The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2008-02-12FILE Prepared 1 /28/08 *Revised 1111 TOWN Of ESTES PARK The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY: Town Clerk Williamson, Officer Rudy Solano and Officer Jeremiah Polucha. MUSEUM ADVISORY BOARD RECOGNITION. Director Kilsdonk. PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 22,2008. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, January 23,2008: Police 1. Estes Valley Victim Advocates Contract - $7,500 Budgeted. 2. 2008 Dodge Charger, vehicle replacement fund - $21,362 Budgeted. B. Community Development, February 7,2008: CVB 1. Horse Contracts: a. Rocky Mountain Miniature Horse Club - June 18th-22nd b. Team Penning Event - July 18th-200 c. Colorado Arabian Horse Club - July 2nd -July 6th. d. Westwood Equestrian Development - June 26th-29th e. Colorado Springs Dressage Association - July 18~h-2001 f. Colorado Junior Rodeo Association - August 15th-17# 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ORDINANCE # 01-08 LIONS CLUB STANLEY FAIRGROUND CONCESSION STAND LEASE. Director Pickering. 2. RESOLUTION #4-08 RE-APPROPRIATION OF 2007 ENCUMBERED FUNDS TO THE 2008 BUDGET. Finance Officer McFarland. 3. 4~h QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland. 4. ADOPTION OF 2008 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. Administrator Halburnt. 5. MARY'S LAKE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY DESIGN MODIFICATION/ EXPANSION - PHASE 1 - Director Goehring. 6. APPEAL OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION. Director Joseph. Mayor Baudek: Open the Public Hearing (A). The formal public hearing will be conducted as follows: â€¢ Mayor - Open Public Hearing â€¢ Staff Report â€¢ Appellant Presentation â€¢ Public Testimony â€¢ Mayor - Close Public Hearing â€¢ Board Discussion & Motion to Approve/Deny. Appeal of Staff's determination that the commercial roasting operation by Kind Coffee LLC located at 552 W. Elkhorn Avenue is a use by right in the "CO" Commercial Outlying zoning district, Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association/Applicant. 7. FIRE DEPARTMENT FEE FOR SERVICE IN THE COUNTY. Administrator Halburnt and Chief Dorman. a. First Amendment to the Larimer County Fire Agency Intergovernmental Agreement for Fire Department service area outside Town limits. b. Fire District Taskforce. 8. STANLEY FAIRGROUNDS MULTI-USE BARN CONCEPT AND FINANCING. Administrator Halburnt. 9. ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY LOAN REQUEST. Director Smith. 10.TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. 11.ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the AnpnrIA w,q nrenprpri 02/08/2008 FRI 14:53 FAX 9705862816 EP Administration @001 *************************** *** FAX MULTI TX REPORT *** *************************** JOB NO. 0011 PGS. 2 TX/RX INCOMPLETE ----- TRANSACTION OK 6672527 5869532 5866336 5861691 6353677 2247899 5771590 ERROR 5869561 Prepared 1 /28/08 i *Revised . 111 TOWN Of ESTES PARK The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7-00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY: Town Clerk Williamson, Officer Rudy Solano and Officer Jeremiah Polucha. MUSEUM ADVISORY BOARD RECOGNITION. Director Kilsdonk. PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 22,2008. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A Ch iklir <Ze,fatw lan,ion, 91 9AARÂ· 02/08/2008 FRI 14:53 iR3045 ~001 ***************** *** TX REPORT *** ***************** JOB NO. 0011 ST. TIME 02/08 14:39 PGS. 2 SEND DOCUMENT NAME TX/RX INCOMPLETE ----- TRANSACTION OK 6672527 5869532 5866336 5861691 6353677 2247899 5771590 erose@estes. org Eric Rose ERROR 5869561 Prepared 1/28/08 *Revised ~ TOWN OF ESTES PARK The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, ' high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY: Town Clerk Williamson, Officer Rudy Solano and Officer Jeremiah Polucha. MUSEUM ADVISORY BOARD RECOGNITION. Director Kilsdonk. PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 22,2008. 2. Bills. Prepared 1 /28/08 *Revised Ill TOWN Of ESTES PARK The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY: Town Clerk Williamson, Officer Rudy Solano and Officer Jeremiah Polucha. MUSEUM ADVISORY BOARD RECOGNITION. Director Kilsdonk. PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 22,2008. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, January 23,2008: Police 1. Estes Valley Victim Advocates Contract - $7,500 Budgeted. 2. 2008 Dodge Charger, vehicle replacement fund - $21,362 Budgeted. B. Community Development, February 7,2008: CVB 1. Horse Contracts: a. Rocky Mountain Miniature Horse Club - June 18th-22nd b. Team Penning Event - July 18th-20th. c. Colorado Arabian Horse Club - July 2nd-July 6th d. Westwood Equestrian Development - June 26th-29.1. e. Colorado Springs Dressage Association - July 18th-20th f. Colorado Junior Rodeo Association - August 15th-17th 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ORDINANCE # 01-08 LIONS CLUB STANLEY FAIRGROUND CONCESSION STAND LEASE. Director Pickering. 2. RESOLUTION #4-08 RE-APPROPRIATION OF 2007 ENCUMBERED FUNDS TO THE 2008 BUDGET. Finance Officer McFarland. 3. 4~h QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland. 4. ADOPTION OF 2008 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. Administrator Halburnt. 5. MARY'S LAKE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY DESIGN MODIFICATION/ EXPANSION - PHASE 1 - Director Goehring. 6. APPEAL OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION. Director Joseph. Mayor Baudek: Open the Public Hearing (A). The formal public hearing will be conducted as follows: â€¢ Mayor - Open Public Hearing â€¢ Staff Report â€¢ Appellant Presentation â€¢ Public Testimony â€¢ Mayor - Close Public Hearing â€¢ Board Discussion & Motion to Approve/Deny. Appeal of Staff's determination that the commercial roasting operation by Kind Coffee LLC located at 552 W. Elkhorn Avenue is a use by right in the "CO" Commercial Outlying zoning district, Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association/Applicant. 7. FIRE DEPARTMENT FEE FOR SERVICE IN THE COUNTY. Administrator Halburnt and Chief Dorman. a. First Amendment to the Larimer County Fire Agency Intergovernmental Agreement for Fire Department service area outside Town limits. b. Fire District Taskforce. 8. STANLEY FAIRGROUNDS MULTI-USE BARN CONCEPT AND FINANCING. Administrator Halburnt. 9. ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY LOAN REQUEST. Director Smith. 10.TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. 11.ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the ArlenrIA wAQ nrer,Arpri 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ORDINANCE # 01-08 LIONS CLUB STANLEY FAIRGROUND CONCESSION STAND LEASE. Director Pickering. 2. RESOLUTION #4-08 RE-APPROPRIATION OF 2007 ENCUMBERED FUNDS TO THE 2008 BUDGET. Finance Officer McFarland. 3. 4th QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland. 4. ADOPTION OF 2008 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. Administrator Halburnt. 5. MARY'S LAKE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY DESIGN MODIFICATION/ EXPANSION - PHASE 1 - Director Goehring. 6. APPEAL OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION. Director Joseph. Mayor Baudek: Open the Public Hearing (A). The formal public hearing will be conducted as follows: â€¢ Mayor - Open Public Hearing â€¢ Staff Report â€¢ Appellant Presentation â€¢ Public Testimony â€¢ Mayor - Close Public Hearing â€¢ Board Discussion & Motion to Approve/Deny. Appeal of Staff's determination that the commercial roasting operation by Kind Coffee LLC located at 552 W. Elkhorn Avenue is a use by right in the "CO" Commercial Outlying zoning district, Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association/Applicant. 7. FIRE DEPARTMENT FEE FOR SERVICE IN THE COUNTY. Administrator Halburnt and Chief Dorman. a. First Amendment to the Larimer County Fire Agency Intergovernmental Agreement for Fire Department service area outside Town limits. b. Fire District Taskforce. 8. STANLEY FAIRGROUNDS MULTI-USE BARN CONCEPT AND FINANCING. Administrator Halburnt. 9. ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY LOAN REQUEST. Director Smith. 10.TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. 11. ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the AnpnrIA wAQ nrenprpri Prepared 1/28/08 *Revised ~ TOWN Of {STES PARK The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY: Town Clerk Williamson, Officer Rudy Solano and Officer Jeremiah Polucha. MUSEUM ADVISORY BOARD RECOGNITION. Director Kilsdonk. PUBLIC COMMENT (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 22,2008. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, January 23,2008: Police 1. Estes Valley Victim Advocates Contract - $7,500 Budgeted. 2. 2008 Dodge Charger, vehicle replacement fund - $21,362 Budgeted. B. Community Development, February 7,2008: CVB 1. Horse Contracts: a. Rocky Mountain Miniature Horse Club - June 18th-22nd b. Team Penning Event - July 18th-200 c. Colorado Arabian Horse Club - July 2nd-July 6th d. Westwood Equestrian Development - June 26th-29th* e. Colorado Springs Dressage Association - July 18th-20m f. Colorado Junior Rodeo Association - August 15th-17th. Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 22,2008 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 22nd day of January, 2008. Meeting called to order by Mayor Baudek. Present: John Baudek, Mayor Bill Pinkham, Mayor ProTem Trustees Eric Blackhurst Dorla Eisenlauer Richard Homeier Chuck Levine Wayne Newsom Also Present: Greg White, Town Attorney Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator Lowell Richardson, Deputy Town Administrator Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Absent: None Mayor Baudek called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and invited any person desiring to participate to stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY. Chief Richardson stated James Kenny was promoted to Sergeant approximately one year ago and has met his probationary period. Town Clerk Williamson conducted a Swearing in Ceremony for the promotion of James Kenney to Sergeant. PUBLIC COMMENT. None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. Trustee Levine congratulated Deputy Town Administrator Richardson on his recent promotion. Trustee Blackhurst read a prepared statement regarding his position as a Trustee. He stated he is a volunteer to this community and takes his oath of office seriously. He spoke to the recent verbal attacks in the media and in person including the insinuation that the Board has violated the law; accusations of profiting from his position as Trustee; and Trustee property damaged both personal and business related. He hopes that the community can engage in a civil and respectful process that weighs many views and ideas moving forward. Town Clerk Williamson reviewed the upcoming election process. The election will be held April 1, 2008. Qualified electors of the Town of Estes Park will elect three Trustees, a Mayor and vote on an Initiated Ordinance requiring the sale of any property owned by the Town of Estes Park within the Stanley Historic District. Those elected, will take office on Tuesday, April 8,2008 and all will serve for four years. Candidates may begin circulating their Nomination Petitions on Monday, February 11 th, and the submittal deadline is Friday, February 29th. All candidates must be a resident of the Town for the 12 months prior to the election. Residents must be registered to vote, and rd the voter registration deadline is Monday, March 3 . Early voting will be conducted through Absentee Ballot and applications are available in the Town Clerk's office. Mayor Baudek commented on the lack of response by the Board to recent accusations. He stated the Board wants to hear from the public and encourages citizens to come forward to discuss issues by creating an environment that is not critical or negative. He Board of Trustees - January 22,2008 - Page 2 addressed Mr. Nichols comments that the Trustees are not always right, but they are certainly unanimous. He stated much of the Board's duties are routine in nature and a split vote would not be accepted. The Town operates on a committee level with major issues discussed at the Committee meetings prior to being discussed by the Board. He also addressed the implied statement by Mr. Nichols that the Board took improper action by discussing the Initiated Ordinance in an Executive Session. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated January 8, 2008 and Study Session Minutes January 8,2008. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Utilities, January 17, 2008. 4. Intent to Annex Resolution #3-08 - Kundtz Addition, Phase 1,11 and 111. Public Hearing scheduled April 22,2008. 5. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, December 4, 2007 (acknowledgement only). 6. Estes Valley Planning Commission, December 18, 2007 (acknowledgement only). It was moved and seconded (Pinkham/Levine) the Consent Agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ESTES PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY - REQUEST EXTENSION OF NOTE FOR THE PINE KNOLL APARTMENT PURCHASE. Town Administrator Halburnt reviewed the $2.7 million loan with EPHA. This loan is spread out over several funds with revenues budgeted for 2008. The General Fund anticipated $850,000 in revenue with the repayment of the loan in 2008 and an ending fund balance of 29%. If the loan is extended as requested by the EPHA, the ending fund balance in the General Fund would decrease to 22%. The Town's options if the loan is not repaid in 2008 include requesting EPHA to seek a market rate loan, foreclosure on the property, sue EPHA and declare the note in default or recommend an extension of the note. Rita Kurelja/Director of EPHA stated the Housing Authority is requesting a two year extension of the Promissory Note held by the Town, dated June 1, 2006 with an expiration date of June 1, 2008. The original amount of the note was $2.7 million. A principal payment was made in the amount of $90,000, making the current principal $2.61 million. The original interest rate was 3.63% and as per the current note the interest rate adjusted in June of 2007 to 5.43%. EPHA has been making quarterly interest payments to the Town and if the extension is approved, those payments would continue and the note would expire on June 1, 2010. In order to help with the interest payments, the EPHA will rent units in one building on the open market. Discussion followed and is summarized: EPHA was formed by the Town and should be supported, EPHA was asked to take on the project by the ToWn, perhaps the Town is overbuilt with condominiums, EPHA should investigate a market rate loan and the effects on the rents for the affordable units, the Town Board of Trustees - January 22,2008 - Page 3 has other projects moving forward and can not sustain an extension of the loan. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Homeier) the Estes Park Housing Authority should investigate a market rate loan and report back to the Town Board at the second meeting in February with Trustee Blackhurst and Mayor ProTem Pinkham recusing themselves from the vote. 2. SUPPORTERS OF THE PERFORMING ARTS (SOPA) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between SOPA and the Town of Estes Park has been drafted to outline the responsibilities of each party with regard to a performing arts theater. This MOU should be considered a broad outline of the basic considerations. If SOPA raises 100% of the money required for construction of the performing arts theater, the Town would enter into another agreement at that time outlining more specific details. SOPA would be responsible for the operations, management and maintenance of the theater. In exchange, the Town would provide the building site, site preparation contingent upon the sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District, and would provide an annual subsidy of $217,000, based upon annual appropriation of the funds. This MOU may be voided on December 31, 2009 if the Town does not close the sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District and/or SOPA has not raised 100% of the construction costs. This does not preclude a future Town Board from entering into a new MOU at that time. Discussion followed and is summarized: the Board questioned the perpetuity of the annual subsidy of $217,000/year and if is should be scaled back over time; SOPA would be responsible for operating the theater and limiting the Town's exposure; SOPA would be responsible for site preparation if Lot 4, Stanley Historic District does not sell; the MOU aids SOPA in fundraising by establishing Town support for the project. After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Eisenlauer/Newsom) to approve a Memorandum of Understanding between the Supporter of the Performing Arts and the Town of Estes Park outlining the responsibilities of each party for a performing arts theater, and it passed unanimously. 3. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. â€¢ A joint meeting of the Town Board, County Commissioner and Planning Commission would be held on January 29th at 3:00 p.m. at the Conference Center to discuss land use issues. No public comment will be heard at this meeting; however, the community is welcome to attend. 4. ADJOURN. Whereupon Mayor Baudek adjourned the meeting at 7:59 p.m. John Baudek, Mayor Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 23,2008 Minutes of a Special meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 23rd day of January, 2008. Committee: Chairman Newsom, Trustees Blackhurst and Eisenlauer Attending: Chairman Newsom, Trustees Blackhurst and Eisenlauer Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Chief Dorman, Mayor Baudek, Mayor Pro Tem Pinkham, Trustee Levine, Trustee Homeier, and Deputy Clerk Deats Absent: None Chair Newsom called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT. None REPORTS. 1. Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Educational Coordinator's Year End Report - Sue Pinkham addressed the Committee to report on activities she was involved in during 2007 as the WUI Educational Coordinator. The position is funded by a grant and provides the opportunity to work with the US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado State Forest Service, Larimer County, and the Town of Estes Park to provide education regarding wildfires, defensible space, and the pine beetle issue. Ms. Pinkham participated in training, events, and programs including: Public Information Officer (PIO) refresher training, firefighter recertification, basic first aid refresher, the Duck Race, the Wildfire Fair, the Tree Symposium, the Farmer's Market, the Arts & Crafts Fair, Elk Fest, slash collection, and property evaluations/surveys for individual homeowners and homeowners associations. Ms. Pinkham will continue to provide fire mitigation education at upcoming local events and respond to individual requests for property evaluations under the supervision of Fire Chief Dorman. 2. Larimer County Drug Task Force - Lt. Craig Dodd reported on the multi- jurisdictional drug task force that allows for information sharing and provides opportunities for federal grant funding options for the partnering agencies. The task force uses a three tier approach to operations providing 1. Education through presentations, programs, legislation, and training; 2. Enforcement by utilizing anonymous tip lines, intelligence sharing meetings, GPS tracking, and cameras; and 3. Treatment through intervention by Juvenile and Adult Drug Courts, and School Resource Officers. POLICE DEPARTMENT. ESTES VALLEY VICTIM ADVOCATES CONTRACT RENEWAL - REQUEST APPROVAL. The Estes Valley Victim Advocates receive funding annually from the Town of Estes Park for services rendered to crime victims who are residents of Estes Park. The Police Department has reviewed the contract presented for 2008 with Town Attorney White and found there to be no concerns or recommended changes for this year's contract. The Committee recommends approval of the 2008 contract as presented at a cost of $7,500 from account #101-2100-421-22-98 budgeted. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety Committee - January 23,2008 - Page 2 PATROL CAR AND EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT - REQUEST APPROVAL. The 2008 Vehicle Replacement Fund (635-7000-435-34-42) includes $24,500 for the replacement of Patrol Vehicle G102C, a 2002 Ford Crown Victoria. In addition, the Police Department budget (101-2100-421-34-41) includes $8,000 to replace the older police lighting, controls, etc., and safety cage, with upgraded police emergency equipment for the new patrol vehicle. 1. Bids were solicited for the automobile with the following results: Lithia Chrysler Jeep Dodge of Fort Collins, Fort Collins, Colorado 2008 Dodge Charger Police $22,362 Trade-In: G89A, 1995 Ford Taurus 1.000 Bid Price $21,362 Colorado Springs Dodge - Colorado Springs, Colorado (State Bid) 2008 Dodge Charger Police $21,705 Trade-In: G89A, 1995 Ford Taurus 300 Bid Price $21,405 Champion Chrysler JeeD Dodge - Windsor, Colorado 2008 Dodge Charger Police $22,570 Trade-In: G89A, 1995 Ford Taurus 500 Bid Price $22,070 Ferrero 1-25 Chrvsler Jeep Dodge - Loveland, Colorado No Response 2. Bids were solicited for the Police emergency equipment with the following results: Wireless Advanced Communications, Greelev, Colorado Emergency Equipment - Control Module / Strobe Lights / Partition Wig- Wags / Light Bar / etc. $ 6,567 Signs of Life, Estes Park. Colorado Police Striping (Decals) $ 925 Staff recommends trading-in Police Auxiliary Vehicle G89A, a 1995 Ford Taurus with 117,825 miles, (Replacement Type 8, 100,000-120,000 miles or seven years) moving Patrol Vehicle G71A (1998 Ford Crown Victoria with 76,900 miles) into the Police Auxiliary and purchasing a new 2008 Dodge Charger Police from Lithia Chrysler Jeep Dodge of Fort Collins at a cost of $21,362 from vehicle replacement fund. The factory order cut-off date for this vehicle is February 6, 2008, which is before the next Town Board meeting, therefore staff requests approval to order immediately with the right to cancel if not approved by Town Board. Furthermore, staff recommends purchasing updated emergency equipment from Wireless Advanced Communications, Greeley, Colorado, at a cost of $6,567 and vehicle striping from Signs of Life, Estes Park, Colorado, at a cost of $925 for a total cost of $7,492. The Committee recommends approval of the purchase of a 2008 Dodge Charger Police as outlined above at a cost of $21,362 from account #635-7000-435-34-42 budgeted, and emergency equipment and striping for the vehicle at a cost of $7,492 from account #101- 2100-421-34-41 budgeted. REPORTS. 1. Wonder One - The Police Department acquired a 1988 airplane parts vehicle at no cost and, over the past year and a half, had it converted to a mobile communications center. Deputy Town Administrator Richardson thanked the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety Committee - January 23,2008 - Page 3 Town's fleet crew for their work on the project. The Committee was invited to tour the vehicle at the conclusion of the Public Safety Committee meeting. 2. CML - Police Departments in Compliance - The Estes Park Police Department was recognized by the Colorado Municipal League (CML) as an agency in compliance with the Department of Justice's procedures related to the management of juvenile prisoners, based on quarterly assessments performed by the federal government. MISCELLANEOUS. Town Administrator Halburnt announced that the vacancy in the position of Police Chief subsequent to the promotion of Lowell Richardson to Deputy Town Administrator, was filled. After an internal posting of the position and interviews, Wes Kufeld was named Chief of Police. FIRE DEPARTMENT. Mayor Baudek, Mayor Pro Tem Pinkham, Trustee Homeier, and Trustee Levine joined the Committee at the dais for a discussion regarding a proposed fire protection fee schedule for properties outside of the town limits. REPORTS. Report and Discussion - Proposed Fee Schedule and Other Funding Options - Town Administrator Halbumt provided the Committee with information related to charging county residents for fire protection services. A public input session was held on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 to gather information on the topic from residents of the county. Town officials have previously stated that the Town cannot continue to provide fire services to county residents without an additional funding source. The creation of a fire district failed twice at election in both 2004 and 2006, leading to a proposed charge for fire protection to county residents. Larimer County has entered into an IGA with the Town to allow for charges to county residents for fire protection services. As fifty per cent of the volunteer Fire Department's calls are outside of the town limits, the established fee would help offset the costs involved with providing these services. To address concerns raised by county residents, staff recommends that the Town Board appoint a panel to research a fire district that would operate independently of the Town, removing operations from the Town's budget, and charge the same mil levy rate to everyone in the district. At the January 15~h meeting, county resident Don Widrig suggested forming a committee charged with developing a plan upon which the Estes Valley residents would vote. He suggested the committee be comprised of a senior member of the Town staff, a Town Trustee, the Fire Chief and five Estes Valley residents appointed by the Board, three of whom would be from the county. In the interim, county residents would be charged an optional annual subscription fee of $130 for fire service. If a fire occurs and the subscription fee has not been paid, the homeowner or business owner will be charged based upon the Colorado State Forest Services' Cooperator Rate Agreement for apparatus and for personnel based upon the personnel budget/number of response hours. If the Town Board approves charging county residents for fire services, the current IGA with Larimer County would be amended to include the ability to charge both individual and homeowner association subscriptions to offset expenses, with a long range objective of forming a fire district. Discussion ensued among the Committee and the Trustees on the following topics: how to maintain current level of service with inflation and new equipment purchases; fires would be fought regardless of whether subscription paid or RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Safety Committee - January 23,2008 - Page 4 unpaid; no charge for volunteer firefighters' time; do fire districts exist in other areas where services are being provided outside of the town limits; how to publicize and solicit interest in participating in the panel/task force; establish an application process for those interested in serving on the panel/task force; provide the panel/task force with specific instructions and timetable; fire service is critical to all residents of the Estes Valley; it is fair and equitable for everyone using a service to help pay for that service; in-town residents pay more tax than out of town residents; volunteer fire department provides rescue services in addition to firefighting; does the Town have the ability to bill for these services at the present time, and receive input from Town residents. Fred Garrabrant/640 Ponderosa Avenue, Carriage Hills, stated that based on the results of the first fire district vote, residents of Carriage Hills are interested in the creation of a fire district and are willing to pay for fire protection services as long as the amounts they are paying are fair. John Sypher/3825 Star Way, Little Valley, stated that the Little Valley Homeowners Association does not want to be excluded from fire protections services and that the HOA board members have unanimously agreed to pay a fee for fire protection services if subscriptions are made available. After evacuations occurred during the Big Elk Fire, Little Valley invested $50,000 in fire mitigation and is widening roads to provide access for emergency vehicles. The Committee recommends approval of forming a panel/task force to research the creation of a fire district and an interim charge for fire protection services to be brought before the Town Board as an action item at their February 12, 2008 meeting. There being no further business, Chairman Newsom adjourned the meeting at 9:53 a.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 7,2008 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 7th day of February 2008. Committee: Chairman Pinkham, Trustees Eisenlauer and Levine Attending: Chairman Pinkham and Trustee Eisenlauer Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Directors Pickering and Kilsdonk, Managers Marsh, Mitchell and Winslow, and Deputy Clerk Deats Absent Trustee Levine Chairman Pinkham called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT. None CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU. 2008 HORSE SHOW CONTRACTS - REQUEST APPROVAL. Staff requests approval of contracts for six horse shows/events to be held at the Stanley Park Fairgrounds during the summer of 2008. Three of the events have previously been held in Estes Park, with the addition of three new events to the venue. Returning events include the Rocky Mountain Miniature Horse Club, June 18th-22nd; the Tophand Organization - Team Penning, July 18th- 200 (a fundraising event for the Rooftop Rodeo); and the Colorado Arabian Horse Club, July 2nd-July 6th. New events to the facility include: Westwood Equestrian Development, June 26*-29th, (a Saddlebred Organization with approximately 100 horses and a show similar to the Arabian Show); the Colorado Springs Dressage Association, July 18*-20th (a dressage show with 120 horses that will be sharing the facility with the Team Penning Organization); the Colorado Junior Rodeo Association, August 15th-17th (the organization's finals with 200 participants plus their families. Over $100,000 in prizes and scholarships will be awarded at this event.) The Committee recommends approval of the event contracts as described to be included on the consent agenda of the February 12th Town Board meeting. FAIRGROUNDS CONCESSION STAND LEASE RENEWAL - REQUEST APPROVAL. The lease between the Town of Estes Park and the Lions Club of Estes Park for the concession stand at the Fairgrounds at Stanley Park is up for renewal this year. Minor changes have been made to the lease and have been reviewed by Town Attorney White. The new lease will be in effect through December 31, 2009. In past years, approximately $1,000 worth of maintenance has been performed on the concession stand annually, with lease revenue averaging $9751.85 per year. Gross income from the stand for the last four years has averaged $89,600. Operating the concession stand has been the key source of income for the Lions Club since 1954, with proceeds being used to fund scholarships and community projects. The Committee recommends an ordinance be prepared to be taken as an action item to the February 12th Town Board meeting for approval. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development - February 7,2008 - Page 2 REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. â€¢ Marketing â€¢ Media & Public Relations â€¢ Visitors Services Report â€¢ Group Sales Report Discussion took place regarding lodging occupancy reports, indications for the upcoming tourist season, and what effect news stories related to the economy, pine beetle infestation, and rising gasoline prices will have on Estes Park tourism. Dir. Pickering stated that based on information available at this time, he anticipates the upcoming tourist season will be similar to last year's. MUSEUM/SENIOR CENTER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. â€¢ Museum Monthly Report â€¢ Museum Year-End Report â€¢ Museum 2007 List of Acquisitions â€¢ Senior Center Monthly Report â€¢ Senior Center/Museum 2007 Rentals Mgr. Mitchell stated the reported decline in meals served by Meals on Wheels is due to short-term service to people with illness or those returning home after hospital stays, and a decline in the number of long-term services being provided. Mgr. Mitchell and Dir. Kilsdonk stated that rental of the Fall River Picnic Area is promoted through brochures, the Town website, and articles in the newspaper. Parties who have rented the facility have taken good care of the property, and reservations are starting to come in for the summer months. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. â€¢ Community Development Financial â€¢ Monthly Building Permit Summary Town Administrator Halburnt stated that the Community Development Department revenues exceeded expenditures by $89,000 and, in contrast, the Building Department was subsidized by $300,000. Chairman Pinkham commented that the level of construction remains relatively strong even in a slow housing market. ADMINISTRATION. KUNDTZ ADDITION ANNEXATION FEE WAIVER REQUEST. Matthew Heiser, representing Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley, Inc., requested a waiver of fees associated with the annexation of the Kundtz Addition, approximately 2/3 acre on Riverside Drive. The property is the proposed location for future Habitat for Humanity homes. Habitat for Humanity of Estes Valley, Inc. has worked for the past 12 years to provide decent, affordable housing for residents of the Estes Valley. Mr. Heiser stated that in the past, the Town Board has recognized the community service provided by affordable housing and has offered assistance by waiving development fees for Habitat and other affordable housing developments. A public hearing related to the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development - February 7,2008 - Page 3 annexation of the Kundtz Addition has been scheduled for April 22 and, typically, the annexation fee is submitted with the annexation application. Administrator Halburnt stated that the standard for fee waivers and the criteria for qualifying entities are set by the Community Development Committee, and to date, have not addressed fees associated with annexations. She suggested the Committee not only consider Habitat's request, but also consider whether to extend fee waivers to include annexations. After discussion, the Committee recommends approval of the fee waiver for the annexation of the Kundtz Addition, and requests that staff compile further information related to fee waivers to be taken to the February 26, 2008 Town Board meeting as an action item. REPORTS. â€¢ Estes Valley Investment in Childhood Success (EVICS) Presentation - Childcare Task Force Recommendations - Nancy Almond, EVICS Coordinator, reported on the services EVICS provides to families with young children and the childcare options that are currently available in the Estes Valley. An 18-member community task force was created after last year's Childcare Summit to address childcare concerns related to the lack of care for infants and toddlers, the lack of after-school care programs, the expense of childcare for families, and the cost of operating childcare facilities. She stated that the Park School District Board of Education recently made a decision to close down the elementary school that currently houses two childcare facilities. She stated the closure of these two facilities will have a negative impact on childcare in Estes Valley and suggested that the community partner together to address childcare concerns. Discussion followed with all agreeing that young families are needed to provide a balanced community with economic sustainability and that viable childcare options are necessary to achieve this balance. Ms. Almond stated that EVICS will be undertaking an informational campaign to deliver their message to the community and asked for the Town's support. There being no further business, Chairman Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 9:47 a.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk Estes Park Convention & Visitors Bureau Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Bo Winslow - Fairgrounds and Special Events Date: February 7,2008 Re: Concession Stand Lease BACKGROUND: The lease agreement for the concession stand at the Fairgrounds at Stanley Park is up for renewal this year. The new lease is similar to the lease in years past. The revenue structure will continue as in the past. There are several changes in the lease to address items that were unclear. The Town Attorney looked at the lease and approved the changes. The Lions Club has had this lease for over 25 years and to my knowledge this has never gone out for bid. Once again this lease is with the Lions Club of Estes Park and will be through December 31, 2009. BUDGET/COST: In the past year approximately $1000 worth of maintenance has been performed on the concession stand. The lease revenue on the concession stand for the last 4 years has averaged $9751.85 per year. Gross income from the stand for the last 4 years has averaged $89,600. ACTION: Approve lease with Lions Club LEASE THIS LEASE, made and entered into this Â£2 /52date of , ~~-r,uBiV, 2008, between the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, municipal corporation, herein'after referred to as Lessor, and the LIONS CLUB OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a Colorado Nonprofit Corporation, hereinafter referred to as Lessee. WITNESSETH: Lessor, for and in consideration of the covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, to be kept and performed by Lessee, has leased and does hereby lease unto Lessee all those premises, situate in the Town of Estes. Park, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, known and described as follows to-wit: SEE EXHIBIT A - The bordered areas on .the attached exhibit are for the exclusive use of the Lessee as a food and Beverage area. B - The bordered areas on the attached exhibit shows the 3.2 liquor license area. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the above described -premises with the appurtenances, unto Lessee from March 1, 2008 through December 31, 2009, and Lessee in consideration of the leasing of said premises aforesaid by Lessor to Lessee, covenants and agrees with Lessor as follows: 1. To pay to Lessor, as.rent for said premises, fifteen percent (15%) of the gross sales from the operation of Concession Stand on first $50,000 and ten percent (10%) on gross sales over $50,000. For the purposes of this Lease, gross sales shall be the total amount of funds realized from all sales of food and beverages from the concession stand, less sales tax, sales tax license fee, food license fee, and liquor liability insurance. Lessee shall be entitled to deduct from the yearly rent, an amount equal to the annual license fees paid to the Town of Estes Park and the State of Colorado for the 3.2% beer license. Said rent shall be due and payable to the Estes Park Fairgrounds Director on or before the 1.St day of December, during the term hereof beginning on March 1, 2008. 2. To keep complete and accurate records of Lessee's operation of the concession stand and have available to the Town of Estes Park upon request. In addition, a table of calculations would be submitted showing the amount due the Town of Estes Park. 3. To be liable for repairs and maintenance of all items identified.as property of the Lions Club of Estes Park as set forth in the inventory list (Exhibit B). The Lesser shall be liable for repairs and maintenance of all other equipment on the inventory list identified as property of the Town of Estes Park. In addition, the Lessor agrees to pay for maintenance of the interior and exterior of the building in accordance with structural codes and health standards. For general maintenance, i.e. painting and minor improvements, the Lessor will pay for the materials and the Lessee will provide manpower. 4. To keep the Concession Stand and table areas safe and clean and in such order as may be required by the regulations of any governmental authority. This will include the picnic tables and surrounding area. Lessor+ will provide for adequate trash and garbage disposal. 5. Not to alter the structural integrity of the building in any manner, except with the Lessor's written consent. 6. To allow Lessor or its agents to have free access to the demised premises for the purposes of examining or inspecting the condition of the same or the operation of the Concession Stand. 7. To furnish to Lessor a written physical inventory of.the equipment presently located in the demised premises. Lessee shall keep said inventory current by written notice Â·to Lessor, whenever there are any additions to equipment. Each listing shall designate the ownership by either the Lions Club of Estes Park or The Town of Estes Park. 8. Lessee agrees to procure and maintain during the term ofÂ· this Lease, the following insurance coverages: A. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance of at least $150,000.00 per injury and $600,00.00 per occurrence. B. Liquor Liability Insurance for the sale of all alcoholic beverages sold by Lessee of at least $150,000.00 per injury and $600,000.00 per occurrence. C. The Lessee and the Lessor understand and agree that the Town is relying on, and does not intend to waive, by any provision of this Lease, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00 per injury and $600,000.00 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended or otherwise available to the Town or any of its officers, agents or employeesÂ·. D. The Town shall be named as an additional insured on said policies. 