar be approved, and it passed unanimously. lA. PLANNING COMMISSION "CONSENT" AGENDA (Approval of): Mayor ProTem Doylen stated if the Town Board, Applicant(s), Staff or the Public wish to speak on a particular item, a formal Public Hearing would be conducted. Kristin Moseley, Attorney for Robert & Carol Wands requested Item #2, EPCO Subdivision be removed from the consent agenda, and the request was granted. 1 Paul Kochevar, Applicant's Representative, requested Item #1, Lazy R Cottages be removed from the consent agenda, and this request was also granted. 4. SUBDIVISION. Preliminary Condominium Plat, The Woodlands Condominiums, Fall River, The Woodlands on Fall River, Inc./Applicants. The lot is zoned A-1. and the existing accommodations wse will continue. The Planning Commission has Â¢ recommended conditional approval of the Preliminary Condominium Map. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Newsom) Item #4, The Woodlands Condominiums be approved, and it passed unanimously. lA. PLANNING COMMISSION "ACTION" AGENDA: 1. SUBDIVISION. Final Plat and. Final Condominium Map of Lazy R Cottages, James M. Whittlesey/Applicant. Mayor ProTem Doylen opdned the public hearing, and Community Development Director Joseph presented the Staff Report. The Planning Commission reviewed this item and set conditions for approval; however, the 1 Applicant did not meet Town Board submittal deadlines. An Improvement Guarantee was received today, however, other items remain late in being received ahd/or reviewed. Utility access is yet unresolved as well. Staff emphasized that the Applicant has been cooperative; however, review of condominium maps is difficult; and staff has attempted to identify provisions in the Code as they relate to this proposal. In staffs opinion, this item should be continued based on the Town's Submittal Policy and the uncertainty of the utility easement issue. Paul Kochevar, Applicant's Representative, stated that the Applicant has complied with Planning Commission conditiond 1-4, and that the three comments submitted by Town Attorney White and Light & Board of Trustees - November 13, 2001 - Page 3 Power's request for a 15' utility easement for the overhead power line were added after preliminary plat approval. The Code states that the Planning Commission may add conditions if they believe it is in the publics' best interest-such is not the case in this inÂ§tance. Town Attorney White's comments will be addressed When the Applicant, not the Town, records the Declarations; however, the utility easement was never discussed with the Applicant. Mr. Kochevar is not convinced Light & Power needs the easement and this easement will encumber an existing building. Dir. Joseph stated that Comm. Development routinely discusses utility easements during the "Pre-App" conference, and confirmed that there has been uncertainty and difficulty in determining the existing electric service (service drop or main system) on this proposal, and that both the Town and Applicant share responsibility in the lateness of resolving this issue. Light & Power Dir. Matzke commented that perhaps an aerial easement would suffice. Mr. Kochevar delayed response to this suggestion pending discussion with the Applicant. Town Attorney White added that numerous condominium maps are being submitted and they require a unique type of review. Perhaps is it is appropriate for staff to review the Submittal Deadline Policy to ensure timely response from all involved parties. There was no public testimony thus Mayor ProTem Doylen closed the public hearing. Discussion followed concerning existing submittal policy, a desire to assist the customer, and the need for a solution to the utility easement. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Newsom) the Final Plat and Final Condominium Map of Lazy R Cottages be continued to Novetnber 27, 2001, not as a penalty to the Applicant, but to ensure a proper solution to the utility easement has been reached, and it passed unanimously. 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 SubdiOision, ' EPCO, Inc./Applicants (Continued from 10/09/01). Mayor ProTem Doylen opened the public hearing. Director Joseph displayed a PowerPoint presentation with a drawing delineating the site. The Planning Commission discussed at length the access between adjacent property owners Robert & Carol Wands who have historically enjoyed access across the EPCO property. The purpose of amended plat was to correct lot lines, and in the process, staff requested all easements of record be shown on the plat. The plat was referred to adjacent property owners for comment, thus Mr. Wands rhet with staff and stated he has a recorded right of access from MacGregor Ave. and also from Virginia Dr. Both recorded rights of access terminate at the corner of his lot, however, he has historically traveled across the EPCO property. Although staff generally does not participate in discussions pertaining to prescriptive rights, staff does have a responsibility is to ensure existing rights of access and possible prescriptive rights of access are correctly reflected on a plat. At the I , Planning Commission meeting, Wands' attorney pointed out there are some physical obstructions on the site that pertain to the recorded rights of access as well as historic rights of access. Attorney Mosely and Cornerstone Engineering discussed access and Cornerstone has offered to provide a driveway maintenance agreement on plat and written access agreement. The Wands and Attorney Mosely's interpretation of the Planning Commission condition (access agreement) was to be entered into between M/M Wands and EPCO and submitted to staff prior to Town Board action. No such access , Board of Trustees - November 13, 2001 - Page 4 t .4440 agreement has been entered into, nor submitted to staff. Dir. Joseph stated that the plat is in a standard form that the Town, as normal practice, would approve. Mike .Todd/Cornerstone Engineering, appeared requesting the Town waive the written access maintenance agreement' as the Wands have no obligation for maintenance of the driveway. Negotiations have stalled, and the Wands' existing easement has not been vacated thus it remains in tact. Also, an additional easement on the north end of the site has been provided on the plat. Attorney Mosely confirmed her client is not trying toÂ£stall the process, however, historical access is now blocked-the Wands desire adequate access and insufficient turning radius into their property has not been provided. Town Attorney White reported that