HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2019-02-26The 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, February 26, 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.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Bills.
2. Town Board Minutes dated February 12, 2019 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated February 12, 2019.
3. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated January 15, 2019 and Study
Session Minutes dated January 15, 2019 (acknowledgment only).
4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated January 16, 2019 (acknowledgment
only).
5. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated January 17, 2019 (acknowledgment only).
6. Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between Town of Estes Park and
Prospect Mountain Water Company.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. CONTRACT EXTENSION FOR 2019 CHIP AND CRACK SEAL. Engineer Barr.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. CUSTOMER SERVICE PROGRAM UPDATE. Executive Assistant Simpson.
Provide an update on the staff-developed customer service training for the
organization.
2. MICRO-MOBILITY DEVICES. Director Muhonen.
Regulations governing the use of e-bikes, e-scooters, etc.
REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
24-6-402(4)(f), C.R.S. – For discussion of a personnel matter; not involving any specific
employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session; any member of the
Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or
body); or personnel policies that do not require discussion of matters personal to particular
employees.
ADJOURN.
Prepared 02-15-2019
*Revised 02-22-2019
*
1
2
TOWN BOARD MEETING
February 26, 2019
Consent Item #2 Town Board Minutes dated
February 12, 219 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated February 12, 2019.
This item will be available and
distributed on Monday, February 25,
2019.
3
4
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 15, 2019
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
5
Commission: Chair Bob Leavitt, Vice-Chair Sharry White, Commissioners Nick Smith,
Robert Foster, Frank Theis, Steve Murphree
Attending: Chair Leavitt, Commissioners, White, Foster, Smith, Murphree and Theis
Also Attending: Director Randy Hunt, 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 20 people in
attendance.
1.OPEN MEETING
2.AP PROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved and seconded (Smith/Murphree) to approve the agenda as presented
and the motion passed 6-0.
3.PUBLIC COMMENT
Kevin Conrad, Arapaho Road, encouraged more Commissioner/Trustee dialog or even a
town hall forum for verbal exchange between public and the officials who make decisions,
and also suggested a 3 minute time limit per topic, not per person.
4.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of December 18, 2018 Planning Commission meeting minutes.
Approval of December 18, 2018 Study Session minutes
It was moved and seconded (Theis/White) to approve the consent agenda as
presented and the motion passed 6-0.
5.PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS
Planner Becker stated that due to the earlier Study Session discussion, this item will be
continued to a later meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Theis/Foster) to continue the item and the motion
passed 6-0.
6.ESTABLISH START TIME FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND STUDY
SESSION
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 15, 2019
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
6
It was moved and seconded (Leavitt/White) to continue the item and the motion
passed 6-0.
7.DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 1551 S. SAINT VRAIN AVENUE, Owner, ESTES PARK
HOUSING AUTHORITY
Planner Becker reviewed the Development Plan. The property is 1.6 acres and is
currently developed with a four-unit apartment building. The applicant is proposing the
development of two multi-family residential buildings, having 26 workforce housing units.
A lot consolidation was approved and an alternative parking study has been requested.
Staff recommended approval of the Peakview Apartment Development Plan with no
conditions.
Applicant Comments
Naomi Hawf, Executive Director of the Estes Park Housing Authority, gave the history of
the project and reviewed the income criteria and Restrictive Covenants associated with
the project; employed a minimum of 30 weeks/year, minimum one year leases, occupancy
of no more than two per bedroom plus one. The hope is to begin construction this year.
Steve Lane, Bas1s Architecture, reviewed the site plan for the property including fencing,
landscaping, street access, fire department access, lighting and the addition of a bike
storage building. The parking study showed that 2.25 spots per unit is likely too high,
hence the alternative parking request of 52 spaces rather than 56. Data doesn’t exist
regarding school age tenants. There are school bus stops on either side of the property
along Highway 7. The nearest crosswalk is 3/10 of a mile away. CDOT can be asked
about installing a cross walk near the project property. Landscaping buffers were
discussed and an alternate landscape plan was requested. Staff agreed with the analysis
of the alternate landscaping plan.
Public Comments
Richard Ralph, 395 Parkview Lane, requested the PC reject the parking variation and
address the issue on whether this is compliant and following the Development Code.
Hal Irvine, Pastor of Mountain View Bible Fellowship, expressed that the congregation
plans on being a good neighbor and is in favor of the development.
Cliff Baker, 1062 Tranquil Lane, asked if there are any options to the placement of the
building on the north side due to it being the only side that has residences. He also
questioned why the Footprint Rule was not used.
Applicant Response:
Lane stated that the parking is not a variance, it is an alternate parking schedule and staff
has the authority to approve that, per chapter 7 of the EVDC. Fewer parking spaces
provides more green space. There are landscaping buffers on the north property line, and
the living space and decks of the apartments are on the south side of those apartments.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 15, 2019
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
7
Commissioner Discussion
Director Hunt explained the Footprint Rule and that it does not apply to a nonconforming
structure. Four fewer parking spaces does not seem to be too much of an issue.
Concerns were raised about parking in the church lot. The church does have posted
signs stating Parking Only for Church Sponsored Events. It was noted that the comment
on parking waivers is taken seriously and there are too many waivers being requested.
The repeated density bonus requests are getting frustrating. Applicants who are already
getting a density bonus should not be asking for additional requests. Putting resources
toward getting people across the highway to the bike path instead of a sidewalk to
nowhere was suggested. It was recommended that someone from Public Works be on
hand for comments any time there is a Development Review. The Housing Authority was
commended for the diversity of their plan and the openness with neighbors. Hawf stated
that the Housing Authority and the architect will commit to meeting with anyone wanting to
discuss any further issues.
It was moved and seconded (Leavitt/Murphree) to approve the Peakview
Development Plan according to findings of fact. The motion passed 6-0.
8.LOCATION AND EXTENT, 543 Elm Road, Larimer County Maintenance Facility
Senior Planner Woeber reviewed the Location and Extent Review for the redevelopment
of the existing County Road and Bridge Department Satellite Maintenance Facility. The
lot will be reconfigured for the redesign of the facilities and to enable CDOT to take
ownership of their own property. The redevelopment of the County and CDOT facilities,
the Boundary Line Adjustment and realignment of Range View Road will all be separate
applications. Staff recommend approval of the Location and Extent Review.
Applicant Comments
Jennifer Johnson, Larimer County Planning and Real Estate Manager, presented a power
point of the current location and the planned development of the Location and Extent
proposal. Larimer County owns two lots, one of which is leased to CDOT. Combining the
lots will make for a 10 acre site. The current facility is 62 years old and is in dire need of
replacement. 5 neighbors attended the meeting held on December 20. The County has
offered to pave a portion of Range View Road. The applicant is not aware of any required
soil testing.
Public Comments
Bill Brown, 340 Elm Road, expressed concerns with realigning Elm Road and Range View
and how the grading is going to be addressed.
Ryan Leahy, 398 Elm Road, asked what improvements would be made to Elm Road.
Applicant Response
Todd Juergens, Larimer County Road and Bridge Director, explained that Elm Road and
Range View will be realigned from a Y intersection to a 90 degree intersection, with
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 15, 2019
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
8
Larimer County’s design criteria used to address the grading issue. These roads are not
currently publicly maintained, but County would take over maintenance of Elm Road up to
Range View and CDOT has committed to pave Range View. The roads will not have curb
and gutter, but a road side ditch.
Commissioner Discussion
Theis inquired about old plans from Elm Road connecting to Elkhorn Lodge and if future
impacts might interfere with realignment.
It was moved and seconded (White/Smith) to approve the application for a Location
and Extend Review for the property at 543 Elm Road with staff findings. The motion
passed 6-0.
9.DISCUSSION ON FUTURE CODE AMENDMENTS
Park and Recreation facilities/Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
Diane Ernst, 147 Stanley Circle Drive, stated there is extensive interest in the community
and people are keeping an eye on things. Residents don’t want commercial development,
allowed by right, in residential zones. She asked in what residential zoning areas the low
intensity commercial development will be allowed.
Kevin Conrad, 2240 Arapaho Road, reiterated that there is a lot of concern about the
quality of residential areas around town. As a homeowner there are expectations of
activities residential in nature, not commercial in nature. Reviewing one development at a
time, in a checklist format, may result in losing the overall vision of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Commission comments:
Make sure discretionary reviews are not being recast as ministerial.
Points will still be made in Development Proposals referring to the Comp Plan.
Adjustments may be made by way of a Code Amendment rather than specific
outcome on a Development Plan.
Changes are being made to give a clearer guideline. The Comp Plan should
not be used as a basis for denial.
Currently, there is a requirement for the Development Plan to meet goals of
Comp Plan, which is legally indefensible, per Attorney White.
The rearrangement, not an uncoupling, is more of a pragmatic use to help make
a point and keep on track.
County acknowledges their Development Plan is out of sync, but they “don’t go
there” with any of their development plans.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 15, 2019
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
9
There being no further business, Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 4:23 p.m.
_________________________________
Bob Leavitt, Chair
__________________________________
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado February 19, 2019
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the PLANNING COMMISSION of the Estes
Valley, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held Rooms 202/203 of Town Hall.
Commission: Chair Leavitt, Vice Chair White, Commissioners, Foster, Murphree, Smith,
Theis
Attending: Leavitt, Foster, Theis, Murphree, Smith, White
Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Director Hunt, Senior Planner Woeber, Planner I
Becker, Town Board Liaison Norris, Code Compliance Officer Hardin and
Recording Secretary Swanlund
Absent: none
Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m.
There were approximately 10 people in attendance. This study session was streamed and recorded
on the Town of Estes Park YouTube channel.
Mountain Coaster Discussion:
Chair Leavitt addressed the comments made during the Board of County Commissioners hearing.
Attorney White noted that attorneys try to raise issues, which is what Attorney Zier was doing.
Director Hunt stated that from a staff point of view, the October 30 meeting was clear, thorough and
gave staff and community good guidance. All hearings have been completed and there are two
pending law suits going to district court. The Development Plan for the Mountain Coaster has been
approved as of now. The property owner can begin development.
Attorney White noted that it is possible that the district court could determine that a decision was not
appropriate, which could remand the Mountain Coaster back through the process and to the Planning
Commission. PC is still under ex-parte communication. Caution should be taken when discussing
this, even within the PC.
See attached statement from Chair Leavitt.
By-Laws revision
Planner Becker reviewed the updated By-Laws based on what was discussed at the December Study
Session. Foster brought up consistency issues with Board vs Commission, Member vs
Commissioner, and Chair vs Chairperson. Attorney White agreed with these comments. Also
brought up was subdivision plats being approved within 30 days, which is Colorado law. Relevant
and adopted policies should be written and voted on as they specifically relate to the PC and its
members and formally adopted by both elected Boards. Hunt suggested circulation of the list of town
policies to the PC for the next meeting. It was agreed that this not be voted on and adopted today due
to the changes requested.
Peak View Apartments: 10
Planning Commission Study Session January 15, 2019 –Page 2
Planner Becker reviewed the Development Plan from the Estes Valley Housing Authority. The
proposal is to demolish the current building and construct two multi-family buildings. There is an
alternative parking plan being submitted. Theis asked if there is a fence proposed to prevent people
from parking in the church parking lot and perhaps a shared parking agreement might be proposed.
This is all workforce housing, not attainable housing, and will be deed restricted. Since the Housing
Authority owns the building, Community Development will do a yearly audit making sure residents
work in the Park School District boundaries full time. Foster wondered about the introduction of
school age children that may be moving into the current workforce housing projects being constructed
and how that could affect traffic and cross walks. Hunt recommended including the School District on
Development Plans where children may be involved. Also brought up was the traffic safety concern
across the street from the access point where Acacia and Avalon come together. Public Works has
had communication with CDOT. It was suggested to run this by the PD and Schools. If staff sees a
potential for families with children in a development plan, it should be addressed in the review stages.
