HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2019-01-22The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high-quality, reliable services
for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while being good stewards
of public resources and our natural setting.
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services,
programs, and activities and special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities.
Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
AGENDA APPROVAL.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
1. POLICY GOVERNANCE MONITORING REPORT - Policy 3.3.
Board Policy 2.3 designates specific reporting requirements for providing information
to the Board. Policy 3.3, Financial Planning and Budgeting quarterly.
2. STORMWATER FEES UPDATE.
Update on recent discussions with Board of County Commissioners on proposed
Stormwater fees - Director Muhonen.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Bills.
2. Town Board Minutes dated January 8, 2019 and Town Board Study Session Minutes
dated January 8, 2019.
3. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated November 13, 2018 and December
18, 2018 (acknowledgment only).
4. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated November 15, 2018 and December 20, 2018
(acknowledgement only).
5. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated November 21, 2018 and December 19,
2018 (acknowledgement only).
6. Acceptance of Town Administrator Policy Governance Monitoring Report.
7. Resolution #02-19 Setting the Public Hearing date of February 12, 2019 for a New
Beer & Wine Liquor License filed by High West Investments, LLC, dba Vino Giu, 207
Park Lane, Estes Park, CO 80517.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: (Outside Entities).
1. LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT UPDATE.
To introduce Eric Lund as the new CEO of the Local Marketing District.
Prepared 01-11-2019
*Revised
1
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
2. ESTES VALLEY PARTNERS FOR COMMERCE QUARTERLY REPORT.
3. UPDATE ON FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECTS AND FUNDING BY THE OFFICE OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (OEM). Michael Willis, Director of OEM.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. ORDINANCE #01-19: AMENDMENTS TO THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL
RESIDENTIAL CODE (IRC). Code Compliance Officer Hardin.
Proposed amendments to the 2015 International Residential Code relating to vacation
homes, single family dwellings, and hotels.
2. APPOINTMENTS TO THE NORTHERN COLORADO REGIONAL TOURISM
AUTHORITY BOARD. Mayor Jirsa.
To appoint a Town representative to the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism
Authority Board due to the resignation of Mike Abbaitti.
3. PARKS ADVISORY BOARD INTERVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT. Town
Clerk Williamson.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. UPDATE ON THE ENTERPRISE WIDE CONTENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE
(LASERFICHE). Administrative Assistant Beers.
Town Clerk staff to present an overview of progress, implementation and goals for
2019.
ADJOURN.
2
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
From: Town Administrator Lancaster
Date: January 22, 2019
RE: Internal Monitoring Report - Executive Limitations
(Quarterly Monitoring Report Policy 3.3)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER:_report_______
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Board Policy 2.3 designates specific reporting requirements for me to provide
information to the Board. Policy 3.3, Financial Planning and Budgeting requires
quarterly reporting of compliance in April, July, October and January.
Present Situation:
Policy 3.3 states: “With respect for strategic planning for projects, services and activities
with a fiscal impact, the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either the operational or
fiscal integrity of Town government.”
This report constitutes my assurance that, as reasonably interpreted, these conditions
have not occurred and further, that the data submitted below are accurate as of this
date.
Proposal:
n/a
Advantages:
• Provides accountability to the Town Administrator
• Provides assurances of fiscal stability to the Town Board and the public
• Is an integral part of Policy Governance for the Town of Estes Park
Disadvantages:
• none
3
Action Recommended:
None – Report only
Finance/Resource Impact:
n/a
Level of Public Interest
moderate.
Attachments:
Internal monitoring report for January 2019
4
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
970.577.3705
flancaster@estes.org
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 22nd, 2019
TO: Board of Trustees
FROM: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
SUBJECT: INTERNAL MONITORING REPORT - EXECUTIVE LIMITATIONS
(QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT POLICY 3.3)
Board Policy 2.3 designates specific reporting requirements for me to provide
information to the Board. Policy 3.3, Financial Planning and Budgeting requires
quarterly reporting of compliance in April, July, October and January.
Policy 3.3 states: “With respect for strategic planning for projects, services and activities
with a fiscal impact, the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either the operational or
fiscal integrity of Town government.”
This report constitutes my assurance that, as reasonably interpreted, these conditions
have not occurred and further, that the data submitted below are accurate as of this
date.
________________________
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
5
3.3.1. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which deviates from
statutory requirements.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that our budgeting practices and policies
comply with all State statutory requirements that are applicable to statutory Colorado
towns.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There are no deviations in our practices and policies in violation of State Statutes. The
2019 Town budget was submitted to the State of Colorado on time as required by statute
in December of 2018 following Town Board approval.
Evidence:
1. The annual independent audit
2. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
3. All policies are reviewed for compliance with State Statutes by the Town
Attorney.
4. State Department of Local Government has not issued any non-compliance
notifications to the Town of Estes Park regarding our budgetary obligations under
statute.
Report: I report compliance
3.3.2. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which deviates
materially from Board-stated priorities in its allocation among competing
budgetary needs.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the annual budget, as adopted by the
Board of Trustees, is the officially adopted priorities of the Board. This includes any
budget amendments approved by the Town Board throughout the year and any specific
spending authorizations approved by the Town Board. I interpret “materially deviate” to
mean any change in spending priority that results in diverting resources away from any
Board objective, goal or outcome substantial enough to contribute to not achieving the
objective, goal or outcome. I do not interpret minor deviations resulting from changing
circumstances, community demands and unforeseen circumstances outside of the Town’s
control, as material deviations.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
Budget spending does not materially deviate from the levels approved in the adopted
budget.
Evidence:
1. The adopted budget was prepared based on the Board stated priorities.
2. There have been no substantial budget changes presented to the Board for review
6
and approval as of this date.
3. HTE Budget reports for each department are available on a regular basis or as
requested.
Report: I report compliance
3.3.3. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which contains
inadequate information to enable credible projection of revenues and
expenses, separation of capital and operational items, cash flow and
subsequent audit trails, and disclosure of planning assumptions.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean the budget, as recommended by the Town
Administrator, must be based on credible data and the best available information
concerning the local economy and other factors that may impact our revenues and
expenses. In addition, the budget is to be structured to separate capital expenditures
from operational costs. All revenue projects will be conservative and it is more critical not
to overestimate revenues vs underestimating revenues.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
1. Revenue projections are clear and deviations between projected an actual
revenues are within a 5-10%, barring any catastrophic events.
2. Actual revenue received and reported to date is not less than projected.
3. The Budget presented to the Board for adoption is in a format the separates
revenues, expenses and capital expenditures.
4. Any assumptions used in preparing the budget are clearly articulated to the Board
during budget review sessions.
Evidence:
1. Currently our sales tax revenue for 2018 (as reported, collections run about 45
days in arrears due to State collection and reporting) is 8.49% higher than in 2017
and higher than projected for 2018. (through November)
2. Current revenue is not less than projected.
3. The current budget and proposed budget are both presented in the format that
separates revenues, expenses and capital.
4. Assumptions leading to the projects were discussed with the Board during budget
review sessions.
Report: I report compliance
3.3.4. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which plans the
expenditure in any fiscal year of more funds than are conservatively
projected to be received in that period, or which are otherwise available.
7
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the proposed budget must be balanced.
This includes expenditures for the year not exceeding the revenues received from all
sources. Exceptions are Board approved use of fund balances, and use of funds that have
been accumulated over a period of time, with the approval of the Board, with the intent of
saving funds to pay for a specific project or capital expense.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The proposed budget meets the above criteria and year end expenses do not exceed
year end revenues, inclusive of any board approve spending of fund balance or specific
reserve funds.
Evidence:
1. The adopted budget and the CAFR document provide independent evidence that I
have not allowed budgeting which plans the expenditure in any fiscal year of more
funds than are conservatively projected to be received in that period, or which are
otherwise available.
Report: I report compliance at this time, but I am also reporting caution. At the time of
the preparation of this report, the Federal Government is in a partial shutdown, which is
impacting the accessibility to Rocky Mountain National Park. Should the shutdown
continue for an extended period of time, there is possibility of negative impacts on sales
tax revenue. We have contingency plans in place, including implementation trigger
points.
3.3.5. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which reduces fund
balances or reserves in any fund to a level below that established by the
Board of Trustees.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I the audited year end unrestricted fund
balance in the General Fund does not drop below 20% unless otherwise authorized by the
Board. If the Board approves and adopts a budget that plans for reducing the fund
balance below the 20% level, I interpret this as being authorized by the Board. (This
interpretation will be modified if the Board adopts a cash reserve minimum policy in the
future. Staff will be bringing options for such a policy forward in the near future for Board
consideration, as directed in the September study session.)
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
1. The final CAFR indicates that a general fund fund balance of 20% or greater, or as
otherwise approved by the Town Board.
2. The proposed budget anticipates an end of year fund balance in the General Fund
of 20% or greater unless otherwise approved by the Town Board..
Evidence:
8
1. The 2017 CAFR shows a 10.3% fund balance at the end of 2017. (due to flood
reimbursement floods being received after the financial deadline at the end of
February.)
2. The 2018 budget anticipates a 21.2% fund balance at the end of 2018
3. The 2019 budget anticipates a 22.8% fund balance at the end of 2019
Report: I report compliance
3.3.6. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which Fails to
maintain a Budget Contingency Plan capable of responding to significant
shortfalls within the Town’s budget.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I must prepare the budget, maintain a
fund balance of 20% or more in the general fund, and adequate fund balances in all
enterprise funds, including the required TABOR reserve.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
1. The final CAFR indicates that a general fund balance of 20% or greater.
2. The proposed budget anticipates an end of year fund balance in the General Fund
of 20% or greater.
3. The Town Board has adopted and approved a Formal Budget Contingency plan
Evidence:
1. The 2017 CAFR shows a 10.3% fund balance at the end of 2017. (due to flood
reimbursement floods being received after the financial deadline at the end of
February.)
2. The 2018 budget anticipates a 21.2% fund balance at the end of 2018
3. The 2019 budget anticipates a 22.8% fund balance at the end of 2019
4. Current cash and investment reserves are reported to the Board on a monthly
basis, as required by Board policy 670.
Report: I report compliance
3.3.7. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which fails to
provide for an annual audit.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I must ensure that the Town completes
an independent audit annually. Further, that audit report should result in an unqualified
and unmodified opinion from the Board’s auditors.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The audit is complete and presented to the Town Board.
Evidence:
9
1.The 207 Audit has been completed and the CAFR prepared and submitted to the
State of Colorado.
2.The 2017 included an unqualified and unmodified opinion from the auditors
Report: I report compliance
3.3.8. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which fails to
protect, within his or her ability to do so, the integrity of the current or
future bond ratings of the Town.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I cannot take any action that will result
any negative impact on the Town’s bond rating. This includes, maintaining adequate fund
balances as required in 3.3.5 and maintaining adequate bond coverage ratios for all
revenue bonds associated with the Town’s enterprise funds.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
1.I am in compliance with 3.3.5
2.Required bond coverage ratios are met.
Evidence:
1.The general fund year end fund balance is greater than 20%
2.The required Bond coverage ratio for L&P 125% and for Water is 110%. Our
current coverage for the L&P Bonds is 691% and for Water is 503%.
Report: I report compliance
3.3.9. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which results in new
positions to staffing levels without specific approval of the Board of Town
Trustees. The Town Administrator may approve positions funded by
grants, which would not impose additional costs to the Town in addition
to the grant funds and any temporary positions for which existing
budgeted funds are allocated.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I cannot allow any new positions or
expansion of any part-time positions to be advertised or filled without prior Board
approval. I may allow the reduction in staffing without Board approval and any positions
or partial positions funded by grants or any temporary positions for which existing
budgeted funds are allocated may be filled without prior approval of the Board.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
No new positions or expansion of positions are approved and hired without approval of
the board, with the exceptions noted above.
Evidence:
1.All positions are indicated in the adopted and proposed budgets and no
unapproved positions are shown.
Report: I report compliance 10
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Date: January 22, 2019
RE: Stormwater Management Project Update
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER_Update_
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Present an update on the proposed Estes Valley Stormwater Management Project.
Present Situation:
On October 22 and 23, 2018 PW staff received direction from the County
Commissioners and Town Board to proceed with the distribution of proposed
stormwater management fees and educational information through a direct mailing to
the owners of 7676 improved parcels within the Estes Valley Development Code
boundary. Additionally, a public opinion survey is to be conducted to learn property
owner reactions to the proposed fee and funding structure for a future stormwater utility.
As Town and County staff jointly worked through the data, monthly fees in excess of
$35/month were noted for 449 parcels. This represents 5.8% of the total parcels. This
week County PW staff presented concern to the Board of County Commissioners that
fees greater than $30/month are unreasonably high for residential property owners, and
recommended that the fee structure be revised into a capped or tiered system for
residential properties only. Town PW staff suggested to the County that in this situation
where impervious area data has been measured for all properties within the program
area, it feels fundamentally unfair to lower the fees for select few residential property
owners and then raise fees on other parcels to meet the program revenue objectives.
The County Commissioners expressed a desire to understand the Town Board’s
opinion of the high outlier fees before proposed fee data is finalized and shared with
each property owner.
Proposal:
Staff has prepared and attached a summary of two options for calculating fees. The
first proposes fees uniformly based on the measured impervious area of each lot as
discussed in October. See the attached fee comparison spreadsheet.
11
The second option applies a 12,000 SF limit on the fee calculation for “Residential”,
“Agricultural”, and “Mobile Home” account types. This results in a maximum proposed
monthly single-family residential stormwater management fee of $34.50 per parcel. The
associated fee reductions for 136 individual parcels is as much as 86%, and is
accomplished at the expense of raising all the other property owner fees by about 2%.
See the attached fee comparison spreadsheet and Fee Distribution bar charts.
A third option is to create a fee reduction formula that is more broadly available to all
property owners who meet a specific set of criteria. Fee credit reductions could be
based on the percentage of undeveloped land on each parcel, constructed stormwater
detention or other flowrate controls on a parcel, or even civic/community contributions
such as nonprofit status.
Options 1 and 2 are complete, and the associated fees could be quickly distributed to
property owners. Option 3 will take additional time to develop. The County staff has
volunteered to develop a tiered residential fee structure, and has indicated acceptance
of the proposed fees (including high outlier fees) for the nonresidential parcels. The
delay associated with this option is expected to exceed two months.
Upon receipt of direction on which fee structure to present to the public, Staff will launch
an additional month of public outreach. When complete, Staff proposes to return to the
Town Board and County Commissioners for further discussion of the feedback received
from the public and to receive direction from both Boards regarding potential
implementation of a stormwater utility for managing stormwater in the Estes Valley.
Advantages:
Careful study of fee amounts should improve fairness, reasonableness, & payer support.
Disadvantages:
The reconsideration of fee calculation methodology delays the process of gathering
additional citizen feedback for consideration of the proposed stormwater utility.
Action Recommended:
Fee guidance as outlined above.
Finance/Resource Impact:
The implementation of any stormwater management program will require new funding.
Staff’s previous recommendation uses a mixture of utility fees and future sales tax.
Consideration of grants is now added in an effort to further reduce parcel owner fees.
The range of values of fee and sales tax revenue can vary widely depending on the size
of the stormwater program, its speed of implementation and preferences on how to
balance revenue generation between user fees, grants and sales tax.
Level of Public Interest
The level of public interest seen to date is moderate for this program. Staff believes the
interest level will increase when fee estimates are shared publicly.
Attachments:
Fee Proposal Comparison Spreadsheet, Bar Charts, & graphic illustration 12
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FEE PROPOSAL COMPARISONUpdated 16 Jan 2019 by GPMOPTION 1: Fees based on impervious area for all parcelsJurisdiction Minimum Monthly FeeMaximum Monthly FeeAverage Monthly FeeMedian Monthly Fee90th Percentile Monthly FeeNo of Parcels with user fees >$35/moNo of Parcels with user fees >$100/moNo of Parcels with user fees >$500/moTown$2.42$1,837.26$15.90 $18.00 $27.09324 899County$2.36$6,093.40$14.18 $15.27 $23.65125 201Both$2.36$6,093.40$15.25 $16.19 $24.22449 10910OPTION 2: Impervious area capped at 12,000 SF for residential parcels onlyJurisdiction Minimum Monthly FeeMaximum Monthly FeeAverage Monthly FeeMedian Monthly Fee90th Percentile Monthly FeeNo of Parcels with user fees >$35/moNo of Parcels with user fees >$100/moNo of Parcels with user fees >$500/moReduction in fees >$35/moTown$2.42$1,873.96$15.95 $18.31 $27.59262 91962County$2.36$6,215.22$14.04 $15.03 $24.0751 18174Both$2.36$6,215.22$15.24 $16.47 $24.66313 10910136Sample of ImpactsParcel No. Parcel AddressParcel Owner NameAccount TypeParcel Area (SF)Measured Impervious Area (SF)Capped Impervious Area (SF)Monthly Fee (Imp Area)Monthly Fee (Adjusted for Cap)Fee Change % Change3402420003 2625 MARYS LAKE RDMARYS LAKE LODGE COMBINED CONDResidential93700 93700 12000 $248.42 $34.50‐$213.92‐86.1%2517005701 1890 DEVILS GULCH RD XXX Single Family Residence Residential475444 42783 12000$114.71$34.50‐$80.21‐69.9%2517005704 2000 DEVILS GULCH RD XXX Single Family Residence Residential442726 30856 12000$83.39$34.50‐$48.89‐58.6%2517106001 2039 KENDALL DRXXX Single Family Residence Residential 1055590 51972 12000$138.84$34.50‐$104.34‐75.2%2517300009 1880 DEVILS GULCH RD XXX Single Family Residence Residential914760 35836 12000$96.47$34.50‐$61.97‐64.2%3535225001 1565 HIGHWAY 66RAMS HORN VILLAGE PUD Residential 233888.014 83411 12000 $221.40 $34.50‐$186.90‐84.4%2530441901 1601 BRODIE AVEESTES PARK SCHOOL DISTRICT R‐3Exempt1613462.4 698745 NA$1,837.26 $1,873.96$36.70 2.0%3404200022 353 ASSOCIATION DRY M C A OF THE ROCKIESPartial Exempt 25843712.4 2319513 NA $6,093.406,215.22$121.82 2.0%3524439002 451 E WONDERVIEW AVE STANLEY VILLAGE SHOPPING Commercial605829 509205 NA $1,339.53 $1,366.28 $26.74 2.0%2530285901 610 BIG THOMPSON AVE ESTES PARK SANITATIONExempt138829 33353 NA89.94$91.70 $1.75 1.9%2529109923 2201 MALL RDUSA BoR‐‐UTSD PlantExempt63150.4915 145938 NA $168.19$171.51$3.32 2.0%2520000910 851 DRY GULCH RDCROSSROADS MINISTRYExempt59243 13824 NA$38.66 $39.39 $0.73 1.9%2519352001 710 BLACK CANYON DR 1 XXX CondominiumResidential1884 1884 NA$7.31 $7.41 $0.10 1.4%2530209009 241 4TH STXXX Single Family Residence Residential11957 3328 NA$11.10 $11.27 $0.17 1.5%13
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FEE PROPOSAL COMPARISON
Updated 22 Jan 2019 by GPM
OPTION 1: Fees based on impervious area for all parcels (revenue forecast is $1,571,025 per year). 7676 paying parcel owners
Jurisdiction Minimum Monthly Fee Maximum Monthly Fee
Average
Monthly Fee
Median
Monthly Fee
90th
Percentile
Monthly Fee
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$35/mo
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$100/mo
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$500/mo
Town $2.42 $1,837.26 $15.90 $18.00 $27.09 324 89 9
County $2.36 $6,093.40 $14.18 $15.27 $23.65 125 20 1
Both $2.36 $6,093.40 $15.25 $16.19 $24.22 449 109 10
OPTION 2: Impervious area capped at 12,000 SF for residential parcels only (revenue forecast is $1,569,532 per year). 7676 paying parcel owners
Jurisdiction Minimum Monthly Fee Maximum Monthly Fee
Average
Monthly Fee
Median
Monthly Fee
90th
Percentile
Monthly Fee
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$35/mo
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$100/mo
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$500/mo
# Parcels
Reduction in
fees
>$35/mo
Town $2.42 $1,873.96 $15.95 $18.31 $27.59 262 91 9 62
County $2.36 $6,215.22 $14.04 $15.53 $24.08 51 18 1 74
Both $2.36 $6,215.22 $15.24 $16.47 $24.66 313 109 10 136
OPTION 3: Reduced impervious area fee (93%) plus new pervious area charge of $0.25/acre (revenue forecast is $1,569,694 per year). 8583 paying parcel owners
Jurisdiction Minimum Monthly Fee Maximum Monthly Fee
Average
Monthly Fee
Median
Monthly Fee
90th
Percentile
Monthly Fee
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$35/mo
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$100/mo
No of Parcels
with user
fees
>$500/mo
Town $2.36 $1,714.07 $15.30 $13.30 $24.74 302 82 9
County $2.36 $5,802.04 $15.09 $12.13 $22.60 142 19 2 Increases high fee outliers in County
Both $2.36 $5,802.04 $15.24 $13.94 $23.99 444 101 11 Lower fees for 90% all owners
Sample of 12ksf Cap Impacts
Parcel No.Parcel Address Parcel Owner Name Account Type
Parcel Area
(SF)
Measured
Impervious
Area (SF)
Capped
Impervious
Area (SF)
Monthly Fee
(No Cap)Monthly Fee
(12ksf Cap)
Fee
Change % Change Notes
3402420003 2625 MARYS LAKE RD MARYS LAKE LODGE COMBINED CONDResidential 93700 93700 12000 $248.42 $34.50 -$213.92 -86.1%
2517005701 1890 DEVILS GULCH RD XXX Single Family Residence Residential 475444 42783 12000 $114.71 $34.50 -$80.21 -69.9%
2517005704 2000 DEVILS GULCH RD XXX Single Family Residence Residential 442726 30856 12000 $83.39 $34.50 -$48.89 -58.6%
2517106001 2039 KENDALL DR XXX Single Family Residence Residential 1055590 51972 12000 $138.84 $34.50 -$104.34 -75.2%
2517300009 1880 DEVILS GULCH RD XXX Single Family Residence Residential 914760 35836 12000 $96.47 $34.50 -$61.97 -64.2%
3535225001 1565 HIGHWAY 66 RAMS HORN VILLAGE PUD Residential 233888.014 83411 12000 $221.40 $34.50 -$186.90 -84.4%
2530441901 1601 BRODIE AVE ESTES PARK SCHOOL DISTRICT R-3 Exempt 1613462.4 698745 NA $1,837.26 $1,873.96 $36.70 2.0%
3404200022 353 ASSOCIATION DR Y M C A OF THE ROCKIES Partial Exempt 25843712.4 2319513 NA $6,093.40 6,215.22 $121.82 2.0%
3524439002 451 E WONDERVIEW AVE STANLEY VILLAGE SHOPPING Commercial 605829 509205 NA $1,339.53 $1,366.28 $26.74 2.0%
2530285901 610 BIG THOMPSON AVE ESTES PARK SANITATION Exempt 138829 33353 NA 89.94 $91.70 $1.75 1.9%
2529109923 2201 MALL RD USA BoR--UTSD Plant Exempt 63150.4915 145938 NA $168.19 $171.51 $3.32 2.0%
2520000910 851 DRY GULCH RD CROSSROADS MINISTRY Exempt 59243 13824 NA $38.66 $39.39 $0.73 1.9%
2519352001 710 BLACK CANYON DR 1 XXX Condominium Residential 1884 1884 NA $7.31 $7.41 $0.10 1.4%
2530209009 241 4TH ST XXX Single Family Residence Residential 11957 3328 NA $11.10 $11.27 $0.17 1.5%
Capping the
impervious
area at 12ksf
for 136
residential lots
reduces their
high outliers
fees at the
expense of a
2% fee increase
for the
remaining
7540 parcel
owners.
UPDATED 01-22-2019
$5 $10 $15 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 $150 $200 $300Town569 1944 701 427 347 129 2 0 0020102County193 1015 647 345 233 117 0 0 00000000500100015002000250030003500Fee Distribution ‐RESIDENTIAL (12ksf impervious area cap)14
$5 $10 $15 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 $150 $200 $300 $400 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $8,000Town695 2106 803 499 429 180 30 25 29 24 23 16 41 18 15 5 3 5 3 1 0County223 1036 662 354 252 129 13 4 2 2 5 3 7 3 3 3 1 0 0 0 10500100015002000250030003500Fee Distribution ‐ALL PROPERTIES(12ksf impervious area residential cap) 15
Center latitude: 40.4033 \xB0 North. Center longitude: 105.4839 \xB0 West. Scale: one to 4,800.0000. Visible Features: 1 features visible on EstesPark_EstesValleyDevelopmentCodeBoundary. 66 features visible on
EstesPark_Impervious_Surfaces_clipped_20181213_point. 74 features visible on EstesPark_Impervious_Surfaces_clipped_20181213. 32 features visible on
EVP_Parowner_Parcels_Adjusted_w_Impervious_Surfaces_calculations_20181213.
Tools Edit Features Draw Navigation Find Data Measure Tool Labels
Export Upload DataInitial View IdentifyHome Print
Basic Tools
Open Save Save as
Global Tasks
I want to...PIN: 2517106001
Description
Residential
KENDALL DELBERT E/JUDY A
2039 KENDALL DR
Parcel SQFT: 487,117
Imp. Surf. Centroid Method SQFT: 51,972
Imp. Surf. Clip Method SQFT: 51,972
Details
OBJECTID
722
Shape
N/A
PARCELNUM
2517106001
LOCADDRESS
2039 KENDALL DR
NAME
KENDALL DELBERT E/JUDY A
NAME1
INCAREOF
MAILINGADD
PO BOX 1207
MAILINGCIT
Layers PIN: 2517106001
Sign in2517106001
16
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 8, 2019
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 8th day of January, 2019.
Present: Todd Jirsa, Mayor
Cody Walker, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Carlie Bangs
Marie Cenac
Patrick Martchink
Ron Norris
Ken Zornes
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary
Absent: Greg White, Town Attorney
Mayor Jirsa called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so,
recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
It was moved and seconded (Cenac/Norris) to approve the Agenda with the
addition of the Local Marketing District Board Reappointment of Sean Jurgens
and Local Marketing District Interview Committee Appointment, and it passed
unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
Nancy Almond/County citizen and Director of Estes Valley Investment in Childhood
Success (EVICS) provided an update on childcare facilities in Estes Park. She stated
the two full day childcare centers reached capacity and have been short staffed which
has limited the number of children able to be enrolled. A home licensed childcare
provider, the only type of childcare provider for infants in Estes Park, recently had a
family emergency which affected five families with infants. The Childcare Assistance
Program remains on a two year wait list, and EVICS has provided scholarships for 11
children who should be recipients of the Childcare Assistance Program. EVICS
anticipates receiving a Community Innovation Grant from United Way of Larimer
County. She thanked Trustee Bangs for her work and contributions at EVICS.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS
Trustee Bangs thanked Nancy Almond and EVICS for the opportunity. The Childcare
and Workforce Housing Ad-Hoc Task Force met, and had preliminary discussion on
potential stakeholders, partners and communication with the Board and community. The
Transportation Advisory Board met and discussed trails, connectivity, safe streets along
Graves Avenue and Highway 7 and different technologies to be used with the Parking
Management Plan, such as license plate recognition systems.
Trustee Norris stated the Estes Valley Planning Commission would meet January 15,
2019 and would discuss holding meetings in the late afternoon to early evening. The
Family Advisory Board elected Laurie Dale Marshall as Chair and Rachel Balduzzi as
Vice-Chair, three FAB Board openings would be posted soon for appointment. He also
spoke on the Childcare and Workforce Housing Ad-Hoc Task Force stating criteria
would be presented to the Board regarding focus areas, funding options and plans for
public engagement and outreach. DRAFT17
Board of Trustees – January 8, 2019 – Page 2
Trustee Zornes would be attending the first meeting of the Larimer County Mental
Health Initiative Policy Council, and the Wasteshed Regional Policy Advisory Committee
would meet January 18, 2019.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Town Administrator Lancaster stated the Leadership Team has discussed responses
and contingency plans to the government shutdown. The economic health of the Town
has been tied to Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP) and it would be prudent to
examine revenue impacts to the Town. They discussed the options of placing a hold on
capital purchases, capital projects not funded by grants, and new hiring. They also
discussed the impacts the shutdown would have on the community and RMNP
employees; and option of waiving late charges and interest fees on utility bills.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Bills.
2. Town Board Minutes dated December 11, 2018 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated December 11, 2018.
3. Family Advisory Board Minutes dated November 1, 2018 (acknowledgement
only).
4. Parks Advisory Board (PAB) Bylaw Update.
5. Resolution #01-19 Public Posting Area Designation.
It was moved and seconded (Bangs/Walker) to approve the Consent Agenda,
and it passed unanimously.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. ORDINANCE #01-19 AMENDMENTS TO THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL
RESIDENTIAL CODE (IRC). It was moved and seconded (Walker/Norris) to
Continue Ordinance #01-19 to January 22, 2019, and it passed unanimously.
2. LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT BOARD APPOINTMENT – SEAN JURGENS,
REAPPOINTMENT, TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2022. Mayor Jirsa
presented the reappointment of Sean Jurgens to the Local Marketing District
(LMD) Board. It was moved and seconded (Jirsa/Cenac) to reappoint Sean
Jurgens to the Local Marketing District Board for a 4-year term expiring
December 31, 2022, and it passed unanimously.
3. LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT INTERVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT.
Mayor Jirsa presented the appointment of two Board members to the LMD
Interview Committee and suggested himself and Trustee Cenac be appointed. It
was moved and seconded (Walker/Norris) to appoint Mayor Jirsa and
Trustee Cenac to the Local Marketing District Interview Committee, and it
passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 7:19 p.m.
Todd Jirsa, Mayor
Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary DRAFT18
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado January 8, 2019
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 8th day of January, 2019.
Board: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Walker, Trustees Bangs,
Cenac, Martchink, Norris and Zornes
Attending: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Walker, Trustees Bangs,
Cenac, Martchink, Norris and Zornes
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, and Recording Secretary Disney.
Absent: Town Attorney White
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
BENEFITS OF ROUNDABOUTS.
Director Muhonen and Mark Johnson of MTJ Roundabout Engineering presented the
history, benefits, and challenges associated with using roundabouts for roadway
intersection traffic control. Three roundabouts were being designed for installation in
Estes Park at the Wonderview/MacGregor intersection, US 36/Community Drive
intersection and Moraine/Crags intersection. Mr. Johnson highlighted the advantages of
roundabouts as: reductions to fatalities, intersection crashes and injures; cost efficiency
over the lifetime of a roundabout; shorter and safer pedestrian crossings; reduced air
and noise pollution caused by idling cars; and simplified driver decision-making.
The Trustees discussed: roundabout education for visitor population; structure of three-
way roundabouts; the shorter distance of crosswalks and size of roundabouts; the ability
to accommodate larger vehicles; snow maintenance; options to accommodate disabled
pedestrians; and criteria standards for roundabout design.
TRUSTEE & ADMINSTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Town Administrator Lancaster requested the Board determine when to discuss the
Stanley Historic District becoming subject to Estes Valley Planning Commission for
development review. He stated this could be done before or after the Film Center
Development, a Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority (NOCO RTA) project,
has been approved. It was determined to review the Stanley Historic District
development review process in 2020.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Mayor Jirsa stated there would be an additional position to be filled by Estes Park on
NOCO RTA. Additionally, Mike Abbiatti, Town appointee, would be resigning soon.
Thus, the Board would need to make two appointments to NOCO RTA. It was
determined to bring the appointments forward to the January 22, 2019 meeting. It was
also determined to add the seasonal parking issue and the Parking Management Plan
to items for future consideration by the Board. Mayor Jirsa stated he would like an in-
depth review of Building Department Operations and potential implementation of a 24-
hour approval process at the Study Session on January 22, 2019.
There being no further business, Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 6:56 p.m.
Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary DRAFT19
20
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Bob Leavitt, Vice-Chair Sharry White, Commissioners Nick Smith,
Russ Schneider, Robert Foster, Frank Theis, Steve Murphree
Attending: Chair Leavitt, Commissioners, Foster, Murphree. Smith and Theis
Als o Attending: Acting Director Travis Machalek, Town Attorney Greg White, Senior
Planner Jeff Woeber, Town Board Liaison Ron Norris, Planner II Brittany
Hathaway, Planner I Robin Becker, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund
Absent: Commissioners Schneider, White
Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 20 people
in attendance.
1.OPEN MEETING
Planning Commission/Staff Introductions.
2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (Theis/Foster) to change item 6 (Ferguson) with item 5
(Black Canyon) on the agenda as presented and the motion passed 5-0.
3.Public Comment:
Tom Gootz, 2855 Grey Fox Drive, Chapter 4, Table 4.1 has been intercepted/distributed to
many people, and the dramatic proposals for residential areas are wrong for Estes Park. He
asked that the PC take them seriously.
4.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of the October 16, 2018 Study Session Minutes.
Approval of the October 16, 2018 Planning Commission meeting minutes.
Approval of the October 30, 2018 Special Planning Commission meeting minutes.
It was moved and seconded (Murphree/Smith) to approve the consent agenda as
presented and the motion passed 5-0.
5.MINOR SUBDIVISION, FERGUSON TOWNHOMES 3 AND 4
1581, 1583, 1587, 1589 Mary’s Lake Road
Commissioner Theis recused himself and took a seat in the audience.
Planner Becker reviewed the Minor Subdivision proposing the creation of two townhome
subdivisions. Each would consist of two townhome lots, two out-lots and a townhome
21
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall building. Staff recommended approval of proposed Preliminary Townhome Subdivisions with
the following conditions:
1)Detailed grading and drainage plan for both shall be submitted with the Final Plat
applications.
2)Shared drainage and maintenance easements between Ferguson Townhome 3 and 4
shall be shown on the Preliminary and Final Plats.
3)A Road Maintenance Agreement shall be submitted with Final Plat applications.
Commission/Staff Discussion:
None
Applicant Discussion:
Seth Hanson, applicant, stated that he has previously done a similar project, approved by
the PC. The townhomes are under construction, and the goal is to sell them individually
rather than have one ownership. The county engineer requires a detention basin, thus the
conditions of approval. The downhill neighbors are not impacted by the development
drainage.
Public Comment:
Trudy Ester, 1070 Griffith Court, explained the massive concrete “lego” blocks that were
installed to address the drainage from the applicant’s first project. She has spent thousands
of dollars on landscaping to cover them up. She showed the PC photos, requesting that the
applicant finish the first project before being allowed to do another.
Applicant:
Hanson noted that what Ms. Ester was referring to was a completely separate property and
project. He did not want the concrete wall, however it was required of him by County
Engineers at that height, with that material. He was not allowed to have any water drain
onto her property including historical flow. He confirmed that Conditional Items 2 and 3
have been satisfied, item 1 is waiting for approval from the County Engineer.
Commission Comments/Questions:
None
It was moved and seconded (Foster/Smith) to approve the Ferguson 3 and 4
Preliminary Townhome Subdivision according to findings of fact, including findings
and conditions recommended by staff. The motion passed 4-0.
6.DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT, BLACK CANYON INN
800 MacGregor Avenue
Planner Becker reviewed the proposal of a 150 seat wedding venue, a motel-style
accommodations building and 8 condo-style accommodation units. A variance is scheduled
for review by the Board of Adjustment on December 4. Staff recommended approval of the
22
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Development Plan with the condition that the applicant receives the variance.
Commission/Staff Discussion:
Theis clarified that the PC was being asked to review this project prior to the variance on the
size of the building. Attorney White explained that there is no code requirement for
percentage of accessory use to overall use. If the Board of Adjustment doesn’t grant the
variance, a new development plan will be required.
Applicant Discussion:
Justin Spodek, applicant, spoke on the process of the plan, remarking that the business is
driven by hospitality, and because of that they have proceeded with empathy and
consideration. They been in close contact with neighbors and generously agreed to remove
the entire 3rd floor of the proposed accommodations building. The wedding venue is being
built down slope and facing north to mitigate noise for neighbors. Outdoor Deck and patio
space will be used as intermittent space between the ceremony and the reception. The
upper level will be where ceremonies will be held, ground level will be for receptions and after
parties. Hours of operation have not been decided. The wedding venue will be rented out to
non-staying guests as well as paying overnight guests. If parking were to become a problem,
a shuttle service would be used, which would be an acceptable condition for the PC to add to
the proposal.
Theis suggested developing an overflow parking plan.
Steve Lane, Bas1s Architecture, presented slides on the proposal showing the layout and
location of the venue. In regard to the variance request, Chapter 5 of the Development Code
states that a banquet hall is allowed as accessory use and buildings can be detached in this
(A)zoning district.
Jes Reetz, Cornerstone Engineering, discussed traffic flows and impact. Delich and
Associates did the traffic analysis study. There will be an ‘emergency access only’ drive on
the south exit, sharing an easement with the Stanley Hotel property. There is an overflow
parking area already constructed at the south entrance to the property. This area cannot be
paved due to stormwater considerations.
Public Comment:
Anna Claassen, 370 Homesteader Lane, thanked the developers for their excellent
communication and willingness to work with neighbors. She expressed concerns with
vehicle noise and lights from the parking lot on properties to the south and east. The owners
are open to a berm and landscaping, and she requested that the landscaping be irrigated for
3 years to ensure it does not die.
JR Davis, 375 Prospector Lane, agreed with Claassen’s comments and concerns. He
suggested that the commitments and proposals by the neighbors be put in writing.
Applicant Response:
Reetz explained the 4 foot retaining wall being proposed on the eastern edge of the parking
23
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall lot. It is approximately 10 feet off the property line, with a berm and landscaping behind,
which should block headlights. Landscaping code requires 8 trees and 11 shrubs per 100
feet of linear property line. There is the possibility of adding a split-rail fence to keep people
from trespassing. Theis mentioned that a solid fence or wall would block noise and light
better than landscaping alone. The applicant is open to continued work with neighbors on
the concerns of noise and lights.
Lane asked why the 1,000 sq. foot variance mechanism didn’t go before the BOA for
previous, more recent projects. White answered that the PC can grant a modification up to
25%. Machalek answered that the planning staff did a search of previous variances and
determined that it was overlooked in the past, but that doesn’t mean we can overlook it now
when we know it is a requirement.
Commissioner Discussion:
All agreed that this is a well done project, complementing the applicants on the way they
followed the rules and terms of communication with the community and neighbors.
It was moved and seconded (Leavitt/Foster) to approve the Black Canyon Wedding
Venue Development Plan with the condition of a Parking Plan for overflow parking,
and according to findings of fact with findings and conditions recommended by Staff.
The motion passed 5-0.
10 minute break from 2:55-3:05
7.CODE AMENDMENT, ALLOW OFFICE USE IN RM- ZONING
Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC): §5.2 Table 5.1 and EVDC §5.2.B.2.i
Planner Hathaway reviewed the proposal to amend EVDC Accessory Uses permitted in
Residential Districts and additional requirements for Specific Accessory Uses/Structures
permitted in Residential Zoning Districts. Staff recommended approval of the language in
“Exhibit A” stating that this text amendment is in response to a shortage of adequate and
affordable office space for small businesses and non-profit agencies.
Commission/Staff Discussion:
None
Public Comment:
None
Applicant Discussion:
Laurie Dale Marshall, Estes Park Nonprofit Resource Center (EPNRC) Director, read a letter
giving the history of EPNRC and the reason for the proposed Code Amendment and Special
Review. She noted that the EPNRC office space is budgeted at $1,000/month and in her
search she found two spaces in that price range with most office rentals being between
24
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall $1200-$1750/month and not large enough. Affordable office space is hard for all nonprofits
in the Estes Valley. The additional, but not exclusive, access within the church makes the
space more desirable.
Michael Moore, Pastor of the Presbyterian Community Church of the Rockies, stated that as
a church, they are not allowed to profit from use of space. The church is able to partner with
and recoup costs with a nonprofit making it a win/win situation.
Commission Comments:
Commissioner Murphree thanked the pastor for his allowance of the use of the church by the
community. Leavitt and Foster expressed concern that this will open up RM zoned area to
excessive office use but felt comfortable with the restrictions and the S2 process. The
temporary use permit is only available for one year, and this Code Amendment is the only
way, per Code, to allow this type of office use.
It was moved and seconded (Foster/Leavitt) to recommend approval to the Estes Park
Town Board of Trustees and the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners of
the text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code, finding that the
amendment is in accord with Section 3.3 of the EVDC. The motion passed 5-0.
8.SPECIAL REVIEW, ESTES PARK NONPROFIT RECOURSE CENTER, OFFICE USE IN
RM-MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, 1700 BRODIE AVENUE
Planner Hathaway reviewed the proposal of the Special Review Use (S2) to permit an
accessory office use within the RM-Residential Multi-Family zoning district at the PCCR.
Staff recommended approval of the S2 Special Review with findings and conditions as
stated.
Commission/Staff Discussion:
Highest amount of square feet the EPNRC could go up to at this location is 1400, from the
current 800. This is a good reciprocal use for the church and EPNRC.
Public Comment:
None
It was moved and seconded (Leavitt/Murphree) to recommend approval to the Estes
Park Town Board of Trustees the Special Review Use proposal, including findings
and conditions as recommended by staff. The motion passed 5-0.
9.CODE AMENDMENT, CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Amendment to the EVDC to remove inappropriate regulatory cross-references
between the Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code.
Planner Woeber reviewed the request. The current Code requires Comprehensive Plan
“consistency” as a criterion in decision-making for various types of applications and actions.
The removal of such regulatory requirements restores the Comprehensive Plan to its
25
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall appropriate status as a visioning and goal setting document.
Commission/Staff Discussion:
Foster asked what the Comprehensive Plan’s role is in future changes to the EVDC.
Removing the Comprehensive Plan from Development Proposals is a terrible mistake. PC
should have a clear understanding of what the effect of these amendments would be to the
Development Code. Leavitt mentioned the unintended consequences and need for a
thorough review before taking any action. PC has had short time to review and digest this
amendment and the public needs time to look at it. White noted that the State mandates
that we have a Comprehensive Plan, and State Statutes require Municipalities adopt it. PC
is not required to use Comprehensive Plan as criteria for making approvals by State Statute.
One of the main problems is the use of the terms shall be consistent and compatible. Many
aspects of the Comprehensive Plan can be used for or against in the justification process.
One of the main concerns is with regard to Development Plan approval with use of the
Comprehensive Plan (density, height, land use, etc.) to make sure those boxes are
checked. This is not just removing the linkage between the Comprehensive Plan and
Development Code, it is clarifying how, where, and when. This subject needs more
discussion and review. Trustee Norris recalled that the concerns and issues of the Town
Board and the Board of County Commissioners almost exclusively related to Development
Plans. There is value in using the Comprehensive Plan for zoning and general Valley-wide
development. The 1999 plan is still what needs to be used to bridge the two subjects.
Public Comment:
Fred Barber, 2190 Devils Gulch Road, provided written comments to the PC and staff
regarding the proposal, and asked that they be entered into the record (attached). He spoke
on keeping the current wording and not updating the Code, which is applicable under the
law.
Jay Vetter, 1711 Mills Drive, remarked that the PC is the citizen’s voice for the Estes Valley.
He referenced recent Code Amendments, stating that this Code Amendment would be
detrimental to the community and requested approval only with careful analysis and citizen
input.
Kevin Conrad, 2240 Arapahoe Road, commended the PC on the thoughtful deliberation they
are putting into the current Code Amendments, warning of the serious consequences.
Decoupling requires the need of a mechanism to incorporate the concepts of the
Comprehensive Plan into enforceable code. He encouraged the PC to go slowly down this
road and find a way to make individual decisions on developments.
Commission Comments:
Foster would like more time and a better solution on this subject. Machalek stated that he
understands what the PC is looking for: clarity on what the Comprehensive Plan can and
should be used for regarding Code Amendments and the need to take a more surgical
approach in extracting the Comprehensive Plan from the Development Code. Theis
believes that zoning and land use decisions need to be left connected to the Comprehensive
Plan. There is no rush in approving this Code Amendment. Updating the current plan to roll
26
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission Meeting
November 13, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall into the new plan is necessary. Directive from elected boards is needed on how the
Comprehensive Plan relates to zoning and code amendments.
It was moved and seconded (Leavitt/Theis) to continue the amendment as stated in
Exhibit A to the December 18 PC meeting. Reasons given were: more time needed to
review and discuss the issues raised; no time constraints; the need to retain some
connection between Comprehensive Plan and Development Code in code changes
and zoning; need for public input. The motion passed 5-0.
10. CODE AMENDMENT, PARK AND RECREATION DEFINITION
Planner Woeber requested a continuance of the proposed Amendment to the EVDC to
revise the definition of Park and Recreation Facilities to the December 18 PC meeting due
to the current drafts not being sufficiently complete for the PC to review. A continuance of
the moratorium will be needed due to this continuance.
Public Comment:
Fred Barber, 2190 Devils Gulch Road, provided written comments to the PC and staff. He
requested that they be entered into the record (attached). He suggested vacating the
moratorium and rolling back the wording on the Code Change on an interim basis which will
take away the “time frame schedule”.
It was moved and seconded (Smith/Theis) to continue the Park and Recreation Code
Amendment to the December 18, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. The motion
passed 5-0.
There being no further business, Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 4:20 p.m.
Bob Leavitt, Chair
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
27
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
December 18, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Bob Leavitt, Vice-Chair Sharry White, Commissioners Nick Smith,
Russ Schneider, Robert Foster, Frank Theis, Steve Murphree
Attending: Chair Leavitt, Commissioners Schneider, White, Foster, Smith, Murphree
and Theis
Also Attending: Acting Director Travis Machalek, Town Attorney Greg White, Senior
Planner Jeff Woeber, Planner Robin Becker, Town Board Liaison Ron
Norris, Code Compliance Officer Linda Hardin, Recording Secretary Karin
Swanlund
Absent: none
Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 5 people in
attendance.
