HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2019-03-26
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
5:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.
Rooms 202/203
4:45 p.m. - Dinner
5:00 p.m. Introduction to Water Rates Study Process.
(Director Bergsten)
5:30 p.m. “Open Space” Designations on Previous Zoning Maps.
(Director Hunt)
6:00 p.m. Removing 500 Foot Limit for Liquor Licenses. (Town Clerk Williamson)
6:15 p.m. Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions.
6:25 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items.
(Board Discussion)
6:30 p.m. Adjourn for Citizens Information Academy Graduation
and Town Board Meeting.
Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this
meeting at approximately 4:30 p.m.
AGENDA
TOWN BOARD
STUDY SESSION
1
2
March 19, 2019
Estes Park Town Board
Town of Estes Park, Colorado
PO Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
RE: Water Utility Rate Study Progress Meeting #1
Members of the Board,
In preparation for the Town Board meeting scheduled for March 26 th, AE2S Nexus is pleased to provide
the attached presentation relating to the Town’s Water Utility Rate Study. AE2S Nexus is firm focused on
utility financial management in the water sector and we are excited for the opportunity to visit with the
Board to discuss the rate study process, objectives, and policy considerations that we will be evaluating
for the Town of Estes Park .
The goal of this study is to evaluate current and future revenue requirements of the utility and provide
recommendations for the water system’s financial planning and cost of service based ratemaking. A
primary objective of this study is to develop a prudent financial plan to fund major capital replacements,
including funding of ongoing distribution system renewal needs and the anticipated replacement of one of
the Town’s two water treatment plants. In addition to capital planning, the study scope of services also
include s an in depth review of all other utility revenue requirements and an analysis of the Town’s fixed
vs. volumetric rate revenue generation to ensure stable utility funding over time.
The meeting on March 26th will be the second of four on-site meetings for the study, with a focus on
study process, policy objectives, and a review of preliminary utility revenue requirement forecasts.
Following the presentation, AE2S Nexus will be seeking feedback from the Board on the analyses
conducted thus far and will take comment on related policy objectives of the Board .
We look forward to meeting with you and working to set the course for the success of you r water utility.
Should you have any additional questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at (701) 866 -3639,
or via email at shawn.gaddie@ae2s.com.
Sincerely,
AE2S Nexus
Shawn Gaddie, P.E.
General Manager
3
3/22/2019
1
Town of Estes Park, CO
Water Rate Study
Study Overview for Town Board
March 26, 2019
Common Reasons to Complete a Rate Study
The Rate Study Process
Considerations for Estes Park Study Needs
Next Steps
WATER RATE STUDY
Items for Discussion Today
4
3/22/2019
2
•Identify and correct cost inequities to maintain equitable
structure
•Design rates to send appropriate pricing signals
•Support proactive financial planning decisions for short‐
and long‐term capital and operational needs
•Avoid “rate shock”
•Manage revenue stability and reserve funding
•Develop funding strategy for asset management needs
•Provide documentation and support for rate‐making
decision process
•Provide framework for rate reasonableness
•Educate policy makers and rate payers
COMMON REASONS TO COMPLETE A RATE STUDY
THE RATE STUDY PROCESS
AWWA M1 Manual
offers excellence guidance for establishing
Water Fees and Charges
A Comprehensive Study Approach
RATE STUDY PROCESS
5
3/22/2019
3
+ O&M Expenses
+ Transfer Payments
+ Debt Service (P&I)
+ Capital Projects Funded from Rates
= Total Revenue Requirements
–Miscellaneous Revenues
= Balance Required from Rates
+ Total Capital Projects
–Revenue Bonds (Bond Proceeds)
–Grants
–Customer Contributions (e.g. SDC’s)
= Capital Projects Funded from Rates
(i + Term)
(≥Annual
Deprec. Exp.
Detail of the Cash Basis Revenue Requirements
DETERMINING REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Estes Revenue Requirements
DETERMINING REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Division 2019 Budget Adjustment Adjusted 2019
Source of Supply 202,200$ -$ 202,200$
Purification 1,153,074$ -$ 1,153,074$
Distribution 1,545,413$ -$ 1,545,413$
Customer Accounts 496,665$ -$ 496,665$
Administration and General 746,764$ -$ 746,764$
Transfers 149,042$ -$ 149,042$
Debt Service 410,270$ -$ 410,270$
Capital 3,381,093$ (2,811,093)$ 570,000$
Total Revenue Requirement 8,084,521$ (2,811,093)$ 5,273,428$
2019 Test Year Budget
•2019 Test Year Budget adjusted for representative year of rate
funded capital
•$2.811M adjustment = sum of reserve and capital contributions
6
3/22/2019
4
Estes Revenue Requirements: Looking over the Horizon
DETERMINING REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Future Revenue Requirement Considerations
Capital Renewal
•$1M per year Reinvestment Target
Staffing
•Expanding resources for capital and
O&M (3 FTE additions)
Water Treatment Plant Expansion
•Significant Investments planned for
Glacier Plant ($30M+ in 2024)
•Future Debt Service Planning
O&M Cost Escalation
•O&M Expense projected to grow from
$4.1M to $6.1M by 2029
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Revenue Requirement Projections
O&M Debt Service P&I
Contributions to Reserves Transfers
Rate Funded Capital/Reserves Revenue at Existing Rates
Key COSA Objective:
•Objectively allocate revenue requirements to
customer classes
•Ensure “Cost Causer is Cost Payer”
What is a COSA?
