HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2017-03-28The 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, March 28, 2017
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.
Policy Governance – Executive Limitations.
1.CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated March 14, 2017 and Town Board Study Session dated
March 14, 2017 and Town Board Workshop dated March 7, 2017.
2.Bills.
3.Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated February 15, 2017
(acknowledgement only).
4. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated February 17, 2017 (acknowledgement only).
5. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated February 21, 2017
(acknowledgement only).
6. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated February 7, 2017
(acknowledgement only).
7. Mountain Meadow Annexation Agreement Amendment – Continued to the April 11,
2017 Town Board meeting.
Prepared 03/17/17
* Revised
1
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
8. Resolution #10-17 Setting the Public Hearing date of April 25, 2017 for a New Beer
and Wine Liquor License filed by Elk Meadow RV Essential Group LLC dba Elk
Meadows Lodge & RV Resort, 1665 Highway 66, Estes Park, CO 80517
9. Approval of Policy Governance Report.
2. LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. UPDATE LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION FOLLOW-UP FOR BOWL FORT
COLLINS LLC DBA CHIPPERS LANES ESTES PARK CENTER. Town Clerk
Williamson.
2. NEW HOTEL & RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR BIRD &
JIM LLC DBA BIRD & JIM, 915 MORAINE AVENUE, ESTES PARK, CO 80517.
Town Clerk Williamson.
3. NEW LODGING & ENTERTAINMENT LIQUOR LICENSE FILED BY LAZY B
CHUCKWAGON AND SHOW, LLC, DBA LAZY B, 600 W. ELKHORN AVENUE,
ESTES PARK, CO 80517. Town Clerk Williamson.
4. TRANSFER OF A HOTEL & RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE WITH OPTIONAL
PREMISE FOR ESTES VALLEY RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT; SMOKIN
DAVES, LLC DBA HANGER RESTAURANT AT THE ESTES PARK GOLF
COURSE, 1480 GOLF COURSE ROAD, ESTES PARK, CO 80517. Town Clerk
Williamson.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff
for Town Board Final Action.
1. ACTION ITEMS:
A. RESOLUTION #11-17 & ORDINANCE #10-17 CLOUD NINE SUBDIVISION
ADDITION ANNEXATION. Planner Gonzales.
4.ACTION ITEMS:
1.ORDINANCE #09-17 PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE: EVDC §5.1.B (VACATION HOMES). Director Hunt.
2. ORDINANCE #08-17 PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE: EDVC §4.3, §5.2, AND §13.3 (ACCESSORY KITCHENS).
Director Hunt.
3. BOARD POLICY #107 TRUSTEE E-MAIL. Town Administrator Lancaster.
4. TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTMENTS. Town Clerk
Williamson.
5. ADJOURN.
2
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
970.577.3705
flancaster@estes.org
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 28th, 2017
TO: Board of Trustees
FROM: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
SUBJECT: INTERNAL MONITORING REPORT - EXECUTIVE LIMITATIONS
(QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT POLICY 3.3)
Board Policy 2.3 designates specific reporting requirements for me to provide
information to the Board. Each March I report on the following staff limitations:
Policy 3.1 Customer Service
Policy 3.2 Treatment of Staff
Policy 3.4 Financial Condition and Activities
Policy 3.5 Asset Protection
Policy 3.6 Emergency Town Administrator Backup and Replacement
Policy 3.9 Communication and Support to the Board
Policy 3.10 Capital Equipment and Improvements Programming
Policy 3.11 General Town Administrator Constraint – Quality of Life
This report constitutes my assurance that, as reasonably interpreted, these conditions
have not occurred and further, that the data submitted below are accurate as of this
date.
________________________
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
3
3.1 The quality of life in The Town of Estes Park depends upon the
partnership between citizens, elected officials and Town employees.
Therefore, within the scope of his/her authority, the Town Administrator shall
not fail to ensure high standards regarding the treatment of our citizens.
3.1.1 The Town Administrator shall not fail to encourage the following basic
attitudes in employees:
3.1.1.1 The Citizens of The Town of Estes Park deserve the best possible
services and facilities given available resources.
3.1.1.2 Prompt action is provided to resolve problems or issues.
3.1.1.3 Attention is paid to detail and quality service is provided that
demonstrates a high level of professionalism.
3.1.1.4 Each employee represents excellence in public service.
3.1.1.5 Each employee is “the Town” in the eyes of the public.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that customer service is stressed in
training and in performance evaluations of all staff, and staff is held
accountable for providing a high level of customer service. This does not
mean that the customer always gets everything they are requesting or
demanding. Sometimes staff is in a position to say “no” or must enforce
laws and regulations. I interpret this to mean staff is courteous,
professional, prompt, and fair in all their dealings with the public.
Furthermore, due to the related nature of the sub-sections of 3.1.1, it is my
interpretation that I may report on all of these limitations as a group, rather
than individually.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
1. Customers issues are dealt with promptly and in a courteous and fair manner.
2. Complaints that the Board and Management receive about customer service
regarding Town employees are minimal.
Evidence:
1. Customer Service is included in the performance evaluations of all
employees
2.The Board and the Town Administrator receive no or few complaints from
citizens about the behavior of and treatment by Town employees.
3. The Board, Management and the Town Administrator receive compliments
and letters of appreciation from customers.
4
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.1.2 The success of Estes Park Town Government depends upon the partnership
between citizens, elected officials and Town employees. Accordingly,
regarding the treatment of citizens and customers, the Town Administrator
shall not:
3.1.2.1 Fail to inform citizens of their rights, including their right to due process.
3.1.2.2 Ignore community opinion on relevant issues or make material decisions
affecting the community in the absence of relevant community input.
3.1.2.3 Allow the community to be uninformed (or informed in an untimely basis)
about relevant decision making processes and decisions.
3.1.2.4 Be disorganized or unclear with respect to interactions with the
community.
3.1.2.5 Ignore problems or issues raised by the community or fail to address
them in a timely manner.
3.1.2.6 Allow incompetent, disrespectful or ineffective treatment from Town
employees.
3.1.2.7 Unduly breach or disclose confidential information.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that citizens are informed well in
advance of any Town action. Staff takes steps to solicit and encourage
public comment on matters of public policy and public projects. Staff treats
all citizens in respectful and courteous manner. Within the restrictions of the
law, staff does not disclose confidential information. Furthermore, due to the
related nature of the sub-sections of 3.1.2, it is my interpretation that I may
report on all of these limitations as a group, rather than individually.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
1. All projects and public policy discussions include public outreach and
involvement.
2. Issued raised by community members are dealt with promptly at a staff
level, if possible, and when necessary are brought to the Town Board for
consideration and discussion.
3. Staff does not disclose confidential information.
Evidence:
1. Number of public meetings, community meetings and outreach meetings,
above and beyond just normal Board of Trustee meetings.
2. Newspaper articles and press releases associated with public projects and
policies
5
3. Social media outreach associated with public projects and policies.
4. Comments from the public to Town Administrator and Board members
regarding public outreach.
5. Lack of legal actions against the Town due to failure to provide due
process.
6. Lack of any legal action against the Town for improper disclosure of
confidential information
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.2 With respect to the treatment of paid and volunteer staff, the Town
Administrator may not cause or allow conditions which are unsafe, unfair or
undignified.
Accordingly, pertaining to paid staff within the scope of his/her authority,
the administrator shall not:
3.2.1 Operate without written personnel policies that clarify
personnel rules for employees.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town has clearly
written personnel policies that are current with current legal
decisions and that the policies are readily available to all employees.
These policies are not static and may be changed as legal
environment changes or other issue warrant.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Town has written personnel policies that cover the normal scope of
employment issues.
Evidence:
1. Town personnel policies are available to all employees on I-Town
and in the HR office.
2. All personnel policies have been reviewed and approved by the
Town Attorney and CIRSA.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.2.2 Fail to acquaint staff with their rights under this policy
upon employment.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that all new employees are
6
informed of Town employment policies and personnel policies.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
Every new employee is informed of the personnel policies
Evidence:
1. Town personnel policies are available to all employees on I-Town
and in the HR office.
2. New employees are informed of the Personnel Policies as part of
their on-boarding process.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.2.3 Fail to commit and adhere to the policies of Equal
Employment Opportunity and Fair Labor Standards Act.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town follows the
strict interpretation of EEOC and FLSA.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Town has no cases of legal non-compliance.
Evidence:
There have been no successful legal actions against the Town in the past
year regarding any EEOC or FLSA violations as an employer.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.2.4 Fail to make reasonable efforts to provide a safe working
environment for employees, volunteers and citizens
utilizing Town services
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town facilities are
clear of safety hazards and are properly maintained. All hazards
cannot be completely eliminated, and with normal wear and tear and
acts of God, new hazards will develop. I interpret this limitation not
to mean that all hazards are eliminated and do not exist, but that
reasonable precautions and planning is made to prevent and repair
hazards and that when a hazard is identified, there is action to
mitigate the hazard in a timely and appropriate manner.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There are no unaddressed safety hazards in Town facilities. New
hazards are addressed promptly
7
Evidence:
1. Successful safety audit and inspection from CIRSA
2. The Town had two injury accidents in the past year. Both have
been addressed and we have made internal changes to ensure
this won’t happen again.
Report: I am reporting partial compliance.
3.2.5 Operate without written volunteer policies that clarify the
responsibilities of volunteers and of the Town for all
volunteers.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town must have a
current volunteer manual.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Town has written a written volunteer manual.
Evidence:
The Town Volunteer Manual is available on the Town Website
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.4 With respect to the actual, ongoing condition of the Town government’s
financial health, the Town Administrator may not cause or allow the development of
fiscal jeopardy or loss of budgeting integrity in accordance with Board Objectives.
Accordingly, the Town Administrator may not:
3.4.1. Expend more funds than are available.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the there have been no
expenditures in excess of those approved in the adopted budgeted.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There are no expenditures in excess of those approved in the budget.
Evidence:
1. Town financial reports.
2. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.4.2. Allow the general fund and other fund balance to decline
below twenty percent of annual expenditures as of the end
8
of the fiscal year, unless otherwise authorized by the
Board.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the General Fund fund
balance at the end of the fiscal year is over 20%. This is based on
the calculation of fund balance after all carry over funds are included
encumbered but not expended funds are excluded at the end of the
year.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
Fund balance does not dip below 20%
Evidence:
1. Town financial reports.
2. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
3. The current estimate is $5,184,550 (fund balance ratio of
approximately 30% of 2016 General Fund expenditures)
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.4.3. Allow cash to drop below the amount needed to settle
payroll and debts in a timely manner.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that all funds have adequate
cash to settle all debts with the period for which they are due.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
All payments are made on time from cash on hand
Evidence:
1. Town financial reports.
2. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.4.4. Allow payments or filings to be overdue or inaccurately
filed.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that all payments or filings
have been made on time and accurately.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
All payments have been made on time and accurately
9
Evidence:
1. Town financial reports.
2. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.4.5. Engage in any purchases wherein normally prudent
protection has not been given against conflict of interest
and may not engage in purchasing practices in violation of
state law or Town purchasing procedures.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town has
comprehensive purchasing policies to guide the expenditures of
funds and that those policies are complied with.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Town has adopted purchasing policies and all purchases are made in
compliance with these policies
Evidence:
1. Town purchasing policies are available on I-Town
2. The annual audit
3. Single Audit of federal funds purchases
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.4.6. Use any fund for a purpose other than for which the fund
was established.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that any use of funds from a
specific fund, must be for the purpose as specified
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
All expenditures are made from the appropriate fund
Evidence:
1. Town financial reports.
2. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
3. Annual Audit
10
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.5 Within the scope of his/her authority and given available resources, the
Town Administrator shall not allow the Town’s assets to be unprotected,
inadequately maintained or unnecessarily risked.
Accordingly, he or she may not:
3.5.1. Fail to have in place a Risk Management program which
insures against property losses and against liability losses to
Board members, staff and the Town of Estes Park to the
amount legally obligated to pay, or allow the organization to be
uninsured:
3.5.1.1 Against theft and casualty losses,
3.5.1.2 Against liability losses to Board members, staff and the
town itself in an amount equal to or greater than the
average for comparable organizations.
3.5.1.3 Against employee theft and dishonesty.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town has adequate
insurance coverage to protect the Town from loss. Furthermore, due
to the related nature of the sub-sections of 3.5.1, it is my
interpretation that I may report on all of these limitations as a group,
rather than individually.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Town adequate insurance and suffers no unreasonable uninsured
losses
Evidence:
1. CIRSA audit
2. The Town has not paid out for any unreasonable uninsured losses
in the last year.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.5.2. Subject plant, facilities and equipment to improper wear
and tear or insufficient maintenance (except normal
deterioration and financial conditions beyond Town
Administrator control).
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that town facilities and
equipment are properly cared for and maintained. I interpret this to
11
include all physical buildings, and utility infrastructure, however this
does not include transportation infrastructure or real property.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
We have preventive maintenance programs for our buildings, major
building systems and rolling stock.
Evidence:
1. Ongoing improvement projects in Light and Power and Water
utilities completed in the last year, as reported to the Board.
2. PM schedules for rolling stock
3. Facilities maintenance projects completed in the last year, as
reported to the Board.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.5.3. Receive, process or disburse funds under controls
insufficient to meet the Board-appointed auditor’s
standards.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that there are no comments
in the annual audit that raise the question of insufficient controls.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
We have an audit with no relevant qualifying comments.
Evidence: The internal controls are sufficient to properly account for the
financial activity of the Town. The 2015 audit had included a few
comments related to controls but none required the auditors to modify
their opinion. The most significant comment is related to the grant
receivable accounting procedures which have been tightened up
significantly for 2016. Staff have worked hard over the last few months to
resolve many of the concerns the auditors expressed in 2015The annual
Audit
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.5.4. Unnecessarily expose Town government, its Board of
Town Trustees or staff to claims of liability.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean neither I nor the Town staff
take any action that results in unnecessary liability to the Town.
12
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There are no legal or other settlements resulting from an unnecessary
exposure.
Evidence:
There were no settlements paid out as the result of any unnecessary
liability in the last year.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.5.5 Fail to protect intellectual property, information and files
from loss or significant damage.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that all town information is
protected adequately through fire-walls, cyber security measures
and adequate backups. Non-electronic data is secured and
protected at a level appropriate for the information.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
We have no losses of data or information
Evidence:
1. We have had no significant losses or damage to information or
files over the last year.
2. CIRSA Audit
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.5.6 Acquire, encumber, dispose or contract for real property
except as expressly permitted in Town policy.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean I may not take any action as
described in 3.5.6 without the express permission of the Board of
Trustees.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There are no real property transactions that are not approved by the
Board of Trustees.
Evidence:
There were no real property transactions in the last year that were
not expressly approved by the Board of Trustees.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
13
3.5.7 Allow internal control standards to be less than that
necessary to satisfy generally accepted
accounting/auditing standards recognizing that the cost
of internal control should not exceed the benefits
expected to be derived.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that our internal controls are
reasonable as interpreted by the Town annual audit.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
We have an audit with no qualifying comments regarding internal
controls.
Evidence: The internal controls of the Town fully meet this requirement
as evidenced by the clean audit opinions received in past years. There is
nothing to indicate a deterioration in this condition for the year ended Dec
31, 2016.
Report: I am reporting compliance.
3.6 In order to protect the Board from sudden loss of Town Administrator services,
the Town Administrator may have no fewer than two (2) other members of the
Town management team familiar with Board of Town Trustees and Town
Administrator issues and processes.
3.6.1. The Assistant Town Administrator shall act in the capacity
of Town Administrator in his/her absence. In the absence
of the Town Administrator and Assistant Town
Administrator a Town Department Head previously
designated by the Town Administrator will act in the
capacity of Town Administrator.
3.6.2. The Town Administrator shall provide the necessary training
needed to enable successful emergency replacement.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I must officially
delegated two staff members to serve in my stead, should I not be
able to perform the duties of my job. This delegation is to be
expressly designated in an internal operating procedure
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There is an adopted policy that specifies continuity for the Town
Administrator.
Evidence:
14
Policy 203, TA Backup and Replacement, is posted on I-Town.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9 The Town Administrator shall not permit the Board of Town Trustees to be
uninformed or unsupported in its work.
Accordingly, he or she may not:
3.9.1 Let the Board of Town Trustees be unaware of relevant
trends, anticipated adverse media coverage, material external
and internal changes, and particularly changes in the
assumptions upon which any Board policy has been
previously established.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Board has no surprises
related to Town issues that they have not been informed of directly
from myself or the appropriate staff. I also interpret this to be
limited to issues, events, media coverage and other matters to
which staff or myself is aware of. At times, we are also surprised
by issues that arise and I do not feel I am responsible to inform the
board of issues that I could not have reasonable know or suspect
as coming forward.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
Board members are not surprised by any issue that staff or myself was
previously aware of.