the plat does show the easements of record and the new easemerit that EPCO is willing to grant the Wands; Wands does not have to accept the new easement and it is not wittiin the Town Board province to referee the access dispute. The Plat complies with all standards for amended plats. Discussion followed, and it was moved and seconded (Habecker/Barker) the Amended Plat of Parts of Lots 1, 2,15 & 17, Block 10, Second Amended Plat o the Town of Estes Park, EPCO SUBDIVISION 106 approved, with Planning Commission condition #1 pertaining to easements for the PE Sanitation District, and . without Planning Commission conditions #2 and #3 pertaining to the driveway maintenance agreement brld written access maintenance agreement, and it passed unanimodsly. Â¥ i SUBDIVISION. Preliminary Plat, Solitude Subdivision of Lot 1, Carlson Addition, Frederic & Susan Carlson/Applicants. Director Joseph presented the staff report for this lot that is zoned A- Accommodations, located at 600 Fish Creek Road and proposed to be subdivided into 7 lots (f6r sale) for accommodations purposes (equates to 5 dwelling units/acre). Paht use has alternated between short-term and long-term rentals. The Planning Commission has recommended conditional approval of the preliminary plat. Applicant's representative Paul Kochevar itated that staff has been adequately described the proposal; the preliminary plat has been submitted to he Planning Commission; and conditional items have been incorporated in the plat. As there was no public testimony, Mayor ProTem Doylen closed the public hearing. It was moved and sdconded 2Newsom/Jeffrey-Clark) the Preliminary Plat of Solitude Subdivision be approved with the Planning Commission conditions, and it passed unanimously. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. 2001 BUDGET SUPPLEMENT - RESOLUTION #27-01. Finance Officer Brandjord presented and clarified the Resolution supplementihg the Budget for the year ending December 31, 2001. Attorney White read Resolution #27-01, and it was moved and seconded (Barker/Newsom) Resolution #27-01 .be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. 2002 BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION. Town Administratof Widmer and Finance Officer Brandjord presented the 2002 Budgdt and thefollowing documents: Â· A. Highway User's Trust Fund. I - . Board of Trustees - November 13, 2001 - Page 5 B. Resolution #44-01 - Setting the Mill Levy of 1.902 mills. C. Resolution #45-01 - Adopting the 2002 Budget of $28,953,776. D. Resolution #46-01 - Appropriating Sums of Money. Finance Officer Brandjord requested Resolution #44-01 be continued to December 11, 2001, and it was moved and seconded (Habecker/Barker) Resolution #44-01 be continued to December 11, 2001, and it passed unanimously. Budget assumptions include a projected 4.5% increase in sales tax. Salary increases are proposed as a 3.8% cost of living adjustment plus a 1.8% merit pool, for a total of 5.6%. Medical insurance is expected to increase 16.7% and dental insurance is expected to increase 13.4%. Many of the Town Board goals adopted in May, 2000 have also been incorporated. Mayor ProTem Doylen opened the public hearing, and, following presentation, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Jeffrey-Clark) the Highway Users Trust Fund be approved, and it passed unanimously. Town Attorney White read Resolutions #45-01 and #46-01. There being no public comment, Mayor ProTem Doylen closed the public hearing. It was moved and seconded (Barker/Newsom) Resolutions #45-01 and 46-01 be approved, and it passed unanimously. Trustee Barker noted the Town Board's and staffs numerous study sessions resulting insubmittal and adoption of the 2002 Budget. 3. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A. Sales Tax Report. September statistics indicate an increase of 7.8% from 2000; year-to--date is up 5.2% over 2000. B. Ice Rink. Citizens who would like this project to continue were urged to contact the Town Board and EVRPD Board by written letters. Letters will assist both Boards in gauging the level of community support. NOTE: The Board of Trustees will conduct one Town Board meeting in December, December 11, 2001. Concluding all agenda items, Mayor ProTem Doylen adjourned the meeting at 8:53 p.m. Susan L. Doylen, Mayor ProTem Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk :*I. I I. 0 .... - DRAD....PUBLISHINSCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 15, 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 15th day of November, 2001. ,Â¥ . Committee: Chairman Barker, Trustees Doylen and Gillette Attending: Chairman Barker and Trustee Doylen Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Public Works Director Linnane, Water Supt. Goehring, Fleet Manager Mahany, Clerk * O'Connor Absent Trustee Gillette Chairman Barker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY - REQUEST FOR TWO WATER TAPS AT NO CHARGE. Habitat has requested two free water taps for Lots 3 and 4, Habitat Subdivision. The Town has approved three similar requests; if approved, it is recommended that the General Fund reimburse the Water Fund for these two taps in the 2002 Budget. The cost per tap is $4,090, thus the total request is for $8,180. Staff recommends that Habitat reimburse the Town if the houses are sold on the open market within the next 10 years, which is similar to the other requests. Also, staff recommends that Habitat restrict usage of the homes so that no commercial businesses are allowed. This has been an issue with the previous Sanborn Acres Habitat home, and Habitat has agreed with this condition. Discussion followed on the basis for the home business restriction. The Committee recommends approval of the 2002 Budget request to include the following conditions: 1) the Town be reimbursed by Habitat if the home is sold within 10 years; and 2) no home businesses be allowed. 2001 WATER LOOP PROJECT CHANGE ORDER- REQUEST APPROVAL. Congested utilities, rock outcroppings, and a narrow right-of-way are requiring a water main crossing on Devil's Gulch Road. The contractor, Dirt Doctor, has estimated the crossing at a negotiated price of $9,380, and the change order may be funded with the $135,000 under-budget for the 2001 Loop Project. The Committee recommends approval of the change order in the amount of $9,380 submitted by Dirt Doctor. 