•Analysis to equitably allocate the costs to
customers classes based on level of service
Why Perform a COSA?
•Fair and Equitable Distribution of Costs
•Legal Defensibility
•Significant user additions or user base change
Cost of Service Analysis (COSA) Basics
RATE STUDY PROCESS
7
3/22/2019
5
Customer Class A
Customer Class BDEMANDCALENDAR YEAR
DEMANDSYSTEM DEMANDCombined System
Demand
$ Base
$ Peak
$ Base
$ Peak
$ Base
$ Peak
Those Who Cause the Cost, Pay the Cost
RATE STUDY PROCESS
CALENDAR YEAR
CALENDAR YEAR
RATE STUDY PROCESS
Commodity
Related
Capacity
Related
Customer
Related
Residential
Customers
Commercial
Customers
Residential
Commercial
- Source of Supply
- Purification
- Distribution
- Customer Accounts
- Administration
- Transfers
- Debt Service
- Capital
Total Test
Year Budget
Residential
Residential
Commercial
Commercial
Bulk Water
Customers
Bulk Water
Bulk Water
Bulk Water
Cost of Service Analysis
Functionalization Classification Allocation
Result: Total Allocated Cost
of Service by User Class
8
3/22/2019
6
•Existing Rate Structure Reviewed for Potential Changes to Correct Existing
Inequities and Improve Performance of Rate Structure
•Develop Rate Structure Adjustments, if appropriate, based on overall
Utility Objectives
Rate Design
•Easy to Understand and Administer
•Effective in Yielding Total Revenue Requirements
•Able to Generate a Stable Revenue Stream
•Structured to Charge the Appropriate Customers
based on Level of Service
•Equitable, as well as Defendable
COMMON RATE
STRUCTURE GOALS
RATE STUDY PROCESS
Current Water Rates
ESTES PARK WATER RATE STUDY
Rural has a 60% rate
differential from urban rates
9
3/22/2019
7
•High Seasonal Revenue Variability
•Balancing Fixed vs. Variable Revenue is key to Stable Revenue Generation
Rate Design: Key Considerations for Estes
RATE STUDY PROCESS
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Estes Park Seasonal Consumption
(kgal)
Winter (Oct‐Mar)Summer (Apr‐Sept)
Comparison of Total Projected Revenue Requirements
to Total Projected Revenues to Ensure Sufficient Revenue
is Generated to Provide Revenue Stability
OBJECTIVES:
Fund Recurring Operating & Maintenance Expenses
Develop/Maintain Adequate Working Capital and Required Reserves
Provide for Annual Capital Costs
Monitor Debt Service Coverage to Ensure Loan Covenants are Met
Determine the Adequacy of Existing Rates and Identify
the need for Future Rate Increases
Revenue Adequacy: “The Utility Financial Plan”
RATE STUDY PROCESS
10
3/22/2019
8
Common Reserve Policies and Targets
RATE STUDY CONSIDERATIONS
Reserve Type Common Purpose Typical Targets
Operating / Working Capital Stable operating cash for minor fluctuations
in revenue (i.e. collections lag, etc.)•90 to 180 days of operating expenses
Debt Service Typical per bond covenants / SRF loan
covenants / grant requirements
•Multiplier of total combined
maximum P&I payments
Rate Stabilization Weather Based Influences / Planned Capital
Spending Fluctuations
•Observed revenue fluctuations from
weather based/seasonal influences
•Percentage of average rate funded
capital
•Forecasted variation in capital
spending
Renewal/Replacement Ensuring Consistent System Investment
Overtime / Generational Equity
•1‐Year depreciation expense
•Forecasted average annual renewal
cost
•Defined asset management plan
Emergency Variable based on System Risk (i.e. Drought
Susceptibility / Natural Disaster)
•Varies based on defined purpose and
risk
Projected Revenue Adequacy Under Current Rates
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Key Adjustments to Future
Revenue Requirements:
•Additional Full Time Employees:
1 in 2019, 2 in 2020
•Rate Funded Capital target set
at $1,000,000 per year starting
in 2020
•WTP Debt Service begins in
2026 (Includes reserve funding)
•Decreased Non‐Operating
Revenues after 2019
‐$15,000,000
‐$10,000,000
‐$5,000,000
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Total Projected Revenues vs. Revenue
Requirements
Total Revenues Total Revenue Requirements Cumulative Revenue Deficiency
11
3/22/2019
9
Addressing Shortfalls and Avoiding Rate Shock:
Revenue Adequacy
Adjustments to Budget | Delaying Capital Investment | Increasing User Fees
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Revenue Adequacy
Addressing Shortfalls and Avoiding Rate Shock:
Adjustments to Budget | Delaying Capital Investment | Increasing User Fees
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
12
3/22/2019
10
Shawn Gaddie
Shawn.Gaddie@ae2s.com
WATER RATE STUDY
Next Steps
•Finalize Revenue Requirements for Rate Model
•Incorporate Board policy comments/direction
•General Feedback to Staff on Today’s Discussion
•Develop Options for Reserves and Reserve Targets
•Finalize Rate Modeling and Review w/ Staff
•COSA →Rate Design →Revenue Adequacy
•Develop and Present Draft Study Results for Board Comment
•Forum?
