The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES Estes Park Planning Commission 2026-06-16Town of Estes Park,Larimer County,Colorado,June 16,2026 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 June 16,2026. Commission:Chair Charles Cooper,Vice Chair David Arterburn,Dick Mulhern,Chris Pawson,Julie Phares Attending:Commissioners Cooper,Phares,Pawson,Community Development Director Steve Careccia,Planner II Kara Washam,Planning/Permit Tech Joe Berek,Town Attorney Dan Kramer,Town Board Liaison Bill Brown,Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund Absent:Arterburn,Mulhern Commissioner Cooper called the meeting to order at 1:50 pm.There were 6 people in the audience. INTRODUCTIONS As the Chair and Vice Chair were absent,the Commissioners nominated Commissioner Cooper as Chair Pro Tern.Commissioners and staff introduced themselves. AGENDA APPROVAL It was moved and seconded (Phares/Pawson)to approve the agenda.The motion passed 3-0. CONSENT AGENDA 1.Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated May 19,2026 Approval of the May 19 meeting minutes was continued to the next scheduled meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT NONE ACTION ITEMS: 1.Rezone from RM Multifamily to A1-Accommodations 440 Vallely Road. Planner Washam reviewed the staff report.The applicants request to rezone the subject property from RM (Multi-Family Residential)to A-1 (Accommodations,Low- Intensity)for the purpose of reclassification of the existing three-unit accommodations structure from “Vacation Home”to “Resort Lodge.”In order to be reclassified,the property must be zoned to a district that allows such use,as “Resort Lodge”is not permitted in the property’s current RM (Multi-Family Residential)zoning.No future development is proposed with this application. The applicants previously submitted a rezoning request in Fall 2025 and appeared before the Planning Commission on January 20,2026.At the public hearing,the Estes Park Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward to the Town Board a recommendation of approval of the proposed Zoning Map Amendment,on the basis of the review criteria in §3.3.D.of the Estes Park Development Code,if the Town Board determines it is appropriate to approve per the purposes of Ordinance 11-25 (Ballot Question 300).Consequently,the applicants went before the Town Board on January 27,2026,to request approval of the rezoning.The Town denied the Zoning Map Amendment (rezoning)from RM (Multi-Family Residential)to A-1 (Accommodations, Low Intensity)for failure to comply with Ordinance 11-25 enacted in November 2025. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission -June 16,2026 -Page 2 Following this denial,the applicants have resubmitted their rezoning request to satisfy the requirements of Ordinance 11-25.They have obtained written approval from twenty- three (23)of the thirty-one (31)record property owners within 500 feet of the subject property.This represents seventy-four percent (74%)support,exceeding the required two-thirds (2/3)threshold.Staff recommended approval of the rezone request. DISCUSSION: Jennifer Waters,Town of Estes Park Civil Engineer,explained that there is no public right-of-way along the middle section of Valley Road,even though the town maintains it. While the dedication of a right-of-way is not a requirement for this application,there is hope that the residents will eventually dedicate the road to the town. Don and Denice Borda,applicants,presented the history of this rezone request.They have contacted the neighbors an additional two times since the previous meeting, obtaining the required percentage of signatures needed. Commissioner Pawson asked Town Attorney Kramer why this application couldn’t have bypassed the Planning Commission since this request had already been approved at a previous meeting.Kramer explained that while the Town Board theoretically has the authority to direct procedures,the previous denial was due specifically to non- compliance with Ballot Measure 300.Kramer clarified that the Planning Commission's core responsibility is to evaluate applications solely against the established review criteria in the Development Code,rather than on historical context. Commissioner Cooper asked about obtaining the signatures.The Bordas discussed the challenges they faced in complying with Ballot Issue 300,including the absence of guidance from the town,logistical hurdles and how they collaborated with fellow citizens to obtain the required signatures. PUBLIC COMMENT: None It was moved and seconded (Pawson/Phares)to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Zoning Map Amendment application,to rezone the 0.80-acre subject property addressed at 440 Valley Road from RM (Multi-Family Residential)to A-1 (Accommodations,Low Intensity), in accordance with the findings of fact outlined in the staff report.The motion passed 3-0 2.Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit 919 Elk Hollow Ct. Planner Washam reviewed the staff report.The Applicant proposes to construct a 510- square-foot (34’x15’)detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)of modular construction to be installed on a permanent foundation.The intent is for multi-generational use to house a family that can no longer afford the Estes Valley area but work there.However, the Development Code does not dictate who can reside in the ADU.The proposed location of the detached ADU was selected to integrate seamlessly into the lot to minimize disruption to the neighborhood.The ADU will be sprinklered,as required by the Fire code.The applicant will provide one (1)space for parking for the resident(s)of the ADU,as required by EPDC §5.2.B.2.a.(7).The ADU may not be used as a short¬ term rental unit (stays less than 30 days),as prohibited by EPDC §5.2.B.2.a.(3).Staff recommended the following conditions for approval: The primary entrance of the proposed ADU shall be oriented toward the existing single-family home,facing east. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission -June 16,2026 -Page 3 The exterior colors and materials of the proposed ADU shall generally match the existing single-family home as much as feasible. DISCUSSION: None PUBLIC COMMENT: Ed Ellington,926 Village Green Ln,supported the ADU request as a neighbor. It was moved and seconded (Phares/Pawson)to approve the Conditional Use Permit,according to findings and conditions proposed by Staff.The motion passed 3-0. DISCUSSION ITEMS: With no further business,Chair Pro-Tern Cooper adjourned the meeting at 2:30 pm. Karin Swanlund,Recording Secretary Director Careccia spoke on the Development Code update.The department is currently working toward the 50%draft,which will be circulated to the commissioners,trustees and the public for review prior to the next meeting.The consultants will attend the Planning Commission meeting on July 21 to present an overview of the work done to date. Rezoning Criteria and Neighborhood meeting processes will likely be discussed at the August 18 Planning Commission meeting.The Town Board Study session on June 23 will include a discussion on rezoning criteria.The July 14 Town Board Study Session will include a discussion on neighborhood meeting procedures. The next open house for the Development Code is scheduled for July 21 at the Museum. M mS U^aa^ Chuck Cooper,Chair Pro-terr/