The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2005-08-23r, .l 4 1 1 47 6 Prenared 08/16/05 \'t- 6â‚¬3499 TOWN OF ESTES PARK *94Â·: iÂ£ Stitutut i =râ‚¬-.0. .9 .;Â©iÂ·9: w-:6.53(' Â·,Â«f.t: fiI;tilt/-yy:Â·i~ir/22%4~*i:APIET,L: rb,4 Â°Â·:'93Â·;i-Â·iâ‚¬ it ..,~~.-:.Â·Â·Â·-' '.Â·o~Â«Â·~Â·>;15*91Â·ff:'+I-~.~of-TE.~:"..446AL*6 :tÂ· %Â·:f :af'.Si." ~~ 3:7?i~.m.....- <- .32*043 '' The Mieeion of the Town of Estes Park ie to plan and provide reliable, hi0h-value eervicee for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take 0reat pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by Deine 0006 stewards of public reeourcee and natural Bettina BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, August 23,2005 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address) TOWN BOARD COMMENTS SPECIAL HOME RULE ELECTION - FINANCIAL REPORT 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated August 9,2005. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Works, August 11,2005: 1. Estes Valley Community Services Coalition - Common Good Committee - Event Approval - SEE ACTION ITEM #1 BELOW. 2. Fish Creek Trail Phase 111, Design/Construction Management, Van Horn Engineering, $39,699. 3. Sewer Utility Easement, Lot 3, S. St. Vrain Addition, Byford D. & Rachel Jarvis - Easement Grant. B. Utilities, August 18,2005: 1. Christmas Display Contract - Estes Valley Home and Garden Center, $49,400/$51,400 for 2005/2006 and $15,000/yr. for supplies for 2005/2006 (Budgeted Item). 1 Continued on reverse side 4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, August 2 & August 9, 2005 (acknowledgment only). 5. Estes Valley Planning Commission, August 16,2005 (acknowledgment only). l A. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA (Approval of): Mayor Baudek: Open the Public Hearing for all Consent Agenda Items. If the Applicant, Public or Town Board wish to speak to any of these consent items, they will be moved to the "Action Item" Section. 1. CONSENT ITEMS: A. AMENDED PLAT: 1. Lot 2 of the Amended Plat of Lot 2, Deer Crest Subdivision, and Tract 59A, Fall River Addition, Bruce Ballard/Applicant. B. DEVELOPMENT PLAN/DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. 1. Revised Development Plan 02-17 & 3rd Amendment to the Development Agreement: Vista Ridge Condominiums, Lot 3, Vista Ridge Subdivision, Estes Investors, LLC/Applicant. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ESTES VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES COALITION - COMMON GOOD COMMITTEE - REQUEST EVENT APPROVAL. Town Administrator Repola. 2. FINANCIAL REPORTS - GENERAL FUND. Finance Officer McFarland. 3. RESOLUTION 19-05 - SUPPORT OF REFERENDUM C & D. Town Administrator Repola. 4. "FIRST DAY" SCULPTURE FOR STANLEY FAIRGROUNDS. Town Administrator Repola. 5. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. 6. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION: A. 24-6-402(4)(f), C.R.S. - Discussion of a personnel matter and not involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session; any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or body), or personnel policies that do not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees. Motion: I move the Town Board go into Executive Session for a conference with Town Attorney White for the purpose of receiving legal advice on the item listed above under C.R.S. Section 24-6- 402(4)(f). 7. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION & ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. 2 L-â€¢ ,% 1 ELECTION EXPENSE REPORT SPECIAL ELECTION - HOME RULE August 2,2005 ACCOUNT NUMBER ACTUAL 101-1400-414-22-25 Election Judges (4 @ $110.00/ea.) $ 440.00 101-1400-414-23-01 Publishing $ 173.74 101-1400-414-26-01 Materials/Supplies Diebold Election Systems (programming $1,328.50 & ballot printing Larimer County (registration lists & $ 575.00 equipment rental - $890:00) Miscellaneous (forms, meals, postage, $ 150.53 etc. - $111.28; $39.25) TOTAL EXPENDED $2,667.77 Report prepared by Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 9,2005 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 9th day of August, 2005. Meeting called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Susan L. Doylen. Present: Susan L. Doylen, Mayor ProTem Trustees Richard Homeier Chuck Levine Wayne Newsom Bill Pinkham Also Present: Randy Repola, Town Administrator Jackie Williamson, Deputy Town Clerk Absent: John Baudek, Mayor Lori Jeffrey-Clark, Trustee Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Mayor Pro Tem Doylen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENTS John Ericson, 413 Pawnee Lane, presented the Board with a draft resolution in support of Referendum C & D. The Colorado Economic Recovery Act is a five-year "timeout" from TABOR rebates that allows the state to earmark money for education, health care, transportation and retirement plans for fire and police without raising taxes. Referendum C&D does not change TABOR; however, it will keep Colorado competitive with other states in seeking new jobs and investments from new and existing companies that demand good roads and schools. Without it the state risks that these companies may by-pass Colorado for other favorable states. If the Town Board approves the resolution, he would encourage the Board to present it to our state representatives at the August 300 meeting. The Board agreed to review the materials presented and to place the resolution on the August 23* meeting agenda. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS None. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated July 26,2005. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, July 28,2005 B. Community Development, August 4,2005: Special Event Dept. 1. Policy Manual - Amending Performance Park Hours of Operation (from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mon. - Sat. and 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Sun.) . Board of Trustees August 9,2005 - Page 2 2. Estes Park Heritage Foundation Committee: Request funds to support Estes Park Heritage Festival Event - SEE ACTION ITEM #1 BELOW. 4. Estes Park Housing Authority, May 11 & June 29, 2005 (acknowledgment only). 5. Intent to Annex Resolution 18-05 - Fall River Second, Third, and Fourth Additions. Set Public Hearing for 11/08/05. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Homeier) the Consent Agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ESTES PARK HERITAGE FOUNDATION COMMITTEE: REQUEST FUNDS TO SUPPORT ESTES PARK HERITAGE FESTIVAL EVENT. Administrator Repola reviewed a letter received from the Heritage Committee dated July 27,2005. The Committee is planning a one-day event on August 27,2005 and is requesting $5,000 funding from the Town. In the past, the Town has assisted groups with financial support for events. The 2005 budget contains $2,000 in the Special Events budget to support events not directly sponsored by the Town; however, the Special Events Dept. is planning to use this account to fund other events held downtown that have lost funding this year. The Community Development Committee reviewed the request at the August 4~h meeting and approved $1,000 be allocated from the Special Events fund. Dee Pritchard, Committee Chair, stated they have filed for the 501 c status and are continuing to look for sponsors. The Park Theatre and Cultural Arts of Estes Park will be beneficiaries. Revenue will be generated from the sale of a commemorative booklet and through some paid events (most events - free of charge). Advertisement of the event has been at the local level, Front Range papers and through the Committee's website. If approved, the Committee would use the funds to purchase comprehensive insurance for the event. Administrator Repola informed the Board that the Town could provide an insurance rider through CIRSA for the event at a lower rate than the Committee could obtain on their own. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded (Levine/Newsom) to fund the Heritage Festival up to a $1,000 from the Special Events fund with the Town purchasing insurance for the event through CIRSA and any remaining funds to be used to sponsor events not currently funded, and it passed unanimously. 2. APPOINTMENT - TOWN CLERK. JACKIE WILLIAMSON. Town Administrator Repola stated with Vickie O'Connor's retirement, Deputy Town Clerk Williamson has been named Town Clerk. It was moved and seconded (Pinkham/Homeier) Jackie Williamson be appointed Town Clerk, and it passed unanimously. 3. ICG FIBER OPTIC LEASE CONTRACT - APPROVAL. Town Administrator Repola informed the Board that the Town of Estes Park has been in discussions with ICG Telecomm Group to lease capacity on the Town owned fiber optic network. Staff briefed the Utilities Committee on the status of the negotiations in an executive session at its July meeting, and received permission and direction related to agreement details. Attorney Board of Trustees August 9,2005 - Page 3 White is reviewing the final contract details. Initial terms include two five-year leases for four fiber strands between Estes Park and Loveland. The Town's objective in leasing the fiber to ICG is to provide a return on the Town's investment, and stimulate local competition among providers by introducing an additional telephone service provider. The contract requires ICG to make payment to the Town Light and Power fund of up to 18% of gross revenues over and above their break-even point on a monthly basis. The payment shall not exceed the fair market value of fiber leases in Northern Colorado (currently $27.90/line/mile/month) which is approximately $34,800 annually. If ICG does not receive revenues adequate to break even, no payment is required. Jamie Radisewitz and Dan Caruso CEO of ICG were present and briefed the Board on the company's history. 1CG is considered the largest competitor to Qwest in the Telecom and Internet services in Colorado. This contract will bring enhanced service, choice and competitive prices to the businesses of Estes Park. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Pinkham) the fiber optic lease agreement with ICG be approved, and it passed unanimously. Administrator Repola commended Public Works Dir. Linnane for his efforts with this project. 4. