Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board 2024-10-22Town ofEstes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 22, 2024 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 October, 2024. Present: Gary Hall, Mayor Marie Cenac, Mayor Pro Tem Trustees Bill Brown Kirby Hazelton Mark Igel Frank Lancaster Cindy Younglund Also Present: Travis Machalek, Town Administrator Jason Damweber, Deputy Town Administrator Dan Kramer, Town Attorney Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Absent: None Mayor Hall called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION - SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL DAY. The Mayor proclaimed October 14, 2024 as Sister Cities International Day and recongized the sister city relationship the Town has with Monteverde, Costa Rica. AGENDA APPROVAL. It was moved and seconded (Hazelton/Cenac) to approve the Agenda, and it passed unanimously. PUBLIC COMMENTS. John Meissner/Town resident recognized the passing of Gordon MacAlpine and condolences to former Trustee Barbara MacApline. He commented the Board should consider not hearing public comment at the study sessions. Jim and Ruth Kelly/Town resident requested the Board consider adopting an enforceable and measurable noise ordinance similar to Larimer County or other mountain towns in Colorado. John Guffey/Town resident read a portion of a paper he wrote on biocentric theology related to ecological connection and how wilderness fits into our plans and equality to best sustain life on this planet. TRUSTEE COMMENTS. Board comments were heard and have been summarized: the Estes Park Housing Authority has a conditional contract to acquire property between Hwy 7 and Stanley Avenue; a new session of the BASE program has begun; Trustee Brown reviewed his position on the noise ordinance, the items the Board has agreed on and items still to be discussed by the Board such as aligning the Town's ordinance with the state; attended the Mountain Town 2030 conference to discuss climate solutions; reminded citizens to vote this November; Sister Cities continues to look for additional members; the Town would receive grant funding from PRPA for battery storage in Estes Park to store renewable energy produced in the valley; the Larimer County tax for road improvements on the November ballot, if passed, would fund two projects in Estes Park on either end of Mali Road; commented it may be time to move the Post Office out of downtown; reminded citizens that the budget process begins early next year, continues throughout the year with the development of the strategic plan, and culminates in the presentation of the Board of Trustees - October 22,2024 - Page 2 budget for Town Board approval; and thoughts and prayers were extended by the Board for Barbara MacAlpine's loss. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. POLICY GOVERNANCE MONITORING REPORT - POLICY 3.3. Town Administrator Machalek reported on Board Policy Policy 3.3 and reported full compliance. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Bills. 2. Town Board Meeting and Study Session Minutes dated October 8,2024. 3. Estes Park Planning Commission minutes dated September 17, 2024 (acknowledgment only). 4. Resolution 77-24 Approving Contract for Planning a New Raw Waterline to Marys Lake Water Treatment Plant, $190,000 Budgeted. 5. Resolution 78-24 2025 Annual Workforce Housing and Childcare Funding Plan. 6. Letters of Support for three Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Multimodal Transportation and Mitigation Options Fund (MMOF) Grant Applications: • Moraine Avenue Trail Design • Trolley Facility • Transit Operations 7. Letter of Support to Upper Front Range Transportation Planning Region & CDOT for the Safe Routes to School Grant Application toward the Community Drive Multi-Use Trail North Segment. 8. Acceptance of Town Administrator Policy Governance Monitoring report. It was moved and seconded (Younglund/Cenac) to approve the Consent Agenda with the removal of Item 4, and it passed unanimously. Consent Agenda Item 4 - Resolution 77-24 Approvinfl Contract for Planning a New Raw Waterline to Marys Lake Water TreatmenjLPJant, $190.000 Budgeted. Staff requested removal of the item to report a reduction in the cost of the project to $150,000 due to a reduction in the scope of the work to be completed. It was moved and seconded (Hazelton/Cenac) to approve Resolution 77-24 with the modification of the contract amount to $150,000, and it passed unanimously. ACTION ITEMS: 1. PUBLIC HEARING - 2025 PROPOSED BUDGET. Director Hudson presented the proposed 2025 budget, including the intended uses of the Highway Users Trust Fund (HUTF) revenues received by the State of Colorado. The 2025 sales tax projections have been set at the 2023 actual revenues. The Town has experienced a decline in sales tax collection in 2024 with the leading indicators suggesting a recover has begun after the Alexander Mountain wildfire closures and the Loop construction earlier this year. The General Fund currently projects an ending fund balance of 25.3% at the end of 2025, meeting the reserve requirements outlined in Finance Policy 660. HUTF estimated revenues of $275,000 would be used to fund Street Division activities related to streetlights, traffic signs, street maintenance, and other qualifying street expenditures. Public comment was heard and has been summarized: Ravit Michener/Town resident and Victory Endsley/Town resident