•Date?
•Present Final Results and Recommendations to Board
•Date?
Thank You
Shawn Gaddie
Shawn.Gaddie@ae2s.com
WATER RATE STUDY
13
3/27/2019
1
Town of Estes Park, CO
Water Rate Study
Study Overview for Town Board
March 26, 2019
Common Reasons to Complete a Rate Study
The Rate Study Process
Considerations for Estes Park Study Needs
Next Steps
WATER RATE STUDY
Items for Discussion Today
UPDATED PRESENTATION
3/27/2019
2
•Identify and correct cost inequities to maintain equitable
structure
•Design rates to send appropriate pricing signals
•Support proactive financial planning decisions for short‐
and long‐term capital and operational needs
•Avoid “rate shock”
•Manage revenue stability and reserve funding
•Develop funding strategy for asset management needs
•Provide documentation and support for rate‐making
decision process
•Provide framework for rate reasonableness
•Educate policy makers and rate payers
COMMON REASONS TO COMPLETE A RATE STUDY
THE RATE STUDY PROCESS
AWWA M1 Manual
offers excellence guidance for establishing
Water Fees and Charges
A Comprehensive Study Approach
RATE STUDY PROCESS
3/27/2019
3
+ O&M Expenses
+ Transfer Payments
+ Debt Service (P&I)
+ Capital Projects Funded from Rates
= Total Revenue Requirements
–Miscellaneous Revenues
= Balance Required from Rates
+ Total Capital Projects
–Revenue Bonds (Bond Proceeds)
–Grants
–Customer Contributions (e.g. SDC’s)
= Capital Projects Funded from Rates
(i + Term)
(≥Annual
Deprec. Exp.
Detail of the Cash Basis Revenue Requirements
DETERMINING REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Estes Revenue Requirements
DETERMINING REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Division 2019 Budget Adjustment Adjusted 2019
Source of Supply 202,200$ -$ 202,200$
Purification 1,153,074$ -$ 1,153,074$
Distribution 1,545,413$ -$ 1,545,413$
Customer Accounts 496,665$ -$ 496,665$
Administration and General 746,764$ -$ 746,764$
Transfers 149,042$ -$ 149,042$
Debt Service 410,270$ -$ 410,270$
Capital 3,381,093$ (2,811,093)$ 570,000$
Total Revenue Requirement 8,084,521$ (2,811,093)$ 5,273,428$
2019 Test Year Budget
•2019 Test Year Budget adjusted for representative year of rate
funded capital
•$2.811M adjustment = sum of reserve and capital contributions
3/27/2019
4
Estes Revenue Requirements: Looking over the Horizon
DETERMINING REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Future Revenue Requirement Considerations
Capital Renewal
•$1M per year Reinvestment Target
Staffing
•Expanding resources for capital and
O&M (3 FTE additions)
Water Treatment Plant Expansion
•Significant Investments planned for
Glacier Plant ($30M+ in 2024)
•Future Debt Service Planning
O&M Cost Escalation
•O&M Expense projected to grow from
$4.1M to $6.1M by 2029
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Revenue Requirement Projections
O&M Debt Service P&I
Contributions to Reserves Transfers
Rate Funded Capital/Reserves Revenue at Existing Rates
Key COSA Objective:
•Objectively allocate revenue requirements to
customer classes
•Ensure “Cost Causer is Cost Payer”
What is a COSA?
•Analysis to equitably allocate the costs to
customers classes based on level of service
Why Perform a COSA?
