HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2006-02-28f Prepared 2/20/06 /: 14 4 i. 1/ 34'&&- 49-1 T, 9 %97:01?7 1 OWN OF ESTES PARK #4 - _._..r.il 34:.:· ' 32¢. I 21*4-+2234,14, -,£423443».~.:.:0·04:'0.·4%7.264: 4 .'..'te..9%993-449*01,4.~42, .f.:3§-: -0~·Iij<.422- .* t. '4 -69%#/:::i~~:~/:'V-'-.+.....:: :..-.2·-'/::;.*m·/:// ':.8#....''-/--..·/ /4-,-4-.55 A........1...'*97;.. I - ....7 The Mission of the Town of Estes Fark le to plan and provide reliable, high-value eervicee for our citizene, vieitors, and employees. We take 0reat pride eneurin0 and enhancing the tuality of life in our community by Deine 0ood stewarde of public resources and natural eettin0. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, February 28,2006 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PROCLAMATION. Presentation to Salud Family Health Center proclaiming the week of March 5 - 11, 2006 as "Estes Park Salud Family Health Center Week" in Estes Park. PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address) TOWN BOARD COMMENTS 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated February 14,2006. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, February 23,2006. Police Department 1. Purchase two 2006 4x4 Expedition SSV with emergency equipment & vehicle stripping, $45,017 (Budgeted). Fire Department 1. Purchase one 2006 4x4 Expedition SSV with emergency equipment, GPS & vehicle stripping, $32,590 (Budgeted). 4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, February 7,2006 (acknowledgment only). 5. Estes Valley Planning Commission, February 21, 2006 (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: 1. SUPPLEMENTAL CONDOMINUM MAP A. Supplemental Condominium Map Phase XIX, Park River West Condominiums, Units 605, 607, 609, 668, and 670, Lots 1 and 2, Park River West Subdivision, Richard H. Wille Trust/Applicant. B. Supplemental Condominium Map #4, Solitude I Condominiums, Units 4 and 6, Lot 1, Solitude Subdivision, Fish Creek Properties, LLC/Applicant. C. Supplemental Condominium Map #3, Sundance Condominiums, Unit 2, Tract 69B of the 1 st Replat of Tract 69, Fall River Addition, Brian Murphy, LLC/Applicant. D. Supplemental Condominium Map #4, Thunder Canyon Condominiums, Building C-Unit 1, Building D-Unit 1, and Building E-Unit 1, Stanley Hills Subdivision, Roy Johnson/Applicant. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. LIQUOR LICENSING: TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP - FROM DON R. SPOMER AND DARCY A SPOMER. dba SPUR 66 LIQUOR TO SPUR LIQUOR INC. dba SPUR 66 LIQUOR, RETAIL LIQUOR STORE. Town Clerk Williamson. 2. LIQUOR LICENSING: TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP - FROM THOMAS KIM dba EAST SIDE FOOD STORE TO EVEREST FOOD STORE LLC dba EAST SIDE EVEREST FOOD STORE. 3.2% BEER OFF-PREMISES. Town Clerk Williamson. 3. ESTES VALLEY MULTICULTURAL CONNECTION UPDATE. Louise Olson. 4. ESTES VALLEY LIBRARY DISTRICT APPOINTMENT. Marjorie Corcoran, replacing Marshall Hesler and completing a 1-Year Term, expiring 12/31/06. 5. QUARTERLY AND YEAR END SALES TAX REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland. 6. TOWN ADMINISTRATORS REPORT. 7. ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared.
f hp Laserjet 3015 ¢P® HP LASERJET FAX invent Feb-24-2006 3:01PM Fax Call Report Job Date Timej Type Identification Duration Pages Result 217 2/24/2006 2:49: 1:9PM Send 6672527 1:30 2 OK 218 2/24/2006 2:50:54PM Send 5869561 1:29 2 OK 219 2/24/2006 2:52:28PM Send 5869532 1:44 2 OK 220 2/24/2006 2:54:17PM Send 5861691 2:11 2 OK 221 2/24/2006 2:56:33PM Send 6353677 1:46 2 OK 222 2/24/2006 2:58:25PM Send 5771590 2:38 2 OK
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 14, 2006 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall said Town of Estes Park on the 14~h day of February, 2006. Meeting called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Doylen. Present: Susan L. Doylen, Mayor ProTem Trustees Richard Homeier Lori Jeffrey-Clark Chuck Levine Wayne Newsom Bill Pinkham Also Present: Randy Repola, Town Administrator Lowell Richardson, Chief of Police Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Suzy Schares, Deputy Town Clerk Absent: Mayor John Baudek 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 COMMENT. None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. None. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 24,2006. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, January 26,2006: 1. Estes Valley Victim Advocates Contract B. Community Development, February 2,2006: CVB 1. Stanley Park Contracts 2006 1. Suri-Llama Association - June 1 -4 2. Colorado Arabians Horse Club - July 1- 4 3. Copper Penny Show - Colorado Hunter Jumper Association -July 21-23 2. Theatre at Stanley Park Expenditures 1. Theatre pro forma update: Approve agreemenVexpenditure with AMS Planning & Research - $7,000 FOSH/Comm. Reinvest. 2. Theatre design: Approve agreemenVexpenditure with Thorn Architects and Semple Brown Design - $15,000 FOSH/Comm. Reinvest. 3. 2006 Performance Park Noise Policy
Board of Trustees -February 14, 2006 - Page 2 Senior Center 1. Naming Senior Center Room #114,for Don & June Tebow Community Development Department 1. Salud Foundation - Request for Security and Fee Waivers 2. Hazel Stevens - Request for Fee Waiver C. Public Works, Februar~ 9,2006 4. Conference/Training Policy Review. It was moved and seconded (Levine/Newsom) the Consent Agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously with Item 3.A. and 4 being removed from the consent agenda. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Pinkham) item 3.A. be approved, and it passed unanimously with Trustees Levine & Homeier Abstaining. Town Administrator Repola reviewed the amendments to the Conference/Training Policy. Trustee Homeier recommended adding the Town Boards approval for exceptions made to the policy for the Mayor. It was recommended item 4 be continued. It was moved and'seconded (Homeier/Pinkham) to postpone the review of the Conference/Training Policy until a later meeting, and it passed unanimously. lA. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA (Approval of): 1. ACTION ITEMS: A. ESTES PARK MEDICAL CENTER HOSPITAL ADDITION, SPECIAL REVIEW #06-01. APPLICANT/ESTES PARK MEDICAL CENTER. Dir. Joseph reviewed the application and variances requested from the Estes Park Medical Center. Staff recommends approval of the application with the following conditions: (1) compliance with the conditions recommended by the Estes Valley Planning Commission; (2) staff review and approval of landscaping in the area south of the detention basin. A few evergreens should be planted in this area to aid in parking-lot screening; (3) Notes about drainage and utility information being subject to final approval by staff shall be added back to the plan; (4) The section of sidewalk shown on the plan reviewed by Planning Commission shall be added back to the plan. Following discussion, Mayor ProTem Doylen closed the public hearing, and it was moved and seconded (Pinkham/Homeier) Estes Park Medical Center Hospital Special Review #06-01 be approved with the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission on January 17, 2006, and it passed unanimously 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ORDINANCE 1-06 - PARK HOSPITAL DISTRICT NORTH PROPERTY LINE (undeveloped 50 ft Right of Wav). LEASE AGREEMENT. Dir. Joseph reviewed the conditions of the lease agreement with Park Hospital for the portion of the Prospect Avenue right-of-way that connects Stanley Circle Drive to Prospect Avenue. He explained the lease agreement will prohibit future road connections along the hospital's north property line between Stanley Circle Drive and the existing Prospect Avenue roadway and will reduce future vehicle and pedestrian conflicts. Town Attorney White reviewed the terms of the lease and stated the term of the lease will be for 20 years with 2-additional 20 year terms being available. Mayor Pro Tem questioned the isolation of the sidewalk being required on Fir Avenue. Suggestions were made for future sidewalk