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A. Election Results Report. Town Clerk Williamson presented the election results for the Special Home Rule Election held on August 2, 2005: QUESTION: VOTES Shall The Town Of Estes Park, Colorado YES = 324 Forrn A Home Rule NO = 450 Charter Commission? CANDIDATES: Jeff Barker 244 Eric W. Blackhurst 330 Patrick Cipolla 272 Erle Collom 97 David Crockett 216 Sue Doylen 321 Dorla Eisenlauer 251 John M. Ericson, Jr. 305 Sandi Gleich 149 Bryon Hall 155 Mark Hewitt 146 Lori Jeffrey-Clark 183 Chuck Levine 273 Irene Little 230 Karen McCIure 139 Larry Pesses 236 Bill Pinkham 331 Dee Pritchard 147 Al Sager 297 Dorathea Sloan 182 Lois H. Smith 249 David Tavel 263 Jim Tawney 125 Ann Taylor 228 Board of Trustees August 9,2005 - Page 4 Linda Wagner 243 Lois Weaver 196 , Sharleen Westfield 56 Ted Williams 195 Cindy Younglund-Liddell 167 Financial report will be presented at the August 23rd meeting. B. Budget Discussions. Budget hearings will be held at 8:0 a.m. on Friday, Oct. 7th, Oct. 14,; Oct. 21 St, and Oct. 28'h. This is the second year of a 2 year budget; therefore, no substantial changes should be forthcoming. Capital Improvement fund needs to be factored into the Community Reinvestment Fund and the General Fund. The public hearing and adoption of the budget will take place at the Nov. 8th meeting. C. Goal Team #1 - Economic Development Advisory Council. The Town is creating an Economic Development Council to advise and assist in the implementation of an economic development strategy. The project titled Estes Park 2017 (Estes Park's 100:h Anniversary) is expected to provide an action plan for sustaining the local economy and tourism. The Committee will be made of approximately 12 to 15 members from a variety of industries in Town. Applications are due by August 2gth and are available in Administration or the Town website. A list of potential members will be presented to the Town Board for consideration at the Sept. 13th meeting. There being no further business, Mayor Pro Tem Doylen adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m Susan L. Doylen, Mayor Pro Tem Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 11, 2005 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 1 1 th day of August, 2005. Committee: Chairman Levine, Trustees Homeier and Jeffrey-Clark Attending: Chairman Levine and Trustee Homeier Also Attending: Town Administrator Repola, Clerk Williamson, Public Works Director Linnane, Facilities Mgr. Sievers Absent: Trustee Jeffrey-Clark Chairman Levine called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. ESTES VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES COALITION - COMMON GOOD COMMITTEE EVENT PROPOSAL - REQUEST APPROVAL. Dr. Earl Matson stated the Common Good Committee was formed to address the contentious atmosphere currently present within the community and the country, and to encourage our community to care about the community, appreciate our differences, encourage the space for those differences to co-exist, to show respect through your words and actions, and build a respectful, safe and civic-minded community. The committee is organizing a one day event in the middle of September entitled Estes CARES (Caring, Acceptance, Respect, Encouragement and Support). They propose holding a community wide event in Bond Park where a variety of colored ribbons would be placed in trees along the Virginia Drive side of the park and remain through the end of September. The Common Good Committee would be responsible for the maintenance of the ribbons and their timely removal. A small sign will be placed in front of the trees to explain their significance. Trustee Homeier pointed out that Autumn Gold will be taking place during this ongoing display. He suggested that a member of the Committee be available to answer questions during that weekend event. Administrator Repola suggested the museum could coordinate with the Committee to have a program on Martin Luther King, Jr. who dealt with these issues in the past. The Committee will also have ongoing columns in the Trail Gazette and the Estes Park News. A discussion guide is being developed to help precipitate discussion among individuals. Discussion followed, with the Committee noting their support of the Estes Cares Event, directing the Common Good Committee to contact Mgr. Hinze to clarify if prior approval for the use of Bond Park is required, and if so, complete a Park Use form prior to the Town Board meeting on August 23rd FISH CREEK TRAIL PHASE 3 - DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SCOPE OF SERVICES AWARD - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL. Dir. Linnane informed the Committee that the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) awarded the Town an "Enhancement Grant" of $160,000 for the third phase of the Fish Creek Trail (Lakeshore Drive/Carriage Hills Pond area) with the Town matching those funds with $100,000. The Town solicited bids for the Design/Construction Management Scope of Services and received the following bids: Cornerstone Engineering $46,885 Van Hom Engineering $39,695 , RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Works Committee - August 11, 2005 - Page 2 The revised 2005/2006 budget will contain a line item for the cohstruction of this unforeseen project. Advertisement for the construction bids is tentatively scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2005 or the first quarter of 2006 with completion of this portion of the trail by August of next year. Facilities Mgr. Sievers stated if construction bids come back higher than the budgeted funds, only a portion of the trail may be completed, leaving a gap between Carriage Drive and the Hwy 7 trail. Public meetings will be held during the end of September to discuss design options with the community. Following discussion, the Committee recommends awarding the Fish Creek Trail Phase 3 Design/Construction Management Scope to Van Horn Engineering at a cost of $39,699. Staff will provide the Town Board budget options to complete the Fish Creek trail and link it to the Hwy 7 trail during the upcoming budget discussions. LOT 3. SAINT VRAIN ADDITION - SEWER UTILITY EASEMENT - REQUEST APPROVAL. Dir. Linnane reviewed a request by Bud & Rachel Jarvis managers of The Links of Estes Park, Inc. for a 15' wide and 22.6' long sewer line easement that would cross a small portion of the Estes Park Golf Course at the northeast corner of Lot 3, Saint Vrain Addition adjacent to fairway 5. The sewer line would serve a proposed six-unit condominium development currently under review by the Community Development Dept. The Committee recommends approval of the request to grant a sewer line easement as described above from the Estes Park Golf Course to Lot 3, Saint Vrain Addition. REPORTS. 1. Underpass/Eagle Rock School Project Update. The project is in Phase I of the planning process. Cindy Elkins will present an update including details on graffiti and maintenance of the project at the Sept. meeting. 2. Fish Creek Trail Pedestrian Path Update. Traffic control was removed August 10. The concrete pouring is complete and the handrail is 50% complete. A portion of the trail intersecting the Bonza property will be removed in order to correct the grade of the driveway. Reseeding should take place next week. 3. Street Sign Proiect Update. The contractor interested in the project has withdrawn. Cornerstone Engineering has been contacted to obtain a price on construction management. 4. Drv Gulch Drainage Project Update. The previous trench gate design will not work due to the utilities in the area. A concrete slope (trickle channel) to the culvert will be poured near the Raven Avenue intersection to direct water flow north. Van Horn Engineering is working on the design and the project should be completed by the end of the year. 5. Carriage Hills Ponds Proiect Update. Staff stated a community meeting was held August 10th. The dams did not pass State inspection and must be improved to meet standards and ensure continued insurance coverage. There being no further business, Chairman Levine adjourned the meeting at 9:02 a.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk . t RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town o f Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 18, 2005 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the UTILITIES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 18th day of August, 2005. Committee: Chairman Jeffrey-Clark, Trustees Newsom and Pinkham Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Repola, Public Works Director Linnane, Utilities Supt. Goehring, Finance Director McFarland, Town Clerk Williamson Absent None Chairman Jeffrey-Clark called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. LIGHT & POWER DEPARTMENT. Christmas Display Installation & Maintenance Contract - Request Approval. Dir. Linnane reported 2 bids were received on July 2gth for the 2005/2006 Christmas display installation, maintenance, and dismantling. The installation shall take place prior to Thanksgiving and be removed in February. The contract is based on full performance as outlined in the specifications, which includes (7) displays, lights, and rebar trees: 2005 2006 Estes Valley Home and Garden $49,400 $51,400 T.A. Enterprises $54,430 $56,300 The Committee recommends approval of the 2-year bid in the amount of $49,400/$51,400 for 2005/2006 submitted by Estes Valley Home and Garden Center and up to $15,000/yr. for supplies as budgeted 2005 and 2006 Christmas Display subject to appropriations and performance. REPORTS. 1. Light and Power Dept. Financial Data - Dir. McFarland reviewed the report. 2. Water Financial Data - Dir. McFarland reviewed the report. 3. Santa Display - Administrator Repola informed the Committee that staff has reviewed the Knoll-Willow Master Plan and performed a site review to determine a location for the Santa display. A lighter Santa display has been discussed to decrease the disturbance on the Knoll-Willow environment. Randy McNeil (local artisVwelder) has been contacted to design a lighter weight Santa display pattemed after the current display and placed on the Knoll or hung from the cliff wall of the Knoll. Mr. McNeil has suggested to staff that the display could be made from a lightweight and durable aluminum. 4. MacGregor Water Tank - Construction resumed during the 3rd week in July with the walls completed and the internal roof supports poured. The roof will be poured mid September and back filling of the tank will take place shortly thereafter. The current shut down date for construction in October lst. Chairman Jeffrey-Clark adjourned the meeting at 8:38 a.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 2,2005,8:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair Al Sager; Members Cliff Dill, Chuck Levine, and Wayne Newsom; Alternate Member Jeff Barker; one vacancy Attending: Chair Sager Also Attending: Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, and Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Members Dill, Levine, and Newsom; one vacancy; Planner Shirk Chair Sager called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. He stated that there were not enough Board of Adjustment members available for the meeting to provide a quorum. He announced that a Special Meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 8,2005 at 8:00 a.m. in the Board Room of the Town Hall to consider the items scheduled for the current meeting. He confirmed with planning staff that all known affected parties had been contacted. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Continued to the Tuesday, August 8,2005 Board of Adjustment meeting. 2. LOT B, AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 21 & 22, BLOCK 7, COUNTRY CLUB MANOR ADDITION, 507 Driftwood Avenue, Applicant: Carl Ropp - Variance Request from Section 4, Table 4-2, of the Estes Vallev Development Code. requiring a minimum ten-foot side-yard setback in the R - Residential zoning district Continued to the Tuesday, August 8,2005 Board of Adjustment meeting. 3. LOT 34, BLOCK 27. BONNIE BRAE ADDITION. 1200 Graves Avenue. Applicant: Graves Avenue Plaza, LLC - Variance Requests from Estes Vallev Development Code Section 4, Table 4-5, requiring minimum 15-foot front-. side-, and rear-vard setbacks in the CO - Commercial Out/vinG zoning district and from Section 7.13.B.2, requiring outdoor trash collection to be located at the rear of a lot Continued to the Tuesday, August 8,2005 Board of Adjustment meeting. 4. REPORTS None. There being no further business, Chair Sager adjourned the meeting at 8:02 a.m. Al Sager, Chair Julie Roederer, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment August 9,2005,8:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair Al Sager; Members Cliff Dill, Chuck Levine, and Wayne Newsom; Alternate Member Jeff Barker; one vacancy Attending: Chair Sager, Member Levine, Member Newsom, Alternate Barker Also Attending: Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, Planner Shirk, and Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Member Dill, one vacancy Chair Sager called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. 1. CONSENT AGENDA The minutes of the July 12, 2005 meeting. 2. LOT B. AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 21 & 22, BLOCK 7, COUNTRY CLUB MANOR ADDITION, 507 Driftwood Avenue, Applicant: Carl Ropp - Variance Request from Section 4, Table 4-2, of the Estes Vallev Development Code, requiring a minimum ten-foot side-vard setback in the R - Residential zoning district Planner Chilcott summarized the staff report. She stated that this is a request for a variance to Section 4, Table 4-2, of the Estes Valley Development Code to allow an addition to a residence to be built five feet from the northern property line and on the southern property line in lieu of the ten-foot setbacks required. The property is located in the R - Residential zoning district. The current deck on the rear of the residence would be removed and the addition built in the same location, extending the same amount as the current deck into the northern setback and an additional three feet into the southern setback. The proposed one-story addition would add 308 square feet to the existing 528-square-foot house. A smaller addition that complies with the setbacks could be built but could only be eight feet wide. The shape of the lot provides a very limited building area; the lot shape and location of the residence combine to create special circumstances and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with the Code requirements. This request was sent to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to adjoining property owners for review and comment. No adjoining property owners have contacted staff to express concerns about the proposed variance. The owners of 505 Driftwood Avenue, the property immediately adjacent to the north, emailed staff on July 17, 2005 to express support for the requested variance. Planner Chilcott stated the proposed addition is similar in design to the existing house, the essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and adjoining property owners would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. Public Comment: The applicant, Carl Ropp, was present. He stated the total width of the proposed addition will be fourteen feet. It follows the same elevations of the current residence and will not obstruct views from adjacent properties. 1 , RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2 August 9,2005 It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Levine) to approve a northern side-yard setback of five feet and a southern side-yard setback of zero feet in lieu of the required ten-foot setbacks, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one alternate in attendance, one absent, and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with the submitted plans. 2. A registered land surveyor shall set the survey stakes for the foundation forms. After the footings are set and prior to pouring the foundation, the surveyor shall verify compliance with the variance and provide' a setback certificate. 3. The owner shall obtain a maintenance easement from the property owner to the south prior to issuance of the building permit. 3. LOT 34. BLOCK 27, BONNIE BRAE ADDITION, 1200 Graves Avenue, Applicant: Graves Avenue Plaza, LLC - Variance Requests from Estes Vallev Development Code Section 4, Table 4-5, requiring a minimum 15-foot side-vard setback in the CO - Commercial Outlvinq zoning district. and from Section 7.13.B.2. requiring outdoor trash collection to be located at the rear of a lot (formerly requested variances to the front- and rear-vard setback requirements were withdrawn bv the applicant) Planner Shirk summarized the staff report. He stated the variance requests are being sought in conjunction with a variety of development applications for this property. It is the applicant's intent to remove the existing cabins and build a.new, two-story office building that would include an employee-housing unit. The proposal requires an amended plat, a rezoning request to rezone the cabin area from RM - Multi-Family Residential to CO - Commercial Outlying, and a development plan. The proposed variance would allow a corner of the proposed office/residential building and a deck to be located 9.5 feet from the property line. The applicant has redesigned the deck to limit its encroachment and minimize the variance request. Additionally, the applicant requests a variance to allow a dumpster.to be located in the side yard rather than the rear yard. Planner Shirk noted that parking and driveway requirements tend to push the building to one side of the lot, although the building could be designed to meet the setback requirements. The trash-collection area could be located at the rear of the lot, but would be less accessible to building occupants and trash-collectidn trucks. The lot is long and narrow but does meet the minimum width requirements of the CO - Commercial OutlyinÂ¢] zoning district, so the burden of proof of special circum-stances lies with the applicant. It is the planning staff's opinion that the variance requests are not substantial, that the existing character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and that adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment. The applicant plans to erect a concrete fence along the eastern property line to deter recurring vandalism. This request was sent to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to adjoining property owners for review and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. Comments received from Estes Park Sanitation District expressed concern about a sanitary sewer line that serves the property to the south, but noted the line doesn't appear to extend through the area under consideration. The applicant will be required to protect the line if it is located during excavation. Staff also received comments from Joann McGill, who expressed general opposition to development in Estes Park. Public Comment: The applicant, John Lynch, was present. He stated the property was originally one lot but had been divided and the southern portion rezoned because of the existing cabins. He stated the addition of a concrete fence along the eastern property line was voluntary and would be used to address vandalism. He has been working on the building design and site layout for several years to ensure they are aesthetically pleasing for the community and tenants of the building. He stated the building would be used for offices with the exception of a second-floor apartment for an on-site 0 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3 August 9,2005 property manager. He stated that he was comfortable with the recommended condition of approval that the variance be subject to approval of all other applicable development review proposals. Chair Sager stated his concern with reviewing the variance application prior to approval of the amended plat, rezoning, and development plan for the property. He also questioned whether the applicant had considered making the building smaller or moving it to the east to meet the side-yard setback requirements. Betty and Steve Nickel, the building designers, stated they had redesigned the building and had re-sized the rooms many times, attempting to minimize the variance request, and noted their objections to shortening that end of the building due to the effect it would have on the overall design of the building. Gerald Mayo, nearby property owner, spoke in support of the variance and requested the Board of Adjustment give him equal consideration if he made any future variance requests. There was discussion among the Board members, with Alternate Member Barker noting that additional CO-zoned property would be beneficial to the community, Member Newsom stating approval of the variance would not have an adverse effect on the property to the west because a parking lot exists on the portion of that property closest to the proposed new building, and Member Levine noting the total square footage of the proposed variance would be between twenty-five and thirty feet-a very small request. There was further discussion regarding whether the eastern setback requirement for landscaping could be reduced, allowing the building to be moved farther east, however, that would require a separate variance application. Member Levine stated his support of the proposed variance for the dumpster location, noting that it makes better sense than placing the dumpster at the back of the lot. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Levine) to approve a variance to allow the trash-collection area to be located in the side yard, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one alternate in attendance, one absent, and one vacancy. It was also moved and seconded (Levine/Barker) to approve a side-yard setback of 9.5 feet for the new office building in lieu of the fifteen feet required, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one alternate in attendance, one absent, and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1. Approval of all other applicable development review proposals. 