•Equitable Distribution of Costs
•Legal Defensibility
•Significant user additions or user base change
Cost of Service Analysis (COSA) Basics
RATE STUDY PROCESS
3/27/2019
5
Customer Class A
Customer Class BDEMANDCALENDAR YEAR
DEMANDSYSTEM DEMANDCombined System
Demand
$ Base
$ Peak
$ Base
$ Peak
$ Base
$ Peak
Those Who Cause the Cost, Pay the Cost
RATE STUDY PROCESS
CALENDAR YEAR
CALENDAR YEAR
RATE STUDY PROCESS
Commodity
Related
Capacity
Related
Customer
Related
Residential
Customers
Commercial
Customers
Residential
Commercial
- Source of Supply
- Purification
- Distribution
- Customer Accounts
- Administration
- Transfers
- Debt Service
- Capital
Total Test
Year Budget
Residential
Residential
Commercial
Commercial
Bulk Water
Customers
Bulk Water
Bulk Water
Bulk Water
Cost of Service Analysis
Functionalization Classification Allocation
Result: Total Allocated Cost
of Service by User Class
3/27/2019
6
•Existing Rate Structure Reviewed for Potential Changes to Correct Existing
Inequities and Improve Performance of Rate Structure
•Develop Rate Structure Adjustments, if appropriate, based on overall
Utility Objectives
Rate Design
•Easy to Understand and Administer
•Effective in Yielding Total Revenue Requirements
•Able to Generate a Stable Revenue Stream
•Structured to Charge the Appropriate Customers
based on Level of Service
•Equitable, as well as Defendable
COMMON RATE
STRUCTURE GOALS
RATE STUDY PROCESS
Current Water Rates
ESTES PARK WATER RATE STUDY
Rural has a 60% rate
differential from urban rates
3/27/2019
7
•High Seasonal Revenue Variability
•Balancing Fixed vs. Variable Revenue is key to Stable Revenue Generation
Rate Design: Key Considerations for Estes
RATE STUDY PROCESS
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Estes Park Seasonal Consumption
(kgal)
Winter (Oct‐Mar)Summer (Apr‐Sept)
Comparison of Total Projected Revenue Requirements
to Total Projected Revenues to Ensure Sufficient Revenue
is Generated to Provide Revenue Stability
OBJECTIVES:
Fund Recurring Operating & Maintenance Expenses
Develop/Maintain Adequate Working Capital and Required Reserves
Provide for Annual Capital Costs
Monitor Debt Service Coverage to Ensure Loan Covenants are Met
Determine the Adequacy of Existing Rates and Identify
the need for Future Rate Increases
Revenue Adequacy: “The Utility Financial Plan”
RATE STUDY PROCESS
3/27/2019
8
Common Reserve Policies and Targets
RATE STUDY CONSIDERATIONS
Reserve Type Common Purpose Typical Targets
Operating / Working Capital Stable operating cash for minor fluctuations
in revenue (i.e. collections lag, etc.)
•90 to 180 days of operating expenses
often required per loan covenants
Debt Service Typical per bond covenants / SRF loan
covenants / grant requirements
•Multiplier of total combined
maximum P&I payments
Rate Stabilization
Weather Based Influences / Floating Target
based on Planned Capital Spending
Fluctuations
•Observed revenue fluctuations from
weather based/seasonal influences
•Percentage of average rate funded
capital
•Forecasted variation in capital
spending
Renewal/Replacement Ensuring Consistent System Investment
Overtime / Generational Equity
•1‐Year depreciation expense
•Forecasted average annual renewal
cost
•Defined asset management plan
Emergency Variable based on System Risk (i.e. Drought
Susceptibility / Natural Disaster)
•Varies based on defined purpose and
risk
Projected Revenue Adequacy Under Current Rates
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Key Adjustments to Future
Revenue Requirements:
•Additional Full Time Employees:
1 in 2019, 2 in 2020
•Rate Funded Capital target set
at $1,000,000 per year starting
in 2020
•WTP Debt Service begins in
2026 (Includes reserve funding)
•Decreased Non‐Operating
Revenues after 2019
‐$15,000,000
‐$10,000,000
‐$5,000,000
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Total Projected Revenues vs. Revenue
Requirements
Total Revenues Total Revenue Requirements Cumulative Revenue Deficiency
3/27/2019
9
Addressing Shortfalls and Avoiding Rate Shock:
Revenue Adequacy
Adjustments to Budget | Delaying Capital Investment | Increasing User Fees
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Example Analysis
Revenue Adequacy
Addressing Shortfalls and Avoiding Rate Shock:
Adjustments to Budget | Delaying Capital Investment | Increasing User Fees
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Example Analysis
3/27/2019
10
Addressing Shortfalls and Avoiding Rate Shock:
Preliminary Rate Increase Scenarios for Estes Park
RATE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Deferral Approach 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%15.0%13.0% 7.0%3.0% 3.0%
Rate Smoothing
Scenario 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%5.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
Preliminary Projection of Total Increases Required on all Fixed and Volumetric Rates
Shawn Gaddie
Shawn.Gaddie@ae2s.com
WATER RATE STUDY
Next Steps
•Finalize Revenue Requirements for Rate Model
•Incorporate Board policy comments/direction
•General Feedback to Staff on Today’s Discussion
•Develop Options for Reserves and Reserve Targets
•Finalize Rate Modeling and Review w/ Staff
•COSA →Rate Design →Revenue Adequacy
•Develop and Present Draft Study Results for Board Comment
•Forum?
•Date?
•Present Final Results and Recommendations to Board
•Date?
3/27/2019
11
Thank You
Shawn Gaddie
Shawn.Gaddie@ae2s.com
WATER RATE STUDY
14
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: March 26, 2019
RE: Parcels Inappropriately Labeled as Open Space on Zoning Maps:
Study Session Update – March 26, 2019
(Mark all that apply)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER_Discussion item
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Review “Open Space” overlay symbols on the Estes Valley Zoning Map, including Town-owned
parcel on Dry Gulch Road; determine Board direction on future direction and disposition
regarding the erroneous open-space labeling.