9. It is agreed by the parties hereto: A. All items on the .equipment list owned by the Lessor, all improvements, and all fixtures and equipment shall become the property of Lessor when permanently placed or affixed in the demised premises, and said improvements fixtures and equipment shall be insured at the Lessor's expense. B. Lessee shall have the concession for the sale of all food and drink, for the Stanley Park Grandstand Area and for the blacktop in front on the Stanley Park Grandstand Area as described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference during the term of this Lease. The Lessor specifically reserves the right to allow or license other concessionaires on the Stanley Park grounds other than the area specifically described on Exhibit -A". Fundraising events conducted in the Grandstand area described in Exhibit "A" will be allowed and Lessee will be notified of everit in advance. C. Lessee shall operate said Concession Stand at all events scheduled at the Stanley Park Grandstand Area, and when Lessor requests that the Concession Stand be operated for the other events at Stanley Park with 3 weeks notice. Lessor will provide the Lessee a schedule of events for the season at least three weeks prior to the start of the first event of the season. Changes that effect the .operation of the Stand or require the services of the Lessee will be presented to the Lessee and jointly the two parties will negotiate whether the Lessee can.handle the situation or event. Lessee agrees to work with the renter of the grounds and comply with their mandatory open hours of operation. Lessee will contact each show manager, 3 weeks prior to show to decide hours of-operation and discuss any other special needs. LesseeÂ· shall provide lessor hours and needs discussed with show manager. For events that have other food concessions, hours of operation can be negotiated with fairgrounds manager. D. Lessor will negotiate beverage contract, Lessee will be required to work with beverage company, selling and stocking only beverages provided by that company. If product is not available through said beverage supplier, fairgrounds manager will be notified and authorization to purchase from other supplier may be granted. E. If Lessee shall fail to comply with the conditions.of this Lease, or should not well and truly perform all and every one of the covenants and agreements herein contained on the part of the Lessee to be performed and kept, then this Lease shall, at the option of Lease, cease and absolutely terminate. Notice of such termination shall be delivered to either the then acting President or the then acting Secretary of Lessee. In the event of a default .by either party in the terms and conditions hereof, the non-defaulting party shall give the defaulting party ten (10) days' notice in writing of said default. If said default is not cured within said ten (10) day period, the non- defaulting party shall be entitled to begin legal proceedings, including an action for specific performance and/or damages or terminate the Lease. Damages shall include all reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred by the non-defaulting party. F. In the event that changes occur which materially affect the operation of the demised premises, either party shall have the option to request that this Lease be renegotiated. G. Lessee may operate the Concession Stand other than at events scheduled at Stanley Park Fairgrounds by the Town of Estes Park through the Estes Park Fairgrounds Director. Lessee will pay the Town as rent for the events covered by this specific Paragraph five percent (5%) of the gross sales minus sales taxes from the operation of this Concession Stand during these events. For the purpose of this specific. paragraph only, gross sales shall be defined to mean the total amount of funds realized from all sales of food, and beverage from the Concession Stand exclusive of sales taxes. 10. Lessee understands and agrees that it is an independent contractor under the Â·terms and conditions of this agreement. As such, the Lessee is not entitled to unemployment or insurance benefits through the Town. Also, the Lessee understands and agrees that it is solely responsible for all Federal and State income tax, FICA taxes and unemployment insurance taxes. Lessee also understands and agrees that it is responsible for worker's compensation coverage and taxes for itself and any employee. 11. All notices, demands or other documents required or desired to be given, made or sent to either party, under this Agreement shall be in writing, shall be deemed effective upon mailing or personal delivery. If mailed, said notice shall be mailed, postage prepaid as follows: LESSOR LESSEE Town of Estes Park Lions Club of Estes.Park, CO Attn: Special Events Director P. O. Box 2016 P. O. Box 1967 Estes Park, Â·CO 80517 Estes Park, CO 80517 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands the day and year first above written. TOWN of ESTES PARK< COLORADO By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk LESSOR LIONS CLUB OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO By: 0 ~~Uta.Dll-2.-~ Â£4)Lcoll-044- President g ATTEST: c~2.-~ SesÂ·gatanÂ¥ LE>Sâ‚¬â‚¬ ORDINANCE NO. 01-08 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THE CONCESSION STAND AT THE FAIRGROUNDS AT STANLEY PARK TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado has determined that it is appropriate to renew the lease agreement with the Lion's Club of Estes Park for a period of two years beginning January 21, 2008 and ending December 31, 2009 for the concession stand at the Fairgrounds at Stanley Park NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: Section 1. That the lease agreement is renewed. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS DAY OF , 2008. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk I hereby certify that the above ordinance was introduced and read at a meeting of the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2008, and published in a newspaper of general publication in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado on the day of ,2008. Town Clerk Finance Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board ofTrustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer Date: February 12, 2008 Subject: Resolution to re-appropriate funds encumbered in the 2007 budget to the 2008 budget Background Certain Town departments have entered into contracts for goods and/or services that were not fulfilled by year-end December 31, 2007. In order to keep only one budget year open, purchase orders (encumbrances) that are outstanding at year-end are re-appropriated into the current budget year as a reservation of fund balance, per Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Those encumbrances when liquidated and paid are charged against the prior year's budget rather than against the budget of the year in which the expenditure is actually incurred. It is staff' s intention to keep rollovers to a minimum, but projects are often affected by weather, and by availability of product. Documentation Attached is the list of those encumbrances that remain outstanding at the end of 2007. As a frame of reference, rollovers for 2006-07 totaled $735,000. Although rollovers for 2007-08 are $586,000 (80%) greater than 2006-07, the bulk of the increase is concentrated in 3 purchase orders: 23197 (engineering for the new water plant), 23226 (truck with aerial extension) and 23303 (street sweeper). These three purchases orders account for $665,000. Without these, rollover volume would have actually decreased 20%. Action steps requested Staff requests carrying those encumbrances are carried forward into the current budget year, per attached Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 4-08 A RESOLUTION RE-APPROPRIATING FUNDS ENCUMBERED IN THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK'S 2007 BUDGET TO THE 2008 BUDGET YEAR WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park's accounting system incorporates a purchase order system that encumbers the budget appropriation when commitments for the purchase of goods or services are made; and WHEREAS, encumbrances that were not liquidated in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 are reserved from the ending fund balances; and WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park intends to appropriate funds in the budget for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008, to satisfy the commitments for the outstanding encumbrances. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THAT: 1. The following 2008 budgets are increased for appropriations for outstanding 2007 budget encumbrances. 2007 2008 2008 2008 ENCUMBRANCE O&M TRANSFERS REVISED FUND (PO Rollovers) EXPENSES OUT BUDGrT General $281,783.47 $8,701,318.00 $3,165,418.00 $12,148,51 Community Reinvestment 21,204.42 4,947,125.00 0.00 4,968,329.42 Museum 3,265.50 307,914.00 0.00 311,179.50 Conservation Trust 5,500.00 32,012.00 0.00 37,512.00 Larimer County Open Space 29,680.08 350,000.00 0.00 379,680.08 CVB 23,953.07 2,746,475.00 0.00 2,770,428.07 Light & Power 590,181.50 16,807,978.00 908,390.00 18,306,549.50 Wate r 361,261.24 8,540,831.00 99,221.00 9,001,313.24 IT 3,760.28 391,267.00 0.00 395,027.28 $1,320,589.56 $42,824,920.00 $4,173,029.00 $48,318,538.56 Il. The ending fund balance from the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 will be the source of funds for the budget amendments. ADOPTED this day of ,2008. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk =8= .O CO N 0.<, :288 92 8 8 00 ON M O M 00 - 5Â° Â§* 9 52 . R A * 320% 4 9 - $ N N W * .9. 0 I N 0 0(-000Â©000 r- 000./00-~0-00â€¢noo CD 001,;00 2 W E 3 4 % 8 /* 1 2 2 0 & 3 *i i 0 *4/0 /*i i niat m i -MOC.'- Ce-,N- f.1 .4-â€¢A-IMP, rn.0 rn N E g E - N - e M -- Ch M -- 0 =88:888888:8885882:800Â© 00Â©00.0.0000000000<Â©CO 9 - 000000Â©0000Â©000Â©OO00ONooo goo_occdopÂ©00=go=2Â©800:006Â©odoododooocdoogooo 1 0. 0 0 M -- - g - I â‚¬ 4 8 %8:1 C veâ‚¬41% ~ e g -3 2 â€ž 3 L - U K #41 -, 4 3112=31 33 ifiatif j 11 9 * E 1 4 16-ilits i 433 i -a jiu i i i 1 -5<-0,42% 24% it"1% 112 1, 3 9 C O 0 M M I C O-f. ..O E I "-* 2 : CE O A 0 1.- 5 = M = â‚¬ @21.2 1~~33? 2 2 1 * *8 -11 2- 9 9~ -2 * 4- i 1 @F? d j M i '*i s 11 1 1%# 1 1 11 119 * Z ZI * 1 9 9 4 93Â£'ll ff##< 81: :88/0:h&/370. Z 222~m* ~:2 2,~342*2~2:g Et*gg -$*mE-,N*-~ 35&@=23.% 2~ 2 :#2# E~:22@3 fEi#4 L E U F3E1EEE3EE8EEM**2%E*EEÂ§535393W&CC53TIN*&&59E13MBF3 GENERAL TOTAL Legislative Executive Building Police Fire Engineering Streets Parks CRF CTF MUSEUM LCOS CVB POW WATER IT 28,600,00 262,721.04 22.422.00 32,367.79 10*t9t 00'OOL'E 00'0( L uonw: MOOD J 0**886' 11 lu@ludinb â€¢8 952'1 t'8-99*' 1100 1300 1700 2175 2200 2400 3100 5200 LIGHT & 00 Z,1 9 1 00'Zt 1' 1,890,00 1,890.00 1,890.00 13.032.00 18,954.42 16,648.08 1,068.00 dieering 950.00 13.498.97 2,552.00 0.00 00 009'4 Z9'6ZL'Zl Z9'6LL'Z 9-L06'[ (SE) Slletp 10'uo 1,000.00 2,250.00 St'*01'c SE+01'Z "t lumlog J 09'EZL'Z 05*ELL'Z 00 005'â€¢ 00 005't 2,~~ ~~loqd. Atide 104d MueÂ·41 gui 00 86Â£ 00'86L 9-n 0104!d de O~04d pud Sounf 2008 ENCUMBRANCE LIST - PO Rollovers [,445.70 1,445.70 ve/Fish Creek modifications ,426.25 1,426.25 1,426,25 tr et Sweeper 190,475.00 00'000'61 00'000'61 00'000'61 mieuodsuell - INSFId 3,5Â· Z 0.00 122,898.00 NSAA LL[.P claim 4,299.62 4,299.62 4,299.62 937,58 500.00 500.00 041.00 1,041.00 923.00 4,500.00 10 at 9'LOS'Â£ ineen PO # 35 88 do .b bc e - t- 0 -D : :<->8 < ~<65 2008 ENCUMBRANCE LIST - PO Rollovers 1100 1300 1700 2175 200 2400 3100 5200 LIGHT & DESCRIPTION GENERAL Legislative Executive Building Police Fire Engineering Streets Parks CRF CTF MUSEUM LCOS CVB a,72~ WATER IT 23549 11 Access - north door - mti repair 2,586.95 2,586.95 2,503.44 23553 an Horn topo survey Â· transportation study 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 23554 lorado hibits an pa eis 0.00 542.00 542.00 23555 merican a ety - unker acemen[ 4,668.00 4,668.00 4,668.00 23556 Wh catiand Fire - rept of 1." fire hose 599,68 8,599.68 8,599.68 23559 dwest Materials - landscapin for Tregent 0.00 900.00 900.00 23560 rm adillo Fencing - gate at sto ge/Ip yard 4,500.00 4,500Â·00 4,500.00 23565 UC - mediation training - Nagl/Vendegna 800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 281,783.47 1,541.00 4,299.62 5,423.00 1,800.00 13,267.68 21,871.95 226,033,97 7,346.25 21,204.42 5,500.00 3,265.50 29,680.08 23,953.07 590,181.50 361,261.24 3,760.28 23550 oori oescabling - alarm and camera mic and upgrade 0.00 2,503.44 TOTAL 1,320,589.56 23S43 stes Valley Electric - rebuild 7 exhibits PO # 23561 cristi , sand/salt mix 1 560,00 13,560 00 13,560.00 Finance, Light & Power, Water Departments Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board ofTrustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Steve MeFarland, Finance Officer Date: February 12, 2008 Subject: 4th Quarter Financial Report Background Attached please find the fourth quarter 2007 "dashboard" financial report. Documentation/explanation The expenditure categories used in the General Fund box are not identical to the way items are reported in the budget. The categories in this report are in line with GFOA recommendations, but I thought it might be useful to report how the General Fund departments correspond to the attached report: General Government: Legislative (1100), Judicial (1200), Executive (1300), Elections (1400), Finance/Admin (1500), Community Development (1600), Buildings (1700), Employee Benefits (1800), Subsidies/Grants (1900), Transportation (5600). Public Safety: Police (2100,2155,2175), Fire (2200), Protective Inspections (2300). Engineering/Public Works: Engineering (2400), Streets (3100). Culture/Recreation: Parks (5200). Other revenues include all of non-sales tax revenues in the General Fund, the largest of which include property tax, use tax, franchise fees, interest, PILOTs, and business and liquor licenses. The calendar year is complete with the exception of end-of-year adjustments resulting from our annual audit, which is to be performed in March. While confidence is high that there will not be significant changes to the attached financials, we are nonetheless stamping the report "DRAFT". Please note that actual data is now being compared to the revised budgets. The General Fund box reports revenues at 97.7% ofbudgeted levels. December sales tax figures are not included in the totals. When included, it is estimated that revenues will be at approximately 101% ofbudget. Expenditures are currently at 94% of budget. Encumbrances from 2007 to 2008 will be about $282,000, which would take expenses to 97% ofbudget. The Sales Tax box reports 4th quarter and YTD numbers in italics, as December is an estimate (average of2004-06). Ifthe -$400,000 estimate for December proves to be reasonably accurate, sales tax revenues will be at 102% of revised budget. Further details on 2007 sales tax data will be reviewed in the February 26,2008 Town Board Meeting, schedule permitting. The Enterprise Funds box (see supporting pages for Light & Power and Water Fund breakdowns) shows that enterprise funds revenues are at 102% of budget. The L&P bond issuance has been included for budget comparison, but will be categorized as a balance sheet entry by the time the CAFR is processed. Expenses are under budget as well at only 89% of budget. Rollovers in the Enterprise Funds total $951,443, which would bring expenditures to within 96% ofbudget. A side note on the Enterprise Funds: the L&P bond issuance was a tremendous success. The rate (3.83%) was 50 basis points lower than we had anticipated which will save about 10% on debt service estimates over the life of the bond. Further, Standard and Poors gave the project a rating of "A+", which is the highest rating the Town has ever received on a bond issuance. The Investments box has been retooled to show investments by type of fund. The pension funds are managed by a third party (actually, only the Fire Pension is managed by a third party, but accounts for 99.4% of the Pension Funds' assets). EPURA investments reside in a ColoTrust money market account and are not mingled with Town investments. The bond issuance is listed separately due to its size. The prevailing money market fund rate is listed, as that is the vehicle in which the bulk of Town investments reside. Action steps requested None. â€¢ Page 2 1 t.4 &42 .A 959'C .Mt't'** N. ... 4 .. 44 Sfir 2 . ;f iÂ¥,h . -4 -143: $ -e i~9Â·4' lup da IE I OUBUIE[ LOOE JollunO I#t 44* 13 1 4 4 4 4 2 < 32 2 32 le 0194.- r-Ornt- Â® 00 â‚¬9 1-: 0 iz Â¢9 B W - o h o w Â·Â·Â·Â· & 00 0 0 O 00 0 0 00 0 0 41 00 00-1-=f , moÂ© 0 61 w 06 N wri 61 4 00 & Tte= - 1 NN r- ---00 - 0 h - oua 00 en Q 00 M D W - B W â€¢n c, 00 0, 5 -0 t. M-ern ON 1- er, 1Â· 00 0 rl O 16 L h 8 250 0, 8 Â·8 1 r n rt rt U el e 0 9 7 9 0. 9 0- i 00. 0 4 m 00 re, ch - bodâ‚¬Nrn ur-Moo m + 00 e N - M tn O - O 5 00 1 0 1- Z RR 4% 1-t-OC-*- B-M M.â‚¬*# 0-r- 0-Â¢1 9 0- 61 W O N-01 - -1- - U el - 22 4 1 * t~ 3 0 (01 - * C Co O U W N N Q "r O 00 0. reJU 000 0 0 00 tA N ~t: g 9 h W *00 *X &, IC O ; d fri 2 4 L ~4 h u 7Â¢2 Z W tr' W 1\ 5 0 91- 00 / 00 00 e r-*Met -bal - 44 29 a 4(5 4 N - 4 -M - 6 4 :2 61 - e 1. 0 P. W * - 2.47 Z 7~, 04 - A F.14 '4 0 r O W 00 0 - ilik ~.59 -8 0/1 yl J., 0 LIJ=r VM 3 3 E M E -i-g * 2 -2 1 0 0 >Eut 4 2 1 3 8 -O 82 .8 94 -9 ><05=00<E-ou Lu * 7 g = 41 0 E- E M 3 U M gled 6 0 a â‚¬ 2 402 4 - e i aw / ms 01 - a. 01 1 E- 4 Le 47*. 414.1 %i #0022 542202@~ 2 g og H n W rn M M 61 0 0 - 2ag: 32'g wooeir- >. a =0011 i m M e o ) -- 4* t<W W U.'- - illp 02%58 Morâ€¢,00,0 0 5% 3 7 4.. N 2 3 9. 11 n 22:4225:8 7 â‚¬ ~C> tt . ..... %* 0= 4 m b M en -MON 00 -MO m 1- hIP- h 5 0 00 61--WONO , 90 00 -00- (1â‚¬9~000-1-N er, UL 9 9.r rel-- Men - N -.. I. I 99 ..:tt k. . 14/ M/r-U -0 . Z * O 16 -r- 52282*8 2 5 68%%4 5 Â·â€¢-49 tri=Â·00% ; *A. 2tg9 .... t-N-O moo.99.0.~10. 0. q flnne! ?trt" O hBOA h 00-â€¢ANMO 00 Voke.1 r :.8.3.Il Châ€¢Ahoot\(NO 0 - 59 M Wer~_0 N M - N - N N h 1 01 N r. -Cl.%R 04 0 tritatn a . W: >. - - Z B.*W W 45 OO rhrk 0 0 0 , K 1,#P'k AIM 0 k 2 - 20 t. E 0 E Lid c r O m M .2 5 E ~ 8 1 0, E w Lu < c., e * 6 5 g if/ 1 SE CO U *DA; 0 5 u) - U] U A bo c â‚¬413'~~ ze.086.22 &1:OBER Mon.WOOEE- 9 4 2% G f a % 0 E E m U - V /1 Al Â»Â·-ri %4'04 1 9$ EIZ'005'LS 3SV3'HD3 3MON 1 N %5'5 IE 3SVEIHO3G/EIS EnIONI 13N LO-ooa LO-100 anNA 41!Bi) Sihilk Xvl S31VS BEE' 91'92 L90'ES' 81 6#L'9LO'81 (481'86Â£1) D 00 sapnpul LO D 41#~ i 1 901'919'LI OLS'308'9 I spund 696'L LEE'* 192* 88'LO ' $7, 00,00 $12,951 3 000 bond issuance %68 4 LO/IE/ZI '0181 lu@luls@AU! Polood lenuue S3SN3dX3 Â¥101 9L6'6*8'0 1 S3SN dX3 TIV1O1 le.IOUOD/U!,U ZED'' 59 (Ban 90-kOOZ) EGI Its J oaa dof alo wlisa puD LOOZ Vy d - NO JOJSUBJ OCV~DON â‚¬t\-01 001 N -en- Orn . I - - . rt h 00 0 rn vi rc 01 O rt h WONO C.1- rel ron 20&:02@2242 ~ ~ tA M 01 0 0 rt 00 00 0,6 C.i (:2. CS eer- OVO or) Â©r- 00% - 1% CON 07 N 3 <f 2 0 02 41) = 5 c 4 E E 4 0 C 1-4 0 - 0 1 A 00 0 %24Â§'segg: Ul u mot@Â·E@%*EM 0 6 2 -Ca O 1 Z = 43 9 8 )1 0.2~3Ea 54-% 2~ &1 5% .* 5 5 & 0 ~06'2 Me/MouEE= Budget Year-to-I~te budget Year-to-Date $7,100,000 $6,857,755 96.6% $6,296,853 3,077,308 3,039,241 98.8% 3,427,231 m Enterprise Funds 1,005,796 1,030,101 102.4% 989,788 ELS'CIL'OI %L*L6 Â£60'LE6'OI VOI'Â£*I'II SHANHAH-H EOS'50I LII'L6I' 906'IZE'Z 388'060 558'85Z'E 6*9'SIE'Â£ 086'9*I'I 9 IO'ILE'I â‚¬ZE'6 I9'I S)<10/H 'II I 1,6 380'60C0 I 8 0I Viol 2007 7 % of GENERAL FUND 4th QUARTER 2007 6 209'58Â£ 0*9'898 L Â£96'EL OZO' IOI OI 6Â£5'Â£Ef'E 6 9'Â£317'Z 01 000'003 . D O Ne NOrn O N W G M 1 0 tr) U A Zd Ch - 10 00 1- A en 00 00 10 + 00 n WO--M N Q + crl G In =r =r . f .2 6 Crl O, 'C) Ch N - e M G 1 09 Q t-OXI-N CM-550 N tr; 01-- rt (90 Ttlr}- W W . c, 1 + - e 1 -1- ..1 4-1 0 gi222 00 000 0%20 0 & re) Ir) In h 00 2444:9140' 0 .g .-t<Nodo -- h M Q N 1 0 O-cleo c\OC\C\C~Ch M Ch 4 & --- $ - C h 5 2 NO C\Â©Ove-COOM# +hky: 3 m 0% M M 09 1 O 00 0 Q N Q 00. - r. -ho , M 1 Chi 1 . .. 2 0 0 Â© 6 - 00 h Vi. M. cr ~4 1 00 M 10 h h 9 --1 1-CNE u N h Ck N m 1 6 - 1:* 0 .$ .gr. 0 irt ~ E-4 A 59 0 :& k 9. Â»-1 A/ A Â© a enwornoo ONOOCNIONOrne *.3 It N tr) 10 N 1 1 00 N M 00 0 4- Â¢9 Â¥.2 .. lot-Cho 0% u * t- M e O 00 . I g NOONâ‚¬nh OW-e rn e 0\ 0 *YA (9 - O - W 00 F G M 00 $ 0 00 N + 1 1 0% 1 0% h M u m 41 g I I .. . ti "04 0 W W -- - e; u en 0 1 Ad A , 'Allâ€¢ ' -D S 0 UD 8% 0 O 2 2 mt 2 06 - U 0 d -92 0 ..1 X 548 P 08% 3 0 .2 Ul g Â¢5 6 30 . w C m 9& 10 M 12 it .M E fa Br: >=2M.M 0.-E.2.mB Â·cl - :1SuGZ M20:00<Ed L80200'IS %5 OZI 528'358'9$ 60Z'989'5$ EISVERIOHa/HSVE[HONI laN 859'OI 680'50I'LI 267, 57 062'Â£Â£09 (eouenss! puo Â£6'I 917' I SE'O I SE[SNE[dXH EIVJ.01 ENT UNDS Sl~noo 2 3 0%00-0 1 Ir; t..$.$ M M Mt~ vi 00%0-- 00 M 1- Mer)00 UN r- - 0 - %0 C\ q all <1. 40- .ttl 0% r- en ..... 6 r.Â©01- 00 Vi - 00 Vi 0 Vi VO rt ic to 00 00 "-4 ro r,Ovir-O=Orern â‚¬ 1- vt 01 -M virn v' ri p* .4 VD I I . M M N 1 e9 0 >11 itt .- .1 122222 120 Ji zi le zi 1: 2: Gi tukt 0 & q r r. C. rt. - N 04001-0~00 AIN M ".*tj, 12 1 4 060: 06. 74 (5 fil-:M 4- r- rn ~c; er; W 0 - O 01 00 - 000000 CA WD O r-' h 00 -- f '4*, 50 f,iÂ· Â© t: Ner) 0 00 00 2.--it r- Â© 22 h - - en- 1 NW L h trat 6 M 00 â‚¬ rv er; 0 M tr) 0 pK ...1 1- ro - rn 23< 44 04 L M rn WI dÂ·teÂ· .0 -- i Â©& 0 0\ C VO M -4-91-C\~00-Cnt- 9&1 Vitlyj *rn en vio O e .-4 00 trI 1 . . . I I . . . . ChOOV,r% Int-rvr-010000 M M M 00 1 ~00- 004-Qoot- 0 M 5 5 en 1 rf n rn 04 00 0 0 4-00 'r. -4 -Moornher}-191- 01 rn rn trt., C '.4 4.E 4*t 4Â© g 44. 0 3 22442 Go E O f'h'V E z, e O 0 04 C 0 0 U U 30% I k 5 -2 2 2 k:Â¥Â· Â»fc 0 0 99 w .2 Et Z b ~ 5 '8 M 2 f N .a u) 1 294 U.1 - LO r-1 - ./7 4.44 M 9 9 2. 04 > 4 2 &1 .5 A E -4 0 72 U d -N W #DOUJ XMA-,00<COU ; 4 809'L65$ %L'88 I- 88Â£'Lt'9$ (ZII'Et'ES) E[SVE[HOE[CUE[SVEnIONI .LE[N $2,586,838 722,516 216,087 E9Â£'Â£ZI I Â£0'68+ UOUEOULIn 9*6'5*L 650'ZEâ‚¬ slunooo I 9L'86 9 E' I I 6'E SE[SNHdXEI EIVIO,L i SUBE.Ied Administration Memo To: The Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator Date: February 7,2008 Subject: 2008 Organizational Chart BACKGROUND: -- The Estes Park Municipal Coded (2.68.040) directs that the "Town Administrator shall present an administrative organizational chart to the Board of Trustees for approval." The accompanying chart is the proposed structure for 2008. The changes in the 2008 organizational structure include: Town Administrator supervisory authority for the following departments: Community Development, Police, Public Works, Utilities and Town Clerk. Deputy Town Administrator supervisory authority for the following departments: CVB, Finance, Fire, Museum and Senior Center. Police Department includes code enforcement and animal control. Utilities includes GIS. BUDGET: No budget implications ACTION: Staff requests approval of the proposed 2008 Organizational Chart % 1/ 0: 00 1- â€¢Â·â€¢ 3 b 5 0 CUt* 0, : 1 12 :b 10* E Cl 0 43 u.1 Of abe .22 ~ 0% 3 8 0 /CON 2 2 E .62.9 1- $ m Stâ‚¬ egg . El-0 2 99.. 2.3. S m.g?:-- ~ * 4 E .2) 2 â€¢ <MY&%80 0- Z.-59).EbJE mZ~~LL[1-Â§ 4 4 (-Eff<*t = 2@%289 3 82 %.=LUMA %Â§ 02< 8 ; m ct L 2 05% Etâ‚¬%~0 2 -& 35-3 C E.* C 2 Cr E E Â·0 0 E .2 A . iE 2 1 8% M 2 0, imeâ‚¬*=me# 43*Â·602>Â®D 00/00: :110.79 M B 5 2 5 2 Lu 0 5 :e m 0 8 41 E -&Â£3 -m 0 4 .314 2.% i 0 Q. 8.9 2 0 *al 3 8-2 @ 2 - r- [h *3 3 -00 422 @@ LK &* 1 239/Wn3Sn IN 510103810 BAO hl010 lueld OJPAH JeA!H Iled STANDING COMMITTEES Fire/Rescue eu.~05 Utilities UTY TOWN uo!1001100/ Jol!â‚¬!A 1 6umueot seinu}IN 333osm ADMINISTRATOR BOARDS & COMMISSI NS ORY BOARDS Theater Board eoueualuierl -buipling Water Department Inter-Office Memorandum ESTES|BEI PARK COLORADO TO: Town Board From: Bob Goehring Date: 2/5/2008 Re: Marys Lake Water Treatment Facility Design, Modifications / Expansion: Phase I Background As the Marys Lake Water Treatment Facility project prepares to start construction in the summer of 2008, it is necessary to initiate a procurement contract with the preferred membrane equipment supplier in advance of construction. Each membrane manufacturer has unique requirements for the installation of their product, which impacts the design and construction of the treatment facility - improvements. As-a-result, selection of-the.supplier is necessary in order-to finalize the design. Due to the high cost of manufacturing the membrane filters, these companies require a contract with a payment schedule based on key milestones. Once the membranes have been ordered, the membrane supplier will provide our engineers with the necessary shop drawings to complete the facility design. There are two manufacturing companies that produce submerged membrane filtration systems appropriate for retrofitting the treatment facility: US Filter (a subsidiary of Siemens Corporation), and Zenon (a subsidiary of General Electric). Membrane Procurement bids were solicited at the end of 2007 by HDR and both manufacturing companies returned bids. See attached Bid Review from HDR recommending Zenon / GE. The recommendation is based on the lowest 20-year present worth cost for a 4 million gallon per day (mgd) treatment facility, which includes the capital cost of the equipment along with the present worth of operating and replacement costs for a 20-year period. The total annual operating cost numbers represent the amount of funds that the Town would have to have available today in order to cover the entire 20 years of operating costs, The Zenon proposal for annual operating costs translates to a current cost of $0.03 per 1000 gallons of treated water. In addition to having the lowest total 20-year present worth cost, the Zenon proposal will also provide the Town with three stages of treatment, thereby reducing the total wastewater discharge to sewer and reducing potential wastewater fees. In addition, the Zenon system allows all the new equipment to be located within the existing treatment building, eliminating the need for a building addition and providing the flexibility to expand to 6 mgd without Water Department Inter-Office Memorandum 101 E ST E S |~~| PARK COLORADO expanding the building. Following are the estimated costs for the project, reflecting the cost savings in construction resulting from utilizing the Zenon system. Budget See attached Bond progress update. Zenon/GE Membrane Procurement $2,518,348 Construction Contract $2,500,000 Total Cost $5,018,348 Power and Water Bond not to exceed amount $5,500,000 Action steps requested Staff recommends accepting the Zenon / GE proposal for $2,518,348 for a 4 mgd membrane filtration system. Upon signing of the contract, the first payment to Zenon / GE would be for 15% of $2,518,348 or $377,752.20, after approval of shop drawings needed to finalize the facility design. The $377,752.20 will come from the-existing budget. In.June.2008 the Water-fund will be reimbursed_with bond proceeds in accordance with Reimbursement Resolution 12-07. The remaining $2,140,595.80 will be due incrementally according to the following schedule, with the expectation that the Town will accept delivery of the membrane equipment in September or October 2008 and complete acceptance testing in March 2009. Payment Schedule for Membrane Procurement Percentage of Payment Event at each Event Approval of Shop Drawings 15 Approval of Preliminary 0&M Manuals 5 Delivery of Goods (membranes and equipment) 50 Approval of Final 0&M Manuals 5 Delivery of Final O&M Manuals 5 Performance of Manufacturer' s Field Services 5 Satisfactory completion of Acceptance Testing 15 The membrane contract will be retained directly with the Town, and will not be assigned to the general contractor installing the equipment to avoid contractor markup on the equipment and provide a direct line of responsibility for the 10- year warranty. A 10-year warranty for the membranes will begin after final acceptance testing; requiring Zenon to replace any failed membranes based on strict performance criteria. ONE COMPANY | Many Solutions SM . January 22,2008 Mr. Bob Goehring Town of Estes Park 615 Elm Road P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Membrane Equipment Procurement Bid Review Mary's Lake Water Treatment Facility Improvements, Membrane Equipment Procurement HDR Project No. 67197 Dear Mr. Goehring, We have reviewed the bids received on January 8,2008 for the Mary's Lake Water Treatment Facility ---1--Membrane EquipmentÂ·Procurement=--We-received-bids,from-both ofthe approved suppliers,-Zenon/GE . - and U.S. Filter/Siemens. The following table summarizes the bids received from both suppliers. A detailed bid tabulation is attached to this letter; SUMMARY OF BIDS FOR ESTES PARK US Filter Zenon/GE Description /Siemens Value Value Total membrane system capital cost including both first and second stage ' treatment $2,518,348 $2,350,000 Total of annual operating costs (present worth) $488,569 $671,558 20-year present worth of annual cost for membrane replacement , $361,167 $453,715 20-YEAR PRESENT WORTH TOTAL $3,368,084 $3,462,149 . As shown in the table above, the 20-year present worth cost proposed by both bidders is very similar, with Zenon's total cost: being about $94,000.less than Siemens' cost.. In addition, several ~ price deduction options were offered by both bidders. The additions and deductions offered by both bidders are as follows: HDREngineering,Inc. Â· .303 East'17thAvenue Phone: (303) 76+1520 Suite 700 . Fax: (303}86017139 Denver, CO 80203-1256 www.hdrinc.com Mr. Bob Goehring January 22,2008 Page 2 Zenon/GE â€¢ Provide 'N' capacity for both first and second stage membranes: $ 500,000.00 Dedudt U.S. Filter/Siemens â€¢ Provide 'N' capacity forÂ·both first and second stage membranes: $ 75,000.00 Deduct â€¢ Replace transfer pumps with non-ANSI G&L pumpsby Goulds: $ 22,000.00 Deduct Based on our review of the bids received for the Membrane Edluipment Procurement, we recommend award of the contract to Zenon/GE. The Zenon/GE proposal demonstrated a thorough understanding of Â· the project. Some ofthe particular advantages of the Zenon/GE proposal include: â€¢ The Zenon proposal allows for third stage flocculation, whereas the Siemens proposal does not allow for third stage flocculation. â€¢ The Zenon proposal provides space for a fourth treatment train that can be used in the future to expand the plant capacity to 6 mgd. The Siemens proposal does not allow for the addition of a - - fourth treatment train: + - - - , â€¢ The Zenon proposal takes advantage of the available space in the clearwell, which reduces the size of the necessary building addition. The Siemens proposal does not take advantage of the Â· available space in the clearwell and therefore a significant building addition is required. â€¢ The Siemens proposal requires phosphoric acid for membrane cleaning, which is not required for the Zenon system. AdditionalÂ·building space will be required for this chemical system. â€¢ The Zenon proposal utilizes a low density membrane for the second stage membranes, which is well suited for high solids loading. Â· The Siemens proposal utilizes the. same high-density membrane type for both the first and second stage membranes. The Zenon proposal includes several exceptions *to the contract commercial language. Furthermore, some additional. clarification is needed from Zenon on technical issues. Consequently, it is our recommendation that the Estes Park contractbe awarded to Zenon/GE subject to successful negotiation of the final contract. Please let us know if you have any questions on our bid award recommendation or need any additional information. Sincerely, 1.4 C N,4 HDR Engineering Sarah Clark, P.E. Project Manager HDREngineering, Inc. MEMORANDUM To:Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Bob Joseph, Community Development Director Date: 2-6-08 Subject: Appeal of Kind Coffee Use Classification Background: The Estes Valley Development Code sets forth a process for classification of uses not specifically noted in the Use Tables. The following code sections describe this process: Uses Not Listed As Permitted. Uses not specifically listed as permitted by right or by special review in a specific zoning district, as depicted in Use Tables 4-1 and 4-4, are prohibited unless such use is subsequently permitted pursuant to the use classification procedure set forth in Â§3.12 of this Code, or the rezoning/amendment procedure set forth in Â§3.3 of this Code. Â§ 3.12 USECLASSIFICATION REQUESTS A. Purpose and Applicability. 1. The use classifications set forth in Chapter 4, "Zoning Districts," and defined in Chapter 13, "Definitions," describe one (1) or more uses having similar characteristics, but do not list every use or activity that may appropriately fall within the classification. This Section shall apply to determine all questions or disputes whether a specific use is deemed to be within a use classification permitted in a zoning district. 2. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to permit any specific use that is expressly prohibited in a zoning district. 3. If, pursuant to this Section, a specific use cannot be clearly determined to be in a use classification permitted in the applicable zoning district, such use may be incorporated into the zoning regulations by a Code Amendment, as provided in Â§3.3 above. B. Procedures for Use Classification Request. The procedure for an application to determine a use classification shall be as follows: 1. Step 1: Pre-Application Conference. A pre-application conference is voluntary for use classification requests. 2. Step 2: Staff Review and Action. Within thirty (30) days from the date a complete application is submitted, the Staff shall: (a) review the application according to the standards set forth in this Section; (b) consult with the Town or County Attorneys and other staff, as necessary; and (c) make a final determination as to whether the subject use shall be deemed to be within a use classification set forth in this Code and whether such use should be allowed in the applicable zoning district. 3. Appeals. Appeals from the Staff's determination on a use classification request shall be made to the respective Boards. 4. Form of Determination. All final determinations by Staff or the Boards shall be provided to the Applicant in writing and shall be filed in' the official record of use classification determinations. C. Standards for Review. The following considerations shall be used to determine what classification a use is in and whether it is appropriate to allow such use as a principal use in the applicable zoning district: 1. The actual or projected characteristics of the subject use compared to the stated characteristics of each use classification allowed in the zoning district (see Â§13.2, "Use Classifications/Specific Use Definitions and Examples"); 2. The relative amount of site area or floor space and equipment devoted to the use; 3. Relative amounts of sales from the subject use compared to other permitted uses; 4. The relative number of employees in each use; 5. Hours of operation; 6. Building and site arrangement; 7. Vehicles used with the use; 8. The relative number of vehicle trips generated by the use; 9. Signs expected in conjunction with the use; 10. How the use advertises itself; 11. Whether the use is likely to be found independent of other uses on the site; 12. Any other potential impacts of the subject use relative to other specific uses included in the classification and permitted in the applicable zoning district; and 13. Whether the subject use is consistent with the stated intent and purposes of this Code and the zoning district in which it is to be located. Staff followed this process as required by the Code Sections cited above. Specifically, staff used the standards for review criteria to arrive at a determination that the Kind Coffee business is an allowed use in the CO commercial zoning district as follows: Use Classification Business: Kind Coffee Address: 552 W. Elkhorn Zoning District: CO, Commercial Outlying D. Standards for Review. The following considerations shall be used to determine what classification a use is in and whether it is appropriate to allow such use as a principal use in the applicable zoning district: 1. The actual or projected characteristics of the subject use compared to the stated characteristics of each use classification allowed in the zoning district (see Â§13.2, "Use Classifications/Specific Use Definitions and Examples"); Staff finding: Typical of Retail and Small-scale Wholesale sales, Office, and Brew Pub 2. The relative amount of site area or floor space and equipment devoted to the use; Staff finding: Approximately 1/4 retail, 1/4 office, 14 roasting and storage 3. Relative amounts of sales from the subject use compared to other permitted uses; (not available). 4. The relative number of employees in each use; Staff finding: typical ofretail 5. Hours of operation; varies seasonally, Staff finding: typical of retail and office 6. Building and site arrangement; Staff finding: typical of retail and office 7. Vehicles used with the use; Staff finding: typical of retail 8. The relative number of vehicle trips generated by the use; Staff finding: typical of retail 9. Signs expected in conjunction with the use; Staff finding: typical of retail 10. How the use advertises itself; Staff finding: typical of retail 11. Whether the use is likely to be found independent of other uses on the site; Staff finding: not applicable in this case 12. Any other potential impacts of the subject use relative to other specific uses included in the classification and permitted in the applicable zoning district; and Staff finding: typical of retail 13. Whether the subject use is consistent with the stated intent and purposes of this Code and the zoning district in which it is to be located. Staff finding: Retail and Wholesale uses are allowed as principle use Summary Staff Finding: Retail Food and Beverage Sales is a listed permitted use. Small-scale Whole Sale Sales and Distribution is a listed permitted use. Office is a listed permitted use. Coffee Roasting is similar to a Brewery (a listed permitted accessory use). Kind Coffee is very similar to these listed permitted uses considering all of the required standards of review listed above. Required Town Board ACTION: As noted in section 3.12 8.3 Appea/s the staff finding can be appealed to the Town Board of Trustees. The hearing of this appeal should focus on the prescribed code procedure as set out above. Any motion to overturn the staff determination should identify a specific error in the staff findings. A motion to uphold the staff findings can be so stated. ESTAFF RESPONSE to the Appellant's Positioli ~tatemenit &/6/04 Note: The staff responses (in bold italic and highlighted) have been integrated into fhi body of the appelletk politiollstatement for convenience of tracking the context Of 'theresponsel APPEAL POSITION STATEMENT INTRODUCTION This is an appeal from an Estes Park Community Development Department staff decision to allow Kind Coffee Company to be involved in a manufacturing process at 552 W. Elkhorn Avenue in a Commercial Outlying Zoning District. A. The property at 552 W. Elkhorn occupied by Kind Coffee, is zoned as CO or - Commercial Outlying. The properfy south- of Kind Coffee is owned by the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association, and the property to the immediate west is also owned by the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association and is zoned Commercial Outlying. Historically, from documents that were provided by the Town of Estes Park, at some point in time there was an application made and, reviewed by the Estes Park Planning and Zoning staff and as a result there was a Use Classification for the business known as Kind Coffee at 552 West Elkhorn Ave. (Exhibit A). This appeal relates to that use classification determination, which basically allows a manufacturing process (wherein coffee beans are roasted), which violates the Estes Valley Development Code. Also, there was a document provided relative to "A River and Side Yard variance dated June 5, 2006 (Exhibit B). This seven (7) page document is referred to in this presentation because some of the information gleaned relative to the objections of the appellant, Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association, is derived from that variance record. Both of these documents are going to be referred to in this appeal It should be noted that no members of the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association or owners thereof received any information relative to this variance (Exhibit B) prior to the granting of the variance, or the staff decision to allow the manufacturing process referred to [Exhibit A-] prior to that decision. REWReply: Tlie variance grnnted by miff in 2006 <to allow a 6'x10'~ 'concrete landing at the back door) is not subject to appeal before the Town YBoard. The decision to grant this variance has no bearing _on_the_ust classification_thatjs-theonly-subjectofthe_currentappealt Page 2 of 13 SECTION I A. Chapter 4 of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) deals with, in part, non-residential zoning (Exhibit C). 1. Section 4.4(2)(b) (EVDC) states that CO - Outlying Commercial Zoning District. "This zoning district is established to encourage the development of a wide variety of commercial and retail uses along the major corridor entryways into the valley and the town of Estes Park. This zoning district is established to implement the "commercial" and "commercial- recreation" future land use categories recommended in the comprehensive plan. This district should accommodate the majority of the larger, free standing commercial and retail buildings to meet future demand in the community." B. Exhibit D is also attached, which is the density and dimension standards for non- residential zoning districts. The number of exemptions that were granted to Kind Coffee Company were rather remarkable and are described briefly. For instance, under CO lots fronting an arterial is to be 40,000 sq. ft. The square footage of this property does not come close to that. Lots fronting arterials must be 200 feet wide, this frontage is 157.39 feet wide. Front footage of 25 foot setback minimum with side yard setback of 15 feet. Staff RepWO-The dimensional standards referred to above apply only to newl; 'subdivided lots and new building construction created subsequent to 200('t 'under the new code. The subject lot and existing building both pre-date the Lloption of these standards and are exempt from retro-active application ofi these standards. The property in question may be occupied for any use allowed 'under the current zoning regardless of these dimensional non-conformitied *urthermore, these dimensional non-conformities do not prevent a changt ~from-one p.ermitted_use_to_another. permitteduse\ Interestingly enough Planning and Development approved a variance for the river and side yard setback for Kind Coffee in June of 2006 (Exhibit B). Exhibit B states, "the proposed loading area also encroaches in to the 15 foot minimum required side yard setback." The documents quotes, "the Petitioner requests the variance to EVDC section 7.11.N.2.b, which states, "a loading dock shall not be located in a required setback. In addition street side loading areas shall be setback at least 70 feet from the street property line or 1 10 from the street centerline. " Stal-Râ‚¬*W. The variance granted by staff in 2006 is not open to appeal befor; 'the Town Board. The decision to grant this variance has no bearing on_the_use, 'classificationin question that is the.only_subject of.the current appealj Page 3 Of 13 An examination of the improvement survey would show that the building itself is only 17 feet from the property line. The new 6 x 12 concrete slab clearly encroaches on the side yard property setback. A 6 foot wide slab would seem to be, at best, an 11 foot setback rather than the required 15 foot setback. This variance was granted to allow a loading dock for receiving and shipping as a result of a manufacturing process. Statt Reph: The variance granted by staff in 2006 is not open to appeal befor~ the Town Board. The decision to grant this variance has no bearing on-the-use, 'classification in auestion that is the only subject of the curcent appeag LI SECTION II A. The use classification document provided (Exhibit A) refers to the standards of review. B. According to the use classification document, the "Planning and Zoning staff outlined standards for review and then made the staff- finding retail food and beverage sale is a permitted use, small-scale wholesale sales and distribution is a permitted use. Office is a permitted use. Coffee roasting is similar to a brew pub and this is permitted as an accessorY use. C. Table 4-4 (EVDC) (Exhibit C) covers the permitted uses in non-residential zoning districts. A "p" designation is permitted by right, an "s" designation is permitted by special review and a "-" is prohibited. The staff made the finding that retail food and beverage sale is a permitted use. Unfortunately, table 4.4 does not have a section for retail food and beverage sales. Staff Reply: This statement is in error. Table 4.4 specifically identifie; Eating/Drinking Establishments as a permitted principal use in the CO zonind district. Table 4.4 also specifically identifies Food/Beveraae Sales as _d 'permitted principal use in the COzoning district; Under retail establishments (Exhibit D), the chart lists retail establishments large and all other retail establishments. There appears to be a limitation to sale of products manufactured or produced on the subject premises and a limitation that no more than 15% of the principal buildings gross floor area shall be devoted to retail space. According to the use classification standard for review (Exhibit A) paragraph 2, the relative amount of site area or floor space and equipment devoted to the use; is approximately 14 retail, 1/4 office, 92 roasting and storage. Clearly retail at 25% is in excess of the 15% limit Staff Reph: The standards referred to above are found in Table 5-2 Accessor; rUses Permitted in Non-Residential zoning districts. The snecific notations iR Page 4 of 13 'this table are cross referenced to sections 5.1 G and 5.1-1 These code section~ ~expressly pertain only to accessory uses located in the A-Accommodations Uning district or the 0-office and I-1 industrial districts. As such, these cod~ references have no bearingwhatsoever_on_the_subject PLope#y_tbptjsJpcated_int Phe CO zoning district.