Board of Trustees -February 14, 2006 - Page 3 developments. Following discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Doylen closed the public hearing. Town Attorney White read Ordinance #1-06 approving the lease agreement. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Levine) Ordinance #1-06 for the lease agreement with Park Hospital District be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. REPUBLIC PARKING - PARKING STUDY. Tamara Von Feldt and Dana G. Klein, Republic Parking, reviewed the final draft of the parking study conducted on July 27-31, 2005. 14 surface lots and 11 streets, with a total of 1366 spaces, were reviewed. The study found that 2 out of the 5 days studied the lots were over 80 percent full at the peak time. During the peak time 10 lots were completely occupied and 15 lots had open spaces. Recommendations were made to reconfigure Wiest parking lot, create a uniform signage program and instaN additiona! signage at key areas of the city, develop an employee parking program, create "short term employee spaces", implement a transit system to shuttle visitors from the Fairgrounds to downtown, and create an employee shuttle bus program from the Faitgrounds to downtown. Chief Richardson recommended following the recommendations as closely as possible. Staff would like to analyze the data and then submit a proposal for implementation. Mimi Hardendorf, Weststar Bank, questioned the ability to limit visitors using their private lot. Republic Parking suggested a ticketing system. Chief Richardson commented that ticketing is very limited by statue on private property. Dir. Joseph suggested stenciling "employee parking only" on the spaces. Chief Richardson stated a staff member will work with Weststar Bank to review the town requirements and limitations on signs. Paul Fishman, 14ers Caf@, questioned the means taken to gather the information for the study. 3. APPOINTMENT OF ROBERT HAMBLIN TO THE ESTES PARK MUSEUM ADVISORY BOARD, 4-YR. TERM. EXPIRING FEBRUARY 1. 2010. Mayor Pro Tem Doylen requested approval of the appointment of Robert Hamblin to the Estes Park Museum Advisory Board. It was moved and seconded (Pinkham/Newsom) Mr. Hamblin be so appointed with his term expiring February 1, 2010, and it passed unanimously. 4. RE-APPOINTMENT OF WAYNE NEWSOM. CHUCK LEVINE. AND AL SAGER TO THE ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. Dir. Joseph requested approval of the re-appointment of Al Sager with a term expiring February 28, 2008 and the re-appointment of Chuck Levine and Wayne Newsom with a term expiring February 28, 2009. It was moved and seconded (Homeier/Jeffrey- Clark) Al Sager, Chuck Levine, and Wayne Newsom be re-appointed, and it passed unanimously, with Levine and Newsom abstaining. Trustee Levine thanked the CIA members for attending the Town Board meeting. 5. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION: Conference with Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions under Section 24-6-402(4)(B), C.R.S. and for the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing- strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators, under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(e). Motion: It was moved and seconded (Pinkham/Levine) the Town Board enter Executive Session for a conference with Town Attorney White for the purpose of receiving legal advice under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(B) and determining positions relative to matters that may
Board of Trustees -February 14, 2006 - Page 4 be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and instructing negotiators, and it passed unanimously. R Whereupon Mayor ProTem Doylen adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 8:59 pm Mayor ProTem Doylen reconvened the meeting to open session at 10:20 p.m. 6. LOT 4 STANLEY ADDITION CONTUCT - REQUEST APPROVAL. Town Administratbr Repola reviewed the sale of Lot 4, Stariley Addition. Staff recommends approval of the contract for an amount of $1,250,000 with a closing date -of August 14, 2006. Town Attorney White reviewed the terms of the contract. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded (Pinkham/Levine) for the approval of the contract (draft #4) for sale of Lot 4 Stan'ey Addition, and it passed unanimously. 7. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. Town Adminisfrator Repola reported Utilities Comrhittee Meeting scheduled for Thursday, Feb. 16,2006 has been cancelled. 8. ADJOURN. Following completion of all agenda items, Mayor Pro Tem Doylen adjourned the meeting at 10:28 p.m. Susan L. Doylen, Mayor Pro Tem Suzy Schares, Deputy Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 23,2006 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 23rd day of February, 2006. Committee: Chairman Newsom, Trustees Doylen and Homeier Attending: Chairman Newsom, Trustees Doylen and Homeier Also Attending: Chief Richardson, Chief Dorman, Deputy Clerk Schares Absent: None Chairman Newsom called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Sgt. Rose introduced Luke Marshall, 2006 Cub Scout Pine Wood Derby 3rd place winner, who replicated an Estes Park Police car for his derby car. Sgt. Rose presented Luke with a certificate of appreciation. POLICE DEPARTMENT. 1. Bureau of Reclamation Special Use Permit - Request Approval. Commander Kufeld explained the Town of Estes Park currently possesses a special use permit with an expiration date of December 31, 2009 with the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). The special use permit allows for radio antenna placement on the BOR tower located on Prospect Mountain. EPPD implemented wireless network connectivity in January 2003 through the acquisition of a federal grant (Edward Byrne Memorial Grant) initially to provide police officers network access from their patrol vehicles via laptop computers. Subsequently, the ability for other town departments to have complete access and use of this wireless network at their convenience was incorporated within this project. The BOR agreed to allow the Town of Estes Park to amend the current special use permit "No. 9-LM-60- L4662" for the purpose of installing a wireless antenna on their tower at the Prospect Mountain site. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendment to the BOR Special Use Permit No. 9-LM-60-L4662. Following discussion, The Committee recommends approval of the Bureau of Reclamation Special Use Permit. 2. Expedition Bid Approval - Request Approval To Purchase Budgeted Item. Public Works Supt. Dave Mahany explained the 2006 Police Department budget includes $45,000.00 for the replacement of Patrol Vehicle G-72A, 2000 4x4 Jeep Cherokee, 6 years old with 62,000 miles, (Replacement Type 3,60,000 miles or 6 years) and replacement of vehicle G-90B, 1995 Ford Taurus, 11 years old with 73,000 miles (Replacement Type 8, 100,000 miles or 7 years / very high operation costs at this time). Bids received: • Spradley Barr Ford - Ft. Collins, Co. 2006 Ford 4x4 Expedition SSV (Special Services Vehicle) G72A BID - 2006 Expedition $24,631.00 G-90B BID - 2006 Expedition $24,631.00 Trade-In G72A $ 6,000.00 Trade-In G90B $ 1,600.00 Bid Price $18,631.00 Bid Price $23,031.00 • Burt Arapahoe Ford - Centennial, Co. 2006 Ford 4x4 Expedition SSV (Special Services Vehicle) G72A BID - 2006 Expedition $25,122.96 G-90B BID - 2006 Expedition $25,122.96
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety Committee - February 23,2006 - Page 2 Trade-In G72A $ 6,000.00 Trade-In G-90B $ 1,200.00 Bid Price $19,122.96 Bid Price $23,922.96 • Phil Long Ford - Colorado Springs, Co. 2006 Ford 4x4 Expedition SSV (Spkial Services Vehicle) G72A BID - 2006 Expedition $25,476.00 G-90B BID - 2006 Expedition $25,476.00 Trade-In G72A $ 4,800.00 Trade-In G90B $ 1,000.00 Bid Price $20,676.00 Bid Price $24,476.00 ****************Updated Emergency Equipment - Control Module / Strobe Lights / Wig-Wags / Spotlights / etc. (Wireless Adv. Greeley Co).......................... .....$1,855.00 • Police Stripping (Decals) Signs of Life....................................................$1,500.00 Staff recommends trading-in G-72A and G-90B and purchasing two new 2006 4x4 Expedition SSV from Spradley Barr Ford for a cost of $41,662.00 / Purchasing updated emergency equipment from Wireless Advanced Communications for a cost of $1,855.00 / vehicle stripping from Signs of Life ' for a cost of $1,500.00 for a total cost of $45,017.00. Following discussion, The Committee recommends approval of the bid from Spradley Barr Ford with emergency equipment as recommended by staff at a cost of $45,017.00. Reports: 1. Estes Valley Victim Advocates - Mary Mesropian, Executive Director of Estes Valley Victim Advocates, reviewed the annual report for Estes Valley Victim AdOocates and reviewed the duties for Victims Advocates staff and volunteers. Estes Valley Victim Advocates provides advocacy to victims of domestic violence, sexoal assault, stalking, other crimes and trauma. In 2005,255 men, women and children With 1,402 total contacts were assisted. The operating budget was just over $100,000 with funding coming from several organizations and foundations. Future objectives include opening a safe shelter for battered women and their children. 2. Municipal Court Report - Judge Brown updated the Committee of the number of cases and amount of receipts .received in 2005. There were 321 new cases with $20,762 received. Judge Brown introduced Dale Stapleton, Municipal Court Clerk. He reviewed the partnership with Restorative Justice. 3. 2005 Police Department Statistics - Commander Kufeld reviewed the 2005 Police Department Statistics. There were 253 arrests made in 2005. FIRE DEPARTMENT. Expedition Bid Apprdval - Request Approval To Purchase Budqeted Item. Public Works Supt. Dave Mahany explained the 2006 Fire Department budget includes $35,000.00 for the replacement of Utility Vehicle G-57 and the updating of the emergency lighting on this vehicle, G-57 is a 1990 4x4 Jeep Cherokee, 16 years old with 90,000 miles, (Replacement Type 1, 80,000 - 90,000 miles or 10 years). This vehicle is equipped as an emergency response vehicle for the Fire Department. Bids received: • Spradley Barr Ford - Ft. Collins, Co. 2006 Ford 4x4 Expedition SSV (Special Services Vehicle)........................