County Location and Extent
Planner Woeber reviewed the Location and Extent for the proposed County Maintenance Facility
located on a 10 acre parcel on Elm Road. The facility is in need of updating due to its age. There are
numerous other projects connected with this site which will be applied in the next few months
including a Boundary Line Adjustment, Right of Way dedication, and rebuilding the current CDOT
facility.
Vacation Homes
CCO Hardin reviewed the requested recommendations from the December meeting. The following
items were suggestions from the Town Clerks office and meeting discussion:
o using the term relocate instead of transfer,
o registrations not completed within ninety days will be voided and are subject to reapplication
o use of the word renewal instead of reapplication
o transfer of ownership as a separate item from property management
o changes would be in effect starting with the 2020 calendar year
o should there be an exception for the first calendar year someone obtains a license, especially
if they get the license late in the calendar year
o B & B’s can offer limited ancillary services to guests only
o turn-around time for registrations is not currently an issue
o any signage must meet the requirements of the respective jurisdiction; add a cross-reference
o voting on individual proposals can begin at the February meeting
o building codes will be going to Town Board on the 22nd to extend vacation home life safety
inspection dates
Lunch 12:15-12:30
Park and Rec Code Amendment
Director Hunt discussed the recent history of the Park and Recreation Code Amendment and
explained the 2017 revision was incomplete and needed an adjustment. This revision is to the
definition only, with more revisions possibly to come. This changes the wording of low intensity and
occasional and incidental use. The concept of this definition change is that it would not encompass
something that is in operation continuously. There was discussion on “intensity” and how to be more
11
Planning Commission Study Session December 18, 2018 –Page 3
specific with its use, with traffic and parking being the more obvious guidelines. S2 reviews could be
a good tool to use. Too many exceptions require some body to look at the plan, that body is likely to
be the PC. And amendment to reasonable parking and traffic thresholds needs to be looked at.
Temporary Use permits were brought up as another option but they are only available for a total of
one year. Foster suggested using the words limited to rather than including. We don’t want to
increase the number of nonconforming uses with a simplistic solution. Norris reminded all that this is
a process, not a done deal. Both elected boards would appreciate discussion with careful
consideration of the pros and cons and asked that the PC report on what they see as the key
fundamental underlying principles that need clarification. Historical commercial activity
(grandfathering) would require more precision with intensity and amount of use.
Comp Plan Consistency Code Amendment
Director Hunt discussed the decoupling of the Development Code from the Comp Plan. Ministerial
and Discretionary reviews have been sorted out. Ministerial (comp plan reference removed):
variances, development plans, temporary uses/structures, public uses, final plats. Discretionary
(continued comp plan reference): preliminary plats, rezonings, PUD’s, code changes.
IGA discussion
A joint Study Session between the TB and BOCC is scheduled for February 19 to discuss the future
of the IGA. The comp plan rewrite cannot continue until a decision is made on whether or not the IGA
is being continued. The current IGA expires February, 2020. PC members are allowed and
encouraged to discuss their thoughts with elected officials. All town trustees should hear what the PC
members and the public think on this matter.
Going paperless
Director Hunt proposed getting rid of the paper notebooks and move to electronic devices:
Chromebook or IPad. Concerns about writing/taking notes and looking at drawings and plans were
raised. Karin will send out a Doodle poll to get feedback.
Due to time constraints, Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 1:17 p.m.
_____________________________________
Bob Leavitt, Chair
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
12
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 16, 2019
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 16th
day of January, 2019.
Present: Gordon Slack
Tom Street
Belle Morris
Stan Black
Amy Hamrick
Ann Finley
Linda Hanick
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
David Hook, Engineering Manager
Ryan Barr, Pavement Manager
Justin Kearney, Streets Supervisor
Brittany Hathaway, Planner
Christy Crosser, Grant Specialist
Absent: Ron Wilcocks
Janice Crow
Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
No public was in attendance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A motion was made and seconded (Street/Finley) to approve the December meeting
minutes and all were in favor.
2019 STIP PRESENTATION (R. Barr):
The Town’s Pavement Manager, Ryan Barr presented the 2019 Street Improvement Plan
(STIP) to the TAB. Barr provided a review of the 2018 program and provided updates for
the 2019 plan. He shared the different pavement conditions to benchmark the 2024 goal
of 70 PCI system-wide.
Barr went on to show the TAB what improvements have been completed within the entire
network as part of the STIP program since inception. Also introduced was the 1A trails
work to be completed including available grant opportunities.
Barr then provided an update regarding the repaving of East Elkhorn which was approved
by CDOT. An Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) will be entered into, with the Town of
Estes Park to perform the mill and overlay work. Chair Morris asked about the possibility
of adding road width. This IGA covers only the critically needed maintenance work and
doesn’t include redesign to accommodate widening.
DOWNTOWN WAYFINDING UPDATE (D. Hook):
Engineering Manager David Hook presented updates on the Downtown Wayfinding
Project. This project is currently scheduled as a Town Board action item at the February
26, 2019 Town Board meeting. There will be another opportunity for review of the
proposal at the February TAB meeting. Planner Hathaway and Manager Hook have
worked collaboratively on this initiative with the primary information being taken from the
Downtown Plan adopted in 2018.
13
Transportation Advisory Board – January 16, 2019 – Page 2
Hook stepped through the presentation material (mission, history, timeline, etc.) and
provided an overview of the newly planned sign locations. There are now more kiosks
(nearly double) and fewer directional pedestrian signs (approximately half) in the plan. All
changes made took public comment into account based on outreach efforts. Hathaway
discussed the proposed destinations and the higher utilization of symbols.
Final design efforts are pending AECom signage designs for the Downtown Estes Loop
project. Many details are still being finalized but the team is utilizing consistent colors
and/or themes for consistency. Member Slack expressed his agreement with the design
presented.
Member Black asked if there had been any consideration for lighting of the signs.
Hathaway stated the kiosks will be backlit and potentially interactive to allow updates to
locations of areas that may move. Other signage will be strategically placed near lit areas.
Hook introduced the Public Works Grant Specialist, Christy Crosser, and requested her
feedback based on her research of the interactive signs. Crosser stated there is a wide
variety of off-the-shelf products to be considered. Wall mounted screens would be easy
to install based on the current design taking into account accessibility. She stated the
importance of being fiscally responsible when selecting any signage options.
Member Hamrick asked the TAB the intended goal of the kiosk, to allow discussion about
the type of interacting visitors will be expected to perform. There is a desire for smart
phone capability, potential for a QR code to download a static map, or to bring interactive
potential to the phone. It was stated the Town should establish a base of static wayfinding
prior to working toward all electronic. Member Slack asked if an option exists to start the
project with static signage with later addition of electronic capabilities. TAB members
concurred that at least a couple kiosks should be static to see how it goes. Muhonen
confirmed and stated the goal is simply to let visitors know where they are and the location
of their destination. There are pros and cons to both styles.
Black advocates for all electronic signage and suggested that Visit Estes Park may be
able to help provide some funding for this information to be distributed. It is uncertain, at
this time, who will manage the information provided on the wayfinding signs.
Member Hanick also expressed her support of all electronic signs due to societal
changes. She feels we should plan to do all interactive and prioritize from one to ten what
signs should be installed first. Planner Hathaway will bring a plan back to the TAB with
sign pricing to help make the needed decisions.
Manager Solesbee asked about any utilization tracking of electronic signs to paint a clear
picture of how often a given sign is being utilized. Crosser stated that Google Analytics
would be available.
Trustee Liaison Bangs requested information on what other communities are using.
Crosser stated that kiosks are used heavily in Vail, in a variety of different styles. Crosser
has found them extremely useful.
COMPLETE STREETS POLICY REVIEW (D. Hook):
Manager Hook presented updates for the Complete Streets Policy which was distributed
on January 15 to the TAB requesting edits. Suggestions will help advance the documents
in preparation of the February 12 Town Board Study Session presentation. Understanding
that the review period for this information was very short, Hook suggested a discussion
occur at today’s meeting and any additional suggested edits be provided by February 1
for incorporation into the presentation material.
Hook reminded the TAB that within the Resolution all the WHEREAS statements were
extracted from the adopted Downtown Plan. The primary changes made by Hook to the
draft policy and resolution prepared by Co-Chair Street and Chair Morris were
grammatical, modified for consistency, and spelling errors.
14
Transportation Advisory Board – January 16, 2019 – Page 3
Co-chair Street incorporated the information received from Hook into the originally
created document with the exception of those for which he disagreed. Street stated that
he agreed with 90% of the proposed changes, with any needed formatting changes to be
completed by Administrative Assistant Van Hoozer. Street would provide the updated
document to Hook and Van Hoozer.
Hook provided suggested changes to verbiage on how to handle exceptions to the policy
(i.e. if a Public Works employee determines they’re unable to apply the Complete Streets
checklist, in its entirety, to a given project). The original document created reflected the
approval of exceptions be required by the TAB, Public Works and the Town Board. Hook’s
changes reflected approval by Public Works only. Street expressed his strong
disagreement with this edit. Hook stated that Public Works must have administrative
freedom to perform the work even when all the new principals cannot be applied. Street
feels there is a need for appropriate checks and balances. Director Muhonen stated that
he doesn’t want to create a new variance/waiver process but would prefer to follow
existing protocol. Muhonen suggested Street and Hook work through details. He and
Hook will then review the development code to explore the current variance process.
Once done, the issue will be reviewed by the Town Attorney and will be brought back to
the TAB before going to the Town Board.
Coming to the TAB for approval of a process exception would be inappropriate as the
TAB is not a regulatory board. The Town Board is too high a level for approving these
exceptions but the Board of Adjustments would be a logical place for approvals. Street
feels it is important that the TAB be made aware when an exception is required, even if
not providing approval.
Street and Hook will meet and/or collaborate via email. Hook reminded the TAB that in
order for this policy to be fully effective, the Estes Valley Development Code needs
changed primarily for enforcement and to add the requirements to future development.
TRAIL MASTER PLAN:
Postponed until the February TAB meeting due to time constraints.
PROJECT UPDATES (G. Muhonen – Public Works Administration)
Muhonen reported that the January 8 Town Board Study Session received a presentation
on roundabouts which generated outreach.
PROJECT UPDATES (D. Hook – Engineering Manager)
No project updates were provided from Manager Hook due to time constraints.
PROJECT UPDATES (V. Solesbee – Parking & Transit)
Estes Transit: A special shuttle services will be provided for Winterfest and the Wine &
Chocolate Festival. Solesbee will provide a ridership report at the February TAB meeting.
The Town has received approval from CDOT on the new Electric Trolley order. There is
a moratorium on capital expenditures at this time due to the Federal government
shutdown. The lead time for the new shuttle is now set for September.
The 2019 shuttle sponsor program has launched. Solesbee reported that sponsorships
for 2018 generated just over $13K. As of Friday, January 11, the sponsorships were
already at $9K.
The gas-powered trolley, thanks to the Fleet Division, has been repaired and is now ready
for the season.
Parking: The 2019 Residential Parking Permit program began and permits are being are
now being issued. The current rate for both residents and businesses is $30 per year.
Next year, Solesbee will be reviewing and modifying this rate.
Needed repairs are being made to the Digital Message Signs and the software is being
updated. Solesbee reported they’re discovering that the existing software has many more
15
Transportation Advisory Board – January 16, 2019 – Page 4
capabilities than originally thought. It now needs determined if the switch to a new
software is necessary.
Solesbee met last week with a company that provides License Plate Recognition (LPR)
technology and is waiting on their quote for the Town’s technology needs. LPR is a big
priority for 2019. Solesbee is visiting with other communities on how best to make
objective, data-driven, informed decisions on whether or not to initiate paid parking.
Manager Solesbee shared with the TAB the presentation material for the new paid
parking warrant process. Early conversations have been initiated with other communities.
After reviewing the presentation material with the TAB, due to time restraints, Solesbee
stated she’d send the material to all TAB members with a list of questions as homework
for the next meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
With no other business to discuss, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 2:04 p.m.
Recording Secretary
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Department
16
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 17, 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 17th day of January, 2019.
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 8:36 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public was in attendance.
The Estes Arts District (EAD) has been preparing for the Friends of Folk Festival. The
EAD will be sponsoring many activities and events around town in 2019. Additionally,
the upcoming art walk will have trolley service available.
The EAD donated funds allowing the purchase of a small crane for the Lumpy Circus.
The EAD’s current structure is now aiming for a more independent approach and is
working to get donations, etc. through their own efforts and initiatives.
GENERAL BUSINESS
A motion was made and seconded (Johnston/Elliot) to approve the December meeting
minutes and all were in favor.
PAB OFFICER ELECTIONS
Chair Moore initiated the discussion regarding 2019 officer elections. Trustee Liaison
Martchink suggested tabling the elections until after current vacancy interviews occur,
which is anticipated to occur prior to the February PAB meeting. This would allow
involvement from the newly appointed members.
Additionally, Members Papineau and Lockwood’s terms ended December 31, 2018 and
are therefore unable to nominate, vote, or be nominated.
A motion was made and seconded (Elliot/Johnston) to postpone officer elections until
new members are seated on the Parks Advisory Board and all were in favor.
17
Parks Advisory Board – January 17, 2019 – Page 2
MRS WALSH’S GARDEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MWGAC) UPDATE
Chair Moore stated that the last meeting of the MWGAC involved much discussion on
the newly created Google Group for MWGAC. The committee is now working on a
policy for plant identification and a mission statement review and upgrade to
appropriately fit with the current Town of Estes Park guidelines.
Moore reported that Supervisor Berg provided the 2018 year-end budget report to
enable planning for 2019. The committee was very appreciative
For those plants without identification labeling, the committee has ordered new labels.
The committee will continue to working on identification of plants existing in MWG.
MWGAC has transitioned to more current resources for label identifications. Priorities
have also been identified.
NOXIOUS WEED ORDINANCE
Chair Moore and Member Papineau met with the Town’s Code Compliance Officer,
Linda Hardin a couple times regarding ordinance wording and enforcement of noxious
weeds within the Town of Estes Park. Both Hardin and Director Hunt are in agreement
with the suggested changes to the ordinance wording. The new wording brings
enforcement of noxious weeds in line with the ordinance language for beetle-infested
trees, which is far more in-depth.
Member Papineau suggested a change to the label of Class C noxious weeds within the
Town’s ordinance, to “Estes Valley Noxious Weed List” while maintaining the existing
requirements and definitions of Classes A and B listed by the State and County. Class
C is not currently part of the Town’s enforcement. However, within the Estes Valley,
those weeds on the Class C list are a significant problem. Moore stated that by
providing a specific Estes Park designation it would provide more leverage for Town
enforcement. Moore feels that, as a result, it would more likely push folks to deal with
the weed problems rather than ignore the ordinance.
Supervisor Berg reminded the PAB that the reason there is a Class C is because the
given weed is so widespread and out of control that it would be near impossible to
eradicate. Additionally, if property owners are required to eradicate or significantly deal
with a Class C weed, they would be a substantially financially impacted. This is the
reason the State doesn’t provide identification of all Class C weeds. Since the Class C
weeds are so out of control efforts should be directed to continuing to handle and
eradicate the Class As and Bs to keep them from becoming Class Cs. Berg suggested
the potential of adding responsibilities of those a Noxious Weed Board would have for
properties within town limits.
Officer Hardin can issue tickets for violations to property owners however to begin this
new enforcement initiative, and the associated additional workload, Hardin would need
a seasonal officer or intern to assist. With the 2019 budget having already been
approved by the Town Board this would be a 2020 initiative. Member Elliot is familiar
with intern programs and stated a curriculum would be required. Without the educational
component a seasonal worker would be appropriate. Moore and Elliot will discuss the
potential structure to finding someone to fill the role. Hardin and Hunt will write the new
code language. They will elaborate on definitions contained in the draft created by
Papineau. The policy needs to contain more in-depth definitions.
18
Parks Advisory Board – January 17, 2019 – Page 3
Supervisor Berg will distribute the recently revised Town of Estes Park – Parks Division
Weed Management Plan to Moore and Papineau. The desire is to have the
enforcement portion in place before weed season. Berg suggested finalizing and
distributing the weed listing right away as the code language amendment would take
longer to get in place. Papineau will bring the listing with suggested edits for adoption at
February PAB meeting.
Papineau reported to Berg that there is significant weed growth (musk thistle and
mullein) within the fencing erected by the Watershed Coalition near the existing picnic
shelter along the river banks on both sides.
PARKS DIVISION UPDATE
Berg reported the following updates from the Town’s Parks Division:
x The Mountain Heritage Festival planning committee had its first meeting prior to
the Christmas break. Co-Chair Johnston volunteered his time for the 2018
festival but will be unable to do so for 2019, however he will proceed with the t-
shirt design. Berg asked if any other PAB members would be able to fill that void.
Co-Chair Elliot volunteered to fill that role on the planning committee for 2019.
Member Papineau will be able to help at the booth as she did last year and Chair
Moore will be assisting at the MWG booth. The Town’s Parks Division will
continue leading this effort as in the past.
x After the December PAB meeting, Berg visited Lee and Molly Kemper,
caregivers of Annie the Elk. Berg wanted to discuss and explain the vote of the
December PAB meeting wherein the PAB declined support of erecting a bronze
statue of Annie in Bond Park. Berg explained the specifics of what the PAB found
to be unacceptable and that they could certainly go to the Town Board who have
the final say on the matter. Berg further stated that if the Kempers desire, they
could always reach out to private property owners about erecting the statue on
property not owned by the Town. The Kempers weren’t terribly upset and will
reach out to a couple landowners about this potential. The art inventory listing
reflects privately owned art and Annie could easily be added to the list once
something is produced.
x The Public Works Grant Specialist, Christy Crosser is actively exploring grants
for a potential synced holiday music/light show. The former Public Works Director
in Lyons is promoting this as Lyons previously had something similar. This is only
in beginning discussions, however Director Muhonen and Town Administrator
Lancaster are enthusiastic.
x The Town is working on getting fast-chargers and a shelter installed near the
Parks Shop for electronic trolley.
x Matt O’Reilly is currently dismantling backflow devices
x Keri Kelly has completed the flower orders for 2019
x Staff is repairing trail markers
x Construction of the Sensory Garden is anticipated to begin January 28
19
Parks Advisory Board – January 17, 2019 – Page 4
x Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) grant award for the Big Thompson River
Picnic Shelter will occur in March 2019. If awarded, construction of the shelter is
anticipated to start in fall 2019.
x With the denial of the initial grant application for the Parks Division’s Greenhouse
Expansion, Crosser is exploring other potential grant opportunities
x The Town Administrator has placed a hold on all capital project spending until
Rocky Mountain National Park reopens.
x The Estes Park Museum received a grant for needed upgrades at Knoll-Willows
Open Space, a portion of which includes installation of permanent binoculars at
the existing structure.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Visit Estes Park (VEP) sculpture walk brochure needs to be modified. Berg is
working to schedule a meeting with VEP about this item as well as a few others. VEP is
in flux with employees and getting a meeting scheduled has been difficult. Chair Moore
asked if a specific request from PAB would be needed to help move this along. Berg
would like to invite the new CEO to a meeting and will communicate accordingly. The
brochure needs to be made all-inclusive. The existing VEP brochure is not user friendly
at all.
Berthoud, Colorado has an Arts In Public Places policy that could be very usable for our
community.
A motion was made and seconded (Johnston/Elliot) to adjourn the meeting at 9:54 and
all were in favor.
Recording Secretary
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works
20
UTILITIES Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Reuben Bergsten, Utilities Director. Steve Rusch, Utilities Coordinator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Date: 2/26/2019
RE: Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between Town of Estes Park
and Prospect Mountain Water Company
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
To increase the reliability of water infrastructure in our community, the Water Division
will reconstruct and take ownership of the Prospect Mountain Water Company (PMWC)
private water system.
Present Situation:
PMWC filed for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in 2015. Following the bankruptcy filing, the
Bankruptcy Trustee, Dan Hepner, entered into an Agreement with the Town for the
Town to operate the PMWC Water System. The Town and the Bankruptcy Trustee
have negotiated the Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement which provides for
the transfer of the PMWC Water System to the Town. Currently, the PMWC Water
System does not meet the Town’s Design Standards and needs to be rebuilt. The
Town of Estes Park’s 2019 Strategic Plan states that we are to “have reliable, efficient
and up-to-date infrastructure serving our residents, businesses and guests.”
The Town has received approval of loan/grant funding from the USDA Rural
Development for rebuilding of the PMWC Water System. The rebuilding of the System
will occur following transfer of the system to the Town pursuant to the Agreement which
is set to occur on or before May 1, 2019 provided that the Transfer Agreement receives
approval from the United States Bankruptcy Court and the Public Utilities Commission
of Colorado.
Once the System is transferred to the Town, all of the PMWC customers will become
Town customers and billed by the Town for water service. All Town costs for
administration, engineering, and operation of the PMWC Water System and the cost of
the rebuild of the System will be paid by the PMWC’s customers over a period of forty
years. Other Town water customers will not be responsible for these costs.
21
If the Transfer Agreement is not approved by the Town and due to the fact that PMWC
is in bankruptcy, the Bankruptcy Court may order the System to be abandoned and the
PMWC customers will not have an agreement in place for the provision of water to their
properties.
Proposal:
Town Board to approve the Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement.
Advantages:
• Existing PMWC customers will benefit from the Town’s safe reliable drinking
water as well as the addition of fire protection, which they currently do not have.
• This will improve the economy of scale for the water operations.
• The improvements are equitable because the reconstruction will be funded by
only existing PMWC customers.
Disadvantages:
• Existing customers will have the responsibility of repayment of $4,493,000 (loan
portion of the total loan/grant funding of $11,110,000), however this was
approved in a majority vote of PMWC customers.
• This is a relatively large addition to the Town’s existing distribution system which
will add to ongoing maintenance and workload, however the Town has been
working under an approved Agreement to Operate Water System since March 8,
2016.
Action Recommended:
Approval of the Agreement will allow staff to move forward with next steps in the USDA
funding process. Primary milestones include contractor selection, construction and
project management until completion.
Finance/Resource Impact:
The Finance Department will bring a budget amendment forward to authorize this total
project amount, which will ultimately be funded by the USDA upon project closeout.
Level of Public Interest
Low general public interest, however the PMWC customers have a higher level of
interest in the approval of this agreement.
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval of the Voluntary Transfer Agreement between Town of Estes
Park and Prospect Mountain Water Company.
Attachments:
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement with Exhibits:
A. USDA Letter of Conditions
22
B. Service Line Ownership and Responsibility Delineation
C. Form of Trustee’s Deed
23
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 1 of 37
VOLUNTARY WATER SYSTEM TRANSFER AGREEMENT
This VOLUNTARY WATER SYSTEM TRANSFER AGREEMENT (“Agreement”)
is entered into this ____ day of _________________, 2019 between the Town of Estes
Park, by and through its Water Enterprise (the “Town”) and the Prospect Mountain
Water Company, Inc., debtor in Chapter 7 bankruptcy Case No. 15-14286 TBM
(“Prospect Mountain”), by and through its Bankruptcy Trustee, Daniel A. Hepner
(“Trustee”); collectively (the “Parties”).
RECITALS
A. The Town, through its Water Enterprise, operates and maintains a municipal
water utility distribution system (the “Town’s System”) within the Town of Estes
Park and surrounding areas.
B. Prospect Mountain is a privately-owned Colorado public water utility providing
service in its designated service territory within unincorporated Larimer
County, Colorado. Prospect Mountain provides water service to its service
territory (“Service Territory”) pursuant to a Certificate of Public Convenience
and Necessity (“CPCN”) issued by the Public Utilities Commission of the State
of Colorado (the "Commission"). Prospect Mountain currently serves
approximately 130 customers.
C. Prospect Mountain wishes to transfer its water distribution system
infrastructure owned and used by Prospect Mountain (the “Prospect Mountain
System”) to the Town along with all of its property and its tangible and
intangible assets; and the Town wishes to acquire the Prospect Mountain
System and Prospect Mountain’s real property and its tangible and intangible
assets and incorporate the same into the Town’s System.
D. Prospect Mountain and the Town entered into that certain Water Service
Agreement dated August 13, 2012, in order for the Town to provide bulk water
to Prospect Mountain.
E. On April 22, 2015, Prospect Mountain filed a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Petition
under the United States Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) with the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado (“Bankruptcy
24
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 2 of 37
Court”). Daniel A. Hepner was appointed Trustee in the Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
Court proceeding and has managed Prospect Mountain since that time.
F. On March 8, 2016, Prospect Mountain and the Town entered into an
Agreement to Operate Water System (the “Operating Agreement”). Since that
time, the Town has been maintaining and operating the Prospect Mountain
System pursuant to the terms of the Operating Agreement.
G. The Parties have determined the need to replace the Prospect Mountain
System, which infrastructure has been in place for approximately 45 years and
has exceeded its useful life, in order to provide improved water quality, water
pressure and fire flow volume, and to meet the Town’s System standards and
requirements.
H. Preliminary engineering and environmental reports have been completed and
approved by the Town for the demolition, redesign, and reconstruction of the
Prospect Mountain System, including all infrastructure elements of the water
distribution system below and above ground that is owned by Prospect
Mountain (the “Project”). The Town Board determined that the Town would
undertake the Project on the condition that existing customers of the Town
would not incur costs related to the Project.
I. The Town has incurred unreimbursed expenses owed by Prospect Mountain
in operating the Prospect Mountain System pursuant to the Operating
Agreement to date and will continue to incur expenses until the transfer of the
Prospect Mountain System to the Town.
J. To finance the cost of the Project, Prospect Mountain and the Town agreed
that the Town would apply for Federal assistance.
K. The Town applied for and received approval of both a loan and a grant
administered by the Rural Utility Service (“RUS”) of the United States
Department of Agriculture (the “Agency”) dated September 28, 2018 (the
“Letter”) which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Letter describes the
Project, the Project funding, the Project budget, and other requirements and
conditions for the Project.
L. In order for the Town to obtain interim financing and enter into final design and
construction contracts for the Project, Prospect Mountain has agreed to
transfer the Prospect Mountain System, its tangible and intangible assets and
25
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 3 of 37
real property to the Town pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
M. Following the transfer of Prospect Mountain System to the Town, most of the
Town’s expenses for the development and execution of the Project including
administration, legal, construction, contingencies, engineering fees, lab
services, and interest will be paid as set forth in Section II of the Letter. These
costs will be solely due to the Project and attributable to customers located in
the Prospect Mountain Service Territory.
N. Following transfer, Prospect Mountain shall not be liable to the Town or any
third party for the Prospect Mountain System or for any expenses for the
development and execution of the Project.
O. Following transfer, the Trustee shall take those steps necessary under the
Bankruptcy Code to complete administration of the bankruptcy estate,
including but not limited to, the payment of allowed claims and the distribution
of any remaining funds in which the bankruptcy estate has an interest whether
held in an estate account or in the Prospect Mountain Capital Improvement
Fund (the “CIF”) established at the direction of the Commission as approved
by the Bankruptcy Court and the Commission.
P. The Parties contemplate that, after payment of all allowed claims authorized to
be paid by the Bankruptcy Court, including all administrative expenses, any
remaining funds held by the bankruptcy estate as well as any remaining funds
in the CIF Account will be paid to the Town to be used for the benefit of the
Prospect Mountain System for interim repairs prior to the Project construction,
or for the Project if such interim expenses are not incurred.
Q. Time is of the essence to conclude the Bankruptcy Court proceeding, to
transfer the Prospect Mountain assets to the Town, and to commence and
complete reconstruction of the Prospect Mountain System.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained herein and the above Recitals, and for other good and valuable consideration,
the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as
follows:
26
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 4 of 37
Section 1. Project Financing, Construction, and Costs
1.1 The terms and conditions of the Letter have been deemed acceptable by the
Parties and form the basis for this Agreement.
1.2 Unless this Agreement is terminated as set forth herein, the Town shall be solely
responsible for the terms and conditions, tasks and responsibilities as set forth in
the Letter.
Section 2. Prospect Mountain Transfer
2.1 Subject to the terms and conditions herein, Prospect Mountain agrees to transfer
to the Town and the Town agrees to accept, the following from Prospect
Mountain (the “Assets”):
a. All tangible and intangible assets of Prospect Mountain, including, but
not limited to, the water distribution infrastructure, storage tanks, pump
stations, personal and real property, customer accounts, and all
appurtenances thereto.
b. A sum to be determined as set forth in Section 2.7, below, representing
all unpaid accounts receivable for customers of Prospect Mountain, if
any, which remain after payment of all allowed claims and
administrative expenses in the Bankruptcy Court.
c. By Trustee’s Deed, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C,
any real property owned by Prospect Mountain. To the best of the
Trustee’s knowledge, information and belief, Prospect Mountain owns
two parcels of real property which are set forth on Exhibit B attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
d. By Trustee’s Deed, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C,
all easement rights of Prospect Mountain whether held in fee, by
prescription, or by plat dedication, including but not limited to all utility
easements and rights-of-way.
e. All funds held by the bankruptcy estate in the CIF that remain after the
Trustee’s payment of all allowed claims and administrative expenses
authorized by the Bankruptcy Court to be paid as set forth in Section
2.7, below.
27
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 5 of 37
f. The Town acknowledges and agrees that the amounts of any funds
available for transfer to the Town listed in this section are not known at
this time. The Parties agree that this Agreement is not contingent in any
way on the receipt by the Town of any specific amount of funds that
may or may not exist in the CIF or in the bankruptcy estate at the
conclusion of the bankruptcy proceeding.
2.2 Transfer of Prospect Mountain assets other than real property shall be by good
and sufficient bill of sale, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances of record.
2.3 Transfer of uncollected accounts receivable, if any, shall be made by good and
sufficient assignment without recourse pursuant to the True-Up Provisions in
Section 2.7, below.
2.4 Transfer of remaining funds in the CIF or other funds in the bankruptcy estate
shall be pursuant to the True-Up Provisions in Section 2.7, below.
2.5 Date of Transfer. The Date of Transfer shall consist of an initial closing in the
items listed in Sections 2.1, but prior to the fulfillment of the True-Up Provisions
discussed in Section 2.7, below. The Date of Transfer shall mark the date of
termination of the Operating Agreement and Water Service Agreement and shall
mark the point after which the Town will assume full and total control of Prospect
Mountain and its assets. Following the initial closing on the Date of Transfer,
Prospect Mountain shall have no further obligation or liability with respect to the
maintenance or operation of the Prospect Mountain System and shall have no
further control of its assets.
2.6 The Date of Transfer of Prospect Mountain and its assets shall occur on or before
May 1, 2019 or as scheduled upon the fulfillment of the contingencies set forth in
Section 3, below.
2.7 True-Up Provisions for Transfer of Funds. After entry of an Order of the
Bankruptcy Court approving the Trustee’s Final Report and Applications for
Compensation, and after disbursement of all funds necessary to pay the allowed
claims and administrative expenses set forth in the Trustee’s Final Report, the
Trustee and the Town shall perform the following tasks, referred to as the “True-
Up Provisions”:
2.7.1. The Trustee shall prepare a full accounting which shall identify all unused
28
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 6 of 37
funds remaining in the control of Prospect Mountain, including all funds held in all
bankruptcy estate accounts and the CIF and a list of all uncollected accounts
receivable;
2.7.2. The Trustee will provide such accounting to the Town for its review;
2.7.3. The Trustee will cause any available and remaining funds shown in such
final accounting to be transferred to the Town by check;
2.7.4. The Trustee shall provide the Town with copies of all invoices for
uncollected accounts receivable and shall assign such uncollected accounts by
good and sufficient assignment as set forth in Section 2.3, above;
2.7.5. The Town shall accept the final accounting, subject to its determination
that there are no calculation errors set forth in such accounting, but the Town
agrees that it shall not have any recourse to challenge the amount of funds to be
transferred to the Town other than as agreed to by the Trustee in his sole
discretion as a calculation error in the accounting;
2.7.6. The Town agrees that no specific amount of funds has been represented
or promised by Prospect Mountain to the Town under this section and no specific
amount of funds for transfer is contemplated or required under the conditions
precedent in Section 3, below.
2.8 Subsequent to the Date of Transfer and the fulfillment of the True-Up Provisions,
the transaction shall be completed and this Agreement shall be of no further force
or effect. The Town acknowledges and agrees that, at that time, the Trustee
shall take those steps necessary for the Bankruptcy Court to close the
bankruptcy proceeding, Prospect Mountain will cease to exist, and there shall be
no liability or recourse available from Prospect Mountain to the Town or to any
third party in any form or fashion whatsoever.
2.9 No representations or warranties. The Town acknowledges that the Trustee is
unable to make, shall not be required to make, and shall not be deemed to have
made, any representation or warranty whatsoever as to the physical condition of
the Prospect Mountain System or its assets. The acquisition of the Prospect
Mountain System by the Town is based solely on the basis of the Town’s own
review of the physical condition of the Prospect Mountain System, and
documents relating to Prospect Mountain, including but not limited to the
Preliminary Engineering Report and Environmental Assessment. The Trustee
29
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 7 of 37
cannot and shall not assume the risk that adverse matters may not have been
disclosed to the Town by the Town’s investigation.
2.10 As a standard matter of practice involving assets conveyed from bankruptcy
estates through court appointed administrators, Trustee’s limited knowledge of
the Prospect Mountain System as the Trustee of a bankruptcy estate does not
permit Trustee to convey the Prospect Mountain System and its other assets
which are the subject of this Agreement other than in their present “AS IS”
condition, subject to all faults. Accordingly, the Prospect Mountain System which
is the subject of this Agreement is being conveyed “AS IS, AND WITH ALL
FAULTS WITH NO REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY THE TRUSTEE.”
Section 3. Conditions Precedent for Closing
3.1 Regulatory and Bankruptcy Court approvals. This Agreement shall be submitted
for approval by the Commission and the Bankruptcy Court. Both the Commission
and the Bankruptcy Court shall be advised by the Parties that this Agreement
represents a package of compromises and necessary steps to implement the
Letter and transfer the Prospect Mountain System. If the Commission or the
Bankruptcy Court imposes conditions or modifications that materially alter this
Agreement and are unacceptable to either party, then the Parties shall provide a
good faith alternative for approval under rehearing procedures. If either the
Commission or the Bankruptcy Court does not approve the alternative proposal
of the Parties, and if the Town, after consultation with Prospect Mountain,
determines that the material conditions or modifications render the Town unable
to perform its obligations under the Letter, then either Party may terminate this
Agreement for good cause upon thirty days written notice to the other Party.
3.1.1. Bankruptcy Court Approval. This Agreement is subject to, and shall not
become effective until approved by, the written Order of the Bankruptcy Court
upon such notice as may be required. Trustee shall apply to the Bankruptcy
Court for an Order approving this Agreement.
3.1.2. Commission Approval. This Agreement is subject to, and shall not
become effective until approved by, the final written decision of the Commission,
upon such notice as may be required. Trustee and the Town shall jointly apply to
the Commission for an order approving this Agreement. It is the intent of the
Parties to request an affirmative determination from the Commission that, as a
result of approving the Agreement transferring the Prospect Mountain System
and all of Prospect Mountain’s assets to the Town, and approval of the System
30
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 8 of 37
Reconstruction Surcharge, discussed below, the Commission will not exercise
continuing jurisdiction over the Town or the Town’s Water Enterprise with respect
to the Prospect Mountain Service Territory.
3.2 Prospect Mountain shall make reasonable, good faith efforts to provide the
necessary documentation to include all Prospect Mountain customers’ property
within the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and Municipal
Subdistrict (“Northern”).