Present Situation:
[Please see staff memorandum from the Aug. 14, 2018 Town Board Study Session, attached.
Also attached are the 2013 Official Zoning Map (in four sections plus legend) and a copy of the
1960 Final Plat for the Dry Gulch property and vicinity.]
Since the August Study Session, staff has counted the number of parcels covered by the
crosshatch overlay. The figures are as follows:
• Town: 39 parcels
• County: 44 parcels
• TOTAL: 83 parcels
Staff was not able to verify the acreage of the parcel totals, due to GIS issues. However, as the
map demonstrates, the County parcels are typically much larger than Town parcels.
Proposal:
Staff recommends discussion as follows on: (1) the erroneous open-space symbolization in
general; and (2) on the Town-owned property on Dry Gulch Road specifically.
1. Staff’s recommended course of action to Town Board in August 2018 for the mislabeling
in general was to readopt the entire Official Zoning map by vote of Town Board and
County Commissioners, following recommendation by Planning Commission. This would
be done by reviewing and map-verifying all map-amendment zoning ordinances (Town) 15
and resolutions (County) since the Official Zoning map was adopted in November 1999.
This action would leave no remaining doubt, should there be any, about the invalidity of
the open-space designations on the map. It would also have the additional minor benefit
of correcting any other zoning errors on the current Official Zoning Map.
Questions have been asked about citizens’ reliance on the open-space symbols on the
map in making decisions about what can be done on their own nearby properties, or
whether to buy nearby properties. It is regrettable that the misleading information was on
the maps, and that it persisted for 10 years and through a number of staff changes in
Community Development. Regrets notwithstanding, except for the Dry Gulch site, staff is
aware of no one who made specific decisions about nearby properties based on the
incorrect symbols.
It would be possible, if the Board directs, to reach out to adjacent property owners to
those parcels and ask if they were aware of the symbols and/or made decisions about
their own property in reliance on the symbols. That outreach could be done directly (e.g.,
individual letters to owners) or indirectly (e.g., mass media requests to “contact the Town
if you own property near any of these parcels and you knew they were shown as open
space on the Zoning Map…”) If this outreach is undertaken, the outcomes could be
factored into any subsequent decisions by the Town or County.
Staff would caution that we should not approach this matter by simply confirming the
open-space designations through adopting a zoning-map amendment. For one thing,
that would in effect be a rezoning of property, and, although it’s legal to rezone property
without consent of the owner, it is not a best practice to do that. Another practical
difficulty is that an EVDC text amendment would be needed to define and provide
regulations for the overlay district, because those definitions and regulations have never
existed.
2. Regarding the Dry Gulch property (Parcel ID 2520309903) specifically: Staff suggests
the following factors are relevant:
a. To our knowledge, one citizen has indicated that he was aware of and accepted
as accurate the open-space designation for the subject property. He is an
adjacent landowner to the west.
b. Except for the inaccurate crosshatching on the Zoning Map, there is no other
direct indicator that the land is, or ever was, intended as open space. Some have
indicated that labeling on the Final Subdivision Plat for the Town property led
them to this understanding. A copy of the plat is attached, showing the note
“Public Area Dedicated to the Town of Estes Park”. This note is not standard
platting or planning language, and the ambiguity could arguably be interpreted to
suggest that a dedicated park or open space had been created by the plat. The
strict language does not lead to that result. As a matter of practicality, this land
has never been administered or designated as a type of Town Park or open
space – as contrasted with the Knoll-Willows property, for example.
c. The land is unquestionably the Town’s property. Per Attorney White’s and my
own understanding, the Town is at liberty to use the land in whatever fashion it
deems appropriate, subject of course to zoning and other land-use and
development permissions, as are most all properties in Estes Valley.
Staff would first note that a decision on the future of the Dry Gulch property, and the
timing of any decision, is the Town Board’s to make.
16
With that said, I suggest it is important to point out that the Town is a property owner
like any other, and has the same bundle of rights and privileges to use its own
property accordingly. There are always competing public needs that the Town is
responsible for acknowledging and trying to meet, while balancing conflicts among
those competing needs.
In this case, a primary Strategic Goal for the Town is addressing a critical shortage in
workforce housing. The Dry Gulch property is zoned E (Estate Residential), which is
a single-family district; however, last year an application was filed (and subsequently
withdrawn) to rezone the property to RM (Multi-family Residential). All such requests
should be considered on their own merits following an application, and we don’t have
an application right now. But it is hard to argue that the Town does not need any
additional workforce housing, and in most cases that is going to mean multi-family
housing. Dry Gulch Road is recently improved with good capacity, and water, sewer,
and other infrastructure elements are available to support denser development in this
location.
Action Recommended:
N/A for formal action; study session only at this time.
Finance/Resource Impact:
N/A
Level of Public Interest
Medium - Public is interested in development in the Dry Gulch corridor and this property in
particular. No public comment has been made to staff’s knowledge on any other crosshatched
open-space properties.
