HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Study Session 2014-05-27
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado May 27, 2014
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in the
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 27th day of May, 2014.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson,
Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Town Attorney White and
Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Trustee Norris questioned the timing of planning issues for the Falcon Ridge
development and if the Board would be considering an action item before review by the
Planning Commission. Administrator Lancaster stated the Board would be considering
an amendment to the annexation agreement approved with the original annexation in
2001 to increase the density on the lot. The amended agreement needs to be in place
prior to the Planning Commission’s review of the development.
Trustee Ericson stated contingency funds for projects should be used to address
fluctuations in material costs, unexpected changes to approved construction design or
additional time to complete work due to unforeseen circumstances such as a flood. Any
redesign of the Event Center using contingency funds should be considered by the full
Board. Board consensus was any significant scope change to a project should be
reviewed by the Board.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Commercial property and Fish Hatchery property review would be scheduled for July
22, 2014. The Board requested a flood recovery financial update at the next study
session. Mayor Pinkham requested the addition of a discussion on the use of the Town
logo versus the Town seal and the development of a policy.
TOWN SPONSORED PUBLIC FORUMS.
Public meetings, forums, and open houses are often conducted by staff to provide the
public input on issues, to disseminate information, and to discuss potential actions.
Meetings can be initiated by either the Board or the staff depending on the nature of the
discussion.
The Board discussed the item to determine when it would be appropriate for the Board
to approve a forum prior to advertisement. After discussion, the Board agreed a forum
to receive public opinion or information would be sent to the Town Board well in
advance of the meeting be advertised. This would allow the Board to raise any
concerns they may have on holding the forum.
Further discussion was heard over Town Advisory Committees holding forums and/or
taking public comment at their meetings. It was noted that Advisory Committees should
notify the Board of a proposed forum prior to advertising to the public. Additional
concern was raised that holding forums or accepting public comment at Committee
meeting could be perceived by the public their issue is being addressed by the Town or
Town Board Study Session – May 27, 2014 – Page 2
approved by the Committee. Administrator Lancaster suggested the use of forums and
public comments should be discussed further with the Boards and Committees to
understand current practices and add specific language to their bylaws to outline the
practice.
TOWN’S ROLE IN HOUSING ISSUES.
Housing affects the local economy, workforce, local school district and the overall
demographics of the community. Prices for single family homes are higher than the
average in Colorado; however, they are competitive with other mountain destination
communities, but considerably higher than those in the valley or metro area. Availability
of long term rentals is extremely limited which makes it difficult for full-time working
residents and seasonal employees to find housing. The profitability of short term
vacation rentals provides a strong disincentive for owners and developers to provide
long term rentals. This market continues to grow and does not appear to be reaching a
saturation point. The Town’s involvement to date in housing issues has been limited to
density bonuses for qualifying developments and fee waivers in some cases,
particularly for projects of the Estes Park Housing Authority. Staff requested direction
from the Board on what role the Town should have in housing issues including housing
availability for working families and full time professionals, entry level housing for
families, low income housing, seasonal housing, long term rentals, and seasonal
rentals.
Trustee Norris summarized the Town’s efforts as it relates to housing as follows: the
Town has provided financial support to Habitat for Humanity and the Housing Authority;
Town rents housing units to employees; Town owns property that could be developed
for additional housing/affordable housing; Development Code changes could be made
by the Town as it relates to housing; fee waivers for affordable housing developments;
and a PUD process. The areas of high concern for the public tend to be workforce
housing and seasonal housing.
The Board agreed the Town should be a catalyst to bring affected groups (Lodging
Association, Restaurant Association business community, School District, Hospital)
together to discuss housing related issues. Additional data would be needed to
determine the level of need before discussing further.
Eric Blackhurst/Estes Park Housing Authority Chair reviewed the three previous housing
studies conducted in 1990, 1999 and 2008 which all demonstrate a need for additional
affordable housing in the valley ranging from 500 – 900 units over the years.
Employees are unable to find year-round housing, and therefore, are discourage from
making their homes in the valley. He stated housing directly impacts economic
development as businesses need housing for employees including full-time, temporary
and seasonal. The Housing Authority operates and owns approximately 166 rental
units and services approximately 300 families in the valley through other programs such
the Section 8. The Housing Authority does not support the middle income family of 60-
125% of the median income for the county or address seasonal housing. The Housing
Authority has identified barriers such as code issues, ADUs, market rate units and
PUDs.
Mathew Heiser/EPHA Board member stated an effective mechanism to encourage the
development of affordable housing by private developers is through incentives. For
example, developers could receive an increase in the number of market rate units when
affordable or employee units are added to a development. This mechanism would
produce at no cost to the community additional market-rate housing inventory by the
developers.
Board discussion followed and has been summarized: shuttling workers from the valley
does not help the town build a community and would only be a temporary fix; as the
Town is not land-locked in the winter employees would still live in the valley due to the
amenities of a larger community and employment opportunity for spouses; vacation
Town Board Study Session – May 27, 2014 – Page 3
homes are attractive to second homeowners that wish to use their properties and can
make a larger profit than as a long term rental; the Town needs to focus on developing
information on what exists, the needs, and not solutions at this time; the focus should be
to address seasonal housing and year-round housing for the middle income up to
125%; and creating year-round housing for economic development.
Community Development staff would develop a summary for the Board outlining issues,
trends, existing policies, and recommendations from staff on what codes are working
and not working. Administrator Lancaster stated the review of current issues, obstacles,
proposed solutions, barriers, tools that could be used to address housing needs,
statement of problem and next steps would be provided to the Board for the upcoming
Board Retreat.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:12 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk