Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2007-03-28TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION Wednesday, March 28, 2007 12:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. Museum Conference Room 200 Fourth Street AGENDA 1. CML Update — Sam Mamet 2. Vacation Rentals 3. Fire Dept. (County Response) 4. Marketing District Administration Memo To: Mayor Baudek and Town Trustees From: Randy Repola Date: 3/27/2007 Re: Local Marketing District Background: Senator Steve Johnson and Representative Don Marostica have successfully carried our Local Marketing District amendment (Senate Bill 111) through the state senate and house respectively. We are awaiting signature by Governor Ritter. Though we are not assuming that a signature is a given, staff has drafted the attached outline for consideration in the event that our bill becomes law. The outline was created by Mr. Pickering and has been reviewed by Town Attorney White. At this point, this outline is simply for discussion purposes. Recommendation: Should this outline be acceptable (as submitted or amended), staff will refine it as appropriate and await final action on SB 111. In the event that further action is appropriate, staff will take those matters to the Community Development Committee. 1 LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT DRAFT SCHEDULE DATE TASK Spring 07 Bill is signed by the Governor May Review formation and organization of other LMDs May or June Have George K. Baum do phone survey (400 calls) May -June Town/ County assess formation and organization of LMD 1. What's the District's boundaries 2. What percentages of tax to collect 3. What's the money used for 4. Where's the old money go 5. Organizational format June Draft proposed contract (IGA) between County and Town July — Dec. Petition signed by 51% commercial real property owners (value) Jan. — Feb. 08 Form a Political Action Committee (Key Influencers) March First joint (Town/County) public hearing May Second joint public hearing June Town Board/County Commissioners adopt contract and order election July — Nov. PAC to campaign for LMD Nov. 4, 2008 Election Jan. 1, 2009 Lodging Tax begins collection July 1, 2009 New LMD marketing committee begins work. Jan.1, 2010 LMD funds begin Administration Memo To: Mayor Baudek and Town Trustees From: Randy Repola Date: 3/27/2007 Re: Vacation Homes Background: During the last several months, Town Board and staff have received repeated complaints about one specific vacation home located on Blue Spruce Court (A Celtic Lady's Mountain Retreat). The issues surrounding this particular property have highlighted shortcomings in the municipal and development codes as well as our enforcement efforts. We will address as many issues as time allows during the study session, but, at a minimum, we will outline strategies for addressing the current issues as they relate to vacation home rentals and the existing municipal ordinance. The Estes Park Municipal Code and Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) differ on vacation rentals and Bed and Breakfast inns (B& B). The EVDC permits B&B's in Multi -family (RM) districts as a use by right and in the Two-family (R2) districts following special review. Furthermore, the EVDC permits "short-term nightly rentals" as an accessory use in residential zoning districts. On the other hand, the MC does not mention B&B's. Planning staff have traditionally treated B&B's as a subset of vacation homes. The MC permits vacation homes in all zoning districts as a principle use. Consequently, both vacation homes and B&B's have been allowed to operate in any zoning district in town. Therefore, any action taken to address vacation rentals within the Municipal Code does not preclude the need to clarify conflicts between it and the EVDC. Staff shall take the necessary steps to address those issues starting with the Community Development Committee. However, the direction provided by the Board of Trustee on this issue shall guide future efforts as they relate to the development code. Currently there are 60 vacation homes listed in our business license index. Staffs review indicates that 55 of these properties appear to be located in residential zoning districts. Included in your packet are the minutes from the March 20, 2007 EVPC meeting. The issue of vacation rentals was part of that meeting and you may find the material useful. Recommendation: Staff has prepared the attached table as a "menu" of options for the Town Board to consider as possible solutions to the current concerns expressed about vacation home rentals in residential zoning districts. The options range from status quo to prohibition of vacation homes in residential zoning districts. 