Attachments:
1. Previous TBSS staff memo from Aug. 14, 2018 on this subject
2. Zoning map layer from August 27, 2013, showing erroneous open-space designations
3. Plat: 1st Addition to Lone Pine Acres, approval dated August 8, 1960.
17
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: August 14th, 2018
RE: Parcels Inappropriately Labeled as Open Space on Zoning Maps
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE x LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION x OTHER Study Session
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES x NO
Objective:
Explain brief history of “Open Space” overlay symbols on the Estes Valley Zoning Map;
review present status of those symbols and the Map; propose course of action.
Present Situation:
For approximately ten years – beginning in or near 2007 and ending in December 2017
– the publicly-distributed version of the Estes Valley Official Zoning Map showed a
significant number of properties in the Valley zoned “Open Space”. The zoning was
shown by overlay symbols (crosshatching in several colors) over the base zoning
district for each property so indicated.
Your four attached maps are close-ups of these symbols on the Zoning Map as they
appeared, mostly unchanged, from 2007 through late 2017. (The attachment happens
to be the Zoning Map from August 2013, but staff confirms that to the best of our
knowledge, the open-space symbols are virtually the same from 2007 until 2017.)
Staff found in late 2017 that these open-space symbols had no basis and no
authorization in the Estes Valley Development Code or any other adopted zoning
regulations. They were removed with all deliberate speed when their invalidity was
realized.
Meanwhile, however, regarding one property in particular, some citizens have indicated
they were aware of the symbology and may have used it in making decisions about
nearby land. Specifically, staff is aware of several such instances with regard to the
Town-owned property on the west side of Dry Gulch Road adjacent to Lone Pine Acres
(Parcel # 2520309903).
18
This is past history. It is useful today primarily to tell us how mistakes were made, and
alerting us that we should never make them again. With that in mind, here is a short
chronology:
• In 2006, the Town of Estes Park shifted GIS services from our IT staff to a
contract with InVision GIS in Fort Collins. These services included maintaining
the Zoning GIS layer on which our day-to-day zoning map information depends
• In approx. 2007 (possibly 2006 or 2008), the former Community Development
Department Director directed InVision staff to add the “Existing Open Space”
symbols to the Zoning Map’s GIS layer. Evidently this direction consisted of a
phone conversation and an accompanying emailed or mailed sketch map.
o Our information mostly comes from a verbal conversation between former
Planner II Audem Gonzales and InVision GIS consultant Jill Fischer in fall
2017, after staff began questioning the symbols. Jill has been our contract
GIS technician since the original transfer in 2006.
• The former Director did not state any reason for the addition to Jill. Her
recollection is that he provided the map with the symbols already drawn on
certain properties and simply directed her to add the layer to the Zoning Map.
• Shortly after that direction was given to Jill in 2007, the symbols were digitally
added to the Zoning Map at InVision.
• The symbols were two types: One type (red crosshatching pattern) indicated
“Existing Open Space – Public”, and the other type (blue crosshatching pattern)
indicated “Existing Open Space – Private”.
• This GIS Zoning Map layer was printed on wall-size maps that were posted in
Town Hall and elsewhere, and it was converted to PDF and posted on the
Town’s website. It served for all practical purposes as the Official Zoning Map.
• In fall 2017, the current staff noticed that the symbols did not appear to have any
reference or legal anchor in the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). In
other words, they showed as “overlay zones” on the Zoning Map layer; however,
staff found no Ordinances or Resolutions confirming that the Existing Open
Space symbols were ever processed as zoning districts.
o Colorado Revised Statutes and our EVDC are very specific as to how the
Official Zoning Map is to be modified. The Town adopts such amendments
by Ordinance, for example, with rezoning Ordinances including or
incorporating by reference a legal description of property to be rezoned.
o This process would be identical for overlay zones and base zones; the two
types of zoning are not distinguished separately in Code or Statutes.
o All adopted Town Ordinances leave a clear “paper trail” in the form of
signed Ordinances in the Town Clerk’s records, minutes from the relevant
Town Board and Planning Commission meetings, and similar instruments.
Parallel processes in Larimer County would also leave paper trails.
o Staff has checked from multiple angles. It is clear that no paper trail exists
for the overlay Open Space symbols on the Zoning Map.
19
• Inasmuch as there was no legal authorization for the symbols to be placed on the
map, after consultation with legal counsel and administration, the current Director
asked InVision to remove the symbols from the Zoning Map layer. This was done
in approx. early December, 2017.
Staff has not asked the former Director or other staff from that era why or how it was
decided the symbols should be placed on the Zoning Map layer. Although the answer
might be of historical interest, it does not change the clear lack of authority to place
them. The only legal and ethical course of action upon finding this series of happenings
is the course that current staff have taken: removal of the symbols.
The 2007 placement of these symbols on the Official Zoning Map was an unauthorized
act. It has had the effect of undermining trust in the integrity of our zoning regulations. It
is a past action; the intervening years cannot be reversed. However, we surely can and
should be on guard that nothing like this is done in the future. I believe an apology is in
order to those who may have relied on the inaccurate Zoning Map, and to our
community as a whole.