Evidence:
1. Weekly updates to the Board
2. What’s up weekly e-mail to staff
3. Individual e-mails to the Board on a regular basis regarding
issues
4. Economic Dashboard
5. Press releases
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9.2 Fail to submit monitoring data required by the Board (see
policy on Monitoring Town Administrator Performance in
Board/Staff Linkage) in a timely, accurate and
understandable fashion, directly addressing provisions of
Board policies being monitored.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I report to the board as
outlined in the review schedule adopted in Policy Governance Policy
15
2.3. and the format of the reports are acceptable to the majority of
the Board.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
Compliance reports are received by the board as required in Policy 2.3
Evidence:
1. All compliance reports over the last year were supplied to the
board within the required timeframe
2. Format of these reports was expanded and revised in
September of last year at the request of the Mayor.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9.3 Fail to establish a process that brings to the Board of Town
Trustees as many staff and external points of view, issues
and options as needed for informed Board choices on major
policy issues.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that information presented
must give equal weight to differing options and opinions. At the
same time, staff may make recommendations and may present
recommended options to the Board, as well as other opinions.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
Standard presentations are structured so that pros and cons and varied
points of view are always included.
Evidence:
1. Board observance and opinion.
2. Use of the standard SOPPDA memo format for all presentations
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9.4 Present information in unnecessarily complex or lengthy
form.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that information presented
to the Board has enough detail for each trustee to be adequately
informed to make a policy decision and is presented in a manner in
which even complex issues are understandable. At the same time,
there is not so much peripheral information presented that it takes
the board “into the weeds” and into discussions of minute details
rather than broad policy issues. I also understand that each Board
member may have a different level of preferred detail and a different
16
preference of how information is presented. I must strive to present
information that optimizes the needs of all board members, but may
not maximize the needs or style of any one trustee.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
All members of the Board feel they have received enough information to
make policy decisions on any particular issue.
Evidence:
1. Board observance and opinion.
2. Use of the standard SOPPDA memo for all presentations
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9.5 Fail to provide support for official Board of Town Trustees
activities or communications.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that official Board activities
and actions are clearly communicated to the public and there is a
culture of transparency within Town Government. I am responsible
not just for my own actions, but that this is the culture throughout the
organization. I am responsible for the support provide to the board
through other staff, such as the PIO and Town Clerk.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
There is a culture of transparency throughout the organization and it is
demonstrated in our day to day actions.
Evidence:
1. Board observance and opinion.
2. Activities of the PIO through news media, social media and other
tools.
3. Public comments regarding the Town’s transparency of
information.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9.6 Fail to deal with the Board of Town Trustees as a whole
except when fulfilling individual requests for information.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I do not play favorites
with any members of the board and that at all times I treat each
member of the board fairly and respectfully. I also interpret this to
17
mean I can have confidential conversations with any member of the
Board, and that I respect that confidentiality. I believe to be effective
in my job in assisting the Board as a whole to be successful, Board
members must have a level of trust that each can communicate with
me openly without reservation.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
All members of the Board feel they can be open and honest with me in all
our personal communications and that I am treating each board member
fairly and with respect.
Evidence:
1. Board observance and opinion.
2. Lack of instances where failure to comply has resulted in issues
with the Board, staff or the public.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.9.7 Fail to report in a timely manner any actual or anticipated
noncompliance with any policy of the Board of Town
Trustees.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that at any time when I am
in noncompliance with any item described in the Staff Limitations
section of the adopted Policy Governance Policies, whether
intentional or unintentional, I notify the Board at the earliest possible
opportunity. I also interpret “earliest possible opportunity” to be
relative to the materiality of the noncompliance. It is my
interpretation than a major noncompliance is any issue that may
have significant financial, legal, or political impacts on the Town,
should be reported asap. Minor, non-material items, such as those I
would indicate with a Yellow traffic light in my compliance reports
and are a partial compliance or open to interpretation, may be
reported in a regularly scheduled report to the Board.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Board becomes aware of a situation of non-compliance by the Town
Administrator from any source other than me.
Evidence:
Board observance.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.10 With respect to planning for and reporting on capital equipment and
improvements programs, the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either
18
operational or fiscal integrity of the organization.
Accordingly, he or she may not allow the development of a capital program
which:
3.10.1 Deviates materially from the Board of Town Trustees’
stated priorities.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that we do not pursue any
capital projects or equipment that materially deviates from related to
the key outcomes, goals and objectives adopted by the Town Board
within the strategic plan.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
All capital improvements and purchases of capital equipment can be
directly tied to the Board’s Strategic plan and no expenditures are made
or planned that are not supportable under the current Town financial
resources.
Evidence:
1. Adopted Town Budget for Capital projects and equipment.
2. The Vehicle Replacement Plan, which budgets and plans for
multi-year funding of capital vehicle purchases.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.10.2 Plans the expenditure in any fiscal period of more funds
than are conservatively projected to be available during
that period.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean we are conservative with
our budgeting and we do not overstate revenue or understate
expenditures
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
We do not exceed our budgeted expenditures
Evidence:
1. CAFR
2. Annual Budget
Report: I am reporting compliance (NOTE: This policy seems to
be redundant with policy 3.4.1)
19
3.10.3 Contains too little detail to enable accurate separation of
capital and operational start-up items, cash flow
requirements and subsequent audit trail.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that our adopted budget and
subsequent accounting separates out capital, operating and other
expenses.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The budget and financial reports provide adequate separation of fund
use.
Evidence:
1. Annual audit
2. Published Budget
3. Financial Reports
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.10.4 Fails to project on-going operating, maintenance, and
replacement/perpetuation expenses.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that the Town has a Capital
Improvement Plan that is active and maintained.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
We have a robust and complete capital improvement plan
Evidence:
Capital Improvement Plan was presented to the Board in late 2016,
but will not be fully in place and implemented until later this year
Report: I am reporting partial compliance
3.10.5 Fails to provide regular reporting on the status of the
budget and on the progress of each active project,
including data such as changes and the financial status of
each project, including expenditures to date.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that staff should regularly
report back to the Board the progress of major projects that are
currently planned or underway. This does not apply to day to day
operational activities.
20
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
The Board feels adequately informed about ongoing projects
Evidence:
1. Reports on projects at CD/CS and PUP
2. Reports to the Board at regular board meetings
3. Weekly updates to the Board from the Town Administrator
4. Specific e-mails when issues arise that the Board should be
aware of.
5. Study sessions with the Board, when needed.
Report: I am reporting compliance
3.11 With respect to Town government's quality of life for the community, the
Town Administrator shall not fail to plan for implementing policies of the
Board regarding economic health, environmental responsibility, and
community interests.
Interpretation – I interpret this to mean that I have instituted general
policies that govern departmental operations, only as needed, but
where required to protect and enhance economic health,
environmental responsibility and community interest. I interpret this
as a catch-all requirement to cover polices that are not specifically
called out in other sections of the policy governance document.
Compliance with the policy will be achieved when:
This catch-all is rather subjective and open to the interpretation of the
Board of Trustees.
Evidence:
Opinion of the Board of Trustees.
Report: I am reporting compliance
21
22
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, March 14, 2017
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town
of Estes Park on the 14th day of March, 2017.
Present: Todd Jirsa, Mayor
Wendy Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Bob Holcomb
Patrick Martchink
Ward Nelson
Ron Norris
Cody Walker
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the
Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
Gordon MacAlpine/Town citizen stated a new Sierra Club committee has been formed in
Estes Park to help promote clean energy, keep air and water clean, and protect wildlife
habitat. The committee offered their support in addressing any of the initiatives at the
local level.
Jerry Kennell/Town citizen thanked the Town for the work on MacGregor Avenue. He
spoke in support of the immigrant community that provides employees for the Estes Park
service economy. He requested the Town codify through the passage of a resolution the
assurance that immigrants would be treated appropriately and protected.
Tony Schetzle/Town citizen commented on the proposed amendments to the
International Building Codes that would address vacation homes presented at the Study
Session. He stated concern with the appearance the amendments were a done deal,
and questioned reducing the requirements for commercial operations such as vacation
homes and decreasing the safety for guests. Transient occupants are at a higher risk as
they are unfamiliar with the surroundings.
Josh Wharten/County citizen commented he has rented his house on Airbnb and VRBO
for the past two years to provide additional income for his family. Allowing vacation rentals
could grow the middle class and allow individuals to afford a home in the Estes valley.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to amend the agenda to include the
Appointment of the Local Marketing District Interview Committee, and it passed
unanimously.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Trustee Norris stated the Estes Valley Planning Commission would hold its regular
meeting on March 21, 2017. The Town continues to seek applicants for the newly formed
Family Advisory Board.
Trustee Martchink commented the Parks Advisory Board would review the utility box artist
submissions and bring forward recommendations for the Town Board’s final approval.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
23
Board of Trustees – March 14, 2017 – Page 2
None.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated February 28, 2017 and Town Board Study Session
dated February 27 and February 28, 2017.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes.
a.Community Development/Community Services Committee Minutes
dated, February 23, 2017.
4.Estes Valley Board of Appeals Minutes dated December 8, 2016 and February
9, 2017 (acknowledgement only).
5. Estes Valley Library District Board Appointments:
David Hemphill to complete Judy Fontius’ term ending December 31, 2020.
6. Resolution #09-17 Setting the Public Hearing date of April 11, 2017 for a New
Tavern Liquor License filed by Cliff, Inc, dba Hollywoods, 110 ½ W. Elkhorn
Avenue, Estes Park, CO 80517.
It was moved and seconded (Holcomb/Koenig) to approve the Consent Agenda
Items, and it passed with Trustee Walker abstaining.
2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS (Outside Entities):
1. LARIMER COUNTY COMMUNITY REPORT. Commissioner Donnelly
presented the 2015-2016 community report for Larimer County. The report
provides a high-level overview of the county services, goals and performance.
3.ACTION ITEMS:
1.RESOLUTION #07-17 REAPPROPRIATION OF 2016 ENCUMBERED FUNDS
AND PROJECT “ROLLOVERS” TO THE 2017 BUDGET. Finance Director
Hudson presented the 2016 rollovers to the 2017 budget for purchases, contracts
and projects not completed by the end of the fiscal year 2016. He stated some
of the purchases, contracts and projects may have related revenues, such as
grant revenues to offset costs. The rollovers of approximately $18 million would
bring the 2017 budget to $68 million in 2017. The largest rollover includes $8
million for the parking garage. Projects associated with the rollovers have also
been rolled over into the 2017 budget. Attorney White read Resolution #07-17.
It was moved and seconded (Holcomb/Walker) to approve Resolution #07-17
reappropriating additional sums of money for the Town of Estes Park for
the budget year ending December 31, 2017, and it passed unanimously.
2.ORDINANCE #09-17 PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE: EVDC §5.1.B (VACATION HOMES). Director Hunt
reviewed proposed changes to the EVDC vacation home regulations, including
the requirement that all 2017 vacation home applications be filed by March 31,
2017, rather than registrations issued by that date; remove the requirement that
all registered vacation homes have a Certificate of Occupancy issued by
December 2016; place maximum parking requirements for vacation homes in
residential districts within the vacation home section of the code; allow flexibility
in the actual date of registration issuance; provide additional guidance to the
Estes Valley Planning Commission in criteria for making determinations
regarding 9-and-over vacation homes in residential districts; and clarify a number
of minor language and reference ambiguities. The large vacation home
language would clarify the EVPCs ability to consider appropriate alternative
standards if the minimum one acre lot size or setbacks are not met.
24
Board of Trustees – March 14, 2017 – Page 3
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig commented the March 31, 2017 date was not an end
date for the registrations to be accepted, rather the cap would determine the
deadline. Renewal of current registered vacation homes was to be completed
by March 31, 2017 to maintain their priority under the cap. She also questioned
if letters had been sent to group two, vacation homes operating without a current
registration, as identified by Host Compliance in January. Staff stated letters
were sent on March 10, 2017 notifying the property owners of the need to submit
an application by March 31, 2017.
Heidi Riedesel/County citizen and realtor stated concern with the March 31, 2017
deadline and the impact it would have on property values, difficulty with
establishing real estate contracts, and cumbersome registration process. She
stated the majority of buyers are individuals interested in purchasing a vacation
home for future retirement in Estes Park.
Judy Domina/County citizen commented she purchased several vacation home
properties prior to her retirement in Estes Park. The vacation homes provided
her with the income needed to retire. She stated she continues to operate two
vacation homes and utilizes local contractors to maintain the properties. She
requested the Town Board reconsider the March 31, 2017 registration date.
Tony Schetzle/Town citizen stated the March 31, 2017 date to register a vacation
home should remain. The cap was established as the number of vacation homes
the community would allow or tolerate if registered by the deadline.
Dick Spielman/Town citizen stated the 588 was not a goal, rather a cap on the
number that would be allowed by March 31, 2017. The cap was to be
reconsidered annually each April.
Julia Daley/Town citizen concurred the March 31, 2017 date was established as
a date to review the cap and either raise or lower the cap. The cap has presented
challenges for potential buyers and investors in the community.
Discussion amongst the Board has been summarized: The Board agreed to the
cap of 588 and the cap should be used rather than March 31, 2017; questioned
the language in 2.j. and recommended the removal of December 31, 2017; the
queue established priority for renewals and properties rented in 2016 but not
registered; the cap represents what the community would tolerate in residential
zoning district; the cap was a compromise to allow vacation homes to grow in the
accommodations zoning district and to cap growth of vacation homes in the
residential zoning district; and the March 31, 2017 date would remain for those
properties that want to apply for a 9 and above occupancy.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to continue the Public Hearing
for Ordinance #09-17 to the March 28, 2017 meeting to amended the code
language clarifying registration for residential vacation homes would be
conducted after March 31, 2017 until the cap has been met, and it passed
unanimously.
3.ORDINANCE #08-17 PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE (EDVC) §4.3, §5.2, AND §13.3 (ACCESSORY
KITCHENS). Director Hunt presented amendments to the EVDC to eliminate
accessory kitchens as a legally conforming accessory uses in the Estes valley.
The change would eliminate the possibility of creating an attached Accessory
Dwelling Unit (ADU) which could be rented out separately from the principle
single-family dwelling unit, a violation of the EDVC, or allow a non-rented
accessory-kitchen to be built and maintained, thereby circumventing the code.
Staff recommends the amendments to bring accessory kitchens in line with the
denial of the attached ADU long-term regulations by the Town Board in 2016.
Director Hunt stated allowing the kitchens and not ADUs would equate to bad
planning practices and would not be recommended by staff. Staff recommended
25
Board of Trustees – March 14, 2017 – Page 4
new code language be added to allow and define the use of outdoor kitchens.
The Estes Valley Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed
changes, stating a homeowner may have a legitimate need for an accessory
kitchen, and the need to be consistent with the building and zoning codes.
Paul Brown/County citizen stated homeowners have requested second kitchens
for numerous reasons but have been largely for bars in luxury homes.
After further discussion, Attorney White read Ordinance #08-17. It was moved
and seconded (Holcomb/Walker) to continue the Public Hearing for
Ordinance #08-17 to the March 28, 2017 meeting to include language for
outdoor kitchens and remove sections 2.f.(4) and 2.f.(5) from the
Development Code, and it passed unanimously.
4.RESOLUTION #08-17 TO OUTLINE PROCEDURE AND SCHEDULE FOR
ESTES VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. Director Hunt
commented the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated due to
changes in the community and the need to update a number of dated elements.
The Estes Valley Planning Commission has begun an informal but organized
task to update the Plan. The proposed Resolution would add the Town governing
body’s direction to this effort, providing some milestones for scheduling, and
outlining a reasonable process and time frame for the project. If approved, a
similar Resolution would be presented to the Board of County Commissioners
for their consideration and approval. Attorney White read Resolution #08-17. It
was moved and seconded (Norris/Holcomb) to approve Resolution #08-17,
and it passed unanimously.
5. BOARD POLICY #103 TOWN BOARD PROCEDURES AND TOOL BOXES.
Town Administrator Lancaster presented revisions to both Policy #103 and #105
to clarify and codify the Board’s procedure for a Board member to add an item to
the agenda at a Board meeting, for public participation during a Board Study
Session, and to address minor updates to the policies. A quasi-judicial motion
would be added to Policy #103 to outline the need to follow a failed motion in the
positive with a motion in the negative.
7.BOARD POLICY #105 AGENDAS.
After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Nelson/Koenig) to
approve Board Policy #103 with an amendment to change Agenda review
to Agenda approval and Board Policy #105, and it passed unanimously.
8. APPOINTMENT OF THE LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT INTERVIEW
COMMITTEE. It was moved and seconded (Walker/Jirsa) to appoint Trustee
Walker and Mayor Jirsa to the Local Marketing Board interview committee,
and it passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m.
Todd Jirsa, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
26
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, March 14, 2017
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of
the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at the
Town Hall in Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 14th day of
March, 2017.
Board: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Holcomb,
Martchink, Nelson, Norris and Walker
Attending:All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Attorney White, CBO Birchfield and Recording
Secretary Beers
Absent:None.
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m.
PROPOSED LOCAL AMENDMENT TO THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL
CODE RELATED TO VACATION RENTALS WITHIN THE ESTES PARK TOWN
LIMITS. Chief Building Official (CBO) Birchfield provided a description of the proposed
amendments to the International Building Residential Code (IBC) relating to single
family dwellings and vacation homes. He reviewed the general direction from the Board
as the following; do not regulate vacation homes as a change of use; maintain current
provision of exempting automatic sprinkler requirements for one- and two-family
dwellings regulated by the IBC; do not retroactively require sprinkler systems in existing
vacation homes which may legally have occupant loads of more than eight, where they
comply with specific requirements of the Estes Valley Development Codes (EVDC) as
of December 16, 2016; determine allowable occupant loads for vacation homes based
on the number of bedrooms, 2 per bedroom plus 2 additional persons; provide a
definition for a small hotel, and require exit signs. In order to fairly and consistently
administer the provisions of the IBC, it is necessary to amend the codes to address
local concerns related to vacation homes. He presented two flow charts outlining the
proposed changes from the current requirements and provided definitions of the
following:
An Existing Building is described as any building built under permit prior to June
1, 2017, the effective date of the amendments.