4. REPORTS Director Joseph announced that Member Horton has resigned his positions on the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment and Estes Valley Planning Commission due to professional commitments. He expressed appreciation for Mr. Horton's work on the Board and wished him well. He noted that the County Commissioners' office has been notified and is taking applications to fill Mr. Horton's positions. There being no further business, Chair Sager adjourned the meeting at 9:10 a.m. Al Sager, Chair Julie Roederer, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission August 16, 2005,1:30 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Joyce Kitchen; Commissioners Wendell Amos, Ike Eisenlauer, George Hix, Betty Hull, and Edward Pohl; one vacancy Attending: Commissioners Amos, Eisenlauer, Hix, Hull, and Pohl Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Larimer County Chief Planner Legg, Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott, and Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Chair Kitchen; one vacancy Acting Chair Pohl called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence of the meeting. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. Estes Valley Planning Commission minutes dated July 19, 2005. b. Amended Plat, Goldmann Lot Combination, Lots 17 & 44, Thunder Mountain Park PUD, 2727 Nimbus Drive, Applicant: Stephen & Joyce , Goldmann c. Preliminary Condominium Map, Rocky Point Condominiums, Lot 17A, Amended Plat of Lots 17,18, & 19, GreelerBoulder Colony, 2327 Highway 66, Applicant: Crystal Creek Development, Inc. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hull) that the Consent Agenda be accepted, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and one vacancy. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 3. REZONING, NYTES PROPERTY, Tract 2, Hillery Parrack Exemption, 1753 Wildfire Road, Applicant: Larimer County Larimer County Chief Planner Russell Legg reviewed the staff report. He stated this is a request to rezone a 2.33-acre lot from E-Estate to CH-Heavy Commercial zoning. Prior to the adoption of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan, the lot was zoned C-Commercia/ and had been granted a Special Exception from the county on February 24, 1998 to allow construction of a single-family dwelling and a shop building on the commercially zoned lot. The conditions of the Special Exception are as follows: 1. No outside storage of materials shall be allowed on the property; 2. No outside storage or maintenance of vehicles shall be allowed; and, 3. The shop building shall be an earth-tone color. When the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan was adopted on November 2, 1999, the property was rezoned from C-Commercial to E-Estate. During the notification process prior to adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the property owner, Mr. Hillery Parrack, requested that the adjacent lot remain zoned for commercial use but did not object to the Estate zoning of this lot. The current property owner, Mr. James Nytes, contends that he was unaware of the proposed change in zoning when he RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 2 August 16,2005 purchased the lot from Mr. Parrack and during the one-year period following the Plan adoption when property owners could request consideration of potential zoning errors. When the county brought zoning-violation action against Mr. Nytes on September 20, 2004 for violation of Special Exception condition #2, he requested "reinstatement" of the C--Commercial zoning for the property. Following discussions with the County Attorney, the County Commissioners, and Estes Park Community Development staff, it was agreed that the guiding principal during the valley-wide rezoning had been to zone according to use; at that time, Mr. Nytes asserts that he had already established his business use of the property. Therefore, Larimer County staff is bringing this rezoning request forward under the same provisions that were in effect during the one-year timeframe following the valley-wide rezoning. Staff, with the concurrence of the applicant, believes that the full range of uses allowed under CH-Heavy Commercial zoning would not be appropriate. Staff is recommending the rezoning be approved only for the existing uses on the site, which include a single- family residence (employee housing), the shop building, and storage of two construction trailers. Additionally, the limitations imposed by the Special Exception approved in 1998 will apply, with the exception that a limited amount of vehicles and equipment shall be exempt from the definition of outside storage. Public Comment: The property owners, James and Billie Nytes, were present. Mr. Nytes stated they have no objections to the recommended conditions of approval. Commissioner Amos questioned the number of vehicles and equipment that would be stored outside on the site. Mr. Nytes agreed to limit the outside storage of equipment and vehicles to no more than four pieces of equipment and no more than eleven vehicles. Ed Floering, adjacent property owner of 1851 Wildfire Road, and Nathan Parrack, adjacent resident at 1775 Wildfire Road, each stated that he had no objections to the current use of the property or to the proposed rezoning. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hull) to recommend approval of the request to Rezone the Nytes Property, Tract 2, Hillery Parrack Exemption, from E- Estate to CH-Heavy Commercia/ to the Board of County Commissioners, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1. Permitted uses are the employee housing (existing single-family residence), maintenance and repair services associated with the construction materials business, including the shop building, as shown on the site plan. 2. Equipment storage shall be limited to four pieces of equipment and eleven vehicles. 3. No outside storage of business or construction material shall be allowed on the property. 4. No outside maintenance of vehicles shall be allowed. 5. The shop building shall remain an earth-tone color. Acting Chair Pohl called a brief recess from 2:00-2:03 p.m. to allow the sound system to be reset. 4. PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP, THE LINKS OF ESTES PARK, a portion of Lot 3, South Saint Vrain Addition, 1006 S. St. Vrain Avenue, Applicant: Bud and Rachel Jarvis Planner Chilcott stated this request was continued at the July 19, 2005 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant to attempt to resolve a discrepancy in the easement required to access the property. The easement is along the north RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 August 16,2005 boundary of the Eagles Landing property, which lies between the applicant's property and State Highway 7. The applicant has submitted a second easement dedication and staff examined the recorded condominium map for Eagles Landing; both show an easement along the entire length of the northern boundary of the Eagles Landing property. A driveway maintenance agreement between the applicant and Eagles Landing is one of the conditions of approval for The Links of Estes Park Development Plan 05-02. Attorneys for both parties have been reviewing drafts of the maintenance agreement and planning staff expects it to be finalized in the near future. Staff recommends that The Links of Estes Park Development Plan 05-02 serve as The Links of Estes Park preliminary condominium map because the preliminary condominium requires compliance with the same adequate public facility standards with which the development plan must comply. The development plan was reviewed at staff level at the request of the applicant because less than ten units were proposed; Development Plan 05-02 was conditionally approved by staff in July 2005. The request was submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to adjacent neighbors for consideration and comment. Comments were received from Estes Park Public Works Department, Town Attorney Greg White, Upper Thompson Sanitation District, Estes Valley Recreation and Park District, Larimer County Department of Health and Environment, and the Colorado Department of Transportation. Beverly Christenson, Eagles Landing Homeowners' Association president, met with planning staff. Public Comment: Beverly Christenson, president of the Eagles Landing board of directors, stated the homeowners' association agrees that a legal easement exists to the applicant's property. The association has a draft maintenance agreement that has been given to the Jarvises for review with their attorney and the association will negotiate terms of the maintenance agreement in good faith. Ross Stephen of Cornerstone Engineering was present to represent the applicant. He reiterated that a draft maintenance agreement has been provided to the Jarvises and that no difficulties are anticipated. He stated the applicant is continuing to work on meeting all other conditions of approval of the development plan. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Hix) to recommend approval of the Preliminary Condominium Map, The Links of Estes Park, Portion of Lot 3, South Saint Vrain Addition, to the Town Board of Trustees, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1. Approval of The Links of Estes Park Development Plan #05-02. 5. BUILDING ENVELOPE CORRECTION, Lot 4, Mary's Lake Estates, 565 Lakewood Court, Applicant: Richard & Sherry Flanery Planner Shirk summarized the staff report, stating this is a request to clarify the location of a platted building envelope. The site is located at the intersection of Mary's Lake Road and Lakewood Court. The plat of Mary's Lake Estates subdivision was approved by the Board of County Commissioners in 1996 and included building envelopes. However, the building envelopes do not include any distances or directional bearings and are not tied to a property line. The building envelopes "float" within platted lots, and this particular building envelope appears to be located over a large rock outcropping. The proposed location of the building envelope will meet required setbacks and promotes the limits of disturbance standards set forth in Section 7.2 of the Estes Valley Development Code, which protect wetlands, rock outcroppings, and trees. Although the Estes Valley Development Code allows RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 4 August 16, 2005 planning staff to grant minor modifications to approved final plats, this building envelope was created through the public hearing process, and staff felt this correction should also be subject to a public hearing and the associated neighbor notification. The application was submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. No comments were received from neighboring property owners. Public Comment: None. It was moved and seconded (Hix/Eisenlauer) to recommend approval of the Building Envelope Correction, Lot 4, Mary's Lake Estates Subdivision, to the Board of County Commissioners, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed uanimously with one absent and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1) Exhibit "A" shall be modified as follows: a. The format shall be 8.5" x 11". b. The new building envelope shall reflect the stakes as set in the field. c. The new building envelope shall include bearings and distances, include a tie to a lot corner, and be a different line weight and type than the former building envelope. d. The distance belween the property line and the new building envelope shall be clearly delineated. e. The "former building envelope" shall be labeled as such, and the "new building envelope" clearly labeled as such. f. Lakewood Court shall be delineated and labeled. g. The lot size shall be shown in acres. 