1 0 0 w q § / 0 ƒ "0 2 Maintenance of the residential character of neighborhoods (as impacted by vacation homes). Con • Existing codes appear to be inadequate to address current concerns _-..-_.__-...... • Enforcement may be difficult • Does not guarantee that vacation home will not negatively impact residential character of neighborhood • Difficult enforcement • Difficult enforcement • Increased enforcement costs • Potential for increased complaints from property owners/managers • Requires approximately 55 property owners to discontinue rentals • Likely that certain properties will continue to operate without legal authority • Enforcement would be difficult Pro • No ordinance changes required • Prohibits other uses such as seminars • Could reduce traffic • Eliminate the appearance of "small hotels" operating in residential districts • Remove requirement of full time, on -site manager (EVDC conflict) • Likely reduce amount of traffic • Reduce traffic related to turnover • Possibly discourage disruptive behavior • Reduce repeat complaints and offenses • Limit impact of vacation homes on neighborhoods • No need to interpret "residential character" • Remove a principle commercial use from residential zoning districts al 61 CA Do nothing (status quo) Require that vacation homes not provide any other business service Limit vacation home rentals to one party Limit groups to no more than 8 persons Set minimum for length of stay Strict interpretation and enforcement Prohibit vacation homes in all residential zoning districts Business Regulations & Licenses Section 5.20.080 5.20.080 Revocation of license. The Town, after giving written notice to the owner of any business, profession, occupation or accommodation who has either failed to pay the fee in accordance with Section 5.20.060 may revoke the license of the owner. Upon revoca- tion of the license, the owner's right and privi- lege to conduct the business, profession, occupation or accommodation within the Town is terminated. (Ord. 1-91 §1(part), 1991; Ord. 19-91 §1(part), 1991; Ord. 4-04 §1, 2004) 5.20.090 Inspections. The Town shall be entitled at any time, upon reasonable notice to the owner of any business, profession, occupation or accommodation, to inspect the premises occupied by the business, profession, occupation or accommodation for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with the terms and conditions of this Chapter. In the event that such inspection reveals that the busi- ness license fee charged to the business, profes- sion, occupation or accommodation is in fact erroneous, an adjustment shall be made by the Town of the license fee. (Ord. 1-91 §1(part), 1991; Ord. 19-91 §1(part), 1991; Ord. 4-04 §1, 2004) 5.20.100 Chapter exceptions. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following: (1) Any business, profession or occupa- tion licensed under any other Town ordi- nance and paying a license fee to engage in such business, profession or occupation, other than sales tax licenses, nor to any busi- ness, profession or occupation paying another business license fee or tax to the Town. (2) Any business, profession or occupa- tion which consists solely of delivering goods at wholesale to other businesses, pro- fessions or occupations within the Town. (Ord. 1-91 §1(part), 1991; Ord. 19-91 §1(part), 1991; Ord. 15-97, 1997) 5.20.110 Vacation homes in residential zoning districts. This Section shall apply to the leasing, rent- ing and occupation of any vacation home exist- ing in the following zoning districts of the Town: RE-1, RE, E-1, E, R, R-1, R-2 and R-M. (1) Purpose. The purpose of this Sec- tion is to permit the leasing, renting and occupation of vacation homes in residential zoning districts while maintaining the residential character of those districts. (2) Restrictions on rentals. The leasing, renting or occupation of all vacation homes subject to this Section shall be restricted as follows: a. Vacation homes shall not be oper- ated in a manner that is out of character with residential uses. This includes vehicular traffic and noise levels that are out of character with residential uses. Vacation homes shall be designed to be compatible, in teens of building scale, mass and character, with a predominantly low -intensity and low -scale residential setting. Guest rooms shall be integrated within the vacation home. Kitchen facili- ties shall be limited to be consistent with single-family residential use. b. A vacation home shall be rented, leased or furnished to no more than one (1) party with a maximum of eight (8) individual guests. The total maximum occupancy of eight (8) individuals shall be further limited by a maximum of two (2) guests per bedroom plus two (2) 5-a Business Regulations & Licenses Section 5.20.110 individuals. In the event the vacation home is managed by a full-time on -site manager, the