advocated for the reinstatement of base funding for the Estes Park Arts District to invest in arts within the community. Collen Board of Trustees - October 22,2024 - Page 3 DePasquale/Estes Chamber of Commerce President requested base funding be maintained in 2025 for the EDWC programs. Cato Kraft/Estes Nonprofit Network Executive Director and Caity Leeds/Estes Nonprofit Network Board Member requested the Board reconsider the base funding of $65,000 in 2025 due to the significant return the nonprofits generate throughout the valley. John Guffey/Town resident suggested the Town consider the ecological and cultural values when developing and approving the budget. Town Board discussion, questions and comments have been summarized: requests from entities tied to other taxing districts such as the School District and the Estes Park Friends of the Museum may be viewed as a redistribution of public tax funds without public input, and therefore, should not be consider through the community funding initiative; thanked staff for the effort in preparing the budget and commended staff in meeting the policy guidelines in the development of the 2025 proposed budget; the proposed community initiative funding remains a philosophical issue and not a policy issue as to how to allocate funds; questioned whether or not the Town had a commitment to fund the EDWC; concern was heard on tripling the investment in the Estes Nonprofit Network to eliminate the entity's efforts in applying for other funding sources; and support was heard amongst the Board to increase funding for the Arts District to 2024 levels and review ongoing funding for the EDWC in 2026. After further conversation, it was moved and seconded (Hazelton/Cenac) to continue the public hearing for the 2025 Budget to the November 12, 2024 meeting, and it passed unanimously. 2. RESOLUTION 79-24 GRANTING TOWN STAFF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY FOR COLORADO'S ADVANCE-BROADBAND EQUITY, ACCESS AND DEPLOYMENT (BEAD) PROGRAM. Director Bergsten stated Power and Communications has completed 90% of the build out of the fiber optic infrastructure for Trailblazer Broadband within the power distribution area. The remaining 10% contain areas with the highest construction cost per customer location and the fewest customers per mile of fiber optic infrastructure. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) allocated $42.5 billion to the Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) for the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program. Colorado was awarded a portion of these funds to be distributed through a competitive grant program which requires a 25% match. The Town's application would request $6 - $8 million for the project requiring $1.5 - $2 million in matching funds which exceeds staff approval levels. In addition, the application requires a Signature Authority be identified who has the authority to obligate and enter into contracts for the Town, knowledgeable about the proposed project(s), and can answer questions related to both the Town and the applications. The proposed resolution would provide this authority to the Town Administrator or his designee as outlined in the resolution. If awarded the grant(s), staff would present the grant agreements) to the Town Board for consideration and appropriation of matching funds. Trustee Brown raised concern with the cost to provide services outside town limits and suggested a differential rate for these customers be explored. It was moved and seconded (HazeltonA/ounglund) to approve Resolution 79-24, and it passed unanimously. 3. ORDINANCE 15-24 AMENDING CHAPTERS 5 AND 13 OF THE ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REMOVE RES ID OCCUPANCY LIMITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW. Director Careccia presented the ordinance that would align the Town's Development Code with the new Colorado State Statute (29- 20-111 C.R.S.) that went into effect on July 1, 2024 which prohibits local governments from limiting the number of people who may live together in a single dwelling, unless such occupancy limits are based on demonstrated health and safety standards, such as those established in building or fire codes, water and wastewater environmental quality standards, or on affordable housing program guidelines. The proposed amendments would removal all occupancy restrictions within the Development Code. This change would bring the Town in alignment with the state statutes; however, staff would have limited recourse to address future overcrowding issues. One method of recourse would be to enforce parking limitations as established with the Development Code which limits outside parking of no more than four vehicles parked on a residential Board of Trustees - October 22, 2024 - Page 4 lot of two acres or less. After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Igel/Cenac) to approve Ordinance 15-24, with Trustee Brown voting "No". 4. ORDINANCE 16-24 AMENDING SECTIONS3.2. 