3.3 New individual meters have been installed for all Prospect Mountain customers.
3.4 Prospect Mountain shall provide a list of all active and pending Prospect
Mountain customers, property descriptions of all identified customers, and a
listing of any property owners who have requested connection to the Prospect
Mountain System but have not initiated connection procedures under Prospect
Mountain’s existing tariffs.
3.5 There have been no material changes in the terms and conditions of the Letter as
of the Date of Transfer.
Section 4. Parties’ Responsibilities Prior to Transfer
4.1 The Town shall continue to operate and maintain the Prospect Mountain System
pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Operating Agreement including, but
not limited to, operation and ordinary maintenance of the Prospect Mountain
System, and the provision of bulk water.
4.2 The Town shall cooperate and provide any necessary information to Prospect
Mountain in order for Prospect Mountain to obtain approvals from the
Commission and the Bankruptcy Court for transfer of the Prospect Mountain
System to the Town pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
4.3 Prospect Mountain shall continue to perform its responsibilities pursuant to the
terms and conditions of the Operating Agreement.
4.4 Operating Agreement Authorized Improvements. Pursuant to provisions of the
Operating Agreement and as approved by the Commission in Decision No. C18-
0380, the Trustee has transferred $261,000 to the Town to be used by the Town
for interim capital improvements to the Prospect Mountain System deemed
necessary by the Town to operate the Prospect Mountain System (the
31
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 9 of 37
“Authorized Improvements”). The Authorized Improvements include, but are not
limited to, a new booster pump, SCADA system upgrades, tank demolition, and
installation of individual water meters. The Town has determined that installation
of the new booster pump should be postponed until reconstruction of the
Prospect Mountain System as part of the Project.
4.4.1. Prospect Mountain agrees with the Town’s position that the installation of
the new booster pump is not consistent with the Project contemplated in the
Letter and the Town’s obligations thereunder, and to construct the new booster
pump would be a waste of resources.
4.4.2. The Town estimates that it will take approximately $135,000 to install all of
the water meters, complete the tank demolition, and upgrade the SCADA system.
Accordingly, the Town anticipates that approximately $125,000 will remain after
those expenditures.
4.4.3. The Parties agree that, in the application to be made to the Commission
for the Commission’s approval of this Agreement, Prospect Mountain shall
request authorization from the Commission to amend or vacate Decision No.
C18-0380 to allow the Town to use the remaining portion of the Operating
Agreement authorized payments to the Town to pay unreimbursed operational
costs incurred by the Town pursuant to the Operating Agreement. The Town
acknowledges that this provision is subject to approval by the Commission given
the Commission’s prior decision authorizing these expenditures for specific
capital projects. The Parties agree that this section is a material condition of the
Agreement because the Operating Agreement unreimbursed costs will not be
paid to the Town within the scope of the Letter or the Project and that such costs
have been legitimately incurred by the Town through its obligations under the
Operating Agreement.
4.4.4. The Town agrees that any remaining portion of said funds retained by the
Town shall be used by the Town to maintain and operate the Prospect Mountain
System prior to construction of the Project. In the event the funds retained by the
Town are not used by the Town to operate and maintain the Prospect Mountain
System prior to construction of the Project, the remaining retained funds shall be
used for the Project.
4.5 The Parties agree that, other than the Agency approval attached as Exhibit A, no
financing or financial approval is required by the Town as a condition precedent
in Section 3, above.
32
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 10 of 37
4.6 The Town acknowledges that, following approval of this Agreement, all Town
approvals have been achieved and no further votes of the Town Board or any
referendum are required to effectuate this Agreement.
Section 5. Responsibilities of the Town Following Transfer
5.1 Upon the Date of Transfer, the Operating Agreement shall terminate. Prospect
Mountain customers shall become Town water customers subject to the Town’s
Water Enterprise rules and regulations. The Town shall assume full control of
Prospect Mountain as the incumbent utility, including but not limited to billing
responsibility. Each customer shall be billed individually by the Town for water
service at the Town’s applicable water rate. All former Prospect Mountain
customers will become subject to all the rules and regulations of the Town’s
Water Enterprise including, but not limited to, bill payment, termination of water
service, and turn-on charges.
5.2 As part of the Project, each individual former customer of Prospect Mountain will
be required to have a separate connection into the new water mains. As required
in the Town’s Water Enterprise rules and regulations, each service line shall be
required to be owned and maintained by the property owner including the
physical connection into the water main.
5.3 System Development Fee. The Town has been providing bulk water to Prospect
Mountain according to the terms of the Water Service Agreement and the
Operating Agreement. The Town’s bulk water rate to Prospect Mountain includes
the amortized cost of the Town’s System Development Fee and Water Right Fee
(collectively the “System Development Fee”) for a property owner to obtain
residential water service for a single-family residence from the Town over twenty
(20) years. The following process represents the understanding of the Parties
regarding the transition to the Town Water Enterprise and the process for
implementing the charges required to repay the USDA loan.
5.3.1. The Town shall credit the pro-rata amount of the System Development
Fee paid by Prospect Mountain from August 2012 to the Date of Transfer of the
Assets for existing Prospect Mountain customers which the Town has determined
to be 33% of the amortized System Development Fee for existing customers (the
“Pro Rata Credit”);
5.3.2. Following the Date of Transfer and until completion of the Project, for
33
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 11 of 37
properties that are not connected to the Prospect Mountain System which are
located within the Service Territory, the Town will allow such properties to
connect to the Town’s System. Said properties shall pay the Pro Rata Credit
prior to connection to the Town System. The new customers shall follow the
Town’s rules and procedures for connection to the Town’s System;
5.3.3. For existing Prospect Mountain customers and new customers in the
Service Territory that connect to the rebuilt system prior to completion of the
Project, the remaining portion of the Town’s System Development Fee will be
paid through the Agency funding of the Project.
5.4 System Reconstruction Surcharge. Upon completion of the Project and disbursal
from the Agency of all Project funds, the Town shall determine the final cost of
construction of the Project. The final cost shall include legal and administrative
costs of the Town, engineering, and all out-of-pocket miscellaneous costs
attributable to the construction and administration of the Project, as well as the
remaining portion of the Prospect Mountain ratepayers’ System Development
Fees (the “Town Costs”). The Letter includes an approved grant from the Agency
that will be applied to reimburse the Town Costs. After accounting for 1) the
grant portion of the Agency funding upon completion of the Project as a credit to
the Town Costs, 2) any Town funds remaining from the transfer of the CIF and
other accounts receivable under this Agreement as a credit to the Town Costs, 3)
the amount owed per the terms of the Letter and the Agency Loan, 4) financing
costs, and 5) any remaining unreimbursed Town Costs, the Town shall issue a
Revenue Bond pursuant to Section II.5 of the Letter. The Revenue Bond will
secure the Agency Loan part of the funding.
5.4.1 After the Town has issued the Revenue Bond, the Town shall calculate the
System Reconstruction Surcharge (the “Surcharge”). The Surcharge will be
solely applicable to former Prospect Mountain customers within the existing
Service Territory that become customers of the Town, plus any new customers
that connect to the Prospect Mountain System prior to the completion of the
Project pursuant to section 5.3.2, above (the “Benefitted Town Customers”).
5.4.2 The Surcharge formula will be determined based upon the payment
schedule under the Revenue Bond and no other costs. The Town shall create an
amortization schedule over 40 years to repay the Revenue Bond exactly and in
full. The Town will identify the final number of Benefitted Town Customers and
will convert the annual amortization schedule requirements into a monthly
amount divided pro-rata and exclusively payable by the Benefitted Town
34
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 12 of 37
Customers on a monthly basis. The Town will credit any overpayment of the
Revenue Bond to the Benefitted Town Customers after the Revenue Bond has
been repaid in full.
5.4.3 The Parties agree that the Benefitted Town Customers are the
beneficiaries of the Letter and the Revenue Bond and that such costs are
exclusively caused by the Benefitted Town Customers. The Town agrees that,
aside from the Surcharge, there will be no other charges to the Benefitted Town
Customers that are different than those charged to all customers of the Town’s
Water Enterprise. The Surcharge formula and rate schedule shall not be modified
by the Town until the Revenue Bond and Town Costs have been paid in full. At
that time, the Surcharge will be eliminated.
5.4.4 Upon completion of the Project and the determination of the Surcharge as
provided in Section 5.4 above, any new customers located within the former
Service Territory shall be new customers of the Town and shall be responsible for
paying the then current Town System Development Fee charges for connections
to the Town’s System and payment of the Town’s water rates. Said new
customers shall not be subject to the Surcharge.
5.5 Prospect Mountain shall have no responsibility or liability of any kind in
connection with the requirements detailed in this section after the Date of Transfer.
Section 6. Closing and Date of Transfer
6.1 The Parties agree that, unless extended by mutual agreement of the Parties, the
Date of Transfer for this Agreement shall occur on May 1, 2019. The Parties
agree to make reasonable good faith efforts to achieve the contingencies listed in
Section 3 by the Date of Transfer. However, if either Party believes an extension
of the Date of Transfer is necessary to allow for the contingencies to be satisfied,
then the Parties shall execute an extension of the Date of Transfer. Such
extension shall be approved by both Parties and such approval shall not be
withheld, shall not be unreasonable delayed, and shall not be unreasonably
conditioned by the Parties in order to fulfill the contingencies.
6.2 The Parties agree that the Letter and Agency approval require that this
Agreement be effectuated. With that understanding, this Agreement may be
terminated only for good cause pursuant to Section 3.1, above. Specifically, a
failure to achieve all closing conditions in Section 3, above, by the Date of
Transfer shall not be a breach of this Agreement unless such conditions are not
35
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 13 of 37
achieved due to the negligent or willful and wanton conduct of the Trustee.
Pursuant to Section 6.1, the Date of Transfer shall be extended as required by
the Town in order to achieve the conditions precedent in Section 3, or the Town
may, in its discretion, waive any condition precedent that is not fulfilled and notify
the Trustee of its intention to schedule a Date of Transfer at any time.
Section 7. Additional Terms and Conditions
7.1 Additional Documents or Action. The Parties agree to execute any additional
documents and to take any additional action necessary to carry out this
Agreement.
7.2 Integration and Amendment. This Agreement represents the entire agreement
between the Parties and there are no oral or collateral agreements or
understandings between the Parties with respect to the operation and
maintenance of the System. Only an instrument in writing signed by all Parties
may amend this Agreement.
7.3 Governing Law. The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern this Agreement.
7.4 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon,
the Parties, and their respective legal representatives, successors, and assigns;
provided, however, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to permit the
assignment of this Agreement except as otherwise specifically authorized in this
Agreement.
7.5 Liability. Prospect Mountain agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the
Town, its officers, agents and employees from and against all liability for any and
all claims, liens, suits, demands or actions for damages, injuries to persons,
including death, property damage, including loss of use, and expenses, including
court costs and reasonable attorney's fees, arising out of or resulting from
activities under this Agreement, except for any such liability resulting from the
negligence of the Town, its officers, agents and employees. Prospect Mountain’s
liability under this Section shall terminate on the Date of Transfer.
7.6 Governmental Immunity. The Town, its officers, and its employees, are relying
on, and do not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this Agreement, the
monetary limitations (presently three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000)
per person and nine hundred ninety thousand dollars ($990,000) per occurrence)
or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado
36
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 14 of 37
Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. § 24 10 101, et seq., as amended, or
otherwise available to the Town and its officers or employees.
7.7 No Waiver of Rights. The Town and Prospect Mountain understand and agree
that neither Prospect Mountain nor the Town waive any rights they may have
individually as entities to pursue any course of action deemed by Prospect
Mountain or the Town to be in the best interest of the individual entity.
7.8 Waiver or Breach. The waiver by any party to a term of this Agreement or a
breach of any term or provision of this Agreement shall not operate as or be
construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach by any party.
7.9 Severability. If any clause, sentence, term, condition, covenant and/or provision
of this Agreement is ruled to be illegal, null or void by a court of competent
jurisdiction, then the remaining portions of this Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect.