$25,055.00 Trade-in: Truck G-57 1990 4x4 Jeep Cherokep $ 1,200.00 Bid Price $ 23,855.00 • Burt Arapahoe Ford - Centennial, Co.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety Committee - February 23,2006 - Page 3 2006 Ford4x4 Expedition SSV (Special Services Vehicle)........................$25,546.96 Trade-in: Truck G-57 1990 4x4 Jeep Cherokee ........$ 1,000.00 Bid Price: $ 24,546.96 • Phil Long Ford - Colorado Springs, Co. 2006 Ford 4x4 Expedition SSV (Special Services Vehicle)......................$25,900.00 Trade-in: Truck G57 1990 4x4 Jeep Cherokee .........$ 1,000.00 Bid Price: $ 24,900.00 ***************** • Updated ]Emergency Equipment - Control Console / Control Module / Overhead lights / Strobe Lights / Wig-Wags / Spotlight / etc. ONireless Adv. Greeley Co.) $5,485.00 • GPS Location System ,..(Spradley Barr Ford) ,.....,................................$2,500.00 • Fire Department Stripping (Decals) (Signs of Life) ..................................$750.00 Staff recommends trading-in G-57, 1990 4x4 Jeep Cherokee and purchasing a new 2006 4x4 Expedition SSV from Spradley Barr Ford for a cost of $23,855.00 / Purchasing updated emergency equipment from Wireless Advanced Communications for a cost of $5,485.00 / purchasing a GPS Location System from Spradley Barr Ford for a cost of $2,500.00 / vehicle stripping from Signs of Life for a cost of $750.00, for a total cost of $32,590.00. Following discussion, The Committee recommends approval of the bid from Spradley Barr Ford with emergency equipment as recommended by staff at a cost of $32,590.00. There being no further business, Chairman Newsom adjourned the meeting at 9:14 a.m. Suzy Schares, Deputy Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment February 7,2006,8:00 a.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Board: Chair Al Sager; Members Cliff Dill, Chuck Levine, John Lynch, and Wayne Newsom; Alternate Member Jeff Barker Attending: Members Dill, Levine, Lynch, and Sager Also Attending: Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, Planner Shirk, Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Member Newsom, Alternate Member Barker 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. ELECTION OF OFFICERS It was moved and seconded (Levine/Lynch) to appoint Member Dill as Chair. There being no further nominations, Cliff Dill was elected Chair by acclamation; Member Dill took over the meeting as Chair. It was moved and seconded (Sager/Lynch) to appoint Member Levine as Vice- Chair. There being no further nominations, Chuck Levine was elected Vice-Chair by acclamation. 2. CONSENT AGENDA a. The minutes of the January 10, 2006 meeting. b. Lot 11, Block 1, Fall River Estates, 1341 David Drive - Staff request to continue item to March 7,2006 meeting. The consent agenda was accepted as presented. 3. LOT 2, BLOCK 3. WINDCLIFF ESTATES, 5â„¢ FILING. 3101 Eiger Trail, Applicant: Darling Enterprise, Inc. - Variance request from Estes Vallev Development Code Section 4.3. Table 4-2, to allow portions of a residence to be built 11 feet from the Eiqer Trail propertv line and 17 feet from the St. Moritz Trail propertv line in lieu of the 25-foot front-vard setbacks required bv the Estes Vallev Development Code (EVDC) in the E-1-Estate zoning district Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. He stated this property is zoned E-1-Estate and is bounded by St. Moritz Trail on the southern (downhill) side and by Eiger Trail on the eastern (uphill) side. The lot immediately to the north is an open-space lot, and the lot to the south is currently undeveloped. Because the property is bounded by roads on two sides, the applicant is requesting a variance from the EVDC for two "front-yard" setbacks to allow a seventeen-foot setback from St. Moritz Trail and an eleven-foot setback from Eiger Trail. The lot was originally platted in the 1 970s; the applicant wishes to build a new detached single-family residence. The E-1-Estate zoning district provides for a one- acre minimum lot size, but this lot is legally nonconforming and only 14 acre in size. Due to the lot's shape, if the twenty-five-foot setback requirements and minimum building-width requirements were adhered to, the remaining buildable area would provide a small, square footprint of 600 square feet; the resulting home would not be in character with the neighborhood. Planner Shirk stated the proposed single-family residence is similar in nature to that of surrounding residences, and if the variance is DRAFT
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2 February 7,2006 granted, the essential character of the neighborhood would not change. The applicant has designed the house to minimize the requested variance and will locate the proposed residence closer to and below the level of Eiger Trail, which will minimize its visual impact. Planner Shirk noted the proposed driveway is short and steep. In addition to giving consideration to raising the elevation of the garage, the applicant has been working with the homeowners' association on a proposal to lower the roadbed; tfie combination of the two changes would result in a more level driveway. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to neighboring 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. A letter of support from the Windcliff Property Owners Association Architectural Control Committee was received by Planning staff. A letter from neighboring property owner, Harlow Sprouse of 1561 St. Moritz Trail, stating he had no objection to the variance request, was given to the Board Members by the applicant. Public Comment: The applicant, Don' Darlirig; was' present. Discussion followed among the Board, staff, ahd the apblicant regarding the slope of the proposed driveWay, the possibility of raising the elevation of the garage by no more than three feet, and the applicant's proposal to lower the adjacent roadbed by an amount to be determined by placement of the water line. There was also discussion about handicapped accessibility tb the house, although said accessibility is not required. John Hiatt, Chairman of Windcliff Pto,perty Owners' Association Architectural Control Committee, confirmed the Committee's support of the applicant's variance request. He noted Mr. Darling had done good job of fittirig the house on the lot and had worked closely with the Architectural Control Committee. Member Sager requested that Planner Shirk clarify 'the need for two front-yard setback variances. Planner Shirk stated that the Estes Valley Development Code definition of a front-yard setback is any setback from a street. The lot in question is bounded by two streets and the proposed residence will encroath,into the setback along both streets, therefore two front-yard setback varianpes: must be requested. + Member Sager clarified that, architecturally, the proposed rasidence has both a front and a rear. y Member Levine stated the proposed residence is very much in character with the neighborhood, and the applicant had done godd job in designing it as such. It was moved and seconded (Levine/Sager) to approve the variance request to allow a front-yard setback of seventeen feet along St. Moritz Trail and a front- yard setback of eleven feet along Eiger Trail in lieu of the twenty-five-foot setbacks required, with the findings and conditions r6commended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. - CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with the approved site plan. 2. Compliance with applicable building codes. 3. A setback certificate prepared by a registered land surveyor shall be presented to the building official at the footing/foundation inspection. This certificate shall verify ' the foundation location and height was set in accordance with the approved site plan. DRAFT
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3 February 7,2006 4. REPORTS Planner Chilcott reported on the variances granted for the Whyard commercial building/residence at 189 & 191 East Riverside Drive, which were approved December 6, 2005. One condition of approval was compliance with the submitted plans. Mr. Whyard has since applied for a building permit and some changes have been made to the plans. A variance was approved to allow an addition to be built up to the property line; the proposed addition is now located two feet from the property line. Mr. Whyard had also proposed to build a second floor on the addition and move his residence into the new addition. He now proposes to build the second-floor portion of the addition at a later date and keep his residence in its current location. Planning staff has no concerns about the second-story portion of the addition being built at a later date. The proposed dumpster and storage locations have been changed. Planner Chilcott noted Mr. Whyard had done a good job of screening the dumpster in its current location. Other minor changes include the material on the exterior of the addition and the location of windows. There being no further business, Chair Dill adjourned the meeting at 8:30 a.m. Cliff Dill, Chair Julie Roederer, Recording Secretary DRAFT
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission February 21, 2006,1:30 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Edward Pohl; Commissioners Wendell Amos, Ike Eisenlauer, George Hix, Betty Hull, Joyce Kitchen, and Doug Klink Attending: Commissioners Eisenlauer, Hix, Hull, Kitchen, Klink, and Pohl Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Town Board Liaison Homeier, Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, and Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Commissioner Amos, Planner Shirk 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 January 17, 2006. b. Preliminary Condominium Map, River's Edge Condominiums, NW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Section 16, T5N, R73W of the 6~ P.M., 1605 Fish Hatchery Road, Request to construct six previously approved duplex buildings providing twelve condominium units, Dallman Construction, Applicant. It was moved and seconded (Hull/Eisenlauer) that the Consent Agenda be accepted, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 3. MINOR SUBDIVISION PLAT, Shanafelt Subdivision, Lot 2, Prosser Subdivision, 1445 S. St. Vrain Avenue, Applicant: Gary & Christine Shanafelt Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. She stated this is a request for a minor subdivision to divide one lot into two. The lot is located at the corner of Tranquil Lane and Highway 7, is zoned RM-Mu#i-Fam#y Residen#a/, and is 1.62 acres in size. The applicant proposes to divide the lot into one 30,386-square-foot duplex lot (0.7 acres) and one 40,007-square-foot multi-family lot (0.92 acres). The proposed lots meet the lot size, dimensional standards, and configuration requirements of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). As it currently exists, the maximum allowable density on the lot would be thirteen units. If the proposed subdivision is approved, the maximum allowable density would be reduced by four units, with a development potential of seven units on proposed Lot. 2A and development on Lot 2B limited to the two existing duplex units. No development is currently proposed. If development on Lot 2A is proposed in the future, construction of three or more units would require Planning Commission review and Town Board approval. Development of fewer than four units could be approved at the staff level. A landscaped buffer is required between the property to the west zoned R- Residentia/ and the proposed duplex lot (Lot 2B). Staff recommends waiving this requirement since a duplex already exists on this lot and no additional-units can be built on the lot. Piatted limits of disturbance are not required or recommended. Staff recommends that the location of gas lines be shown on the plat and that the plat be rerouted to the Public Works Department and to Upper Thompson Sanitation
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 4 2 February 21, 2006 '. e District for their review and approval prior to Town Board review on March 28,2006. ISO calculations for fire protection have been submitted; the Fire Chief has not expressed any concerns about the calculations. Additional adequate public facilities standards,·including stormwater drainage and the.possible requirement of .a· traffic impact study, ~ will be, reviewed if development is proposed on Lot 2A. Staff is supportive of retaining *the existing access onto Colorado Highway 7 for the currerit residences and Any future development that may occur on the site. The construction of sidewalk is not recommended because a non-motorized trail is located directly across from the proposed lots along Highway 7. The driveway access easement is currently thirty Met wide. Planning staff has suggested that the applicant consider narrowing the driveway easement to twenty feet, the minimum width required, and shifting the easement to the north, which would provide a larger buildable area on proposed Lot 2A. This requ6st was submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and to adjacent neighbors for consideration and comment. Comments were received from the Town of Estes Park Public Works Department, Town Attorney Greg White, Upper Thompson Sanitation District, and Colorado Department of Transportation. Planning staff received calls and emails from a few neighbors concerned about the type of development that could occur on the proposed lots and how close to the adjoining property line future development. could be located. No written comments . were received from neighboring property owners. 0 , 1 , .1 . Public Comment: ,, Mike Carnes, 1047 Tranquil Lane, stated his objection to rezoding the lot from estate zoning to multi -family zoning, reducing the required setbacks, increasing density in the neighborhood, the height of buildings that may be'constructed in the future, the impact future development may have on the water pressure in the adjacent Tranquil Vale subdivision, and general objections to further deVelopment in his neighborhood. Discussion followed with Chair Pohl, Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, and Town - Attorney White each clarifying that the lot's zoning will not change-it has been zoned for multi-fAmily use for at least twenty years-the required setbacks will not change, and the allowable density on the proposed lots would actually decrease if the subdivision is approved. Building height is governed by the EVDC, which limits height to thirty feet. ' . 1.A There.was further discussion over Mr. Carnes' concerns about the lack of water pressure in the Tranquil Vale subdivision. Town Attorney White advised Mr. Carnes to address his concerns about the water pressure in the Tranquil Vale subdivision with ~the Town water departinent and the Town Utilities Committee. He clarified that this is not a development proposal, that the proposed subdivision meets all EVDC requirements and therefore cannot be recommended for disapproval by the Planning Commission. . Christine Collins, 1032 Tranquil Lane, requested clarification on the setbacks. Planner Chilcbtt stated that the wording in the statement of intent was incorrect. Although it refers to a reduction of setbacks, it is the setback from the new interior property line shared by the proposed lots, not the setbacks from the front property line or any neighbors' adjoining property lines. Ms. Collins stated her opposition to tlie subdivision request and her concern about not receiving notification of the request. She noted that she also has poor water pressure at her residence. Cliff Baker, 1062 Tranquil Lane, questioned the purpose of the meeting, the authority ·bf the Planning Commidsion, and who governs the density of development and changes of zoning. He also asked about the number of parking spaces required per unit and whether there is a requirement to provide room for a fire truck to turn around.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 February 21, 2006 Sue Phelps, 1070 Tranquil Lane, stated she shares concerns raised by other neighbors and that she had not received mailed notification. She questioned whether consideration is given to the appearance of proposed development. Meri Winkel, 1431 S. St. Vrain Avenue, questioned access to the proposed lots, stating her concern that traffic would be redirected past the front of her residence. Town Attorney White stated that whatever private property rights of access Ms. Winkle has are not affected by this decision and can't be changed by decision of the Planning Commission. Marilyn David, 1054 Tranquil Lane, requested and was provided a copy of the neighbor notification mailing list. She questioned whether consideration is given to required utilities or to neighbors' comments and stated her objection to development that may result in the loss of a "family" neighborhood. Drew Sartell, Van Horn Engineering and Surveying, was present to represent the applicant. He stated the owner does not wish to move the location of the driveway as recommended by staff. He reiterated that the existing lot has the development potential for thirteen units if the subdivision application is not approved. He stated the Shanafelts are long-time residents of the area and are reducing the development potential of the lot by proposing this subdivision. Commissioner Hull recommended a neighborhood meeting between the owners and the neighbors to clarify issues and address concerns. She and Chair Pohl thanked the neighboring property owners for their input. Commissioner Kitchen stated there is no legal obligation to mail notification to neighboring property owners; it is done as a courtesy. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Kitchen) to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision of Lot 2, Prosser Subdivision, to the Town Board of Trustees, with the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. CONDITIONS: 1. Plat approval shall be conditioned on comments in the affected agencies' memos, letters, and emails referred to in the staff report. 2. The preliminary plat shall be rerouted by Van Horn Engineering and Surveying to Public Works for their review and approval of the water service lines prior to Town Board review. 3. The preliminary plat shall be rerouted by Van Horn Engineering and Surveying to the Upper Thompson Sanitation District for their review and approval of the sewer service lines prior to Town Board review. 4. The location of gas lines shall be shown on the plat prior to Town Board review. The gas line to the existing duplex on proposed Lot 2B shall be relocated into one of the proposed utility easements along the property line if it crosses Lot 2A so the buildable area of Lot 2A is not limited. Chair Pohl declared a ten-minute recess at 3:05 p.m.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission , 4 February 21, 2006 4. AMENDED PLAT, Mary's Meadow Development, Lots 2,4, and Outlot A, Mary's Lake Replat of Mary's Lake Subdivision, AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 06-01 and PRELIMINARY CONDOMINIUM MAP, Mary's Meadow Development, Proposed Lot 4A, Mary's Meadow Replat of Mary's Lake Replat of Mary's Lake Subdivision, East of Mary's Lake Lodge at the intersection of Kiowa Drive and Mary's Lake Road, Applicant: Mary's Meadow Development, Inc. Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. She stated this is an amended plat application to consolidate three lots-Lots 2,4, and Outlot A of the Mary's Lake Replat-into two lots, proposed Lots 2A and 4A. The total land area is approximately 7.8 acres; proposed Lot 2A is approximately 2.7 acres and proposed Lot 4A is approximately five acres. The existing lots are zoned A-Accommodations/High*ay Corridor, no change in zoning is propoded. Density was transferred from Outlot A to Lots 2 and 4 when the Mary's Lake Subdivision was originally platted in 2000, so , r'emoval of Outlot A will.not result in an increase in density. i ,The lot size, dimensional standards, and configuration are appropriate for the location of the subdivision and for the type of development and use contemplated. The ®plicant has demonstrated that there are building sites on both lots. When Mary's Lake Subdivision was originally platted, Outlot A was created to h protect wetlands that were identified by TR Boss Environmental and Biological Consulting, and to, accept drainage from all lots in the subdivision except Lot 1. A second wetlands study was prepared in 2005 by Darcy Tiglas, who concluded that although two of the three required criteria for wetIAnds had been met, the third- hydrology requirements-was not met and therefore wetlands were not present on Outlot A. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers agreed with the conclusion. Planning staff finds that the area has value as wildlife habitat, and is supportive of the proposed elimination of Outlot A because a platted limits-of disturbance, a no-build area, is proposed, which would protect the area of greatest significance as open space. Drainage requirements changed with Larimer County's adoption of new stormwater drainage regulations in the summer of 2005. The drainage studies for the Mary's Lake Replat stated that no detention pond was required. The studies have been updated as part of this amended plat application and now state that detention is required. Detention facilities should be designed to improve the area's natural value and follow best-management practices. The Mary's Meadow development plan 06- 01 shows a preliminary drainage plan for a detention facility, .which will be revised. The applicaht and planning staff desire to enhance the wildlife value of the area and provide detention ponds that are natural in appearance. Multiple, smaller ponds are being considered; detention may need *to be split between Lots 2A and 4A. This is also a development plan application to build tAirty-five multi-family.residential units. Five single-family units, five duplexes (ten units), and five four-plexes (twenty units) are proposed. Six accessory buildings are also proposed-a 6,000-square- foot, two-story common building and five four-car garages. The plan meets all required density and dimensional standards. A maximum of forty-one residential , units or 123 accommodations units are permitted on the property. The development plan will also serve as the preliminary condominium map. Only one principal use-residential use-is proposed and a note to that effect should be added to the plat. Deed-restricted attainable housing is not proposed, and no density bonus has been requested. Residential use of the property does provide for rentals and the use of units as vacation homes, provided EVDC and municipal regulations are followed.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 5 February 21, 2006 Although residential use is an allowed use in the A-Accolhmodations zoning district, the accessory. use standards for the A zoning district are designed for accommodations development and are not appropriate for residential development. In order to address neighbors' concerns, the applicant has agreed to limit accessory uses to those found in the RM-Multi-Family Residential zoning district and staff recommends that a note stating so be added to the development plan. The total square footage of accessory buildings is limited based on the square footage of all principal buildings, but there is no limit on the number of *permitted accessory buildings in either the A or the RM zoning districts. In response to neighbors' concerns about the proliferation of future storage buildings, staff recommends that the number of additional accessory buildings be limited with this approval and that the applicant add a note to the plan stating the maximum number of additional buildings that will be allowed in the future. Staff recommends a maximum of five additional accessory buildings and/or a total of 2,000 square feet in additional accessory buildings be allowed; the applicant is supportive of this restriction. Proposed accessory rooms within the cbmmon building include a laundry facility, an art room, a library, a kitchen, and a meeting/dining room. Kitchen facilities in the proposed common building are for use by residents who wish to eat meals together; no restaurant is proposed. Staff believes the accessory rooms are incidental and customarily found uses/rooms in a residential common building. Because the community'building will provide storage space for residents, planning staff recommends the phasing of the development include construction of the community building early in the process. Proposed phase I includes the first two four-plexes, the community building, garages, and associated landscaping. Proposed phase 11 includes construction of the tri-plexes and the remainder of the parking. Planner Chilcott stated that staff recommends the phasing plan be revised so that all detention is constructed when 25% of the building permits have been issued for the entire Mary's Lake subdivision and noted that development may have already reached that point. Neighbors' concerns include the number of vehicles permitted on the property. Parking is an accessory use and is permitted only in designated parking spaces. Seventy-nine parking spaces are required; seventy are proposed, with areas reserved for the addition of nine parking spaces if demand requires their construction. Information should be provided on the development plan explaining when construction of these parking spaces will be triggered and their construction should be addressed in the phasing plan. Neighbors have also expressed concern about overflow parking spilling onto Kiowa Drive and have requested that required parking be constructed with each phase. Planner Chilcott noted that the developer is not allowed to use off-site parking, ihcluding parking along the Kiowa Drive right-of- way, during construction. Given the number of parking spaces shown on the plan, no recreational equipment or recreational vehicles will be allowed to be parked or stored on the property. The applicant may choose to further limit allowed accessory uses through private restrictive covenants. The property owners at 2824 Kiowa Trail have requested that the driveway entrance on Kiowa Drive be relocated so that headlights do not shine directly into their main window; this request has been shared with the applicant. Staff has recommended that at least 'one handicapped-accessible parking space be located near the common building. Planner Chilcott stated the proposed development plan does a good job of addressing operational and physical compatibility with existing use, with the exception that the location of trash receptacles should be further reviewed. Adequate public facility improvements for probosed Lot 4A are required to be installed or guaranteed prior to issuance of the first building permit, and
/ 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 6 February 21, 2006 improvements are required to be installed concurrent with the impacts of the development. The propos@d development complies with all applicable standards for outdoor storage, areas, activities, and mechanical equipment. No concerns were expressed by reviewing agencies about the provision, of water, sewer, or electric services to Lot 2A. . . . t. A traffic impact study was prepared arld reviewed with the Mary's Lake Replat in 2005; road-improvements were requited as a bondition of.plat approval. No further improvements are required with this plat. The study assumed development of fifty units on Lots 2 and 4 of the ~pry's Lake Replat; thirty-five units are proposed on Lot 4A. The study may need to be updated once development is proposed on Lot 2A. I. $ A twenty-foot-wide pedestrian easement was dedicated with · the Mary's Lake Subdivision plat and on the Mary's Lake'Replat and is accurately reflected on.this proposed plat., Planning staff recommends that the easement be relabeled and dedicated as a non-motorized trail easement, which is consistent with fhe trail plans for the area. I '1 It. is the obinion of planning staff that trail .construction along the 'Lot 2A and 4A proPS'ty lines adjacent to Mary's Lake Road was triggered with the Marits Lake Replat, although it was * agreed to· 'delay trail design and construction until a development plan for Lots 2 and 4, which is the area encompass'ed by proposed Mary's Meadow, was submitted. Estes Valley Recreation and Park District submitted a letter recommending trail construction. The property owners involved in the replat are not supportive of assuming responhibility for trail construction and will appeal the requirement to construct the trail to the Town Board at their March 14, 2006 meeting. The landscaping plah should be updated to be Oonsistent with the development plan, including any changes to'81raindge. Staff is supportive 6f installing landscaping along Kiowa Drive in phase 1, giveri concerns voiced by Kiowa Ridge property owners. The timing of detention pond construction and ' tile- associated landscaping requires further review and will be evaluated when plans are resubmitted prior to the March 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. Phasing for the open area and detention pond construction and landscaping should be separate from phasing of unit constructi6n on Lot 4A. I & Greg Sievers of the Public Works Department stated rfcent changes, in , the applicant's plans necessitates Fire Chief Scott Dorman's re-verification that the ten- foot-wide pedestrian path proposed,between the residences will provide adequate access for emergency vehicles. -. '* t, Proposed L6ts 2A and 4A are reverse-frontage lots. Building design may not be such that long, blank walls face Mary's Lake Road; additional lalidscaping may be needed to buffer Mary's Lake Road. This request was subthitted to all appilcable revibwing agency staff arld to adjacent neighbors for consideration and comment. Comments were received from the Town of Estes Park Department of Building Safety and Public Works Department, from Town Attorney Greg White, Estes Park Sanitation District, Estes Valley Recreation and Park District, Larimer County Engirieering Department, Larimer County Planning and Building Services Division, Colorado Department of Transportatign, and United States Army Corps of Engineers. Written comments were received from neighboring property owners Gilbert Thomas and Carol J. Gresslin of 2824 Kiowa Trail and from William G. Howell of 3025 Sioux Court. Planning staff met with adjacent property owners a humber of times and attended the Kiowa Ridge homeowners' association meetiAg in January to answer questions about Town review of the applications. , Neiohbors remain concerned with some aspectgof the proposed development which are beyond the scope of Town regulations and review. . C
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 7 February 21, 2006 Planner Chilcott noted that deve16pment plan approval does not obligate a property owner to build the approved units. The owner can request major or minor changes to the plan or discard the approved plan and submit a new plan for review and approval. The Estes Valley Development Code provides for minor modifications of up to ten percent to'be reviewed and approved by staff. Review by the Planning Commission is required for more significant changes. A finding that approval of this application will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other property in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) is required; however, planning staff needs additional information prior to making this evaluation. Due to the complexity of the project, planning staff recommends the amended plat, development plan 06-01, and the preliminary condominium map applications be continued to the March 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, with resubmittal of the applications with revised plans by Fet)roary 28, 2006 to address issues described in the staff findings portion of the staff report, including all affected agencies' comments that would necessitate changes to the plat. The revised plans will be posted on the Town website at www.estesnet.com/comdev/ CurrentRequests.htm the following week; there will not be mailed re-notification of neighbors or the additional publication of legal notice. Commissioner Hull questioned whether patrons of Mary's Lake Lodge would use the parking in the proposed Mary's Meadow development. Planner Chilcott noted that some parking for Mary's Meadow will be along Kiowa Trail, and reviewed the steps that were taken to address neighbors' concerns over the design of that road. Although the road is in a public easement, it will be privately maintained and posted at both ends with "Private, no through traffic" signs, which should minimize use of the parking spaces by Mary's Lake Lodge patrons. Public Comment: Frank Theis of CMS Planning and Design was piesent to represent the applicant. He provided a copy of the detention area concept plan. He has been working with wetlands expert Darcy Tiglas to design a plan that both enhances wildlife habitat and improves the detention. He noted the applicant's desire to create an area that will be an amenity for the property. He also stated he represents all developers of the Mary's Lake Replat in their opposition to constructing the required pedestrian trail at their expense. He noted there is ongoing negotiation with staff on this issue and that the developers intend to appeal the trail requirement before the Town Board. In response to a'question from Director Joseph, he stated the detention ponds shown on the concept plan may have seasonal standing water, depending on weather conditions. Chair Pohl questioned the applicant, Jim Tawney, whether he would agree to staff's recommendation of a continuance. Mr. Tawney stated he has postponed presenting these applications to the Planning Commission since December in an effort to address concerns raised by neighbors and planning staff and that he would be willing to continue the applications for one additional month. Joe Coop of Van Horn Engineering and Surveying was present to represent the applicant. Commissioner Hull stated her reservations about the parking plan and her desire to see all seventy-nine parking spaces constructed, as required by the EVDC. Mr. Coop stated that co-housing studies Ahow that number of parking spaces would not be required to meet the needs of residents. Commissioner Klink noted that if the co-housing plan failed and the units were to become condominiums at a later date, the Commissioners would have done a disservice to the community. Commissioners Hull and Klink also expressed their concern about emergency vehicle access to the units. Mr. Coop stated he would review the access with Fire Chief Dorman again and
. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission , 8 February 21, 2006 Mr. Tawney noted that the plan for emergency vehicle access is what was recommended by Fire Chief Dorman. Mr. Tawriey also rioted that the owner 6f Mary's Lake Lodge has purchased property from him in or~ler to provide adequate parking for the lodge. He reiterated that Kiowa Drive will be signed at both ends as a private road. He stated the proposed parking is appropriate for the co-housing concept and that he will market the development to people who are interested in co-housing. Tom Gresslin,·adjacent property owner of 2824 Kiowa Trail, highly praised Planner Chilcott for all her work on this proposal, noting that she has served as " an intermediary between neighboring property. owners and the developer when communication between them was strained. He stated he lives directly across the street from the proposed development and has no objection to it. He noted that , planning staff has done much and the developer has agreed to many changes to address his conberns. He stated the proposed driveway coming out of the parking area is on an upward slant and pointed directly at his bay window. He requested that the applicant move driveway to the other end of parking lot, noting there is vacant land to theeast of his property all the way to Highway 7. He reminded Plarining ., Commissioner& that they must ensure there is no injury to other property in the neighborhood and stated the current egress from the parking area would injure his property. He requested that the Commissioners deny the applicant's request to . reduce the amount of parking provided. .He.requested the location of the common building be changed so the building is closer to the lodge and the residential units are closer to nei6hboring residential properties, stating " that would provide 1, development that was more consistent with adjacent properties. He also requested that the applicant provide more concrete information on covenants and restrictions , for the development, noting thaf co-housing in the Denver ared