vacation home may be rented, leased or furnished to more than one (1) party subject to the limitations of two (2) guests per bedroom plus two (2) individuals with a maximum of eight (8) guests. c. No changes in the exterior appear- ance to accommodate each vacation home shall be allowed, except that one (1) wall - mounted identification sign no larger than four (4) square feet in area shall be permitted. d. Only one (1) vacation home shall be permitted per lot in single-family residential districts. e. No recreational vehicle, as the same is defined in Chapter 13 of the Estes Valley Development Code, tent, tempo- rary shelter, canopy, teepee or yurt shall be used by any individual for living or sleeping purposes. f. Each vacation home is permitted a maximum of three (3) guest vehicles on site and parked outside at any one (1) time. On -street parking shall be prohib- ited. g. Vacation homes shall be subject to commercial utility rates for the entire calendar year of the current license, and sales tax collection and remittance. It is the owner's responsibility to notify the Utility Billing Department when the resi- dence is no longer being used as a vaca- tion home after the license expires. h. The application for a business license for any vacation home shall desig- nate a local resident or property manager of the Estes Valley who can be contacted by the Town with regard to any violation of the provisions of this Section. The per- son set forth on the application shall be the agent of the owner for all purposes with regard to the issuance of the business license, the operation of the vacation home and revocation of the business license pursuant to the terms and condi- tions of this Section. i. Any vacation home in operation on or before November 1, 2004, and whose owner obtained a business license from the Town for 2004 shall be entitled to operate the vacation home to the extent of its operation on the effective date of the ordinance codified herein, including but not limited to the number of guest individuals allowed to occupy the vaca- tion home at any one (1) time, the number of guest vehicles allowed to be parked on- site and any permitted signage identifying the operation of the vacation home. In the event the operation of the vacation home grandfathered by this Section is aban- doned for a period of one (1) year or the owner does not maintain a business license for the vacation home in any subsequent calendar year, the vacation home shall then be subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Section, including but not limited to the number of guest individuals occupying the premises, the number of vehicles allowed to be parked outside one -site and the signage identifying the operation of the vacation home. Supp. 12 5-4 • Business Regulations & Licenses Section 5.20.110 (3) Violation. It is a violation of this Section for any owner, agent, guest and/or occupant of a vacation home to be convicted, including a plea of no contest, of a violation of Section 9.08.010 (Disturbing the Peace) of this Code; to fail to collect and remit all required sales tax to the State due and owing for the leasing, rental or occupation of a vacation home; to violate any provisions of this Section; and/or to fail to acquire and pay for a business license. For the purpose of this Section, only violations of Section 9.08.010 of this Code which occur on the premises of the vacation home and while a vacation home is being occupied as a vaca- tion home shall be a violation of this Section. (4) Revocation of license. The Town may revoke the business license of any vaca- tion home for violation of the provisions of this Section as follows: a. The Town Clerk, upon the receipt and verification of any violation of this Section, shall give written notice to the owner or agent that a violation has occurred. b. Upon the receipt and verification of any subsequent violation of the terms and conditions of this Section, within two (2) years of the date of the written warning set forth in Subsection a above, the Town Clerk shall revoke the business license by giving written notice to the owner or agent of the revocation of the license. Said revocation shall be for one (1) year from the date of the notice. c. Upon the receipt and verification of any subsequent violation of the terms and conditions of this Section within two (2) years after reinstatement, the Town Clerk shall revoke the business license by giv- ing written notice to the owner or agent of the revocation of the business license. Said revocation shall be for two (2) years from the date of the notice. Upon revocation of the business license, the owner's right to operate a vacation home on the property shall terminate. (5) Appeal. Any owner or agent who wishes to contest the written