~ D. Table 13.2 (Exhibit E) also talks about eating/drinking establishments and food/beverage sales. The Use Classification Standard for Review(Exhibit A), paragraph 1 refers to c(13)(2), "Uses, Classifications, Specific Use Definition and Examples." Definition 17 is eating/drinking establishment. 17(a) (Exhibit E) has a general definition, "retail businesses serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises. 17(b)(2) talks about a restaurant which is "an establishment where the principal business is the sale of food and beverages in a readY to consume state where fermented malt beverages, malt, special malt, and vinous and spirituous liquors may be produced on the premises as an accessorvuse." It is difficult to see where, as an eating or drinking establishment, the Kind Coffee operation fits into a specific definition as a retail food and beverage sales. The staff finding states that "coffee roasting is similar to a brew pub and this is permitted as an accessory use retailing small scale wholesale is the principle. Yet, retail takes up 1/4 of the space and the roasting and storage take up 14 of the space, with an office taking up 14 of the space, with no space allocated for wholesale sales. In reality, on allocation of space, the roasting, storage and wholesaling is the primary use and retail is an accessory use, even allocating 92 of the office space to retail and /2 to roasting, storage and wholesaling, roasting, storage and wholesaling use more room, than the retail. Staff Reply: The code does not set forth space allocation as the sole governindj 'friteria for identifying the principal use of the property. The principal use oi this property is best judged by weighing the allocation of time suent in pursuit 'of the various activities associated with the businessE ~It is important to note that coffee roasting is performed less than five hours 03?4 ~veek (or less than 10 % of the total time the building is occupied and in active~ use). Therefore coffee roasting cannot be considered the principal use of the property. The hours of use of the property as a retail business and as officA 'supporting the.retailbusinesses far_exceed.the.hoursof.roasting.operations> Not only by floor space, but by actual use, the Kind Coffee facility at 552 W. Elkhorn Avenue is open for retail approximately 3-4 months per year. The other eight (8) months it is used only as a roasting/wholesale/storage area and therefore, does not fit within the provisions. In reality, the coffee roasting, storage and shipping is done 12 months per year while the retail store is open 3-4 months per year. Again the coffee roasting and storage is the primary use and not the accessory use. (See photographs J-1 and J-2). Retail is in fact the accessory use. Anecdotally, I went to Kind Coffee in the late summer of 2006, I knew that the East Elkhorn store had wireless internet and I was trying to decide Page 5 of 13 whether or not to put wireless internet in my condominium and wanted to know whether or not they were going to have wireless internet I could use rather than put one in my condominium. I was told by the employee that they were not going to have the wireless internet because the retail selling of coffee was only a way of getting around the zoning ordinance to allow the roasting operation. Attached as Exhibit F is a letter to the Estes Park Planning and Zoning Department dated October 5, 2006. The same information was relayed by an employee of Kind Coffee to Robert Ayres and other property owners in 2007. D. Table 5.2 (EVDC) (Exhibit E) refers to accessory uses permitted in the non- residential zoning districts. The production of fermented malt beverages, malt, special malt, and vinous and spirituous liquors (brew pub is permitted but is permitted as an accessory to a permitted restaurant use only.) Below that is the reference to restaurants, bars, newsstands, gift shops, clubs, managerial offices and lounges. It is again permitted in CO, but only allowed when inside the principal building containing a permitted principal hotel, motel, resort, lodge or maior entertainment event facility uses. Staff Reph: The standards referred to above are found in Table 5-2 Accessor; . - - Uses Permitted-in-Non-Residential zoning districts.-The specific notations in thii 'table are cross referenced to sections 5.1 G and 5.1 J. These code sectionA specifically pertain only to accessory uses located in the A-Accommodations zoningi 'district or the O-office and I.1 industrial districts. As such, these code references have no-bearingwhatsoeveron.the-subject property.that.is.locatedin-the_CO_zoning kistrict.1 Based on these definitions the staff finds that coffee roasting is similar to a brew pub and that it is permitted as an accessory use. It is not permitted as an accessory use in the Kind Coffee location at 552 West Elkhorn Avenue as it is permitted as an accessory to a permitted restaurant use only. Before a coffee roasting facility is allowed it must be an accessory to a permitted restaurant use. F. Section 13.3, EVDC, paragraph 5 defines accessory use. "Accessory use shall mean a use of land or a building that is customarily and clearly incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and that is ordinarily located on the same site or lot as such principal use." G. The Use Classification (Exhibit A) paragraph A.2. shows 1/2 of the allotted floor space and equipment is devoted to roasting and storage. Plus the retail store is open only 3-4 months a year while roasting, storage and wholesaling is a 12 month operation. H. I would direct your attention to the documents from the Kind Coffee website, Exhibit K. The first page of that exhibit talks about "a small coffee shop and roastery in the heart of the Rocky Mountians," and states, "As we begin dabbling in the wholesale business, the roasting demands soon outgrew our small 5 pound Page 6 of 13 Diedrich roaster so we decided to move the roaster into a warehouse and during the process. bought a bigger roaster." They further state, "With a steadY growing web-presence and good word-of-mouth advertising, we now ship daily from our warehouse." On the second page of Exhibit K, the talk about their shop, stating, "There' s a coffee shop on the corner in downtown Estes Park," and, "We welcome our guests to discover an original coffee shop full of light, color, conversation and beautiful aromas from behind the bar," and, "We provide free wireless internet access for laptops, or iump on our computers for a small fee." You'll note, among other things, that there is no reference to the store or coffee shop at 552 West Elkhorn Ave, which is the subiect here. The reason for that is that location is thier manufacturing and warehouse operation. I'm directing your attention to page three of Exhibit K, it states, "but begins long before the beans arrive at our 1,000 square foot roasterv in Estes Park, Colorado." Then it goes on to state, "Burlap sacks of raw beans, still in their green stage, arrive at our warehouse fresh and ready to roast. Using a Sivetz, a hot air roaster powered bv two burners and multiple fans, we are able to roast 200 pounds of coffee per hour." You would think that if Kind Coffee was legitimately operating a retail sales shop out of this property, rather than a manufacturing, warehouse and shipping process, that they would at least mention that they have two coffee shops, one located "On the corner in downtown Estes Park," and one located at their West Elkhorn Avenue address. It is very clear that the manufacturing that goes on here is primarily a manufacturing and warehousing process, which they claim they are shipping from daily, and they ship daily from their warehouse. This is clearly not an accessory use, it is the primary use and it violates the Estes Valley Development Code, as well as the Use Determination by the staff. SECTION III A. The Staff (Exhibit A, paragraph 2) talks about retail, office and storage and then in paragraph 13 brings in retail and wholesale uses allowed as a principle use. Table 4-4 (Exhibit C) talks about permitted use for non-residential zoning district. Referencing warehousing and storage. Limited warehousing and storage is not automatically permitted but permitted by special review. As far as warehousing and storage goes in CO, it is not permitted on lots abutting an arterial street or highwaY. This property abuts highway 34/Elkhom Avenue, which is an arterial street or highway. So in fact this operation is not permitted at this location. B. The Kind Coffee website and actual practice of using the property in question is as a warehouse and a manufacturing process. Warehousing is not permitted on an arterial street in Commercial Operations Zoning and this is clearly a violation of the Estes Valley Development Code. This process should only be conducted in a CH or heavy commercial zoning. Staff Reply: The 1,000 s.f. building that Kind Coffee now occupies wai Yormerly used as professional office space. No expansion of the structure was. 'needed_to_accommodate_the_change of use when Kind Coffee moved into thJ Page 7 Of 13 I- 1 - building. It is a gross exaggeration to describe this buitiling as a warehousJ Whe element of storage that does occupy 500 square feet inside the building iJ 'similar to the storage space that would be commonly associated_withj t:estaurant,-orfor-thatmatter-any-other-retai(merchandising. use.~ C. In fact, what is being conducted at the location is CH (Exhibit C), heavy commercial zoning, which reads, "this zoning district is intended to provide for heavy commercial uses including vehicle repair, construction trades and bulk goods retailing. It shall be limited to areas within the Estes Valley that already contain some of these types of heavy commercial uses, and shall not include areas fronting the valley's highways or arterial streets. Permitted uses shall include UtilitY facilities and installation, repair services, bulk storage and limited manufacturing. Manufacturing is defined in Black's Law Dictionary: manufacture, n. the process or operation of making wares or any materials produced by hand, by machinery, or by other agency: anything made from raw materials by the hand, by machinery, or by art. Jones Bros. Company v. Underkoffler, D.C.Pa.16f Supp. 729 730 . The production of articles for use from raw material or prepared materials by giving such materials new forms, qualities, properties or combinations, whether by hand, labor or machines. Cain's Coffee Company. The City of Muskogee, 171 Okl 635,44 p2d. 50 52 . D. The primary activities taking place at Kind Coffee are the roasting, packaging and storage and wholesale of coffee, transforming it from raw coffee beans to roasted coffee beans. This is clearly a manufacturing process and is permitted to be conducted in a CH heavy commercial zoning district, not in outlying commercial districts. It is also the principle use not the accessory use. Staff Reply: The code specifically lists Brew Pubs as a permitted use in the C(]~ 'district. An examination of the volume of storage and large mechanical 'equipment associated with a micro-brew business like the Estes Park Brewery clearly demonstrates that the intent of the code is to permit this kind of us~ 'despite the element of "manufacturing" or "processing" associated with the, business. In fact it would be difficult to find a resort community anywhere that has relegated either micro-breweries or boutique coffee roasters to theirJ industrial districts or heavy commercial districts. To the contrary, these uses, %re highly valued in thriving downtowns across the county. Residents and visitors now expect to find them as part of an active downtown experience, and the aspect of specialty, or boutique_production_of_a_unique_local_brand 6&ances_thâ‚¬(mgge_of.the_downto_19,1 E. Under Section 13.2, Use Classifications, Specific Use Definitions and Examples, Definition 29 (Exhibit L) relates to industry. Under Industry (General) it states, "Products may be finished or semi-finished and are generally made for the wholesale market for transfer to other plants or to order for Firms or Consumers. Goods are generally not displayed or sold on site, but if so, they are subordinate part of sales. Relatively few customers come to the manufacturing site." This Page 8 Of 13 definition fits the Kind Coffee Operation to a "T". Of course industries belong in the heavy commercial zoning and not in the commercial outlying. Again, this is a violation of the CO Zoning as this seems to clearly define where this manufacturing plant and wholesale distribution plant should be. F. Section 5.1(5) deals with Specific Use Standard. This section contains regulations that apply to specific uses or classes of uses. (Exhibit G). G. Paragraph "s", Warehousing and Storage; Wholesale Sales and Distribution. (Exhibit G), provides under paragraph 1 that all wholesaling, distribution and storage of materials and equipment, except vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products, shall be conducted within a totally enclosed building. Photograph J6 shows basically the shipping or distribution area and in fact the area just in front of that brown box partially depicts the 6 x 12 slab, as does photograph J7. J7 is a view of what appears to be a swamp cooler type air conditioner, which we have had the pleasure of looking at for most of the summer and so far all of the winter. This photo also depicts the door that was added. Photograph J8 is another view of the building showing the extended chimney they have added to try to alleviate either some of the noise issues or odor issues. Photo J9 is a clear depiction of the slab that was added and taken from the front of the store on January 15, 2008. Exhibit J.9 depicts the cart used to move pallets, which is outside all the time. Many items are stored outside of the building. Paragraph G2 provides that vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products shall be screened from view from all neighboring properties and from internal and external streets with a minimum 6 foot solid masonry or wood fencing and landscaping, berms and landscaping, or other approved comparable screening. When loading vehicles, the vehicles are not screened from the neighboring property to the south or to the west. A weather-worn box has been left out by the loading dock for months (Photos J6,7,8). 'Stati Reph: The volume of coffee handled at this site is so modest that thA 'owner of Kind Coffee usually uses her own car to load and transport the beans~, PHeavy trucks, as normally associated with wholesale production and ~arehousing, rarely visit the site. There is no space for trucks to back up to thA back door as would certainly be_the_case_wjth a warehouse loading -dock;, Photograph J 10 shows the view from the presenter's deck. SECTION IV A. The neighbors to the South is the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association. There are two condominium buildings with seven units in one and eight units in the other. The Condominium Association also owns the property that is directly to the west of Kind Coffee. Apparently the original builders of the complex were going to put a third building in as a Building C, which never did develop. page 9 of 13 Exhibit B, paragraph IV, discusses staff findings relative to the variance. It is interesting that the questions asked is not considered in the Use Classification found by the staff in Exhibit A. Question paragraph IV (2)(c) asks the question, "whether the essential character of the neighborhood will be substantiallY altered or whether adioining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. It is the Condominium Association' s position that the character of this neighborhood is substantially altered and suffers a substantial detriment by the allowance of this roasting, manufacturing, warehousing and distribution center being located at 552 West Elkhorn Avenue. B. The roasting creates a sickening odor comparable to burnt coffee and is often referred to as the burnt toast smell. During the roasting process, at times, it makes it virtually impossible for the owners to sit on their deck and enjoy the Fall River as it rushes by their home. At many times the roasting odor is so strong that even going inside and shutting the doors will not keep the obnoxious odor out. It has substantially affected the quiet and peaceful enjoyment of our property by not allowing us the full use of our condominiums and our decks. Also the burnt coffee odor permeates the condominiums when they are closed up and it is trapped in the condominiums. When an owner or guest comes to visit on the weekends the condominiums normally have to be aired out before they can -be enjoyed. Staff Reply: The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (Ait~ 'Pollution Control Division) is responsible for regulating and enforcing airJ ~uality standards in this case. Boutique coffee roasting is now so common that the Department has adopted standards specifically tailored to address emissions 'from coffee roasting. The Division has inspected the operation at 552 W~ r]Elkhorn and has found the operation to.be fully .compliant with-all_of_thJ, 6pplicalde- State_stedards.! C. The obnoxious whine in the roasting process is loud, irritating and offensive and also interferes with our peaceful enjoyment and use of our property. D. The smell and noise is not only personally offensive, but members of our Association, including a presenter, have become nauseated due to the strong smell. E. The noise problem is significant. It should be understood that the roasting noise is substantially different than that produced by the Fall River. A Police Officer taking noise readings from our deck without the roasting process determined that the river itself was above the noise ordinance at that time (Exhibit H, last page). However, the river is a soothing, relaxing sound and once the whining of the manufacturing process starts it becomes an irritating, offensive sound. Page 10 of 13 F. This owner does not understand why if the river itself is above the noise ordinance why would it be acceptable to exacerbate the condition by allowing an offensive, loud, whining sound during manufacturing that is clearly above the ordinance. In spite of the Police Officer's report, at certain times of the year the whining is totally offensive. In fact, the officers report clearly shows that the roasting process elevates the noise beyond statutory standards (Exhibit H). G. The neighborhood has been altered substantially by this manufacturing process. We are no longer able to sit on our deck at any time, day or night, and enjoy the beautiful Colorado scenery and the wonderful soothing sounds of the Fall River. We now have what appears to be the only manufacturing process located in our entire end of town. H. Now our enjoyment of our property, the river and the scenery is contingent upon the whims of Kind Coffee and their very irritating and obnoxious roasting activity. I. The noise and smell not only affects ourselves but affects our guests and the renters within the buildings as the Kind Coffee roasting operating adversely and substantially affects the enjoyment of our property. Some renters have even indicated that they would not continue to rent because of the offensive smell and noise from the operation. J. A complaint was apparently made to the Estes Park Police Department relative to the noise and odor emanating from Kind Coffee. The Code Enforcement Officer, Andrew Hart, made an incident report to the Estes Park Police Department. It is interesting that the report (Exhibit H) does not state who filed the complaint, but lists three witnesses. K. Apparently it was not taken into consideration by the Planning and Zoning staff that there was noise and odor associated with the Kind Coffee roasting operation. However, it is clear that Planning and Zoning knew about it because of personal statements made by Administrator, Robert Joseph, who admitted to at least 2 owners that there was a strong odor that emanate from the coffee roasting operation from previous locations. L. Attached are relevant portions of 8.06 Estes Park Municipal Code (Exhibit I). Section 8.06.01 has a list of definitions and among those are the definition of unreasonable noise: unreasonable noise means any sound of such level and duration as to be or tend to be injurious to human health or welfare, or which would unreasonably interfere with enjoyment of life or property throughout the town or in anY portions thereof, but excludes all aspects of the employer- employee relationship concerning health and safety hazards within the confines of, a place of employment. Page Il of 13 M. Section 8.06.020 unreasonable noise prohibited and states: no person shall make, continue or cause to be made or continued any unreasonable noise; and no person shall knowingly permit such noise upon any premises or enter upon any motor vehicle owned, possessed or driven by such persons or under such persons control or operation. For purposes of this section, members of the Police Department are empowered to make a prima facie determination as to whether a noise is unreasonable. N. Section 8.06.030 is maximum permissible noise levels. Under paragraph A it states: a noise measured or registered in the manner prescribed in 8.06.030 from any source, at a level which is in excess of dB(a) established for the time period and zoning districts listed in this section, is hereby declared to be a noise disturbance and is unlawful. The chart under 8.06.030 (a) lists the Commercial Outlying (CO) maximum dB(a) from 7 am to 8 p.m. is 60 and from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. is 55. O. Exhibit H, which is attached has two attachments. One page shows the 15 different locations where sound was measured and the second page shows measurements apparently when roasting was conducted on: (a) September 21, 2007, (b) September 26, 2007, (c) September 27, 2007, and the average was shown for those three dates and then not roasting, which apparently means that those measurements were taken when Kind Coffee was not roasting on September 27,2007. At location no. 5, which is right next to the waterfall and at location no. 6, which is west of the waterfall, there was a consistent measurement in excess of the requirements. However, at location no. 9, which the presenter believes is on his deck or near his deck (photograph J10), on September 27, 2007 when not roasting the measurement was below the decibel level at 56.4 and when roasting on that date it was above the decibel level at 64.3. This is almost a 9 point increase in the measurement. On prior roasting days, on (a) and (b) the level was above the established level and should have been declared a noise disturbance. The same results show for location no. 10, which appears to be the first floor of the presenter' s condominium building. The same results were obtained at locations no. 13, no. 14 and no. 15 with no. 14 being Mr. Ayers condominium and again no. 9 being the Bailey's condominium. With 7 of the 15 measurement locations showing excessive noise and 7 of the 12 on the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium's side of the river showing excessive noise the Police Officer made the determination that the ambient noise resulting from the roasting production does not constitute an unreasonable noise source. On the other hand, the code itself specifically, under 8.06.30, states that a noise measured or registered in the manner provided in section 8.06.030 from any source at any level which is in excess of the dB(a) established for the time period and the zoning district listed in this section is hereby declared to be a noise disturbance and unlawful. Although perplexing, one senses an appearance of impropriety in that the code enforcement officer is a designee of the planning and Page 12 Of 13 zoning department director, whose staff made the favorable "Use Determination" we are al-pealing. StaffReply: The question of compliance with applicable noise standards m,4 be disputed under a separate process, but this dispute should not enter_into.the 'deliberations.as to-the-conformity-of.the-use.in.the_CO-zoning district P. Again, the noise made by Fall River is a noise that is clearly there, but is clearly a relaxing noise while the noise from the roasting equipment and operation is a very irritating noise. Q. In conclusion, relative to this section, the question asked in Exhibit B, whether the essential character of the neighborhood will be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer substantial detriment as a result of the variance. When you have a new irritating noise from a manufacturing process located immediately adj acent to your property, it substantially alters and adversely affects the character of the neighborhood, as well as your property values. R. There is a substantial amount of residential and accommodation property along Fall River Road. Part of many people' s dream in Estes Park is to have a home along the river, it was certainly our dream. Our condominiums and the location is very special, right next to the Fall River, and because of this manufacturing process our enjoyment of our property has been substantially hampered, and our neighborhood changed. SECTION V Another concern that we have is the effect of this roasting process on the elk. The triangle, owned by Elkhorn Lodge, adjoining our property to the east, has always been a popular hang out for the elk population during the summer. During the summer months there were elk on that property at least five (5) to seven (7) days per week. This last summer that has changed and elk where they are there on an average of 2 days per week. Obviously elk have an acute sense of smell and we are wondering whether or not any wildlife impact study was made before this operation was allowed to be installed. CONCLUSION A. It is amazing that Exhibit B, Section 4 (6) makes the following statement, under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted. or a use expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of the Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. This should also be applicable in the "Use Determination" made by the staff. Yet the staff decision for both the Use Determination and the Variance allow blatant exceptions and violation of the zoning provisions. Page 13 Of 13 B. They have violated the spirit and the letter of the commercial outlying zoning concept. They allowed a small manufacturing process of roasting and warehousing coffee beans in a district that was designed to expand to allow the larger commercial development in that area. Kind Coffee on their website clearly refers to this property as their warehouse roasting facility. This building isn't even referred to as a retail sales outlet on their website C. The variance which they allowed was to provide for a shipping area for this manufacturing and warehousing process. They have violated the accessory use provisions of the EVDC by allowing a coffee roasting facility to go into a retail area as an accessory operation, "like a brew pub", which is suppose to be an accessory operation within a restaurant whose principal business is the sale of food. In reality, the principal business is the roasting of coffee beans and warehousing and wholesaling them. The retail sale of coffee is nominal and the accessory use is in fact the primary use and that is a clear violation of the zoning ordinance. D. They are allowing warehousing and storage operations to be established on Elkhorn Avenue, an arterial road, and that is clearly in violation of the Code. In fact, the variance granted in Exhibit B is all about facilitating the building of a loading dock for a manufacturing and warehouse business not the retail sale of coffee, which is clearly not allowed under the Estes Valley Development Code. When the question is asked, "whether the essential character of the neighborhood will be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance", the answer is clearly yes to the neighbors closest to the problem. We respectfully request the Boards of Trustees to overturn the staff decision to allow this manufacturing process in a commercial outlying district, and require the owners to stop the roasting and dismantle the roasting facility. Respectfully submitted this day of February, 2008, Verd R. Bailey, Secretary Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association VRB/dla ELKHORN PLAZA CONDIMINION ASSOCIATION 540-550 WEST ELKHORN AVE Estes Park Colorado, 80517 APPEAL POSITION STATEMENT INTRODUCTION This is an appeal from an Estes Park Community Development Department staff decision to allow Kind Coffee Company to be involved in a manufacturing process at 552 W. Elkhom Avenue in a Commercial Outlying Zoning District. A. The property at 552 W. Elkhorn occupied by Kind Coffee, is zoned as CO or Commercial Outlying. The property south of Kind Coffee is owned by the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association, and the property to the immediate west is also owned by the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association and is zoned Commercial Outlying. -- - - - - Historically, from documents that were provided by the Town of Estes Park, at some point in time there was an application made and, reviewed by the Estes Park Planning and Zoning staff and as a result there was a Use Classification for the business known as Kind Coffee at 552 West Elkhorn Ave. (Exhibit A). This appeal relates to that use classification determination, which basically allows a manufacturing process (wherein coffee beans are roasted), which violates the Estes Valley Development Code. Also, there was a document provided relative to "A River and Side Yard variance dated June 5, 2006 (Exhibit B). This seven (7) page document is referred to in this presentation because some o f the information gleaned relative to the objections of the appellant, Elkhom Plaza Condominium Association, is derived from that variance record. Both of these documents are going to be referred to in this appeal It should be noted that no members of the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association or owners thereof received any information relative to this variance (Exhibit B) prior to the granting of the variance, or the staff decision to allow the manufacturing process referred to [Exhibit A] prior to that decision. SECTION I A. Chapter 4 of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) deals with, in part, non-residential zoning (Exhibit C). 1. Section 4.4(2)(b) (EVDC) states that CO - Outlying Commercial Zoning District. "This zoning district is established to encourage the development Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 2 of 11 of a wide variety of commercial and retail uses along the major corridor entryways into the valley and the town of Estes Park. This zoning district is established to implement the "commercial" and "commercial- recreation" future land use categories recommended in the comprehensive plan. This district should accommodate the majority of the larger, free standing commercial and retail buildings to meet future demand in the community." B. Exhibit D is also attached, which is the density and dimension standards for non- residential zoning districts. The number of exemptions that were granted to Kind Coffee Company were rather remarkable and are described briefly. For instance, under CO lots fronting an arterial is to be 40,000 sq. ft. The square footage of this property does not come close to that. Lots fronting arterials must be 200 feet wide, this frontage is 157.39 feet wide. Front footage of 25 foot setback minimum with side yard setback o f 15 feet. Interestingly enough Planning and Development approved a variance for the river and side yard setback for Kind Coffee in June of 2006 (Exhibit B). Exhibit B states, "the proposed loading area also encroaches in to the 15 foot minimum required side yard setback." The documents quotes, "the Petitioner requests the variance to EVDC section 7.11.N.2.b, which states, "a loading dock shall not be located in a required setback. In addition street side loading areas shall be setback at least 70 feet from the street property line or 110 from the street centerline. " An examination of the improvement survey would show that the building itself is only 17 feet from the property line. The new 6 x 12 concrete slab clearly encroaches on the side yard property setback. A 6 foot wide slab would seem to be, at best, an 11 foot setback rather than the required 15 foot setback. This variance was granted to allow a loading dock for receiving and shipping as a result of a manufacturing process. SECTION II A. The use classification document provided (Exhibit A) refers to the standards of review. B. According to the use classification document, the "Planning and Zoning staff outlined standards for review and then made the staff finding retail food and beverage sale is a permitted use, small-scale wholesale sales and distribution is a permitted use. Office is a permitted use. Coffee roasting is similar to a brew pub and this is permitted as an accessory use. C. Table 4-4 (EVDC) (Exhibit C) covers the permitted uses in non-residential zoning districts. A "p" designation is permitted by right, an "s" designation is permitted by special review and a "-" is prohibited. The staff made the finding that retail food and beverage sale is a permitted use. Unfortunately, table 4.4 does not have Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 3 of 11 a section for retail food and beverage sales. Under retail establishments (Exhibit D), the chart lists retail establishments large and all other retail establishments. There appears to be a limitation to sale of products manufactured or produced on the subject premises and a limitation that no more than 15% of the principal buildings gross floor area shall be devoted to retail space. According to the use classification standard for review (Exhibit A) paragraph 2, the relative amount of site area or floor space and equipment devoted to the use; is approximately 1/1 retail, 14 office, 14 roasting and storage. Clearly retail at 25% is in excess of the 15% limit D. Table 13.2 (Exhibit E) also talks about eating/drinking establishments and food/beverage sales. The Use Classification Standard for Review(Exhibit A), paragraph 1 refers to c(13)(2), "Uses, Classifications, Specific Use Definition and Examples." Definition 17 is eating/drinking establishment. 17(a) (Exhibit E) has a general definition, "retail businesses serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises. 17(b)(2) talks about a restaurant which is "an establishment where the principal business is the sale of food and beverages in a ready to consume state where fermented malt beverages, malt, special malt, and vinous and spirituous liquors may be produced on the premises as an " accessory use. It is difficult-toÂ·see-where; as an eating-or-drinkifig-establishment, the Kiiid Coffee operation fits into a specific definition as a retail food and beverage sales. The staff finding states that "coffee roasting is similar to a brew pub and this is permitted as an accessory use retailing small scale wholesale is the principle. Yet, retail takes up 1/1 of the space and the roasting and storage take up !4 of the space, with an office taking up M of the space, with no space allocated for wholesale sales. In reality, on allocation of space, the roasting, storage and wholesaling is the primary use and retail is an accessory use, even allocating !4 of the office space to retail and 1/2 to roasting, storage and wholesaling, roasting, storage and wholesaling use more room, than the retail. Not only by floor space, but by actual use, the Kind Coffee facility at 552 W. Ell<horn Avenue is open for retail approximately 3-4 months per year. The other eight (8) months it is used only as a roasting/wholesale/storage area and therefore, does not fit within the provisions. In reality, the coffee roasting, storage and shipping is done 12 months per year while the retail store is open 3-4 months per year. Again the coffee roasting and storage is the primary use and not the accessory use. (See photographs J-1 and J-2). Retail is in fact the accessory use. Anecdotally, I went to Kind Coffee in the late summer of 2006, I knew that the East Elkhorn store had wireless internet and I was trying to decide whether or not to put wireless internet in my condominium and wanted to know whether or not they were going to have wireless internet I could use rather than put one in my condominium. I was told by the employee that they were not going to have the wireless internet because the retail selling of coffee was only a way of getting around the zoning ordinance to allow the roasting operation. Attached as Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 4 Of 11 Exhibit F is a letter to the Estes Park Planning and Zoning Department dated October 5, 2006. The same information was relayed by an employee of Kind Coffee to Robert Ayres and other property owners in 2007. E. Table 5.2 (EVDC) (Exhibit E) refers to accessory uses permitted in the non- residential zoning districts. The production of fermented malt beverages, malt, special malt, and vinous and spirituous liquors (brew pub is permitted but is permitted as an accessory to a permitted restaurant use only.) Below that is the reference to restaurants, bars, newsstands, gift shops, clubs, managerial offices and lounges. It is again permitted in CO, but only allowed when inside the principal building containing a permitted principal hotel, motel, resort, lodge or maior entertainment event facility uses. Based on these definitions the staff finds that coffee roasting is similar to a brew pub and that it is permitted as an accessory use. It is not permitted as an accessory use in the Kind Coffee location at 552 West Elkhorn Avenue as it is permitted as an accessory to a permitted restaurant use only. Before a coffee roasting facility is allowed it must be an accessory to a permitted restaurant use. F. Section 13.3, EVDC, paragraph 5 defines accessory use. "Accessory use shall mean a use of land or a building that is customarily and clearlY incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and that is ordinarily located on the same site or lot as such principal use." G. The Use Classification (Exhibit A) paragraph A.2. shows M of the allotted floor space and equipment is devoted to roasting and storage. Plus the retail store is open only 3-4 months a year while roasting, storage and wholesaling is a 12 month operation. H. I would direct your attention to the documents from the Kind Coffee website, Exhibit K. The first page of that exhibit talks about "a small coffee shop and roastery in the heart of the Rocky Mountians," and states, "As we begin dabbling in the wholesale business, the roasting demands soon outgrew our small 5 pound Diedrich roaster so we decided to move the roaster into a warehouse and during the process. bought a bigger roaster." They further state, "With a steady growing web-presence and good word-of-mouth advertising, we now ship daily from our warehouse." On the second page of Exhibit K, the talk about their shop, stating, "There's a coffee shop on the corner in downtown Estes Park," and, "We welcome our guests to discover an original coffee shop full of light, color, conversation and beautiful aromas from behind the bar," and, "We provide free wireless internet access for laptops. or iump on our computers for a small fee." You'll note, among other things, that there is no reference to the store or coffee shop at 552 West Elkhom Ave, which is the subiect here. The reason for that is that location is thier manufacturing and warehouse operation. I'm directing your attention to page three of Exhibit K, it states, "but begins long before the beans arrive at our 1,000 square foot roastery in Estes Park, Colorado." Then it goes on to state, "Burlap sacks of raw beans. still in their green stage, arrive at our Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 5 Of 11 warehouse fresh and ready to roast. Using a Sivetz, a hot air roaster powered by two bumers and multiple fans, we are able to roast 200 pounds of coffee per hour." You would think that if Kind Coffee was legitimately operating a retail sales shop out of this property, rather than a manufacturing, warehouse and shipping process, that they would at least mention that they have two coffee shops, one located "On the corner in downtown Estes Park," and one located at their West Elkhorn Avenue address. It is very clear that the manufacturing that goes on here is primarily a manufacturing and warehousing process, which they claim they are shipping from daily, and they ship daily from their warehouse. This is clearly not an accessory use, it is the primary use and it violates the Estes Valley Development Code, as well as the Use Determination by the staff. SECTION III A. The Staff (Exhibit A, paragraph 2) talks about retail, office and storage and then in paragraph 13 brings in retail and wholesale uses allowed as a principle use. Table 4-4 (Exhibit C) talks about permitted use for non-residential zoning district. Referencing warehousing and storage. Limited warehousing and storage is not automatically permitted but permitted by special review. As far as warehousing - - -and-storage goes in CO, it-is not pdftnitted on lots abutting an arterial street or highway. This property abuts highway 34/Elkhorn Avenue, which is an arterial street or highway. So in fact this operation is not permitted at this location. B. The Kind Coffee website and actual practice of using the property in question is as a warehouse and a manufacturing process. Warehousing is not permitted on an arterial street in Commercial Operations Zoning and this is clearly a violation of the Estes Valley Development Code. This process should only be conducted in a CH or heavy commercial zoning. C. In fact, what is being conducted at the location is CH (Exhibit C), heavy commercial zoning, which reads, "this zoning district is intended to provide for heavy commercial uses including vehicle repair, construction trades and bulk goods retailing. It shall be limited to areas within the Estes Valley that already contain some of these types o f heavy commercial uses, and shall not include areas fronting the valley's highways or arterial streets. Permitted uses shall include utility facilities and installation, repair services, bulk storage and limited manufacturing. Manufacturing is defined in Black's Law Dictionary: manufacture, n. the process or operation of making wares or any materials produced by hand, by machinery, or by other agency: anything made from raw materials by the hand, by machinery, or by art. Jones Bros. Company v. Underkoffler, D.C.Pa. 16f Supp. 729 730 , The production of articles for use from raw material or prepared materials by giving such materials new forms, qualities, properties or combinations, whether by hand, labor or machines. Cain's Coffee Company. The City of Muskogee, 171 Okl 635,44 p2d. 50 52 . Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 6 of 11 D. The primary activities taking place at Kind Coffee are the roasting, packaging and storage and wholesale of coffee, transforming it from raw coffee beans to roasted coffee beans. This is clearly a manufacturing process and is permitted to be conducted in a CH heavy commercial zoning district, not in outlying commercial districts. It is also the principle use not the accessory use. E. Under Section 13.2, Use Classifications, Specific Use Definitions and Examples, Definition 29 (Exhibit L) relates to industry. Under Industry (General) it states, "Products may be finished or semi-finished and are generally made for the wholesale market for transfer to other plants or to order for Firms or Consumers. Goods are generally not displayed or sold on site, but if so, they are subordinate part of sales. Relatively few customers come to the manufacturing site." This definition fits the Kind Coffee Operation to a "T". Of course industries belong in the heavy commercial zoning and not in the commercial outlying. Again, this is a violation of the CO Zoning as' this seems to clearly define where this manufacturing plant and wholesale distribution plant should be. F. Section 5.1(5) deals with Specific Use Standard. This section contains regulations that apply to specific uses or classes of uses. (Exhibit G). G. Paragraph "s", Warehousing and Storage; Wholesale Sales and Distribution. (Exhibit G), provides under paragraph 1 that all wholesaling, distribution and storage of materials and equipment, except vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products, shall be conducted within a totally enclosed building. Photograph J6 shows basically the shipping or distribution area and in fact the area just in front of that brown box partially depicts the 6 x 12 slab, as does photograph J7. J7 is a view of what appears to be a swamp cooler type air conditioner, which we have had the pleasure of looking at for most of the summer and so far all of the winter. This photo also depicts the door that was added. Photograph J8 is another view of the building showing the extended chimney they have added to try to alleviate either some o f the noise issues or odor issues. Photo J9 is a clear depiction of the slab that was added and taken from the front of the store on January 15, 2008. Exhibit J.9 depicts the cart used to move pallets, which is outside all the time. Many items are stored outside of the building. Paragraph G2 provides that vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products shall be screened from view from all neighboring properties and from internal and external streets with a minimum 6 foot solid masonry or wood fencing and landscaping, berms and landscaping, or other approved comparable screening. When loading vehicles, the vehicles are not screened from the neighboring property to the south or to the west. A weather-worn box has been left out by the loading dock for months (Photos J6,7,8). Photograph J10 shows the view from the presenter's deck. Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 7 Of 11 SECTION IV A. The neighbors to the South is the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association. There are two condominium buildings with seven units in one and eight units in the other. The Condominium Association also owns the property that is directly to the west of Kind Coffee. Apparently the original builders of the complex were going to put a third building in as a Building C, which never did develop. Exhibit B, paragraph IV, discusses staff findings relative to the variance. It is interesting that the questions asked is not considered in the Use Classification found by the staff in Exhibit A. Question paragraph IV (2)(c) asks the question, "whether the essential character of the neighborhood will be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. It is the Condominium Association's position that the character of this neighborhood is substantially altered and suffers a substantial detriment by the allowance of this roasting, manufacturing, warehousing and distribution center being located at 552 West Elkhom Avenue. B. The roasting creates a sickening odor comparable to burnt coffee and is often referred to as the burnt toast smell. During the roasting process, at times, it makes it virtually impossible for the owners to sit on their deck and enjoy the Fall River - as it rushes by their home. -Af many tim@s the roasting odor is so strong that even going inside and shutting the doors will not keep the obnoxious odor out. It has substantially affected the quiet and peaceful enjoyment of our property by not allowing us the full use of our condominiums and our decks. Also the burnt coffee odor permeates the condominiums when they are closed up and it is trapped in the condominiums. When an owner or guest comes to visit on the weekends the condominiums normally have to be aired out before they can be enjoyed. C. The obnoxious whine in the roasting process is loud, irritating and offensive and also interferes with our peaceful enjoyment and use of our property. D. The smell and noise is not only personally offensive, but members of our Association, including a presenter, have become nauseated due to the strong smell. E. The noise problem is significant. It should be understood that the roasting noise is substantially different than that produced by the Fall River. A Police Officer taking noise readings from our deck without the roasting process determined that the river itself was above the noise ordinance at that time (-Exhibit H, last page). However, the river is a soothing, relaxing sound and once the whining of the manufacturing process starts it becomes an irritating, offensive sound. F. This owner does not understand why if the river itself is above the noise ordinance why would it be acceptable to exacerbate the condition by allowing an offensive, loud, whining sound during manufacturing that is clearly above the Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 8 of 11 ordinance. In spite of the Police Officer's report, at certain times of the year the whining is totally offensive. In fact, the officers report clearly shows that the roasting process elevates the noise beyond statutory standards (Exhibit H). G. The neighborhood has been altered substantially by this manufacturing process. We are no longer able to sit on our deck at any time, day or night, and enjoy the beautiful Colorado scenery and the wonderful soothing sounds of the Fall River. We now have what appears to be the only manufacturing process located in our entire end o f town. H. Now our enjoyment of our property, the river and the scenery is contingent upon the whims of Kind Coffee and their very irritating and obnoxious roasting activity. I. The noise and smell not only affects ourselves but affects our guests and the renters within the buildings as the Kind Coffee roasting operating adversely and substantially affects the enjoyment of our property. Some renters have even indicated that they would not continue to rent because of the offensive smell and noise from the operation. J. A complaint was apparently made to the Estes Park Police Department relative to the noise and odor emanating from Kind Coffee. The Code Enforcement Officer, Andrew Hart, made an incident report to the Estes Park Police Department. It is interesting that the report (Exhibit H) does not state who filed the complaint, but lists three witnesses. K. Apparently it was not taken into consideration by the Planning and Zoning staff that there was noise and odor associated with the Kind Coffee roasting operation. However, it is clear that Planning and Zoning knew about it because of personal statements made by Administrator, Robert Joseph, who admitted to at least 2 owners that there was a strong odor that emanate from the coffee roasting operation from previous locations. L. Attached are relevant portions of 8.06 Estes Park Municipal Code (Exhibit I). Section 8.06.01 has a list of definitions and among those are the definition of unreasonable noise: unreasonable noise means any sound of such level and duration as to be or tend to be injurious to human health or welfare, or which would unreasonably interfere with enioyment of life or property throughout the town or in any portions thereof, but excludes all aspects of the employer- employee relationship concerning health and safety hazards within the confines of a place of employment. M. Section 8.06.020 unreasonable noise prohibited and states: no person shall make, continue or cause to be made or continued any unreasonable noise; and no person shall knowingly permit such noise upon any premises or enter upon any motor vehicle owned, possessed or driven by such persons or under such persons control Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 page 9 of 11 or operation. For purposes of this section, members of the Police Department are empowered to make a prima facie determination as to whether a noise is unreasonable. N. Section 8.06.030 is maximum permissible noise levels. Under paragraph A it states: a noise measured or registered in the manner prescribed in 8.06.030 from any source, at a level which is in excess of dB(a) established for the time period and zoning districts listed in this section, is hereby declared to be a noise disturbance and is unlawful. The chart under 8.06.030 (a) lists the Commercial Outlying (CO) maximum dB(a) from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. is 60 and from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. is 55. 0. Exhibit H, which is attached has two attachments. One page shows the 15 different locations where sound was measured and the second page shows measurements apparently when roasting was conducted on: (a) September 21, 2007, (b) September 26, 2007, (c) September 27, 2007, and the average was shown for those three dates and then not roasting, which apparently means that those measurements were taken when Kind Coffee was not roasting on September 27,2007. At location no. 5, which is right next to the waterfall and at location no. 6, which is-west- df the waterfall, there was a consistent measurement in excess of the requirements. However, at location no. 9, which the presenter believes is on his deck or near his deck (photograph J10), on September 27, 2007 when not roasting the measurement was below the decibel level at 56.4 and when roasting on that date it was above the decibel level at 64.3. This is almost a 9 point increase in the measurement. On prior roasting days, on (a) and (b) the level was above the established level and should have been declared a noise disturbance. The same results show for location no. 10, which appears to be the first floor of the presenter's condominium building. The same results were obtained at locations no. 13, no. 14 and no. 15 with no. 14 being Mr. Ayers condominium and again no. 9 being the Bailey's condominium. With 7 of the 15 measurement locations showing excessive noise and 7 of the 12 on the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium's side of the river showing excessive noise the Police Officer made the determination that the ambient noise resulting from the roasting production does not constitute an unreasonable noise source. On the other hand, the code itself specifically, under 8.06.30, states that a noise measured or registered in the manner provided in section 8.06.030 from anv source at anv level which is in excess of the dB(a) established for the time period and the zoning district listed in this section is hereby declared to be a noise disturbance and unlawful. Although perplexing, one senses an appearance of impropriety in that the code enforcement officer is a designee of the planning and zoning department director, whose staff made the favorable "Use Determination" we are appealing. Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Page 10 of 11 P. Again, the noise made by Fall River is a noise that is clearly there, but is clearly a relaxing noise while the noise from the roasting equipment and operation is a very irritating noise. Q. In conclusion, relative to this section, the question asked in Exhibit B, whether the essential character of the neighborhood will be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer substantial detriment as a result of the variance. When you have a new irritating noise from a manufacturing process located immediately adjacent to your property, it substantially alters and adversely affects the character of the neighborhood, as well as your property values. R. There is a substantial amount of residential and accommodation property along Fall River Road. Part of many people's dream in Estes Park is to have a home along the river, it was certainly our dream. Our condominiums and the location is very special, right next to the Fall River, and because of this manufacturing process our enjoyment of our property has been substantially hampered, and our neighborhood changed. SECTION V Another concern that we have is the effect of this roasting process on the elk. The triangle, owned by Elkhorn Lodge, adjoining our property to the east, has always been a popular hang out for the elk population during the summer. During the summer months there were elk on that property at least five (5) to seven (7) days per week. This last summer that has changed and elk where they are there on an average of 2 days per week. Obviously elk have an acute sense of smell and we are wondering whether or not any wildlife impact study was made before this operation was allowed to be installed. CONCLUSION A. It is amazing that Exhibit B, Section 4 (6) makes the following statement, under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of the Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. This should also be applicable in the "Use Determination" made by the staff. Yet the staff decision for both the Use Determination and the Variance allow blatant exceptions and violation of the zoning provisions. B. They have violated the spirit and the letter of the commercial outlying zoning concept They allowed a small manufacturing process of roasting and warehousing coffee beans in a district that was designed to expand to allow the larger commercial development in that area. Kind Coffee on their website clearly refers to this property as their warehouse roasting facility. This building isn't even referred to as a retail sales outlet on their website Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal Position Statement/February 2008 Pagellofll C. The variance which they allowed was to provide for a shipping area for this manufacturing and warehousing process. They have violated the accessory use provisions of the EVDC by allowing a coffee roasting facility to go into a retail area as an accessory operation, "like a brew pub", which is suppose to be an accessory operation within a restaurant whose principal business is the sale of food. In reality, the principal business is the roasting of coffee beans and warehousing and wholesaling them. The retail sale of coffee is nominal and the accessory use is in fact the primary use and that is a clear violation of the zoning ordinance. D. They are allowing warehousing and storage operations to be established on Elkhorn Avenue, an arterial road, and that is clearly in violation of the Code. In fact, the variance granted in Exhibit B is all about facilitating the building of a loading dock for a manufacturing and warehouse business not the retail sale of coffee, which is clearly not allowed under the Estes Valley Development Code. When the question is asked, "whether the essential character of the neighborhood will be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance", the answer is clearly yes to the neighbors closest to the problem. We respectfully request the Boards of Trustees to overturn the staff decision to - allow this manufacturing process in a commercial outlying district, and require the owners to stop the roasting and dismantle the roasting facility. Respectfully submitted this / ~ day of February, 2008, -1./.,4 6, 1,04- / j.:0....2...2632/9/ Verd R. Bailey, Secretary Elkhom Plaza Condominium Association VRB/dla Use Classification Business: Kind Coffee Address: 552 W. Elkhorn Zoning District: CO, Commercial Outlying B. Standards for Review. The following considerations shall be used to determine what classification a use is in and whether it is appropriate to allow such use as a principal use in the applicable zoning district: 1. The actual or projected characteristics of the subject use compared to the stated characteristics of each use classification allowed in the zoning district (see Â§13.2, "Use Classifications/Specific Use Definitions and Examples");Retai/ and Small-scale Wholesale sales, Office, and Brew Pub 2. The relative amount of site area or floor space and equipment devoted to the use; Approximately 14 retail, 14 office, 1h roasting and storage 3. Relative amounts of sales from the subject use compared to other permitted uses; similar to retail and small-scale wholesale 4. The relative number of employees in each use; typical of retail 5. Hours of operation; varies seasonally, typical of retail and office 6. Building and site arrangement; typical of retail and office 7. Vehicles used with the use; typical of retail 8. The relative number of vehicle trips generated by the use; typical of retail 9. Signs expected in conjunction with the use; typical of retail 10. How the use advertises itself; typical of retail 11. Whether the use is likely to be found independent of other uses on the site; na 12. Any other potential impacts of the subject use relative to other specific uses included in the classification and permitted in the applicable zoning district; and typical of retail 13. Whether the subject use is consistent with the stated intent and purposes of this Code and the zoning district in which it is to be located. Retail and Wholesale uses are allowed as principle Staff Finding: Retail Food and Beverage Sales is a permitted use. Small-scale Whole Sale Sales and Distribution is a permitted use. Office is a permitted use. Coffee Roasting is similar to a Brew Pub and this is permitted as an accessory use. i q 6Â¥4 Nt + li g 552 West Elkhorn Avenue River and Side-Yard Setback Variance Requests Estes Park Community Development Department Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND DATE: June 5,2006 W = A., A LOCATION: The site is located at 552 - USFS West Elkhorn Avenue, within the Town of --- I..... . 34 Estes Park. Legal Description: Metes and Bounds PETITIONER/PROPERTY OWNERS: Elkhorn Commercial Properties, LLC/Same 04. USFS RMAP STAFF CONTACT: Bob Joseph & h APPLICABLE LANI) USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) REQUEST: The property owner wishes to expand the door opening on the west side of the existing building, remove the exterior wooden ramp that is adjacent to this door, and replace the ramp with a slightly larger concrete loading area. The existing ramp and a storage building encroach into the river and side-yard setback. The owner intends to remove both structures. The petitioner requests a variance to EVDC Â§7.6.El.a(2)04 which requires a thirty-foot river setback for developed lots in the "CO" Outlying Commercial zoning district to build a concrete loading area. This section of the EVDC states, Exception for Lots Developed Prior to the Adoption of this Code. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high- water mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. 11 The proposed loading area also encroaches into the fifteen-foot minimum required side-yard setback. The petitioner requests a variance to EVDC Â§7.11.N.2.b, which states, A loading dock shall not be located in a required setback. In addition, street side loading areas shall be set back at least seventy (70) feet from the street property line or one hundred ten (110) feet from the street centerline, whichever is greater. II. SITE DATA AND MAPS Number of Lots/Parcels One Parcel Number(s) 35252-00-015 Parcel Area Tax Assessor Records | 1,500 square feet (0.03 sq. ft.) Application Form 5,600 sq. ft. Land Area Calculation by Staff 150' x 155' * .5 = 11,625 sq. ft. based on Improvement Location Certificate Zoning "CO" Outlying Commercial Existing Land Use Current Use - Vacant Office Building Prior Use - Office (Basis Architecture Office) Proposed Land Use Kind Coffee Retail Shop. Coffee Beans will also be roasted and distributed from this location ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Adjacent Zoning Adjacent Land Use North "K' Accommodations/Highway Corridor Accommodations (Owned by Mountain Sage Inn) South "CO" Outlying Commercial Undeveloped "RM" Multi-Family Residential Residential Condominiums East A Accommodations/Highway Corridor Accommodations (Owned by Mountain Sage Inn) West "CO" Outtying Commercial Undeveloped SERVICES Water Town of Estes Park Sewer Estes Park Sanitation District Fire Protection Town of Estes Park Electric Town of Estes Park Telephone Qwest III. REVIEW CRITERIA All variance applications shall demonstrate compliance with the standards and criteria set forth in Chapter 3.6.C and all other applicable provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code. Page #2 - River and Side-Yard Setback Variance Request for 552 West Elkhorn Avenue C C This variance request falls within the parameters of a staff-level review and will not be reviewed by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment. Staff has made this determination by reviewing the reduction in vertical encroachment into the setback, i.e., the removal of the storage shed that currently encroaches in the setback, versus the small portion (two-by- twelve-foot strip) of concrete that would encroach two feet further into the river and side-yard setback than the current ramp. IV. STAFF FINDINGS Staff finds: 1. Special circumstances or conditions exist (e.g., exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of the property) that are not common to other areas or buildings similarly situated and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with this Code's standards, provided that the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purposes of either tlie specific standafds, this Code or the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: There are special circumstances associated with this lot and practical difficulty may result from strict compliance with the Code standards. The requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying or impairing the intent and purpose of the Code standards requested to be varied. The lot size is significantly less than the 40,000-square-foot minimum lot size required for "CO" zoned lots, such as this, that front an arterial street. The lot is also less than the 15,000-square-foot minimum for lots that do not front an arterial. The combination of the lot size, the triangular lot shape, and the location and design of the existing building, built in 1977, creates special circumstances. 2. In determining "practical difficulty," the BOA shall consider the following factors: a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance. Staff Finding: There can be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. Page #3 - River and Side-Yard Setback Variance Request for 552 West Elkhorn Avenue b. Whether the variance is substantial. Staff Finding: The removal of the storage building from the setback, combined with the small increase in square footage in the setback, minimizes the impact of this variance request. Also the loading area, i.e., the six-foot-by-twelve-foot area will not be used for vehicular access or parking. Delivery vehicles will park in the parking lot and a lift will be used in the loading area. Staff has also verified with the Floodplain Administrator, Will Birchfield, that the proposed loading area is not in the 100-year floodplain. c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. Staff Finding: The essential character of the neighborhood will not be substantially altered and adjoining properties will not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. The loading area, which will not serve as an employee or customer parking space, will have less visual impact that the existing storage shed, which will be removed. d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as water and sewer. Staff Finding: The variance will not affect the delivery of public services provided the following is addressed. The proposed loading area is in water line easement. The easement agreement states, "The work of installing said water lines shall be done with care, and all damage to any improvements on grantor' s property caused thereby shall be restored to preconstruction conditions at the expense of the Town." A condition of variance approval shall be that the Town is not liable for repair of the concrete loading area, if work is done in the easement. The easement agreement will be amended by the property owner, reviewed by the Town, and recorded by the Town, at the property owner' s expense, prior to final inspection of Building Permit #8067 for interior building remodel. e. Whether the Applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement. Staff Finding: The property owner purchased the property on July 21, 2001, per Larimer County Tax Assessor records, after the Page #4 - River and Side-Yard Setback Variance Request for 552 West Elkhom Avenue February 1, 2000 effective date of the Estes Valley Development Code and with knowledge of the requirements. f. Whether the Applicant's predicament can be mitigated through some method other than a variance. Staff Finding: The applicant' s predicament could not be mitigated without a significant building remodel, i.e., provision of a loading door and ramp on the front of the building and redesign of the parking lot. A loading area at the front of the building could not be as effectively screened from the street. 3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. Staff Finding: The submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the applicant's propertflre not of so general of recurrent a nature as to mike reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 4. No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing or proposed subdivision if it will result in an increase in the number of lots beyond the number otherwise permitted for the total subdivision, pursuant to the applicable zone district regulations. Staff Finding: The variance, if granted, will not reduce the size of the lot. 5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief. Staff Finding: The variance provides the least deviation from the regulations that affords relief. The proposed six-foot-wide loading area is four feet narrower than the minimum for required loading areas. The applicant should verify that the width is sufficient for delivery trucks and that trucks will not drive on the adjacent grass, damaging vegetation. Page #5 - River and Side-Yard Setback Variance Request for 552 West Elkhorn Avenue 6. Under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited under the terms of this Code for the zone district containing the property for which the variance is sought. Staff Finding: The proposed loading area is a permitted use. The coffee bean roasting is permitted only in conjunction with the retail use and with public access to the roasting area. V. STAFF DECISION Staff APPROVES the requested variance CONDITIONAL TO: 1. The loading area, i.e., the six-foot-by-twelve-foot area, is approved for loading with a lift. Vehicular access to this loading area is not permitted as the width is not sufficient for vehicular access. 2. Compliance with the submitted site plan. 3. The twenty-foot-wide waterline easement recorded at Reception #92066510 states, "The work of installing said water lines shall be done with care, and all damage to any improvements on grantor' s property caused thereby shall be restored to preconstruction conditions at the expense of the Town." A condition of variance approval shall be that the Town is not liable for repair of the concrete loading area. The easement agreement will be amended by the property owner, reviewed by the Town, and recorded by the Town, at the property owner' s expense, prior to final inspection of Building Permit #8067 for interior building remodel. J[. After the loading area is built, the boundary survey shall be completed verifying compliance with the variance (stating the setback from the annual high-water mark of the river and the side-yard property line). The concrete loading area shall not extend over a property line. /~5. The storage building shall be removed from the property by June 30, 2006. Page #6 - River and Side-Yard Setback Variance Request for 552 West Elkhorn Avenue STATEMENT OF INTENT AND HOW THE PROPOSED VARIANCE MEETS THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS We are requesting a variance for the addition of a grade-level 6 ft. by 12 ft. concrete slab on the west side of our building to accommodate the loading and unloading of merchandise. The configuration of the Elkhorn Commercial Properties, LLC. lot presents a practical difficulty that necessitates the request for a variance from the code setbacks. Much of the property outside the footprint of the existing building is taken up by the 25- foot highway setback and the 30-foot river setback. The proposed slab falls within the river setback. The grade-level slab is within an area enclosed by a fence and bounded by Fall River and the parking lot at the front of the building. The slab should have no impact on any of the neighbors in the area. Based on the foregoing, the opinion of Elkhorn Commercial Properties, LLC. is that this is a minor variance. Ini E Â© a U V ? 6911 15%# : 1 1 '51 9 1 11 MAY - 8 1%6 :: ~~~ â€¢rs 2/9 /' b. CO Outlving Commercial Zoning District. This zoning distrid is established to 1 encourage the development of a wide variety of commercial and retail uses along / the major corridor entryways into the Valley and the Town of Estes Park. This ~ zoning distrid is established to implement the "Commercial" and "Commercial- 1 Recreation" future land use categories recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. / This district should accommodate the majority of the larger, freestandingj commercial and retail buildings to meet future demand in the community. c. O Office Zoning District. This zoning district is established to implement the "Office" future land use category recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. The intensity of future office development will be controlled through district standards setting forth a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) and building height maximum. ~ d. CH Heavy Commercial Zoning District. This zoning district is intended to provide for heavy commercial uses, induding vehicle repair services, construction trades and bulk goods retailing. It shall be limited to areas within the Estes Valley that already contain some of these types of heavy commercial uses, and shall not include areas fronting the Valley's highways or arterial streets. Permitted uses shall include utility facilities and installations, repair services, bulk storage and limited manufacturing. Most of these uses shall be permitted by right, but subject < to specific size limitations. Larger facilities shall be subject to special review. 3. Industrial Zoning Districts. a. I-1 Restricted Industrial Zoning District. This zoning district implements the 'Restricted Industrial" land use category recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Permitted uses shall include a relatively wide variety of industrial uses, as reflected in the existing mix of industrial land uses, induding several concrete/asphalt plants, propane distributors, construction trade yards and gravel mining and crushing facilities. However, to discourage future conflicts, residential uses shall not be permitted in this zoning district. An important element of development in this industrial zone district shall be compliance with performance standards to protect adjacent uses from adverse impacts of industrial development. B. Table 4-4: Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Table 4-4 Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts Nonresidential Zoning Districts "P" = Permitted by Right "S" = Permitted by Special Review "-" = Prohibited Additional Regulations (Apply in All Districts Use Classification Specific use A A-1 CD CO O CH I-1 Unless Otherwise Stated) Â· .f , RESIDENTIALLUSE CLASSIFICATIONS:. 4 - 10 9 - It Bank or Other In CD, no drive-through Financial --PPP-- service shall have access Institution from Elkhorn Avenue Building ___p - P P Â§51.L Materials/Services Business Services - - P P P P - Catering Service - - - P - P P Commercial -----pp Laundry Construction - - - - - P P Â§5.1.D; Â§5.1.L Storage Yard . Bar/tavern P - PP-PP Â§5.1.G Restaurant P - PPPPP Â§5.1.G With outdoor Eating/Drinking Establishments seating or P - P P P P P Â§5.1.G and Â§5.1.M food service With drive- through ---P - P P Â§51.G service I . _1 Â§5.1.E Convenience --PP-PP In CD, no drive-through stores service shall have access Food/Beverage from Elkhorn Avenue Sales Convenience store with fuel - - - P -S S Â§51 E and Â§5.1.Q sales Convenience store with Â§5.1.E and Â§5.1.M outdoor --PP-PP In CD, no drive-through seating or service shall have access from Elkhorn Avenue food service Â§5.1.L Grocery store - - - P - - - In CD, no drive-through Liquor store - - P P - - - service shall have access from Elkhorn Avenue In CD, no drive-through All other - - P P - - - service shall have access from Elkhorn Avenue Funeral or Interment ---P-pp Services Laboratory __p Pppp In CD, such use shall not be located on Elkhom Avenue Maintenance/ ---P-P P Â§5.1.L Repair Service Office --PPP-- - 1 Outdoor Sales - - - S - P P Â§Â§5.1.L and 7.13 (Ord. 10-00 Â§2) In the A district Â·Permitted as accessory to an accommodations use Personal Services P - PpppP only; and Â·Use shall be located within the same structure as a permitted accommodations use. Plant Nurseries - - - P - P p Â§5.1.L Retail Â§5 1.L; In CD, no drive- / / Retail through service shall have establish---SP--- ~ Establishments access from Elkhorn ments, large Avenue Â§5.1.L; In the CH and I-1 districts: Â·Limited to sales of products Z manufactured or produced on the subjed premises; and All other retail --PP-PP Â·No more than 15% ofthe principal building(s)' gross floor area shall be devoted _~ to retail sales. In CD, no drive-through service shall have access from Elkhorn Avenue -1 If such use contains more Self-Service Mini- Storage - - - - - P/S P/s than 20.000 sq. ft. of gross floor area, it shall be subject to Spedal Review Car wash - - - P - P P Â§5.1.Q Quick Vehicle Services, lubrication ---P-p P Â§5.1.Q Limited services Service ---P - P P Â§5.1.Q: Â§5.1.L station Vehicle/ Automobile P - - p _ ~ _ In A, only as part of a hotel Equipment Sales rentals or motel use & Services Commercial In CD, such use shall not be parking - - P P P - - permitted to locate on facility Elkhorn Avenue Li m ited equipment ---P - P P Â§5.1.R rentals Vehicle/ equipment - - - P - P P Â§5.1.L repair . 4 "96 4 41 INDUSTRIAL USES Custom -----p P Â§5.1.L General - - - - _ _ p Â§5.1.L Industrial -- ----P Â§5.1.L services Industry Â§5.1.L; Â·In CH, uses containing Limited ----- P/S P more than 15,000 square feet of gross floor area shall be subject to special review Research & ---Pppp development Gravel Mining - - - - - - P Recycling Facility - - - - - S P Â§5.1.L C Bulk Storage - - - - - - P Â§5.1.L; Â§5.1.S General - - - - - - P Â§5.1.L, Â§5.1.S Â§5.1 L; Â§5.1.S j Warehousing and - rin .CO, not permitted on lots - 61 - j Storage - abutting an arterial street or Limited ---S- P/S P highway Â·In CH, uses containing 1 more than 15,000 square i\ feet of gross floor area shall be subject to special review Small scale - - - p - p p- Â§521.S ~- Wholesale Sales & All other < Distribution wholesale -- - - - S P Â§5.1.S sales/ C distribution U OTHER SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED USES SER.Â§501,N '31%89wl~*9iV@Es.u_. #k IÂ·Â·TWKe'*13~Mt'i?91...waA. AccEsSORY=-U~S-E~Â§7--7Vâ€ž*~~~-~~~-~22Â§5.Â¥, "ACCESSORYUSES AND STRUCTURES." TEMPORARY USES SEE Â§5.3, "TEMPORAR* USES AND STRUCTURES." C. Density and Dimensional Standards. 1. Table of Density and Dimensional Standards by Zoning District. Table 4-5 below \\sts the density and dimensional standards that apply within the nonresidential zoning districts. These are 'base" standards, not guarantees that stated minimums or maximums can be achieved on every site. Other regulations of this Code or site- specific conditions may further limit development on a site. 2. Minimum Land Area Requirements for Accommodation and Residential Uses in the Nonmsidentia/ Zoning Distnbts. Table 4-5 below indudes a standard for "minimum land area per accommodations (guest) or residential unit," which applies only in the A, A-1 and CD zoning districts. The "minimum land area" necessary to meet this standard rST-1 D shall be measured using the net land area definition set forth in Â§4.3.C, Â«Density/Dimensional Standards." When applying the minimum land area standard to a parcel's net land area, all resulting fractions shall be rounded down to the next lower whole number. 3. Maximum Units/Density Not Guaranteed. The number of dwelling or guest units allowed on a site is based on the presumption that all other applicable standards shall be met. The maximum residential or accommodations density established for a zoning district is not a guarantee that such densities may be obtained, nor a valid justification for varying other dimensional or development standards. 4. Table 4-5: Density and Dimensional Standards for the Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Table 4-5 Density and Dimensional Standards Nonresidential Zoning Districts Minimum,tand Minimum Building/ Areaper Minimum Lot Size [7] Structure Setbacks [4] [8] Max. Accommodauon Max. Lot or Cover- Bldg Zoning Residential Unit Area Width Front Side Rear Height Max. age District (sq. ft per unit) (sq ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft.) [9] FAR (%) Accommodation Unit =1,800 [1]; Artel-ial = 25 [5]: Residential Units: A 40,000 [2] 100 [3] All other 15 [6] 10 [6] 30 N/A 50 SF = 9,000: streets = 2-Family = 6,750; - 15 MF = 5,400 Arterial = 25 [5]; A-1 10,890 15,000 [2] 50 [3] All other 15 10 30 .20 30 streets = 15 Accommodation Units Only = 1,800: SF & SF & 2-Family 2-Family (stand-alone) = 9,000; (stand- If lot If lot Accommo- alone) = Mini- abuts a abuts a Dwelling Units dation uses = 25; mum = 8 residential residential (1 st Floor) 1 unit 20,000 MF Maxi- property = property = 30 2.0 n/a CD per 2,250 square 10; 10; feet of gross All other uses (stand- mum = land area = rda alone) - 16 All other All other 100; cases = 0 cases = 0 Dwelling Units All other (2nd Floor) No uses = n/a minimum gross land area per unit (Ord. 15-03 #3) Lng *ON B.Iequ,nig 0 Lots fronting arterials = 40,000 [2]; Frontinq A[terial Outdoor ah*rials = = 25 [5]; 1 CO n/a All other Commercial 200; 15 [6] 15 [6] 30 .25 65 Recreation/ Entertainment All other streets 2922121 lots = 50 =15 , All other lots = - L -1520121 Residential Units Fronting Arterial (2nd Floor) Arterials = = 25 [5]; O 1 unit 2,250 sq. 15,000 [2] 200; All other 15 [6] 15 [6] 3025 50 ft. GFA of All other streets = prindpal use. lots = 50 15 CH n/a 6,000 [2] 50 15 0 [6] 0 [6] 30 .50 80 Fronting Arterial Arterials = = 25 [5]; I-1 n/a 15,000 [2] 200; All other 10 [6] 10 [6] 30 .30 80 All other streets = lots = 50 15 (Ord. 2-02 #6; Ord. 11-02 Â§1; Ord. 15-03 #3) NOTES TO TABLE 4-5:-- - - [1] For guest units in a resort lodge/cabin use that have full kitchen facilities, the minimum land area requirement per guest unit shall be 5,400 square feet. See also Â§5.1.P below. [2] If private wells or septic systems are used, the minimum lot area shall be 2 acres. See also the regulations set forth in Â§7.12, "Adequate Public Facilities." [3] For lots greater than 2 acres, minimum lot width shall be 200 feet. [4] See Chapter 7, Â§7.6 for required setbacks from stream/river corridors and wetlands. (Ord. 2-02 #5: Ord. 11-02 Â§1) [5] All front building setbacks from a public street or highway shall be landscaped according to the standards set forth in Â§7.5 of this Code. [6] Setback shall be increased to 25 feet if the lot line abuts a residential zoning district boundary. [7] See Chapter 7, Â§7.1, which requires an increase in minimum lot size (area) for development on steep slopes. (Ord. 2-02 #6) [8] All structures shall be set back from public or private roads that serve more than four dwellings or lots. The setback shall be measured from the edge of public or private roads, or the edge of the dedicated right-of-way or recorded easement, whichever produces a greater setback. The setback shall be the same as the applicable minimum building/structure setback. This setback is applicable only in the "A-1" district. (Ord. 11- 02Â§1) [9] See Chapter 1, Â§1.9.E, which allows an increase in the maximum height of buildings on slopes. (Ord. 18-02 #3) 5. Number of Principal Uses Permitted Per Lot or Development Parcel. a. Maximum Number of Principal Uses Permitted. One (1) or more principal uses shall be permitted per lot or development parcel, except that in the A zoning 4,34 ' a â‚¬WLÂ£61/ 1 1 â‚¬- i districts. If a specific accessory use or structure is permitted in a zoning district, the column. underneath the zoning district will be marked with a "Yes." If the accessory use or structure is not permitted in a particular zoning district, the column will be marked with a "No." If there is a reference contained in the column entitled additional conditions," please refer to the cited section for additional conditions that shall apply to the specific accessory use. b. Unlisted Accessory Uses and Structures. If an accessory use or structure is not listed in Table 5-2, but satisfies all the conditions set forth in Â§5.2.A.4 above, it may be permitted subjed to compliance with the general dimensional and operational standards set forth in this Section. Table 5-2 Accessory Uses Permitted in the Nonresidential Zoning Districts - Nonresidential Zoning District "Yes " = Permitted "No" = Not Permitted Accessory Use A A-1 CD CO O CH I-1 Additional Conditions Barns and Stables No Yes No No No No No As accessory to a principal residential or accommodations use only. Cafeteria, Dining Halls Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Â·In the A district, accessory and Similar Food to a permitted Services accommodation use only. Â·Such facilities shall be operated primarily for the convenience of employees, clients, customers or visitors to the principal use. Car Wash Bay No No No Yes No Yes Yes A single-bay car wash allowed as an accessory to a permitted service station use only Clubhouses, including Yes No Yes Yes No No No As accessory uses to golf space for the sale of courses or indoor golf or other sporting recreational facilities only equipment, food and refreshmehts Employee Housing .Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Â§5.2.C.2.a (Ord 18-01 #lg) (Including Caretaker Quarters) Family Home Yes Yes Yes No No No No Â§5.2.B.2.d Home Day Care, Small Occupations (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) As accessory to a principal residential use only Home Occupation Yes Yes Yes No No No No Â§5.2.B.2.d Home (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) Occupations As accessory to a principal residential use only. 4 15 d Meeting Rooms, Yes No Yes Yes No No No As accessory to a principal Banquet Halls and accommodations use only. similar group gathering Except in the A zone, shall spaces and uses be located inside the same building housing the principal use. Such facilities shall be operated primarily for the convenience of guests, customers or visitors to the principal use. Total gross floor area of the accessory use shall count toward any maximum FAR requirement. Nightly Rentals No Yes Yes No No No No Â·As accessory to a principal residential use only. Â·The short-term nightly rental of a dwelling unit as an accessory use in the A-1 and CD districts shall not be subject to the requirements of Â§5.2.B.2.g above. Â·See also Table 4-4 which permits short-term nightly rentals as-a-principal use of a dwelling unit in the A-1 and CD zoning districts. Outdoor Retail Sales No No No Yes No Yes Yes Â§5.1.L: Accessory to a principal retail sales/service or grocery store use only Private Greenhouses Yes Yes Yes No No No No As accessory to a principal residential use only Private Recreational Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Facilities for use by residents, employees or guests ~ Production of Yes No Yes Yes No No No Accessory to permitte fermented man restaurant use only 2 beverages, malt, special malt and vinous and spirituous liquors (brew pub) ~ shops, clubs, principal building containing Restaurants, bars, Yes No Yes Yes No No No Â§5.1.G: Â§5.1.J: Only news stands, gift allowed when inside the managerial offices and a permitted principal hotel, < lounges motel, resort lodge or major entertainment event facility use 1% F r 1,6 41% 1-f@ 8 1.9 453 irA : 1j ji 1 0 12 ELKHORN PLAZA ASSOCIATION 11[11 OCT - 9 2006 1 4 540-550 West Elkhorn Avenue 3.11 U P.O. Box 2792 64-- -J Estes Park, Colorado 80517 L . October 5, 2006 Estes Park Planning and Zoning Commission P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Kind Coffee Company Dear Sirs: On behalf of the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association, I am writing to complain about the manufacturing processes which are taking place at the Kind Coffee building at the 500 to 600 block of West EIkhorn Avenue. The "Retail" portion of the store is closed but the "Manufacturing" being conducted in the store continues. The owners of the Association are offended by the obnoxious odors created by the roasting of the coffee beans as well as the obnoxious sounds, which come from the building. As far as we are concerned it is a nuisance. In earlier discussion with an employee of Kind Coffee I was advised that the only reason they sell coffee there is so that they can get around the Manufacturing Restrictions of the Zoning Regulations. The primary use of the building is for manufacturing and not commercial sales, so near to many residences. We are requesting that the Planning and Zoning Commission take action against Kind Coffee Company for conducting clearly, a manufacturing or industrial operation in a commercial outlying district. Please advise as soon as possible on your position relative to this matter and what action will be taken to stop this manufacturing. Yours very truly, Â¢_02 A 6+ Verd R. Bailey, SecretaryÂ¢~ Elkhorn Plaza Association < S. Warehousing and Storage; Wholesale Sales and Distribution. All warehousing and storage uses and wholesale sales and distribution uses shall be permitted subject to the following standards: 1. All wholesaling, distribution and storage of materials and equipment, except vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products, shall be conducted within a totally enclosed building. 2. Vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products shall be screened from view from all neighboring properties and from internal and external streets with a minimum six-foot solid masonry or wood fencing and landscaping, berms and landscaping or other approved comparable screening. T. Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be subject to the following standards: 1. General. a. All telecommunications facilities shall comply with the standards of this Code, all applicable standards of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 and all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration. b. Building permits for a facility shall not be issued until the facility is approved through the development plan or special review process. 2. Microcell Antenna Towers. - a. Microcell antenna towers shall be permitted by right in the zoning districts shown in Tables 4-1 and 4-4, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) The tower is thirty (30) feet in height or less; and (2) The tower is placed two hundred (200) feet or less from the right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 34 or 36 or Colorado Highway 7; and the tower is placed on a lot on which is located any of the following uses. (a) Schools: (b) Hospitals; or (c) Police or fire station; or (3) The tower is placed at a public utility substation or within a high-tension power line easement. b. Microcell antenna towers that are higher than thirty (30) feet and/or do not satisfy the locational criteria set forth in paragraph a above shall only be permitted by special review. 3. Compliance with the Larimer County Wireless Facilities Siting Regulations. A\\ telecommunications facilities shall comply with the purpose and standards set forth in the Larimer County Land Use Code, Â§16, "Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) Facilities," including but not limited to the following provisions contained therein: a. Â§16.1.2.B, "Preferred CMRS Facilities"; b. Â§16.1.2.C, "Facilities on Residential Properties"; c. Â§16.1.2.D, "Facilities at Historic Sites and Visually Sensitive Areas," except that for historic sites located within the Town of Estes Park, the Board of Trustees shall be the entity with sole authority to allow siting of facilities on a historic site or 9-G â‚¬ -9 incident Report 07-15881 i /+ ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT Reported Date 170 MACGREGOR AVENUE 10/10/2007 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 <MIS> ESTES PARK ORDIN Officer HART,ANDREW Administrative Information Agency Case No Supplement No Reported Date Reported Time ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT 07-1588 ORIG 10/10/2007 14:27 Incident No Dispo Nature of Call 072830325 REPORT TO FOLLOW <MIS> ESTES PARK ORDINANCE (NON NIBRS) Location City ZIP Code Rep Dist 552 W ELKHORN AV ESTES PARK 80517 F72330 DArea Area From Date From Time To Date To Time EP EP1 09/20/2007 11:00 10/10/2007 14:27 Officer Entered by RMS Transfer E0710/HART,ANDREW E0710 Successful Approving Officer Approval Date Approval Time E9102 10/12/2007 10:55:20 Person Summary Invl Invl No Type Name MNI Race Sex DOB OWN 1 I HAMRICK,AMY 1184684 C F 12/30/1975 Invl MNI Race Sex DOS Invl No Type Name WIT 1 I AYRES,ROBERT 1184654 C M Invl Invl No Type Name MNI Race Sex DOB WIT 2 I BAILEY,VERD RALPH 1184685 C M 08/03/1949 Invt Invl No Type Narne MNI Race Sex DOB WIT 3 I THOMPSON,JACK 1184655 C M -1~7-tive A complaint was received reporting that the business located at 552 West Elkhorn was in violation of the Estes Park Municipal Code. The complaining party stated that excessive noise and noxious odors were present at the Kind Coffee facility during roasting operations. Multiple sound level readings were obtained and observations were made during a roasting operation at the facility. There is insufficient evidence to support a finding of violation. Attempts will be made to schedule a meeting with the involved parties to address any unresolved issues. COPY Printed At Report Officer E0710/HART,ANDREW 10/12/2007 11:16 Page 1 of 4 Supplement No incident Report 07-1588 ORIG ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT '*1W 014 :11:11]al ke * Ed 9 :4< m:M~IN [â€¢i ~ev gilllllllllllllllllllilllli Involvement Invl No Type Name OWNER (SUBJECT TYPE) 1 *INDIVIDUAL HAMRICK,AMY MNI Race Sex DOB Age Juvenile? Height Weight 1184684 CAUCASIAN (NOT SELECTABLE) FEMALE 12/30/1975 31 No 5'10" 175# Hair Color Eye Color BROWN GREEN Type Address City State HOME 2210 ARAPAHO RD ESTES PARK COLORADO ZIP Code 80517 Type Address City WORK/BUSINESS 552 W ELKHORN AV ESTES PARK State ZIP Code COLORADO 80517 Type ID No St OPERATOR LICENSE OR ID NUMBER 149-70-5326 COLORADO Phone Type Phone No BUSINESS (970)577-1220 1%'A I I 01 4516111 =il l :Ill I *'1 :1 =11 W-rd :4 42* 5{â€¢] =1 4 64 ~ Involvement Invl No Type Name WITNESS (SUBJECT TYPE) 1 *INDIVIDUAL AYRES,ROBERT MNI Race Sex 1184654 CAUCASIAN (NOT SELECTABLE) MALE WITNESS (SUBJECT TYPE) 2: BAILEY.VERD RALPH Involvement Invl No Type Narne WITNESS (SUBJECT TYPE) 2 *INDIVIDUAL BAILEY,VERD RALPH MNI Race 1 Sex DOB Age 1184685 CAUCASIAN (NOT SELECTABLE) MALE 08/03/1949 58 Ethnicity Juvenile? Height Weight Hair Color Eye Color Skin NOT OF HISPANIC ORIGIN No 5'10" 180# GRAY OR PARTIALLY GRAY BROWN FAIR Type Address City State HOME 540 W ELKHORN AV ESTES PARK COLORADO ZIP Code 80517 Type ID No St OPERATOR LICENSE OR ID NUMBER 013110146 COLORADO Phone Type Phone No HOME (970)577-7599 WITNESS (SUBJECT TYPE) 3: THOMPSON.JACK Involvement Invl No Type Narne WITNESS (SUBJECT TYPE) 3 *INDIVIDUAL THOMPSON,JACK MNI Race Sex 1184655 CAUCASIAN (NOT SELECTABLE) MALE Type Address City State HOME; 540 W ELKHORN AV ESTES PARK COLORADO ZIP Code 80517 Narrative Report Outline 07-1588 Officer's Actions Interview with Amy HAMRICK Officer's Actions Interview with Bob AYERS 9 Â»/ Interview with Jack THOMPSON 6 9 Interview with Verd BAILEY Determination Case Disposition Attachments Officer's Actions A complaint was received reporting that the business located at 552 West Elkhorn was in violation of the Estes Report Officer Printed At E0710/HART,ANDREW 10/12/2007 11:16 Page 2 of 4 1 M 4.kfet ' 4#' COpY Supplement No incident Report 07-1588 ORIG ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT Park Municipal Code. The complaining party stated that excessive noise and noxious odors were present at the Kind Coffee facility during roasting operations. Interview with Amv HAMRICK HAMRICK is the owner of Kind Coffee and conducts the roasting operations at the production facility. HAMRICK offered me access in to her business to observe the roasting facility and informed me of the processes involved during production. HAMRICK stated that she has been aware of the concerns from the residents of condominiums across the river. HAMRICK stated that she has modified her roasting equipment to reduce noise during production following the neighbors initial complaints. HAMRICH reports spending in excess of $2,000 to lessen noise output from the facility. Officer's Actions On 092107, I responded to Kind Coffee on 552 West Elkhorn Avenue, to take sound meter readings while a coffee roasting operation was underway. Following the EPMC section 8.06.040, I identified 15 locations along the property boundary from which to take sound level meter readings. These readings are reflected in the comparative report which is attached to this document. Subsequent site visits were made and sound meter readings were taken on September 26 and September 27, 2007. Sound level readings were taken from each of the 15 locations during the 4 measurement periods. Additionally, I recorded sound level readings while the production facility was idle. Every attempt was made to ensure that no sound level readings were recorded during periods of wind or wind gusts. No wind gauges were available for accurate wind speed determination. I nterview with Bob AYERS AYERS is a resident of the Elkhorn Plaza Condos and presently owns two of the condominium units. AYERS stated that the noise and odor from the roasting operation was affecting his family adversely. AYERS stated that the noise was disruptive to him and that.the odor from the roasting operation lingers in the vicinity for a period of up to a "few hours" following a roast. AYERS advised me of an Elkhorn Plaza condos resident that was hospitalized following a respiratory distress event that he credited to the odor from Kind Coffee. Interview with Jack THOMPSON THOMPSON is a resident of the Elkhorn Plaza condominiums. THOMPSON stated that he is aware of the concerns of his neighbors with regard to the coffee roasting operation. THOMPSON stated that the odors and noises originating from Kind Coffee were not a concern for him. He does note the increase in noise and odor during operations at Kind Coffee, but felt that the levels were reasonable. Interview with Verd BAILEY BAILEY is a resident of Elkhorn Plaza condominiums. BAILEY stated that the odor and noise originating from the Kind Coffee facility during production was intolerable. BAILEY stated that the odor permeates their home even though the sliding glass door is closed. BAILEY also stated that the noise from the production facility was disruptive and surely in violation of local ordinance. Determination In reviewing the findings from the sound level surveys, it is apparent that the majority of the noise in the area between Kind Coffee and Elkhorn Plaza condominiums is caused by a small waterfall on Fall River situated between the two structures. Additionally, significant noise is generated by vehicle traffic along Elkhorn Avenue. The sound level meter readings for the waterfall was 79.9 dB(A). The sound level meter readings for vehicle traffic on Elkhorn was 71.4 dB(A). Given the background sound level present, the ambient noise resulting from the roasting production does not constitute an unreasonable noise source. The odor resulting from the roasting process is not regulated by the Estes Park Municipal Code. I contacted the Larimer County Environmental Health office in Estes Park to inquire about applicable county regulations. I was informed that complaints had been received pertaining to the roasting facility and that the county staff has investigated the concerns. It is my understanding that no formal action was required from that investigation. The staff from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPH&E) was contacted to see if any state regulations pertained to this particular event. Staff from CDPH&E stated that there are regulations in place Printed At ~ Report Officer E0710/HART,ANDREW 10/12/2007 11:16 Page 3 of 4 Incident Report 07-1588 ORIG Supplement No ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT , or coffee roasting facilities and that operators may be required to submit an Air Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) with the state. I continue to work toward arranging a meeting between the business owner and residents of the Elkhorn Plaza condominiums to address the complaint. Case Disposition This case is inactive pending follow up. Attachments 1)Table showing sound level meter readings for 9/21, 9/26 & 9/27 2)Sketch map identifying locations sound measurements were obtained Report Officer Printed At E0710/HART,ANDREW 10/12/2007 11:16 Page 4 of 4 07-1588 1 1 1 1 1 1 e Â© 1 \91\ 1 0 e Ute 0 @ 1 Jee Ul L -3 f 't Ay g *0009 e Oh9 e .308713 Saarlop )/M-~26 /- .Â·112* Al Location 8 8 C Average not roasting 9/21/2007 9/26/2007 9/27/2007 9/27/2007 1 53.2 51.1 52.5 52.2 45.9 2 51 50 50.4 50.5 43.9 3 56.5 58 58.4 57.6 52.5 4 67.6 53.4 54.4 58.26 63.2 e =woÂ·v,~.-Â£ Â· --*.*.7. t,,1â€¢-7.LÂ· . -T 1 5 71 75.5 75.3 ~134%21**442 72.5 6 67.8 74.5 72.7 *42'304.-79156&:'249,i:,? 79.9 Â·- â€¢21:JL.,.IÂ·/t=.5,// -~ Â·, 7 56.4 53.2 52.6 54.06 58.5 8 60.7 58.5 60 59.73 62.6 9 61.4 63.3 64.3 4'49:<2Â·RETE22,~fl:,2.2.:17.1. 56.4 10 63.6 62.4 61.3 , NEL:-062:43:, :--4-2 57 1 J..1 Â· I :Â·ia=i .26- i 11 58.1 58.3 58.2 58.2 56.2 12 65.1 60.7 61.4 :~~-:r.~,E62.4..a-31,-: -:.: 63.8 13 60.7 63.3 . 63.9 - iMm@%.,Efatt?~?15 58.8 .Â·i'4>2.1,;.~.-G.,6'U"~Â·,rÂ·'Pt,<:@fhÂ· 14 64 60.9 61.8 ~MN<6223.'.i~' :.4.Â· 58.5 15 58.1 60.7 59 59.26 56.6 1 19 Health, Sanitation & Nuisances ~0+Imu Section 8.04.091 on the effective date of the ordinance codified Chapter 8.06 herein and subject to this Section shall have one (1) year from said effective date to have a key Noises lock box installed and operational. 8.06.010 Definitions. (c) The Fire Chief shall designate the type of key lock box system to be implemented The following words, terms and phrases, within the Town and shall have the authority to when used in this Article, shall have the follow- require all structures to use the designated sys- ing meanings ascribed to them: tern. Ambient sound level means the total (d) The owner or occupant of a structure sound pressure level in the area of interest, required to have a key lock box shall, at all including the noise source of interest. times, keep a key in the lock box that will allow for access to the structure. A-weighting means the electronic filtering in sound level meters that models human (e) The Fire Chief shall be authorized to hearing frequency sensitivity. implement rules and regulations for the use of the key lock box system. Background sound level means the total sound pressure level in the area of interest, (f) Any person who owns or occupies a excluding the noise source of interest. structure in violation of this Section shall be subject to the penalties set forth in Section Code Enforcement Ollicer means an 1.20.010 of this Code for any violation of this employee of the Town authorized to issue Section. (Ord. 13-07 Â§1, 2007) variances pursuant to Section 8.06.060. 8-5a Supp. 15 44 Health, Sanitation & Nuisances Section 8.06.010 Sound level means the instantaneous 8.06.030 Maximum permissible noise levels. sound pressure level measured in decibels with a sound level meter set for A-weighting (a) A noise measured or registered in the on slow or fast integration speed. manner provided in Section 8.06.030 from any source at a level which is in excess of the dB(A) Sound level meter means an instrument established for the time period and zoning dis- used to measure sound pressure levels tricts listed in this Section is hereby declared to conforming to standards as specified in ANSI be a noise disturbance and is unlawful. When a Standard S 1.4-1983 or the lateat version noise source can be identified and its noise thereof. measured in more than one (1) zoning district, the limits of the most restrictive zoning district Sound pressure level means twenty (20) shall apply. multiplied by the logarithm, to the base ten (10), of the measured sound pressure divided Zoning District, Maximum Noise [dIKA)] by the sound pressure associated with the threshold of human hearing, in units of Sound Level decibels. 7 a.m. - 8 p.m. - Areas Zoned - 8 p.m. 7 a.m. Unreasonable noise rneans any sound of Rural Estate (RE-1) 55 50 such level and duration as to be or tend to be Rural Estate (RE) 55 50 injurious to human health or welfare, or Estate: 1 Acre (IE-1) 55 50 which would unreasonably interfere with the Estate: .5 Acre (IE) 55 50 enjoyment of life or property throughout the Residential (R) 55 50 Town or in any portions thereof, but excludes Residential *-1) 55 50 all aspects of the employer-employee Two-Family (R-2) 55 50 relationship concerning health and safety Multi-Family (RM) 55 50 hazards within the confines of a place of employment. (Ord. 2-04 Â§1, 2004) Accommodations (A) 55 50 Accommodations (A-1) 55 50 8.06.020 Unreasonable noise prohibited. Commercial Outlying (CO) 60 55 6/0~0~~ Commercial Downtown (CD) 60 55 No person shall make, continue or cause to Commercial I leavy (CH) 60 55 be made or continued any unreasonable noise; Office (O) 60 55 and no person shall knowingly permit such noise Restricted Industrial (I-1) 80 75 upon any premises or in or upon any motor vehi- cle owned, possessed or driven by such person (b) tf the noise source in question is a pure or under such person's control or operation. For tone, the limits set forth above shall be reduced purposes of this Section, members of the Police by five (5) dB(A). Department are empowered to make a prima facie determination as to whether a noise is (c) In multi-use buildings, when noise unreasonable. (Ord. 2-04 Â§1,2004) originates in one (1) unit and is received in another unit within the same building, the maximum dB(A) for such noise shall be the same as the maximum dB(A) for the zoning district in which the building is located. (Ord. 2- 04 Â§1, 2004) 8-7 Supp. 14 0-1 4-44,1- .,~4 '' AÂ¥! '1 *_2'j, 1 6-FL-Â·L ' zf 1--1, 1-- 1 2 r IT I -3- - =--77-~7 14 - 1.fl;*147 112'11 2 1.--1 73 1 - 2 Â· 1. 8,Â·p i 1 - 7 Â· 1141'1114/11 '10-1-,1 1-11 111 - - -~1 - . 1 - 11 *97 L T i - , 1 1 - - Â· I ' 62â‚¬ I e<914 % ' NkÂ· , 4% 4. -1 ..4 - .1 - r r .4.4 ~ - 'râ‚¬*12111 riu-I}11 1 11-11 -11.111111 111 1'1~ . 1,- -r k. . -*4 41 9. . 96113-t~,~.3,~iv-zi,%~~,'f ~~f~~~~1-_ f '- ' k ' 4*- '' lili . 1 61 - " 11 r 1 4 1 -11 - 1 - .7 3: '44'4+~il.-11:-Ili ik)*' :1: I.:'. H )..f f;iÂ·~ ..- ,# - . 1 tai T e e I #1,(Â£16%*Fl!,~,II:.6 .>,t,:;.~. ,~.'i,~Â·-i" i--~ ~ r 1 ..1 1 _' *tj'%rt?141/ 9!*~~14,1 -, I~~~|,11 111, - 11 1 1- '' .....r#9414**vigv!*4# 11,7-1211111,1~9--1~. < +~*f r_ k . PU...1. 1.471,/Lt,1.*t.r . 4,11- 1-2tl,1 .3 49-, 1 - 4 W.,IMIN!,1. 11 'j ~ . â€¢:nAÂ·' :J 1 -1 * .lf- ' â€ž 114!:11+â‚¬1 -T1~1*1:,TJ.:;11.1â€žI'Â·- ,Â·,I , 11-41 " '/1- .L l .1 Â· 11.-r ' A '4 ....... 1 ..1 # I ..51 - * 9,1 . 7.-1 t.... 1.111~. 1 :1111 lili- .4 1.1 L",11 11 t 1.- 1 1.11. > ' Â¥7' ~ ~ ,- 1.11.1 ; h Lili -i, 1 | I' i *t . , s'+7'4:'1 1,9 ~4# 1-4:92.2495 L -D 1 -1 91 1 11 1-21-L, i 1. ./4,&Â£.4Â· 1,*':7':- i t.'1rloDNÂ«;49 4.e lÂ· | ~ i '11- 1 1./ 1 .f 'i Â» Â£4f' Mp. Â£ 4 ' 1- 11â„¢11 - , f Â· 72% f '4 4- a V_f - 1 Blumberg No. 5137 I '10: -* :..... 4/1~ + '. -fâ€¢ .J. f./7- r -0-13~ 44i + M./1//Ill//7- Â» 4%%;bi '4*~~ 0-~~14~ 3 ftff>iÂ· 7 4. 4/ 13=:.7*92 --el -2 .3 . kNK..Al- Â·...4. ..f3300,..RÂ¢4,4:Â»t...:1 ...:--Â»1-1.:1?~I.- -3;.Dif;~klt,%495, 1 03;.-Â·31...1/ImmtÂ·~1,462 'Q..All..'t.NA'tteÂ·2*~*,ibk..e 1-91 y.. , ~ ... -.Â·Â·-1~~<*Â·t:?;:7~4?frttf{-42W,MB Vj'*?.r.>.1.,-4Â·.~4& '~ Â·Â·: 4%24*6:FlÂ·::Â·92.:Â¥*b,vt.- ~ ,--'-'~ -r--4.~~. .--22-VE*AM#$/Rjm/ r. -Â·Bat--Â·.51-241418/4408{-32& R.*A-:ju/,i;-Â«4Â»fi~~ *-~ ,~-,Â£-:Â· . ~~~~~~;(22) liZ~M~.2=~24*244'-,LA'.I~*I>432 #.v.~~.~1 '--39 ~~~~42~- . . ~ 2-3 2 '-1-t '. . ~ A . " 0 4.14 1.1 11, :711~ f .. r - 4 -W / 1 i " -49klimp :~ 324:Ck Â¥. 4-~~izu tl~-~ ~ _.-1.---,~@bl~~' 3. er"W 52= kil 1// / 4 - 4 1 , Â»Sal. 15aa@1~ ~1 .- 5. A.Â·-*. - - 6 : 1, 1 111 1 11 1-.ly- 1 1 1 +1 1 .â€¢ft> I ~=. ~ & *. ..4-20'. - + 4.1.11... 1 ,-- : ' Â·-'4*Viant//Â£5 1 9 yol 1 3& -2 1 4.1414.t.~fltor - â‚¬=9 1 r - .4 --1-P ... : R P R 9 0 t .3. 'f ~ ,Â¥6jt & iff 401 ..4.0 4 I 6 6 â€¢t *.â€¢ * 0 +I i 1 + . 4*44 48+36.4- .â€ž.. . â€¢*+ *Al,4,4 4.a, /:69/61-Â· I j 1 ' 6 8 .4 4 -1 1,4 1% 1- .,"41 Â·â€¢ 1 9. 1~*giJA-4,=1*.i.4 4.46..Talty.;6~ ..4 1 1.2. ?,1 , ...4,.~'-g. a. 1 4.1. 1, *Â· 1.I .6.-. !31..Tz.:,., , 4 0 ~. ., 4 ., 44'. ,Â¥+1.3.:1.T71.8-1. #/ 1 j.*44:It..i 1 l. , 'I .... '. Ulthlf 1 ' I '4 L:.1, 1.Â·1'1 ~1-'141 MJâ€¢- p. 'Â· 4Â·,@,Â· :tttl t.*uj,itt,ttf.. t., .frn 1, 1; it *iftÂ·~:i:lud#LbLE;Tjii) .,,Â¢.4 *4â€¢,Â· A 4,4 4, ..+ 4.. 4Lt tri,I '44*#4 444*' .4.1,J1 1- Â· 'Â· '''-~.a.,1,'.61 1:lj ..., t.~ 1 . S.-Â· /64â€¢*$444+ -.:.... 4,4 A ~, 4.....,~* 6 Ati. 1 .A*44*Â¢. *: .Mi.,â€¢|BÂ»6*01,0 } tlettift#~IÂ·Â·Â·,~' f 3,1.-Li "iÂ·-1.E Frfkt.*ti 1,! ''AM ~ ~â€¢Â·* 5Â·Â¢ ' 5.*Â·4*4â€¢ Â·44 .44Â£44 4/r"'Â· 16- 1.... i. ..4.0.1. i-. 1. aÂ· i~ka~K#*t,4*lf .'~4.4'.1, 1- - -4 -Vi. .14 littflf:F:':111.1/<pt..1 A.1 1 â‚¬. liU 11.1.-1.4.1Â·,1Â·libl. e}*1*z.it â€¢.t , 14 ' t.i. I. ..â€ž, 44%4,14 'UN Ffr ...4 4 1,t..1.4 i.r.â€¢..14:1/?iJU~LE~fÂ·#Â·ill-Â·40:t#111411 d. .4 14.'.1 ':1-â€¢.1~~~':.3.;.1 , .. Â· 4 ,#.1.11344Â·211:Â·91/P/TYqhqU' 1 k. 1 . 9, 4/44(,4-Â·:/,n.Â¢ '.i ., I ...Â· *-~f.>I. 9.44 4 6â€¢ 4/.#.. '4â€¢NI:Â£:,i 4.-6.,I..,â€¢,1.1144/*M'* 1--â€¢Irri ...,11'.1,1,1,1 . 4.4. w.â€¢* r-Â· ~.. 1 *1# *< .,4,# 4*L -â€¢. A*priÂ·44â€¢Â·â€¢~15Â·i,1 f.Â· ''f, ''#Â·'~'c"'tÂ·: â€¢<.4_1~~~~#-A<t';:1 1;:24,113,(If~'~.7.,+,1 1,, , 44-- . Att ; 4,4 i~44.4-â€¢Â·-,4.4424â€¢0â€¢'60 ittlt&~11 1 1 11 +~M~/ 'Pi'L 1- 44 4 W 4 . 4 4,*~Lit-4. 1*-, .. i. ..1 9 4.Â· 0 1Â·.!2.1.1 + . . 11 '.1~7'Tr~mt~.=0.-,fi. 9.4 lyP 4- 4 11'Ad.,i.,ijt~4 ittl.tÂ·.4, , 41 i: 1~L':4; 4. 1.-1 ,fi;12-1-tr// , K : 64'.p : ' 60: ,. ~A M~&Â·|.Lk/l ..1 ,?.1 1 ... I 'U..9 4.f Â· i' 60.~2'# 1#,#!â€¢,~:FUâ€¢1Â·Â·N~|~.1- } 1. j â€¢t, i, - I- 5 Wt't ' I i ' : F I a.... '' /.-9.'.1 ... I k 'Â· :Â· m. 4- U~ NÂ·Â·Â·â€¢Â·~;IlL.~~.t &'1.~Â·1Â·.*,~f Â·Â·â€¢Ait. 1 ,+41WiFit T.4 :1Â·' '1 ; u:fi, ,Â·-'-1 *'F**S#+414% 4.flk.4.1(. ' .' /4 1 1 *1 '441, i . ,. . , 4 1.. 1-4 t' t.,4, ,,-1=..â€¢- 1, :t St' 1. !.. , Â·.f ' 't:'3ftil.:-t filt):.IM!!1;'1-UN:t, cft, iÂ· AÂ¢' :-,2.4 $0,)3Â¢ j/6.1.Â·1,6;.1 ,r.2., j'iâ€¢.,~ : <44?$ 4 K, 4 â€ž8...: i i. . ,Â· 1 .--*: 4 ,#,r,w.,...1 +4 â€¢:-m...,wf .â€¢ Â· . ..â€¢ : , :,Â·"lift i'*A- 0,Â· A. , , f , -3 i 711 f lit:. 1 4% h. 81#* 1Â·:t' 6, '2 -- . ; 31: 1 1 I i {-,kE-1.~ r ; 1 Â£ ,- li 140 < jt â€ž: ~.4. i, *, 4,/7/.1 d,/' .'...: .../ . I f e .'u l ./ I. + 'I :Ej;~IFTBITT . 1 1 1 4 4+L - =: :1 Ftâ€¢;f~ i '~f Ii~Â· ~i-zAl./Â£44~kâ€¢â€¢%â€¢*Â·I',â€¢ ~fÂ·'141,~ 1. f'' r, 1,â‚¬4#q i t:-r-: 4 ~ 4-Â¢Â·#A#--Â£ Â¢ i.Â¢11*- AJ~ 1.*,f*(*fit..400/.4... ' '-4.'4.#AniÂ¢i~IÂ· 16~.1~Â·A~.Li,Â·4*â€¢, J.+tn.:4 r: i.+1 Â· , Â· Â·:i:.Â·1: 41-11tiditu Â·. i' :T . i-, b Â·6/Tâ€¢Ti-; ''.1,/r~t'~i~--:ilil.t- , ,LJAZI 411*ite.4 25: r :rbit t. 21-t:168. rlf..~j.L .5.-bli JA~.WI#f.!j f?: ft} 1 +CjklfÂ»i: )41: 4 Â¢*Â¥ pÂ¢, ~- 11,6.04Â¢4~Â·;/t.41.1,~,â€¢ i*Â·Alt,0 4 41.4 +4 0 itt 1.:1:J **1 R '41'J,04'.>t>/9 4, , 11-1!i i -"*-+34,;AbjurhyiÂ·-tlit Jdul,~i-6./Â·01-1-% 1 ./ ' 7~-r~*Al.e~.i:4,#2.i,1. iii-7 Â· ti & Nl~fitii:' t.*tf_,lilli ./ 1 Â· f 1 k.+1*{141*$21 H"Hht-: 4 '*4 ,flit i Â·.2991 1: 5~41 r '1-10 0- Â»k i, ilik~'4 4 -RO+42 . p~.... 1.21 1/1 ~ 1.32 1111 ' ~1;N~#JU.bpkiT:-13_Â·flf-li~jill, k iff h flfill -- '.-. tf .}9 ~b.*.'~ 1-s ~- 2. 7 1 /44 r witifillitl- - Â· 11 at -4/i./ 611-- t:RE #lt i /, - 11-1 , 14 - I. t,- 4- Ll 9,/' - 7Â·----r-- -7/Â£-5- - *- 4- 1 r* 1 4'" ''. r 1 1. 1-11 '.. ' $.. ... 1 1.1 ,&Â£=1 -1 - -91- &04' i ,-,..,i -~=~- 31.11-*14'If- -'AD'.11't>.7... 7 92 1 .- 7 -1 10.-1.-Ic ... ., 4 - I. - Â·02 '111>4<frtÂ¢,dpâ‚¬1 3,? 46. 1%11 -4.1 1-77 k e i 4 . I I _J7 1, - g.*;:9: -1?01 I r\*F Â· -2:Wat.. ': 2 da-6:. . 4.+1 1% 4 . p. 3 ulÂ·t# ElÂ· Â·tÂ· .1:Â· i.. 4* 4 - fl. -VÂ¥ 4 -11 * 41111 -1 1 . 4 .41 :4'4~11 + 1. - 1.. C ', 11.,il'.pf, Â· - .0 -44- 1,1 ..1 . 1,1 1 11 1 4* ' I _#fl_.1/1 - r 4- .... 1-1- I I+~ :,1 -* Â·Â· t, . 11 --1. 11 21- III.lili - - 4442'41 !1.**42.1-i-4-ti~2~4 rÂ· t' It 1-f t 411 Â«1 ./ ..1 1 '1 n =- - 1.- 1 4.4 Le /4 t.- . . -4,1 @a , 1.Â· 4 .. , , 9. 'i ' 'fih~: 1 ~ 3 r;IÂ· 24 ; . 91 N...3 57:--26.. th, I *I 1 -'. 1 -I & -- '$ #t . ..2. - - , 1- 'Â·-li. J e - r .1-44 -2 -it- + 4 1 -E : --Mi; :9 --7 4 1 'r .# f 1, 't;- t,Â· r- Tâ‚¬.1. 1~ 'WV '~2 --4 . Â·â€¢- 1 4/1 *.. .1 1 73,4-- + t. 11'4 'i Â»04 -4 r. --c : i â€¢ I it:. il /=s 11- 4. ' ..- -ft th .Irphint'6,1 1. i..Â· . 0,0 : 1 Â£ 1 f t t:-' 4 y , 4 -4. ,â€ž ,? F. . -- â€¢ 2 E Y *-_ ,-i --11~ K â€¢ 1 ~7 6 4 Et -IL'. . 1. 1:719 4 t #i J 17* 32 -,F_ 4 1 4 . - .2 3 Ir#, c: 42 3, - I . i -I , --% " .p, 1- i ' 3Â¥ ..l 1 -4.. , , 14.- 1 + ..4.-, . . 1 ,} L .1 Ip Â·, i ', 4- I r -- y :11 Â·Â·Â· 2 - â€ž . , .ts, '9 ./ 4, M -IL '1 24==t , 6 E!. 4 . 9. b., 41 4 1 t= It 4. + ir r-r ' '-12,â€ž f.=p '51 ' tr:â‚¬12.12 . r 0 .SAifif n#;Af ?15;-3:3344.~ i,91 i =224.,&4,#Jii;,di 7Â§,194 1Â£=:A&11.-â€ž219221p_1 =:3:-R i?-- -h& r .9 -xl '-i.* A. 4. 441 1.11. 1, 013- . :txÂ·L v. '; 4: t)4 Â¥{rgil:*ff31_'il-~ ~I~~~4.~~,~~.~r~,~ --~96â‚¬jt :Â·t 2,~~#}!~41~ ~~~~:~1jK*E'!44 -f 3 - ~I rÂ· A Ti c:, 40-ln 1.;,1544,63:Fl 'i, trgrjj~ rffL.t., i .~s~a-i,rd~=.~. :t -t '4. ..." . :klin:-ipti-:it :?litt '44,-tiLEifriLÂ·Â©' rt.jij w*Z 1: ati, Â·I~,.~ #.t.4.,F~illh7/,1i tilirjli-%- :t--iii 9':34*1"f- - 4- - .: , A" 4 1 1 . . et -44 +12 -41.-' . ift{*fiA?-3:4*:tligilit~li'13,1.4 I~*4%,'43 2%256.~~,Fil]~~~i~~~*~*3ill ~ji'Â¢4 %3~.Fli~Fr~,~#tw_*1%_Ti FIt- ~ f Â«24. 4'1% :i:,Ei-'i*!11 ~Uij li-*ft! 11?64 'I,we -, 9tri~fil*~! Iii*1~ bigi_12'' 1%4W1~5it;544~3ip Y -y ; ,4:1*-:!!i~ti~~1,9~11,*41'21:6,434'41*3~,4134~6't-8 'I "~~AL# '[ph' 6-:A. *-f ":Â·Â·d E, Â· i 4-' 21- 4 - -P-' . 1 11.* 1- ' .:/. il ."1 Â·ur t -mt f 1 +f Il :1~~01 1*=4Â· 1''ler' J,!rab t.-4:#-141: IF- 11>,fli-:111 -14.11 -1 .[Ai :FiÂ·!~3}i*2- 1/Â£4rplitli.:1 iii ':'1Â· -*J L ..1 f 1, il'* il t:41Â· 1,Â® /6 1--m Â·1 -4,Â· ./ -1, 4- i - , .em~; :eli , 41 m.1 '169't .gil :16 4/Alli f{! 1;.3;1 3 1 -igi '1''iwillibli#Mil:'11*jit*)11&1:1@li~.1% litilt, 1:43{211@1] ES- It -*tmt: 11 - , 1 4 I.... 1 -4 m 1 -4 :- .1 4 V HL , t 11.- '11 1 ~ :- ' E 11; i t . Al r y Â·.i.~ it 1l; li ~-~:tj~~014~=17I~1~1~,~~~~fi~- ~~~~~j~~4,~%<~~i , . t' iÂ®L--*44:Â·411 -Â£12,101 *110 t .Â¥ii .-ir-â€ž ;1 k- I tE t-1, ,-- r ' - %% 41 4 It 14*11 %- &11.* 4:10 1 iIi. luEENt !1.92:9Â· =Et}i ,ir=i- 11.=ME'I.:r:, !1/14- .,=4 T ' P 120rt- Â·Â·-'}~i '*g.IllÂ®.11} 411; t.i -10.11 * it 4. 11 It:'4 1 1, +11. 14 4 .- 1 t..14 , 4. 1- 4 1 -12*4Â°'i, 11:Et- 1 5Â· 2.32 ' 41- ' 14 Â¥ -91...1. j. 1 -1 6912*i-*!t !2'lit [i ~ ~ 1 -LEM; 4 11-==i 1, r * %14 1 F #A#T"fl.t i F . 1 4 1 9249/hhi/Ch li ' ~yii 't'litc 13ic -1 2 11 1 11 1 12% 4.- 11111 2. C . â‚¬~!i~Â«Â¢ijA'jii'k~:'4;14.-4 . - j. 1 41 1.1 111 1% I .4.1 le.ii til-:f.'li#i'4011. tiÂ· ' r 1 + jiii, iti~ ir '!4#e<.1* 1 -4:'.1 " *-â€ž.1.1 .F-9 6 %24 11*3~111 ~!1#.il h t r 1 t 4 :2Ft: 44 .i; '1 1.. s .6 -4 11 . ' , 102!t: 1 1 1 EÂ·ij!,11'~tili?~61'~ki~~~,ji'*li~"4*4Iff,'.,1,26 4 -A- M L.- 1.- 1.24: it 11 4 6/5 : i :=Ell 1 - It 1 0:*.11/F 11 --, . 4 4-- 1 1 1 1 11 :101, '1; 1 Â·liBFF?1141 11~iti 'itillifi; -ILLE.~11 112Ll~ 'r'rk.Li. L trift~b-7 1 , F *141- 1 1 i '' - r. 5/4: 4.14-4.11 9,0 I f .2/7-a +4 . .4.7'1,-[imEÂ¥11. i, #Si' 1~,%1 1 ~f'.1, ,pi~ fi, t' i 11 ;: ~.Imdril'11.!ff#A-ki: !1241, 4,-!Eli- il,1 11 1 .11 4-4. 't, 1 Â·Â· 424,4. 11 4 4- m L t 4.:2.2 15/ '44~4.3'jtifef *fil, ~ H - + Â·Â· ~ 1 9 *22.4 li, 1,4 tr-â€¢tiâ€¢ .1 -tet-â€¢*; Cr~% 1,".132{t-'1' 1:Cr.:11.- ,!it. th A--' + lAi .1, 11 14Â» 4 . .1 7219 4..1. 4 11'Xl~ IN!41%!~ ticÂ©46 'litit; tilifil-%11 -4 ''01 1. 4 1:Al'rÂ·tÂ· 7 9 '4 1.1~A.-4, '13gg: 4 Â·:e" :r fÂ¥6#*44}. .fi 4 4,7:!ili:~11... i*2Â¢:i *RNM##<41 4//ghtf'Q/Â£9jW/~~(4444*jitii.i.tiii:. T. --. - 2.7 , "â€žJ#. ,% 7 '. ... .,It -' U â€¢, 7, ,Â·.:rtn "6-fi'E. iti~~t.,~: 4 (329; ..11 ifi,'rTZEÂ©. ; %12.V<:4â‚¬2, 1,-4--AUL'LT 1 Â·.4 3%-t~:DI 9, t.*i:1.e#,4 )20*2112'&, 'f' 11 't' 45, 2 - i f % lf-1 ki.. 44. ~9,2%34.t124'ti.:.-Â·i: ~14%-1*.- '3111,k qig#f .~ti~~~i~.~*.iA?j.1**'1~~:FE#~~46 4 : . f -Sc &-=3 3 3!i 31----i-134, te='Ct-,= 0:Z , .413,34 ,; ,~~, 1*'~f,:.HiÂ·:r. >1 jit:"U:NE;:#E 11., 1%-4 :v;:-~itÂ·M/*2'i'y ~9 x it, :t:*<22'< --' 14 fflf. 40;1 ~A ' P,T. 1 .' #'I.-.6/ . p. I' 'r , -. '- I, , -2 -: '.112 7â‚¬1-:I:2 --'--d li2~. 51Mt k'-s'. -sf '"9412: 7.?32 Ct 317-9-4394== 1 1-,T-T~ ri . ., -f.. ' ,-6.,0 ' 72..~; Â·.:24.ZIN~ I,~19-1 .Â·1-7, ...,931.-1,1't~~;.. >,-1, ffil:-5,{:,';.3 13-IÂ°9;414,1. ,~:, 4, t-:413:tf.,{â€ž21 7 - ,-1-4 1 ' .,6 1 trt/'. .: 3.-r.. '3 ; 2 07.., as '17'tty:'' . ~bka .; i.- , -.ty:?210Â©AhBA% ~tritifi.~4 ,2,-i : . ., /4.=,- i . 1 ., ., 1 10,/I . , 1â€¢:.4.- J f ' P ..1 - 1 , rjwqÂ¢Â¢b~Â» 90 ' r L 0-6 ~7 7 .LFED , er- *7-I i 6 I â€¢ F- i h . E Â·*.4.Wr;; R â€¢ i: r .... r . W *'FL ma Pt* , t. Â» f ..:. , F ** A. 1. I. .r. f,Â·- .6-" + m ge. 99 W * 4 %%. ./. I. E a L. Â¢ Â£1 0 *22 F *- :64* -W *27- . I ./. 2~ -!Be,u e re 4. A ef; 1.4 - aijÂ£- . L Ze., + 6 I ..Ill 12:. %' t.Â· N ~ Â·Â·-t -0.-I *~2: f $97 7.7 .. - 2 r BM =p.â€¢ $ 4 4 7 W A m M e *9 9 1- 2 + -28 1 1 49" *%Â¥02 ISS. - - ..... i Â¥ ter : .2: . 0 , E~~*It 0.,f 90 - .Al. Prt F -., ~-Ey+I~ 7 + duÂ· ~.934;:44*y'jitÂ¢~Â·f '=2-â€¢â€¢--~ a. I.., 4 Al' D . 4:244.4 -'... 'Bil ' P - Â¥ a 1 ~ 1 1. .. . 1 1-3* 9.*fatÂ·Ui&: -9, I "t=2 .9 : 1. .tifli#;44*43 4.Â·~ w./ 1 -* - . 14. tiht - .. t 1Â· 3 *F - .C-+ 1.4 ....4.Cly~'~eah'Wt-' 5 -- - Â· . IR ...- .. dâ€¢â€¢;42k Â·Â·, ' tri li 4 . 1. -,1 -' Â·q.a=r .il. . 94>- r L ~--7 .. -' .t S - 1%.4/ - 1. 1.-:. g-lk ,-~ # 1 )0 -ph g.; i .:i, %*k- .. f n * re - Â·4 :Al/*fllÂ·Â·. 9â€¢ El" -:.es - Â· - .-â€¢4'424Afi ..$...162- I I ..=eli.' ~ Â¥ 4 -- 4.4 ah,7 1 1--1 I -3.-9- i 8-<rce*RE-I . a.1 .Â·B':. .1 - ~4~Â·:Â·-Â·-24 :.4*1, F:~~,>34' .::~~ p.} , 4: ' ..t 'r S *AL. OffÂ»< t.71-0~--7-. - flfÂ· ~ ~#F,i ..2Â· -*.'Â»NÂ·'.<1 410'v'* tut 'b\. i. U , 91 :94/,Akmmlimill"M'Iplali 4 -- .= 14% . -mn 0-- ill., Sill// 1/Ims.a 4* == 49 Jit9~Vi#4-14 5.4â€ž 4 -=1~ .. ' I Z. 4-Â«eten -- 2 --~ 212*14 491.4Â£ - 1 .AB. ..1.*as ....6 43 e i 97*4 ~t g.,5.- AV Â£*026.91 1 F *g: '4 Z=2# 4 144 /4 2 21 43 '9< -trin -6 9* - 4*, ) 17* -- < *Â» tÂ»* t .. I . v 0 41. 1*4446.4444, I J . 1-40*.,4.04.*04/8<3**i .% k :ji I 9 - 24* 9 . Nt=4 t.& A 34 --rf- 91 .2.-- .2 - â€¢ .ff 4.:I'll"I."I/A. **t I.# . 1 1 6.E 4 - -A Y / 46 -P* Â¢ 49.* A â‚¬A- 6 - P .--ik . I - ' 914 : I * %4 * I U. 1 4~.3,-*lip 'ge " #3234/4 1.,Se.s: ~ 11 3 . *Â«9* .1- 1. - '4 . 33:+AM/~~- < ti * f - .4 F4 I & e . 1 , >1,3,2 ~~ 5 -4 f ' 01**A' /'.i 4 . 1 , 1 : 4;1,1 1 A F"I ' 1. 4,41. 0,9 11* ' e ' 2 . 41 -0 I Â£* I - W .4 1,4 7 +19 y -- * g .% 4 ./ 'I . f w - I I I - . 0 11*: ~.1 4 1 I . 'A / -â‚¬ . 4: 2/ f .r ,/ Pt A 4 -2 , r 9 j ~ 4 ~ . 0,9 , 40â‚¬ A *k . ly- 4 ... .. I. 4 e 9-45-- 4 5 $ '.-1 1%- -'. 9 , ./ $ ..a A *09 -/4 : c . I 4 - lf- 6 6411': - 41 4' '* - 3, ; / ' le/,+ 3 W. 4 I. - .9/ I V , 3, 34 4,4 4./f 4 - 0. 1-47 6 . >4 ...I# 10 - , 4,Â£ 4 U t. i " ./IM *1~ I . *7 Y - .33/. li . 4 - Â· 4. tr 4 x I s. 4 .... . I I. t - .Â» k I 'r C lag - ./.- , t . *< - 7 C * r 4 _ 1'., i * 4,5.9. 2 15.GAÂ· ty Â»4~ - 0*-7 ). . 9 -li -h ...# 4 * 8= -6*3%,+Eit , rÂ· -- 1.3 --- i Â¥ - . 4 , N. 2 - -*& 1;. 3/Â»Â»e i '93./ . .- .%Â»- 44/ -.6 4,2.'- 44'e :* -24 . 4 1 1 -a u ./ I 2%# .F .9,~~ -. Â¥ 1 : 441 1 i * - f,- 49/ 172... :44 - - 'I -1~=9 937â‚¬-33-3 .... $% I 4 - ~ --2 -. 1 4 ? f 399 --, . i A-1 :.lfÂ©3 1/ 3%#f<?014*5 , a ..rd *2 1 NX.3*'R/*J*.'-44 -1 #459-FIA .bifi)~~2 ./.* t --1.#Â£*24.-32, . ..3, 4 1 -4.INIC *4* I "mi - 9 h 2-4.aw,4-,- m , -....= I .,.r L /25%1,1//M . 4-0~V.~..- . eÂ« . %~9fric* Â£*- :3593**4 4tZWBri#. ;h~*08; e Z?**1* .J -'-b -- i.. + 9. 9 4 431Â»9 . 94.16 '0 12 9= 4. 4--al 3. P . 1.1.Â®re: ./r...p . -* ...) I. --:9:31 i & 4.*:f '.. r - d .r I. 5 ' *54 ;391*.:%2 790**"- Â¥ 18.Â· 3 4+696*t . 1_2- U. . 9*7â€¢kâ€¢ * 4 .1 , 4442 . 7 .1 Â»i 1 Mt 9 I 11# i Il'Ilry*lil ***fai- ~ /#r. S*6 - .,Â£. k A. 0-ek*fyÂ· 1-1 :,9 b.'*4- 1.22*. 10* ~r /19 2 I Ct= AC 4 1- .Â· 24 r ,/6 ~ 6 , ..2,!fll C'%. ./.7 ,;91 *-1., . + . a 1.010 - Il .M d w. fir - ,Â· . 1 0.-I - 1.- 11 ~341 "U'- iffi-.Â·.I:LÂ·-:4; 1 41* =t- I ./. 0 L ..1 1Â· Â· Â·Â·Â·b ' 1-y ' 4,f,i,g;,AA,A,-.. *, j 4 W * f .â‚¬= i: ..fâ€¢ i *71 """'6&4'1*5fFMFis~id.. ..Lit.-411:i'tiARM,6.'F,i, f-,r Ii''r' A A.t 0 :f=:A-*2. 1 . 1 C ..# . 9#Â£ 12*t~*k -, f~ri ... 1 1. 1. 1.1. ..39.W ...4 - . - . Â·47 Â·Â·f.1'- ~~ J I. L /4/ T* 00; 1/9 -74 2,50 . *h,4 4 . i- -if 212 *7 a .t *-2~ Â¥ â€¢L _ " -* 1 4 .9; 939 1 ~~*~h ./ I SÂ·.d...$.* -/4..I .4 ...'.'01. . 4 -I //el'. L r. *.Â·IMÂ·'4- ..' ~i ' . A -lu e + . --..,254't..'. i. / ... 3. 1-ip Ar -f Â· 44 a././ 43 1. 112114,-1 . 4,0 - . , - 11 1-111 - 1 1 ........ 4. 6. &,2 4 . -1 1. 4 45 -17. '.... .. 1 iâ‚¬...i . ... 9 .e 1,& ..' 9Â·1Â· 6 Â· Â·Â·*4 8 , 3.4 Â· ... - 2- 4 rÂ· .d!# f..., - - t- 9 . .... 1 - ' 79?44*.-Â·. = - .1. 1 -. Â« 42Â«% 4 44 * I I ././// I .. ' , *i Â·. thy<*~ . % : '. 1 , 9 e r. i./.#~.5'Â· et ... r Af '611 i, .~, :~ ~'_M ,=A h V ..31/6/'ir,4.:/ -flo ' t q 13 0. - 1 LE 1 4., . . 7 69442**i *'r ".' -b : i._~.W~ - -Â·7-ai--- 4 - 9%4 -t V % t I f . 4, 55, Ar'lli - : . ....14**4 - - . I - a $ Â·i. 4.- . LE'Im"Frr / . 11 + 11, - 4,Â·,Â·2#Ili e . : i. b ' -': 2~f~A 4. 1 -- lili Q /. tuÂ£7 10&..r, .7.:4;#e.,55.2 , *.~ial 4., Af'L . ~ 1 *. 1.- 9 1Â¥'.9-0 ) tw $Â· 14 4Â·:- ;9 -l: . .At . ...Â·... Â·Â· . 4.2 4 ..1 - 1 11 11 1 j.. 94 . h , I '08.- .. .. + . I.F. â€ž *.Â£ 4 k I. M .t B~ 4 :- . f L ..... 1 , 2 Â· 7. I. 4. 1924 . - V 1 1 -3~ Â¢ al ' -3-r 62 - 3. c ~''i~+7 3 f , .. P j , ff 2 I /0 !4 ..4 ....4 -41 , 21. i . ..4 - i. Â·i â€ž; -4*3!~rs . ~ - .... I. , .i: ..A ; . h. ... . m ---r -Â· Â· ----------------- -------r#V . .11..., , ... E 4-4+ i 11 About Us Itlilill II Kind Coffee was born out of the Estes Park Coffee Company, a ~~=~~.'~~~~~# small coffee shop and roastery in the heartofthe-Rock-- - ***'141[imMountains in Estes Park, Colorado. We've Deen roasting ~#"*~ 191 coffee since 1998 and have developed our business into an ~ environmentally aware and friendly entity. The floors in our coffee shop are even made out of bamboo, a renewable resource! As we began dabbling in the wholesale business, the roasting. 131â€¢~*i,~~VE~ *i~iarlds soon ourqrew BJUMall 5 pound Diedrich roaster so M./1 121/ we decided to move the roaster into a warehouse and during -the-Recess,boughtabigger.roaster- With change in the air, we thought it was the best time to change our name and image to something that better portrayed both our personal and business practices. In October 2002, Kind Coffee, LLC emerged. \Mth a steadil~growing web-presenceandÂ·Â·9QQd word-of-mouth advertising, we ngw ship dgilv from our warenousniand we're still Ta-Bulously located in the mountains of Colorado in Estes Park.) Everyday we strive to live up to the K/ND name. Between the coffee shop -A- and roastery, we contribute time, energy, money and, of course, coffee, to * li non-profit organizations, causes and events. Your choice to support Kind i.-2 Coffee is not only good for you, it benefits the lives of people across the 10 )]t country and the world. 1 1%.1 Our Roastery Our Shop 1% For The Planet 2/4/2008 11:14 AM 0-M ify , - --- - --------- - -Cl- AILL}J./2 " VI V'.AIRIUIVAIGV.kULAU Uliddllilll.Flip 4 1111U -LL /1 Our Shop There'sa.coffee shoppn the corner in dERitown EstesfaILD quaint caft wher@ the -am--- local community meets for the best tasting + .,9i coffee in town. The famous Lumpy Ridge ~2'Y~â€¢=~ dominates the view from tall storefront windows while the Big Thompson River Apples by out back. Morning colors shine in from large 0 ..picture windows along the eastern wall while Nimmi~EF*.:.- 4 :<% =*, -p= , the regulars show up like clockwork and mingle -ragi.-,=*990.0 with travelers visiting for the first time. As the afternoon comes and goes, tables hold hot teas and tasty lattes while occupants sit and chat, work away on wireless laptops, get lost in books, catch up on journal entries, and flip through newspapers. In a time of e-mails, cell-phones, and self-reliance, coffee shops are where the community meets face-to-face. Kind Coffee is a meeting place where coffee connoisseurs and novices alike can experience fine quality certified organic, shade-grown coffees at the best price in town. Come in and experiencea unique blend of art, ~ 1~1:0 :*F p *gle-ss Internet access for laptop#, or jump on I [0 1*1 !11 gurcomj*Rem-mra-sm-7176@ZE&milfor breakfast, stay for lunch with a wide selection ./..P......2..9,11, of handmade sandwiches, baked goods, and ~ of course, our mugs of coffee for just a dollar. - -1.'Wtliw= One-pound bags of our fresh-roasted coffees, whole bean or ground, are also available for the convenience of your home or office. Wander around our other retail items in Kind Gear. E WHY A KIND COFFEE SHOP? 6 6 - / Surrounded by the peaks and pine-covered .I slopes above town, Kind Coffee's source of Â»41 433';31.weE@*B.. inspiration is apparent. We love the N. .. . :-'4*-â€žw. Max=-,;:~.0=Â£ environment. Our deliberate selection of Girli &215?3*11*1~ coffees from certified organic growers throughout the world enables Kind to support Ifil,~ the sustainability of our beautiful planet. Inside our shop, we further our efforts by incorporating environmentally friendly practices from floor to ceiling. Speaking of the floor, its solid bamboo*, a renewable resource that costs a little more but takes only from what can grow again. * Kind Coffee asks all patrons never to bring panda bears onto the premise. After a long day of hiking boots and Crocs, our prized bamboo and the rest of the shop is cleaned with an assortment of 'green" products, cleaning agents derived from nature to get the job done without the use of harmful substances. These products are healthier for our employees too! Expanding on these practices, further than recycling all glass, plastic, and cardboard waste, we are delighted to use cups made from recyded paper for all hot drinks, while our cold cups are made from com. No, your drink will taste nothing like com, but the cup will biodegrade in about seven days! ofl 1/,/1AAO 1 1.le AR, a-y~' - " - az-1-Vv-W#-VA*- 41--aaa--7-7 Â· --' --- Our Roastery Yes, we realize it may taste as if our delicious coffee is roasted by pure magic. In a way, the I .S > .i: fine art of producing a cup of coffee is - ... 2 magical, 4ulkegins long before the beans ~ arrive at our 1200.sguare foot roastery in - Estes Park, Colorado. ,/ As Kind is committed to purchasing only I'll'/2,/I'll/"Illib:Â£~0,ill'IN//Imm/" certified organic fairly traded coffee, all of our beans are sourced from growers that share our beliefs in the sustainability of the environment. We are happy to pay a higher price for our beans in order for farming communities to maintain social stability. This commitment to good business limits bean selection in the present, but we believe in the importance of providing only the healthiest, highest quality coffee to our customers. As more growers adapt to environment-friendly farming methods, Kind will expand our selection. We currently acquire beans from Costa Rica, Peru, Guatemala, Columbia, Sumatra, and Mexico. Burlap sacks of raw beans, still in their green =illi stage, arrive at our warehouse fresh and ready toroasf~DEia SivelE-8 hot air roaster 1/~#i./.I powered by two 6UffiB-r-s-*fia-Ffiu.tipie fans, we EfFI,kt{'403-PIG are-abte-to-roast-200--Â®-0-fid*ifboff@9_12Â£r IAN'*: .. VIA hour. The air flowing through our Sivetz is Illillialle'41il.Efill consistently replaced ensuring every bean has ~ Fullqilk. - 11 - ir = its chance to express the rich, intense flavors lu./At:t.â€¢23*/I' 4.' we love them for. Monitoring the beans with -ar : 4""' 5.:f'?4*'Im. Â·1- 44"' pinpoint precision, our roastmaster achieves Â«- ' the appropriate scent, color, and flavor for each desired roast. Our roastery is located on Fall River beneath the towering peaks of the Continental Divide. Rocky Mountain National Park is minutes away from our shop and frequented by the Kind crew. Inspired by the nature that surrounds us, Kind Coffee has developed such blends as the acclaimed Lumpy Ridge Roast, Long's Peak Blend, Bear Lake Breakfast Blend, Fall River Blend, and others. With personalized labels and custom blends, our roastery revels in the vivid diversity of our patrons and is busy roasting only the best beans for them and the environment. ofl 2/4/2008 11-13 AM L (3) Uses that provide exclusive care and planned treatment or training for psychiatric, alcohol or drug problems, where patients are residents of the program, are classified in "Group Living." 28. Household Uving. a. General Definition: A family unit related by blood, marriage or adoption or eight (8) or fewer unrelated individuals (including resident and nonresident care givers) living together in a single dwelling unit, with common access to and common use of all living and eating areas and all facilities for the preparation and serving of food within the dwelling unit. b. Examples: This dassification includes households living in single-family houses, duplexes, town homes, other multi-family dwelling structures, manufactured housing and other structures with self-contained dwelling units. 