2001 WATER LOOP PROJECT ADDITION - REQUEST APPROVAL. During the past several years, the Dept. has received complaints about low pressure during the middle of the summer from several homeowners on Devil's Gulch Road. These homes are located on or near the 'blue line" for this area. A low-pressure complaint is a Priority 2 on the Town's Replacement Schedule and also an indication that the main serving this area is undersized. Thus, the Dept. has been replacing 3.5" pipe with 12" pipe along Devil's Gulch. While replacing the main in the immediate area will help, it is also necessary to upgrade the system to ensure adequate supply. This project will improve the Devil's Gulch area now and Mr future development as well. BRAOFORDPUBLISHINGCO. .RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS , Public Works Committee - November 15, 2001 - Page 2 Cornerston@ Engineering received bids for the project, and Kearney and Sons was the . low bidder. â€¢ Engineering Design and Construction ManagemenV Cornerstone Engineering $ 6,750 â€¢ Construction/Kearney and Sons 45,026 Total: $51,776 The 2001 Loop Project-bids were $135,000-under-buqlgej,_tjus, funding for this project - would be from this excess. -r---- - --- -4.--- I . The Committee recommends constructing the South Lane Interconnect Project in 2001 using budget surplus and awarding the contract to the low bidder, Kearney and Sons, for a total amount of $45,026, plus $6,750 for Cornerstone Engineering. STREET DEPT. SANDER EQUIPMENT PURCHASES - APPROVAL. Fleet Manager Mahany reported that the Street Dept. 'is requesting the replacement of three sanders on the Snow Plow Trucks. These sanders hhve been in the fleet for many years and the combination of wet sand and salt has deteriorated the sander roller and framework. Staff is requesting to replace this equipment with the same manufacture and model as the other sanders for fleet standardization. Bids were requested from the Swenson representative in this area. These sander replacements are included in the Street Department's 2001 Budget. Bids were received from MacDonald Equipment, the Swenson Sander Representative for this area. MacDonald Equipment: Unit #0265 Unit #303 Unit #338 $3,224.00 $3,224.00 $3,224.00 No Trade (Unit #0265) - 300.00 Trade-In - 300.00 Trade-In (being retained for spare) $3,224.00 $2,924.00 Bid Price $2,924.00 Bid Price The total cost is $9,072.00; the budgeted amount was $10,500.00. The Committee recommends approval to purchase three new Swenson Sanders from MacDonald Equipment Co. for a combined cost of $9,072.00. MUNICIPAL BUILDING AIR CONDITIONING PROJECT - REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH DESIGN/BUILD PROJECT. The Municipal Building is not air-conditioned and due to numerous complaints, the Town budgeted funds (2001) for the installation of an air-conditioning system ($170,000). Poudre Valley Air Co. is working with Thorp and Associates on the Library and Town Board Room Projects. Staff desires to coordinate this project and contract with Thorp and Poudre Valley Air to design/build a new air conditioning system for the Municipal Building. The entire heating system will be reviewed to ensure a viable system is installed. ' The Committee recommends staff be authorized to proceed with the Air Conditioning Design/Build Project with Thorp Associates and Poudre Valley Air. If solicited prices exceed the budget, staff will return to the Committee for further review. - BRADFORD /UeLISHING co. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Works Committee - November 15, 2001 - Page 3 CAUSEWAY UNDERPASS/FISH CREEK INTERSECTION PROJECT FUNDING RESOLUTION - REQUEST APPROVAL. Director Linnane reported that CDOT traditionally requires a funding letter for their joint projects, and the Town meets this requirement by adopting a Resolution. The Resolution was presented, and the Committee recommends the Resolution be approved. The Committee commended Director Linnane and staff for their achievements in obtaining state funding on numerous state highway projects. REPORTS. Roadway and Parking Lot Asphalt Condition. This item was postponed to the December meeting. There being no further business, Chairman Barker adjourned the meeting at 8:30 a.m. 411Â£, Â© O 6# AA j Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 47-01 WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park has previously budgeted and appropriated in its 2002 Budget, sufficient funds for the Town's required financial participation in the Causeway Underpass/Fish Creek Intersection Project; and WHEREAS, CDOT has allocated an additional $563,000 for (1) preliminary design, (2) final design and construction management, and (3) construction, of the new Highway 36/Fish Creek Intersection in the year 2002, it is necessary for the Town to execute a funding letter with the Colorado Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: 1. The Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park hereby approves and authorizes the funding of $563,000 in the year 2002 to be reimbursed by CDOT at 100%, and the execution of the funding letter by and between the State of Colorado for the use and benefit of the Colorado Department of Transportation in the Town of Estes Park for the Causeway Underpass/Fish Creek Intersection Project. 2. The Public Works Director of the Town of Estes Park is hereby authorized to execute the funding letter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND PASSED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK on this day of ,2001. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk SAAOFOAD PUSLISHING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment November 13, 2001, 8:00 a.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Board: Chair Jeff Barker, Members Joe Ball, Judy Lamy, Wayne Newsom and Al Sager Attending: Chair Barker, Members Lamy, Newsom, and Sager Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: Member Ball Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. The minutes of the October 2, 2001, meeting were accepted as presented. 2. LOT 22A, OLYMPUS HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION: TBD BELLEVUE DRIVE. APPLICANT: REX ROSS WALKER- SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant wishes to deviate from the 15-foot rear yard setback to allow a property line setback of 8 feet to allow for the construction of a detached single-family residential structure. The applicant proposes to build a 58' by 28' residential structure for employee housing. The plat was recorded in 1934, and was amended in 2000. The amendment increased the size of the lot to the maximum extent possible. It is Staff's opinion the size and shape of the lot combine to create special circumstances that result in practical difficulty and would prevent the construction of a typical single-family residential structure. Considering the character of the neighborhood and the size and shape of the lot, Staff does not consider the variance substantial. The essential character of the neighborhood would not change. The 15-foot setback restriction has recently been imposed on the owner's property. The owner purchased the property in 1992, before the adoption of the EVDC. The property was platted in 1934, before the adoption of building setbacks. It is Staffs opinion the request is the least deviation that allows relief. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Member Sager asked why property corners and building location were not staked. Joe Coop advised it was an oversight due to his absence. He also confirmed that the sewer manholes are in the right-of-way. Based on the fact that the property corners and building location were not staked, it was moved and seconded (Sager/Newsom) to table the application until the December 4, 2001 meeting. Motion passed unanimously with one absent. 3. MISTY MOUNTAIN LODGE, 232 E. RIVERSIDE DRIVE: LOT 27. RIVERSIDE SUBDIVISION, APPLICANT: MARK A. HEWITT, MILE HI REALITY, INC. - VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 6.3.C.1 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE e BRADFOROPUSLIS'ING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment November 13, 2001 Page 2 Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. The applicant requests a six foot variance from the mandated 10 foot side yard setback as required in the "RM" Multi-Family Residential zoning district to expand an existing deck attached to the two story building on the southeast portion of the lot. This building was built in the late 1930's. The southwest corner of the building and the deck are situated four feet three inches from the side property line and are within the ten foot side yard setback. The deck cannot be rebuilt in the same' location or expanded without a variance. There can be beneficial use of the property without the variance. This is a request for a six-foot variance fidm the ten foot mandated ' setback wfiich is-subgthritial.- Replacing and widening tlie existing deck-will not_- - substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Adjoining property owners have not contacted staff to comment on this proposal and staff is not aware of their opinions about the variance request. The variance would not affect the delivery of public services. The applicant purchased the property after the February 1, 2000 effective date of the EVDC and with knowledge of the requirements. The variance, if granted may offer the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. There had been a storage shed, not shown on the plat, located in the southeast corner of theÂ· lot within the ten-foot side yard setback which has now been removed. Mark Hewitt, applicant, was present and reviewed their proposal. It is a safety issue to widen the deck and relocate the staits. Public Comment: None. Based on the improvement in safety and staff recommendations, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Sager) to approve a side yard property line setback of 4 feet as opposed to a 10-foot setback as required in the "RM" zoning district with the following conditions. Moti6n passed unanimously with one absent. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. The property owner shall provide a setback certificate by a registered land surveyor for the side yard setback. 4. TIMBER CREEK CHALETS, 2115 FALL RIVER ROAD: LOT 1, PETTYJOHN ADDITION, APPLICANT: FRED & DEBRA WOJCIK - VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 7.5, LANDSCAPING & BUFFERS, OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant wishes to place approximately 1.5 parking spaces and a driveway within the landscape setback. A development plan was conditionally approved July, 2001. A condition of approval was to either redesign the parking area to conform to Section 7.5, or to petition the Board of Adjustment for a variance. It is staff's opinionÂ· special circumstances exist. Other site design options exist; however, Staff does not consider the requested variance substantial. In order to minimize the impact of the parking and driveway on Fall River Road, the applicant has proposed to upgrac~e the existing wooden fence by extending it 16 feet to the north and painting. Staff suggests additional landscaping be located in front of the fence. The property was rezoned to the A-1 district and the landscaping requirements implemented with the adoption of the EVDC. The site plan could be redesigned to reduce the amount of asphalt surface that is not for use for parking. No BRADFOROPUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment November 13, 2001 Page 3 significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Member Sager asked about staking. Ross Stephen of Cornerstone Engineering, representing the applicant, advised that the cabin had been staked for the development plan review. The encroachment, however, is only with the parking and driveway area. The requested location for the additional vegetation appears to be in the right-of-way and they would prefer to do it on the other side of the fence. Director Joseph suggested that the fence could be turned toward the cabin and the landscaping placed between the road and the fence. Ross Stephen agreed that this could work. Public Comment: None. Based on staff findings, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Lamy) to approve the requested variance to Section 7.5, Landscaping and Buffers; subsection F.b (6) No Development in Street Frontage Buffer Area of the EVDC, specifically to place two parking spaces and a driveway within the landscape setback with the following conditions. Motion passed unanimously with one absent. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. Submittal of a revised development plan incorporating the following: a. Three (3) additional coniferous trees, minimum of 8 feet tall and in a healthful condition, shall be located along the base of the fence. Trees shall be located so they will not interfere with existing overhead power lines, and shall be located outside of the road right-of-way. b. Five (5) 5-gallon shrubs shall be planted along the base of the fence. c. Existing fencing shall be extended 16 feet northeast, and shall be painted and maintained. d. The drive area shall be redesigned to be a maximum of 20 feet wide, and adequate turn-around area shall be provided for the parking spaces. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, compliance with the sign code is required. 5. GOOD SAMARITAN VILLAGE CONGREGATE BUILDING; LOT 1, GOOD SAMARITAN SUBDIVISION, APPLICANT: THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4, TABLE 4-2, OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant wishes to deviate from the Code to allow for a maximum height of 40 feet in lieu of the 35-foot maximum adjusted height for this slope. On October 23, 2001, the Town Board approved the rezoning and subdivision of the land. On October 16, 2001, the Planning Commission conditionally approved a development plan for the 17.5-acre senior living facility. The Congregate Living Building, as proposed, will have a maximum height of 40 feet from original grade. This includes a basement-level parking garage, and two floors of living space above. Should the Board decline this variance request, the applicant will be required to submit a revised site plan to the Estes Valley Planning Commission for review and approval. Should the Board BRADFORO PUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS / Estes Valley Board of Adjustment November 13, 2001 Page 4 approve the request, the applicant will proceed with the conditionally approved development plan. It is Staff's opinion that the slope of the lot and the nature of the facility combine to create special circumstances. Due to the satisfaction of the comprehensive plan goal of providing senior housing and code intent of minimizing impervious coverage, will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either the Code or the Comprehensive Plan. It is Staff's opinion the additional five feet of height will have less of an impact on the character of the neighborhood than reducing the height and increasing the - - - -amount of surface parking lot._The structure_co~ be redesigned to eliminate the parking garage, which would allow the building 16--66-approximately-10 feet narrower, reducing the need for the height variance. However, due to the slope of the lot, and the nature of the building, it is likely a variance would be necessary even with the redesign. It is Staff's opinion the architect has minimized the requested variance to the fullest extent possible, and the request therefore represents the least deviation that would allow for the underground parking garage. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision ofÂ·public services. Member Sager commented that the change in roof slope from 5/12 to 4/12 would reduce the amount of variance needed. He also was not able to locate the site staking. Kerry Prochaska of Cornerstone Engineering apologized that the staking had not been refreshed for the Board of Adjustment, but the making (in orAnge) had been done in September arid should still be there. Steve Lane, architect, reviewed the background of the development of the building. The width of the building is driven by the size of the parking garage. The 5/12 roof was designed to allow for an architectural design that would be more aesthetically acceptable in the area. A 4/12 roof is the lowest that could be done with a tiled roof material and a tile roof is less obtrusive that a metal or rolled roof. This was the best alternative in providing a high quality building and re'moved the need for 9,000 sq. ft. of asphalt parking outside. Member Newsom compliniented the applicant on their designÂ· for the area. Public Comment: Michael Kellam, 1170 Meadow Lane, commented that the aesthetics was important to the neighbors and he was in favor of the proposal. Member Sager made the second with the comment he was disappointed that the lower roof level had not been used; however, he supports the project. Based on staff findings, it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Sager) to approve the requested variance to allow for a maximum height of 40-feet from original grade in lieu of the 35-foot maximum adjusted height for this slope with the following conditions. Motion passed. Those voting yes: Sager, Barker, Newsom. Those voting no: Lamy. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. A certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor verifying finished floor elevation and shall be submitted to the building official at the foundation inspection. 2. Compliance with the submitted site plan. BRAOFOROPUBLISINGCOÂ· RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment November 13,2001 Page 5 6. REPORTS None. Member Sager requested that the policy of not having Board of Adjustment the day after a holiday be adhered to in the future. The regular meeting was postponed this month due to a conflict with the Town Board budget hearings, which then placed it the day after Veterans Day. Staff will do their best to see that this will not happen in the future. Member Newsom suggested that Staff let applicants know that their submittals will be tabled without the proper site staking. Director Joseph advised that Staff will check on the staking and work with the applicant to make sure the stakes are clearly visible. There being no further business, Chair Barker adjourned the meeting at 9:15 a.m. Jeff Barker, Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary BRADFOROPUBLISHING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission Public Hearing on Estes Valley Development Code Revisions November 15, 2001, 1:30 p.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Commission: Chair Joyce Kitchen, Commissioners Wendell Amos, DeeDee Hampton, Ed McKinney, Cherie Pettyjohn, Edward Pohl, and Dominick Taddonio Attending: Chair Kitchen, Commissioners Amos, McKinney, Pettyjohn, and Pohl Also Attending: Town Liaison Habecker, Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: Commissioners Hampton and Taddonio Chair Kitchen called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT - (regarding those items not on the agenda) Rich Wille, 1401 Raven Circle - Had concerns regarding condo maps going through the subdivision review process. Suggested engineer's certified verification of foundation location and elevation, and the plans turned in for building permits be enough to prove what was built was what was approved at the development plan review. Staff could approve before a CO was issued. Director Joseph said this has been under consideration using concurrent development plan review and preliminary condo map review. Staff will draft a proposed revision for review by the Planning Commission. Director Joseph reviewed a letter received from Kenneth and Carol Dahlgren, 575 Chapin Lane, regarding a disturbance of the peace (noise and dust from a privately owned go-cart). They have suggested a zoning code revision to not allow go-carts to operate within 150 ft from the owner's property line. Town Attorney White suggested referring this to Town Board to be dealt with as a police ordinance rather than a zoning ordinance. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS Director Joseph reviewed the proposed revisions in Block 2 for discussion. Item 1. Â§4.3 C. Density/Dimensional Standards Various ways of applying the Open Space regulation to new developments were demonstrated. Single family lot developments would need separate outlots rather than conservation easements to be practicable. Revisions are also needed in the Incentives chapter. The item was continued to the December meeting. Item 2. Â§4.3 C. Stream and River Corridor Setbacks The proposed change would allow a 25-foot setback for streams and minor drainages with the existing 50 foot setback applying only to the river category. Discussion regarding which tributaries should be considered "rivers" followed. Staff will prepare two versions of the Stream and River Corridor map for the next meeting. Prior public input from such organizations as the Alpine Anglers of Trout Unlimited will be researched and current comments will be solicited by public notice. A more detailed publication of the meeting will be made forthe December meeting. Item 3. Â§13.3 Definition of Gross Floor Area The proposed change for the basement exclusion would read: "The lowest floor of a nonresidential building where no portion of the enclosing exterior wall is exposed more than three (3) feet above finish grade and that does not have direct access to the exterior through a door (i.e., the total floor area of a walk-out basement in a commercial building is included in the calculation of gross floor area)." Matthew Heiser commented that in the Code the definition of finish grade eRAOFOROPUBLISHINGCO. RECORD.OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - November 15, 2001 Page 2 was 6 feet from the building. This might have an effect on a steep slope. Table 4-5 was proposed to change the standards for 3 of the zoning districts. Maximum FAR in the A zoning district would change from .25 to.30. RM is a use by right in the A District and therefore should be consistent with the RM zoning district which has .30 FAR maximum. Since the A-1 zoning district is a lower density, the maximum FAR is proposed to go from .25 to .20. In the CO District, the maximum lot coverage is proposed to change from 50 to 65%. Planner Shirk reviewed an example demonstrating that 50% is too restrictivefor parking spaces - _for the allowable square footage of a commercial building. These 3 are corrections- to tha original -intent-of the -Code,-not-changes. in_policy._ Policy changes (major changes in the numbers to this table) should be a direction from the Boards. Item 4. Â§13.3 Revision to Definition of Arterial Street Director Joseph requested that this be deferred until the next meeting or after the first of the year. The Town is in the process of a major transportation study. The map from the Comp Plan is dated and a new updated one will most likely be produced from this study. It would be best to wait for the result of the new study before making proposed changes. Director Joseph reviewed the Net Density Calculation examples in the Staff report. First example: Open Space not subtracted from net density would allow for a reduction in minimum lot size. All the language in the Code refers to net density when calculating the maximum number of lots allowed. The alternative of allowing a conservation easement rather than an outlot is less desirable because it would be quite difficult to administer. Example 2 is the current interpretation of the Code. Example 3A does not work since the minimum lot size (in the table) is 2.5 which invalidates the incentive section of the Code. Carriage Hills 7*' Filing and The Reserve were given as examples for clustering. Director Joseph reviewed the Floor Area Ratios table, which gave examples in the Ranch Meadow Subdivision, North Ridge Meadow Condos, Stanitz Apartmehts and Elk Ridge development. The FAR is the only control of the appearance of bulk. Staff will have some suggestions for proposed changes in the commercial and accommodation zoning districts. 2O Next meeting for Code Revisions will be December,PC 2001. Meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m. Joyce Kitchen, Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary Board of Trustees - November 13, 2001 - Page 2 lA. PLANNING COMMISSION"ACTION" AGENDA: 1. SUBDIVISION. Final Plat and. Final Condominium Map of Lazy R Cottages, James M. Whittlesey/Applicant. Mayor ProTem Doylen opened the public hearing, and Community Development Director Joseph presented the Staff Report. The Planning Commission reviewed this item and set conditions for approval; however, the Applicant did not meet Town Board submittal deadlines. An Improvement Guarantee was received today, however, other items remain late in being received and/or reviewed. Utility access is yet unresolved as well. Staff emphasized that the Applicant has been cooperative; however, review of condominium maps is difficult; and staff has attempted to identify provisions in the Code as they relate to this proposal. In staffs opinion, this item should be continued based on the Town's Submittal Policy and the uncertainty of the utility easement issue. Paul Kochevar, Applicant's Representative, stated that the Applicant has complied with Planning Commission conditions 1-4, and that the three comments submitted by Town Attorney White and Light & Powefs request for a 15' utility easement for the overhead power line were added after preliminary plat approval. The Code states that the Planning Commission may add conditions if they believe it is in the put)lics' best interest-such is not the case in this instance. Town Attorney White's comments will be addressed when the Applicant, not the Town, records the Declarations; however, the utility easement was never discussed with the Applicant. Mr. Kochevar is not convinced Light & Power needs the easement and this easement will encumber an existing building. Dir. Joseph stated that Comm. Development routinely discusses utility easements during the "Pre-App" conference, and confirmed that there has been uncertainty and difficulty in determining the existing electric service (service drop or main system) on this proposal, and that both the Town and Applicant share responsibility in the lateness of resolving this issue. Light & Power Dir. Matzke commented that perhaps an aerial easement would suffice. Mr. Kochevar delayed response to this suggestion pending discussion with the Applicant. Town Attorney White added that numerous condominium maps are being submitted and they require a unique type of review. Perhaps is it is appropriate for staff to review the Submittal Deadline Policy to ensure timely response from all involved parties. There was no public testimony thus Mayor ProTem Doylen closed the public hearing. Discussion followed concerning existing submittal policy, a desire to assist the customer, and the need for a solution to the utility easement. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Newsom) the Final Plat and Final Condominium Map of Lazy R Cottages be continued to November 27, 2001, not as a penalty to the Applicant, but to ensure a proper solution to the utility easement has been reached, and it passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 48-01 WHEREAS, on May 2, 2000, the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado was recorded at Reception Number 2000028656 of the records of the Larimer County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder (the "Covenants"). The Plat of Sleepy Hollow Subdivision ("Sleepy Hollow Subdivision"), a portion of the Sl/2 of Section 22, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6~ P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, was recorded on May 2, 2000 as Reception No. 2000028655 of the records of the Larimer County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder (the "Plat"); and WHEREAS, the Declaration requires that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, approve any amendment to the Declaration; and WHEREAS, the owners of Sleepy Hollow Subdivision have forwarded an Amendment of Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, for the purpose of receiving the approval of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park for said Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO. The Board of Trustees approves the Amendment to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, as more fully set forth on Exhibit "A". PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK this 27th day of November, 2001. Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk t AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR SLEEPY HOLLOW SUBDIVISION TOWN OF ESTES PARK, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO THIS AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS is made this day of July, 2001, by (1) CONNELY PARTNERS, LTD., a Texas limited partnership, by G. D. Connely, general partner, as owner of Lots 1-3, 5-7, 9 and 10, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat described herein; (2) JBG BUILDERS, INC., a Colorado corporation, as owner of Lot 4, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat described herein; (3) M. J. ALDRICH BUILDERS, INC., a Colorado corporation, as owner of Lot 8, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat described herein; and (4) ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK ASSOCIATES, a Colorado non-profit corporation (the "Associates"), as owner of Outlot A, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat described herein. RECITALS: A. On May 2,2000 the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, Town o f Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, were recorded at Reception Number 2000028656 of the records of the Larimer County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder (the "Covenants"). The Plat of Sleepy Hollow Subdivision ("Sleepy Hollow Subdivision"), a portion of the Sl/2 of Section 22, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, was recorded on May 2,2000 as Reception No. 2000028655 of the records ofthe Larimer County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder (the "Plat"). B. Connely Partners, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, is the owner of Lots 1-3, 5-7, 9 and 10, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat, described above. JBG Builders, Inc., a Colorado corporation, is the owner of Lot 4, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat, described above. M. J. Aldrich Builders, Inc., a Colorado corporation, is the owner of Lot 8, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat, described above. The Associates is the owner of Outlot A, Sleepy Hollow Subdivision, according to the Plat, described above ("Outlot A"). Collectively the owners of Lots 1-10 are referred to as the "Owners". C. Sleepy Hollow Subdivision has a total of 10 Lots. The lots which the Owners own represent 100% of the lots and 100% bfthe ownership of the Sleepy Hollow Property Owners Association, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation. D. Gary D. Connely donated and conveyed Outlot A to the Rocky Mountain National Park Associates, a Colorado non-profit corporation (the "Associates"). The Associates, in turn, intends to donate Outlot A to the United States of America, acting by and through the Department ofthe Interior, National Park C:\wordata\RMNPA\Connely\Decl Amend2 1 7/24/01 Service, for the benefit of Rocky Mountain National Park "Rocky Mountain National Park"). Prior to conveyance of Outlot A to Rocky Mountain National Park the parties wish to amend the Covenants tp exclude Outlot A from the terms and conditions of the Covenants. - AMENDMENT: 1. - EXCLUSION OF-OUTIJOT A FROM COVENANTS. The parties hdeby agrke that the Covenants are hereby amended to remove Outlot A Sleepy Hollow Subdivision from the description of property subject to the terms 6f the Covenants, and that for all purposes Outlot A shalt not be and is not subject to the terms ofthe Covenants. There shall be no public access across the remainder of Sleepy Hollow Subdivision (Lots 1-10 and Outlots B and C) to Outlot A. Public Access to Outlot A from other locations is not prohibited and public access to Outlot A may be permitted by the owner of Outlot A on such terms and conditions as are deemed appropriatd by the owner of Outlot A. 2. APPROVAL. As provided in paragraph 18 of the Covenants this Amendment has been approved bythe owners of at least 75% ofthe Lots who own at least 75% of the voting membership of the Association. This Amendment has been approved by the owners of 100% of the Lots who own 100% of the voting membership of the Association. This Amendment has also been approved by the Associates, as the Owner of Outlot A, and the Bohrd of Trustees ofthe Town of Estes Park, Colorado. 3. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. Except as amended by this Amendment the ' Covenants shall remain in full force and effect. C:\wordata\RMNPA\Connely\Decl Amend2 2 7/24/01 APPROVAL: This AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR SLEEPY HOLLOW SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF ESTES PARK, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, is hereby approved by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: By: Title: STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2001, by as of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes, Colorado. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: (SEALf Notary Public C:\wordata\RMNPA\Connely\Decl Amend2 7 11/16/01 Town of Estes Park *t' Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Alison Chilcott, Planner I and Bob Joseph, Director Date: November 27, 2001 Subject: Final Condominium Map and Final Plat for Lazy R Condominiums Background. This is a final condominium map application to condominiumize the Lazy R Cottages. The site is located at 891 Moraine Avenue, within the Town of Estes Park, and is owned by Lazy R Cottages at Estes Park, L.L.C. The lot is zoned "A" Accommodations/Highway Corridor and the existing accommodations use will continue. This is also a final plat application to clarify that Tract 14 is one legal lot. Location Map The Final Condominium Map and Final Plat were -JA-1 1 continued from the ~W# Family November 20, 2001 Town Pine View - Condominiums Board meeting to the - Lazy R Cott es -#Pe. November 27, 2001 Town Tract 13 1 ~,s Tract 14 x# Board meeting to allow - 1 the applicant time address *-< American Wildner ss Tours outstanding conditions. All outstanding conditions -4 2 - Tjny Town Nature vers O fi have been addressed. Shops Â£ v 8 5 2 = f Budget. None. Action. Approval of final condominium map and final plat. 92 Ed Volz 17% 18 0 E B VE [Al Director --Ii ill Phone (970) 586-8116 11 1!i FAX (970) 586-0189 i-'11 1 NOV 1 9 2001 11 iN, evolz@estes.lib.co.us 1 Li.' i ESTES PARK i PUBLIC LIBRfiRY Estes Valley Public Library District http://www.estes.lib.co.us November 16, 2001 Mayor John Baudek Town of Estes Park P. O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Mayor Baudek: At the end of this year, the four-year terms of two members of the Estes Valley Public Library District Board of Trustees - Cami Sebern and Steve Little - will expire. The purpose of this letter is to request that the Town Board approve the re-appointment of these two incumbents for an additional four year term each, and subsequently forward their names to the Larimer County Commissioners for their approval. Each of these individuals has expressed their desire to continue as Library Board Trustees for an additional term. In addition, both have been active contributors to the Library District's progress in the past. Mrs. Sebern is the Board's Secretary, and is Chair of the Policy Committee. Dr. Little is the Board's Vice President, a member of the Technology Committee, and also is a member of the committee overseeing the current building addition. Continued involvement by these two dedicated citizens will allow the Library District to sustain its reputation for high quality programs and superior service. Approval of their re-appointment by the Town Board of Trustees is respectfully requested. Sincerelk did.>Â£470-tÂ« Al Wasson President Estes Valley Public Library Board of Trustees f Pc/Town Clerk Vickie O'Connor with copies of applications RO. BOX 1687 . 335 EAST ELKHORN AVENUE â€¢ ESTES PARK, CO 80517 Hotmail Page 1 of 2 ms,0 HOtnlailÂ® debinlcho~@hotmail.com Inhm[ 1 Previous Page From : CAMI T SEBERN <csebern@juno.com> To : debinlchols@hotmail.com Subject : Fw: Application Date : Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:06:56 -0700 Attachments : APPLICATIONFORUBRARYTRUSTEE.doc.LNK (lk) Hi Cami: Guess I forgot to give you one. Now there's a surprise. :o) The application form is below this text, and it's attached as a file that you may be able to open. Thanks. Just get it to me by 620pm Monday. APPLICATION FOR LIBRARY TRUSTEE NAME 4 Ae<-, PHONE 5-8,67 - )842 MAILING ADDRESS 409 &4-08 aÂ»e e-mail address 25â‚¬bgrn ejuno. co--,n OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: kÂ£.16~ a.0, 40 7/276-4 ~DUCATIONAL-*KG~5%*L - ..Â£Â»-6 0011:Z.0<dÂ·r-- LAOCAzt,Â«~ PRESENT CIVIC ACUVITIES: E?PL 19*2 PAST CIVIC ACnVI-nES: (Pt,y .Â»10Â«./.06Â»42 6-04 64'U? 21,(0/ 62.,220-4~1:Â» WHY ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SERVING AS A LIBRARY TRUSTEE? ~*.A.Lat. jiLO.Us W 0. 01Â°1 3'Vkf00<~-t J f 9 14% 8Â»p~Â£6 jÂ».U WHAT IDEAS WOULD YOU LIKE TO PURSUE DURING YOUR TERM? * CA *U.4 -U-j2Â·40 Ch.1 '#0 hit) a p J- OTHER COMMENTS: I have read the general description outlining the responsibilities involved in serving as a library trustee. I believe that I have the time, energy, and interest to function in this capacity. , http:/Aw7fd.1.../getmsg?curmbox=F000000001&8=bb75248686237O8882af5928badbÂ¢21&msg=MSGI005255793.12&printf= 11/8/2001 . APPUCATION FOR LIBRARY TRUSTEE - NAME 5-9--epheu J, l.~I#le, PHONE 970-5â‚¬6 -905/ MAILING ADDRESS p.0. 80>< 37 1 0/R 144 w,00 ; 49 POS-5 2- e-mail address be#Â«5 9000 2 65, 4>-wt OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Attro engl (~(er p.nb le,{sar- 4- tiSearcUr EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 84 'bi.f /â‚¬Â«673 hitau Â»y 19 6/ Vk A Astravo-NN , (44; .4 K.uw 1965, PA D u,C LA , As frm-Â»0â€ž /97/ PRESENT CIVIC ACTIVITIES: 0/A50Â£4r d (Fr/eÂ· Pa,y-4 66,07 600â€¢Â·zf 7,2- 93,9-/, 2. ?, AA#11 Re+nq- 5110,547 Ol,4 '~rp-M . 8644& rfÂ· t}ytmas , CLAv*Jkr #14â€¢Ak 56(421- '4 Ve\wpluu Cut Ctoff,â€¢.4 14;A,#>FÂ·.7 Â· 80.4 4 D,reÂ·43 , 206rca t,endwuâ€¢,0rr 450-c, PAST CIVIC ACTIVITIES: 50 /4 t F 66*t- WHY ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SERVING AS A LIBRARY TRUSTEE? I k.,vt. 44*n 4 +rw~ec 4-- 4.Â·< pÂ·1911 -t .tpprEAS .4. A.K,1,-; 4,1'rt + 1,10Â·n-Vl A~/ p.*â€že . I Wo uU k te i Up/MAe t. 6 ,< Servzl, WHAT IDEAS WOULD YOU LIKE TO PURSUE DURING YOUR TERM? 40 01& i. +L- 479<ft..chAA prowls Au,reta e.t"L CUAAÂ£44- tal,Pâ€¢"15NK +.4 6y Â¥44 07Â£F\,2.fli râ€¢MA,0 'A +4 w*, -,+ U uw 4.-066.1, . OTHER COMMENTS: i have read the general description outlining the responsibilities involved in serving as a library trustee. I beli?ye that I have the Ume,pergy, and interest to function in this epadty. v.#-41 -8.64 Signature . Date 4 le { 1 1 1