Proposal:
Staff believes our course of action now should include two different considerations: (1)
Re-adoption of the Official Zoning Map; and (2) consideration of how this circumstance
affects the Dry Gulch property.
(1) Toward the goal of making a clean break from the errors of the past, staff
suggests the Town Board of Trustees consider a formal re-adoption of the
Official Zoning Map as it stands today – minus the open-space symbols, of
course. The Town Administrator, Town Attorney, and Community Development
Director agree this is an appropriate step to remove any lingering ambiguity.
(2) Another discussion is appropriate on what should be done with the Dry Gulch
property in particular.
The following specifics would be our procedural suggestions for re-adoption (1):
• Consult with Larimer County, beginning with County Community Development
staff and including a work session with the Board of County Commissioners. As
the maps show, many of the misapplied open-space symbols are on County
properties. In any case, re-adoption of the Official Zoning Map requires approval
by both elected bodies.
• Discuss with Planning Commission in a PC Study Session. Planning Commission
review and approval of any Zoning Map changes, including re-adoption, is
required by State law and local Code.
• Staff will review all rezoning ordinances since the Official Zoning Map’s original
adoption to be sure that no other errors or omissions have found their way onto
the current Map.
20
• For public transparency, it’s suggested that the public have the opportunity to
review the current Map and indicate any errors they believe are on the map. This
would not be an opportunity to bring about new rezonings. Nor would it address
concerns along the lines of “I wish my zoning had been XX in the 2000 Map
adoption…” The public input would be to flag any ordinances the staff review
may have missed.
For the Dry Gulch property: As noted, staff is aware that some citizens were advised,
via looking at the improper Zoning Map or by discussion with former staff, that the Dry
Gulch site was legally protected as “perpetual open space” or similar. Inasmuch as the
Town is owner and thus has the legal right and privilege to propose appropriate land
use for its real estate, consideration of various futures for the Dry Gulch site would be
appropriate.
Staff views the Dry Gulch property matter as a policy-level discussion for the Town
Board. We would offer no specific recommended course of action at this time, and await
direction.
Advantages:
Discussion item only
Disadvantages:
Discussion item only
Action Recommended:
Discussion item only
Finance/Resource Impact:
n/a
Level of Public Interest
Low overall; medium-high for Town-owned property on Dry Gulch Road
Attachments:
1. “Zoning Map layer: Aug. 27, 2013” (5 pages, including Map Legend on p. 1).
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson
Date: March 26, 2019
RE: Removing 500 Foot Limit for Liquor Licenses
Objective:
To consider an Ordinance to remove the limitation of liquor establishments located
within 500 feet of schools as defined by the State Statute:
"School" means a public, parochial, or nonpublic school that provides a basic academic
education in compliance with school attendance laws for students in grades one to
twelve. "Basic academic education" has the same meaning as set forth in section 22-
33-104 (2)(b).
Present Situation:
Ordinance #05-18 was passed by the Board and later approved by the County
Commissioners in April 2018 revising the Estes Valley Development Code to allow
schools in all zoning district as a permitted use or with a special review dependent on
the type of school. Prior to the change schools were not permitted in residential zones.
This change had an unintended consequence as it relates to liquor licensing within the
Town of Estes Park.
The Town currently has over 70 liquor licenses with the bulk of the licenses located in
the downtown corridor, which is surrounded by residential properties. The Development
Code change allows a new school to be located in a residential zone adjacent to the
downtown corridor within 500 feet of a well-established business corridor. This would
limit new liquor licenses from establishing in the downtown or other areas of town if a
school establishes a presence in the neighborhood. This could have a significant
impact on the type of businesses located in the downtown corridor.
The Town recently had a non-public school located on Hwy 7 within walking distance of
an established brewery and tasting room. If the brewery wanted to expand or open an
additional facility nearby it could not have been within 500 feet of the school. There is
no requirement for where a public school can locate and no current regulations requiring
notification to other businesses in the area.
TOWN CLERK’S OFFICE Report
29
Proposal:
Staff recommends the Town Board consider an Ordinance to remove the 500-foot limit
for liquor license establishments as outlined above. Attached is a chart of a recent
survey completed by another municipality demonstrating which communities have either
removed the limit entirely or have modified the distance requirement in some manner.
The Town has limited land resources and finding a location for a school can be difficult.
The likelihood a school would be located near downtown is high. In fact, the Roots
school was located within 500 feet of downtown and would have impacted the liquor
establishments in the downtown corridor. The new Vino Giu license would not have
been able to be considered by the Board if the school was still operational.
Advantages:
The Town could maintain its sales tax base downtown and continue to allow liquor
establishments downtown in the event a school was to locate in a neighborhood
surrounding the downtown corridor.
Disadvantages:
Would allow a school and a liquor establishment to be located within 500 feet of each
other.
Action Recommended:
Provide staff with direction on the proposed draft ordinance. If the Board agrees with
the proposed ordinance, set the item for an upcoming Town Board meeting.
Budget:
No direct impact. The possible loss of sales tax dollars and liquor licensing fees if the
Town is unable to license establishments in the future do to the location of a school.