1.OPEN MEETING
Planning Commission/Staff Introductions
Thanks were given to Commissioner Schneider who was attending his final meeting. His
appointment is up and he will not be renewing. This leaves a vacancy available to be filled
by a town citizen.
2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (White/Schneider) to approve the agenda as presented
and the motion passed 7-0.
3.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of November 13, 2018 Planning Commission meeting minutes.
Approval of November 13, 2018 Study Session minutes
Large Vacation Home, 907 Prospect Park Drive, Jason/Amy Brown, owners
Request to increase bedrooms from four to five.
It was moved and seconded (Smith/Murphree) to approve the consent agenda as
presented and the motion passed 6-0 with White abstaining.
4.CODE AMENDMENT, CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Staff recommended this item be continued to the January 15, 2019 Meeting.
Foster asked if the November proposal is supported by the town. Machalek stated that it
is not, the topic is the same, the edits are different and a new draft can be drawn up if that
is what the Commission wants. Foster then suggested withdrawing the proposal.
Staff withdrew the proposed code amendment. It will be resubmitted at a future
date. No action was taken.
28
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
December 18, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
5.CODE AMENDMENT, PARK AND RECREATION DEFINITIONS
Staff recommended this item be continued to the January 15, 2019 meeting. Woeber
stated that there is no acceptable draft for County approval at this time.
Foster recommended that this Code Amendment be withdrawn from the agenda as there
is no content before the Commission to continue or review. There has been a large
amount of public comment and confusion on this subject.
Staff recommended withdrawal of the code amendment continuance. It will be
resubmitted at a future date. No action was taken.
6.DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 1551 S. SAINT VRAIN AVENUE, ESTES PARK HOUSING
AUTHORITY
Staff recommended this item be continued to the January 15, 2019 meeting due to Public
Works comments not being addressed by the applicant in time for this meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Smith/White) to continue the Development Plan of 1551
S. Saint Vrain for the reasons presented and the motion passed 7-0.
7.DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 1450 BIG THOMPSON AVENUE, QUALITY INN
Planner Woeber reviewed the Development Plan proposal for the addition of a two-story
structure with a garage and storage on the lower level and two one-bedroom “managers’
quarters” apartments on the upper level. The applicant also requested a waiver to the
maximum lot coverage standard. A 2014 Development Plan was never completed,
therefore a plan for the entire site is requested to be approved with this current
application. Public Works will review final construction plans and will take a closer look at
the drainage issues. Staff recommended approval of the Development Plan and the
Minor Modification request, to allow lot coverage of 54.9% in lieu of the maximum
allowable 50%.
Commission/Staff Discussion:
Clarification of the minor modification waiver was given; the applicant is asking for 54.9%
coverage. PC can give up to a 25% waiver on the 50% maximum allowable, this request
is for an additional 4.9%. Structure size footprint is 900 square feet, 2 stories high.
Applicant Discussion:
Jes Reetz, Cornerstone Engineering, stated that the impervious coverage is being
increased by 1.5% making drainage issues negligible. The owner knows of no current
drainage issues. There is a lot of open/green space on the downhill slope from
construction site.
Public Comment:
None
29
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
December 18, 2018
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission Questions:
For approval of the requested lot coverage exception, the PC would like to see Public
Works review the drainage prior to construction. Drainage reports should have been in
the staff report. Public W orks did not see a problem with it in the pre-application stages.
Woeber suggested a drainage letter signed and stamped by an engineer prior to the
zoning authorization of the building permit. Theis expressed concerns about approving
the entire development plan, stating that future problems could come back on the PC.
It was moved and seconded (Theis/Murphree) to approve the Development Plan and
Minor Modification Request with the condition of acquiring a letter from a licensed
engineer describing the current drainage situation and findings of fact
recommended by staff. The motion passed 7-0.
8.Public Comment:
John Vernon, 3175 Tunnel Road, asked the PC to reject the uncoupling of Development
Code from the Comprehensive Plan.
Naomi Hawf, Estes Park Housing Authority, stated she is looking forward to the January
review of the Peak View Apartments Development Plan, and that all necessary comments
should be submitted and be a nonissue.
9.REPORTS:
Director Hunt should return to the office by late December.
Merry Christmas!
There being no further business, Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 2:07 p.m.
_________________________________
Bob Leavitt, Chair
__________________________________
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
30
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 15, 2018
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Parks Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park,
Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Conference Room of the Estes Park
Museum on the 15th day of November, 2018.
Present Merle Moore
Vicki Papineau
Wade Johnston
Geoffrey Elliot
Also
Present: Brian Berg, Parks Supervisor
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Patrick Martchink, Town Board Liaison
Kevin McEachern, Public Works Operations Manager
Absent: Dewain Lockwood
Chair Merle Moore called the meeting to order at 8:37 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public in attendance.
Co-Chair Johnston provided the update for the Estes Arts District (EAD). The EAD has
been meeting recently to plan for the coming year. Johnston reported there is a very
talented, accomplished sculptor in town that is willing to work to create something
beautiful for the Downtown Estes Loop Project.
The EAD has funding to do some great stuff this year and will be budgeting for
contributions to the Town’s AIPP fund for future projects. The EAD is currently planning
for a project near Safeway located in the transition area from the parking lot down to the
Subway area. The EAD will push native Colorado, low maintenance plantings.
Chair Moore stated that the Mrs. Walsh’s Garden Advisory Committee (MWGAC) has
discussed hybrid natives that are superior to, and more elaborate than natives that
could potentially be added into the Parks system, with the exception of Mrs. Walsh’s
Garden (MWG).
GENERAL BUSINESS
A motion was made and seconded (Papineau/Johnston) to approve the October
meeting minutes with minor edits and all were in favor.
MRS WALSH’S GARDEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MWGAC) UPDATE
The MWGAC is looking to create Google group for MWGAC members to have open
dialogue regarding educational programming and how to interact with the Parks
Division, the PAB, and the Town Board. The MWGAC will then be able to review their
mission statement collaboratively via Google Group.
31
Parks Advisory Board – November 15, 2018 – Page 2
AIPP FUNDING
Chair Moore sent documentation to the PAB reflecting what other communities do to
fund their AIPP programs and he’s looking for feedback from the PAB on this
information. Moore is questioning whether 1% of the funds from capital project costs
should be the primary funding source. Moore also asked PAB members if the funds for
each project should only be used for art specific to that project or if it should be used for
any art on Town property. Co-Chair Johnston stated that in many communities 1% of
transient taxes (hotels, etc.) are used for public art. This type of change would need to
be on a future voting ballot and sent to a vote. It was further stated that this would get
on the ballot easier if the initiative is citizen-led and with a signed petition with 350+
signatures.
The PAB then discussed tying this new 1% initiative to government entities only or also
requiring this of private entity projects. Moore will touch base with the State lead for
public art in Colorado for further discussion. This will help outline best practices.
Trustee Liaison Martchink will discuss with the other Trustees, their interest in
establishing an AIPP fund and will bring a response to the next regularly scheduled PAB
meeting.
PAB BY-LAW UPDATES
The PAB discussed that, especially with all the difficulty recruiting new PAB members,
requiring applicants reside in the Estes Valley is not a broad enough area. This
reference in the by-laws should be changed to ‘Estes Valley School District’ boundaries.
It was also suggested the wording be changed to remove the current requirement of two
years of residency.
A motion was made and seconded (Elliot/Johnston) to change Section 1A by ending the
section after, “. . .Tree City USA Standards.”
A motion was made and seconded (Johnston/Elliot) to change the language in Section
3A from ‘Estes Valley’ to ‘Estes Valley School District’, to remove the requirement for
two year residency, and to state there will be no more than 7 members on the board,
and all were in favor.
A motion was made and seconded (Elliot/Johnston) to change the language in Section
3F by removing the stated number of members required for a quorum to state, “. . . a
majority of the sitting board. . .” and all were in favor.
Once the new by-laws are formally adopted by the Town Board, Chair Moore would like
the Town’s Human Resources Division to reach out to those applicants that were turned
down due to the requirements being modified to express the intent to allow their
membership application.
AIPP MINOR EDITS UPDATE
The PAB reviewed the AIPP Guidelines document reflecting minor content and
formatting changes.
A motion was made and seconded (Papineau/Elliott) to accept the changes and all were
in favor.
32
Parks Advisory Board – November 15, 2018 – Page 3
PARKS DIVISION UPDATE
x Keri Kelly had a happy and healthy baby girl.
x Supervisor Berg attended the regional open space meeting and shared 2018
expenditures. All counties in the region provided updates as well.
o The area knows as the Thumb and Needle on Prospect Mountain is going
up for sale. Should the property be sold to the government the sale price
is $790K after a 5% decrease.
o The Town Board has opted to fund trails
Member Papineau brought up issues with noxious weed bagging. There’s an existing
unfunded mandate for noxious weed control that allows owners to mow noxious weed
fields. Mowing (without bagging) spreads seed for transference to other properties.
There is a need for ordinance modification and adoption to intervene, requiring
commercial mowers and individuals to bag the weeds even if mowing. The current
process perpetuates the problem. Papineau will meet with Larimer County on
December 13. Operations Manager Kevin McEachern will look into a grading permit.
Supervisor Berg will bring the existing noxious weed ordinance to the December PAB
meeting for review and to provide a recommendation to the Town Board. Larimer
County is conducting heavy-handed enforcement to get the point across although the
Town has not conducted this type of enforcement.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Town recently received a request for support and funding for a sculpture to be
erected for a pet elk named Annie. Based on the information provided, the existing
regulations and the shown opposition by Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW), the PAB
doesn’t feel this sends the appropriate message to the public.
A motion was made and seconded (Elliot/Johnston) to support CPW previous opinion
on the matter of Annie the Elk and not provide support of erecting a sculpture and all
were in favor. The verbiage used for this basis is from an email sent by the Area 2
Wildlife Manager of CPW dated May 23, 2016, “While CPW does not object to the
statue, we feel it would be wrong for Lee to use the statute to memorialize or bring
attention to the elk he has in possession by placing signage about Anna, Destiny or any
of the other four elk he has. In Colorado it is illegal for a person to have wildlife in
private possession.”
A motion was made and seconded (Johnston/Papineau) to adjourn the meeting and all
were in favor.
Recording Secretary
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works
33
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 20, 2018
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Parks Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park,
Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Room 202 of Estes Park Town Hall on the
20th day of December, 2018.
Present Merle Moore
Vicki Papineau
Wade Johnston
Geoffrey Elliot
Dewain Lockwood
Also
Present: Brian Berg, Parks Supervisor
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Patrick Martchink, Town Board Liaison
Kevin McEachern, Public Works Operations Manager
Absent:
Chair Merle Moore called the meeting to order at 8:37 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Lee and Molly Kemper, along with their representative Kent Bernbeck attended the PAB
meeting to present their proposal for a bronze statue of their pet elk, Annie, to be
erected in Bond Park. A powerpoint presentation was shown introducing Annie as well
as sample sculptures created by the proposed artist.
Mr. Kemper stated that he was contacted by an Estes Park veterinarian in 1973
requesting help with Annie. She’d been orphaned and attacked by coyotes at
MacGregor Ranch and was needing rehabilitation. Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW)
intended to shoot her however Lee stood in front of her to prevent her death. At this
time there were no reintroduction methods established. Mr. Kemper has devoted his
entire life to caring for the elk in his possession and has paid for all care himself. Annie
is almost 30 years of age and Mr. Kemper has two of her granddaughters in his
possession. He’s currently caring for these three elk and one llama.
The PAB thanked the Kempers for their presentation and stated that the matter would
be discussed further and a determination made.
Trustee Liaison Martchink informed the PAB that he discussed the proposed Art In
Public Places Fund with the other Trustees and the Town Board would like to see a
draft policy presented by the PAB. More information is needed in order for an informed
decision to be made on implementing an allocation to that fund.
Martchink initiated an email to the Town’s Finance Direct Duane Hudson. Hudson
replied providing critical information regarding capital projects and associated 1% of
each project to the AIPP fund. He provided various figures with caveats regarding
grants. Funds involved are dependent on the capital projects performed each year. The
designated project manager would then have to add these funds to the overall project
34
Parks Advisory Board – December 20, 2018 – Page 2
cost. Hudson also stated that there needs to be a nexus between funding mechanism
and project and that management of the funds needs to be determined. Once details
are ironed out a proposal needs created. Martchink would like to see a formal policy for
further discussion and adoption.
Member Papineau asked Chair Moore if there is a model policy to reference. Moore
doesn’t have current data so he will reach out to a few communities .
GENERAL BUSINESS
A motion was made and seconded (Johnston/Elliot) to approve the November meeting
minutes and all were in favor.
MRS WALSH’S GARDEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MWGAC) UPDATE
The MWGAC has now created a google group to collaboratively review the garden’s
mission statements, program planning, etc.
Member Papineau asked if MWGAC has been receiving itemized statements regarding
the MWG fund expenditures. She stated the committee should know the specific
expenditures. Moore stated that the MWGAC has been hoping for year-end details. This
information will aid with future planning. Berg will be providing this data to the MWGAC
at the end of the year.
NOXIOUS WEED ORDINANCE
Supervisor Berg distributed the current version of the Town’s Noxious Weed Ordinance.
The Town’s Code Enforcement Office Linda Hardin is responsible for enforcement of
noxious weed ordinance violations however, due to time restrictions she performs more
reactive enforcement.
There currently exists an unfunded State mandate to dispose of noxious weeds
however no specific language is contained outlining the appropriate methods for proper
weed eradication. Verbiage needs expanded to include this information. The local
ordinance can have stronger requirements than the State. The PAB has the knowledge
base to best restructure and further detail the language. Chair Moore stated that simply
stating the weeds need to be removed “prior to seed maturity of the different weed
species” with an added chart would be very beneficial. Member Elliot stated that
ordinance modification should include educational information and tools to properly
handle the weeds.
Member Papineau stated there is a huge problem in the Estes Valley. She’s heard
many complaints that revegetation efforts fail due to the existing noxious weed issues.
Supervisor Berg suggested potentially creating a subcommittee of the PAB to work in
collaboration with Compliance Officer Hardin to define an appropriate ordinance. There
is also the potential to partner with other entities (i.e. ELSA) that would like to see a
stronger ordinance in place. Papineau informed the group that the next ELSA meeting
will occur on January 3, 2019.
The PAB will review the content of the ordinance and bring all comments to the next
regularly scheduled meeting in January. Member Papineau will help liaison the
subcommittee with help from Moore and Elliot. Papineau to establish a meeting date
with Enforcement Officer Hardin within the next week.
35
Parks Advisory Board – December 20, 2018 – Page 3
SENSORY GARDEN
The Sensory Garden plan established by Tricia Morales-Diaz has been vetted through
the Town officials needing involved (Public Information Officer, Public Works Director,
etc.). This stage of the plan initiates the push to get signs approved and the idea moving
forward. Project details will be defined at a later date. The Town is hoping to partner
with Visit Estes Park, Families for Estes, and other community organizations.
Berg stated the entire location for the Sensory Garden would be re-irrigated. Chair
Moore suggested establishing back-up plants for those being ‘touched’ as part of the
Sensory Garden. For the faux river, Member Papineau suggested contacting Rocky
Mountain National Park (RMNP) regarding epoxy testing done near the greenhouse and
that will later be used near the Alluvial Fan. Member Elliot suggested contacting Doug
Parker at the RMNP Trails Office.
PARKS DIVISION UPDATE
Berg was approached by Sunrise Rotary requesting installation of one or two donated
flagstone picnic tables with benches near the Gazebo by the Wiest Parking lot. Berg is
concerned that outdoor furniture placed in certain areas could cause additional work
during snow operations. The width of that space would be very tight with non-movable
tables. There is substantial seating already available and river access is critical to this
location.
Chair Moore suggested the potential of placing the donated tables by the existing
benches rather than sticking more seating out in the middle. Berg will factor this into his
evaluation of feasibility. Another option would be to remove a planting area destroyed
during the construction of the newly replaced Moraine Avenue Bridge.
With the loss of a key employee, Tricia Morales-Diaz in a couple months, Berg will be
attending the CSU Career Fair to scout potential replacement.
Parks staff will be attending the February ProGreen conference in Denver, CO. This
conference offers excellent educational opportunities for staff.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chair Moore stated he’s noticed that the AIPP Brochures located at Town Hall need
replenished.
Moore also stated that Visit Estes Park’s (VEP) website regarding bronze statues in
Estes Park is not accurate, complete nor cleaned up enough to hand out. The existing
art inventory lives in Town Hall.
Berg reminded the PAB that all agenda items need to be funneled through Chair Moore
for addition to each meeting agenda in a timely manner.
The PAB discussed the Annie the Elk presentation. Member Papineau stated this would
be a good learning opportunity to teach public about how to properly interact with the
animals. Co-Chair Johnston is torn based on the emotional presentation by the
Kempers. Member Elliot stated that while he’s sympathetic to Lee’s story, the issue still
remains that these are unnatural living circumstances.
36
Parks Advisory Board – December 20, 2018 – Page 4
Elliot’s position has not changed and he still feels that the Town should not participate in
memorializing Annie by allowing the statue on Town property. Private property is not an
issue. There exists a taskforce to protect wildlife and allowing this would contradict
efforts by task force. Moore feels the emotion conveyed in the presentation but concurs
this is a bad message to send to the public and sets the wrong precedent.
A motion was made and seconded to reject the proposal as it relates to Town property
(Elliot/Papineau) and all were in favor.
A motion was made and seconded (Elliot/Johnston) to adjourn the meeting at 10:11 and
all were in favor.
Recording Secretary
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works
37
38
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 21, 2018
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Room 203 of Town Hall on the 21st
day of November, 2018.
Present: Gordon Slack
Tom Street
Belle Morris
Stan Black
Ron Wilcocks
Linda Hanick
Amy Hamrick (via FaceTime)
Also Present: Trustee Carlie Bangs, Town Board Liaison
Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Vanessa Solesbee, Parking & Transit Manager
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Absent: Ann Finley
Janice Crow
Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:02 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Estes Park resident John Long was in attendance. Long and his wife recently relocated
to Estes Park. He retired at the end of June this year as the Executive Director of Bike
Public, a Houston, Texas comprehensive bicycle plan. He’s also done extensive work
with the City of Houston’s Complete Streets Coalition. Houston adopted the Complete
Streets program and Long is very pleased to see that Estes Park working toward
something similar. He feels the principles are critical for community development. This
will help ensure mobility for all transportation modes.
Director Muhonen asked Long if he’d encountered a wave of scooters and, if so, to please
provide input. Long stated he doesn’t have enough information about scooters and is
unfamiliar with that process. Houston is currently dealing more with dockless bike
systems and is holding off on scooters but continues looking at the parameters and
restrictions on how they operate.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A motion was made and seconded (Slack/Wilcocks) to approve both the October 17, 2018
regular meeting minutes as well as the October 23, 2018 special meeting minutes and all
were in favor.
WAYFINDING UPDATE:
Chair Morris informed the TAB that wayfinding signage proposals will be brought to the
Town Board in an upcoming meeting. Manager Hook asked the TAB their thoughts on
providing a letter of support with recommendations. Morris suggested drafting a memo
mentioning the importance of connectivity.
Member Slack confirmed with Manager Hood that the 2019 budget for wayfinding is $50K.
The Downtown Estes Loop (DEL) will be implementing consistent signage. The goal is
for high quality, low maintenance signage.
Member Slack asked Trustee Liaison Bangs if a letter is needed for the wayfinding. Bangs
stated that since the funds have already been approved through the budget process a
letter isn’t necessary. Muhonen stated that if the TAB decides to provide a letter it would
be due in one week and therefore may not be the best use of members’ time.
39
Transportation Advisory Board – November 21, 2018 – Page 2
COMPLETE STREET POLICY REVIEW:
Chair Morris introduced the full Complete Streets packet of information to the TAB.
Director Muhonen notified the TAB that he made the decision to remove this topic from
next week’s agenda pending a full set of completed documentation on the policy being
introduced. This topic has been moved to the January 22, 2018 Town Board Study
Session agenda.
The TAB began their review of the content of provided overview and background of policy
creation. Muhonen confirmed this is to be added with the presentation of the policy being
proposed. He asked that a Transportation Advisory Board Recommendation be provided
on the proposed Complete Streets Policy.
Muhonen had suggested changes to the policy document including taking out some of
the specifically named projects. Co-Chair Street extrapolated the Complete Streets
project information from the adopted Downtown Plan (DP). Street felt that there was no
existing mechanism to implement the DP and thought this would be a good first step. It
was determined that it would be best to keep this policy at a higher level guiding
document.
Muhonen suggested the potential of adding to this document a request that the Town
expand the Capital Improvement Program to include project identified in the DP. Street
to add this verbiage. The DP also shows that significant public outreach was performed
as part of the DP creation process, of which Complete Streets was included.
Co-Chair Street will make edits as discussed and provide to Director Muhonen who will
have Town Attorney White review the content. A motion was made and seconded
(Slack/Black) to have Street represent the TAB in the creation of this document alongside
Director Muhonen and Town Attorney White and all were in favor. Once all changes are
incorporated the document will be presented to the TAB for final approval.
Member Hanick stated that while she was in Golden, CO on fairly major street, the traffic
speeds were quite high until they reached the roundabout where all slowed down. This
was an example of how roundabouts can help our growing community.
Director Muhonen will need all edits from Street and the completed slideshow from Chair
Morris no later than December 31, 2018. Street and Morris agreed to have all information
to Muhonen by that date.
SHUTTLE & PARKING UPDATES:
Transit Program Manager Brian Wells provided updates of changes to existing shuttle
routes via a hand-out based on the reduction of service outside town limits. Wells has
received comments which have been mainly negative. The Trail-Gazette interviewed
Wells and Parking & Transit Manager Vanessa Solesbee to highlight the benefits of the
service changes. The interview should be reflected in the Friday, November 23 edition.
Manager Wells reported that while waiting for CDOT to approve the order for the new
electric trolley, the manufacturer has reached out due to the time lost. The manufacturer
has expressed their displeasure in the delay. Wells stated he’s also been working on a
charging system in the works to operate with the new electric trolley. He’s currently
working on the logistics of where the station will be located. Manager Solesbee is looking
into a grant for a fast-charging station. The project must be done by June 1, 2019.
Solesbee proceeded to walk through highlights of the parking utilization information being
presented at the November 27, 2018 Town Board Study Session (charts/graphs/maps).
She wants to ensuring data requested has been captured related to Phase 1 of the
Downtown Parking Management Plan (DPMP), as well as providing next steps in 2019.
Solesbee explained the industry-accepted 85% occupancy measurement standards. 40
Transportation Advisory Board – November 21, 2018 – Page 3
Member Wilcocks feels the parking structure data should be included as part of the core
downtown statistics. Without the data being reflected this way, it may be misleading to
the public. Wilcocks also expressed the need to define utilization. Are we representing
that these numbers are over a period of time, a snapshot, etc.? Lower utilization for a
certain percentage of the time is healthy.
It is critical to paint the whole picture. The data may say one thing but experience may
say something else. Potentially recondition behavior to access available spaces.
All numbers and calculations need analyzed for accuracy due to some questions received
from the TAB. Wilcocks also stated the importance of providing year-round utilization
numbers since the numbers presented are for summertime only. In 2018 the summertime
numbers were the only measured timeframes for the year.
Trustee Bangs likes the data as presented for this purpose from a Town Board
perspective. The primary missing piece of information collected in 2018 are real time
parking utilization statistics. This measurement is necessary prior to moving forward to
Phase II. Member Black requested this be emphasized in the presentation to the Town
Board.
PROJECT UPDATES (G. Muhonen):
The Downtown Estes Loop (DEL) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) met recently and
discussed the potential condemnation of DEL area parcels that have not reached an
agreement. At the December 11 Town Board Study Session the DEL TAC will provide
their quarterly update. Central Federal Lands (CFL) pointed out a new grant program
(BUILD) and suggested we submit application for funding being awarded in July 2019 to
replace both the Rockwell and Riverside bridges as well as to perform channel widening
from Hwy 36 south. The Town requested AECOM provide a fee proposal to complete the
grant application. If awarded to the Town, this would nearly double scope of DEL project
by simultaneously performing these bridge upgrades. Director Muhonen also learned that
CFL does periodic calls for grant applications for the Federal Lands Access Program
(FLAP). A call should be made in the spring of 2019. This will bring back the concept for
the Moraine Avenue Multimodal Improvements. It was confirmed with the TAB that the
same application will be submitted for Moraine Avenue. Current DEL Project Manager
James Herlyck will be leaving for another CDOT department and recommended the Town
reapply for this project. The Town will need strong support from the Estes Park community
in order to have a chance of being awarded this grant. Muhonen recommended to the
TAB that if there are strong feelings of support in the group that it be conveyed in their
daily dealings.
Representatives from CDOT, Larimer County and the Town of Estes Park met this week
to discuss 2019 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grants. The Larimer
County members of the Upper Front Range Transportation Planning Region expressed
their support of the Town’s application for the full $720K in grant dollars. Muhonen stated
that due to funding shortages for the US36 & Community Dr. roundabout, this grant would
help bring the intersection improvements to fruition.
CDOT will conduct an open house on December 5 covering information on the
roundabout planned for the US 34 (Wonderview)/MacGregor Ave. intersection. The open
house will take place in Rooms 202 and 203 in Estes Park Town Hall from 4:30pm-
6:30pm). Director Muhonen strongly encouraged TAB members to attend this meeting to
provide feedback.
Manager Hook attended a stakeholder meeting for the CDOT work on Hwy. 7. CDOT is
restarting stakeholder coordination regarding road work on Hwy 7 from Lyons to Hwy 72.
CDOT will be incorporating a 4’ shoulder on the uphill lane to address bicycle community
members’ concerns.
The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) grant application for Brodie Avenue improvements
was approved and work is anticipated to occur in the summer of 2019.
41
Transportation Advisory Board – November 21, 2018 – Page 4
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant application for Fall River Trail was
awarded covering future construction work from David Drive to the Rocky Mountain
National Park (RMNP) entrance. RMNP is now working to partner with the Town to have
the future trail be constructed through the Aspenglen campground for connection to the
RMNP trail system.
The Town is anticipating another call for grant applications from Great Outdoor Colorado.
The Town will apply for this grant funding to apply to the last phase of the Fall River Trail.
Director Muhonen will be drafting a position on e-scooters in Estes Park. He will bring the
draft document back to the group for discussion.
OTHER BUSINESS
With no other business to discuss, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 2:09 p.m.
Recording Secretary
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Department
42
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 19, 2018
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Room 202 of Town Hall on the 19th
day of December, 2018.
Present: Gordon Slack
Tom Street
Belle Morris
Stan Black
Ron Wilcocks
Amy Hamrick
Ann Finley
Janice Crow
Also Present: Trustee Carlie Bangs, Town Board Liaison
Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Vanessa Solesbee, Parking & Transit Manager
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Absent: Linda Hanick
Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:15 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
none
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A motion was made and seconded (Wilcocks/Slack) to approve the November meeting
minutes and all were in favor.
TRAIL MASTER PLAN:
Chair Morris introduced the need for review and update of the Estes Valley Master Trails
Plan (EVMTP). Morris stated the EVMTP lacks acknowledgement of specific connectivity
of sidewalks and trails in areas of Estes Park. Morris requested TAB members consider
the areas in which they reside and assess if connecting sidewalks or trails are needed.
Morris suggested filling in the areas missed existing outside the downtown corridor. TAB
will review and discuss possible updates for the EVMTP.
PROJECT UPDATES (G. Muhonen – Public Works Administration)
Muhonen reported that good questions and conversation as well as valuable public input
was received at the Benefits of Roundabouts presentation to be given at the January 8,
2019 Town Board Study Session. Community members in attendance supported the
roundabout proposed in 2020 for the intersection of US 34 (Wonderview Ave.) and
MacGregor Ave.
US 36 & Community Drive Intersection: Colorado Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
determined $720K would be obligated in 2019 for Colorado air quality improvements.
CMAQ designated the full allocation to Larimer County. After meeting attendance and in-
depth discussions, it was determined by the Upper Front Range Transportation Planning
Region (UFRTPR) to grant all funds in 2019 to Estes Park for the US 36 & Community
Drive roundabout. Due to the traffic volumes originally reported being low, it was
determined that a two-lane westbound leg would be required over the designed one-lane.
The design consultant is now working on this redesign. Muhonen is determining needed
emissions statistics for the CMAQ funds. Additional design will occur as part of Phase 2
to incorporate two lanes all the way to Fourth Street.
Downtown Estes Loop: The process of condemning three properties within the Loop area
due to an impasse has now been completed. Although condemnation was not the ideal 43
Transportation Advisory Board – December 19, 2018 – Page 2
course, property owners refused to engage with CDOT for property acquisition.
Member Black asked if newly elected Town Board Trustees would have the ability to stop
the Loop project. Muhonen stated that they would have that ability however they would
also know that the Town would have to reimburse the federal government millions of
dollars.
PROJECT UPDATES (D. Hook – Engineering Manager)
Complete Streets Policy: The draft policy still needs reviewed by Town Attorney White.
Manager Hook will have something ready for the January 22, 2019 Town Board meeting.
2019 Street Improvement Program (STIP): A presentation will be made on the 2019 STIP
program at the regularly scheduled January TAB meeting. It will be presented again at
the February 12, 2019 Town Board meeting.
Brodie Avenue Trail: The Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with CDOT has been fully
executed. Working toward design completion and will progress on to the bidding process.
Downtown Wayfinding: The report is still in development and will be shared at the
regularly scheduled January TAB meeting. It will then go, as an action item, to the
February 12, 2019 Town Board meeting.
Moraine Avenue Bridge Replacement: The project is wrapping up and Public Works is
working to close the construction contracts.
Fall River Trail: The grant agreement with Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) has been
fully executed. Once final details are complete preparations to solicit bids will begin. Work
on cultural resources (historical clearance, etc.) is currently taking place.
Digital Message Signs: This project is currently in the process of grant closeout.
Hook also reported CDOT’s desire to proceed with an overlay project on the downtown
portion of Elkhorn Avenue. All are hoping the project will be completed the summer of
2019. Member Slack asked if there was anything the TAB could do to stress the
importance of this project. Muhonen stated that if the group feels strongly a letter could
be sent to Corey Stewart. A motion was made and seconded (Slack/Black) to send a
memo to Corey Stewart and all were in favor.
PROJECT UPDATES (V. Solesbee – Parking & Transit)
Manager Solesbee extended her appreciation to the TAB for feedback provided at the
last meeting. It aided in preparing for the November 27, 2018 Town Board Study Session
(TBSS) presentation. In summary, the Trustees encouraged proceeding in 2019 with real-
time occupancy information, turnover data and technology solutions.
In the Fall of 2019, the needed additional data will have been collected and reassessment
of appropriate next steps can occur (i.e. paid parking warrant, land use, value of space,
etc.).
Solesbee asked the TAB if there would be interest in receiving more information on how
other communities handle this process, and all were interested. Solesbee will revisit with
the group in early 2019. Member Wilcocks would like to ensure that “85% occupancy” is
better defined/modeled to accommodate seasonality. Statistics annually reflect
enormously low utilization. Solesbee will share additional information with the TAB later
today via email.
Solesbee reported that she’s 30% through a walking tour of the downtown businesses.
Her goal is to speak with all the businesses and record feedback received. The
introductions and one-on-one meetings are going well.
44
Transportation Advisory Board – December 19, 2018 – Page 3
Solesbee is working to finalize part-time job descriptions for the new division. Different
recruitment efforts are required since the required working season is longer than college
students can offer in the summer. She asked that TAB members get the word out about
these highly customer-oriented positions.
Solesbee is also working with License Plate Recognition (LPR) vendors with help from
Director Muhonen. While the Town cannot afford the absolute ideal LPR solution,
Solesbee is working to find the best option for Estes Park. The process will start with five
lots identified in the Downtown Parking Management Plan (DPMP). Moving forward, all
lots will be included. On January 9, 2019 an LPR vendor will be coming up to give a
presentation of what’s been tailored for Estes Park. Technology is anticipated to be tested
and implemented in early May 2019.
OTHER BUSINESS
Muhonen expressed his pleasure and appreciation for all the TAB has initiated on behalf
of the Town of Estes Park and of all members’ time and perspective.
Trustee Liaison Bangs reminded the group the she is a vessel for transportation issues
to be taken to the Town Board.
Member Slack extended his appreciation to the Mayor for his work to get Elkhorn Avenue
addressed.
With no other business to discuss, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 1:52 p.m.
Recording Secretary
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Department
45
46
RESOLUTION #02-19
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES
PARK, COLORADO:
That the filing date of the application for a New BEER & WINE Liquor License, filed
by High West Investment, LLC dba Vino Gui, 207 Park Lane, Estes Park, Colorado, is
January 2, 2019.
It is hereby ordered that a public hearing on said application shall be held in the
Board Room of the Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue, on Tuesday, February 12,
2019, at 7:00 P.M., and that the neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of said
application and hearing shall be the area included within a radius of 3.15 miles, as
measured from the center of the applicant's property.
DATED this day of
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
47
48
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Linda Hardin, Code Compliance Officer
Date: January 22, 2019
RE: Ordinance 01-19: Proposed Text Amendment to the 2015
International Residential Code: IRC R327, Vacation Home and Large
Vacation Home Life Safety Survey
(Mark all that apply)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
To approve and adopt amendments to the International Residential Code (IRC) R327,
to extend the deadlines for Vacation Home life Safety Survey application submittals,
surveys and compliance for existing vacation home registrations. Also to provide
direction and timelines for new vacation home registrations with respect to the Life
Safety Survey regulations.
Present Situation:
In April 2018, the Town Board of Trustees and County Board of Commissioners
adopted similar local amendments to the 2015 IRC with respect to vacation homes and
large vacation homes. These amendments require that all vacation homes built under
the IRC undergo a Life Safety Survey conducted by a Building Official for the purposes
of ensuring that these properties are safe for renters.
Under the current code, the initial survey must be completed by March 31, 2019.
Notices to this effect were sent by Town and County departments last year. Both the
Town Building Division and County Building Department agree that it would now be
physically impossible in either department to complete the required surveys by this
deadline. In Town, there are still 182 property owners that have yet to submit their
application, let alone schedule the survey inspection. We have a total of 441 vacation
homes within town limits.
Larimer County Building Division brought similar amendments to the County
Commissioners at their meeting on December 17, 2018. Their amendment is
requesting that the completed application be submitted to the Building Department by
March 31, 2019, and final compliance and issuance of a new CO must be completed by 49
March 31, 2021. They intend to follow that with amendments to accommodate new
vacation home registrations in June 2019.
Proposal:
The Town amendment is in agreement with the County’s amendment requiring the
application submittal occur by March 31, 2019. For vacation homes within Town
boundaries the initial survey should be completed by March 31, 2020, and final
compliance and CO issued by March 31, 2021. Staff felt that adding the date required
for the initial survey would prevent a bottle neck of scheduling surveys by March 31,
2021, and would ensure that property owners would have time to complete any work
required by the final deadline of March 31, 2021.
The proposed amendment also provides for registrations received after March 31, 2019.
As new vacation homes are registered, it will be necessary to have timelines for the
compliance with R327. This proposal provides adequate time to complete the
application, inspection and final compliance.
The proposed amendments are to extend the deadlines to a reasonable and attainable
conclusion without over burdening the Building Division or vacation home owners and
ensuring all life safety surveys are completed in timely and efficient manner.
Staff will increase outreach so that vacation home owners and managers will have
multiple advance notifications of deadlines, well before the deadlines arrive.
Advantages:
• Extending deadlines will allow the surveys to be completed in accordance with
code
• Creating a timeline for new registrations provides direction for staff and property
owners
• The Building Division will have more flexibility in scheduling surveys
• Vacation home owners will have ample time to make corrections and be
compliant
• This will align with the County in an effort to maintain consistency between our
jurisdictions
Disadvantages:
• Could delay completion of the surveys by one year
• Would continue to allow the renting of spaces that may be unsafe
Action Recommended:
Staff is recommending approval of Ordinance 01-19 to extend the deadlines for the
vacation home life safety surveys.
The Estes Park Board of Appeals voted (4 – 0) to recommend approval of the
amendments at their meeting on December 6, 2018. A few changes to the draft have
been made since December 6, 2018.
50
Finance/Resource Impact:
No significant additional impact to Town finances or resources will result from this
ordinance.
Level of Public Interest
Low – The life safety surveys are of interest to vacation home owners and property
managers, and there is concern over the limited amount of time they have to complete
them under existing codes. However, no formal comments or remarks have been
received by the Community Development Department concerning this specific
ordinance.
Sample Motion:
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees approve Ordinance No. 01-19,
amending the International Residential Code R327.
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees deny Ordinance No. 01-19,
amending the International Residential Code R327, finding that…[state findings for
denial]
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees continue Ordinance No. 01-19,
amending the International Residential Code R327 to [certain date], in order that…[state
direction to staff pursuant to continuance]
Attachments:
1. Ordinance No. 01-19
2. Exhibit A
51
ORDINANCE NO. 01-19
AMENDING THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE TO REVISE APPLICATION
AND COMPLIANCE DEADLINES TO R327 AS IT RELATES TO VACATION HOMES
AND LARGE VACATION HOMES
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2018, the Estes Park Board of Appeals conducted a
public meeting on a proposed text amendment to the International Residential Code,
revising the deadlines for Compliance to the Vacation Home Life Safety Survey Code
R327; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2018, the Estes Park Board of Appeals voted to
recommend approval of the text amendment; and
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2018, the Larimer County Board of Commissioners
adopted partial code amendments and intends to adopt additional code amendments in
June 2019, maintaining consistency within the jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park finds the text
amendment complies with International Residential Code and the intent of R327, and has
determined that it is in the best interest of the Town that the amendment to the
International Residential Code, as set forth on Exhibit A, be approved; and
WHEREAS, said amendment to the International Residential Code is set forth on
Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1: The International Residential Code R327 shall be amended as more
fully set forth on Exhibit A.
Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after
its adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park,
Colorado, this day of _______, 2019.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
52
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting
of the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2019 and
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on
the ________ day of , 2019, all as required by the Statutes of
the State of Colorado.
Town Clerk
53
EXHIBIT A
SECTION R327
VACATION HOME AND LARGE VACATION HOME
LIFE SAFETY SURVEY
R327.1 General. Vacation homes and large vacation homes shall comply with Section R327.
Prior to occupancy as a vacation home or a large vacation home after March 31, 2020, the dwelling
shall have been issued a Certificate of Occupancy in accordance with R327.3. Vacation home or
large vacation home registrations issued after March 31, 2019 shall have no more than sixty (60)
days from the effective registration date to submit a complete application for a Life Safety Survey
building permit to convert the home to a vacation home, and shall complete the life safety initial
inspection within one hundred eighty (180) days of issuance of permit. Vacation home or large
vacation home shall be approved for occupancy if the Certificate of Occupancy in accordance with
R327.3 has been issued within twelve (12) months from initial inspection date, and provided all
other regulatory requirements have been completed and approved. Failure to comply shall result
in revocation of registration.
R327.2 Life safety survey. After March 31, 2019, a vacation home or a large vacation home with
a current registration, shall not be approved for occupancy unless the vacation home owner has
made a full and complete application for a Life Safety Survey building permit to convert the home
to a vacation home or large vacation home. until the Building Official performs a life safety
survey. After March 31, 2020, a vacation home or large vacation home with registration prior to
March 31, 2019, shall not be approved for occupancy until the Chief Building Official or designee
performs a life safety survey. After March 31, 2021, a vacation home or large vacation home with
registration prior to March 31, 2019 that has not obtained Certificate of Occupancy in accordance
with R327.3 shall not be approved for occupancy. Failure to comply shall result in revocation of
registration. At minimum, vacation home and large vacation home life safety surveys shall include
the provisions of R327.2.1 through R327.2.20. Subsequent life safety surveys, if provided, shall
use the same compliance criteria as the initial survey, unless this code is otherwise amended.
54
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: January 22, 2019
RE: Interview Committee for Parks Advisory Board
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
To appoint Town Board members to the interview committee for the two positions open on the
Parks Advisory Board.
Present Situation:
The Parks Advisory Board is currently made up of seven volunteer community members. The
Board currently has three (2) position open. Administrative Services has continued to advertise
the openings and currently has three applications.
Proposal:
Per Policy 101 Section 6 states all applicants for Town Committees/Boards are to be
interviewed by the Town Board, or its designee. Any designee will be appointed by the Town
Board.
Advantages:
To move the process forward and allow interviews to be conducted of interested applicants.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
To appoint two Trustees to the interview panel for the Parks Advisory Board openings.
Budget:
None.
Level of Public Interest.
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the appointment of Trustees __________ and ___________ to the
Parks Advisory Board interview panel.
55
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Report
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Bunny Beers, Administrative Assistant
Date: January 22, 2019
RE: Update on the Enterprise Wide Content Management Software (Laserfiche)
Objective:
Present an overview of progress, implementation and goals for 2019 for the enterprise
wide content management software (Laserfiche).
Present Situation:
In December 2016 the Board approved the purchase of an enterprise wide document
management software (Laserfiche). Projected benefits included:
•Reduced storage space
•Enhanced document security & collaboration between departments
•Improved regulatory compliance/record retention
•Efficiency
•Enhanced transparency and improved access to public records
•Improved workflow
In 2017 a Core User group was established consisting of staff members from each
department. The group has developed a policy, naming standards and assisted with the
testing of new processes with the software. The group intends to automate over 15
processes in 2019 which would improve overall operational efficiency, increase
transparency, and customer and citizen convenience through the use of electronic
forms available on the website, significantly reducing paper consumption.
Level of Public Interest:
The known level of public interest in this item is low to moderate.
Attachments:
None
57
1/23/2019
1
Confidential Customized for Lorem Ipsum LLC Version 1.0
Town of
Estes Park
Enterprise Wide Content Management Software
Research
Lakewood & Snowmass Village
●Policy and naming standards
●Establishing a Core User Group
Laserfiche Empower Conference
●2017 - 3 Attendees
●2018 - 6 Attendees
●2019 - 6 Attendees
●Peak Performance - Value Added Reseller/Software Support
●support.laserfiche.com & answers.laserfiche.com
●Municipalities currently using Laserfiche
●Laserfiche Forms Business Process Library i.e. Open Records Request, Permits, HR Onboarding, Accounts Payable
Resources
1/23/2019
2
Town Board Agenda Process Automation Overview
The Clerk’s office builds and distributes the Board of Trustees meeting agendas. Where to Start?
1 What are we trying to accomplish?
Find a way to streamline and automate a
simple process which takes staff
approximately 4+ hours to complete.
2 Who needs to be involved?
We started simple. The Clerk’s office began
working on the process and slowly involved
our Core User Group as well as Department
Heads for testing purposes.
3 Does the process need to be improved?
We wanted to avoid doing a process the
same way it has been done in the past when
we had a perfect opportunity to eliminate
unnecessary processes and increase
productivity.
4 What resources will be required?
We leaned heavily on Peak Performance
and support.laserfiche.com and followed
the motto “more heads are better than
one”.
Process Mapping
1/23/2019
3
Process
An email is automatically sent to the appropriate staff two
weeks prior to the Town Board meeting through a Workflow.
Agenda Item Form
For access to the Form staff can click on the link provided in
the reminder email or save the link as a bookmark for quick
access.
1/23/2019
4
Routing
Form is completed
Legal Review
(if applicable)
Director Review Additional Director Review
(if applicable)
Clerk Review
APPROVED
Agenda
Agenda is built using information received in the Agenda Item Forms
which are completed by staff and auto-populated into a Word template.
1/23/2019
5
STREAMLINED PROCESSES COMPLETED IN 2017 - 2019
License & Registration Renewal Processing
Town Board Study Session Agenda Item Form
Town Board Agenda Item Form
Internal & External Board Room Request
Forms
Net Meter Agreement
Water Tap Fee Calculation
Public Records Portal - www.estes.org/recordsportal
2018 & 2019 Electronic Review for Renewals
Backflow Test Report
Tell Me What - Citizen Review Card Open Records Request Form - Available 2nd
Qtr
Miscellaneous Building Permit - Testing Beginning 2nd Qtr
License/Registration Invoicing Review & Issuing
1137 License Renewal invoices issued for 2019
160 paper invoices mailed - no email on file or undeliverable
522 License renewals issued as of January 21, 2019
754 Registration (VHR/ B&B) renewal invoices issued for 2019
12 paper invoices mailed - no email on file or undeliverable
332 Registrations received as of January 21, 2019
❖Notices sent to confirm email addresses
❖Reduction in business license fees - reduced the amount of returned incorrect payments
❖Increase customer service by delivering invoices directly to business owners
❖Eliminated postal processing and undetermined delivery timeframes
❖Reduced the amount of return mail
❖Eliminated cost to produce an invoice for business which did not renew in 2019
1/23/2019
6
2018
1400 Licenses & 788 Registrations
$1.56 approx. per license/registration = $3,413.28
2019
Approx. 200 Licenses & Registrations sent by mail
$1.56 approx. per license/registration = $312
90%
Est. reduction in cost to produce & process a renewal
↓
75%
Estimated amount of time to produce & process a renewal
↓
2018
Approx. 16 minutes to process a single renewal
2019
Approx. 4 minutes to process a single renewal
Feedback
“Great process improvement to e-mail invoices and provide for online payment!”
“Easiest painless process for government I have experienced.”
“Convenient, fast and simple process.”
“Night/day compared to previous renewals.”
1/23/2019
7
What’s Next for the Town?
2019 ►
★Travel Request Form
★Right of Way Permit Processing
★Building Permit Processing
★IBC/IRC Permit Application
★Automated Process for Packet Building
★HR Onboarding
★GIS & Parcel File Access for Customers
★Business License Forms & Processing
★Open Enrollment Automation
★Zoning Approval Form
★Inspection Request Form & Processing
★Building Contractor License Application & Processing
★Address Change Form - Building Division
★Wool Market Application & Online Payment Processing
★Renewable Energy Purchase Program
★News Releases
★Policies
★Municipal Court Citation Processing
★Contractor Business License Affidavit & Processing
Questions?