HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Park Planning Commission 2026-05-19Town of Estes Park,Larimer County,Colorado,May 19,2026
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK PLANNING COMMISSION of the
Town of Estes Park,Larimer County,Colorado.The meeting was held in the said Town
of Estes Park on May 19,2026.
Commission:Chair Charles Cooper,Vice Chair David Arterburn,Dick
Mulhern,Chris Pawson,Julie Phares
Attending:Commissioners Cooper,Arterburn,Mulhern,Community
Development Director Steve Careccia,Senior Planner Paul
Hornbeck,Town Attorney Dan Kramer,Town Board Liaison
Frank Lancaster,Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund
Absent:Pawson,Phares
Chair Cooper called the meeting to order at 1:30 pm.There were 7 people in the
audience.
INTRODUCTIONS
Commissioners and staff introduced themselves.
AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved and seconded (Mulhern/Arterburn)to approve the agenda.The motion
passed 3-0.
CONSENT AGENDA
1.Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated February 17,2026
It was moved and seconded (Arterburn/Mulhern)to approve the consent
agenda.The motion passed 3-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT
NONE
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Commissioner Mulhern nominated Vice Chair Arterburn as Chair,and Chair Cooper
nominated Commissioner Mulhern as Vice Chair.Vice Chair Arterburn seconded both
nominations.The vote passed 3-0.Arterburn took over as chair for the rest of the meeting.
ACTION ITEMS:
1.Fall River Village Planned Unit Development
Planner Hornbeck reviewed the staff report.The 24 existing units and event facility are
located on a single 3.8-acre lot that is proposed to be subdivided into 14 townhome lots,
one 8-plex lot,one duplex lot (2 units),and one lot for the event facility/office.The
subdivision is a separate application and agenda item from this application to amend
the existing PUD.Most of the desired uses are currently permitted under the PUD,
which allows multi-family and two-family residential dwellings,government offices,and
daycare.The PUD amendment is necessary to address nonconforming situations
resulting from the subdivision and to make minor changes to allowed uses.The PUD
seeks approval for changes in lot size,building envelopes,setbacks,parking,loading,
sidewalks,and "uses".Staff recommended that the Planning Commission forward to the
Town Board a recommendation to approve the combined Preliminary/Final PUD Plan,
subject to the following findings and conditions of approval:
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission -May 19,2026 -Page 2
Findings:
1.This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for
consideration and comment,with no objections received.
2.The combined Preliminary/Final PUD Plan application complies with applicable
standards set forth in the Estes Park Development Code.
Conditions:
1.Parking shall be managed by the owner's association to ensure parking is
provided in accordance with the approved PUD in a safe manner that does not
block emergency access and shall include enforcement of event facility
occupancy limits as necessary.
Pete Levine,Director of Real Estate Development for the Housing Authority,gave a
presentation covering both agenda action items.He reviewed the background of how
the Housing Authority became the owner of the property.The review covered finances,
property goals and how to achieve the goals.Also discussed were the plans for Skyview
and Cliff House,HOA rules and the sales strategy for the buildings on the upper level of
Fall River Village.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Keith and Marlene Stone,350 Far View Dr.,expressed concerns regarding traffic and
noise.They raised questions about the parking capacity for the event center,noting that
there are currently very few dedicated spaces,leading to fears of overflow parking along
the Far View frontage,similar to past experiences with weddings at the location.
Kristine Poppitz,county resident,argued that the PUD amendment should be classified
as a major or new application rather than a minor one,which would trigger stricter
requirements under the Town's development code and Ordinance 11-25.She
expressed concerns about the lack of publicly available notes from the community
meeting.She requested more clarity on the financial risks involved,specifically
regarding the potential for the property to incur losses and to lose its affordability
covenants.She raised questions about the operational details of the Sky View event
center and the status of the proposed childcare facility,emphasizing that the community
deserves clear and early communication about these land-use changes.
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Cooper asked if the school bus stops in FRV,and Chair Arterburn asked
about the neighborhood meeting minutes.Scott Moulton,Executive Director of the
Housing Authority,stated that childcare would be open to the entire community and
noted that they were unsure of the specific location of the nearest school bus
stop.Regarding the community meetings held for this project,Moulton admitted that
the meeting minutes had not been posted to the website,but committed to making them
available.
Planner Hornbeck clarified that there are 80 parking spaces in the lot.These include 16
garage spaces and 14 spaces in front of them,with the remainder designated as
common parking for the office and event facility.The 97-person occupancy limit for
the Sky View event center was derived from a study that assumed a 3-person-per-
vehicle ratio.Accounting for residential and daycare parking needs,approximately 22
spaces are available during the day,and there is sufficient capacity to support the event
outside office hours.