has shacks, chickens, and pigs on the property. Commissioner Hull asked Mr. Tawney whether the driveway from the parking area could be moved. Mr. Tawney stated.that moving the drive could impact a future owner. Chair Pohl pointed out that thdre is no choice for Mr. Gresslin, but a future owner of an adjacent lot could choose where' to place a window to eliminate the, problem of car lights shining into it. Joe Foro, neighboring property owner of 2800 Kiowa Trail, stated he has spoken in favor of other development in this area and that he does not oppose multi-family development. He stated he has not received positive two-way feedback from the developer about what the proposed deyelopment will look like iR the future. He stated his home is approximately 150 feet from the front door „of the proposed common building and listed multiple concerns with the possible future use of the common building, including community gatherings every night. He stated e does not wish to look out his front window at a common building that may have a bus or snowplow parked there all the time. He reminded Commissioners about the EVDC requirement that development be consistent with surrounding neighborhoods. He stated his concern about the lack of garages for the residences and about co- housing developments in Denver and Boulder that are in various stages of deterioration. He would like to see controls placed on this project. Mr. Tawney stated that not all current co-housing. is deteriorating; some co-housing developments are city showpieces. He remirided Commissioners,that the issue of protective covenants is not a part of the development plan process and stated one of the parts of co-housing is the process of consensus building among residents. As the developer and owner of the property, he is trying to create a structure that will allow the eventual residents of the development power over the covenants. Chair Pohl and Town Attorney White confirmed that rdview of covenants is not part of the development plan application process. Town Attorney White noted that covenants
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 9 February 21, 2006 are reviewed when the final condominium map application is processed; the covenants are not reviewed for use regulations, they are reviewed for consistency with Town regulations on things such as density and declarant's rights. Mr. Tawney went on to note that co-housing is a viable housing option for teachers, town and hospital employees, and other working members of the community, noting that his vision of shared transportation is not a big bus, as Mr. Ford alluded, but rather four or five people car-pooling to work. Commissioner Kitchen encouraged the applicant to consider redesigning the parking egress to eliminate car lights shining into Mr. Gresslin's window. In order to receive more information on the proposed detention area, on the comments made by the Public Works Department, on the emergency vehicle access to the proposed residential units, and on the proposed number of parking spaces, it was moved and seconded (Hull/Klink) to continue the Amended Plat request for Mary's Meadow Development, Lots 2,4, and Outlet A, Mary's Lake Replat of Mary's Lake Subdivision, and the Development Plan 06-01 and the Preliminary Condominium Map requests, Mary's Meadow Replat of Mary's Lake Replat of Mary's Lake Subdivision, to the March 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent 5. REPORTS None. Director Joseph expressed his appreciation for Planner Chilcott's hard work on the Mary's Meadow development proposal. He stated she has done an outstanding job and further expressed his appreciation of her work as Acting Director while he was out of town. Chair Pohl expressed his appreciation of Mr. Tawney's willingness to continue his requests to the next Planning Commission meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:53 p.m. Edward B. Pohl, 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 Date: February 22,2006 Subject: Park River West Condominiums, Supplemental Condominium Map, Phase XIX, Lots 1 and 2, Park River West Subdivision, Richard H. Wille TrusUApplicant Background. Richard H. Wille Trust has submitted a supplemental condominium map application for Park River West Phase XIX. Phase XIX consists of five units, Units 605,607, and 609 in Building 21 located on Lot 1, Park River West Subdivision and Units 668 and 670 in Building 4 located on Lot 2, Park River West Subdivision. The site is adjacent to River Rock Condominiums on Moraine Avenue (CO Highway 36). Lots 1 and 2 of the Park River West Subdivision are zoned "RM" Multi-Family Residential. The condominium map is consistent with the approved development plan with the exception of the proposed finished floor elevations. An as-built development plan is required once construction of improvements is completed. Location Map The Town Board approved a Supplemental Condominium Map for Park River West Phase 4 XVI11 at the November 22,2005 meeting. .t 4 1 ./ i : Budget. Ce ar Ridge Ci cle . / None. CD 4 02%» 40. 6 rh i 91 0/,4 02 .1 60 Action. O 0 Approval of the Supplemental Condominium 8 Map for Park River West Phase XIX. Ri r PI.
Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Alison Chilcott, Planner 11 Date: February 22,2006 Subject: Solitude I Condominiums, Supplemental Condominium Map #4, Lot 1, Solitude Subdivision, Fish Creek Properties, LLC/Applicant Background. The applicant, Fish Creek Properties, LLC, has submitted a supplemental condominium map application for Solitude I Condominiums. This consists of two units, Units 4 and 6 on Lot 1, Solitude Subdivision, addressed 1890 Sketch Box Lane. The lot is zoned "A" Accommodations/Highway Corridor. This map and declaration do not reserve the right to develop additional units beyond those approved with Development Plan #02-14, expand units, or withdraw property from the association. Development Plan #02-14 has been approved for ten resort lodge/cabins on this lot. One unit remains to be condominiumized. An as-built plan is required once construction of improvements is completed. The Town Board approved Supplemental Map #3 at the July 26,2005 meeting. Budget. | 1.•KE )1 ESTES None. 9-2=Zn--_»eall=_2- -- 7#97~ Action. iP'i44¢34 Approval of Solitude I Condominiums . Lot 4 Supplemental Condominium Map #4. - - ~ SCHOOLS l*E-r~*,r· Lot 3 CROCKER RANICH BRODIE AVE =2 99¢4- SOLITUDE SUB. Lot 6 flh- t:8==r- _ Lot 2 18 HOLE 111 C~L Lot 1 VICINITY MAP rA | 1" = 1,000' +/-
Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Alison Chilcott, Planner 11 Date: February 22,2006 Subject: Sundance Supplemental Map #3 Sierra Sage Lane - Off Fall River Road Tract 69B of the First Replat of Tract 69 Fall River Addition Background. The applicant, Brian Murphy, LLC, has submitted a supplemental condominium map application for Sundance Condominiums on Tract 69B of the First Replat of Tract 69, Fall River Addition. Supplemental Map #3 consists of one unit, Unit 2, addressed 1411 Sierra Sage Lane. The final map is consistent with the approved development plan. This is a 6.77-acre lot, zoned "RM" Multi-Family Residential. ' Ten residential units are shown on the preliminary map, and this is the third unit to be condominiumized. At the June 28,2005 meeting, the Town Board approved the second supplemental map for Sundance Condominiums. Budget. None. - ROCKY WOUNT- r.nON,L .. BUK>ARY Action. --7 .... il = , 1.- € Approval of the Sundance Supplemental ,-,r:76;•46/ -7-r- -= r=-1 Condominium Map #3 application conditioned on IE~gzlzE,-- LE(Fillrhxbck'*-e clarification/removal of the LCE leader arrow on ----1~ 1.1--!-»t the northwest side on Unit 2. N .,cs- .. - 1 -1 -0--;1 lilli 1 .1 VICINTY MAP . ···.- : .' . r 7
I J*; Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Dave Shirk, Planner·~0$ Date: February 28,2006 Subject: Thunder Canyon, Supplemental Condominium Map #4 Background. On April 13, 2004, the , 1 -- 1 ........Lic.7-3--r....»---t---7·:.+ + *11 Town Board approved the map of the f- -3 2 Thunder Canyon Condominiums, which -_--..=-.1.~+1„"···~···1--·1···"F"'~---~1~-~- I , 1 . : Site 9 1 i 1 ... \ I are currently under construction. 71 ! This is the fourth supplemental map, --# ---*--* 2 :1 1 vi# '- ht</>t-..f... .:.2/f,J ~ which finalizes buildings C,D, E, and F. r 1*---4.. ...1, : ... ..'.....- A ·4 77 / Condominium maps cannot be finalized Stanley Hotel 't-··-~Ir,; ···y 4.' ' JU , /7.,V .1 1 '",/ until they are substantially complete, ta- J.Ji~ £-~'' 3 which is why this map is before the ,--- -·( i i . ....r >..... Town Board now. N H \ i......1........1.......1-- : p/ :/1\ The site is located at 720 Black Canyon Drive, and there is one unit left to be finalized. Budget. N/A Action. Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Second Supplemental Condominium Map of Thunder Canyon Condominiums CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Compliance with Development Plan 03-12 "Thunder Canyon;" 2. The units being finalized shall be delineated with a heavier line weight than other units shown; 3. The Town Engineer signature block shall be removed from the map. 4. The condominium declarations shall be amended to preclude parking in front of buildings E and F.