7.10 Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any of the rights or obligations of the
Parties hereto, shall be assigned by either party without the prior written consent
of the other.
7.11 Counterparts. This Agreement and future amendments, if any, may be executed
by facsimile or electronic signatures. All facsimile or electronic signatures shall
be considered the original signatures for all purposes. This Agreement and
future amendments, if any, may be executed in counterparts. All counterparts,
when taken together, shall be deemed as an original.
7.12 No Third Party Beneficiary. The Parties understand and agree that this
Agreement between Prospect Mountain and the Town shall not benefit nor
accrue to the interest of any other third party beneficiary including, but not limited
to, any individual customer of Prospect Mountain.
7.13 Time is of the Essence. The Parties acknowledge that time is of the essence,
and agree to fully and promptly cooperate in order to secure funding.
7.14 Notice. Any and all notices or any other communication herein required or
permitted shall be deemed to have been given when personally delivered or
deposited in the United States postal service as regular mail, postage prepaid,
and addressed as follows or to such other person or address as a party may
designate in writing to the other party:
37
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 15 of 37
The Town: Town of Estes Park
Attn: Town Administrator
PO Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
Prospect Mountain: PROSPECT MOUNTAIN WATER CO
C/O DANIEL A. HEPNER CH 7 TRUSTEE
950 SPRUCE ST STE 1C
LOUISVILLE, CO 80027-1977
Email: d.hepner@dah-law.com
With Copy To: Mark Detsky, Esq.
Dietze and Davis, P.C.
2060 Broadway, Suite 400
Boulder, CO 80303
Telephone: 303-447-1375
Email: MDetsky@DietzeDavis.com
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on
the date first set forth above.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK BY AND
THROUGH ITS WATER ENTERPRISE
PROSPECT MOUNTAIN WATER
COMPANY
By:_____________________________
By:_____________________________
Title: Mayor
Name: Todd Jirsa
Title: DANIEL A. HEPNER, CH 7
TRUSTEE
38
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 16 of 37
EXHIBIT A
USDA Letter of Conditions
39
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 17 of 37
40
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 18 of 37
41
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 19 of 37
42
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 20 of 37
43
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 21 of 37
44
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 22 of 37
45
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 23 of 37
46
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 24 of 37
47
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 25 of 37
48
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 26 of 37
49
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 27 of 37
50
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 28 of 37
51
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 29 of 37
52
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 30 of 37
53
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 31 of 37
54
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 32 of 37
55
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 33 of 37
56
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 34 of 37
EXHIBIT B
Service Line Ownership and Responsibility Delineation
1. Owner name: Prospect Mountain Water CO, Inc.
Parcel #35363-07-042
No site address, Prospect Mountain Drive
0.07 acres
(Existing tank to be demolished and pump pit)
57
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 35 of 37
2. Owner name: Prospect Mountain Water Company, Inc.
Parcel #35364-00-014
101 W. Peak View Drive
0.25 acres
(PROSPECT MOUNTAIN treatment plant)
58
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 36 of 37
EXHIBIT C
FORM OF TRUSTEE’S DEED
Daniel A. Hepner whose address is 950 Spruce Street, Suite 1C, Louisville, Colorado, in
his capacity as trustee (“Trustee”) of the bankruptcy estate of Prospect Mountain Water Company,
Chapter 7 Case No. 15-14286 TBM in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of
Colorado, pursuant to Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado
entered on , 2019 and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby sells and quitclaims to Town of Estes Park, whose
mailing address is P.O. Box 1200, Estes Park, Colorado 80517, any and all interests Trustee may
have in the real property located in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado which property is
legally described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto.
Signed this ___ day of , 2019.
DANIEL A. HEPNER, TRUSTEE
By: _________________________________________
Daniel A. Hepner, Trustee of the bankruptcy estate of
Prospect Mountain Water Company, Chapter 7 Case No.
15-14286 TBM, United States Bankruptcy Court for the
District of Colorado
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of , 2019, by Daniel A.
Hepner, Trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Prospect Mountain Water Company, Chapter 7 Case No. 15-
14286 TBM, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My Commission expires: ______________.
____________________________
Notary Public
59
Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement between
Prospect Mountain Water Company and the Town of Estes Park
Page 37 of 37
EXHIBIT A to Trustee’s Deed
1. Any real property owned by Prospect Mountain whether owned in fee, by
prescription, or by plat dedication, including but not limited to the following
parcels located in Larimer County, Colorado:
a. Parcel #35363-07-042
No site address, Prospect Mountain Drive
Consisting of 0.07 acres
(Existing tank site)
b. Parcel #35364-00-014
101 W. Peak View Drive
Consisting of 0.25 acres
(PROSPECT MOUNTAIN treatment plant)
2. All easement rights of Prospect Mountain whether held in fee, by
prescription, or by plat dedication, including but not limited to all utility easements
and rights-of-way.
60
PUBLIC WORKS Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From:Ryan Barr, EI, Pavement Manager
David Hook, PE, Engineering Manager
Gregory Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date:Feb 26, 2019
RE:Contract Extension of Chip Seal & Crack Seal
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Public Works seeks Town Board approval of a change order which would extend the
2018 Vance Brothers, Inc. construction contract to include the 2019 Pavement Seal
Treatment Program for the application of chip, slurry, and crack seal resurfacing
treatments on multiple roads and one parking lot in the Town of Estes Park.
Present Situation:
On February 23, 2016 Public Works presented a plan improve the condition of Town
streets to an overall system-wide PCI of 70 by the year 2024. To effectively implement
this plan, we need to hire a contractor to begin the 2019 portion of this Pavement Seal
Treatment Program.
The low bidder in 2018 was Vance Brothers, Inc. This contractor has a good reputation
and extensive experience in chip sealing roads including in Estes Park. The contractor
performed the 2016 Chip Seal Program in Estes Park under the name Foothills Paving.
The Town was satisfied with the chip and crack seal work that Vance Brothers, Inc.
performed in 2018.
The contract for the 2018 program was awarded to Vance Brothers, Inc. on May 1,
2018. The contract documents, specifically the Special Conditions, contained the
following language related to contract extensions:
“The Town of Estes Park reserves the option of extending the contracts of the 2018 Chip and
Crack Seal Program for an additional three years in one year periods. If the Town chooses to
exercise its option to extend for an additional year, it shall provide written notice to the
contractor no later than March 1, 2019 for 2019…”
61
Vance Brothers, Inc. has committed to honoring 2018 bid unit prices through the 2019
Pavement Seal Treatment Program if the Town chooses to extend the contract. By
exercising this option, the Town would save over $23,000 in chip and crack seal costs in
comparison to bidding the program at projected 2019 prices.
With the Town’s spending moratorium in place, Public Works is seeking approval to
extend the contract prior to the March 1, 2019 deadline. Otherwise the Town will have to
bid this work and will lose the cost-savings opportunity.
Proposal:
Public Works proposes extending the Vance Brothers, Inc. contract for the 2019
Pavement Seal Treatment Program.
Advantages:
Rehabilitation of multiple roads in Estes Park
Utilization of 1A sales tax funds to improve Estes Park streets
Anticipated cost savings of over $23,000 by continuing with 2018 bid unit prices
Disadvantages:
Temporary, short duration disruption of traffic in the proposed work areas,
however work will be scheduled to minimize disruption
Funds could be used for other street improvement purposes, however this usage
is consistent with the approved 2024 STIP Program
Exception to current spending moratorium, however approval of this extension
allows us to take advantage of 2018 unit prices and avoid cost increases
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval of the attached change order to Vance Brothers, Inc. in the
amount of $466,906.00, and authorization for PW staff to spend up to the budgeted
amount of $520,000.00 if needed to address unanticipated conditions encountered
during construction.
Finance/Resource Impact:
This project will be funded from the Street Improvement Fund and is included in account
numbers 260-2000-420.25-20 and 260-2000-420.35-52 in the 2019 budget.
Level of Public Interest
Public interest on this project is expected to be moderate.
Sample Motion:
I move for approval/denial of the change order with Vance Brothers, Inc. for the 2019
Pavement Seal Treatment Program in the amount of $466,906.00. Public Works staff is
authorized to spend an additional 11.4% contingency of $53,094 if needed for
unanticipated changes encountered during construction.
Attachments:
Change Order #3
Vance Brothers Proposal
2019 Pavement Seal Treatment Program & Maps
62
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
Date 2/21/2019 Contractor Vance Brothers, Inc.
Submitted by Ryan Barr Address PO Box 877366
Project name 2019 Pavement Seal Treatment Program City State Zip Kansas City, MO 64187-7366
Project #19STIP
Instructions: Complete all sections with sufficient details. If not applicable insert "NA". Expand narrative space or attach additional pages as needed.
1 Reason for change (narrative)
A Adding 2019 Chip Seal & Crack Seal program quantities
B Provide contract time extension to perform the 2019 program work
2a Description of change (narrative)
A Add 2019 program quantities at the 2018 bid unit costs, as agreed upon by Contacrtor and Owner. Items that were not bid in 2018 have fair and negociated 2019 unit costs.
B The Town plans to exercise its right to extend the Vance Brothers contract another year. Increasing contract time to allow for completion of 2019 Chip Seal & Crack Seal program.
2b NO.ITEM NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
CURRENT
CONTRACT
QTY UNIT
UNIT
COST
CURRENT
ITEM COST
CHANGE
ORDER
QTY
CHANGE
ORDER AMT
ADJUSTED
ITEM COST
2019
A CO3 Emulsified Asphalt Chip Seal (1/4 inch)0 SY 3.34$ -$ 87,000 290,580.00$ 290,580.00$
A CO3 Hot Poured Joint and Crack Sealant 0 LB 2.65$ -$ 35,000 92,750.00$ 92,750.00$
A CO3 Pavement Marking Paint (4 inch Yellow)0 GAL 90.00$ -$ 95 8,550.00$ 8,550.00$
A CO3 Pavement Marking Paint (4 inch White)0 GAL 90.00$ -$ 63 5,670.00$ 5,670.00$
A CO3 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking 0 SF 23.00$ -$ 1,076 24,748.00$ 24,748.00$
A CO3 Parking Lot White Paint (Text & 4 inch Stall Lines)0 GAL 128.00$ -$ 36 4,608.00$ 4,608.00$
A CO3 Slurry Seal (Parking Lot)0 SY 4.00$ -$ 10,000 40,000.00$ 40,000.00$
466,906.00$
2018
CO2 Emulsified Asphalt Chip Seal 94,000 SY 3.34$ 313,960.00$ -29,883 (99,809.22)$ 214,150.78$
CO2 Hot Poured Joint and Crack Sealant 40,000 LB 2.65$ 106,000.00$ 20 53.00$ 106,053.00$
CO2 Pavement Marking Paint (4 inch Yellow)150 GAL 90.00$ 13,500.00$ -47 (4,221.00)$ 9,279.00$
CO2 Pavement Marking Paint (4 inch White)90 GAL 90.00$ 8,100.00$ -51.65 (4,648.50)$ 3,451.50$
CO2 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking 250 SF 23.00$ 5,750.00$ 289.60 6,660.80$ 12,410.80$
CO2 Time Reduction
CO1 Mastic Crack Sealant 0 LB 2.90$ -$ 11,700.00 33,930.00$ 33,930.00$
CO1 Sealcoat & Striping 0 EA 5,000.00$ -$ 1.00 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
CO1 Time Extension -$
384,275.08$
2018
COSTS Original contract amount 447,310.00$
Change in contract costs previous change order/s #CO1 & CO2 (63,034.92)$
Change in contract costs this change order
Adjusted contract amount 384,275.08$
Percent change to contract costs (informational only)%
2018 & 2019
COSTS Original contract amount 2018 384,275.08$
Change in contract costs previous change order/s #
Change in contract costs this change order 2019 466,906.00$
Adjusted contract amount 2018 + 2019 851,181.08$
Percent change to contract costs (informational only)
TIME Original contract time working days
Change in contract time previous change order/s #working days
Change in contract time this change order working days
Adjusted contract time working days
Original substantial completion date date
Adjusted substantial completion date date
2018 Final completion date 2/5/2019 date
B 2019 Final completion date 6/28/2019 date
(2/20/2019) U:\Engineering\PROJECT FILES\Ballot 1A Projects\2018 Projects\2018 Chip and Crack Seal\02 Financial\Vance Brothers Inc\Payments\CO and PayApp
file name: VB Change Order 3 63
APPROVAL: This Change Order is accepted and the Contract is amended to conform thereto.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK CONTRACTOR
Approved by Project Manager Date Contractor signature Date
Approved by Engineering Manager Date Contractor title
Approved by Public Works Director Date TOWN SIGNATORY AUTHORITY THRESHOLDS
ENGINEERING MGR $30,000
DIRECTOR $50,000
Approved by Town Administrator Date TOWN ADMINISTRATOR $100,000
Copies to: project file, Finance Dept, Town Clerk
(2/20/2019) U:\Engineering\PROJECT FILES\Ballot 1A Projects\2018 Projects\2018 Chip and Crack Seal\02 Financial\Vance Brothers Inc\Payments\CO and PayApp
file name: VB Change Order 3 64
65
2019 PAVEMENT SEAL TREATMENT PROGRAM
1
Town of Estes Park
Public Works Department
2019 Pavement Seal Treatment Program
EXTENSION: The Town of Estes Park (Town) has chosen to exercise its option to extend the
construction contract for Vance Brothers, Inc. for an additional year. During the extension
period, the terms and conditions of the Contract Documents shall remain in force. As agreed
upon by Town and Contractor, work for the 2019 program will be priced using the 2018 bid
prices.