It was confirmed that this is a major PUD application rather than a minor one,and it was
acknowledged that the proposal is subject to standard development requirements,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission -May 19,2026 -Page 3
which were followed.Potential questions about ordinance 11-25 should be deferred to
the Town Board.
Moulton answered questions raised by Commissioner Mulhern.He confirmed plans to
install seasonally removable speed control devices (rubberized bumps)on the property
to improve safety,as permanent structures are not feasible due to winter snow removal.
He reiterated that the business plan—which involves selling 14 townhomes to pay down
debt—has been consistently communicated to the Town Board.He emphasized
that dedicated funding sources (voter-approved initiatives and regulatory linkage fees)
and a $2.5 million debt service reserve serve as backstops to mitigate the risk of
financial default or loss of affordability covenants.Discussion turned to the building code
requirements for the units,specifically the need for attic fire separation and fire
sprinklers in certain lots.The Housing Authority explained that they have a 180-day
window to complete this work and are actively working with contractors to execute the
retrofits as quickly as possible to meet safety standards prior to the final subdivision
recording.
It was moved and seconded (Cooper/Mulhern)to forward a recommendation of
approval for the combined Preliminary/Final Planned Unit Development Plan
according to the findings and conditions recommended by Staff to the Town
Board of Trustees.The motion passed 3-0
2.Fall River Village Amended Plat
Planner Hornbeck reviewed the staff report.The 24 existing units and event facility are
located on a single 3.8-acre lot that is proposed to be subdivided into 14 townhome lots,
one 8-plex lot,one duplex lot,and one lot for the event facility/office.A concurrent PUD
amendment is necessary to address nonconforming situations resulting from the
subdivision and to make minor changes to allowed uses.
Per Review Procedures and Standards of the Code,"Subdivisions are approved in two
stages:first,a preliminary subdivision plat is approved,and second,a final subdivision
plat is approved and recorded."Section 3.2 of the Code requires the Planning
Commission to review the preliminary plat and make a recommendation to the Town
Board,which is the final decision-making body.The final plat is reviewed by the Town
Board only.Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward to the Town
Board a recommendation to approve the preliminary plat,subject to the following
findings and conditions of approval:
Findings:
1.Adequate public/private facilities are currently available or will be made available
by the applicant to serve the subject property.
2.This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for
consideration and comment,with no objections received.
3.The preliminary plat application complies with applicable standards set forth in
the Estes Park Development Code,subject to approval of the corresponding
application to amend the PUD.
Conditions:
1.All recommendations identified in the building code analysis shall be completed,
inspected,and accepted by the Town prior to recording of the final subdivision
plat.
DISCUSSION:
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission -May 19,2026 -Page 4
Planner Hornbeck confirmed that while some lots were granted a zero-foot setback for
internal property boundaries as part of the townhome development plan,the specific no¬
build area discussed is a distinct requirement to maintain safety and access around
existing site amenities,such as the spa or hot tub.In response to Commissioner
Mulhern's question about the water meters on lots 13 and 14,the HOA will be
responsible for managing the water bill and using submeter data to bill individual lot
owners fortheir actual consumption accurately.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Kristine Poppitz,a county resident,questioned why the previous recommendation did
not include a condition regarding the potential application of Ordinance 11-25,Town
Board involvement.She also commented about the applicant's request for a sidewalk
waiver,citing past public discussions regarding Peak View apartments.The commenter
argued that the town code regarding sidewalks and trails should be strictly followed to
ensure connectivity for residents and visitors,urging the commission not to set a
precedent by granting special exceptions.
Planner Hornbeck clarified that the Public Works department had reviewed the
application and determined that new sidewalk construction was not necessary.The
decision was based on the fact that the property is an existing development that already
incorporates a sidewalk,which effectively provides the required pedestrian
connection through the facility.
It was moved and seconded (Cooper/Mulhern)to forward to the Town Board a
recommendation of approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat according to
findings and conditions recommended by Staff.The motion passed 3-0.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Director Careccia provided an update on the Development Code revision process,
noting we are currently reviewing early drafts and providing feedback to the consultant.
The goal is to have a document ready for public review by July,with potential study
sessions scheduled before both the Planning Commission and the Town Board in late
July.
He also reminded the Commissioners to notify the Planning Division regarding any
potential absences for upcoming summer meetings to ensure proper planning.
With no further business,Chair Arterburn adjourned the meeting at 2:45 pm.