6. MINOR SUBDIVISION PLAT, KINGSWOOD SUBDIVISION, Lot 24, Little Prospect Mountain Subdivision, TBD Stanley Circle Drive, Applicant: Mike Kingswood Planner Shirk stated this request to divide an existing lot into two lots was continued at the July 19, 2005 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant to provide a site drainage plan and building envelopes. The 1.55-acre lot and the surrounding properties are zoned E-Estate, which provides for a half-acre minimum lot size. Approval of this subdivision would allow construction of one additional house and would provide site-specific "limits of disturbance" standards that do not apply to the existing lot. The revised drainage plan has been submitted. Planner Shirk stated that although the applicant has not provided building envelopes, acceptance of Figure 1 in the staff report, which provides for increased limits of disturbance, as a condition of approval preserves significant rock outcroppings and trees while still allowing site- specific flexibility for development. Because the property has an average slope greater than 12%, the required minimum lot size is increased. Lot 1 has an average slope of 23.05% and is proposed to be 28,370 square feet, which does not meet the slope-adjusted minimum lot size of 32,834 square feet. Lot 2 has an average slope of 18.68% and is proposed to be 39,143 square feet, thus exceeding the adjusted minimum lot size. The applicant is requesting a minor modification to the adjusted minimum lot size for Lot 1. Planning staff is supportive of the minor modification because it will not result in additional building sites and will provide a more logical lot-line configuration. ' .4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 5 August 16,2005 The applicant will be required to widen the paving width of Stanley Circle Drive to twenty-two feet. Due to a history of stormwater issues in the neighborhood, planning staff recommends dedication of an easement for the drainage-detention swale on proposed Lot 1. The swale will be required to be designed to minimize adverse visual impacts and should look like a natural feature of the land. Planning staff has received a number of contacts from adjacent property owners in opposition to the proposal, the most recent of which was received from Laverne and Doris Jean Mertz on August 12, 2005. Other property owners who commented on the proposal were listed in the July 12, 2005 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Public Comment: Mike Todd of Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying was present to represent the applicant. He stated the applicant is requesting the limits of disturbance recommended in the staff report be reduced and the drainage easement be eliminated to allow more flexibility in the placement of future homes and driveways. Gary Matthews, 139 Stanley Circle Drive, stated that many property owners in the neighborhood are concerned about this proposal, noting the addition of two homes and driveways has a greater impact than one and reduces open space. He supported the staff's recommended limits of disturbance if building envelopes are not required. The applicant, Mike Kingswood, requested a compromise on the staff's recommended limits of disturbance, stating his willingness to work with staff to reach such compromise. The Commissioners and staff discussed the applicant's right to divide the lot and the limits of disturbance that should apply. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Eisenlauer) to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision Plat, Kingswood Subdivision, Lot 24, Little Prospect Mountain Subdivision, to the Town Board of Trustees, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and an additional condition that the limits of disturbance shall be determined by an agreement between planning staff and the appliant. Following further discussion, the motion was withdrawn. It was agreed to allow the applicant to try to reach a compromise agreement with planning staff on the required limits of disturbance. If an agreement cannot be reached prior to submission of the application to the Town Board, the staff's recommended limits of disturbance will prevail. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Eisenlauer) to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision Plat, Kingswood Subdivision, Lot 24, Little Prospect Mountain Subdivision, to the Town Board of Trustees, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1. The Limits of Disturbance shall be amended as per Figure 1 set forth in the Staff Report unless an agreement can be reached between the applicant and planning staff modifying the limits of disturbance to the satisfaction of both parties prior to submission to the Town Board for final approval. 2. Limits of Disturbance spelling shall be corrected. 3. The following note shall be placed on the plat: "Limits of Disturbance shall apply unless modified by a site-specific development plan." 4. A drainage easement shall be dedicated for the proposed drainage swale across Lot 1. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 6 August 16,2005 5. The weir system for the proposed detention pond should be shown on the plat, and shall comply with Section 7.2.B7, which states "adverse visual and aesthetic impacts on the natural landscape and topography shall be minimized to the maximum amount feasible." 6. The subdivider shall install required electric service. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by Light and Power. 7. Stanley Circle shall be widened to 22 feet along the length of the subdivision. Road plans shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works prior to construction. 8. The required Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall include all required improvements, including road upgrade, electric, drainage, and monumentation. 9. The dedication statement shall dedicate the utility easements to the public in the form required by the Estes Valley Development Code. 7. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT, Resubdivision of Lot 1, Seifert Addition, 470 Moccasin Circle Drive, Applicant: Fred Wojcik Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This is a request to subdivide a 2.63-acre lot into three lots. The property is zoned R-2-Two-Fam#y Residen#a/ and is character- ized by steep, north-facing slopes and identified wildfire and geologic hazards. The applicant has worked closely with planning staff, revising the design three times, to craft very specific building envelopes that will ensure all development is located in the lower portion of the property, where the slope is not as steep. While the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan encourages infill of older core areas, it also includes a variety of scenic and environmental-quality policies intended to discourage development on steep slopes, many of which are codified in the Estes Valley Development Code. The R-2 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 18,000 square feet for a single-family residence and 27,000 square feet for a duplex. Because the average slope of the property is greater than 12%, the minimum lot size has been increased. The average slope of proposed Lot 1 is 17.7%, and therefore requires a minimum single-family lot size of 23,700 square feet or a minimum duplex lot size of 32,700 square feet. Lot 1 is proposed to be 51,515.95 square feet, which would allow a duplex to be built on this lot. The average slope of proposed Lot 2 is 32.9% and therefore requires a minimum single-family lot size of 38,900 square feet or a minimum duplex lot size of 47,900 square feet. Lot 2 is proposed to be 31,191.6 square feet. The average slope of proposed Lot 3 is 34.9%, which requires a minimum single- family lot size of 40,900 square feet or a minimum duplex lot size of 49,900 square feet. Lot 3 is proposed to be 31,632.9 square feet. The applicant is requesting a minor modification to the adjusted minimum lot size for Lots 2 and 3 from the Planning Commission, which is allowed under EVDC Section 3.7.A2b. Approval of the minor modification will not result in a density increase. Planning staff recommends that proposed Lots 2 and 3 be rezoned to E-Estate to prevent future buyers from believing a duplex could be built on the lots when there is not enough land area to do so. Planner Shirk stated the proposed subdivision is also subject to limits of disturbance standards and noted the application adequately satisfies the majority of these standards. However, in order to minimize visual impact, design standards should be submitted that address building materials and colors, which must be natural materials of wood, brick, or stone in muted colors, as well as requiring that each structure be individually designed, and limiting the footprint of each dwelling to 1,500 square feet. While the property is not in a mapped geological-hazard area, it has RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 7 August 16,2005 been field-identified by planning staff and the Colorado Geological Survey as such, with shallow bedrock and the associated ground water identified as a potential hazard. The applicant proposes to abandon the existing driveway and provide a new paved driveway near the western property line, which will be shared by all three lots. This request was submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services. The Larimer County Wildfire Safety Specialist stated that a note should be placed on the plat stating 'Wildfire mitigation in accordance with the Estes Valley Development Code shall be required prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy." Public Comment: The applicant, Fred Wojcik, stated he met many times with planning staff and considered many alternatives for the site. He noted his desire to develop the site tastefully with minimum disturbance to the surrounding area and stated his acceptance of the staff's conditions of approval. Lonnie Sheldon of Van Horn Engineering and Design stated the proposed driveway is on an 11% grade and meets the Code standard for driveways. The Commissioners and staff discussed the proposed building envelopes and staff's recommendation to limit the building footprints to 1,500 square feet. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hull) to recommend approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat, Resubdivision of Lot 1, Seifert Addition, to the Town Board of Trustees, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed uanimously with one absent and one vacancy. CONDITIONS: 1. Lots 2 and 3 shall be rezoned to E-Estate (1/2-acre). This shall be at no cost to the applicant and shall be presented to the Town Board for consideration with the Final Plat. 2. Design standards shall be submitted for recording with the final plat. These shall address building color (muted colors) and materials (natural materials of wood, brick, or stone), require that each structure be individually designed, and limit the footprint of each dwelling to a maximum of 1,500 square feet. 3. A driveway maintenance agreement shall be submitted with the final plat. The cost of driveway construction shall be born by the applicant and shall be included in the Development Agreement to be submitted with the final plat. 4. The applicant shall install a street sign for the proposed Robin Meadow Lane. 5. All service lines shall be installed to the property line prior to the paving of the drive. 6. The subdivider shall install the electric service and distribution system. Plans shall be finalized with the required construction drawings to be submitted with the Final Plat. 7. The existing dwelling shall connect to the Estes Park Sanitation District line located under Moccasin Circle. 8. The applicant shall petition to get out of the Upper Thompson Sanitation District area and into the Estes Park Sanitation District area. This process shall be completed prior to submittal of the final plat. 9. Details of the driveway drainage swale shall be included with the Final Plat. 10.The driveway radius shall be delineated, and the driveway opening shall not exceed thirty (30) feet at the street line (per Appendix D). RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 8 August 16,2005 11. The access easement shall be revised so it does not encroach onto Lots 2 or 3, with the exception of a small portion in the northeast corner of Lot 2. The easement shall also be labeled as a drainage easement. 12. An easement shall be dedicated to provide for the electric service across Lot 1. 13."Base Zone Lot Size Requirements" shall include specific lot numbers in addition to directional descriptions. 14. The "Project Timing" outlined on the Grading Plan shall be revised to reference 2006. 15.Ten-foot-wide utility easements shall be dedicated around the perimeter of the subdivision. 16. Proposed building envelopes shall tie to a lot corner. 17. Distances from the lot lines to "Proposed House" shall be removed. 18. The labeling in the area south of the proposed driveway to the existing house shall be clarified. 19.The grading plan shall be redesigned to ensure drainage from the lowest portion of the driveway will be directed east and not into the road. 20.The following notes shall be placed on the plat: a. 'Wildfire mitigation in accordance with the Estes Valley Development Code shall be required prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy." b. "Lots 2 and 3 shall be subject to Section 7.7 of the Estes Valley Development Code, regarding Geologic Hazards with an emphasis on drainage and slope stability." 8. REPORTS Planner Shirk stated that staff has approved YMCA Development Plan 05-03, a staff-level review of a proposal to build a new water-treatment facility to serve the needs of the YMCA of the Rockies-Estes Park Center. The building will be 1,100 square feet; a proposal of 10,000 square feet or larger requires Planning Commission review. Director Joseph stated the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Block 7 amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code. He also announced that Member Horton has resigned his positions on the Estes Valley Planning Commission and Estes Valley Board of Adjustment due to his professional commitments. He noted that the County Commissioners' office has been notified and is taking applications to fill Mr. Horton's positions. Elaine Johnson, neighboring property owner to Rocky Point Condominiums, inquired about the Preliminary Condominium Map. Director Joseph noted the item was on consent agenda. Ms. Johnson agreed to speak with Planner Shirk regarding her questions about the condominium map immediately following the meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:47 p.m. Edward B. Pohl, Acting Chair Julie Roederer, Recording Secretary Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Alison Chilcott, Planner 11, and Bob Joseph, Director Date: August 18,2005 Subject: Streamside Amended Plat, Lot 2 of the Amended Plat of Lot 2, Deer Crest Subdivision, and Tract 59A, Fall River Addition, Bruce Ballard/Applicant Background. This is an amended plat application to combine two lots, both zoned "A" Accommodations/Highway Corridor, into one lot. The property is located on the south side of US Highway 34 (Fall River Road) between Deer Crest and Bear Creek Luxury Condominiums, just west of the US Highway 34/US Highway 34 Bypass intersection. The property is addressed 1260 Fall River Road and 1350 Fall River Road. The larger, developed lot is 15.94 acres and the smaller, undeveloped lot is 0.88 acres; the combined lot size is 16.82 acres. The larger lot is developed as a nineteen-unit accommodations property, Streamside on Fall River. Most of the acreage is steeply sloped and heavily treed. The undeveloped lot is fairly flat, rectangular, fronts US Highway 34 (Fall River Road) to the north, and is bordered by Fall River to the south. Combining the lots would allow Streamside on Fall River to develop additional accommodations units on the flat lot. Accommodations units cannot be developed on this lot without the lot combination since it is less than 40,000 square feet in size. "RaN;; *irÂ»*.1 ./1/&*/Ped The Estes Valley Planning Commission - Sundance JE--a 1 E- *-3--Ii..El/z-Â«u - recommended conditional approval of this plat at their - 0 , Lj218:*240'34('aâ€ž 2>-~h\ .>~5 June 21, 2005 meeting. , .A" 1 RA:44*/I'll- IA - /1 Bear Cre,k Luxury Condos & 1 Budget. , Und*voloped 341: 1 ~ None. : i: Streamside od / .\ L-/0 .til- Fall River 1 -i- AN V Al:A~W Action. Approval of the plat with the conditions of approval -VV recommended by the Estes Valley Planning Commission. Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Alison Chilcott, Planner 11, and Bob Joseph, Director Date: August 18,2005 Subject: Revised Development Plan #02-17, Vista Ridge Condominiums, Lot 3, Vista Ridge Subdivision, and Third Amendment to the Wildfire Ridge Development Agreement, Estes Investors, LLC/Applicant Background. This is a revised development plan application for Lot 3, Vista Ridge Subdivision (Vista Ridge Condominiums). The application is submitted by Estes Investors, LLC. Estes Investors, LLC is a partnership between the Estes Park Housing Authority and local investors. The original development plan, which was approved by Town Board on September 10, 2002, proposed construction of sixty-one residential units on three lots. Thirty-one of the units were affordable to households earning eighty (80) percent or less of the Larimer County Median Income and thirty (30) units were market rate. Development on Lots 1 and 2 has proceeded according to the approved development plan. Sixteen units have been constructed and sold on Lot 1. Twelve units have been constructed and sold on Lot 2 and construction is underway on the remaining nine units. -dj The original development plan approval for Lot -- / 6-8*/47.\0.Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·j 3 required either approval of a height variance by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment for 11 0,0 The Neighborhood the southern- and easternmost building or a \1 -A 1 (Proposed Subdivision)~~~~~2 3 redesign to lower the building height. The -ff-- ~ - 1 ic Vista Ridge applicant has redesigned the site to comply 1(3 Crabapple Lane 4.- _~ I with the height requirements. Staff and / 7 "RE-1" Planning Commission are supportive of the ~>/ .i. ---Ii revised layout. Liftil.~-- | Revisions include a reduction in the number of units from twenty-two to twenty, driveway redesign, and construction of two buildings along the eastern property line rather than one. This lot is subject to a development agreement, which includes waivers/modifications to Estes Valley Development Code standards as shown on the approved development plan, and also specifies the attainable/market-rate unit mix. Since the design and unit mix is changing, revisions are needed to the development agreement. This requires Town Board review of both the agreement and the development plan. The Estes Valley Planning Commission recommended conditional approval of the development plan at their July 19, 2005 meeting. Budget. Development plan application fees were waived. Action. Approval of Revised Development Plan #02-17 with the conditions of approval recommended by the Estes Valley Planning Commission, and approval of the Third Amendment to the Wildfire Ridge Development Agreement. â€¢ Page 2 THIRD AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR WILDFIRE RIDGE ADDITION TO THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK THIS THIRD AMENDMENT to the Development Agreement is effective this day of , 2005, by and between THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO ("the Town"), and ESTES INVESTORS, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ('the Owner"). RECITALS A. The Town and Pinnacle Homes and Designs, LLC, entered into a Development Agreement dated November 16,1998, for development o f real property annexed to the Town o f Estes Park more particularly described as Lot 1, Wildfire Ridge Addition to the Town o f Estes Park, Colorado. B. The Town and Wildfire Development, LLC, successor in interest to Pinnacle Homes and Design, LLC, amended the Development Agreement effective August 10,1999. C. The Owner is successor to Wildfire Development, LLC. D. The Owner and the Town entered into a Second Amendment to the Development Agreement effective September 13, 2002. E. The Second Amendment to the Development Agreement allowed the Owner to construct 61 dwellings (31 affordable units and 30 market rate units) on this Property. F. Due to development considerations, the Owner has reduced the total number units to be constructed on the Property from 61 units to a total of 59 units (30 affordable units and 29 market rate units). G. On July 19, 2005, the Estes Valley Planning Commission recommended to the Town Board the approval of the Revised Development Plan 02-17 for Lot 3 of the Property contingent on the approval of this Third Amendment to the Development Agreement by the Town Board. FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION OF the mutual promises and covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the Town and Owner agree as follows: 1. The purpose of this Third Amendment is to reduce the number of dwelling units on the Property from 61 units to 59 units (30 affordable units and 29 market rate units), and to approve and incorporate the terms and conditions of the Revised Development Plan 02-17 into this Third Amendment to the Development Agreement. 