Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board Study Session 2026-07-14RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town ofEstes Park, Larimer County, Colorado July 14, 2026 Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in the Board Room in said Town of Estes Park on the 14th day of July, 2026. Board: Mayor Hall, Mayor Pro Tem Hazelton, Trustees Brown, Eshelman, Igel, Lancaster, and Mieras Attending: Mayor Hall, Mayor Pro Tem Hazelton, Trustees Brown, Eshelman, Igel, Lancaster, and Mieras Also Attending: Town Administrator Machalek, Deputy Town Administrator Damweber, Attorney Kramer, and Deputy Town Clerk Beers Absent: None Mayor Hall called the meeting to order at 4:15 p.m. Water Rate Study. Utilities Project Manager Jacqui Wesley reviewed public outreach plans for the water rate study including public meetings, special presentations with local organizations, online, informational videos, bill stuffer, and coordination with a consultant and Public Information Officer Miller on other opportunities to engage the public. She introduced Shawn Gaddie/AE2S Nexus who presented the preliminary rate study findings and requested initial feedback regarding the rate structure and the public engagement plan. The last rate study was completed in 2019/2020 with the last increase occurring in 2022. Rate studies typically take place every three years or at major changes in capital planning. He stated the "tap fees" or system development and water rights fees had not been reviewed or adjusted since 2016 and would be included in the second phase of the 2026 rate study. He highlighted future challenges including inflation and cost- escalation, deferred maintenance, major system improvements, limited growth projections and rollback of state/federal funding. Water rate study objectives include ensuring a reliable utility operation, sustainable utility financial plan, water master plan implementation and ensuring any rates which are set are fair and equitable. The consultant presented a flexible model with high and low scenarios and has been working with the Town to plan for higher costs, with adaptability, should better circumstances be realized. He reviewed Phase 1 which was described as a revenue requirement and revenue adequacy evaluation. Planning scenarios were reviewed for construction at $40-50 million in capital cost variability with the Master Plan implementation cost ranging from $110 million (low) to $150 million (high) in capital needs in the next 10 years. He stated the rate would increase regardless of the high to low scenario and would build a revenue increase strategy that can be backed off, if a better scenario can be realized. Revenue was not anticipated to grow quickly over time. Forecasts on a $150 million Master Plan Implementation reflected a 15% increase over a five-year timeframe. Low implementation reflected a 10% increase. He reviewed water rate comparisons for Telluride, Steamboat Springs, and Pinewood Springs as well as other rate increases and increases in costs of sen/ices in the community. Next steps would include gaining Board feedback, continuing public outreach, finalizing the primary rate study report and moving into Phase II with staff. Board comments and questions have been summarized: Clarification was requested on water purification costs presented; how other communities have shared this responsibility with the visitors of their communities to reduce the impact to the residents; whether the implementation could occur more quickly due to aged infrastructure and would it significantly increase the rates; what the full timeline would be for implementation and the benefits of utilizing grants and other funding sources to reduce costs. Housing Definitions and Density Bonuses in the Development Code. In response to the 2026 Strategic Plan Goals, Manager Speedlin presented potential RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 14, 2026 - Page 2 updates to Housing Definitions and Density Bonuses in the Estes Park Development Code. Staff requested Board feedback related to affordability targets, zoning applicability, development feasibility, and appropriate incentive structures to support workforce and attainable housing development. The Town has utilized density bonuses since the early 2000s. Between 2013 and 2017, no housing units were developed utilizing the density bonus framework. Since 2017, density bonuses have contributed to the development of 188 workforce or attainable housing units in the Estes Valley including Peak View, Prospector Apartments, Wildfire neighborhood and Grand Estates. Utilization remains limited and was attributed to limited relationship between affordability levels and development review incentives; uncertainty in the development review process; high land, infrastructure, and construction costs; limited availability of developable RM (Multi-family Residential) zoned land, and the need to rezone properties prior to pursuing attainable housing projects. The current incentive does not differentiate between projects serving different households at various affordability levels. Development costs continue to rise while uncertainty related to financing infrastructure and construction makes affordable housing projects difficult to pursue especially for private