Revisions to the Vance Brothers, Inc. Construction Agreement
The 2018 Contract/Bid Documents are modified as follows:
SCHEDULE OF 2019 ACTIVITIES:
Town Board Approval February 26, 2019
Notice of Award February 27, 2019
Pre-Construction Meeting TBD (May 3, 2019 = target)
Notice to Proceed May 3, 2019 (target)
Substantial Construction completed June 21, 2019
Final Construction completed June 28, 2019
During the pre-construction meeting, the Contractor will provide a schedule of construction
activities which will meet the construction completion deadlines listed above.
2019 Pavement Seal Treatment Program
SCOPE: The 2019 work will include crack seal, chip seal and associated re-striping of multiple
roads in the Town of Estes Park. The work will also include crack seal, slurry seal and associated
striping of the Town Hall parking lot. The contractor shall supply all labor, materials and
equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with these specifications. The roads
proposed for chip seal are listed below.
Aspen Avenue
Birch Avenue
Columbine Avenue
Courtney Lane
Crags Drive
Curry Drive
Davis Street
Fish Hatchery Road
Graves Avenue
High Street
High Pine Drive
James Street
Landers Street
Lott Street
Moccasin Circle Drive
North Ridge Lane
Park View Lane
Raven Avenue
Raven Circle
Valley Road
Virginia Drive
66
2019 PAVEMENT SEAL TREATMENT PROGRAM
2
The roads proposed for the 2019 Chip Seal are shown in Exhibit A.
The roads proposed for the 2019 Crack Seal are shown in Exhibit B.
A graphic of the Town parking lot for crack seal, slurry seal and striping is shown in Exhibit C.
The Project Manager listed in Article 2. PROJECT MANAGER is revised to be Ryan Barr.
Retainage for the 2018 Chip and Crack Seal Program has been paid (balance = $0), so the 5%
retainage will apply only to the 2019 work as per the General Conditions, 71.0 PARTIAL
PAYMENT, Section 3.
The Town Contact Person listed in the Special Conditions, Section 1.0 shall be Ryan Barr who
can be contacted at (910) 577-3575 or rbarr@estes.org.
Contractor shall extend their Payment and Performance Bond to cover the 2019 program.
67
LAKEESTES
UV66
BuckCreek
BigT hom psonRiver
FishCree kB e a v e r B ro ok
BlackCanyonCreek
Fall River
BigT h ompso
nRiver
B i g T h o m p s o n R i ver DryGulch£¤36
£¤36
£¤34
This draft document was prepared for internal use by theTown of Estes Park, CO. The Town makes no claim as tothe accuracy or completeness of the data contained hereon.
Due to security concerns, The Town requests that youdo not post this document on the internet or otherwisemake it available to persons unknown to you.
0 1,400 2,800Feet
1 in = 2,667 ft±Town of Estes ParkPublic Works
2019 Pavement SealTreatment ProgramExhibit A
2019 Chip Seal
Chip SealChip Seal and Striping
68
LAKEESTES
MARYSLAKE
UV7
UV66
B ig Thom psonRiverBigTh o m p s onRive r
FishCree kBeaverB ro okBl
ackCan
yonCr
ee
k
FallRiv er DryGulchBigT h o m p so n R i v e r
£¤36
£¤34
£¤36
£¤34
£¤36
This draft document was prepared for internal use by theTown of Estes Park, CO. The Town makes no claim as tothe accuracy or completeness of the data contained hereon.
Due to security concerns, The Town requests that youdo not post this document on the internet or otherwisemake it available to persons unknown to you.
0 1,250 2,500Feet
1 in = 2,333 ft±Town of Estes ParkPublic Works
2019 Pavement SealTreatment ProgramExhibit B
2019 Crack Seal
High Priority - Complete FirstLower Priority
69
Black C a n y o n C r e e k
This draft document was prepared for internal use by theTown of Estes Park, CO. The Town makes no claim as tothe accuracy or completeness of the data contained hereon.
Due to security concerns, The Town requests that youdo not post this document on the internet or otherwisemake it available to persons unknown to you.
0 40 80Feet
1 in = 75 ft±Town of Estes ParkPublic Works
2019 Pavement SealTreatment ProgramExhibit C
Estes Park 2019 Parking LotCrack Seal, Slurry Seal, Re-Striping
Town Hall Parking Lot
Estes ParkTown Hall
Estes ParkLibrary
70
Town of Estes Park
Service Elevated
Customer Service
Training
Background
•Customer Service is a priority – 78%
positive rating in 2018 Citizen
Survey
•Overall positive feedback on service
•We want a program that develops
consistency and a culture around
service excellence
71
Background
•Administration set a goal to
research and implement a customer
service program
•Programs for the public sector are
limited
•Encouraged to contact the City of
Boulder
Background
•Boulder’s program is tailored to
public employees
•Peer‐led with a positive impact on
the organization
•Began working together in late 2017
to develop our program
72
Background
•Town Administrator and Leadership
Team supported plan to move
forward
•Put together a team of employees
across the organization
•Held 3 planning sessions
The Team
Barbara Jo Limmiatis (Utilities – IT)
Bunny Beers (Administrative Services)
Caleb Robertson (Police)
Christy Crosser (Public Works)
Deb Callahan (Utilities – Water)
Kate Rusch (Administration)
Megan Van Hoozer (Public Works)
Mikaela Fundaun (Museum)
Rob Hinkle (Community Services)
Robin Becker (Community Development)
Suzanna Simpson (Administration)
73
Organizational Values
•The basis for the program and our
conduct as Town employees
•Each value represents our service
priorities
•Support the Town’s Mission, Vision
and Strategic Plan
Organizational Values
Responsive
We assess situations with care and
respond to customer needs in a
helpful and timely manner.
74
Organizational Values
Approach
We approach each customer with
respect and empathy, engaging in
open dialogue and demonstrating a
willingness to listen and work
together toward the best possible
outcome. We ask the same of our
customers.
Organizational Values
Outcome‐focused
We provide reliable and efficient
services to meet customer needs,
taking proactive and innovative
measures and ensuring closure for
each customer
75
Organizational Values
Supportive
We are empowered through
development, education and
resources to provide the appropriate
customer service in a supported
environment.
Organizational Values
Accessible
We strive to ensure that information
and resources are kept up to date and
easy to find and understand.
76
The Program
•We represent the Town ‐ our
interactions shape perception of
local government and the
community
•Covers a variety of concepts and
techniques
•Applies to all levels of staff
The Program
•Caleb Robertson and Christy
Crosser are current trainers
•Three offsite sessions in 2019
•Mandatory participation
•Leadership team will be the test
group
77
Additional Measures
•Email and comment card
•Recognition for Town staff
•Promotion
•Follow‐up
Current Status
•Trainers attended a session in
Boulder
•Finalizing curriculum
•First session in late spring
78
Town of Estes Park
Questions?
79
80
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: February 26, 2019
RE: Micromobility Devices (Ebikes, Escooters, etc)
Objective:
Discuss with the Town Board objectives and content for a potential ordinance governing
the comingling of small, human or electric-powered transportation devices with
pedestrians and automobiles on sidewalks, trails, and streets.
Present Situation:
•The Model Traffic Code (adopted by ordinance in Estes Park) prohibits the use of
the electrical motor on an electric assisted bicycle when operated on a public
bike path or pedestrian path.
•Private companies (such as Bird, Lime, Lyft, Razor, Spin, etc.) have flooded
some US cities with an abundance of dockless Electric Mobility Scooters (EMS),
in an effort to deliver readily-available, affordable, shared transportation devices
for short distance trips. These alternatives to automobiles have delivered
benefits (some relief to dependence on cars) and disbenefits (increased
collisions, injuries, community conflict, etc.).
•Neither state nor municipal law contemplated EMSs being used in the emerging
manners as transportation devices. Furthermore, state law treats EMSs as toy
vehicles which are prohibited on bicycle lanes and roadways.
•The Town administration has expressed interest in potentially allowing ebikes on
some recreational trails and pre-emptively establishing regulations to prevent
problems experienced with EMSs in other municipal jurisdictions.
•The proposed ordinance has been reviewed by the Estes Park Cycling Coalition,
citizen Transportation Advisory Board, and several guest attendees at numerous
monthly meetings dating back to June 2018. Their comments are incorporated.
Proposal:
81
Draft Ordinance 0X-19 is proposed to modify the Estes Park Municipal Code to allow
ebikes and EMSs on most Town trails and roadways.
Advantages:
•Trail use is expanded to include a larger group of vehicles and users.
•MDs are prohibited on the Riverwalk, Elkhorn, and Moraine sidewalks where
pedestrian density too high to allow safe mixing with wheeled devices.
•A speed limit of 6 mph is proposed where MD’s are comingled with pedestrians
on sidewalks.
•A speed limit of 15 mph is proposed where MD’s may mix with pedestrians on
wider multi-use trails.
•Expanding the legal use of MDs on the Town’s transportation network could
reduce the number of automobiles on the roadway and the associated adverse
environmental impacts.
•Permitting and operational rules are proposed to prevent problems experienced
with large-scale rentals of EMSs documented in other municipal jurisdictions.
Disadvantages:
•Encouraging MDs on trails, sidewalks, and roadways increases the potential for
more conflicts between travelers moving at disparate speeds. Increases in
personal injury accidents could be an expected outcome.
•Expanded regulations can hinder expansion of commercial business ventures.
•This is conceived as an honor-system proposal that does not include expanded
enforcement efforts to assure compliance.
Action Recommended:
Discussion and direction on bringing an MD ordinance to the Town Board at a future
public hearing for potential adoption.
Finance/Resource Impact:
Future approval of an MD ordinance may slightly increase the visitation and associated
sales tax revenue generation in Estes Park. Any demand for expanded enforcement of
new rules could result in additional costs to the Town General Fund.
Level of Public Interest
The known level of public interest in this item is low.