A Small Hotel is a building which contains dwelling units and/or sleeping units
where accommodations are provided for less than nine occupants, transient in
nature and units may be individually rented. Units are limited to 1800 sq. ft.
Amendments would exempt one- and two-family dwellings from automatic fire sprinkler
requirements. Existing vacation homes would require a Life Safety Survey as opposed
to the retroactive sprinkler requirement. Vacation homes would maintain current
occupancy regulations of two per bedroom plus two, requiring home owners to dictate
where the additional two persons would reside for sleeping purposes. All sleeping
rooms must comply with sleeping room requirements outlined in the IBC. Large vacation
homes occupancy is determined by the IBC occupant load factor of one person per
every 200 sq. ft. A large vacation home would be subject to retroactive sprinkler
requirement based on size over 1800 sq. ft. Staff proposed effective January 1, 2019,
all vacation homes would require a Certificate of Occupancy and Life Safety Survey
performed by a building official. The Board of Appeals approved of staff entering a
vacation home to inspect specific items related to vacation rentals. CBO Birchfield
presented images as examples of different types of violations inspectors see inside
homes. Staff has worked closely with the local fire department to review inspection
items and the proposed amendments.
Board discussion followed and has been summarized: safety concern for properties not
required to have sprinklers; consider revisiting the discussion in a year; and clarification
on the process of obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. DRAFT27
Town Board Study Session – March 14, 2017 – Page 2
TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Town Administrator Lancaster requested providing the Board with guidelines and
suggestions on committee meetings in an effort to make meetings more effective. Town
Board consensus was to review committee guidelines and limit required staff time
during meetings. Trustee Nelson recommended budgeted items go straight to Town
Board.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Town Administrator Lancaster recommended discussing the Strategic Plan during
scheduled Study Sessions allowing conversation about each key outcome area as
opposed to discussing several items during a single meeting.
Director Muhonen has made contact with CDOT to discuss taking over minor street
maintenance for state highways in Town limits. A contract would give the Town more
control over changes to signage, stripping changes, light maintenance downtown, etc.
Town Administrator Lancaster asked to bring additional information to a Study Session
for discussion.
There being no further business, Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 6:32 p.m.
Bunny Victoria Beers, Recording Secretary DRAFT28
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado March 7, 2017
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in the
Board Room in said Town of Estes Park on the 7th day of March, 2017.
Board: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Holcomb,
Martchink, Nelson, Norris and Walker
Attending:All
Also Attending: Town Clerk Williamson
Absent:None
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m.
VALUES WORKSHOP.
Dallas Everhart/Consultant reviewed communication topics and Emergenetic profiles
discussed at the previous meeting. The Board defined values as the beliefs that drive
the direction, priorities and decision of the Board. Mr. Everhart stated shared values set
the foundation for how the Board would work together and establish the culture of the
organization. He worked with the Board to identify and establish shared values,
including leadership, integrity, teamwork, respect, transparency, honesty and
responsible. The Board defined each value and identified key ways in which to
establish if the value is working, not working and remedy when the value is not being
followed.
The next workshop would address What is working, What is not working, What is
missing and What is confusing.
There being no further business, Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 6:08 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
29
30
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 15, 2017
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Room 203 of Town Hall, in said
Town of Estes Park on the 15th day of February, 2017.
Present: Kimberly Campbell
Gordon Slack
Belle Morris
Stan Black
Ann Finley
Also Present: Bob Holcomb, Town Board Liaison
Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Kevin Ash, Engineering Manager
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Admin. Assistant
Absent: Brian Wells, Shuttle Director
Gregg Rounds
Amy Hamrick
Ken Zornes
Tom Street
Chair Campbell called the meeting to order at 12:05 p.m.
There were not enough members present at the onset of the meeting to establish a
quorum. As a result, the January minutes will be reviewed and approved/changed at the
March meeting.
PROJECT UPDATES, Kevin Ash, Engineering Manager
2017 Street Improvement Program: An update was provided at the Town Board Study
Session reflecting the identified upward trend of the Town’s pavement condition index
(PCI). The update also showed the breadth of the projects undertaken to improve our
street system score.
MacGregor Avenue Improvements:
The Public Works Department would continue working closely with the Utilities
Department and the Sanitation District to coordinate work on this project. The
Estes Valley Recreation and Parks Division trail design was still pending at the
time of this meeting. The Town will complete the concrete trail from Wonderview
Avenue to St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church.
31
Transportation Advisory Board – February 15, 2017 – Page 2
The Field Inspection Review (FIR) has taken place to identify any concerns not
captured in the 30% design. An additional easement will need to be acquired.
Director Muhonen provided positive news that CDOT’s design for the intersection
of Wonderview Avenue & MacGregor Avenue includes a round-about. Design of
the intersection improvement will take place in 2019 and the actual build will
take place in 2021.
A sharrow road has not yet been considered for MacGregor Avenue. Additional research
is expected for MacGregor as well as Dry Gulch Road.
Digital Message Signs (DMS): A temporary sign had been placed at the first of three
locations. The Public Works Department hopes for public comments from the
community prior to permanent installation.
Per Member Finley, the location of the temporary sign wouldn’t provide enough time to
make the decision to get into the turn lane. Manager Ash stated there would be a
potential move as the Town was still determining access to electricity for placement.
Due to the high electric demand, the message signs are unable to operate solely with
solar energy. A meeting would be held on February 15th to determine where the
primary computer which communicates with the signs will be located. The next location
planned for temporary sign placement is Hwy 34 & Summit.
It is anticipated that permanent installation will take place in June 2017.
Fall River Trail: It was announced that $10 million will be available in GOCO grant dollar.
The maximum amount allotted to the winning applicants is $2 million. There will be a
meeting with the grant writer at the end of February and the Town will plan to submit
an application.
PROJECT UPDATES, Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Fish Creek Public Infrastructure Project: Director Muhonen stated that the project is on-
schedule and six of the nine box culverts are open for traffic. Future work to take place
once weather improves.
Transit Facility Parking Structure: Director Muhonen and Project Manager Ginny
McFarland attended a tour of the Colorado Springs precast facility where the girders are
being created. This portion of the project is on schedule.
32
Transportation Advisory Board – February 15, 2017 – Page 3
The earthwork contractor hired for this project has gone bankrupt. The Town has
contracted with Diamond Excavating for the needed work. This same excavation
company was hired by the Town for work on the Community Center.
Elkhorn Resurfacing: Member Slack inquired about CDOT’s progress on planning the
resurfacing of Elkhorn Avenue. An Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandate states
if there is major construction on any road, the responsible party must ensure all the
ramps, curbs, etc. comply with ADA regulations which could result in significant
expenses for the Town. Director Muhonen would like to propose the Town be
responsible for the ADA mandates if CDOT will perform all the resurfacing work.
TAB INITIATIVES
Downtown Master Plan: Community Workshops would begin in later February with the
first workshop focusing on the long-term vision. As the following workshops approach,
there may be break-out sessions to address more specific pieces/topics. Chair Campbell
strongly encourages TAB participation.
Earlier in February, the parking meter vendor, IPS, came to meet with Director Muhonen,
Chair Campbell and others. They were able to learn, from the wireless manufacturer, the
different technologies, cost estimates ($500-$600 per individual parking spot meter
including installation), and needed features (based on other users). The vendor
preferred single meters to multi-space meters. If using multi-space meters, there are
several additional factors the Town will need to consider.
Chair Campbell will gather all information documented for board members showing the
criteria/needs and will present this to other vendors. The TAB will need to determine the
public process.
Director Muhonen suggested the consultant’s deliverable should reflect all paid parking,
ordinances, budget for hardware, etc. Heavy involvement would be needed from
downtown property owners and public outreach will need done for the consultant to
utilize.
Downtown Estes Loop: Chair Campbell presented her idea for providing bike lanes on
Elkhorn from US 34/US 36 to Bond Park. All space to be acquired would be on the north
side of the street (majority town-owned). The idea would generate 8’ on each side of the
33
Transportation Advisory Board – February 15, 2017 – Page 4
street. Chair Campbell wanted to present this idea and would like to reassess at a later
date.
OTHER BUSINESS
With no other business to discuss, Chair Campbell adjourned the meeting at 1:18 p.m.
34
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 17, 2017
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Parks Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park,
Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Executive Board Room of the Estes Park
Events Center, in said Town of Estes Park on the 17th day of February, 2017.
Present: Dewain Lockwood
Carlie Bangs
Vicki Papineau
Ronna Boles
Merle Moore
Terry Rustin (via phone)
Scott Miller, Student Advisor
Also
Present: Patrick Martchink, Trustee Liaison
Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Brian Berg, Parks Division Supervisor
Kevin McEachern, Operations Manager
Cydney Springer, Estes Arts District
Absent: Celine Lebeau
Co-Chair Moore called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m.
NO PUBLIC COMMENT
Town Board Liaison Patrick Martchink introduced and welcomed our new member and
Student Advisor, Scott Miller. Member Miller will provide student/youth perspective to
the Parks Advisory Board.
GENERAL BUSINESS
It was moved and seconded (Papineau/Lockwood) to approve the January meeting
minutes and the motion passed unanimously.
MOUNTAIN FESTIVAL UPDATE
The Centennial Committee joined the Mountain Festival Meeting on February 16, 2017
to coordinate initiatives for this year’s celebration. There will be an educational tent as
well as a student innovation corner (3D Printer, Robotics Club, etc.). Friday will be
35
Parks Advisory Board – February 17, 2017 – Page 2
geared more toward education and Saturday will be more for family. All three bands
have been secured with funding assistance from the Mayor.
DECORATING UTILITY BOXES [DUB]
PAB members reviewed and commented on the Request for Qualifications Member
Boles drafted targeting local artists (EP Light & Power service area) that have been
residents for a minimum of 6 months. The selections will be made based solely on the
art provided, and not on the artist.
Sample art submissions will be sent to Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative
Assistant, no later than March 10, 2017. These submissions will be compiled and
brought back to the PAB at the March 17 meeting for a group decision. The PAB would
like to get three to five utility boxes decorated in Summer 2017.
Member Boles presented a photo array of submissions for the vinyl wrap testing of the
utility box located near the police station. The PAB selected both Captain Eric Rose’s
photo of two elk on the mountainside, and Member Boles’ photo of Mills Lake. The two
selected photos will be mocked up by Bill Slater to show how they’d appear on the utility
box and will be sent to members for review. The wrap selected will be applied to the box
in late May or early June, 2017.
PARKS DIVISION UPDATE
Supervisor Brian Berg presented the new dismount decals (bicycles, skateboards) to
the PAB. The decals will be applied to the sidewalk pavement using heat for better
adherence. Each decal is 3’x3’ and is approximately $150 each.
The Parks Division is determining the best way to provide future sidewalk clearing
(snow, ice, etc.) without damaging the decals.
A few other items being address by the Parks Division are relocating the rocks residing
at Bond Park, tunnel lighting, and glow-in-the-dark footprints throughout the tunnel.
OTHER BUSINESS
With no other business to discuss, Co-Chair Moore adjourned the meeting at 12:04 p.m.
36
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
February 21, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Michael Moon, Vice‐Chair Russ Schneider, Commissioners Betty Hull, Doug
Klink, Steve Murphree, Sharry White, one vacant position
Attending: Chair Moon, Commissioners Schneider, Hull, Klink, Murphree, and White
Also Attending: Community Development Director Randy Hunt, Planner Carrie McCool, Code
Compliance Officer Linda Hardin, and Recording Secretary Karen Thompson
Absent: Planner Audem Gonzales, County Liaison Michael Whitley
Chair Moon called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were eight people in attendance.
1.PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of minutes, January 17, 2017 Planning Commission meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Schneider/Hull) to approve the consent item as presented and the
motion passed 7‐0.
3.DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2016‐08, DOLLAR GENERAL, LOT 31, AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 32‐35, AND
PORTIONS OF LOTS 1, 31 & 37, WHITE MEADOW VIEW PLACE, LESS 2000032927; 455 STANLEY
AVENUE
Approximate time 00:21. Planner McCool stated staff was requesting the item be continued to the
March 21, 2017, Planning Commission meeting. However, if there are members of the public that
wish to speak on this item, they may comment at this time.
Public Comment
None.
It was moved and seconded (Klink/White) to continue the Dollar General application to the
March 21 approve the consent item as presented and the motion passed 7‐0.
4.CLOUD NINE MINOR SUBDIVISION, METES & BOUNDS PARCEL LOCATED AT 1595 FISH
HATCHERY ROAD
Approximate time. 1:40. Planner McCool reviewed the staff report, as Planner Gonzales was not
in attendance. Project is a request to subdivide four single‐family lots in the A‐1–
Accommodations zone district. The subject property (3.13 acres) is located in unincorporated
Larimer County, within the Estes Valley Development Code area. Each proposed lot would meet
the minimum lot size standard.
37
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
February 21, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Approximate time 4:00. Review criteria. Items are listed in detail in the staff report. It should be
noted the applicant has also applied for an annexation of the proposed lots into the Town limits.
The annexation application is tentatively scheduled to be heard by the Town Board on March 28,
2017. The application was routed to affected agencies, and no significant comments were
received. A legal notice was published in the local newspaper, and a notice was mailed to
adjacent property owners. No comments were received.
Public Comment
Karen Cherman/applicant was available to answer questions.
David Bangs/applicant’s agent stated there is a small structure on the property that encroaches
onto the neighboring property, but it does not come into play with the proposed subdivision.
Attorney White stated once an application for annexation has been accepted, it cannot be
revoked.
Staff Findings
1.With the conditions of approval listed, this proposal will comply with all applicable sections
of the Estes Valley Development Code.
2.Adequate public facilities are currently available to serve the proposed subdivision.
3.The proposed lot configurations meet minimum lot size requirements.
4.This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration
and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative
to code compliance or the provision of public services.
Conditions of Approval
1.Show existing sewer service line to home on Lot 3 on Preliminary Plat.
2.Show joint access easement across Lot 1 and Lot 2 on Final Plat.
3.Submit maintenance agreement for shared driveway with Final Plat submittal.
4.Remove language on Note 9 of Preliminary Plat stating the maintenance agreement and
shared access easement will be submitted with building permit. Both are required with
Final Plat submittal.
5.Remove Town Board signature block and replace with Board of County Commissioners.
It was moved and seconded (Klink/Murphree) to recommend approval of the minor subdivision
to the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners with the findings of fact and conclusions
of law, with findings and conditions recommended by staff and the motion passed 7‐0.
5.AMENDMENT TO ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS RELATED TO VACATION
HOMES.
38
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
February 21, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Approximate time 14:50. Director Hunt stated there have been some conflicts between the
Vacation Home application descriptions and the Larimer County Assessor records; specifically, the
number of bedrooms. Staff is working diligently with the Assessor’s office to resolve the issues. It
is unknown how long it may take to resolve the reconciliation. The proposed amendment would
revise the regulations to say the application must be filed by March 31, 2017. Staff will work as
quickly as possible to complete the application process with the property owners.
Director Hunt reviewed the staff report. The following lists approximate times and specific topics:
Approximate time 18:35. Planning Commission guidance in 9‐and‐over decision‐making.
Approximate time 21:50. Maximum parking requirements.
Approximate time 22:30. Vacation Home deadline in non‐residential districts.
Staff and Commissioner Discussion
Approximate time 25:20. Regarding EVDC Section 5.2.B.1.a.(3), Commissioner Schneider
questioned the calendar year dates. Director Hunt would like to have a conversation with the
Town Clerk to clarify the text. Attorney White stated there should be provisions to allow vacation
home owners to operate during the renewal process. The Town Clerk handles the registrations,
and will be asked to clarify the language for this section. Commissioner Schneider requested a
minor change to EVDC Section 5.1.B.2.j. Director Hunt stated the change could be addressed in
the motion.
Approximate time 32:30. Regarding Section 5.1.B.3.c.(3) and (4), Commissioner Moon was
concerned about the judgement calls in this section, wanting there to be a level playing field.
Town Attorney White stated it is up to the Planning Commissioners to make sure they maintain a
level playing field in their decisions.
Approximate time 35:05 Commissioner Leavitt questioned the parking regulations. Code
Compliance Officer Linda Hardin stated the previous code language allowed a maximum number
of parking spaces to three. The new regulations are in line with the zone district in which the
vacation home is located.
Approximate time 36:09 There was brief discussion regarding the local representative section of
the registration.
Approximate time 40:00. There was brief discussion regarding Urgent and Non‐Urgent issues with
vacation homes. Staff will review EVDC Section 12.7 to see if the language can be clarified.
Public Comment
None.