1 2. The Revised Development Plan 02-17 of Lot 3 of Vista Ridge Condominiums, Lot 3 Vista Ridge Subdivision to the Town o f Estes Park, Colorado, shall control development of Lot 3 of Vista Ridge Subdivision. 3. All other terms and conditions of the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement for Wildfire Ridge Addition to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, shall continue in force and effect. This Third Amendment to the Development Agreement is effective this day of ,2005. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk ESTES PARK INVESTORS, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company 2 Administration Memo To: Mayor Baudek and Town Trustees From: Randy Repola ~-* Date: 8/17/2005 Re: Common Good Committee, Project CARES Background: The Common Good Committee of the Estes Valley Community Services Coalition is seeking support for their Project "CARES" (Caring, Acceptance, Respect, Encouragement and Support). The project will include the placement of ribbons on trees in Bond Park during the month of September. The group anticipates an event in the park on September 21St. The event will be approved through the normal special event procedure. Additionally, the Committee anticipates other activities during the month to encourage acceptance of diversity of opinions within the community. The Common Good Committee is requesting permission to place the ribbons on trees in the northwest corner of Bond Park and to allow them to stay there during the month of Septebmer. They will also be responsible for keeping the area clean and will post information in that general location explaining the project. Budget. There are no identified costs to the Town. Action: Approval or disapproval of the request by the Common Good Committee to place ribbons on a certain group of trees in Bond Park. 1 Finance Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer Date: August 19, 2005 Subject: Review of General Fund, January 1 - June 30, 2005 Background Attached please find documents that will aid in our discussion and analysis of the General Fund for the first six months of2005. Documentation 1. Graph of Standard Deviation of Cumulative Sales Tax Returns a. Update of sales tax projections using existing tracking systems (traffic counts, historic data), specifically whether or not we are "tracking" to the annual budget. 2. General Fund income statement bv department a. Discussion of first half of year from departmental (business) standpoint. 3. General Fund income statement for internal review a. Discussion of first half of year from internal review standpoint. 4. Light and Power Department Trends (Green/Red) a. Discussion ofrevenue trends for Light and Power. 5. Graph ofvariance between budgeted and forecasted revenues a. Continuation of#4. Action steps requested None. CIO O 4 1 0 \\ ~x - f f J - C J - +2 SD -+1 SD BAV VO ZO $6,917,094 $6,548,347 $6,000,000 $6,170,731 $5,810,853 $5,442,106 as E- - 030 AoN PO des XeIN Jdv JeIN qe=1 uer 93306â‚¬ Standard Deviations of Cumulative Sales Tax Revenue $7,000,000 $5,000,000 000'000'*$ 000'000'Â£$ 000'0002$ 000'000' MB J ' 0$ $8,000,000 TOWN OF ESTES PARK - GENERAL FUND INCOME STATEMENT 2005 % of 2005 % of YTD % BUDGET Rev Y-T-D Rev of BDGT REVENUES Taxes $7,534,882 74.8% $1,579,927 52.5% 21.0% Property 250,680 170,068 Sales (includes use taxes) 6,835,808 1,223,237 Franchise (phone, gas, cable, electric, water) 419,240 175,002 Other 29,154 11,620 Transfers 966,773 9.6% 497,978 16.6% 51.5% Intergovernmental revenue 161,146 1.6% 81,469 2.7% 50.6% Current revenue 61,695 0.6% 42,197 1.4% 68.4% Miscellaneous 35,328 0.4% 15,694 0.5% 44.4% Legislative 510 0.056 218 0.0% 42.8% Judicial 0 0.0* 32 0.0% 0.0% Executive (licenses/permits) 260,000 2.6% 213,082 7.1% 82.0% Elections 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Finance/Accounting 30,054 3% 36 0.0% 0.1% Community Development 94,871 0.9% 55,196 1.8% 58.2% Buildings 158,360 1.6% 75,684 2.5% 47.8% Benefits 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Community Services 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Police 77,075 0.8% 45,436 1.5% 59.0% Police Communications 30,400 0.3% 129 0.0% 0.4% Fire 0 0.0% 390 0.0% 0.0% Protective Inspections (licenses/pemits) 267,000 2.7% 227,101 7.6% 85.1% Engineering 2,000 0.0% 583 0.0% 29.2% Streets & Highways 386,106 3.8% 158,620 5.3% 41.1% Sanitation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Parks 1,000 0.0% 4,651 0.2% 465.1% Buisness Development 8,000 0.1% 8,849 0.3% 110.6% TOTAL REVENUES 10,075,200 too.0% 3,007,270 too.0% 29.8% EXPENDITURES Legislative 101,732 1.0% $46,979 1.6% 46.2% Judicial 37,756 0.4% 16,997 0.6% 45.0% Executive 373,270 3.7% 180,517 6.0% 48.4% Elections 7,108 0.1% 7,101 0.2% 99.9% Finance/Accounting 246,245 2.4% 72,682 2.4% 29.5% Community Development 396,433 3.9% 175,209 5.8% 44.2% Buildings 387,963 3.9% 192,822 6.4% 49.7% Benefits 26,100 0.3% 1,263 0.0% 4.8% Community Services 435,345 4.3% 409,842 13.6% 94.1% Police 1,759,204 17.5% 731,906 24.3% 41.6% Police Communications 530,751 5.3% 258,306 8.6% 48.7% Fire 510,731 5.1% 184,737 6.1% 36.2% Protective Inspections 231,291 2.3% 119,561 4.0% 51.7% Engineering 81,991 0.8% 31,100 1.0% 37.9% Streets & Highways 893,763 8.9% 471,124 15.7% 52.7% Sanitation 53,500 0.5% 15,337 0.556 28.7% Parks 778,196 7.7% 289,281 9.6% 37.2% Buisness Development 83,451 0.8% 40,452 1.3% 48.5% Contingencies 123,300 1.2% 14,795 0.5% 12.0% Interfund Transfers Out 4,310,905 42.8% 997,555 33.2% 23.1% EPURA transfer 200,000 2.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 11,569,035 114.8% 4,257,565 141.6% 36.8% EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES ($1,493,835) -14.8% ($1,250,295) 41.6% 83.7% 1 en Nâ€žh- 110-1 : A 01 -CloornQ , / A ! C.Ercln er, O ' ' I 11 1 C<' 5 2 1 1-PA~HOO e N 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 It 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 @:B- : 222&222#6\ 6\!ch' 0 .0 .0 1 .0 1 %222222,4, U ; 002 000109*01 1 Â£ f ~ wheneÂ©-O,00, A A 1 -4 en N A W rn en en #Noriniend :0 1 t- M | N 00 4- N M M tr, In *l N! M * M en - 01 1 er; 1 RE: 1 1 1 1 01 1 1 1 1 2 2 Z Â£â‚¬%544% g e Elâ‚¬EEES*/6 i *920,040 4 i B H O N N O 45 - O 17Â·~ i 00 i MÂ©--MIAÂ© i M i 1 04 00* M r- -1- M !0~ U _WOOD M 'wi WA : 019(fl=â‚¬11 Nel 00 10 10 N h M ~ M i . 9 A i eaÂ© 000~ N t- er)(9 Mah: 00 Trt-Ch=1-h ; r-Â·3 9 t-MO---enu Mig-1 --4- -NION rt Ch - 00 - Ch i m ! -- 1 * 1 # 7 6 4322 2322Â£ Â£Â£Â£ Â£ Â£ 4 1 1 E Â£ Â£ 4 @4 4 00 1 00 1 N N I. 40Â©NNod do g 0005*44 t-/ 01(1- ./ clenoor- M M orn e o coh FreÂ©InG 62 41 a 00 N er; 1 0 MOO ch 00 051,11000 41#~ Dorn)*00â‚¬90* 04 * 001-CneÂ© .------- - Lic<'Eencrd ZZ XI- O u tr; - e C~ U 0 CricÂ·noooN-*00 00 Chene] r-+ 01 + C 4 0 Inl,991- 01 81 00 COCh-CON r. c . Â© U t-- Cler,- =r â‚¬6 %*; z o C K U U 4 C 4 I E LeÂ· @ OO u U U k g CM <M mat U 4 . 0 64 6. ou#*E= ee 29 PO: u R 0 2 .5 M .* A s ~ M % .a . 0 2 8 1 P 1% g N C Â¢ 3 EUEOEÂ¢AÂ¢ WOAUJUU* WI 107,157 2005 2004 36,93 I8579O I I OOZYLODI SanUOAO 019'ILO'I 09Â£'17Â£Â£'I toE'59Â£ S#Jom O!Iqnd-St 9Z0'8 IZ UO!18010011- 890'83 sopu@SU LOI'IL6'Â£ %"11 5Â£0'695'I I sain,!puadxa Il:101 EFEE %L'Â£8 %9' 1 t- (Z,6Z'OSE'I$) %8.171- (9Â£8'Â£6Â¢1$) 2IS[AO SliaNS[AGIN AO SSI)XG[ Â£8'Â£56 FOR THE YEARS 2005 & 2004 TOWN OF ESTES PARK BUDGET ansfer from Light & Power ervices 612IalII VHndE, O1 JOJSUE.Ii 12[alIGNISIJXSI (NSIGNIA) REVENUES Licenses & P . TOWN OF ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER TRENDS Type Summary Date July-05 12 - month moving average Total % Total % of Avg Avg Avg # of accts KWH Growth Revenues Total Rev Rev/KWH KWH/Cust Rev/Cust Residential 7,242 3,743,668 0.4% $316,145 41% $0.0846 517 $43.64 Residential Demand 427 808,191 -0.1% $65,709 9% $0.0832 1,896 $154.15 Res Energy / Time of Day 218 385,660 0.3% $21,128 3% $0.0557 1,763 $96.55 Res Basic Energy 9 12,578 4.8% $1,003 0% $0.0800 1,359 $108.09 Gen Serv Small 1,511 2,014,974 1.0% $170,211 22% $0.0846 1,333 $112.61 Gen Serv Large 87 2,766,760 0.2% $165,954 22% $0.0601 31,920 $1,913.61 GSL - Comml - Time of Day 1 9,855 -2.0% $600 0% $0.0569 9,855 $600.29 GSS - Comml- Energy TOD 12 17,081 2.0% $1,021 0% $0.0598 1,463 $87.02 Municipal 60 250,455 1.6% $18,524 2% $0.0739 4,160 $307.74 Outdoor Area Lighting 16 0 $185 0% NA 0 $11.31 Wind Power 100 0 $2,060 0% NA 0 $20.61 RMNP - Administrative 2 1,084 -8.8% $42 0% N/A 542 $21.13 RMNP - Small Admin 19 70,254 -0.7% $3,007 0% $0.0428 3,698 $158.29 RMNP - Large Admin 6 61,364 -0.5% $2,276 0% $0.0375 10,227 $379.28 avg $767,865 100% annual revenues at this pace: $9,214,379 budget $9,393,999 projected over/under: | ($179,620)| I '. -621 -t Ce e -40. fÂ« 6 uee,Neq eouepeA - (000'00Â£$) 90-AON pepe[Oid pue peje6pnq go-oaa SenueADJ (000,00*$) Feb-05 ($627,090) Variance between budgeted and projected revenues $0 Jan-05 ($661,248) Mar-05 ($525,865) Apr-05 ($387,073) May-05 ($342,~ ($100,00042* Jun-05 ($269, Jul-05 ($179, Aug-05 Sep-05 ($200,000) Oct-05 (000'009$) (000'009$) (000'002$) RESOLUTION #19-05 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING REFERENDUM C&D THE COLORADO ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT WHEREAS, the recent recession, combined with the September 11 attacks, caused our state revenues to drop 16 percent, forcing Colorado to cut $1 billion in spending the past three years, and ; WHEREAS, without immediate relief, state officials would have to start making even more massive cuts next year in funding for schools, roads and healthcare, even as the state's growing population creates demands for more spending, and; WHEREAS, Colorado must remain competitive with other states in seeking new jobs and investment from companies that demand good roads and schools whenever they expand their operations, and; WHEREAS, the State of Colorado will need $3.1 billion over the next five years to restore services that have been cut, ranging from Medicaid to higher education to strategic transportation projects, and; WHEREAS, the Colorado Economic Recovery Act proposes asking voters at the November 2005 Coordinated Election to forgo their TABOR taxpayer refunds for five years and let the state earmark that money for education, health care, transportation and retirement plans for fire and police, and; WHEREAS, in the sixth year, 2011, if revenue exceeds the amount the state can spend on these services, the first $100 million will pay bonding obligations for construction and other needs, including schools and roads, and; WHEREAS, in 2011, the income tax rate would drop from 4.63 percent to 4.5 percent and remain there every year there is a TABOR refund, and; WHEREAS, together, we must help Colorado recover from our ongoing budget challenges, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: The Board of Trustees hereby declare their full support of, and urge a YES vote for The Colorado Economic Recovery Act appearing as Referenda C&Don the November 1, 2005, statewide ballot. 