3.15AND APPENDIX B OF THE ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO PUBLICNOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS. Senior Planner Hornbeck stated the proposed ordinance would bring various minor issues related to public notice requirements in the Development Code up to date with current practices and remove inconsistencies with code timelines by requiring 15-day notice for all public notices such as the newspaper, mailing to surrounding property owners, and posting and field staking the subject property. Notification to adjacent property owners would be simplified by amending the code to require all properties within 500 feet of the subject property to receive notice. The code would be further clarified to require neighborhood meetings for rezonings only and not for text amendments. The ordinance would also address modifications to the application submittal requirements to address current practices and eliminate out of date requirements such as the submittal ofmylars. Kristine Poppitz/County resident stated agreement with most the changes, however, she would support a neighborhood meeting for text amendments. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded (IgelA^ounglund) to approve Ordinance 16-24, and it passed unanimously. 5. ORDINANCE 17-24 AMENDING SECTIONS 3.2. 3.15 AND APPENDIX B OF THE ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS (PUD) ANtrVARIANCES. Senior Planner Hornbeck commented the review of the PUD process began at a Town Board study session on June 25, 2024, followed by a Planning Commission study session on July 16, 2024, and the Planning Commission recommending code amendments to the Town Board at their September 17, 2024 meeting. The proposed code changes to the PUD process in the Development Code would address the limitations of the current code, including the permitted use only on CO Outlying Commercial zoned parcels, the minimum parcel size of three (3) acres, and the minimum requirement of 30% open space which exceeds other zone districts and remains difficult for infill development. The Comprehensive Plan approved in 2022 envisioned mixed-use centers and corridors with medium to higher density vertical mixed residential and commercial use developments located on or near major throughfares. The PUD process would be a key tool in accomplishing this vision and assist current interested development and redevelopment within these corridors. The amendments would require stringent review criteria, ensure PUDs are only used when they provide a clear community benefit and not simply as a workaround to standard code requirements, and allow the decision-making body to look holistically at a project to consider its overall benefits. The proposed changes would consist of eliminating a preliminary/final PUD process in-lieu of a single application; allows PUDs in any non-residential zone rather than only the CO zone; reduces minimum size to two (2) acres rather than three (3) acres or property of any size with five (5) or more units; reduce the minimum open space requirements for smaller properties using a tiered system; allow modifications of building heights up to 42 feet with corresponding standards; allow modification of parking requirements with supporting parking study; prohibits variances for density of accommodations uses in-lieu of PUD process; add standards for compatibility; and require public benefits as a condition of approval of PUDs. Public comment in opposition of the amendments was heard from Tom Washburn/Town resident, Kristine Poppitz/County resident, and Steve Neilson/Town resident. Comments have been summarized. A number of comments concerned the height allowance of 42 feet without specific review criteria and line of sight considerations. Other concerns raised included the overdevelopment of Estes Park and the need to protect views. Board of Trustees - October 22,2024 - Page 5 Frank Theis/Town resident stated support for the ordinance overall with the exception of the height because there continues to be pressure to develop vertically. He urged the Board to consider height limitations. John Guffey/Town resident questioned do we want our natural open space to be used for financial gain and high density would not be the answer. It was moved and seconded (Cenac/Hazelton) to continue the meeting past 10:00 p.m., and it passed with Trustee Brown voting "No". Barbara Cole/Town resident stated a clear definition of exceptional benefit to the community needs to be provided to avoid any confusion. John Meissner/Town resident stated concern with the Comprehensive Plan now guiding decisions and questioned developers backing out of exceptional benefits their developments may provide the community once they receive approvals. Scott Moulton/Estes Park Housing Authority Executive Director spoke in favor of the changes to the PUD requirements which would assist the community addressing issues and needs in a creative manner. Trustee discussion was heard and summarized: support for the changes; concern for the height modifications; additional conversation would be needed with the community before considering the proposed changes; questioned why the proposed amendments include 42 feet for the building height rather than 30 feet; the Comprehensive Plan was designed to be a community vision for the rewrite of the Development Code and to address issues such as PUDs; PUDs can be a tool that allows for flexibility, creativity and mixed use for infill development; and compatibility with the surrounding development remains key to the success of PUD developments. Staff stated 42 feet was adopted for downtown which provides for four (4) stories versus 38 feet that limits development to three (3) stories. It was moved and seconded (Brown/lgel) to continue Ordinance 17-24 to the November 26, 2024 meeting, and it passed with Trustee Hazelton voting "No". Whereupon Mayor Hall adjourned the meeting at 10:28 p.nz Gary Hall, Mgyor^J