Staff and Commission Discussion
39
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
February 21, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
The following revisions to Exhibit A were discussed and the general consensus from the
Commissioners was to approve them:
§5.1.B.1.a.1 – Addition of a grace period
§5.1.B.1.a.3 – Addition of a licensing period (after reviewing the section with the Town Clerk)
§5.1.B.2.e – Replace Community Development Department with Regulatory Agency
§5.1.B.2.j ‐ Revise the first sentence to say: All vacation home owners in any residential zoning
district who wish to obtain an operating registration during 2017 shall be required to apply for a
new or renewed, as the case may be, operating registration no later than March 31, 2017.
It was moved and seconded (Klink/Schneider) to recommend approval to the Estes Park Town
Board and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners as presented in Exhibit A as
recommended by staff, and subject to the discussed alterations listed above, and the motion
passed 7‐0.
There was brief discussion regarding the Large Vacation Home Special Reviews that will be
forthcoming. Chair Moon stated it will most likely be necessary for the Commissioners to do site
visits, similar to site visits conducted with development reviews. Attorney White added site visits
are not required, but considered good practice; however, Commissioners will need to remember
that discussion with the applicant would not be allowed.
6.AMENDMENT TO ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS RELATED TO ACCESSORY
KITCHENS.
Approximate time 53:40. Director Hunt stated the EVDC has a conflict that does not allow
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), but does allow Accessory Kitchens. To remove the conflict, the
allowance of Accessory Kitchens as a permanent accessory use in residential districts is proposed
to be removed. A limited kitchen would be allowed. The determination of a limited kitchen
versus a permanent kitchen would be the installation of a second 220‐volt stove or equivalent
gas‐fired appliance. An outdoor kitchen (open on at least two sides and exposed to the weather)
would not be affected by this code revision. This amendment is an appropriate step to eliminate
the loophole for ADUs.
Approximate time 58:34. Discussion among the Planning Commissioners regarding this proposed
amendment.
Public Comment
Approximate time 1:06:50. Paul Brown/town resident and local home designer was opposed to
the removal of the allowance of accessory kitchens.
Public comment closed.
Staff and Commission Discussion
40
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
February 21, 2017
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Approximate time 1:12:45. Comments included but were not limited to: is there a way to use
technology to assist with the enforcement of ADUs; Estes Park is not the only municipality dealing
with these issues; there is a need for aging in place or children moving back home, and ADUs
could assist with that.
It was moved and seconded (Hull/Schneider) to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of
Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners deny the text amendment to the
Estes Valley Development Code as presented in Exhibit A, finding that it is a solution to an
unenforceable non‐problem and the motion passed 6‐1 with Chair Moon voting against the
motion.
There was brief discussion regarding enforcement of the rental of ADUs. Code Compliance Officer
Hardin stated the Host Compliance software is for short‐term rentals, and does not identify long‐
term rentals.
7.REPORTS
A. Downtown Plan public workshop will be held Thursday, February 23, 2017 at the Estes Park
Event Center. This is the first of several public meetings for the Downtown Plan.
B. Hydrology Study public meetings will be held Monday, February 27, 2017. A study session will
take place at 2 p.m. in the Town Board Room. The same presentation will be provided at 6:00
p.m. at the Estes Park Event Center. Both meetings are open to the public, although no public
comment will be taken at the study session.
C. Director Hunt stated the Planner I position has been filled, and the new employee will begin
work at the end of March.
There being no further business, Chair Moon adjourned the meeting at 2:55 p.m.
_________________________________
Michael Moon, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
41
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
February 7, 2017, 2016 9:00 a.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board: Chair Wayne Newsom, Vice-Chair John Lynch, Pete Smith, Jeff Moreau,
Rex Poggenpohl
Attending: Members Lynch, Smith, Moreau, and Poggenpohl
Also Attending: Community Development Director Randy Hunt, Planner Audem
Gonzales, Planner Carrie McCool, Recording Secretary Thompson
Absent: Member Newsom
Vice-Chair Lynch called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. There were three people in
attendance. He introduced the Board members and staff.
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological
sequence.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of minutes dated January 10, 2017.
It was moved and seconded (Smith/Poggenpohl) to approve the minutes as
presented and the motion passed 3-0 with Moreau abstaining and Newsom absent.
3. LOT 31A, AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 32-35, AND PORTIONS OF LOTS 1, 31, & 37;
WHITE MEADOW VIEW PLACE, LESS 200032927; 455 STANLEY AVENUE; DOLLAR
GENERAL
Planner Gonzales reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Vaquero Estes Park Partners,
LP requests three variances, as follows:
(1) Variance from Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) Section 7.11.N.2.b which
states loading areas shall not be located in a required setback, and street side loading
docks shall be set back at least 70 feet from the street property line or 110 feet from
the street center line, whichever is greater. Request is to locate the loading area
approximately 54 feet from the center of Stanley Avenue.
(2) Variance from EVDC Section 4.4.D.2.a which requires building main entrances in the
CO–Commercial Outlying zone district be located facing the arterial. Request to have
the building front on Stanley Avenue, a non-arterial street.
42
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2
February 7, 2017
(3) Variance from EVDC Appendix D.B.7.a which requires a driveway width of no more
than 30 feet. Request to allow a driveway width of approximately 49.5 feet at the
property line, which relates to approximately 62 feet at the street line.
Planner Gonzales stated a legal notice was published in the local newspaper and
adjacent property owners were notified by mail. Two public comments in opposition to the
project were received. No major comments or concerns were received from reviewing
agencies.
Staff findings can be viewed in the staff report.
Staff and Member Discussion
Comments from members were in favor of the project, but concerned about the building
frontage and access on Stanley Avenue. There was no information from the applicant
showing all options to access the property from Highway 7 had been requested and
exhausted. The general consensus from the Board was to continue the meeting to allow
the applicant more time to come up with alternatives.
Public Comment
Devan Pharis/applicant stated the submitted design was the seventh iteration due to the
slope of the lot and the requirements of an on-site detention pond. There was a CDOT
approved access point, but it was at the lowest point on the lot where the detention pond
should be located.
Rick Houser/town resident requested additional information regarding the loading area
and the general layout of the proposed project.
There was lengthy discussion regarding the location and size of the building, location of
the driveway, and the height of a retaining wall.
Additional information requested by the Board included:
x Other options for the building location to reduce the setback issues with the loading
area
x Report on discussions with CDOT regarding the access location
x Any other design variations to the location of the building on the site
x Submit a grading plan so the Board can see the topography/slope of the area
x Report on the possibility of sharing a driveway with the property to the north
x Report on possibly locating the detention pond underneath the driveway
Director Hunt stated the Dollar General Development Plan was scheduled to go before
the Estes Valley Planning Commission on February 21, 2017. If the variance item was to
be continued, it would be appropriate to also continue the Development Plan to the March
43
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3
February 7, 2017
21, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant was agreeable to the revised
schedule.
It was moved and seconded (Poggenpohl/Smith) to continue the variance requests
to the March 7, 2017 meeting and the motion passed 4-0 with one absent.
7. REPORTS
A. Director Hunt stated staff is proceeding with processing the applications for vacation
homes with occupancies of eight and under. In order to maintain transparency, there is
a scheduled Town Board agenda item to provide a formal statement that the new
regulations will not interfere with vacation homeowner’s contractual arrangements
through 2017. This will allow vacation homes with existing reservations for nine or
more to fulfill their contractual obligations to their guests in 2017.
B. Director Hunt stated there was some difficulty with county records and vacation home
registrations, one of which is the ability to define the number of bedrooms with the
assessor records. Staff is considering changing deadlines in order for Town and
County staff to complete reconciliations with the county regarding number of
bedrooms. There will be a code amendment to allow this process to occur.
C. Director Hunt stated Board training is still in the planning stages. It would be beneficial
to have both the Board of Adjustment members and the Planning Commissioners in
attendance.
D. Director Hunt reported Bob Leavitt was recently appointed by the County
Commissioners to the Planning Commission.
E. It was noted there would not be a quorum for a meeting on April 4, 2017. Staff should
keep this in mind during conversations with customers.
There being no other business before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 10:08 a.m.
___________________________________
John Lynch, Vice-Chair
__________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
44
Estes Valley Board of Trustees, March 28, 2017
Mountain Meadow Annexation Agreement Amendment
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Audem Gonzales, Planner II
Date: March 28, 2017
RE: CONTINUANCE of Consent Agenda Item #7 Mountain Meadow
Annexation Agreement Amendment
(Agreement between TOEP and The Sanctuary, LLC)
______________________________________________________________________
Objective:
Staff is asking the Town Board to continue this item to the next regularly scheduled
meeting on April 11, 2017. Staff requires additional time to prepare the amended
agreement and have the owner agree to the amendments.
Sample Motion:
1. I move to CONTINUE the Mountain Meadow Annexation Agreement Amendment to
the next regularly scheduled meeting on April 11, 2017.
Attachments:
None
45
46
RESOLUTION #10-17
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES
PARK, COLORADO:
That the filing date of the application for a New BEER & WINE Liquor License, filed
by Elk Meadow RV Essential Group LLC dba Elk Meadows Lodge & RV Resort, 1665
Highway 66, Estes Park, Colorado, is March 23, 2017.
It is hereby ordered that a public hearing on said application shall be held in the Board
Room of the Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue, on Tuesday, April 25, 2017, at 7:00
P.M., and that the neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of said application and hearing
shall be the area included within a radius of 4.7 miles, as measured from the center of the
applicant's property.
DATED this day of
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
47
48
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: March 23, 2017
RE: Update Liquor License Violation Follow-Up for Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba
Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center
Objective:
To receive an update from Chippers Lanes on new liquor practices that have taken
place since the most recent violation in October 2016.
Present Situation:
In November 2016, the Town Board considered the renewal of the liquor license held by
Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center because of the
reoccurring liquor violations at the establishment. The new manager for Chippers
outlined a number of steps the establishment would take to address the violations and
to train staff. The Board requested the licensee return in March 2017 to review how the
new procedures were working.
Proposal:
The owner and manager would provide the Town Board with an update on the new
procedures.
Advantages:
To assure the Town Board the establishment has taken necessary steps to address the
reoccurring violations.
Disadvantages: None.
Action Recommended: Update only at this time.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest
Medium to High – Serving alcohol to minors and non-compliance with Colorado State
Liquor Laws are concerns for the community.
Sample Motion:
No action is required at this time.
49
50
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: March 23, 2017
RE: Liquor Licensing: New Hotel & Restaurant Liquor License Application for
Bird & Jim, LLC dba Bird & Jim, 915 Moraine Avenue, Estes Park,
Colorado
Objective:
Approval of a new Hotel & Restaurant liquor license located at 915 Moraine Avenue,
Estes Park, Colorado. Application filed by Bird & Jim, LLC dba Bird & Jim.
Present Situation:
An application for a new Hotel & Restaurant liquor license was received by the Town
Clerk’s office on February 1, 2017. All necessary paperwork and fees were submitted;
please see the attached Procedure for Hearing on Application – New Liquor License for
additional information. The applicant is aware of the Town Board’s Training for
Intervention Procedures (TIPS) requirement and has not been schedule at the time of
this memo.
Proposal:
To present the application for the Town Board’s review and consideration for a new
Hotel & Restaurant liquor license.
Advantages:
Approval of the license provides the business owner with the opportunity to operate a
liquor-licensed establishment in the Town of Estes Park.
Disadvantages:
The owner is denied a business opportunity to serve alcohol to patrons.
Action Recommended:
Approval of the application for a new Hotel & Restaurant liquor license.
Budget:
The fee paid to the Town of Estes Park for a new Hotel & Restaurant Liquor license is
$1319. The fee covers the administrative costs related to processing the application,
background checks, and business licensing. In addition, the annual renewal fee
payable to the Town of Estes Park for a Hotel & Restaurant Liquor license is $869.
51
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood
are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and that the desires of
the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor license. Based upon
these findings, I move that the application for a new Hotel & Restaurant liquor license
filed by Bird & Jim, LLC dba Bird & Jim be approved/denied.
Attachments:
Procedure for Hearing
Application
Individual History
Police Report
52
July 2002
PROCEDURE FOR HEARING ON APPLICATION
NEW LIQUOR LICENSE
1.MAYOR.
The next order of business will be the public hearing on the application of Bird & Jim
LLC dba Bird & Jim for a new Hotel and Restaurant Liquor License located at 915
Moraine Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the facts and evidence
determined as a result of its investigation, as well as any other facts, the reasonable
requirements of the neighborhood for the type of license for which application has
been made, the desires of the adult inhabitants, the number, type and availability of
liquor outlets located in or near the neighborhood under consideration, and any other
pertinent matters affecting the qualifications of the applicant for the conduct of the type
of business proposed.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
2.TOWN CLERK. Will present the application and confirm the following:
The application was filed February 1, 2017.
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees on February 28, 2017, the public hearing
was set for 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 28, 2017.
The neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of this application and hearing
were established to be 4.70 miles.
The Town has received all necessary fees and hearing costs.
The applicant is filing as a Limited Liability Company.
The property is zoned CO – Outlying Commercial which allows this
type of business as a permitted use.
The notice of hearing was published on March 17, 2017 .
The premises was posted on March 16, 2017 .
53
There is a police report with regard to the investigation of the applicant.
Status of T.I.P.S. Training:
X Unscheduled Scheduled * Completed
There is a map indicating all liquor outlets presently in the Town of Estes Park
available upon request.
3.APPLICANT.
The applicants will be allowed to state their case and present any evidence they
wish to support the application.
4. OPPONENTS.
The opponents will be given an opportunity to state their case and present any
evidence in opposition to the application.
The applicant will be allowed a rebuttal limited to the evidence presented by the
opponents. No new evidence may be submitted.
5. MAYOR.
Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard
to the application and, if so, to read all communication.
Indicate that all evidence presented will be accepted as part of the record.
Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any questions of any person speaking at
any time during the course of this hearing.
Declare the public hearing closed.
6. SUGGESTED MOTION:
Finding. The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the
neighborhood are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and
that the desires of the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor
license.
Motion. Based upon the above findings, I move that this license be granted/denied.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: March 23, 2017
RE: Liquor Licensing: New Lodging & Entertainment Liquor License
Application for Lazy B Chuckwagon and Show, LLC dba Lazy B, 600 W.
Elkhorn Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado
Objective:
Approval of a new Lodging & Entertainment liquor license located at 600 W. Elkhorn
Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado. Application filed by Lazy B Chuckwagon and Show,
LLC dba Lazy B.
Present Situation:
An application for a new Lodging & Entertainment liquor license was received by the
Town Clerk’s office on February 10, 2017. All necessary paperwork and fees were
submitted; please see the attached Procedure for Hearing on Application – New Liquor
License for additional information. The applicant is aware of the Town Board’s Training
for Intervention Procedures (TIPS) requirement and has completed the training.
The liquor license application has been sent to the Colorado Department of Revenue
Liquor Enforcement Division (LED) for a concurrent review as requested by the
applicant. This allows the LED to review the application simultaneously with the Town
and expedites the issuance of the new liquor license.
Proposal:
To present the application for the Town Board’s review and consideration for a new
Lodging & Entertainment liquor license.
Advantages:
Approval of the license provides the business owner with the opportunity to operate a
liquor-licensed establishment in the Town of Estes Park.
Disadvantages:
The owner is denied a business opportunity to serve alcohol to patrons of the
chuckwagon dinner and performance.
Action Recommended:
Approval of the application for a new Lodging & Entertainment liquor license.
67
Budget:
The fee paid to the Town of Estes Park for a new Lodging & Entertainment Liquor
license is $1319. The fee covers the administrative costs related to processing the
application, background checks, and business licensing. In addition, the annual
renewal fee payable to the Town of Estes Park for a Lodging & Entertainment Liquor
license is $869.
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood
are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and that the desires of
the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor license. Based upon
these findings, I move that the application for a new Lodging & Entertainment liquor
license filed by Lazy B Chuckwagon and Show, LLC dba Lazy B be approved/denied.
Attachments:
Procedure for Hearing
Application
Individual History
Police Report
68
July 2002
PROCEDURE FOR HEARING ON APPLICATION
NEW LIQUOR LICENSE
1.MAYOR.
The next order of business will be the public hearing on the application of Lazy B
Chuckwagon & Show LLC dba Lazy B for a new Lodging & Entertainment Liquor
License located at 600 W. Elkhorn Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the facts and evidence
determined as a result of its investigation, as well as any other facts, the reasonable
requirements of the neighborhood for the type of license for which application has
been made, the desires of the adult inhabitants, the number, type and availability of
liquor outlets located in or near the neighborhood under consideration, and any other
pertinent matters affecting the qualifications of the applicant for the conduct of the type
of business proposed.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
2.TOWN CLERK. Will present the application and confirm the following:
The application was filed February 10, 2017.
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees on February 28, 2017, the public hearing
was set for 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 28, 2017.
The neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of this application and hearing
were established to be 3.50 miles.
The Town has received all necessary fees and hearing costs.
The applicant is filing as a Limited Liability Company.
The property is zoned CO – Outlying Commercial which allows this
type of business as a permitted use.
The notice of hearing was published on March 17, 2017 .
The premises was posted on March 16, 2017 .
69
There is a police report with regard to the investigation of the applicant.
Status of T.I.P.S. Training:
Unscheduled Scheduled * X Completed
There is a map indicating all liquor outlets presently in the Town of Estes Park
available upon request.