1 > N. I INTRODUCED, READ, and ADOPTED this day of ,2005. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk 2 . . Memo To: Mayor Baudek and Town Trustees From: Randy Repola Â¢1~- Date: 8/17/2005 Re: Fairgrounds Sculpture Background: The Stanley Park Fairgrounds revitalization plan includes a plaza area complete with a pedestal for a sculpture of some sort. Coincidentally, this past winter, Frances Matthews of Denver contacted the Town and expressed a desire to contribute a sculpture in memory of her sister, Lois Lee Matthews, who died in the Big Thompson flood in 1976 at the age of 19. Tracy Feagans, in Town Administration, met with Ms. Matthews and ultimately aided in the selection of a piece, named "First Day" created by local artist Carol Cunningham. The piece will fit nicely with the fairground motif and is favored by Ms. Matthews. Budget The total cost for the sculpture and placement is approximately $48,500 and is further broken out as follows: Sculpture: $45,000 Base/lighting: $ 3,500 Ms. Matthews has committed to $20,000 towards the sculpture plus the cost of the base and lighting. Therefore, the Town's share will be approximately $25,000. This amount is available in the Community Reinvestment Fund as part of the moneys allocated to the Fairground revitalization. Action: Staff requests support of the Town's portion of the "First Day" sculpture in the amount of $25,000. With regards to the blatantly false allegation that the Estes Park Housing Authority renting to 'illegals'... â€¢ The Estes Park Housing Authority requires that non-citizens have documentation o Usually this comes in the form of a Permanent Resident Card issued by the INS. EPHA will not accept a copy; they must see the original and make a copy for their files. o EPHA requires that all have SS #s. Those numbers are checked to ensure that they are valid numbers. It is also important to note, that ALL who apply for housing in any of EPHA complexes must first: â€¢ Be income qualified with regards to the AMI limit ,and â€¢ Second must also have adequate income to pay the rent. o EPHA obtains third party employment and income verification on all households. â€¢ EPHA also runs credit and criminal background checks on everyone. â€¢ EPHA will NOT rent to anyone who does not have a job, and the prospect of a job for the next 12 months or a verify-able income source (i.e. Disability, SS, Pension). It is important to note is that it is the job of EPHA to treat ALL people fairly and equally. Their major funding sources (DOH, CHFA, Federal Home Loan Bank etc) strongly encourage to do outreach to minority populations. The number of elderly residents in EPHA programs is as follows: â€¢ Section 8- 14 or 18% of program participants â€¢ Rental Units- 15 or 6 % of rental units â€¢ Homeownership- 12 or 26% of those programs This information was also available last week had any interested party attempted to contact EPHA staff. Programs and People served A total of 379 people are CURRENTLY served by the EPHA and EPHA administered programs and development. This does NOT take into account the number of people who were assisted or served and are no longer. Also not taken into account are the approximately 50 additional people who have been served by the Larimer Home Ownership Program and the Larimer Home Improvement Program. (this info will take a bit longer to obtain) Section 8 Program A total of 78 people are currently assisted by our Section 8 program. Of those people: 14 are Elderly (18%) 5 are Hispanic (6 %) 20 are children (26%) 13 of the Families (not individuals) served are Disabled families Rental Programs 254 people are currently served in our Rental units 15 people are Elderly 51 are Hispanic 90 are children 12 are disabled Homeownership (Vista Ridge) 47 People 2 are Hispanic 12 Elderly . Message Page 1 of 1 Subj: Programs and People served EPHA Date: 8/22/2005 3:09:52 P.M. Mountain Standard Time From: rkurelja@estes.org To: jobands@aol.com Mayor: Attached is a quick synopsis of the people we currently serve in our various programs. This does include Lone Tree. What is not included are those who are or have been served by the Larimer Home Ownership Program (Down payment assistance) or Larimer Home Improvement Program (low interest home improvement loan program). It will take me a while to gather these numbers. The incomes of those we serve are behNeen 30%-80% of the Area Median Income for Larimer County. It is also important to note that our Section 8 program (along with everyone elses) has recently taken large cuts and due to lack of HUD funding is currently frozen. With regards to the Pine Knoll apartments: I have spoken with both the Rural Development people and the Pine Knoll owners. There were 14 Rental Assisted units (worked similar to Section 8) at that complex. Those individuals will continue to be serviced until the end of February. They can move at that time to any other Rural Development complex ( 3 additional here in Estes) and they will be put at the top of the list for Rental Assistance at those developments. There are also Developments in Berthoud, Windsor and many communities throughout the front range. All residents at Pine Knoll will recieve a priority letter which will allow them to go to ANY Rural Development project in the country and be put at the top of the wait list. Just between us at the moment-we (EPHA)are investgating some possible alternative/emergency funding, but I hesitate to talk publically about this until I have more information and/or confirmation. I will keep you informed. Please let me know if there is anything else we can do. Rita Kurelja Estes Park Housing Authority Tuesday, August 23,2005 America Online: JOBANDS Estes Park Apartments LLLP 2032 Caribou Drive, Suite 102 Fort Collins, CO 80525 August 23,2005 Mr. John Baudeck Mayor Town of Estes Park Via email Dear Mayor Baudeck, As you may know, Pine Knoll Apartments, 1155 S. St. Vrain, has been an affordable housing complex for seniors in your community. The property was built in 1982 under the 515 Rural Rental Housing Program, a USDA program that made low-interest direct loans to private entities to build affordable housing in rural communities. The loan allowed low rents, and required the owners not to prepay the loan for 20 years. While our commitment to Estes Park has not wavered, I want to inform you of certain upcoming changes in the status of Pine Knoll. The Partnership that owns Pine Knoll paid in full the Federal loan on Aug. 15. It is our intention to convert the affordable housing property, over the next six months to twelve months, either to market rate rentals or condominiums. We have had discussions with the Estes Park/Loveland Housing Authorjty regarding its interest in purchasing the property; however, the Loveland Housing Authority determined it was not feasible. We have notified our Pine Knoll tenants of the upcoming changes and are allowing them a minimum of six months, and up to twelve months for some, to find other housing or stay at the property if they can afford to do so. If the property is converted to condominiums, Rural Development may have special financing to assist our tenants with the purchase of a unit. We and Rural development are working with our tenants to assist them in this transition, whichever direction it goes. For your information, I have attached a fact sheet that outlines the history and planned conversion of Pine Knoll. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call 970-226-8775. Thank you. Mike Sollenberger General Partner , r For information: Mike Sollenberger 970-226-8775 Conversion of Affordable Apartments Pine Knoll Apartments 1155 S. St. Vrain Estes Park, CO August 22,2005 1. The Rural Development loan on this multi-family housing development in Estes Park was paid in full on August 15, 2005. â€¢ As a result of the loan payment, rental leases at the property will expire at the end of their current lease term. â€¢ The development will be converted from affordable apartments over the next 6- 12 months. 2. History of the developments. â€¢ The property was built in 1982 under the 515 Rural Rental Housing Program, a USDA program that made low-interest direct loans to private entities to build affordable housing in rural communities. â€¢ Affordable housing is generally defined as housing on which the occupant is paying no more than 30 percent of gross income for housing costs, including utilities. This is the definition used by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. â€¢ The development is owned by a separate limited liability limited partnership (LLLP) that agreed to not repay the loans for 20 years, forego all but a token return on asset during that period and offer below-market rental rates to seniors with qualifying incomes. â€¢ The development is a nicely maintained 48 unit two-story complex. 3. Process for notifying tenants about lease pay off. â€¢ Property owners first notified tenants Oct. 3,2003, that the loan would be repaid. As well, property managers reminded tenants via notices on common bulletin boards, mailed notices and personal communication. â€¢ Subsequently, Rural Development provided seven notices to tenants advising them the loan repayment was imminent. Conversion of Affordable Apartments-pg. 2 4. Actions by property owners to help tenants remain in affordable housing. â€¢ Prior to repayment of the Federal loan, owners of the property approached Rural Development to secure an equity loan to maintain the property as affordable housing for another 20 years. â€¢ Due to severe budget cuts at the Federal level, Rural Development was not able to provide the equity loan. â€¢ The property owners then offered to sell each property at its appraised value for 180 days to non-profit organizations nationwide. â€¢ Property owners held discussions with the Estes Park/Loveland Housing Authority regarding its interest in purchasing the property. The Loveland Housing Authority determined it was not feasible to purchase the property. â€¢ Rural Development will provide all tenants with information about other Rural Development properties, transfer of Rental Assistance and Letters of Priority Entitlement. 5. Current lease options offered to tenants. â€¢ Property owners are giving tenants the option to remain in their current apartments up to 6 months beyond the Aug. 15, 2005, notice that the Federal loan was paid, or until their current lease term expires. Some tenants will have up to eleven months to either seek new housing, or stay at the Property if they can afford to do so. â€¢ Property owners are pursuing the option of converting the apartments to condominiums and will have completed an analysis of this option by Oct. 1, 2005 or sooner. â€¢ If the properties are converted to condominiums, special financing options from Rural Development may be available in Estes Park to help maintain affordable mortgages.