29. Industry. a. Industry, Custom: Establishments primarily engaged in on-Â§#R._Pmduciion_or repair of goods by hand, involving the use oi_band_-tools__Rod small-sgle equipfhaft{,lh-Woding small enging _ repa_iL_ -Almiture making and restoring, Â®Fiblateringr tustam-care of-motorcycle restoring, and other similar uses. -i. b. = Industrt General: M*u*cturing Qf products, primarily from extracted or raw materials, or bulk storage and handling of such products and materials. Uses in this classification typically involve a high incidence of truck traffic and/or outdoor storage of products, materials, equipment or bulk fuel. This classification includes food processing and packaging, laundry and dry cleaning plants, small animal breeding, stonework and concrete products manufacture (including concrete _ ready-mix plants) and power generation. Products may be finished or semi-finished and are generally made for .the Wholesaie market_fertran*r 19 other plants, or to order foifirm# or- consurnell Gdods_ #re generally_not.displayed-6,-Â§60-ah-sit@750{-ifild, They are a subgrdinate part of salg. Relatively few customers come to the manufacturing site Accessory activities may include offices, cafeterias, parking, employee recreational facilities, warehouses, storage yards, repair facilities, truck fleets and caretaker's quarters. c. Industrial Services: Firms engaged in the repair or servicing of industrial, business or consumer machinery, equipment, products or by-products. Operations often include outdoor activities and storage of products, materials, equipment or bulk fuel. Firms that service consumer goods do so by mainly providing centralized services for separate retail outlets. Few customers, especially the general public, come to the site. Accessory activities may include offices, parking, and storage. (1) Examples: Examples include welding shops; machine shops; tool repair; electric motor repair; repair of scientific or professional instruments: repair, storage, salvage or wrecking of heavy machinery, metal and building materials; vehicle towing; auto and truck salvage and wrecking; heavy truck servicing and repair; tire retreading or recapping; building, heating, plumbing or electrical contractors; printing, publishing and lithography; exterminators; fuel oil distributors; solid fuel yards; uses that involve the transfer or storage of solid or liquid waste; and photofinishing laboratories. Â£Â£,9 Â·ON 0- 0 d. Industry, Limited: Manufacturing of finished parts or products, primarily from previously prepared materials, or the provision of industrial services, both within an enclosed building. This classification includes laboratories, processing, fabrication, assembly, treatment and packaging, but excludes basic industrial processing from raw materials, food processing and vehicle/equipment services. Typical uses indude custom bookbinding, ceramic studios, candie-making shops and custom jewelry manufacture. Limited industry uses shall not include uses such as mining and extracting industries, petrochemical industries, rubber refining, primary metal and related industries, or other noxious industrial uses. Incidental direct sale to consumers of only those goods produced on-site is permitted. e. Research and Development Establishments primarily engaged in the research, development and controlled production of high technology electronic, industrial or scientific products or commodities for sale. Uses include biotechnology, films and nontoxic computer component manufacturers. 29.5 Junk Vehicle and Junkyard. a. Junk Vehic/e. A vehicle that is inoperable (unable to move under its own power), or is partially or totally dismantled or has all or portions of its body work missing or substantially damaged or is not registered with the State of Colorado as required by Section 42-3-103, C.R.S., or by Section 42-12-102, C.R.S., and the number plate assigned to it is not permanently attached to the vehicle as required by Section 42-3-123, C.R.S., or is lacking proper equipment to the extent that would be unsafe or illegal to use on public road rights-of-way or otherwise not equipped with lamps and other equipment as required by Section 42*202 to 42-4-227, C.R.S. This definition does not indude implements of husbandry, farm tractors, farm or ranch equipment or vehicles customarily operated in a farm or ranch operation. (Ord. 12-00 Â§1) b. Junkyard. A facility for the display, storage, collection, processing, purchase, sale, salvage or disposal of used or scrap materials, equipment, junk vehicles, appliances or other personal property whether of value or valueless. Junkyard does not include the storage of implements of husbandry, farm tractors, farm or ranch equipment or vehides customarily operated in a farm or ranch operation. (Ord. 12-00 Â§1) 30. Laboratory. Establishments providing medical or dental laboratory services; or establishments with less than two thousand (2,000) square feet providing photographic, analytical or testing services. Other laboratories are classified under Industry. 31. Maintenance and Service Facilities. Facilities providing maintenance and repair services for vehicles and equipment, and materials storage areas. This classification includes corporation yards, equipment service centers and similar facilities owned by the city, public or private utilities, or other public entities. 32. Maintenance/Repair Service. Establishments providing appliance repair, office machine repair or building maintenance services. This classification excludes maintenance and repair of vehicles (see vehicle/equipment repair), and excludes maintenance and repair of industrial equipment and machinery (see limited industry). 33. 0Mce. 1 ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION - Submittal Date: Jah -4 200 fj '1 Type of Application F Development Plan 1- Boundary Line Adjustment Cond&minitit. Mapic .a - t- Special Review r ROW or Easement Vacation 1- Preliminary Map F Rezoning Petition 1- Street Name Change r Final Map 1- Preliminary Subdivision Plat 1- Time Extension 1- Supplemental Map f- Final Subdivision Plat ~ Other: Please specify E Minor Subdivision Plat Ak r-44/'AMACID CK..p faa_| F Amended Plat General Information Project Name F/â‚¬40,0 244-2 A- 4.-0,.Jo A-ssâ€¢U ~,2141. COPA=<3 Project Description < 70 -iSO Q L.0 Ao, A. Ai, 4 / CS Z 9/ 664,0-0 /1-</ S Project Address 5 A-VA â‚¬- Legal Description Parcel ID # -3 5 1% 1 - 00 -OIS section Township Range Site Information Total Development Area (acres) Existing Land Use 1/ 46-411 6 0761 01- Proposed Land Use Â£Â£,PAL- 11.6( 5,40,0 741.Â«ACC, o/c.-1 *CAL./ Existing Water Service K Town r Well r other (Specify) Proposed Water Service r Town F Well F Other (Specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service JAEPSD r UTSD r septic Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service r EPSD r UTSD r septic Is a sewer lift station required? F- Yes r No Existing Gas Service 1- Xcel F Other F None Existing Zoning CO 00 Proposed Zoning Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? F Yes F No Has site staking been completed? r Yes F No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person \ 9.AÂ» 060-2 12 0 Mailing Address 540 CD- 4/ULAn,0 / 13 -3 9- <A.,cs p AÂ·â€¢.v- Calo, 04; Attachments ~< Application fee F Statement of intent 1- 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan I- 11"X 17"reducedcopyofplatorplan F Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report, wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information. Town of Estes Park 4 P.O. Box 1200 4 170 MacGregor Avenue .K Estes Park, CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 0 Fax: {970) 586-0249 4 www.estesnet.com/ComDev Contact Information Primary Contact Person is r Owner * Applicant F ConsultanVEngineer Record Owner(s) Se.c, Art-,1--ctick LLS + < *FLM Et-4,,uite,b ~ Mailing Address 0,5- T .1 44 A.,0 PLAZA- 1 OLO US 13.1,151(: WL l.1 â€¢ r Phone A.),trk r.) ./[A- iA t U "U Â¢ W UQ.1-1 I 1 11 U 1 - 4-ltkitt#J Cell Phone : 5-44/lioti) 94,Vidz,& C. 6 C Fax i i S 10 54 0% -â€¢ne Ati- u q, 1-p** Email ~ tukkile u, ELL{#0.1 6022 1 Appiicant \Itte 9- 66-,6 1 ( Eft'(4,0 Pl,Az.(. co#40, 4-33/ Mailing Address 5 92) 43. 9 t- E-/Artto , A--' 8 -3 Phone 930- 97)- 7 599 9 90 - 1 -7 -1 -6 2-0 r Cell Phone Fax <06 - 6 â‚¬ 1- Email VASJD â‚¬ 62_60 Est- Consultant/Engineer Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email APPLICATION FEES < For development within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. I hereby certify that the provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PR/NT.Â· Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Signatures: Record Owner Date Applicant Date < APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing the application I am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property. I In submitting the application materials and signing this application agreement, I acknowledge and agree that the application is subject to the applicable processing and public hearing requirements set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). I I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, and that, prior to filing this application, I have had the opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/DevCode.) ~ I understand that acceptance of this application by the Town of Estes Park for filing and receipt of the application fee by the Town does not necessarily mean that the application is complete under the applicable requirements of the EVDC. I I understand that this proposal may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date. â€¢ I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete. I The Community Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is determined to be complete. -I-lgrant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to my property during the review of this application. I l acknowledge that l have received the Estes Valley Development Review Application Schedule and that failure to meet the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application becoming NULL and VOID. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PR/NT.- Elt<\Aor,0 9(-dz-Â£*- COAIO,ki#iu-â€¢vi Atâ€¢Â·)/ t~'24.-21 fick-t l.Â« Applicant PLEASE PRINT: ~e,C~ Ect: Iâ‚¬>/, Sce-,-1-0,*./ 9. 1 01.0 . a Butk.1 60-1*0 Ms,a U ' ' Signatures.- Record Owner 3/460,0 1*244.111:. 092.<_ 6./ Efy.-1 k.. 6,-4/ Date 1.- 9 - 69Â¥ Applicant U',Lf@f L. 0,Â·~ C C--./'1 Date i - 9 -89 i Revised 10/13/06 STATEMENT OF CODE SECTIONS APPLICABLE TO THE APPEAL 1. Section 13.2, Use Classifications/Specific Use Definition and Examples. The staff violated the provisions of 13.2, specific definitions outlined later. 2. Section 4.4(a)(2)(B) regarding Commercial Outlying Zoning Districts, as that district was established to encourage the development of a wide variety of commercial and retail uses along the major corridor entryways in to the valley and town of Estes Park. This zoning district was established to implement the commercial and commercial/recreation future land use categories recommended in the comprehensive plan. This district should accommodate the majority of the larger free standing commercial and retail buildings to meet future demand on the property. The granting of the variance and the use is inconsistent with a CO Outlying Commercial zoned district. 3. The manufacturing process and the roasting process clearly should have been put in a CH, Heavy Commercial Zoning District. 4. Table 4.4, Permitted Uses In Nonresidential Zoning District. The staff held that this was an appropriate retail and small scale wholesale sales office and brew pub. This establishment does not fit into the definition of an eating/drinking establishment, does not fit into the definition of a retail establishment large and all other retail, and in fact there is more than 15% of the principal buildings gross floor area devoted to retail sales. 5. This is in fact a warehousing and storage use and it is not permitted in CO and it is not permitted on lots abutting an arterial street or highway. 6. It is also a wholesale sales and distribution and provisions of 5.21(s) have been provided. 7. Section 4-5, Density and Dimensional Standards Nonresidential Zoning Districts. In CO the lots fronting arterial should be 40,000 square feet, for outdoor commercial recreation entertainment and all others 15,000 square feet. 8. Fronting an arterial it should be 200 square feet. 9. Further EVDC 7.6 (e)(1)(a)(2)(b) requires a 30 foot setback for developed lots. In a CO Outlying Commercial District this section of the EVDC states, "exceptions for lots developed prior to the adoption of the code, all buildings and accessory structures shall be setback at least 30 feet horizontally (plain view from the annual high water mark of river corridors, or if not discernible from the defined bank of the river). They allowed a variance to allow the building of a loading dock in violation of the development code. 10. EVDC table 5.2, Accessory Uses Permitted in Nonresidential Zoning District. In respect to the "production of fermented malt beverages malt, special malt and vinous and spirituous liquors (brew pub), it is an accessory to a permitted restaurant use only." This is clearly not a restaurant and this is clearly a violation of that portion of the code. Further it talks about "Restaurants, bars, newsstands, gift shops, clubs, managerial offices, and lounges only allowed when inside the principal building containing a permitted principal hotel, motel, resort lodge or major entertainment event facility use. "' 11. In reality what is happening is that this Kind Coffee location is open for retail sales approximately 4 months of the year and is open for roasting 12 months a year. The roasting and storage portion takes up half of the space while the primary business of retail coffee shop takes up 25% of the space. In terms of actual use they are roasting, storing, warehousing, and shipping 12 months a year and they are selling retail coffee 4 months a year. This "brew pub" like business is the primary use and not the accessory use and that, consequently, violates the code. 12. The roasting operation substantially changes the nature of the community. The odor and the noise are strong and offensive and violate the spirit of the EVDC and adversely affect and change the nature of this neighborhood from a basically resideiltial ndighborhood with multi-family residences and it should not be allowed. The noise created by the roasting process violates the town municipal code, but the code enforcement officer, who is a designate of the planning and zoning director, totally ignores that fact. RECORDS OF PROCEEDING AND DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THE DECISION BEING APPEALED 1. Copy of permit file for 552 W. Elkhorn, in possession of Town Clerk/Planning and Zoning. 2. Copy of variance file for 552 W. Elkhorn, in possession of Town Clerk, Town of Estes Park/Planning and Zoning. 3. Copies of Bob Joseph correspondence, in possession o f Town of Estes Park/Planning and Zoning. 4. Pertinent documents to be submitted by Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association, Appellant. (a) Use Classification (b) 552 W. Elkhorn Ave. River and Side Yard Setback Variance Request (c) Estes Valley Development Code 4.4(a)(1) B and D (d) Estes Valley Development Code Table 4.4, Permitted Uses Nonresidential Zoning Districts, Relevant Sections (e) Exhibit D, Table 4.5, Density and Dimensional Standards, Nonresidential Zoning Districts, relevant portions (f) Exhibit E, Estes Valley Development Code, Table 5.2, Accessory Uses Permitted in Nonresidential Zoning Districts. (g) Exhibit F, letter dated October 5,2006 to Estes Park Planning and Zoning Commission. (h) Exhibit G, Estes Valley Development Code, Section 5.1 (S) (i) Exhibit H, Estes Park Police Department incident report 071588 0) Exhibit I, Estes Park Municipal Code Section 8-06 - Relevant sections (k) Photographs relevant to appeal. 1 1 -29/k .,on;ailiri1stliT23,18181:1"'"IMI"'ii'K .up-342: February 6,2008 Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees, Please find the following information in this packet submitted by Amy Hamrick and Kind Coffee, LLC with regards to the February 12, 2008 Public Hearing on the Use Classification of 552 W Elkhorn Avenue: 1. Print out of complete Power Point to be presented at the Hearing. I anticipate there to be overlap with Mr. Joseph's official response and will modify my presentation as needed at the time of the hearing, to keep it short. 2. Three letters of support from neighbors in both the Elkhorn Plaza Condos AND the Willow Court Condos. 3. Exhibit A: The Statement of Use Kind Coffee provided to the Town with regards to our desire to move our business to 552 W Elkhorn Ave. This text is also in the Power Point which I will refer to in my presentation but will not read. 4. Exhibit B: Advertising Samples from 2006 and 2007 that clearly show our intent to advertise and to use the 552 W Elkhorn Ave location as an Espresso Bar/Retail Outlet. Respectfully, F .1 -RA#vuujÂ« Amy AWmrick Owner Kind Coffee, LLC Enclosures (4) fi~'"+414'f_ Ki~ f -:5.fait-'iÂ·kff*<-4 Â£2,_- 1.... 4 1 - 412-7 . . 7-IFf--,-1.~-4 -' -~,-*-446-&.- *----, 1,4-, i- ir-1 4 .1,11 --~-:1 '14*~7Â· 2 1 â€¢FU,1111. - '.-:M'*ty.-8--Rlp.11}111 .' 1. .4-'--,~1.-3- i r - Â· -*02- *: 44 - 1*i.... 9.-4, - ' 9.- a 1 1 J 1 4 -- - til=:411 1 - 1 =.1 - 4,1.1 - - 11 l . 1 11 - 1-61'* - 1 9 -----=-442 1 r mAN*Lâ€¢ - - -1. f firls & Ir . B ./U' i''ll............Al. 1 1- -- " ti/9.2. '1.9. -/0-*PAVVI- â€¢'23Â£67Ihilli.Trlli -â€¢ 11 11- 1: -41.4 439, I - ilk.- $ e -8/ I ar, I ./-1 ~4. ' - 1, -4 - , *ffet=mitiv - ": C'* - .18///U M - . - i - 4.'a*....*//0.-3 ... #---..... +1 . â€¢-%--//9/~/AP#11,~ . Â·t'Â£18}Â·11&. ' * 11 .A-L- 2- : r * a 1&92.-1-1... .../....rl- _I 1 9. 'f .1 9 3-I * .mFrin'. - 14- . -2.- - L- -1, 1 111:-1 '/r. 1.16 Â» Â·11 +L -- .....= . *2 1# + 1,1.1.-751*=.1 4.-/"'.. 9---m 12..&&.0 I '/ I 0 ,.34 &11 . lit"t i, tt/ 1-91 ~1 11 4 Ar .i ~ '' â€ž ,-~.Mal,1//.~f- 62-Â·'4'&-,+ Jik-L,EriA0 1=. 0 Abl- 3..7- - . *. ." 91*3*F,- - .igza==,Wn '- Vil =,#Ii,i,.'1W..'&i - -' ~ ' - - 1 9.1 - -' 1 .-1 I-k~ -' ' 2-2- M - - 1 Â¥,S , - ' Ald.2/,84 -'....=4'Â· all'll 194'â‚¬25. 1- -*-*-0Â£ *ati.-1... .. 1 r- 4 ...li' Joic- 6/- F $, * I 1, . . . 'Sa . ./.'#ls ../2 - he= r: /11 -1 4 11 *f 'RZTKIMPE;IPAI'* 44*-36~ 1:14 , 4 7 9.1 -- ' -71 79 , - Ii'.4,v.,/m . - ....4-4 -- --- .9-- ty,7 # 1-24: :a.. 1. 1 1 01 1 1 , ill '-I *: *,Â·r , 4 , 9.r."87/i I .*I . - 1 11 I ' â€¢ 2 r Â·h ' .:-EL 1 1 ..b=Â¥~1*r./ 1 r-'41:-1.---f. 1.- 2 - 4 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1 4/1-1 -- 1- 4;119.1 1 - 4 - 17.92~.1. -=:'.11*: . ..1. I ' 1.,- 1 :,49-7 1 1.- .1, * - 4 - ..46W-- k 471- 1. 11-~Â·1~I ~'' 7 I-' 1/.IMAOM.= ' ll - Â·'1 C . 1 1 9 - - --1 11. 1 IN~14 1 - - 1 Â· -2.I Â·Ii --2? 1 11 - Â£ 411 - U= r-a i ItÂ· ,/, -- 1 - 1 71 ; , : ...11 --1 , " : ly,EZUU.AN - ., I 1~ 1 -7 - I AP. r ..1 r, -,0.... 44-0 4,3 -60- â€¢ , * #-4 *-~ + -Â·1~ .,P r â‚¬ -*/*0:.40Â£- .9*//.1 1.. - Â·0 -:,7 L.- ?IN ..EÂ«.0.e#/ t.7F * I - ' . 4, I . 0,1. K; . I _ I - 1 1 7--1-4. r .., - 1-- 4 - 4 :Pi , , - Â· 1--~-EY -~4~195.- 4- 1.- 1.. I . 71, _' I ,-1 . 2/' r 1= 4!3/11//*1~40,6/1. 4 *1- I ?41 .f V%% 1. Â»+ .,9-~1 ' 48 fla 1 i-Â§ 1-Ye %96%61, ~ *2%*5 4 1-t -%* '.27= '3Â»7 ~ 4.5 t,4 Â·tte 344 ~34 6 t',0/ fit 4 44- 1 *44 N Â¥ b e ./ /% 33; %44. *144*4. 40 *4057 21% 73: Â»44 4 b . A 0.044 - 2 0 1 4160 # 'll Â· M P" 7 rn 4 w. .1 927 41* ,Â«Â¢49 -lity 'et. *4 Â» Moved to 1 201 C Graves Ave and established Kind Coffee LLC $!luied Bu!Pl!nq Joi peildclo se!.Wedo.Id ID!,Jell]woo uloll>Ilg ssaugnq Joi peuedo puD UJ04)113 AA Egg pelepoluekl f What we do Estes Park Coffee Company established HISTORY **99>4~4444~ % 44*/ C 2* p *3.3,1 ~ -- -- --il---i--.U - 4* 2/ lift ft/ . -02[,~ All'llil' * .gal- '45; ,Â£2 4 , 11 1 1.m.. 1 -1- -/ .7 1.- 42 ~FIFFY'll./.S 4 "61:1"lill . *04- -: - â€¢. 34 1[ff~ ly.. =11%2~ w/,9 14 7 41""-Ia'- {99 4% -1 4 'ib'h//71-tr- â€¢gr M -1/1 Alâ€žlill'll . N F -4 38&* 32 1 . 0 1.1 i 11 .â‚¬2*Iri -/i, 1 4-3.VIS 4 i f , i ' ili' . 1,25- 2-1- '7 --*21 - 1 1 LI'.l i :bL 'p #~- 1... 12.1 -1 , 4.: + * -*0- :~: - -- - *4' 9* .. 4 Â·.9 I. I m..4/1-' 4.- r t ...1 Ell.... Wa"/3. litÂ»# f - =2 - E ". -9 - TY" Â¥r'.1 1 U > '54: 1.. .1 16.~.,.i'.'.'t // ...4 3. f. r Vfyi . I - ink kf 6 lit. Â«Â¢3 9% 44 L-11*VAR p ',~ ~*%*ftÂ®/4.-a Â·An: Coffee Roaster laajadenbs 006> 7 1% ?*Â¥* 4 42 34 49 >jaw. :e f3 6.3 e'.:4,9 ff*Â¢' *24' 3% 43*r i 44 23 9; 44 'cy,732 ..... 19%0*t 4.0/0 46, 1;244 4 444 1 Ae:~ D ewou 04 +sn! ... ... 0#Le 'Su!1103 4:1 'Jepinog 'JeAuea o u Steamboat Springs m Durango u Breckenridge e~Dpuoq.,DD L Ouray *41 3.1 W 6 Gof O & 1 - 7,Â«2 19 , Community Or . t.4% 2 k eÂ¥* ,> . ..,7. a. i 6. . - - 4 00 .. . Wl 40'eli/,-,' 9 ' 6 46 to peak SCE@C ~'Â·- F r f f Â¥24 ;el . 1 1 4*: 0 '4.80 .4 I 2-'"I - . 40 â‚¬ .4. 4 7//p H C a 0# 54 FÂ»t S I 3Â»4 - 3. . 0 ff 8 11 0.5. 4, 9 0, 2 5 5 QI 20% ri 44 E Â° 0 - A.B. Ple 2 Â® %@niey hÂ·Â·Â·I 0 8 -C AVE â‚¬07 0 0 In y -,5 . 3 1.50 1 /1 b k 1 5 M twi,<.3 Ave <b 49 Elm Ave Â¥2' Awe CU - 4 4 fv 1 0 2 5 6 0-1 E 2 ... w: O VV ' 3 ~, 64*rview Ave $ i. 012 1 34 34* d .P'.9.- al. Dr . 91 . fo I "04/,1.1 - 4,4 1 7.1>-I...t~~~3 V Ok 4, 13 au - '22'/ 5 lA. . $ 4 e 0 , 8 0 4*48,0, Cb 5.68 - R i 0 1 0.'ll. i b * 2 0 01 B & 4 1 51 3 0 LU : Ott 9 '','S E , 0 -1~.K>8 2.....3 CouftÂ·,ey 1, 3 46'. Â».906, 9 5 6 ; 00#&'' L. % . 2 4,- IF) 1 1 *4 U I as 61 ty-* Â» .*444 002@*40* deri.- *09 90{}Z@ a 362 E Elkhorn Ave 6ima ,:44493 f. 46*/p 4/ Â© 19 u.~iunc " s':â€¢90/7 03 &4 'U' 9693'.2 e.v elit? 10#V ver P.leackwi Rd le,v Li: 94 .Â£9'8 ce Â·Â· 2 Comr,~,Â·ity 1>; 5 Cornnlun,ty Or ~~~Â· 0 JR m . r. 0 â€¢..7'. . * <C TV w '7 ~| ~F/Tile,< y.# -- 0 16@ ' -2 <*el Â· 9. 6, U. I .- I 0 -ro b e 1 5 Peak to Peak Se I. . 3% Ija,$# c, .0 vyÂ· 44 A. 9 9# . I 5 f g 0,*45'04 40 s r i, *Al t.4 / .0 I'' 41 0 . ., I Jr, 20 ) Cm 9 9 14 2. - 4 3 0) 2 - 2 4 2 '5<~.~ F.F : ._3 -, ANT,Â¢.0 Aee 12' c 9 B.ch Ave C./ F ataniev A.Â· 1 1 5 rÂ·,Ir van,2 1 ~ ~ 2 904,40(.,1 Ave r 9 b c 24 0 O - b Eun Ave 2 .- F u A - 2 8 :t " Â£0 a .J 13 0 :/.9 af, /rvew Ave 471 a Â«St 4, 1 01 c, F.* '~41' -St// 3 'Gleg, ..a D, . jr d , '(7 40,~12.'8.71 6 3. 9 . '-m a 4 4 n - 614 -4 <13 â‚¬:,16, 4% 10 . . .r m @ my i Ott & 4 5 un r - 9 1 61, *5 . 4 2 .9 f 'I "12% CD COUft'7*V I Â· /4 1% 1 2 ......r , 4 3 '4. 15) 1 Map Satellite ~ Ter 4 .pa v,*ooz 140 den - @10009 9002&,2- Â£39Â©; 14#dow Rd rea Lti . . ; CD 14 ue.Â· t:j unr, 4, 9 43*.El 00 90.Jo 8 w E,orn 44 ./' vie..i, pÂ¢08 0 342% 2. ai* %4Â« 49 Â·Â·30(0 494 - 'Ek ..%% 4 14. P )Â«* k tp ?44 6. 14 a.) 0 U) /. er: ro 4-J %,rm 0 0 -O 2 kIÂ¥ ::If (UL 3 (0 4 *11 14* ;'ta 01 U C 0 I .-i t.* D (10) UO 3 L. /9 3 0 93 th. 44 24 00 X J 1 1 0000 4,63 #44 5~ I 6*9~ 60.2 .iÂ»'39 >ti/ 3itti --* ~ lit ~ i - ing redeveloped Reasons for M expensive rent Increased roasting capacity :*41** 41'14 94* A#'LA fit * .. ly 3%kit -* b Â£ ult r 1Â¥Nli *r (/) CL 0/ D 80 I I m 10 01 V 01 '44. 04* ./. 0 0 e Aw 1. 49''R 4. /3?2% 23,44*09/42 1 ~1~ 49 â‚¬44 4 zoft<**23'Â» Â· ~Â· ,Â·f s E (130131*. Roaster Use 44 C Â¥i:. Â»t E t. ff - 71 . .2 . 0 6 -i 4 4 (D b C Â·Â·ew' U- 4 N' 4 - Community Or - 19 'llo-'Air.1 2.2'r.. 1% .... - .41=9 - 0. .. 14 ('10 . .'*7.' Â· N Fulwfwi n C i--V> P A . . I Cl f f PeaK to peak Sc . 6 r, 19, - 18 . 9+ a CJ L Â· 40* %9 f '0 .0 â‚¬ 1 94.- u y or 'IWION_. ./ 0 9 2 FÂ¢Â·.~s s i r -1 > O'Â· %- : 4. P - 0 04. 91 + 04. 3 9 36 2 's, c . I L lia -44 C a 1 0 0- 3 0 As,pee &/ W c 6 +Â·? / Starnley Â»* 0 0 Bs,ch Ave " 1 1 [6'2 Q . 1. A 4 5 34 0 3,Â·1:WOM Ave "1 . 4 1 C I . .IS Stear" F b F rn A.Â·e 65 B 1 4- 611 A" 1 65 a O 21 441 2-4 11 1 t> 444 1, 1. 4 &,p,â€¢ew Ave, Q.~ 49 + 9 9 4 m 11'' i d,et .,. , 61491 & . 44 Â¢12' .444:1 '1 7 1,7 455:0"WI - 4 - L c 1. 1 L _./ 0 =3â‚¬ . V> m Â£ 29.2 - 11 1 = 1% y : 4 'i .3 it a Ill Lott 5- l. I. r C P 4 F Q / a tri 4 ,[45 5 r. #, m b .,4 1 CD .re.8 CouoleÂ¥ 1 P L 9* k 4 -14 4 cr - u 7,9 F ~ ~Â»Ur,9 e f 7 I . y J '231: 0 0 1 0 1 1 30 13,9 & 0 m* .' 4-1 + 1 i.: D F e 41 22 0 0 - I 4 ;8&%24 2/0 t :t 3..2 h 0 44 4% Etify~*+t'ti~*4*~~*/rt 1 1 Â·*002@*P deil goof@ d, 194 0,09Â·'e 1 . 0,5.00, V % 44 W Wondervie,1 Ave IE} w Elkw 4,8 =% 119 *22** = 4ipiN "1 5Â¥*** fil 4%,ak *t *449 40 4Â« 4*351 .f 34 '124+ .- I#: .- 1% e 1. &/R/" J 4% 3 '*A \ 173*% U)U ro ro Jit a) 4- f3 i -6, 0) 4% Â¥91 61 CE u L 0, t.' J Q. 4 UDO 3% '1 00000 4146 . fit,/t ..... n. easons for Moving Again 63. â€žbi ; *2:~l;; 1~~ /W~:~., 4:4 Â».3 e 44 C ?41% 19,1 More visible presence in town dO4s aagoo puz JOJ ~ellualod et out of basement ff *FtÂ°41 60>11%% 0 - 10 0 6 9Â£// â‚¬ 5.6.8 r Itt 2 0, E 2-2 rt â‚¬ 1 0 2 - Â¤Z k a) 1= 0 0. = P 49 3! = 0.G 12/9 M 0 0= m E.5 g 4 1 v N O-=3 Â»CU- 2> c 00 7% - 0.= P .- Â¤ .9! 2 12 8 v -5 Â¤) C 1- C .9 4) C (1) 3 0 0-92_2~ 2 8 2- 8 6;Q 006)3 2 n ~(17Â¤ 41% 52 '93{42 :.0.4 2 6 2 -LO 0~-(DD n ov -Â¤Â§Â¤ Â» 0) 2 0-25-0- - 0- - 4)2Â·c, 0 3 8 3 3> 3 * 8 4- .- 1- *- . 0 2. T NE B 0 44 @ 71 0 :t O (D ..I CD M D - Â¤EO= 15 . -3 222 I M h (1)_c M GE 5 24- & 42 2 L -C k t.ji 2 -M (P PO -2 1 2 4 2 ir U /fÂ« 4, = (1) 03-(*icE 6-2 3.9 L - =- 52 = 4 8 91 -- ~ ~ 8 i 2 Â·â‚¬ E 32 1 8 1 L .â‚¬ 0 0 2 1 1 0 -M 0,/L*o 0 0 6 2 FP Â¤ e *4 10 66 E -* .54 E 43 -2 -2 gr 2 -g =* It'*Il 3 0 132*Â·s 2-8 4= f: 2 7 DE - 0. a c R Â¤ s 01 - 1-1- 5 . (D - 3! 7 Â£ 0, 74% 3/11& JO o y "5 W #Die ~# 8 8 i .# 61- c o 0 ," E (1) C .:f (1) ,92 -Â¤ 4301 .O (10) _c -0 c .c -0 > - I 9031:~ D O LU 0 -U N O W M * 3 8 C 2 4 N eD 44 "f*7' A.4 *2*4*=t tuff h.â‚¬gy -4 's6nw ee,Joo 'eaJJOD P aftinAL Sip sseu!snq 40 pull Cu to L Â·ette jo ossejdse 0!ue 11!4 Sts!.Inot 404.1 Statement of Use 4 .. 11=; ..:-4 i. . . . . . ...; ~a t I Â·~$ '* Tr 2262 ' % , t./7.- 1 11.n..5/- . , :.Sh, â‚¬, 1% A , .-- ... -, 4~~'A kv A. ., r Hl - 1 1, . 51 - - A. 1 ./ 41 ~ )A -- V twff : e *(*4 44* I 34% >34 / : 9 . . - '..- . 3. 4/5/ . .1.- - 3 .4.- 3 29 13 1 . " W I .. -' ., 31 & 1,1 + . Â· 4 t.4.* .f k.f.&. 1 7 4 Â· A 3 ...LL.try. 20 .n. 1 .Â»t fil' .~.11.~0 >L-I 2.4 & 4. . 9/ : - F /9, . Â· 4 47 aa.-1 -1.-1--)=1,2 1, 1/.Ad -*K,~.~912,~i2 .9~-fr.~R ;#"~ ~'~ ....#5 .Alr 1-- - 90 414% 4/9 fl "Loading Area" *A /4 64 1 4/ 1 1 t Â·-2 1.-1 -ia.,:. 4 113 . 1 ' 4 -4.4.h,f: 11,1 41 '. I 6-- 1 niff I t.: F-Â· 1 ' d.i.itg~~ * i , . Mm a,111 1 1 - 4 se: - ....lu. I ''Se. ~~~1- r. -- J â€ž 4 111 .'' r....lin= -t --1 - Â· 1-1 + 44 - g. % /4, 2: 11'ri + â‚¬939 Â»tv '3% '42 Â»32 Coffee Bar/Offi ~â€žFFÂ»1%,-9--1-v<,~~~~~~~~~~,~~-~~ "-idâ€¢-r~ W - - - .r?~' - Er Â· 9 77 4 Ne r V 1 - ,--1:11- . 1 -ar=' 41 - 2 14 ~ ..' r:, 6 _ A Lk' 16 - i r . 1 ' i Â· P.- - 4 -,Ir 11- 1 Ill. - 1 1 -1-1 1,1/ - - .11 % -- 1 0'95Â¥Fit.p.il 4. f ./ 1.- . ....w Â¥f'Â·pr;' % 4*'M" ' .3#0 - 'lij:<ADÂ» LI - 1.- 1 3.- 1 , -C '& AW -1 1 - 1 1 1 - - 'i- 9 â‚¬ - 1,1. I :- I j'lls I - 1 .&,41441" f- i --- 1 /2 ' 1 i. A.=0-2 . 14 7,7 , 1 - I .Di Â·Â·J 2--' , i , - 4 -5;43tYP r - 0 . . 6 1 -. ' 1-1 â€¢ i * F '1. .1/1. I -6 *r L . .1 . 1 r 1 1 1 Â£ b - ~ 'â€¢-m --, . 7.4~-=. 4 711 - . 1.16- -- Â¥-1.r 1 -T - - 1 1**1 . -tlili...di"Kt . Ill'â€ž' i : - 1, *-sm,JW~~/Ii , 4 - - 9, ..B- m-%2g.B , I 7-9 . 1 1- -1.-r AÂ»?1. 1 . , ki> NE"/&4 1~ Â£- _ r - 1-Â¥ Je-~*2~~~~-2- . 1 Â¢ 1 14*+TIf- , -, 1~2,. ' - ijbul,r - - '7/, 0 - '4| 4 2.g t..de.--9370 -1-ma - ... . _ Ji ..r 1 1 - ,r' - , .1 ' A Lid Â·1Ti.41~615 - '"/A/ Â¢#41 -19 1 i- I 1..,04.=J. + - - 41 mamEN - 1 /*/ L. ~4/leÂ·'I *fil~ Â· 11-4.1.Z.:I.. -. i~&IN#- + ,Â· e 1 1121~ 31%~~~~~~ -- 77-12- 1 - 1 11 A -liwillp~~.f 1- it . -- S. p d..; 0 =1,=-,11 "10, =a'. 1* -21: L i - 2$:.2 4 rdiA / 1 1, ./.-Il l,I. -. 1//lilillit - 1 - reiwi ... 1 It- .1.3 n .~ *f'. 54~'~ IML 1 1 1 r 111 , to,""Alw,liwir,ng'fidli .... 1 ./4 2 1 41 I 3 --4 - pÂ· 4/YL,<11. -1.1////NC///31;/147/,~ 1 . / r.Â·14': 4 ' . i '1 1 I /. rm 1 J. -17-Nf A~' 9.1 -4 1 , 2/.6#*:i 1,~~ h, - 1.. " I 1 8-1.- - 11&Â·11 d. '. 4-1.FIMW 4 --LE= --/.1/A-- r.- 7 W y - 3.- _ i -1 i/* A , 0 lily 11. - iâ‚¬ - - 3,6;8.:d66;:Illl;*2*41717499".illl'fet . 1-4 1 0 9 *11 - _ -1 5% L .- P# ~gÂ®- #-r -_- 7*W/,2 1,<I. f 8.--1651 1 1 . - 1 - + 1- - ki - -.4*1.I--2147 t'. - I .-C:- 2*b. I./. 7 -;F f - 6 + *21.1 1- 1:-1 11, - #4 7-,-, it.4--- - .0.-4-'-,1 ;18,8 * - . - - 11.- .r..4.,â‚¬P- I - - i~ Â· , -- .,. --fIA-- - . 'i -44: : i i . i ._ I - 1 4.- 1.11 --~ 1, 1 1 J. 1 91 - ' - -'.Â£ ~-'.'--' ' - ' ' 1 - L.Nih///"&.'e-: 0illill"*di/20'll'lill/*:Mili:"P,4 - .... 1 -6---1.2.7 *&.41 .21=0..~ 1 '11 - . - 1 1.Â£ 1.1 ~ .il . I 4 + f 4 1. th .9 4 343, â‚¬, -49 9* jAFf* :964 4 ./ 9/ 4424 tâ‚¬39'- 0,~-4*ft& %*44 2Â»34 30/ â‚¬92;23 C 2044% Off*%4 A IU 0 ttfil 66 .0 Ep il 01-C 0 4,Â»410 4) Ir- 34 -0 4% 3.- 1- /1 -1rs 4 (DC li 3 = 4, 0 E 1_ 4- t. 2, 4- 1- 11 -U(DO 4% 49Â¤Â¤CU U vt- 1. C 33(D 1 Tie* 4 431* (Dcco u 4,181 > (D 99'**54 W <C C (D -0- 1 - 0 0 08 a Â¤ E E C 1 ,"R grÂ¢Ng)42 E 2 =i (1) C 2 624 CN or'.3 13 Pr :I AAODIFICATIONS voluntary steps we've taken 1 Hour of Roasting m 9a-5p, Mon-Fri than necessary 4deso[ 'JW 44!AN UO!4100! swoes Bu!Pnp 11 aiDes-el puD pedD+-03 punos eN,nlu 04 6u!#ueA petolnsu!/peBU'043 (U /,PPO 2 1 jo /040# D Joj) eop,A; Aeuu#[p pes,08 41'ON 01 41nos/,seM u,0'J lueA U]00i pe6UD40 , V , -1.~ I *I-Nk >*49 94E L.ti 96 '*Â¥,?1 14 >fl~ 3* 41 3%49 >~ 1*t a ':>d f#*45* 344 j i -- ~ML'b ' 'L - 3 1 1 --4 4.1 -llim * 2' -- f I &*i Â¢ pÂ· -1.3#~:4 1 1 I - -694&-ilib---1Â· *i ~ ~|~ .. 1 -,1 f. 9.- --I--fis 1 =:1 1 -5 38 - 4-- 1 - 14 1 . I .6 Â·f 411 1 4, 1- Tl 12- 4L -I ' 4%2 ;- 1 6 â‚¬,1. I - ' '' 9%33 i 93Â¥ 61 r, 41 . I . 234. A b ....1,85-121.0 19 6â‚¬55 ../ 1 ~'2 -'145 44* N ' 0' 4 7.- ..44-.'y'.0 01 ff :Ai- 1-1 4 . .p 3 - ..,4 2 - #43*pt'y '' - I + Znfr 4. 4% "# ''3*i<Â· V 049 li* 4*4 l. 9/'f.*g RELATED ISSUES 39,32 *f 9 4 6 < V T; i 240 O m c I /0 O E 11; O - 5 4 0 U 0 . 0 X LE 1 24 . i tu i, E 9 9 - O - > 01 4,=Eb . {11 -- 4 0 Â£ Me m a. a, 76 O 1-u- U Unmu. , 1 1 0 1- 0,0 ,-1 -1 m 1- 1-0 to 1\ ro â€¢D fo ro fo r'] -leâ€¢Im/tr)* U ' ' 1 1 1 1 4, 41 4, al w I -LILIL . E E 0&6&*th 0. 01 0 0 0 0 %.- 15 53 53% E2EE2E 9 2 m . I. - ccecce CCCCCC fc=.C==== 1-Groroforom - J C ~UUUVUU NEENEE 21 to a 2 2 3% 1 2 = -> 5 4 9/9 > %1 i. 5 1 3 @ i 3% Ul 410 "194* Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan ** pv>,-/' 'r'~,1't'<4.'f~;.~i~69412Jfit" f~Jtkki~ -' Ji~ 14*24th~ic , 7.~ ~** '0' *lf*Ik~40~ m.: 4%86>:,Ck ~iI{~44*f~"k~03''l~ ,(~ '**i~ Courthouse oj uoilein).40 pue uielunow Dadsold ellill,Â»03 421 silew/slll lanning Process â€ž,BIAJBAO )!LUOUO:)3 peok' .IBAIV I lu'Od 33Ae U,4101 UN.00 eadv Dujuueld saa!/LlawI Jo A.leuslunS 'I xipuaaav ueld uo pv - L Jawell) UG Â» 49 4 -tr 7' 39. 2 32* ff- .Al 44>*% fÂ¥* 3i & i - 344 * 9% /414 3%% 249 - - un B A 4- _ a L W 4.C .0 2 2 4-1 A~.% 1 .2 4- *j ru E ap 3 g o. Cn 2 2 a' - _C . ci 2 9 23 I % I f,3*; . Â£ -- u m 4, - m a Â£ u, I . I C5Â·LI. -9 ti Ht m . ,< 3*34 1 0 0 I; Â» *4%Â» * w e + ro W f 1 9Â£ f * 4 0 ro w I - 10 9 11' . fo 4- C U Â£ rq C L. b 4-0 lA 411 C 5 - /.c : Â£ 0 4,n O' , 21<U ac . - 4-0 . L 01 5 V v al u; 4- -O eDi -22 5 4,- 3 (0 : -0.9! t. ~ b '- ISP_Â· 1- r f f E Â£ 5 D fo >- ro- 1 0 - ...Co;0.* -0 6. 11} 10 W Z .w . * E :ogk Â£rn 1.0.3 ~ ~~~ Â£ ~ ~ CyÂ£ f - S . t a. Ul C[32* E =9*Rie *wh = * : 0 -U L 13 30 1 _U vi - S vo_M .w@ 5â‚¬oq' 011 p O (11 u, 0, ro C r 0 41, - O a > C W 0 41 C = - - 45 I.-*..& E : 5 - (10 -2 E -E : - H *.01 0,0 5 2 3 3 42 i Cw O . -'' C -111'1)> I C fo C 60 1 - 2 #22â‚¬1 g 4,2:22:. .*c. 0 ./ W. . m 0 Ul U W. 3 32 .,0 w ..0 121Â£ 2 :- J , , 2 8 2 15 0, Â£ C *CE< - 'U 4- r â‚¬13+ 0 - A %5.58 3 un -92 -a 3 u 4 Â£ L U Â£32 . (D I Â· -3/, - p O ..c -- =g (DE U 1 -2 0 4 g Â£34-5 --E -f = 2- -M & -2- 9 g = " E-Â§ -Â¥ rf C~~~ -~ O. [~ Lf) C -C .W C &- C r O 6. B $ m >E e & S u t . 1 'g -8 2 0.1 + E :16 '' 4, CC,nt z rmc. fy.,> 3 461 U -% 332 232 5 -5-.I-*:51: = 53-4 -6 2% @ E-*~ t.naa, L. 11, 2 Pl . .. I a=e, .C ~ .&0 5 'W . C 0. H 5-62,Te w Kcâ‚¬~Ce- two =Cl m g' 1= 0 34 2 J 0 1,0 - r. En ,r H ro _1 Â£ H -0 3 d a : 41 5 6 2 - C * , = 0 U . I J i. , th I ' â‚¬4 , JIL & W 0 -0 m , 4. / m - i U -1 g Z S Af 44 . - w. u w du, 0 61 0 = 2 0 825 222 2,0 ; 4 5/ I Â»t 2 + .4. 44, â‚¬: 1?4% ;:. k e ' takbi ,%34% '41~,i*4 241'ea luc># sebuei ea.14 ell) Buiugep squewdjeose U.104)113 JO uol 830> le,DJal,Ulll lanning Division C apter 5 - 9& t - 0 O 9.- CI *0 S *0 s k , .rl , ,-Â£ 1â€¢ 04~~ ~,~ .~ A ~ t01,77*Â»1 0 - : 23, O 2 E.9 ..1 O 4= 0 0 E 0800 1 & .1[32 0 = - tel r ... p 4 -- 1 .Em Zil i EE N, .4 - , 7, 1 16 & M -alt . ./ .. 4 .6 2 39 < I.: -71 .1 - i 4 9 4 ..4, m /\4 8 f illillill'.Mple//9,~#~~ ..r~in,41%-5... OC 11 4 " + FZ -41 -8 1 i, d *1 1. 7 1 1 8 f i,1 4 544 j 01 1 ne t. 1 111 a f 2 1~ 11.1 ,9 ..f I - - m 4 4 - 3 . 41 4/ 01 >y W 00 W * D 3 ch 1 U. 3 i 1,4 V <= 1 t :2 4/ I ' , ofÂ»* 1* O f'44* . 3.-4 f . ; 1 H i 1/1 3, ) AAeaH lenialll C o) 6 .Alino lelojeluuu UMOD BIOJOUJU.1 Zoning Then & No - 2003 Map 94.Berle'AON petdo 2 JILLJeE| 0,#Al 'le, le!0-'al.UU.loD BU!Alino 0-3 I '411. I ./.99// 5.11 1 i. 21-3, 44 3,#4~N i~ >_ Klif+42.9..1imill'lim"Fill'll'llililifill"'IFF",1.:* Â· r. If-Â» F .11 1 r ..34.241 24*4 ' -11- "-Â·12'411.1 1~ .11 -11,1 201. 1 21 11'E . 1-14 11 . 1 1 1 Â£ 4.1 1. - 6 1 1 1, ' *I? . 1- 1 1 1 -1 /1.-- I.7~Â«D r - 1 . ' 1 *1 - 1 I g. '104â€¢air -: y: 1 + . r 5 #14 124 04..u Â£ItÂ£itr= .*,1 - , Lei . 1 ty AL 72' ..1-â‚¬ t.- A ..27Â· 1 1.- 1/1 - -4Â£1 14 -1 . .14 - , ' /4 41 , 414:Â·~ A -Â·â€¢ 0 .te 14 1 r - 'r F ,%.,-497 2-1,10 . 4,6~,Ff. iz,i:~~1~7'rÂ·. ' , - I ' i~#~ 7*-Tit irm 1, 11/ - - - - ~ 41*4 11,-i+ 4 U â€¢4 - 01 m '' - 7 .fâ€ž47--9>*~ ti~ 4 1.11 â€¢* %4 7: 7.-445 ' p i 1 .... P 9 -1 6/1 , 2., C- - 14Â¢1 :6 - 1 - , e 1 12 4- 21*1... e .- I.-al.... itY '11 LILI ./~. 1-'- r % 1-1. 1 ,-TG,4 -- -4 3/ - -- 1 -.43 . -2~~ 1- - - - - V ..7.1 . 1,0=1.4 '. -r ' . '' IL Â· '-2 4- P J Â·1~:=f-er- I Â£ A ~2 1 + 94 -*41 ..r i i - Vi :- tki . 1,1 < -D ta* 711 5.1-* 41,4 11 Y -145.ali_915 - 108: 4 -- e SKE 'a; r -,Â·~*~kÂ·~i'.,â€¢9Â·~A 114Â¥ 1. 29=r,+2,1' 1- ' -1*Â· --i,fal.R9e /7. f Ami 3 # 0/ 11 -6, .(*fÂ· . 0 1'. 'lt L. 4:4.: 1 1,244 - It- A ./9% It 41,1 .1 , 11. 1 --1 4 *41 1.- - f fy - 1 4,~ /84*Jk --- 14*3 -J . I - I. - 76%132*,a â€¢' .4 .Fita 1 1.511= - - - 9 00?10Â® 4 Y./i'.33 i - I * 7~ - 1 :3433~~ lit- - bld*jMmEN................WY -r4449,1 - -I -1 114-411.1 - . i.0 1- -- L 4 1.1-"-7" if Â£,i,-Â·t; t/,aÂ»,377 3 1. I -1 1- :11 ~_5'4 4: / W A (D 4% 14- 0 1 U O6 4 1 3 0 h >43 0 - tt 0 (A (A a) 9 C I 0- 44 -Q (A C 1 4- C .25 13 1- C 114 0 .E _0 0 LL IN 63 23 El 41* ee,&00 bu!#sloo.1- 1 40 C "6. C >34 C 44 44% *iqÂ« C %44 .. 08 0, 78 G E cn _, c cn Â£ RI 10 (0 0 m U 'g. x O ro .C O L CL U) N 4 4, .'. '41 4, '1 - - -,I S. ifi. , 4.J LA- 2 cy) o 9 lu...$,-h 95 +2 -M,Xy . 4 flo - 14. . 1 ..1- L C:, .E '* I ,~3LL'~ -'i--"I -- 6- 1 OX U) CA 1 â€ž1 19 . 0 7 UX 1 L ifE o 00 -ON O 1-1 i a.) "1 3 j tigx 6 1 O LA --' 4-) L CO 1 U 1-1 PO c g. 1 Â»0 1 4 1 -- 0444 1 *f 4.7-i'*f. F.lil."3~ 3 149#IN rE 1 -11 4 1. 1 L ,_641 -4, ~~1 r.1 1 ..U *34% Ff* & 49 C I 044 00) U 4*43 C 19# I- 3Â¢4% U- 2 19*f .- 4-9 0 EU a c -C (U (0 -0 CD -td 54 c. E 0< 3% >9& mfj,Ag* #43 .. 42 0 1 4. -- 4744 5 0 .- 4.. 9416 M V 62 + O 4 ..1.3 2 . **41 -2 - 6 1 V :i -6 c vi C r 0 - 4 v 3 -S 2 C *I. % 42 0- to t . ..01@3 0782 â‚¬ 0- u' ~ 5 0 3 -!(Di 32 Etm36.2 â€¢r- Â·r- â‚¬@0% =EEg-voEbtoZE (r) c - C tfi u 660 to) LE % 4 21 E 9 E g % 7 EP O E 2 2 .8 T ' 4-b x W T a. a. 1 1 0. A.A .- 4%* O -- 0 4) 2 2- o a. a I 4.40,4 -2 .5 2 --' - 2 I. Abl O 2 1 0 d CL O. 1 I i-'31 E En E Rete .- c v 4224 I. &2=28 a n. 0- a. a E E Â·0 a. 25 94 -g E j{Ege J o. a. a. 0 0 yl*. 94 2 **2 I C: 1 1 1 1 1 0 ics W Z 6 E J a a. 1 1 {1> 411 ... ._ O 5 4 o E .9 14 2 2 Â® 2 6 2 o t. a a./$Â£ 0 -J K 44 'R C Ill ./. 2 Of - L. 2/4 2 d 9, 99 : 4-49% 0 u, 05 -12- -/ O 4% 4*37. 2.- .C C 3% .Al 71= *A ./ *??'<* 7Â¥~~ Â« fl 4 14 0, -1 zones 6unteas -loopino :aW 10 Eunees SlueUJUS!1qelsE doopino :akl 1 -eA. p OU 'CD ul 71 Jo sales/36eJols eAew Feo'Yes; J -wsiiqeise 3Aew aM 401 96Jel 'sluew e/u s,Il! os auou Aluo s! 36ejooJ 'bs pe}OAep eq 11 sauoz I-I pue 45no]41-BA!]p OU -SEF [71231 'sesllueld pelq elll Jo %9 L uew; - - 1!ele.1 Jeloo Ily 1 Regulations sse,~e~il~oqsye JO peJ tki* 0 Zone buildi ng details y Special Revi 831AJes POO; Retail ll,\4 6uplu!Â·la/Bullea sluewilstlqelsE ~~*~> Office Retail Use Classif 1.,Â»I Itte kil. *4:.. 19 K U) 1 \S\ / 94, h M > 02 RE 0 -0 499% O 6 2 2 33* 8 $ c> 0 2 '% 2 34 Em 9 1 Ef 29 - 425 0 6- = C Cl.E ER@ 16@2 1~ B m C .C &44% U CL (0 R E [1. c. liti Â«>' 94 3>. 1 3 1 Â»99 Â· n u, filt{Li O c' 9 I - 9 9 40* 4 i Ff 2 2 1 U) r r *Â» a. a. CL Co 1 1 1 3 0 0- : R a> - F E 1 1 1 g : 11 Z 6 1 1 1 -*:. 4 1 1 1 44 (0 0 U) 24*F 6 2 U, E E o 5 t . L E ./ 2 99 U, Il O 0 0 2% 6- -CJ *3 i ar 1. g = b â‚¬1) 2 42 al> ./ E E =Â£ 13 -0 1-1 0 < 3.-8 . (0 -0 0 - -O 0 41) 34't C 0 0 OUID .C , 0 0 3=0 (13] m c) E 2 (1) c (D 0 g 4Â·3 0 C 2 2*% 52 8 g , 1 4% 3% d) O m 00 2 1- O N 0 0 42 0) 0 -O ) 00 4- 1- 22 0 b U> m 2 Â£ 0 0 - * 0 R 5 0 te?S p l 51Â» 0 - 0 2 412. g @5 +Zd 0 5 3 0> - 0- C 4- (0 0-60>b i Fl ZE@ r 63 - 3 0.-- . u) m Â£ " . m V - fill '149, , ' 4/' *f ~0*7~. 1.2*&11'*~4'v 2 0#' *jy~ . ~ .~f ~ . feet of gross fl oor area shall ejenbs pue Buisnolieler,4 11Â¥ 'uo!1nquls!0 pue sales eleseloqM :e 941 01 Pefqns pguluu@d eq liells sesn uolinqulsip pue sales Jo Â»0741104@81'lieuj~Xal plly@fll 1 pue s 0!11@doid Bupoq45 u Il luoiJ Slgi 1 ~!~e 9j~jeo~pd~notoe@;qUI~ells 'Spnpoid pesnoll@-39,11 041 5 Zone building details itted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts d by Special Review 04 pall@NOS @Cl IIB4s sionpoi pasnoll@JeR, @41 6ulpodsueil s@1014@A E dential Zoning Districts = Permitted by Right "-" = Prohibited L CD 1 CO 1 0 i CH l 1-1 U d Sid - ..fo'*1.fbflu *34* *9 1 iff *- 7/ - sle!.I@jew Jo efedols pue uoilnq!4 louel pOO,A JO *JUOSelll p.lOS jOOJ-X!s -Su!u@@jos @lqeiediuoo peAoidde Jall]O 44: 1 4% Out 0 0 0 e â‚¬ 31 e .3 15 .S 2 2 .S . m 0 -,4 2 -5 R 1 1 11 41 3 O * C A 3 2 2 0 -.i# 01 4 '44 u %8 5 9 boE 4 1% 51) C rt C 2 .9 .8 5 E E K 0 -&10>0- , w %>1 91 4 5, 4 ./ 0 4. 15 29 .8 .a ...1 1 ls# 0 Abbfk PA .3 8 412 82< ?4 3 0 45 .# 45 aL 41 .M .* 4 3 0 -= - 9 3. 8 u Â·Â·Â·Â· 6 Â©O 23 .1 040,50=m 11262 u . A 4/J B 68.8 .g.5 % 4, 4# .Wo 4 411 eN 3#3 31 4 6 .50 4 8 -0 3% r / e 2 Qi 41. -6 60 2 39 1 E %11% R :2 82 1 !4 -ce#69 * * 8 1 2 2 84. M 23 --4 - = Â¤ H ec Oe lite 4 > Ul CO A 0 Â¢: O e ..~14 UN U 9 . â‚¬6,= 10 $Â© AR 1 *Ji /4,/;4 44<2* ~t 97.Ilillilliliallilir i ~Ii> iÂ»44*ti~~Â»tiU building from the .UIEIdpooU Il I 951 U[ lou ST Eole osodoid Staff Finding 4% :44* 1%4 6, s 3+2Â·* 24% 2% 4/ 4*487 Â·3â‚¬* ya *ff 9â‚¬tft 03% 3,9 434 $% 4 32 . N 9. /le % 444 3* 444 % /2 # 13* f*4 944 1 t.* 44% :*E 77 24 44- AN-~9*!Â¢994>Â» Â»Â«WA+42/0 WEd:SA"im"151#: Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan Chapter 6 Community Wide Policies S4#UOLU uoseas-JJO 241 5u!-Inp pasop sassau!snq iiÂ¥ 6I '1 Aq shelds!p Moile -10 aoeid U! sheids!p Mopu!M aAeai lie Ls'g 06ed Planning Area 7 - Downtown . 1 Development Guidelines sdnoifi Ai!UnUILLIOD 4u.. 4*- i.4 934 Ln In 1.0 h LA Â· Â· N 00 m r-1 Ne ~ r-1 4*it 1% IM ja f 31 1. -+ 2% jf 62Â£* m . . 1. 1.4-=11.-1- ifydr.<U> 1. 3 ~-' 'flt#' 4~ .: 1 2 4 . 40. 4 -*>*04.:.= n. 441;.. A.,1.i ~'â€ž :4 2~ t.Â·%;Â·Â·i 'rt ~- ;2 :.~+A<62 Â·.*â‚¬2'. - .*khÂ· r ... N. -%*.4/ 6 . 13.25 SL'6I SE'IE SE'LI Wes v. St'BI EZZ 1 2101 r 12.5 S'EI Time Spent Roasting Hours Spent Roasting 2007 '>laaM e s/lep S /Xep Jed -Inoll I uelll ssal s! s!41 9 415 0{34 2191~ lit~ .le C 9% 4% E 01 X r~ LA ,Â·A Â£11 1\ 144 * 04 00 /3 - - yea:.f : O I +U 0 C a> 772 L L 3/3 D U 0 0 00 3: c U E 0 t 4- u OUXU DE U =,4, %040% 4â€ž410 44% 9 334/ 93'55*. ..2*it (D C a. 9649 %LE 9 %IL'ZE %SL ES %LE'BI Buidd,49 9 Percentage of Time 1000 2000 3000 4000 8SSE I 2101 Working g3 434 974**e 6 f./4%. I . 93'Fie 443 492 4 k It M *LU 0 2 -1 00 443 C (D 7.t' 1 9- .tffÂ¢ w,3 *a v, 093% Â¤ $49 N *320Â£ 24'k lacement f rk Business doing the same thing it uo pesoq peuAS SIDAA 4044 PDAUOD/ D 40 uo!.tdniietul u! sseu!snq e.poiedo ot suo!.tdo Me& 41! A,~ 01 pu!>I eADel [3 arly 10 years in town. V'....6... . muiuoz 03 Jo CID eJOLU OU) >p Dd setsil 'pOAO.IddD Wots Page 1 of 2 Kind Coffee From: Rebecca Boyd [tenorphantom@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 04,2008 5:27 PM To: amy@kindcoffee.com Subject: Support The Boyd 12151 Bannock St. #D Westminster. CO 80234 720-536-8428 Dear Amy, We were a neighbor of your business in Estes Park. We lived in the Condos at 550 W. Elkhorn Ave A-5 for over 7 months, beginning last May '07. We were asked by another resident Jack Thompson, if since we have moved away and no longer have to face the neighbors if we would write a letter in support o f you and your coffee roasting location. We readily agreed due to the fact that the whole time we were there we never were bothered by any noise or the smell of the roasting coffee. Occasionally we could smell the coffee when it was roasting, but at no time was it offensive. We are not sure why any o f the other residents would consider it a problem. Our son worked from home on his computer 24/7 and he never complained about any offensive odors other than when the condo below us was remodeling and the glue for the new flooring being laid was used. Now that was an odor problem ! We are unsure why the city of Estes Park would give any credence to this as a problem, when We think they would want to support a young woman in her entrepreneurial endeavors. The City is a growing tourist town and should encourage businesses like yours in the area. We wish you the Best of Luck on Feb. 12, 2007 and would be there in person to support you and your business if possible. However, my husband will be returning from Ohio on that day and I just had major surgery on Jan 22nd and am not allowed to drive yet. Sincerely, Randy M. Boyd 2/7/2008 Page 2 of 2 Rebecca S. Boyd Amos R. Boyd PS Please feel free to share this letter and our phone number with the city council if we can assist you in this matter any further. Unfortunately we move down closer to my jobat NSMC Jan. 14,07 2/7/2008 Kind Coffee From: JAY FEAGANS [jayjdf@yahoo.com] t: Saturday, February 02,2008 9:47 AM Amy@kindcoffee.com Subject: In Favor of Kind Coffee West End Location I am not bothered by the brewing at the West end of Elkhorn Avenue location. I think the aroma is a great improvement over the horse stable smell that is at times overpowering. Citizens of Estes who moved into that area were willing to accept the smell of the horse stables and knew the area was zoned to allow commercial operations. If people are against Kind Coffee's new location they be contacting their town representatives about changing the zoning for the area, not trying to restrict which businesses are allowed. Also, there are plans for more commercial development to replace the horse stables. Maybe someone should be looking into that if zoning in that area is under review. Kind coffee is a real asset and draw for Estes Park. Sincerely. Jay Feagans 300 Far View Drive #5 PO Box 2183 Estes Park, CO 80517 Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs NOD32 2847 (20080204) Information This message was checked by N0D32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com 1 January 29,2008 Estes Park City Council Estes Park, Colorado Re: Amy Hamrick Kind Coffee I lived at 550 W Elkhorn Avenue for a number of months. This is a condo in back of Kind Coffee. During the time that I lived there, I had not noticed any noxious odors from the Kind Coffee business. Sincerely, .k:fl . 3 %1 1 K ~ Elt:l) CLO : Gail J. Or{~ay 1766 Lower Broadview Rd. Estes Park, CO 80517 .,7 - 32 1.@ft--21.UÂ·-:4Â·. .Â·,E:.'.4 EXHIBIT A: STATEMENT OF USE 552 W Elkhorn Ave Kind Coffee would like to rent this property for the following uses: 1. Open a 2nd espresso bar/shop (in addition to our current location at 470 E Elkhorn.) to service our west-end customers and people traveling into the Park and out Fall River Rd. This location offers greater convenience for customers who don't want to venture "downtown," especially during the high season. Providing zoning allowed for it, Kind Coffee would like to offer outdoor tables and chairs or benches in the summer. 2. Sell retail products such as bags of fresh roasted Kind Coffee. coffee mugs, t- shirts, calendars, gift cards, etc. 3. Move our coffee roastery to this location as well. As a locally made product, we believe that having our roastery somewhere that people can visit as a plus to our business. Like a brewery. the roastery is a unique, boutique kind of business that tourists will enjoy visiting while purchasing a great espresso or latte. 0 ... ....0 , I .0 0 -0 - . 0 -- 0 77 't-='943tjf,~ M:t E: 2 Â£171* Â» O E 0..A.