3.APPLICANT.
The applicants will be allowed to state their case and present any evidence they
wish to support the application.
4. OPPONENTS.
The opponents will be given an opportunity to state their case and present any
evidence in opposition to the application.
The applicant will be allowed a rebuttal limited to the evidence presented by the
opponents. No new evidence may be submitted.
5. MAYOR.
Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard
to the application and, if so, to read all communication.
Indicate that all evidence presented will be accepted as part of the record.
Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any questions of any person speaking at
any time during the course of this hearing.
Declare the public hearing closed.
6. SUGGESTED MOTION:
Finding. The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the
neighborhood are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and
that the desires of the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor
license.
Motion. Based upon the above findings, I move that this license be granted/denied.
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson
Date: March 23, 2017
RE: Liquor Licensing: Transfer of Ownership from Estes Valley Recreation
and Park District et al, dba HANGAR RESTAURANT AT ESTES PARK
GOLF COURSE, to Estes Valley Recreation and Park District; Smokin’
Dave’s, dba HANGAR RESTAURANT AT ESTES PARK, 1480 Golf
Course Road, Hotel and Restaurant with Optional Premises Liquor
License
Objective:
Transfer an existing liquor license located at 1480 Golf Course Road to the applicant.
Present Situation:
A Hotel and Restaurant with Optional Premises Liquor License is currently held at the
location referenced above. The license is currently held by the Estes Valley Recreation
and Park District (EVRPD) and their former concessionaires, Tory & Bernice Nelson.
Per their concession agreement, EVRPD requires that the concessionaires, along with
the EVRPD Board of Directors, be listed on the liquor license. EVRPD recently
contracted with Smokin’ Dave’s to provide food and beverage service at the Hangar
Restaurant. This change in concessionaires requires a transfer of the liquor license. A
temporary permit was issued on March 15, 2017, which authorizes the continued sale of
alcohol beverages as permitted under the permanent license while the application to
transfer ownership of the license is pending.
The application was delivered to the Town Clerk’s office on March 10, 2017, along with
all required fees. The applicant is aware of the TIPS training requirement.
Proposal:
To present the application for the Town Board’s review and consideration to transfer the
existing license to Estes Valley Recreation and Park District, Smokin’ Dave’s, dba
HANGAR RESTAURANT AT ESTES PARK GOLF COURSE.
Advantages:
The transfer of the license provides the business owner with the opportunity to continue
operating an existing, liquor-licensed establishment without an interruption of service to
its clientele.
Town Clerk’s Office Memo
81
Disadvantages:
The business owner is denied the opportunity to continue operating an existing liquor-
licensed business during the licensing process.
Action Recommended:
Approval to transfer the existing Hotel and Restaurant with Optional Premises Liquor
license to Estes Valley Recreation and Park District, Smokin’ Dave’s, dba HANGAR
RESTAURANT AT ESTES PARK GOLF COURSE.
Budget:
The fee paid to the Town of Estes Park for a Hotel and Restaurant with Optional
Premises Liquor License transfer is $1319. The fee covers the administrative costs
related to processing the application, background checks, and business licensing. In
addition, the renewal fee payable to the Town for a Hotel and Restaurant with Optional
Premises Liquor License is $869 per year.
Level of Public Interest:
Low
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the Transfer Application for a Hotel and Restaurant with
Optional Premises Liquor License filed by Estes Valley Recreation and Park District,
Smokin’ Dave’s, dba HANGAR RESTAURANT AT ESTES PARK GOLF COURSE.
Attachments:
Procedure for Hearing
Application
Individual History
Police Report
82
April 2003
PROCEDURE FOR TRANSFER OF LIQUOR LICENSE
TOWN CLERK.
Will present the application and confirm the following:
The application was filed March 10, 2017 .
The Town has received all necessary fees and hearing costs.
The applicant is filing as an Association/Limited Liability Corporation .
There is a police report with regard to the investigation of the applicants.
Status of T.I.P.S. Training:
Unscheduled Completed X Pending Confirmation
MOTION:
I move the Transfer Application filed by Estes Valley Recreation & Park District; Smokin’
Dave’s, LLC doing business as The Hanger at Estes Park Golf Course for a Hotel and
Restaurant with Optional Premise License be approved/denied.
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
Estes Valley Board of Trustees, March 28, 2017
Cloud Nine Subdivision Annexation
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Audem Gonzales, Planner II
Date: March 28, 2017
RE: Annexation Proposal – Cloud Nine Subdivision Addition
(Resolution #11-17 and Ordinance #10-17)
______________________________________________________________________
Objective:
Conduct a public hearing to consider an Annexation application for compliance with the
Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) and Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.).
Present Situation:
The property is approximate 3.13 acres in size and is zoned A-1 Accommodations. The
Board of County Commissioners approved the Cloud Nine Subdivision Final Plat on
March 20, 2017.
The property borders Town limits on the west and south. Directly north and east are
other County properties.
Proposal:
The annexation request includes approximately 3.13 acres of land zoned A-1
Accommodations within the unincorporated Estes Valley. The approved Final Plat
consists of a 4 lot single-family home subdivision located off Fish Hatchery Road. The
subdivision shall retain the A-1 zone district classification.
There are no public improvements associated with this subdivision. No annexation
agreement accompanies this annexation request.
Advantages:
1. This request complies with Eligibility for Annexation standards set forth in C.R.S.
31-12-104;
2. This request complies with Limitations standards set forth in C.R.S. 31-12-105;
3. An annexation election is not required under C.R.S. 31-12-107(2).
105
Estes Park Town Board of Trustees, March 28, 2017
Cloud Nine Subdivision Annexation
4. Increases property tax and potential commercial tax revenue to the Town
5. Re-develops an underutilized property within the Estes Valley
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
Planning Staff is recommending Approval of the Cloud Nine Subdivision Addition
Annexation application.
Budget:
None.
Level of Public Interest:
Low: There has been no written public comment received as of March 22, 2017. Any
comments received after this date shall be placed on the applications page of the Town
website at www.estes.org/currentapplications
Sample Motions:
Below are the Town Board’s options related to the Annexation application:
1. I find that the application meets the review criteria, and move to APPROVE
Resolution #11-17 and Ordinance #10-17 with no conditions:
2. I find that the application meets the review criteria, and move to APPROVE
Resolution #11-17 and Ordinance #10-17 with the following conditions;
3. I find that the application does not meet the review criteria, and move to DENY
Resolution #11-17 and Ordinance #10-17;
4. I find that the applicant has not provided sufficient information to review the
application and move to CONTINUE THE HEARING to provide adequate time to
review additional materials.
Attachments:
Resolution #11-17
Ordinance #10-17
Annexation Map
Application www.estes.org/currentapplications
106
RESOLUTION NO. 11-17
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES
PARK, COLORADO:
The Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, in accordance with
Section 31-12-110, C.R.S., hereby finds that with regard to the proposed annexation of the
following described area, that the requirements of the applicable parts of Sections 31-12-
104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., have been met; that an election is not required under Section
31-12-107(2), C.R.S.; and that no additional terms and conditions are to be imposed on
the annexation. The area eligible for annexation known as “CLOUD NINE SUBDIVISION
ADDITION” to the Town of Estes Park is as follows:
Containing Acres: 3.13
A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T5N, R73W OF THE 6th P.M.
LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO WIT:
PARCEL 1
A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 5
NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY,
COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS COMMENCING AT
THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16 WITH ALL BEARINGS
CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SAID
SECTION 16 CONSIDERED AS BEARING S01°19'00"W; THENCE
S01°19'OO"W A DISTANCE OF 1315.31 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
SAID SE 1/4 TO THE EAST 1/16TH CORNER OF SAID SE 1/4; THENCE
S89°14'30"W A DISTANCE OF 1298.19 FEET ALONG THE EAST-WEST
CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO THE CENTER 1/16TH CORNER OF SAID
SE 1/4 AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89°43'22"W A
DISTANCE OF 455.66 FEET ALONG THE EAST-WEST CENTERLINE OF SAID
SE 1/4 TO A POINT BEARING N89°26'18"E A DISTANCE OF 839.67 FEET
FROM THE WEST 1/16TH CORNER OF SAID SE 1/4: THENCE N00°30'53"E A
DISTANCE OF 99.84 FEET PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SW 1/4
OF SAID SE 1/4 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
THE FISH HATCHERY ROAD; THENCE THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES
AND DISTANCES ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE
FISH HATCHERY ROAD; THENCE S81°00'19"E A DISTANCE OF 6.37 FEET;
THENCE 235.07 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, SAID
CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 18°03'55" A RADIUS OF 745.55 FEET AND
IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING N89°57'42"E A DISTANCE OF 234.10
FEET; THENCE 218.92 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT
TO A POINT ON THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4, SAID
107
CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 04°10'57" A RADIUS OF 2999.05 FEET AND
IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING N83°01'10"E A DISTANCE OF 218.87
FEET; THENCE S01°20'19'W A DISTANCE OF 123.42 FEET ALONG THE
NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 1.06 ACRES MORE OR LESS AND IS
SUBJECT TO ALL EXISTING EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF
RECORD, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO.
PARCEL 2
A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T5N, R73W OF
THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS COMMENCING AT THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 16 WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE TO THE
EAST LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 16 CONSIDERED AS
BEARING S01°19'00"W THENCE S01°19'00"W A DISTANCE OF 1315.31 FEET
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO THE EAST 1/16 CORNER OF
SAID SE 1/4 THENCE S89°22'00"W A DISTANCE OF 1753.83 FEET ALONG
THE EAST-WEST CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO A POINT BEARING
N89°26'18"E A DISTANCE OF 839.67 FEET FROM THE WEST 1/16TH
CORNER OF SAID SE 1/4; THENCE N00°18'35"E A DISTANCE OF 161.28
FEET PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE W 1/4 OF SAID SE 1/4 TO A
POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE FISH
HATCHERY ROAD AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE THE
FOLLOWING THREE COURSES AND DISTANCES ALONG THE NORTHERLY
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE FISH HATCHERY ROAD; THENCE S79°08'45"E
A DISTANCE OF 16.57 FEET; THENCE 216.16 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CURVE TO THE LEFT, SAID CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 18°03'56" A
RADIUS OF 685.55 FEET AND IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING
N89°54'47"E A DISTANCE OF 215.26'; THENCE 214.44 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT TO A POINT LYING 14.25 FEET
PERPENDICULARLY TO THE WEST OF A NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF
SAID SE 1/4, SAID CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 04°00'55" A RADIUS OF
3059.85 FEET AND IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING N82°56'57"E A
DISTANCE OF 214.40 FEET; THENCE N00°08'08"E A DISTANCE OF 35.71
FEET PARALLEL TO THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4,
THENCE S88°48'25"W A DISTANCE OF 65.00 FEET PERPENDICULAR TO
THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4, THENCE N00°59'22"E
118.80 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF FALL RIVER; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF FALL RIVER N64°55'51"W
37.23 FEET; THENCE N81°59'40"W 81.89 FEET; THENCE N71°49'00"W
128.07 FEET; THENCE N81°12'25"W 134.30 FEET; THENCE N75°15'06"W
9.51 FEET TO A POINT LYING N00°38'53"E FROM THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE S00°38'53"W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE
NW 1/4 OF SAID SE 1/4 268.84 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 2.07 ACRES MORE OR LESS AND IS SUBJECT
108
TO ALL EXISTING EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD,
LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM FROM THE ABOVE PARCELS, ANY PORTION
CONTAINED IN THAT INSTRUMENT RECORDED MARCH 5, 1992 AT
RECEPTION NO. 92011615; COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO.
DATED this day of , 2017.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
109
110
ORDINANCE NO. 10-17
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS
CLOUD NINE SUBDIVISION ADDITION
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES
PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. That a Petition for Annexation, together with four (4) copies of the plat of
said area as required by law, was filed with the Board of Trustees on the 23th day of
January, 2017 by the landowners of one hundred percent (100%) of the area and owning
one hundred percent (100%) of the area, excluding public streets and alleys of the area
hereinafter described. The Board, by Resolution at its regular meeting on the 28th day of
February, 2017, accepted said Petition and found and determined that the provisions of
Section 31-12-107(1), C.R.S., were met; and the Board further determined that the Town
Board should consider the annexation plat on Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. in the
Municipal Building for the purposes of determining that the proposed annexation complies
with the applicable provisions of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., and is
considered eligible for annexation.
Section 2. That the Notice of said hearing was given and published as provided in
Section 31-12-108(2), C.R.S.
Section 3. That the hearing was held pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-12-
109, C.R.S., on the 28th day of March, 2017.
Section 4. That following said hearing, the Board of Trustees adopted a Resolution
determining that the proposed annexation met the requirements of the applicable parts of
Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S.; that an election was not required under
Section 31-12-107(2), C.R.S.; and that no additional terms or conditions are to be imposed
upon said annexation.
Section 5. That the annexation of the following described area designated as
CLOUD NINE SUBDIVISION ADDITION to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, is hereby
approved:
Containing Acres: 3.13
A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T5N, R73W OF THE 6th P.M.
LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO WIT:
111
PARCEL 1
A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 5
NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY,
COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS COMMENCING AT
THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16 WITH ALL BEARINGS
CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SAID
SECTION 16 CONSIDERED AS BEARING S01°19'00"W; THENCE
S01°19'OO"W A DISTANCE OF 1315.31 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
SAID SE 1/4 TO THE EAST 1/16TH CORNER OF SAID SE 1/4; THENCE
S89°14'30"W A DISTANCE OF 1298.19 FEET ALONG THE EAST-WEST
CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO THE CENTER 1/16TH CORNER OF SAID
SE 1/4 AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89°43'22"W A
DISTANCE OF 455.66 FEET ALONG THE EAST-WEST CENTERLINE OF SAID
SE 1/4 TO A POINT BEARING N89°26'18"E A DISTANCE OF 839.67 FEET
FROM THE WEST 1/16TH CORNER OF SAID SE 1/4: THENCE N00°30'53"E A
DISTANCE OF 99.84 FEET PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SW 1/4
OF SAID SE 1/4 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
THE FISH HATCHERY ROAD; THENCE THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES
AND DISTANCES ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE
FISH HATCHERY ROAD; THENCE S81°00'19"E A DISTANCE OF 6.37 FEET;
THENCE 235.07 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, SAID
CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 18°03'55" A RADIUS OF 745.55 FEET AND
IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING N89°57'42"E A DISTANCE OF 234.10
FEET; THENCE 218.92 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT
TO A POINT ON THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4, SAID
CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 04°10'57" A RADIUS OF 2999.05 FEET AND
IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING N83°01'10"E A DISTANCE OF 218.87
FEET; THENCE S01°20'19'W A DISTANCE OF 123.42 FEET ALONG THE
NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 1.06 ACRES MORE OR LESS AND IS
SUBJECT TO ALL EXISTING EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF
RECORD, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO.
PARCEL 2
A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T5N, R73W OF
THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS COMMENCING AT THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 16 WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE TO THE
EAST LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 16 CONSIDERED AS
BEARING S01°19'00"W THENCE S01°19'00"W A DISTANCE OF 1315.31 FEET
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO THE EAST 1/16 CORNER OF
SAID SE 1/4 THENCE S89°22'00"W A DISTANCE OF 1753.83 FEET ALONG
THE EAST-WEST CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4 TO A POINT BEARING
N89°26'18"E A DISTANCE OF 839.67 FEET FROM THE WEST 1/16TH
112
CORNER OF SAID SE 1/4; THENCE N00°18'35"E A DISTANCE OF 161.28
FEET PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE W 1/4 OF SAID SE 1/4 TO A
POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE FISH
HATCHERY ROAD AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE THE
FOLLOWING THREE COURSES AND DISTANCES ALONG THE NORTHERLY
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE FISH HATCHERY ROAD; THENCE S79°08'45"E
A DISTANCE OF 16.57 FEET; THENCE 216.16 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CURVE TO THE LEFT, SAID CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 18°03'56" A
RADIUS OF 685.55 FEET AND IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING
N89°54'47"E A DISTANCE OF 215.26'; THENCE 214.44 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT TO A POINT LYING 14.25 FEET
PERPENDICULARLY TO THE WEST OF A NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF
SAID SE 1/4, SAID CURVE HAS A DELTA ANGLE OF 04°00'55" A RADIUS OF
3059.85 FEET AND IS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD BEARING N82°56'57"E A
DISTANCE OF 214.40 FEET; THENCE N00°08'08"E A DISTANCE OF 35.71
FEET PARALLEL TO THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4,
THENCE S88°48'25"W A DISTANCE OF 65.00 FEET PERPENDICULAR TO
THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SE 1/4, THENCE N00°59'22"E
118.80 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF FALL RIVER; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF FALL RIVER N64°55'51"W
37.23 FEET; THENCE N81°59'40"W 81.89 FEET; THENCE N71°49'00"W
128.07 FEET; THENCE N81°12'25"W 134.30 FEET; THENCE N75°15'06"W
9.51 FEET TO A POINT LYING N00°38'53"E FROM THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE S00°38'53"W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE
NW 1/4 OF SAID SE 1/4 268.84 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 2.07 ACRES MORE OR LESS AND IS SUBJECT
TO ALL EXISTING EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD,
LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM FROM THE ABOVE PARCELS, ANY PORTION
CONTAINED IN THAT INSTRUMENT RECORDED MARCH 5, 1992 AT
RECEPTION NO. 92011615; COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO.
Section 6. The Town of Estes Park, Colorado, hereby consents, pursuant to
Section 37-45-136(3.6) C.R.S., to the inclusion of lands described above into the Northern
Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Municipal SubDistrict, Northern Colorado
Water Conservancy District.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its
adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF
ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS DAY OF , 2017.
113
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
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 of , 2017 and published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of
, 2017, all as required by the Statutes of the State of Colorado.
Town Clerk
114
115
116
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Staff Report
To: Hon. Mayor T. Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator F. Lancaster
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: March 28, 2017
RE: Ordinance No. 09-17: Proposed Text Amendments to Estes Valley
Development Code: EVDC §5.1.B (Vacation Homes)
[Continued from March 14, 2017 Town Board]
PROCESS UPDATE for March 28, 2017:
At the March 14 meeting, the Town Board of Trustees voted to continue this
amendment to March 28, 2017. They also directed staff to prepare an
amendment that would allow for registration of 8-and-under Vacation Homes in
residential districts after the current deadline of March 31, 2018.
A description of the amendment requested by Town Board is below under
“Discussion / AMENDMENT UPDATE”. That update also calls out the requested
amendment language in Exhibit A. Otherwise, this is the same staff report that
the Board saw in your March 14 packets.
Staff has no objections to this requested change, and supports adoption of the
amended Exhibit A, Version B, attached.
On Monday, March 20, the Board of Larimer County Commissioners voted to
approve the EVDC changes in Exhibit A, Version B.
Town Board approval on March 28 will bring closure to this matter.
Objective:
Review and recommendation on proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC) §5.1.B (Vacation Homes): amendments to the Vacation
Homes (VH) regulations regarding processing of applications, standards for reviewing 9-
and-over vacations homes, and minor changes made for clarity or consistency.
[Following direction given by the Town Board on Mar. 14, revisions include
modifications to provide for residential-district, 8-and-under occupancy VH
registrations for full calendar year 2017.
This staff memo is the same as the March 14 memo, except for underlined
additions in the “Update on 2017 Deadline” section.]
Code Amendment Objective:
117
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
The objective of this proposed code amendment is to revise the EVDC to do the following:
Require that all 2017 VH applications be filed by March 31, rather than registrations
issued by that date;
Remove (for the time being) the requirement that all registered VH homes have a
Certification of Occupancy issued by Dec. 2016;
Place maximum parking requirements for VHs in residential districts in this section
of code;
Specify that VH applications in non-residential districts can be applied for after
March 31, 2017 (as they are not subject to the cap);
Allow flexibility in the actual date of registration issuance;
Provide additional guidance to the Planning Commission in criteria for making
determinations regarding 9-and-over VHs in residential districts;
Clarify a number of minor language and reference ambiguities.
Proposal:
Amend EVDC Section 5.1.B (Vacation Homes) as stated in Exhibit A [“PC Draft”], dated
Feb. 21, 2017, attached.
Both staff and the Estes Valley Planning Commission recommend that the Board of
Trustees approve Exhibit A as drafted.
Discussion:
AMENDMENT UPDATE: March 28, 2017:
As a result of discussion following the Estes Park Board of Realtors
meeting [see “Update’ section from prior staff report, repeated on the
following pages], an amendment was requested to remove the existing
March 31 deadline for 8-and-under residential VH registration.
As required in the December 15 amendments to EVDC, the March 31 was
to allow a “snapshot in time” on that date of exactly where we stand with VH
impacts in residential areas of the Estes Valley. More specifically, it was to
see where our registrations stood with respect to the 588 residential cap,
since the 588 figure based on a best estimate from last July.
118
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
As of this writing (Mar. 23), we are running approx. 423 residential VH
registrations completed or in process – i.e., approx. 165 registrations left
under the cap. Although a huge surge of applicants could come in the last
week in March, it does not appear we will hit the cap by March 31 based on
the pace so far. Nearly all expected renewals are in hand – meaning that
nearly all those who might now apply are new VH owner/operators.
The Realtors and others have made a case that registrations after March
31 do not pose much risk of inadvertently exceeding the cap. Their concern
is that sticking to the March date will lock potential buyers and sellers out of
the market for nine more months, until registrations resume in January
2018.
Town Board members were receptive to these concerns and voted to
continue the amendment package to March 28, and directed staff to draft
language removing the March 31 deadline for 8-and-under residential VHs.
Staff has drafted the appropriate language, which appears in Sec. 5.1.B.2.j
in Exhibit A, Version B, included. Basically, all this language does is to let
the cap itself, rather than the deadline + cap, regulate 8-and-under
numbers. If we hit the cap in April, June, or whenever, registrations will still
be halted and a wait-list created. Staff sees only minor administrative
burdens by making this change. This is already how we’re processing the
accommodations and commercial VH applications.
Substantial amendments like this typically would go back to Planning
Commission for review, but in this case March 31 is nearly here. Staff has
no objections to the proposed change.
This set of amendments has been assembled as a result of various practical
difficulties staff has observed during the administration of the VH regulations. In
some cases, they only make clear what most parties understood to be the spirit
and intent of the regulations as adopted in December.
March 31 deadline:
The most notable problem we have encountered is that the March 31, 2017
deadline to issue all operating registrations has turned out to be impossible for
some owners/applicants and the staff alike.
Most such problems have come up in connection with the need to reconcile
number of bedrooms. In some cases – less than half, but still significant – VH
applicants are reporting a certain bedroom count that does not match Larimer
County Assessor property records. The reasons vary. Sometimes, a room may
119
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
have been converted to a bedroom (legitimately or otherwise), but the Assessor’s
office does not have the updated figure. A few applicants may not understand the
way bedrooms are counted. And in some cases, the Assessor’s records seem to
be wrong or incomplete (records have been found by County staff that show
houses with zero bedrooms, for example). Regardless of cause, the records must
match for many reasons, including proper registration.
The reason this affects deadline is that changing or verifying the records is a slow
process, especially for County properties. The only current ways to reconcile a
bedroom discrepancy are either: (a) go back through old building-permit records;
or (b) conduct a new building inspection. County records before 1998 are not
systematically accessible and require hand searching, and many County records
do not even exist if a house is older than approx. early 1970s. The Town’s building
records system has older data but suffers from its own inefficiencies, many due to
obsolete software.
Building inspections can be done, but there is no clear authority to inspect just to
determine number of bedrooms. And, building inspections are not free and cannot
be scheduled on a moment’s notice; travel time from Fort Collins is a factor. (The
County retains authority for building regulations in unincorporated Estes Valley.)
The bottom line is that the March 31 deadline is unattainable for some applicants
who otherwise are trying to comply, and unattainable for staff as well. A solution is
to require that all applications be filed by March 31, but add flexibility as to when
the application must be completed. An “abeyance policy”, currently administered
by staff, will not interfere with VH operators’ ability to honor rental contracts already
in the pipeline, even if registration takes longer than we wish.
(A collateral benefit is straightening out record-keeping glitches as they are found.
Unorganized public records would not be a formula for good government or citizen
satisfaction.)
Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.):
For much the same reason as above – irregularity of records and difficulty
accessing them – this requirement has proven infeasible. The original intent was
to stop someone from getting a registration as a “placeholder” for an incomplete
house or even a vacant piece of ground, which under the cap would potentially
kick current operators out of the queue and onto a waiting list. In practice, current
regulations – specifically, the requirement for a site inspection – are keeping this
from happening in 2017.
Staff would like to suggest a longer-term solution for the C.O. matter. This
regulation seems manageable for now due to the inspection requirement, but
120
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
inspections only required in limited situations after 2017. We will work on an
acceptable mechanism and bring that forward later this year.
Maximum Parking Requirements:
These have been in EVDC for years, but with two problems: (a) they are currently
in a weird Code location where few people (including staff) know how to find them
easily; and (b) it is not clear whether they apply to VHs, since they are phrased as
applying to “accessory uses” in one- and -two-family dwellings.
Our recommendation is that the regulations be copied from their current location
in Sec. 5.2.e.(6).(b) and repeated in the vacation home section, which is what the
amendment does. The rules themselves remain the same as they have been in
residential districts.
Non-residential district VHs fall under the “Hotel, small” category for parking
regulations. This is also unchanged from current Code, but repeated here for
completeness, so all parking rules can be found in the same spot.
2017 VH deadline in non-residential districts:
This is also a March 31 issue, but deals with a different facet of VH policy. Staff’s
understanding is that new VHs (whether brand-new construction or new
registration for existing structures) should be encouraged toward Accommodations
or Commercial locations, other things being equal. Removing the rigid March 31
deadline for non-residential VH applications is aimed toward this goal. Two
elements make the March 31 deadline less important in these districts to begin
with: (a) There is no cap in the non-residential districts, so hard deadlines for
registration do not translate into competition to stay under the cap; and (b) 9-and-
over VHs in those districts do not go through Planning Commission review, so the
gate-keeping function of March 31 deadline in residential areas does not have the
same applicability.
Update on 2017 deadline: Staff met with the Estes Park Board of Realtors
(EPBOR) on Mar. 2 regarding this amendment package. Several concerns
were expressed, but probably the main one was the March 31, 2017
deadline for residential properties to register. The December 2016
amendment is worded such that a residential VH that does not file
registration by this March 31 is not eligible to register for the rest of 2017.
That requirement is not proposed for change here. The Code does allow
open registration again from Jan. 1, 2018 onward. The reason for this
provision is so the community can accurately assess where we are with
regard to the cap and with regard to VH impacts generally. After 2017
settles, out, the scene is expected to become clearer.
121
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
The concern by EPBOR is that potential buyers and sellers who are not in
Estes Park, or otherwise do not know about the December regulations, may
close on a property without knowing it can’t become a vacation home for
the 2017 season. The newness of the VH regulations and the temporary
character of the post-March prohibition give this argument some validity.
Staff has no specific concerns with allowing for post-March 31 registration
in residential districts, as long as we have an accurate picture of where our
numbers stand at the March 31, 2017 deadline. We believe an amendment
could be written to allow post-March 31 registration, while still providing for
adequate data collection and impact assessment in 2017.
In continuing this amendment package to March 28, the Town Board
directed that language be added to allow for 2017 residential-district
registrations for 8-and-under VHs to continue beyond the current March 31
deadline. This has been done. The new language affects only two sections
in attached Exhibit A Version B, compared to Version A that the Board saw
on March 14. Those are Sec. 5.1.B.2.j (p. 5 of 10) and Sec. 5.1.B.5.h (pp.
7 of 10 and 8 of 10). In brief, these two newest changes allow 8-and-under
registrations in every district to continue throughout 2017, and specify that
the 9-and-over residential VHs still have a Mar. 31, 2017 cut-off date.
Flexibility in Registration Issuance:
This one has already been discussed. Uncertainties in accessing and finalizing
records mean this provision is necessary. It would be awkward at best if the staff
held to a firm deadline to complete our work and then found we couldn’t get at the
needed information; that is even more the case for applicants. The public does
benefit from known deadlines and outcomes, but in this case there is no help for
it. Staff commits to getting pending registrations done as soon as resources allow.
Planning Commission Guidance in 9-and-over Decision-making:
This amendment deals with the criteria for making alternative judgments in cases
where a 9-and-over residential-district application involves a property with less
than one (1) acre, and/or smaller setbacks. The amendment gives direction on the
types of criteria that in classic zoning practice can substitute for acreage and
setbacks in reducing impacts on neighboring properties. The list of criteria in the
amendment is not exhaustive, and other buffering elements can also come into
play.
It is legally required that the Planning Commission come up with objective
substitutes like these for acreage and setbacks in making their decisions, though.
Without guidance like these criteria, decisions could easily slip into becoming
“arbitrary and capricious”. Those are bad words in local-government decision-
122
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
making, and get downright dangerous when a judge uses them to describe your
decision. We don’t need to go there.
Minor Language and Reference Fixes:
Most of these need no explanation and are clear when read in context. A typical
example is adding the words “Off-Street” in front of “Parking”, in Sec. 5.1.B.1.e.(1).
Since the old Vacation Home regulations addressed on-street parking regulation
(technically not feasible under a development code), this clears up any lingering
confusion.
Staff Findings of Fact:
The text amendment complies with EVDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments – Standards for
Review).
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review
“All rezonings and text amendments to the EVDC shall meet the following criteria:”
1. “The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected;”
Staff Finding:
The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected.
2. “The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would
allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in
the Estes Valley;”
Staff Finding:
The proposed text amendment is compatible and consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the
Estes Valley.
3. “The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability
to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the
application were approved.”
Staff Finding:
Providers of public water, sewage disposal, electric services, fire protection, and
transportation services have expressed no concerns with the proposed
amendment in principle.
123
Ord. No. 09-17 (memo written March 23,
2017)
Advantages:
Complies with the EVDC Section §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review.
Clarifies EVDC Vacation Home regulations so as to conform with current realizations
and recent developments in practical administration of the Dec. 2016 amendments.
Disadvantages:
People may find themselves even wearier than they were on March 14 about
continued flux in Vacation Home rules.
Action Recommended:
Review the amendment for compliance with Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC)
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review, and approve the amendment as
drafted.
Level of Public Interest:
High: Anything affecting vacation home regulations has been the subject of strong,
sustained interest in Estes Valley.
Sample Motions:
APPROVAL
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees approve Ordinance No. 09-17,
including Exhibit A, as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission.
DENIAL
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees deny Ordinance No. 09-17, including
Exhibit A, finding that . . . (state reasons for denial).
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A: Text Amendment: Sec. 5.1.B (Vacation Home) & related sections
[Amendment pkg. 2017-A, Version B]
124
Ordinance No. 09-17
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE
REGARDING VACATION HOMES
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2017, the Estes Valley Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley
Development Code, Section 5.1.B (Vacation Homes), and found that the text
amendments comply with Estes Valley Development Code §3.3.D Code Amendments,
Standards for Review; and
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2017, the Estes Valley Planning Commission voted
to recommended approval of the text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park finds the text
amendment complies with Estes Valley Development Code §3.3.D Code Amendments,
Standards for Review and determined that it is in the best interest of the Town that the
amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code, Section 5.1.B (Vacation Homes),
as set forth on Exhibit “A”; be approved; and
WHEREAS, said amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code are set forth
on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1: The Estes Valley Development Code shall be amended as more fully
set forth on Exhibit “A”.
Section 2: Immediate passage of this Ordinance is necessary for the
preservation of health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the Town in order to provide
for appropriate registration processing for vacation home applications by March 31, 2017,
and therefore the Ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately after its
passage, adoption, and signature of the Mayor.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF
ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS DAY OF _______,
2017.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
125
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting
of the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2017 and
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on
the ________ day of , 2017, all as required by the Statutes of
the State of Colorado.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
[REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
126
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
EXHIBIT A
Estes Valley Development Code
Text Amendment: Sec. 5.1.B (Vacation Home) & related sections
[Amendment pkg. 2017‐A, Version A B]
§5.1 SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS
B. Vacation Home.
1.All vacation homes shall be subject to the following:
a. Annual Operating Registration.
(1) All vacation homes shall obtain an operating registration on an annual
basis, according to an application period as specified in this which Code. An
operating registration shall be effective on and following the date of issuance
for all of the remaining calendar year in which it is issued, unless suspended
or revoked for cause, provided that registered vacation homes may continue
operation during January 1 and March 31 of any calendar year following a
year in which the vacation home was duly registered..
(2) If the property is located within Town limits, the business license shall be
considered the operating registration. If the property is within the
unincorporated Estes Valley, an operating registration shall be obtained
from the Town of Estes Park Town Clerk's Office.
(3) Beginning January 1, 2017, the annual period for filing operating registration
applications shall begin January 1 of each year and end on March 31 of each
year, in accordance with subsection (1). Issuance of an operating registration
between April 1 and December 31 in any given calendar year shall take place
on a schedule determined by the Town Clerk’s office and such schedule shall
be at the sole discretion of the Town.
(4) Pro-ration and partial reduction in any required registration fees for an
operating registration issued after January 1 in any given year shall not be
authorized.
(5) No more than one (1) operating registration shall be issued and effective in
any given calendar year for any given each vacation home. An active
registration for a specific vacation home shall be transferable to a different
owner in accordance with procedures in this Code and as established by the
Town Clerk’s Office.
(6) Effective December 16, 2016, vacation home operating registrations in
residential zoning districts (designated herein as zoning districts E,
E-1, R, R-1, R-2, RE, RE-1, and RM) shall be held at a maximum total
(“cap”) of 588 registrations in effect at any given time. This cap shall be
reviewed annually by the Planning Commission and governing Boards, in or
near the month of April beginning in or near April 2017. Applications received
at any time such that their approval would cause the cap to be exceeded shall
be held and kept on file in the order they are received and deemed complete
by the Town Clerk’s Office. Registrations held on such list shall be issued
during the calendar year as operating registrations may become available.
127
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
(7) Vacation homes in non-residential zoning districts (designated as all zoning
districts except those enumerated in the preceding subsection) shall not be
included in or subject to this cap.