Level of Public Interest:
Low
Attachments
Sample Ordinance
Town and Liquor Distance Spreadsheet
Ordinance 05-18 - Link
30
ORDINANCE N0. XX-19
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AMENDING ESTES PARK’S MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.28 "BEER AND LIQUOR SALES", ADDING SECTION 5.28.040 "DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS" TO ELIMINATE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FROM SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees, pursuant to 44-3-
313(1)(d)(Ill), C.R.S., may eliminate or reduce the distance restrictions pertaining
to liquor licensed premises and public or parochial schools; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of Estes Park, by Ordinance #05-18, allows public
schools as a use permitted in all residential zoning districts and a use permitted by
a special review for non-public schools in residential zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of Trustees desires to eliminate any conflict between
uses in these zones and the new school use;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TELLURIDE, COLORADO that:
Section 1. Section of 5.28.040 of the Estes Park Municipal Code be added
to read as follows:
Section 5.28.040 Distance Requirements.
(1) Pursuant to Section 44-3-313(1)(e)(III)(A) & (B), C.R.S., the
distance requirements of Section 44-3-313(1)(d)(1) are hereby
eliminated.
(2) A finding the issuance of the license will have no adverse effect on
the operation of the school and the student body.
(3) A finding that the applicant has the ability to diligently enforce
the liquor laws as they pertain to the license applied for.
(4) A condition that any renewals of the application granted be
reviewed as to its effect on the neighborhood particularly as to
impact on the school.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective upon 30 days from
the date of publication of notice of its passage in a newspaper of
general circulation within the Town of Estes Park.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park,
Colorado this_______day of______________, 2019.
31
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
_____________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Town Clerk
I hereby certify that the above ordinance was introduced and read at a
meeting of the Board of Trustees on the_____day of__________, 2019 and
published in a newspaper of general publication in the Town of Estes Park,
Colorado, on the________day of____________, 2019.
_____________________________
Town Clerk
32
Municipalities with Liquor Distance Variances
Jurisdiction Population 0' Mix 500' Year Ord Notes
Granby 1,877 X Eliminated for Beer and Wine
Telluride 2,399 X 2009
Ord
1318
Eliminate IF school affected ok's, no adverse effect, signage,
renewal based on impact
Timnath 2,458 X 2015
Ord
17
Eliminated for B&W, B&B, H&E, OP, Arts, SEP, Brew pub,
Vinters Restaurant, Temp for Transfer, Temp for extension
Buena Vista 2,760 X 2006 Ord 5
Changd H&R to 150' from specific elementary and high
school
Silt 3,043 X
New Castle 4,669 X
Dacono 4,792 X
Berthoud 5,394 X
Cherry Hills Village 6,315 X
Monument 6,420 X
Must comply with 500' rule ‐ Mfg, Limited Winery,
Nonresident Mfg, importer, malt liquor importer, wholesaler,
wholesale beer
Eagle 6,678 X 2004
Ord
15 Only in Central Business District
Gypsum 6,922 X 2014
Ord
09 Beer and Wine, 200'
Lone Tree 13,500 X
6‐1‐
20.
Eliminated for College Campus, will eliminate for additional
licenses if a license exists within 500' from a public
elementary school
Montrose 19,062 X
Fountain 27,767 X
Wheat Ridge 31,192 X 2012
Ord
1510
B&W, H&R, Brew Pub, Arts, Vinters Restaurant, Distillery
Pub*, L&E* (* in process)
Castle Rock 60,000 X
Parker 60,000 X 1999
5.02.
730
Allows on‐premise consumption if within Downtown
Business District
Longmont 92,088 X Eliminated for H&R and Brew Pubs
Greeley 100,883 X
Boulder 107,349 X
Westminster 113,130 X
Arvada 115,368 X 2006
Ord
4017
Thornton 133,451 X
Sec
42‐
130 H&R if by High school or college and parcel is 5 acres+
Lakewood 152,597 X
Ft. Collins 161,175 X 1997
Ord
117 Lifted for all except RLS and LLDS around CSU only
Denver 682,545 X Elminate for H&R, Brew Pub near or on College campuses
Eliminated 500'
Some Variances
Require 500'
33
34
April 9, 2019
•Review of County Wasteshed
Master Plan
April 23, 2019
•Presentation of Stanley Park Master
Plan
•Parking Update/Seasonal Parking
Issues
June 11, 2019
•Downtown Estes Loop Quarterly
Update
September 10, 2019
•Downtown Estes Loop Quarterly
Update
Items Approved – Unscheduled:
•Estes Park Housing Authority
Project on Highway 7 – Part II
•Discussion with Town Prosecutor
and Municipal Judge
•Future of Human Resources
Management
•Distributed Energy Discussion
•Update on Film Center Plans
Tentative Pending Confirmation
from John Cullen
Items for Town Board Consideration:
Discussion of Revisions to
Stormwater Regulations in
Response to Colorado Water
Conservation Board Non-
compliance Letter
Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items
March 26, 2019
35
36