-~ 8 2,2 0 JUA 12 86 0 -r- N - W 10 2 Z ~ 3 LU lu E o " 2.5 03 ms All'im#<bAE 'nÂ¢ 2 33 : 0 3 0 v S 1- 41 9 1 1 5 2 18 11: .a 33* 3-#.2 N 16 = *0 92 6, 1 15158 A.i" 114/4-~25% lj:23 m O E E O/87 4-'~4-' t.~ 2 9.33â‚¬.Z Z 3. 3- .241 6 R e 44- 13 4.. Ae Ap iT _, > 16 * 91 > r- C 3 =R - - 0= 0 .. 1 g M 92 *0*&73 73 (D ,~9 DO g &' LU Â§ 0 6, 0 .Af 0 4) 6, 404 1 (A m U) 4,0 1. 1 2 6, 1 Â®*LU 8 . 3% 'Qit~ Z Q 4- * & & 0 5 2 1 0 4-,e, 0 LLE Â°b Z & 6 \ '4 m / '4 9 EM a-E 2 - .U - *1 0 F c .19 100 2-81 k Â®04 Si ., ",W -, . .:? 89 -Â§ t; 13 b .ZE, 03 t D .- 2.52 2 C -... Z G *i "T r- 3 c W - 0 0 0 ElÂ» M ft'-A*L/*/4*4 --A 0 a - = .2. - EÂ©1 LE :* C.8&&& - M *<2 3. .mm Wle I. -..... co 0 c) a) O C> 01 25 -0 0 lilli 2 -&!Im Ills 2 I Z 0- ... -, Â¢10 > 2 -* < r <,1 - ' ......Ct i - CO 0 - U.% F' â€ž af = LE il-/.'--i- 0 4,177 *Milil,il tn U r W $ I:- C i. 5 U; 1'~ 19 1-LgH - E 3 ro I .0 Z Y e ta -.ls*lis-=30 u ' 4+1-99...J.~..W., 4...... 0 I Â® ., UU -~ trit,4Hg;519:I CO -O tri q 2 - a ,â€¢P- PA Â£13 .2 38 ~fE_ E3 ~ m - /4, 2 0 L) 923 C - â€¢ t. I . F I ..3 .B1- -%5rÂ£-9' f) L.~ f i 1.4 2% 1 r Â·5 E t//,29 C Q. . 1.-9-A-- .1.....I 1 E 89* . A .- & 6/. 0.0 & 3 O -0= 5 9 Qi ~,1.1 #.7/.Fl Om % 1,1 * f b Ll -t LU % "C .--- r. -,LI~ .- 13 M.*44 00 0 9*R -0 0 k H /'#4 J , P Z O 9 UJ . â‚¬ m 0 0 M 00 b 4 -ES A./././..7 - r /1Â£11,1 /1, -..... 4--a. - -TE LL Â®2 0 .Â¢.C b O C - 12 :IL z- coe=a CO . tu) .0 0 0 0 - v O. 0 O 5 3 0 M E 4 1 3 h -0 l i,E JL~ i,231&6"il; 4 4 52 1: 01 li ti J~ 63 :E t. hi (6-5 ./.'*-~Ti"B.' Iv.././-4/1 Z 0 0: 4. -~ 2 * 22 -. 3 42Â£52*52 -J ui 2 E:&3&82 U.1 0, ='10 <'-1&510 A C i.-pal-i C CA * 1 =Mt 0 -' asÂ° 1.2. N > N ..6 CO 05 di Â£:A Â¢ 5/ E ..m. 13 4 31> 4 05.0 2 ..1 (0 I z t-= o == . 000 01 & 10 6, C m Z ro O 16 . 80 a .c - SO N 01.1.1 ~ 3, ./ 9 0 & 1& A ...PEE :S LU *: (D 4 4 3 ill e M W 0 t d~ d liu mu' 0,9 m 0 6 e e ~ ~ & < s %5% p C 43 4 C 0 .< 413 0 - 0 -0 .9 C Z ~ ~ 2 Lei Omi: NC 0 4% 7 7 h C.3 8 .2 CD Vi E. F: 4 -6 8 --All//8*"*.--'--u,bimE='* -3- N m O e 5 8 0 !11 5 11 tz -"""~-"Ii"-""-I"IF~21%,13,W,t .+4- ZA .Jau.mOO 2~ Rfit ii.lE. 1 BU.â€ž el MO 4 3* . 0.2,8 . Ill'Waillmil/El"kid'"Ii'ii<46//////I.4a2.liv eâ€ž trail gazette May 2007 trail gaz estes park vacationland 06/07 and 07/08- 2~ rate ads rside Seat SMoeus I!e4 (sudiui epe If.Sae drink is r lesser value] b Roasti,15 & Ser, 'pei s x!40 'peles eun fqd 'snullun4 '11 'Snullun4 'llq s)peug 1!eil sapeuo I:-ABLE,IERE. TOO esso Bar/Coffee Shop 470 East E RSNOilÂ¥001 'pele 970-586-52 r 552 W Elkhorn A nods & Balrod Goods cess & Seating Coffee 42 KIND C 552 ELKHo vE s*epuns pesolo Ludl-Uleoâ‚¬:9 418(] lud Z-Uleoâ‚¬9 Outdoor iaN3 193 IT'S TOO KIND! 0304413 :seM Zgg J04>113 1593 Ozt iguoile,OI 4104 113 INV0U9 1V i hung pole' CÂ©FFEE # or,v : -the-9 ND COFFEE, Green Tea reggOS! (made in Lyons) RMNP! January 31, 2008 -@E@EOWE-p To: Board of Trustees _~_ FEB - 4 2008 : Town ofEstes Park -/ P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, Co, 80517 By- From: James W. Frampton 300 Far View Dr. Estes Park Co. 80517 RE: Kind Coffee/Elkhorn Plaza Condo Association Appeal This letter is to inform the Board ofTrustees ofEstes Park Colorado of my opposition to your decision to allow Kind Coffee Company to carry on manufacturing activity (roasting coffee beans at their location at 552 West Elkhorn Ave.). As a condominium owner in the Willows Condos in this location, I feel that this activity is not appropriate and is creating a disturbance to the residents in the area including being a health hazard to those who may be susceptible to the noise and especially the offensive odors that this activity is creating. This decision is also threat to the property value of mine and other property values in this area. I would ask that you respectfully consider including this objection, documented by this letter, in the upcoming hearing on February 12, 2008 at 7:00 pm in the Town Hall Boardroom, with respect to the appeal that is being made by the Elkhorn Plaza Association and others. Thank you very much. Respectfully, James W. Franapton Peggy J. Frampton - Property Owners at Willows Condominiums Â·. .2 3 ~--4- T Â·13 :j.:2.-.'- : February 6,2008 Marie Esla Miner 301 Far View Drive Estes Park, CO 80517 This letter is to address the appeal made by the Elkhorn Plaza Condominium Association regarding the Kind Coffee operation located at 522 W. Elkhorn Avenue. I own property approximately 250 feet from the Kind Coffee operation, and have found this operation to be a neighborhood asset. The roasting operation is certainly more o f an asset than when the building was vacant for a year. In the time the roasting business has been in operation, my husband and I have each noticed the odor only a handful of times, and not once have either o f us heard any noise. Odors from the Elkhorn Lodge are much more frequent than any odors associated with coffee roasting. One could argue the smell of roasting coffee is less offensive than the smell of horses coming from the Elkhorn Lodge. I concur with planning staff' s opinion the roasting/coffee bar is similar in nature to a brewpub, though this is a preferable operation to a brewpub due to the hours and clientele of a brewpub. The business is also similar to a catering service, which is an allowed use in this district, or a bakery, which is not a listed use. Would the neighbors make this same appeal i f a bakery were in operation, with early morning hours and odors? The condo association feels the coffee bar is a token operation, as it is open only during the summer hours. Would this appeal be made i f it were open year-round? Would the Association prefer a treatment facility, group living facility, animal hospital/grooming, building materials storage, bar/tavern (with 2:00 AM closing time), funeral home, liquor store, or car lot? All of these are allowed in the "CO" district. The property has been zoned for commercial use for over forty years, and residents of the Association should have considered potential commercial uses before buying into the neighborhood. In short, this business is an asset to the neighborhood, and as a nearby resident and property owner, I request the Town Board vote to uphold the planning staff decision. Tbank you for your attention. Â» Of Â»t Marie Esla Miner / Administration Memo To: The Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator Date: February 7,2008 Subject: Charges for fire services recommendation BACKGROUND: A public input session was held on Tuesday, January 15 regarding charges for fire services and a recommendation was made to the Public Safety Committee on Wednesday, January 23. We've held several meetings primarily because county residents felt they did not get a chance to voice their opinions at previous meetings. The majority of the input surrounded a fair and equitable solution for both town and county residents. Town officials have long said they could not continue to provide fire services to county residents without an additional funding source. Two proposed fire districts failed at elections in 2004 and 2006, at which time the town said it would have to implement a "charge for fire services" to county residents. A proposed fee would not be based on the number of fires in the Estes Valley Planning Area, but rather to offset the cost of the fire department's ability to be prepared to fight a fire if it would occur. This includes personnel, training, equipment, and in 2008 a total operating budget of $921,027. Fifty percent of the volunteer Fire Department's calls are outside of the town limits. Larimer County and the Sheriff's Department entered into an IGA with the Town to allow us to charge their residents for fire service. Paragraph 4 of the IGA needs to be amended to allow the town to enter into agreements with "individual private residents or property owners" who are not part of a recognized homeowners associate or other governing entity. The next step will be to forward the amendment to the County and Sheriff's Office for their approval. If the board agrees to amend the IGA, staff will move forward with charging county residents for fire services. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The town board should appoint a panel to research a fire district that operates independently of the town and charges the same mil levy rate to everyone in the district. The county residents want a fair and equitable solution and this is the only way to reach their desired solution. It also takes the operation out of the town's budget, addressing a concern expressed by some county residents that they were unable to trust the town. I will also point out that we've only heard from the county residents regarding this issue. We have not asked the town residents their points-of-view. Don Widrig made a suggestion to form a committee charged with developing a plan upon which the Estes Valley residents would vote. He suggested a committee comprised of a senior member of the Town staff, a Town Trustee, the fire chief and five Estes Valley residents appointed by the board, three of which would be from the county. We would also recommend including a volunteer firefighter, for a total of 9 members. 2. In the interim, the board should charge county residents for fire service. We are providing a service to county residents without a funding source. While I think we all would want to provide this service for free, the reality is we can't without affecting levels of service in the fire and all town departments. The county has said it is not in the fire service business. The county fully supports a charge for the service and we've made the subscription fee optional. For the first year, staff recommends charging residential and commercial properties a flat fee of $130. If a homeowners' association of 10 units or more subscribes, we recommend a reduced rate of $120 per unit If a fire occurs and the subscription fee has not been paid, we will charge the homeowner or business owner based upon the Colorado State Forest Service's Cooperator Rate Agreement for apparatus. There will also be a charge for personnel based upon the personnel budgeUnumber of response hours for the prior year. Our long range objective should be to have a fire protection district. Our short term objective should be to generate revenue to offset expenses. FIRST AMENDMENT TO LARIMER COUNTY FIRE AGENCY INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is effective the day of 2008, among LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO (the "County"), the LARIMER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE (the "Sheriff') and the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO (the "Town"). RECITALS 1. The parties entered into the Larimer County Fire Agency Intergovernmental Agreement effective the 17th day of September , 2007. The parties desire to amend the Intergovernmental Agreement to allow the Town to enter into agreements with individual property owners or residents in the Response Area in lieu of recovery of costs for response in the Response Area as more fully provided for in the Agreement. 2. Section 29-1-201 et seq. and Section 29-5-101 et seq. C.R.S. as amended, provide statutory authority for the parties hereto to enter into this First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE RECITALS WHICH ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Paragraph 4 of the Intergovernmental Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: Contract Services. The parties agree that the Town shall have the option, but not the responsibility, to enter into agreements with Homeowners Associations, individual private residents or property owners, or other entities owning, occupying and/or governing property located within the Response Area to provide the services set forth in Paragraph 1, Subsections a., b. and c. above. The terms and conditions of said agreements shall be in the sole discretion of the Town. The parties hereto agree that the compensation set forth in the agreements shall be in lieu of the recovery of costs of said response as more fully set forth in Section 30-10-513.5 (1)(a) (see Paragraph 3 above). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement effective as of the day and year first above written. LARIMER COUNTY By: ATTEST: Secretary LARIMER COUNTY SHERIFF By: ATTEST: Secretary TOWN OF ESTES PARK By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk TOWN BOARD MEETING February 12,2008 Action Item #8. Stanley Fairgrounds Multi-Use Barn Town Administrator Halburnt will prepare a memo based on the outcome of the study session held on the 8th. This memo will be sent via email prior to the meeting. Memorandum February 7,2008 To: Mayor Baudek and Town Board of Trustees From: Gerald Swank, Chairman, EPURA; Wil Smith, Director, EPURA ZX.,g:2~.I~ Re: Short-Term Loan for EPURA Project The EPURA Board of Commissioners takes great pride in the final project of its current life. A primary goal of the Town and the EPURA Board has been to connect the Riverwalk throughout downtown. Very recently, it has become feasible to do this with the cooperation of Sharon Seeley, owner ofthe Park Theater Mall and the River Shops. Sharon has agreed to allow EPURA to connect the Riverwalk through the Mall and along the area of the River Shops to Moraine Avenue. This will accomplish a continuous Riverwalk throughout downtown Estes Park! In order to accomplish this, the work has to be done in the off-season, a fast track endeavor. to be sure. It has to be finished by May, in order to minimize inconvenience to the merchants,and to maximize the advantage of the prime tourist season. EPURA has the financial resources to do this project in the form of property tax increment from 2007 that will come in over the course of 2008. The project cost is estimated at just under $1,500,000. The property tax increment to EPURA is just under $1,500,000. The problem is, due to the necessary fast track of the project, EPURA will be receiving invoices from the contractor and the consultants sooner than the property tax increment will be received. In order to pay the contractor and consultants in a timely manner, EPURA needs to borrow an estimated $600,000 from the Town. Most of this, an estimated $500,000, could be paid back by the end of July, 2008. The remaining $100,000 would be paid back as soon as the property tax increment becomes available or no later than the end of 2008. In the unlikely event of a minor shortfall, any difference would be paid out of EPURA's 2009 funding. The attached table, prepared by Finance Director MeFarland, shows the anticipated tax increment in flow as "projected income" and the anticipated timing of the project expenses. EPURA respectfully requests that these funds be made available, so that the project can be accomplished before the busy season and this milestone of accomplishment can be realized. EPURA 2008 PROJECTED CAPITAL PROJECT CASH FLOW EPURA BEG PROJECTED CAP END CASH INCOME PROJECT CASH 1/1/2008 $500,000 Jan-08 0 300,000 200,000 Feb-08 16,926 300,000 (83,074) Mar-08 230,052 400,000 (253,022) Apr-08 107,680 400,000 (545,342) May-08 215,612 100,000 (429,731) Jun-08 115,708 (314,022) Jul-08 228,916 (85,107) Aug-08 12,626 (72,481) Sep-08 10,515 (61,966) Oct-08 5,865 (56,102) Nov-08 4,119 (51,983) Dec-08 10,548 (41,435) $958,565 $1,500,000 ($41,435) From: Kupka, Chuck [mailto:charles-kupka@uiowa.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:40 AM To: Bob Joseph Subject: Kind Coffee Appeal Mr. Joseph, I understand the Kind Coffee appeal hearing is today. My wife and I own a unit in the Elkhorn lodge directly across the river from Kind Coffee on the second floor (540 W Elkhorn Ave unit B 7). I understand there are legal issues involved with this appeal however from my perspective the only real issue is the ongoing odor that occurs when Kind Coffee is roasting coffee beans (not to mention the noise factor). I live out of state, and when we periodically arrive at our condo and open the door there is consistent unpleasant odor that apparently has been trapped inside! I can detect the odors outside when roasting is occurring. The odors range from being unpleasant to very bad (to the point of being nauseating). Despite all of the legal reviews, please understand that since the Kind Coffee operation began, our environment has been negatively impacted. That is not right. I sincerely hope that those involved will take the steps necessary to eliminate this operation from occurring in our backyard. I would suspect that if it were occurring in your back yard you would not accept it. Thanks for allowing me to express our deep concern in this matter. Chuck and Jan Kupka 1736 2nd Ave. SE Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52403 Kind Coffee From: "Heather R Bolander" <Heather.Bolander@colorado.edu> To: <amy@kindcoffee.com> Sent Sunday, February 10, 2008 8:56,PM Subject: Support for Kind Coffee Amy, I am writing concerning your business, Kind Coffee, located at 552 W. Elkhorn Ave. I am a full-time resident of 550 W. Elkhorn Ave., unit A-1, which is located directly across the river from your store. I have recently heard some ofthe part- time residents of my condominium HOA direct complaints toward Kind Coffee and would like to pledge my support of your business. I understand that you are currently defending your business license through an appeal process brought forth by my neighbors. I question the validity of such an appeal, considering the city's approval of your business and all of the time, effort, and funding that has been spent getting your business off the ground. It seems to me that this appeal process should have begun upon your application for a business license rather than after the fact. Nevertheless, since the appeal has gone forth, I would like to address some comments to the city's board members. Please share this letter with them on my behalf. It is my understanding that the current complaint being directed toward your West Elkhorn Ave. location is regarding the manufacturing aspect of your business. Specifically, I have heard concerns regarding the noise and smell that occurs during the manufacturing process. Personally, I take more issue with the noise from the motorcycles that drive along Elkhorn Ave. than I do with the noise and smell from the coffee bean manufacturing. Both the noise and smell are minimal, and the manufacturing only occurs for a short time during business hours. I have found that you run a professional and respectful business and have always been responsive to my comments. Your business has been a good neighbor to me. Ofcourse, my opinion is only one of many. I eagerly invite the board members to join me on my deck while the coffee bean manufacturing is occurring so that they may form their own unbiased opinions. Please forward my contact information to them in case they are interested in accepting my offer. Best wishes to you in your business endeavors. -Jack Thompson 550 W. Elkhorn Ave., A-1 970-324-5700 2/11/2008 @m@Mu 3-2.-fl Brodzinski/Thompson ~li FER 1 1 2008 ~1 553 W. Elkhorn Ave. Estes Park, CO 80517 February 9,2008 Town Clerk Jackie Williamson Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Appeal of Staff Determination regarding Kind Coffee Company Dear Board Members: We are writing in regard to the appeal of the determination to allow Kind Coffee to open and operate a manufacturing operation at 522 W. Elkhorn Ave. We believe the planning staff was in error to allow this type of operation in an area so close to residential and accommodations properties. The coffee roasting operation does not fit the classification of a retail/small scale sales use classification. We were originally pleased with the thought of having a coffee shop across the street from our lodging establishment. This was before we realized the impact the manufacturing operation would have on us and our guests on an almost daily basis. The smell and noise from the roasting operation at Kind Coffee has caused guest complaints on a regular basis, and the limited time the coffee shop is actually open does nothing to offset the problems it has created. There is a very strong burning smell throughout the neighborhood on any day the roaster is in operation. Our guests constantly come to the front desk to ask, "What's burning?" If the noise and smell has caused us this many problems, the impact on the condominiums right next door must be tenfold. In the four years we have owned Mountain Sage Inn, we have had more complaints about Kind Coffee than we ever had about the smell of the horses when Elkhorn Lodge was at full operation. The Kind Coffee Company paid to upgrade the building to meet town requirements in good faith that they would be able to operate their roaster, but, we believe, the use is not compatible with this particular location. We would like to see the manufacturing operation moved to a more appropriate industrial or heavy commercial location and for the town to make some type of concession to Kind Coffee to offset the money they spent on the building to meet town requirements. Sincerely, Lynda Thompson Bootsie Brodzinski 108 Pinewood Dr. ~~ FEB 1 2 2008 [~ Lyons, CO 80540 February 9,2008 Jacquie Halburnt Town Administrator 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Ms. Halburnt: I'm baffled. The town has put huge bucks into extending the River Walk west, and then the planning commission breaks the zoning rules to encourage an industrial polluter to plunk down in the middle of the nearby tourist accommodations/residential neighborhood. I'm speaking of Kind Coffee at 552 W. Elkhorn. When my friend who owns a condo there went with neighbors to see Bob Joseph about it, before she could say anything, he told her, "You're hypersensitive. You'll have to move." Hypersensitive? I used to live in that neighborhood and still visit friends there often, and the first time I was engulfed in the gassy burnt-odor emission of a roasting in progress, I almost knocked on doors to see whose home was on fire. I've heard the fire department, in fact, has been called. If I were a tourist staying in one of the nearby condos or lodges along West Elkhorn, I would never come back. The stench is stifling. Nothing like having to close all your windows most days in summer, or have a home or lodge room that smells worse than a badly burnt dinner. If you want tourist-oriented businesses to set up shop in Estes with confidence that an industrial operator won't be allowed next door, your planning commission is going to have to start following the zoning codes and play by the rules. You've lost the clean air that residents and tourists alike used to love in that part of town. Property values will likely fall. My understanding is that Joseph suggested that Kind Coffee sell coffee in the mornings in summer to slip its industrial operation in under commercial zoning status. But it still doesn't fit the criteria. The Town Board will be in the uncomfortable position Tuesday night of following the zoning criteria or not against Joseph's recommendation. Kind Coffee is in the difficult position of having followed his recommendation, investing in renovating a building that it may soon have to leave. And the reputation of the whole town as a desirable tourist destination, and a place one can dare to buy a home without your neighbor making you sick with intense gas combustion fumes, has been dealt a big blow. I hope that you'll get involved in this one, and pressure the commission to behave reasonably. Sincerely, 2--CLJY~-- Cathee Coulter 1 + / -4--V.--A-,Q",---1--- -IiEN*3,03 4.211}Alâ‚¬L_i* 14 f71 3 7 1 Sf 1 9 2#7 9 -0 _ I '14 i j text e : 1 n.f 53 0 >45;'t \ fi 63 25 ./--le- V -4*1-3331 -- - i\6 - V 1 %#(*I=~*=(%Â£t*#- r ,,4Â« \ /2 3 2 ,/47 h.'94 f 22 ~ i t t. i. 4X 9. // .1 06-0 Ntlk 4442 1 â€¢ e rt ~~0*1 J~ ~I v--5 t(*tr 4 2 ----- 3,1 r .*, D #* tfrb' 'fi,f f f 4/ , ./ ..1 3 4*.' .04 4.9 / 11 11 7 \ .' ..' I I# 1 '94 1\ Â¢ 5 /4 1 /0 2 1 9.0 9.' hif . 1 , 0 t.\\ 1(9 1 , 3 1 1, 1 4 41- it :/ f y i 7 -1 4- >7 1 49 fâ‚¬~' * rf r til. i; a- ~~ u \ 1tvt *\ 1 - 45)/ f k / / / A fti).w '5 .Fh, , -4 i m; 1 1.1 4 2 f / A NU'wah --â€ž.*-- - / 02,/ . a-\ 1 , 7 , 1 7 1 4/j i j \\1 2 \ 90/ f Â« t / 1 2 .1 4' ' t - <mo, / 2 1 LA\1 1 , 1 i .- -,2 43 ./ 1 /:// 4 ' / z, :1*,/ // i 721.-_i..*---* f 2/ / ./.Ob ./ %<*4 f / / //1 / / eli I 5 7 / '60- / 1:/ // 7/ fiff //'/ .6>: ret.-14/ 2 / / 4 f w,y(R., 1 /4 / ~rN' //4 /// %Â¢4 0 5 Ar, ~ ' */ ) fi*/ r -4 4 . * :..vj - ~, 5 / v / , 4 .: //1 1.9 2 \:% 7 14' 7 5.3 // /' O /1 h:* / 4 0:2 0 1210 ; 644 fito /7 1 4 ve,th<77 40 . i. & v 4 .$ r @2) \ m 1 <-t 0 M k 1440 .2 1 \ - :f,0// (1 i j / /4 !21 2 1 j 2// / 4 0 2 K ,22 ./. 7 1 1 A# A 4 00 94, /9 V tSt: 4 4 ti U i 0 14 7/, ; 4 C - ,$ / 7 /1 y / 0 /iN 41 2.: I U . 3 1, Â£ 2 . i + AB (11 4 9 -/44 . Â» 4/0. I , u . t /f :94 54% X \ t 2 1 /42 0 0 ' i /7 .\ : 3 - ht 1 40 9, Â· 4 Â»1 134/9 /, ts kg I' . 42 K ..4 330 ign*// U 4, p 6 4 4 A/ 0 9 8 ,11 i & O -1 j) AfÂ· 9 f 3.6 45 11 111 4 44 #Â· AL t 9; 1/ li ?1 Â· 44 - 7 ;1 f â€¢ *6Â» 41 i j /4% // ./ s .3 :04/ Attachment B Inventory List for Concession Stand 2008 Estes Park Lions Inventory Coleman Grill Char-broil Grill 4 - Picnic tables with attached benches Toastmaster Food Warmer Toastmaster Commercial Toaster Aerohot Steam Table Aerohot Cold Keeper Montgomery Ward Compact Frig/Freezer Caravel Ice Cream Freezer Astro Popcorn Popper Manitowoc Ice Machine True Refrigerator / Cooler 3 door True Stainless Steel Refrigerator True Pass Thru Display Refrigerator J-H- McKie Coffee Maker Whirlpool Sandwich Prep Refrigerator Vulcan Cook Top 2 - Stainless Steel Tables 6' X 30" 4' X 30" 2 Cash Registers Sno - Cone Machine 2 Microwaves ( Sharp & Whirlpool) Town of Estes Park Inventory Sanyo Cash Register Walk - In Cooler Stainless Steel Triple Sink Small White Sink 2 - Hot Water Heaters (GE & Rheem) , # Appeal Remarks regarding Kind Coffee Manufacturing Operations By Linda Farrell @ 540 W. Elkhorn B-8 Mr. Bailey has very well stated our concerns in our appeal. I am speaking to expand on a few points since I am the closest unit in the Elkhorn Plaza Condos to this Manufacturing operation & extremely affected. 1. Manufacturing is a Maior usage of this Building a. Besides members ofour Condo association hearing it from Kind Coffee's employees', we have observed and believe this manufacturing to be a primary usage ofthis building. b. In fact, Kind Coffee's Internet site speaks oftheir: "1000 sq. foot roastery in Estes Park". c. Ironically, Kind Coffee's Internet site also states: "We are committed to making a positive impact on both our local community and the environment 2. Meeting with Bob Joseph prior to filing this Appeal Process: At the beginning of the meeting - before any discussion or dialogue began - Mr. Joseph's opening remark was: "You need to sell and move." 3. Manufacturing has changed the nature of the neighborhood This is a long standing are of residences and temporary accommodations, which have lived in tranquility and harmony with this small commercial lot businesses for decades. However, Kind Coffee's manufacturing operation has clearly affected us and we believe it should be moved to a non-residential industrial heavy commercial zoned area of town. 4. Manufacturing Substantially Interferes with Eniovment of our Properties: 5. Manufacturing Adversely Affects mv and other Property values. Due to this manufacturing our neighborhood is not going to be an area people will choose to buy into ...nor rent 6. Manufacturing has Affected mv Health SUMMARY: I am concerned for myself and for others in this neighborhood for the long-range consequences of allowing this manufacturing to remain at this location. Thank you for listening. Please reverse this decision and have this operation relocated for the fourth and final time to an industrial heavy commercial zoned area oftown. Thank you d - - 1 4 2 COFFEE Our Roastery Yes, we realize it may taste as if our delicious coffee is roasted by pure magic. In a way, the fine art of producing a cup of coffee is magical, but begins long before the beans arrive at our 1,000 square foot roastery in Estes Park, Colorado. . 4 ..Â·..,:~ AS Kind is committed to purchasing only certified organic fairly traded coffee all of ----. Â·,vÂ·,Tili,â€žF, our beans are sourced from growers that share our beliefs in the sustainability of the environment. We are happy to pay a higher price for our beans in order for farming communities to maintain social stability. This commitment to good business limits bean selection in the present, but we believe in the importance of providing only the healthiest, highest quality coffee to our customers. As more growers adapt to environment-friendly farming methods, Kind will expand our selection. We currently acquire beans from Costa Rica, Peru, Guatemala, Columbia, Sumatra, and Mexico. Burlap sacks of raw beans, still in their green stage, arrive at our warehouse fresh ,)41,1 and ready to roast. Using a Sivetz, a hot air master powered by two burners and multiple fans, we are able to roast 200 pounds of coffee per hour. The air flowing 1.- 1 / ...... 4 4.40 through our Sivetz is consistently replaced ensuring every bean has its chance to ~~11, Whi express the rich, intense flavors we love them for. Monitoring the beans with Lai= - pinpoint precision, our roastmaster achieves the appropriate scent, color, and flavor / --0, p. 14 - for each desired roast. . Fgh: A ..= 4 . h Our roastery is located on the shores of Lake Estes beneath the towering peaks of the Continental Divide. Rocky Mountain National Park is minutes away from our shop and frequented by the Kind crew. Inspired by the nature that surrounds us, Kind Coffee has developed such blends as the acclaimed Lumpy Ridge Roast, Long's Peak Blend, Bear Lake Breakfast Blend, Fall River Blend, and others. With personalized labels and custom blends, our roastery revels in the vivid diversity of our patrons and is busy roasting only the best beans for them and the environment. Our Shop There's a coffee shop on the corner in downtown Estes Park, a quaint cafe where the local community meets for the best tasting coffee in town. The famous Lumpy -2-=.li,vul'.2 1. Â·Â· ..tÂ¥,319..A$ Ridge dominates the view from tall storefront windows while the Big Thompson River ripples by out back. Morning colors shine in from large picture windows along the eastern wall while the regulars show up like clockwork and mingle with travelers -m,~ visiting for the first time. As the afternoon comes and goes, tables hold hot teas and 9 tasty lattes while occupants.sit and chat, work away on wireless laptops, get lost in - books, catch up on journal entries, and flip through newspapers. In a time of e-mails, 1 *. .,1.1 ..2. cell-phones, and self-reliance, coffee shops are where the community meets face-to- face. Kind Coffee is a meeting place where coffee connoisseurs and novices alike can experience fine quality certified organic, shade-grown coffees at the best price in town. ELKHORN PLAZA CONDIMINION ASSOCIATION '. 540-550 WEST ELKHORN AVE Estes Park Colorado, 80517 REBUTTAL TO STAÂ¥Â¥ RESPONSE TO APPELLANT'S POSITION February 12, 2008 First, initially I want to make a correction in my introduction statement, relative to the zoning. Kind Coffee is in CO or Commercial Outlying. The property directly south, where our condominiums are at, is actually zoIled RM, multi-family residential. Our property to the west across the river, is zoned commercial outlying and I apologize for that inaccuracy. In rebuttal to the following items: Section A, page 1: We are very much aware that this appeal is related to the use determination, however, Exhibit B is significant in many ways as it defines and explains some of the legal issues, for instance, relative to the zoning, relative to the size of the lot, and relative to the variances that were granted. In our opinion, it should be kept in mind that these two proceedings, the variance proceeding, which primarily allows them to put in a loading dock slab, and the use classification, are a part and parcel ofthe same project. Exhibit B is primarily significant for background information, but it is also important as resource material for our appeal. The Kind Coffee property is, of course, in the CO and the purpose of the CO zoning, as stated in the Estes Valley Development Code, is that "the zoning district is established to encourage the development of a wide variety of commercial and retail uses among the maior corridor entryways into the valley and the Town of Estes Park. The zoning district is established to implement the commercial and commercial recreation future land use recommended in the comprehensive plan. The district should accommodate the maioritv of the larger free standing commercial and retail buildings to meet future demand in the community." How does the allowing of this primarily manufacturing and warehousing business located in this very small building in this outlying commercial zoning promote the development plan? Section I, paragraph B.: The dimensional standards are important because they give the Trustees an idea of what is actually going on. Again, although this building is zoned CO the allowing of a manufacturing and warehousing property is not compatible with CO zoning. It is also important because when you look through the documents in the town file, relative to the variance application was attached Exhibit M, says that Kind Coffee would like to rent this property for the following uses: Elkhorn Plaza Condo Assoc./Kind Coffee Appeal ) Rebuttal to Staff Response to Position Statement/February 11, 2008 Page 2 Of 6 . 1. Open a second espresso bar/shop in addition to our current location at 470 East Elkhorn, to serve our West end customer and people traveling into the park and out Fall River Road. This location offers greater convenience for customers who don't want to venture downtown, especially during the high season, providing zoning allowed for it, Kind Coffee would like to offer outdoor tables and chairs or benches in the summer. 2. Sell products such as bags of fresh roasted Kind Coffee, coffee mugs, t- shirts, calendars, gift cards, etc. (They would probably need to be open to accomplish these tasks.) 3. Move our coffee roastery to this location, as well, as a locally made product. We believe that having our roastery somewhere that people can visit is a plus to our business. Like a brewery, the roastery is a unique, boutique kind of business that tourists will enjoy visiting while purchasing a great espresso or latte. Page 2 of 12: Again we have made the rebuttal to Exhibit B. We do realize what this is all about. What is all about is allowing a manufacturing and warehouse project in as an accessory use when it is actually the principle or primary use. Section II, C.: The staff made the finding that retail food and beverage sales is a permitted use. Section 4.4 does not specifically use the language "retail food and beverage sales," the Staff saying this is a permitted use. It makes it extremely difficulty to analyze the statute, when in fact the Staff language is not consistent with the code, because then you have to look at several permitted uses and try to fit them together to make it work. Section 4.4 talks about food/beverage as a permitted use. If you look at Exhibit C you'll see that food/beverages sales are substantially different than eating/drinking establishments. The language that 4.4 shows, if you look at Exhibit C, is eating/drinking establishment and there are references to 5(1)(g), which we will talk about later. However, what is the more significant definition comes under definitions in Chapter 13, number 17, (Exhibit R) it talks about a "retail business serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises," Example B-1, "bar and taverns," and Example B-2, "a restaurant." And a restaurant is, "an establishment where the principle business is the sale of food and beverages in a ready to consume state where fermented malt beverages, malt, special malt, and vinous and spirituous liquors may be produced on the premises as an accessory use," . Again, had the principle place of business been the sale of food and beverages then this would be a permissible accessory use, in a restaurant. If you look at retail establishment in Exhibit C, which is the combination of retail sales, retail food and beverage sales is a permitted use. However, the retail sales appears to have some limitations. One limitation which I do not understand is the "no more than 15% of the principal buildings gross floor area shall be devoted to retail sales". This is a good time to bring in some other information. For instance, we have Exhibit O, provided to us by the Town of Estes Park, which is relevant because we look at the use and occupancy class and again it is retail. We have a retail eating/drinking establishment, Exhibit P, which is, of course, part of the documentation provided, and on Elkhorn Plaza Condo Assoc./Kind Coffee Appeal Rebuttal to Sta#Response to Position Statement/February 11, 2008 Page 3 of 6 conditions at the bottom of the page, 5/19/06, "no food preparation is indicated on drawing. Require double check black back-flow preventer, if food preparation is in future plans..." so this was not planned to be for the sale of any food prepared on the property and of course they are not authorized to do that. Basically, we are talking about apparently a retail sale of coffee being the primary use, with no food preparation. The staff is the one that makes it a retail food and beverage sale as permitted. Food preparation not being permitted, and there is no specific category, in spite of what the staff says, about retail food and beverage sales. Combining retail and food and beverage only serves to confuse the issue. Now we go to Section II; D, which is basically the crux of the issue and that becomes what is primary use and secondary use. The argument is and the staff's reply is that the code does not set for space allocation as the sole governing criteria for identifying the principal use of the property. If that is not significant then why does the staff, in Exhibit A, indicate that it is approximately Y retail, lA office and M roasting and storage. We did not make that a criteria, the staff did (no wholesale is mentioned in the space allotment). Then it is stated that the principal use of this property is best judged by weighing the allocation of time spent in pursuit of the various activities associated with the business. If retail food and beverage sale is a permitted use, and all of the applications indicate that it is for a retail purpose, then why if the business is closed 8 months out of the year as a retail business how can that be a primary use? If you look again at Exhibit K, which is the web site, they say, "with a steady, growing, web presence and good word of mouth advertising we now ship daily from our warehouse." Then they talk again about their coffee shop in downtown Estes Park and have no mention of this coffee shop, which is the coffee shop in question. Then they talk about their roastery and they talk about their 1,000 square foot roastery in Estes Park. Their 1,000 roastery in Estes Park is the same as their warehouse and it is this location. There is no mention of this property in their website as being a retail property. Again, their green coffee beans in the raw and green stage arrive at our warehouse fresh and ready to roast and they are able to roast 200 pounds of coffee per hour. So if you look at their website you see that they are able to make 200 pounds of coffee per day and they ship daily from their warehouse. So, logic tells us that if you are doing roasting and warehousing 5days per week for 12 months and that you are doing retail coffee 3-4 months, roasting and shipping is clearly the primary use and not the accessory use. Fairly one would have to assume that the office is used 12 months for roasting and shipping and at best 3-4 months per year in this location as retail and the office would again support both retain and shipping. We can discuss this all we want, but in reality roasting, warehousing and shipping of coffee is the primary use, not the accessory. If you look at attached Exhibit O, it shows allocated square footage as retail 180 sgt office 90 sqft, storage and shipping 810 sqft. Exhibit Q, which is a copy of the document provided, it shows clearly that the open space for the roaster and packaging area are clearly taking up the vast majority of the space. Quite frankly, for the staff to argue that this is not the primary use is disingenuous. So, if the staff allocates M of the space for retail and M for the space for the office and 96 of the space for roasting, storage, and wholesaling, then that must be the criteria Elkhorn Plaza Condo Assoc./Kind Coffee Appeal Rebuttal to Staff Response to Position Statement/February 11, 2008 Page 4 Of 6 ' that they used. But even using all of the criteria discussed, it is clear that the principal use of this business is manufacturing and not retail sales. Section II, D (2nd II,D).: We strongly disagree with the interpretation in the staff response. It is clear, if you look at Exhibit E, under the accessories permitted to non-residential zoning districts, it talks about the "production of fermented malt beverages, malt, special malt, vinous and spirituous liquors (brew pub)" is a permitted use in CO, but is permitted as an accessory to a permitted restaurant use only. So they're comparing this to a brew pub situation, but in fact if you compare it to what the development code refers to in this Section, it is only permitted as an accessory to a permitted restaurant use. Again, this Kind Coffee operation, according to Exhibit P, there is no food preparation indicated on the drawing, so this operation is clearly not a restaurant. Then while under the next section, restaurant, bars, newsstands, gift shops, etc., the proper interpretation is that in the 3 zoning districts, A, O, and 1 -L, they are only allowed when inside a principal building containing a permitted principal hotel, motel, resort, lodge or major entertainment event facility. It is pretty clear that restaurants are allowed in CO. It says they are permitted in CO, but still the brew pub effect which the staff likens this to is only an accessory to a permitted restaurant use. So, the proper interpretation is that they can have this coffee roasting facility in the zoning areas A, CD, CO, and 1-L, but it has to be an accessory use permitted to a restaurant and if it is in zones A, O or 1-L it can be in a restaurant, but it has to be a part of a hotel or resort. Otherwise, the interpretation is that you cannot put a restaurant in CO and I do not think that is the proper interpretation. You can have the roasting operation in CO, but it has to be an accessory use to a restaurant. Section III: There was a substantial structural change within the building, including the necessity of obtaining a variance to build a 6x 12, basically a loading dock. They put the new double door out to the loading dock, they moved the restroom, they moved the kitchen wall, as you can see in Exhibit Q. Then if you direct your attention back again to Exhibit K, the Kind Coffee people are referring to this as a warehouse. Page 1 again of Exhibit K, "with a steady growing web presence and good word of mouth advertising we now ship daily from our warehouse". On the third page, "but begins long before the beans arrive at our 1,000 square foot roasterv in Estes Park. Burlap sacks of raw beans. still in their green stage, arrive at our warehouse. fresh and ready to roast." They are referring to it as a warehouse. And, again, nowhere in that exhibit do they refer to the location at 552 West Elkhorn. If there is a gross exaggeration it is a gross exaggeration on the staff's part to try to fit this warehouse and manufacturing process into the Kind Coffee building, and call it an accessory use. Then the staff talks