(8) Beginning December 16, 2016, every vacation home for which an operating
application is made shall require that the vacation home undergo and pass an
initial inspection in accordance with this Code prior to issuance of the
operating registration.
(9) Beginning December 16, 2016, no operating registration for a vacation home
shall be issued unless the vacation home structure has a valid Certification of
Occupancy issued by the appropriate authority.[Reserved]
(10) Issuance of an operating registration for a vacation home shall not constitute a
zoning entitlement for a property’s use as a vacation home, nor shall absence
of an operating registration for a vacation home constitute removal or
abrogation of a property’s zoning permissibility for use as a vacation home.
However, both appropriate zoning permission and compliance and a valid
current operating registration are shall be necessary elements in order for
operation as a vacation home to occur.
(11) Operating registrations that are deemed active as of December 31 in any
given year shall have priority for renewal in the following calendar year over
any new operating registration applications, provided a re-application for said
active registration by the same owner is received and deemed complete, all
required inspections passed, and fees paid by March 31 of the renewal
calendar year.
(12) Local Representative. The registration shall designate a local resident or
local property manager in the Estes Valley who can be contacted by
telephone and is available when the vacation home is rented, with regarding
to any violation of the provisions of this Section. The person set forth on
the application shall be the representative of the owner for immediate
violation resolution purposes with regard to the operation of the vacation
home. The local representative may be the same person as the property
owner. An annual operating registration shall not be valid unless the property
owner, and the designated local representative (if different), sign the
operating registration application acknowledging all vacation home
regulations. If the local representative changes during the calendar year, it
shall be the responsibility of the property owner to notify the Town Clerk within
fifteen (15) days of change, and to insure the new local representative is
knowledgeable of all vacation home regulations. If the property owner
changes during the calendar year, it shall be the responsibility of the new
property owner of record to transfer the operating registration into his/her
name and to ensure all other regulations in this Section are in compliance.
(13) State Sales Tax License. A condition of issuance of the annual operating
registration shall be proof of a current sales tax license, provided by the
applicant.
(14) Violations. The relevant Decision-Making Entity may deny or withhold the
renewal of an annual operating registration until a violation related to such
property, use or development is corrected, in accordance with §12.4.A.1. The
relevant Decision-Making Entity may revoke or suspend the annual operating
registration at any time in accordance with §12.4.A.2. Operating the vacation
home during any such period of suspension or revocation shall be a violation
of this Code. Appeals to this section shall be made in accordance with the
appeals process in the Estes Valley Development Code.
128
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
(15) Nothing described herein shall limit the Town or County, within their
respective jurisdictions, from exercising other remedies and enforcement
powers pursuant to Chapter 12 of this Code or other penalties and
enforcement powers as may be available at law.
b. Estes Park Municipal Code. Properties located within the Town of Estes Park
shall comply with all the conditions and requirements set forth in the Town of Estes
Park Municipal Code, Chapter 5.20 (Business Licenses). In case of conflict between
Chapter 5.20 and provisions of §5.1.B of this Code, the provisions of §5.1.B of this
Code shall control.
c. Residential Character in Residential Zoning Districts. V acation homes in residential
zoning districts as designated in this Section shall not be designed or operated in a
manner that is out of character with residential use of a dwelling unit by one
household. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Design shall be compatible, in terms of building scale, mass and
character, with low-intensity, low-scale residential use.
(2) For purposes of §5.1.B of this Code, “bedroom” and “sleeping room” are
deemed equivalent terms to each other, and equivalent to a sleeping space
pursuant to the currently adopted and applicable International Building Codes.
Kitchen facilities shall be limited to be consistent with single-family residential
use. No kitchen facilities or cooking shall be allowed in guest rooms, sleeping
rooms or bedrooms.
d.Postings.
(1) Vacation homes in all zoning districts shall have a clearly legible notice posted
on-site. The posted notice shall be provided by the Town Clerk’s Office at the
time the operating-registration is initially applied for, shall be posted in a
prominent location inside the vacation home prior to or during the initial
inspection, and shall remain posted in the same location for the duration of its
use as a vacation home. The posted notice shall include standard contents as
determined and approved by the Community Development Department.
(2) Property Line Boundaries: The property owner or local representative shall
inform all occupants of property boundaries.
(3) Property owner or local representative shall include in all print or online
advertising the operating registration number in the first line of the property
description.
(4) Advertising shall accurately represent the allowed use of the property,
including the maximum number of allowed occupants.
(5) Neighbor Notification. Prior to issuance of the initial annual operating
registration, the owner or local contact shall be responsible for mailing a
written notice.
(a) Notice shall be mailed, with certificate of mailing or other method as
approved by staff, to the owners of properties within one hundred (100) feet
of the boundary of the subject property.
(b) Notices shall provide a name and telephone number of the local
representative and property owner. Any change in the local representative
or property owner shall require that the name and telephone number of the
new representative or owner be furnished to the Community Development
Director and owners of properties within one hundred (100) feet of the
subject property within15 days two (2) weeks of the change. Mailed notice
of such changes shall follow the same procedure as the initial notification
129
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
as specified herein.
(c) Copies Proof of mailing certificates shall be provided to the Community
Development Director upon issuance of initial annual operating registration.
e.Parking.
(1)Minimum Required Off-Street Parking. Except in the CD Downtown
Commercial zoning district, the number of off-street parking spaces available to a
vacation home shall not be less than two (2).
(2) Maximum Off-Street Parking – Residential Zoning Districts. This Section
applies to all vehicles that are not parked or stored in a fully enclosed garage. No
more than a total of four (4) vehicles shall be parked or stored on a lot of two (2)
acres or less. No more than a total of five (5) vehicles shall be parked or stored on a
lot greater than two (2) acres in size, but less than five (5) acres. No more than a
total of six (6) vehicles shall be parked or stored on a lot equal to, or greater than
five (5) acres, but less than ten (10) acres. No more than a total of eight (8) vehicles
shall be parked or stored on a lot equal to, or greater than ten (10) acres.
(3) Maximum Off-Street Parking – Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Maximum
parking for vacation homes in nonresidential zoning districts shall be regulated
according to the parking standards applicable to “Hotel, small”
e.f. Employee Housing Units. Employee housing units as designated in §5.2.C.2 shall
not be designated as vacation homes as defined and regulated herein.
f.g. Attainable Housing Units. Attainable housing units as designated in §11.4 shall not
be designated as vacation homes as defined and regulated herein.
g.h. Accessory Dwelling Units. Vacation homes shall not be allowed on residential lots of
record containing an accessory dwelling unit as defined and regulated herein.
h.i. Density. Only one (1) vacation home shall be allowed per residential dwelling unit.
One (1) or more vacation homes may be allowed on an individual lot of record,
subject to all regulations in this Code and other regulations as may be applicable.
2. All vacation homes shall also be subject to the following:
a. Maximum Occupancy in Residential Zoning Districts: 8-and-Under occupants.
Except for 9-and-over vacation homes that may be approved and registered under the
provisions of this Code via Large Vacation Home Review (LVHR) application, the
maximum allowable occupancy for an individual vacation home shall be eight (8)
occupants. Occupancy shall be further limited to a maximum of two (2) individuals
per sleeping room plus two (2) individuals per vacation home.
b.Maximum Occupancy in Residential Zoning Districts: 9-and-Over occupants. A
residential structure with four (4) or more sleeping rooms may
apply for Large Vacation Home Review (LVHR) approval as a “9-
and-over vacation home”, in accordance with the regulations in
§5.1.B.3. The maximum occupancy in a 9-and-over vacation
home shall be as specified in the Large V acation H ome R eview
terms of approval; provided that occupancy shall be limited to a maximum
of two (2) individuals per sleeping room plus two (2) individuals per vacation home.
c. Maximum Occupancy in Non-Residential Zoning Districts.
Occupancy shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) individuals per sleeping room
plus two (2) individuals per vacation home. No overall maximum occupancy for a
vacation home in a non-residential zoning district shall be applicable, provided that the
vacation home is deemed to be in compliance with all Building, Fire, and Health
130
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
Codes and that a valid operating registration is issued.
d. For purposes of this Code section, occupancy shall not be counted differentially on
the basis of age or status.
e. Number of Parties:, Vacation homes in residential zone districts as those districts are
defined herein shall be rented, leased or furnished to no more than one (1) party,
occupying the vacation home as a single group. Owners of the vacation home shall
not be allowed to occupy the vacation home while a party is present. All occupants
must shall be registered by name on or before the time of the party’s initial occupancy.
The name registry shall be maintained by the property owner or manager, and shall
be made available to the appropriate regulatory entity(s) upon the regulatory entity’s
request.
f. Home Occupations. Home occupations shall not be operated on the site of a vacation
home, nor shall vacation homes offer ancillary services to guests.
g.Vacation homes shall be required to meet applicable Building, Health and Fire codes.
h. Except as specifically provided for elsewhere in this Code, general development
standards (Chapter 7) as required by the underlying zoning district shall be
applicable. In residential zoning districts, development standards shall be those for
single-family detached dwellings in the zoning district. In non-residential zoning
districts, development standards shall be those for “hotel, small” in the zoning district.
i. Vacation homes, whether new or existing structures, shall be subject to the
requirements of Sec. 7.9 (Exterior Lighting) for new development.
j.Initial Time Frame for Compliance. All vacation homes in every zoning district shall
be required to obtain a new or renewed, as the case may be, operating registration
by a deadline no later than March 31, 2017.Vacation home owners in any zoning
district may apply at any time during 2017 for an operating registration, provided that
in all cases: (a) the vacation home shall not be occupied by clients until the
registration is approved and issued; and (b) the operating registration remains valid
only until December 31, 2017.
j.k. Issuance of the operating registration by the Town shall have no fixed deadline;
however, the Town shall make all reasonable effort to issue operating registration
approvals in an orderly and expeditious manner, as may be determined by the Town.
3. Large Vacation Home Review (LV HReview) for 9-and-Over Vacation Homes in
Residential Zoning Districts.
a. The owner of record of a vacation home in a residential zoning district that has
obtained an approved valid operating registration filed a complete application for an 8-
and-under vacation home operating registration on or before March 31, 2017, may
make application for Large Vacation Home Review (LVHR) under the procedures of
this Section and Code to allow nine (9) or more individuals to occupy the vacation
home, provided that:
(1) The vacation home for which Large Vacation Home Review application is
made has four (4) or more sleeping rooms; and
(2) The vacation home is in compliance with all applicable Building, Health, and
Fire Codes, or is brought into compliance with said Codes by deadline dates
as specified in accordance with the Codes.
b. The Large Vacation Home Review application shall be reviewed and may be
approved by motion and affirmative vote of the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission’s decision shall be final, except that an appeal by a party in interest of
131
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
the Planning Commission’s decision may be made to the Town of Estes Park Board
of Trustees or the Board of Larimer County Commissioners, whichever has
jurisdiction.
c. Large Vacation Home Review for a 9-and-over vacation home shall comply with the
following policies and procedures:
(1) The procedure for application, review, and approval shall comply with the
“Procedure Checklist for Large Vacation Home Review: 9-and-Over Vacation
Homes”, promulgated and maintained by the Community Development
Department;
(2) The required “Vacation Home Safety Inspection Report” and “Vacation Home
Location Inspection Report” shall be provided to the Planning Commission
prior to any Planning Commission approval of a Large Vacation Home Review;
(3) The minimum lot size for a 9-and-over vacation home shall be one (1) acre,
unless the Planning Commission makes a specific finding of fact that the
vacation home is in conformance with applicable has demonstrated adequate
buffering or screening from adjacent and nearby properties, such that use and
development standards with a lot size of less than one (1) acre is
commensurate with Large Vacation Home use. Appropriate alternative
standards for demonstrating adequate buffering or screening shall include, but
not be limited to: orientation of the Large Vacation Home on the property away
from nearby residential structures, linear separation from other residential
structures, separation from other structures by an intervening right-of-way,
topographic features such as rock formations or grade differences, and mature
vegetation or fencing;
(4) The minimum front, side, and rear setback from any lot boundary shall be
twenty-five (25) feet or the setback under the zoning district, or whichever is
greater, unless the Planning Commission makes a specific finding of fact that
the vacation home is in conformance with applicable use and development
standards with has demonstrated adequate buffering or screening from
adjacent and nearby properties, such that a setback of less than twenty-five
(25) feet or less than the setback under the zoning district, whichever may be
applicable, is commensurate with Large Vacation Home use. Appropriate
alternative standards for demonstrating adequate buffering or screening shall
include, but not be limited to: orientation of the Large Vacation Home on the
property away from nearby residential structures, linear separation from other
residential structures, separation from other structures by an intervening right-
of-way, topographic features such as rock formations or grade differences, and
mature vegetation or fencing;
(5) An approved Large Vacation Home shall in no case be occupied by more than
two (2) occupants per bedroom plus two (2) additional occupants.
d. Denial of a Large Vacation Home Review zoning permission for use as a 9-and-over
vacation home shall not void an existing operating license for an 8-and-under vacation
home, nor shall such denial in itself void zoning permissibility for use as an 8-and-
under vacation home; provided that 8-and-under vacation home zoning requirements
in this Code and other applicable regulations remain applicable.
4.Inspections
a. Beginning December 16, 2016, inspections of all vacation homes per the
requirements of this Code shall be completed prior to initial approval of any operating
registration.
132
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
b. All vacation homes with registrations approved during calendar year 2017 shall be
inspected at least one (1) time during calendar year 2017.
c. Inspection after a violation is cured, and or after a change in ownership, shall be
required.
d. Inspections shall be completed by the Department in accordance with the applicable
inspection checklist as promulgated and maintained by the Community Development
Department. The checklist shall be either the “Procedure Checklist for 8-and-Under
Vacation Homes” or the “Procedure Checklist for Large Vacation Home Review: 9-
and-Over Vacation Homes”, whichever may be applicable. These checklists are
hereby adopted and incorporated by reference in this Code.
5. Transitional Regulations. In order to establish an equitable method of transitioning
from pre-existing vacation-home regulations and those taking effect on December 16,
2016 and beyond, the following interim regulations shall be effective. In case of any
conflict between regulations elsewhere in this Code and the transitional regulations,
the transitional regulations shall control:
a. All 2017 operating-registration applications for vacation homes that have active
operating registrations as of December 15, 2016, shall have first priority in
application processing and operating-registration approval for 2017.
b. Within such application first-priority queue as may result from applications filed
under subsection a., sequencing of registration issuance shall be determined by the
date/time received filing stamp by the Town Clerk’s Office on the face of each
application.
c. All 2017 operating-registration applications for vacation homes that do not have
active operating registrations as of December 15, 2016, but for which either or both
of the following is provided to the Town Clerk’s office at the time of initial application,
shall have second priority in application processing and operating-registration
approval for 2017:
(1) a written signed contract for vacation-home occupancy during 2016 is
provided to the Town Clerk’s Office;
(2) an executed and signed sales tax return establishing that sales tax has been
paid during Year 2016 to the State of Colorado for the vacation home.
d.Within such application second-priority queue as may result from applications filed
under subsection c., sequencing of registration issuance shall be determined by the
date/time received filing stamp by the Town Clerk’s Office on the face of each
application.
e. All 2017 operating-registration applications for vacation homes that do not satisfy
the requisite conditions in subsection a. or c. shall have third priority in application
processing and operating-registration approval for 2017.
f. Within such application third-priority queue as may result from applications filed
under subsection e., sequencing of registration issuance shall be determined by the
date/time filing stamp by the Town Clerk’s Office on the face of each application.
g. In the event the cap for vacation homes in residential zoning districts in §5.1.B.2 is
reached at any point in the 2017 queuing process, applications shall be maintained
on a waiting list in the order established within priority queues as specified above.
h. All operating registrations approved and issuedpursuant to applications filed
between December 16, 2016 and March December 31, 2017 shall initially be for 8-
and-under occupants only. The Large Vacation Home Review shall determine
133
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
whether or not operating-registration-approved vacation homes in residential zoning
districts with four (4) or more sleeping rooms may be approved as 9-and-over Large
vVacation hHomes; provided, however, that no 9-and-over Large Vacation Home
shall be approved for any 8-and-under vacation home in a residential district whose
registration is filed after March 31, 2017..
i. All vacation home permits in effect on December 15, 2016 shall be automatically
extended and in effect through March 31, 2017. This extension shall be deemed a
separate matter from the operating registration requirements beginning January 1,
2017. Either an approved 2017 operating registration or an extended 2016 permit
shall allow operation of an 8-and-under vacation home at a given location, provided
the vacation home remains in compliance with all other applicable regulations.
Table 4-1: Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts.
Table 4-4
Permitted Uses: Residential Zoning Districts
Table 4-4: Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts.