Town Clerk's Office Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Date: February 8,2006 Subject: Liquor-License Transfer - SPUR 66 LIQUOR Background: Spur 66 Liquor held their Retail Liquor Store License as a partnership. They are now applying for a Transfer of Ownership of the license as a corporation (Spur Liquor Inc.). Donald and Darcy Spomer remain the owners of the business. A change of this nature requires a formal transfer of ownership and the application is being presented for your consideration. The current license does not expire until April 6th. Budget N/A Action: Staff recommends approval of the Transfer of Ownership Application filed by the Spur Liquor Inc. 1
£ I Town Clerk's Office Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Repola From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Date: - February 23,2006 Subject: Liquor License Transfer - East Side Food Store Background. The East Side Food Store located at 381 S. St. Vrain Ave. has a 3.2% beer off- premise license held by Thomas Kim. Everest Food Store LLC is the new owner/operator. They are requesting a transfer of the current liquor license that is due to expire on April 28,2006. The new owner has submitted all necessary forms and payment. The Town Clerk's office has reviewed the Town Boards policy for TIPS training and the applicant is in the process of scheduling the training. Budget: N/A Action: Staff recommends approval of the Transfer of Ownership Application filed by Everest Food Store LLC.
Estes Valley Multicultural Connections Las Conexiones Multiculturales del Valle de Estes Public Services & Private Businesses SERVICIOS SOCIALES ELL & Education Issues , POBLICOS y PRIVADOS ELL y TEMAS DE EDUCATION i ' Housing j TEMAS DE WRIENDA U I ~ i Health Issues TEMAS DE SA„ 1 9 •.It. 1./l/,13 Jobs k x Legal System TEMAS LABORALES - ASUNTOS LEGALE, Social and Religious Events EVENTOS SOCIALES y RELIGIOSOS
FAX (970) 586-0189 Claudine Perrault Director Phone (970) 586-8116 cperrault@estes.lib.co.us ESTES PARK PUBLIC LIBRARY Estes Valley Public Library District http://www.estes.lib.co.us Jackie Williamson January 16, 2006 Clerk, Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Ms. Williamson: Mr. Marshall Hesler resigned from the Estes Valley Public Library District (E-VPLD) Board of Trustees effective December 19,2005. The Board received two new applications and reconsidered three previous applicants for this vacant position. The Board interviewed each applicant and is recommending that Marjorie Drew Corcoran be appointed to a 1-year term that would terminate on December 31, 2006. This short interim term is necessary in order to bring the trustee appointment schedule into a better rotation sequence than currently exists. Maljorie Corcoran currently owns and manages the Mountain Home Cafd in Estes Park and has over 20 years of small business management experience. The EVPLD Board of Trustees believes that this experience will be very valuable for understanding the needs of the Estes Valley business community that can be satisfied by the Estes Park Public Library. Ms. Corcoran has previously been a board member and treasurer for the Senior Center, Habitat for Humanity, Estes Valley Land Trust, Estes Park Music Festival and the Estes Park Woman's Club. This past financial experience will be very beneficial to the EVPLD Board in helping to ensure that our budget and finances are accurate. We believe that Ms. Corcoran has the education, career experience, and enthusiasm to make an effective and valuable Board member. The EVPLD Board of Trustees respectfully requests that the Town Board approve Marjorie Corcoran's appointment as an EVPLD Trustee at its earliest convenience. Sincerely, - '10 90»»3 Jufie Parker, President EVPLD Board of Trustees RO. BOX 1687 • 335 EAST ELKHORN AVENUE . ESTES PARK, CO 80517
Sales Tax Report: 2005 330!#0 eoueu!:1 - pueVe:pl/\1 GAelS
1- 0 0 00 4 0 co - f M- i T T \\\ 4 <C 1 J 4 - \A > - Z 0 0 CD CO J 6AV *0-ZO 000'000'4$ $7,000,000 $6,971,262 88'ZE*'95 --- $6,000,000 $6,170,731 Actual e IN Jdv J BIN qeJ uer Standard Deviations of Cumulative Sales Tax Revenue $8,000,000 $5,000,000 000'000'€$ 000'000'2$ 000'000'LE 0$
'Ani JAV Jo 342) % 01&1 ZI 2 £ 1,5 0 1 , 0% C. 2 0%% aluoiu~ Estes Park Sales Tax Trends $600,000 - - 20% - 15% $6,422,910 - 10% %51- - $535,243 560E- ''''l'111'11'1111'11 >Of°/f/°// ot tft»//2/71 Estes Park Sales Tax Trends Cok QUI z I) JEOU!1 - COA¥ OFY ZI) le@U!7 - % 0111 ZI - 0Av ow El - 1 $500,000 $400,000 000'00£$ 000'OOES 000'001$
$6,000,000 - - . . I Sales tax revenues $5,000 000 $4,000,000 - .11 9001 *001 GOOZ ZOOZ LOOZ 0001 666L 866K 266X 966L 966K *66 L £66L 166L L66 L 066L 686L 886L 286X 986L 986L $7,000,000 - 000'000'£$ I,. - 000'000'Z$ - - - - 000'0007$ -0$
0 hl 3 H 1 0 ¤ DNIallne?h!36]INnlI 000'000'4 All1Iln ¤ 3SaNHOhllN 1¥k33N39¤ SNISOO1I : 000'000'22 00030 1 GOOZ *OOZ £001 2002 SALES TAX -MAJOR CATEGORIES 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 000'000'Z 000'000'L
~2· 1 _4 -O ce O O 60% OOTHER SNIallnB 9 B38INA-Ii All 1Iln 0 3SaNHONIN 1¥h!3N39O S N I 9 0 01 I 000=10 9001 *001 £001 1002 SALES TAX - MAJOR CATEGORIES BY % 100% 80% %02
0 ($) senueAei xel Sales- slunoo uoueus!A dNINkl - 9£/*€ Sn slunoo 0!JJeil 000'000'£ TRENDS 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 000'000'4 000'000'Z 000'000' L gooz 4002 £001 ZOOE LOOZ 00oz 666L 866L Z66L 966K 966:
.. 1 Ill ~l 0 ($) senueAej xe; sales- 000'000'* uoue!1!s!A dNIAIN - (9£/,£ Sn) sjunoo 0!ueil Ido snu!Ul Xel Smes- 000'000'£ 9001 *001 £001 1001 LOOZ 0001 666K 866L Z66L 966K 966J TRENDS 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 000'000'Z 000'000'L
.. 1 h : 0 (E) Senl.laAeJ Xel sales- 000'000'4 uoileus!/\ d NINhl- (98/4£ sn) sjunoo o!#eil - Sales tax minus CPI 9001 *001 £001 1001 LOOZ 00oz 666t 866K 266X 966J 966L TRENDS 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 000'000'€ 000'000'Z 000'000' L
.. POWERPOINT PRESENTATION/NARRATIVE BOARD MEETING - FEBRUARY 28,2006 1. Intro 2. Std deviation o f Cumulative Sales Tax Revenue a. 2005 revenues exceeded 2002-04 avg by 4%. b. 2005 fell between avg and +1 SD. 3. Estes Park Sales tax trends a. Top line reports sales tax revenues by 12-month MA. Slope is positive (y axis on left). Currently at an all time high ($535K/month). b. Purple line is the change of the 12MA on a month basis. For example, we're increasing at the rate of 1.91% per year. Slope is positive (y axis on right). What you want is for the purple line to stay above the slope line, and certainly above 0. 4. Sales tax revenues (20 years). a. 2005 an all time high! 5. Sales tax major categories a. Food, lodging, retail pretty steady. 6. Sales tax - major categories by % a. Food and lodging greater percentage than ever before. Retail smallest % in past 4 years. b. Utilities increased obviously. 7. Trends a. While RMNP and traffic counts appear flat, sales tax is increasing. 8. Trends a. However, i f you factor out CPI, the line flattens out considerably (dark blue to light blue). 9. Trends a. If sloping lines are added, you can see that real Town revenues are still increasing slightly faster than traffic and Park counts.