developers. She provided an overview of existing density examples including Mountain Wood Townhomes (14 units per acre), South Saint Vrain Apartments (12 units per acre), Eagle's Landing Condominiums (17 units per acre), and Fail River Village (19.46 units per acre). Staff reviewed comparable mountain communities and the maximum base density zoning comparisons which reflected the Town density was one of the lowest values. Current base density in RM was at 8 units per acre and the incentive for workforce/attainable housing density bonus at 16 units per acre. She stated successful affordable housing programs rarely rely on density alone. These factors suggest it's appropriate to evaluate whether the Town's current incentive framework affects the advancement of the communities workforce housing goals and whether adjustments should be considered to better align with incentives with the desired affordability outcomes. Staff requested guidance on the following points to inform potential updates to the code: area median income (AMI) scaled density bonus structure, expanded applicability across zoning districts, and feasibility and market alignment. The Board provided feedback on: additional incentive; what affordability levels should be prioritized; appropriate density; expanded density bonuses and whether density bonuses should be paired with additional incentives. Discussion was heard and has been summarized: The importance of addressing lower AMI; areas where changes would benefit the Estes Park Housing Authority's ability to provide housing; density levels on private lots; the impacts to parking as density increases; to define what 150% AMI means; how the Town can bridge the gap for developers and where that responsibility resides within the community; concerns were heard for further increasing density in accommodations zoning; the importance of researching other incentives and maintaining the character of existing zoning. Staff would have conversations with private developers, review base density values and would bring back examples to the Board. Draft Code Amendment for Neighborhood Meetings. At the May 26, 2026, study session the Board provided direction on the development code neighborhood meeting requirements. Director Careccia reviewed proposed code amendments including: Allowing the Director to waive/require additional neighborhood meetings (based on impact to surrounding properties, mix uses, density, complexity, or potential for adverse impacts); applicant retains responsibility for meeting coordination and public notice; applicant remains meeting moderator, staff attendance remains optional; meeting summary - must include how applicant intends to address, or not address, the issues discussed at neighborhood meeting; Director may require follow-up neighborhood meeting(s). Staff requested Board input on proposed changes. Board discussion ensued and has been summarized: An example was requested of a situation where a neighborhood meeting would be waived; whether there should be a neighborhood meeting prior to the pre-application meeting and the benefits to making the pre-meeting optional; how much work typically goes into getting to a pre-application meeting for a developer; not there to evaluate or moderate; there may be no value added to add extra steps to a standard processes; the importance of ensuring the developer does not limit public attendance including press; what the earliest possible time a member of the public can find out about a potential development or proposed RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 14, 2026 - Page 3 project; if staff observe the meeting was not held according to the code, could the staff say the meeting was not held the way it should have and must be held again; the value in having a staff member attend the neighborhood meeting as observers only who can confirm the meeting was held according to the requirements; and the average number of development applications which are received in a year. Town Attorney Kramer recommended and the Board was in support to add language related to public participation was expected to observe basic standards of civility. Staff would bring forward proposed amendments to the code for consideration at a future meeting. Trustee and Administrator Comments and Questions. The Fagade and Sidewalk Improvement Program Proposal was added to items approved/unscheduled. Future Study Session Agenda Items. It was requested to add a discussion on the history of the Fish Hatchery Property Project to approved/unscheduled. Staff stated timing of any application may determine when the discussion will be heard in an effort to remain within the parameters of quasi- judicial procedures. Trustee Igel requested Board interest in a discussion to consider refunding 2026 vacation home licensing fees for 440 Valley Road. The property was rezoned through Ordinance 11-26, effective July 27, 2026. The Town does not have a policy on refunding fees; therefore, the Board would need to make a decision related to the request. It was determined the Board would have an additional discussion to gather more information and ascertain Board consensus before directing staff. There being no further business, Mayor Hall adjourned the meeting at 6:54 p.m. ^ Bunny Victoria Beers, Deputy Town Clerk