Table 4-4
Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zoning Districts
Specific
Use
Residential Zoning Districts
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S" = Permitted by Special Review
“LV” = Permitted by Large Vacation Home
Review
"—" = Prohibited
Additional Regulations
(Apply in All Districts
Unless Otherwise Stated)
RE‐
1 RE E‐1 E R R‐1 R‐2 RM
Low-Intensity
Accommodations
Bed and
Breakfast
Inn
̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ S P §5.1B
Vacation
Home:
8-and-
under
Occupants
P P P P P P P P §5.1B
Vacation
Home:
9-and-over
Occupants
LV LV LV LV LV LV LV LV
§5.1B (Large Vacation Home
Reviews may be approved by
Planning Commission only,
subject to specified criteria)
134
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
Use
Classification
Specific
Use
Nonresidential Zoning Districts
"P" = Permitted by Right
"S" = Permitted by Special Review
"—" = Prohibited
Additional
Regulations
(Apply in All
Districts
Unless Otherwise
Stated) A A-1 CD CO O CH I-1
Low-Intensity
Accommodations
Vacation
Home P P P P — — —
§ 5.2 ACCESSORY USES (INCLUDING HOME OCCUPATIONS) AND ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES
Table 5-2
Accessory Uses Permitted in the Nonresidential Zoning Districts
Accessory Use
Residential Zoning District
"Yes" = Permitted "No" = Not Permitted
"CUP" = Conditional Use Permit Additional
Requirements A A-1 CD CO O CH I-1
Vacation Home No Yes Yes No No No No §5.1.B
In CD, such use shall
not be located on
the ground floor of a
building fronting on
Elkhorn Avenue.
(Ord. 02‐10 §1)
§7.9 EXTERIOR LIGHTING
B. Applicability. All new development shall comply with the standards set forth in this Section.
Vacation homes as designated and regulated in §5.1.B of this Code shall comply with the
standards set forth in this Section, whether new or existing.
§ 12.7 - ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
A. Nonemergency Matters.
In the case of a violation of this Code that does not constitute an emergency or require immediate
attention, written notice of the nature of the violation shall be given to the property owner, agent,
or the Applicant for any relevant permit or registration. Notice shall be given in person, or by
certified U.S. Mail, or contact via website contact. The notice shall specify the Code provisions
allegedly in violation, and—unless a shorter time frame is allowed by this Chapter—shall state
that the individual has a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of the receipt of the notice in
which to correct the alleged violations before further enforcement action shall be taken. The
notice shall also state any appeal and/or variance procedures available pursuant to this Code.
The Board of Trustees or Board of County Commissioners, as applicable, may grant an
extension of the time to cure a violation, up to a total of ninety (90) days, if the Board finds
135
Estes Valley Development Code
Vacation Homes – Exhibit A – Amendment pkg 2017-A, Version A
Mar. 28, 2017 – TB meeting [continued from Mar. 14]
that due to the nature of the violation, it reasonably appears that it cannot be corrected within
fifteen (15) days. (Ord. 2-02 #3)
[REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
136
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Staff Report
To: Hon. Mayor T. Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator F. Lancaster
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: March 28, 2017
RE: Ordinance No. 08-17: Proposed Text Amendments to Estes Valley
Development Code: EVDC §4.3, §5.2, and §13.3 (Accessory
Kitchens): Modified per Discussion on Mar. 14
Objective:
Review and decide upon proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley Development
Code (EVDC) §4.3, §5.2, and §13.3 (Accessory Kitchens): amendments to the
Accessory Kitchen regulations regarding the elimination of accessory kitchens as an
independent accessory use in residential districts.
UPDATE for Mar. 28: The Town Board on March 14 continued this item for two
weeks in order to allow staff time to formulate specific amendment language. At
that meeting, staff advised that a best-practice action on most substantial EVDC
amendments would be to send the amendments back to Planning Commission
for their review.
Remanding this item to the Planning Commission remains a recommended best
practice, and one option for the Town Board on Mar. 28 would be to remand it to
the Commission for review on April 18. If Planning Commission makes a
recommendation at that meeting, the amendment could be brought to the Town
Board again on April 25.
Another option for the Town Board at tonight’s meeting would be to approve,
approve with modifications, or disapprove the amendment as redrafted, or to
continue the item again. If the Town Board wishes to dispose the item without
remanding to the Planning Commission, staff would recommend it be approved
as redrafted in Exhibit A (Mar. 28 version).
Code Amendment Objective:
The objective of this proposed code amendment is to revise the EVDC to do the
following:
Modify the Accessory Kitchens section in the Estes Valley Development Code to
remove certain unenforceable and/or irrelevant provisions;
137
Ord. No. 08-17 (memo written March 8,
2017)
Add EVDC language to provide that outdoor kitchens can be built or maintained,
and also adds a definition to Code for “Kitchen, Outdoor”.
Proposal:
Amend EVDC Sections 4.3, 5.2, and 13.3 as stated in Exhibit A, dated Mar. 28, 2017,
attached.
Discussion:
Overall: The new language in Exhibit A retains the ability to have an accessory
kitchen in a single-family house, with the same basic regulations that have
existed since around 2010. Several sections are recommended for removal, as
discussed below:
Sec. 5.2.B.2.f.(4) – Interior Access: This amendment removes an unenforceable
requirement that a homeowner or resident keep one or more interior doors
unlocked. Staff would have no un-intrusive way of determining whether someone
is locking a door inside a private home. One could observe that this requirement
is even dangerous in some households. Someone with a second stove in a
house with small children probably does not want the stove to turn into an
entertainment center. That doesn’t tend to work out very well.
Sec. 5.2.B.2.f.(5) – Affidavit: This device seems intended to instill guilt feelings in those
who might be tempted to rent out their second-kitchen areas as ADUs. In practice, there
is no way to enforce this. It is not even clearly legal, as up to eight (8) unrelated people
can still constitute a household under current EVDC. Affidavits and similar devices with
no clear-cut applicability or enforceability are merely cosmetic. Staff would state that a
worthless affidavit is worse than no affidavit at all.
(The same argument could be made for removing subsections (1) and (2),
prohibiting use as an ADU and/or by multiple families. Staff would recommend
leaving these in place, if for no other reason than to avoid leaving our Code in
direct conflict with itself. It is acknowledged that few if any practical tools exist to
enforce (1) and (2) in this case.)
Sec. 5.2.B.2.f.(3) – Address: This section was not mentioned on March 14, but on
additional review, staff sees no useful purpose for a prohibition on a second address in
this part of Code. Assigning addresses should be under the purview of the appropriate
public officials for public safety, mail delivery, and similar purposes, and should be
regulated by MSAG (Master Street Address Guide) protocols, which is the recognized
public-safety standard for Dispatch purposes and 911 response. Addressing functions
have no role in kitchen regulations.
138
Ord. No. 08-17 (memo written March 8,
2017)
Outdoor Kitchens: This additional language (unchanged since Mar. 14) is self-
explanatory and seems to need no additional explanation beyond what was included in
the prior staff memorandum.
Staff Findings:
The text amendment complies with EVDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments – Standards for
Review).
§3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review
“All rezonings and text amendments to the EVDC shall meet the following criteria:”
1. “The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected;”
Staff Finding:
The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area
affected.
2. “The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code
would allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of
the Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development
patterns in the Estes Valley;”
Staff Finding:
The proposed text amendment is compatible and consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the
Estes Valley.
3. “The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability
to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the
application were approved.”
Staff Finding:
Providers of public water, sewage disposal, electric services, fire protection, and
transportation services have expressed no concerns with the proposed
amendment in principle.
Advantages:
Complies with the EVDC Section §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review.
Allows for accessory kitchens, which anecdotally seems to be a somewhat popular
housing accoutrement in the Estes Valley.
139
Ord. No. 08-17 (memo written March 8,
2017)
Disadvantages:
Some second-kitchen areas in houses may end up becoming de-facto ADUs. It can
be argued this is a minor and acceptable risk.
Level of Public Interest:
Medium: Some community members, including contractors who install or rehab
kitchens, seem concerned about losing the ability to have or retain second kitchens. To
staff’s knowledge, there has been no discernible support for getting rid of second
kitchens.
Sample Motions:
REMAND
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees remand Ordinance No. 08-17,
including Exhibit A, as modified, to the Planning Commission for consideration and
recommendation.
APPROVAL
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees approve Ordinance No. 08-17,
including Exhibit A, as recommended by staff.
CONTINUANCE
I move to continue Ordinance No. 08-17, including Exhibit A, to the regularly scheduled
Town Board meeting on March 28, 2017, because… (state reason(s) for continuance -
findings).
DENIAL
I move that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees deny Ordinance No. 08-17,
including Exhibit A, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Attachments:
1. Ord. No. 08-17 (incl. Exhibit A (Mar. 28): Accessory Kitchens).
2. Sample affidavit: “Accessory Kitchen – Estes Valley Development Code”
140
Ordinance No. 08-17
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE
REGARDING ACCESSORY KITCHENS
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2017, the Estes Valley Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley
Development Code, Sections 4.3, 5.2, and 13.3 (Accessory Kitchens), and found that the
text amendments comply with Estes Valley Development Code §3.3.D Code
Amendments, Standards for Review; and
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2017, the Estes Valley Planning Commission voted
to recommended approval of the text amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park finds the text
amendments comply with Estes Valley Development Code §3.3.D Code Amendments,
Standards for Review and determined that it is in the best interest of the Town that the
amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code, Sections 4.3, 5.2, and 13.3
(Accessory Kitchens), as set forth on Exhibit “A”; be approved; and
WHEREAS, said amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code are set forth
on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1: The Estes Valley Development Code shall be amended as more fully
set forth on Exhibit “A”.
Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after
its adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF
ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS DAY OF _______,
2017.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
141
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting
of the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2017 and
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on
the ________ day of , 2017, all as required by the Statutes of
the State of Colorado.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
142
EXHIBIT A
[Mar. 28, 2017 – Town Board]
§ 4.3 – RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
§ 5.2 - ACCESSORY USES (INCLUDING HOME OCCUPATIONS)
AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
B. Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts
Table 5-1
Accessory Uses and Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts
RE-1 RE E-1 E R R-1 R-2 RM
Outdoor kitchen Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Accessory kitchen Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
§5.2.B.2.f
(Ord. 03-10 §1)
2.Additional Requirements for Specific Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted
in the Residential Zoning Districts.
f. Accessory kitchen.
(1) Approval of a kitchen accessory to a single-family dwelling shall not
constitute approval of a second dwelling unit or accessory dwelling unit.
(2) The dwelling shall not be occupied by more than one (1) family unit, as
defined in Section 13.2.C.28 "Household Living."
(3) The dwelling shall have only one (1) address.
(4) Interior access shall be maintained to all parts of the dwelling to ensure
that an accessory dwelling unit or apartment is not created.
(5) Land Use Affidavit
143
(a) Accessory kitchens located in a portion of the dwelling that also
includes sanitary facilities shall require a Land Use Affidavit prepared by the
Community Development Department.
(b) The Community Development Department shall record this Land
Use Affidavit, at the applicant's expense, at the time of issuance of a
building permit.
f. Outdoor kitchen. A single-family dwelling may have one (1) outdoor kitchen,
either attached to the principal structure or detached, in addition to one (1) ore more
kitchens inside the principal structure, provided that:
(1) An outdoor kitchen shall be a minimum of 10 feet from the rear lot line and
not closer to the side lot line than the required side yard setback of the
applicable district.
(2) Cooking appliances in an outdoor kitchen shall maintain a minimum distance
from combustible materials as recommended by the appliance manufacturer
and as may be required under the applicable International Fire Code (IFC).
§ 13.3 - DEFINITIONS OF WORDS, TERMS AND PHRASES
130. Kitchen shall mean a room or space within a room equipped with such electrical
or gas hook-up that would enable the installation of a range, oven or like
appliance using 220/40 volts or natural gas (or similar fuels) for the preparation
of food, and also containing either or both a refrigerator and sink.
130.1 Kitchen, Accessory shall mean a kitchen other than the principal kitchen
associated with a single-family dwelling.
130.3 Kitchen, Outdoor shall mean a kitchen as defined herein, except that an
outdoor kitchen shall be located in an unenclosed area that may be roofed, but is
open on at least two sides and exposed to weather.
144
ACCESSORY KITCHEN – ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER:
PARCEL NUMBER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
I/WE, the undersigned as owner(s) of the above referenced real property (the
“Property”), have read and understand Section 5.2.B2g, entitled Accessory Kitchens, of
the Estes Valley Development Code.
I (we), as owner(s) of the Property, understand and acknowledge the requirements and
conditions under which this Accessory Kitchen is approved. This shall include the
following requirements:
(1) Approval of the accessory kitchen shall not constitute approval of a second
dwelling unit or accessory dwelling unit on the Property.
(2) The dwelling on the Property shall not be occupied by more than one family
unit, as defined in Section 13.2.C.28 “Household Living.”
(3) The dwelling on the Property shall have only one address.
(4) Interior access shall be maintained to all parts of the dwelling on the Property
to assure that an accessory dwelling unit or apartment is not created.
This Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the Property as a burden
thereon, for the benefit of, and enforceable by, the Town of Estes Park/Larimer County,
Colorado and its respective successors and assigns. This Agreement shall bind each
Owner, and each Owner shall be personally obligated hereunder for the full and
complete performance and observance of all covenants, conditions and restrictions
contained herein, during the Owner’s period of ownership of the Property. Each and
every conveyance of the Property, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and
incorporate by this reference, the covenants contained in this Agreement, even without
reference to this Agreement in any documents of conveyance.
Each Owner agrees to comply with the provisions of this Agreement as a requirement
for title and is therefore personally obligated to perform and observe all the conditions of
approval and restrictions on the use of the Property set forth above.
145
The Town of Estes Park/Larimer County, Colorado shall have the right to enforce the
terms and conditions of this Agreement including, but not limited to, a suit for equitable
relief to enforce compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The
Owner shall pay all court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by the Town of
Estes Park/Larimer County, Colorado in the enforcement of any of the terms and
conditions of this Agreement.
This Agreement shall be binding upon the undersigned, his/her personal
representatives, heirs, transferees, successors and assigns, and future owners of the
Property.
ACKNOWLDEGED AND AGREED TO this _______ day of ____________________,
20__.
________________________________
OWNER (print name)
________________________________
OWNER (signature)
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF _____________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_______________________, 20___, by _______________________________.
Witness my hand and official seal.
______________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
146
Board Email Draft 2 3/28/2017
Revisions 0 Town of Estes Park, Town Board Policies
Effective Period: ongoing
Review Schedule: Annually - March
Effective Date: 3/28/2017
References: Policy Governance 1.2
TOWN BOARD POLICY
107
Public Posting of Town Board E-mail
1. PURPOSE
To provide the highest level of transparency and ease of access to the general public of
all public record emails generated by Town Trustees.
2. APPLICABILITY
This policy shall apply to the incoming and outgoing emails of the Board of Trustees,
including the Trustees, Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem, who exercise, at their discretion,
public posting of their emails.
3. PROCEDURE
a. Trustees wishing to participate in having their e-mails posted on the Town Website
must first notify the Town Clerk, in writing or by e-mail.
b. Any Trustee wishing to cease the posting of their e-mail on the Town website may
do so at any time by notifying the Town Clerk in writing or by e-mail.
c. A copy of any email sent to or by a member of the Town Board will be automatically
posted to a page accessible through the Town website for a period of one year.
These emails may be accessed at www.estes.org/boardemails.
d. Public addresses contained in the to/from/bcc/cc fields will not be posted. However,
all information contained in the body of any email to the Mayor or Trustees will
become public, including any personal information added by the user.
e. Emails will not be publicly posted when the subject line contains any of the following
terms:
i. Private
ii.Confidential
iii. Work Product
iv. Personnel
v.Personal
f. Emails which include the Town Attorney’s email address in any location of the email
will not be publicly posted.
147
Board Email Draft 2 3/28/2017
Revisions 0 Town of Estes Park, Town Board Policies
g. Any emails which are not public record or are not allowed to be publicly inspected
pursuant to the Colorado Open Records Act or any other State or Federal legislation
or regulation, will not be posted
h. Requests to remove and e-mail as outlined in section h below, should be directed to
the Town Clerk, Public Information Officer or Town Administrator
i. Posted emails may be removed by the Town under the following circumstances
1. Posted emails, which upon review, are not public record or not allowed to
be physically inspected under the Colorado Open Records Act or any other
State or Federal legislation or regulation.
2. Emails that contain obscene, libelous or false information.
3. Any constituent may request removal of posted emails because the
constituent expected that the email would be confidential or was a personal
or private matter.
j. Emails posted to the site are not monitored real-time. The Town of Estes Park is not
responsible for the content of emails sent by users.
Approved:
_____________________________
Todd Jirsa, Mayor
148
Town Clerk Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jisa
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: March 23, 2017
RE: Transportation Advisory Board Appointment
Objective:
To appoint one member to the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB).
Present Situation:
At the February 28, 2017 Town Board meeting, the Board approved the reappointment
of Anne Finley and Stanton Black to the TAB for an additional 3-year term because they
were the only applicants that applied by the close date. The Board requested the third
open position be re-advertised.
At the close of the advertisement on March 17, 2017, the Town had received one
application from the current member of the TAB, Belle Morris. Her term expires on
March 31, 2017.
Proposal:
As Belle Morris was the only applicant, staff recommends foregoing the interview
process and reappoint Belle Morris to an additional three-year term.
Advantages:
Filling the position would complete the nine-member committee.
Disadvantages:
If the appointment is not made, the position would remain vacant until the position could
be re-advertised and interviews conducted.
Action Recommended:
Reappointment of Belle Morris for a three-year term expiring on March 31, 2020.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest. Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the reappointment of Belle Morris for a three-year term expiring
on March 31, 2020.
149