warning or the revocation of a business license shall be entitled to request a hearing before the Town Clerk by written notice delivered in person or by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Town Clerk within fifteen (15) days of the date of the warning or revocation. The Town Clerk shall hold a hearing on the appeal and determine whether or not a violation of the provisions of this Section has occurred. The owner shall be entitled to present any evidence of compliance with the terms and conditions of this Section at said hearing. The decision of the Town Clerk as to whether or not the violation occurred shall be final and not subject to further appeal. (Ord. 4-04 §3, 2004) 2007_BUSINESS_LICENSE RM < CL Q W c W W Q w w< w W W W W W W CY CL Ct W W 1Y c< W W, W d 3 Bedrooms N N 4 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 3 Rooms 2 Rooms tn D M 3 Bedrooms 2 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 2 Bedrooms M 3 Bedrooms 2 Rooms 2 Units 5 Bedrooms 4 Rooms each unit O O N 2005 2005 2005 2005 2001 2004 2004 2004 2004 2006 2003 6) a) O) v- 2002 2006 2002 u) O O N O) a) d) •- d' O co N 2006 LC) O O N 0) O) O) T- 0) a) O) v- 2004 2003 2005 1575 Fall River Road Unit B 580 Riverside Drive 318 Big Horn Drive 1050SStVrainE-2 919 High Acres Drive 1575 Fall River Road Unit C 1755 Dekker Circle 330 Park View Lane 696 Moraine Avenue 250 Davis Street 331 Fall River Lane 1060 Marys Lake Road 415 Park View Lane 1903 Ptarmigan Trail 1070 Crestview Court #B-5 861 Big Horn Drive 241 Fall River Lane 1050 S St Vrain #F-1 641 Chapin Lane 245 Cyteworth 1010 S St Vrain Avenue #E-4 1050 S St Vrain Avenue C3 340 James Street 1407 Cedar Lane 140 Big Horn 150 Riverside Drive #A-6 650 S St Vrain Avenue 731 S St Vrain Avenue 1420 Axminster Lane 254 & 256 Davis Street John Moynihan Richard & Betty Herzfeldt A. Huber & J & A Canary Robt. & Patti Folden Barbara Sample John Moynihan Gary & Cindy Oliver PJ Scruggs Wendell Walker Lois & James Gunlicks Owen Gaul Walt Hebert Riley Quest, LLC. David & Norma Govan Sam Munn Caprissa Frawley Brendan Reilly Verle Gutherie Gary & Laura Wile Barbara Fisher J. Ronald Montgomery John P. Quinn Richard & Margaret Scott Tony Williamson Lucinda Koester Norma Pritchard Jerald Hardin Ed Peterson Rex & Vanessa Stahla MOYNIHAN, JOHN HERZFELDT, RICHARD & BETTY 0 0 Z 0 U Z I 0 0 m FOLDEN, ROBERT & PATTI SAMPLE, BARBARA MOYNIHAN, JOHN OLIVER, GARY & CINDY SCRUGGS, P.J. - SECOND FAMILY LTD PT WALKER, WENDELL DAVIS HILL BED & BREAKFAST GAUL, OWEN ANNIVERSARY INN, THE RILEY QUEST, LLC. GOVAN, DAVID & NORMA MUNN, SAM GILDED PINE MEADOWS, INC. REILLY, BRENDAN GUTHRIE, VERLE WILE, GARY G. & LAURA J. BARBARA'S BED & BREAKFAST MONTGOMERY, J. RONALD McQUINN, JOHN P. SCOTT, RICHARD & MARGARET WILLIAMSON, TONY SCHNEIDER FAMILY TRUST KOESTER, LUCINDA BLACK DOG INN SHADOW PINES A MOUNTAIN VALLEY HOME, LLC ROCKY MOUNTAIN VIEWS, LLC •- N M d 10 CO I� CO O O� c- �~- v- NN N N N N N N N CO N M 2007_BUSINESS_LICENSE O Q D ww W W w Q w Al W W rx w w W cc cKw W W cc cc Q W W W d 3 Bedrooms N N 4 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 3 Rooms 2 Rooms 3 Units 3 Bedrooms 2 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 2 Bedrooms CO 3 Bedrooms 2 Rooms 2 Units 5 Bedrooms 4 Rooms each unit O N 2005 2005 2005 2005 2001 d' 0 N 2004 2004 2004 2006 2003 6) 0) N— 2002 2006 2002 2005 O) 0) � V' O N 2006 2005 0) 0)) ,— 0) 0) '— NI- 0 N CO 0 N 2005 1575 Fall River Road Unit B 580 Riverside Drive 1318 Big Hom Drive 1050 S St Vrain E-2 919 High Acres Drive 1575 Fall River Road Unit C 1755 Dekker Circle 330 Park View Lane 696 Moraine Avenue 250 Davis Street 331 Fall River Lane 1060 Marys Lake Road 415 Park View Lane 1903 Ptarmigan Trail 1070 Crestview Court #B-5 861 Big Hom Drive _ 241 Fall River Lane 1050 S St Vrain #F-1 641 Chapin Lane 245 Cyteworth 1010 S St Vrain Avenue #E-4 1050 S St Vrain Avenue C3 340 James Street 1407 Cedar Lane 140 Big Hom 150 Riverside Drive #A-6 650 S St Vrain Avenue 731 S St Vrain Avenue 1420 Axminster Lane 254 & 256 Davis Street MOYNIHAN, JOHN John Moynihan Richard & Betty Herzfeldt A. Huber & J & A Canary Robt. & Patti Folden Barbara Sample John Moynihan Gary & Cindy Oliver PJ Scruggs Wendell Walker Lois & James Gunlicks Owen Gaul Walt Hebert Riley Quest, LLC. David & Norma Govan Sam Munn Caprissa Frawley Brendan Reilly Verle Gutherie Gary & Laura Wile Barbara Fisher J. Ronald Montgomery John P. Quinn Richard & Margaret Scott Tony Williamson Lucinda Koester Norma Pritchard Jerald Hardin Ed Peterson _N (0 co co co a) c co 06 X a) HERZFELDT, RICHARD & BETTY BIG HORN CONDO FOLDEN, ROBERT & PATTI SAMPLE, BARBARA MOYNIHAN, JOHN OLIVER, GARY & CINDY SCRUGGS, P.J. - SECOND FAMILY LTD PT WALKER, WENDELL DAVIS HILL BED & BREAKFAST GAUL, OWEN ANNIVERSARY INN, THE I RILEY QUEST, LLC. GOVAN, DAVID & NORMA MUNN, SAM GILDED PINE MEADOWS, INC. REILLY, BRENDAN GUTHRIE, VERLE 'WILE, GARY G. & LAURA J. BARBARA'S BED & BREAKFAST MONTGOMERY, J. RONALD McQUINN, JOHN P. SCOTT, RICHARD & MARGARET WILLIAMSON, TONY SCHNEIDER FAMILY TRUST KOESTER, LUCINDA BLACK DOG INN 'SHADOW PINES A MOUNTAIN VALLEY HOME, LLC ROCKY MOUNTAIN VIEWS, LLC N CO d LO (O I� CO O— N N N CO N 0 N N N N N N N N N 0 M Eric Blackhurst From: Randy Repola [rrepola@estes.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:30 AM To: Eric Blackhurst Subject: RE: Vacation Rental Thanks Eric. This will be helpful in my discussion with Bob. randy Original Message From: Eric Blackhurst [mailto:eric@ericblackhurst.com] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 4:02 PM To: Randy Repola Subject: Vacation Rental Randy, Here is the stuff I sent to Bill after he submitted his matrix. Something else to throw into the mix. I think you are right. We are making this way to complicated. B&Bs are distinct entities that differ substantially from my concept of vacation rental properties. Here is my take on the definition of a "vacation rental property". A vacation rental property in a single family residential neighborhood is solely for the purposes of overnight accommodations for periods of less than 30 days. No other commercial purposes are permitted. There shall be no on -sight management or employee. Meals may be prepared by the occupants of the vacation rental for the occupants consumption. I think we can stick with the vehicle and parking requirements, eliminate the on -site manager component - this just leads to abuses of the intent; eliminate the sign stipulation - no signs. Keep the licensing and sales tax components and the stuff about RVs, etc. Clearly the Fall River property is being operated as a commercial enterprise in a residential zone, and not in the spirit of the "vacation rental" concept as I see it. This all probably needs to be defined, but I think we need to work with staff on this. Let me know what you think. Eric Specializing in Commercial and Residential Properties since 1986 1 1 1 1 1+ 1 1 I I++++++++ 1 1 1+ 1 1 1 1 1 I+ 1 1 I-+++ I I -H-+-I ++++ 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1-11 1 1 ++ +++-F III + 1-+ I-+++ I I + 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission March 20, 2007, 1:30 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Betty Hull; Commissioners Wendell Amos, Ike Eisenlauer, Bruce Grant, Joyce Kitchen, Doug Klink, and John Tucker Attending: Chair Hull; Commissioners Amos, Eisenlauer, Grant, Kitchen, Klink, and Tucker Also Attending: Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, Town Board Liaison Homeier, and Recording Secretary Roederer Absent: Planner Chilcott, Town Attorney White Chair Hull called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence of the meeting. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Estes Valley Planning Commission minutes dated February 20, 2007. It was moved and seconded (Eisenlauer/Amos) that the consent agenda be accepted, and the motion passed unanimously. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT George Hockman, 1625 Prospect Estates Drive, requested that the Commissioners speak into their microphones so he would be able to hear. 3. REPORTS a. Vacation Homes / Short -Term Rentals Director Joseph stated no action on this item would be taken at today's meeting. This subject is on the agenda to allow the public to ask questions and provide comment. Town staff are actively pursuing enforcement issues specifically relating to a short-term rental property in Fall River Estates; the owners have been cited with a violation of the Municipal Code. The owners have the right to appeal in a closed hearing before the Town Clerk. In the Town Municipal Code, the definition of a vacation home and a nightly rental property is the same. Under the land use code (Estes Valley Development Code), the majority of nightly rental uses occur in accommodations zoning districts (a type of commercial zoning), while vacation homes are a narrow subset in the nightly rentals category and are allowed in single-family residential zoning districts (non-commercial zoning). Planning staff is seeking to correct the discrepancy between the Municipal Code and the land use code. Public Comment: Tom Ewing, 1082 Fall River Court, expressed his appreciation for the sensitivity Town staff and the Planning Commissioners have shown to issues that have been raised concerning the Celtic Lady's Mountain Retreat. Problems related to that vacation rental RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission March 20, 2007 income residents, ADUs provide more affordable housing. Director Joseph encouraged the Planning Commissioners to consider the following questions: • Do you think accessory dwelling units should be allowed in any zoning district? o If no, what districts do you favor allowing them in? • Do you think accessory dwelling units should be allowed regardless of lot size? o If no, do you think there should be a minimum lot size? • Do you think ADU should be attached to the main house? • Do you think ADU should be allowed to be detached? o If yes, do you think the property should be a minimum size (list size)? • Do you think ADU should be allowed to be rented? • Do you think ADU should be sold separately from the main house? • Do you think ADU should have architectural or design standards? Discussion followed, here summarized: The minimum -lot -area requirement is not commonly used in other communities. At the time the EVDC was adopted, the Planning Commission felt that the proliferation of ADUs should be limited. If every home can have an ADU, there would be considerable impact on density. The minimum -lot -area requirement provides an extra buffer for neighboring property owners. Spare bedrooms can be rented for additional income; an ADU is defined as a living area with a second kitchen. It is difficult to define what constitutes a kitchen. Some homeowners desire a second kitchen in their residence for the convenience of having a dishwasher, microwave, and/or sink in the family room without intending to create an ADU. Deed restrictions have been used to prevent a future owner from creating an ADU with this second kitchen, but that circumvents the EVDC minimum -lot -size requirement. Homeowners are unhappy when they discover they cannot add a wet bar to their residence due to the ADU definition; most violations of the ADU requirements are the result of construction of "second kitchens" without a building permit. Public Comment: Don Gooldy, 1071 Fall River Court, questioned how many cars could park at a residence with an ADU and whether cars could park in the street. Director Joseph stated plans are reviewed for adequate parking when an ADU is proposed. The EVDC limits the number of vehicles that may be parked on a property, including on -street parking. He noted that ADUs can provide benefits, such as allowing an elderly person to live in their own home longer by hiring a live-in caregiver. c. Brief Description of Lake Estes Village Proposal Director Joseph emphasized that no action on this item would be taken at today's meeting. The proposed development plan for the Lake Shore Lodge and Lake Estes Inn and Suites properties is scheduled for review at the April 17, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. Public comment will be taken at the April meeting. The total site is just under sixteen acres and consists of two or three separate lots. The applicant may propose an amended plat to dissolve the lot lines; this would remove the constraint of setback and utility easement requirements along internal lot lines. It would provide the applicant more freedom in site design but would not yield any higher density in development of the site. The lots are currently zoned A —Accommodations; no change in zoning is proposed. The applicant is proposing construction of fifteen two- story buildings with a total of 103 condominium units to be completed in two phases. Future additions to the existing Lake Shore Lodge are shown on the plans for informational purposes only. The condominiums will consist of three types of units: units with full kitchens, units with limited kitchens, and "lock -out" units with no kitchens. All density calculations will be thoroughly reviewed; the approved number of units will not exceed the maximum density allowed under the Estes Valley Development Code. Summary of the traffic impact analysis will be included in the staff report to the Planning Commission at next months' meeting. Impacts of construction are addressed through Administration Memo To: Mayor Baudek and Town Trustees From: Randy Repola Date: 3/27/2007 Re: Fire Department County coverage Background: Staff has not yet met with Larimer County officials to discuss the changes desired in our current relationship as it pertains to fire protection. We will be meeting with County staff on Tuesday, April 3rd in Fort Collins. The approach that we are taking is that the Town desires a termination of the current "Automatic Aid" agreement. Furthermore, we will advise the County that if they are unable to provide fire protection to the residents currently served by the Estes Park Fire Department (EPFD), we are willing to discuss an arrangement by which the EPFD will provide specific services if we can come to an equitable arrangement to offset the Town's costs. Recommendation: No action at this time. Staff will report back to Public Safety Committee on the results of our April 3rd meeting with the County. 1