about the element of storage that does occupy 500 square feet inside of the building which is M of the building, is similar to the storage space that would be commonly associated with a restaurant, or for that matter, any other retail merchandising use. The problem is that this is not a restaurant, there is no food preparation going on here. It cannot be an accessory use to a restaurant if there is no Elkhorn Plaza Condo Assoc./Kind Coffee Appeal Rebuttal to Staff Response to Position Statement/February 11, 2008 Page 5 of 6 restaurant and it is not just a retail establishment, it is a manufacturing operation. If this was a retail coffee shop, we could not be happier, but it is a manufacturing process that creates a noise and a stench that interferes with our property rights. Again, the owners classify it as a warehouse in their advertising and in a sense this is the crux of the issue. If you look at Exhibit R, these are definitions and examples that they are talking about, at the bottom of the page, eating/drinking establishments, retail businesses serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the property. Restaurant is an establishment where the principal business is the sale of food and beverages in a ready to consume state where fermented malt beverages, special malt, venous, spirituous liquor may be produced on the premises as an accessory use. They have justified the existence of allowing this manufacturing process as an accessory use. This is not an eating establishment, it is not a restaurant, and this analogy between the coffee roasting process and the brew pub that they have used to justify this does not allow them to place this coffee manufacturing process here because it has to be an accessory use. If it is a brew pub at least it has to be an accessory use to a restaurant and if you are using the analogy that this is like a brew pub, then this operation should have to be an accessory use to a restaurant, which it is not. It is not an accessory use because the roasting and manufacturing warehousing project is the primary use. If it is an accessory use it is permitted in a restaurant and this is no restaurant. Section III, D: A brew pub is a permitted use as an accessory use to a restaurant. I have been to a few brew pubs in Colorado, but I have never been to a brew pub that was not associated with a restaurant. The brew pub in Estes Park is associated with a restaurant. Brew pub's in Boulder are associated with restaurant's. Brew pub's in Fort Collins are associated with restaurants. Brew pub's in Moab, Utah and Park City, Utah that I have been in are associated with restaurants. It is a permitted accessory use and it is a permitted accessory in a CO to a restaurant. The Kind Coffee Company is not a restaurant, the principal business in this location is not selling food and coffee, ikt is a coffee manufacturing process. Section III, G: If you look again at Exhibit K, Kind Coffee talks about their warehouse and this is their warehouse facility, it is their roastery, and it is their manufacturing facility. Look again at Exhibit K, "Burlap sacks of raw beans, still in their green stage, arrive at our warehouse." I would be very surprised if these arrive at the warehouse in the owner's car. I am attaching a photograph, and I admit that it is of extremely poor quality, but it was taken at dusk on a Friday afternoon, and that is Exhibit S, taken January 18, 2008, and that, poor as it is, is a UPS truck backed up to the loading dock. The second Page of that Exhibit is another photograph, a much better photograph, taken in the summer of 2007, showing a UPS truck backed up to the dock. This is a frequent occurance. Now if it was a casual package pick-up, one would assume that it would not be backed up to the loading dock, where it is. If you look at Exhibit T you will see that one of the specific requirements here was that no vehicles be backed up to the loading dock. I had just gotten home from work, I was standing across the river between our two buildings, and took that photograph. That was the same kind of UPS truck used allover town, which meant it was a sizable vehicle, and there is space for the truck to back up to the dock, contrary to what the staff states. Elkhorn Plaza Condo Assoc./Kind Coffee Appeal ~ Rebuttal to Staff Response to Position Statement/February 11,2008 Page 6 of 6 Section III, B: This indicates that the Colorado Department of Health and Environment is responsible for regulating and enforcing and that there was a test done. Unfortunately, in the file that we were provided there were not test results. The problem is that the odors are sickening, they are offensive and they stink! That has substantially altered our neighborhood and you have complaints not only from Elkhorn Plaza people, but complaints from Willow Condominium owners and complaints from the Sage Inn Motel. If the guests of the Sage Inn Motel complain about the smell there are other places in Estes Park to stay. That has to be an economic detriment to them. It not only effects our enjoyment of our property, but it effects the value of our properties adversely. Section IV, 0: We clearly understand that this is a matter that may have to be taken up later in criminal court or in civil court. We are assuming that if the staff knew there was a noise problem and knew that there was an odor problem that was present at other locations of this roasting process in town, they would not allow it here, but they did. As we pointed out earlier, according to the police officer's report, when he did his noise complaint investigation, when they were not roasting there was no violation and when they were roasting there was a violation, yet the officer deemed, even contrary to the language of the code, that there was not a significant violation. Well, to us, it is a significant violation. The noise of the Fall River as it rushes by our condominiums is wonderful, the roasting noise is bad. In conclusion, I would like to point out three different statements. In Exhibit B on page 6 at the top, it says, "Under no circumstances shall the board of adjustment grant a variance to allow a use not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication, prohibited under the terms of this code for the zoned district containing the property for which the variance is sought." It is our position that this also applies to a Staff decision. Allowing of this manufacturing operation in CO is prohibited and it is prohibited as it was to be an accessory use. However, it can only be an accessory use to a permitted restaurant. There is no restaurant here. This operation is not an accessory use, it is the primary use. Further, on page 4 of Exhibit B, the questions that is answered, "whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance." As a result o f the allowing of this use at this location is a substantial detriment to the adjoining property owners. The third statement I would like to draw your attention to is under Exhibit I, we talked about unreasonable noise. Unreasonable noise means "any sound of such level and duration as to be or tend to be injurious to human health or welfare, or which unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of life or property throughout the town or in any portion thereof..." Unreasonable noise is prohibited. Why do we have to put up with this unreasonable noise. For all of the reasons stated in our arguments, we respectfully request that you overrule the Use Determination made by the Staff Findings. pr 18 06 04:04p IBIS~' - 31256~-950 P.1 0. i 64Â£4Â£+ 553 W Elkhorn Ave Kind Coffee would like to rent this property for the following uses: 1. Open a 2nd espresso bar/shop (in addition to our current location at 470 E Elkhorn.) to service our west-end customers and people traveling into the Park and out Fall River Rd. This location offers greater convenience for customers who don't want to venture "downtown," especially during the high season. Providing zoning allowed for it, Kind Coffee would like to offer outdoor tables and chairs or benches in the summer. 2. Sell retail products such as bags of fresh roasted Kind Coffee, coffee mugs, t- shirts, calendars, gift cards, etc... 3. Move our coffee roastery to this location as well. As a locally made product, we believe that having our roastery somewhere that people can visit as a plus to our business. Like a brewery, the mastery is a unique, boutique kind ofbusiness that tourists will enjoy visiting while purchasing a great espresso or latte. /14 , d\04 1 (36 ., Elkhorn Commercial Properties &-0-/0 552 West Elkhorn 2003 IEBC/IBC Code Study International Existing Building Code Wock classification: Alterations, Level 2 (reconfiguration of space) Level 1 Alteration requirements Accessible route to primary function, including toilet facilities, required Max %-inch thresholds, with beveled edges Level 2 Alteration requirements Existingsmoke alarms to be reviewed for acceptance by Bldg Official Use & Occupaney Class -- Chapter 3 j M,Retail J Per Table 302.3.2 Storage are*s within M occ's need not be separated if < 1,000 sf Height & Atea Limitations -- Chapter 5 Type V-13 Main Floor: Use Group: M Allowable area: 8,000 Type V-B (2 story, Max ht 30) Increase for separation: Not taken Increase for sprklr. Not spfinklered Total Allowable: 8,00Osf Existing: 1,080sf (no new area proposed) -h\\ Means of Egress -_Cli*pter.10------------- .zRZE*ilia-7=intetior seating): 180sf@ 30sf/occ (gross) = 6 occs Office 90sf @ 100suocc (gross) = 1 occ Storage, stock & shipping: 810sf @ 300sf/occ (gross) = 3 occs < \\.4-Total occupant load: (1 exit required) 10 occs- -Fibi /064, I. 1 '1-ON Anic :61*1,4 Enc,46 Oult.9'v OF-8323. u i, - L:)00â€¢230 4471-09 , f Permit Record Report Â· Printed: 5/25/2006 Page 3 of 5 Permit Number: 8067 File Received: Decision Date: Status: Department: 5/17/2006 5/25/2006 Approved Planning ' Comments: Concrete pad at loading door not to be constructed prior to completion of staff level variance. Approval Reviews: File Received: Review Completed: Reviewer: Status: 5/25/2006 5/25/2006 Bob Joseph Approved with comments Comments: Approvals: File Received: Decision Date: Status: Department: 5/1 /2006 5/15/2006 Approved Sanitation Comments: Approvals: File Received: Decision Date: Status: Department: 5/17/2006 5/18/2006 Approved Water Approval Reviews: File Received: Review Completed: Reviewer: Status: 5/18/2006 5/18/2006 Cliff Tedder Approved Comments: Certificates: Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Certificate of Occupancy Issued: Issued: By: By: Expiration: Occupancy: Conditions: Date: 5/19/2006 Status: Approved wit Code: Condition Description: Condition Comments: 5-19-06 No food preparation is indicated on drawings. Require double check backflow preventer as property is designated low hazard. If food preparation is in future plans recommend putting in an RP backflow preventer with adequate drainage at this time. In either case device needs to be installed to specs (drawing attached) and tested by a certified tech (list attached). Test results to be sent to the water department then final signoff approval will be granted. DH Violations: -L~ Violation Date: Violation #: Agency: Status: Deadline: 04/18/2006 15:49 1847869-12 THE UPS STORE . PAGE 02/02 C I Coffee counter- Includes new Front door. plumbing and electric, 3 basin sink. ctc... Design TBD, New office French dooryÂ· Kitchen wall moved.. bathroorn New door into -roastery," ATI open space for roaster and packaging area. H20 heater counter. Cut hack os mnall as possIble, New double door out to loading doek... Blumberg No. 5137 li _E-I c. Excentions: This classification shall not include-MvicE-lot amusement and entertainment, such as jukeboxes, pool tables, coin-operated games, pinball machines or television and radio where such devices are clearly incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the premises. 13. Commercial Recreation or Entertainment Establishments, Outdoor. a. General Definition: Any outdoor enterprise whose main purpose is to provide the general public with an amusing or entertaining activity, where tickets are sold or fees collected at the gates of the activity. Activities may take place in a number of structures that are arranged together in an outdoor setting. Accessory uses may include concessions, restaurants, parking, caretaker's quarters and maintenance facilities. b. Examples: This classification includes go-kart tracks, outdoor mazes, riding academies, roping arenas, livery stables, equestrian arenas, amusement parks, Â· golf driving ranges, miniature golf facilities and zoos. c. ExceDtions: This use classification does not include the following: (1) Concert halls, stadiums, race tracks of any kind, or other similar facilities intended to attract large crowds in excess of one thousand (1,000) persons. Uses that draw large numbers of people to periodic events, rather than on a continuous basis, are classified as major entertainment events; (2) Outdoor shooting ranges: (3) Golf courses, which are classified separately under "Golf Course" below. 14. Construc#on Stomge Yard. A facility utilized for the storage of vehicles, equipment and materials utilized in the construction industry. 15. Cu/twa/ /nst#utions. Nonprofit institutions displaying or preserving objects of interest in one (1) or more of the afts or sciences. This classification includes libraries, museums and art galleries. 16. Day Care Center. A nonresidential facility for the purpose of providing less than twenty-four-hour care for children or adults, none of whom are receiving on-site medical or psychological treatment, therapy or counseling but some or all of whom may be receiving on-site physical assistance with day-to-day living activities. A day care center for children is a facility that is required to be licensed as such by the State of Colorado, Department of Human Services. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) 17. Eating/Drinking Establishments. a. General Definition: Retail businesses serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises. b. Examples: This classification indudes the following types of specific uses: (1) Bar/Tavem: An establishment providing or dispensing by the drink for on-site consumption of fermented malt beverages and/or malt, special malt, vinous or spirituous liquors, and in which the sale of food products such as sandwiches and light snacks is secondary (also known as a tavern). A bar/tavem may include provision of live entertainment and/or dancing; however, a bar/tavem shall not include any adult business use. (2) Restaurant: An establishment where the pnncipal business is the sale of food and beverages in a ready-to-consume state where fermented malt [33 . beverages, malt, special malt and vinous and spirituous liquors may be produced on the premises as an accessory use. A restaurant may include an outdoor seating area or outdoor food service, subject to all applicable use and development standards set forth in this Code (see Â§5.1.M below). (3) With Drive-Through Service: An eating/drinking establishment in which the principal business is the sale of foods or beverages to the customer in a ready-to-consume state and in which the design or method of operation of all or any portion of the business allows food or beverages to be served directly to the customer in a motor vehide without the need for the customer to exit the motor vehicle. 18. Emergency Hea/th Cam. Facilities providing emergency medical service with no provision for continuing care on an inpatient basis. 19. Entertainment Event, Major. a. General Definition: Major entertainment event uses are characterized by activities and structures that attract people to specific (often large-scale) events or shows. Activities are generally of a spectator nature. Accessory uses may include restaurants, bars, concessions, parking and maintenance facilities. b. Examples: Examples include fairgrounds, stadiums, sports arenas, coliseums, auditoriums and exhibition and meeting halls/areas. c. Exceptions: This use classification does not include the following: (1) Exhibition and meeting areas with less than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet of total event area, which are classified as "Retail Establishments" below. (2) Meeting areas, banquet halls and similar uses that are part of hotels or restaurants and are accessory to those uses, which are included in the accommodations or retail establishment classification. See also Â§5.1.C of this Code. (3) Movie theaters, which are classified under indoor commercial recreation or entertainment establishments. (4) Recreation or entertainment uses conducted on a continuous basis that are dassified as indoor or outdoor commercial recreation or entertainment establishments. 19.5 Family Home Day Care. A facility in the permanent residence of the provider, for the purpose of providing less than twenty-four-hour care for two (2) or more adults or children who are not related to the caregiver and none of whom are receiving on-site medical or psychological treatment, therapy or counseling but some or all of whom may be receiving on-site physical assistance with day-to-day living activities. A family home day care for children is a facility that is required to be licensed as such by the State of Colorado, Department of Human Services. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) a. Family Home Day Care, Small. A facility licensed by the State of Colorado to serve eight (8) or fewer adults or children with no more than one (1) nonresident caregiver on site at any time. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) b. Family Home Dav Care. Larae. A facility licensed by the State of Colorado to serve more than eight (8) adults or children and may include nonresident 1 -\ U Prn ZE LS Â·IN ./.4,1.1,g . 1 Â· 1 14 '*. - 1 , . . I' ':lk,Ed* . 'v; *>t u. 14 *tr A 72 Â· 7:.Â·*4..,Â£ ' 4 -1'f S:Â· f /4- .. , 62'4% I I.'021//ir. - . 1 ..1"9/. -+I- 4~~~2 4.- .:/ I . . P . .. 4* + %*.4 -3 - 0 1 4 . F . G 7.' a.,2 - '01%'.At Ti : 41 N â€¢*Â¢ 4 9. A , 44; 17 2 -.Mt. 4.' ..et. -- , . 9 7-. ~74 .1 ., - 9 2 *-Al'&),-i-- 1/ '1 1 i 7- 1 RESPONSE TO REVISED DRAFT STAFF REPORT 11-2.keeconferred withkmy at Kind Coffee LLC and she assures me there will be no vehicular access to tÂ£-loading-ema. ~ -------- V.2. It is my understanding the Site Plan is correct. As I understand based on Don Irwin' s review today of the Floor Plan, no line was drawn on the Floor Plan showing that the loading area will intersect with the existing sidewalk. Do you want me to submit a corrected floor plan? V.3. I do not understand this requirement for a registered land surveyor which will require us to expend additional dollars and will delay the completion of this project. If it ~ is necessary, I will ask England Surveyors who provided the enlarged ILC if they can set survey stakes and provide a setback certificate. If they cannot can you suggest a surveyor to assist us? With respect to a survey if we order one England has already told me it can i not be done until well in to July 2006 at the earliest. V.4. If such water easement is available can you obtain it? If not how can we obtain it? In our opinion we see no need for this document since any water line laid could potentially damage our building. V.5.We agree to remove the Storage Building no later then June 30,2006. V.6. How do we make this flood plain determination and from whom do we obtain any required flood plain permits? '1 l I 1- 1. Such uses shall be screened with a solid (100% opaque) wall or fence with a minimum height of eight (8) feet. 2. No outdoor storage area shall be placed or maintained within a required building or yard setback. 3. Stored items shall not project above the fence or wall used to screen the material. 4. It shall be unlawful to store or otherwise have, maintain or allow on a single parcel of land or on contiguous parcels under common ownership more than one (1) nonfarm vehicle not having current Colorado license plates or registration unless the vehicle is in an approved auto repair garage, body shop, gas station or other similar use where vehicle storage is permitted. There shall be no limit on the number of active or serviceable agricultural vehicles on a parcel of land, regardless of whether such vehicles have current registration or license plates; however, the restrictions of one (1) vehicle per parcel of land shall apply to agricultural vehicles that are clearly abandoned or that are not, in their present condition, suitable for active agricultural use. E Convenience Stores. 1. If fuel is sold as part of the convenience store operation, the conditions for service stations listed in Â§5.1.Q below shall also apply. In addition, parking areas for retail sales and fuel service shall be separated from each other, and circulation within the property to each parking area shall be separate and clearly marked or evident. 2. No drive-through service shall be permitted as part of the operation of a convenience stone. 3. Outdoor seating areas may be permitted; see Â§5.1.M "Outdoor Seating Areas or Food Service" use-specific standards below. F. Day Care Centers and Large Family Home Day Care. Day care centers and large family home day care shall be subject to the following standards: 1. The minimum lot area for a day care center in residential zoning districts shall be twelve thousand (12,000) square feet. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) 2. In approving day care centers and large family day care homes, the Decision-Making Body may impose conditions related to location, configuration and operational aspects of the center or home to ensure that the use is compatible with surrounding uses. This includes, but is not limited to, hours of operation, noise, lighting and parking. (Ord. 6- 06 Â§1) 3. In approving day care centers and large family day care homes, the Decision-Making Body may impose conditions on the site design and structures to ensure compatibility with the character of the surrounding neighborhood in terms of building mass, scale and design. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) 4. Large family day care homes shall have direct access to a paved public street. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) 5. Day care centers in the E, E-1, RE and RE-1 residential zoning districts shall be adjacent to an arterial street. (Ord. 6-06 Â§1) G. Eating/Drinking Establishments. 1. In the A, O and I-1 zoning districts, eating/drinking establishments may be permitted in buildings as an accessory use not occupying more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross floor area. See also the specific use regulations applicable to hotels in Â§5.1. J below. 2. For restaurants and other eating/drinking establishments with outdoor seating areas or outdoor food service, see Â§5.1.M below. H. Emergency Health Care. In the CD zoning district, the emergency health care service must be small-scale (not exceeding seven thousand five hundred [7,500] square feet), and the provider must furnish sufficient proof that emergency response vehicles and other visitors and activities associated with the proposed use will not interfere with existing or anticipated surrounding uses. 1. Group Living Facilities, Small; Group Living Facilities, Large; Senior Institutional Living Uses. 1. Genem//y App#cab/e Standards. All the above-listed uses shall be subject to the following standards: a. The number of residents occupying a facility at any one (1) time, including staff and family of staff, shall not exceed one (1) person per two hundred (200) square feet of living space. b. All structures shall be compatible in terms of building mass, scale and design with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. c. Such use proposed to be sited in an existing structure and proposed to house more than five (5) clients or persons shall, to the maximum extent feasible, meet the requirements set forth in the current applicable Building and Fire Codes. 2. Standards for All Senior Institutional Uving Uses and Large Group Living Facilities. \1 active and continuous operations are not carried on for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months in a facility that was approved pursuant to this Code, the use shall be considered to be abandoned. As applicable, the use may be reinstated only after obtaining a new special review approval. J. Hotels. All hotel uses shall be subject to the following standards: 1. UrS to fifteen percent (15%) of the gross floor area of a hotel may be in nonliving- quarter accessory uses, including management/employee offices, meeting rooms, banquet halls, retail services such as newsstands and gift shops, and similar accessory uses, provided that any incidental business is conducted primarily as a service to guests, and there is no entrance to such places of business except from inside the building. 2. In addition to the accessory uses allowed in paragraph J.1 above, up to an additional twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross floor area of a hotel may be devoted to eating/drinking establishments as an accessory use. K. Mobile Home Park. All mobile home parks shall be subject to compliance with the regulations governing mobile home parks in Â§7.14 of this Code. L. Outdoor Display/Sales and Storage. All uses with outdoor displays, sales or storage shall be subject to compliance with the outdoor display/sales regulations in Â§7.13 of this Code. See also Â§4.4.D.1 for specific operation restrictions on outdoor displays and sales applicable in the CD Downtown Commercial zoning district. M. Outdoor Seating Areas or Food Service (Convenience Stores or Eating/Drinking Establishments). Appeal Remarks regarding Kind Coffee Manufacturing Operations By Linda Farrell @ 540 W. Elkhorn B-8 Mr. Bailey has very well stated our concerns in our appeal. I am speaking to expand on a few points since I am the closest unit in the Elkhorn Plaza Condos to this Manufacturing operation & extremely affected. 1. Manufacturing is a Major usage of this Building a. Besides members of our Condo association hearing it from Kind Coffee's employees', we have observed and believe this manufacturing to be a primary usage of this building. b. In fact, Kind Coffee's Internet site speaks oftheir: "1000 sq. foot roastery in Estes Park". c. Ironically, Kind Coffee's Internet site also states: "We are committed to making a positive impact on both our local community and the environment 2. Meeting with Bob Joseph prior to filing this Appeal Process: At the beginning ofthe meeting - before any discussion or dialogue began - Mr. Joseph's opening remark was: "You need to sell and move." 3. Manufacturing has changed the nature of the neighborhood This is a long standing are of residences and temporary accommodations, which have lived in tranquility and harmony with this small commercial lot businesses for decades. However, Kind Coffee's manufacturing operation has clearly affected us and we believe it should be moved to a non-residential industrial heavy commercial zoned area of town. 4. Manufacturing Substantiallv Interferes with Eniovment of our Properties: 5. Manufacturing Adversely Affects mv and other Propertv values. Due to this manufacturing our neighborhood is not going to be an area people will choose to buy into ...nor rent 6. Manufacturing has Affected mv Health SUMMARY: I am concerned for myself and for others in this neighborhood for the long-range consequences ofallowing this manufacturing to remain at this location. Thank you for listening. Please reverse this decision and have this operation relocated for the fourth and final time to an industrial heavy commercial zoned area of town. Thank you Appeal Remarks regarding Kind Coffee Manufacturing Operations By Linda Farrell @ 540 W. Elkhorn B-8 Mr. Bailey has very well stated our concerns in our appeal. I am speaking to expand on a few points since I am the closest unit in the Elkhorn Plaza Condos to this Manufacturing operation & extremely affected. 1. Manufacturing is a Major usage of this Building a. Besides members of our Condo association hearing it from Kind Coffee's employees', we have observed and believe this manufacturing to be a primary usage of this building. b. In fact, Kind Coffee's Internet site speaks oftheir: "1000 sq. foot roastery in Estes Park". c. Ironically, Kind Coffee's Internet site also states: "We are committed to making a positive impact on both our local community and the environment 2. Meeting with Bob Joseph prior to filing this Appeal Process: At the beginning ofthe meeting - before any discussion or dialogue began - Mr. Joseph's opening remark was: "You need to sell and move." 3. Manufacturing has changed the nature of the neighborhood This is a long standing are of residences and temporary accommodations, which have lived in tranquility and harmony with this small commercial lot businesses for decades. However, Kind Coffee's manufacturing operation has clearly affected us and we believe it should be moved to a non-residential industrial heavy commercial zoned area of town. 4. Manufacturing Substantiallv Interferes with Eniovment of our Properties: 5. Manufacturing Adverselv Affects mv and other Propertv values. Due to this manufacturing our neighborhood is not going to be an area people will choose to buy into ...nor rent 6. Manufacturing has Affected mv Health SUMMARY: I am concerned for myself and for others in this neighborhood for the long-range consequences ofallowing this manufacturing to remain at this location. Thank you for listening. Please reverse this decision and have this operation relocated for the fourth and final time to an industrial heavy commercial zoned area of town. Thank you i # 0-N 1 C LE 1--- , 1-1 . ) t/. ---- U-- 361 1 1 .-/1.-9 -. I za ~3 1. 1 ' -41 #13 4 â‚¬ F \\ h 4 171. -27 .- - . .<263 , 7.4 r Â».. , 4 ...th 21 :c *1/, , \1 , Â£7 /3-' Fi 1.&:Py .it t z e 4.. .e.j P * bj , 97 / U t ex ./ I 4.-4 i -*O 10 .2 1 e 1 1 'fca 1 05. to// / 11 it - 7 , . 11 1 .4250 1 \ : :I A" ~, r. '11 \ , f f t--3 U.4<7 .p g 1 1 12â€¢' r.6- r P i .i ., 1 f : /* 7 1 vo MW 1 1 3 1 f-h ; , i j in. 1 1.7, R i -2:-9 14 i 2 /2/ / 2 ,% 1-,1 ,#6 'f f. . 3, Lh# f ' / I N 1 ./ :e flu - / 0 0/ i 1; t'Â· 1 --6 4 Â£ .10 3 i:i ']3 j 1 : t. r * 0 -::c 4/ R 1 1 1 f 9.3--1, ~/ 41 / , A7-7 1 i j 1 , /9 11\\\.1 i /.4 1 , i de /1 2 /. 1 rÂ·Â·Â·. c ; 6-0-o NI~ t\ 1 1 44 /2 X\~ :ill>/til // / / At 4 / 4 I // , 5 / -, ft i 4/ 4 :/ , 1 h 44, 9 i / t.7,1 / 4 '14.1/ 1 ' 4 + i 24 1 f l jf , tÂ«0 7 f / 1./1, 1 9/4 ; :, 0 / , 1 j. 1 1 * 1 t~ ~f},4 j 1 / \ 4 + -j ? hÂ«/ , //''e kiektru; .8 / / /4/. E>.. 1,1 / 9. /:7'l,\N ME, t. 0, 34/ . +7 h / / 4,2 43/h '. 11.\ 42, '24 -* .0. , â€¢6 1 \ , 0,/ 34[321441* r ./ * ,.0 / . I , X -4 30%102 2,4 , y % %/1 . 2/ , , . 01 * /77 Â»> 4 Â·4 /~ 7 6- 30 , 2 < 12 ./ 4 '1% 4 - . 4,1/7 4 4 .ov ,/ L' f ,! 1 : h f H %4â‚¬ 90 f Â» -4 1 1 i /7 4 y .Â¥ an I ' ... I. , '' W,\\ f x : 9Â£/ I U L. 1 . i %4 7 1, 1 7/ \ u 'f (Â« r N 1/ .p& 4 jr / 4 li- . It . 4 d.\ /4 21 <Uy to/,1 .7 .i d , '2004%Â« \ 1 9 0 %44 ,Â·fi N 24 9 9 U / 12: P.7 %4 i V Â«- cyÂ·<79<:f /~ 0 , 0 < â€ž . I 1 Y te rh q g lil + * fi Xe / 4 0 2 2 ff 1-3 / > 11 1 0 2044/ 25 1 b ' I.I / y if 1, "4 Attachment B Inventory List for Concession Stand 2008 Estes Park Lions Inventory Coleman Grill Char-broil Grill 4 - Picnic tables with attached benches Toastmaster Food Warmer Toastmaster Commercial Toaster Aerohot Steam Table Aerohot Cold Keeper Montgomery Ward Compact Frig/Freezer Caravel Ice Cream Freezer Astro Popcorn Popper Manitowoc Ice Machine True Refrigerator / Cooler 3 door True Stainless Steel Refrigerator True Pass Thru Display Refrigerator J-H- McKie Coffee Maker Whirlpool Sandwich Prep Refrigerator Vulcan Cook Top 2 - Stainless Steel Tables 6' X 30" 4' X 30" 2 Cash Registers Sno - Cone Machine 2 Microwaves ( Sharp & Whirlpool) Town of Estes Park Inventory Sanyo Cash Register Walk - In Cooler Stainless Steel Triple Sink Small White Sink 2 - Hot Water Heaters (GE & Rheem) From: Kupka, Chuck [mailto:charles-kupka@uiowa.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:40 AM To: Bob Joseph Subject: Kind Coffee Appeal Mr. Joseph, I understand the Kind Coffee appeal hearing is today. My wife and I own a unit in the Elkhorn lodge directly across the river from Kind Coffee on the second floor (540 W Elkhorn Ave unit B 7). I understand there are legal issues involved with this appeal however from my perspective the only real issue is the ongoing odor that occurs when Kind Coffee is roasting coffee beans (not to mention the noise factor). I live out of state, and when we periodically arrive at our condo and open the door there is consistent unpleasant odor that apparently has been trapped inside! I can detect the odors outside when roasting is occurring. The odors range from being unpleasant to very bad (to the point of being nauseating). Despite all of the legal reviews, please understand that since the Kind Coffee operation began, our environment has been negatively impacted. That is not right. I sincerely hope that those involved will take the steps necessary to eliminate this operation from occurring in our backyard. I would suspect that if it were occurring in your back yard you would not accept it. Thanks for allowing me to express our deep concern in this matter. Chuck and Jan Kupka 1736 2nd Ave. SE Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52403 Kind Coffee From: "Heather R Bolander" <Heather.Bolander@colorado.edu> To: <amy@kindcoffee.com> Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 8:56.PM SubJect: Support for Kind Coffee Amy, I am writing concerning your business, Kind Coffee, located at 552 W. Elkhorn Ave. I am a full-time resident of 550 W. Elkhorn Ave., unit A-1, which is located directly across the river from your store. I have recently heard some of the part- time residents of my condominium HOA direct complaints toward Kind Coffee and would like to pledge my support of your business. I understand that you are currently defending your business license through an appeal process brought forth by my neighbors. I question the validity of such an appeal, considering the city's approval ofyour business and all of the time, effort, and funding that has been spent getting your business off the ground. It seems to me that this appeal process should have begun upon your application for a business license rather than after the fact. Nevertheless, since the appeal has gone forth, I would like to address some comments to the city's board members. Please share this letter with them on my behalf. It is my understanding that the current complaint being directed toward your West Elkhom Ave. location is regarding the manufacturing aspect of your business. Specifically, I have heard concerns regarding the noise and smell that occurs during the manufacturing process. Personally, I take more issue with the noise from the motorcycles that drive along Elkhorn Ave. than I do with the noise and smell from the coffee bean manufacturing. Both the noise and smell are minimal, and the manufacturing only occurs for a short time during business hours. I have found that you run a professional and respectful business and have always been responsive to my comments. Your business has been a good neighbor to me. Ofcourse, my opinion is only one of many. I eagerly invite the board members to join me on my deck while the coffee bean manufacturing is occurring so that they may form their own unbiased opinions. Please forward my contact information to them in case they are interested in accepting my offer. Best wishes to you in your business endeavors. -Jack Thompson 550 W. Elkhorn Ave., A-1 970-324-5700 2/11/2008 ff) LE @ IE o %7 0 31 f 4 Brodzinski/Thompson i h j FEB 1 1 2008 1 553 W. Elkhorn Ave. Estes Park, CO 80517 lay--- February 9,2008 Town Clerk Jackie Williamson Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Appeal of Staff Determination regarding Kind Coffee Company Dear Board Members: We are writing in regard to the appeal of the determination to allow Kind Coffee to open and operate a manufacturing operation at 522 W. Elkhorn Ave. We believe the planning staff was in error to allow this type of operation in an area so close to residential and accommodations properties. The coffee roasting operation does not fit the classification of a retail/small scale sales use classification. We were originally pleased with the thought of having a coffee shop across the street from our lodging establishment. This was before we realized the impact the manufacturing operation would have on us and our guests on an almost daily basis. The smell and noise from the roasting operation at Kind Coffee has caused guest complaints on a regular basis, and the limited time the coffee shop is actually open does nothing to offset the problems it has created. There is a very strong burning smell throughout the neighborhood on any day the roaster is in operation. Our guests constantly come to the front desk to ask, "What's burning?" If the noise and smell has caused us this many problems, the impact on the condominiums right next door must be tenfold. In the four years we have owned Mountain Sage Inn, we have had more complaints about Kind Coffee than we ever had about the smell of the horses when Elkhorn Lodge was at full operation. The Kind Coffee Company paid to upgrade the building to meet town requirements in good faith that they would be able to operate their roaster, but, we believe, the use is not compatible with this particular location. We would like to see the manufacturing operation moved to a more appropriate industrial or heavy commercial location and for the town to make some type of concession to Kind Coffee to offset the money they spent on the building to meet town requirements. Sincerely, Lynda Thompson Bootsie Brodzinski 108 Pinewood Dr. Lyons, CO 80540 ~ FEB 1 2 2008 ~ February 9,2008 Jacquie Halburnt Town Administrator 170 MacGregor Ave. Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Ms. Halburnt: I'm baffled. The town has put huge bucks into extending the River Walk west, and then the planning commission breaks the zoning rules to encourage an industrial polluter to plunk down in the middle ofthe nearby tourist accommodations/residential neighborhood. I'in speaking of Kind Coffee at 552 W. Elkhorn. When my friend who owns a condo there went with neighbors to see Bob Joseph about it, before she could say anything, he told her, "You're hypersensitive. You'll have to move." Hypersensitive? I used to live in that neighborhood and still visit friends there often, and the first time I was engulfed in the gassy burnt-odor emission of a roasting in progress, I almost knocked on doors to see whose home was on fire. I've heard the fire department, in fact, has been called. If I were a tourist staying in one of the nearby condos or lodges along West Elkhorn, I would never come back. The stench is stifling. Nothing like having to close all your windows most days in summer, or have a home or lodge room that smells worse than a badly burnt dinner. If you want tourist-oriented businesses to set up shop in Estes with confidence that an industrial operator won't be allowed next door, your planning commission is going to have to start following the zoning codes and play by the rules. You've lost the clean air that residents and tourists alike used to love in that part of town. Property values willlikely fall. My understanding is that Joseph suggested that Kind Coffee sell coffee in the mornings in summer to slip its industrial operation in under commercial zoning status. But it still doesn't fit the criteria. The Town Board will be in the uncomfortable position Tuesday night of following the zoning criteria or not against Joseph' s recommendation. Kind Coffee is in the difficult position of having followed his recommendation, investing in renovating a building that it may soon have to leave. And the reputation of the whole town as a desirable tourist destination, and a place one can dare to buy a home without your neighbor making you sick with intense gas combustion fumes, has been dealt a big blow. I hope that you'll get involved in this one, and pressure the commission to behave reasonably. Sincerely, /Dotlt~- (Lst~--- L- Cathee Courter 1 4 # r tity/â€¢ f=Eb 11.1 J k ~=: 13:1 -21 *4*f ~Â·~ ',~ ~I~~ inoun/os. Cu:'A' I ANV,IMOD 3NO >IH 1... , a) C Wi CD u 0 1 -Â¤ 0 CO 14; *44 .11 11 ' 0 CO 0 iE O 0 c M coOD 0- C StÂ· ee crs ~&E. 0 L fe Â£ 5 0 --- .C O. * E E.c 03 CD C // ' -' 1% -52 ..linrioli:~ .1~:re:Lilk'.2 Z E 9 co e) 1- - > CD co N a) #2' =- E 2. E E* c O- 6 0 -O -0 0 22 -5 1 4-1. ..:tED:. 41 -4,I' 4.r [La- 00 00 a,LUa) .... â€¢ Membrane systems are unique to the supplier Membrane Procurement Process purchase necessary to customize design solicited frz%Â°3 two will be installed in ..,............,..w""47,Â·k. t,1///'ll"Im Fil 1.1 y.4 1 111 lili" ki4'. f. C a) 1 1 1 U) 1 1 1 1,1, a) i~ i =~ii Â·~ i ii iii: ~*i CO *+ > $ t C % #4 -Ir 111 0 fll'., e E R o :g 4 -111 - 1 ne- -0-92 n c 1 -1Â¥ i -2 Â£ - 0 U, 0 1.211-, 1'1~7 lili 1 -11 RE 1 -./.. 50 <:.2, 3 hi e 1.-filll* .Â£1 -Â¤ .E r~ ft= 32 F -a E a, M 15 8 19 OE~ O -ALU ES 1!*11-1 ... -,- Â· |~L_Lz I al an er operating costs provided for 20- â€¢ Membrane proposals based on 4 MGD capacity vided for all equipment needed for Membrane Proposal Evaluation valuation U) 0 -1 O 8 - 1 1 Summary of Membrane Bids for Estes Park Description mens $2,518,348 $2,350,000 ~ 8994Z9$ 699'88+$ (4UOAA lueseld Jeak -03) 9 LZ'89*$ Z9 L' L9Â£$ (4]JOAA lueseid Jeek-03)31~ ~ ~ 61f C 29Â¢Â£$ .80'89Â£2$ Value Value Zenon / GE Total membrane system capital sisoo 6ulleledo lenuue Jo lejol jsoo luelueoelde] eueiquu H.LBOAA 1NBSBEId 11Â¥3*-02 0 1:111 4 4 lili 4 !11 1% ~. 3& !,P' 1 -1 14 1.1 1 1#Ii'~11 11 1. 1 1 f, 1 7---IN 14.6 , -11 4 +61' 1 0, 1 J , 1 1/ 1~111,1'll 111.1. -1,17 .. ' il ,~ '5 il" ~ 671* / 111~ - 1,1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 . 11&,1 : N' 1 1)1 lili.1 11 11 1 '1 a.t r 1 e" - 4 C . .111- .*.*f :4L o 9 cu Â»L. i a:$ CD 7,44 0 0 -a E 4- 14 oa) CD J 1111!1111*1111911~ 41 t 4-J C - U) a) i a) CON 1- COK Â¤) W 2 -Â¤ C E (D a) E (0 3 8 rl, C: C: 2 E - cio o I 0.00 1- * c A o NE F .ty = CD (0 (1) a) LO o C, 4 <ER 6 N-Â°cooE I . . 1- 1 treatment -reduces ultiple stages of scharge 4 ,Â·4 t' L 1/1 .MI: 11 71.41 f -1 11 11 - 1 4r 14 â€ž 1 0 00 y /4 1 - 1 7 1 + .1Â·5 â‚¬ = E . 4< y 11. 3.J efll- a) B CO 1- O - 4 4; L, 1 +11Â¢1 t 2 CO E 12 , 111111119 C P 11 U) C 141 ~ 241 + -t-4 -4 CL 'I' X Q) 11(44:Ul 1-1%1411 12= C -214.r 4 .W ' -a i'f'**':d"> 1 . Il 11 11 1 1 ,1.111 lili.,1 1 1 11~. 1 4 i "lilli , 1 i ,'Ii,#91; ,k 9 0. 1-.' . 11Â§111.1 441' 4/ EE 74 CD co -O ~C 0 16 c-Â¤ 9 0 14* ,' ~~ '12. / L-C= . ,11!lf-ir c (5-0 0 11:1'. O -9 09 0 439. Ira'. t. -5. C N CE CO CD 'IN' I lilli . f lili 1.2. 1 .. 1 Benefits of Using Zenon Membranes â€¢ Zenon membrane equipment and layout preferred es allow for 3-st g e treatment membranes are ater discharge to se No building addition required a U a â‚¬ 1 1 1 W -WE . .5. 1-25 . 10 2122., .0 e r i, s r ilili ,0 ga L--Ii e. I m 11 IL -23 :!10 r----, 1 1 d r----------7 &I T 4*& 1 (i@ -2.E 1 al -* 1 b m 5111!1 h ./.4..1 h:E - 0. 4 11 9 4 & - 1, 0 1 I Z -. 00[LI , 1 Mi . u, r--9 - d Â»7 ff>/ 9 0 1 f Z MEâ€¢ 1@ 11 9::f:,a w. 46 517'L ~~-Za m.-lign.Im M-1 11/ yee ' , -9 Â·// 1//1/ - '119221].MI Lower Level Plant Layout LI I I 1~11011 0 1 0 1 mi â‚¬ 11 11/ =/ 1 1. Z % 1-74 1 m -. i)U . T.LI do L ] b j ~a IXÂ«32_- 1122. 1-1- 1 1- L-1 . . 11 1- 1 0- 11 -- 41 1 < u ,Â·,,-i,Â·i,/1 1 11 0 - - 4 3-B,1 40,00 #L- 9 f I I -h 0 21 91 .Ul....1 @ - 4,10 ~ 6. / #i -Â£ ililli li - m" 6 -CK- M. i i.. /,A 1 --=1'.1 000 0 1.1 -- I| 1--1-Ill'......."- lil = 111...21.11 0 0 0431 lilli 111''11111 $ ===-===U :::::::1(3 10....CO. 0* - e L 6 2% 0 4P il] z 2/ Upper Level Plant Layout Mr'.Im:EKS 11,0 â„¢