Attachments:
Draft Ordinance 0X-19
Portland 2018 E-Scooter Findings Report Link
82
Page 1 of 7
ORDINANCE NO. 0X-19
AN ORDINANCE REENACTING CHAPTER 9.18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK RELATING TO SKATEBOARDS,
ROLLERBLADES, and BICYCLES
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees encourages alternative transportation modes that
are environmentally friendly, reduce society's dependence on fossil fuels, and
encourage more people to complete trips by environmentally-friendly modes of
transportation; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees is committed to embracing new transportation
and mobility technology and desires to prepare for the safe integration of Electric
Mobility Scooters (EMSs) into the Town's transportation system and to ensure that the
use of EMSs as alternate modes of transportation contemplated by this ordinance is
safe, prudent, and in the best interest of all users; and
WHEREAS, neither state nor municipal law contemplated EMS devices to be used
in the emerging manner as a transportation device; and
WHEREAS, the state law currently treats EMSs as “toy vehicles” and, as such,
prohibits their operation in bicycle lanes or roadways; and
WHEREAS, EMSs are more akin to bicycles than toy vehicles given the speed at
which they travel, and
WHEREAS, Estes Park has a desire to govern the use of EMSs to respect safety
and infrastructure and to enact laws and rules that protect and provide guidance to EMS
operators, EMS suppliers, law enforcement, city officials, pedestrians, and the general
public; and
WHEREAS, the Estes Park Municipal Code does not permit electric assisted
bicycles to be operated on bicycle and pedestrian paths; and
WHEREAS, the Colorado General Assembly recently passed House Bill 17-1151,
which refines the definition of an Electric Assisted Bicycle and affords such mode of
transportation a presumption of allowance on bike and pedestrian paths in the state
unless a municipality provides otherwise; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees wishes to implement House Bill 17-1151; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees desires to amend the Town Code to prohibit the
rental of MDs without permits issued by the Town; and
83
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado has
determined that it is in the best interest of the Town to amend certain sections of the
Municipal Code of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Chapter 9.18 of the Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety
and reenacted to read as follows:
Chapter 9.18
Micromobility Devices
9.18.010 Definitions
(a) Bicycle means a device propelled by human power upon which any one
(1) or more persons may ride and which is composed of one (1) or more wheels. Bicycle
includes unicycles, tricycles, tandem bicycles, and pedicabs.
(b) Electric assisted bicycle means a vehicle having three wheels or
less, fully operable pedals, and an electric motor not exceeding seven hundred
fifty (750) watts (one horsepower) of power rating, and conforming to one of
three classes as follows:
1) "Class 1 electric assisted bicycle" means an electrical assisted
bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the
rider is pedaling and that ceases to provide assistance when the
bicycle reaches a speed of twenty (20) miles per hour.
2) "Class 2 electric assisted bicycle" means an electrical assisted
bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance regardless of
whether the rider is pedaling but ceases to provide assistance when
the bicycle reaches a speed of twenty (20) miles per hour.
3) "Class 3 electric assisted bicycle" means an electrical assisted
bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the
rider is pedaling and that ceases to provide assistance when the
bicycle reaches a speed of twenty-eight (28) miles per hour.
(c) Electric mobility scooter (EMS) means a stand-up scooter with two tandem
wheels, designed to transport only one person, and that is powered by an electric
propulsion system having a top speed of no more than twenty miles per hour.
(d) Electronic personal assistive mobility device (EPAMD or segway) means a
self-balancing, two (2) nontandem wheeled device that is designed to transport only one
(1) person; solely powered by an electrical propulsion system with an average power of
seven hundred fifty watts (one horsepower) with a maximum speed of less than fifteen
(15) mph on a paved level surface.
84
Page 3 of 7
(e) Micromobility device (MD) means any small, human or electric-powered
transportation solution such as a bicycle, electric assisted bicycle, scooter, electric
mobility scooter, EPAMD, rollerblades, skateboard, or any other small, lightweight
vehicle that is being used as to move persons for recreational or point-to-point trips
within public rights of way or transportation easements
(f) Multi-use path means those publicly owned and maintained trails, paths,
and rights-of-way not less than 8’ wide and designated as trails or paths in the Estes
Valley Master Trails Plan, as amended and on file in the office of the Community
Development Director and the Public Works Director.
(g) Rollerblades means a pair of shoes or boots which have attached wheels
and allows the person wearing the boots to propel themselves along a surface.
Rollerblades includes roller skates and in-line skates.
(h) Sidewalk means the public pedestrian walkway commonly less than 8’
wide, generally parallel to and situated within the adjacent public street right of way, and
maintained by the adjacent private property owners.
(i) Skateboard means a device propelled by human or motorized power upon
which any person may ride, which is composed of one (1) or more wheels and upon
which is mounted a flat board or surface designed to carry one (1) person.
(j) Toy vehicle shall mean any vehicle that has wheels and is not designed
for use on public highways or for off-road use.
1) Toy vehicle includes, but is not limited to, gas-powered or electric-
powered vehicles commonly known as minibikes, "pocket bikes", kamikaze
boards, go-peds, and stand-up scooters except for EMSs as defined in this
Chapter.
2) Toy vehicle does not include off-highway vehicles or snowmobiles.
9.18.20 Scope.
The provisions of this article applicable to a micromobility device apply
whenever an MD is operated upon any public street, roadway, path, trail, or sidewalk
designated for the use of an MD subject to the exceptions contained herein. These
regulations do not apply to a toy vehicle, wheelchair, or any ADA Mobility aids/devices
designed to assist mobility impaired people who use pedestrian rights-of-way or trails.
These provisions do not apply to unpaved single-track trails on land owned by the Town
of Estes Park.
9.18.030 Application of traffic laws.
(a) A person operating an MD on a public roadway is granted all of the rights
and is subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by the traffic rules
85
Page 4 of 7
and regulations of the Town of Estes Park, except as to special regulations and the
provisions of laws and ordinances which by their nature can have no application.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in this Section, the operation of MDs in the
Town shall be exempt from the provisions of ordinances that pertain exclusively to
motorized vehicles in the Town.
(c) For purposes of operation, parking, and equipment, MDs shall be subject
to Part 109 of the Model Traffic Code, and shall be subject to the provisions and
regulations concerning bicycles contained in the Model Traffic Code Parts 221 and 1412
adopted by the Town, except the provisions of MTC Part 1412(14) which prohibits the
use of an electrical motor on a bike or pedestrian path shall not apply. AN MD may park
on a sidewalk in such a manner as to not impede the normal and reasonable movement
of pedestrians or other traffic.
9.18.040 Obedience to traffic-control devices.
(a) A person operating an MD must obey the instructions of official traffic-
control signals, signs, and other control devices applicable to vehicles, unless otherwise
directed by a police officer.
(b) If authorized signs indicate that no right or left or U-turn is permitted, it is
unlawful for a person operating an MD to disobey the sign, except where the person
dismounts from the MD to make the turn, in which event, the person must then obey the
regulations applicable to pedestrians.
9.18.050 Carrying persons.
No MD shall be used to carry more persons at one time than the number for which it
was designed or equipped.
9.18.060 Carrying articles.
It is unlawful for a person operating an MD to carry any package, bundle, or article that
prevents the operator from keeping full control of the MD at all times.
9.18.070 Right-of-way.
AN MD is considered a vehicle under all portions of this Code that govern right-of-way.
The operator of an MD must yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian at all times.
9.18.080 Riding in bicycle lanes, roadways, and sidewalks.
(a) AN MD may be operated in any bicycle lane or in the roadway and is
prohibited from using any adjacent sidewalk if the maximum speed limit of the roadway
does not exceed thirty miles per hour (<30 mph). If no bicycle lane is available and the
86
Page 5 of 7
roadway has a speed limit greater than thirty miles per hour (>30mph), the MD may be
operated on the sidewalk.
(b) Persons operating an MD on a sidewalk in accordance with this section
may not exceed a speed of six miles per hour and must yield to pedestrians at all times.
(c) Persons operating an MD on a multi-use path in accordance with this
section may not exceed a speed of 15 miles per hour and must yield to pedestrians at
all times.
(d) It is unlawful for any person to operate an MD on a roadway or bicycle
lane at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions then
existing or in excess of the posted speed limit.
(e) Persons operating an MD may not ride more than two abreast except on
bicycle lanes set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
(f) If the right-hand lane is wide enough to be safely shared with overtaking
vehicles, persons operating an MD shall ride far enough to the right as judged safe by
the operator to facilitate the movement of such overtaking vehicles unless other
conditions make it unsafe to do so. Persons operating an MD may use a lane other
than the right-hand lane when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private
roadway or driveway, overtaking a slower vehicle, or taking reasonably necessary
precautions to avoid hazards or road conditions.
(g) This section does not apply to a uniformed city, state, or federal employee
operating an MD while engaged in the discharge of his or her duties or to a police officer
operating an MD that is a marked or unmarked official police vehicle, while engaged in
the discharge of his or her official duties.
9.18.090 Lamps, reflectors and audible warning devices.
(a) When in use on a public roadway, sidewalk, or path during dusk to dawn,
every MD (or operator) must have a lamp on the front that emits a white light visible
from a distance of at least five hundred feet to the front.
(b) When in use on a public roadway, sidewalk, or path during dusk to dawn,
every MD (or operator) must have a red reflector of a type approved by the Police
Department that is visible for six hundred feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful
lower beams of head lamps on a motor vehicle.
(c) When in use on a public roadway, sidewalk, or path when in use from
dusk to dawn, every MD (or operator) must have reflective material of sufficient size and
reflectivity to be visible from both sides for six hundred feet when directly in front of
lawful lower beams or head lamps on a motor vehicle or, in lieu of such reflective
material, with a lighted lamp visible from both sides from a distance of at least five
hundred feet.
(d) All MDs operated in the Town shall be equipped with audible
warning devices or the operator shall proclaim an audible announcement
87
Page 6 of 7
prior to approaching or overtaking a pedestrian or other MD operator.
9.18.100 Restrictions.
It is unlawful for any person to operate MDs in the following public areas:
(a) The Riverwalk from the east portion of the pedestrian tunnel under US
Highway 36 west to the west boundary of Tregent Park.
(b) The Riverwalk from West Riverside Drive south to Piccadilly Square.
(c) All of George Hix Riverside Plaza.
(d) All municipal parking lots and the parking structure (bicycles and electric
assisted bicycles excepted).
(e) Performance Park (bicycles and electric assisted bicycles excepted).
(f) Public sidewalks appurtenant to Elkhorn Avenue from 300 East Elkhorn
Avenue to and including 200 West Elkhorn Avenue.
(g) Public sidewalks appurtenant to Moraine Avenue from 100 Moraine
Avenue to its intersection with Elkhorn Avenue.
(h) The provisions of this Chapter limiting the use of MDs shall not apply to a
person with a mobility impairment caused by physical disability that uses the device to
enhance that person's mobility.
(i) It shall be unlawful for any parent, guardian, or any adult to authorize,
assist, permit, or encourage any minor to operate any MD in violation of the provisions
of this Chapter.
(j) It shall be unlawful to operate any toy vehicle on any public roadway. Toy
vehicles are permitted on sidewalks and trails where MD’s are allowed under these
provisions.
9.18.110 Commercial uses of micromobility devices.
(a) It is unlawful for the owner of an MD to rent the MD to any person in the
Town unless the owner of the MD has obtained a business license from the Town in
compliance with the Municipal Code. Such rental services shall be operated from a
building physically located in Estes Park on land properly zoned for such rental hub
operations.
(b) The Town may issue permits to commercial enterprises owning MDs and
offering to the general public guided MD tours to groups of ten (10) persons or less
(excluding tour guides).
(c) As a condition of the permit, the permittee shall: maintain the MDs in safe
working condition; ensure that all MDs are equipped with operational audible warning
devices at all times; require that all MD tour guides are properly trained and/or certified
88
Page 7 of 7
operators; ensure that the MDs are operated in compliance with all applicable law;
provide certified helmets for the use of MD renters in compliance with sections 109 and
1502(4.5) of the Model Traffic Code, and store the MDs securely indoors when not in
operation by customers/employees.
9.18.120 Administrative Rules.
To allow for safe integration of MDs on Town roadways, sidewalks, and multi-
use paths, the Town Administrator may prescribe, adopt, promulgate and
enforce reasonable rules that restrict or otherwise limit the time, place or manner of
operation or use of MDs.
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
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
89
90